I have a problem for which I am trying to determine the most suitable software to use. Here is a brief description of the problem.

I have a mixture of inertial particles A and B with different properties. I want to inject this mixture into a channel filled with fluid, and observe the transport properties. I expect inter-particle collisions and two-way coupling between fluid and particles to be important to the physics we want to capture. I would also like to use non-Newtonian fluids.

I am looking for suggestions for commercial or open-source softwares that can tackle this problem.


Do you wish to model the two-way coupled solid-fluid flows or you wish to carry out PIV or tracking on particle images? If you wish to model the two-way coupled solid-fluid flows, there are numerous type of models are that valid, most notably Euler-Euler approaches or Euler-Lagrange (CFD-DEM unresolved or resolved) approaches. Euler-Euler approaches are available in numerous open source (OpenFOAM) or commercial (Fluent, Star-CMM+) software.

For CFD-DEM modeling you can look at the following open source project:

  • CFDEM project

(https://www.cfdem.com/), i was a developer of it during my thesis

Some commercial software are also incredibly powerful for these type of CFD-DEM problems:

  • Fluent + EDEM
  • Fluent + Rocky 4
  • Star CCM+
| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ I will look into these. I also obtained a suggestion to use MFIX(mfix.netl.doe.gov). Do you have any suggestions on using MFIX vs using CFDEM workbench? $\endgroup$ – GreenEye Jun 19 '17 at 12:16
  • $\begingroup$ I am a little bit biased, because I have developed in the CFDEM framework. I think it depends on what you wish to do. If you want to study gas-solid flows, with chemical reaction, with chemical species and in the context of chemical processes, then MFIX is a lot better. However, I don't think it contains a lot for solid-liquid flows (and even less for complex rheology). I think the CFDEM framework is a bit more versatile in general, since it can benefit from all that comes with OpenFOAM, such as the support for non-newtonian fluid. However, the learning curve for both can be high. $\endgroup$ – BlaB Jun 19 '17 at 17:16

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.