xref: /libCEED/examples/fluids/index.md (revision c94bf672d90849b4b5f0bff0e3d176986d999ed7)
1(example-petsc-navier-stokes)=
2
3# Compressible Navier-Stokes mini-app
4
5This example is located in the subdirectory {file}`examples/fluids`.
6It 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).
7Moreover, 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.
8
9## Running the mini-app
10
11```{include} README.md
12:start-after: inclusion-fluids-marker
13```
14## The Navier-Stokes equations
15
16The mathematical formulation (from {cite}`giraldoetal2010`, cf. SE3) is given in what follows.
17The compressible Navier-Stokes equations in conservative form are
18
19$$
20\begin{aligned}
21\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \bm{U} &= 0 \\
22\frac{\partial \bm{U}}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{\bm{U} \otimes \bm{U}}{\rho} + P \bm{I}_3 -\bm\sigma \right) + \rho g \bm{\hat k} &= 0 \\
23\frac{\partial E}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{(E + P)\bm{U}}{\rho} -\bm{u} \cdot \bm{\sigma} - k \nabla T \right) &= 0 \, , \\
24\end{aligned}
25$$ (eq-ns)
26
27where $\bm{\sigma} = \mu(\nabla \bm{u} + (\nabla \bm{u})^T + \lambda (\nabla \cdot \bm{u})\bm{I}_3)$ is the Cauchy (symmetric) stress tensor, with $\mu$ the dynamic viscosity coefficient, and $\lambda = - 2/3$ the Stokes hypothesis constant.
28In 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
29
30$$
31P = \left( {c_p}/{c_v} -1\right) \left( E - {\bm{U}\cdot\bm{U}}/{(2 \rho)} - \rho g z \right) \, ,
32$$ (eq-state)
33
34where $c_p$ 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).
35
36The system {eq}`eq-ns` can be rewritten in vector form
37
38$$
39\frac{\partial \bm{q}}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}) -S(\bm{q}) = 0 \, ,
40$$ (eq-vector-ns)
41
42for the state variables 5-dimensional vector
43
44$$
45\bm{q} =        \begin{pmatrix}            \rho \\            \bm{U} \equiv \rho \bm{ u }\\            E \equiv \rho e        \end{pmatrix}        \begin{array}{l}            \leftarrow\textrm{ volume mass density}\\            \leftarrow\textrm{ momentum density}\\            \leftarrow\textrm{ energy density}        \end{array}
46$$
47
48where the flux and the source terms, respectively, are given by
49
50$$
51\begin{aligned}
52\bm{F}(\bm{q}) &=
53\underbrace{\begin{pmatrix}
54    \bm{U}\\
55    {(\bm{U} \otimes \bm{U})}/{\rho} + P \bm{I}_3 \\
56    {(E + P)\bm{U}}/{\rho}
57\end{pmatrix}}_{\bm F_{\text{adv}}} +
58\underbrace{\begin{pmatrix}
590 \\
60-  \bm{\sigma} \\
61 - \bm{u}  \cdot \bm{\sigma} - k \nabla T
62\end{pmatrix}}_{\bm F_{\text{diff}}},\\
63S(\bm{q}) &=
64- \begin{pmatrix}
65    0\\
66    \rho g \bm{\hat{k}}\\
67    0
68\end{pmatrix}.
69\end{aligned}
70$$ (eq-ns-flux)
71
72Let the discrete solution be
73
74$$
75\bm{q}_N (\bm{x},t)^{(e)} = \sum_{k=1}^{P}\psi_k (\bm{x})\bm{q}_k^{(e)}
76$$
77
78with $P=p+1$ the number of nodes in the element $e$.
79We use tensor-product bases $\psi_{kji} = h_i(X_0)h_j(X_1)h_k(X_2)$.
80
81For the time discretization, we use two types of time stepping schemes.
82
83- Explicit time-stepping method
84
85  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)
86
87  $$
88  \bm{q}_N^{n+1} = \bm{q}_N^n + \Delta t \sum_{i=1}^{s} b_i k_i \, ,
89  $$
90
91  where
92
93  $$
94  \begin{aligned}
95     k_1 &= f(t^n, \bm{q}_N^n)\\
96     k_2 &= f(t^n + c_2 \Delta t, \bm{q}_N^n + \Delta t (a_{21} k_1))\\
97     k_3 &= f(t^n + c_3 \Delta t, \bm{q}_N^n + \Delta t (a_{31} k_1 + a_{32} k_2))\\
98     \vdots&\\
99     k_i &= f\left(t^n + c_i \Delta t, \bm{q}_N^n + \Delta t \sum_{j=1}^s a_{ij} k_j \right)\\
100  \end{aligned}
101  $$
102
103  and with
104
105  $$
106  f(t^n, \bm{q}_N^n) = - [\nabla \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N)]^n + [S(\bm{q}_N)]^n \, .
