Advertisement

Ocean Dynamics

, Volume 62, Issue 8, pp 1201–1215 | Cite as

Adaptive volume penalization for ocean modeling

  • Shanon M. Reckinger
  • Oleg V. Vasilyev
  • Baylor Fox-Kemper
Article
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Multi-scale modelling of coastal, shelf and global ocean dynamics

Abstract

The development of various volume penalization techniques for use in modeling topographical features in the ocean is the focus of this paper. Due to the complicated geometry inherent in ocean boundaries, the stair-step representation used in the majority of current global ocean circulation models causes accuracy and numerical stability problems. Brinkman penalization is the basis for the methods developed here and is a numerical technique used to enforce no-slip boundary conditions through the addition of a term to the governing equations. The second aspect to this proposed approach is that all governing equations are solved on a nonuniform, adaptive grid through the use of the adaptive wavelet collocation method. This method solves the governing equations on temporally and spatially varying meshes, which allows higher effective resolution to be obtained with less computational cost. When penalization methods are coupled with the adaptive wavelet collocation method, the flow near the boundary can be well-resolved. It is especially useful for simulations of boundary currents and tsunamis, where flow near the boundary is important. This paper will give a thorough analysis of these methods applied to the shallow water equations, as well as some preliminary work applying these methods to volume penalization for bathymetry representation for use in either the nonhydrostatic or hydrostatic primitive equations.

Keywords

Immersed boundary methods Shallow water equations Adaptive mesh refinement Wavelet collocation Complex geometry 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by DOE-CCPP (DE-FG02-07ER64468). BFK was supported by NSF FRG 0855010. Also, thanks to Scott Reckinger.

