School of Mechanical Aerospace and Civil Engineering

The equations we need to solve, are then
∂ (ρU V ) ∂P ∂ ∂ (ρU U ) + =− + ∂x ∂y ∂x ∂x „ „ µ ∂U ∂x ∂V ∂x « « + ∂ ∂y ∂ ∂y „ µ ∂U ∂y ∂V ∂y « « + Su
(1a)

Pressure-Velocity Coupling
T. J. Craft George Begg Building, C41
Contents: Introduction to CFD Numerical solution of equations Finite difference methods Finite volume methods Pressure-velocity coupling Solving sets of linear equations Unsteady problems Turbulence and other physical modelling Body-fitted coordinate systems Reading: J. Ferziger, M. Peric, Computational Methods for Fluid Dynamics H.K. Versteeg, W. Malalasekara, An Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics: The Finite Volume Method S.V. Patankar, Numerical Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow Notes: http://cfd.mace.manchester.ac.uk/tmcfd - People - T. Craft - Online Teaching Material

∂ (ρU V ) ∂ (ρV V ) ∂P ∂ + =− + ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x ∂ (ρV ) ∂ (ρU ) + =0 ∂x ∂y

µ

+

µ

+ Sv

(1b)

(1c)

where Su and Sv represent any other source terms that may be present (from buoyancy, rotation, turbulent stresses, etc). Before considering how to obtain the pressure field, we first examine alternative storage arrangements that can be used for the discretized flow variables, since these have a bearing on how source terms are represented, and thus on how the schemes to be described may be implemented.

- p. 3

Overview
Up to now, we have mainly considered discretization schemes, and how they are used for a single equation. In practical flow solvers, we have to solve a set of coupled pde’s. In 3-D, this involves determining U , V , W and P , as well as any additional quantities (temperature, enthalpy, turbulence energy, etc) that may be required in the problem. We have already examined how to discretize the momentum equations and solve them to obtain U , V and W . As explained, this can be done in an iterative fashion, employing under-relaxation if necessary, to account for the coupling between the equations. However, we do not have a transport equation for the pressure P . Instead, the 4th equation we have is the continuity equation – which does not even contain the pressure. In this lecture we are thus going to consider a strategy for handling the coupling between the velocity and pressure fields in a flow computation. For now, we restrict attention to 2-D flow, consider a steady-state flow, and work within a finite volume framework on a simple rectangular mesh. This is sufficient to demonstrate how schemes for coupling the pressure and velocity can be developed, and the same methods can readily be extended to 3-D and more complex problems.
- p. 2

Discretization
The U momentum equation can be integrated over the control volume shown below, resulting in a discretized equation of the form
au p Up = X au i Ui + Sup + Su
(2)

where Sup are the source terms arising from integrating the pressure gradient over the cell, and Su represents any other source terms. One convenient arrangement for storing the discretized variables is to use a single set of control volumes, so all variables are stored at the same locations (colocated). This has the advantage that all geometrical data only needs to be stored once. However, as outlined below, this arrangement does also have some disadvantages.
W w P N

e

E

S

If P is stored at the same position as U , we need to interpolate between PP and PE to get Pe , the pressure at the east face of the cell (and similarly for the west face). The source term Sup can then be approximated as
Sup = (P w − P e ) (∆x∆y ) ∆x
(3)
- p. 4

