When computational fluid dynamics (CFD) predictions dont agree with well-controlled experimental measurements, are the differences due to:
1. An inaccurate CFD solver (physical models, algorithms, numerical diffusion, or truncation errors) that are largely outside the users control? or
2. Faulty human inputs (poor geometry representation, low mesh quality, inaccurate material properties and/or boundary conditions), which can be minimized by improved user training and experience?
In reality, CFD accuracy is affected by both. However, a colleague with more than 20 years of industrial CFD experience once told me that when he has problems with CFD, 95% of the time the problem is with the mesh. The quality of the CFD mesh is not just a product of the grid generation software. It is a product of both the mesh generator in the pre-processor and the solver because each is an enabler for what the user can do.
Good CFD software gives the user maximum control of the grid. Good CFD software also has low memory consumption enabling the user to run larger models that maximize grid resolution where needed. Software Cradle, developer and supplier of SC/Tetra, its flagship multi-purpose, unstructured grid CFD software product, cites several features in SC/Tetra that help minimize user induced errors and enable creation of accurate CFD simulations:

DE's editors contribute news and new product announcements to Digital Engineering. Press releases may be sent to them via [email protected].
Follow DE
Join over 90,000 engineering professionals who get fresh engineering news as soon as it is published.