xref: /honee/index.md (revision bb8a0c61f21224cefcdd60e71004bb99df1e9a58)
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  $$
172d783cc74SJed Brown  \begin{aligned}
173d783cc74SJed Brown  \int_{\Omega} \bm v \cdot \left( \frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right)  \,dV
174d783cc74SJed Brown  - \int_{\Omega} \nabla \bm v \!:\! \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N)\,dV & \\
175d783cc74SJed Brown  + \int_{\partial \Omega} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS & \\
176*bb8a0c61SJames Wright  + \int_{\Omega} \mathcal{P}(\bm v)^T \, \left( \frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} \, + \,
177d783cc74SJed Brown  \nabla \cdot \bm{F} \, (\bm{q}_N) - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right) \,dV &= 0
178d783cc74SJed Brown  \, , \; \forall \bm v \in \mathcal{V}_p
179d783cc74SJed Brown  \end{aligned}
180d783cc74SJed Brown  $$ (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$$
204*bb8a0c61SJames Wright\mathcal P(\bm v) \equiv \bm{\tau} \left(\frac{\partial \bm{F}_{\text{adv}} (\bm{q}_N)}{\partial \bm{q}_N} \right) \, \nabla \bm v\,,
205*bb8a0c61SJames Wright$$ (eq-streamline-P)
206d783cc74SJed Brown
207*bb8a0c61SJames Wrightwhere parameter $\bm{\tau} \in \mathbb R^{3}$ (spatial index) or $\bm \tau \in \mathbb R^{5\times 5}$ (field indices) is an intrinsic time scale matrix.
208*bb8a0c61SJames WrightMost generally, we consider $\bm\tau \in \mathbb R^{3,5,5}$.
209*bb8a0c61SJames WrightThis expression contains the advective flux Jacobian, which may be thought of as mapping from a 5-vector (state) to a $(5,3)$ tensor (flux) or from a $(5,3)$ tensor (gradient of state) to a 5-vector (time derivative of state); the latter is used in {eq}`eq-streamline-P` because it's applied to $\nabla\bm v$.
210*bb8a0c61SJames WrightThe forward variational form can be readily expressed by differentiating $\bm F_{\text{adv}}$ of {eq}`eq-ns-flux`
211f15b3124SJed Brown
212f15b3124SJed Brown$$
213f15b3124SJed Brown\begin{aligned}
214f15b3124SJed Brown\diff\bm F_{\text{adv}}(\diff\bm q; \bm q) &= \frac{\partial \bm F_{\text{adv}}}{\partial \bm q} \diff\bm q \\
215f15b3124SJed Brown&= \begin{pmatrix}
216f15b3124SJed Brown\diff\bm U \\
217f15b3124SJed Brown(\diff\bm U \otimes \bm U + \bm U \otimes \diff\bm U)/\rho - (\bm U \otimes \bm U)/\rho^2 \diff\rho + \diff P \bm I_3 \\
218f15b3124SJed Brown(E + P)\diff\bm U/\rho + (\diff E + \diff P)\bm U/\rho - (E + P) \bm U/\rho^2 \diff\rho
219f15b3124SJed Brown\end{pmatrix},
220f15b3124SJed Brown\end{aligned}
221f15b3124SJed Brown$$
222f15b3124SJed Brown
223f15b3124SJed Brownwhere $\diff P$ is defined by differentiating {eq}`eq-state`.
224*bb8a0c61SJames WrightThis action is also readily computed by forward-mode AD, but since $\bm v$ is a test function, we actually need the action of the adjoint to use {eq}`eq-streamline-P` in finite element computation; that can be computed by reverse-mode AD.
225*bb8a0c61SJames WrightWe may equivalently write the stabilization term as
226f15b3124SJed Brown
227f15b3124SJed Brown$$
228*bb8a0c61SJames Wright\mathcal P(\bm v)^T \bm r = \nabla \bm v \tcolon \left(\frac{\partial \bm F_{\text{adv}}}{\partial \bm q}\right)^T \, \bm\tau \bm r,
229f15b3124SJed Brown$$
230f15b3124SJed Brown
231*bb8a0c61SJames Wrightwhere $\bm r$ is the strong form residual and $\bm\tau$ is a $5\times 5$ matrix.
232f15b3124SJed Brown
233f15b3124SJed Brown:::{dropdown} Stabilization scale $\bm\tau$
234f15b3124SJed 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.
235f15b3124SJed BrownTo build intuition, consider a boundary layer element of dimension $(1, \epsilon)$, for which $\nabla_{\bm x} \bm X = \bigl(\begin{smallmatrix} 2 & \\ & 2/\epsilon \end{smallmatrix}\bigr)$.