the continuity equation does not explicitly contain P . P i-2 i-1 i i+1 i+2 Methods are available to overcome the above problem. so there is a relatively weak linkage between the velocity and local pressure field (as PP is not used).On a uniform grid. However. This can lead to chequerboarding: a pressure field that oscillates from node to node on the grid can still appear as uniform to the discretized momentum equation. 7 S A much stronger coupling between the velocity and pressure field nodal values is obtained by using a staggered grid. At each iteration a ‘correction’ to the pressure distribution is calculated. The momentum equations provide us with a set of discretized equations which can be solved for U and V . designed to drive the local velocity field towards one that satisfies both momentum and continuity equations. The disadvantage of this is that there are separate control volumes for U .5(PW − PE ). Dv = ∆x/an . if we know the pressure field. for example. Ue denotes a nodal value of the U velocity. V and P . The pressure gradient term in the equation for Ue is now simply Sup = (P P − P E ) (∆x∆y ) ∆x (4) Note that. and Su and Sv any other source terms. 6 Vn = (6b) v where Du = ∆y/au e . we thus work within a staggered grid arrangement. After dividing through by the diagonal coefficient. for now we consider an N alternative arrangement that results in a stronger linkage between adjacent pressure and velocity values. PW Uw The SIMPLE Scheme PN Vn PP Vs PS Ue PE A widely-used scheme for coupling the pressure and velocity is the SIMPLE (Semi Implicit Method for Pressure Linked Equations) scheme of Patankar (1980). For now. Instead.p. this interpolation gives Pw − Pe = 0. The summation on the right hand sides represents the contributions from the surrounding nodal values. w P e E . However. In this arrangement the velocity components are stored at the centres of the faces of the pressure control volume. whilst PP could be significantly higher or lower). Sup and Svp are the pressure-related source terms. we consider how an iterative procedure can be used to adjust the pressure field in order to ensure that the resulting velocity field does satisfy continuity. The discretized momentum equations for Ue and Vn are written as: au e Ue = X au i Ui + Sup + Su av n Vn = X av i Vi + Svp + Sv (5) Such overheads become particularly cumbersome in non-orthogonal and 3-D grid arrangements. 5 . and Vn a nodal value of V . which is outlined in the following. Such schemes are generally referred to as Pressure Correction schemes. so more geometrical information has to be stored. 8 . . the discretized momentum equations can be written in the form Ue = X au Ui i + Du (PP − PE ) + Su au e X av Vi i + Dv (PP − PN ) + Sv av n (6a) so there is a direct coupling between the velocity and the pressure values at adjacent nodes.p. although we have 3 equations for U . In the CFD II course we do consider how to handle the case when all quantities are stored at the same location. Pressure Correction Schemes The problem in obtaining the pressure field arises because.p. (PE and PW can be the same value. we cannot use the continuity equation directly to obtain P .p. . V and P . because of the staggered grid.

are then obtained from The corresponding corrections to the velocities. Now suppose we add corrections U ′ . P ′ to the velocities and pressure so that the corrected variables U∗ = U + U′ V∗ =V +V′ P∗ = P + P′ (7) In the SIMPLE scheme. 10 . 11 Subtracting equations (6) from these. Substituting equations (11) into the discretized continuity equation then results in ′ Vn = (9b) ˆ ˜ ′ ′ ′ ′ ∆y [ρDu ]e (PP 1 − PE 1 ) − [ρDu ]w (PW 1 − PP 1 ) which provides relations between the corrections to the pressure and velocity that ensure the momentum equations are still satisfied. V field. and the pressure and velocities are thus all updated. . gives ′ = Ue X au U ′ ′ ′ i i + Du (PP − PE ) au e X av V ′ ′ ′ i i + Dv (PP − PN ) av n (9a) ′ . By substituting these expressions into the discretized momentum and continuity equations. Substituting these new values into the discretized momentum equations gives: X au ′ ′ ′ ′ i )= (Ui + Ui ) + Du (PP − PE ) + Du (PP − PE ) + Su (Ue + Ue au e X av ′ ′ ′ i (Vn + Vn )= (Vi + Vi′ ) + Dv (PP − PN ) + Dv (PP − PN ) + Sv av n (8a) ′ . P ′ ) As a first approximation. The more complicated term involving the summation of velocity corrections over neighbouring nodes is put into the second part of the correction.p. Then we can write U ′ = U1 2 ′ ′ Ue 1 + Ue2 ˜ ˆ ′ ′ ′ ′ + ∆x [ρDv ]n (PP 1 − PN 1 ) − [ρDv ]s (PS 1 − PP 1 ) = −Sm (14) The above equation can then simply be written in the form ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ a p PP 1 = a e P E 1 + a w P W 1 + a n P N 1 + a s P S 1 + Su (15) where ae = ∆y [ρDu ]e aw = ∆y [ρDu ]w an = ∆x[ρDv ]n S u = − Sm as = ∆x[ρDv ]s X au U ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ i i = + Du (PP 1 − PE 1 ) + Du (PP 2 − PE 2 ) au e X av V ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ i i + Dv (PP 1 − PN 1 ) + Dv (PP 2 − PN 2 ) av n (10a) ap = ae + aw + an + as (10b) ′ ′ Vn 1 + Vn2 = ′ can be solved. V ′ . U1 1 equations (11). V ′ . 12 . To simplify the analysis. we now examine the discretized continuity equation.Starting off with some initial values for the pressure field. Integrating the continuity equation over the pressure control volume leads to ∗ ∗ ∗ − ρw Uw )∆y + (ρn Vn − ρs Vs∗ )∆x = 0 (ρe Ue (12) or ′ ′ ′ − ρw Uw )∆y + (ρn Vn − ρs Vs′ )∆x = −Sm (ρe Ue (8b) (13) where Sm = (ρe Ue − ρw Uw )∆y + (ρn Vn − ρs Vs )∆x is simply the mass imbalance arising from the original U .p. satisfy the continuity equation. ′ and V ′ . However. . and P ′ . these will not.p. V ′ and P ′ Note that the choice of this split ensures a very simple linkage between U1 1 1 values. we now assume that the second part of the corrections (U2 2 2 may be neglected. using methods This set of linear equations for the pressure correction P1 considered in earlier lectures. Since we want the corrected velocities to satisfy continuity. V ′. 9 . we now attempt to solve for the corrections U ′ .p. the two parts of the corrections are defined such that ′ ′ ′ Ue 1 = Du (PP 1 − PE 1 ) ′ Ue 2 = X au U ′ ′ ′ i i + Du (PP 2 − PE 2 ) au e (11a) ′ ′ ′ Vn 1 = Dv (PP 1 − PN 1 ) ′ Vn 2 = X av V ′ ′ ′ i i + Dv (PP 2 − PN 2 ) av i (11b) satisfy both the momentum and continuity equations. in general. the above equations can be solved to obtain U and V . we now split the velocity and pressure corrections into two parts: ′ + U ′ etc.

