|
[Sponsors] |
December 22, 2005, 12:53 |
Finite Element vs. Finite Volume Codes
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Can anybody explain to me the difference between finite element and finite volume CFD codes? Which one is preferable for what type of problems? Thanks.
|
|
December 22, 2005, 12:56 |
Re: Finite Element vs. Finite Volume Codes
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Most CFD people use the finite volume because of it's stability over the finite element.
|
|
December 22, 2005, 20:19 |
Re: Finite Element vs. Finite Volume Codes
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I have found that the FEM showcases the underlying physics in a superior way to FVM, which tends to, by its cell-averaging design, damp certain physical phenomena.
The nodal interconnectivity of FEM gives useful inter-node information. I understand that there is information in the Wiki on the FVM - FEM comparison. diaw... |
|
December 26, 2005, 20:07 |
Re: Finite Element vs. Finite Volume Codes
|
#4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
on Wiki on the FVM - FEM comparison is still not written, i wished to add but i do not understant much of FEM, so left it for people who excel in FEM.
|
|
December 29, 2005, 01:45 |
Re: Finite Element vs. Finite Volume Codes
|
#5 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
FEM is normaly apllied to structurall analysis, because the code calculates a length expansion, and out of this it calculates the stress as the first derivation of the length. To be able to do this the FEM-Cell must have at least a linear weight function, which means there are two points discribing a line (e.g. in 3D 8 nodes per hexaeder-cell). The fist derivation of it is a constant function. When you have for e.g. a 1D problem, you would get a piecewise (per dx-interval) constant stairways shape of the stress, which is not really accurate. So you better choose a quadratic weight function (means in 1D there are 3 points defining a quadratic funtion), to get a linear stress in the dx-intervall. For a first shot many peaple using the linear cells in combination with a higher mesh resolution.
In CFD there is no need to calculate a first derivation of a value. Because of this a constant weight function is sufficient (FV-Methode, only 1 node per cell). You can increase the result accuracy by using FE-Methods, but is has a great overhead, which let dramatically decrease the speed of the solution progress. To manage at least 8 nodes per cell (linear wight function) instead of only 1 node per cell leads to a extrem memory requirement. Conclusion: In Structural analysis you don't have a choice, you have to use at least a linear cell, because of the first derivation of the length. But in CFD, (especially for large meshes and in transient calculations) FEM-Methods are not really practicable, in these days (!). By the way; when using more and smaller cells in general, the needed geometrical accuracy given by the modell-walls (especially in CFD) is much higher. Hope this helps Hubert Janocha |
|
January 2, 2006, 19:14 |
Re: Finite Element vs. Finite Volume Codes
|
#6 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Thanks for all your replies. Some CFD packages that use FEM approach, present it as part of the natural evolution of things. Now I have a better idea.
|
|
January 3, 2006, 09:26 |
Re: Finite Element vs. Finite Volume Codes
|
#7 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
For fluids, FEM will provide intricate flow details that FVM would be hard-pressed to do. The interconnectivity between nodes is precisely why FEM does such a good job. I think of FVM as a glorified form of FDM - a net of point samplings taken over the flow domain.
diaw... |
|
January 3, 2006, 13:58 |
Finite elemnent and finite volume
|
#8 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Finite volume codes are easy to write. Writing a finite element code is laborious and it takes much time.
|
|
January 6, 2006, 04:19 |
Re: Finite elemnent and finite volume
|
#9 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
1)Finite Element basically works on Weighted residual method and Finite Volume works bascially on Conservation priniciples.
2)In FEM nodal connectivity is important to get solution if u r not able to make so it will take as freeedge in solution domain. But in FVM nodal connectivity is not mandatory but face connectivity is must since flux b/t cell face has to conserve. ciyo Alex |
|
January 6, 2006, 22:59 |
Re: Finite elemnent and finite volume
|
#10 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
>>>1)Finite Element basically works on Weighted residual method and Finite Volume works bascially on Conservation priniciples.
-------- FVM is also a Weighted Residual method... with constant weighting (ref Patankar - p30) diaw... |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What is C.V. based finite element method | C-H Kuo | Main CFD Forum | 4 | September 19, 2022 14:06 |
how to set periodic boundary conditions | Ganesh | FLUENT | 15 | November 18, 2020 06:09 |
finite volume VS finite element | solomon | FLUENT | 4 | April 3, 2015 00:10 |
channelFoam for a 3D pipe | AlmostSurelyRob | OpenFOAM | 3 | June 24, 2011 13:06 |
sliding mesh with Finite elements or finite volume | tool | Main CFD Forum | 0 | October 9, 2008 10:07 |