LEENJE AMA I Flow3scast PDF

Optimize your flow using FLOW-3D and CAESES®
Ceyhan Erdem (FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS),

Melissa Carter (Flow Science),
Adwaith Gupta (Flow Science) and
Stefan Harries (FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS)
FLOW-3D Users Conference, Barcelona, June 5-7, 2017

FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017
Optimize your flow using FLOW-3D and CAESES®
Illustrated for
a microfluidic mixer and
a die-casting runner system
FLOW-3D Users Conference, Barcelona, June 5-7, 2017

CAE System Empowering Simulation
Upfront CAD Upfront Optimization

• Simulation-ready • Design explorations
• Highly automated • Formal optimization
Variable Pre- Software Post- Optimization &

Geometry processing Connection processing Assessment
Upfront CFD
• Robust auto meshing
• Batch processing
Mesh Flow
Generation Solver
3 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

Simulation-driven design (SDD)

Selected references

The next 22 minutes
▪ Introduction
– Focus
– Levels of application
– Work flow
▪ Microfluidics
– Level 1
– Level 2
▪ Die-casting
– (Level 1)
– Level 2
▪ Conclusions
▪ Outlook

Introduction
▪ Focus
– Use of FLOW-3D in optimization by
coupling to CAESES®
▪ Applications are for illustration
– Actual simulation setups are not discussed
in any depth
– Setups follow best practice by specialists at
Flow Science

Levels of application and work flow
▪ Level 1:
Easily vary flow and simulation set-up
(e.g., speeds, temperature…)
▪ Level 2:
Readily include shape variations, too
▪ Work flow for level 1
1. Run FLOW-3D once for your baseline
2. Use CAESES and FLOW-3D in a coupled
mode
3. Let CAESES change the free variables
4. Execute FLOW-3D repeatedly in batch
mode
5. Collect and analyze results within CAESES
▪ Addition for level 2
1. Build and utilize a parametric model

Microfluidic mixer

Microfluidic mixer
26 μm
Source: J. Homann, Wikipedia
Human hair
ranges from
50 to 100m in
diameter
31 μm
10 μm
Microfluidic mixer
▪ What does the mixer do? Source: Protein folding, Kjaergaard, Wikipedia
– Initiate the folding process of proteins, i.e.,
changes of their molecular structure from
random coils to 3d-folded shapes
▪ Why do we care about 3d-folded proteins?
– Needed in a wide range of biological
functions
– Used in drug discovery, DNA sequencing
and amplification, in molecular diagnostics
and food engineering
▪ How can you produce something that is
smaller than a hair’s diameter?
– Lithography
– Wet etching
– Bonding of substrates

Optimizations at different levels
▪ Level 1
– Start with a good mixer geometry
– Vary inlet speeds
▪ Level 2
– Parameterize geometry
– Vary geometry, too
Reference
Ivorra, B.; Redondo, J.L.; Santiago, J.G.; Ortigosa, P.M.;
Ramos, A.M. “Two- and three-dimensional modeling
and optimization applied to the design of a fast
hydrodynamic focusing microfluidic mixer for protein
folding,” Physics of Fluids 25, 032001 (2013)

Objective and constraints
▪ Objective Source: Ivorra et al., 2013
– Time it takes for the scalar concentration

of injected proteins to drop from a 90% to
30% concentration at a representative
probe position (y = 10 μm in the c.p.)
▪ Constraints
– Constant mixer depth = 10 μm
– Xmax = 12 μm and Ymax = 30 μm
– θ Є [0,π/3]
– s = 1.5 μm, c = 2.0 μm, e = 5.0 μm
– amin = 0.5 μm and bmin = 1 μm
– lc Є [2.5 μm, 5.0 μm]
Simplification
– ls Є [1.0 μm, 9.0 μm]
Compute only one quarter utilizing symmetries
– le Є [0.1 μm, 20.0 μm]
– Re = ρνL/η ≤ 15
Mixer simulation within FLOW-3D
▪ Mixer
– Center inlet channel:
Fill in a mixture of unfolded proteins and a
chemical denaturant (6 M GdCl solution)
– Two side inlet channels:
Inject a background buffer
▪ Base fluid
– Density = 1013 kg/m 3
– Dynamic viscosity = 8·10-4 Pa·s
▪ Scalar properties
– Advection: second order in fluid 1
– Molecular diffusion coef. = 2.026·10-6

Mixer simulation within FLOW-3D
▪ Models applied for

– Fluid sources
– Scalars
– Viscosity and turbulence
– Automatic volume of fluid advection
▪ Mesh
– Non-conforming
– Total number of mesh blocks: 1
– Total number of real cells appr. 40 000
– Cell size = 0.1 m in x- and y-direction Clock time
(unit depth in z-direction) About 7 minutes per variant on a 4 core Intel

i7-5820K @ 3.30GHz x 12
▪ Stopping criteria
– Time = 25 s

Connection between FLOW-3D and CAESES
Parametric Journal and batch

geometry files controlling the
created within simulation within
CAESES FLOW-3D
Files obtained Result files

from FLOW-3D obtained from
and FlowSight FLOW-3D
for assessments and used by
optimization
strategy

