Uncertainties and CFD Code Validation

Author:

Coleman H. W.1,Stern F.2

Affiliation:

1. Propulsion Research Center, Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department, University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, AL 35899

2. Iowa Institute of Hydraulic Research, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242

Abstract

A new approach to computational fluid dynamics code validation is developed that gives proper consideration to experimental and simulation uncertainties. The comparison error is defined as the difference between the data and simulation values and represents the combination of all errors. The validation uncertainly is defined as the combination of the uncertainties in the experimental data and the portion of the uncertainties in the CFD prediction that can be estimated. This validation uncertainty sets the level at which validation can be achieved. The criterion for validation is that the magnitude of the comparison error must be less than the validation uncertainty. If validation is not accomplished, the magnitude and sign of the comparison error can be used to improve the mathematical modeling. Consideration is given to validation procedures for a single code, multiple codes and/or models, and predictions of trends. Example results of verification/validation are presented for a single computational fluid dynamics code and for a comparison of multiple turbulence models. The results demonstrate the usefulness of the proposed validation strategy. This new approach for validation should be useful in guiding future developments in computational fluid dynamics through validation studies and in the transition of computational fluid dynamics codes to design.

Publisher

ASME International

Subject

Mechanical Engineering

Reference33 articles.

1. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), 1994, “Editorial Policy Statement on Numerical Accuracy and Experimental Uncertainty,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 32, No. 1.

2. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), 1997, “Guide to the Assessment of Uncertainty in Computational Fluid Dynamics Simulations,” AIAA G-077, Jan. 1997 draft of a recommended practices document.

3. American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), 1993, “Editorial Policy Statement on the Control of Numerical Accuracy,” ASME JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING, Vol. 115, No. 3.

4. Baldwin, B. S., and Lomax, H., 1978, “Thin Layer Approximation and Algebraic Model for Separated Turbulent Flows,” AIAA Paper AIAA 78-257.

5. Beard, R. M., and Landrum, D. B., 1996, “Effects of Kinetic Rate Uncertainty on the Predicted Performance of Small Hydrogen Thrusters,” AIAA Paper AIAA-96-2856.

Cited by 171 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

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3