Hi Ivar,
Thank you for your reply. Adding [1/μm] to the variables in the boolean restrictions for the cut plane gives a syntax error, but I have appended "e-6" to all of the numbers and am now getting 3.05e-16, which still doesn't really make sense, though at least it isn't 0.
COMSOL does indeed let you define a surface normal for cut planes (you will see the instructions on how to do so are in the blog post you linked), and I was hoping that there was a similar option for a parameterized surface, as that is really what I would like to use.
I assume that by "define an internal boundary" you mean create a boundary in your geometry and then run the computation? I realize that this is an option, but I would prefer to define the boundary in post-processing so that I can explore different boundaries easily without having to recompute my solution each time. It seems that this is exactly what the parameterized surface is for, so I do not know why it is not working.
Best,
Geoffrey
Thank you for your reply. Adding [1/μm] to the variables in the boolean restrictions for the cut plane gives a syntax error, but I have appended "e-6" to all of the numbers and am now getting 3.05e-16, which still doesn't really make sense, though at least it isn't 0.
COMSOL does indeed let you define a surface normal for cut planes (you will see the instructions on how to do so are in the blog post you linked), and I was hoping that there was a similar option for a parameterized surface, as that is really what I would like to use.
I assume that by "define an internal boundary" you mean create a boundary in your geometry and then run the computation? I realize that this is an option, but I would prefer to define the boundary in post-processing so that I can explore different boundaries easily without having to recompute my solution each time. It seems that this is exactly what the parameterized surface is for, so I do not know why it is not working.
Best,
Geoffrey