|
[Sponsors] |
![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Member
John
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 92
Rep Power: 17 ![]() |
Which one is better, more accurate, most used, etc.?
And specifically, if one is interested in looking at propeller/turbine and airframe/wing interaction aeroacoustics, which code gives the most reliable results? I've read the brochures, papers, and the claims to superiority. I would like to know what users and colleagues of users of either of these aeroacoustics codes or any other code for that matter think. Thanks. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
aeroacoustics, caa++, noise, propeller, sysnoise |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Transport mesh from ICEM CFD, to Fluent, to Sysnoise | Wieland | FLUENT | 2 | April 15, 2012 06:28 |
STARCCM+ and SYSNOISE | nomad | STAR-CCM+ | 0 | April 29, 2010 19:54 |
sysnoise pricing | Alex | Main CFD Forum | 0 | January 14, 2008 17:18 |
STAR CD CAA Partner | tootoon | Siemens | 10 | July 8, 2007 07:25 |
computational aeroacoustic (CAA) | ricklee | Main CFD Forum | 1 | September 14, 2006 11:08 |