|
[Sponsors] |
February 23, 2004, 18:25 |
Jameson's scheme for LES ?
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Dear all,
as we know that the central difference scheme is popular and a common practice for incompressible flow LES, I wonder if Jameson's central difference scheme is also OK for compressible flow LES. Why or why not ? Any references ? Thanks for your reply in advance. Li Yang |
|
February 23, 2004, 22:53 |
Re: Jameson's scheme for LES ?
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I used the TVD scheme with convective term and central difference scheme in the viscous term. I'm studying the compressible LES.
|
|
February 23, 2004, 22:57 |
Re: Jameson's scheme for LES ?
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi,
I have not tried Jameson for LES, but have used it for incompressible NS. It Works well. Just switch off the shock capturing dissipation terms, At present I am not exactly remembering it. I will give the answer in 1-2 days time. Best of Luck Apurva |
|
February 24, 2004, 04:45 |
Re: Jameson's scheme for LES ?
|
#4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi Apurva,
Jameson's scheme is indeed OK for relatively low speed flow simulation. What did you mean "switch off the shock capturing dissipation term" ? As far as I know, Jameson's central difference scheme consists of a central differencing term and two artificial viscosity terms. Kind regards Li |
|
February 24, 2004, 05:28 |
Re: Jameson's scheme for LES ?
|
#5 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
as far as I know, most of people using high order (3rd or 5th order) upwind schemes for compressible flow LES. But those schemes are found still very dissipative.
Therefore, I would like to know whether Jameson's central difference scheme will be OK for compresible flow LES where there is no strong shock. |
|
February 24, 2004, 07:11 |
Re: Jameson's scheme for LES ?
|
#6 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Their are second order and fourth order dissipative terms. One of them is meant for damping the osscilations and avoiding checker-board solution. While second is used for shock capturing and avoiding failure of central difference scheme at Mach 1 (where normal central difference scheme will fail).
Please read Jameson, Turkel and Skmidt's paper carefully. |
|
February 24, 2004, 07:49 |
Re: Jameson's scheme for LES ?
|
#7 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I have a suggession, go through 1997 AIAA Journal, there is a paper by Jonathan Wises (I am not sure of spelling) on preconditioning. Try that method.
|
|
February 24, 2004, 13:40 |
Re: Jameson's scheme for LES ?
|
#8 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Thanks a lot. I have some further questions about Jameson's scheme, as I wonder how large these artificial viscocity terms could be, compared to the real viscous terms. In addition, can these two artificial viscous terms be switched off for a RANS calculation in a subsonic case ? Will this makes possibly a stable and less dissipative numerical scheme ?
|
|
February 25, 2004, 13:02 |
Re: Jameson's scheme for LES ?
|
#9 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Implicit Solution of Preconditioned Navier-Stokes Equations Using Algebraic Multigrid.
Author(s): Jonathan M. Weiss; Joseph P. Maruszewski; Wayne A. Smith Source: AIAA Journal (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics) Year: 1999 Volume: 37 Number: 1 Pages: 29-36 |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
how to understand high resolution scheme and high order scheme | iilw1314 | Main CFD Forum | 7 | April 12, 2022 12:29 |
When to use upwind or central differencing schemes? | quarkz | Main CFD Forum | 6 | August 19, 2011 03:24 |
2nd order upwind scheme (Fluent and CFX) | Far | FLUENT | 0 | May 22, 2011 01:50 |
Definition of limiter function for central dirrerencing scheme | sebastian_vogl | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 0 | January 5, 2009 11:08 |
extrapolation in MUSCL scheme | Chandra | Main CFD Forum | 6 | February 14, 2007 11:21 |