|
[Sponsors] |
April 28, 2013, 03:49 |
Fluent subforum
|
#1 |
Senior Member
|
Hi All.
It is my observation that on Fluent forum there is large audience and therefore there are many question posted on forum on daily basis. Here is the statics for Sunday April 28, 2013 for different forums. Ansys forum 59 viewing (total for Fluent, CFX and Ansys meshing forum) Fluent 29 viewing CFX 15 viewing ANSYS Meshing Forum 9 viewing Main Forum 9 Viewing floefd-floworks-flotherm 2 viewing Numeca 2 viewing Openfoam 16 viewing Phoenics 1 viewing SU2 1 viewing CD-adapco 2 viewing In addition to that no of threads/posts posted on Fluent forum on daily basis is way higher than any other forum and therefore threads go away unanswered. What do you think it would be better to split Fluent forum into sub-forums. What do you think about the following sub-forums? Here is my idea about sub-forums and needs discussion: 1. General discussion 2. Transient problems 3. UDF related issues (already there) 4. Multiphase 5. Combustion 6. Turbomachinery, wind turbine and mixing tanks 7. Heat Transfer 8. Convergence related issues ( I am not sure about this since in all areas of cfd convergence can be treated differently. Similarly general forum can create confusion) 9. Advance topics (Rocket propulsion etc) 10. Transition modelling 11. Cavitation 12. Solver settings Thanks Last edited by Far; April 29, 2013 at 15:29. |
|
May 13, 2013, 08:17 |
|
#2 |
Senior Member
OJ
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: United Kindom
Posts: 473
Rep Power: 20 |
Subforums seems a good idea, but too much fragmentation may not be helpful. It may confuse the members while posting since their problem can be classified under many headings, at the same time, may discourage the members from visiting posts on unfamiliar topics.
The most appropriate way to do this classification can be understanding the statistics of different topics on the FLUENT forum. But in the absence of the data, the ones below seem relevant: 1) Multiphase 2) Heat transfer 3) UDF (Already there) 4) Turbomachinery 5) Miscellaneous First four are specialized topics and folks who excel in each of these topics can advance the discussions there. All rest can be classified under miscellaneous, since there may not be frequent questions related to niche topics (eg combustion, rocket propulsion etc) anyway. The owners who want answers for old/unanswered topics can always reply in the post to kick it to the front page. Cheers OJ |
|
May 13, 2013, 13:41 |
|
#3 |
Administrator
Peter Jones
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 682
Rep Power: 10 |
I agree that we should not split it up too much. Statistics on which different topics are discussed would be good to have. I browsed through the current forum and another subforum division could be something like:
This kind of division would split the content up in a different but also logical way: solver, modeling & applications. Most questions are mainly in one of these topics I guess, but sometimes it can be difficult to judge if the convergence problem someone has is related to numerics, the turbulence model used or the application modeled . We could ad more specialized topics like UDF also. What do you think about this? |
|
May 15, 2013, 00:02 |
|
#4 |
Senior Member
|
Dear Pete and OJ
I agree that too much division will make things difficult. Following are few points to consider : 1. Many threads remain unanswered due to large volume of new threads being posted on daily basis which moves slightly older threads to next page and therefore gets less attention. 2. By making new sub-forums it is possible that the experts of each field will go to subforum directly and reply to particular thread. Moreover each thread will get more time on the front page. 3. I agree with the sub-forums proposed by Pete. 4. A poll can be added on Fluent forum to get detailed survey from forum members. 5. Statistics of different type of questions posted can also help in deciding the sub-forum division More discussion is needed. |
|
May 15, 2013, 10:51 |
|
#5 |
Administrator
Peter Jones
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 682
Rep Power: 10 |
Browsing through the threads in the Fluent forum again it is not easy to find a good sub-forum division that will make it easy to select a proper sub-forum. I've added a few more sub-forums to my list. Do you think that the following forum division will make it easy for users to select a good forum for their questions? Or would you prefer a different type of sub-forum division? Is it good to add a Multiphase Flow forum? Should we also add a Heat Transfer forum?
