which of them is better?
 

Hi every one !:)
I want to meshing a complex geometry that I make it in Gambit.
is there any body that can help me and say me that I use ICEM or pointwise, I mean which of them is more useful?[ solver is Fluent]
this is the first time that I want to use them!:rolleyes:

Why don't you try to mesh your geometry with gambit?

I did! but in some more complex parts gambit didnt allow to have Hex mesh then when I Read this cases in fluent , they didnt converged! sb says that this problem is from badly meshed cases! then I want to improve it!

off course you can mesh complex geometries with hex element in Gambit.
You only need to split your geometries into subdomains which can be handled with hexa.
I am not sure you can mesh your geometry with hexa ON THE FLY with ICEM or Pointwise.
If you don't need a full hexa mesh, you can mesh your stuff with tetra-hexcore (gambit), which is a combination of tetra and a core of hexa. (And that can be meshed almost on the fly)

ICEM CFD Hexa FTW
 

I would say a main advantage of ICEM CFD is that the blocking topology is independent of the geometry.

It is much easier to split the blocking than the geometry, particularly for advanced things like Ogrids. There is a patch independent "shrinkwrap" like feel to the blocking that makes it easy to use.

Our training includes a simple Elbow Pipe example (Bend with a valve stem thru it). In ICEM CFD, I can do it in a few minutes, the new students on their first day of Hexa can do it in half an hour. Gambit experts in my class have told me it would take hours in Gambit.

Once you have created your blocking in ICEM CFD, it is relatively easy to apply that to any similar geometry or to modify it to improve quality. You can't simply modify geometry splits like you can blocking splits.

Also, the ICEM CFD Hexa blocking is completely script-able and the scripting is very robust. We have users who made scripts for version 4.1 that are still running on 12.1 and will continue to run thru future versions.

As for comparison with Pointwise, I am sure they have their strengths (such as excellent smoothing), and I can't say anything bad about them (good group of guys, good support, good software). The users we have converted to ICEM CFD Hexa, including some at Lockheed in Ft. Worth Texas where Pointwise was born, have told us that ICEM CFD is faster because of its top down blocking approach and automated features (such as Ogrid). In terms of customer base, ICEM CFD Hexa has many more customers than Gridgen and Pointwise combined (~5 times as many), but Pointwise is more concentrated in their corner of the market (external aircraft aerodynamics).

thanks Dear ! I Try to use ur instructions .