236f15b3124SJed BrownSo a small normal component of velocity will be amplified (by a factor of the aspect ratio $1/\epsilon$) in this transformation.
2372fc546d0SJed 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.
238689ee6fdSJames WrightA contravariant measure of element length in the direction of a unit vector $\hat{\bm n}$ is given by $\lVert \bigl(\nabla_{\bm X} \bm x\bigr)^T \hat{\bm n} \rVert$.
2392fc546d0SJed 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.
2402fc546d0SJed 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.
241f15b3124SJed Brown
242f15b3124SJed 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 $m^2/s$).
243f15b3124SJed BrownThis can be generalized to arbitrary grids by defining the local Péclet number
244f15b3124SJed Brown
245f15b3124SJed Brown$$
246f15b3124SJed Brown\mathrm{Pe} = \frac{\lVert \bm u \rVert^2}{\lVert \bm u_{\bm X} \rVert \kappa}.
247f15b3124SJed Brown$$ (eq-peclet)
248f15b3124SJed Brown
249f15b3124SJed BrownFor scalar advection-diffusion, the stabilization is a scalar
250f15b3124SJed Brown
251f15b3124SJed Brown$$
252f15b3124SJed Brown\tau = \frac{\xi(\mathrm{Pe})}{\lVert \bm u_{\bm X} \rVert},
253f15b3124SJed Brown$$ (eq-tau-advdiff)
254f15b3124SJed Brown
255f15b3124SJed Brownwhere $\xi(\mathrm{Pe}) = \coth \mathrm{Pe} - 1/\mathrm{Pe}$ approaches 1 at large local Péclet number.
256f15b3124SJed 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.
257f15b3124SJed BrownFor advection-diffusion, $\bm F(q) = \bm u q$, and thus the perturbed test function is
258f15b3124SJed Brown
259f15b3124SJed Brown$$
260f15b3124SJed Brown\mathcal P(v) = \tau \bm u \cdot \nabla v = \tau \bm u_{\bm X} \nabla_{\bm X} v.
261f15b3124SJed Brown$$ (eq-test-perturbation-advdiff)
262f15b3124SJed Brown
263f15b3124SJed BrownSee {cite}`hughesetal2010` equations 15-17 and 34-36 for further discussion of this formulation.
264f15b3124SJed Brown
265*bb8a0c61SJames WrightFor the Navier-Stokes and Euler equations, {cite}`whiting2003hierarchical` defines a $5\times 5$ diagonal stabilization $\mathrm{diag}(\tau_c, \tau_m, \tau_m, \tau_m, \tau_E)$ consisting of
266f15b3124SJed Brown1. continuity stabilization $\tau_c$
267f15b3124SJed Brown2. momentum stabilization $\tau_m$
268f15b3124SJed Brown3. energy stabilization $\tau_E$
269f15b3124SJed Brown
270*bb8a0c61SJames WrightThe Navier-Stokes code in this example uses the following formulation for $\tau_c$, $\tau_m$, $\tau_E$:
271*bb8a0c61SJames Wright
272*bb8a0c61SJames Wright$$
273*bb8a0c61SJames Wright\begin{aligned}
274*bb8a0c61SJames Wright
275*bb8a0c61SJames Wright\tau_c &= \frac{C_c \mathcal{F}}{8\rho \trace(\bm g)} \\
276*bb8a0c61SJames Wright\tau_m &= \frac{C_m}{\mathcal{F}} \\
277*bb8a0c61SJames Wright\tau_E &= \frac{C_E}{\mathcal{F} c_v} \\
278*bb8a0c61SJames Wright\end{aligned}
279*bb8a0c61SJames Wright$$
280*bb8a0c61SJames Wright
281*bb8a0c61SJames Wright$$
282*bb8a0c61SJames Wright\mathcal{F} = \sqrt{ \rho^2 \left [ \left(\frac{2C_t}{\Delta t}\right)^2
283*bb8a0c61SJames Wright+ \bm u \cdot (\bm u \cdot  \bm g)
284*bb8a0c61SJames Wright+ C_v \mu^2 \Vert \bm g \Vert_F ^2\right]}
285*bb8a0c61SJames Wright$$
286*bb8a0c61SJames Wright
287*bb8a0c61SJames Wrightwhere $\bm g = \nabla_{\bm x} \bm{X} \cdot \nabla_{\bm x} \bm{X}$ is the metric tensor and $\Vert \cdot \Vert_F$ is the Frobenius norm.
288*bb8a0c61SJames WrightThis formulation is currently not available in the Euler code.
