Part versus Part Design for CfdOF models ?

A subforum specific to the development of the OpenFoam-based workbenches ( Cfd https://github.com/qingfengxia/Cfd and CfdOF https://github.com/jaheyns/CfdOF )

Moderator: oliveroxtoby

Post Reply
techGuy
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2022 12:48 am

Part versus Part Design for CfdOF models ?

Post by techGuy »

I generally use Part Design when building FreeCAD models. However, all the examples I see on this forum seem to be using the Part workbench instead of Part Design.

Is there a reason the models on this forum use Part instead of Part Design ? Does it work better ?

Are there issues using CfdOF with models created in the Part Design workbench ?

Thanks
herbk
Veteran
Posts: 2657
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2014 3:45 pm
Location: Windsbach, Bavarya (Germany)

Re: Part versus Part Design for CfdOF models ?

Post by herbk »

Hi,
at my case it is just because i don't like working with PD...
Gruß Herbert
User avatar
NewJoker
Veteran
Posts: 3014
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2020 7:49 pm

Re: Part versus Part Design for CfdOF models ?

Post by NewJoker »

I guess that the Part workbench is often used for CfdOF model preparation because it offers primitives that can serve as simple geometry for tests and as fluid domains. There are also boolean tools useful for example for cutting geometry for external flow analysis from wind tunnel geometry. But Part Design can also be used for CfdOF models.
User avatar
Raedchen_im_System
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2019 5:22 pm
Location: In der Nähe von Stuttgart
Contact:

Re: Part versus Part Design for CfdOF models ?

Post by Raedchen_im_System »

I use both workbenches (Part Workbench, Part Design Workbench), and both work fine with CfdOf. Issues only arise when using functions from the Part Workbench and the Part Design Workbench. However, these problems when mixing the workbenches are very rare. Personally, I prefer the part design workbench because handling is closer to "professional" CAD-Systems like Catia and ProE/Creo.
techGuy
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2022 12:48 am

Re: Part versus Part Design for CfdOF models ?

Post by techGuy »

[/quote]
NewJoker wrote: Sat Mar 25, 2023 8:32 am I guess that the Part workbench is often used for CfdOF model preparation because it offers primitives that can serve as simple geometry for tests and as fluid domains. There are also boolean tools useful for example for cutting geometry for external flow analysis from wind tunnel geometry. But Part Design can also be used for CfdOF models.
I've found that the Part workbench has somewhat better tools for working with objects too. I simulated the same multi element wing with both PD and Part and found part was easier to work with. Mainly because I imported a geometry that Part could extrude whereas PartDesign could not. If I have to build something up from drawings/dimensions, I'll use PD. If I have an object to work with, I'll use Part.

Raedchen_im_System wrote: Sat Mar 25, 2023 9:41 amPersonally, I prefer the part design workbench because handling is closer to "professional" CAD-Systems like Catia and ProE/Creo.
I agree. I'm running Real Thunder version 2023-01-31. Sketcher and PD have several enhancements that are not available in mainline FreeCAD.
KAKM
Posts: 109
Joined: Tue May 04, 2021 12:17 am

Re: Part versus Part Design for CfdOF models ?

Post by KAKM »

The big difference is that Part Design defaults to solids and Part defaults to shells (or at least, converts more easily to shells). The OpenFOAM mesher works based on a boundary surface, not a solid region, so the parts that are built as shells from the ground up instead of being converted partway through play more nicely with the OpenFOAM mesher.
Post Reply