0% Plagiarism Guaranteed & Custom Written

205AAE Aircraft Aerodynamics

Assignment Brief

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:

Demonstrate a competence in the use of Computational Fluid Dynamics Software
Perform experimental methods tests and techniques for fluid analysis
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

demonstrate your understanding in this assignment and complete additional individual investigation to create your submission.

Report: 35%

ANSWER RELEVANCE (30) ARGUMENT & COHERENCE (30) EVIDENCE (30)

SUMMARY (10)

Video: 15%

ANSWER RELEVANCE (100)

The report should broadly cover the following topics:

Introduction

General description of the problem and the purpose of the CFD simulations.
The CFD code chosen for solution of the problem.
Computing platform used for the runs.
Schematic diagram of the region of interest with all key dimensions.
Boundary conditions - include comments on/justifications of assumptions made and known areas of approximation or lack of information.
Details of the initialisation of the simulation.
Fluid properties - include comments/justifications of assumptions and data sources. - Modelling option selections: e.g. laminar/turbulent+turbulence model+near-wall treatment. - Mesh design: mesh description including one or more diagrams of the grid that are sufficiently clear to illustrate the approach to mesh design.
Solution algorithm choices - a comprehensive summary of all the main selections. Demonstrate a competence in the use of Computational Fluid Dynamics Software
Iterative convergence criteria choices: settings of truncation levels for residuals and choice of additional target quantities for convergence monitoring.
Brief summary of particular aspects of simulation design that required special attention to get simulation to work and to get accurate results, also noting unresolved problem issues.

Simulation quality

Mesh independence & iterative convergence: Target quantities should be shown to be independent of iterative convergence criterion and mesh. Identify where compromises were necessary if the results are still mesh dependent.
Validation: Summarise the method used to validate your CFD approach; give comments on how an improved match with experimental data was achieved by changes to the modelling strategy.
Qualitative assessment: further confidence in the results can be built by analysis of the results using basic knowledge of fluid dynamics
is the simulated flow behaving as you would expect, given your understanding of fluid mechanics?

Result interpretation and reporting

Velocity vector plots
Streak-lines and particle paths
Contour plots of flow variable
Profile plots
Grid display
View manipulation
Graphs and tables of Forces, Pressure distributions etc.

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:

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).
Please notify your registry course support team and module leader for disability support.
Any student requiring an extension or deferral should follow the university process as outlinedhere.
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.
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.
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.
You are encouraged to check the originality of your work by using the draft Turnitin links on Aula.
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.
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.

Marking Rubric

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

Fail

learning outcomes

consistently address the assignment brief. At the lower end fails to answer the question set or address the learning outcomes. There is minimal evidence of analysis or evaluation.

discussion or theoretical engagement. At the lower end displays a minimal level of understanding.

evidence. At the lower end demonstrates a lack of real understanding. Poor presentation of references.

understanding is poor with limited evidence of wider reading. Poor structure and poor presentation, including referencing. At the lower end there is evidence of a lack of comprehension, resulting in an assignment that is well below the required standard.

20-

29%

Fail

Fail -. Students arguments are very weak and with no evidence of alternative views. Little evidence of originality, creativity, and problem- solving skills. Student demonstrates a lack of technical and/or artistic skills.

Fail - Clear failure demonstrating little understanding of relevant theories, concepts and issues Serious and fundamental errors and aspects missing. Little evidence of ability to apply learning resources.

Fail - Minimal evidence of research and use of established methodologies and incomplete knowledge of the area.

Fail - Expression and presentation deficient for accuracy and proficiency. Insufficient communication and expression and with deficiencies in professional skill set.

0-19%

Fail

Fail - Not a serious attempt. Very weak or no evidence of originality, creativity, and problem-solving skills. Students presents no evidence of logical argument and no evidence of alternative views. Student evidences few or no technical and/or artistic skills

Fail - Material may be entirely irrelevant. Assessment may be fundamentally wrong, or with major elements missing.

Inadequate understanding of relevant theories, concepts and issues. Complete failure, virtually no understanding of requirements of the assignment.

Fail - No evidence of research. Inadequate evidence of ability to apply learning resources.

Fail - Expression and presentation extremely weak for accuracy and proficiency. Communication and expression very weak and with significant deficiencies in professional skill set.

205AAE Aircraft Aerodynamics

100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written,
Tailored to your instructions

Our Giveaways

Plagiarism Report

for £20 Free

Formatting

for £12 Free

Title page

for £10 Free

Bibliography

for £18 Free

Outline

for £9 Free

Limitless Amendments

for £14 Free

Get all these features for
£83.00 FREE

ORDER NOW

Still Not Convinced?

View our samples written by our professional writers to let you comprehend how your work is going to look like. We have categorised this into 3 categories with a few different subject domains

View Our Samples

Demonstrate a competence in the use of Computational Fluid Dynamics Software

205AAE Aircraft Aerodynamics

Assignment Brief

Introduction

Simulation quality

Result interpretation and reporting

Our Giveaways

Still Not Convinced?

Recent Uploads