'v on KARMAN INSTITUTE ..' .

FOR FL UID DYNAMICS

IJ .J 1991

Technical Note 172

K U\l"an~'O

INVESTIGATION OF ROE's 2D WAVE

DECOMPOSITION MODELS FOR
THE EULER EQUATIONS

P. De Palma, H. Deconinck, R. Struijs

July 1990

~&~
-~O~ RHODE SAINT GENESE BELGIUM
~t7W
..... V=--
o I 1990 I 0238 I 381 VKI TN 172. JULY 1990
 von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics
Chausse de Waterloo, 72
B-1640 Rhode Saint Gense-Belgium

Technical Note 172

INVESTIGATION OF ROE's 2D WAVE

DECOMPOSITION MODELS FOR
THE EULER EQUATIONS

P. De Palma, H. Deconinck, R. Struijs

July 1990
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ........................................................................ i
Acknowledgements ................................................... ~ . . . . . . . . .. ii
List of Symbols .............................................. '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. iii

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................ 1
2. WAVE MODELS FOR THE EULER SYSTEM ................................... 3
2.1 Simple wave solution ........................................................ 3
2.2 Simple waves for Euler system ............................................... 6
2.3 Roe's simple wave models ................................................... 7
2.4 The discrete models ......................................................... 8
3. CONSERVATIVE APPROACH
4. FLUCTUATION SPLITTING SCHEMES
4.1 Concept of fluctuation ...................................................... 18
4.2 Splitting ................................................................... 19
4.3 Determination of the eoefficients ai . .... .............. . ...... . ....... . ...... 20
4.3.1 Roe monotone seheme ........................................... ..... 20
4.3.2 Low diffusion seheme ........................ ............... .......... 21
5. RESULTS AND COMMENTS
5.1 Shear flow .................................................................. 22
5.2 Oblique shock reflection .................................................... 23
5.3 Ramp flow ................................................................. 24
5.4 Nozzle flow ................................................................. 24
5.5 Extension to quadrilateral eells ............................................. 25
5.5.1 Finite volume approach .............................................. 25
5.5.2 Triangle based scheme for quadrilaterals .............................. 27
5.5.3 Diagonal approach for quadrilaterals ... .............................. 28

References .................................................................. . .. 30
Figures ......................................................................... 31
 Abstract

The subject of this work is the implementation of a new technique to solve the 2-D
Euler equations by modeling the solution with a discrete number of simple waves. The the-
ory of this decomposition was proposed by P. L. Roe in 1985 but was never put succesfully
into practice before.

The global solution is obtained by superposition of elementary solutions consisting of

plane waves. The traveling directions of these waves are not fixed in advance but depend
on the local flow gradient at each time step.

Three different wave decomposition models have been considered and implemented,
based on four acoustic waves, one entropy wave and respectively vorticity (model A), or
one shear wave propagating in the perpendicular direction to the streamlines (model B),
or one shear wave propagating in the direct ion of the pressure gradient (model C).

Different first order upwind fluctuation splitting schemes have been tested both for
triangular and quadrilateral cells.

Different test cases have been solved with the new method: shear flow, oblique shock
reflection, ramp flow, nozzIe flow; a comparison among the results obtained with the
different decomposition models and numerical schemes has been made.
 Acknowledgements

The present research was carried out as part of the Brite/Euram Contract No AERO-
0003-C, issued by the European Communities.

The first author is deeply indebted to Professor M. Napolitano, from the University of
Bari, Italy, and to Professor H. Deconinck for involving him in this Brite/Euram Contract.

11
 List of Symbols

A jacobian in the x direction

a sound speed
B jacobian in the y direct ion

en jacobian in the direction n

c sound speed
F flux in the x direct ion
G flux in the y direct ion
p pressure
r eigenvector of en
S surface of the eomputational cell
t time
T generie triangular eell
U conservative variables
x x component of veloeity
y y component of veloeity
n generic vector
a type of simple wave
a I coefficient for splitting
() acoustie wave angle
eigenvalue of en
p density

4> entropy wave angle

cp fluctuation

111
 1. INTRODUCTION

The solution of inviscid Euler equations in one dimensional space has reached a high
level of precision and sophistication. One dimensional approximate Riemann solvers, in
fact, allow the recognition of non linear phenomena such as contact discontinuities, shocks,
expansion waves and they can treat them in the proper way, e.g. using the linear recon-
struction of the discrete data.

This is relatively easy because in a one space dimension we have only two possible
directions of propagation for the signais, and an upwind technique based on the propagation
properties of the flow is quite straightforward.

For the two dimensional case, it is possible to apply one dimensional Riemann solvers
along some particular directions. In classical approaches based on an operator splitting
these directions of propagation of the signals are the normals to the boundaries of each
cello However, in this way, every link with the local physical wave properties of the flow
is lost. For example, the local change in tangential velocity through the edge of a cell is
treated as a contact discontinuity by the one dimensional Riemann solver but in the reality
it could be due to a shock not parallel to the cell boundary (Fig. 1). Recent studies ([1],
[5], [7]) have put in evidence new types of approaches for the decomposition of the Euler
equations based on trajectories, used for the upwinding, which are not grid dependent,
but directly related to the local flow gradients. In this way we solve the problem along
preferential directions which change in space and time according to the flow behaviour.

Deconinck & Hirsch [5] proposed a decomposition based on 2-D characteristic theory.
They selected four characteristic compatibility equations which lead to an optimal decou-
pling of the Euler system. These equations represent respectively an entropy wave, a shear
wave and two acoustic waves with well defined propagation speed and intensity.

In the present work a different theory, which was proposed by Roe ([1], [4]) in 1985

and never applied successfully before, has been implemented. According to this theory
the Euler system is decomposed in six wave equations whose directions of propagation
and velocities depend on local flow gradients. They represent respectively four orthogonal
acoustic waves, one entropy wave and one shear wave (different wave models have been
obtained changing the last wave).

Once a suitable model has been identified (pattern recognition step), the problem is
essentially reduc.e d to scalar advection in two space dimensions. The class of advection
schemes used in the present work has been proposed by Roe in 1987, [2].

An extensive study of these schemes (known as fluctuation splitting schemes) has been
made in [3] for unstructured grids based on triangles with unknowns stored at the vertices.
The basic idea of these schemes is to distribute the flux balance over each triangle towards
the vertices with upwind weights calculated on the base of the convection velocity of the
waves obtained by the decomposition. Extension to cell vertex quadrilateral grids is also
considered in this report.

At the moment time integration is Euler explicit and the scheme is first-order accurate
in time and spacej extension to second order accuracy will be considered in the future. The
approach proposed by Roe is conservative as will be explained in the following chapters.

The code has been tested on a certain number of test-cases (oblique shock reflection,
shear flow with different angles, ramp flow, nozzle flow)j a comparison with the results
available in the literature has been made.

2
 2. WAVE MODELS FOR THE EULER SYSTEM
2.1 Simple wave solution

Roe's decomposition is based on the concept of the "simple wave solution" of the
Euler equations. Let us consider the system in its quasi linear form

(2.1)

where U is the vector of the primitive variables (p, u, v,PY, and A and Bare the jacobian
matrices. A simple wave is by definition a solution of system (2.1) of the type:

u= U(v) (2.2)

where v is a scalar parameter. In other words, it is a solution depending only on a single

scalar pa.rameter :
v = v(x,y,t) - (2.3)

Solutions within this particular class will be used as building blocks to construct the general
solution of the system. From the definition of simple wave (eqs. 2.2 and 2.3) it results:

au = dU ov (2.4)
dv

Hence the u varies only with the variation of v which is equivalent to say that U is constant
on the lines v=cst in a 2D plane. This means that it is possible to write the gradient of U
in the following form:
vu = dU Vv (2.5)
dv
where the gradient of v ca~ also be expressed as :

Vv =1 Vv 1n (2.6)

indicating, in this way, that n is the direction of both gra.dients.

