UFR 2-11 Evaluation: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
was observed in the extensive cross-validation | was observed in the extensive cross-validation | ||
exercise carried out in the EU FLOMANIA project [‌[[UFR_2-11_References#4|4]]]. | exercise carried out in the EU FLOMANIA project [‌[[UFR_2-11_References#4|4]]]. | ||
Figure 4 depicts the relative deviation from experimental drag achieved | [[UFR_2-11_Evaluation#figure4|Figure 4]] depicts the relative deviation from experimental drag achieved | ||
by DES and URANS within this work. | by DES and URANS within this work. | ||
<div id="figure4"></div> | |||
{|align="center" border="0" width="650" | {|align="center" border="0" width="650" | ||
|[[Image:UFR2-11_figure4.gif|UFR2-11_figure4.gif]] | |[[Image:UFR2-11_figure4.gif|UFR2-11_figure4.gif]] | ||
Revision as of 09:46, 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.
|
| Figure 4: Comparison of URANS and DES for the prediction of mean drag coefficient for the NACA0012 airfoil at α = 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. |
|---|
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