Hello to everyone but especially to ex-CFX Users! I am a 3-year CFX User and not quite happy with it. Anybody could share his comparison of NUMECA against CFX, please?

Your comparison basing on what? their accuracy? their prices?their time-consuming? or their robustness?

I think it's nonsense to compare two different CFD Code, especially these comericial softwares. to say the truth, there is still a long way for NUMECA INTERNATIONAL to go.

Dear all,

When NUMECA products are confronted to its competitors, their rapidity and precision have always won.

As a matter of fact, NUMECA offers modern and automated CFD solutions.

Its technologies result in the most rapid and precise solvers. Quick turn-around in the design cycle and its high quality results have cut overal cost and time in the most important industries that have chosen NUMECA products as their design tools.

Regards,

Jip

HAHA,Jip. You must be a guy working in Belguim

Dear All

In the fundamental CFD algorithm, CFX belongs to 'Pressure Correction Method', while NUMECA to 'Time Marching Method'. PCM was developed primarily for incompressible turbulent applications, one of the famous schemes to be SIMPLE, and thus it has to be extended to cover compressible flow applications using some special skills. TMM was developed for compressible turbulent applications with a strong conservative formulation of the hyperbolic equations, and thus it has to be extended to cover incompressible flow applications using a special skill such as the pre-conditioning with beta. My opinion is that each code must be much better in its own home ground.

Hi Kevin,

CFX does not employ a pressure correction method. This is a common misconception. CFX employs a fully implicit, pressure based solver that solves the coupled mass and momentum equations simultaneously. As such, it does not suffer from the problems that pressure-correction based codes face. There is no special treatment necessary to handle incompressible, sub/tran/hyper-sonic flows.

-Robin