|
[Sponsors] |
June 17, 2006, 02:28 |
CFD is still not enough?
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi,
I have been watching some documentries and read some articles about things concerning aero and was curious as to why people still use wind tunnels and the smoke wands on scale models. What is lacking in CFD which makes these physical tests still required? Or are these physical tests still needed as validation for the CFD analysis? The one that comes to my mind immediately was the one of the boeing's blended wing project: http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...nded+wing.html They have built a scale model so that they can test the control systems and other aspects of the plane. I have done hardware in the loop simulation myself before, so my thinking is that it is purely validation of the results, but I would like to know for certain if and what limitation still exist with CFD. I am an engineer, but I don't have fluids background, fluids are just an interest of mine. Thanks |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
STAR-Works : Mainstream CAD with CFD | CD adapco Group Marketing | Siemens | 0 | February 13, 2002 12:23 |
Where do we go from here? CFD in 2001 | John C. Chien | Main CFD Forum | 36 | January 24, 2001 21:10 |
ASME CFD Symposium, Atlanta, July 2001 | Chris R. Kleijn | Main CFD Forum | 0 | August 21, 2000 04:49 |
Which is better to develop in-house CFD code or to buy a available CFD package. | Tareq Al-shaalan | Main CFD Forum | 10 | June 12, 1999 23:27 |
public CFD Code development | Heinz Wilkening | Main CFD Forum | 38 | March 5, 1999 11:44 |