Advertisement

Progress in the Development of a Class of Efficient Low Dissipative High Order Shock-Capturing Methods

  • H. C. Yee
  • B. Sjögreen
  • N. D. Sandham
  • A. Hadjadj
Conference paper
Part of the Notes on Numerical Fluid Mechanics (NNFM) book series (NNFM, volume 78)

Summary

In a series of papers, Olsson (1994, 1995), Olsson & Oliger (1994), Strand (1994), Gerritsen & Olsson (1996), Yee et al. (1999a,b, 2000) and Sandham & Yee (2000), the issue of nonlinear stability of the compressible Euler and Navier-Stokes Equations, including physical boundaries, and the corresponding development of the discrete analogue of nonlinear stable high order schemes, including boundary schemes, were developed, extended and evaluated for various fluid flows. High order here refers to spatial schemes that are essentially fourth-order or higher away from shock and shear regions. The objective of this paper is to give an overview of the progress of the low dissipative high order shock-capturing schemes proposed by Yee et al. (1999a,b, 2000). This class of schemes consists of simple non-dissipative high order compact or non-compact central spatial differencings and adaptive nonlinear numerical dissipation operators to minimize the use of numerical dissipation. The amount of numerical dissipation is further minimized by applying the scheme to the entropy splitting form of the inviscid flux derivatives, and by rewriting the viscous terms to minimize odd-even decoupling before the application of the central scheme (Sandham & Yee).

The efficiency and accuracy of these schemes are compared with spectral, TVD and fifth-order WENO schemes. A new approach of Sjögreen & Yee (2000) utilizing non-orthogonal multi-resolution wavelet basis functions as sensors to dynamically determine the appropriate amount of numerical dissipation to be added to the non-dissipative high order spatial scheme at each grid point will be discussed. Numerical experiments of long time integration of smooth flows, shock-turbulence interactions, direct numerical simulations of a 3-D compressible turbulent plane channel flow, and various mixing layer problems indicate that these schemes are especially suitable for practical complex problems in nonlinear aeroacoustics, rotorcraft dynamics, direct numerical simulation or large eddy simulation of compressible turbulent flows at various speeds including high-speed shock-turbulence interactions, and general long time wave propagation problems. These schemes, including entropy splitting, have also been extended to freestream preserving schemes on curvilinear moving grids for a thermally perfect gas (Vinokur & Yee 2000).

