UNIT NO 1: Finite difference schemes:

Topic No.1: Projection and truncation error

Topic No.2: Stability, consistency, accuracy and convergence of numerical schemes

Topic No.3: Time marching methods

Topic No.4: FDM applied to linear advection - diffusion equation

Topic No.5: MacCormack scheme and its application to Euler and N-S equations.

Topic No.6: Equations of Fluid Dynamics and their classification

Topic No.7: Boundary conditions.

UNIT NO.2 Basics of Finite Volume Method:

Topic No.8: Equations in integral form

Topic No.9: Numerical flux at cell faces

Topic No.10: Upwind methods

Topic No.11: Flux - vector splitting

Topic No.12: Flux- difference splitting

Topic No.13: Shock capturing methods

UNIT NO.3 Basics of Finite Element Method:

Topic No.14: Isoparametric elements

Topic No.15: Bilinear and tri-linear elements

Topic No.16: Numerical Integration

Topic No.17: Space function

Topic No.18: Petrov- Galerkin method

Topic No.19: Computation of turbulent flows

Topic No.20: RANS

Topic No.21: Turbulence modelling

UNIT NO.4 Grid generation:

Topic No.22: Algebraic and pde based methods

Topic No.23: O-, C-, H-type topologies

Topic No.24: Unstructured meshes, Hybrid meshes

Topic No.25: Large scale problems in CFD

Topic No.26: Iterative solvers, Preconditioning techniques

Topic No.27: Vector and parallel computing

Topic No.28: Post- processing for visualisation

CFD

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is the use of applied mathematics, physics and
computational software to visualize how a gas or liquid flows -- as well as how the gas or
liquid affects objects as it flows past. Computational fluid dynamics is based on the Navier-
Stokes equations.

Partial differential equation

A partial differential equation (or briefly a PDE) is a mathematical equation that involves
two or more independent variables, an unknown function (dependent on those variables), and
partial derivatives of the unknown function with respect to the independent variables.
The order of a partial differential equation is the order of the highest derivative involved.
A solution (or a particular solution) to a partial differential equation is a function that solves
the equation or, in other words, turns it into an identity when substituted into the equation. A
solution is called general if it contains all particular solutions of the equation concerned.
The term exact solution is often used for second- and higher-order nonlinear PDEs to denote
a particular solution (see also Preliminary remarks at Second-Order Partial Differential
Equations).
Partial differential equations are used to mathematically formulate, and thus aid the solution
of, physical and other problems involving functions of several variables, such as the
propagation of heat or sound, fluid flow, elasticity, electrostatics, electrodynamics, etc.

What Are the Navier-Stokes Equations?

The Navier-Stokes equations govern the motion of fluids and can be seen as Newton's
second law of motion for fluids. In the case of a compressible Newtonian fluid, this yields

where u is the fluid velocity, p is the fluid pressure, ρ is the fluid density, and μ is the fluid
dynamic viscosity. The different terms correspond to the inertial forces (1), pressure forces
(2), viscous forces (3), and the external forces applied to the fluid (4). The Navier-Stokes
equations were derived by Navier, Poisson, Saint-Venant, and Stokes between 1827 and
1845.

These equations are always solved together with the continuity equation:

The Navier-Stokes equations represent the conservation of momentum, while the continuity
equation represents the conservation of mass.

How Do They Apply to Simulation and Modeling?

These equations are at the heart of fluid flow modeling. Solving them, for a particular set of
boundary conditions (such as inlets, outlets, and walls), predicts the fluid velocity and its
pressure in a given geometry. Because of their complexity, these equations only admit a
limited number of analytical solutions. It is relatively easy, for instance, to solve these
equations for a flow between two parallel plates or for the flow in a circular pipe. For more
complex geometries, however, the equations need to be solved.

Truncation error

In numerical analysis and scientific computing, truncation error is the error made
by truncating an infinite sum and approximating it by a finite sum. For instance, if we
approximate the sine function by the first two non-zero term of its Taylor series, as in for
small , the resulting error is a truncation error.

projection error

A projection error is the unconscious assumption that others think, feel, judge, or perceive
more or less what we do. For instance, those who drink (abstain from) alcohol tend to
overestimate (underestimate) the drinking habits of others.

Time marching methods

Fast marching method. The fast marching method is a numerical method created by James
Sethian for solving boundary value problems of the Eikonal equation: Typically, such a
problem describes the evolution of a closed surface as a function of time with speed in the
normal direction at a point on the propagating surface.

After discretizing the spatial derivatives in the governing PDE's (such as the
Navier-Stokes equations), we obtain a coupled system of nonlinear ODE's in
the form

du -
dt = F(u,t)

These can be integrated in time using a time-marching method to obtain a

time-accurate solution to an unsteady flow problem. For a steady flow problem,
spatial discretization leads to a coupled system of nonlinear algebraic
equations in the form

F(u)=O.

