CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > OpenFOAM

linearUpwind

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

Like Tree3Likes
  • 2 Post By chegdan
  • 1 Post By fredo490

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   April 11, 2013, 09:51
Default linearUpwind
  #1
New Member
 
Robin Debroux
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 22
Rep Power: 13
robdeb is on a distinguished road
Hi,

I'm trying to understand the linearUpwind scheme in OpenFOAM. The linearUpwind.C isn't clear to me. So I have some questions:
-Is it simply the extansion of the upwind scheme to the second order?
-In the User Guide, it is said to be first/second order bounded. But for me, I would not have expected it to be bounded in the second order. Where am I wrong?

Thank you.
robdeb is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 11, 2013, 17:28
Default
  #2
Senior Member
 
Daniel P. Combest
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: St. Louis, USA
Posts: 621
Rep Power: 0
chegdan will become famous soon enoughchegdan will become famous soon enough
Quote:
-Is it simply the extension of the upwind scheme to the second order?
Yes

Quote:
-In the User Guide, it is said to be first/second order bounded. But for me, I would not have expected it to be bounded in the second order. Where am I wrong?
It is unbounded unless you use a gradient scheme that bounds the values. Maybe this older discussion will help:

http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/ope...tedlinear.html

Good luck.
rajibroy and elham usefi like this.
chegdan is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 11, 2013, 17:54
Default
  #3
New Member
 
Robin Debroux
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 22
Rep Power: 13
robdeb is on a distinguished road
Thank you very much for your answer!
robdeb is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 19, 2013, 07:47
Default
  #4
New Member
 
Robin Debroux
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 22
Rep Power: 13
robdeb is on a distinguished road
Hi again,

I'm simulating a supersonic flow with a shock, inviscid case.
I wanted to compare a TVD scheme (limitedLinear) with linearUpwind. I tried linearUpwind without cellLimited and then with cellLimited. What I expected was that the linearUpwind scheme without cellLimited gave me spurious oscillations but it doesn't. The two case (linearUpwind with and without cellLimited) gave me the same results. The localisation of the shock isn't very good compare to limitedLinear but I see no spurious oscillations near it.
How can we explain it?

Thank you.

Robin
robdeb is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 20, 2013, 21:08
Default
  #5
Senior Member
 
Daniel P. Combest
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: St. Louis, USA
Posts: 621
Rep Power: 0
chegdan will become famous soon enoughchegdan will become famous soon enough
What type of gradient scheme are you using?
chegdan is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 22, 2013, 04:28
Default
  #6
New Member
 
Robin Debroux
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 22
Rep Power: 13
robdeb is on a distinguished road
Gauss linear
robdeb is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 23, 2013, 11:42
Default
  #7
Senior Member
 
HECKMANN Frédéric
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 249
Rep Power: 16
fredo490 is on a distinguished road
give your full scheme file. Maybe you can try a leastsquare method.
fredo490 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 24, 2013, 04:30
Default
  #8
New Member
 
Robin Debroux
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 22
Rep Power: 13
robdeb is on a distinguished road
Here is my fvSchemes for the linearUpwind case without cellLimited:


/*--------------------------------*- C++ -*----------------------------------*\
| ========= | |
| \\ / F ield | OpenFOAM: The Open Source CFD Toolbox |
| \\ / O peration | Version: 2.1.1 |
| \\ / A nd | Web: www.OpenFOAM.org |
| \\/ M anipulation | |
\*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
FoamFile
{
version 2.0;
format ascii;
class dictionary;
location "system";
object fvSchemes;
}
// * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * //

ddtSchemes
{
default Euler;
}

gradSchemes
{
default Gauss linear;
grad(p) Gauss linear;
grad(U) Gauss linear;
}

divSchemes
{
default none;
div(phi,U) Gauss upwind;
div(phid,p) Gauss linearUpwind grad(U);
div(phi,e) Gauss linearUpwind grad(U);
div(phi,K) Gauss linearUpwind grad(U);
div((muEff*dev2(T(grad(U))))) Gauss linear 1;
}

laplacianSchemes
{
default none;
laplacian((rho*(1|A(U))),p) Gauss linear corrected;
laplacian(muEff,U) Gauss linear corrected;
laplacian(alphaEff,e) Gauss linear corrected;
}

interpolationSchemes
{
default linear;
}

snGradSchemes
{
default corrected;
}

fluxRequired
{
default no;
p ;
}


// ************************************************** *********************** //


Thank you, I'll try leastSquare method.
robdeb is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 24, 2013, 09:18
Default
  #9
Senior Member
 
HECKMANN Frédéric
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 249
Rep Power: 16
fredo490 is on a distinguished road
why you didn't put "div(phi,U)" to the second order ?

All the gradient should take the solved variable:

div(phid,p) Gauss linearUpwind grad(p);
div(phi,e) Gauss linearUpwind grad(e);
div(phi,K) Gauss linearUpwind grad(K);
elham usefi likes this.
fredo490 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   April 24, 2013, 10:01
Default
  #10
New Member
 
Robin Debroux
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 22
Rep Power: 13
robdeb is on a distinguished road
I noticed that for all the inviscid case in the tutorials, sonicFoam never use second order for this term. I've tried a second order but it doesn't improve my solution and gave me more spurious oscillations just after the shock.

Sorry for the mistake, I saw it but forgot to change it for the "linearUpwind without cellLimited" case but I didn't made the mistake for the "linearUpwind with cellLimited" case. So I don't think the mistake come from that. But I just ran the simulation with the corrections, I'll tell you if it changes something.

Thank you
robdeb is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   June 26, 2021, 23:59
Default
  #11
HPE
Senior Member
 
HPE's Avatar
 
Herpes Free Engineer
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: The Home Under The Ground with the Lost Boys
Posts: 932
Rep Power: 12
HPE is on a distinguished road
A contribution after 8 years:

J. Guerrero's Finite Volume Method: A Crash introduction's 15th slide gives a succinct explanation for the linearUpwind scheme.
HPE is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   March 16, 2022, 18:11
Default
  #12
New Member
 
Justyna Salachna
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 10
Rep Power: 6
salachnaj is on a distinguished road
Hi . In the slaid 15, shouldn't it be 3/2 instead of 2/3??
salachnaj is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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 Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A few simple questions about linearUpwind and limitedLinear chegdan OpenFOAM 27 June 21, 2021 11:39
Why define a grad Scheme when using linearUpwind? Benedikt OpenFOAM Pre-Processing 2 August 10, 2019 09:19
rhoCentralFoam linearUpwind Andy_bm OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD 8 November 14, 2011 12:34
linearUpwind scheme in OpenFOAM 2.0.1 ??? cabul OpenFOAM 8 November 9, 2011 07:57
Discretization settings Foam vs. Fluent wuppdupp OpenFOAM Pre-Processing 6 July 25, 2009 03:35


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:39.