Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid

Mechanics

ISSN: 1994-2060 (Print) 1997-003X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tcfm20

A New Spatial Discretization Strategy of the

Convective Flux Term for the Hyperbolic
Conservation Laws

Adnan Qamar, Nadeem Hasan & Sanjeev Sanghi

To cite this article: Adnan Qamar, Nadeem Hasan & Sanjeev Sanghi (2010) A New
Spatial Discretization Strategy of the Convective Flux Term for the Hyperbolic Conservation
Laws, Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics, 4:4, 593-611, DOI:
10.1080/19942060.2010.11015344

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/19942060.2010.11015344

Copyright 2010 Taylor and Francis Group

LLC

Published online: 19 Nov 2014.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 203

View related articles

Citing articles: 2 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tcfm20
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 593–611 (2010)

A NEW SPATIAL DISCRETIZATION STRATEGY

OF THE CONVECTIVE FLUX TERM FOR THE HYPERBOLIC
CONSERVATION LAWS
Adnan Qamar*, Nadeem Hasan** and Sanjeev Sanghi#

* BME, College of Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann-Arbor, MI-48109, USA

E-Mail: adqamar@umich.edu (Corresponding Author)
** Department of Mechanical Engineering, A. M. U., Aligarh (U.P.)-202002, India
# Department of Applied Mechanics, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi-110016, India

ABSTRACT: In this work, a new spatial discretization scheme for flows governed by the hyperbolic conservation
laws is proposed. The spatial discretization involves the concept of classical particle velocity upwinding (PVU) for
the convective flux term in the hyperbolic conservation laws. The novelty of the approach lies in the use of the fluid
particle velocity or the entropy wave speed at the cell interface to ascertain the upwind direction. The cell face
convective fluxes are obtained from a first order or a second order upwind biased interpolation, depending on
whether the cell under consideration lies in the vicinity of a discontinuity or in a region of steep gradients in the
solution. The discontinuities or regions of steep gradients are detected by employing a smoothness indicator function
as employed in some of the earlier studies. The proposed spatial discretization strategy has been combined with a
two step, second order explicit time integration strategy for the application to the solution of the unsteady
Euler/Navier-Stokes equations in the strong conservation form. Test cases involving two 1-D Riemann problems,
three 2-D inviscid supersonic flow problems and a 2-D viscous supersonic flow problem, have been employed to
establish the validity of the procedure and to assess the performance of the proposed strategy. The proposed PVU
scheme performs quite favorably in comparison to conventional schemes. From the point of view of implementation,
particularly in multidimensional scenarios, this strategy offers a good balance of accuracy and simplicity.
Keywords: upwinding, convective flux, compressible flow, riemann, shock-vortex, cylinder, step flow

1. INTRODUCTION flows. They use the same strategy throughout the

High speed flows are characterized by the
presence of shock, expansion and contact
discontinuities and their interactions among
themselves and with the boundary-layer. Accurate
prediction of such interactions is critical to the
aerodynamic design of supersonic aircraft, air-
breathing engine intakes and its other components.
The presence of these flow features for the case of
a supersonic aircraft affect the aerodynamic loads
and important design parameters such as surface
pressure, skin friction, lift and drag. The
challenge of accurate and efficient prediction of
these flow features has been the primary
motivation towards the construction of efficient
and accurate numerical methods for non-linear
hyperbolic conservative laws.
A large number of numerical schemes for
compressible flow computations are available in
the literature. These schemes can be classified as
the first, the second and the third generation
schemes by Laney (1998). The first generation
methods are some of the early and most basic
methods for the computation of compressible
solution domain irrespective of the presence of
the discontinuities. The first generation methods
can be further subdivided into two categories,
namely the flux approach and the wave approach.
The flux approach considers only the fluxes
whereas the wave approach models the flux and
the wave, using either flux vector splitting or
Riemann solvers, which make them more
physical and accurate at the cost of being more
expensive and complicated. The first generation
methods exhibit low accuracy and stability. They
can model shocks well but suffer from low
accuracy in smooth regions or, vice-versa. They
can also model smooth region well but then
experience poor stability near shocks in the form
of spurious oscillation and overshoots, often
termed the Gibbs phenomenon. Some of the
popular first generation numerical schemes are
the schemes of Lax Friedrichs, Lax Wendroff,
Steger Warming, Van Leer, Beam-Warming,
Godunov, Roe, etc as detailed in Laney (1998)
and Hirsch (1990).
The second generation methods, also known as
the solution sensitive methods, combine a range