Input file prepin

From material properties to number of mesh
elements and density, everything can be addressed
and controlled through CAESES


Output data
Data obtained from FLOW-3D are transferred to
CAESES and used for objectives and/or constraints

Optimize your flow at level 1
uc
us us
Lower Baseline Upper

bound bound
Center uc m/s 0.02 0.038 0.05
Side us m/s 5.0 5.2 7.0 *
* constraint Re = ρνL/η ≤ 15 requires that Vside ≤ 7 m/s

Level 1 results from a DoE
Worst level 1 Baseline Best level 1
Lower bound Worst level 1 Baseline Best level 1 Upper bound
Vcenter m/s 0.02 0.048 0.038 0.02 0.05

Vside m/s 5.0 5.125 5.2 7.0 7.0
Objective s 1.999 1.899 1.306
Change 105% – 69%

Level 1 results from a DoE
Worst level 1 Baseline Best level 1
Contours obtained at time when the best design’s scalar concentration dropped to 30%
▪ Build a parametric model within CAESES

▪ Change geometric parameters, too

Parameters for level 2 optimization
• a1_min • R1
• a2_min • R2
• b_min • s_length
• c_length • side_loc
• l_c • theta
• l_e • w2_angle
• l_s

Parameters
• a1_min • R1
• a2_min • R2
• l_c • theta
• l_s

Parameters
• a1_min • R1
• a2_min • R2
• l_c • theta
• l_s

Parameters
• a1_min • R1
• a2_min • R2
• l_c • theta
• l_s

Parameters
• a1_min • R1
• a2_min • R2
• l_c • theta
• l_s

Parameters
• a1_min • R1
• a2_min • R2
• l_c • theta
• l_s

Parameters
• a1_min • R1
• a2_min • R2
• l_c • theta
• l_s

Parameters
• a1_min • R1
• a2_min • R2
• l_c • theta
• l_s

Parameters
• a1_min • R1
• a2_min • R2
• l_c • theta
• l_s

Parameters
• a1_min • R1
• a2_min • R2
• l_c • theta
• l_s

Parameters
• a1_min • R1
• a2_min • R2
• l_c • theta
• l_s

Parameters
• a1_min • R1
• a2_min • R2
• l_c • theta
• l_s

Parameters
• a1_min • R1
• a2_min • R2
• l_c • theta
• l_s

Evolution over various DoE and deterministic searches

Level 2 results from DoE and deterministic optimization
Initial design Baseline Best level 2
Initial design Worst level 1 Baseline Best level 1 Best level 2
Objective s 11.92 1.999 1.899 1.306 0.0935

Change 628% 105% – 69% 5%

Level 2 results
Initial design Baseline Best level 2
Contours obtained at time when the best design’s scalar concentration dropped to 30%
Die-casting
Cast part
From an engine maker

Cast part and runner system
Ø= 0.075 m
0.224 m
0.098 m
0.121 m 0.112 m 0.150 m
0.051 m 0.020 m
0.011 m

Objectives and constraints
▪ Objectives
– Overall entrained air volume and
– Free surface defect concentration
(i.e., impurities arising from oxide fast shot
formation on the free surface) phase
▪ Constraints
– Velocity in gates need to be between 20
and 60 m/s
slow shot
– Gates should be fed from runner system at
phase
the same time
– All defects should go to overflows
– Fast shot starts when metal hits the gates
– Flow should be from thin to thick sections
and on shortest route

Adjustments within CAESES
fast shot
phase
calculator within
CAESES to
determine the
fast shot, slow
shot speeds for
slow shot
each parametric
phase
model

Die-casting within FLOW-3D Cast
▪ Plunger
– CuCoBe (Copper die)
– Thermal conductivity = 300 W/(m·K)
– Density · specific heat = 3.52 · 106 J/(m3·K)
▪ Remaining space mold
– Steel H13
– Thermal conductivity = 28.6 W/(m·K)
– Density · specific heat = 3.56 · 104 J/(m3·K)
– Max. thermal penetration depth = 0.014

Dim. Liquid Solid
Cast material Aluminum Alloy A380

(LM24, ADC10/AC4B)
Density kg/m3 2460 2710
Dyn. viscosity Pa·s 0.0012 -
Specific heat J/(kg·K) 1245.3 963
Thermal conductivity W/(m·K) 104 96.2
Initial temp. °C 649
Temperature °C 574.4 497.3
Latent heat of fusion J/kg 3.89 · 105


▪ Mesh
– Mesh type: non-conforming
– Total number of mesh blocks: 2
– Total number of real cells  1 400 000
– Cell size = 2 mm

▪ Simulation properties
– One fluid with free surface model
▪ Models applied
– Air entrainment
– Cavitation
– Defect tracking
– Density evaluation
– Gravity and non-inertial reference frame
– Heat transfer
– Moving and simple deforming objects Clock time
About 2 hours per variant on a 8 core Intel
– Solidification i7-5820K @ 3.30GHz x 12
– Viscosity and turbulence
▪ Stopping criterion
– Filling fraction reached 0.999

