CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > ANSYS > CFX


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

Like Tree13Likes
  • 13 Post By turbo

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   February 8, 2016, 12:12
Exclamation CFX vs. FLUENT
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 174
Rep Power: 13
turbo is on a distinguished road
This topic never stops showing up in the forum. Let me help you make it clear.

1. By CFD Code
  • FLUENT : UK college > Creare (US) > Fluent (US) > Ansys
  • CFX : UK Nuclear Research > AEA Technology (UK) > ASC (Canada, CFX-TASCflow) > Ansys
  • STAR-CD : UK college > CD-Adapco
  • FineTurbo : Brussel college (Prof. Hirsch) > NUMECA
2. By Solver Type
  • Segregated : Pressure-based Method of FVM : FLUENT, STAR-CD
- Continuity, momentum and energy equations are solved sequentially.
- Pressure is later corrected by Pressure-Velocity Coupling (like SIMPLE, SIMPLEC or PISO)
- Originally for incompressible flow, but extended to compressible flow

  • Coupled : Time Marching of FVM : FLUENT (RAMPANT), FineTurbo
- Conservative vector forms in time and space
- Explicit (FineTurbo, FLUENT RAMPANT) or implicit (FLUENT) solver with multigrid
- Originally for compressible flow, but extended to incompressible using pseudo-compressibility factor
- Better accuracy in highly compressible flows (maybe controversial)

3. CFX is kind of unique
  • CFX is a coupled solver, but needs the pressure-velocity coupling, too. It belongs to the Pressure-based group.
  • CFX is fully implicit, relatively faster than FLUENT, but requiring much storage.
  • CFX is a cell-vertex code, while FLUENT a cell-centered.
  • CFX has a shape function borrowed from FEM to evaluate gradients, but FLUENT uses the staggered grid concept.
  • CFX has more friendly GUI for turbomachinery users (that was a kind of business strategy for CFX-TASCflow to survive competing with FLUENT).
  • FLUENT has traditionally more users in more general applications.
  • Both are now good enough !
5. My recommendations
  • If you simulate combustion, multi-phase or chemically-reacting flows, I'd go with FLUENT segregated.
  • If you simulate a single phase turbomachinery flow, two options are recommended : CFX or FineTurbo. In this area, they are totally different animals. Try out both in your model through a comparison with reliable test data before making a decision.
  • NUMECA FineTurbo grid generation package (Autogrid) has been frequently agreed more powerful and of higher quality, but the Post still looks not easy to love.

Last edited by turbo; February 8, 2016 at 14:58.
turbo is offline   Reply With Quote


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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 Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mesh and Solve Times for CFX, Fluent, CD-adapco Jade M Main CFD Forum 4 August 28, 2012 02:54
Import CFX def into Fluent eric_wang FLUENT 0 April 18, 2011 13:14
OpenFOAM vs. Fluent & CFX marco Main CFD Forum 81 March 31, 2009 14:22
Fluent Vs CFX, density and pressure Omer CFX 9 June 28, 2007 04:13
Jobs in cfd - fluent or cfx? jobman Main CFD Forum 6 July 5, 2006 15:02

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:15.