I'd love to hear what you found most helpful and what questions/topics you'd like addressed in future episodes! So please comment below or send an email to podcast@cfd4industry.com
AMAZING KADE; I have no other words !! The way Saplding spotted the problem, "Parabolic equation has no diffusion that propagates upstream." That is accurate, but imagine when they were learning and developing all that knowledge. It may be common sense today but look at it from the eyes of the people developing all this... I worked on parabolized Navier Stokes Equations at the beginning of my PhD and it struck me the simplicity and its resolving power simultaneously! That reminds me about the elliptic nature of disturbance in the BL; I remember I had a discussion with a lecturer many years ago about the nature of signals that trigger transition !! AMAZING !!
Thank you so much for your feedback, Julio. Reminds me of this statement from Hirsch's text "As with many ideas which appear simple afterwards, the orginal development required deep understanding of the problems both numerical and physical."
That episode was amazing! The creativity of the CFD developers in using pure physics to describe complex phenomena is truly inspiring. Thank you very much!
I think what resonated with me was the distinction between being a scientist and an engineer. Which is the difference between good enough to solve problems vs state of the art accuracy. Sometimes there can be frustration from CAE simulation engineers in small teams dealing with both method development and production pipelines, that designers do not care enough to understand the physics and limitations behind the insights given to them, they just expect an answer of go/no-go. When designs have less margins due to cost and efficiency reasons, models which were previously sufficiently accurate suddenly need improvement and this is where engineers need to put on scientist hats to figure things out. I think ability to adapt to this role switch is important to have in a career in this field.
I enjoyed our discussion very much. For the next sessions, I recommend that 1. It would be great to have an expert working on CFD and AI (ML) together, most likely on flow past over airfoils, cylinders, etc., 2. CFD and parallel computation Thank you.
Hey dear. I saw your RUclips channel. Your channel has many videos but not enough views and subscribers. Your channel should be optimized, your videos are very good but your video optimization is very bad Example: SEO score is zero, no perfect title - description - no SEO friendly tags added, no social media sharing Platform and some in your RUclips channel Settings are not correct. Because of this your video is not reaching the people who are interested and you are not getting enough views, likes and subscriptions Many problems for which your video views and subscribers are not good. As a result, your video views are not affected. You need SEO for your RUclips channel immediately. As a video SEO expert, I look forward to your response. Thank you.
I'd love to hear what you found most helpful and what questions/topics you'd like addressed in future episodes! So please comment below or send an email to podcast@cfd4industry.com
AMAZING KADE; I have no other words !! The way Saplding spotted the problem, "Parabolic equation has no diffusion that propagates upstream." That is accurate, but imagine when they were learning and developing all that knowledge. It may be common sense today but look at it from the eyes of the people developing all this... I worked on parabolized Navier Stokes Equations at the beginning of my PhD and it struck me the simplicity and its resolving power simultaneously!
That reminds me about the elliptic nature of disturbance in the BL; I remember I had a discussion with a lecturer many years ago about the nature of signals that trigger transition !! AMAZING !!
Thank you so much for your feedback, Julio. Reminds me of this statement from Hirsch's text "As with many ideas which appear simple afterwards, the orginal development required deep understanding of the problems both numerical and physical."
That episode was amazing! The creativity of the CFD developers in using pure physics to describe complex phenomena is truly inspiring. Thank you very much!
Glad you enjoyed Aki's wealth of experience!
I think what resonated with me was the distinction between being a scientist and an engineer. Which is the difference between good enough to solve problems vs state of the art accuracy.
Sometimes there can be frustration from CAE simulation engineers in small teams dealing with both method development and production pipelines, that designers do not care enough to understand the physics and limitations behind the insights given to them, they just expect an answer of go/no-go.
When designs have less margins due to cost and efficiency reasons, models which were previously sufficiently accurate suddenly need improvement and this is where engineers need to put on scientist hats to figure things out. I think ability to adapt to this role switch is important to have in a career in this field.
Yes, the scientist improves the enigneer's tools and the engineer can focus the scientist's effort!
This was amazing 🎉 Thanks Kade for this insightful podcast.
So glad you enjoyed it! Aki had a wealth of knowledge to share (:
Really insightful words from Dr. Akshai Runchal. Thanks for sharing Kade
I agree! Dr. Runchal is full of wisdom.
That's it what I am looking for in this platform. Thanks for this content ❤love from India🇮🇳
I love hearing that. Thank you so much!
I enjoyed our discussion very much.
For the next sessions, I recommend that
1. It would be great to have an expert working on CFD and AI (ML) together, most likely on flow past over airfoils, cylinders, etc.,
2. CFD and parallel computation
Thank you.
Thank you for the feedback! I've got some ML episodes lined up.
Great podcast. I feel very related with the research hat and consulting hat in CFD project ^^
Thanks for the feedback. I've spent the majority of my career in CFD consulting and Aki hit the nail right on the head.
Valid insights...
Hey dear.
I saw your RUclips channel. Your channel has many videos but not enough views and subscribers. Your channel should be optimized, your videos are very good but your video optimization is very bad Example: SEO score is zero, no perfect title - description - no SEO friendly tags added, no social media sharing Platform and some in your RUclips channel Settings are not correct. Because of this your video is not reaching the people who are interested and you are not getting enough views, likes and subscriptions
Many problems for which your video views and subscribers are not good.
As a result, your video views are not affected.
You need SEO for your RUclips channel immediately. As a video SEO expert, I look forward to your response.
Thank you.