This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

# 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

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

p.p. 11 Subtracting equations (6) from these. and P ′ . . 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. we now examine the discretized continuity equation. V ﬁeld. Since we want the corrected velocities to satisfy continuity. we now attempt to solve for the corrections U ′ . The more complicated term involving the summation of velocity corrections over neighbouring nodes is put into the second part of the correction. By substituting these expressions into the discretized momentum and continuity equations. 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) ′ . satisfy the continuity equation. V ′ . However. 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. these will not. ′ and V ′ . 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 ′ ) As a ﬁrst approximation. 10 . are then obtained from The corresponding corrections to the velocities. we now split the velocity and pressure corrections into two parts: ′ + U ′ etc. in general. using methods This set of linear equations for the pressure correction P1 considered in earlier lectures. V ′ . we now assume that the second part of the corrections (U2 2 2 may be neglected.p. 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) ′ . V ′. 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. 9 . 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.Starting off with some initial values for the pressure ﬁeld. V ′ and P ′ Note that the choice of this split ensures a very simple linkage between U1 1 1 values. U1 1 equations (11). To simplify the analysis. 12 .p. Now suppose we add corrections U ′ . . the above equations can be solved to obtain U and V .

V 7. Calculate velocity corrections U1 1 These expressions are then substituted into the discretized continuity equation. 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) . ′ . Calculate coefﬁcients and source terms for the pressure correction equation (14) ′ 4. in an attempt to account for the neglected ′ . a second corrector stage is now added. V ′ and P ′ in the ﬁrst stage. In the PISO scheme. V ′ 5. and U1 1 1 However.Since the SIMPLE scheme is typically embedded within an iterative ﬂow solver. the same decomposition of corrections to the velocity and pressure is ′ . between steps 6 and 7 of the SIMPLE algorithm. 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. the equation for P2 a second correction to the pressure. Solve for the pressure corrections P1 ′. In the PISO scheme. Start with initial values 2. V ′ and P ′ . . Update P . 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.p. Solve momentum equations to get U . designed to improve convergence speeds. and may sometimes lead to better convergence. is the PISO (Pressure Implicit solution by Split Operator method) scheme proposed by Issa (1982).p. therefore. One such variant. 14 . the whole algorithm is: 1. U . V ′ and P ′ are computed as described earlier. 13 . the source ′ is solved and the result used as terms Su of equation (19) are calculated. which is very similar in structure. V 3.p. 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. made as in the SIMPLE scheme. 15 The PISO Scheme One problem with the SIMPLE scheme as described is that it can be rather slow to converge.