
[Sponsors] 
Riemann solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics 

LinkBack  Thread Tools  Search this Thread  Display Modes 
February 21, 2016, 14:23 
Riemann solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics

#1 
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 19
Rep Power: 14 
Hi,
I have been struggling to understand a specific part of the derivation of the exact Riemann solver for the Euler equations presented in Toro's book (Riemann Solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics). The particular issue starts on page 119, where the author presents the generic equation connecting two states (L and R), the iterative solution of which provides the value of p* (the pressure in the star region). The functions that appear in this equation depend on whether the wave is a shock or a rerafaction wave, but this is intriguingly defined by the condition that p*>pL or p*<pL (for example for the left wave, equation 4.6). In my understanding what defines a shock (or a rarefaction) is the convergance (divergence) of the eigenvectors, rather than the pressure. I would very much appreciate your help with this. Thanks, Ricardo 

February 21, 2016, 14:37 

#2  
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,266
Rep Power: 67 
Quote:
you are correct if consider an initial smooth solution that, depending on the coalescence or not of the charactereistic curves (of the same family) generates shock or expansion, but the Riemann problem is defined already as a discontinuous initial state. 

March 2, 2016, 18:28 

#3 
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 19
Rep Power: 14 
Thanks. Yes, I agree, but my point was: what determines whether a given wave (e.g. a 1wave) is a shock should be lambda1L<lambda1*, and not pL<p* (where lambdas are the eigenvalues and 'p' the pressure). It is unclear (not demostrated in the book) if the former implies the latter.
Ricardo 

March 3, 2016, 08:23 

#4  
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,266
Rep Power: 67 
Quote:
If you consider only the initial state provided by the Riemann problem, the u velocity is zero, therefore you have only dx/dt=+/a for the characteristic equations. For t=0+, depending on the initial state, you have some possible framework as reported in the file. Ideally, two shock waves are possible. 

March 3, 2016, 11:30 

#5 
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,266
Rep Power: 67 
PS: of course the sound velocity a is different for the state 1 and 4 due to the difference in the pressure.


March 3, 2016, 19:03 

#6 
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 19
Rep Power: 14 
Thanks again for your kind follow up. I still cannot fully appreciate this, as for a generic Riemann problem, u is not necessarily zero. In fact the left and right states can have any values of u.
I appreciate comments. 

March 3, 2016, 19:34 

#7 
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,266
Rep Power: 67 
Yes, of course, you can have a nonvanishing u but the reasoning does not change... Depending on the initial state, among the four cases, you can have also two expansion as shown in
http://oai.cwi.nl/oai/asset/10964/10964D.pdf The Riemann problem in such case has no shock even for the discontinuous initial state 

March 4, 2016, 13:03 

#8 
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 19
Rep Power: 14 
Thanks again. I think there might have been a bit of misinterpretation since my original question. The question was about a specific definition presented in the mentioned book by E. Toro. It states that whether a particular wave is a shock or rarefaction is defined by (for example for a left shock or rarefaction): p*<pL or p*>p where the star denotes the intermediate state within the Riemann fan and 'L' the left (initial) state. Why
p*<pL and not u*a*<uLaL? The convergence or divergence of the eigenvalues is determined by the three variables [as a=f(rho, p)], rather than p alone. 

March 4, 2016, 13:16 

#9  
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,266
Rep Power: 67 
Quote:
I have in mind that the waves are totally defined by the initial state (no p* is analysed), I never go deeper in the idea of your question.... Maybe some infos can be found in the book of LeVeque.. 

March 4, 2016, 13:39 

#10 
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 19
Rep Power: 14 
Thanks. Yes, this is given when defining the exact Riemann solver, so it has to be generic enough to include any initial state. I read LeVeque's book, but the exact solver is not included.
This is also given in the paper. A FAST RIEMANN SOLVER WITH CONSTANT COVOLUME APPLIED TO THE RANDOM CHOICE METHOD E.F. TOR0 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...650090908/epdf Thanks for taking the time to discuss the issue. 

Tags 
euler equations, finite volume method, riemann, solver, toro 
Thread Tools  Search this Thread 
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Is there a difference between Riemann solvers and characteristic based solvers?  linkamp  Main CFD Forum  3  February 18, 2016 10:12 
comments on FDM, FEM, FVM, SM, SEM, DSEM, BEM  kenn  Main CFD Forum  2  July 18, 2004 19:28 
New Books and Numerical Software  Eleuterio TORO  Main CFD Forum  0  December 18, 1998 13:41 