Simcenter STAR-CCM+ vs. Simulink

The applications that I have been using it with in terms of flow and energy and temperature distributions and coupled solvers, segregated solvers, these kind of areas if you need that, those kind of solvers, it's very good. It's very robust. Maybe on the combustion side, it could improve, especially if you have these kind of tabulated solvers that you want to use, not the detailed chemistry, then it becomes very difficult to get some results from it. And do you trust the results or not? That's always the question on that kind of application, something that I could think of really fast.

Incentivized

Simulink is a great tool for designing systems in the very early stages of projects. This lets you understand concepts and have a working model much faster, saving you time and money by being able to find errors really quick. On the other hand, when the projects reach a state of deployment you'll need to translate all the acquired knowledge and/or data from Simulink to the specific system you will be using. For example, you might design and validate a spacecraft propulsion system in Simulink, but when you build the real life model you will need to translate the designed algorithm/system to the actual code running aboard the spacecraft.

Incentivized

• Meshing, for instance, it's very easy to mesh, try different approaches to meshing. Traditionally that's a very difficult job, but in STAR-CCM+ it makes it very easy and very reliable. Post-processing also is very nice and in all the modeling, the physics that you can carry out and you can simulate is also very, very nice. I tried to move to the priorities that does a good job. All in all, it's a very good software.

Incentivized

• When you design a circuit or system, time is cheating because it gives results that are very close to reality.
• Time and financial gain by easily changing the design part.
• Support and include renewable energy sources.

Incentivized

• Implementing physics like Cox-Voinov model
• Mesh related stability issues
• Chemical & plasma physics
• Integration with other products from Siemens (similar level as we have with Abacus)
• Speed up the lagrangian solver
• Improved guidence on uFluidics & evaporation models
• Interoperability (HEEDS, AMEsim, System Modelling Workbench but also with non siemens products and open source codes required for LBM, DSMC, PIC, DFT...

• Learning curve for designing accurate models and getting useful results can be pretty steep for most people that aren't used to graphical based design and representation of systems.
• Simulink requires a lot of CPU power and computer resources to run smoothly without crashing. Together with the MATLAB environment, a standard installation consumes a lot of disk space and becomes greater when more toolboxes are included.
• Community for Simulink support and documentation is inferior to that of MATLAB and it isn't used as a standard tool by most of academia. I believe other tools such as Labview are far more common, making it easier to get help and find examples online.

Incentivized

Great single window GUI

Incentivized

Our designated support engineers do a proper job. On the outdated Help file and training material there is a lot to gain

It is super easy when it comes to implementing it.

Incentivized

Control blocks and more detailed algorithms can be run in Matlab Simulink. Simulation and PCB drawing of electronic circuit boards are performed in Proteus.

Incentivized

• Time saved in creating a inhouse code, tens and tens of hours.
• Time saved in experimental setup, tens of hours.
• Does add some time in testing to confirm star is doing what you think it's doing, but an overall net gain in productivity.

• Better data analysis
• Excellent data visualization
• Identification of areas of opportunity to attack

Incentivized