Substituting the simple wave solution in eq.(2.1), the following relation is obtained :

ovdU dU
atdv +(Anx+Bny)IVvl dv =0 (2.7)

3
which shows that ~~ is a right eigenvector of the matrix C n = Anx + Bny with corre-
sponding eigenvalue ). :
dU
-=r (2.8a)
dv
(2.8b)

Introducing the derivatives along the normal n to the curves v = est,

oU _ dU dU ov
-on = n . VU = n 1Vv 1n-
dv
=1 Vv 1-dv = -
on
r

the following expression is obtained from eq. (2.7) :

ov ov
-r+C - r =0 (2.9)
ot non
Using eq.(2.8b), eq. (2.9) can also be expressed as

ov ov
- +).- = 0 (2.10)
ot on
Equation (2.10) is the weIl known advection equation which has traveling wave solutions
of the form :
v = v(xn x + yny - ).t)

The solutions of eq. (2.10) are wavelike solutions traveling in the generic direction
n with speed),. The speed of each wave is represented by the eigenvalues of the matrix
Cn. This matrix, in a 2D space, has four eigenvalues (and corresponding eigenvectors)
describing four different types of simple waves. The type of the wave will be indicated
with "a".

For each of these waves, from the Euler system (2.1), an advection equation is obtained
with solution
v~ = v~(xnx + yn y - ).~t)

which means that we are considering the variations of the parameter v~ associated with
the simple wave of type "a" traveling in the "n" direction.

4
 The simple wave solution U~ is obtained by solving the ordinary differential equation
(2.8a) and the sealar wave equation (2.10) : from equation (2.8a) we obtain

u;: = r~v~(x, y, t) + cst (2.11)

and from eq. (2.10) :

(2.12)

where
q = xn x + yny - ~t (2.13)

So the simp Ie wave solution gets the form:

U;:(x, y, t) = r~v~(q) (2.14a)

From eq.(2.14a) it follows that we ean write a perturbation in the x-y plane due to simple
wav~ 0: traveling in direct ion n as:
(2.14b)

with ~; =1 Vv!: 1and where ~; defines the "strength" or "intensity" of the simple wave

and VU~ represents the eontribution to the variation of the primitive variahles U due to
the simple wave of type 0: traveling in the n direction.

A general perturhation will be deeomposed in a number of these simple wave pertur-

bations. Hence we ean write for the most general case
2~ 2~

8U= LLr~8vnO:= LL8U;: (2.15)

8=0 Cl' 8=0 Cl'

with n= 1xcos8 + 1ysin8. The summation is extended to all types of waves (0: = 1, ... ,4)
and to all their possible directions of propagation (8 = 0, .. , 27r). In practice, models have
to be built with a discrete number of simple waves.

In this work, different wave models will he implemented based on a particular choice
of six waves, as proposed by P. Roe.

5
 2.2 Simple waves {or Euler system

In this section the four possible types of simple wave solutions for the 2D Euler system
will be examined in more detail. To each eigenvalue and eigenvector of the matrix en,
a particu1ar wave is associated. The former in fact represents, as we have seen in the
previous chapter, the speed of propagation of each wave; the lat ter is used to project the
variation of the scalar parameter v!: on the primitive variables as equation (2.8a) suggests.

Let us now examine the different waves:

Entropy wave : (0' = 1)
The propagation speed and the eigenvectors are respectively:

r l = (I,O,O,OY

In this case the eigenvector is not depending on the traveling direct ion n of the wave. The
intensity of this wave is proportional to the entropy and it is again independent from n:

1
1Vv~ 1=1 Vp- 2c Vp 1

Shear wave: (0' = 2)

This solution does not exist for ID flows. The intensity of the wave is :

which represents the projection of the velocity vector gradient Vu along the wave front
(perpendicular to n). Propagation sp eed and corresponding eigenvector are given by :

First acoustic wave: (a = 3)

The intensity is given by : 1Vv~ 1=1 nx Vu + ny Vv + :c 'lp 1and we have:

,3
An
--+ c
=un

6
 Second acoustic wave : (0' = 4)
The intensity is given by : 1\lv~ 1=1 -n x \lu - ny \lv + ie \lp 1and we have:

\4
An = --
U n - c 4
rn = '12 P
t,-nx,-ny,pc
)T

Hence the acoustic disturbances propagates with a speed Un +c and U n - c in the direction
n.

2.3 Roe's simple wave models

Equation (2.15) shows that, in order to reconstruct the general solution of the Euler
system, we could superpose the effects of all possible waves. This is rat her complex in a 2D
flow. The waves, in fact, can propagate in infinitely many directions and there are other
physical phenomena, like vorticity and shear flows, which do not exist e.g. in the 1D case.

The first problem to solve is then the choice of a discrete number of waves to compose
a flow model. These will be chosen such that the traveling orientation is not fixed in
advance but is depending on flow properties, in order to have a good simulation of the
physics of the phenomena.

Assuming locallinear variation of the flow variables on each cell of the computational
domain, it follows that there are only eight degrees of freedom in the choice of the wave
model. The choice concerns both the types of waves and their traveling directions. Con-
sidering the LHS of equation (2.15), we can discern the following eight parameters (in
primitive variables ):

These eight derivatives can be calculated at each time step for each cell (if linear variation
of the data is supposed); hence, it follows tha:t ,only eight degrees of freedom are available
in the choice of the wave model.

7
 Roe's decomposition is based on the idea of incorporating into the models all the
elementary types of 2D flows. Hence, we have to consider acoustic waves, shear waves
(which are directly related to the shear flows) and entropy waves (useful, for example, .
in the description of shocks). They are combined such that their global effect results in
gradients at time level 1 which match the gradients of the known solution at time step
1, providing eight conditions on the strengths and orientations to be used. The other
properties have to be defined from physical arguments. One such argument is that locally
lD flow has to be decomposed using one entropy and two acoustic waves traveling in the
direct ion of the local flow.

2.4 The discrete models

Two parameters determine one wave: its intensity and its direct ion of propagation .
. To fix a model it is possible to choose only eight parameters in the RHS of equation
(2.15), in order to "match" them with the locallinear gradient au. In this way we get a
system in which the unknowns represents the variables which determine the decomposition
(intensities and propagation directions of the waves).

Roe proposed two different models [1] consisting in the following choices:

1. One entropy wave with unknown direction "<jJ" and intensity "j3" (2 unknowns).

2. Two acoustic waves of the first type traveling orthogonal to each otherj the direction
of propagation is given by one angle "()" and the intensities are "al" and "a2" (3
unknowns).

3. Two acoustic waves of second type traveling in the opposite direct ion of the waves in
2) with intensities "a3" and "a4" (2 unknowns). Seven parameters have been chosen
till this pointj we have still the fr:ee choice of another variabIe to fix the decomposition.
This last choice concerns the effect of shear or vorticity and can be made in several

8
 ways in order to obtain a relatively easy algebra in solving the resulting system. In
the models proposed by Roe the following contributions are considered:

4. MODEL A : the last unknown is represented by the local uniform vorticity "w" (on
each cell of the computational domain).

5. MODEL B : a shear wave traveling in the direction perpendicular to the streamlines

is added to the model, with unknown strength "k".

6. MODEL C: In this work an original model has also been implemented which presents
a different choice about this last point: the last unknown is represented by a shear
wave traveling in the direct ion of the pressure gradient, with unknown intensity "k".
This idea is coming from the Euler wave-decomposition due to Deconinck-Hirsch ([5],
[7]), based on the characteristic theory, in whieh the authors have already used this
kind of shear wave.

A sketch of the waves composing the models is given in figures 2, 3 and 4, where a
section of the Mach eone is shown at a fixed time level with all the wave fronts traveling
in the appropriat.e directions.

Henee, mat.ching the derivatives of the flow variables (p, u, v,p) with the ehosen pa-
rameters by means of equation (2.15), a non-linear system (system 1) of eight equations

in eight unknowns is obtained. This system, as it is shown in the following pages, is ana-
lytieally solved and gives us all the geometrieal and physieal informations eoneerning the
deeomposition. As the solution shows, all parameters dep end on flow gradients and they
will be ealculated at eaeh time step for eaeh eell: in this way the deeomposition is based
only on flow properties and there is no influence of the mesh direetions on it.