Received: 17 Feb. 2010; Revised: 22 Jun. 2010; Accepted: 12 Jul. 2010

593
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)
of first generation methods, varying the exact
blend from place to place based on solution
features such as shocks. The solution sensitive
methods can be classified into three categories,
namely, the flux limited methods, the self-
adjusting hybrid methods and the flux corrected
transport (FCT) methods. This categorization
masks the fact that on the fundamental level all
the three approaches are the same. The difference
arises not in the basic ideas and philosophies, but
in the implementation details, the tradition, the
jargon and the notations. All the solution sensitive
methods locate the region of large gradient
indicating the presence of discontinuities and use
a suitable type of (first order accurate) first
generation method to avoid oscillations in that
region. Higher order first generation methods are
employed in regions where the gradients are not
large i.e. the smooth regions. Solution sensitive
methods are also commonly referred to as TVD
methods. Many solution sensitive methods
explicitly enforce non-linear stability conditions,
which reduces spurious oscillations near shocks.
However, they suffer from clipping errors at the
solution extremas. The combination methods have
trade-offs which are far less severe than the first
generation methods. Some of the popular second
generation methods are Van Leer’s flux limited
method, Sweby’s flux limited method, Roe flux
limited method, Harten’s flux corrected method,
Boris-Book flux corrected method, Harten self-
adjusting method, etc as given in Laney (1998)
and Hirsch (1990).
The third generation methods are the most elegant
and elaborate methods with high overall accuracy.
They are often referred to as the high-resolution
shock capturing methods. The popular names
among this category are MUSCLE, PPM and
WENO (Laney, 1998; Hirsch, 1990; Toro, 1999)
type schemes, which are based on the
reconstruction evolution technique. They are very
accurate in smooth regions but show a diffusive
behavior in the vicinity of discontinuities.
However a major drawback associated with the
third generation schemes is that they are very
complicated to implement and have a large
computational overhead per grid point. Therefore
they are expensive in terms of CPU time
especially in the computing of multidimensional
flows. For instance, the high order WENO
scheme turned out to be too costly to be used for
grid convergence studies in several cases reported
by Sjogreen and Yee (2003).
For the computation of compressible flows the
second generation solution sensitive methods are
found to be more suitable in the overall sense if
594
factors like ease of implementation for practical
multidimensional problems, computational
efficiency, stability and accuracy are to be taken
into consideration. Among these methods, the
upwinding procedure is one of the most popular
choices for investigating high speed flows
(Pandolfi and Ambrosio, 2002). While the roots
of the upwind procedures lie in the first
generation methods, they have been successfully
applied in the higher generation methods. In
general the upwinding procedure for compressible
flows is applied to the inviscid flux in the
governing equations, which are generally based
on the wave speeds. The major approach in the
upwinding schemes can be divided in two
categories, namely the Godunov approach and the
Flux Vector Splitting approach. A comprehensive
review of these methods can be found in Harten et
al. (1983), Jameson (1995), Pandolfi and
Ambrosio (2002), Roe (1981), Sokolov (2002)
and Steger and Warming (1981).
The Godunov type approach utilizes an exact or
an approximate Riemann solution between two
adjacent states across the cell interface to
calculate the flux through the interface between
them. Most of the Gudonov type schemes have
proven to be accurate and robust for one-
dimensional Euler equation computations.
However as pointed out in Sun and Takayama
(2003), for multidimensional cases the extension
based on one dimensional Riemann solvers which
neglects the shear waves that only exist in multi-
dimensions, contains a large amount of
empiricism and must therefore remain a suspect.
Although these schemes have been successfully
applied to many practical problems, Quirk (1994)
reported that many Godunov type schemes
contain subtle flaws that can cause spurious
solutions in two dimensions.
The Flux Vector Splitting approach achieves
upwinding by decomposition of the flux vector
into components contributed by the left and right
running waves in a given coordinate direction.
The discretization of the split components is then
carried out using an upwind bias where the
upwind direction is based on the wave direction.
However, as compared to the Godunov type
scheme, the Flux Vector Splitting results in
poorer resolution of contact discontinuities (Sun
and Takayama, 2003). Most upwinding schemes,
either Godunov or Flux Vector Splitting type
have difficulties in resolving the sonic point and
often produce a spurious expansion wave.
Another class of schemes that has gained
popularity in the recent past is the AUSM family
