Combine components module with sets of .msh files for NS simulation

[oh304]

Check these boxes if you have followed the posting rules.

• Q&A Navier Stokes is the most appropriate category for my question
• I have consulted the posting Guidelines on the Discussions front page
• I have searched the Discussions forum and my question has not been asked before
• I have searched the MOOSE website and the documentation does not answer my question
• I have formatted my post following the posting guidelines (avoid screenshots if possible, triple back quotes before/after pasted text, etc)

Question

Hi there,

I have had a brief look around but can't find anything on this to use, so I will ask here! :)

I am trying to run a simulation where i have a set of components as defined in an input file (also not using SAM as based in UK). I would like the components to connect a set of geometries that I have exported as .msh files.

For example, a fluid would flow along a FlowChannel1Phase component into a heat exchanger, simulated by the HeatStructureCylindrical component. This would be the interface with a GMSH produced geometry (tank of water, .msh file), which would uptake heat then transfer said heat to another heat exchanger which is connected to another component, to be similarly fed to another tank, etc etc.

Please let me know if there is something out there which has done something similar, utilizing different geometries etc.

[GiudGiud]

Hello

This is the kind of things we do using the Components system in the thermal hydraulics module.

If you have a component that has a geometry which is only meshed externally, you will want to use a FileMeshComponent for it.

Alternatively, it is often viable to use a MultiApp for these component simulations and use the HeatTransfer / Structure components which interface with multi apps

[oh304]

Thanks for the reply. I'll have a look.

[GiudGiud]

hi @oh304
I briefly saw your reply so I ll give more information

Are there any examples anywhere of instead combining GeneratedMeshGenerator geometries with Components, and running NS on the meshes?

No we dont support using MeshGenerators and Components at the moment. We do support using the mesh generators to create files, then loading them using a FileMeshComponent. Then kernels and BCs can be added to their mesh.
Alternatively, the FileMeshPhysicsComponent can be used in combination with a Physics (which is just a bunch of kernels, bcs, materials etc)

I started building up this file (just a line, and a box) and get a segmentation fault for some reason.

Ah we should have a clean error for this. I ll push a patch. Thank you for reporting

[GiudGiud]

I was also curious how to create continuity across physically separated boundaries. On the left small block below, I want the

So there are two options:

• you can create some sort of mapping between the two surfaces, then the functor system will work as long as you call functors with the element arguments for where it is defined (that's where the mapping comes through, on boundary i, you call the functor with elem_on_j mapped from elem_from_i)

[GiudGiud]

or you look at our mortar implementation. That's something I am less familiar with, but a general way of addressing non-contiguous/conformal meshes

[GiudGiud]

last idea, user objects can be used to "store" the values you care about and also handle the mapping from one surface to the other. You can look at the nearest / layered / ... average/integral user objects. They do these averaging/integrands operations on variables, then one can just request the value by passing a position

[oh304]

That's perfect thank you. I have ended up using FVFunctorConvectiveHeatFluxBC for now, referencing temperatures for T_bulk & T_solid. When I have time to refine, I will use one of your recommendations, the mortar one looks promising.

Hopefully this is the last (if not one of the last) questions I have:
If I want to rotate the orientation of my simulation by 30 degrees, is the FVBodyForce the best option to use? A force could be applied to the x & y velocity terms. My only concern is, it is the direction of the gravity vector that I want changed (by 40 degrees!).

Best wishes,

[GiudGiud]

FVBodyForce the best option to use?

It's alright as long as you are not using the NSFV RC corrections for body forces. If you are then you need to use INSFVMOmentumGravity

My only concern is, it is the direction of the gravity vector that I want changed (by 40 degrees!).

you can apply that transformation to the gravity vector OR
you can use a TransformGenerator to rotate your mesh, and keep the gravity vector unchanged