[Boris_M]

Hi CFDfan,

there is no difference between SWFS and FloEFD with regards to electronics cooling at the moment.
Yes, FloTHERM XT is based on the meshing and solver of FloEFD but uses the electronics cooling know-how of FloTHERM.
FloTHERM is the electronics cooling market leader and has waaaaay more electronics cooling capabilities than FloEFD has. It is specifically built to the electronics cooling applications whereas FloEFD is a general purpose CFD code and has some but nearly as many functionalities for electronics cooling as FloTHERM and FloTHERM XT has.
The good thing with FloTHERM XT is you can use the SW models directly in FloTHERM XT as is is based on the SW modeler and therefore all parametric data of the SW model is available and the geometry can be adjusted just like in SW.
In FloTHERM XT you can use EDA import in which you will get not only the PCB data from a simple block to a detailed PCB with single traces from ODB++ data (detailed Copper nets) as well as automatically getting all the EDA information about heat generation rate of the imported ICs and other components in that comes from the EDA tool. So if you import a PCB you can filter components by size as well as dissipated power and also select which detail you want to have them, as a block, 2R or more detailed like a DELPHI model etc. from FloTHERM Pack (www.flothermpack.com) where you can generate detail chip models or also use them from most major vendors. You can also capture power modes of components
And FloTHERM XT has just like FloTHERM a smart part library so if you need a heat sink you can basically drag and drop it out of a library with just a few definitions about the size and fin height etc. The same goes for many other components.

So if you are working strongly in the electronics cooling application FloTHERM or FloTHERM XT would be the best solution from Mentor Graphics. If you like the meshing and the direct use of your SW models then FloTHERM XT is the strongest electronics cooling solution you can get that even uses the FloEFD/SWFS meshing and solver technology.
If you are interested then you can always have a try of it by contacting one of the Mentor offices or resellers, depending on where you are based. It is like test driving a car. You don't have to buy it but if it helps to do you job more accurate and better then it is worth a try.

Boris

[CFDfan]

Thank you Boris for your explanations.

I talked about XT among my colleagues and it turned out one of them has evaluated it for about a month.
He confirmed its suitability for electronic cooling application , the smart part library and the tight integration with Solidworks (SW), which was great. The things he didn't like was that:
1. XT couldn't read native SW files created by later versions of SW (than the one XT was integrated with).
2. The meshing in XT he said was somewhat different than in SWFS. He run the model he had with the 3 different meshing levels in XT and got quite different results. This was not so prominent in SWFS, where the difference in the results when running (the same) model with mesh resolution factor of 3 and say 8 was just a couple of %. To get the same results in XT he had to run his model with the finest level of meshing there, but then the number of cells was about 30% higher than in SWFS' model and the simulation run slower.
In summary he had mixed feelings about XT - very good idea but not refined yet.

[Boris_M]

Hi CFDfan,

Yes, XT is always a little behind the SW version as SW releases it first and the next release of XT usually gets the next SW version as well.
The same is with FloEFD and SW. FloEFD releases new capabilities and they are not or not all of them in SWFS at the same time.

The meshing technology to be precise is the same but the way to mesh the models is different as it is tuned to the way FloTHERM meshes and that is based on smart parts. So each smart part will have a local mesh setting available and of course the way to specify the mesh by the look of the GUI is different. It simply has a different menu but the mesh technology is the same.

It depends on when he tested it. There has been some changes since the very first release. As in every product, the first release is the first release and never the best as the next is always better. It is always a convergence case. The older a product grows the more optimized it is.
As for the mesh settings I cannot tell what he did. Maybe he was used to the SWFS meshing and did it the same way in XT and here it simple has to be done differently. In such case it is best to talk with the engineers of the reseller or Mentor Graphics directly to get their input.
I've seen users of traditional CFD tools start using FloEFD and they tried to create meshes as they know it from the other tools. You had to teach them that this is not necessary as the technology is different. It's like learning to drive stick if you are used to automatic :-) (or the other way around in terms of automatic meshing)
Often you have to learn things new in a new product and forget about the old way of doing it. It will always frustrate you because you'll say "But I'm used to do it this way." You don't call your new girlfriend by the name of the old one because you are used to using that name for your girlfriends, right :-)

I mean you can certainly try it on your own to see how it is and make your own opinion of it.

Boris

[CFDfan]

Boris a continuation of this interesting topic.
I read a promotional material about the SmartCels in Floefd that allow for good accuracy with less cells and shorter calculation time. This sounds like a very good idea and my question is:


1. Starting from which version of Floefd will/are these "smartcells" be available?

2. Will the SWFS module in Solidworks 2017 be supporting the smartcells and if not are there plans to introduce them in SWFS as well and when?

[Cengizhan Arslan]

Hi CFDfan,

It's a marketing decision, they just changed the name

[Boris_M]

Hi Cengizhan,

Not quite true, it was a technical decision to give the "partial cells" a technical terminology that is better understood than its previous name and with that the need for a better explanation of the technology was required. But since it is not just the mesh but also the solver technology that make it work (the combination of both), this had to be shown and so the name SmartCells was given that describes the combined technology. Partial Cells were only the cells at the fluid/solid boundary called.

Regards,
Boris

[Cengizhan Arslan]

Hi Boris,

What i was trying to say is that instead of smart cell, it could be intelligent or clever or wise or "geometry and solution adaptive, helping the solver with boundary layer treatment 'two-scales wall functions model' with just mesh number at boundary layer and whether it could be laminar-turbulence-transient flow; newtonian non-newtonian fluid or not etc.., you don't have to worry about the type of it because FloEFD only uses cartesian based, includes boundary layer" mesh. Well, maybe the last one is a little bit longer

But of course you are right, it's very different from other meshing technology like cut cell although they like similar to each other and like you said not just meshing, it's combined technology with FloEFD solver. Maybe solver needs a special name either

Regards,
Cengizhan

[Boris_M]

Hi Cengizhan,

Yes, exactly the long term was the reason for a good short name that basically summarizes the technology.
And SmartCell includes the solver technology that applies for those cells that make them work. The rest of the solver to the far field is not much different to other solvers, just the way to handle the boundary layer and the type of mesh the way it is and provide good results is what is the big difference and that is part of the SmartCell naming.

Happy holidays to everyone,
Boris

[Boris_M]

Hi CFDfan,

The SmartCells are the combining technology of the formerly called partial cells and the solver technology that makes them work with FloEFD’s meshing technology, i.e. working without body fitted meshes and still get that good results.
The white paper you read eaxplains the technology a little better than the meshing and turbulence paper you can find on the Mentor Graphics website.

But it is nice to see that this technology seems to be so exciting that you want to have it in SWFS as well :-)
However, you have been using it already all the time, this just shows how goodthe technology is :-)

Boris