Abstract

Two workshops were held at the ASME V&V Symposiums of 2017 and 2018 dedicated to Iterative Errors in Unsteady Flow Simulations. The focus was on the effect of iterative errors on numerical simulations performed with implicit time integration, which require the solution of a nonlinear set of equations at each time-step. The main goal of these workshops was to create awareness to the problem and to confirm that different flow solvers exhibited the same trends. The test case was a simple two-dimensional, laminar flow of a single-phase, incompressible, Newtonian fluid around a circular cylinder at the Reynolds number of 100. A set of geometrically similar multiblock structured grids was available and boundary conditions to perform the simulations were proposed to the participants. Results from seven flow solvers were submitted, but not all of them followed exactly the proposed conditions. One set of results was obtained with adaptive grid and time refinement using triangular elements (CADYF) and another used a compressible flow solver with a dual time stepping technique and a Mach number of 0.2 (DLR-Tau). The remaining five submissions were obtained with five different incompressible flow solvers (ansyscfx 14.5, pimplefoam, refresco, saturne, starccm+ v12.06.010-R8) using implicit time integration in the proposed grids. The results obtained in this simple test case showed that iterative errors may have a significant impact on the numerical accuracy of unsteady flow simulations performed with implicit time integration. Iterative errors can be significantly larger (one to two orders of magnitude) than the residuals and/or solution changes used as convergence criteria at each time-step. The Courant number affected the magnitude of the iterative errors obtained in the proposed exercise. For the same iterative convergence criteria at each time-step, increasing the Courant number tends to increase the iterative error.

References

References
1.
Eça
,
L.
,
Vaz
,
G.
,
Toxopeus
,
S.
, and
Hoekstra
,
M.
,
2019
, “
Numerical Errors in Unsteady Flow Simulations
,”
J. Verif. Validation Uncertainty Quantif.
,
4
(
2
), p.
021001
.10.1115/1.4043975
2.
Hay
,
A.
,
Etienne
,
S.
,
Pelletier
,
D.
, and
Garon
,
A.
,
2015
, “
Pelletier - hp-Adaptive Time Integration Based on the BDF for Viscous Flows
,”
J. Comput. Phys.
,
291
, pp.
151
176
.10.1016/j.jcp.2015.03.022
3.
Schwamborn
,
D.
,
Gerhold
,
T.
, and
Heinrich
,
R.
,
2006
, “
The DLR TAU-CODE: Recent Applications in Research and Industry
,” European Conference on Computational Fluid Dynamics (
ECCOMAS CFD
), Egmond aan Zee, The Netherlands.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/224798567_The_DLR_TAU-code_Recent_applications_in_research_and_industry
4.
Eça
,
L.
, and
Hoekstra
,
M.
,
2014
, “
A Procedure for the Estimation of the Numerical Uncertainty of CFD Calculations Based on Grid Refinement Studies
,”
J. Comput. Phys.
,
262
, pp.
104
130
.10.1016/j.jcp.2014.01.006
You do not currently have access to this content.