# FSI with interFoam and CalculiX

**URL:** <https://precice.discourse.group/t/fsi-with-interfoam-and-calculix/277>\
**Category:** Is preCICE for me?\
**Tags:** openfoam, calculix, fsi, multiphase\
**Created:** [July 21, 2020, 8:33am UTC](https://precice.discourse.group/t/fsi-with-interfoam-and-calculix/277 "2020-07-21T08:33:29Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![uekerman](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/precice.discourse.group/uekerman/32/2199_2.png) [@uekerman](https://precice.discourse.group/u/uekerman)\
**Post date:** [July 22, 2020, 7:40am UTC](https://precice.discourse.group/t/fsi-with-interfoam-and-calculix/277/2 "2020-07-22T07:40:41Z")

</div>

Hi @jianzhou722!

interFoam has already been used with the OpenFOAM adapter:

- [FSI: OpenFOAM adapter with interFOAM](https://precice.discourse.group/t/fsi-openfoam-adapter-with-interfoam/175)
- fluid-fluid coupling in [this fork](https://github.com/chrisosse/openfoam-adapter)

There should be no fundamental problem and the approach would indeed be very similar to the standard FSI tutorial you mentioned.

“Dynamic meshing” sounds a bit more critical. Currently, preCICE relies on static coupling meshes. Meaning that you define them only once during initialization. This is enough if you do FSI based on an ALE approach. If you want to refine your fluid mesh, however, in every timestep and with this also your coupling mesh, then you reach the borders of preCICE currently. We are working on this, however: [https://github.com/precice/precice/issues/225](https://github.com/precice/precice/issues/225)

---

_[View the full topic](https://precice.discourse.group/t/fsi-with-interfoam-and-calculix/277)._