STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

Hello

Soes anyone has information on STAR CCM+ v3.02? I saw star released it today.

Thanks!

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

It's on the server for download now. Very long list of improvements.

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

Hi!

Can you share the list?

Thnaks!

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

Nothing about volume meshing.... In my eyes this is the main problem of ccm+ and there should be more efford be pushed into that.

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

What exactly are you missing?

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

I am missing everything in regard to controlling the mesh properly. Like you can do it in ICEM or GAMBIT. I know about volume sources, but it is to general. I want to be able to adjust the mesh on every edge and face. This is a very simple option that isnt included yet. It will probably take years before they include it.

I don't understand why CD-Adapco is focusing so much on everything else but the meshing controls*. For instance you can't even design a mesh by bricks or alike. Further the Star-Design software really sucks, I don't hope they will base the geometry generation on Design.

* The only reason is income for CD-Adapco. The more physics CCM+ will be able to handle the more customers will be signing contracts.

BR Kasper

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

Is it possible to get a PROSTAR licencse with CCM? I use Gridgen on a daily basis and occasionally ICEM CFD and have had a good look at GridPro. IMHO PROSTAR in the hands of a skilled user is still the best mesher. It takes a lot of time to learn but you get control down to the vertex level. Not block structured exactly but very powerful. It's a shame that cd-adapco has not made that part of the CCM tool kit.

VSET,CSET

My two cents - Andy R

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

Andy Give up control over every last vertex. Give in to the force of automation and allow it to place your vertices for you. Be one with the mesh. Darth

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

Darth, My mesh is going I can feel it

Daisy Daisy...

- Andy R

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

Good quality. CCM+ produces poor qulity meshes for complex geometry.

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

I am a STAR-CD user for more then 12 years. So I like Prostar very much. On the other hand todays delopment processes forces us to focus on more or less automatic mesh generation with some loose of control of the mesh. Concerning the CCM+ I actually use it for meshing - yes. In my opinion it has a very good surface remesher and you can control mesh size for every surface. The volume mesher is also very fast and very good in my opinion, as long as you are going with tetrahedral meshes and prism-layer. I do not like the polyhedral approach, because I agree with others, that for complex geometries (with small details and gaps) it produces very bad mesh quality. It is also impossible to create a good-quality prism-layer for poly meshes on complex geometries. But as I already said, for tet-meshing with prism-layer, I really love it.

Tom

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

How about PROAM for complicatd geometry? I am very much frustrated with PROAM for a complicated model. Still strugling!!! Self intersection problems after subsurface gen... Mesh generation problems.... Extrusion problems..... Asembly probls...

Oh God!!!!

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

I Agree with Tom: Surface meshing is quite good as well as Tetra+Prisma. Poly and Trimming are bad for complex geometries. However, Tetra is not the way to go. ProAM Trimming is also bad for complex geometries.All over all except Tetra Meshing there is no good volume mesher from Adapco. And tetra quality is ok for CD/ccm+ but in general... highly skewed....

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

The weakest part of the system is usually sitting in front of the monitor.

"Der Nichtschwimmer schiebt es auch immer auf die Badehose"

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

Maybe. However I do not think you can blame me for that. CD-Adapco recommended settings produced the same poor results and the mesh generated by CD-Adapco on the same geometry looks the same... Have you ever tried to mesh really complex geometries with either trimmed or polyhedral cells? If yes check in ProSTAR 4 for concave cells or centroids. Take a close look at theses cells and you will be quite surprised upon what cells ccm+ sumetimes runs. If you never meshed complex geometries try it first before telling me I am to stupid.

Regards

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

Tom,

do you run these tetra-meshes in ccm+ afterwards or in CD? I could not export them to CD version 3 due to the fact that tetras are described as polyhedrals. How do you do. Regards.

BastiL

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

I started using PROAM around 1997 with version 0.96 (called SAMM at this time) and have quite some experience with complicated geometries :) Creating meshes for customers is a big part of my work.

I would really like to know what you call a "complex geometry".

1) Not every geometry is suited for automatic meshing. When you have small gaps to resolve you have to use manual tools like prostar or gridpro or ...

2) Polys are a huge step forward for complicated geometries since the solution is much more stable than on tet meshes. Together with "cell quality remediation" you will get at least a running solution. If the bad cells are in an area of interest you always habe the possibility to refine the mesh localy and get a better cell quality...

3) You will probably never fine a tool which is equally good for all cases.

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

I would really like to know what you call a "complex geometry". A full racing car with lots of thin-walled air guiding elements, sharp corners, small angles and thin cuts...

Not every geometry is suited for automatic meshing. When you have small gaps to resolve you have to use manual tools like prostar or gridpro or ... I agree. However Aerodynamics is one of the main promotions of ccm+

Polys are a huge step forward for complicated geometries since the solution is much more stable than on tet meshes. Together with "cell quality remediation" you will get at least a running solution. If the bad cells are in an area of interest you always habe the possibility to refine the mesh localy and get a better cell quality... Right if you compare with pure tet meshes. I never did that. I prefer more hex-dominant meshes which run better than polys on my geometries.

You will probably never fine a tool which is equally good for all cases. I agree. However if it is one of the main promotion cases of the tool....

Nowadays we use other tools which seem to be better suited.

Regards

Re: STAR CCM+ v3.02
 

Bastil,

It has been a while since I did this. But what I remember is that I think you need to go back to version 2.02 or 2.04. So you can export the tetra mesh as a .ccm file. Read the .ccm file into 2.02 and then export to some type of format that prostar can read.

They made the change to the way tetras were made in 2.04 or 2.06 so it forces you to use star 4 I believe.