UFR 2-11 Evaluation: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
|[[Image:UFR2-11_figure4.gif|UFR2-11_figure4.gif]] | |[[Image:UFR2-11_figure4.gif|UFR2-11_figure4.gif]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
!align="center"| | !align="center"| Figure 4: Comparison of URANS and DES for the prediction of mean drag coefficient for the NACA0012 airfoil at ? = 60°. Results of 11 different simulations conducted by different partners with different codes and turbulence models within the EU FLOMANIA project [4]. Experimental data cited by Hoerner [6] are used as reference. | ||
|} | |} | ||
<br/> | <br/> |
Revision as of 09:42, 7 September 2011
High Reynolds Number Flow around Airfoil in Deep Stall
Flows Around Bodies
Underlying Flow Regime 2-11
Evaluation
Comparison of CFD Calculations with Experiments
A dramatic improvement in solution fidelity for DES compared to URANS, first reported by Shur et al. [22], was observed in the extensive cross-validation exercise carried out in the EU FLOMANIA project [4]. Figure 4 depicts the relative deviation from experimental drag achieved by DES and URANS within this work.
Contributed by: Charles Mockett; Misha Strelets — CFD Software GmbH and Technische Universitaet Berlin; New Technologies and Services LLC (NTS) and Saint-Petersburg State University
© copyright ERCOFTAC 2024