2D steady test case: cylinder - validation for thick non-lifting bodies
Comparison with the analytical solution: $ C_p = 1-(2sin \theta)^2 $
3D steady test case: sphere - validation for thick non-lifting bodies with both quadrilateral and triangular mesh
Comparison with the analytical solution: $ C_p = 1-( {3/\!2} \, sin \theta ) ^2 $
2D steady test case: NACA0012 airfoil - validation of the “Dirichlet” boundary condition for thick lifting airfoils
2D steady test case: NACA63 mean line - validation of the “Neumann” boundary condition for thin lifting airfoil
Comparison with the NACA method (analytical solution) at the same "ideal" angle of attack (1.6deg).
PaMS results "2D/3D" correction: $ Cp_{2D} \approx (1 / 2AR)Cp_{3D} $ , $ Cl_{2D} \approx (1 / 2AR)Cl_{3D} $ (finite wing, aspect ratio = 24)
3D steady test case: elliptic wing - validation for lifting wing
2D unsteady test case: oscillating flat plate - validation for oscillating thin lifting airfoil
Comparison with the Theodorsen theory (analytical solution).
  PaMS results "2D/3D" correction: $ Cl_{2D} \approx \left( 1+2/AR \right)\,Cl_{3D} $ (finite wing, aspect ratio = 24).
2D unsteady test case: oscillating airfoil - validation for oscillating thick lifting airfoil
3D unsteady test case: rotor hovering - validation for wake models
Comparison with experimental data (NASA wind tunnel test - M=0.46, Retip=2.5e+6).
(blade pitch angle = 8deg, rotational speed = 1250 rpm, static CT = 0.0046)
3D unsteady test case: Vertical Axis Wind Turbine - validation for lifting wing and wake-body interference
3D unsteady test case: NASA SR2 propeller - validation for wing-propeller configuration
Comparison with experimental data (NASA wind tunnel test – M=0.7, Re=5.0e+6) at the same propeller thrust coefficient (CT=0.245) and at zero angle of attack
3D unsteady test case: tiltrotor - validation for wing-propeller configuration @ angle of attack up to 90deg
Comparison with experimental data (NACA wind tunnel test – M=0, Mtip=0.58, ReMAC=0.8e+6 at the same propellers thrust (100.5 N).
3D steady test case: light aircraft - validation for wing-fuselage configuration
Comparison with experimental data (Partenavia wind tunnel test – M=0, Re=7.4e+5).
PaMS results corrected with the experimental drag coefficient at zero lift.
3D steady test case: internal flow - validation of the boundary conditions for internal flows
Comparison with a numerical solution (Fluent - finite volume Euler solver) with the same surface grid.
3D unsteady test case: helicopter - validation for the aerodynamic interaction between a helicopter rotor and an airframe
Comparison with experimental data (US Army Research - 6deg nose down, speed 16 m/s).
3D steady test case: High Lift Prediction Workshop 1 (HiLiftPW-1) - 1st AIAA CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop - validation for slat-main-flap "Config. 1"
3D steady test case: High Lift Prediction Workshop 2 (HiLiftPW-2) - 2nd AIAA CFD High Lift Prediction Workshop - validation for wing-body DLR F11 "Config. 4"
Comparison with experimental data (Airbus B-LSWT wind tunnel test – M=0.176, Re=15.1e+6) from -3.2deg to 24.2deg.
Fluere.it     by Paolo Caccavale