An accurate and efficient gridless method based on implicit, fast, and constrained weights optimization schemes for compressible flows

Technical Paper
  • 17 Downloads

Abstract

An accurate and efficient gridless method is presented for calculation of inviscid compressible flows in subsonic to supersonic flows. The Taylor series least squares is used for discretization of spatial derivatives at each point. Fast gridless method using the second- and fourth-order artificial dissipation terms is applied for solving the Euler equations. Two methods are proposed for increasing the accuracy; implementing the constrained weights optimization and using high-order Taylor series expansion on the fast gridless method. The explicit and implicit dual-time schemes are applied for temporal discretization. To speed up convergence, local time stepping and residual smoothing techniques are used. The capability and accuracy of the methods are compared with other gridless methods, finite volume method and AGARD data for some test cases in subsonic, transonic and supersonic flows. Results show that the use of the constraint weights optimization increases the accuracy especially with fewer point distributions in comparison with conventional gridless methods and it is more efficient than other gridless methods.

Keywords

Gridless method Implicit method Constrained weights optimization Artificial dissipation Euler equations 

References

  1. 1.
    Lee CK (2000) A new finite point generation scheme using metric specifications. Int J Numer Meth Eng 48(10):1423–1444CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Löhner R, Oñate E (2004) A general advancing front technique for filling space with arbitrary objects. Int J Numer Meth Eng 61(12):1977–1991MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ortega E, Oñate E, Idelsohn S (2009) A finite point method for adaptive three-dimensional compressible flow calculations. Int J Numer Meth Fluids 60(9):937–971MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ortega E, Oñate E, Idelsohn S, Flores R (2013) A meshless finite point method for three-dimensional analysis of compressible flow problems involving moving boundaries and adaptivity. Int J Numer Meth Fluids 73(4):323–343Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nguyen VP, Rabczuk T, Bordas S, Duflot M (2008) Meshless methods: a review and computer implementation aspects. Math Comput Simul 79(3):763–813MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liu G-R (2009) Mesh free methods: moving beyond the finite element method, 2nd edn. Taylor & Francis, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Liu G-R, Gu Y-T (2005) An introduction to meshfree methods and their programming. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Katz A, Jameson A (2009) A comparison of various meshless schemes within a unified algorithm. In: 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including The New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, Orlando, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Batina JT (1993) A gridless Euler/Navier–Stokes solution algorithm for complex-aircraft applications. In: 31st Aerospace Sciences Meeting, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reno, NVGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ghosh A, Deshpande S (1995) Least squares kinetic upwind method for inviscid compressible flows. In: 12th Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VAGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Morinishi K (2001) Effective accuracy and conservation consistency of gridless type solver. Computational fluid dynamics 2000. Springer, Berlin, pp 325–330Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Löhner R, Sacco C, Onate E, Idelsohn S (2002) A finite point method for compressible flow. Int J Numer Meth Eng 53(8):1765–1779CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Deshpande S, Anil N, Arora K, Malagi K, Varma M (2004) Some fascinating new developments in kinetic schemes. In: Workshop on Modeling and Simulation in Life Sciences, Materials and Technology, December 7-8, Madras, pp. 43-63Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tota PV, Wang ZJ (2007) Meshfree Euler solver using local radial basis functions for inviscid compressible flows. In: 18th AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VAGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cai XW, Tan JJ, Ma XJ, Zhang M, Wang HS (2013) Application of hybrid Cartesian grid and gridless approach to moving boundary flow problems. Int J Numer Meth Fluids 72(9):994–1013Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Z-h MA, H-q CHEN, X-j WU (2006) A gridless-finite volume hybrid algorithm for Euler equations. Chin J Aeronaut 19(4):286–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Katz A, Jameson A (2009) Multicloud: multigrid convergence with a meshless operator. J Comput Phys 228(14):5237–5250MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hashemi M, Jahangirian A (2011) An efficient implicit mesh-less method for compressible flow calculations. Int J Numer Meth Fluids 67(6):754–770MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang H, Periaux J (2012) A fast meshless method coupled with artificial dissipation for solving 2D Euler equations. Comput Fluids 71:83–90MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jaisankar S, Shivashankar K, Rao SR (2007) A grid-free central scheme for inviscid compressible flows. In: 18th AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VAGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Deshpande SM, Ramesh V, Malagi K, Arora K (2010) Least squares kinetic upwind mesh-free method. Def Sci J 60(6):583–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hashemabadi M, Hadidoolabi M (2015) Development of an implicit high order gridless method for inviscid compressible flows. Modares Mech Eng 15(5):127–134 (In Persian) Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Arora K, Deshpande SM (2011) Accuracy and robustness of kinetic meshfree method. Meshfree methods for partial differential equations V. Springer, Berlin, pp 173–188MATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Somasekhar M, Vivek S, Malagi KS, Ramesh V, Deshpande S (2012) Adaptive cloud refinement (ACR)-adaptation in meshless framework. Commun Comput Phys 11(4):1372–1385CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chen H, Shu C (2005) An efficient implicit mesh-free method to solve two-dimensional compressible Euler equations. Int J Mod Phys C 16(03):439–454MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kennett D, Timme S, Angulo J, Badcock K (2012) An implicit meshless method for application in computational fluid dynamics. Int J Numer Meth Fluids 71(8):1007–1028MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Katz A, Jameson A (2010) Meshless scheme based on alignment constraints. AIAA J 48(11):2501–2511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hadidoolabi M (2005) Unsteady compressible flow simulation for 3D moving bodies using unstructured grids. Amirkabir University of Technology, Department of Aerospace EngineeringGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jahangirian A, Hadidoolabi M (2005) Unstructured moving grids for implicit calculation of unsteady compressible viscous flows. Int J Numer Meth Fluids 47(10–11):1107–1113CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jameson A, Mavriplis D (1986) Finite volume solution of the two-dimensional Euler equations on a regular triangular mesh. AIAA J 24(4):611–618CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jameson A (1995) Analysis and design of numerical schemes for gas dynamics, 2: artificial diffusion and discrete shock structure. Int J Comput Fluid Dyn 5(1–2):1–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jameson A (1995) Analysis and design of numerical schemes for gas dynamics, 1: artificial diffusion, upwind biasing, limiters and their effect on accuracy and multigrid convergence. Int J Comput Fluid Dyn 4(3–4):171–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bertsekas DP (1996) Constrained optimization and Lagrange multiplier methods. Athena Scientific, BelmontMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Blazek J (2015) Computational fluid dynamics: principles and applications, 2nd edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, AmsterdamMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Katz A, Jameson A (2008) Edge-based meshless methods for compressible flow simulations. In: 46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit. Reno, NevadaGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lock RC (1970) Test cases for numerical methods in two-dimensional transonic flows. In: AGARD Report No. 575, Advisory Group For Aerospace Research And Development. ParisGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Yoshihara H, Norstrud H, Boerstoel J, Chiocchia G, Jones D (1985) Test cases for inviscid flow field methods. In: AGARD Advisory Report AR-211, advisory group for aerospace research and development. NEUILLY-SUR-SEINE, FranceGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pulliam T, Barton J (1985) Euler computations of AGARD working group 07 airfoil test cases. In: 23rd Aerospace Sciences Meeting, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. RenoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Space Research Institute, Malek e Ashtar University of TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations