Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8bljj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-16T04:56:52.946Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter Six - Compressible Flows via Finite Difference Methods

from Part Two - Finite Difference Methods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

T. J. Chung
Affiliation:
University of Alabama, Huntsville
Get access

Summary

In general, the physical behavior of compressible flows is more complicated than in incompressible flows. Compressible flows may be viscous or inviscid, depending on flow velocities. Compressible inviscid flows are analyzed using the potential or Euler equations, whereas compressible viscous flows are solved from the Navier-Stokes system of equations. Shock waves may occur in compressible flows and require special attention as to the solution methods. Furthermore, shock wave turbulent boundary layer interactions in compressible viscous flows constitute one of the most important physical phenomena in computational fluid dynamics. Let us consider air flows at speeds greater than 100 m/s, which corresponds to a Mach number of approximately 0.3, but less than 1700 m/s, or approximately Mach 5. Air flows in this range (0.3 ≤ M ≤ 5) may be considered as compressible and inviscid. This range is usually subdivided into regions identified as subsonic (0.3 < M < 0.8), transonic (0.8 ≤ M ≤ 1.2), and supersonic (1.2 < M ≤ 5). For M > 5, the flow is referred to as hypersonic. Hypersonic flows around a solid body are usually coupled with viscous boundary layers. Effects of dilatational dissipation due to compressibility, high temperature gradients, vortical motions within the secondary boundary layers, radiative heat transfer, vibrational and electronic energies, and chemical reactions are examples of some of the complex physical phenomena associated with hypersonic flows.