of schemes. Developed during early 90’s, this
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)
class of schemes originated from the work of Liou
and Steffen (1991 and 1993). The basic idea of
the AUSM schemes which separates them from
the rest of the schemes is the separation of the
total flux into three components namely, the
convective part, the pressure and the viscous
terms. The derivatives of these separated
components are then evaluated by applying
different discretization strategy to the three
components. In these schemes the pressure and
convective terms are separated only in the
momentum equation while in the energy equation
the two terms are combined together. The
convective fluxes are evaluated at the cell faces
by utilizing the left or right states of the face
under consideration. The choice between the left
or right state is made on the basis of a cell face
Mach number which is defined by combining the
contributions from both the left and right state. In
order to model the wave physics the cell face
Mach number is split into a part contributed by
right running waves and a part contributed by left
running wave. The idea is similar to the Van-Leer
splitting based on the Mach number splitting. In
fact Liou and Steffen (1991) utilizing the same
polynomial function of (M1) for splitting the
Mach number as employed by Van-Van-Leer
(1982). The pressure at cell face is also
determined by splitting it into two components on
the basis of right and left running waves. The
viscous terms are discretized using central
differencing. Many variants of AUSM family
have also been proposed in the recent past in
which the convective terms at a cell interface are
re-evaluated according to the criterion of TVD
limiters (Kim and Kim, 2005). These families of
schemes have been proven to be accurate, simple,
robust and easy to extend to other type of
conservation laws, thus providing an attractive
alternative to the existing schemes. In spite of the
enormous progress achieved, deficiencies like the
post-shock overshoots and pressure oscillations
along the transverse direction in the boundary
layers have been experienced as reported by Kim
and Kim (2005).
Recently, the classical first order particle velocity
upwinding discretization of the convective term in
the hyperbolic conservation laws was employed
by the present authors Qamar et al. (2005 and
2006). The work demonstrated the applicability of
the discretization procedure for the computing of
flows governed by the hyperbolic conservation
laws. The upwinding strategy was combined with
the two step predictor-corrector time integration
finite difference scheme. It resulted in stable and
reasonably accurate computation of flows
595
governed by 1D scalar advection equation, 1D
Euler equation and the 2D Navier-stokes
equations. No explicit artificial viscosity was
needed to stabilize the computations. The stability
of the scheme was demonstrated analytically for
the linear advection equation using the Von-
Neumann Stability analysis. The criteria of TVD
and monotonicity were applied to the results of
the numerical test cases to further demonstrate the
stability characteristics of the scheme.
While the earlier study by the present authors
establishes the applicability of the PVU strategy
in the context of the hyperbolic conservation laws,
it also simultaneously opens up several issues that
warrant further investigations. Firstly, the relative
performance of the PVU scheme with respect to
the conventional schemes needs to be investigated
and secondly in order to make the scheme suitable
for practical computation of multidimensional
flows, the suitability of higher order upwinding
discretization needs to be examined. For the
higher order version of the PVU scheme a similar
idea to that of Boris and Book (1973) FCT
method is applied which is an adaptive blend of
two simpler methods (first order upwinding and
Lax-Wendroff, 1960). In case of PVU scheme, an
adaptive blend of first and second order upwind is
utilized with the smoothness indicator function
which decides the use of first order or second
order discretization in the solution domain. Also,
only a fix grid is used while computing the
solution using the PVU scheme as appose to fixed
and moving Lagrangian grid used in Boris-Book
FCT method.
The paper is organized in four sections. The
governing equations (Euler and Navier-Stokes)
for compressible flow of a perfect gas are
presented together with details of the proposed
2nd order version of the PVU scheme in section 2.
Section 3 comprises the numerical test cases in
which the comparison and the performance of the
1st order PVU scheme is made with those of the
conventional schemes, followed by numerical
testing of the 2nd order PVU scheme. Finally
conclusions are drawn and suggestions for future
work are made in section 4.
2. NUMERICAL SCHEME
The spatial discretization of the system of
hyperbolic conservation laws in the proposed
strategy is based on the following key ideas:
 The total flux is separated into the ‘convective’
and ‘non-convective’ parts. The pressure terms
occurring in the momentum and the energy
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)

