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

Weno-rf

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   May 18, 2010, 02:51
Default Weno-rf
  #1
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 7
david_e is on a distinguished road
I am planning the implementation of a small 3D MHD code using finite difference WENO. I was wondering about which flux-splitting technique to use. In particular I was wondering about using Roe with entropy fix (WENO-RF) or local Lax-Friedrichs.

It seems to me that, in order to do a Roe splitting, I could just set (in the x-direction):

Fi+ = Fi, if si > 0
Fi+ = 0, otherwise

where Fi is the projection on the characteristic variables of the flux vector and si the associated speed. In this way I would need to perform only half of the flux reconstructions (a-la ENO-RF) with respect to WENO-LLF when I don't need to use the entropy fix. (Because each wave has just either a positive or a negative non-trivial flux).

In any case I could not find any reference on the implementation of WENO-RF schemes, so I am not sure about this formulation.

Does anyone have any experience with WENO-RF methods or knows about a reference in which I could find the details of the formulation?
david_e is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 18, 2010, 03:53
Default Hamilton-Jacobi WENO
  #2
Member
 
Hans Bihs
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 8
valgrinda is on a distinguished road
Hei,

you could use the Hamilton-Jacobi WENO formulation instead. Straightforward coding through divided difference table. See Osher&Fedkiw "Level Set Methods and dynamic implicit surfaces" for details.
http://books.google.de/books?id=J4sJRlk0KQ8C&lpg=PR8&dq=osher%20fedkiw%20 level%20set%20google%20books&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f= false

Cheers
Hans
valgrinda is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 18, 2010, 09:48
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 7
david_e is on a distinguished road
Hi, thank you for the reply.

Quote:
Originally Posted by valgrinda View Post
you could use the Hamilton-Jacobi WENO formulation instead.
It's my understanding that the Hamilton-Jacobi WENO is tuned Hamilton-Jacobi equations, while my equations - Euler / ideal-MHD equations - are written as balance laws. Thus I don't understand why I should prefear the HJ-WENO to the well tested WENO-LLF. Am I missing something?
david_e is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 18, 2010, 11:04
Default Weno
  #4
Member
 
Hans Bihs
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 34
Rep Power: 8
valgrinda is on a distinguished road
Hei,

You can do two things for the conservations law: you can reconstruct the numerical fluxes of a cell with WENO and use the conservation law directly in its conservative form. Or you can use the upwind-biased Hamilton-Jacobi WENO directly on the differential operator. When you check the literature, for general fluid flow calculations with WENO, this is usually the way it is implemented.
If a scheme with strictly enforced conservation is a must for you, then you a right, you are better off with the flux based WENO.

Cheers
Hans
valgrinda is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 18, 2010, 12:25
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 7
david_e is on a distinguished road
Thanks for the hints, I will definitely look into HJ-WENO to learn more about them. But for the applications that I have in mind mass conservation is absolutely required. Thus, as you suggested, I have to use WENO in the flux version.

In any case what do you think of the way in which I intend to perform the global flux splitting? Is it the right way? I have been trying to extend to WENO the ENO-RF decomposition used by

Shu, Chi-Wang and Osher, Stanley; Efficient implementation of essentially non-oscillatory shock-capturing schemes, II; Journal of Computational Physics; 83 32-78

but it's not entirely clear to me if I am adopting the right approach or if I should just decompose the flux in waves and the split them in the positive and negative part. The latter seems the most correct thing to do because the flux then will be smooth at the sonic point, but it's also twice as expensive. Also the ENO-RF formulation doesn't need the splitting on the single waves...
david_e is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   May 19, 2010, 04:17
Default
  #6
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 7
david_e is on a distinguished road
It was pointed to me that the answer to my questions are addressed in the

ICASE Report No. 97-65

by Shu.
david_e is offline   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
convergence of Euler Equations with WENO Shyam Main CFD Forum 0 June 1, 2007 00:47
WENO Code (1D Advection Equation) Carolyn Main CFD Forum 6 March 11, 2007 14:21
WENO SCHEME BASICS Help Required!!! John Main CFD Forum 1 January 18, 2007 04:16
Finite Volume WENO Scheme DSS Main CFD Forum 3 January 15, 2007 04:47
Flux splitting for WENO scheme DSS Main CFD Forum 6 January 10, 2007 11:59


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:00.