1d783cc74SJed Brown(example-petsc-navier-stokes)= 2d783cc74SJed Brown 3d783cc74SJed Brown# Compressible Navier-Stokes mini-app 4d783cc74SJed Brown 5d783cc74SJed BrownThis example is located in the subdirectory {file}`examples/fluids`. 6d783cc74SJed BrownIt solves the time-dependent Navier-Stokes equations of compressible gas dynamics in a static Eulerian three-dimensional frame using unstructured high-order finite/spectral element spatial discretizations and explicit or implicit high-order time-stepping (available in PETSc). 7d783cc74SJed BrownMoreover, the Navier-Stokes example has been developed using PETSc, so that the pointwise physics (defined at quadrature points) is separated from the parallelization and meshing concerns. 8d783cc74SJed Brown 9575f8106SLeila Ghaffari## Running the mini-app 10575f8106SLeila Ghaffari 11575f8106SLeila Ghaffari```{include} README.md 12575f8106SLeila Ghaffari:start-after: inclusion-fluids-marker 13575f8106SLeila Ghaffari``` 14575f8106SLeila Ghaffari## The Navier-Stokes equations 15575f8106SLeila Ghaffari 16d783cc74SJed BrownThe mathematical formulation (from {cite}`giraldoetal2010`, cf. SE3) is given in what follows. 17d783cc74SJed BrownThe compressible Navier-Stokes equations in conservative form are 18d783cc74SJed Brown 19d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 20d783cc74SJed Brown\begin{aligned} 21d783cc74SJed Brown\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \bm{U} &= 0 \\ 22d783cc74SJed Brown\frac{\partial \bm{U}}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{\bm{U} \otimes \bm{U}}{\rho} + P \bm{I}_3 -\bm\sigma \right) + \rho g \bm{\hat k} &= 0 \\ 23d783cc74SJed Brown\frac{\partial E}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{(E + P)\bm{U}}{\rho} -\bm{u} \cdot \bm{\sigma} - k \nabla T \right) &= 0 \, , \\ 24d783cc74SJed Brown\end{aligned} 25d783cc74SJed Brown$$ (eq-ns) 26d783cc74SJed Brown 27d783cc74SJed Brownwhere $\bm{\sigma} = \mu(\nabla \bm{u} + (\nabla \bm{u})^T + \lambda (\nabla \cdot \bm{u})\bm{I}_3)$ is the Cauchy (symmetric) stress tensor, with $\mu$ the dynamic viscosity coefficient, and $\lambda = - 2/3$ the Stokes hypothesis constant. 2865749855SJed BrownIn equations {eq}`eq-ns`, $\rho$ represents the volume mass density, $U$ the momentum density (defined as $\bm{U}=\rho \bm{u}$, where $\bm{u}$ is the vector velocity field), $E$ the total energy density (defined as $E = \rho e$, where $e$ is the total energy), $\bm{I}_3$ represents the $3 \times 3$ identity matrix, $g$ the gravitational acceleration constant, $\bm{\hat{k}}$ the unit vector in the $z$ direction, $k$ the thermal conductivity constant, $T$ represents the temperature, and $P$ the pressure, given by the following equation of state 29d783cc74SJed Brown 30d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 31d783cc74SJed BrownP = \left( {c_p}/{c_v} -1\right) \left( E - {\bm{U}\cdot\bm{U}}/{(2 \rho)} - \rho g z \right) \, , 32d783cc74SJed Brown$$ (eq-state) 33d783cc74SJed Brown 34d783cc74SJed Brownwhere $c_p$ is the specific heat at constant pressure and $c_v$ is the specific heat at constant volume (that define $\gamma = c_p / c_v$, the specific heat ratio). 35d783cc74SJed Brown 3665749855SJed BrownThe system {eq}`eq-ns` can be rewritten in vector form 37d783cc74SJed Brown 38d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 39d783cc74SJed Brown\frac{\partial \bm{q}}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}) -S(\bm{q}) = 0 \, , 40d783cc74SJed Brown$$ (eq-vector-ns) 41d783cc74SJed Brown 42d783cc74SJed Brownfor the state variables 5-dimensional vector 43d783cc74SJed Brown 44d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 45d783cc74SJed Brown\bm{q} = \begin{pmatrix} \rho \\ \bm{U} \equiv \rho \bm{ u }\\ E \equiv \rho e \end{pmatrix} \begin{array}{l} \leftarrow\textrm{ volume mass density}\\ \leftarrow\textrm{ momentum density}\\ \leftarrow\textrm{ energy density} \end{array} 46d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 47d783cc74SJed Brown 48d783cc74SJed Brownwhere the flux and the source terms, respectively, are given by 49d783cc74SJed Brown 50d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 51d783cc74SJed Brown\begin{aligned} 52d783cc74SJed Brown\bm{F}(\bm{q}) &= 53f15b3124SJed Brown\underbrace{\begin{pmatrix} 54d783cc74SJed Brown \bm{U}\\ 55f15b3124SJed Brown {(\bm{U} \otimes \bm{U})}/{\rho} + P \bm{I}_3 \\ 56f15b3124SJed Brown {(E + P)\bm{U}}/{\rho} 57f15b3124SJed Brown\end{pmatrix}}_{\bm F_{\text{adv}}} + 58f15b3124SJed Brown\underbrace{\begin{pmatrix} 59f15b3124SJed Brown0 \\ 60f15b3124SJed Brown- \bm{\sigma} \\ 61f15b3124SJed Brown - \bm{u} \cdot \bm{\sigma} - k \nabla T 62f15b3124SJed Brown\end{pmatrix}}_{\bm F_{\text{diff}}},\\ 63d783cc74SJed BrownS(\bm{q}) &= 64d783cc74SJed Brown- \begin{pmatrix} 65d783cc74SJed Brown 0\\ 66d783cc74SJed Brown \rho g \bm{\hat{k}}\\ 67d783cc74SJed Brown 0 68d783cc74SJed Brown\end{pmatrix}. 69d783cc74SJed Brown\end{aligned} 70f15b3124SJed Brown$$ (eq-ns-flux) 71d783cc74SJed Brown 72d783cc74SJed BrownLet the discrete solution be 73d783cc74SJed Brown 74d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 75d783cc74SJed Brown\bm{q}_N (\bm{x},t)^{(e)} = \sum_{k=1}^{P}\psi_k (\bm{x})\bm{q}_k^{(e)} 76d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 77d783cc74SJed Brown 78d783cc74SJed Brownwith $P=p+1$ the number of nodes in the element $e$. 79d783cc74SJed BrownWe use tensor-product bases $\psi_{kji} = h_i(X_0)h_j(X_1)h_k(X_2)$. 80d783cc74SJed Brown 81d783cc74SJed BrownFor the time discretization, we use two types of time stepping schemes. 82d783cc74SJed Brown 83d783cc74SJed Brown- Explicit time-stepping method 84d783cc74SJed Brown 85d783cc74SJed Brown The following explicit formulation is solved with the adaptive Runge-Kutta-Fehlberg (RKF4-5) method by default (any explicit time-stepping scheme available in PETSc can be chosen at runtime) 86d783cc74SJed Brown 87d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 88d783cc74SJed Brown \bm{q}_N^{n+1} = \bm{q}_N^n + \Delta t \sum_{i=1}^{s} b_i k_i \, , 89d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 90d783cc74SJed Brown 91d783cc74SJed Brown where 92d783cc74SJed Brown 93d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 94d783cc74SJed Brown \begin{aligned} 95d783cc74SJed Brown k_1 &= f(t^n, \bm{q}_N^n)\\ 96d783cc74SJed Brown k_2 &= f(t^n + c_2 \Delta t, \bm{q}_N^n + \Delta t (a_{21} k_1))\\ 97d783cc74SJed Brown k_3 &= f(t^n + c_3 \Delta t, \bm{q}_N^n + \Delta t (a_{31} k_1 + a_{32} k_2))\\ 98d783cc74SJed Brown \vdots&\\ 99d783cc74SJed Brown k_i &= f\left(t^n + c_i \Delta t, \bm{q}_N^n + \Delta t \sum_{j=1}^s a_{ij} k_j \right)\\ 100d783cc74SJed Brown \end{aligned} 101d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 102d783cc74SJed Brown 103d783cc74SJed Brown and with 104d783cc74SJed Brown 105d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 106d783cc74SJed Brown f(t^n, \bm{q}_N^n) = - [\nabla \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N)]^n + [S(\bm{q}_N)]^n \, . 107d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 108d783cc74SJed Brown 109d783cc74SJed Brown- Implicit time-stepping method 110d783cc74SJed Brown 111d783cc74SJed Brown This time stepping method which can be selected using the option `-implicit` is solved with Backward Differentiation Formula (BDF) method by default (similarly, any implicit time-stepping scheme available in PETSc can be chosen at runtime). 