The following conclusions can be obtained about the deeomposition to underline the
physieal meaning of the models: the entropy wave direct ion (angle j3) coineides with the

9
local entropy gradient direct ion and the intensity of this wave is the entropy gradient
modulus.

Besides, for model A the principal acoustic wave direct ion (angle 8) coincides with
the principal axis of the strain rate tensor:

=( Uz
u,,~v., Vy
)
It is easy to demonstrate that this direction is perpendicular to the discontinuity in
the case of a shock and that it has an inclination of 45 with the discontinuity in the case
of a slip line. These conclusions have also been numerically verified (see chapter 5).

10
 ISYSTEM -11

II II . II . II 1 ap
al COSu + a2cos u - a3 sznU - a4 sznu = - 2 -a
pc x
. II . II II II 1 ap
alsznu + a2 sznu - a3COS U - a4COS u = -2-a
pc y
211 211 . 211 . 211 1 au
alCOS u + a2cos u - a3 szn u - a4 szn u = --a
c x
= ~c aauy
w
al sinOcosO - a2sinOcosO - a3sinOcosO + a4sinOcosO - 2
c

alsinOcosO - a2sinOcosO - a3sinOcosO + a4sinOcosO + :::.-

2c
= ~c aavx
1 av
. 211
al szn u + a2szn
. 211
u-
211 211
a3cos u - a4cos u = --a
c y

al cosO + a2cosO - a3sinO - a4sinO + {lcos</> = ~p aapx

al sinO + a2sinO - a3cosO - a4cosO + {lcos</> = ~p aapy

av + au)
( ax ay
tan20 =
( au _ av)
ax ay

1 [au av av + att)2 + (au _ av)2]

al - a2 = 2c ax + ay + ( ax ay ax ay

av + au)2 + (au _ av)2]

( aX ay aX ay

al + a2 = 1
pc2
(a p
ax cosO + ap .)
ay smO

a3 + a4 = -pc12 -axp (a .)
cosO - - smO
ay
ap
11
 w -
_(ovOX _ou)
oy

(Op
1
p
~a )
f3cos<f> = p ox - c ax 2

p)
f3sin<f> = p (Op
1
oy -
1
c2
a
ay

12
 3. CONSERVATIVE APPROACH

To have good shock-capturing properties in our algorithm we must ensure that it

is conservative, e.g. at steady state the conserved quantities (mass, momentum and en-
ergy), within the computational domain, are allowed to change only because of variations
occurring on the boundaries of the domain [1].

In the next pages, the results of the previous chapter will be extended to a conservative
methodology.

Consider the computational domain divided in a certain number of triangula~ cells (in
general unstructured); the variables are stored at the vertices of these cells. Extension to
quadrilateral cell is easy and will be considered later. According to the conservation form
of the Euler equations :
Ut + Fx + G y = 0

.an estimation of the variation in time of these variables, averaged on each cell, is given by
(Fig. 5) :
Ut = ~[Fi(Yi+l - Yi-l) - Gi(Xi+l - xi-dl = -~F\ .ni
(3.1)
2ST 2ST

,where ST is the area of eachtriangle and ni is the inner scaled normal to the edge opposite
to node "i" (Fig. 5); the surnrnation is extended to the contour of the triangle.

The solution is updated distributing this variation among the vertices of each cell as
will be discussed in chapter 4. The distribution can be made in an upwinding way with
respect to the traveling direction of each wave. The basic idea is to place the changes only
on the nodes towards which the wave is moving. The select ion of the vertices and the
weighting factors used to split the contribution of each wave dep end on the orientation of
the wave with respect to the cell. Different kinds of upwind schemes can be constructed
choosing in different ways the weighting factors. In any case, with the following approach,
all these schemes are conservative.

In fa.ct, if we sum up eq.(3.1) for all the cells of the domain, we obtain thetotal change

13
by (Fig. 6):

(3.2)

where the summation is extended to the closed line 1-2-3-4-5-6 in figure 6. For this it
results : !.l.Uj = O. So it is proven that the conserved variables cannot vary due to events
occurring on interior boundaries: that is what wasrequested by a conservative method.

The following step is to decompose the global averaged variation in time given by eq.
(3.2) into several contributions due to each wave in order to apply upwind schemes for
updating. Hence, let us consider again the simple wave solutions of the Euler system.

From eq. (2.8a) by integration we get:

u: = v~r~ + est. (3.3)

(considering the contribution from one wave). Taking the derivative of eq. (3.3) with
respect to time, since (from eq. (2.12)) ~ = -.x~ it results :

OU)O' (ov oq _)0' .x a-a

( ot = oq ot r =
n n -Qn n
r
n
(3.4)

where by definition ~; is the intensity Qn of the wave.

Equation (3.4) shows that the variation in time of the conservative variables, due to
the passage of a simple wave, is equivalent to the product of the intensity Qn and the wave
speed .~ multiplied by the eigenvector r~ which project the effect of that wave on the
conserved variables.

Let us introduce the notation :

where .~, Qi are, respectively, the speeds and intensities of the acoustic waves and .x~, (3
are the speed and intensity of the entropy wave.

14
 Summing up all contributions coming from the four acoustic waves and the entropy
wave, equation (3.4) becomes:

(3.5)

where au represents the averaged variation over the cell of the conservative variables. For
model A there is no shear wave; for model B it can be easily proven that, for the particular
traveling direction chosen, the speed of the shear wave is zero, and for this reason the sum
in equation (3.4) is limited to five terms in these two cases. For model C it is necessary
to add the contribution A6r~ = k.~r~ where .~ and k are the speed and the intensity of
the shear wave; hence, the sum in eq. (3.4) has to include also this wave because, in this
case, the shear wave speed is not zero.

The rum, now, is to calculate the Ai within each cell in such a way that the total
effect of the perturbation (eq. (3.5)) in that cell will produce the correct conservative flux
integral over the cello

Using the results concerning the decomposition of chapter 2 and substituting in eq.
(3.4) the expressions for ai, {3, and . i , the consistency of the method has been checked
and it has been shown that it is necessary to add a correction in the momentum equations
amounting respectively to (-~pvw) and (~puw) in the RHS of eq. (3.4) in order to take
into account the contribution of vorticity for model A.

The equations are shown on the followng pages; of course, W = 0 for models Band C
while A6 is zero for mode Is A and B.

The LHS of each eq. (3.5) is obtained from the conservative expression (3.1), for each
cello For 0, 4> and w the values calculated according to the decomposition described in
chapter 2 will be assumed. Hence eq. (3.5) represents a system of four equations in five
unknowns (Ai) (i=1, .. ,5) for models A and B, while, adding the contribution from A6, we
obtain a system of four equation in six unknowns for model C. It is necessary to add one
equation to close the system for models A and B : Roe [1] proposed to use arelation among

15
the parameters Ai for (i=I, .. ,4) which does not derive from the conservative formulation :

Al + A 2 - A3 - A4 = PX [u cos(20 + v sin(20)] + PY2 [u sin(20 - v cos(20)] + aR (3.6)

pa 2 pa

where R is a constant depending on the velocity gradient [1].

The demonstration of eq. (3.6) is given in [1]. For model C we need two more relations
to close the system : we can use equation (3.6) also in this case and we will add the relation
A6 = k>'~ using for >.~ and k the values obtained from system 1.

So we have, for each model, a complete system for the parameters Ai which represent
the effect of each wave on the conservative variables according to eq. (3.5) (see System 2).

Each of these informations is then treated independently from the others, implement-
ing an upwind splitting for each cell based on the traveling speed of the particular wave:
then the solution will be updated on the nodal points summing up the contributions, from

all waves, arriving at each point.

