Aerodynamic computations using a higher-order algorithm

Rango, S. De; Zingg, David W.

doi:10.2514/6.1999-167

Cited by 16 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All cases are converged to within plotting accuracy for all results shown. In cases where the residual does not reach machine zero, the cause is either the turbulence model 6 or the limiter. 7 Table V shows the relative cost of a single evaluation of the right-hand side for each discretization, excluding the boundarycondition calculation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is accomplished by fitting a cubic spline to the airfoil coordinates and the surface pressure and skin friction distributions. An adaptive quadrature routine based on the two-point GaussLegendre rule with a global error control strategy is then used to perform the integration [6].…”

Section: Governing Equations and Numerical Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These discretizations use second-order approximations for the grid metrics and the viscous derivatives. The fourth discretization under study is the algorithm of De Rango and Zingg [6], which uses fourth-order centered differences with matrix artificial dissipation for the convective terms and fourth-order differencing for the grid metrics and viscous terms. Grid convergence studies are used to determine the numerical error produced by each discretization.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of several spatial discretizations for the Navier-Stokes equations

Zingg¹,

Rango²,

Nemec³

et al. 1999

14th Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grid convergence studies for subsonic and transonic flows over airfoils are presented in order to compare the accuracy of several spatial discretizations for the compressible Navier-Stokes equations. The discretizations include the following schemes for the inviscid fluxes: (1) second-order-accurate centered differences with third-order matrix numerical dissipation, (2) the second-order convective upstream split pressure scheme (CUSP), (3) third-order upwind-biased differencing with Roe's flux-difference splitting, and (4) fourth-order centered differences with third-order matrix numerical dissipation. The first three are combined with second-order differencing for the grid metrics and viscous terms. The fourth discretization uses fourthorder differencing for the grid metrics and viscous terms, as well as higher-order approximations near boundaries and for the numerical integration used to calculate forces and moments. The results indicate that the discretization using higher-order approximations for all terms is substantially more accurate than the others, producing less than two percent numerical error in lift and drag components on grids with less than 13,000 nodes for subsonic cases and less than 18,000 nodes for transonic cases. Since the cost per grid node of all of the discretizations studied is comparable, the higher-order discretization produces solutions of a given accuracy much more efficiently than the others.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Governing Equations and Numerical Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of several spatial discretizations for the Navier-Stokes equations

Zingg¹,

Rango²,

Nemec³

et al. 1999

14th Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For comparison, the terms used in Refs. [13,14] by De Rango and Zingg et al are given as the following,…”

Section: The New 4th-order Central Differencing For Viscous Terms [15]mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…De Rango and Zingg [13] and Zingg et al [14] suggested a 4th-order accuracy conservative scheme for the viscous terms. However, their schemes do not achieve the maximum order accuracy within the stencil width used.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%