Hi everyone, What's the point
 

Hi everyone,
What's the point of defining mvConvection object? why not simply using fvm:div(phi, Yi) and fvm:div(phi, h)?
Thanks,
Mahdi

Hello mehdi
Did you get any response to this question?

ohje......

:(

Nobody has an answer.......

??

I'm also interested at...

mvconvection
 

Hi,
I am still waiting to see the answer.

Thanks,
Farshad

It seems that the reason should be
All the div(phi, Yi) and div(phi, h) have a similar discretization form, except for the tracked variable. With mvConvection object, you can use a single surface interpolator (multivariateSurfaceInterpolationScheme) for all the div(phi, Yi) which will save a lot of efforts for setting the discretization scheme. Such a treatment can also speed up calculation relative to the form of fvm:div(phi, Yi).

Hope this helps.

Regards, Junwei

Isn't this the answer?
I know it is 2017 now! :D
https://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/op...s-fvm-div.html

I know it is 2019 now!
But I got different results with this mvConvection.
In my solver, two additional variable is transported.
When I use separate scheme for these two variable ( fvm::div(phi, field) ), I found that the results is different with mvConvection ( mvConvection->fvmDiv(phi, field) ).
So, is there any other difference between mvConvection->fvmDiv and fvm::div?