
[Sponsors] 
Trying to understand FDM vs FVM vs Conservative form vs Nonconservative form 

LinkBack  Thread Tools  Search this Thread  Display Modes 
December 3, 2019, 09:32 
Trying to understand FDM vs FVM vs Conservative form vs Nonconservative form

#1 
Senior Member
Mandeep Shetty
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 185
Rep Power: 8 
Hello, my question is regarding solving the conservative form and the nonconservative form of the governingequations (GE) using finite difference method (FDM) and finite volume method (FVM).
When reading about the differences between the conservative form and the nonconservative forms of the GE it was said that since in the conservative form the dependent variables are the fluxes (and not the primitive variables) they are better conserved and "physically" correct. (among other things) When reading about the differences between the FDM and FVM it was said that the finite volume was better at conserving the fluxes which are an advantage. (among other things) Here are my confusions and questions: i)When using FVM do we only solve equations in conservative form? ii)When solving the conservative form of the GE using FDM are the fluxes conserved or does this only apply when solving the equations using FVM. iii)If we solve the GE in the conservative form using FDM and then using FVM what will be the difference? ie will the "conservativeness" be the same for both FDM and FVM methods? 

December 3, 2019, 11:18 

#2 
Senior Member
Lucky
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 5,146
Rep Power: 61 
FVM method naturally lends itself to governing equations that are already in conservative form because of the Gaussdivergence theorem. The volume integral of a divergence is easily converted into a surface integral of fluxes. Now supposing you knew (i.e. you solve for) the fluxes exactly, there is no discretization error and your original GE is exactly solvable.
In FDM, you would need to discretize (using a finite difference) the divergence itself. There is now a discretization error. At best you satisfy the balance in your discretized GE and not the original GE. If you were to do FVM on an equation (or any term) that cannot be cast in a conservative form, you can't abuse the divergence theorem and FVM becomes less appealing and starts to look more like FDM because a bunch of things will need to be discretized (using some discretization scheme, which is usually a finite difference scheme). Actually this already happens in FVM to some extent. Knowing that, it's kind of a nobrainer in FVM to always write your equations in conservative form in the first place if possible. Otherwise, don't do FVM! 

December 3, 2019, 11:30 

#3 
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,290
Rep Power: 67 
First of all, let me address the different forms of the equations in their continuous form.
According for example to the textbook of Hirsch, you will read: 1) Integral form 2) Differential divergent form 3) Differential quasilinear form 1) is the basic form to be discretized in a FV formulation and is conservative by construction. 2) can be written in a FD formulation with the divergence of the fluxes that can be written in FVlike conservative form. 3) Only suitable for FD formulation and is generally not conseervative. The dependent variables are not the fluxes but the variables that appear under time derivatives. I suggest to search for similar questions, this topic was already addressed. 

December 4, 2019, 00:30 

#4  
Senior Member
Mandeep Shetty
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 185
Rep Power: 8 
Quote:


December 4, 2019, 00:36 

#5  
Senior Member
Mandeep Shetty
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 185
Rep Power: 8 
Quote:


December 4, 2019, 03:00 

#6  
Senior Member
Filippo Maria Denaro
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,290
Rep Power: 67 
Quote:
The integral form for mass, momentum and total energy is always conservative. It is written as a variation in time of the volumeaveraged variables due to the surface integral of the fluxes. If you conversely see an integral equation for some variable having a production term, this latter remains a volumeaveraged term that cannot be written as a surface integral of the fluxes. But that is due to the physics of the problem not to the numerics. From the integral form you can write the differential divergence form and then the quasilinear (non conservative) form. Again, similar question was already answered in other post. 

Tags 
conservative form, finite difference method, finite volume method, non conservative form 
Thread Tools  Search this Thread 
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Radiation in semitransparent media with surfacetosurface model?  mpeppels  CFX  11  August 22, 2019 07:30 
Conservative discretization  arungovindneelan  Main CFD Forum  1  July 4, 2019 03:22 
What are strong and weak form of conservative form  granzer  Main CFD Forum  3  July 3, 2019 11:25 
Conservative form of NS equation for incompressible flow and sharp interface  doctorWho  Main CFD Forum  1  November 5, 2013 05:53 
comments on FDM, FEM, FVM, SM, SEM, DSEM, BEM  kenn  Main CFD Forum  2  July 18, 2004 18:28 