equations are clubbed with the viscous terms to reasonably accurate procedure for the computing
form the ‘non-convective’ part of the flux. of multi-dimensional flows of practical
importance.
 The gradient of the convective fluxes is
The following sections provide the details of the
constructed from the cell face values which are
spatial discretization for the system of hyperbolic
obtained by employing a first order upwind
conservation laws. The spatial discretizations
biased procedure or a higher order upwind
have been proposed within the framework of a
biased procedure. The upwind direction at a
finite difference methodology operating on a
cell interface is decided on the basis of fluid
structured grid. However, the ideas can be
particle velocity or entropy wave speed at the
implemented on an unstructured mesh with
cell face.
suitable modifications to suit the needs of a finite
 The choice between the usage of a first order volume methodology. The proposed spatial
upwind and a higher order upwind discretization philosophy is combined with a
methodology is made on the basis of the predictor-corrector time integration methodology
existing gradients in the solution. In regions of to assess the performance of the scheme for the
steep gradients, physically representing shocks, hyperbolic conservation laws.
contacts etc., a first order upwind scheme is
utilized in order to avoid spurious oscillations. 2.1 Spatial discretization
For regions with relatively low gradients, a
A two-dimensional system of conservative laws
higher order upwinding scheme is employed in
(Anderson, 1995) governing a variable density
order to maintain accuracy.
flow (compressible flow) is given by
The first idea bears some resemblance to the
U F G
AUSM family of schemes originally developed   J (1)
by Liou and Steffen (1993). However, there are t x y
some important differences. In the AUSM family,
where U is the vector of conserved quantities, F
the flux is separated into a convective part; a
and G are the total flux vectors and J is the source
pressure part and the viscous contribution as far
vector. Following the ideas outlined in section 2,
as the momentum equations are concerned. For
Eq. 1 is written in a slightly different form as,
the energy equation, the flux is separated into a
convective and a non-convective part. Another U  ( Fc  Fnc )  (G c  G nc )
important difference lies in the evaluation of the   J (2)
t x y
flux at the cell faces. In the AUSM family, while
the flux at the cell face is evaluated using an The total flux vectors F and G are split into two
upwind procedure, the upwind direction is not vectors. Fc includes the convective terms in x-
based on the fluid particle velocity as in the direction and Gc accounts for the convective
proposed PVU scheme. Instead, in an effort to terms in y-direction. The Fnc and Gnc vectors,
model the wave physics, the cell face Mach represent the pressure and viscous terms
number is split into a contribution from the right respectively. For the system governed by the
and the left running waves. Suitable functions are Euler and the Navier-Stokes equations, the
then employed for the supersonic and subsonic various flux vectors in accordance with the form
regimes to determine these contributions. expressed in Eq. 2 are given as follows:
The basic philosophy of the proposed scheme  2D-Euler equations
rests on accurate discretization of the fluxes in
order to maintain the overall conservation of the   u  0 
entire system. The scheme only takes into account u   2 p 
  u   
the entropy wave in determining the convective U   Fc    Fnc   
fluxes at the cell faces. Owing to the hyperbolic  v    uv  0 
nature of the unsteady form of the governing   E    uE  up 
equations for compressible flows, much of the v  0  0 
effort of the researchers has gone into      
  uv  0  0 
constructing schemes that rely on the wave Gc   2  Gnc    J  
dynamics. The present effort is directed at v  p  0 
  vE  vp  0
reducing the computational overheads per grid
point associated with the conventional flux
splitting schemes and to provide a simple and

596
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)

 2D-Navier-Stokes equations
 0 
 
 p    4 u  2 v  
  u    M 2 Re  3 x 3 y  
u   2
  u   
U   Fc    Fnc     v u  
v    uv    Re  x  y  
  
