Dear all of u, I want to buy a cfd software but i don't which one is the most appropriate. Could u tell me the name of some and give the advantage and the inconvenient. I thank u bye advance for ure time and consideration and hope to have some answer. Sam

SOME CFD CODES ARE:

1.FLUENT (SOLVER-POST PROCESSING)

2.CFX(SOLVER-MESH GENERATOR-POST PROCESSING)

3.CFD2000 (SOLVER)

4. STAR-CD (SOLVER,MESH GANERATOR,POST PROCESSING)

5. PHOENICS

THE BEST OF THE BEST IS: THE BEST CFD ALL OVER THE WORLD WITH BIG DIFFERENCE IS THE POWERFUL SOLVER FLUENT 6.1.22 COMBINED WITH MESH GENERATORS AS GAMBIT 2.1.6 OR TGRID 3.6.8. (IN BRIEF: USER FRIENDLY-FRIENDLY-.. PROGRAMMING IN C++ WITH AN EASY WAY, DEFORMING (THE ONLY ONE)AND MOVING MESHES VARIETY OF SOLVERS ANS SCHEMES:SEGREGATED, COUPLED, SIMPLE, SIMPLEC, PISO, IMPLICIT, EXPLICIT, UPWIND, FIRSTAND SECOND ORDER, PERFECT POST PROCESSING-HARDCOPY, VIDEO ANIMATION (METAFILES MPEG...)

GOOD LUCK!

Sam,

I have used both fluent and phoenics for cfd purposes.

The comparision is not as strainght forward as some people like to think as fluent and phoenics carter to differnt grups of people.

Fluent with the bundle of mesh generators and the like is very well supported around the world and is, in my opion, easier to start to use and easier to define/redefine some problems.

It is however an order of cost more expensive than phoenics.

Phoenics for me at least, allows me acces via programing, and the latest versions a built in prograing/complier to manipulate variable as I see fit. WIth out the need to purchase a complier and learn in detail another programing langauge.

Phoenics is very good as a general purpose CFD tool when compared to the other products on the market. For what I use it for it is the best value for money CFD tool on the market.

Leon Mills,

first of all it's not cheaper (3000 euro fluent annual update, 4500 euro phoenics annual update)

ARE YOU BLIND????????!!!!!!!!! i don't believe that you have used fluent more than 30% of it's capabilities. WITH RESPECT I TELL YOU THAT IT'S TIME TO LEARN ALL OF US PROGRAMMNG IN C++, WHICH IS NOT DIFFICULT VIA FLUENT (LIBRARIES HELP). YOU CAN DO ANYTHING WITH C++, AND DON'T FORGET IN 2-D PROBLEMS, YOU DON'T NEED TO SEE THE STUPID VR GUI.

SAM YOU KNOW THE TRUTH CAUSE I TOLD YOU TO BUY ANOTHER SOFTWARE IN ANOTHER FORUM, DO NOT FORGET THAT. REGARDS

STK, I guess you really think that CFD can replace actual physical process. May be your target is just pretty pictures? Why do you suggest type of software only by GUI? If you can show the comparison of different types of CFD pakages (with its own models) with experimental investigatios - I can belive your words. But those results will depend on case and may be different for diffirent type of software (models have some difference). And as you know, the solution algorithm is same. The best software is that which can solve your problem maximum close to real phenomena. The comparison Fortran and C++ is just palaver.
P.S. Why do you use capital letters? It's not conveniense to read. Please, if for you hard to see small one, use View -> Text size -> Largest

NO UNFORUNATELY FOR THE FANS OF PHOENICS, IT IS NOT ONLY THE ANIMATION ADVANTAGES! AS YOU SAID THE ALGORITHMS ARE THE SAME, BUT YOU FORGET THAT PHOENICS DOES NOT HAVE VARIETY OF SOLVERS (ONLY SIMPLEST) DOES NOT SOLVE HYPERBOLIC MODELS (SUPERSONIC FLOW SEE Y101 AND Y105 LIBRARY SUPERSONICS TO LOUGH UNTIL TOMORROW!WHERE ARE THE SHOCKS AND EXPANSIONS!!!) DO NOT FORGET THAT USER FRIENDLY IT IS AN ALSO IMPORTANT AND COST EFFECTIVE CHARACTERISTIC. ALSO FLUENT IT IS ONLY A SOLVER NOT MESH GENERATOR, SO IT HAS BEEN DESIGNED ONLY FOR THAT PURPOSE. SOLVERS THAT YOU CAN SEE: SIMPLE, SIMPLEC PISO,---IMPLICIT---EXPLICIT--SEGREGATED---COUPLED! TRY TO CONVERGE A PROBLEM WITH STALL ANGLE OF ATTACK IN PHOENICS! YOU NEED COUPLED EXPLICIT....AND MORE AND MORE..... DO NOT COMPARE THEM. IF YOU HAVE MONEY JUST BE CAREFUL WHERE YOU INVEST THEM. REGARDS

STK,

I have had enouhg of your udeness in your posts.

