CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > General Forums > Main CFD Forum

Implementing AUSM for FVM and Fully Implicit subsonic compressible flow

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

Like Tree3Likes
  • 2 Post By sbaffini
  • 1 Post By Krishan.aero

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   June 13, 2018, 18:26
Arrow Implementing AUSM for FVM and Fully Implicit subsonic compressible flow
  #1
New Member
 
Kriahan
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 6
Krishan.aero is on a distinguished road
I have been using AUSM for subsonic compressible flow with explicit time integration. But now I am facing problem of convergence and I want to switch to fully implicit time integration for my case.

I need help with following things:

1. How to find F(I+1/2) i.e flux at the face of control volume. As it is compressible flow and flux terms are
in conserved variable form. Do I need to change everything to primitive variables?

2. In AUSM we require left and right variables to be known to compute Mach splitting thus Flux at face. But in Fully Implicit case how would I do it? Compute Mach splitting using information from previous step?

Regards to CFD-online community members,
Krishan.aero is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 14, 2018, 03:27
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
sbaffini's Avatar
 
Paolo Lampitella
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Italy
Posts: 1,895
Blog Entries: 29
Rep Power: 36
sbaffini will become famous soon enoughsbaffini will become famous soon enough
Send a message via Skype™ to sbaffini
These two references might be useful:

Rinaldi et al., Exact Jacobians for implicit Navier-Stokes simulations of equilibrium real gas flows, J. Comp. Phys. 270, 2014

Colonia et al., Implicit implementation of the AUSM+ and AUSM+up schemes, Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fluids 75, 2014
arjun and Krishan.aero like this.
sbaffini is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 9, 2018, 20:47
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Kriahan
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 6
Krishan.aero is on a distinguished road
Thank you very much @Paolo. I really appreciate your help.
sbaffini likes this.
Krishan.aero is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 15, 2018, 12:46
Default SLAU does not converge for TVD schemes
  #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Singapore
Posts: 102
Rep Power: 9
usv001 is on a distinguished road
Dear all,

I am trying to implement an implicit finite volume solver using the SLAU flux. I have used a matrix-free method with LU-SGS iteration. The solver works perfectly when I use 1st order upwind schemes on problems like low speed flow (M = 0.01) over cylinder and hypersonic flow (M = 8.1) past blunt body. I obtained very good convergence for both these cases.

However, when I tried to use higher order TVD reconstruction (e.g. van Leer, van Albada, etc.) instead of the 1st order upwind schemes, the solver has trouble converging for both cases. It even starts to produce pressure-velocity decoupling ('checkerboard') in some regions for the low speed flow over cylinder case. There is no such mention of a degradation of performance with increase in order of accuracy in the papers that I've read so far.

I wonder if anyone has faced similar issues and/or perhaps could shed some light on this topic. For your information, I am using OpenFOAM. So, the interpolation schemes should not be the problem. I am interpolating the primitive variables density, velocity and pressure and computing the numerical flux from the reconstructed values.

Thank you for your time.

USV
usv001 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 15, 2018, 13:33
Default
  #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 188
Rep Power: 13
naffrancois is on a distinguished road
Have you tried first to converge your solution using a simple explicit scheme ?

Venkatakrishnan specifically dealt with poor convergence of Barth and Jespersen limiter on unstructured grids. You may have a look to his papers.
naffrancois is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 16, 2018, 00:22
Default
  #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Singapore
Posts: 102
Rep Power: 9
usv001 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by naffrancois View Post
Have you tried first to converge your solution using a simple explicit scheme ?

Venkatakrishnan specifically dealt with poor convergence of Barth and Jespersen limiter on unstructured grids. You may have a look to his papers.
Thank your for taking your time to answer my question. I ran the two cases (low speed flow past cylinder & hypersonic flow past blunt body) using 1st order explicit Euler time marching with CFL=0.3. The simulations do not converge with TVD reconstructions but they converge steadily with 1st order upwind reconstructions. I forgot about Venkatakrishnan's limiter. Perhaps that might solve the problem. I'll try to implement it and post the results if I manage to do so.

By the way, I have another question for the case of flow past cylinder. I always get a little asymmetry in the results for this case (please see attached image for converged 1st order upwind results). The results reported in the papers always show perfectly symmetric pressure contours but I am not able to reproduce it. Could it be the effect of boundary conditions? I am fixing the values of pressure and velocity at the far field boundary which is located 20R away from the centre of the cylinder. Should I extend the boundary further away from the cylinder, like >40R?

Many thanks,
USV
Attached Images
File Type: jpg p.jpg (22.5 KB, 17 views)
usv001 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 23, 2018, 22:13
Default
  #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Singapore
Posts: 102
Rep Power: 9
usv001 is on a distinguished road
Hello there,

I have tried implementing Venkatakrishnan's limiter and extending the domain but the solution still does not converge. I have detailed my methods in a new thread that I started (link). I would really appreciate any help toward understanding the two problems:
  1. Why is there an asymmetry for the case of nearly incompressible flow past a cylinder?
  2. Why does the solver not converge when using high than 1st order methods?

USV
usv001 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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 Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fully implicit compressible Foam Solver? hxaxtma OpenFOAM 1 July 23, 2019 09:03
2 Questions: Fully implicit compressible Solver and time depentend pressure inlet? hxaxtma SU2 2 September 25, 2017 08:26
Fully Developed Flow in Star-cd SMM STAR-CD 0 September 5, 2011 22:08
help with compressible flow BC's (need subsonic flow) meangreen Main CFD Forum 5 July 24, 2010 13:16
fluid flow fundas ram Main CFD Forum 5 June 17, 2000 21:31


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:35.