Mark Lohry writes:
> It seems to me with these semi-implicit methods the CFL limit is still so
> close to the explicit limit (that paper stops at 30), I don't really see
> the purpose unless you're running purely incompressible? That's just my
> ignorance speaking though. I'm currently running
Mark Lohry via petsc-users writes:
> For what it's worth, I'm regularly solving much larger problems (1M-100M
> unknowns, unsteady) with this discretization and AMG setup on 500+ cores
> with impressively great convergence, dramatically better than ILU/ASM. This
> just happens to be the first
>
>
>
> Any thoughts here? Is there anything obviously wrong with my setup?
>
Fast and robust solvers for NS require specialized methods that are not
provided in PETSc and the methods tend to require tighter integration with
the meshing and discretization than the algebraic interface supports.
I
