Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-05T16:56:11.290Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Design and execution of validation experiments

from Part IV - Model validation and prediction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2013

William L. Oberkampf  and
Christopher J. Roy
Christopher J. Roy
Affiliation:
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Get access

Summary

Chapter 10, Model validation fundamentals, discussed the philosophy of validation experiments and how they differ from traditional experiments as well as calibration experiments. A validation experiment is conducted for the primary purpose of determining the predictive accuracy of a mathematical model. In other words, a validation experiment is designed, executed, and analyzed for the purpose of quantitatively determining the ability of a mathematical model and its embodiment in a computer code to simulate a well-characterized physical process. In this chapter we describe six primary guidelines for the design and execution of validation experiments. Our discussion will also deal with how these guidelines can be carried out and why they are sometimes difficult to execute in practice.

We will then discuss a high-quality validation experiment that the authors, as well as several others, designed and executed. The experiment is referred to as the Joint Computational/Experimental Aerodynamics Program (JCEAP). From the beginning of the project, it was designed to synergistically couple computational fluid dynamics development and an experimental research in a hypersonic wind tunnel. The program was initiated in 1990 at Sandia National Laboratories and came to a successful close in 1997. The program helped develop the six fundamental guidelines for the design and execution of high-quality validation experiments. We use JCEAP to exemplify these six guidelines and make recommendations for how they can be applied to validation experiments in general.