16
 ISYSTEM - 2, Models A, B I
For model B : w = 0

3. -(pv)t = pAl (v+asinO)+pA 2 ( v-asinO)+pA 3( v+acosO)+pA4 ( v-acosO)+pA 5 v-!puw

4. -(pe)t = pAI(h + aucosO + avsinO) + pA 2 (h - aucosO - avsinO) + pA3(h - ausinO +
avcosO) + pA 4( h + ausinO - avcosO) + ! pA 5 ( u 2 + v 2 )

5. Al +A2 - A3 - A4 = Px( ucos20 + vsin20) + Py( usin20 - vcos20) + aR

ISYSTEM - 2, Model C I

2. -(pu)t = pAl ( U + acosO) + pA 2 ( u - asinO + pA3(u - asinO) + pA4 (u + asinO) + pA5 u -

aA6sinb

3. -(pv)t = pAl (v + asinO) + pA 2 ( v - asi nO) + pA 3(v + acosO) + pA 4(v - acosO) + pA 5 v +

aA6cosb

4.-(pe)t = pAI(h + aucosO + avsinO) + pA2 (h - aucosO - avsinO) + pA3(h - ausinO +

avcosO) + pA 4(h + ausinO - avcosO) + ! pAs (u 2 + v 2 ) + aA6 (vcosb - usinb)

5. Al + A2 - A3 - A4 = Px( ucos20 + vsin20) + Py( usin20 - vcos20) + aR

17
 4. FLUCTUATION SPLITTING SCHEMES
4.1 Concept of fluctuation

In the previous chapters we have seen how the model for the decomposition of the
Euler system is chosen and how the parameters of the model are calculated based on the
flow gradients. This calculation is made for each cell of the computational domain. AIso,
we have seen how to calculate an averaged value, on the area of the cell, of the variation
in time for the conservative variables. But the values of the unknowns are stored on
the vertices of each cell; so we need an algorithm to distribute the global mean variation
calculated on the cell towards the vertices, to be able to update the solution at these points.

This algorithm is based on the concept of "fluctuation" and it has been studied in
detail in [3] for the case of scalar advection. The principles of the method will be briefly
described for a triangular mesh, but the concepts are easily extended to any kind of cells
(Fig. 7). The fluctuation is defined for a triangle T as:

( 4.1)

Assuming a mean value Ut for the conservative variables on each cell, we obtain :

<Pr = Ut Sr = - J1r V FdS (4.2)

where Sr is the area of the triangular cello Since the variation of the data is linear on the
edges of the cells, the integral in eq. (4.2) can be approximated with the following formula

(4.3)

where the index i represents the vertices of the triangle and ni is the inner normal to the
edge opposed to vertex i according to the notation in figure 7; c is the perimeter of the
cello So we have:
- -~tFi ni
Ut = 2Sr
which allows to calculate the averaged variation in time of the conservative variables for
each cello Putting these values in the LHS of system 2 of chapter 3 (eq.3.4 plus eq.3.5) it
is possible to caIculate the parameters Ai which are directly related to the fluduation.

18
 In fact, from equation (3.5)

and (4.2), we obtain:

(4.4)

Equation (4.4) shows that the [Ai], multiplied by the corresponding eigenvectors, give the
contribution of each wave to the fluctuation. Hence, for each wave it will be possible to
apply the algorithm of "fluctuation splitting" in an upwind way with respect to their speed.

4.2 Splitting

Equation (4.4) can be rewri t ten in the form:

(4.5)

in which we put in evidence that the global fluctuation has been divided in several contri-
butions due to each wave "k". Let us now consider the wave "k" traveling in the direction
m with speed . The fluctuation associated with this wave is:

k
<PT =
Jf
JT Utk dS = -Ut'
k
ST ( 4.6)

according to the definition (4.1).

Discretizing this equation for each cell, we get ([2], [6]):

(4.7)

where "i" is the index of the vertices of the cell and 'ESi = ST. Si is a part of the area of
the triangle associated to each node. In this work it has been considered [6] Si = t ST as
shown in figure 8. From eq. (4.7) it is easy to calculate the updating contribution to node
"i" due to the wave k:
(4.8)

19
This is, naturally, the contribution coming from one triangle T on the node "i"; the global
variation due to the wave k over one vertex is given by :
k
'Uj = L 'Ufi
T
which represents the summation of all contributes coming from the surrounding triangles
to node "i" as shown in figure 9. In eq. (4.8) the parameters ai are the coefficients which
define the splitting : they establish which part of the global fluctuation <Pk has to be sent
to each node "i" (Fig. 10). Of course, one must have for consistency and conservation :
~iai = 1. Upwind schemes can be obtained if the parameters ai depend on the orientation
of the speed of each wave. The idea is to send informations only to those vertices which
are downstream with respect to the propagation of the waves.

4.3 Determination of the coefficients ai

A wide variety of numerical upwind schemes can be obtained just changing the defini-
tion of the parameters ai. Classical upwind schemes can be expressed within the fluctuation
splitting approach, e.g. for a central scheme we have ai =t for i = 1, .. ,3.

The theory and the criteria on which the choice of the parameters ai can be based
are described in [2] and [3]. A detailed description of these criteria is beyond the aims of
this report.

4.3.1 Roe monotone scheme

In the present work, two types of numeri cal schemes, for each model, have been
implemented. The first scheme results in a monotone solution and it is due to P. Roe [2].

If we indicate with m the wave speed direction, we can have two different situations
on a triangular mesh, as shown in figures 11 and 12 :
* Case (1) : "one inflow si de"
* Case (2) : "two inflow side"

In the fi.rst case we can send the fluctuation due to this particular wave t the vertex

20
which is downstream in the direction of m. But in the second case (two inflow sides) it is
necessary to split the global fluctuation between the two vertices which are downstream.
It has been proven that one always gets a monotone solution in case (1). So in the second
case we can try to reduce the problem to the simpIer case of "one inflow side" in order to
get a monotone solution.

Hence, the wave speed vector is divided into two components parallel to the two edges
of the triangle in which the vector m is entering (Fig. 13). Then it is possible to treat each
of these components as case (1), associating to each of them a part of the fluctuation.

Following this approach a monotone scheme is obtained with coefficients:

al = 0

(m n2)(ffi [12)
2Sr
(m n3)(ffi .. [13)
Q3 = 2Sr
where n is the normal to the edges and represent the edges of the triangles.

4.3.2 Low diffusion scheme

The second scheme which has been implemented is a low diffusion upwind scheme.
The case of one inflow side is treated as before. For the case of two inflow sides there is a
simp Ie geometrie interpretation (Fig. 14) : the amount of the fluctuation sent to a vertex
is proportional to the projection of the corresponding edge on the norm al direction to the
wave speed vector. It results :

al = 0;

where ei is the projection of the wave speed vector on the normal to eaeh edge. The same
seheme is known as a-weighting seheme in the fini te element literature [2]. The sum of the
coeffieients is again one to ensure conservation, but the condition for monotonieity is not
fulfilled.

21
 5. RESULTS AND COMMENTS

As this report describes the fust successful implementation of Roe's simple wave mod-
els, much emphasis is put on the validation and comparison of the methods, the models
and the fluctuation schemes. Therefore we fust consider some elementary flow problems,
each having a particular difficulty of Euler flow, such as a contact discontinuity or shock.
The results are compared with classical TVD schemes based on lD Riemann solvers.

5.1 Shear flow

As a first test case a shear flow aligned wi th the grid (45) has been considered.
Then, to eliminate the influence of the grid direction, a shear flow at 22.5 degrees has
been solved with the three models and numeri cal schemes. All the results presented have
been obtained on the triangular grid with 31 31 nodes shown in figure 15.

Figures 16, 17 and 18 show respectively the results obtained with models A, Band
C using low diffusion scheme. The flow is supersonic with Mach numbers based on x-
resp. y-component of the velo city given by MI = 3. and M 2 = 1.24. All the results are
monotonie as is shown by the cuts in the middle (x=O.5) and on the right boundary, both
for density and Mach number.

The best results in this case are obtained by model B that shows the lowest diffusion.
This behaviour was expected because in model B the shear wave is traveling in the direction
perpendicular to the streamlines which is the more relevant physical direction in this case,
the pres su re being uniform all over the flowfield.

