|
[Sponsors] |
November 21, 2000, 15:01 |
Fluent vs. CFX vs. Star CD
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Does anyone have any opinions on which if these packages is better for the beginner user for modeling centrifugal turbomachinery?
|
|
November 22, 2000, 00:33 |
Re: Fluent vs. CFX vs. Star CD
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
(1). In response to your e-mail, even though I have given you the recommendation about the code which I think is more widely used in pumps and fans, it is still a good idea to visit each vendor's website to get more samples related to your applications. (2).Radial turbomachinery is highly 3-D, and the flow field always involves flow separation even under the design conditions. (3). It is also a good idea to read the ASME/ Journal of Turbomachinery. You should be able to find some published CFD papers related to the radial turbomachinery.(centrifugal pumps and fans)
|
|
November 22, 2000, 05:36 |
Re: Fluent vs. CFX vs. Star CD
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Sam, I think it is too hard to answer this type of question and I don't think that there is a reliable answer at all. To answer your question you should try to use these codes for solving the same problem and compare its outcome with experimental results.
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mesh and Solve Times for CFX, Fluent, CD-adapco | Jade M | Main CFD Forum | 4 | August 28, 2012 03:54 |
Import CFX def into Fluent | eric_wang | FLUENT | 0 | April 18, 2011 14:14 |
High Resolution (CFX) vs 2nd Order Upwind (Fluent) | gravis | ANSYS | 3 | March 24, 2011 03:43 |
Fluent Vs CFX, density and pressure | Omer | CFX | 9 | June 28, 2007 05:13 |
Reynolds Stress Model in Fluent Vs CFX | Tim | FLUENT | 0 | December 6, 2005 23:03 |