Assessment of CFD models for shock boundary-layer interaction

A workshop on the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) prediction of shock boundary-layer interactions (SBLIs) was held at the 48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting. As part of the workshop numerous CFD analysts submitted solutions to four experimentally measured SBLIs. This paper describes the assessment of the CFD predictions. The assessment includes an uncertainty analysis of the experimental data, the definition of an error metric and the application of that metric to the CFD solutions. The CFD solutions provided very similar levels of error and in general it was difficult to discern clear trends in the data. For the Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes methods the choice of turbulence model appeared to be the largest factor in solution accuracy. Large-eddy simulation methods produced error levels similar to RANS methods but provided superior predictions of normal stresses.

Assessment of computational fluid dynamics and experimental data for shock boundary-layer interactions

A workshop on the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) prediction of shock boundary-layer interactions (SBLIs) was held at the 48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting. As part of the workshop, numerous CFD analysts submitted solutions to four experimentally measured SBLIs. This paper describes the assessment of the CFD predictions. The assessment includes an uncertainty analysis of the experimental data, the definition of an error metric, and the application of that metric to the CFD solutions. The CFD solutions provided very similar levels of error and, in general, it was difficult to discern clear trends in the data. For the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) methods, the choice of turbulence model appeared to be the largest factor in solution accuracy. Scale-resolving methods, such as large-eddy simulation (LES), hybrid RANS/LES, and direct numerical simulation, produced error levels similar to RANS methods but provided superior predictions of normal stresses. Copyright © 2012 by Daniella E. Raveh and Michael Iovnovich.