[mr_fluent]

Originally Posted by aerogt3

That's a pretty bold statement. But your post is full of assumptions, most of them false . . .

If they are false go ahead and prove them, don't just make statements in air.

Originally Posted by aerogt3

You cannot mesh in fluent. The GUI is terrible. It crashes, it fails all the time, the mouse interface is rubbish, rotating and displaying things is a huge pain. ICEM has a proper GUI. Fluent's is terrible. The menus going from left to right does not mitigate this.

I can not mesh in Fluent (and you can mesh in openFOAM too). But i could mesh in gambit and other mesher ansys provides. Plus there are many meshers for Fluent. Could you name couple of them for openFOAM.
Go ahead do that.

Plus, if someone does not know how to use it, things are definitely terrible for him. I never had any issue what you are saying. It all works great for me.

Originally Posted by aerogt3

Another terrible feature. The TUI features are impossible to ever stumble upon. It's like building a car with a navigation system that is underneath the car buried behind the exhaust system where you can't see or find it.

TUI features are best thing it has. Almost all of my work is automated because of this and it saves me lot of time. I can even schedule my work in pipeline and automate post processing. Linux+Fluent is best thing if some one know how to use it.

Originally Posted by aerogt3

You can also use coupled, but is foam not a good solver because it doesn't have that option? The core of a solver is bigger than p-v coupling. You can get into the semantics of all these small features.

You are the one boasting that openFOAM can replace 90% of Fluent as a solver. Fluent provides almost all types of solvers people can chose and use based on their needs. openFOAM is good in what it can do, but its no Fluent. Fractional step, density based coupled solvers are very much used. If you do not use, it does not mean they mean nothing to others.

Originally Posted by aerogt3

My bottom line point is that I can obtain equally accurate results with foam given the same input mesh. Maybe it will take 10% more iterations, or I'll have to use a text interface. But as a solver it can do the same job.

Bottom line is openFOAM in current state is far from replacing 90% of Fluent.

[aerogt3]

Originally Posted by mr_fluent

I can not mesh in Fluent (and you can mesh in openFOAM too). But i could mesh in gambit and other mesher ansys provides. Plus there are many meshers for Fluent. Could you name couple of them for openFOAM.
Go ahead do that.

Openfoam can import from most any commercial mesher. Pointwise (probably the best commercial mesher available) exports directly to foam. More will too, in the future.

I never had any issue what you are saying. It all works great for me.

Oh ok, well, since you're the only CFD user in the world, then that's 100% conclusive!

TUI features are best thing it has. Almost all of my work is automated because of this and it saves me lot of time. I can even schedule my work in pipeline and automate post processing. Linux+Fluent is best thing if some one know how to use it.

The TUI is great. I have everything scripted through matlab. But what isn't great, is features which are in the TUI but not the GUI . . . that's like a navigation system in a car, that the manufacturer places underneath the engine and never tells you is there . . .

Bottom line is openFOAM in current state is far from replacing 90% of Fluent.

As an external flow solver is it very much in a position to replace fluent, and a lot of companies are recognizing that. Of course, someone with the username "mr_fluent" probably never will.