In figure 19 the static pressure is shown which is constant for all modeIs, with little
oscillations. Figure 20 shows the wave speed vectors for the first acoustic wave: they have
an inclination of 45 with the streamlines as predicted by the theory (see chapter 2).

In figure 21 the comparison between the solutin obtained with model Band a classical
finite volume approach based on Roe F.D.S. first order is shown. Astrong improvement

22
in capturing the discontinuity, obtained with the wave decomposition method, is evident.
It is also interesting to compare the result form model B (first order) with a second order
Roe F.D.S. (Fig. 22) : the two results are very similar. This improvement is mainly due
to the decoupling of the wave decomposition solver from the grid directions. In fact, in the
classical finite volume approaches, typically we solve the Riemann problem at the edge of
each cell of the"computational domain : this feature does not allow a proper treatment of
discontinities which are not aligned with those edges. This can be illustrated by computing
the same shear flow at 00 so that it is aligned with the mesh. For this case Roe first order
F.D.S. resolves the discontinuity in two cells (Fig. 23). On the other hand, in the case of
a shear flow with inclination 22.5 0 , the same scheme smears very much the discontinuity.
In the wave decomposition approach the traveling direction of the waves was calculated
taking into account only the flow properties, e. g. referring always to the direct ion of some
physical meaningful gradient.

5.2 Oblique shoek reflection

An oblique shock reflection on a flat plate has been considered as second test case.
The inlet Mach number is M=2.9 and the inclination of the first branch of the shock is 29 0
with the plate. A symmetrie triangular grid with 61 21 points (Fig. 24) has been used.

Figures 25, 26 and 27 show the results obtained respectively with models A, Band
C using Roe-monotone scheme. Note that monotonicity is only guaranteed for the scalar
case and only if the linearization is done correctly [3]. Indeed, for the system case, not all
the results are really monotone: model C shows the best solution and it is the only one
which gives really monotone results.

In model C the shear wave is traveling in the direction of the pressure gradient and
this helps to explain its bet ter performance: in a shock, in fact, the pressure gradient
direct ion is more relevant than the normal to the streamlines.

Figures 28, 29 and 30 show the cuts for density and Mach number at y=0.5 and y=O

23
(lower solid wall) and the convergence history, respectively for models A, B and C.

The convergence stops for values of the residual around 10- 2 to 10- 3 . This is due
to the random change of the wave speed directions in the regions of uniform flow because
of finite precision arithmeties. In these areas, in fact, the gradient is very small and the
decomposition is not well defined. However, since the fluctuations vanish also in uniform
flow regions, there is nothing to be send in these random directions. Nevertheless, a
numerical noise is generated which inhibits convergence to machine zero.

Algorithms, to check the presence of uniform flowareas, could be used in order to

avoid the application of the decomposition in those regions. An attempt to freeze the
wave speed directions, after a certain number of iterations, will be also made to verify if
lower values of the residual ean be reached (calculations with double precision will be also
made).

5.3 Ramp flow

A ramp with inclination of 20 0 with respect to the horizontalline has been considered.
The grid is shown in figure 31; it contains 61 31 nodes. The flow is supersonic with inlet
Mach number M=3. At the moment only model C has been tested on this case.

Figure 32 shows the isolines for Mach and density as wen as Mach distribution at
y=0.5 and on the lower boundary.

5.4 N ozzle flow

A Laval nozzle test case has been considered. The geometry is shown in figure 33 and
taken from [8]: there are two eosine shaped walls yielding a 10% constriction at the throat.
A symmetrie triangular mesh is used, wi th 63 . 33 nodal points.

Three supersonic test cases have been solved respectively with inlet Mach number
M=3., M=3.5, M=1.75; last two results earl be compared with the data available in [8].

24
The results are shown in figures 34, 35 ' and 36. The case with inlet Mach number M=3.5
presents a solution which is very similar to the one obtained in [8] using a second order
scheme with limiter function. The nonlimited F.D.S. solution shows better resolution of
the shocks, however, at the price of some unphysieal oscillation around it. The third case
(M=1.75) presents a good solution for the first shock originating at the wall of the nozzle
but the second reflected shock is smeared too mueh. Compared with a classical TVD finite
volume solution (Fig. 36) one sees again that the second order unlimited version resolves
this shock in a bet ter way, however, with some oscillations. The classical second order
limited version keeps monotonicity but smears the second shock almost in the same way
as the present scheme : but we have to remember that this scheme is only first order in
space.

The scheme is anyway monotone and an extension to second order win surely improve
the solution in the more complicate test cases.

5.5 Extension to quadrilateral eells

The code has a1so been tested using a general unstructured division of the computa-
tiona1 domain in quadrilaterals. Two different approaches have been considered to have a
numerical splitting of the fluctuation on each cello The fust one mimics a classical finite
volume scheme in the case of the scalar equationj the second one is the average of two
upwind schemes based on triangle fluctuation splitting.

5.5.1 Finite volume approach

a) Basic scheme for scalar equation: In this case eaeh cell is divided in four parts connecting
the mid points of two opposite sides as shown in figure 37. Following the notation in the
figure, we ean express the fluctuation on each cell as

referring to a general 2D scalar advection equation

25
 au
-at +71 Vu = 0
where Ui, i=1, .. ,4, are the unknowns stored in the vertices of eaeh eeIl, and ni, i=1, ... ,4,
are the sealed normals to the internal sides of the four quadrilaterals in whieh eaeh eeIl is
divided.

We split in this way the fiuctuation in the sum of four eontributions: eaeh of them
ean be assigned to one of the vertices in an upwind way with respect to the eonveetion
speed 71. For example, the quantity 71 . nl (UI - U2) will be used to update the point 2 if
a . nl > 0 otherwise it will update the point 1. The same criterion is applied to the other
terms of the sum in equation (5.1). It ean be easily demonstrated that this is a positive
sehemes and that it is equivalent to the first order upwind seheme using for node ij the
finite volume obtained tracing the subdivision as shown in figure 38.

As it is weIl known this is a very dissipative seheme.

b) finite volume with simple wave modelling for sealar case: We solve the sealar dveetion
equation in the foIlowing form:
(5.2)

where
Vu
and
m = I Vu I
So we get for the fiuctuation an expression similar to (5.1):

Distributing the four terms in the sum (5.3) aeeording to an upwind criterion (as we h ave
seen for equation (5.1)) with respect to the wave speed 1m we get a monotone solution.

e) non monotonie low diffusion seheme for quadrilaterals : Starting from equation (5.2) ,
we replaee the differenees u i - Uj by

(5.4)

26
where rij is the vector corresponding to the i-j side of the quadrilateral. The gradient in
the R.H.S. is evaluated on each cell using the Gauss theorem:

where Si are the outer normals and S the surface of the quadrilateral, Fig. 39; the sum-
mation is extended over the four sides of the cello Substituting expres sion (5.4) in (5.3) we
obtain the following formula for the fluctuation:

1
~ = 2Sm I Vu I [(m nd(m. r12) + (m n2)(m rH) + (m n3)(m. r23)+
(m n4)(m. r43)] (5.5)

where the product m I Vu I represents the residual to split among the vertices of the
I

quadrilateral according to the fourl coefficient in the sum in eq. 5.5. For example the
quantity

will be used to update point 1 or 2 depending on the sign of m . nl.

This scheme has been used for Euler equations: the global residual on each cell has
been split in six contributions each due to one particular simple wave; then the splitting
of these residual towards the vertices of the quadrilateral follows the procedure described
before.

A shear flow test case has been solved with this scheme: the solution is shown in
figure 40. Model C has been used with the same values of Mach number and grid (31 . 31)
we used for triangular cells. The comparison between the two solutions shows an evident
improvement of resolution for this approach in capturing the discontinuities: however, the
solution is not more monotone as could be expected.

