CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Main CFD Forum

transformations for finite difference ---why?

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   May 25, 2002, 11:47
Default transformations for finite difference ---why?
  #1
adarsh
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
generally we need to transform the grid and constitue a computational plane when using the finite difference methods . this computational plane is a uniform grid on which we solve the modified equations(modified by the transformation) .A point to point correspondence exists between computational plane and physical domain.

whereas for finite volume methods we can directly solve on the non uniform mesh. we dont need any computational plane. It is said that this is because of inherent nature of techniques. Can anyone explain this in more detail . or can you tell me any good refernce which discusses this aspect.

regards,

Adarsh
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 26, 2002, 10:18
Default Re: transformations for finite difference ---why?
  #2
Thomas P. Abraham
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hello Adarsh,

The transformation is used even when using FVM. Don't you think that it is difficult to implement a numerical method on a non-uniform mesh directly?

If you work on a irregular cell directly, you need to compute differently for different cells.

The advantage with the transformation is that each physical cell is mapped onto a regular computational cell. A Jacobian relates a physical cell and a computational cell. That way, the methodology is the same for every cell because the computations are on a regular cell.

Thanks,

Thomas
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 27, 2002, 10:51
Default Re: transformations for finite difference ---why?
  #3
adarsh
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
thanks for reply Thomas .... but i have read in the CFD book by anderson that "FVM can be applied to irregular mesh and hence transformations are needed only for finite difference schemes

transformations in FVM are used only for grid generation for physical plane Can u tell me any other book which gives some good concept on it .

regards, Adarsh
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 27, 2002, 15:21
Default Re: transformations for finite difference ---why?
  #4
Thomas P. Abraham
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Hello Adarsh,

Most of the commercial codes based by some variation of SIMPLE whether it's from FLUENT, STARCD or CFDRC, they all use FVM. They all use co-ordinate transformation.

Thanks,

Thomas
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 27, 2002, 20:39
Default Re: transformations for finite difference ---why?
  #5
greg
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
You are correct that finite volume schemes do not necessarily use coordinate transformations, but can deal with the physical grid points. However, the transformational equivalents show up in terms of computational work through the volumes and areas that have to be computed. In finite difference schemes coordinate transformations are used to give unit divisors in the finite differences. A code can be developed without resort to non-uniform difference approximations, which some claim gives a uniform error behavior (although the absolute error will still depend on the grid geometry to some extent). You can develop finite difference algorithms using non-uniform differences if you wish, but developmentally it is harder. The 2-vol set by Hirsch is a good reference, as is the latest edition of Anderson, Tannehill, and Pletcher. Although I cannot remember the citation (and the paper is at work) Marcel Vinokur published a paper in the 1980s (?) that compared and contrasted finite difference and finite volume approaches and demonstrated the "general" equivalence between them.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 27, 2002, 23:55
Default Re: transformations for finite difference ---why?
  #6
Paul
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Generally, the basic difference is that FVM solves intergal version of the NSe while FDM solves the original differential form of the NSe. To well define a difference numerically, we usually have to do in a stright line, this is why we have to transform a irregular domain into rectangular domain where stright line can be readily defined. For FVM, no matter the element is regular or irregualr, one can always intergate the NSe with some efforts (for irregular element, one has much more geometric considerations) and then to assemble a linear system. FEM also deals with integral form of the NSe ( but in some different fashion). Therefore FVM and FEM are more flexiable for complex geometry.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 28, 2002, 05:24
Default Re: transformations for finite difference ---why?
  #7
krishan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
why then FEM is rarely used .. and FVM is most commonly used ..whats the major difference between the two... FEM and FVM. this discussion is going nicely.
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 28, 2002, 08:00
Default Re: transformations for finite difference ---why?
  #8
Axel Rohde
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
For an earlier discussion on FEM, FVM, FDM, see also,

www.cfd-online.com/Forum/main_archive_2001.cgi?read=18691
  Reply With Quote

Old   May 28, 2002, 17:46
Default Re: transformations for finite difference ---why?
  #9
Tony
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
FDM, FVM and FEM all need transformation (mapping) from the physical plane to the computational one when dealing with complex geometries. However, the FDM requires a global mapping (say boundary fitted) while the FVM and FEM uses a local one for each cell (element). Of cause, the local mapping is much easier. Moreover, a global mapping may not exist for some tough configurations.
  Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Periodic Boundary Condition for upwind difference yohey44 Main CFD Forum 0 October 27, 2010 13:10
paraview - plotting difference to reference data joewe ParaView 0 August 30, 2010 18:01
the effect of upwind difference hades Main CFD Forum 8 March 15, 2009 00:43
Difference between scaled residuals and... Dieter FLUENT 0 April 28, 2006 17:52
Fininte difference and Finite element Technique Mahendra Singh Mehra FLUENT 3 December 23, 2005 00:49


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 21:22.