112d783cc74SJed Brown The implicit formulation solves nonlinear systems for $\bm q_N$: 113d783cc74SJed Brown 114d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 115d783cc74SJed Brown \bm f(\bm q_N) \equiv \bm g(t^{n+1}, \bm{q}_N, \bm{\dot{q}}_N) = 0 \, , 116d783cc74SJed Brown $$ (eq-ts-implicit-ns) 117d783cc74SJed Brown 118d783cc74SJed Brown where the time derivative $\bm{\dot q}_N$ is defined by 119d783cc74SJed Brown 120d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 121d783cc74SJed Brown \bm{\dot{q}}_N(\bm q_N) = \alpha \bm q_N + \bm z_N 122d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 123d783cc74SJed Brown 124d783cc74SJed Brown in terms of $\bm z_N$ from prior state and $\alpha > 0$, both of which depend on the specific time integration scheme (backward difference formulas, generalized alpha, implicit Runge-Kutta, etc.). 12565749855SJed Brown Each nonlinear system {eq}`eq-ts-implicit-ns` will correspond to a weak form, as explained below. 12665749855SJed Brown In determining how difficult a given problem is to solve, we consider the Jacobian of {eq}`eq-ts-implicit-ns`, 127d783cc74SJed Brown 128d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 129d783cc74SJed Brown \frac{\partial \bm f}{\partial \bm q_N} = \frac{\partial \bm g}{\partial \bm q_N} + \alpha \frac{\partial \bm g}{\partial \bm{\dot q}_N}. 130d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 131d783cc74SJed Brown 132d783cc74SJed Brown The scalar "shift" $\alpha$ scales inversely with the time step $\Delta t$, so small time steps result in the Jacobian being dominated by the second term, which is a sort of "mass matrix", and typically well-conditioned independent of grid resolution with a simple preconditioner (such as Jacobi). 133d783cc74SJed Brown In contrast, the first term dominates for large time steps, with a condition number that grows with the diameter of the domain and polynomial degree of the approximation space. 134d783cc74SJed Brown Both terms are significant for time-accurate simulation and the setup costs of strong preconditioners must be balanced with the convergence rate of Krylov methods using weak preconditioners. 135d783cc74SJed Brown 13665749855SJed BrownTo obtain a finite element discretization, we first multiply the strong form {eq}`eq-vector-ns` by a test function $\bm v \in H^1(\Omega)$ and integrate, 137d783cc74SJed Brown 138d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 139d783cc74SJed Brown\int_{\Omega} \bm v \cdot \left(\frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N) - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right) \,dV = 0 \, , \; \forall \bm v \in \mathcal{V}_p\,, 140d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 141d783cc74SJed Brown 142d783cc74SJed Brownwith $\mathcal{V}_p = \{ \bm v(\bm x) \in H^{1}(\Omega_e) \,|\, \bm v(\bm x_e(\bm X)) \in P_p(\bm{I}), e=1,\ldots,N_e \}$ a mapped space of polynomials containing at least polynomials of degree $p$ (with or without the higher mixed terms that appear in tensor product spaces). 143d783cc74SJed Brown 144d783cc74SJed BrownIntegrating by parts on the divergence term, we arrive at the weak form, 145d783cc74SJed Brown 146d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 147d783cc74SJed Brown\begin{aligned} 148d783cc74SJed Brown\int_{\Omega} \bm v \cdot \left( \frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right) \,dV 149d783cc74SJed Brown- \int_{\Omega} \nabla \bm v \!:\! \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N)\,dV & \\ 150d783cc74SJed Brown+ \int_{\partial \Omega} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm q_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS 151d783cc74SJed Brown &= 0 \, , \; \forall \bm v \in \mathcal{V}_p \,, 152d783cc74SJed Brown\end{aligned} 153d783cc74SJed Brown$$ (eq-weak-vector-ns) 154d783cc74SJed Brown 155d783cc74SJed Brownwhere $\bm{F}(\bm q_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}}$ is typically replaced with a boundary condition. 