|July 29, 2013, 10:41||
Pathologies of Simple Flux Jacobian Approximation
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4Rep Power: 5
I am working on a CFD code that has a very simple approximation to A (let's write the Euler equations as Q_t + AQ_x = 0, A is the flux Jacobian). If we're iterating on a time step, it currently simply approximates A^(k+1) with A^(k) from the previous iteration with a simple limiter to prevent Gibbs. It's been more or less functional for what this code does, but I suspect this not going to hold up well under various supersonic conditions. Thing is, I'm so used to more advanced methods that I no longer remember why this is a bad idea.
What sort things should I expect to be going wrong with this method and look for in order to compare it with Roe and other more sophisticated methods? The most obvious thing is that it won't handle shock tube problems very well, or any other problem with a moving shock, but what about steady-state problems?
Last edited by CFDJosh; July 29, 2013 at 11:45.
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|SIMPLE algorithm in 3D cylindrical coordinates||zouchu||Main CFD Forum||1||January 20, 2014 18:02|
|solar heat flux through roof||Tim||FLUENT||1||January 17, 2007 17:01|
|Basic question: UDF for wall heat flux||Carl||FLUENT||1||August 5, 2006 19:01|
|CV flux correction in SIMPLE||Sophie||Main CFD Forum||2||April 25, 2002 03:21|
|total mass flux correction for compressible fluid?||Francesco Di Maio||Main CFD Forum||0||August 21, 2000 04:23|