Fluent (main forum still there)
|
|
May 15, 2013, 14:17 |
Against the sub-forums
|
#6 |
Senior Member
François Grégoire
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 392
Rep Power: 17 |
Hi all,
What do you prefer, having one dictionary or having many sub-dictionaries to look for words? The answer is clear to me. Keep it simple please. However, the search bar could definitely be optimized: - It could be always ready to write in it, without clicking some down arrow. - Options could be available right away like in attached figure, instead of 'advanced search' annoying process. Just my 2 cents. |
|
May 15, 2013, 16:10 |
|
#7 |
Administrator
Peter Jones
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 682
Rep Power: 10 |
The problem with keeping everything in one forum is that the volume in the Fluent forum means that a new message will now only stay on the front page listing for three, max four days. Once a message is not on the front page replies are less frequent and many messages are being left unanswered. I do not know if this will improve with a few additional sub-forums with less volume, but it might be worth a try. I still think that we should keep the main Fluent forum though.
|
|
May 16, 2013, 09:04 |
|
#8 |
Senior Member
|
I would like to add my two cents to the discussion.
I agree on the idea of splitting the Fluent Forum and i also undertsand the reasons determining it but i would also consider the typical user behavior. I'll explain better. I consider myself an active user of both the Main Forum (which i always intended as a general CFD forum not related to any of the softwares with dedicated forums, so pure CFD and related techniques/theory with no reference to any specific code) and the Fluent forum (everything related to Fluent). Now, if you look at the quantity of Main Forum posts with Fluent related questions, nomenclature etc., you will notice how the relevant number of Fluent users in the forum (and also their background, let's say this) tends to strongly promote this annoying pollution. So, as a matter of fact, i would suggest a splitting that, while helping Fluent users, also avoids polluting the Main Forum (expert Fluent users know nothing about, say, the PRESTO! scheme... how could a non Fluent user????). In this respect i think that: - having something like a "Main Fluent Forum" is better than a "Miscellaneous" sub-menu under a general "Fluent" Group. The "Main" keyword should promote convergence in my opinion. - The general Main Forum should also reflect the fact that it is not a space for everything not related to the other forums, otherwise everybody will tend to go there. CFD is not vendors software, it's numerical methods, physical modeling, programming issues. The "Main" word should not be random. - The greatest number of posts is still on some convergence issues. Convergence should require a related forum by itself... too bad that people with answers will likely tend to avoit it at all . In conclusion i suggest a subdivision similar to the last one by pete: Ansys -> Fluent:
Finally, as i said before, i would change the description for the general Main Forum, stating that it is ONLY for the general techniques and NOT for the stuff which do not suit the other forums Regards |
|
May 16, 2013, 09:25 |
|
#9 | |||
Administrator
Peter Jones
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 682
Rep Power: 10 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You suggested a "Fluent Theory" forum. I also thought about this, but browsing through the current forum there are not a lot of such deep theory discussions. Would it not be okay to keep these discussion in the main fluent forum or in the appropriate subforum (numerical theory in numerics, modeling theory in modeling, ...). Or perhaps pure theory discussions, as you suggest, warrant a separate more silent theory forum. I'm hesitant. |
||||
May 16, 2013, 10:03 |
|
#10 | |||
Senior Member
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Let me put it in a different way. I feel that most of the wrong posting on the Forums is due to the Fluent users, because they are more than Others and, mostly, newbies. My idea was to provide more clear "Road Signs" for them which would both slow down the post scrolling in the actual Fluent forum and, more importantly, rationalize the posting. I think it is noteworthy that wrong posting was lower before the creation of the ANSYS general category (pre 2009 switch). |
||||
May 16, 2013, 10:20 |
|
#11 | |
Administrator
Peter Jones
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 682
Rep Power: 10 |
Quote:
Handling this is difficult. Perhaps a sticky post on top of the main forum would help, but I doubt if these newbies would even read that before posting. We moderators have started to be more strict about this and now frequently give out infractions to users that cross-post and repeatedly break the forum rules (http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/misc.php?do=showrules). The fact that there were less incorrect posts back in 2009 does not say that much. Back then we had much fewer forums, half the traffic, and a much more stable user-base with less newbies arriving. |
||
May 16, 2013, 10:34 |
|
#12 |
Administrator
Peter Jones
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 682
Rep Power: 10 |
I just added a new sentence on the main forum description: "Do not post Fluent questions here". I hope that can help reduce the number of incorrect Fluent & Gambit posts in the main forum.
|
|
May 17, 2013, 07:55 |
|
#13 |
Senior Member
Lefteris
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 341
Rep Power: 16 |
Maybe it is a good idea to create some sub-forums in the Fluent section but I believe there shouldn't be many sub-forums. Someone's problem may be subject to more than one of these categories and this will cause confusion and chaos.
