UFR 3-33 Test Case: Difference between revisions

From KBwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 22: Line 22:
[[Image:UFR3-33_wind_channel.png|x400px]]
[[Image:UFR3-33_wind_channel.png|x400px]]


Fig. 1: Wind tunnel applied for the experimental investigations.
Fig. 2: Wind tunnel applied for the experimental investigations.


[[Image:UFR3-33_wind_channel_specifications.png|x250px]]
[[Image:UFR3-33_wind_channel_specifications.png|x250px]]
Line 28: Line 28:
[[Image:UFR3-33_description_of_the_test_section.png|x250px]]
[[Image:UFR3-33_description_of_the_test_section.png|x250px]]


Fig. 2: Dimensions and position of the hemisphere in the test section.
Fig. 3: Dimensions and position of the hemisphere in the test section.


== Flow parameters ==
== Flow parameters ==

Revision as of 09:50, 20 January 2016

Turbulent flow past a smooth and rigid wall-mounted hemisphere

Front Page

Description

Test Case Studies

Evaluation

Best Practice Advice

References

Semi-confined flows

Underlying Flow Regime 3-33

Test Case Study

Brief Description of the geometrical model and the test section

UFR3-33 description of the case.png

Fig. 1: Geometrical configuration of the wall-mounted hemisphere.

Description of the wind channel

Provide a brief description of the test facility, together with the measurement techniques used. Indicate what quantities were measured and where.

Discuss the quality of the data and the accuracy of the measurements. It is recognized that the depth and extent of this discussion is dependent upon the amount and quality of information provided in the source documents. However, it should seek to address:

  • How close is the flow to the target/design flow (e.g. if the flow is supposed to be two-dimensional, how well is this condition satisfied)?
  • Estimation of the accuracy of measured quantities arising from given measurement technique
  • Checks on global conservation of physically conserved quantities, momentum, energy etc.
  • Consistency in the measurements of different quantities.

Discuss how well conditions at boundaries of the flow such as inflow, outflow, walls, far fields, free surface are provided or could be reasonably estimated in order to facilitate CFD calculations

UFR3-33 wind channel.png

Fig. 2: Wind tunnel applied for the experimental investigations.

UFR3-33 wind channel specifications.png

UFR3-33 description of the test section.png

Fig. 3: Dimensions and position of the hemisphere in the test section.

Flow parameters

Measuring Techniques

Laser-Doppler anemometer

UFR3-33 LDA configuration.png

Fig 4: LDA configuration and measurement grid resolution of the symmetry x-z-plane.

Constant temperatur anemometer

Numerical Simulation Methodology

Finite volume Navier-Stokes solver

Synthetic turbulent inflow generator

Provide an overview of the methods used to analyze the test case. This should describe the codes employed together with the turbulence/physical models examined; the models need not be described in detail if good references are available but the treatment used at the walls should explained. Comment on how well the boundary conditions used replicate the conditions in the test rig, e.g. inflow conditions based on measured data at the rig measurement station or reconstructed based on well-defined estimates and assumptions.

Discuss the quality and accuracy of the CFD calculations. As before, it is recognized that the depth and extent of this discussion is dependent upon the amount and quality of information provided in the source documents. However the following points should be addressed:

  • What numerical procedures were used (discretisation scheme and solver)?
  • What grid resolution was used? Were grid sensitivity studies carried out?
  • Did any of the analyses check or demonstrate numerical accuracy?
  • Were sensitivity tests carried out to explore the effect of uncertainties in boundary conditions?
  • If separate calculations of the assessment parameters using the same physical model have been performed and reported, do they agree with one another?




Contributed by: Jens Nikolas Wood, Guillaume De Nayer, Stephan Schmidt, Michael Breuer — Helmut-Schmidt Universität Hamburg

Front Page

Description

Test Case Studies

Evaluation

Best Practice Advice

References


© copyright ERCOFTAC 2024