289*bb8a0c61SJames Wright
290*bb8a0c61SJames WrightIn the Euler code, we follow {cite}`hughesetal2010` in defining a $3\times 3$ diagonal stabilization according to spatial criterion 2 (equation 27) as follows.
29114acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari
29214acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari$$
2932fc546d0SJed Brown\tau_{ii} = c_{\tau} \frac{2 \xi(\mathrm{Pe})}{(\lambda_{\max \text{abs}})_i \lVert \nabla_{x_i} \bm X \rVert}
29414acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari$$ (eq-tau-conservative)
29514acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari
2962fc546d0SJed 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 $i$.
2972fc546d0SJed 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.
2982fc546d0SJed BrownThe complete set of eigenvalues of the Euler flux Jacobian in direction $i$ are (e.g., {cite}`toro2009`)
29914acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari
30014acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari$$
3012fc546d0SJed Brown\Lambda_i = [u_i - a, u_i, u_i, u_i, u_i+a],
30214acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari$$ (eq-eigval-advdiff)
30314acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari
3042fc546d0SJed 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.
3052fc546d0SJed 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.
3062fc546d0SJed BrownThe fastest wave speed in direction $i$ is thus
30714acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari
30814acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari$$
3092fc546d0SJed Brown\lambda_{\max \text{abs}} \Bigl( \frac{\partial \bm F_{\text{adv}}}{\partial \bm q} \cdot \hat{\bm n}_i \Bigr) = |u_i| + a
31014acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari$$ (eq-wavespeed)
31114acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari
3122fc546d0SJed 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.
31314acc1b4SLeila Ghaffari
314f15b3124SJed Brown:::
315d783cc74SJed Brown
316d783cc74SJed BrownCurrently, this demo provides three types of problems/physical models that can be selected at run time via the option `-problem`.
317d783cc74SJed 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.
318d783cc74SJed Brown
319d783cc74SJed Brown(problem-advection)=
320d783cc74SJed Brown
321d783cc74SJed Brown## Advection
322d783cc74SJed Brown
32365749855SJed BrownA simplified version of system {eq}`eq-ns`, only accounting for the transport of total energy, is given by
324d783cc74SJed Brown
325d783cc74SJed Brown$$
326d783cc74SJed Brown\frac{\partial E}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot (\bm{u} E ) = 0 \, ,
327d783cc74SJed Brown$$ (eq-advection)
328d783cc74SJed Brown
329d783cc74SJed 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.
330d783cc74SJed Brown
331d783cc74SJed Brown- **Rotation**
332d783cc74SJed Brown
333d783cc74SJed Brown  In this case, a uniform circular velocity field transports the blob of total energy.
33465749855SJed Brown  We have solved {eq}`eq-advection` applying zero energy density $E$, and no-flux for $\bm{u}$ on the boundaries.
335d783cc74SJed Brown
336d783cc74SJed Brown- **Translation**
337d783cc74SJed Brown
338d783cc74SJed 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.
339d783cc74SJed Brown
34065749855SJed 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
341d783cc74SJed Brown
342d783cc74SJed Brown  $$
343d783cc74SJed Brown  \int_{\partial \Omega_{inflow}} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm q_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS = \int_{\partial \Omega_{inflow}} \bm v \, E_{wind} \, \bm u \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS  \, ,
344d783cc74SJed Brown  $$
345d783cc74SJed Brown
346d783cc74SJed 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.
34765749855SJed Brown  The weak form boundary integral in {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns` for outflow boundary conditions is defined as
348d783cc74SJed Brown
349d783cc74SJed Brown  $$
350d783cc74SJed Brown  \int_{\partial \Omega_{outflow}} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm q_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS = \int_{\partial \Omega_{outflow}} \bm v \, E \, \bm u \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS  \, ,
351d783cc74SJed Brown  $$
352d783cc74SJed Brown
353d783cc74SJed Brown(problem-euler-vortex)=
354d783cc74SJed Brown
355d783cc74SJed Brown## Isentropic Vortex
356d783cc74SJed Brown
357575f8106SLeila 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
358d783cc74SJed Brown
359d783cc74SJed Brown$$
360d783cc74SJed Brown\begin{aligned}
361d783cc74SJed Brown\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \bm{U} &= 0 \\
362d783cc74SJed Brown\frac{\partial \bm{U}}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{\bm{U} \otimes \bm{U}}{\rho} + P \bm{I}_3 \right) &= 0 \\
363d783cc74SJed Brown\frac{\partial E}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{(E + P)\bm{U}}{\rho} \right) &= 0 \, , \\
364d783cc74SJed Brown\end{aligned}
365d783cc74SJed Brown$$ (eq-euler)
366d783cc74SJed Brown
367575f8106SLeila 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
368d783cc74SJed Brown
369d783cc74SJed Brown$$
370d783cc74SJed Brown\begin{aligned} (\delta u_1, \, \delta u_2) &= \frac{\epsilon}{2 \pi} \, e^{0.5(1-r^2)} \, (-\bar{y}, \, \bar{x}) \, , \\ \delta T &= - \frac{(\gamma-1) \, \epsilon^2}{8 \, \gamma \, \pi^2} \, e^{1-r^2} \, , \\ \end{aligned}
371d783cc74SJed Brown$$
372d783cc74SJed Brown
373575f8106SLeila 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).