156d783cc74SJed Brown 157d783cc74SJed Brown:::{note} 158d783cc74SJed BrownThe notation $\nabla \bm v \!:\! \bm F$ represents contraction over both fields and spatial dimensions while a single dot represents contraction in just one, which should be clear from context, e.g., $\bm v \cdot \bm S$ contracts over fields while $\bm F \cdot \widehat{\bm n}$ contracts over spatial dimensions. 159d783cc74SJed Brown::: 160d783cc74SJed Brown 16165749855SJed BrownWe solve {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns` using a Galerkin discretization (default) or a stabilized method, as is necessary for most real-world flows. 162d783cc74SJed Brown 163d783cc74SJed BrownGalerkin methods produce oscillations for transport-dominated problems (any time the cell Péclet number is larger than 1), and those tend to blow up for nonlinear problems such as the Euler equations and (low-viscosity/poorly resolved) Navier-Stokes, in which case stabilization is necessary. 164d783cc74SJed BrownOur formulation follows {cite}`hughesetal2010`, which offers a comprehensive review of stabilization and shock-capturing methods for continuous finite element discretization of compressible flows. 165d783cc74SJed Brown 166d783cc74SJed Brown- **SUPG** (streamline-upwind/Petrov-Galerkin) 167d783cc74SJed Brown 16865749855SJed Brown In this method, the weighted residual of the strong form {eq}`eq-vector-ns` is added to the Galerkin formulation {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns`. 169d783cc74SJed Brown The weak form for this method is given as 170d783cc74SJed Brown 171d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 172d783cc74SJed Brown \begin{aligned} 173d783cc74SJed Brown \int_{\Omega} \bm v \cdot \left( \frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right) \,dV 174d783cc74SJed Brown - \int_{\Omega} \nabla \bm v \!:\! \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N)\,dV & \\ 175d783cc74SJed Brown + \int_{\partial \Omega} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS & \\ 176d783cc74SJed Brown + \int_{\Omega} \bm{P}(\bm v)^T \, \left( \frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} \, + \, 177d783cc74SJed Brown \nabla \cdot \bm{F} \, (\bm{q}_N) - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right) \,dV &= 0 178d783cc74SJed Brown \, , \; \forall \bm v \in \mathcal{V}_p 179d783cc74SJed Brown \end{aligned} 180d783cc74SJed Brown $$ (eq-weak-vector-ns-supg) 181d783cc74SJed Brown 182d783cc74SJed Brown This stabilization technique can be selected using the option `-stab supg`. 183d783cc74SJed Brown 184d783cc74SJed Brown- **SU** (streamline-upwind) 185d783cc74SJed Brown 18665749855SJed Brown This method is a simplified version of *SUPG* {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns-supg` which is developed for debugging/comparison purposes. The weak form for this method is 187d783cc74SJed Brown 188d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 189d783cc74SJed Brown \begin{aligned} 190d783cc74SJed Brown \int_{\Omega} \bm v \cdot \left( \frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right) \,dV 191d783cc74SJed Brown - \int_{\Omega} \nabla \bm v \!:\! \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N)\,dV & \\ 192d783cc74SJed Brown + \int_{\partial \Omega} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS & \\ 193f15b3124SJed Brown + \int_{\Omega} \mathcal{P}(\bm v)^T \, \nabla \cdot \bm{F} \, (\bm{q}_N) \,dV 194d783cc74SJed Brown & = 0 \, , \; \forall \bm v \in \mathcal{V}_p 195d783cc74SJed Brown \end{aligned} 196d783cc74SJed Brown $$ (eq-weak-vector-ns-su) 197d783cc74SJed Brown 198d783cc74SJed Brown This stabilization technique can be selected using the option `-stab su`. 