107  $$
108
109- Implicit time-stepping method
110
111  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).
112  The implicit formulation solves nonlinear systems for $\bm q_N$:
113
114  $$
115  \bm f(\bm q_N) \equiv \bm g(t^{n+1}, \bm{q}_N, \bm{\dot{q}}_N) = 0 \, ,
116  $$ (eq-ts-implicit-ns)
117
118  where the time derivative $\bm{\dot q}_N$ is defined by
119
120  $$
121  \bm{\dot{q}}_N(\bm q_N) = \alpha \bm q_N + \bm z_N
122  $$
123
124  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.).
125  Each nonlinear system {eq}`eq-ts-implicit-ns` will correspond to a weak form, as explained below.
126  In determining how difficult a given problem is to solve, we consider the Jacobian of {eq}`eq-ts-implicit-ns`,
127
128  $$
129  \frac{\partial \bm f}{\partial \bm q_N} = \frac{\partial \bm g}{\partial \bm q_N} + \alpha \frac{\partial \bm g}{\partial \bm{\dot q}_N}.
130  $$
131
132  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).
133  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.
134  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.
135
136To 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,
137
138$$
139\int_{\Omega} \bm v \cdot \left(\frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N) - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right) \,dV = 0 \, , \; \forall \bm v \in \mathcal{V}_p\,,
140$$
141
142with $\mathcal{V}_p = \{ \bm v(\bm x) \in H^{1}(\Omega_e) \,|\, \bm v(\bm x_e(\bm X)) \in P_p(\bm{I}), e=1,\ldots,N_e \}$ 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).
143
144Integrating by parts on the divergence term, we arrive at the weak form,
145
146$$
147\begin{aligned}
148\int_{\Omega} \bm v \cdot \left( \frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right)  \,dV
149- \int_{\Omega} \nabla \bm v \!:\! \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N)\,dV & \\
150+ \int_{\partial \Omega} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm q_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS
151  &= 0 \, , \; \forall \bm v \in \mathcal{V}_p \,,
152\end{aligned}
153$$ (eq-weak-vector-ns)
154
155where $\bm{F}(\bm q_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}}$ is typically replaced with a boundary condition.
156
157:::{note}
158The 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.
159:::
160
161We solve {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns` using a Galerkin discretization (default) or a stabilized method, as is necessary for most real-world flows.
162
163Galerkin 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.
164Our formulation follows {cite}`hughesetal2010`, which offers a comprehensive review of stabilization and shock-capturing methods for continuous finite element discretization of compressible flows.
165
166- **SUPG** (streamline-upwind/Petrov-Galerkin)
167
168  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`.
169  The weak form for this method is given as
170
171  $$
172  \begin{aligned}
173  \int_{\Omega} \bm v \cdot \left( \frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right)  \,dV
174  - \int_{\Omega} \nabla \bm v \!:\! \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N)\,dV & \\
175  + \int_{\partial \Omega} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS & \\
176  + \int_{\Omega} \bm{P}(\bm v)^T \, \left( \frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} \, + \,
177  \nabla \cdot \bm{F} \, (\bm{q}_N) - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right) \,dV &= 0
178  \, , \; \forall \bm v \in \mathcal{V}_p
179  \end{aligned}
180  $$ (eq-weak-vector-ns-supg)
181
182  This stabilization technique can be selected using the option `-stab supg`.
183
184- **SU** (streamline-upwind)
185
186  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
187
188  $$
189  \begin{aligned}
190  \int_{\Omega} \bm v \cdot \left( \frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right)  \,dV
191  - \int_{\Omega} \nabla \bm v \!:\! \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N)\,dV & \\
192  + \int_{\partial \Omega} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS & \\
193  + \int_{\Omega} \mathcal{P}(\bm v)^T \, \nabla \cdot \bm{F} \, (\bm{q}_N) \,dV
194  & = 0 \, , \; \forall \bm v \in \mathcal{V}_p
195  \end{aligned}
196  $$ (eq-weak-vector-ns-su)
197
198  This stabilization technique can be selected using the option `-stab su`.
199
200In 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.