As a result of the nonlinearity of these equations, some sort of iterative

method is required to obtain a solution. For example, one can consider the use
of Newton's method, which is widely used for nonlinear algebraic equations
(see Section 6.10.3). This produces an iterative method in which a coupled
system of linear algebraic equations must be solved at each iteration. These
can be solved iteratively using relaxation methods, which will be discussed in
Chapter 9, or directly using Gaussian elimination or some variation thereof.
Alternatively, one can consider a time-dependent path to the steady state
and use a time-marching method to integrate the unsteady form of the equations
until the solution is sufficiently close to the steady solution. The subject
of the present chapter, time-marching methods for ODE's, is thus relevant
to both steady and unsteady flow problems. When using a time-marching
method to compute steady flows, the goal is simply to remove the transient
portion of the solution as quickly as possible; time-accuracy is not required.
This motivates the study of stability and stiffness, topics which are covered
in the next two chapters.
Application of a spatial discretization to a PDE produces a coupled system
of ODE's. Application of a time-marching method to an ODE produces an
ordinary difference equation (OLlE ). In earlier chapters, we developed exact
solutions to our model PDE's and ODE's. In this chapter we will present some
basic theory of linear OLlE's which closely parallels that for linear ODE's,
and, using this theory, we will develop exact solutions for the model OLlE's
arising from the application of time-marching methods to the model ODE's.

Stability

A CFD method is stable if it does not magnify numerical errors. For an explicit CFD scheme
to be stable, the Courant number

If this is not achieved then numerical errors (unavoidable in the scheme) will increase until
they destroy the solution. Implicit solution methods are more stable and able to
tolerate NC > 1, but large values of NC are best avoided.

Consistency
An important question regarding the solution of the NSE (and any other modelled equations
we might be interested in) is how closely our discretised solution will approach the true
solution of the original equations. If the original equations can be recovered mathematically
from the discretised equations by reducing the mesh spacing ( x 0), then the discretised
equations are said to be consistent. If the scheme is consistent and stable, then the numerical
solution should converge to the true solution as x 0. CFD calculations should, if
possible, be run on sucessively finer meshes until the solution does not change, a condition
known as mesh independence.

Conservation & boundedness

The NSE express the conservation of mass and momentum (and energy), fundamental
physical principles which we would want our numerical method to match. In addition,
physically meaningful quantities are often bounded. For instance, negative energies make no
physical sense, and neither does a phase fraction < 1. Mathematical models of the flow
may not be able to fully model complex flows, but they should produce physically realistic
results - they should be realisable. Their numerical implementation as a set of difference
equations, and their solution, should also satisfy these requirements.

mesh or grid

The subdomains are often called elements or cells, and the collection of all elements or cells
is called amesh or grid. The origin of the term mesh (or grid) goes back to early days
of CFD when most analyses were 2D in nature. For 2D analyses, a domain split into elements
resembles a wire mesh, hence the name.Jan 3, 2012

accuracy

That statement is counter to what we all know to be true in practice, that a good mesh helps
the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) solver converge to the correct answer while
minimizing the computer resources expended. Stated differently, most every decent solver
will yield an accurate answer with a good mesh, but it takes the most robust of solvers to get
an answer on a bad mesh.

The crux of the issue is what precisely is meant by “a good mesh.” Syracuse University’s
Prof. John Dannenhoffer points out that we are much better at identifying a bad mesh than we
are at judging a good one. Distinguishing good from bad is clouded by the fact that badness is
a black-white determination of whether the mesh will run or not. (Badness often only means
whether there are any negative volume cells.) On the other hand, goodness is all shades of
gray – there are good meshes and there are better meshes.

Implicit Vs. Explicit Numerical Methods

Numerical solution schemes are often referred to as being explicit or implicit. When a
direct computation of the dependent variables can be made in terms of known quantities,
the computation is said to be explicit. When the dependent variables are defined by coupled
sets of equations, and either a matrix or iterative technique is needed to obtain the solution,
the numerical method is said to be implicit.

Shock capturing method

In computational fluid dynamics, shock-capturing methods are a class of techniques for
computing inviscid flows with shock waves. The computation of flow containing shock
waves is an extremely difficult task because such flows result in sharp, discontinuous changes
in flow variables such as pressure, temperature, density, and velocity across the shock.

