|
[Sponsors] |
January 9, 2007, 12:01 |
WENO Scheme Defining Boundary Stencil
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
My research area requires me to implement a 5th order explicit Weighted Essentially Non-Oscillating scheme for a simple Linear Advection equation (du/dt+du/dx=0) . Since its a 5th order scheme, each node is dependent on 5 neighboring stencils. I have questions on how does one address the problem of defining boundary stencils without losing the order of accuracy or defining them at least using 4th order accuracy.
|
|
January 9, 2007, 19:43 |
Re: WENO Scheme Defining Boundary Stencil
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I simply created ghost cells outside the domain since I knew what the distribution of the scalar was outside the domain. Otherwise use the available stencils and go to 4th order. I would be very surprised if the difference between 4th and 5th WENO was worth considering.
|
|
January 10, 2007, 05:20 |
Re: WENO Scheme Defining Boundary Stencil
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi rampy,
I also used ghost cell approach. For a 5th order reconstruction it means 3 ghost cells at each end. It is not a problem for rectangular domain. However, for a highly skewed curvilinear domain it is becoming a problem. For example, a flow around airfoil cross section, which I implemented for the thesis, especially for the leading edge and the trailing edge (if you are using a conforming boundary implementation, imagine the beginning of a C-cut boundary, where all three cell layers has to be aligned with the 3 cell layer of the other part). Or a multiblock grid, you have to make conforming meshes for these 3 interacting cell layers. In order to overcome these difficulties, order reduction is a choice, like reducing the order to 3rd order then to MUSCL. But you say you are using advection equation, I guess you are on a simple rectangular domain or it is a 1D implementation, so you don't need to avoid to use 3 ghost cells, there is no need for an order reduction in that case. |
|
January 15, 2007, 01:08 |
Re: WENO Scheme Defining Boundary Stencil
|
#4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Thanks a lot for the replies.. It clears some of my fundamental concepts..!!!
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[Gmsh] Import problem | ARC | OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion | 0 | February 27, 2010 11:56 |
RPM in Wind Turbine | Pankaj | CFX | 9 | November 23, 2009 05:05 |
[Urgent] Need help for defining boundary conditions | Jingwei | FLUENT | 2 | March 19, 2009 22:01 |
[Commercial meshers] Trimmed cell and embedded refinement mesh conversion issues | michele | OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion | 2 | July 15, 2005 05:15 |
Mac Cormack scheme and use of PML boundary conditi | vineet kshirsagar | Main CFD Forum | 1 | January 13, 2002 02:46 |