Fluent meshing

ferroburak · October 26, 2014, 17:20

Hi,
I would like to mesh a centrfiugal compressor geometry prepared in Catia v5 using Fluent meshing instead of Gambit meshing tool for a graduate study. I'm familiat with Gambit but it is a bit slow for such a complex 3d analysis.

Can you tell me which version of Fluent would be good for this purpose? Should it be Fluent R15? Also can you compare Fluent meshing with Gambit meshing in terms of speed and mesh quality?

Thanks,
Burak Pehlivan

amin.z · October 27, 2014, 11:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by ferroburak

Hi,
I would like to mesh a centrfiugal compressor geometry prepared in Catia v5 using Fluent meshing instead of Gambit meshing tool for a graduate study. I'm familiat with Gambit but it is a bit slow for such a complex 3d analysis.

Can you tell me which version of Fluent would be good for this purpose? Should it be Fluent R15? Also can you compare Fluent meshing with Gambit meshing in terms of speed and mesh quality?

Thanks,
Burak Pehlivan

Hey
Fluent meshing?
I don't think fluent able to generate mesh like gambit or icem!
Is your mean ansys meshing?

CeesH · October 28, 2014, 01:50

I think you mean ANSYS meshing right, not FLUENT T-grid?

I don't have much experience in T-grid, so I'm gonna assume ansys meshing.
My personal feeling is that ANSYS meshing is a very reasonable programme, but it depends on what you want. ANSYS meshing provides a lot of automization, with relatively limited costumization options compared to ICEM. As a result, you can create good meshes, but the more complex the geometry, the worse it gets. For the type of meshes I make (mostly stirred tanks, pipes, etc.) the results are rather good, in a short amount of time. But around more complex, curved impellers, you are forced to stick with unstructured meshes which may not always be as good as it could be. This may mean you need more grid cells to get reasonable results - which means extra calculation time, but your meshing time goes down significantly.

So to summarize:
Ansys meshing: Quick results, easy to learn, reasonable in most cases. But: mesh quality may be problematic for complex geometries. As a result, possibly a longer calculation time.

ICEM meshing: Steeper learning curve, but in the end, likely better meshes than with ANSYS, as a result, possibly better calculation outcomes (on smaller meshes)

October 26, 2014, 17:20	Fluent meshing	#1
ferroburak New Member Burak Kaya Join Date: Nov 2011 Posts: 21 Rep Power: 14	Hi, I would like to mesh a centrfiugal compressor geometry prepared in Catia v5 using Fluent meshing instead of Gambit meshing tool for a graduate study. I'm familiat with Gambit but it is a bit slow for such a complex 3d analysis. Can you tell me which version of Fluent would be good for this purpose? Should it be Fluent R15? Also can you compare Fluent meshing with Gambit meshing in terms of speed and mesh quality? Thanks, Burak Pehlivan

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
looking for a smart interface matlab fluent	chary	FLUENT	24	June 18, 2021 10:07
[ANSYS Meshing] ''Contact sizing'' in 2D Fluent meshing	kaeran	ANSYS Meshing & Geometry	2	January 30, 2015 10:53
''Contact sizing'' in 2D Fluent meshing	kaeran	FLUENT	0	October 20, 2014 06:21
[Other] Bridge meshing in Workbench (for Fluent)	Plusquamperfectum	ANSYS Meshing & Geometry	1	May 20, 2010 15:30
Fluent 6.2 dynamic meshing	tiger	FLUENT	1	May 4, 2005 12:58

October 28, 2014, 01:50		#3
CeesH Senior Member Cees Haringa Join Date: May 2013 Location: Delft Posts: 607 Rep Power: 0	I think you mean ANSYS meshing right, not FLUENT T-grid? I don't have much experience in T-grid, so I'm gonna assume ansys meshing. My personal feeling is that ANSYS meshing is a very reasonable programme, but it depends on what you want. ANSYS meshing provides a lot of automization, with relatively limited costumization options compared to ICEM. As a result, you can create good meshes, but the more complex the geometry, the worse it gets. For the type of meshes I make (mostly stirred tanks, pipes, etc.) the results are rather good, in a short amount of time. But around more complex, curved impellers, you are forced to stick with unstructured meshes which may not always be as good as it could be. This may mean you need more grid cells to get reasonable results - which means extra calculation time, but your meshing time goes down significantly. So to summarize: Ansys meshing: Quick results, easy to learn, reasonable in most cases. But: mesh quality may be problematic for complex geometries. As a result, possibly a longer calculation time. ICEM meshing: Steeper learning curve, but in the end, likely better meshes than with ANSYS, as a result, possibly better calculation outcomes (on smaller meshes)