Comparison Between HPCMP CREATETM-AV COFFE and Kestrel for Two and Three-Dimensional Turbulent Flow Cases

RS Glasby, JT Erwin - 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 2016 - arc.aiaa.org
54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 2016arc.aiaa.org
A comparison is conducted between HPCMP CREATE™-AV Conservative Field Finite
Element (COFFE) and KCFD (Kestrel) for six specific two and three-dimensional turbulent
flow cases. The comparison is conducted by a member of the HPCMP CREATE™-AV
Quality Assurance (QA) team, and the specific cases are the 2-D subsonic flow around a
NACA0012 and NACA4415 airfoil, 2-D supersonic flow downstream of a base, 3-D sphere
at low Reynolds numbers, 3-D transonic flow around an ONERA M6 wing, and a complex …
A comparison is conducted between HPCMP CREATE™-AV Conservative Field Finite Element (COFFE) and KCFD (Kestrel) for six specific two and three-dimensional turbulent flow cases. The comparison is conducted by a member of the HPCMP CREATE™-AV Quality Assurance (QA) team, and the specific cases are the 2-D subsonic flow around a NACA0012 and NACA4415 airfoil, 2-D supersonic flow downstream of a base, 3-D sphere at low Reynolds numbers, 3-D transonic flow around an ONERA M6 wing, and a complex but generic fighter configuration. For each case, identical meshes and parallel supercomputer resources are utilized for each CFD tool. Robustness, accuracy and performance are the metrics for comparison. Specifically, convergence rates, wall-clock execution time, air vehicle forces (lift and drag) coefficients of pressure, and relevant contours are compared and presented.
AIAA Aerospace Research Center
以上显示的是最相近的搜索结果。 查看全部搜索结果