"Kirk, Benjamin (JSC-EG311)" <[email protected]> writes:

> well you probably should clarify that - you are certainly "unwinding"
> at the cell interfaces to get an upwind bias in the scheme, right? So
> that could be alternatively looked at as a central + diffusive
> discretrization… So I would contend the artificial viscosity is (i)
> less direct and (ii) physically based, but could be thought of as
> viscosity nonetheless.

1. "upwinding" here means the solution of a Riemann problem.  If you use
a Godunov flux, then the "upwinding" is introducing no numerical
viscosity.  I think of Riemann problems as being very fundamental when
solving problems that do not have continuous solutions.

2. Numerical dissipation introduced by an approximate Riemann solver is
decoupled from the convergence rate of the method.  The Riemann solve
has no tunable parameters, does not depend on the grid, and can attain
any order of accuracy purely by raising the order of reconstruction (in
FV) or the basis order (in DG).  Compare this to SUPG, for example,
which has an O(h) term.

Viscous fluxes are messier with DG: they have tunable parameters and the
tradeoffs are never satisfying.

> Certainly if you computed the interface cell flux as the average of
> the neighbors things would go to hell in a hurry?

Yes, that's unstable.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Precog is a next-generation analytics platform capable of advanced
analytics on semi-structured data. The platform includes APIs for building
apps and a phenomenal toolset for data science. Developers can use
our toolset for easy data analysis & visualization. Get a free account!
http://www2.precog.com/precogplatform/slashdotnewsletter
_______________________________________________
Libmesh-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-users

Reply via email to