-
CFX or Fluent for Turbo machinery ?
CFX vs Fluent
Asslamuallikum Sir
Can transient rotor stator interaction approach in CFX model successfully the turbo machinery cascades with different stator and rotor blade counts i.e. with different pitch ratios (for example if the pitch ration is 0.878) with out any bearing on results? OR if fluent sliding mesh option can account for pitch ratios other than 1?
Normally in literature i found different methods to account for different pitch ratio's
1) Phase lag boundary conditions
2) Harmonic balance methods
3) Domain Scaling
I haven't found these methods in Fluent and CFX. May be we have to write UDF's which for the first 2 methods which is an uphill task. And Domain scaling...if someone don't want to use it, what should he do to counter this issue?
I was doing fan simulation, CFX and fluent pressure based solver didn't work because they were not inducing the flow from rotating to stationary domain due to unknown reasons. When i used the density based solver it worked in the first go and the results were closer to experimental results.
And Sir, you are right on fluent convergence issues, fluent has some very useful futures as domain reordering, mesh replacing, adaption and repair etcPosted September 14, 2012 at 14:54 by imran9697
-
CFX or Fluent for Turbo machinery ?
Even better convergence - Fluent 14
Convergence is much better with Fluent V 14 as compared to V 12. Results of NACA 0012 tutorial from Fluent are compared for Fluent V 12 and V 14. However there is no change in drag and lift coefficients.
Posted February 26, 2012 at 06:18 by Far
-
CFX or Fluent for Turbo machinery ?
good InformationPosted February 26, 2012 at 03:45 by Fasri.hatomi
-
CFX or Fluent for Turbo machinery ?
Regarding the comments 2,3 and 4. These problems in Fluent seems to overcome with the new solver technology such as solution steering, pseudo time control, hybrid initialization and better convergence in version 13.
Now one can get the same solution in one order less iterations (10000--->> 1000 or even less) with few orders more convergence (instead of 1e-02 to 1e-04).
Even with the linking to design modeler and ansys meshing (ICEM to be included in workbench in release 14.5) through the ANSYS workbench one can easily perform and update the parametric analysis in Fluent.
Still I feel that the CFX is better than Fluent in turbo machinery (This can be seen from the latest development in turbo machinery modules in CFX 13.) and Fluent in better in external aerodynamics, two phase modeling, combustion and other (all) type of problems.
CFX has also better option for two-way FSI.
Embedded LES is another strong feature of Fluent but What I cannot understand why CFX has still not included the embedded rotating reference module which is available in Fluent V 13.0.Posted January 15, 2012 at 09:54 by Far
Updated January 15, 2012 at 22:40 by Far
 |
 |
 |
|
