Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPark, Joel T.
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-06T05:27:44Z
dc.date.available2022-02-06T05:27:44Z
dc.date.copyright6/18/2021 12:00:00 AM
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.issn0098-2202
dc.identifier.otherfe_143_08_080802.pdf
dc.identifier.urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4278077
dc.description.abstractThe modern methodology for quantifying the quality of experimental data is uncertainty analysis. Current methods are reviewed with some examples primarily from naval hydrodynamics. The methods described apply to fluids engineering. The history of uncertainty analysis, U.S. and international standards on uncertainty analysis, verification and validation standards for computational fluid dynamics, and instrument calibration are discussed. One important result is that random loading in force calibration can produce a lower uncertainty estimate than sequential loading. Statistically, the calibration results for the slope and intercept are the same for the two methods in the example thrust calibration, but the uncertainty in random loading is a factor of three smaller than sequential loading.
dc.publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
dc.titleTheory of Uncertainty Analysis With Application to Naval Hydrodynamics
dc.typeJournal Paper
dc.journal.volume143
dc.journal.issue8
dc.journal.titleJournal of Fluids Engineering
dc.identifier.doi10.1115/1.4050961
dc.journal.fristpage080802-1
dc.journal.lastpage080802-9
dc.page9
dc.treeJournal of Fluids Engineering:;2021:;volume( 143 ):;issue: 008
dc.contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record