|
[Sponsors] |
Explicit vs Implicit method in free surface flow |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
November 16, 2006, 09:38 |
Explicit vs Implicit method in free surface flow
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi everyone,
What is the benefit of using explicit method in solving momentum equations in free surface flows, most of current softwares solve momentum equations explicitely and they have to use stability conditions in order to set time increment in the range that solution has stability. My question is that why noone (based on my knowledge) has used implicit method (for example SIMPLE algorithm or ...) to solve momentum equations which always is stable and there is no need to use any stability conditions! I appreciate to receive your idea and comments about this matter. Thanks Farhad |
|
November 16, 2006, 10:00 |
Re: Explicit vs Implicit method in free surface fl
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
It's not just a question of stability. You need to ask (1) what time step do I require to resolve the surface gravity waves and (2) what is the effect of the timestepping procedure upon the phase speed and group velocity of the waves.
The solution using implicit methods may work for arbitrary large timesteps but that doesn't mean the solution is accurate. It's also possible that even when the timestepping is sufficiently small (this also goes for explicit methods) that the dispersion relation for the numerical waves may be adversely effected by the time discretization. There's some discussion of this, for the shallow water wave equations, in Wesseling's book "Principles of computational fluid dynamics". |
|
November 16, 2006, 10:14 |
Re: Explicit vs Implicit method in free surface fl
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
"My question is that why noone (based on my knowledge) has used implicit method..."
Fluent has, and it has the drawbacks pointed out by Tom. |
|
November 16, 2006, 11:31 |
Re: Explicit vs Implicit method in free surface fl
|
#4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
adding to previous comments,
when u need free surface flow with sharp interface, the stability of interface tracking method (such as VOF, Level set, MAC, ...) usually impose time step limitation (in fact CFL condition). so explict treatment of NS is sufficient. Recently some time step free method for interface tracking were presented such as particle level set, CIP, ..., but their accuracy (physically correctness) is decreased with using large time step. |
|
November 16, 2006, 11:42 |
Re: Explicit vs Implicit method in free surface fl
|
#5 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Thank you all for your helpful comments, I got the point right now.
Farhad |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Free surface flow settubg boundary conditions and plotting velocity profiles | prashanthreddyh | FLUENT | 2 | October 21, 2015 10:58 |
CFX gravity driven free surface flow tutorial | mechovator | CFX | 37 | July 27, 2009 11:28 |
Modeling of free surface flow | sam | FLUENT | 2 | October 29, 2003 11:39 |
CFX 4.4 New free surface option | Viatcheslav Anissimov | CFX | 0 | April 3, 2002 07:27 |
Numerical method for free surface flow? | Oleg Melnik | Main CFD Forum | 4 | January 22, 1999 06:28 |