What are the differences between ANSYS CFX and Fluent?

What are the differences between ANSYS CFX and Fluent

One of the methods that engineers use in their projects is CFD simulation. Among the various software available, Fluent and CFX are two powerful CFD simulation tools provided by ANSYS. In this article, we will compare these two software programs and show you which is more suitable for your needs.

ANSYS Fluent is a powerful CFD software that is powerful and up-to-date in all simulation fields related to fluid mechanics and heat transfer. This software is the most popular CFD software. CFX ANSYS is one of the ANSYS products for CFD simulations. This software has the ability to simulate different fields, but it is usually used to simulate turbo machines such as pumps and turbines.

differences between ANSYS CFX and Fluent-min

Velocity contour comparison in CFD-Post of Fluent (left) and CFX (right) results for flow inside a pipe. The results are slightly different, which can be related to different Nash or different algorithms of these two software. Both software are suitable for many areas of CFD simulation. Taken from NSIV IO’s YouTube channel.

 

ANSYS CFX vs ANSYS Fluent

In the following, we will compare CFX and Fluent in each stage of CFD simulation and other important features that a software needs to have.

Geometry Modeling

Because both software are from ANSYS package, they use the same software for geometry modeling. Therefore they have the same performance in this field.

HVAC CFD

Meshing

CFX employs a vertex-centered approach, whereas Fluent uses a cell-centered approach. This indicates that information such as pressure, temperature, and velocity is saved at the faces of the cells in CFX and stored at the center of each cell in Fluent. Each of these approaches has its advantages. This factor has allowed Fluent to handle all types of meshes, including polyhedral, while CFX is not compatible with some types of meshes. In addition, in CFX, the mesh can be either 3D or pseudo-2D, meaning a mesh with a thickness of one cell. Fluent handles mesh simulation with any dimension.

During some simulations, the mesh specifications are changed and refined, which is known as Mesh Adaptation. In this field, Fluent performs better. Mesh Adaptation is only possible for single domain problems in CFX.

 

Solver

Both software are based on finite volume method. CFX is specially designed for turbomachines and in this field it performs better than Fluent, in other fields Fluent is a better choice.

Fluent can use Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) acceleration to increase simulation speed and efficiency, making it a powerful choice for users who need fast results. In contrast, CFX currently does not take advantage of GPU acceleration and instead relies on Central Processing Unit based (CPU-based) computations, which may result in longer simulation times for complex problems.

Combustion CFD

Post-Processing

It is possible to use the post-processing software available in ANSYS package for Fluent and CFX. However, it is possible to display some parameters and graphs in Fluent during or after simulation, which gives this software a slight advantage in this index.

 

Future vision

In the last few years, ANSYS has focused a lot on Fluent, and with each update, the capabilities of this software have increased, while CFX has only had minor changes. In the same way, CFX will not be able to compete with Fluent in a few years.

 

Learning and Forum

Users of both software require a considerable amount of skill and experience. But ANSYS tutorials are more by far and easy to access. Also, the number of ANSYS specialists is much more and it is easier to find them.

Multiphase CFD

Historical Background

Fluent is developed by Fluent Inc in the US. CFX is developed by AEA Technology in the UK. Due to the capabilities of both software, they have been used by engineers for years. ANSYS has acquired both Fluent and CFX. By adding them to the ANSYS package, it became possible to use the rest of the tools of this software, such as various meshing and post processing software, which greatly increased the capabilities of Fluent and CFX. In addition, ANSYS has very expert engineers and developers who have been working on these two software for years.

Historical Background

ANSYS Fluent main page from version 2023 R2. The appearance of this software has changed in recent years and has become much more beautiful and user-friendly. The numerous options of this software for CFD simulation can be seen in the image.

 

CFX main page image

CFX main page image from version 2023 R2. Unlike Fluent, the appearance of this software has not changed. As you can see, CFX is more difficult to work and learn than Fluent.

CFD heat transfer

Conclusion

We compared the capabilities of ANSYS Fluent and CFX software. In summary:

  • If you need to work on the simulation of turbomachines in a specialized way, CFX is your right choice.
  • If you want to learn a powerful CFD software that is powerful in all branches of CFD simulation, ANSYS Fluent is your right choice. In general, that software is the best option, but like CFX, there are other softwares that are designed for specific fields of simulation and perform better in their specialized field. But if your simulation tasks are diverse and you do not have a specific field for simulation, then Fluent is your right choice.

We at CFDLAND have done many projects with ANSYS Fluent and are experts in all areas of CFD simulation. Take a look at CFD Project to see our portfolios and completed projects. You can  order ANSYS Fluent project from us with the confidence of our expertise, experience and quality of work.

 

more information:

Using ANSYS Fluent for Multiphase Flow Simulations: Techniques and Tips

ANSYS Fluent vs ANSYS Discovery

ANSYS Fluent vs COMSOL

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Shopping Cart
Scroll to Top