# Explicit vs Implicit method in free surface flow

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

 November 16, 2006, 09:38 Explicit vs Implicit method in free surface flow #1 Farhad Guest   Posts: n/a Hi everyone, What is the benefit of using explicit method in solving momentum equations in free surface flows, most of current softwares solve momentum equations explicitely and they have to use stability conditions in order to set time increment in the range that solution has stability. My question is that why noone (based on my knowledge) has used implicit method (for example SIMPLE algorithm or ...) to solve momentum equations which always is stable and there is no need to use any stability conditions! I appreciate to receive your idea and comments about this matter. Thanks Farhad

 November 16, 2006, 10:00 Re: Explicit vs Implicit method in free surface fl #2 Tom Guest   Posts: n/a It's not just a question of stability. You need to ask (1) what time step do I require to resolve the surface gravity waves and (2) what is the effect of the timestepping procedure upon the phase speed and group velocity of the waves. The solution using implicit methods may work for arbitrary large timesteps but that doesn't mean the solution is accurate. It's also possible that even when the timestepping is sufficiently small (this also goes for explicit methods) that the dispersion relation for the numerical waves may be adversely effected by the time discretization. There's some discussion of this, for the shallow water wave equations, in Wesseling's book "Principles of computational fluid dynamics".

 November 16, 2006, 10:14 Re: Explicit vs Implicit method in free surface fl #3 Ford Prefect Guest   Posts: n/a "My question is that why noone (based on my knowledge) has used implicit method..." Fluent has, and it has the drawbacks pointed out by Tom.

 November 16, 2006, 11:31 Re: Explicit vs Implicit method in free surface fl #4 rt Guest   Posts: n/a adding to previous comments, when u need free surface flow with sharp interface, the stability of interface tracking method (such as VOF, Level set, MAC, ...) usually impose time step limitation (in fact CFL condition). so explict treatment of NS is sufficient. Recently some time step free method for interface tracking were presented such as particle level set, CIP, ..., but their accuracy (physically correctness) is decreased with using large time step.

 November 16, 2006, 11:42 Re: Explicit vs Implicit method in free surface fl #5 Farhad Guest   Posts: n/a Thank you all for your helpful comments, I got the point right now. Farhad

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 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 OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post prashanthreddyh FLUENT 2 October 21, 2015 09:58 mechovator CFX 37 July 27, 2009 10:28 sam FLUENT 2 October 29, 2003 11:39 Viatcheslav Anissimov CFX 0 April 3, 2002 06:27 Oleg Melnik Main CFD Forum 4 January 22, 1999 06:28

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 21:06.