201It is defined as
202
203$$
204\mathcal P(\bm v) \equiv \left(\bm{\tau} \cdot \frac{\partial \bm{F}_{\text{adv}} (\bm{q}_N)}{\partial \bm{q}_N} \right)^T \, \nabla \bm v\,,
205$$
206
207where 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.
208This 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`
209
210$$
211\begin{aligned}
212\diff\bm F_{\text{adv}}(\diff\bm q; \bm q) &= \frac{\partial \bm F_{\text{adv}}}{\partial \bm q} \diff\bm q \\
213&= \begin{pmatrix}
214\diff\bm U \\
215(\diff\bm U \otimes \bm U + \bm U \otimes \diff\bm U)/\rho - (\bm U \otimes \bm U)/\rho^2 \diff\rho + \diff P \bm I_3 \\
216(E + P)\diff\bm U/\rho + (\diff E + \diff P)\bm U/\rho - (E + P) \bm U/\rho^2 \diff\rho
217\end{pmatrix},
218\end{aligned}
219$$
220
221where $\diff P$ is defined by differentiating {eq}`eq-state`.
222In this notation, we may equivalently write the stabilization term as
223
224$$
225\mathcal P(\bm v)^T \bm r = \nabla \bm v \bm\tau \diff\bm F_{\text{adv}}(\bm r),
226$$
227
228where $\bm r$ is the strong form residual.
229Note 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.
230
231:::{dropdown} Stabilization scale $\bm\tau$
232A 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.
233To build intuition, consider a boundary layer element of dimension $(1, \epsilon)$, for which $\nabla_{\bm x} \bm X = \bigl(\begin{smallmatrix} 2 & \\ & 2/\epsilon \end{smallmatrix}\bigr)$.
234So a small normal component of velocity will be amplified (by a factor of the aspect ratio $1/\epsilon$) in this transformation.
235The ratio $\lVert \bm u \rVert / \lVert \bm u_{\bm X} \rVert = \lVert \bigl(\nabla_{\bm X} \bm x\bigr)^T \hat{\bm u} \rVert$ measures the element length in the direction of the velocity.
236Note that while $\nabla_{\bm X} \bm x$ is readily computable, its (transposed) inverse $\nabla_{\bm x} \bm X$ is needed directly in finite element methods and thus more convenient for this definition.
237
238The cell Péclet number is classically defined by $\mathrm{Pe}_h = \lVert \bm u \rVert h / (2 \kappa)$ where $\kappa$ is the diffusivity (units of $m^2/s$).
239This can be generalized to arbitrary grids by defining the local Péclet number
240
241$$
242\mathrm{Pe} = \frac{\lVert \bm u \rVert^2}{\lVert \bm u_{\bm X} \rVert \kappa}.
243$$ (eq-peclet)
244
245For scalar advection-diffusion, the stabilization is a scalar
246
247$$
248\tau = \frac{\xi(\mathrm{Pe})}{\lVert \bm u_{\bm X} \rVert},
249$$ (eq-tau-advdiff)
250
251where $\xi(\mathrm{Pe}) = \coth \mathrm{Pe} - 1/\mathrm{Pe}$ approaches 1 at large local Péclet number.
252Note 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.
253For advection-diffusion, $\bm F(q) = \bm u q$, and thus the perturbed test function is
254
255$$
256\mathcal P(v) = \tau \bm u \cdot \nabla v = \tau \bm u_{\bm X} \nabla_{\bm X} v.
257$$ (eq-test-perturbation-advdiff)
258
259See {cite}`hughesetal2010` equations 15-17 and 34-36 for further discussion of this formulation.
260
261For the Navier-Stokes and Euler equations in primitive variables, {cite}`whiting2003hierarchical` defines a $5\times 5$ diagonal stabilization consisting of
2621. continuity stabilization $\tau_c$
2632. momentum stabilization $\tau_m$
2643. energy stabilization $\tau_E$
265
266However, 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.