References

  1. Adcroft A, Marshall J (1998) How slippery are piecewise-constant coastlines in numerical ocean models? Tellus A 50(1):95–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adcroft A, Hill C, Marshall J (1997) Representation of topography by shaved cells in a height coordinate ocean model. Mon Weather Rev 125:2293–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Angot P (1999) Analysis of singular perturbations on the Brinkman problem for fictitious domain models of viscous flows. Math Methods Appl Sci 22:1395–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Angot P, Bruneau CH, Fabrie P (1999) A penalization method to take into account obstacles in viscous flows. Numer Math 81(4):497–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arbic B, Scott R (2008) On quadratic bottom drag, geostrophic turbulence, and oceanic mesoscale eddies. J Phys Oceanogr 38(1):84–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Arquis E, Caltagirone JP (1984) Sur les conditions hydrodynamiques au voisinage d’une interface milieu fluide - milieu poreux : application à la convection naturelle. C R Acad Sci Paris II 299:1–4Google Scholar
  7. Blackstock DT (2000) Fundamentals of physical acoustics. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen C, Liu H, Beardsley RC (2003) An unstructured grid, finite-volume, three-dimensional, primitive equations ocean model: application to coastal ocean and estuaries. J Atmos Ocean Technol 20(1):159–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chui C (1997) Wavelets: a mathematical tool for signal analysis. SIAM monographs on mathematical modeling and computation. SIAM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  10. Chung C (1995) Wave propagation and scattering in computational aeroacoustics. Pennsylvania State University, Department of Aerospace EngineeringGoogle Scholar
  11. Collins WD, Bitz CM, Blackmon ML, Bonan GB, Bretherton CS, Carton JA, Chang P, Doney SC, Hack JJ, Henderson TB, Kiehl JT, Large WG, McKenna DS, Santer BD, Smith RD (2006) The community climate system model version 3 (CCSM3). J Clim 19:2122–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Danilov S, Kivman G, Schroter J (2004) A finite element ocean model: principles and evaluation. Ocean Model 6(2):125–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Daubechies I (1992) Ten lectures on wavelets. No. 61 in CBMS-NSF series in applied mathematics. SIAM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  14. Donoho DL (1992) Interpolating wavelet transforms. Tech. rep. 408, Department of Statistics, Stanford UniversityGoogle Scholar
  15. Fox-Kemper B (2004) Wind-driven barotropic gyre II: effects of eddies and low interior viscosity. J Mar Res 62:195–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fox-Kemper B, Pedlosky J (2004) Wind-driven barotropic gyre I: circulation control by eddy vorticity fluxes to an enhanced removal region. J Mar Res 62:169–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fringer OB, Gerritsen M, Street RL (2006) An unstructured-grid, finite-volume, nonhydrostatic, parallel coastal ocean simulator. Ocean Model 14:139–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Herrnstein A, Wickett M, Rodrigue G (2005) Structured adaptive mesh refinement using leapfrog time integration on a staggered grid for ocean models. Ocean Model 9:283304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Iskandarani M, Haidvogel DB, Levin J (2003) A three-dimensional spectral element model for the solution of the hydrostatic primitive equations. J Comput Phys 186(2):397–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kevlahan KR, Vasilyev OV (2005) An adaptive wavelet collocation method for fluid-structure interaction at high reynolds numbers. SIAM J Sci Comput 26:1894–1915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kevlahan NKR, Vasilyev OV, Cherhabili A (2000) An adaptive wavelet method for turbulence in complex geometries. In: Deville M, Owens R (eds) 16th IMACS world congress 2000 proceedings. Lausanne - August 21–25, 2000, IMACS, vol 411–39Google Scholar
  22. Kevlahan NKR, Alam JM, Vasilyev OV (2007) Scaling of space-time modes with Reynolds number in two-dimensional turbulence. J Fluid Mech 570:217–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Liandrat J, Tchamitchian P (1990) Resolution of the 1d regularized Burgers equation using a spatial wavelet approximation. Tech. rep., NASA contractor report 187480, ICASE report 90-83. NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton VA 23665-5225Google Scholar
  24. Liu Q, Vasilyev OV (2007) A Brinkman penalization method for compressible flow in complex geometries. J Comput Phys 227:946–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lynch DR, Ip JTC, Naimie CE, Werner FE (1996) Comprehensive coastal circulation model with application to Gulf of Maine. Cont Shelf Res 16(7):875–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mallat S (1998) A wavelet tour of signal processing. Academic Press, San Diego, CAGoogle Scholar
  27. Marshall J, Adcroft A, Hill C, Perelman L, Heisey C (1997) A finite-volume, incompressible Navier–Stokes model for studies of the ocean on parallel computer. J Geophys Res 102(C3):5753–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mittal R, Iaccarino G (2005) Immersed boundary methods. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 37:239–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pain CC, Piggott MD, Goddard AJH, Fang F, Gorman GJ, Marshall DP, Eaton MD, Power PW, de Oliveira CRE (2005) Three-dimensional unstructured mesh ocean modelling. Ocean Model 10(1–2):5–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pedlosky J (1987) Geophysical fluid dynamics. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pedlosky J (1996) Ocean circulation theory. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Peskin CS (2002) The immersed boundary method. Acta Numer 11:479–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Popinet S, Rickard G (2007) A tree-based solver for adaptive ocean modelling. Ocean Model 16(3–4):224–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Reckinger SJ, Livescu D, Vasilyev OV (2010) Adaptive wavelet collocation method simulations of Rayleigh-Taylor instability. Phys Scr T142(014064):1–6Google Scholar
  35. Regele JD, Vasilyev OV (2009) An adaptive wavelet-collocation method for shock computations. Int J Comput Fluid Dyn 23(7):503–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schneider K, Vasilyev OV (2010) Wavelet methods in computational fluid dynamics. Ann Rev Fluid Mech 42:473–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sweldens W (1998) The lifting scheme: a construction of second generation wavelets. SIAM J Math Anal 29(2):511–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tseng YH, Fersiger JH (2003) A ghost-cell immersed boundary method for flow in complex geometry. J Comput Phys 192(593–623)Google Scholar
  39. Vasilyev OV (2003) Solving multi-dimensional evolution problems with localized structures using second generation wavelets. Int J Comput Fluid Dyn 17(2):151–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vasilyev OV, Bowman C (2000) Second generation wavelet collocation method for the solution of partial differential equations. J Comput Phys 165:660–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Vasilyev OV, Kevlahan NK (2005) An adaptive multilevel wavelet collocation method for elliptic problems. J Comput Phys 206(2):412–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Vasilyev OV, Kevlahan NKR (2002) Hybrid wavelet collocation–Brinkman penalization method for complex geometry flows. Int J Numer Methods Fluids 40:531–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Vasilyev OV, Yuen DA, Paolucci S (1997) The solution of PDEs using wavelets. Comput Phys 11(5):429–35Google Scholar
  44. White L (2007) Accuracy and consistency in finite element ocean modeling. PhD thesis, Universite Catholique De LouvainGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shanon M. Reckinger
    • 1
  • Oleg V. Vasilyev
    • 2
  • Baylor Fox-Kemper
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Engineering, Department of Mechanical EngineeringFairfield UniversityFairfieldUSA
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical Engineering, UCB 427University of Colorado at BoulderBoulderUSA
  3. 3.Department of Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES), and Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, UCB 216University of Colorado at BoulderBoulderUSA

Personalised recommendations