Parametric Journal and batch

geometry files controlling the
created within simulation within
CAESES FLOW-3D
Files obtained Result files

from FLOW-3D obtained from
and FlowSight FLOW-3D
for assessments and used by
optimization
strategy

Input file prepin

From material properties to number of mesh
elements and density, everything can be addressed
and controlled through CAESES

Output data
Data obtained from FLOW-3D are transferred to
CAESES and used for objectives and/or constraints

Lower Baseline Upper

bound bound fast shot
phase
Speed during m/s 1.5 1.6 2.5
fast shot
Casting fluid °C 620 649 680
temperature
slow shot
phase

Parameters for level 2 optimization
• gate_loc_on_mold
• R_tonque
• tonque_tangency
• gate_length
• gate_angle
• left/right runner end parameter
• mid runner end parameter
• runner_conn

Parameters
• R_tonque
• tonque_tangency
• gate_length
• gate_angle
• runner_conn

Parameters
• R_tonque
• tonque_tangency
• gate_length
• gate_angle
• runner_conn

Parameters
• R_tonque
• tonque_tangency
• gate_length
• gate_angle
• runner_conn

Parameters
• R_tonque
• tonque_tangency
• gate_length
• gate_angle
• runner_conn

Parameters
• R_tonque
• tonque_tangency
• gate_length
• gate_angle
• runner_conn

Parameters
• R_tonque
• tonque_tangency
• gate_length
• gate_angle
• runner_conn

Parameters
• R_tonque
• tonque_tangency
• gate_length
• gate_angle
• runner_conn

Evolution over various DoE and deterministic searches

Level 2 results from DoE and deterministic optimization
Worst design Best level 2

Level 2 results wrt entrained air volume
Worst design Baseline Best level 2
Worst design * Baseline Best level 1 * Best level 2 *
Entrained air volume · 10-5 9.927 (109,8%) 9.045 8.896 (98,4%) 7.718 (85.3%)
Free surface defects · 10-2 2.977 (100,7%) 2.956 2.956 (100%) 2.933 (99.2%)
* evaluation criteria wrt entrained air volume 63 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

Level 2 results wrt entrained air volume

Level 2 results wrt free surface defect concentration

Level 2 results wrt free surface defect concentration

Conclusions
▪ Optimize at different levels of complexity

– Level 1:
Easily vary flow and simulation set-up
(e.g. ,speeds, temperature…)
– Level 2:
Readily include shape variations, too
▪ Two examples given for illustration
▪ Benefit from accurate CFD (FLOW-3D and
FLOW-3D Cast) by coupling to robust variable
CAD and optimization (CAESES®)
▪ Benefit from tight cooperation between
Flow Science and FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS

“To boldly go where no man has gone before”

www.friendship-systems.com
Dr.-Ing. Stefan Harries MSE

harries@friendship-systems.com

Outlook

Outlook

Simulation-driven design from m to km
Source: J. Homann, Wikipedia Source: DSME
Human hair
ranges from
50 to 100m in
diameter
SDD over 7 orders of magnitude
From microfluidics with 10 m of beam to
maritime systems with 400m in length

LEENJE AMA I Flow3scast PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

LEENJE AMA I Flow3scast PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

LEENJE AMA I Flow3scast PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Optimize your flow using FLOW-3D and CAESES®

Ceyhan Erdem (FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS),

FLOW-3D Users Conference, Barcelona, June 5-7, 2017

FLOW-3D Users Conference, Barcelona, June 5-7, 2017

Upfront CAD Upfront Optimization

Variable Pre- Software Post- Optimization &

3 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

4 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

5 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

6 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

7 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

8 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

9 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

11 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

12 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

▪ Objective Source: Ivorra et al., 2013

– Time it takes for the scalar concentration

14 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

▪ Models applied for

(unit depth in z-direction) About 7 minutes per variant on a 4 core Intel

15 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

Parametric Journal and batch

Files obtained Result files

16 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

Input file prepin

17 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

18 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

19 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

Lower Baseline Upper

Center uc m/s 0.02 0.038 0.05

Side us m/s 5.0 5.2 7.0 *

* constraint Re = ρνL/η ≤ 15 requires that Vside ≤ 7 m/s

20 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

Worst level 1 Baseline Best level 1

Lower bound Worst level 1 Baseline Best level 1 Upper bound

Vcenter m/s 0.02 0.048 0.038 0.02 0.05

21 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

Worst level 1 Baseline Best level 1

▪ Build a parametric model within CAESES

23 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

24 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

25 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

26 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

27 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

28 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

29 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

30 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

31 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

32 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

33 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

34 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

35 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

36 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

37 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017

Initial design Baseline Best level 2

Initial design Worst level 1 Baseline Best level 1 Best level 2

Objective s 11.92 1.999 1.899 1.306 0.0935

38 FRIENDSHIP SYSTEMS © 2017