CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD

Did openoam implicitly implement Gamma differencing shceme

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

Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By hjasak

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   January 30, 2007, 18:42
Default I am not sure I post this mass
  #1
New Member
 
Harry
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 27
Rep Power: 8
harry is on a distinguished road
I am not sure I post this massage on the right place. If not, I apologize for it.
I try to implement Gamma in my code in deferred correction mode. I did not see much improvement of my code. Is there something wrong?
Acoording to Hrvoje's theis, Gamma's big virtue is that it dose not require defferred correction due to its compact computational molecule.
So Openfoam should implicitly introduce Gamma? what's openfoam's treatment? I would appreciate your hints.
At current stage, OpenFoam is a very big challege for me as I know nothing about C++. Hence I still work on my own code. But my final taget is OpenFoam
harry is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 30, 2007, 19:02
Default Yes, this is where I did all m
  #2
Senior Member
 
Hrvoje Jasak
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,758
Rep Power: 21
hjasak will become famous soon enough
Yes, this is where I did all my work on the Gamma differencing scheme in the first place. What you do is as follows:

- imagine your scheme as a blend between upwind and central differencing
- look at the paper to find out how to calculate the blending factor from the currect solution for each face (using cell and face gradients)
- ... and now you're free to do whatever you wish.

OpenFOAM implements my scheme directly, i.e. it comes up with interpolation factors that use the blending between upwind and central.

Star-CD used to do it in a deferred correction mode, but I was never to happy with it - deferred correction distorts temporal accuracy. For Mickey Mouse cases, there's no much difference in any case. If you are interested in validation of the numerics rather than chasing LES and similar (sensitive) physics, you'll be all right any way.

Enjoy,

Hrv
Tushar@cfd likes this.
__________________
Hrvoje Jasak
Providing commercial FOAM/OpenFOAM and CFD Consulting: http://wikki.co.uk
hjasak is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   February 5, 2007, 03:11
Default Thanks for Dr.Hrv's answer. In
  #3
New Member
 
Harry
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 27
Rep Power: 8
harry is on a distinguished road
Thanks for Dr.Hrv's answer. In your thesis, you talked a lot about discretised methods for diffusion term. there methods based on the decomposition of surface vector are investigated. Something bother me is that what's the difference between these methods with the one given by Ferziger and Peric in computational methods for fluid dynamics. If any difference, I would appreciate your comments. My code was developed via Ferziger and Peric's text book. Now it seems I need a professional advice. Sorry this topic is not about OpenFoam.Thanks in advance.
harry 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
Examples of implicitly coupled domains nadine OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 3 August 15, 2008 18:53
?to implement gamma differencing scheme Gonski Main CFD Forum 15 January 28, 2007 18:00
The terms that should be treated implicitly in LES ben Main CFD Forum 3 January 28, 2005 04:32
hybrid differencing alice FLUENT 0 July 14, 2004 07:45
Temporal differencing for LES Jongtae Kim Main CFD Forum 0 June 2, 1999 23:09


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 16:35.