Flux vector splitting scheme

Praveen. C
praveen@math.tifrbng.res.in

Tata Institute of Fundamental Research

Center for Applicable Mathematics
Bangalore 560065
http://math.tifrbng.res.in/~praveen

March 18, 2013

1 / 13
Flux Vector Splitting schemes
Split flux F : F (U ) = F + (U ) + F (U )

F + = due to waves moving to right, positive speed

F = due to waves moving to left, negative speed

F + F
has positive eigenvalues, has negative eigenvalues
U U
Numerical flux function

Fi+1/2 = F (Ui , Ui+1 ) = F + (Ui ) + F (Ui+1 )

It is consistent: if Ui = Ui+1 = U

Fi+ 1 = F (U, U ) = F + (U ) + F (U ) = F (U )
2

2 / 13
Steger-Warming scheme
Euler flux satisfy the homogeneity property
F
F (U ) = A(U )U, A(U ) =
U
Split jacobians using eigenvalue splitting

A(U ) = A+ (U ) + A (U ), A (U ) = R(U ) (U )R1 (U )

Flux splitting based on eigenvalues

F (U ) = F + (U ) + F (U ), F (U ) = A (U )U
Steger-Warming flux

Fi+1/2 = F + (Ui ) + F (Ui+1 ) = A+ (Ui )Ui + A (Ui+1 )Ui+1

Vijayasundaram flux
1
Fi+1/2 = A+ (Ui+ 1 )Ui + A (Ui+ 1 )Ui+1 , Ui+ 1 = (Ui + Ui+1 )
2 2 2 2
3 / 13
Steger-Warming Scheme
Conserved vector U in terms of the eigenvectors of A
1
U = 1 r1 + 2 r2 + 3 r3 , 1 = 3 = , 2 =
2
or
U = R, = [1 , 2 , 3 ]>
Split fluxes given by
F = A U = R R1 (R) = 1
1 r1 + 2 2 r2 + 3 3 r3
Upwind property: if [1, 5/3]
F + F
0, 0
U U
Adds excessive numerical dissipation: poor resolution of contact waves
F not differentiable at sonic and stagnation points; Laney
recommends smoothing the eigenvalues
 
1
q
2 2
i = i i + , i = 1, 2, 3
2
4 / 13
van Leer splitting
Mach number: M = ua
If M > 1: all eigenvalues are positive

u a > 0, u > 0, u+a>0

and if M < 1, all eigenvalues are negative
Euler flux: polynomials in M
aM

a2
F =

(M 2 + 1)

a3 M 21 M 2 + 11

Each component flux of the form

F = G(, a)H(M )
Split polynomial H(M ) such that we have upwinding and smoothness
1 H(M ) = H + (M ) + H (M )
2 H + (M ) = 0 for M 1 and H + (M ) = H(M ) for M 1.
d d d
3 dM H + (1) = 0, dM H + (1) = dM H(1).
5 / 13
van Leer: Mass flux

H(M ) = M = M + (M ) + M (M )

To satisfy all conditions, M must be quadratic polynomial in M

0
M 1
+ M +1 2


M = 1 < M < 1
2

M M 1


M
M 1

2
M = 2M 1
1 < M < 1

0 M 1

6 / 13
van Leer: momentum flux

Split M 2 + 1 using cubic polynomials in M

(M 2 + 1) = (M 2 + 1)+ + (M 2 + 1)

0
M 1
2 + M +1 2


(M + 1) = 2 [( 1)M + 2] 1 < M < +1

2
M + 1 M 1

2 M 1
M + 1


2 M 1 2
(M + 1) = 2 [( 1)M 2] 1 < M < +1

0 M 1

7 / 13
van Leer: Energy flux

Split energy flux using quartic polynomials in M

0

M 1
2F +
F3 = [(1)u+2a]
+
2(+1)(1)
1
1 < M < 1


F M >1
3

F3

M 1
[(1)u2a]2 F1
F3 = 1 < M < 1
2(+1)(1)

0 M >1

8 / 13
van Leer flux

Final flux formulae

1
1 (1)u2a
F = a(M 1)2
4

[(1)u2a]2
2(+1)(1)

Has upwind property of split flux jacobians

F + F
0, 0
U U
Adds excessive dissipation for contact discontinuity

9 / 13
Liou and Steffen (1993)
Separate flux into convective and pressure parts

u u 0 a 0
F = p + u2 = u2 + p = M ua + p = M Fc + Fp
Hu Hu 0 Ha 0

Flux splitting
0
F = M Fc + Fp , Fp = p
0
M is same as in van Leer scheme. Pressure p = p+ + p

0
M 1 1
M 1
p+ = p 1
(1 + M) 1 < M < 1 , p = p 1
(1 M) 1 < M < 1
2 2
1 M 1 0 M 1

Remark: See the papers on AUSM family of schemes.

10 / 13
Zha-Bilgen flux vector splitting (1993)

u u 0 0
F = p + u
2 2
= u + p = u u + p

(E + p)u Eu pu E pu
Flux vector splitting

0
1
F = u U + p , u = (u |u|)
2
(pu)

p is same as in Liou-Steffen scheme.

0
M 1 u
M 1
(pu)+ = p 1
(u + a) 1 < M < 1 , (pu) = p 1
(u a) 1 < M < 1
2 2
u M 1 0 M 1

11 / 13
284 8. Flux Vector Splitting Methods

1.6 7

- 0
0 0.5 1 0 05 1
Position Position

2
B
0.5
a

I
0 1.8 1
0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1
Position Position

Fig. 8.3. Steger and Warming FVS scheme applied t o Test 1, with 20 = 0.3.
Numerical (symbol) and exact (line) solutions are compared a t time 0.2 units

12 / 13
Fig. 8.3. Steger and Warming FVS scheme applied t o Test 1, with 20 = 0.3.
Numerical (symbol) and exact (line) solutions are compared at time 0.2 units

x
I

0
2 05
Y

0
0
0 05 1 0 05 1
Positlon Position

2 F
05
a

0 18
0 os I 0 05 I
Positlon Position

Fig. 8.4. Van Leer FVS scheme applied to Test 1, with 20 = 0.3. Numerical
(symbol) and exact (line) solutions are compared at time 0.2 units

13 / 13
 8.5 Numerical Results 285

08i?
1.6

0
0
0 0.5 1 0 0.5 i
Position Position

0
0 0.5
Position
1
1.8 -
0 0.5
Position
1

Fig. 8 .5 . Liou and Steffen scheme applied to Test 1, with 20 = 0.3. Numerical
(symbol) and exact (line) solutions are compared at time 0.2 units

14 / 13