267
268$$
269\bm \tau = \frac{ 2 c_{\tau} \xi(\mathrm{Pe})}{\rho(\diff \bm F) \lVert \nabla_{\bm x} \bm X \rVert}
270$$ (eq-tau-conservative)
271
272where $c_{\tau}$ is a multiplicative constant, reported to be optimal at 0.5, and $\rho(\diff\bm F_{\text{adv}})$ is the spectral radii of the flux Jacobian matrices which represents the wave speeds. {cite}`toro2009` derives the eigenvalues of $\diff\bm F_{\text{adv}}$, $\bm \Lambda$, as following
273
274$$
275\bm \Lambda = (u-a, u, u+a)
276$$ (eq-eigval-advdiff)
277
278where the middle eigenvalue has multiplicity 3, $u = \bm u \cdot \hat n$ is the velocity component in direction $\hat n$, and $a = \sqrt{\gamma P/\rho}$ is the sound speed for ideal gasses. We imply that the wave speed is
279
280$$
281\rho(\diff\bm F_{\text{adv}}) = \bm u + a
282$$ (eq-wavespeed)
283
284Note that this wave speed is specific to ideal gases as $\gamma$ is an ideal gas parameter.
285
286:::
287
288Currently, this demo provides three types of problems/physical models that can be selected at run time via the option `-problem`.
289{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.
290
291(problem-advection)=
292
293## Advection
294
295A simplified version of system {eq}`eq-ns`, only accounting for the transport of total energy, is given by
296
297$$
298\frac{\partial E}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot (\bm{u} E ) = 0 \, ,
299$$ (eq-advection)
300
301with $\bm{u}$ 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.
302
303- **Rotation**
304
305  In this case, a uniform circular velocity field transports the blob of total energy.
306  We have solved {eq}`eq-advection` applying zero energy density $E$, and no-flux for $\bm{u}$ on the boundaries.
307
308- **Translation**
309
310  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.
311
312  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
313
314  $$
315  \int_{\partial \Omega_{inflow}} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm q_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS = \int_{\partial \Omega_{inflow}} \bm v \, E_{wind} \, \bm u \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS  \, ,
316  $$
317
318  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.
319  The weak form boundary integral in {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns` for outflow boundary conditions is defined as
320
321  $$
322  \int_{\partial \Omega_{outflow}} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm q_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS = \int_{\partial \Omega_{outflow}} \bm v \, E \, \bm u \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS  \, ,
323  $$
324
325(problem-euler-vortex)=
326
327## Isentropic Vortex
328
329Three-dimensional Euler equations, which are simplified and nondimensionalized version of system {eq}`eq-ns` and account only for the convective fluxes, are given by
330
331$$
332\begin{aligned}
333\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \bm{U} &= 0 \\
334\frac{\partial \bm{U}}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{\bm{U} \otimes \bm{U}}{\rho} + P \bm{I}_3 \right) &= 0 \\
335\frac{\partial E}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{(E + P)\bm{U}}{\rho} \right) &= 0 \, , \\
336\end{aligned}
337$$ (eq-euler)
338
339Following 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
340
341$$
342\begin{aligned} (\delta u_1, \, \delta u_2) &= \frac{\epsilon}{2 \pi} \, e^{0.5(1-r^2)} \, (-\bar{y}, \, \bar{x}) \, , \\ \delta T &= - \frac{(\gamma-1) \, \epsilon^2}{8 \, \gamma \, \pi^2} \, e^{1-r^2} \, , \\ \end{aligned}
343$$
344
345where $(\bar{x}, \, \bar{y}) = (x-x_c, \, y-y_c)$, $(x_c, \, y_c)$ represents the center of the domain, $r^2=\bar{x}^2 + \bar{y}^2$, and $\epsilon$ is the vortex strength ($\epsilon$ < 10).
346There is no perturbation in the entropy $S=P/\rho^\gamma$ ($\delta S=0)$.
347
348(problem-density-current)=
349
350## Density Current
351
352For 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.
353Its 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
354
355$$
356\begin{aligned} \rho &= \frac{P_0}{( c_p - c_v)\theta(\bm{x},t)} \pi(\bm{x},t)^{\frac{c_v}{ c_p - c_v}} \, , \\ e &= c_v \theta(\bm{x},t) \pi(\bm{x},t) + \bm{u}\cdot \bm{u} /2 + g z \, , \end{aligned}
357$$
358
359where $P_0$ is the atmospheric pressure.
360For this problem, we have used no-slip and non-penetration boundary conditions for $\bm{u}$, and no-flux for mass and energy densities.
361