(1). More than 3 days without any message from our World famous John C. Chien... (2). Has he left the ship ?!?!

Probably his free computer timings are over,but he is an irreppressible character and come back soon.Otherwise we may enquire with Mr.Jonas also.

(1). CFD is only my hobby for the last ten years. (2). The more realistic goal was how to keep a company or a website alive without actually pouring in cash. So, the CFD forum was my project in this respect. (3). In old days, researchers in CFD field were at post PhD levels, and there is no problem in promoting CFD. (4). It is different today, especially when undergraduate students are talking about running a CFD code to do his project. I think, we are not there (the CFD is not there, but the so-called CFD codes are everywhere) (5). I have been busy studying other fields such as OpenGL games programing and computer graphics. And even the web programming using FrontPage is more attractive to me. (6). I think, as soon as CFD get into the hands of non-PhD's, the CFD ceases to exist. And you are begining to see companies looking for engineers to run commercial cfd codes or in-house codes. (7). So, to minimize further mis-understanding of CFD as CFD codes, I think, I need to spend more of my time doing something more interesting to me, such as computer graphics or games programming,etc. I have a lot of reading to do. And if you need to ask me a CFD question, you are free to send me e-mail. But there is no guarantee that I will read the e-mail on the regular basis. Anyway, it is about the time for me to more reading instead of writing.

(5) ... And even the web programming using FrontPage is more attractive to me. ...

Doing web programming using FrontPage is like using CFD-codes without any knowledge, like "non-PHDs doing CFD"

(1). Yes, that's the type of mis-understanding with CFD. CFD is not about running codes or programming. (2). The same is true with FrontPage. Using FrontPage is not programming. HTML is not a programming language, it is a markup language. (3). CFD has nothing to do with webpage design and setup at all.

Bit arrogant arent we john?

I admire John a great deal and he is an asset to this forum or any company. I hope you (Dr. Chien) don't stray to far from CFD...

The thoughts on non-phd's doing CFD is a bit strong, as I seem to remember several bicyle designers who took to the air when scientists (Langley) were stuck on the ground... but at the same time, if you are going to the moon (for example), would it not be best to utilize the best people for the job? Obviously Phd's should be best, imho.

Although in this day an age, it seems that not even B.S. engineers are always doing 'engineering'... Where I work they call some draftsmen 'engineers' and I could see how to a Phd developing CFD that is how one might feel seeing B.S. & M.S. using CFD...

At the beginning, I thought it was quite funny, both the comments of John C. Chien and the comments of the comments of John C. Chien. But as we use to say, the best jokes are the shortest. So, please, all of you guys, be respectful of the forum. If you want to continue to "play", why don't you create a forum called for example "John C. Chien" ? I am sure it would satisfy everybody.

Regards Jean

Hi all,

interesting, what do people make of everyone from the binman (sanitation engineer) to the washing machine repair man (Appliance engineer) using the term engineer to describe themselves? I have every respect for all these positions, but I feel that people do not under stand what us engineers do. My grandmother for example is under the impression I am knee deep in grease from cars each and every day! I have an MSc...about to do PhD...it is depressing to see the proliferation of the term into all walks of life. Any comments??

I predict this one will be off topic really quickly!

But here it goes.

In Mechanical Engineering, the magazine that's sent monthly to the members of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers International (ASME for short), there was a running debate in the letters column about the use of the term 'engineer' and its relationship to the professional credentials, PE (for professional engineer) in the US, P.Eng. in Canada, Chartered Engineer (??) in Britain.

In the U.S. (and I expect Canada and the U.K. as well), the title is awarded after a prescribed amount of applicable experience and successful completion of written and oral exams. The purpose is to promote competency as one means of enhancing public safety. In Tennessee, where I happen to reside, it is illegal to refer to yourself as an 'engineer' if you have not actually been awarded the title by the state board. The debate in Mechanical Engineering centered on the actual value of the credential for earning a living.

How might this relate to CFD and running a commercial code? First, as John Chien has stated often, one must be cautious in accepting or interpreting the results from any CFD code, commercial, public domain, home grown, or whatever. If a design that has the potential to impact the public safety is involved (a new airliner for example), the responsibility for caution is paramount. Of course, the designer has that responsibility even if he's using a slide rule and graph paper!

Presumably the more experience and formal education the analyst has absorbed (BS, MS, Doctorate), the more able he/she is to interpret the results of an analysis or design calculation. I could of course make the same assertion regarding the interpretation of physical experiments, one's own or those reported in the technical literature. Engineer, physicist, mathematician, computer scientist, ultimately you must be skeptical of any claim and cautious in making conclusions. Even those given here!

Jim Park, PhD, PE (ret)

In France where I originate from, being an engineer requires for you to have an engineering degree and is relatively prestigious esp. when it is awarded by well known engineering schools. It requires a fair amount of skills in mathematics and physics (usually a preliminary two to three year university training in math. or physics), which should allow you to understand CFD principles.

It is true that doing a PhD on top of my five year engineering degree gave me the oportunity to understand it a lot better, but I don't see why I wouldn'y have been able to pick up the skills progressively out of my engineering school if I hadn't had the chance to do a PhD. I think John is in denial there.

