I have released an early Windows CAE utility called CrashLens Reporter.

It batch-processes exported LS-DYNA result folders and generates structured PDF and Excel reports for comparing simulation runs.

The current version supports exported ASCII, CSV, and XY-style result files. It does not directly read binary d3plot or binout files yet.

I would appreciate feedback from CAE/FEA users on which outputs and metrics should be prioritised next.

Examples:

- GLSTAT

- MATSUM

- RCFORC

- SPCFORC

- NODOUT

- SECFORC

Product/demo pages:

https://payhip.com/b/1BkPG

https://payhip.com/b/M9QVz

CrashLens Reporter is independent and is not affiliated with or endorsed by Ansys.

Hi,

I’m looking for technical criticism on an early architecture/RFC-stage open-source CAE application-layer initiative.

The goal is not to build a new solver, clone commercial CAE software, or replace existing open-source tools.

The goal is to define the missing application layer that could connect existing open-source engineering tools into one coherent workflow: CAD/geometry, assemblies, MBD, FEA, CFD-ready workflows, meshing, visualization, results, reporting, and future automation.

The public repository is currently focused on architecture, RFCs, MVP definition, and technical review. There is no public implementation yet, although the architecture is informed by prior private prototype work around a Qt-based desktop CAE shell, model tree workflows, viewport interaction, command routing, and diagnostics.

I’m especially interested in feedback from CAE users on:

1. Whether the application-layer direction makes sense.

2. What risks exist around connecting CAD, meshing, solvers, and results into one workflow.

3. How FEA/CFD boundary regions, mesh groups, loads, and result fields should influence the early architecture.

4. Whether the proposed Core Model / Solver Adapter / Results Layer separation is reasonable.

5. What mistakes should be avoided before implementation begins.

Repository:

https://github.com/Shlomo365/open-cae-application-layer

Main RFC discussion:

https://github.com/Shlomo365/open-cae-application-layer/discussions

The most useful feedback would be:

What is the biggest architectural risk, missing assumption, or workflow mistake in this direction?

Thanks,

Shlomo

Hi everyone

I started setting up Hexahedral mesh in TCAS-lite with Axial design and simulation (Axial Fan Design and Simulation – CFD SUPPORT).

After finishing mesh generation, please see in attached picture, I found mesh created shown as Tetrahedral mesh (left side) but in tutorial report be Hexahedral mesh.

I am new user for TCAE. I'm thing there something wrong during my first setup.

Is there any suggestion for make Hexahedral mesh?

I need to simulate a hydrogen explosion near a wall: I need pressure values ​​over time for the structural calculation.
Is it possible to set up the simulation and use BlastFoam in TCFD?
Reading around, I found that the XiFoam or XiFluid solvers exist: does anyone know anything about them? Could they be integrated into TCFD?

Dear CFD Support team,

I am a Master’s student in Mechanical Engineering (Energy Transition specialization) at the University of Brescia, Italy.

For one of my CFD/OpenFOAM exams, I am required to develop a validated simulation project (not a thesis, but an academic project), including comparison with reference or published results. For this purpose, I downloaded your Burj Al Arab simulation example from your platform.

My goal is to reconstruct the case in OpenFOAM and use it as part of my exam project. I would like to kindly ask if it would be possible to receive additional technical details to help me accurately reproduce the simulation in OpenFOAM. In particular, I am looking for:

• Computational domain dimensions and setup;

• Boundary conditions (inlet velocity profile, outlet, wall and ground conditions);

• Turbulence model and main parameters;

• Mesh generation details (refinement regions, layers, resolution);

• Reference values used for force coefficients or validation

If available, even a simplified description of the setup or equivalent OpenFOAM dictionaries (0/, constant/, system/) would be extremely helpful.

The purpose of my work is purely academic, and I aim to ensure the simulation is physically consistent and properly validated.

Thank you very much for your time and support.

Best regards,
Hamza Chokry

I need to simulate this in fluent.

Take a bubble of radius 1 mm with internal pressure as 3 kPa, while the outside liquid is at 1 bar pressure. This bubble is at a distance of 1.1 mm from a flat surface. Gravity acts vertically down.

the bubble is of vapour.

I used multiphase model with VOF.

I created a Rectangular domain to simulate it in 2D with suitable dimensions.

I am facing problems in setting up the pressure difference in and outside the bubble , like I used operation condition has 100kPa , and boundary conditions as pressure oulet for top, right and left side of the Rectangular domain , and wall for bottom side.

Then I patched the bubble with suitable radius, but I am not able to set the presure differnce .

Could anyone help me setting the pressure difference.

Artificial intelligence is changing our world as we know it. A storm of change concerns every field, everything, and everyone. In this little thought experiment, I would like to think about how our beloved Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) and CAE simulations are likely to change. I know, I know. Predicting the future is generally a foolish exercise, …, so I decided to write the following lines about it. Disclaimer: It’s March 2026. 

At the moment, AI is entering CFD through at least three distinct paths, each affecting engineering work in a very different way: Agents, Surrogates, and Coding. These three guys are already happening, and they are quickly changing CAE, and the pace is only growing. Let’s take a look at them one by one.

I need to learn how to model fire and explosion with cfd. Can any one help me?

Hi, wanted to do Drivaer estate simulation with rotating wheels, moving ground. So i started with tutorial from website, and used the same configuration as starting point, and Cd was way to low, then i changed to Kepsilon back and forth Cd was still low. then i switched to half of car and started to refine mesh and Cd went little higher to 0.3 but still it is inacurate, then refined further and Cd ramped to 0.38 then started to look on Y+ and further refined to achieve average 5, but most of car is 2, and still Cd is very high (0.37), tried also with LowRe wall functions but it seems that Cd is still too high. Any Ideas what to check/ to replicate good- consistent results? Experimental CD for estate is 0.314

Hello everyone, 

I have a recurrent problem when meshing with SnappyHexMesh: there are "holes" on some boundaries of my mesh (see picture). Do you know why this is happening? And what could I change to have a mesh that perfectly match with my geometry? I am working on a passage of a centrifugal compressor. 

Thank you in advance !

Alex 

Under development ...

TBRAIN is a new software module for TCAE, an intelligent autonomous agent that automates engineering simulation workflows (especially CFD).

Its goal is to eliminate the need for expert knowledge, drastically accelerate projects, and make simulation accessible through natural-language control, similar to ChatGPT.

Please be advised that our email notification system is currently undergoing a complete redesign to improve reliability and integration with the new TBRAIN architecture. We are working to ensure that automated updates and alerts are fully functional ASAP. Thank you for your patience as we finalize these enhancements.

I am running the Ahmed benchmark case downloaded from cfdsupport, and I get a different drag coefficient compared to what is in the report on the website (experimental value: 0.2850, website value 0.2848, my value 0.305). This is a fairly significant difference. I am using the files exactly as downloaded, in TCAE-Lite version 25.10. What would be the reason for this difference in drag prediction?