Module Title

Aircraft Aerodynamics

Individual

Cohort: Sep

Module Code

205AAE

Coursework Title (e.g. CWK1)

CFD Technical Report

Hand out data

Lecturer

Due date and time: Date:

Estimated Time (hrs): 60 hours

Word Limit*:3000

Coursework type: Report

% of Module Mark: 50%

Submission arrangement online via Aula:

File types and method of recording: PDF or Word file

Mark and Feedback date (DD/MM/YY): 

Mark and Feedback method (e.g. in lecture, electronic via Aula): Marks and Feedback on Aula

Module Learning Outcomes Assessed:

1. Demonstrate a competence in the use of Computational Fluid Dynamics Software
2. Perform experimental methods tests and techniques for fluid analysis
3. Examine the tools and techniques used and the limitations in the analysis of fluid dynamics

Task and Mark distribution:

You are tasked with writing a short industrial consultancy-style report (roughly 2,500, maximum of 3000 words) that presents the results of a CFD validation study that is carried out during your PC tutorial sessions and wind tunnel laboratories. You are tasked to evidence a 5-10 minute video of you performing experimental tests, the set up and running and post processing of your data. This will be used as evidence of individual understanding and demonstration of your own work. A basic understanding of CFD should be demonstrated, an appreciation of experimental and computational analysis techniques and use of CFD software.

Your data should be compared and contrasted to your wind tunnel results and any published results.

You can use the resources on CUOnline (Aula) from lectures etc., Internet, library, personal contacts and staff in the aerospace department at Coventry University to help inform your investigation. Every external resource that you use to gain information has to be referenced in accordance with APA 7^th Referencing Style.

It is advised that you attend all module sessions as you will be advised on presentation and content including explanations of methodologies and generation of results. You should

Conclusions

The report should be submitted in .doc or .pdf format.

Marks will be gained for original work only. Although evidence of research is necessary, content directly copied from other sources/teams (even with appropriate citation) will not in itself gain marks. Marks will be gained for analysis, discussion and new work. If a section has limited original work and/or poor referencing, a mark of zero may be awarded to that section. Students should remind themselves of the academic conduct requirements.

The video should broadly cover the following topics:

Practical Skills Demonstration

The video should show you as an individual performing experimental methods tests and techniques for fluid analysis. You should show competency in safety and data collection rigor.

CFD Skills Demonstration

You should show the CFD software inputs, solving and post processing graphs created for the report. It is advised a time-lapse is used for the solving where this may take several hours to generate data.

Examine the tools and techniques used and the limitations in the analysis of fluid dynamics

Notes:

1. You are expected to use the Coventry University APA style for referencing. For support and advice on this students can contact Centre for Academic Writing (CAW).
2. Please notify your registry course support team and module leader for disability support.
3. Any student requiring an extension or deferral should follow the university process as outlinedhere.
4. The University cannot take responsibility for any coursework lost or corrupted on disks, laptops or personal computer. Students should therefore regularly back-up any work and are advised to save it on the University system.
5. If there are technical or performance issues that prevent submitting coursework through the online coursework submission system on the day of a coursework deadline, an appropriate extension to the coursework submission deadline will be agreed. This extension will normally be 24 hours or the next working day if the deadline falls on a Friday or over the weekend period. This will be communicated via your Module Leader.
6. Assignments that are more than 10% over the word limit will result in a deduction of 10% of the mark i.e. a mark of 60% will lead to a reduction of 6% to 54%. The word limit includes quotations, but excludes the bibliography, reference list and tables.
7. You are encouraged to check the originality of your work by using the draft Turnitin links on Aula.
8. Collusion between students (where sections of your work are similar to the work submitted by other students in this or previous module cohorts) is taken extremely seriously and will be reported to the academic conduct panel. This applies to both courseworks and exam answers.
9. A marked difference between your writing style, knowledge and skill level demonstrated in class discussion, any test conditions and that demonstrated in a coursework assignment may result in you having to undertake a Viva Voce in order to prove the coursework assignment is entirely your own work.

Mark band

Outcome

ANSWER RELEVANCE

ARGUMENT & COHERENCE

EVIDENCE

SUMMARY

90-

100%

1st

Meets learning outcomes

Demonstrates creative flair, a high degree of originality and autonomy.

Exceptional ability to apply learning resources. Demonstrates well-developed problem-solving skills. Student evidences deployment of a full range of exceptional technical skills.

Exceptional work with very high degree of understanding, creativity and critical and analytic skills.

Exceptional understanding of knowledge and subject-specific theories.

Evidence of exceptional research well beyond minimum recommended using a range of methodologies

Work completed with very high degree of accuracy and proficiency and autonomy. Exceptional communication and expression, significant evidence of professional skill set.

80-

89%

1st

All answered fully addressed the learning outcomes and reviews the work in greater depth than expressed in the coursework description.

The work shows knowledge learnt externally from guided study and is of technically correct interpretations.

The work cited are those of professional citations

The work is of a professional publishable standard.

70-

79%

1st

Innovative response, answers the question fully, addressing the learning objectives of the assessment task. Evidence of critical analysis, synthesis and evaluation.

A clear, consistent in-depth critical and evaluative argument, displaying the ability to develop original ideas from a range of sources. Engagement with theoretical and conceptual analysis.

Wide range of appropriately supporting evidence provided, going beyond the recommended texts. Correctly referenced.

An outstanding, well-structured and appropriately referenced answer, demonstrating a high degree of understanding and critical analytic skills.

60-

69%

2:1

A very good attempt to address the objectives of the assessment task with an emphasis on those elements requiring critical review.

A generally clear line of critical and evaluative argument is

presented. Relationships between statements and sections are easy to follow, and there is a sound, coherent structure.

A very good range of relevant sources is used in a largely consistent way as supporting evidence. There is use of some sources beyond recommended texts. Correctly referenced in the main.

The answer demonstrates a very good understanding of theories, concepts and issues, with evidence of reading beyond the recommended minimum. Well organised and clearly written.

50-

59%

2:2

Competently addresses objectives but may contain errors or omissions and critical discussion of issues may be superficial or limited in places.

Some critical discussion, but the argument is not always convincing, and the work is descriptive in places, with over-reliance on the work of others.

A range of relevant sources is used, but the critical evaluation aspect is not fully presented. There is limited use of sources beyond the standard recommended materials. Referencing is not always correctly presented.

The answer demonstrates a good understanding of some relevant theories, concepts and issues, but there are some errors and irrelevant material included. The structure lacks clarity.

40-

49%

3rd Class

Addresses most objectives of the assessment task, with some notable omissions. The structure is unclear in parts, and there is limited analysis.

The work is descriptive with minimal critical discussion and limited theoretical engagement.

A limited range of relevant sources used without appropriate presentation as supporting or conflicting evidence coupled with very limited critical analysis. Referencing has some errors.

Some understanding is demonstrated but is incomplete, and there is evidence of limited research on the topic. Poor structure and presentation, with few and/or poorly presented references.

30-

39%

Fails to

achieve

Fail - Some deviation from the objectives of the assessment task. May not

Fail - Descriptive with no evidence of theoretical engagement, critical

Fail - Very limited use and application of relevant sources as supporting

Fail - Whilst some relevant material is present, the level of