In order to take into account the compressibility and variations of density in high-speed flows, we utilize the conservation form of the governing equations, using the density-based formulation. This is in contrast to the pressure-based formulation for incompressible flows discussed in Chapter 5. For compressible flows, we encounter some regions of the flow domain (close to the wall, for example) in which low Mach numbers or incompressible flows prevail. In this case, the density-based formulations become ineffective, with the solution convergence being extremely slow. To resolve such problems, various schemes have been developed. Among them are the preconditioning process for the time-dependent term toward improving the stiff convection eigenvalues and the flowfield-dependent variation (FDV) methods allowing the transitions and interactions of various flow properties as well as all speed flows.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abgrall, R. 1994 On essentially non-oscillatory schemes on unstructured meshes analysis and implementationJ. Comp. Phys. 114 45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beam, R. M.Warming, R. F. 1976 An implicit finite-difference algorithm for hyperbolic systems in conservation law formJ. Comp. Phys. 22 87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beam, R. M.Warming, R. F. 1978 An implicit factored scheme for the compressible Navier-Stokes equationsAIAA J. 16 393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ben-Artzi, M.Falcovitz, J. 1984 A second order Godunov-type scheme for compressible fluid dynamicsJ. Comp. Phys. 55 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boris, J. P.Book, D. L. 1973 Flux corrected transport 1, SHASTA, a fluid transport algorithm that worksJ. Comp. Phys. 11 38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briley, W. R.McDonald, H. 1975
Casier, F.Deconinck, H.Hirsch, C. 1983 A class of central bidiagonal schemes with implicit boundary conditions for the solution of Eulers equationsAIAA J. 22 1556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casper, J. 1992 Finite volume implementation of high-order essentially nonoscillatory schemes in two dimensionsAIAA J. 30 2829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casper, J.Shu, C. W.Atkins, H. 1994 Comparison of two formulations for high-order accurate essentially nonoscillatory schemesAIAA J. 32 1970Google Scholar
Choi, D.Merkle, C. L. 1993 The application of preconditioning for viscous flowsJ. Comp. Phys. 105 203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chung, T. J. 1999 Transitions and interactions of inviscid/viscous, compressible/incompressible, and laminar/turbulent flowsInt. J. for Num. Meth. in Fl. 31 2233.0.CO;2-U>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Courant, R.Isaacson, E.Reeves, M. 1952 On the solution of nonlinear hyperbolic differential equations by finite differencesComm. Pure Appl. Math. 5 243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, S. F. 1984
Dutt, P. 1988 Stable boundary conditions and difference schemes for Navier-Stokes equationsSIAM J. Num. Anal. 25 245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engquist, B.Majda, A. 1979 Radiation boundary conditions for acoustic and elastic wave calculationsComm. Pure Appl. Math. 32 629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engquist, B.Osher, S. 1980 Stable and entropy satisfying approximations for transonic flow calculationsMath. of Comp. 34 45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrison, T. J.Settles, G. S.Narayanswami, N.Knight, D. D.Horstman, C. C. 1996 Flowfield surveys and computations of a crossing-shock wave/boundary-layer interactionAIAA J. 34 57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godunov, S. K. 1959 Finite-difference method for numerical computation of discontinuous solutions of the equations of fluid dynamicsMat. Sb 47 271Google Scholar
Godunov, S.Zabrodine, A.Ivanov, M.Kraiko, A.Prokopov, G. 1979
Gottlieb, D.Turkel, E. 1978 Boundary conditions for multistep finite difference methods for time-dependent equationsJ. Comp. Phys. 26 181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, M. D.Anderson, J. D. 1977 On the application of boundary conditions to time-dependent computations for quasi–one-dimensional fluid flowsComp. and Fl. 5 127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustafsson, B. 1982 The choice of numerical boundary conditions for hyperbolic systemsJ. Comp. Phys. 48 270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustafsson, B.Sundström, A. 1978 Incompletely parabolic problems in fluid dynamicsSIAM J. Appl. Math. 35 343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harten, A. 1983 High resolution schemes for hyperbolic conservation lawsJ. Comp. Phys. 9 357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harten, A. 1984 On a class of high resolution total variation stable finite difference schemesSIAM J. Num. Anal. 21 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harten, A.Lax, P. D. 1981 A random choice finite difference scheme for hyperbolic conservation lawsSIAM J. Num. Anal. 18 289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harten, A.Lax, P. D.Van Leer, B. 1983 35
Harten, A.Osher, S. 1987 Uniformity high-order accurate nonoscillatory schemes ISIAM J. Num. Anal. 24 279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedstrom, G. W. 1979 Non-reflecting boundary conditions for non-linear hyperbolic systemsJ. Comp. Phys. 30 222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirsch, C. 1990 Numerical Computation of Internal and External FlowsNew YorkWileyGoogle Scholar
Holst, T. L.Ballhaus, W. F. 1979 Fast, conservative schemes for the full potential equation applied to transonic flowsAIAA J. 17 145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Issa, R. I.Gosman, A. D.Watkins, A. P. 1986 The computation of compressible and incompressible recirculating flows by a non-iterative schmesJ. Comp. Phys. 62 66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jameson, A. 1974 Iterative solutions of transonic flows over airfoils and wings, including flows at Mach 1Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 27 283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jameson, A.Schmidt, W.Turkel, E. 1981
