Jake Smith

Hi Ceyhan, Thanks for your help. At present I have roughly solved this problem. The method is to use a lower version of Workbench. I will contact you again if I still have this problem. Thanks again for helping me! Additionally I will write a working summary about my experience using CAESES. I will also send it to your email at that time. I hope you can give me some advice. Thank you!

Hi Ceyhan, The reason I'm using an older version of CAESES is because the license for the new version is a trial license. When using the ACT function, remote verification may be required. Verification may fail due to network issues. Therefore, I cannot import geometry from the new version of CAESES on WORKBENCH. Next, I'll apply for an offline license and try again. Thank you very much for your reply!

Hi Claus， I have received your email and thank you very much for your guidance. Maybe it's because I haven't fully learned the commands and can't understand your thinking. I will learn the relevant commands. I will contact you again if I have questions, thank you again!

Hi Ceyhan， I have solved the problem of shared topology. But the problem that the geometry cannot be updated automatically still exists.The complete project can be found in the file sent to your email address. By installing the latest ACT components in WORKBENCH 2023R1. Then call the 4.4.2 version of CAESES and you should be able to reproduce the issue. thank you for your reply!

Hi,friendship guys! I use the MRF method to optimize the propeller design on Workbench. But there will be problems when sharing topology in Fluent Meshing. I would like to ask if it is possible to complete the shared topology operation in CAESES. Looking forward to your reply, thank you!

Hi Ceyhan, I have sent the files for CAESES and WORKBENCH to your email. Looking forward to your replies and suggestions. Thanks you!

Hi Ceyhan, I've encountered another problem. Workbench can import FSC files and recognize the geometry. However, when I use Workbench DX to perform optimization calculations, the calculation results of all design points are consistent with the calculation results of the first design point. May I ask what caused the problem? Looking forward to your reply!

Hi Claus. Thank you for your reply despite your busy schedule. I'm also exploring optimization designs using OptisLang and Caeses. Looking forward to discussing with you!

Yes, thank you very much for teaching. A new question has been sent to your email. Looking forward to your reply, thanks!

Hi, Claus I have sent it to your email. Please check it out, thanks! Jack

Hi friendship guys!I have some doubts about Blade Analysis for Propellers. 1.I have watched the Caeses4.2.2 instructional video on this function. Is this function improved in 5.2.3? 2.After the STEP is imported into Caeses, the surface type is FBreppart. This caused the Feature fail to analyze.How to create type FBreppart as type NURBS Surface？ 3.I noticed in the tutorial that the propeller is divided into suction side and pressure side. How to divide it in caeses？ Thank you for your reply！

Hi Ceyhan, Looks like a license issue. My permit will expire on August 23rd. However, Caeses cannot be opened right now. Please help me check if there is any problem with the license, thank you very much!

Thank you very much for your reply! I checked the relevant information, the calculation formula of Camber is f/C. Is this correct please? Jack

Hi Ceyhan, I did not open more than two Caeses at the same time. I think it might be due to license issues. For example, when working on the workbench, Caeses will verify the license together. The verification may have failed due to a network problem. I will download version 5.2.2. If there is any progress in the future, I will let you know, thank you for your reply!

Hi friendship guys! I have a question about blade design. I have read FGenericBlade in Type Documentation. My question is are the normalized values of chord, thickness, camber, pitch, rake and skew all divided by R. Because the thickness is very small after dividing by R, it does not match the actual model. Looking forward to your reply, thanks!