199d783cc74SJed Brown 200f15b3124SJed BrownIn both {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns-su` and {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns-supg`, $\mathcal P$ is called the *perturbation to the test-function space*, since it modifies the original Galerkin method into *SUPG* or *SU* schemes. 201d783cc74SJed BrownIt is defined as 202d783cc74SJed Brown 203d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 204f15b3124SJed Brown\mathcal P(\bm v) \equiv \left(\bm{\tau} \cdot \frac{\partial \bm{F}_{\text{adv}} (\bm{q}_N)}{\partial \bm{q}_N} \right)^T \, \nabla \bm v\,, 205d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 206d783cc74SJed Brown 207f15b3124SJed Brownwhere parameter $\bm{\tau} \in \mathbb R^{3\times 3}$ (spatial indices) or $\bm \tau \in \mathbb R^{5\times 5}$ (field indices) is an intrinsic time scale matrix. 208f15b3124SJed BrownThis expression contains the flux Jacobian, which we express in variational notation by differentiating the advective flux $\bm F_{\text{adv}}$ of {eq}`eq-ns-flux` 209f15b3124SJed Brown 210f15b3124SJed Brown$$ 211f15b3124SJed Brown\begin{aligned} 212f15b3124SJed Brown\diff\bm F_{\text{adv}}(\diff\bm q; \bm q) &= \frac{\partial \bm F_{\text{adv}}}{\partial \bm q} \diff\bm q \\ 213f15b3124SJed Brown&= \begin{pmatrix} 214f15b3124SJed Brown\diff\bm U \\ 215f15b3124SJed Brown(\diff\bm U \otimes \bm U + \bm U \otimes \diff\bm U)/\rho - (\bm U \otimes \bm U)/\rho^2 \diff\rho + \diff P \bm I_3 \\ 216f15b3124SJed Brown(E + P)\diff\bm U/\rho + (\diff E + \diff P)\bm U/\rho - (E + P) \bm U/\rho^2 \diff\rho 217f15b3124SJed Brown\end{pmatrix}, 218f15b3124SJed Brown\end{aligned} 219f15b3124SJed Brown$$ 220f15b3124SJed Brown 221f15b3124SJed Brownwhere $\diff P$ is defined by differentiating {eq}`eq-state`. 222f15b3124SJed BrownIn this notation, we may equivalently write the stabilization term as 223f15b3124SJed Brown 224f15b3124SJed Brown$$ 225f15b3124SJed Brown\mathcal P(\bm v)^T \bm r = \nabla \bm v \bm\tau \diff\bm F_{\text{adv}}(\bm r), 226f15b3124SJed Brown$$ 227f15b3124SJed Brown 228f15b3124SJed Brownwhere $\bm r$ is the strong form residual. 229f15b3124SJed BrownNote that both $\nabla \bm v$ and $\diff \bm F$ are $5\times 3$ matrices and that $\bm\tau$ can be defined with spatial indices, or field indices, leading to a stabilization term of $(\nabla \bm v)_{\alpha i} \tau_{ij} \diff \bm F_{\alpha j}$ for spatial or $(\nabla \bm v)_{\alpha i} \tau_{\alpha \beta} \diff \bm F_{\beta i}$ for field, where $\alpha,\beta$ are field indices and $i,j$ are spatial indices. 230f15b3124SJed Brown 231f15b3124SJed Brown:::{dropdown} Stabilization scale $\bm\tau$ 232f15b3124SJed BrownA velocity vector $\bm u$ can be pulled back to the reference element as $\bm u_{\bm X} = \nabla_{\bm x}\bm X \cdot \bm u$, with units of reference length (non-dimensional) per second. 233f15b3124SJed BrownTo build intuition, consider a boundary layer element of dimension $(1, \epsilon)$, for which $\nabla_{\bm x} \bm X = \bigl(\begin{smallmatrix} 2 & \\ & 2/\epsilon \end{smallmatrix}\bigr)$. 234f15b3124SJed BrownSo a small normal component of velocity will be amplified (by a factor of the aspect ratio $1/\epsilon$) in this transformation. 2352fc546d0SJed BrownThe ratio $\lVert \bm u \rVert / \lVert \bm u_{\bm X} \rVert$ is a covariant measure of (half) the element length in the direction of the velocity. 236*689ee6fdSJames WrightA contravariant measure of element length in the direction of a unit vector $\hat{\bm n}$ is given by $\lVert \bigl(\nabla_{\bm X} \bm x\bigr)^T \hat{\bm n} \rVert$. 