http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.530.

8413&rep=rep1&type=
pdf

1. Start with an airfoil that has some good wind tunnel data of a similar size and the
Reynolds number (Re) you are using.

2. Set Computational Domain 10+Cord lengths (C) Ahead, 10-15C Above, Behind and
Below ,change until no discernible difference in result. 5C seems too small in your
examples. see Re: Lift Coefficient on 2D Airfoil further down
3. Change the Y slice dimension to see how it affects the result, increasing should
should allow you to better a more accurate Cl or Cd as less influence from side effect
errors at the expense of longer computational time. Dividing the Lift or Drag force by a
bigger area reduces the side errors since these are the same

4. Use local meshes in an assembly if you don't have access to 2016 to create a finer
mesh around the airfoil as was suggested above. This video is a great
explanation SOLIDWORKS Flow Simulation - Mesh Controls - YouTube
5. Refine the mesh as you have been doing too again until little change to the result

6. Increase the Travels or consider using a dummy plate 1 or 2 cord lengths behind the
airfoil to measure velocity and use it for convergence in addition to lift and drag to
ensure sufficient simulation across the entire Computational domain. Solidworks is
iterating like a spreadsheet ie in a particular order so cells down stream may not have
time to effect those upstream. This is a good example Propeller wash does not seem accurate
7. Try altering the Turbulence Intensity(TI) and length after the above have been done
(one at a time not both together)Turbulence kinetic energy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia If
you plot Re versus TI on a log scale you will note TI getting flatter after about Re=
1,000,000
8. Keep the mesh the same and change the X&Y velocity vectors to simulate Angle of
Attack. If you have the time don't do that change the model orientation instead and see
what difference it makes to the result!

rather that calibrated and can't have confidence in the answers unless you don't change
the shape of the airfoil.

10. Finally do what you originally intended to do, simulate your model in 3D using the
calibrations.
11. Publish your results on the forum. Publishing allows others to peer review your
results (ie replicate them) and also suggest improvements.

My experience with both Solidworks and Flow simulation is not the precise answer but
gaining understanding of the flow behavior which then can guide your idea/product
development to a robust solution rather than spending time and money on a physical
model too early. Unfortunately the calibration bit is very time consuming. Once
completed though, the iteration of the idea can go quickly with good confidence of a
good solution. The technical engineering term "Shit in Shit out" comes to mind!