  E    uE   
    T 
  k  (   1 )up  F 
  Pr Re  x 
 0 
 
   v  u  
v  0   Re  x y  
  uv    
  0  
Gc   2  J   Gnc   p   4 v 2 u  
v  0    M 2  Re  3 y  3 x  
  
  vE  0   

    T 
  k  (   1 )vp  G 
  Pr Re  y 

where  Fc  
2 Fc i 1 / 2, j  Fc i 1 / 2, j 
   , (6)
 2  v 2u    x  i , j x i 1  x i 1 
2 
u   
 (   1 )M   3  y x  
F  (3) where x i 1  x i 1  x i , x i 1  x i  x i 1 .
Re   v u  
v     This generates the need to evaluate the convective
  x y   fluxes at locations midway between the adjacent
nodes. The midway locations can also be regarded
 2  u 2v   as the cell faces. For notational convenience, the
 v    midway locations (i+1/2, j) and (i-1/2, j) on either
 (   1 )M 2  3  x y  
G  
(4) side of the grid point (i, j) are denoted as R and L
Re  v u   respectively.
u    
  x y   The adequate evaluation of convective fluxes
 across the control volume faces is one of the most
V2 challenging problems in the computing of
E  e  ( 1)M 2
 (5) compressible flow. The difficulty lies in the
2
The terms , u, v, p, T, E, e, μ and k are the
dimensionless flow variables namely, density, x i,j+2

and y velocity components, pressure, temperature, i,j+3/2

total energy, specific internal energy, viscosity i,j+1
and thermal conductivity respectively. i,j+1/2
All the spatial discretization strategies, in i-2,j i-3/2,j i-1,j i-1/2,j i,j i+1/2,j i+1,j i+3/2,j i+2,j
accordance with Eq. 2, are discussed in the
context of a structured Cartesian grid, but the i,j-1/2

ideas are readily extendible to other types of grids. i,j-1

For the purpose of a clear description of the ∆xi-2 ∆xi-1 i,j-3/2 ∆xi+1 ∆xi+2
various discretizations, consider a grid point (i, j) y i,j-2
in a Cartesian structured non-uniform grid
x
surrounded by its neighboring nodes as shown in
Fig. 1. The spatial discretization of the gradient of
the convective flux at a grid point for a Cartesian Fig. 1 Computational molecule.
structured grid is expressed as,

597
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)

conflicting requirements of accuracy on one hand where

and the stability and boundedness on the other.
Stability and boundedness require some kind of 1 
x i1 x i1 2x i1 
diffusive smoothing mechanism, while accuracy 4x i 1 x i 1  x i 1 
relies precisely on the opposite. Another factor to
be considered is the simplicity which is of great x i1 x i 1 2x i1 
2 
importance in practical multi-dimensional 4x i 1 x i 1 
calculations. Higher-order upwind schemes are
most successful in eliminating artificial diffusion x i1 x i1 
3 
4x i 1 x i 1  x i 1 
while minimizing numerical dispersion. However,
they are associated with problems such as
overshoots and oscillations that are generally A first order upwind evaluation of  R is same as
more serious than the false diffusion associated
in Qamar et al., 2006,
with the first-order upwind scheme. From the
point of view of practical computations, there is a  i uR  0
strong need for a scheme that is reasonably simple R   (10)
(minimizes computational overheads per grid  i 1 uR  0
point) but at the same time is sufficiently accurate,
A second or higher order upwind evaluation is
non-artificially diffusive and has a non-oscillatory
constructed on the basis of setting up
character. In order to combine these qualities, a
interpolation functions utilizing an upwind biased
composite approach has been employed, in which
stencil. A second order upwind biased
a high-order upwind scheme is combined with a
interpolation would employ two points on the
first order upwind scheme. The first order upwind
upwind side and one point on the downstream
scheme is employed in regions of steep gradients
side of the cell face under consideration.
in the solution while the higher order upwind
Mathematically, a second order upwind
scheme is employed in the relatively smooth
regions of the flowfield. A suitable detection evaluation of  R for u R  0 is expressed as,
strategy and isolation of nodes experiencing large
 R  1 i 1   2  i   3  i 1 (11a)
gradients in the solution from the rest of the grid
is employed to achieve this. where
The upwind evaluation of the flux Fc R is
x i1 x i1 2x i1 
carried out as, 1 
4x i 1 x i 1  x i 1 
Fc R  uRR . (7)
x i1 x i 1 2x i1 
In Eq. 7 u R is the fluid particle velocity at the cell 2 
4x i 1 x i 1 
face and ΦR is the solution vector at the cell face
determined using an upwind bias. The upwind x i1 x i1 
direction at the cell face R is determined from the 3 
4x i 1 x i 1  x i 1 
direction of the fluid particle velocity u R . In the
earlier work (Qamar et al., 2006), the authors For u R <0, the expression for  R is given as,
proposed a linear interpolation for uR.
 R   4  i 1   5  i   6  i  2 (11b)
u i1  u i  .
uR  (8)
2
However in the present study, the fluid velocity is x i1 x i1 2x i 2 
4 
determined by quadratic interpolation procedure. 4x i  2 x i 1 
It will be shown later in section 3, that this
quadratic interpolation leads to enhance the x i1 x i1 2x i 2 
accuracy of computation as compared to linear 5 
interpolation. Thus for the present study the
4x i 1 x i 1  x i  2 
velocity u R is determined through quadratic x i1 x i1 
6 
interpolation given as,
4x i  2 x i 1  x i  2 
u R   1 u i 1   2 u i   3 u i 1 (9)

