Hi All,
As I know CFD is a tool to predict the dynamics in the most economical way. To Run a CFD simulation for getting successful results may take one or more years. Some times CFD tool is used to validate the experimental work. One can furnish the simulated model for the explanation of those dynamics which can not be done experimentally..( Literature is full of these type of examples)..
Now, I wish to know how can we explain the importance of our work in front of those professor's panel they do not have any idea about CFD and how much efforts is required to complete one successful model. On the other side, those candidates can easily pass the defense on the basis of conventional type of experiments... Please guide and suggest..
I think the best way to draft such a defence is asking yourself a few critical question and be honest in answering them.
1. What can we learn from a CFD simulation?
2. What can we learn from a CFD simulation that we cannot learn from an analytical solution, an experimental measurement or a semi-empirical data-fit?
3. Does the work spent on the CFD sym provide other benefits? Examples can be a code re-usable in industry for design or benchmarking, the calibration of some parameter, ...
In this sense, I do not think that a numerical simulation is justified per se, but each case should be weighted through critical thinking, following for example the questions I suggested.
- Badges
- Science topic