Have you heard? Ansys to aquire FLUENT!!!

All you guys better start learning Fluent I guess, CFX will go the way of the dodo!!

Not likely.

Of course they will kill off CFX, why do the need two codes, they will strip CFX of the best bits then convert the users from one to the other (tempting them with free training or some such). It doesnt really matter to ansys, they bought CFX for so little money they wont have lost much, they will just have a massive combined market share.

Where is this news published? I didn't find any announcements on either fluent's or ansys's websites. Confirmation?

It is official, check out www.cfdreview.com

Yes, it's the begining of the end to CFX. If CFX is good enough, Ansys would not need to spend such a huge amount of money to acquire Fluent. $20 millions against $565 millions, which one would win?

But what about the user interface? And turbomachinery-specific capabilities? I hope there is some significant cross-pollination there.

They will probably rip the bits that CFX is good at (i.e. the turbomachinert stuff) out and integrate it within fluent, I imagine most of the bits that are taken will be more solver side and possibly meshing side. I doubt very much that they will retain the gui, they have one that does the job why have another?

http://today.reuters.com/stocks/Over...?symbol=ANSS.O

Check Ansys' stock price

You clearly have no understanding of software architecture. It is not practial to "rip useful bits out" and put them in Fluent. It simply does not work that way. The two solvers are fundamentally different as well, so it would be an impossible task anyways.

If any stripping is done it will be the other way around. Useful models from Fluent are reimplemented in the CFX solver, which is a better core solver. Maybe the whole thing is rebranded or something as well, who knows.

It's all speculation anyways.

Dan.

For CFD in industial applications CFX walks all over Fluent (I've used both) Solver robustness, Post processing (fluent is useless at that), software ergonomics, ease of use. Maybe the university bods like thier 1970's fortran gui but Fluent needs to move into the 21st century.

The way I see it the only thing Fluent has over CFX is the combustion/reacting flows modules.

My bet(hope)is that Fluent gets the chop and CFX is retained

just my 2 cents.. Sam

I think the idea of canning fluent for cfx is a little hard to imagine!

Neale/Dan

ever heard of fidap or comet?

If what you said is true, then why Fluent's turnover is a magnitude larger than CFX?

and why was cfx bought for $20 million and fluent was bought for $565million

Hahahahahah.... wonder how long it will take Fluent to brainwash you the same way CFX did?

Is that you Williams? biatch. While the CFX technology might be a bit better (not quantum leaps ahead like you guys like to think) it'll cost way more to convert the Fluent user base than vice versa.

Sorry, but I hear there's some good MTB'ing in Vermont

There is no doubt that Fluent is bigger and both codes have their advantages. I don't think you'll see either code go away anytime soon. In the end, who really cares which one is "dropped" or if an entirely new code is developed? Whatever comes of this will be good for everyone, because ANSYS is not about to give up any advantage.

Very exciting indeed!

Guy

Sam Z, I agree with you. I've heard the same thing. The only advantage of FLUENT over CFX is the combustion and reacting flows.

I've used both extensively and I prefer CFX. I cringe when I have to run something in FLUENT.

Yep, you fingered me man.... I agree, not quantam leaps ahead.

The bottom line is that any migration of models/code from CFX to Fluent or Fluent to CFX will involve a rewrite. CFX is coupled element-vertex based, Fluent is segregated cell-centered. CFX is written in FORTRAN, Fluent is written in C or C++ or whatever. It's a very difficult software engineering problem.

I don't see that from a core solver standpoint that the CFX into Fluent route makes any sense, you loose the benefits of all the coupling we do. Many of the models in Fluent can easily be reimplemented, some of course may be harder though...

At any rate, this "merger" "aquisition" whatever you want to call it, will give us a chance to really get into the guts of things and see what can realistically be done.

Neale