Keywords

Numerical Dissipation Density Contour WENO Scheme Total Variation Diminish Wavelet Basis Function 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. M.H. Carpenter, J. Nordstrom and D. Gottlieb (1998), “A Stable and Conservative Interface Treatment of Arbitrary Spatial Accuracy,” NASA/CR-1998–206921 (also ICASE Report 98–12 ).Google Scholar
  2. I. Daubechies (1992), Ten Lectures on Wavelets,CBMS-NSF Regional Conference Series in Applied Mathematics, No 61, SIAM.Google Scholar
  3. M. Farge (1992), “Wavelet Transforms and their Applications to Turbulence,” Ann. Rev. of Fluid Mech., 24, 395–457.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. A. Hadjadj, H.C. Yee and N.D. Sandham (2001), “Comparison of WENO with Low Dissipative High Order Schemes for Compressible Turbulence Computations”, RIACS Technical Report, NASA Ames Research Center.Google Scholar
  5. M. Gerritsen and P. Olsson (1996), “Designing an Efficient Solution Strategy for Fluid Flows: I. A Stable High Order Finite Difference Scheme and Sharp Shock Resolution for the Euler Equations,” J. Comput. Phys. 129, 245.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. A. Harten (1978), “The Artificial Compression Method for Computation of Shocks and Contact Discontinuities: III. Self-Adjusting Hybrid Schemes,” Math. Comp. 32, 363.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. A. Harten (1983), “On the Symmetric Form of Systems for Conservation Laws with Entropy,” ICASE Report 81–34, NASA Langley Research Center, 1981 also, J. Comput. Phys. 49, 151.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. A. Harten (1995), “Multiresolution Algorithms for the Numerical Solution of Hyperbolic Conservation Laws,” Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 48, 1305–1342MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. S. Mallat and S. Zhong (1992), “Characterization of Signals from Multiscale Edges,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 14, 710–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. P. Olsson, (1995) “Summation by Parts, Projections and Stability,” Math. Comp. 64, 1035.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. P. Olsson (1995), “Summation by Parts, Projections and Stability II.,” Math. Comp. 64, 212.Google Scholar
  12. P. Olsson (1995), “Summation by Parts, Projections and Stability III,” RIACS Technical Report 95–06, NASA Ames Research Center.Google Scholar
  13. P. Olsson and J. Oliger (1994), “Energy and Maximum Norm Estimates for Nonlinear Conservation Laws,” RIACS Technical Report 94–01, NASA Ames Research Center.Google Scholar
  14. V. Perrier, T. Philipovitch and C. Basdevant (1999), “Wavelet Spectra Compared to Fourier Spectra,” Publication of ENS, Paris.Google Scholar
  15. P.L. Roe (1981), “Approximate Riemann Solvers, Parameter Vectors, and Difference Schemes,” J. Comput. Phys. 43, 357.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. N.D. Sandham, and H.C. Yee (2000), “Entropy Splitting for High Order Numerical Simulation of Compressible Turbulence,” RIACS Technical Report 00.10, June 2000, NASA Ames Research Center; Proceedings of the First International Conference on CFD, July 10–14, 2000, Kyoto, Japan.Google Scholar
  17. C.W. Shu, “Essentially Non-Oscillatory and Weighted Essentially Non-Oscillatory Schemes for Hyperbolic Conservation Laws,” NASA/CR-97–206253, 1997.Google Scholar
  18. B. Sjögreen, “Numerical Experiments with the Multiresolution Scheme for the Compressible Euler Equations,” J. Comput. Phys., 117, 251–261 (1995).zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. B. Sjögreen and H.C. Yee (2000), “Wavelet Based Adaptive Numerical Dissipation Control for Shock-Turbulence Computations,” RIACS Technical Report 01.01, October, 2000, NASA Ames Research Center.Google Scholar
  20. J.L. Steger and R.F. Warming, (1981) “Flux Vector Splitting of Inviscid Gas Dynamics Equations with Applications to Finite Difference Methods,” J. Comput. Phys. 40, 263.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. B. Strand (1994), “Summation by Parts for Finite Difference Approximations for d/dx, J. Comput. Phys. 110, 47.Google Scholar
  22. M. Vinokur and H.C. Yee, (2000) “Extension of Efficient Low Dissipative High OrderGoogle Scholar
  23. Schemes for 3-D Curvilinear Moving Girds,“ NASA Technical Memorandum 209598, June 2000, NASA Ames Research Center; Proceedings of Computing the Future III: Frontiers of CFD — 2000, June 26–28, 2000, Half Moon Bay, CAGoogle Scholar
  24. H.C. Yee (1989), “A Class of High-Resolution Explicit and Implicit Shock-Capturing Methods,” VKI Lecture Series 1989–04 March 6–10, 1989, also NASA TM-101088, Feb. 1989.Google Scholar
  25. H.C. Yee, G.H. Klopfer and J.-L. Montagne (1990), “High-Resolution Shock-Capturing Schemes for Inviscid and Viscous Hypersonic Flows,” J. Comput. Phys., 88, 31.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. H.C. Yee, N.D. Sandham and M.J. Djomehri (1999a), “Low Dissipative High Order Shock-Capturing Methods Using Characteristic-Based Filters,” RIACS Technical Report 98.11, May 1998, also, J. Comput. Physics, 150, 199–238.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. H.C. Yee, M. Vinokur and M.J. Djomehri (1999b). Djomehri (1999b), “Entropy Splitting and Numerical Dissipation,” NASA Technical Memorandum 208793, August, 1999, NASA Ames Research Center, also, J. Comput. Physics, 162, 33–81, 2000.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. H.C. Yee, M. Vinokur and M.J. Djomehri (2000). Djomehri (2000), “Entropy Splitting and Numerical Dissipation,” J. Comput. Phys., 162, 33–81, 2000.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. C. Yee
    • 1
  • B. Sjögreen
    • 2
  • N. D. Sandham
    • 3
  • A. Hadjadj
    • 4
  1. 1.NASA Ames Research CenterMoffett FieldUSA
  2. 2.Department of Numerical Analysis and Computer ScienceKTHStockholmSweden
  3. 3.School of Engineering SciencesUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK
  4. 4.INSA du MadrilletLMFN-CORIA-UMR CNRSSt Etienne du RouvrayFrance

Personalised recommendations