374d783cc74SJed BrownThere is no perturbation in the entropy $S=P/\rho^\gamma$ ($\delta S=0)$.
375d783cc74SJed Brown
376d783cc74SJed Brown(problem-density-current)=
377d783cc74SJed Brown
378d783cc74SJed Brown## Density Current
379d783cc74SJed Brown
38065749855SJed 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.
381d783cc74SJed 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
382d783cc74SJed Brown
383d783cc74SJed Brown$$
384d783cc74SJed Brown\begin{aligned} \rho &= \frac{P_0}{( c_p - c_v)\theta(\bm{x},t)} \pi(\bm{x},t)^{\frac{c_v}{ c_p - c_v}} \, , \\ e &= c_v \theta(\bm{x},t) \pi(\bm{x},t) + \bm{u}\cdot \bm{u} /2 + g z \, , \end{aligned}
385d783cc74SJed Brown$$
386d783cc74SJed Brown
387d783cc74SJed Brownwhere $P_0$ is the atmospheric pressure.
388d783cc74SJed BrownFor this problem, we have used no-slip and non-penetration boundary conditions for $\bm{u}$, and no-flux for mass and energy densities.
389*bb8a0c61SJames Wright
390*bb8a0c61SJames Wright## Channel
391*bb8a0c61SJames Wright
392*bb8a0c61SJames WrightA compressible channel flow. Analytical solution given in
393*bb8a0c61SJames Wright{cite}`whitingStabilizedFEM1999`:
394*bb8a0c61SJames Wright
395*bb8a0c61SJames Wright$$ u_1 = u_{\max} \left [ 1 - \left ( \frac{x_2}{H}\right)^2 \right] \quad \quad u_2 = u_3 = 0$$
396*bb8a0c61SJames Wright$$T = T_w \left [ 1 + \frac{Pr \hat{E}c}{3} \left \{1 - \left(\frac{x_2}{H}\right)^4  \right \} \right]$$
397*bb8a0c61SJames Wright$$p = p_0 - \frac{2\rho_0 u_{\max}^2 x_1}{Re_H H}$$
398*bb8a0c61SJames Wright
399*bb8a0c61SJames Wrightwhere $H$ is the channel half-height, $u_{\max}$ is the center velocity, $T_w$ is the temperature at the wall, $Pr=\frac{\mu}{c_p \kappa}$ is the Prandlt number, $\hat E_c = \frac{u_{\max}^2}{c_p T_w}$ is the modified Eckert number, and $Re_h = \frac{u_{\max}H}{\nu}$ is the Reynolds number.
400*bb8a0c61SJames Wright
401*bb8a0c61SJames WrightBoundary conditions are periodic in the streamwise direction, and no-slip and non-penetration boundary conditions at the walls.
402*bb8a0c61SJames WrightThe flow is driven by a body force.
403*bb8a0c61SJames Wright
404*bb8a0c61SJames Wright## Blasius
405*bb8a0c61SJames Wright
406*bb8a0c61SJames WrightSimulation of a laminar boundary layer flow, with the inflow being prescribed
407*bb8a0c61SJames Wrightby a [Blasius similarity
408*bb8a0c61SJames Wrightsolution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasius_boundary_layer). At the inflow,
409*bb8a0c61SJames Wrightthe velocity is prescribed by the Blasius soution profile, temperature is set
410*bb8a0c61SJames Wrightconstant, and density is allowed to float. At the outlet, only the density is
411*bb8a0c61SJames Wrightprescribed based on the user-set pressure. The wall is a no-slip,
412*bb8a0c61SJames Wrightno-penetration, no-heat flux condition. The top of the domain is treated as an
413*bb8a0c61SJames Wrightoutflow and is tilted at a downward angle to ensure that flow is always exiting
414*bb8a0c61SJames Wrightit.
415*bb8a0c61SJames Wright
416