5.5.2 'Ifiangle based scheme for quadrilaterals

Another approach has been considered to solve the Euler equations on a domain
divided in quadrilateral cells. As shown in figure 41, each cell is divided in two triangles

27
considering both the diagonals one can trace in a quadrilateral. Four different triangles
are, in this way, obtained and for each of them the decomposition is applied according
to the triangular fluctuation splitting. Half of the fluctuation due to each of the four
triangles is then split towards the vertices of the original quadrilateral to update in those
points the solution. In this way we still have a conservative algorithm because the sum
of the fluctuation of two triangles (which compose the quadrilateral) gives the fluctuation
calculated on the quadrilateral.

This approach has been tested on the shear flow and the oblique shock reflectionj
decomposition model C has been used.

Results are respectively shown in figures 42 and 43. The cuts put in evidence that
the solution is monotone everywhere and the discontinuities are captured slightly better
for the shear flow than using the fi.rst approach with triangular cells.

We have to remark, however, that this method is two times more expensive than the
first from the point of view of the CPU time (the grids used are the same showed before).

5.5.3 Diagonal approach for quadrilaterals

I
We describe in this section a new monotone scheme to split the fluctuation on quadri-
lateral cells for the 2-D scalar advection equation

Ut +a Vu = 0

It is possible to write the fluctuation as :

(5.6)

where the ni are the scaled inward normals to the edges of the cell (Fig.44). Let us consider
the case with two inflow sides (Fig. 44). In order to have a positive scheme the global
fluctuation is splitted into three parts and the updating will be made in the following way:

(5.7)

28
 (5.8)

(5.9)

In fact we have (Fig. 44) :

and it is easy to verify that the coefficients of the unknowns in eqs. (5.7), (5.8), (5.9)
are positive for 6.t small enough.

In the case with one inflow side (Fig. 45) only the two vertices downwind with respect
to the advection speed will be updated: the fluctuation will be splitted into two part.s
between the nodes 1 and 4, being

The extension of this scheme to the Euler system follows the same criteria we have seen
for the finite volume scheme, but, also in t.his case, we willioose monotonicity introducing
the gradient calculated on the cell (see section 5.5.1).

29
 References

1. ROE, P. L.: Discrete models for the numerical analysis of the time dependent multidi-
mensional gas dynamics. J. Computational Physics, Vol. 63, 1986, pp 458-476.

2. ROE, P. L.: Linear advection schemes on triangular meshes. Cranfield Institute of

Technology, CoA Report No 8720, 1987.

3. DECONINCK, H.; STRUIJS, R.; ROE, P. L.: Fluctuation splitting for multidimen-
sional convection problems: an alternative to finite volume and finite element
methods. in VKI LS 1990-03 "Computational Fluid Dynamics".

4. ROE, P. L.: A basis for upwind differencing of the two dimensional unsteady Euler
equations. Cranfield Institute of Technology.

5. DECONINCK, H.; HIRSCH, C.; PEUTEMAN, J.: Characteristic decomposition meth-

ods for the multidimensional Euler equations. Lecture Notes in Physics Vol. 264
"10th Int. Conf. on Numerical Methods in Fluid Dynamics" , 1986, pp 216-221.

6. STRUIJS, R.; DECONINCK, H.; COUSSEMENT, G.: Multidimensional upwind

schemes for the compressible flow equations. von Karman Institute, Internal
Note, 1989. (unpublished)

7. DECONINCK, H.: A survey of upwind principles for the multidimensional Euler equa-
tions. in von Karman Institute LS 1987-04 "Computational Fluid Dynamics".

8. POWELL, K. G. & van LEER, B.: A genuinely multidimensional upwind cell vertex
scheme for the Euler equations. NASA TM 102029, 1989.

30
FIc.. 1 - HJFLUENCE OF THE GRID ON THE NUMERICAL METHOD
 Waves for discrete model A Waves for discrete model B model C
, y{Dt y{Dt Waves for discrete

xJDt x/Dt
x/Dt

FIG. 2 - WAVE FRONTS FOR MODEL A FIG. 3 - WAVE FRONTS FOR MODEL B FIG. 4 - WAVE FRONTS FOR MODEL C
 2 2

3 3

1 1

FIG. 7 - ElEMENTARY COMPUTATIONAl CEll

FIG~ 5 - NODAL POINTS NUMBERING

1 2

3
6

3
1

FIG. 8 - AREA OF EACH CEllOlVIDEO

4 IN THREE EQUAl PARTS

FIG. 6 - CONSERVATIVE APPROACH

 2
2

3
m
1
FIG. 9 - CONTRIBUTIONS FOR UPDATING 1
FIG. 13 - ROE MONOTONE SCHEME
FIG. 11 - ONE INFLOW SIDE

2.
2

3 m ........
~
3

1
1
FIG. 10 - FLUCTUATION. SPlITTING FIG. 12 - TWO INFLOW SIDES FIG. 14 - lOW DIFFUSION SCHEME
 , , , , , , , , , 1 1 1

1'\ V 1'\ V l"'- V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ IL i"'- IL' 1'\ V "\V i"\V I"'- VI'\ Vi"'- ~~ IL' ~~
V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V l"'- V 1"\ V I"- VI'\ V'\ V 1"\V 1'\ V 1'\ V I'\V 1"\ V"'-
1'\ V 1'\ V I'\. V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1"- V I"-V "'\V I"-V 1"- VI"- V 1"'- l,I'l", l-(. ""'oL
V 1'\ V I'\. V i'\. V I'\. V I'\.V 1"- V I'\. V 1'\ V'\. VI'\. V I'\. V 1'\ V I"-V I'\. V '\.
1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ IL i"'- IL ;"-/ '\/ '\lt'" I", /1"- V~ /~ / l':- IL
V 1'\ V 1'\ V "\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V l'\ lt'" l'\ L'\. V "\/ IL' l'\/ 1'\/ ~IL' ~ IL l':-

o
'"
"\ V "\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V '\./ 1'\ V '\.V 1'\ /1'\ V",- Li"'- IL I"'- IL
V ,'\ V '\. V I'\. V I'\. V I'\. V 1'\ V 1'\ V '\V 1'\ V I'\. V '\.V !'\ .{ '\1,1' L\ l,I' l"-
'\. / '\ V '\. V '\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V "\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V !'\. V "\/ '\V '\. V 1'\ V
V '\ V '\ V I'\. V I'\. V 1'\ V 1"- V 1"- V 1'\ V I'\. V '\. V 1'\ V !'\V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\
1'\ V I'\. V "'\ V '\ V I'\. V I'\. V 1'\ V 1'\ V I'\. V 1"- V !"- V 1'\ V 1'\ V [../ 1"'\ V
V 1'\ V I'\. V I'\. V 1'\ V "\ V I'\. V '\. V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V I'\. V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\
1'\ V 1'\ V I'\. V 1'\ V 1"'- V '\ V I'\. V !'\. '/ '\ V '\. V I'\. V I'\. V I'\. V 1'\ V 1'\ V
."
lt'" ~ V 1'\ V 1'\ V I'\. IV 1"'- 1/ 1"'\ V 1"'- V "'- IL l':- IL I"'- IL i"'- IL I'\. V I'\. V 1"- V 1'\
["-. V 1'\ V l'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ IL ~ IL ~ IL I"'- IL ~ ~ l':- ~ I"'- ~ !'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V
o V 1'\ V 1"\ IL' 1'\ V l"- V I'\. V ~ / I"'- IL I"'- IL I"'- IL i"'- IL ~ / 1'\ V '\. V 1"- V 1'\
1'\ V 1'\ V I'\, V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ IL ~ IL I"'- IL I"'- IL ~ / i"'- IL ~ lL l':- IL i"'- IL l"'- IL
V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V l"- V 1'\ V ~ / l"'- V I"'- IL I"'- IL ~ IL D, / "'- IL ~ ~ ~ IL l':-
1'\ V 1'\ V l"'- V 1'\ V l"'- V 1'\ IL ['-. V' l"'- V l"'- V' I"'- / I"'- IL' ['-. lI" l':- IL i"'- IL I"'- IL
V 1'\ V I'\.V 1'\ V l'\ L' I'\,V ~ ~ I"'- IL I"'- ~ I"'- ~ ~ L "'- IL ~ / ~ IL l"'-
"" "'"
1'\ V 1'\ V ['\ V 1'\ V 1'\V 1'\ IL 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V I'\. V 1'\ V 1'\ 1I l':- IL i"'- IL l"'- IL
V 1'\ V ['\ V 1'\ V ['\ V ['\ V I", / l"'- V 1'\ V ~ V l"- V l"- IL' '\ IL IL ~ ~ l"'-
"" "'"""
1'\ V 1'\ V ['\ V 1'\ V 1'\V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V ['\ 1/ IL IL I"'- IL
V f'. 1/ ['\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V I'\. V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V I'\. V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1"-V 1"- V 1'\
['\ V 1'\ V ['\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1"'- V 1"'- V [,,- IL
V f'. 1/ 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ 1/ 1'\ 1/ 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1"- V 1'\ V 1'\ IL l"- IL L\ l,I' l"-
['\ 1/ 1'\ 1/ ['\ V 1'\ 1/ 1'\ 1/ 1'\ V ['\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V I" V I" V I" V 1'\ V
V 1'\ 1/ 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V I" V 1"- V 1'\ V 1'\ V I'\. V 1'\ V 1'\ V I" V 1"- V 1"-
['\ 1/ 1'\ 1/ l"'- V I'\. V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1"- V 1"- V I'\. V 1"- V 1"- V 1"- V 1"- [../ 1"- V 1"- l,I'
o
o V 1'\ V 1'\ V ['\ V 1'\ V 1'\ V 1"- V 1"- V 1"- V 1'\ V I'\. V 1'\ V 1"- V I" V 1"'\V 1"- 8
o
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00

