[immortality]

hi
I know analytical solutions are there for inviscid one dimensional laminar and constant properties problems of shock tube.
But i want to validate and examine which compressible solver(sonicFoam,rhoCentralFoam or rhoPimpleFoam(is there any proper other one?))
Is better in capturing viscous effects and... In a near to real shock tube problem.
What suggestions are there how to do that?

[immortality]

Hi
I have obtained new results and want to know the site users opinions.
I set a shock tube case with on left(p=932190,T=1248) on right(p=303975,T=440)
with analytical calculations of shock tube relations I obtained:
-----------------------------------
Analytical:

p2=p3=600048.0756
U=216.00739146
T3=1100.404069
T2=539.232544
rho3=1.899066462
rho2=3.875397513
-----------------------------------
I tested various scenarios and at last obtained these results for different solvers:
------------------------
rhoCentralFoam:

p=602505
U=224.899
T3=1132.55
T2=516.507
rho3=1.85297
rho2=4.06352

-----------------------
rhoPimpleFoam:

p=599864
U=215.897
T3=1099.83
T2=539.906
rho3=1.89972
rho2=3.8694

-----------------------
and sonicFoam:

p=598650
U=216.503
T3=1099.53
T2=533.801
rho3=1.896148
rho2=3.905709 (rho2 and rho3 calculated manually by perfect gas relation)

all values obtained in time=5e-5 s and in (.14,.02,0) location by drawing values on a line in paraview.cases are 1D inviscid.
now the question is that why rhoCentralFoam that is well-known to be appropriate in capturing discontinuties like shock wave has act somewhat off in comparison to others.
and in my experience rhoPimpleFoam has a low speed in run in comparison with rhoCentralFoam.
It appreciated all the opinions.
thanks.