Dear all, I have the following questions about CE/SEmethod (Space-Time Conservation Element Solution Element Method): 1. How can this second order scheme produce results which can only be achieved by 4th-6th order ordinary scheme? 2. Is it a must to use staggered mesh with CE/SE? 3. Why is not CE/SE as popular as the traditional FVM? 4. What is the difficulty in using multi-grid with CE/SE? Any of your reply will be much appreciated. Chris

I'm not an expert in the method.I have seen some papers on the method in 4th computational aeroacoustic worksop organized by NASA

Hi Chris,

I'm doing my PhD using CE/SE scheme and trying to apply for CAA problems. I am using the modified scheme and so far I found that most of my results are as good as the 4th and 6th order schemes in terms of high resolution and low dissipation. In addition, you don't need to worry about the boundary conditions which is a trouble for higher-order schemes and without any special treatment you can manage the capture shock waves which needs also special attention if you are using higher-order scheme and lastly parallelization is really cheaper with respect to higher-order scheme in terms of communication time. I'm not trying to say CE/SE scheme is superior to the higher-order ones but I am really happy to use it.

Answers to your questions;

1) The nature of the scheme is introducing very less dissipation (that's reason why people are using higher-order schemes) and it can be controled.

2) There are some modified versions of the scheme which are using overlapped control volumes where you do not need any staggered mesh. However, I am not fully convinced this one is satisfying the conservation near the boundary.

3) I think it is a bit difficult to understand the discretization especially the idea of coupling temporal discretization with the spatial ones but after all I'm sure that you will find that it is even easier than the conventional finite volume schemes.

4) If you want to use a conventional multi-grid with CE/SE due to the staggering you may have some difficulties but I'm using flux-based multigrid method it is much more easier than the conventional one.

I have got plenty of papers and reports about this method. If you want I can send some of them.

Hope this helps,

Orhan

[tm.mirzaie]

Hi Dear Mr.Orhan
I'm interesting to this method and want to do my thesis with it. But i have some question:
1- In "time conservative finite volume method" topics, we see that we can use LES method for turbulence modeling with this solver. But in other paper mentioned that it doesn't any turbulence modeling method. which quote is true? If it solve problem without averaging?
2- In one paper i see that mentioned this method can be used to flow with mach number many less than 1 up to 10. unless this method isn't for hyperbolic PDE?
3- With good advantages of this method, why from 1995 to now, we don't see many paper with it, is there any problem or difficulty?

Best regadrds
Email: tm.mirzaie@gmail.com

M.Mirzaie