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

Fluent's comments on CFX-5

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   September 11, 2002, 04:01
Default Fluent's comments on CFX-5
  #1
newuser
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hi everybody,

I am working for a pump company in Germany who is looking to start its own CFD activities. We are in contact with STAR, FLUENT and CFX at the moment. During a meeting with Fluent sales guys they claimed that

- the MFR model in CFX is not really working

- CFX's multiphase model (Euler-Euler) is awfully slow

- a coupled solver is not the right choice for our application

- their support mainly employs trainees (with little experience)

- and other things

This sound a bit strange to me. Such claims are wether

- true

- very aggressive marketing

- or just the result of the fact that Fluent is facing trouble with its own models

Any comments on that ?
  Reply With Quote

Old   September 11, 2002, 05:05
Default Re: Fluent's comments on CFX-5
  #2
Steve
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
We are also in the same process of finding/chosing the right code for fire simualtion.

We have heard the same comments by the three companies about the others.

If I can give you an advice, try to talk with a technical engineer about a special case of interest or, better, about a validation. Then it will be much easier for you to choose the most suitable code for your needs.

Steve
  Reply With Quote

Old   September 11, 2002, 20:33
Default Re: Fluent's comments on CFX-5
  #3
Jan Rusås
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Well, If you can't say anything good about your own product or you do not know what is good - then say something bad about the others.
  Reply With Quote

Old   September 12, 2002, 02:06
Default Re: Fluent's comments on CFX-5
  #4
Philipp Beierer
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hi!

I guess making a decision just based on the promises or propositons of a vendor might be quit tricky. Especially in case of such a big investment. Of course you can also take a look on where the code in general has its "home" field of application. Based on my knowledge is e.g. TascFlow often used in turbomachinery, CFX should be especially good in reacting flows etc.. Anyway, as the whole market with all its vendors is developing further, such appraisals are of course relative. I think the only option you have is to give all your potential candidates a problem for which only you have a validated solution. If afterwards all are coming up with the same (and hopefully accurate enough) results you can still take a look on the support or the general user-friendlyness of the code...
  Reply With Quote

Old   September 12, 2002, 04:09
Default Re: Fluent's comments on CFX-5
  #5
mystic_cfd
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
hi there

my experience is restricted to fluent and cfx, but i feel like talking anyway.

If you have experienced CFD people at your company, you have a good start. Without that, if you need to learn to use the programs first, you are heading down a long road, regardless of the code. The cost to train personnel will easily be as much as the cost of the software - in CFD the shortcuts are few.

I have previously heard that Fluent uses an aggressive marketing style, so does Microsoft. And people often repeat things they hear from someone else at a marketing meeting and so the rumours grow. A look at the bugs site of any of these codes and you will see they all have problems.

Go for user support, it will be crucial. In this regards be careful of comments from users of illegal or academic versions of the codes. They do not have access to the best available help (for understandable reasons). Talk to existing commercial users about their support experience. I was impressed by CFX in this regards, have no experience with STAR.

My quote for the day which I just made up: "It is not the software, but the skilled operator who makes the right things happen."

May convergence be with you
  Reply With Quote

Old   September 12, 2002, 06:12
Default Re: Fluent's comments on CFX-5
  #6
Thomas Hildebrandt
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,

we are a CFD software vendor with a strong focus on turbomachinery. NUMECA offers advanced CFD systems for the simulation and design of this particular field of application. My opinion about choosing a CFD software is obviously biased, nevertheless in-line with many of the comments made by you and the other readers. I believe you should consider the following points:

1/ If it comes to turbomachinery you have basically the choice between NUMECA and TASCflow. The other vendors have a restricted capability in this area, in particular FLUENT. 2/ Support and User Friendliness are key points. 3/ A dedicated turbomachinery oriented tool is superior to a general purpose package. 4/ Give it a try: The best way is to propose a benchmark to the different vendors and compare the results as well as the responsiveness and the way the software is presented at your company.

We are glad to offer you such a benchmark. In case that this might be of interest for you just let us know.

With my best regards

Thomas Hildebrandt

http://www.numeca.de
  Reply With Quote

Old   September 12, 2002, 17:34
Default Re: Fluent's comments on CFX-5
  #7
Astrid
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
This is what you have to do:

Hire one or more consultancy firms with a lot of experience on either Fluent, CFX, Star, Numeca, Flow 3D, CFDRC, Phoenics, PDESOL, or whatever. Let them run a case for you, see what the software does, and voila, there is your answer.

I know this will cost some money, but your choice will be based on results and not on shows brought to you by the salesmen. If you let the CFD-code-vendor know you plans, they will run for you (there might be a lead $$$$$$$$$), as well as the consultancy firm. And if you have more money to spend, the consultancy firm can also help you further with the implementation of the code in your company.

If you want to know a good consultancy firm in Europe.....

Astrid
  Reply With Quote

Old   September 17, 2002, 14:28
Default Re: Fluent's comments on CFX-5
  #8
cfd guy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hi Astrid,
Based in your comments, would you mind telling me where do you work at? Please send me an e-mail.
Regards, cfd guy
  Reply With Quote

Old   September 20, 2002, 12:07
Default Re: Fluent's comments on CFX-5
  #9
Dave
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Astrid, could you also send me a copy of who you work for. Cheers Dave
  Reply With Quote

Old   September 20, 2002, 12:11
Default Re: Fluent's comments on CFX-5
  #10
Dave
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Astrid, could you also send me a copy of who you work for. Cheers Dave
  Reply With Quote

Old   September 20, 2002, 12:23
Default Re: Fluent's comments on CFX-5
  #11
Dave
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
It always amazes me when you hear one vendor slag off another. Ok everyone is out to make money, but surely people are intelegent enough to see through the bull of a sales person ! (alas why did the world listen to gates and not the unix guys ???)

Care should be taken when choosing a CFD code, as initial outlay in setup and training is not cheep. And once a user has learnt to do things in one code (often a painful time consuming process) then he or she will be unwilling to repeate this process all over again just to change code. In some ways its like a bank, people open an account then very rarely switch banks.

All of the comments from all of the posts are very for useful for choosing a code. I'd suggest you take your time, speak to as many people as possible (preferably those with multi code experience) get the vendors to perform a test case, if they are unwilling then remind them its a users market !! Also get a comprehensive break down of costs. By this I mean look at the cost of a single user license, multi user licenses and then additional parallel licenses (ie a license per CPU being used for a simulation). The different vendors will charge different amounts and charge in different ways.

Good luck and remember there are lots of people out there who can help !! Dave
  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
CFX vs. Fluent George FLUENT 43 May 15, 2012 23:42
Pros and Cons for CFX, CFdesign, COMSOL Val Main CFD Forum 3 June 10, 2011 02:20
ANSYS to acquire CFX Fred FLUENT 0 February 18, 2003 22:04
ANSYS to acquire CFX Fred CD-adapco 0 February 18, 2003 22:03
Re:FLUENT vs. CFX for RANS solution--your comments robert Main CFD Forum 4 September 5, 2000 18:39


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:12.