scholarly journals Splitting methods for low Mach number Euler and Navier-Stokes equations

1989 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saul Abarbanel ◽  
Pravir Duth ◽  
David Gottlieb
Author(s):  
David Maltese ◽  
Antonín Novotný

Abstract We investigate the error between any discrete solution of the implicit marker-and-cell (MAC) numerical scheme for compressible Navier–Stokes equations in the low Mach number regime and an exact strong solution of the incompressible Navier–Stokes equations. The main tool is the relative energy method suggested on the continuous level in Feireisl et al. (2012, Relative entropies, suitable weak solutions, and weak–strong uniqueness for the compressible Navier–Stokes system. J. Math. Fluid Mech., 14, 717–730). Our approach highlights the fact that numerical and mathematical analyses are not two separate fields of mathematics. The result is achieved essentially by exploiting in detail the synergy of analytical and numerical methods. We get an unconditional error estimate in terms of explicitly determined positive powers of the space–time discretization parameters and Mach number in the case of well-prepared initial data and in terms of the boundedness of the error if the initial data are ill prepared. The multiplicative constant in the error estimate depends on a suitable norm of the strong solution but it is independent of the numerical solution itself (and of course, on the discretization parameters and the Mach number). This is the first proof that the MAC scheme is unconditionally and uniformly asymptotically stable in the low Mach number regime.


2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (6) ◽  
pp. 6105-6139
Author(s):  
Paolo Antonelli ◽  
Lars Eric Hientzsch ◽  
Pierangelo Marcati

Author(s):  
Hyungro Lee ◽  
Einkeun Kwak ◽  
Seungsoo Lee

In this study, two commonly used numerical methods for the analysis of incompressible flows (or low Mach number flows), Chorins’ artificial compressibility method and Wiess and Smith’s preconditioning method are compared. Also, the convergence characteristics of two methods are numerically investigated for two-dimensional laminar and turbulent flows. Although the two methods have similar governing equations, the eigensystems and other details are very different. The eigensystems of the artificial compressibility method and the preconditioning method are analytically examined. An artificial compressibility code that solves the incompressible RANS (Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes) equations is newly developed for the study. An artificial compressibility code and a well-verified existing low Mach number code uses Roe’s approximate Riemann solver in conjunction with a cell centered finite volume method. Using MUSCL extrapolation with nonlinear limiters, 2nd order spatial accuracy is achieved while maintaining TVD (total variation diminishing) property. AF-ADI (approximate factorization-alternate direction implicit) method is used to get the steady solution for both codes. Menter’s k–ω SST turbulence model is used for the analysis of turbulent flows. Navier-Stokes equations and the turbulence model equations are solved in a loosely coupled manner.


2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 150-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduard Feireisl ◽  
Mária Lukáčová-Medviďová ◽  
Šárka Nečasová ◽  
Antonín Novotný ◽  
Bangwei She

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document