Results of the October 2000 CGNS Email Survey

AIAA Reno Jan. 2001

Steve M. Legensky
Founder and General Manager
Intelligent Light

Raw Data

• 360 Surveys Sent Out
• 84 "Responses" of which 45 were "bounces"
• Therefore, 39 usable responses
  • 16 Commercial
  • 11 Universities
  • 6 NASA/National Labs
  • 2 Solver Cos.
  • 2 Grid generation
  • 2 Post-processing

Commercial Responses

• Location = 8 US, 8 European
  • 0 in production
  • 2 using and having some impact
  • 2 haven't tried it yet
  • 12 in various stages of trying it
• Solver/Motivation
  • 11 with in-house/government codes
  • 5 want it for commercial codes
  • Universal desire: share data between codes

NASA/National Lab Responses

• 4 from NASA, 1 Sandia, 1 LANL
  • 0 using and having some impact
  • 2 haven't tried it yet
  • 4 in various stages of trying it
• Main Issues
  • Lack of full pre/post suites to support operation
  • Poor operation in parallel environment
  • Lack of time to implement

Other Observations

• People generally want to interchange data
  • Some European organizations using just ADF
  • Interchange between copmmercial solvers is the key for industrial respondents
  • Some people have experienced small incompatibility problems
• Issues people have raised
  • Complaints about "heaviness of CGNS"
  • Problems with complexity and structure of documentation
  • Some link problems under Windows & LINUX
  • Poor implementation of BC's and unstructured data tyoes