CFD Online Discussion Forums

CFD Online Discussion Forums (https://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/)
-   FLUENT (https://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/fluent/)
-   -   Fluent meshing (https://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/fluent/143502-fluent-meshing.html)

ferroburak October 26, 2014 16:20

Fluent meshing
 
Hi,
I would like to mesh a centrfiugal compressor geometry prepared in Catia v5 using Fluent meshing instead of Gambit meshing tool for a graduate study. I'm familiat with Gambit but it is a bit slow for such a complex 3d analysis.

Can you tell me which version of Fluent would be good for this purpose? Should it be Fluent R15? Also can you compare Fluent meshing with Gambit meshing in terms of speed and mesh quality?

Thanks,
Burak Pehlivan

amin.z October 27, 2014 10:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by ferroburak (Post 516046)
Hi,
I would like to mesh a centrfiugal compressor geometry prepared in Catia v5 using Fluent meshing instead of Gambit meshing tool for a graduate study. I'm familiat with Gambit but it is a bit slow for such a complex 3d analysis.

Can you tell me which version of Fluent would be good for this purpose? Should it be Fluent R15? Also can you compare Fluent meshing with Gambit meshing in terms of speed and mesh quality?

Thanks,
Burak Pehlivan

Hey
Fluent meshing?
I don't think fluent able to generate mesh like gambit or icem!
Is your mean ansys meshing?

CeesH October 28, 2014 00:50

I think you mean ANSYS meshing right, not FLUENT T-grid?

I don't have much experience in T-grid, so I'm gonna assume ansys meshing.
My personal feeling is that ANSYS meshing is a very reasonable programme, but it depends on what you want. ANSYS meshing provides a lot of automization, with relatively limited costumization options compared to ICEM. As a result, you can create good meshes, but the more complex the geometry, the worse it gets. For the type of meshes I make (mostly stirred tanks, pipes, etc.) the results are rather good, in a short amount of time. But around more complex, curved impellers, you are forced to stick with unstructured meshes which may not always be as good as it could be. This may mean you need more grid cells to get reasonable results - which means extra calculation time, but your meshing time goes down significantly.

So to summarize:
Ansys meshing: Quick results, easy to learn, reasonable in most cases. But: mesh quality may be problematic for complex geometries. As a result, possibly a longer calculation time.

ICEM meshing: Steeper learning curve, but in the end, likely better meshes than with ANSYS, as a result, possibly better calculation outcomes (on smaller meshes)


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 21:40.