Show simple item record

contributor authorRobert V. Wilson
contributor authorAssistant Research Engineer
contributor authorHugh W. Coleman
contributor authorEminent Scholar in Propulsion
contributor authorProfessor of Mechanical Engineering
contributor authorEric G. Paterson
contributor authorAssociate Research Engineer
contributor authorFred Stern
contributor authorProfessor Mechanical Engineering and Research Engineer
date accessioned2017-05-09T00:05:06Z
date available2017-05-09T00:05:06Z
date copyrightDecember, 2001
date issued2001
identifier issn0098-2202
identifier otherJFEGA4-27167#803_1.pdf
identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/125361
description abstractPart 2 of this two-part paper provides an example case study following the recently developed comprehensive verification and validation approach presented in Part 1. The case study is for a RANS simulation of an established benchmark for ship hydrodynamics using a ship hydrodynamics CFD code. Verification of the resistance (integral variable) and wave profile (point variable) indicates iterative uncertainties much less than grid uncertainties and simulation numerical uncertainties of about 2%S1(S1 is the simulation value for the finest grid). Validation of the resistance and wave profile shows modeling errors of about 8%D (D is the measured resistance) and 6%ζmax(ζmax is the maximum wave elevation), which should be addressed for possible validation at the 3%D and 4%ζmax levels. Reducing the level of validation primarily requires reduction in experimental uncertainties. The reduction of both modeling errors and experimental uncertainties will produce verified and validated solutions at low levels for this application using the present CFD code. Although there are many issues for practical applications, the methodology and procedures are shown to be successful for assessing levels of verification and validation and identifying modeling errors in some cases. For practical applications, solutions are far from the asymptotic range; therefore, analysis and interpretation of the results are shown to be important in assessing variability for order of accuracy, levels of verification, and strategies for reducing numerical and modeling errors and uncertainties.
publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
titleComprehensive Approach to Verification and Validation of CFD Simulations—Part 2: Application for Rans Simulation of a Cargo/Container Ship
typeJournal Paper
journal volume123
journal issue4
journal titleJournal of Fluids Engineering
identifier doi10.1115/1.1412236
journal fristpage803
journal lastpage810
identifier eissn1528-901X
keywordsElectrical resistance
keywordsSimulation
keywordsWaves
keywordsComputational fluid dynamics
keywordsEngineering simulation
keywordsModeling
keywordsErrors
keywordsReynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equations
keywordsShips
keywordsUncertainty
keywordsContainers AND Geometry
treeJournal of Fluids Engineering:;2001:;volume( 123 ):;issue: 004
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record