2372fc546d0SJed BrownWhile $\nabla_{\bm X} \bm x$ is readily computable, its inverse $\nabla_{\bm x} \bm X$ is needed directly in finite element methods and thus more convenient for our use. 2382fc546d0SJed BrownIf we consider a parallelogram, the covariant measure is larger than the contravariant measure for vectors pointing between acute corners and the opposite holds for vectors between oblique corners. 239f15b3124SJed Brown 240f15b3124SJed BrownThe cell Péclet number is classically defined by $\mathrm{Pe}_h = \lVert \bm u \rVert h / (2 \kappa)$ where $\kappa$ is the diffusivity (units of $m^2/s$). 241f15b3124SJed BrownThis can be generalized to arbitrary grids by defining the local Péclet number 242f15b3124SJed Brown 243f15b3124SJed Brown$$ 244f15b3124SJed Brown\mathrm{Pe} = \frac{\lVert \bm u \rVert^2}{\lVert \bm u_{\bm X} \rVert \kappa}. 245f15b3124SJed Brown$$ (eq-peclet) 246f15b3124SJed Brown 247f15b3124SJed BrownFor scalar advection-diffusion, the stabilization is a scalar 248f15b3124SJed Brown 249f15b3124SJed Brown$$ 250f15b3124SJed Brown\tau = \frac{\xi(\mathrm{Pe})}{\lVert \bm u_{\bm X} \rVert}, 251f15b3124SJed Brown$$ (eq-tau-advdiff) 252f15b3124SJed Brown 253f15b3124SJed Brownwhere $\xi(\mathrm{Pe}) = \coth \mathrm{Pe} - 1/\mathrm{Pe}$ approaches 1 at large local Péclet number. 254f15b3124SJed BrownNote that $\tau$ has units of time and, in the transport-dominated limit, is proportional to element transit time in the direction of the propagating wave. 255f15b3124SJed BrownFor advection-diffusion, $\bm F(q) = \bm u q$, and thus the perturbed test function is 256f15b3124SJed Brown 257f15b3124SJed Brown$$ 258f15b3124SJed Brown\mathcal P(v) = \tau \bm u \cdot \nabla v = \tau \bm u_{\bm X} \nabla_{\bm X} v. 259f15b3124SJed Brown$$ (eq-test-perturbation-advdiff) 260f15b3124SJed Brown 261f15b3124SJed BrownSee {cite}`hughesetal2010` equations 15-17 and 34-36 for further discussion of this formulation. 262f15b3124SJed Brown 26349967df2SLeila GhaffariFor the Navier-Stokes and Euler equations in primitive variables, {cite}`whiting2003hierarchical` defines a $5\times 5$ diagonal stabilization consisting of 264f15b3124SJed Brown1. continuity stabilization $\tau_c$ 265f15b3124SJed Brown2. momentum stabilization $\tau_m$ 266f15b3124SJed Brown3. energy stabilization $\tau_E$ 267f15b3124SJed Brown 26814acc1b4SLeila GhaffariHowever, since our equations are in conservative form, we follow {cite}`hughesetal2010` in defining a $3\times 3$ diagonal stabilization according to spatial criterion 2 (equation 27) as follows. 26914acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari 27014acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari$$ 2712fc546d0SJed Brown\tau_{ii} = c_{\tau} \frac{2 \xi(\mathrm{Pe})}{(\lambda_{\max \text{abs}})_i \lVert \nabla_{x_i} \bm X \rVert} 27214acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari$$ (eq-tau-conservative) 27314acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari 2742fc546d0SJed Brownwhere $c_{\tau}$ is a multiplicative constant reported to be optimal at 0.5 for linear elements, $\hat{\bm n}_i$ is a unit vector in direction $i$, and $\nabla_{x_i} = \hat{\bm n}_i \cdot \nabla_{\bm x}$ is the derivative in direction $i$. 2752fc546d0SJed BrownThe flux Jacobian $\frac{\partial \bm F_{\text{adv}}}{\partial \bm q} \cdot \hat{\bm n}_i$ in each direction $i$ is a $5\times 5$ matrix with spectral radius $(\lambda_{\max \text{abs}})_i$ equal to the fastest wave speed. 2762fc546d0SJed BrownThe complete set of eigenvalues of the Euler flux Jacobian in direction $i$ are (e.g., {cite}`toro2009`) 27714acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari 27814acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari$$ 2792fc546d0SJed Brown\Lambda_i = [u_i - a, u_i, u_i, u_i, u_i+a], 28014acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari$$ (eq-eigval-advdiff) 28114acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari 2822fc546d0SJed Brownwhere $u_i = \bm u \cdot \hat{\bm n}_i$ is the velocity component in direction $i$ and $a = \sqrt{\gamma P/\rho}$ is the sound speed for ideal gasses. 