If you do not like my opinions, fine don't use them. Just don't be offensive in your replies.

I am sick an tired of reading one offensive reply after another.

It appears to me like you save sour grapes about not being able to use your beloved FLUENT.

In my feild of expertise, only PHOENICS, at the time when I purchases the CFD software was able handle to poblems I encounter and are requied to solve. It was the only one with a series of journal entries that explanined how to set up the physical models I was trying to represent.

This will be my last post to any of your questions on this board.

LEON MILLS IF I WAS OFFENSIVE I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT, BUT I THINK I WASN'T. YOU KNOW THAT I AM JUST TRYING TO HELP PEOPLE BY INFORMING THEM. IF YOU REALLY HAVE USED FLUENT 6.1.18 YOU KNOW THE TRUTH. IT IS ALSO YOUR HONOUR IF YOU WANT TO HELP A COMPANY READY TO FASLL DOWN! BUT I PERSONALLY RESPECT THE MONEY OF EVERY PEOPLE AND I THINK THAT FLUENT IS THE BEST WAY TO INVEST THEM IN CFD SOFTWARE. FINALLY I INSIST TO GO TO Y101 AND Y105, IF YOU KNOW A VERY LITTLE FROM SUPERSONIC FLOWS YOU WON'T BELIEVE WHAT YOU 'LL SEE! AND THESE PEOPLE WHEN THEY SELL THEIR SOFTWARE THEY TELL PEOPLE TAT PHOENICS IS CAPABLE OF SOLVING HYPERBOLIC EQUATIONS. THESE THINGS PISS ME OFF! REGARDS I DID NOT HAVE BAD PURPOSE; ESPECIALLY WHEN I AM TALKING TO A CLIENT OF CHAM. I AM NOT FLUENT'S DEALER!

STK,

I can only agree with Leon that your postings are very rude and contain offensive language. The use of capitals in itself is widely recognised as rude and offensive. There are publications in the literature exemplifying the validity of PHOENICS for supersonic and transonic flows (see for example Int.J.Heat Mass Transfer, Vol.33, No.6, p1193, 1990), and so it happens that others succeed with the software you so arrogantly dismiss.

you may have right but for older versions of package. anyway i invstigate the hyperbolic solving in phoenics and i believe that may solves hypersonic flow with a lot of preprocessing work from the user. about capitals i am uset to them i do not use them for being offensive. i understand that bothers peoples so i try to stop using them.

Another part of PHOENICS which I like is that it incorporates the CHEMKIN-II solver for chemical kinetics.

respected autority,

i am fresher in cfd field.i am graduate mechanical engineer from India.

i need the information for cfd at very basic level.

thanking u.

paresh tulankar

There are very good books you should obtain, such as "Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow" by S. V. Patankar (1980). CFD codes like PHOENICS try to give you a user-friendly way to invoke the solution of the necessary Partial Differential Equations (PDE's) that describe the physics of canonical flows. Their primary purpose is to encapsulate the limitations of current numerical methods so the user can quickly achieve a physically plausable result.

I mentioned CHEMKIN-II - which is a well validated *fully implicit* numerical solver. A fully implicit solver is usually needed when solving the PDS's which have "stiff" (i.e., described mathematically by an exponential function of some variable) terms in their balance equations.

Fully implicit solvers are not usually needed for non-exponential equations, such as the equations for stress, flow, diffusion, etc.

PattiMichelle

respected sir ,

sir, i need information regarding CFD course , i am chemical engineer with 2.25 years experience.

please suggest me which cource will give me best job ? either i will do SAP/CFD.

respected autority,

i am graduate chemical engineer from India.

i need the information for cfd at very basic level.

thanking u.

mandar chopade

Dear sir, i finished my mechanical engineering with two years of functional experience in production now i came to know about the computational fluid dynamics. kindly inform me about the course, jobs availability and centres available for teaching cfd especially in bangalore

thanks and regards urs truely kandaswamy