YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASME
    • Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASME
    • Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Assessment of Model Validation, Calibration, and Prediction Approaches in the Presence of Uncertainty

    Source: Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification:;2023:;volume( 008 ):;issue: 001::page 11001-1
    Author:
    Whiting, Nolan W.
    ,
    Roy, Christopher J.
    ,
    Duque, Earl
    ,
    Lawrence, Seth
    ,
    Oberkampf, William L.
    DOI: 10.1115/1.4056285
    Publisher: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
    Abstract: Model validation is the process of determining the degree to which a model is an accurate representation of the true value in the real world. The results of a model validation study can be used to either quantify the model form uncertainty or to improve/calibrate the model. The model validation process becomes complex when there is uncertainty in the simulation and/or experimental outcomes. These uncertainties can be in the form of aleatory uncertainties due to randomness or epistemic uncertainties due to lack of knowledge. Five different approaches are used for addressing model validation and predictive capability: (1) the area validation metric (AVM), (2) a modified area validation metric (MAVM) with confidence intervals, (3) the validation uncertainty procedure from ASME V&V 20, (4) a calibration procedure interpreted from ASME V&V 20, and (5) identification of the model discrepancy term using Bayesian estimation. To provide an unambiguous assessment of these different approaches, synthetic experimental data is generated from computational fluid dynamics simulations of an airfoil with a flap. A simplified model is then developed using thin airfoil theory. The accuracy of the simplified model is assessed using the synthetic experimental data. The quantities examined include the two-dimensional lift and moment coefficients for the airfoil with varying angles of attack and flap deflection angles. Each of these approaches is assessed for the ability to tightly encapsulate the true value at conditions both where experimental results are provided and prediction locations where no experimental data are available. Generally, it was seen that the MAVM performed the best in cases where there is a sparse amount of data and/or large extrapolations. Furthermore, it was found that Bayesian estimation outperformed the others where there is an extensive amount of experimental data that covers the application domain.
    • Download: (11.56Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Assessment of Model Validation, Calibration, and Prediction Approaches in the Presence of Uncertainty

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4291642
    Collections
    • Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification

    Show full item record

    contributor authorWhiting, Nolan W.
    contributor authorRoy, Christopher J.
    contributor authorDuque, Earl
    contributor authorLawrence, Seth
    contributor authorOberkampf, William L.
    date accessioned2023-08-16T18:13:04Z
    date available2023-08-16T18:13:04Z
    date copyright1/13/2023 12:00:00 AM
    date issued2023
    identifier issn2377-2158
    identifier othervvuq_008_01_011001.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4291642
    description abstractModel validation is the process of determining the degree to which a model is an accurate representation of the true value in the real world. The results of a model validation study can be used to either quantify the model form uncertainty or to improve/calibrate the model. The model validation process becomes complex when there is uncertainty in the simulation and/or experimental outcomes. These uncertainties can be in the form of aleatory uncertainties due to randomness or epistemic uncertainties due to lack of knowledge. Five different approaches are used for addressing model validation and predictive capability: (1) the area validation metric (AVM), (2) a modified area validation metric (MAVM) with confidence intervals, (3) the validation uncertainty procedure from ASME V&V 20, (4) a calibration procedure interpreted from ASME V&V 20, and (5) identification of the model discrepancy term using Bayesian estimation. To provide an unambiguous assessment of these different approaches, synthetic experimental data is generated from computational fluid dynamics simulations of an airfoil with a flap. A simplified model is then developed using thin airfoil theory. The accuracy of the simplified model is assessed using the synthetic experimental data. The quantities examined include the two-dimensional lift and moment coefficients for the airfoil with varying angles of attack and flap deflection angles. Each of these approaches is assessed for the ability to tightly encapsulate the true value at conditions both where experimental results are provided and prediction locations where no experimental data are available. Generally, it was seen that the MAVM performed the best in cases where there is a sparse amount of data and/or large extrapolations. Furthermore, it was found that Bayesian estimation outperformed the others where there is an extensive amount of experimental data that covers the application domain.
    publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
    titleAssessment of Model Validation, Calibration, and Prediction Approaches in the Presence of Uncertainty
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume8
    journal issue1
    journal titleJournal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification
    identifier doi10.1115/1.4056285
    journal fristpage11001-1
    journal lastpage11001-21
    page21
    treeJournal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification:;2023:;volume( 008 ):;issue: 001
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian