Comprehensive code verification techniques for finite volume CFD codes

2012 ◽  
Vol 70 ◽  
pp. 59-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Subrahmanya P. Veluri ◽  
Christopher J. Roy ◽  
Edward A. Luke
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-135
Author(s):  
Anna M. V. Harley ◽  
Sagar H. Nikam ◽  
Hao Wu ◽  
Justin Quinn ◽  
Shaun McFadden

Abstract. Verification, the process of checking a modelling output against a known reference model, is an important step in model development for the simulation of manufacturing processes. This manuscript provides details of a code-to-code verification between two thermal models used for simulating the melting and solidification processes in a 316 L stainless steel alloy: one model was developed using a non-commercial code and the Finite Volume Method (FVM) and the other used a commercial Finite Element Method (FEM) code available within COMSOL Multiphysics®. The application involved the transient case of heat-transfer from a point heat source into one end of a cylindrical sample geometry, thus melting and then re-solidifying the sample in a way similar to an autogenous welding process in metal fabrication. Temperature dependent material properties and progressive latent heat evolution through the freezing range of the alloy were included in the model. Both models were tested for mesh independency, permitting meaningful comparisons between thermal histories, temperature profiles and maximum temperature along the length of the cylindrical rod and melt pool depth. Acceptable agreement between the results obtained by the non-commercial and commercial models was achieved. This confidence building step will allow for further development of point-source heat models, which has a wide variety of applications in manufacturing processes.


2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-19
Author(s):  
Burkely T. Gallo ◽  
Jamie K. Wolff ◽  
Adam J. Clark ◽  
Israel Jirak ◽  
Lindsay R. Blank ◽  
...  

AbstractVerification methods for convection-allowing models (CAMs) should consider the finescale spatial and temporal detail provided by CAMs, and including both neighborhood and object-based methods can account for displaced features that may still provide useful information. This work explores both contingency table–based verification techniques and object-based verification techniques as they relate to forecasts of severe convection. Two key fields in severe weather forecasting are investigated: updraft helicity (UH) and simulated composite reflectivity. UH is used to generate severe weather probabilities called surrogate severe fields, which have two tunable parameters: the UH threshold and the smoothing level. Probabilities computed using the UH threshold and smoothing level that give the best area under the receiver operating curve result in very high probabilities, while optimizing the parameters based on the Brier score reliability component results in much lower probabilities. Subjective ratings from participants in the 2018 NOAA Hazardous Weather Testbed Spring Forecasting Experiment (SFE) provide a complementary evaluation source. This work compares the verification methodologies in the context of three CAMs using the Finite-Volume Cubed-Sphere Dynamical Core (FV3), which will be the foundation of the U.S. Unified Forecast System (UFS). Three agencies ran FV3-based CAMs during the five-week 2018 SFE. These FV3-based CAMs are verified alongside a current operational CAM, the High-Resolution Rapid Refresh version 3 (HRRRv3). The HRRR is planned to eventually use the FV3 dynamical core as part of the UFS; as such evaluations relative to current HRRR configurations are imperative to maintaining high forecast quality and informing future implementation decisions.


2001 ◽  
Vol 11 (PR6) ◽  
pp. Pr6-151-Pr6-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Guérin ◽  
M. El Ganaoui ◽  
P. Haldenwang ◽  
P. Bontoux

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document