[GauravB]

Hello,

i am very new to this forum. i am design enginner and work on tools like ansys, Solidworks simulation and hypermesh. now my company has decide to go for CFD.

Can any one please help me to know which software is good in terms of results.

we are in to valve design ( butterfly, knife gate, ball valve, etc...), we are looking for calculating Cv value, pressure drop, flow path etc.

Ansys CFX, Fluent, CFdesign, Flow works ,(any other tool)among this which is the good tool for suppoting above problems.

Regards,

Gaurav B

[Dimeflow]

Hi GauravB,

Have a little experience with the situation you're in. Firstly, even though I dont work for any of the codes, its still probably unfair for me to give my favourites. All the software tools you have mentioned will deffo do what you're after ... but for design purposes there are more 'friendlier' programs then others. All my opinion of course, and I welcome any other user to challenge what I write - important you hear as many opinions as possible.

If Im being crude, Id split the packages up into two cats - high end (eg fluent) and upfront (eg CFdesign). As you might expect high-end software is excellent for many complex and sophisticated applications. However, if you dont need this sort of capacity then i'd be tempted to go down the route of a more upfront code. These codes have shown to be be equal on like-for-like studies but can be a little easier to handle.

things to consider would be (in no order of importance):

cad integration - launching directly from SW or Inventor for instance can save a load of time, especially if you've got a large number of design iterations to get through. A good upfront code will enable you to quickly step back into the cad, make a quick design change, relaunch and use the already input CFD settings.

meshing capability - some progams have better automatic capabilities than others. Again, this can save time. Of course, manual meshing shouldnt be completely overlooked as the geom might actually require it.

typical machine requirements - as a designer you'd probably want something capable of doing at least 'first-take' analyses on your local desktop/laptop.

results comparison - for design work it's essential that your package enables you to quickly give both quantitative and qualitative comparisons. Some packages have a automatic report generating features as well which can be useful.

ease of use - although you obviously want to fully understand and be able to validate all the inputs you make to your model, you want the package to flow (parden the pun) easily and not give you a headache from start to finish. Easy to input boundary conditions for instance. Secondly, if its a tool that you may only use once a month ..... you dont want to have to keep re-learning the software.

One often overlooked consideration is the software support. It can be vital, especially in the early weeks/months. My experience has shown certain codes are a lot better then others.

If I was you, I'd generate some geom that you'd ideally want to model and make contact with a few companies/distributors. They should hopefully demonstrate what they can do with your model so you are in a better position to judge.

What i will say is that now is a good time (competitive!) to get hold of some good software.

If you want any more info feel free to email.

All the best

[GauravB]

Hi Dimeflow

Thanks for putting lights on this. Comparison points mentioned by you is definitely going to help me to identifying a good code for meeting my needs.

also i like the point, that i should ask different service provider to run a case study so i can be in better position to judge the code performance.

Regards,

Gaurav B

[JimB]

GauravB,

I'd encourage you to look at STAR-CCM+ from CD-adapco. It's a powerful CFD tool that's also easy to use. I work for CD-adapco, so I would say that! CD-adapco is the second largest CFD code company after ANSYS, and we're taking significant market share, so it should be on your list.

I'll add two things:
(1) I'd encourage you to do a short eval of the software you're interested in. Giving geometry to vendors is all well and good, but you have to remember it will be given to an experienced user. That's great, but the question you really want answered is will you be able to do that and if so, how long will it take? You'll only find that out by taking some training and giving it a go.

(2) Dimeflow's answer is (word-for-word) the CFdesign sales pitch, so I'd be cautious of advice from people who start their message with, "I don't work for a code vendor but ..."

Enjoy!

Originally Posted by GauravB

Hi Dimeflow

Thanks for putting lights on this. Comparison points mentioned by you is definitely going to help me to identifying a good code for meeting my needs.

also i like the point, that i should ask different service provider to run a case study so i can be in better position to judge the code performance.

Regards,

Gaurav B

[Dimeflow]

Gaurav,

Im not pitching for anyone! Other than that assumption, Jims response is pretty good. I'd deffo agree with getting actual hands on with software if possible. If nothing else, it should indicate how easy or difficult the software is at generating the mesh from native geom.

Although less familiar, I have used CCM+ and it should also be looked in to. In fairness to Ansys I've also found their latest version of Workbench to be a lot more project orientated. But I still maintain that for certain applications, some codes are easier and more efficient to use than others.


Happy shopping