Hybrid tuned center-difference-WENO method for large eddy simulations in the presence of strong shocks

Journal of Computational Physics

Volumn 194, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 435-450

  Hill, D J ^a   Pullin, D I ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Center difference; Compressible turbulence; Hybrid methods; LES

Indexed keywords

GAS DYNAMICS; TURBULENCE;

CENTER DIFFERENCE; COMPRESSIBLE TURBULENCE; DECAYING TURBULENCE; DIFFERENCE SCHEMES; HIGH-ORDER; HIGHER-ORDER; HYBRID METHOD; LARGE-EDDY SIMULATIONS; PERFORMANCE; WEIGHTED ESSENTIALLY NON-OSCILLATORY METHOD;

LARGE EDDY SIMULATION;

EID: 1442331992     PISSN: 00219991     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcp.2003.07.032     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. N.A. Adams, K. Shariff, A high-resolution hybrid compact-ENO scheme for shock-turbulence interaction problems, J. Comput. Phys. 127 (1996) 27-51.
2. G.K. Batchelor, Pressure fluctuations in isotropic turbulence, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 47 (1951) 359.
3. W.S. Don, D. Gottlieb, Spectral simulation of supersonic reactive flows, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 35 (6) (1998) 2370-2384.
4. S. Ghosal, An analysis of numerical errors in large eddy simulations of turbulence, J. Comput. Phys. 125 (1) (1996) 187-206.
5. S. Ghosal, Mathematical and physical constraints on large-eddy simulations of turbulence, AIAA J. 37 (4) (1999) 425-433.
6. D. Gottlieb, J.S. Hesthaven, Spectral methods for hyperbolic problems, J. Comput. Appl. Math. 128 (2001) 83-131.
7. G.-S. Jiang, C.-W. Shu, Efficient implementation of weighted ENO schemes, J. Comput. Phys. 126 (1996) 202-228.
8. B. Kosovic, D.I. Pullin, R. Samtaney, Subgrid-scale modeling for large-eddy simulations of compressible turbulence, Phys. Fluids A 14 (4) (2002) 1511-1522.
9. S. Lele, Compact finite difference schemes with spectral like resolution, J. Comput. Phys. 103 (1) (1992) 16-42.
10. S.Y. Lin, J.J. Hu, Parametric study of weighted essentially nonoscillatory schemes for computational aeroacoustics, AIAA J. 39 (2000) 371-379.
11. X.-D. Liu, S. Osher, T. Chan, Weighted essentially nonoscillatory schemes, J. Comput. Phys. 115 (1994) 200-212.
12. R. Mittal, P. Moin, Suitability of upwind-biased finite difference schemes for large-eddy simulation of turbulent flows, AIAA J. 35 (1997) 1415-1417.
13. S. Pirozzoli, Conservative hybrid compact-WENO schemes for shock-turbulence interaction, J. Comput. Phys. 178 (2002) 81-117.
14. D.I. Pullin, Vortex-based model for the subgrid flux of a passive scalar, Phys. Fluids 12 (2000) 2311.
15. R. Samtaney, B. Kosovic, D.I. Pullin, Direct numerical simulation of decaying compressible turbulence and shocklet statistics, Phys. Fluids A 13 (5) (2001) 1415-1430.
16. R. Sanders, E. Morano, M.-C. Druguet, Multidimensional dissipation for upwind schemes: stability and applications to gas dynamics, J. Comput. Phys. 145 (1998) 511-537.
17. C.-W. Shu, S. Osher, Efficient implementation of essentially non-oscillatory shock-capturing schemes. ii, J. Comput. Phys. 83 (1989) 32.
18. C.K. Tam, J.C. Webb, Dispersion-relation-preserving schemes for computational acoustics, J. Comput. Phys. 107 (2) (1993) 262-281.
19. T. Voelkl, D.I. Pullin, D.C. Chan, A physical-space version of the stretched-vortex subgrid-stress model for large-eddy simulation, Phys. Fluids A 12 (7) (2000) 1810-1825.
20. Z.J. Wang, R.F. Chen, Optimized weighted essentially non-oscillatory schemes for linear waves with discontinuity, J. Comput. Phys. 174 (2001) 381-404.
21. V.G. Weirs, G.V. Candler, Optimization of weighted ENO schemes for DNS of compressible turbulence, AIAA Paper, 97-1940, 1997, pp. 1-11.
22. M. Zhuang, R.F. Chen, Optimized upwind dispersion-relation-preserving finite difference scheme for computational aeroacoustics, AIAA J. 36 (11) (1997) 2146-2148.
23. D.W. Zingg, A review of high-order and optimized finite-difference methods for simulating linear wave phenomena, AIAA J. 97-2008 (1997).