Hardware for CFD reviewed for 2025!

🚀 Since 2009, we've been on a mission to deliver countless successful CFD projects. Over the years, we've become your trusted go-to source for hardware recommendations that can supercharge your CFD (and FEA) simulations. 🖥️🔥

Our commitment? We keep publishing state-of-the-art hardware configurations on the renowned "Hardware for CFD" platform. To make the cut, two factors are non-negotiable: a) our own rave reviews, and b) an unbeatable performance-to-cost ratio. 💪💰

Ready to turbocharge your simulations? Dive into our latest hardware recommendations at the link below:

🔗 Particular Hardware Recommendations:

https://www.cfdsupport.com/hardware-for-cfd.html 

But wait, there's more! We've got practical insights and comments straight from the experts on LinkedIn. Discover the hardware gems that can take your CFD game to the next level:

💼 Practical Comments

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/hardware-cfd-lubos-pirkl

Don't miss out on this opportunity to optimize your CFD setup for success in 2024 and beyond! 🌐💡

#CFDHardware #Simulation #CFDPerformance #HardwareForCFD

Hey everyone,

I’m working on a harmonic analysis simulation and have a question about splitting the frequency range.

Let’s say the frequency range I’m analyzing is from 10 Hz to 100 Hz. Instead of running the harmonic simulation for the entire range in one go, is it feasible to split the range into smaller intervals, for example:

• One simulation for 10-50 Hz, and

• Another for 50-100 Hz?

I’m trying to understand if this approach would still provide accurate results or if there are any drawbacks, particularly at the boundaries where the ranges are split. Has anyone used this method in their analysis, and if so, were there any issues with accuracy or continuity?

From my understanding, harmonic analysis calculates the steady-state response at a specific frequency. For example, consider the system at 10 Hz, assuming no damping. We know the equation is:

M(x′′)+k(x)=Fsin⁡(ωt)M(x'') + k(x) = F \sin(\omega t)M(x′′)+k(x)=Fsin(ωt)

Since 10 Hz is the starting frequency, the initial displacement at all nodes would be zero, x(t)=0x(t) = 0x(t)=0. By solving this, we get the response for this frequency.

Now, when the solver moves to 11 Hz, will it assume the initial displacement is zero again, or will it consider the solution from the previous frequency?

I’d appreciate any insights or suggestions regarding the feasibility of splitting the frequency range and how solvers handle initial conditions between different frequencies.

Hardware for CFD reviewed for 2024! 🚀 Since 2009, we've been on a mission to deliver countless successful CFD projects. Over the years, we've become your trusted go-to source for hardware recommendations that can supercharge your CFD (and FEA) simulations. 🖥️🔥

Our commitment? We keep publishing state-of-the-art hardware configurations on the renowned "Hardware for CFD" platform. To make the cut, two factors are non-negotiable: a) our own rave reviews, and b) an unbeatable performance-to-cost ratio. 💪💰

Ready to turbocharge your simulations? Dive into our latest hardware recommendations at the link below:

🔗 Particular Hardware Recommendations:

https://www.cfdsupport.com/hardware-for-cfd.html 

But wait, there's more! We've got practical insights and comments straight from the experts on LinkedIn. Discover the hardware gems that can take your CFD game to the next level:

💼 Practical Comments

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/hardware-cfd-lubos-pirkl

Don't miss out on this opportunity to optimize your CFD setup for success in 2024 and beyond! 🌐💡

#CFDHardware #Simulation #CFDPerformance #HardwareForCFD

A forum category for hardware related to CAE (Computer-Aided Engineering) simulations for users, developers, and experts to discuss and exchange information, ideas, and knowledge about hardware components and systems that are suitable for CAE simulations.