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

Arnoldi shift-invert method

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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   April 9, 2011, 06:27
Default Arnoldi shift-invert method
  #1
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 6
archer is on a distinguished road
Dear Community,

I am doing some numerical linear stability analysis for fluid flows and taking advantage of
the shift-invert Arnoldi method but I am confused about something.

I know my "correct" eigenvalues have to be "around" my shift parameter but I
am not sure what "around" actually means, ie how close my eigenvalues need to
be the the shift parameter.

For example, I am look for real eigenvalues to determine when instability
occurs. If I have a shift parameter equal to one, should I believe I have an
instability if my first real eigenvalue is of the order
10^(-2)? Or should I only believe those that are of order unity, and assume
the others are spurious?

Thank you for your advice,
Archer
archer is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 9, 2011, 08:25
Default hi archer
  #2
New Member
 
Liu Yang
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 6
kino is on a distinguished road
As I know, the closer the invert parameter is to the real eigenvalue, the faster the eigen-equation can be solved. The converged eigenvalue has nothing to do with the invert parameter.
kino is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 9, 2011, 12:38
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 6
archer is on a distinguished road
Thank you very much for your reply. A mixture of additional reading and testing brought me to that conclusion too. However, there is still something slightly puzzling me:

For same cases, I am getting different eigenvalues for different shift parameters. For example, at a given Reynolds number my leading eigenvalue may be small and negative for one value of the shift parameter and small and positive for another. This means one shift parameter says my flow is stable and another says it's unstable.

Do you think I should I therefore assume that this flows example is stable (but close to the critical Reynolds number) and that small numerical fluctuations/artefacts are to blame for this apparent contradiction? And that, for a truly unstable flow the leading (real part) eigenvalue should be positive regardless of the shift parameter? Or should I believe the result predicted when the shift parameter is close to the predicted real part of the leading eigenvalue?

Your attention to my message is very much appreciated,
Archer
archer is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 9, 2011, 20:09
Default
  #4
New Member
 
Liu Yang
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 6
kino is on a distinguished road
Hi, in my opinion the invert parameter is not supposed to affect the result so much. Have you considered refining the mesh and try again?
kino is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 9, 2011, 20:46
Default
  #5
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 6
archer is on a distinguished road
Yes, that has crossed my mind and with your advice I think may well be the way forward.

Thank you very much.
archer 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
discretizer - gmshToFoam Andyjoe Open Source Meshers: Gmsh, Netgen, CGNS, ... 13 March 14, 2012 05:35
Fluent 6.3.26 vs 12.1 and partition method Anorky FLUENT 0 April 27, 2010 10:55
Code for most powerfull FDV Method D.S.Nasan Main CFD Forum 6 September 4, 2008 02:08
Help about the preconditioner in gmres method Dan Gao Main CFD Forum 3 July 5, 2008 01:18
hess-smith method and fvm method yangqing FLUENT 0 March 20, 2002 20:25


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 22:09.