# How to stabilize an advection dominated finite volume scheme? WITH VIDEO!

 Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 January 9, 2013, 12:44 How to stabilize an advection dominated finite volume scheme? WITH VIDEO! #1 New Member   Max Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 1 Rep Power: 0 Dear forum users! I'm currently implementing a reaction-advection-diffusion system on a closed 2D-surface (surface of a sphere) using C. First I started using finite elements which works just fine for the diffusion, however I could not get the advection to work. After doing some research on the internet I've came to the conclusion that it's better to use finite volume for the advection part instead. So I've now implemented a vertex-centered finite volume routine with upwind scheme for the advection. However it's still unstable! My test is a single Gaussian pulse which is supposed to be advected around the sphere. Here's a typical plot I get: which is a cut at theta = pi/2. phi goes from 0 to 2*pi. The red curve is the initial condition and you can clearly see that this is unstable even though diffusion is still pretty strong. I would like to have a code, where the pulse gets advected by (e.g.) one rotation and has still the same shape. There's also a video: http://www.xammm.com/surf.mpeg I'm using a Crank-Nickolson/Cholesky decomposition scheme. Is there an easy way to stabilize this? Last edited by xammm; January 9, 2013 at 12:56. Reason: added "with video" in title

 January 9, 2013, 13:23 #2 Senior Member   Filippo Maria Denaro Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 2,694 Rep Power: 33 what about the cfl number at which your code was tested?

 January 9, 2013, 17:20 #3 Senior Member   cfdnewbie Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 557 Rep Power: 12 The mesh you are using looks indeed fine enough to rule out major dispersion and dissipation from the spatial scheme.... I assume it is a first order approximation (constants in cells?) . As Filippo pointed out, the temporal scheme could be the issue. Whatever your CFL number, reduce it by a factor of 10, rerun the simulation and check the results. Just out of interest: What flux function are you using?

January 9, 2013, 17:26
#4
Senior Member

Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,694
Rep Power: 33
Quote:
 Originally Posted by cfdnewbie The mesh you are using looks indeed fine enough to rule out major dispersion and dissipation from the spatial scheme.... I assume it is a first order approximation (constants in cells?) . As Filippo pointed out, the temporal scheme could be the issue. Whatever your CFL number, reduce it by a factor of 10, rerun the simulation and check the results. Just out of interest: What flux function are you using?
If I have well understood, the flux function should be piece-wise constant ...

 January 10, 2013, 04:55 #5 Senior Member   Rami Ben-Zvi Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 148 Rep Power: 9 Hi xammm, First, your solution exhibits over- and under- shoots already at t=1. It indicates your convection treatment is inefficient. Try using a 1st order upwind as a starting point to remove that behavior. Only then enhance it to higher order. I suggest you start by pure convection, so that you know what the expected solution is. I also suggest to start with a rectangular domain in a Cartesian coordinate system with periodic BCs, to rule out possible bugs arising from the spherical coordinates treatment. I join the recommendation to decrease the CFL No. A comment: In convection-dominated problems FEM should work fine, but needs more effort. FVM is simpler to formulate (but less consistent). Best luck, Rami

January 10, 2013, 05:04
#6
Senior Member

Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,694
Rep Power: 33
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Rami Hi xammm, First, your solution exhibits over- and under- shoots already at t=1. It indicates your convection treatment is inefficient. Try using a 1st order upwind as a starting point to remove that behavior. Only then enhance it to higher order. I suggest you start by pure convection, so that you know what the expected solution is. I also suggest to start with a rectangular domain in a Cartesian coordinate system with periodic BCs, to rule out possible bugs arising from the spherical coordinates treatment. I join the recommendation to decrease the CFL No. A comment: In convection-dominated problems FEM should work fine, but needs more effort. FVM is simpler to formulate (but less consistent). Best luck, Rami

What do you mean?
Perhaps, owing to the second order time integration, is not strange that the solution shows over/under-estimation even with first-order upwind ..

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post CharlieTan84 Main CFD Forum 3 August 28, 2012 02:34 cfd seeker Main CFD Forum 3 September 8, 2011 04:36 gerardosrez Main CFD Forum 0 March 16, 2011 15:49 Lionel BRS Main CFD Forum 6 July 16, 2006 03:15 Matt Kellerman Main CFD Forum 1 April 10, 2002 11:42

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:14.