CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
Home > Forums > OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD

For second or first order accurate schemes, to what extent, the results are valid?

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

Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By Lieven

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old   July 7, 2013, 11:34
Default For second or first order accurate schemes, to what extent, the results are valid?
Albert Tong
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Posts: 76
Blog Entries: 1
Rep Power: 8
tfuwa is on a distinguished road
Hi forum,

I understand it is not the right place to ask this, but I trust the forum more than textbooks

I am confused by the numerical schemes in numerical simulations in general. For instance, within icoFoam standard solver, the discretisation schemes are,

ddt Euler-----------------------------------1st order;
grad Gauss linear-------------------------2nd order;
div Gauss linear- -------------------------2nd order;
laplacian Gauss linear corrected---------2nd order;
interpolation linear-----------------------2nd order;

So as a whole, we will have 1st order accuracy. If the tolerance is set to be 1e-06, delta_t to be 0.001s and delta_x to be 0.001m, then in the tutorial example of cavity, to what extent the resulting U and p is valid (assuming the convergent is achieved)?

Is it true that anything after the third digit is generally not accurate (since terms of higher than delta_x^2 and delta_t^1 are omitted in Taylor series expansion)?

Many thanks.
Kind regards,

tfuwa is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   July 7, 2013, 17:47
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Leuven, Belgium
Posts: 297
Rep Power: 15
Lieven will become famous soon enough
Hi Albert,

The discretisation schemes that are used in the solver are fully your choise. So you can indeed select 2nd order schemes for the spatial discretization (grad, div, laplacian ...) by selecting a 'Gauss linear' scheme but you might as well select 'upwind' resulting in a 1st order accuracy. But similarly, you can have a 2nd order accuracy of the time integration by setting
ddt(...)         CrankNicolson 1.0;
(or CrankNicholson, depending on you OF version).

Is it true that anything after the third digit is generally not accurate ...
No, this statement is just incorrect. If this were true, there would not be a need for using very fine meshes because regardless the mesh you take, the solution would not improve after the third digit according to this statement... The same holds for the time integration.

The order basically expresses the rate at which the error reduces:
1st order scheme: dT/2 -> error/2
2nd order scheme: dT/2 -> error/4
so the order does not say anything about the absolute value of the error.

Hope this clarifies things a bit.


kiddmax likes this.
Lieven is offline   Reply With Quote


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
second order schemes marine OpenFOAM 66 October 26, 2014 12:10
High order convective schemes Amir OpenFOAM 8 May 16, 2013 03:15
I have a problem with second order accurate solver mym1411 FLUENT 2 March 14, 2010 04:31
Unstable flow simpleFoam 2nd order Valle OpenFOAM 0 August 26, 2009 08:12
How accurate are non-convergent results? Chris FLUENT 12 April 21, 2005 03:56

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 00:34.