SIMPLEX, SIMPLEST, SIMPLEM, PRIME, oh my!
 

Can anybody point me to material detailing the following (recent?) variants of the SIMPLE pressure-based scheme:

SIMPLEX, SIMPLEST, SIMPLEM, PRIME.

Thanks.

Re: SIMPLEX, SIMPLEST, SIMPLEM, PRIME, oh my!
 

try this book by Malasekara et al titled " Computational fluid dynamics. The Finite volume method"

Re: SIMPLEX, SIMPLEST, SIMPLEM, PRIME, oh my!
 

The following papers review at least most of these methods.

M. Darwish, D. Asmar, and F. Moukalled, A COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT WITHIN A MULTIGRID ENVIRONMENT OF SEGREGATED PRESSURE-BASED ALGORITHMS FOR FLUID FLOW AT ALL SPEEDS, Numerical Heat Transfer, Part B, 45: 49–74, 2004

F. Moukalled and M. Darwish, THE PERFORMANCE OF GEOMETRIC CONSERVATION-BASED ALGORITHMS FOR INCOMPRESSIBLE MULTIFLUID FLOW, Numerical Heat Transfer, Part B, 45: 343–368, 2004

Re: SIMPLEX, SIMPLEST, SIMPLEM, PRIME, oh my!
 

I've gotten an earlier paper by the duo: "A UNIFIED FORMULATION OF THE SEGREGATED CLASS OF ALGORITHMS AT ALL SPEEDS", Numerical Heat Transfer, Part B, 37: 103-139, 2000, but it leaves the question of which scheme is the most efficient. Thanks for pointing-out the two newer papers that might just answer that.

I never looked beyond SIMPLE until I came across: http://www.mfrdc.com/moscow.pdf that mentioned the SIMPLEST scheme as the 'most efficient' SIMPLE offspring, so I was curious as to why.

Re: SIMPLEX, SIMPLEST, SIMPLEM, PRIME, oh my!
 

Just read through the 2004 M.Darwish et.al. "Comparative Assessment" paper. SIMPLEC and SIMPLEX outperform the other methods. Good old SIMPLE isn't too bad afterall but is less stable, esp. when there are shocks. Of course, there's that underrelaxation for pressure correction. SIMPLEST and PRIME clocked slowest in all test cases.

Comments? Counter-findings?

Re: SIMPLEX, SIMPLEST, SIMPLEM, PRIME, oh my!
 

Maybe try a paper about SIMPLE/SIMPLER comparison here:

http://panoramix.ift.uni.wroc.pl/~maq/eng/

Best, M.

Re: SIMPLEX, SIMPLEST, SIMPLEM, PRIME, oh my!
 

Maybe try a paper about SIMPLE/SIMPLER comparison here:

http://panoramix.ift.uni.wroc.pl/~maq/eng/

Best, M.

Re: SIMPLEX, SIMPLEST, SIMPLEM, PRIME, oh my!
 

Wow, very well done webpage! How long did you take to come up with the first version (v1.0?) of 'Fluid'? Is it fully C++ or coupled with low-level F77 routines for speed?

Re: SIMPLEX, SIMPLEST, SIMPLEM, PRIME, oh my!
 

Thank you:)

Fluid 1.0 was my first ansi c implementation of any CFD code. I developed it trough 7 months of my first year of studies.

Last month I started this project again. I am working on 2d, c++ code which will use MAC Method with SIMPLE to calculate free surface flows. Actually at the moment I have done 2d version of the code, I am looking for some references to validate 2d free surface flows. Then I will try to extend it into 3d code.

Best Regards, Maciej Matyka http://panoramix.ift.uni.wroc.pl/~maq

Re: SIMPLEX, SIMPLEST, SIMPLEM, PRIME, oh my!
 

I have similar aspirations and hope to get a 2D, and then later, 3D code working for incompressible flow cases and then later with laminar flow natural convection. When I'm seasoned enough, then I'll probably strap on a turbulence model. Quite a change from using 'canned, ready-to-eat' commercial CFD codes. It'll be a bit different from the 'rest' because I'll need to handle issues related to scattered data, as in 'meshless'.

Re: SIMPLEX, SIMPLEST, SIMPLEM, PRIME, oh my!
 

So, Good luck! :) Let me know if you will finish your 2d version of the code. Maybe we can compare our results.

Best, Maciej Matyka