Ansys Discovery or Flagship Tools: The Right Tool For The Right Job

September 18, 2024 Krystian Link

In the movie Gran Torino, Walt Kowalski is getting his friend Thao Vang Lor prepared for his first day working at a construction site“Take these three items right hereYou can have theseWD-40, vise grips, and some duct tapeAny man worth his salt can do half the household chores with just those three things”.  In a similar vein, I was cutting down some invasive trees in my backyard with an EGO chainsaw in a matter of minutesI texted my friend and told him how much I love this chainsaw for its power, speed, and efficiency“The right tool for the right job”, he respondsWhat do these handymen stories have to do with simulationExcellent questionMuch like hand tools and power tools, you must be selective with the tools you use in simulationOne might complete the job in record time but give you less-than-desirable accuracy to launch a productAnother might give you tremendously accurate results, but risk delaying that product launchIn this article, we will compare the benefits of fast and easy-to-use tools like Ansys Discovery to the more advanced capability flagship tools like Ansys Fluent, Mechanical, or HFSSWhich is the best for your application?   Let’s find out. 

Ansys Discovery: Best For Directional Guidance 

In recent months, more customers have been exploring Ansys Discovery and seeing it as a great entry point into the Ansys simulation ecosystemAs a result, we’ve been getting more questions about its application 

Is it going to give me good enough results? 

Should I just jump right into flagship tools? 

Is there an in-between option? 

All meaningful questions, that can be answered in one phrase: Ansys Discovery is a design tool, not a validation toolTo clarify, when I say a “design tool”, I’m referring to something that can aid at the very front-end of product developmentDesign engineers walk a tightrope for a new product concept designIf they proceed developing too many concepts, they risk time and capital validating the “best” design heading to production (and therefore delay a product launch)Conversely, if they rush into product development without concepting (and simulating) a few design iterations, they risk overlooking an even more robust design, potentially resulting in engineering rework, retests, and launch delaysEither outcome is time and capital intensive.  These roadblocks are why Ansys Discovery was developed.  With Ansys Discovery, a design engineer is able to quickly narrow down the most viable concepts with minimal time and capital investment.  By conducting some A-to-B comparison simulations, a design engineer can go into production design work with a much higher degree of confidence that the concepts they selected will have the best chance of making it to production.  

Because Ansys Discovery’s Explore mode leverages the GPU for computation and post-processing, the process is typically much faster than setting up a full simulation in Ansys flagship tools and leveraging your dedicated simulation engineers to do itWhen you reduce your concept design count, you reduce development spend, testing time, and have a greater likelihood of maintaining launch timing. The key differentiator to remember, however, is that Discovery is not going to have the same level of accuracy as flagship toolsFor instance, if you are looking for results to be within 5-10% accuracy, Discovery is not the tool you should be usingThese types of tolerances are best addressed by flagship tools that require more upfront work for meshing, solving, and post-processing. 

Ansys Flagship Tools: Best for Production-Intent Activities 

For when you absolutely have to simulate the most accurate physics, accept no substitutes.  Once you’ve iterated your concepts through Ansys Discovery and have narrowed down your production-intent design, it’s time to bring out the heavy hittersFlagship tools like Fluent, Mechanical, and HFSS are designed for robust simulation capability with an emphasis on accuracy and advanced physicsThe amount of control an engineer has over the mesh, simulation setup, and post-processing capabilities is head-and-shoulders above CAD embedded competitors, and for good reasonPeople are designing space ships, cars, fighter jets, and defense products (just to name a few) using this softwareWhen customers aren’t sure if they need to leverage flagship tools, I will ask them “are you validating your product for production or certifying it according to government or regulated standards?”  If any (or all) of those questions are yes, you need to be using flagship simulation capabilityIn these scenarios, accuracy is paramount, so additional time is typically budgeted in the product development cycle for simulation that supports production-intent designsThese simulations can be carried out weeks or months in advance, and simulation engineers can spend the bulk of their time tuning a model to ensure a widget passes physical testing with flying colors the first timeCan you use flagship tools for concept design workAbsolutelyBut the questions you must ask are: 

“Does the level of accuracy I’m getting from these tools warrant the extra time it takes to get the model setup and running?” 

“Are ‘good enough’ results all that’s needed at this point in the development process?” 

Now, what I’m proposing may be scary“You’re saying I should intentionally choose a less accurate solution to my problem?”.  Certainly notBut what I am saying is don’t be afraid to use the WD-40, vice grips, and duct tape for those simpler tasks where engineering effort can be better spent on higher value activities that require those chainsaws and impact gunsThe value of a simulation engineer is not just in their ability to simulate, but also discern what methods will solve the problem as quickly, accurately, and cheaply as possible.  So next time you launch a new product, try mixing it upLeverage Ansys Discovery to rapidly narrow down your concepts and use the flagship tools for when you’re ready to put a product in your customer’s hands.  Use the right tools for the right jobs. 

 

About the Author

Krystian Link

Krystian is a CFD application engineer at RandSim with over 10 years of product development experience in the automotive and manufacturing industries. His simulation experience focuses on vehicle thermal management, external aerodynamics simulations, and HVAC systems, including a publication in SAE’s Journal of Commercial Vehicles ("CFD Windshield Deicing Simulations for Commercial Vehicle Applications"). After completing his MBA at Indiana University’s Kelley School of Business, Krystian became even more passionate about building and implementing strategic solutions that not only address customers’ simulation needs, but also their business goals.

Follow on Linkedin More Content by Krystian Link
Previous Article
Webinar - Breaking Barriers: Making High-Performance Computing Attainable and Affordable
Webinar - Breaking Barriers: Making High-Performance Computing Attainable and Affordable

Join us October 24th as we break down the barriers and misconceptions about the accessibility of HPC soluti...

Next Article
Is GPU Computing Right for Your R&D Simulation Needs?
Is GPU Computing Right for Your R&D Simulation Needs?

Are GPUs the best path for your HPC needs? The answer to that question is “Can your business afford not to...

×

Have Questions?
Just Ask.

First Name:
Last Name:
Organization:
Country
Comments:
Thank you!
Error - something went wrong!