AIAA Committee on Standards for CFD - Current Status and Plans For International Verification Database

Rahaim, Christopher; Cosner, Raymond; Dominik, D.; Oberkampf, William L.

doi:10.2514/6.2003-844

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This can replace the earlier approach found in the historic scientific methodology that does not have a place for computing and simulation. A relationship diagram between the steps of such a methodology is shown in Figure 1 [27]. The outer circle together with data validity are the technical processes that must be addressed to show that a model is credible.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Review of CFD Guidelines for Dispersion Modeling

Meroney

Ohba

Leitl³

et al. 2016

Fluids

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the review of CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics) guidelines for dispersion modeling in the USA, Japan and Germany. Most parts of this review are based on the short report of the special meeting on CFD Guidelines held at the International Symposium on Computational Wind Engineering (CWE2014), University of Hamburg, June 2014. The objective of this meeting was to introduce and discuss the action program to make worldwide guidelines of CFD gas-dispersion modeling. The following six gas-dispersion guidelines including Verification and Validation (V&V) schemes are introduced by each author; (1) US CFD guidelines; (2) COST/ES1006; (3) German VDI (Verein Deutscher Ingenieure) guidelines; (4) Atomic Energy Society of Japan; (5) Japan Society of Atmospheric Environment; (6) Architectural Institute of Japan. All guidelines were summarized in the same format table shown in the main chapters in order to compare them with each other. In addition to the summary of guidelines, the overview of V&V schemes and many guidelines of CFD modeling in the USA are explained.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…between the steps of such a methodology is shown in Figure 1 [27]. The outer circle together with data validity are the technical processes that must be addressed to show that a model is credible.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of CFD Guidelines for Dispersion Modeling

Meroney

Ohba

Leitl³

et al. 2016

Fluids

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Validation of Conjugate Heat-Transfer Capability for Water-Cooled High-Speed Flows

Engblom

Fletcher

Georgiadis

2007

39th AIAA Thermophysics Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thesis UMI Number: EP32091 INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. ® UMI UMI Microform EP32091

show abstract

Overview of the Aeroelastic Prediction Workshop

Heeg

Chwalowski²,

Florance³

et al. 2013

51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Aeroelastic Prediction Workshop brought together an international community of computational fluid dynamicists as a step in defining the state of the art in computational aeroelasticity. This workshop's technical focus was prediction of unsteady pressure distributions resulting from forced motion, benchmarking the results first using unforced system data. The most challenging aspects of the physics were identified as capturing oscillatory shock behavior, dynamic shock-induced separated flow and tunnel wall boundary layer influences. The majority of the participants used unsteady Reynolds-averaged Navier Stokes codes. These codes were exercised at transonic Mach numbers for three configurations and comparisons were made with existing experimental data. Substantial variations were observed among the computational solutions as well as differences relative to the experimental data. Contributing issues to these differences include wall effects and wall modeling, nonstandardized convergence criteria, inclusion of static aeroelastic deflection, methodology for oscillatory solutions, post-processing methods. Contributing issues pertaining principally to the experimental data sets include the position of the model relative to the tunnel wall, splitter plate size, wind tunnel expansion slot configuration, spacing and location of pressure instrumentation, and data processing methods.

show abstract

AIAA Committee on Standards for CFD - Current Status and Plans For International Verification Database

Cited by 4 publications

References 13 publications

Review of CFD Guidelines for Dispersion Modeling

Review of CFD Guidelines for Dispersion Modeling

Validation of Conjugate Heat-Transfer Capability for Water-Cooled High-Speed Flows

Overview of the Aeroelastic Prediction Workshop

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About