No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Numerical Approximation of a Compressible Multiphase System
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 June 2015
Abstract
The numerical simulation of non conservative system is a difficult challenge for two reasons at least. The first one is that it is not possible to derive jump relations directly from conservation principles, so that in general, if the model description is non ambiguous for smooth solutions, this is no longer the case for discontinuous solutions. From the numerical view point, this leads to the following situation: if a scheme is stable, its limit for mesh convergence will depend on its dissipative structure. This is well known since at least [1]. In this paper we are interested in the “dual” problem: given a system in non conservative form and consistent jump relations, how can we construct a numerical scheme that will, for mesh convergence, provide limit solutions that are the exact solution of the problem. In order to investigate this problem, we consider a multiphase flow model for which jump relations are known. Our scheme is an hybridation of Glimm scheme and Roe scheme.
Keywords
Information
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Global Science Press Limited 2014
References
[1]Karni, S.Viscous shock profiles and primitive formulations. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 29(1592–160), 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Kapila, A.K., Menikoff, R., Bdzil, J.B., Son, S.F., and Stewart, D.S.Two-phase modeling of deflagration-to-detonation transition in granular materials: reduced equations. Phys. Fluids, 13(10):23, 2001.Google Scholar
[3]Baer, M.R. and Nunziato, J.W.A two-phase mixture theory for the deflagration-to-detonation transition (DDT) in reactive granular materials. Int. J. Multiphase Flow, 12:861–889, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Murrone, A. and Guillard, H.A five equation reduced model for compressible two-phase flow problems. J. Comput. Phys., 202(2):664–698,2005.Google Scholar
[5]Saurel, R., Le Métayer, O., Massoni, J., and Gavrilyuk, S.Shock jump relations for multiphase mixtures with stiff mechanical relaxation. Shock Waves, 16(3):209–232, 2007.Google Scholar
[6]Abgrall, R. and Karni, S.A comment on the computation of non-conservative products. J. Comput. Phys., 229(8):2759–2763, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Godlewski, E. and Raviart, P.-A.Numerical approximation of hyperbolic systems of conservation laws. New York, NY: Springer, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Petipas, F., Franquet, E., Saurel, R., and Le Métayer, O.A relaxation–projection method for compressible flows, part II: artificial heat exchange for multiphase shocks. J. Comput Phys., 223(2):822–845, 2007.Google Scholar
[9]Petitpas, F., Saurel, R., Franquet, E, and Chinnayya, A.Modelling detonation waves in condensed energetic materials: multiphase cj conditions and multidimensional computations. Shock Waves, 19(5):377–401, 2009.Google Scholar
[10] Manuel Castro, J.; LeFloch, Philippe G.; Luz Muñoz-Ruiz, María and Parés, Carlos. Why many theories of shock waves are necessary: convergence error in formally path-consistent schemes. J. Comput. Phys., 227(17):8107–8129,2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11]Gallice, G.Positive and entropy stable Godunov schemes for gas dynamics and MHD equations in Lagrangian or Elerian coordinates. Numer. Math., 94:673–713, 2003.Google Scholar
[12]Gallice, G.Roe’s matrices for general conservation laws in Eulerian or Lagrangian coordinates. application to gas dynamics and MHD. C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, 321:1069–1072, 1995.Google Scholar
[13]Roe, P.L.Approximate Riemann solvers, parameter vectors, and difference schemes. J. Comput. Phys., 43:357–372, 1981.Google Scholar
[14]Roe, P.L. Fluctuations and signals - A framework for numerical evolution problems, 1982.Google Scholar
[15]Abgrall, R.Residual distribution schemes: current status and future trends. Comput. Fluids, 35(7):641–669, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16]Pares, C.Numerical methods for nonconservative hyperbolic systems: a theoretical framework. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 44:300–321, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]Sweby, P.K.High resolution schemes using flux limiters for hyperbolic conservation laws. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 21(5), 1984.Google Scholar
[18]Karni, S.Multi-component flow calculations by a consistent primitive algorithm. Journal of Computational Physics, 112:31–43, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[19]Fjordholm, U.S. and Mishra, S.Accurate numerical discretizations of non-conservative hyperbolic systems. Technical Report 2010-25, ETH Zürich, Seminar für Applied mathematisch, 2010.Google Scholar
[20]Castro, M.J., Fjordholm, U.S., Mishra, S., and Parés., C.Entropy stable conservative and entropy stable scheme for non-conservative hyperbolic systems. Technical Report 2011-49, Seminar für Angewandte Mathematik, ETH Zürich, 2011.Google Scholar
[21]Collela, P.Glimm’s method for gas dynamic. SIAM J. Sci. Stat. Comput., 3(1):76–110, 1982.Google Scholar
[22]Sod, G.A.A numerical study of a converging cylindrical shock. J. Fluid Mech., 83(785–794), 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[23]Glimm, J., Marshall, G., and Plohr, B.A generalized Riemann problem for quasi-one dimensional gas flows. Advances in Applied Mathematics, 5:1–30, 1984.Google Scholar
[24]Le Martelot, S., Nkonga, B., and Saurel, R.Liquid and liquid-gas flows at all speeds. Journal of Computational Physics, 255:53–82, 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12
- Cited by