[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

# Re: FEMM Vs. commercial code

- To: femm@yahoogroups.com
- Subject: Re: FEMM Vs. commercial code
- From: "marsupiofr" <marsupio@hotmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 15:51:02 -0000
- In-reply-to: <ar28pp+n1ul@eGroups.com>
- User-agent: eGroups-EW/0.82

    --- In femm@y..., "marsupiofr" <marsupio@h...> wrote:
    > --- In femm@y..., David Meeker <dmeeker@i...> wrote:
    > >
    >
    > Just a note on the fact that FEMM would not be bullet proof for
    > bugs : can we say that commercial programs are really bullet proof
    > for bugs ? I do not think so. With my experience, I think honestly
    > that FEMM is not more or less stable than a commercial program. I
    > really achieved some huge simulations with FEMM for my PhD thesis :
    > repeating 15 hours simulation on a 1.2GHz x86 computer with LUA
    > automation - no problems and this piece of software really saved my
    > life for this PhD thesis.

    I forgot to mention that in my Lab we have :

    - EFCAD (a 2D FE package developped in my Lab but no longer
    maintained)
    - Flux 2D
    - Opera 3D
    - Ansys

    and I chose .... FEMM !!! because :

    1) It's a great software (see former posts)
    2) I like the philosophy of free softwares and I tried, in my PhD
    thesis, to work only with non commercial softs. I generally found
    them more effective, more stable than anything else. Here are the
    tools I used : LaTeX, FEMM, Gnuplot, G++,... It's a personal
    philosophy, that's all.

- References:
  - Re: FEMM Vs. commercial code
    - From: "marsupiofr" <marsupio@hotmail.com>

- Prev by Date: Rif: [femm] where to find full BH curve of NdFeB magnetic material
- Next by Date: RE: [femm] FEMM Vs. commercial code
- Previous by thread: Re: [femm] Re: FEMM Vs. commercial code
- Next by thread: Nov 10 Release
- Index(es):
  - Date
  - Thread