second motionModel

[aestupinan-github]

First of all, great job with this code :)

I'd like to have a rotary shape and a conveyor belt
Quick report, when I add movement to a second wall (conveyor belt), I get an error:

Error occured in file (25):.../phasicFlow-v-1.0/src/phasicFlow/dictionary/fileDictionary.cpp
Function: pFlow::fileDictionary::fileDictionary(const pFlow::objectFile&, pFlow::repository*)
Error in reading from dictionary .../conveyorBelt_coneRot/0/geometry/motionModel

[PhasicFlow]

Thanks. :)
I guess you forget to execute command geometryPhasicFlow to convert your input geometry into some data structure that PhasicFlow understand. You also need to execute particlesPhasicFlow before the start of simulation.

[aestupinan-github]

Thank you for the fast follow up.
In fact the error comes upon execution of 'geometryPhasicFlow'. The case is the modification of 'conveyorBelt'; I've removed the box and added a rotating cone (still labeled box). If I comment the "motionModel" for the conveyor belt the case runs fine, with the 2 model I get the error.
Here I'm attaching the case

conveyorBelt_coneRot_2move.zip

[PhasicFlow]

You cannot define two different motionModels in a single simulation. It can either be conveyorBelt or rotationAxis. If you really want this feature in the code, you need to wait for a few weeks. We are working on it to have various motion models in a single simulation. Maybe under the name generalMotion.

[PhasicFlow]

@wanqing0421
Suppose we are going to incorporate a general motion model. What would it be look like?

motionModel general; 

generalInfo
{
	rotAxis 
	{
                type     rotatingAxis;
		p1        (0 0 0.0);  
		p2        (0 0 1.0);
		omega     3.14; 	
		startTime 1;        
		endTime   30;
	}
        
        motion2
        {
                type vibrating;
                ///....
        }
        
         mRotAxis
        {
              type multiRotatingAxis;
              rotationAxis   something;
        }

}

One way to define it is like this:

generalInfo
{
    rotatingAxis 
    (
        rotAixs1
        {
            p1 ();
            p2 ();
        }

        rotAxis2
        {
            p1  ();
            p2  ();
        }    
    );
        
    vibrating
    (
        vib1
        {

        }

        vib2
        {

        }
    );
        
    multiRotatingAxis
    (
        // ... //
    );

}

[wanqing0421]

In my opinion, the first way is more simple and easy to use.

[PhasicFlow]

I myself prefer the first one. But, the problem is that the syntax for defining the model in dictionary is a bit different. We need to specify type for the model, while we do not do this when we use regular ones.

But in the second model, we use the a syntax as same as the regular ones, with no changes.
The second problem is that, we have, for example, multi-rotating axis motion model which consists of two or more components and in future we will have other types. Enclosing them in a separate section would lead to simplicity in program side and also reduces confusion in the user side.
Do you have anything better in your mind that makes file setup easier for user?

[wanqing0421]

From the user's perspective, we may have multiple motion models in a simulation.

The setup file like this:

    motionModel general; 
    
    generalInfo
    {
    	rotAxis 
    	{
                    type     rotatingAxis;
    		p1        (0 0 0.0);  
    		p2        (0 0 1.0);
    		omega     3.14; 	
    		startTime 1;        
    		endTime   30;
    	}
            
            motion2
            {
                    type vibrating;
                    ///....
            }
            
             mRotAxis
            {
                  type multiRotatingAxis;
                  rotationAxis   something;
            }
    
    }

Then, we can define the motionModel in geometry dict:

    surfaces
    {
        wall1
        {
            type       planeWall;    
    
            motion       motion1;    
        }
    
        wall2
        {
            type       planeWall;   
    
            motion       motion2;    
        }
    }

But, there are some questions, how to define two motions in same geometry? for example, a geometric object may exhibit both translational and rotational compound motion simultaneously

[PhasicFlow]

Each wall entity/geometry object can only have one motion model. If you want to have one object, for example wall1 can only have one motion.

If you wish to have a new type of motion, you must develop a new one.

I still think using first syntax is not very wise, since we cannot use the same old code for general model. But if we use the second style, we can use the same old code for general model.

[wanqing0421]

If we can use the same old code for general model, I suggest use the second syntax. Then it can be use like:

      generalInfo
      {
          rotatingAxis 
          (
              rotAixs1
              {
                  p1 ();
                  p2 ();
              }
      
              rotAxis2
              {
                  p1  ();
                  p2  ();
              }    
          );
              
          vibrating
          (
              vib1
              {
      
              }
      
              vib2
              {
      
              }
          );
              
          multiRotatingAxis
          (
              // ... //
          );
      
      }

Then, we can define the motionModel in geometry dict:

surfaces
{
    wall1
    {
        type       planeWall;    

        motion       rotAixs1;    
    }

    wall2
    {
        type       planeWall;   

        motion       rotAxis2;    
    }
    ...
}