(1). If someone said to you that this space vehicle is not flying, and he said that we have a team of programmers writing this CFD code which was use in the design of this vehicle, then what are you going to do? (2). Then the guy said, here is the listing of the algebraic equations derived by one of our retired senior (with a PhD degree), and the set of governing equations and boundary conditions. Then what are you going to do? (3). After that, the guy said, you have been fooling around with the CFD codes, so can you take a look at these equations and tell us what's wrong with the code and our design? (4). If you can read the governing equations and the algebraic equations used for coding, and tell the guy that "there is no error in the formulation and equations" or "here is the missing term" or "this term should be written this way", then you have the PhD level of training. (remember that even the PhD tends to fake the codeing when the result is not quite right.)

Ladies and Gentlemen,

It seems to me that WE ALL have an interest in this subject, (and I am sure that it is only one of many subjects). It doesnt realy matter what level you are at in a subject as long as you know your limitations.

I am only an engineer, I started work in structural FEA but over a number of years CFD content has crept in and increased to the extent that it is now the major area of my analysis. I am only keeping ahead due to a lot of reading and practice. My experiance is perfect for my job! A PhD is a nice idea but not necessary for my function.

John, Please understand that if others are not purists it doesnt mean that they dont contribute. We engineers promote CFD and other subjects to a real world that doesnt understand what we do and doesnt give a shit as long as it saves/makes money. When I produce my final reports on projects at work nobody reads the appendicies with all the calculations, assumptions etc. The decision makers look at the colour prints! Red is bad, Green is good.

People complain in this forum about the short comming's of commercial codes. They are the best thing that happend to computational analysis. Without the vision of Gosmann et al. CFD and other numerical disciplin's would hardly have got into industry.

John talks about the lack of opportunity in CFD. In my experiance that is not true. I have found many jobs in industry (unrelated to Defense). I think demand is still behind structural analysis but it is picking up in all industries. Phd's in industry are not uncommon, but you dont need one to do a good job! There is no accounting for experiance. I dont think that many of our Scientific Hero's had PhD's.

If you dont have a practical turn of mind stay at University- Write the codes that help the engineers do a better job doing what engineers do---Problem solving!

(1). Clone yourself first. (2). Send your clone to Imperial College to get a PhD in CFD. (3). After his graduation with a PhD, then you two can sit down and discuss the right approach to CFD. (4). To have or not to have a PhD in CFD, that's the question. (5). I have just found out that FrontPage is more interesting than writing a CFD code. That's just my personal opinion. (6). To help a professional engineer with a CFD code, that's just not the right approach. This is because, the computer will keep changing, the operating system will keep changing, the language will keep changing, and for the survival of the vendor company, the code will keep changing. So, it is a good idea to learn the basics... the geometry/mesh generation, the turbulence modeling, the numerical analysis, the solution procedure, etc... And you can always find a professional programmer who is properly trained to write the correct code. (7). What is the British definition of CFD? Just curious, but I will not have to time to read your comment. Good Luck.

Why Imperial college? Is it one of the best in the world?

No Mr.Jean,I will be too pleased to go by the ways of Mr.John C.Chien,every body has got his own way.His services to the forum are immaculate and I would expect him not be away from it for too long.I may also not accept some of his views and I totally find the views of Mr.Erich to be echoing mine.Regards and thanks

Imperial College has a history in CFD, for me, its link to the "SIMPLE" methods. Best in the World (No). Experienced (Yes). I say its not the best because I don't think there is a best. 33% of the project is the students ability, 33% is the professors experience, and the other 33% is the computational resources.

John,

I hope you get the time to read this.

You are taking this too personaly. 1. No one is questioning your dedication to this subject. 2. No one is saying that a PhD is not the ideal thing to have. 3. There are people out there who develop the theorems. Improve the routines/algorithms. 4. There are people out there who use the codes with a reasonable knowledge. 5. There are even people out there who run the codes with no knowledge. 6. commercial companies like Ford dont develop their own software any more. Tech-specialists are not thick on the ground cos they cost too much. 7. Supplier companies do most of the work. But they are too small to afford to write specialist software for particular applications. 8. There is a potential large market out there, it will take the most cost effective compromise, right or wrong. 9. You dont need to go to Imperial to learn CFD. It doesnt have the educational side all sown up! 10. Good luck with the web pages

(1). CFD forum is about the survival issue. (2). I mean, your survival. (3). And the understanding of survival is the understanding of timing.(John C. Chien) (4). Whether it is a long term evolution, or a short term surprise. (5). In any case, the survival is about the learning of skills to survive in the war(s). (which CFD is part of it.) And detailed study of what I have said in the past, might help you to understand this "timing".

I have just completed a lot of recent threads notably the role of the modern engineer in todays society. John Chien remains an authoritative figure on all forums where his immense depth of the CFD subject stands out.John has the ability to apply deep logic and is gifted in the insight to many problem areas associated with scientists,physcists,mathematicians and the equivalent transducers of engineers who ultimately are responsible for success or failure of projects. Handling ideas,concepts and rules of physics coupled with the numerics has advanced leaps and bounds in just my short lifespan. My own area of interest remains advancing concepts and empiricism into the complex flow associated with rotodynamic pumps. My own personal website still remains but difficulty still persists in the conversion from unversity led projects into the product producing world. We must not become too self indulgent either and be prepared to share ideas to others anywhere on this globe.

John`s wish to pursue other areas of interest is healthy and reinvigorating. I am sure he will shadow this forum and intervene when necessary. I offer best wishes to the next John Chien figure who can emerge with a similar wide approach to how CFD`S role continues and changes with time and technology.