anisotropic diffusion fvm::laplacian
Hi,
I have had a look at the implicit discretization of anisotropic diffusion (fvm::laplacian). It seems to me that the implementation is wrong. At least I haven't yet managed to figure out why the coefficients are as they are. It is fairly easy to follow in Ferzinger & Peric how the non-orthogonal correction approach is done for scalar "gamma" fields. For tensor fields it's a bit more tricky. What is being passed to the uncorrected (implicit) laplacian function is the scalar field sfGammaSn. For me it would make sense to pass a vector field sfGamma and then split the derivative nabla(vf) into a derivative along d and a derivative along sfGamma_{unity}. I think the way fvm::laplacian is implemented now shouldn't even work for scalar "gammas" right? Otherwise there wouldn't exist a template version for fvm::laplacians for scalars. I would appriciate if anybody can exchange thoughts on this topic / approves my thoughts / teaches me wrong / explains to me the implementation. Cheers, Michi template<class Type, class GType> tmp<fvMatrix<Type> > gaussLaplacianScheme<Type, GType>::fvmLaplacianUncorrected ( const surfaceScalarField& gammaMagSf, actually passes sfGammaSn const GeometricField<Type, fvPatchField, volMesh>& vf ) { tmp<surfaceScalarField> tdeltaCoeffs = this->tsnGradScheme_().deltaCoeffs(vf); const surfaceScalarField& deltaCoeffs = tdeltaCoeffs(); tmp<fvMatrix<Type> > tfvm ( new fvMatrix<Type> ( vf, deltaCoeffs.dimensions()*gammaMagSf.dimensions()*v f.dimensions() ) ); fvMatrix<Type>& fvm = tfvm(); fvm.upper() = deltaCoeffs.internalField()*gammaMagSf.internalFie ld(); fvm.negSumDiag(); |
I figured out that the coeffs indeed correspond to what I've derived
which is (Sf dot Gamma dot Sf)/(Sf dot d) ... for the uncorrected laplacian. I hope I didn't confuse anyone that read this message! If so, sorry! |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:12. |