Affiliation:
1. Consultant, P.O. Box 3379, Los Lunas, NM 87031
Abstract
Verification of Calculations involves error estimation, whereas Verification of Codes involves error evaluation, from known benchmark solutions. The best benchmarks are exact analytical solutions with sufficiently complex solution structure; they need not be realistic since Verification is a purely mathematical exercise. The Method of Manufactured Solutions (MMS) provides a straightforward and quite general procedure for generating such solutions. For complex codes, the method utilizes Symbolic Manipulation, but here it is illustrated with simple examples. When used with systematic grid refinement studies, which are remarkably sensitive, MMS produces strong Code Verifications with a theorem-like quality and a clearly defined completion point.
Reference28 articles.
1. Roache, P. J., 1998, Verification and Validation in Computational Science and Engineering, Hermosa Publishers, Albuquerque, NM.
2. Roache, P. J., 1999, Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics, Hermosa Publishers, Albuquerque, NM, Chapter 18.
3. Roache, P. J., Ghia, K., and White, F., 1986, “Editorial Policy Statement on the Control of Numerical Accuracy,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 108, No. 1, Mar., p. 22.
4. Steinberg, S., and Roache, P. J., 1985, “Symbolic Manipulation and Computational Fluid Dynamics,” J. Comput. Phys., 57, No. 2, Jan., pp. 251–284.
5. Oberkampf, W. L., Blottner, F. G., and Aeschliman, D. P., 1995, “Methodology for Computational Fluid Dynamics Code Verification/Validation,” AIAA Paper 95-2226, 26th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference, 19–22 June, San Diego, California.
Cited by
459 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献