Finite Element Simulation and Validation for Aerospace Applications: Stabilized Methods, Weak Dirichlet Boundary Conditions, and Discontinuity Capturing for Compressible Flows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
View Video Presentation: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2022-1077.vid The objective of this work is to investigate and validate a new stabilized compressible flow finite element framework for the simulation of aerospace applications. The framework is comprised of the streamline upwind/Petrov–Galerkin (SUPG)-based Navier–Stokes equations for compressible flows, the weakly enforced essential boundary conditions that act as a wall function, and the entropy-based discontinuity-capturing equation that act as a shock-capturing operator. The accuracy and robustness of the framework is tested for various Mach numbers ranging from low-subsonic to transonic flow regimes. The aerodynamic simulations are carried out for 2D and 3D validation cases of flow around the NACA 0012 airfoil, RAE 2822 airfoil, ONERA M6 wing, and NASA Common Research Model (CRM) aircraft. The pressure coefficients obtained from the simulations of all cases are compared with experimental data. The computational results show good agreement with the experimental findings and demonstrate the accuracy and effectiveness of the finite element framework presented in this work for the simulation of aircraft aerodynamics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".