Besides, it would be quite frustrating for someone to navigate through all these forums and subforums especially if he/she has limited time to spare. So, you should keep it straight and simple. I suggest you create only few sub-forums like that:
This should reduce the bulk of posts in the main Fluent forum while at the same time it covers most of the aspects of the software and the forum remains simple and user friendly.
__________________
Lefteris |
|
May 17, 2013, 12:57 |
|
#14 |
Super Moderator
Ghazlani M. Ali
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 1,385
Blog Entries: 23
Rep Power: 29 |
I will say :
1) Aerodynamics 2) Combustion 3) Heat transfer 4) Multiphase 5) UDF may be a sixth one for misc, or mixed... Convergence issues is met everywhere, so if one has convergence issues with his naca 0011, he will just address the problem in the aerodynamics section... |
|
May 18, 2013, 07:50 |
|
#15 |
Administrator
Peter Jones
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 682
Rep Power: 10 |
I like your short list of application areas Ali. I am very hesitant if it is best to create sub-forums based on applications as you suggest Ali or based on the part of the process, as I suggested (numerics, modeling, ...).
|
|
May 18, 2013, 13:19 |
|
#16 |
Senior Member
|
My vote is for the sub-forums listed by pete and sbaffini (Post # 5).
To realize the advantage of sub-forums, you can take a look on UDF sub-forum where people get reply even after weeks, but it is sure that they get reply because posts are on front page for couple of weeks |
|
May 18, 2013, 13:24 |
|
#17 | |
Super Moderator
Ghazlani M. Ali
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 1,385
Blog Entries: 23
Rep Power: 29 |
Quote:
|
||
May 21, 2013, 08:07 |
|
#18 | |
Senior Member
OJ
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: United Kindom
Posts: 473
Rep Power: 20 |
Quote:
Quantitative (equal) division of posts: This thread started with this objective. The nature of subforums in this way will strictly be guided by statistics of the posts appearing everyday. This approach will make sure that at any day, the no. of posts remaining on first page and the no. of posts going on second page are more-or-less the same, so yes, this solves the original problem. But it is not clear if it will ensure that the experts will regularly author the posts and advance the discussions, since it may be difficult for them to find the posts with the subject of their liking in all these subforums. Moreover, it is difficult to obtain the statistics in the first place as pete suggests. Qualitative (categorical) division of posts: a) Process oriented While it may make sense to create it based on the process the way pete, Far and others prefer, it is worthwhile to note that convergence problem of heat exchanger and that of an airfoil have a completely different nature. And if users having convergence problems from all applications and areas keep posting in subforum Numerics, it will still not be a "specialized" forum, and rather a mixture of convergences problems of different types. Authors will have to sift through the posts to hit on the posts on their favorite subjects. b) Application/subject oriented: Instead, if the classification is done on the basis of application subjects like diamondx and I suggest, then the convergence problem of airfoil is posted in say Aerodynamic forum, and that of heat exchanger is posted in say Heat Transfer forum, and the experts in that area, familiar with nature of problems in that area, can cater to the questions. The questions not classifiable still have a place on Main/Miscellaneous (or whatever name) Fluent forum. An expert with a broad understanding of Solver theory and numerics may still fall short in answering convergence issues for all applications (combustion, aerodynamics, multiphase), since the nature of convergence issues varies in these. But, an expert in aerodynamics is more likely to answer most process-oriented questions (modelling, convergence, case setup etc) in aerodynamic applications. Don't you think that this way, the questions may be answered more rapidly? OJ |
||
June 4, 2013, 16:04 |
|
#20 |
Administrator
|
Looks like no final opinion was reached. What would you recommend Sijal?
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A Problem of Fluent Interpreted UDF: parse error | knight | Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming | 25 | August 16, 2018 11:26 |
Two questions on Fluent UDF | Steven | Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming | 7 | March 23, 2018 04:22 |
heat transfer with RANS wall function, over a flat plate (validation with fluent) | bruce | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 6 | January 20, 2017 07:22 |
Alias problem when starting FLUENT from command line | batch_error | FLUENT | 0 | May 24, 2012 09:20 |
Problems in lauching FLUENT | Lourival | FLUENT | 3 | January 16, 2008 17:48 |