2832fc546d0SJed BrownNote that the first and last eigenvalues represent nonlinear acoustic waves while the middle three are linearly degenerate, carrying a contact wave (temperature) and transverse components of momentum. 2842fc546d0SJed BrownThe fastest wave speed in direction $i$ is thus 28514acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari 28614acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari$$ 2872fc546d0SJed Brown\lambda_{\max \text{abs}} \Bigl( \frac{\partial \bm F_{\text{adv}}}{\partial \bm q} \cdot \hat{\bm n}_i \Bigr) = |u_i| + a 28814acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari$$ (eq-wavespeed) 28914acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari 2902fc546d0SJed BrownNote that this wave speed is specific to ideal gases as $\gamma$ is an ideal gas parameter; other equations of state will yield a different acoustic wave speed. 29114acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari 292f15b3124SJed Brown::: 293d783cc74SJed Brown 294d783cc74SJed BrownCurrently, this demo provides three types of problems/physical models that can be selected at run time via the option `-problem`. 295d783cc74SJed Brown{ref}`problem-advection`, the problem of the transport of energy in a uniform vector velocity field, {ref}`problem-euler-vortex`, the exact solution to the Euler equations, and the so called {ref}`problem-density-current` problem. 296d783cc74SJed Brown 297d783cc74SJed Brown(problem-advection)= 298d783cc74SJed Brown 299d783cc74SJed Brown## Advection 300d783cc74SJed Brown 30165749855SJed BrownA simplified version of system {eq}`eq-ns`, only accounting for the transport of total energy, is given by 302d783cc74SJed Brown 303d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 304d783cc74SJed Brown\frac{\partial E}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot (\bm{u} E ) = 0 \, , 305d783cc74SJed Brown$$ (eq-advection) 306d783cc74SJed Brown 307d783cc74SJed Brownwith $\bm{u}$ the vector velocity field. In this particular test case, a blob of total energy (defined by a characteristic radius $r_c$) is transported by two different wind types. 308d783cc74SJed Brown 309d783cc74SJed Brown- **Rotation** 310d783cc74SJed Brown 311d783cc74SJed Brown In this case, a uniform circular velocity field transports the blob of total energy. 31265749855SJed Brown We have solved {eq}`eq-advection` applying zero energy density $E$, and no-flux for $\bm{u}$ on the boundaries. 313d783cc74SJed Brown 314d783cc74SJed Brown- **Translation** 315d783cc74SJed Brown 316d783cc74SJed Brown In this case, a background wind with a constant rectilinear velocity field, enters the domain and transports the blob of total energy out of the domain. 317d783cc74SJed Brown 31865749855SJed Brown For the inflow boundary conditions, a prescribed $E_{wind}$ is applied weakly on the inflow boundaries such that the weak form boundary integral in {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns` is defined as 319d783cc74SJed Brown 320d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 321d783cc74SJed Brown \int_{\partial \Omega_{inflow}} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm q_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS = \int_{\partial \Omega_{inflow}} \bm v \, E_{wind} \, \bm u \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS \, , 322d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 323d783cc74SJed Brown 324d783cc74SJed Brown For the outflow boundary conditions, we have used the current values of $E$, following {cite}`papanastasiou1992outflow` which extends the validity of the weak form of the governing equations to the outflow instead of replacing them with unknown essential or natural boundary conditions. 