|
[Sponsors] |
September 25, 2007, 19:45 |
Upwind scheme
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi there,
I know that upwind scheme should only be used for the initial guess but not for the final results. Can we believe on results from upwind upto an extent, to do some analysis if our model physics is working fine ? Or these results are not good for any kind of analysis ? Regards, KM. |
|
September 26, 2007, 00:21 |
Re: Upwind scheme
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi,
Problem dependant, so cannot give a general answer. Do a run using both and compare for your application. Glenn Horrocks |
|
September 26, 2007, 12:10 |
Re: Upwind scheme
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi KM,
All CFD analysis includes some degree of error. Running with a first order upwind advection scheme simply means that the error is going to be larger for a given grid resolution and therefore will require a much finer mesh to minimize this error. An easy way to estimate the magnitude of this error is to compare results using upwind to High Resolution or a Specified Blend Factor. You'll find that the difference is largest on a coarse mesh and is reduced as you refine the mesh. -CycLone |
|
September 27, 2007, 15:41 |
Re: Upwind scheme
|
#4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Thanks a ton ! It helps.
Regards, Kushagra. |
|
September 27, 2007, 15:41 |
Thanks: Upwind scheme
|
#5 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Thanks a ton ! It helps.
Regards, Kushagra. |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
2nd order upwind vs 2nd order upwind!!! | Far | Main CFD Forum | 7 | March 14, 2013 13:29 |
Use of upwind scheme for interpolation of u/v | quarkz | Main CFD Forum | 6 | August 30, 2011 05:10 |
Second order upwind is not UPwind!!! | Far | CFX | 9 | May 31, 2011 09:21 |
2nd order upwind scheme (Fluent and CFX) | Far | FLUENT | 0 | May 22, 2011 02:50 |
Drag comparison upwind vs. scheme | Luk_Fiz | CFX | 3 | April 27, 2009 22:42 |