High Resolution (CFX) vs 2nd Order Upwind (Fluent)
I am wondering about the similarities between the advection schemes "High Resolution" and "Second Order Upwind" in CFX and Fluent, respectively. As I understand it, the principles behind the schemes are the same;
In CFX, is limited to prevent under/overshoots. In Fluent, the gradient is limited to prevent under/overshoots.
In the CFX documentation, it is decribed how is calculated at each integration point/control volume surface while in Fluent it is not. Does this mean that in Fluent, basically a value corresponding to in CFX is calculated to limit the gradient, and that the Fluent scheme is also bounded? If it is so, is this value calculated similarly to how is calculated in CFX?
Thanks in advance.
I realized my mistake: the details of the limiter in Fluent are actually described in the documentation. It seems that the limiter used in the High Resolution scheme corresponds to the "Standard Limiter" for Second Order Upwind in Fluent; both are based on principles by Barth and Jespersen.
In CFX-Post, there are variables with names "-beta" that indicate the value of the limiter in each control volume.
Does anyone know if there are corresponding variables available in Fluent, and what their names are? I have not found any variables that I think match. In the Fluent documentation, the scalar that limits the gradient is denoted .
about upwind node
i just read the cfx theory , and find its high resolution schemes. as a comment question, i want to know how the wpwind node is found? just mathmatic method or other method?
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:48.|