Kreiss, H. O. 1970 Initial boundary value problem for hyperbolic systemsComm. Pure Appl. Math. 23 273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lax, P. D. 1954 Weak solutions of nonlinear hyperbolic equations and their numerical computationComm. Pure Appl. Math. 7 159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lax, P. D. 1973 Hyperbolic systems of conservation laws and mathematical theory of shock wavesSociety for Industrial and Applied MathematicsPhiladelphia, PAGoogle Scholar
Lax, P. D.Wendroff, B. 1960 Systems of conservation lawsComm. Pure Appl. Math. 15 363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerat, A. 1979
Lerat, A. 1983 83
Lerat, A.Peyret, R. 1974 Noncentered schemes and shock propagation problemsComp. Fl.35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacCormack, R. W. 1969 66
MacCormack, R. W.Paullay, A. J. 1972 72
MacCormack, R. W. 1981 81
Merkle, C. L.Sullivan, J. Y.Buelow, P. E. O.Venkateswaran, S. 1998 Computation of flows with arbitrary equations of stateAIAA J. 36 515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moretti, G. 1979 Pouring, A. A.Shah, V. I.13
Murman, E. M.Cole, J. D. 1971 Calculation of plane steady transonic flowsAIAA J. 9 114Google Scholar
Nordström, J. 1989 The influence of open boundary conditions on the convergence to steady state for the Navier-Stokes equationsJ. Comp. Phys. 85 210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliger, J.Sundsröm, A. 1978 Theoretical and practical aspects of some initial boundary value problems in fluid dynamicsSIAM J. Appl. Math. 35 419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osher, S. 1982 Shock modelling in aeronauticsMorton, K. W.Baines, M. J.Numerical Methods for Fluid DynamicsLondonAcademic Press179Google Scholar
Osher, S. 1984 Riemann solvers, the entropy condition and difference approximationsSIAM J. Num. Anal. 21 217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osher, S.Chakravarthy, S. R. 1984 High resolution schemes and the entropy conditionSIAM J. Num. Anal. 21 955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osher, S.Hafez, M.Whitlow, W. 1985 Entropy condition satisfying approximations for the full potential equation of transonic flowMath. Comp. 44 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peyret, R.Viviand, H. 1985 Pseudo-unsteady methods for inviscid or viscous flow computationsRecent Advances in the Aerospace SciencesCasi, C.PlenumNew YorkGoogle Scholar
Pletcher, R. H.Chen, K. H. 1993
Rai, M. M.Moin, P. 1993 Direct numerical simulation of transitional and turbulence in a spatially evolving boundary layerJ. Comp. Phys. 109 169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raithby, G. D. 1976 Skew upstream differencing schemes for problems involving fluid flowComput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng. 9 153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richtmyer, R. D.Morton, K. W. 1967 Difference Methods for Initial-Value ProblemsNew YorkWileyInterscience PublishersGoogle Scholar
Roe, P. L. 1981 Approximate Riemann solvers, parameter vectors and difference schemesJ. Comp. Phys. 43 357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roe, P. L. 1984
Roe, P. L. 1985 Upwind schemes using various formulations of the Euler equationsAngrand, F.Numerical Methods for the Euler Equations of Fluid DynamicsPhiladelphia, PASIAM PublicationsGoogle Scholar
Rudy, D. H.Strickwerda, J. C. 1980 A non-reflecting outflow boundary condition for subsonic Navier-Stokes calculationsJ. Comp. Phys. 36 55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schunk, R. G.Heard, G. W.Chung, T. J. 1999
Shu, C. W.Osher, S. 1988 Efficient implementation of essentially non-oscillatory shock-capturing schemesJ. Comp. Phys. 77 439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shu, C. W.Osher, S. 1989 Efficient implementation of essentially non-oscillatory shock-capturing schemes, IIJ. Comp. Phys. 83 32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suresh, A.Jorgenson, P. C. E. 1995
Steger, J. L.Warming, R. F. 1981 Flux vector splitting of the inviscid gas-dynamic equations with applications to finite difference methodsJ. Comp. Phys. 40 263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanescu, D.Habashi, G. 1998 Essentially nonoscillatory Euler solutions on unstructured meshes using extrapolationAIAA J. 36 1413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strikwerda, J. C. 1976
Strikwerda, J. C. 1977 Initial boundary value problems for incompletely parabolic systemsComm. Pure Appl. Math. 30 797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweby, P. K. 1984 High resolution schemes using flux limiters for hyperbolic conservation lawsSIAM J. Num. Anal. 21 995CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tannehill, J. C.Hoist, T. L.Rakich, J. V. 1975
Van Leer, B 1973
Van Leer, B 1974 Towards the ultimate conservative difference scheme. II. Monotonicity and conservation combined in a second order schemeJ. Comp. Phys. 14 361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Leer, B[1979]. Towards the ultimate conservative difference scheme. V. A second order sequel to Godunovs methodJ. Comp. Phys. 32 101CrossRef
Van Leer, B 1982
Woodward, P. R.Colella, P. 1984 The numerical simulation of two-dimensional fluid flow with strong shocksJ. Comp. Phys. 54 115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yanenko, N. N. 1979 The Method of Fractional StepsBunch, J. R.Rose, D. J.New YorkAcademic PressGoogle Scholar
Yee, H. C. 1985
Yee, H. C. 1986 Linearized form of implicit TVD schemes for multidimensional Euler and Navier-Stokes equationsComp. Math. Appl. 12A 413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yee, H. C.Beam, R. M.Warming, R. F. 1982 Boundary approximation for implicit schemes for one-dimensional inviscid equations of gas dynamicsAIAA J. 20 1203Google Scholar
Zalesak, S. T. 1979 Fully multidimensional flux corrected transport algorithm for fluidsJ. Comp. Phys. 31 335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhong, X. 1994 Application of essentially nonoscillatory schemes to unsteady hypersonic shock-shock interference heating problemsAIAA J. 32 1606CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×