32565749855SJed Brown The weak form boundary integral in {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns` for outflow boundary conditions is defined as 326d783cc74SJed Brown 327d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 328d783cc74SJed Brown \int_{\partial \Omega_{outflow}} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm q_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS = \int_{\partial \Omega_{outflow}} \bm v \, E \, \bm u \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS \, , 329d783cc74SJed Brown $$ 330d783cc74SJed Brown 331d783cc74SJed Brown(problem-euler-vortex)= 332d783cc74SJed Brown 333d783cc74SJed Brown## Isentropic Vortex 334d783cc74SJed Brown 335575f8106SLeila GhaffariThree-dimensional Euler equations, which are simplified and nondimensionalized version of system {eq}`eq-ns` and account only for the convective fluxes, are given by 336d783cc74SJed Brown 337d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 338d783cc74SJed Brown\begin{aligned} 339d783cc74SJed Brown\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \bm{U} &= 0 \\ 340d783cc74SJed Brown\frac{\partial \bm{U}}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{\bm{U} \otimes \bm{U}}{\rho} + P \bm{I}_3 \right) &= 0 \\ 341d783cc74SJed Brown\frac{\partial E}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{(E + P)\bm{U}}{\rho} \right) &= 0 \, , \\ 342d783cc74SJed Brown\end{aligned} 343d783cc74SJed Brown$$ (eq-euler) 344d783cc74SJed Brown 345575f8106SLeila GhaffariFollowing the setup given in {cite}`zhang2011verification`, the mean flow for this problem is $\rho=1$, $P=1$, $T=P/\rho= 1$ (Specific Gas Constant, $R$, is 1), and $\bm{u}=(u_1,u_2,0)$ while the perturbation $\delta \bm{u}$, and $\delta T$ are defined as 346d783cc74SJed Brown 347d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 348d783cc74SJed Brown\begin{aligned} (\delta u_1, \, \delta u_2) &= \frac{\epsilon}{2 \pi} \, e^{0.5(1-r^2)} \, (-\bar{y}, \, \bar{x}) \, , \\ \delta T &= - \frac{(\gamma-1) \, \epsilon^2}{8 \, \gamma \, \pi^2} \, e^{1-r^2} \, , \\ \end{aligned} 349d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 350d783cc74SJed Brown 351575f8106SLeila Ghaffariwhere $(\bar{x}, \, \bar{y}) = (x-x_c, \, y-y_c)$, $(x_c, \, y_c)$ represents the center of the domain, $r^2=\bar{x}^2 + \bar{y}^2$, and $\epsilon$ is the vortex strength ($\epsilon$ < 10). 352d783cc74SJed BrownThere is no perturbation in the entropy $S=P/\rho^\gamma$ ($\delta S=0)$. 353d783cc74SJed Brown 354d783cc74SJed Brown(problem-density-current)= 355d783cc74SJed Brown 356d783cc74SJed Brown## Density Current 357d783cc74SJed Brown 35865749855SJed BrownFor this test problem (from {cite}`straka1993numerical`), we solve the full Navier-Stokes equations {eq}`eq-ns`, for which a cold air bubble (of radius $r_c$) drops by convection in a neutrally stratified atmosphere. 359d783cc74SJed BrownIts initial condition is defined in terms of the Exner pressure, $\pi(\bm{x},t)$, and potential temperature, $\theta(\bm{x},t)$, that relate to the state variables via 360d783cc74SJed Brown 361d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 362d783cc74SJed Brown\begin{aligned} \rho &= \frac{P_0}{( c_p - c_v)\theta(\bm{x},t)} \pi(\bm{x},t)^{\frac{c_v}{ c_p - c_v}} \, , \\ e &= c_v \theta(\bm{x},t) \pi(\bm{x},t) + \bm{u}\cdot \bm{u} /2 + g z \, , \end{aligned} 363d783cc74SJed Brown$$ 364d783cc74SJed Brown 365d783cc74SJed Brownwhere $P_0$ is the atmospheric pressure. 366d783cc74SJed BrownFor this problem, we have used no-slip and non-penetration boundary conditions for $\bm{u}$, and no-flux for mass and energy densities. 367