CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
Home > Forums > Main CFD Forum

Time integrators for lagrangian methods

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

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   January 13, 2011, 11:00
Default Time integrators for lagrangian methods
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 4
Rep Power: 10
teskio is on a distinguished road
Sponsored Links
Hi everyone,
I'm working with lagrangian methods (vortex methods) and I need to investigate possible time integrators and their efficiency.

Being gridless methods without the CFL limit the time step can be increased to lower the computational cost but this leads to the need to find better time integrators than the simple 1st order Euler (with which the accumulation of error in long simulations is evident).

I've tried a Runge-Kutta 4th order with good results but a considerable increase in computational time.

I need to explore new solutions. I'm looking into symplectic integrators...

Do you have any other suggestion?

teskio is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

Old   January 13, 2011, 12:01
New Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5
Rep Power: 8
mczero57 is on a distinguished road

If you are dealing with discrete vortex equations, which form a hamiltonian system,
symplectic integrators are a good choice since they preserve H. You might also
consider designing your own scheme that preserves all the integrals of your discrete system.

mczero57 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 17, 2011, 05:51
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 4
Rep Power: 10
teskio is on a distinguished road
Thanks mczero,
yes symplectic integrators are definitely a possibility, I'm already going in that direction.
I was wondering if there were other options that I hadn't considered...
teskio is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   January 17, 2011, 20:13
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 82
Rep Power: 10
adrin is on a distinguished road
Symplectic integrators will work only in 2D vortex methods because, to the best of my knowledge, only the 2D equations are Hamiltonian. In 3D, a vortex monopole system is not Hamiltonian. You could, however, use vortex dipoles, or, equivalently, the impulse method (and equations), which is Hamiltonian in 3-D. However, despite the fact that the latter preserves energy, helicity, vorticity/circulation implicitly to machine precision everywhere in the domain, the method has some serious short-comings, which have made it into more of a curiosity than a practical tool.

First-order time integration is simply not acceptable in vortex methods. Second-order RK works perfectly well. 4th-order is higher in accuracy and will allow you take larger timestep sizes, which will probably be more than twice the timestep size you can use with 2nd-order time integration (that really depends on the problem), in which case, 4th-order would be more efficient overall even if it's twice more expensive.

Alternatively, if memory is not an issue and you just want to reduce cpu time, then you can use backward looking methods (adams-bashforth, etc) so that you use only one evaluation per timestep, but use info from previous steps to get higher order extrapolation to the future. A lot depends also on the remaining details of your implementation (is it purely inviscid, viscous requiring operator splitting, wall-bounded, etc)

adrin is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 7, 2011, 00:11
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 10
Rep Power: 10
xnov is on a distinguished road
so is there any progress in symplectic vortex methods? or is it as Adrin said that it is only for 2D vortex methods?

to Adrin: could you explain me a little further why 3D vortex methods is not Hamiltonian?

Last edited by xnov; November 7, 2011 at 00:29.
xnov is offline   Reply With Quote


symplectic integrators, time integrators, vortex method

Thread Tools
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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Time step size and max iterations per time step pUl| FLUENT 31 August 21, 2015 04:46
air bubble is disappear increasing time using vof xujjun CFX 9 June 9, 2009 07:59
IcoFoam parallel woes msrinath80 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 9 July 22, 2007 02:58
AMG versus ICCG msrinath80 OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 2 November 7, 2006 16:15
unsteady calcs in FLUENT Sanjay Padhiar Main CFD Forum 1 March 31, 1999 12:32

Sponsored Links

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:55.