FIG. 15 - GRID FOR SHEAR FLOW TEST CASE: 31-31 NODES

 /

mach mber (.'op 0.1) AMD

10101 p......, (.t., .I.S) AMD

SHEAR 22 . 5 AMO
~ .. SHEAR 22 . 5 AHO

4.8 4 .8

4 .6 4.6

.
':
4 .4

.
4 .4

. ,2 >(
)C
4 .2
a:

i
l!! 4 . 11 !... 4 .
...oe
% %
oe
" 3 .8 " 3.8

3 .6 3 .6

3 .' 3 .4

3.2
1 .0 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8
Y COOROINATE Y COORDtNATE

FIG. 16 - RESULTS FOR SHEAR FLOW MODEL A

 macis umba (o\cp 0.1) BMD
10101 p..... re (.Iep .10-8) BMD

SHEAR FLOV 122 . 5 DEG . ) X=0 . 5 SHEAR FLOV 122 . 5 DEG . ) Xl .

5 .e

4 .8 4.8

4 .6

4.4

'"CD
....
X
4.2

i
:r:
~ 4 .e
z:

3 .8

3 .6

3 .4

.4 .5 .6 .7 .8
y eOORDINATE y eOORD ( NA TE

FIG. 17 - RESULTS FOR SHEAR FLOW MODEL B

 moela ........ (.Iep 0.1) CND ""al p..,...,. (olep .1.S) CMD

SHEAR 22 . 5 CMD SHEAR 22 . 5 CMD

4 .8

4 .6 4 .6

4.4 4.4
on
,::
Cl:
.2
.
" 4.2
lI!
~ 4.'
~I:
i..a 4 .8

I:
3.8 3.8

3 .6 3.6

3.4

Y CooADINATE Y CooRD I NA TE

FIG. 18 - RESULTS FOR SHEAR FLOW MODEL C

 SHEAR 22 . 5 AND
1see

1eee

b5ee

beee

on
55ee
!
w
cr: 5eee
a ~
'"cr:w
0.. 45ee
u
0-
4eee
'"
0-
U>

35ee

3eee
SHEAR FLOW 122 . 5 DEG. J x-e .s
75ee

25ee 78ee

2999
9 .1 .2 .3 . .5 .b .7 .8 .q
Y COOROINATE
1 .9 &518

&8.e
MODEL A
55.9
5 5eee
U>
'"
w
cr:
0..
u 4588
;:
~ .eee
SHEAR 22 . 5 eND
75ee 35ee

1ees
3eee

b5ee 25ee

..
~
beee

5599
2eee
e .1 .2 .3 .. .5 .b .7 .8 .q 1
Y COOROI"AT E
.
><
w
cr: 5ese
::>
U>
MODEL B
U>
W
cr: 45ee
0..

~
~ .eee
'"
35ee

3eee

25es

2eee
9 .1 .2 .3 .. .5 .b .7 .8 .q 1.e
Y caORO I HA TE

MODEL C
FIG. 19 - STATIC PRESSURE FOR SHEAR FLOW
 In
!:!2o
t"'-
o
o o

o
o
o
In
o
.

In
N
o

o
o
O~~~~ __~__L-~~~~_ _~~_ _~~_ _- L_ _~~_ _~~_ _~~_ _~~~O
.
O. 00 00 25 O. 50 00 75 1. 00

