|
[Sponsors] |
Why Laplacian is used instead of a combination of divergence and gradient operators? |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
December 23, 2013, 14:13 |
Why Laplacian is used instead of a combination of divergence and gradient operators?
|
#1 | ||
Senior Member
Canakkale Dardanelspor
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 135
Rep Power: 14 |
Hi
== 1 == The question is why Laplacian is considered as a single operator instead of a combination of the divergence and gradient operations despite these two mathematically the same. == 2 == OpenFOAM programmer's guide Version 2.2.2, page 24, raises this point without giving any justifications: Quote:
Some made mention of this in the forum as follows: Quote:
My guess is that changing the rank of the tensor of interest would lead to an arbitrary issue during the tensor transformation via Laplacian operator if Laplacian is implemented as a combination of the divergence and gradient operators. == 5 == Many thanks for any answer. |
|||
December 24, 2013, 05:12 |
|
#2 |
Senior Member
Bernhard
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Delft
Posts: 790
Rep Power: 22 |
I have the impression you already answered the question yourself.
If you calculated the laplacian of a scalar field, you get a scalar field and you need to add 2 or 3 derivates that you calculated with some stencil. If you calculate the gradient first, you calculate three derivative with some stencil AND need to store the intermediate result. Then, you calculate the divergence, which again needs three derivatives. Of course the amount of calculations would not change to much depending on the order of your schemes, but in any case you would need triple the amount of memory, which is undesired in most cases. This comes at the expense of additional implementation work, which should not be the biggest concern. |
|
December 24, 2013, 14:40 |
|
#3 |
Senior Member
Canakkale Dardanelspor
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 135
Rep Power: 14 |
Many thanks!
|
|
September 26, 2019, 08:40 |
|
#4 |
Senior Member
Ashwani
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Hyderabad
Posts: 154
Rep Power: 13 |
Further, to add an answer it helps in avoiding pressure velocity decoupling for cases involving such issues by the use of compact stencil. Following line at this page may be helpful.
"The second measure undertaken to avoid a decoupling of the pressure at neighbouring points is achieved by the way the Laplacian operator is discretized: It computes the gradient at the cell faces by computing the difference between neighbour and owner cell centre and dividing this difference by the distance between this two points. In this way when the sum of all gradients is taken over the faces of a cell, the computational stencil is much smaller compared with the procedure to interpolated the gradient computed at the cell centre on the faces. Furthermore it involves direct neighbours without alternately skipping neighbours." |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Green's theorem or divergence theorem? | Hermano | Main CFD Forum | 0 | November 30, 2011 17:11 |
buoyantSimpleFoam divergence | TomS | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 0 | November 24, 2011 15:16 |
Wall correction for the temperature gradient | Hagen | OpenFOAM | 0 | March 7, 2011 21:04 |
Pressure Gradient and Velocity Divergence | alvin11 | Main CFD Forum | 4 | May 29, 2010 12:11 |
How to compute UDS fourth order gradient | Emma66 | FLUENT | 1 | April 27, 2010 06:44 |