One of the alternatives for CFD simulation is the lattice Boltzmann equation (LBE), where the fluid is treated as fictitious mesoscopic particles (not molecules). If you need something to make you sleepy, please read the short (and concise, and free) book:  A Practical Introduction to the Lattice Boltzmann Method.

But for commercial CFD code, most are based on Navier-Stokes equations, and differ in the numerical method: finite volume, or finite element, or a hybrid of both. Finite difference based CFD is hard to find in commercial codes.

When Exa hit the market with the first commercial LBE based CFD code, PowerFlow, about 15 years ago, not so much buzz was created in CFD market. Actually, the first a few releases got not-so-good reviews, partially due to the marketing and sales issues (over-promising). Of course, apparently, in recent years,  they got a lot of improvements in both solver and marketing. They also got a few big customers in the automotive industry.  But it is still not considered as the mainstream CFD software among CFD practitioners. In the academic circle, there have … Read the rest “Navier-Stokes vs lattice Boltzmann: will it change the landscape of CFD?”

The post Navier-Stokes vs lattice Boltzmann: will it change the landscape of CFD? appeared first on CAE Watch.

Predicting the future of CFD is similar to weather forecasting, maybe just like Mayan’s Apocalypse.

But this does not stop us from expecting a new prediction, just like you check the weather forecast before travel.

As my first degree is meteorology related, please do not expect the prediction is more accurate than weather forecasting for the next 365 days.

#1. Automated meshing:  a classical fairy tale continues

Fairy tales always have listeners, and of course, tellers as well. When you are young, you are listeners; when you are older, you may gradually become a teller.  What has not been changed is the story.

Automated meshing is such a classic fairy tale in CFD industry.

Meshing is always one of the most challenging tasks for most real-world CFD problems (I am not talking about flow over an infinite plate). Automated mesh generation is the dream … Read the rest “CFD in 2013: what will change? what will not”

The post CFD in 2013: what will change? what will not appeared first on CAE Watch.

1.  Open source CFD solution is cheap because nothing can be cheaper than free.

2.  Open source CFD solution is inferior, otherwise, why is it free?

Both of them are wrong.

Open source CFD solution is not cheap, although licensing is free

Most open source CFD packages are licensed under GNU General Public License (GPL) or BSD license or MIT license.  Under such licenses, anyone can use the software (including source code) for free. There is no limitation on the usage (it means it can be used in commercial project). The only restriction is on the re-distribution of the software or its derivatives: you must release the source code if you want to sell or re-distribute it.

So, licensing the software has no cost. You can get it from the internet. Of course, you can pay nominal fees to get it on a DVD delivered to your doorstep.

But software is only part of a CFD solution.  Human resources and hardware are also in the equation of cost. In most organizations, these two usually cost more, especially the staff cost.

The argument some may have is … Read the rest “Why isn’t open source CFD solution for everyone?”

The post Why isn’t open source CFD solution for everyone? appeared first on CAE Watch.