FIG. 20 - WAVE SPEED VECTORS FOR THE PRINCIPAL ACOUSTIC WAVE

WAVE DE COMPOSITION ( MO~EL B ) FIRST ORDER

4. 4

.5 .b .7

mach number
ISOMACH LINES

_ F .__D .S. FINITE VOLUM E FIRST ORDER

ROE

~~~~
.1--'--:'2.2 .3 .4

ISOMACH LINES mach number

FIG. 21 - COMPARISON
WITH RO~E~W~E~ VOLUME
. . . MODEL
FIRST BAND
ORDER FIN ITE
WAVE DECOMPOsITION ( MODEL B ) FIRST ORDER

_.6

-.
1.. 2

.. ...
~

3 .8

3.6

3.'

3.2
.1 .2 .3 . .5 .6 .7 .1 .9 1.'
r COOllOI .... n
mach number
ISO MACH LINEs

ROE F.D.s. FINITE VOLUME sECOND ORDER

~ ..
_ .8

.6

.'
' .2

.1

3 .8

3 .6

3._

.1 .2 .3
.' .~ .6 .7 .9 .9 l .t

ISOMACH LINEs mach number

FIG. 22 - COMPARISON BETWEEN MODEL BAND FINITE VOLUME

WITH ROE F.D.S. SECOND ORDE~
 DISCONTINUTY ALIGNED WITH THE GRID

J.2

3.1

2.1

2.6

c----c----c----c---
. -c 2. '
____ C----C----C----C----t
C - - - - C - - - - C - - - - C - -_ _ C_ _ _ _ C
<::::----t--
C-C_ :
: - - c - _- C - C 2.2
C
-C----C

~0(~ 1C~C- 2.1 ~

Gn~ 1.1, .1 .2 .l ,. ., ,. .7 ., ., 1.'

l[ caordinate l[ coordinate
ISOMACH LINES MACH (X=l)

DISCONTINUTY NOT ALIGNED WITH THE GRID

.e

'.6

...
' .2

' .1

J.I

J .&

J .'

3 . 2, .1 .2 .l ,4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 L'
X coordin ..te
ISOMACH LlNES MACH (X =l)

FIG. 23 - RESULTS FROM CLASSICAL FIRST ORDER ROE F.D.S. FINITE VOLUME
 0.0 O.S 1.0 1.5 Z.O Z.S '.0 '.1 0

'"cl ..
cl

C>
cl
...cl
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 Z.O Z.S '.0 S.S 0

FIG. 24 - GRID FOR THE OBLIQUE SHOCK TEST CASE 61-21 NODES
 Maeh number (step 0.05)

density (step 0.01)

statie pressure (step 1000)

FIG. 25 - RESULTS FOR OBLIQUE SHOCK MODEL A

 Mach number (step 0.05)

density (step 0.01)

statie pressure (step 1000)

FIG. 26 - RESULTS FOR OBLIQUE SHOCK MODEL B

 Maeh number (step 0.05)

density (step 0.01)

statie pressure (step 1000)

FIG. 27 - RESULTS FOR OBLIQUE SHOCK MODEL C

 oaSH 29 ARH
.0' r-------~--------

0'

.r'

.cr<

.cr<

.cr<

... OOD .... 2IJIID

x COORDINATE

OBSH 29 ARM OBSH 29 ARM

3 . 111 3 .0

2.'1 ,~ 2 . '1
."

2.9 2.9

2 .7 2 .7

2.6 2.6
! a:
lol
2 .5 al 2 .5

i
%
u
2 .
~
%
u
c
2. 4
c "
'" 2.3 2.3

2 .2 2 ,2

2 .1 2.1

2 .' 2 , 111

1 . '1 1.'1
111 ,5 1.0 1.5 2 . 111 2 ,5 3.111 3 ,5 4 ,0 4 .5 111 ,5 1.111 1.5 2 ,' 2.5 3 . 111 3,5 4 ,0 4. 5
X COORD I NA TE X COOADINATE

FIG. 28 - OBLIQUE SHOCK MODEL A

 OBSH 29 BRH
10' . 65

.61

,0'
.55

. 511

....e;; . 45

z
~ .411

. 35
'0"'
. J9

'0" . 25

. 29 2 .5 J.I 3 .5 4 . 11 4.5
9 .5 1.8 1.5 2 .11
X COOADIH~TE
'000 ,"'"
"'"

OBSH 29 BRH OBSH 29 BRH

J . II
J.I

2.q
~ 2 .9

2 .8
2 .8

2.7
2.7

~
2.6

!
2 .6
.
'l'
a: 2 . 5
a: 2 . 5 w
CD
\ol zo
CD

i 2.4
"
z 2.4
X ~
u u
c c
z zo 2 . 3
2 .J

2 .2
2.2

2.1
2.1

2 .9
2.9

1.q
1.q 4 .9 4 .5 9 .5 1 .9 1.5 2.9 2.5 J .9 3 .5 4. B 4 .5
.5 1.9 1 .5 2 .9 2 .5 3 .9 3.5
I X COOROINATE
X COOADIH~TE

FIG. 29 - OBLIQUE SHOCK MODEL B

 '0' ,.----------------1 OBSH 2q CRM S-II
. b5

. bil
,r/'

. 55

,.-' . 511

. 45
'0"
...
>-

i
~ . 411

,0"' . 35

.311

. 25

'000
,. .... . 21
1.' 1.5 2 .1 2 .5 3 .' 3.5 4 . 111
W COORDIHATE
4.'

OBSH 2q CRM OBSH 29 CRM

3.' "'T'T,.,..,........."T'T".........,
3 . ,..,...,.................rT"T...,.....rT"T...,......,..,..,....,...............................

2.9 2 . 9~ _ _1&

2.' 2.8

2 .7 2 .7

2 .6
~ 2 .6
! U

:- 2 . 5

i
li
2.4 !
0:

x
2.4

2 2 .3 ~
r 2.3

2 .2 2.2

2., 2. I

2 .1 2 . 11

1.9
1.. 1.5 2 .. 2.5 3 .. 3 .5 4.. 4 .5 I . 91~~~.~5~~,L.II~~'~.5~~2~. ~~2~.5~~3~.8~~3~.5~~4~.e~~4. '
X COOIIOINAT[ X COOllOI1fATE

FIG. 30 - OBlIQUE SHOCK : MODEL C

 0.00 0.25 o 50 o 75 100

8 8

o o
tJ'l lil
o c:i

lil lil
N N
o c:i

IZ
pi
17 D
oo o
o
o o
0.00 0. 25 0.50 0.75 1.00

FIG. 31 - GRID FOR RAMP FLOW TEST CASE 61-31 NODES

 Mach number (step 0.05) density (step 0.005)
3.6

3 . , 3 ."

3.2 ' .2
3 . 8~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
3.e

2.9 2.9

2 .6 , 2.6
~
2.4 2.4
c
'"
2 .2 2.2

2.8 2.8

1.8 1.8
" ~

1.6 1.6

1 . 4~-L-L~~-L~~~-L~_~~~~~~~~ 1.4~~-L~~~~~~~~~~~~-L~~~~
.1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 . 8 1.1 1.2 ,I .2 .3 . .5 .6 .7 .8 . 91.11.11.2
X COORO I NAlE X COOROINATE

FIG. 32 - RESULTS FOR ~p FLOW MODEL C

 -1.0 ..(l.S 0.0 0.5 1.0
~~
In
~ In
ei ~~
ei

~~

o 0
d 0

[l

1'\
In 11 In
0 ~ ~
eiI
I
~ ~

-1.0 ..(l.S 0.0 0.5 1.0

FIG. 33 - GRID FOR NOZZLE FLOW TEST CASE 63-33 NODES

 Mach number (step 0.06)

density (step 0.01)

FIG. 34 - RESULTS FOR NOZZLE FLOW (M=3. ) MODEL C

 Present work

Mach number (step 0.1)

0 . 20
fj

-0 .2 0
Ref. [8]
Mach number (step 0.1)

Second order (limiter on)

0 . 20
fj

-0 . 20 Ref. [8J
Mach number (step 0.1)

Second order (limiter off)

FIG. 35 - .RESUlTS FOR NOZZlE FLOW (M=3.5) MODEL C

 Present work
Mach number (step 0.1)

0 . 60 ;-o::-o::_~

0.20
IJ

Ref. [8] -0 . 20

Mach number (step 0.1)

Second order (limiter on)

0.20
'I

-0.20 Ref. [8]

Mach number (step 0.1)

Second order (limiter off)

FIG. 36 - RESULTS FOR NOZZLE FLOW (M=1.75) MODEL C

 3

C=mi
1 1
IF C > 0 TIJEN UPDATE 2 ELSE UPDATE 1
I

FIG. 37 - QUADRIlATERAl CEllS FIG. 38 - QUADRIlATERAl CEllS :

FINITE VOLUME APPROACH FINITE VOLUME FOR NODE i-j

I sI

FIG. 39 - QUADRIlATERAl CEllS : GAUSS INTEGRATION

 0.00 0. 25 0.50 0.75

g~~~::::::S~;::;:===::;:==;:;;::::::::::;:::==~~====:=::J~
0. 25 0. 50 0. 75
Mach number (step 0.1)

SHEAR 22 . 5 QUDR . CELL MOD . C

5 .0

4 .8

4.6

4.4

4.2
ttl
11
~ 4 .0
:t:
..,
U
x::
3.8

3.6

3.4

3 .2

3 .0
0 .1 .2 .3 .7 .8 .9 1. e
Y COORorNATE

FIG. 40 - QUADRILATERAL CELLS : SHEAR FLOW

(MODEL C; 31-31 NODES)
 + --

AVERAGE CALCULATION ON FOUR TRIANGLES

FIG. 41 - QUAORIlATERAl CEllS : AVERAGE APPROACH

 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75
8

8
Mach number (step 0.1)

SHEAR 22 . 5 AVER . ~UAD . MOD . e

5 . \l

4 .8

4 .6

4.4

.
\ti
4 .2
cg
)(

J:
U
< 4 . \l
%:

3.8

3 .6

3.4

3.2
IJ .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .q 1 . IJ
Y COOROINATE

FIG. 42 - QUADRILATERAL CELLS SHEAR FLOW

 wo
d

~========~========~====~==~~~~~~========;;========~========~========~j~
0.11 1.0 I.S 2.0 2.S S.O S.S 4.0

Mach number (step 0.05)

OBSH ~UADR . CELL S (MOD. Cl

3."

2.9

2 .8

2.7

- 2.6
'"
<SI
,...
-" 2.5
Cl:
W
CD
r 2.4
:::>
z
:r:
u
..:
r
2 .3

2.2

2. 1

2. "

1 .9
.5 1.'" 1 .5 2.'" 2.5 3 . '" 3 .5 4. '" 4. 5
'" X COOROI NATE

FIG. 43 - QUADRILATERAL CELLS OBLIQUE SHOCK REFLECTION

 4

2 3

FIG. 44 - OIAGONAL APPROACH : TWO INFLOW SIOES

1__------~--------_4

2~------~------~3

FIG. 45 - OIAGONAL APPROACH : ONE INFLOW SIOE'