Method
In shock-capturing methods, the governing equations of inviscid flows (i.e. Euler equations)
are cast in conservation form and any shock waves or discontinuities are computed as part of
the solution. Here, no special treatment is employed to take care of the shocks themselves,
which is in contrast to the shock-fitting method, where shock waves are explicitly introduced
in the solution using appropriate shock relations (Rankine–Hugoniot relations). The shock
waves predicted by shock-capturing methods are generally not sharp and may be smeared
over several grid elements. Also, classical shock-capturing methods have the disadvantage
that unphysical oscillations (Gibbs phenomenon) may develop near strong shock
Euler equations
The Euler equations are the governing equations for inviscid flow. To implement shock-
capturing methods, the conservation form of the Euler equations are used. For a flow without
external heat transfer and work transfer (isoenergetic flow), the conservation form of the
Euler equation in Cartesian coordinate system can be written as

where the vectors U, F, G, and H are given by

where is the total energy (internal energy + kinetic energy + potential energy) per
unit mass. That is

The Euler equations may be integrated with any of the shock-capturing methods
available to obtain the solution.

Classical and modern shock capturing methods

From a historical point of view, shock-capturing methods can be classified into two
general categories: classical methods and modern shock capturing methods (also
called high-resolution schemes). Modern shock-capturing methods are
generally upwind biased in contrast to classical symmetric or central discretizations.
Upwind-biased differencing schemes attempt to discretize hyperbolic partial
differential equations by using differencing based on the direction of the flow. On the
 other hand, symmetric or central schemes do not consider any information about the
direction of wave propagation.
Regardless of the shock-capturing scheme used, a stable calculation in the presence
of shock waves requires a certain amount of numerical dissipation, in order to avoid
the formation of unphysical numerical oscillations. In the case of classical shock-
capturing methods, numerical dissipation terms are usually linear and the same
amount is uniformly applied at all grid points. Classical shock-capturing methods
only exhibit accurate results in the case of smooth and weak shock solutions, but
when strong shock waves are present in the solution, non-linear instabilities and
oscillations may arise across discontinuities. Modern shock-capturing methods
usually employ nonlinear numerical dissipation, where a feedback mechanism adjusts
the amount of artificial dissipation added in accord with the features in the solution.
Ideally, artificial numerical dissipation needs to be added only in the vicinity of
shocks or other sharp features, and regions of smooth flow must be left unmodified.
These schemes have proven to be stable and accurate even for problems containing
strong shock waves.
Some of the well-known classical shock-capturing methods include the MacCormack
method (uses a discretization scheme for the numerical solution of hyperbolic partial
differential equations), Lax–Wendroff method (based on finite differences, uses a
numerical method for the solution of hyperbolic partial differential equations),
and Beam–Warming method. Examples of modern shock-capturing schemes include
higher-order total variation diminishing (TVD) schemes first proposed
by Harten, flux-corrected transport scheme introduced by Boris and Book, Monotonic
Upstream-centered Schemes for Conservation Laws (MUSCL) based on Godunov
approach and introduced by van Leer, various Essentially Non-Oscillatory schemes
(ENO) proposed by Harten et al., and the Piecewise Parabolic Method (PPM)
proposed by Woodward and Colella. Another important class of high-resolution
schemes belongs to the approximate Riemann solvers proposed by Roe and by Osher.
The schemes proposed by Jameson and Baker, where linear numerical dissipation
terms depend on nonlinear switch functions, fall in between the classical and modern
shock-capturing methods

Time-Marching Numerical Methods

Methods for Steady Problems

If we assume the solution is steady, and so, time is not a variable, then the

equation takes the form

R(Q,r)=0

we have at least a few other options for numerical methods:

Iterative Methods. These methods assume the equation is mathematically elliptic and
start with an initial solution and iterate to converge to a solution.
Direct Methods. These methods also assume the equation is elliptic, but solve the
system of equations in a single process.

Space-Marching Methods. These methods assume that equation can be cast as a

mathematically parabolic equation in one of the coordinate directions and marched
along that coordinate. (i.e. Supersonic flows in x-direction

Time Discretization

We will first consider time-marching numerical methods. We first need to

consider a finite time step t

where n is the index for time. The  indicates a finite step (not differential).

A couple of concepts:

1. The marching of the equation over a time step can occur over one or more stages and
one or more iterations.

The marching can be done explicitly or implicitly. An explicit method uses known
information to march the solution. An implicit method uses known and unknown information
and requires solving a local system of equations

Shock capturing method

n computational fluid dynamics, shock-capturing methods are a class of techniques for
computing inviscid flows with shock waves. The computation of flow containing shock
waves is an extremely difficult task because such flows result in sharp, discontinuous changes

in shock-capturing methods, the governing equations of inviscid flows (i.e. Euler equations)
are cast in conservation form and any shock waves or discontinuities are computed as part of
the solution. Here, no special treatment is employed to take care of the shocks themselves,
which is in contrast to the shock-fitting method, where shock waves are explicitly introduced
in the solution using appropriate shock relations (Rankine–Hugoniot relations). The shock
waves predicted by shock-capturing methods are generally not sharp and may be smeared
over several grid elements. Also, classical shock-capturing methods have the disadvantage
that unphysical oscillations (Gibbs phenomenon) may develop near strong shocks in flow
variables such as pressure, temperature, density, and velocity across the shock