Type
Chapter
Information
Verification and Validation in Scientific Computing , pp. 409 - 468
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aeschliman, D. P. and Oberkampf, W. L. (1998). Experimental methodology for computational fluid dynamics code validation. AIAA Journal. 36(5), 733–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aeschliman, D. P., Oberkampf, W. L., and Henfling, H. F. (1994). Fast-response, electronically-scanned multi-port pressure system for low-pressure hypersonic wind tunnel applications. AIAA Aerospace Ground Testing Conference, AIAA Paper 94-2580, Colorado Springs, CO, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.CrossRef
Aeschliman, D. P., Oberkampf, W. L., and Blottner, F. G. (1995). A proposed methodology for CFD code verification, calibration, and validation. 16th International Congress on Instrumentation for Aerospace Simulation Facilities, Paper 95-CH3482-7, Dayton, OH, ICIASF.CrossRef
AGARD (1994). Quality Assessment for Wind Tunnel Testing. NATO Advisory Group for Aerospace Research & Development (AGARD), AGARD-AR-304.
AIAA (1999). Assessment of Experimental Uncertainty with Application to Wind Tunnel Testing. S-071A-1999, Reston, VA, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.Google Scholar
AIAA (2003). Assessing Experimental Uncertainty – Supplement to AIAA S-071A-1999, Reston, VA, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.Google Scholar
Amtec (1995). INCA User's Manual. Bellevue, WA, Amtec Engineering, Inc.Google Scholar
ANSI (1997). U.S. Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement. Boulder, CO, American National Standards Institute.Google Scholar
Barber, T. J. (1998). Role of code validation and certification in the design environment. AIAA Journal. 36(5), 752–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benek, J. A., Kraft, E. M., and Lauer, R. F. (1998). Validation issues for engine – airframe integration. AIAA Journal. 36(5), 759–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Box, G. E. P., Hunter, J. S., and Hunter, W. G., (2005). Statistics for Experimenters: Design, Innovation, and Discovery. 2nd edn., New York, John Wiley.Google Scholar
Chapman, D. R., Mark, H., and Pirtle, M. W. (1975). Computer vs. wind tunnels. Astronautics & Aeronautics. 13(4), 22–30.Google Scholar
Coleman, H. W. and Steele, Jr W. G.. (1999). Experimentation and Uncertainty Analysis for Engineers. 2nd edn., New York, John Wiley.Google Scholar
Cosner, R. R. (1995). CFD validation requirements for technology transition. 26th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference, AIAA Paper 95-2227, San Diego, CA, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.CrossRef
DeLoach, R. (2002). Tactical defenses against systematic variation in wind tunnel testing. 40th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting & Exhibit, AIAA-2002-0885, Reno, NV, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.CrossRef
DeLoach, R. (2003). Blocking: a defense against long-period unexplained variance in aerospace ground testing. 41st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, AIAA-2003-0650, Reno, NV, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.CrossRef
Devore, J. L. (2007). Probability and Statistics for Engineers and the Sciences. 7th edn., Pacific Grove, CA, Duxbury.Google Scholar
Drosg, M. (2007). Dealing with Uncertainties: a Guide to Error Analysis, Berlin, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Grabe, M. (2005). Measurement Uncertainties in Science and Technology, Berlin, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Hinkelmann, K. and Kempthorne, O. (2008). Design and Analysis of Experiments: Volume 1 – Introduction to Experimental Design. 2nd edn., Hoboken, NJ, John Wiley.Google Scholar
ISO (1995). Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement. Geneva, Switzerland, International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
ISO (2008). Uncertainty of Measurement – Part 3: Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement. ISO/IEC Guide 98-3:2008, Geneva, Switzerland, International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
Marvin, J. G. (1995). Perspective on computational fluid dynamics validation. AIAA Journal. 33(10), 1778–1787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCroskey, W. J. (1987). A Critical Assessment of Wind Tunnel Results for the NACA 0012 Airfoil. Washington, DC, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.Google Scholar
Moffat, R. J. (1988). Describing the uncertainties in experimental results. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science. 1(1), 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, D. C. (2000). Design and Analysis of Experiments. 5th edn., Hoboken, NJ, John Wiley.Google Scholar
Morgan, M. G. and Henrion, M. (1990). Uncertainty: a Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis. 1st edn., Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oberkampf, W. L. and Aeschliman, D. P. (1992). Joint Computational/Experimental Aerodynamics Research on a Hypersonic Vehicle: Part 1, Experimental Results. AIAA Journal. 30(8), 2000–2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oberkampf, W. L. and Blottner, F. G. (1998). Issues in computational fluid dynamics code verification and validation. AIAA Journal. 36(5), 687–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oberkampf, W. L. and Trucano, T. G. (2002). Verification and validation in computational fluid dynamics. Progress in Aerospace Sciences. 38(3), 209–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oberkampf, W. L., Martellucci, A., and Kaestner, P. C. (1985). SWERVE Surface Pressure Measurements at Mach Numbers 3 and 8. SAND84-2149, SECRET Formerly Restricted Data, Albuquerque, NM, Sandia National Laboratories.
Oberkampf, W. L., Aeschliman, D. P.Tate, R. E., and Henfling, J. F. (1993). Experimental Aerodynamics Research on a Hypersonic Vehicle. SAND92-1411, Albuquerque, NM, Sandia National Laboratories.Google Scholar
Oberkampf, W. L., Aeschliman, D. P.Henfling, J. F., and Larson, D. E. (1995). Surface pressure measurements for CFD code validation in hypersonic flow. 26th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference, AIAA Paper 95-2273, San Diego, CA, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.CrossRef
Oberkampf, W. L., Aeschliman, D. P., Henfling, J. F., Larson, D. E., and Payne, J. L. (1996). Surface pressure measurements on a hypersonic vehicle. 34th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA Paper 96-0669, Reno, NV, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.CrossRef
Owczarek, J. A. (1964). Fundamentals of Gas Dynamics, Scranton, PA, International Textbook.Google Scholar
Payne, J. L. and Walker, M. A. (1995). Verification of computational aerodynamics predictions for complex hypersonic vehicles using the INCA code. 33rd Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.CrossRef
Porter, J. L. (1996). A summary/overview of selected computational fluid dynamics (CFD) code validation/calibration activities. 27th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference, AIAA Paper 96-2053, New Orleans, LA, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.CrossRef
Rabinovich, S. G. (2005). Measurement Errors and Uncertainties: Theory and Practice. 3rd edn., New York, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Roache, P. J. (1998). Verification and Validation in Computational Science and Engineering, Albuquerque, NM, Hermosa Publishers.Google Scholar
Roy, C. J., McWherter-Payne, M. A., and Oberkampf, W. L. (2000). Verification and validation for laminar hypersonic flowfields. Fluids 2000 Conference, AIAA Paper 2000-2550, Denver, CO, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.CrossRef
Roy, C. J., McWherter-Payne, M. A., and Oberkampf, W. L. (2003a). Verification and validation for laminar hypersonic flowfields, Part 1: Verification. AIAA Journal. 41(10), 1934–1943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy, C. J., Oberkampf, W. L., and McWherter-Payne, M. A. (2003b). Verification and validation for laminar hypersonic flowfields, Part 2: Validation. AIAA Journal. 41(10), 1944–1954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salicone, S. (2007). Measurement Uncertainty: an Approach via the Mathematical Theory of Evidence, Berlin, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Spall, R. E. and Malik, M. R. (1991). Effect of transverse curvature on the stability of compressible boundary layers. AIAA Journal. 29(10), 1596–1602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spall, R. E. and Malik, M. R. (1992). Linear stability of three-dimensional boundary layers over axisymmetric bodies at incidence. AIAA Journal. 30(4), 905–913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steger, J. L. and Warming, R. F. (1981). Flux vector splitting of the inviscid gasdynamic equations with applications to finite-difference methods. Journal of Computational Physics. 40, 263–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, M. A. and Oberkampf, W. L. (1992). Joint computational/experimental aerodynamics research on a hypersonic vehicle: Part 2, Computational results. AIAA Journal. 30(8), 2010–2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, D. C. (2006). Turbulence Modeling for CFD. 3rd edn., La Canada, CA, DCW Industries.Google Scholar
Wong, C. C., Blottner, F. G., Payne, J. L., and Soetrisno, M. (1995a). Implementation of a parallel algorithm for thermo-chemical nonequilibrium flow solutions. AIAA 33rd Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA Paper 95-0152, Reno, NV, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Wong, C. C., Soetrisno, M., Blottner, F. G., Imlay, S. T., and Payne, J. L. (1995b). PINCA: A scalable Parallel Program for Compressible Gas Dynamics with Nonequilibrium Chemistry. SAND94-2436, Albuquerque, NM, Sandia National Laboratories.Google Scholar
Yee, H. C. (1987). Implicit and Symmetric Shock Capturing Schemes. NASA, NASA-TM-89464.
Youden, W. J. (1972). Enduring values. Technometrics. 14(1), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×