CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Main CFD Forum

1 billions cells: useless?

Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   November 23, 2008, 22:11
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #41
georgeous bush
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Sarah Palin does come across a lot like her namesake. Keep up the lip-service...

gorgeous bush almost ex-presidento

  Reply With Quote

Old   November 24, 2008, 06:13
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #42
Fab
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Take a look at OpenFoam it work with polyhedral meshes in the mid-90: Slide 3: http://powerlab.fsb.hr/ped/kturbo/Op...shHandling.pdf
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 24, 2008, 07:25
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #43
underGroundMan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Sarah you sound pissed!
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 24, 2008, 16:47
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #44
Louis
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
poly existed way before the mid-90s.
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 24, 2008, 20:06
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #45
obama
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
now can you move aside and let me take charge of this thing.
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 24, 2008, 20:24
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #46
obama
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
do you feel wet???
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 24, 2008, 21:39
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #47
georgeous bush
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Yessir

Georgeous Bush ex-Presidento
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 24, 2008, 23:43
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #48
Joe Shmo
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
No doubt. ASC (aka ANSYS CFX) was doing this in 1985. See CFX TASCflow. CVFEM forms a polyhedral mesh.... implicitly in the solver... .
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 24, 2008, 23:45
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #49
Joe Shmo
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Funny how you did not get your facts straight. The solver was FLUENT, not CFX. The Italy team was the only one in the top three or four not using CFX.

  Reply With Quote

Old   November 25, 2008, 00:04
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #50
Joe Shmo
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
OK, I read this article.

Meshing a single case with 1 billion cells and solving it end to end is a lot different than meshing a case with 1e9/40 cells and copying 40 times.

So, give me a break. What ANSYS and CD have done here is apples and oranges. Someone with FLUENT actually meshed the entire boat or keel or whatever, and solved it... not made copies of some mesh. It's totally different.

I also like the words about CCM++ "modern architecture". FLUENT has been this way for a long long time... longer than CCM++!!

  Reply With Quote

Old   November 25, 2008, 00:06
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #51
sarah palin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
oh yes, please bring it on.
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 25, 2008, 02:13
Default he he ....
  #52
obama
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
we also broke a 1 billion mark record in November albiet of different sort. We spent 1 billion of campaigning alone.

Breaking into 1 billion is nothing for us. huh.

  Reply With Quote

Old   November 25, 2008, 04:26
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #53
Ronald Regan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Ok Sarah might not work for an$y$ but I think it is a safe bet that Joe does!
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 25, 2008, 06:49
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #54
underGroundMan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Sarah these guys are pulling you. After what you have achieved i.e. one billion cells barrier, you have become a celebrity.
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 25, 2008, 15:57
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #55
Slow Joe
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Joe have you actually used ccm+? If so you will realise how ridiculous it is to compare it to fluent, I have used both and will never move back to fluent.

P.s. where is ansys 12
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 26, 2008, 07:10
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #56
Jeff Vader
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
"So, give me a break. What ANSYS and CD have done here is apples and oranges."

Apples: One billion polyhedral cells

Oranges: One billion tetrahedral cells a year late.

Not even the American Supreme Court or the FIA would give it to the Oranges.

"I also like the words about CCM++ "modern architecture". FLUENT has been this way for a long long time... longer than CCM++!!"

So Fluent has had a modern architecture for "a long long time". Didn't it occur to you that this fact alone means that the architecture isn't modern.

JV

  Reply With Quote

Old   November 26, 2008, 21:46
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #57
fluent-user
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Well if someone has used both of them and understands how engineering is evolving he knows that the difference between fluent and ccm is huge. ccm is so far behind that this is not even funny.

With all the names of modern architecture all you have got is shinning GUI done is java swing. and that is just GUI not solver.

In past Fluent has been providing you with
[*] pressure based solver[*] density based compressible solver (not present in ccm)

In terms of rubustness:[*] AMG solver[*] Geometric or full multigrid (not present in ccm+)

This was in older versions of Fluent. So with modern solver ccm+ has not even caught up with old archaic solver Fluent.

And how about AMG with RPM methods to solve very difficult systems. This is very modern. Where is this type of modern tech in ccm+.

If I will start to touch models that Fluent gives you for example how about LES versions that Fluent allows you to chose. I think ccm+ does not even provide half of them.

For a modern solver ccm+ is pretty archaic. (lot of catching for them to do).

  Reply With Quote

Old   November 27, 2008, 04:30
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #58
Jimmy Carter
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I am not sure anyone is likely to argue that the range of physics in ccm+ are comparable to fluent, but then one code is about 5 times older than the other so that is to be expected. I admit when I first moved from fluent I was somewhat nervous for the same reason but then modern industrial cfd is so much more than just physics. And ccm+ is catching up very fast...

Fine if you want to be doing academic/R&D level type studies then I would suggest fluent may well be the way to go if there is a very specific "niche" model you need. But if you are doing the day in day out industrial cfd that modern engineering requires then ccm+ is a valid alternative (and in my case preferable). Fluent is just a solver after all, how do you prepare and mesh your geometries?

The other thing to think about is that one code has a future the other doesn't, ansys need a follow on code that will keep both cfx and fluent users happy. The fact that they are still struggling to integrate fluent into workbench, so much so they have missed their yearly release, stands testament to the problems they are having.

I think anyone who has used both and understands how engineering is evolving would know all this. Fluent user, have you used both in an industrial setting?
  Reply With Quote

Old   November 27, 2008, 09:01
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #59
fluent-user
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
hi,

i agree with what you say.

my comment was because i am seeing that people come out and rubbish fluent when compared to ccm+, and that too just because gui of ccm+ is cooler.

  Reply With Quote

Old   November 27, 2008, 10:04
Default Re: 1 billions cells: useless?
  #60
Jeff Vader
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
It comes down to more than the GUI though. No one can argue against the that Fluent used to rule the world when it came to solver technology, but like all old software the rate of development has slowed to a crawl, especially since ANSYS try to hammer it into workbench like a square peg into a round hole.
  Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Import netgen mesh to OpenFOAM hsieh Open Source Meshers: Gmsh, Netgen, CGNS, ... 32 September 13, 2011 06:50
snappyHexMesh won't work - zeros everywhere! sc298 OpenFOAM Native Meshers: snappyHexMesh and Others 2 March 27, 2011 22:11
snappyHexMesh aborting Tobi OpenFOAM Native Meshers: snappyHexMesh and Others 0 November 10, 2010 04:23
external flow with snappyHexMesh chelvistero OpenFOAM 11 January 15, 2010 20:43
physical boundary error!! kris CD-adapco 2 August 3, 2005 01:32


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 20:29.