which now becomes ′ ′ ′ ′ (17) (ρe Ue 2 − ρw Uw2 )∆y + (ρn Vn2 − ρs Vs2 )∆x = 0 We thus get ˆ ˜ ′ ′ ′ ′ ∆y [ρDu ]e (PP 2 − PE 2 ) − [ρDu ]w (PW 2 − PP 2 ) ˆ ˜ ′ ′ ′ ′ + ∆x [ρDv ]n (PP 2 − PN 2 ) − [ρDv ]s (PS 2 − PP 2 ) = " # # " X au U ′ X au U ′ i i1 i i1 − ∆ y ρ ∆y ρ au au p p w e " # " # X av V ′ X av V ′ i i1 i i1 + ∆x ρ − ∆ x ρ av av p p n (18) 6. Repeat from step 2 until solution has converged s This can again be written in the generic form ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ a p PP 2 = a e P E 2 + a w P W 2 + a n P N 2 + a s P S 2 + Su (19) ′ correction. Calculate coefficients and source terms for the pressure correction equation (14) ′ 4. Update P . Solve for the pressure corrections P1 ′. the equation for P2 a second correction to the pressure. . the same decomposition of corrections to the velocity and pressure is ′ . between steps 6 and 7 of the SIMPLE algorithm. 15 The PISO Scheme One problem with the SIMPLE scheme as described is that it can be rather slow to converge. designed to improve convergence speeds. V ′ and P ′ are computed as described earlier. and may sometimes lead to better convergence. and U1 1 1 However. V 7. which is very similar in structure. Solve momentum equations to get U . is the PISO (Pressure Implicit solution by Split Operator method) scheme proposed by Issa (1982). the source ′ is solved and the result used as terms Su of equation (19) are calculated. Calculate velocity corrections U1 1 These expressions are then substituted into the discretized continuity equation.p. In the PISO scheme. V 3. 13 . made as in the SIMPLE scheme. a second corrector stage is now added.p. Start with initial values 2.p. In the PISO scheme. U .Since the SIMPLE scheme is typically embedded within an iterative flow solver. therefore. One reason for this is the neglect of the corrections U2 2 2 There are a number of variants on the SIMPLE scheme. U2 2 2 In this second corrector stage the second parts of equations (11) are approximated by ′ Ue 2 = X au U ′ ′ ′ i i1 + Du (PP 2 − PE 2 ) au e X av V ′ ′ ′ i i1 + Dv (PP 2 − PN 2 ) av i (16a) ′ Vn 2 = (16b) . V ′ 5. V ′ and P ′ in the first stage. V ′ and P ′ . 14 . One such variant. the whole algorithm is: 1. and the where the ai coefficients are the same as those in the equation for the P1 source term Su is now given by the right hand side of equation (18) above. in an attempt to account for the neglected ′ . ′ .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful