Looking at the paper I am using to compare my results (Section 3.3.1, Fig 3 and Fig 4) I can see that my lift coefficient is not that far off but my drag is quite far. Implicit unsteady: Time step= 0.001s (1st order) Prism Layer Total Thickness 100% of Base = 0.001 mĬustom Size Relative Size 50% of Base = 5.0E-4 m Minimum Surface Size 10 % of Base = 1.0E-4 m This is my setup information from my Star ccm+ simulation: I am in desperate need at the moment because without validation results I cannot move onto my bridge deck simulation and I have only 5 days left.
#Airfoil nasa how to
Also, the paper mentioned they also got coefficient of moment data and I am not sure how to get that in STAR CCM+. however, the results I get is just not similar to the paper well at least the drag coefficient. I have run many simulations by doing some trial and error on the mesh and physics model I used.
I managed to get some data for the Coefficient of Drag and Lift but for some reason, my Drag values are very high when I compare it to the paper I am using to compare the validation results (Paper Section 3: ). However, in order to do these runs, I first need to do a validation study so I decided to use an airfoil, NASA/LANGLEY LS(1)-0013 ( ) with a chord length of 0.1m. I'm currently doing my project where I have to analyse unsteady airflow around a bridge deck with and without a vehicle on deck at a high wind speed (in turbulent regime). I am a beginner using CFD software and I have to use Star CCM+ for my project.
0 kommentar(er)