598
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)
0.0003
0.00025
(B) Location of expansion wave
0.0002
β(x) (A) Location of shock wave
0.00015
0.0001
(C) Location of
contact discontinuity
5E-05
0
0 0.2 0.4
x
Fig. 2 Typical smoothness indicator function for
1D Riemann problem.
In Eq. 11b, x i  2  x i  2  x i 1 .
The flux Fc L at the left face is evaluated in an
analogous manner. In fact in order to maintain
flux consistency at the cell faces, with the
exception of cells near the boundaries, only the
right or the left face fluxes for each cell can be
computed and utilized by both the cells sharing
the common face.
An important aspect of the proposed scheme is
the judicious and selective use of Eq. 10, Eq. 11a
or Eq. 11b to evaluate the convective fluxes at the
cell faces. This is the important step that imparts
the non-oscillatory characteristic to the scheme in
the vicinity of discontinuities and yet maintains
reasonable accuracy in the otherwise smooth flow
regions.
For the selective use of a first order upwind
scheme or a higher order upwind scheme, a
mechanism needs to be devised to detect the
regions of large or steep gradients in the solution.
The next subsection presents the details of the
strategy employed for this purpose.
2.2 Detecting regions of large gradients
High-order numerical schemes produce spurious
oscillations near discontinuities, which may
indeed, lead to nonlinear (numerical) instabilities
and unbounded computational solutions. Less
severe oscillations may produce nonphysical
solutions, such as negative pressures or
temperatures, which would generally lead to
physical instabilities. First-order schemes are the
only option that can maintain a monotonic
solution structure at discontinuities. Unfortunately,
these schemes generate solutions with an
excessive amount of dissipation.
The goal is to produce a solution with neither
excessive diffusion nor spurious oscillations.
Solution or flux limiting strategies are designed to
restrict or suppress oscillations near
discontinuities. Common limiting procedures are
based on comparing elemental solution features,
such as slopes or curvatures, with those of
neighboring elements. When slopes exceed a
specified threshold, spurious behavior is deemed
present and the flux limiters limit the range of the
oscillations. Unfortunately, such limiters
frequently identify regions near smooth extrema
and this typically results in a reduction of the
0.6 0.8 1 optimal high-order convergence rate. It would,
thus, be helpful to properly distinguish regions
having smooth solutions from regions of
discontinuities.
In the present work a smoothness indicator
function (x,y) suggested by Jiang and Shu (1996)
has been employed. The function is given as:
13
Wi  2 , j  2Wi 1, j  Wi , j 
2
 ( x, y ) 
12 (12)
1
 Wi  2 , j  4Wi 1, j  3Wi , j 
2
4
where W can be any primitive flow field variable.
In the present study density has been chosen to
compute the smoothness indicator function (x,y).
The choice of density is based on the fact that
both shocks as well as contacts cause density to
vary in a discontinuous manner and therefore can
be detected using Eq. 12. The smoothness
function (x,y) contains peaks at the locations of
discontinuities in the flow field. These peaks and
their location in the mesh, can be easily identified
by computing the left and the right partial
derivatives of the function (x,y). For instance,
the plot of smoothness indicator function for a
typical 1-D Riemann problem (details of the
problem is given in numerical test cases section)
at a particular instance of time is shown in Fig. 2.
The function (x) has been plotted against the
grid nodes. The plot contains three peaks, the
highest peak (A) indicates the shock, the second
highest peak (B) indicates the expansion and third
peak (C) represents the contact discontinuity. If
the left and the right derivatives of (x) are
computed at each grid point, then at point A, B
and C the left and right derivatives will come out
to be opposite in sign and possessing large
magnitudes. Thus the grid points associated with
such peaks can be easily identified indicating the
location of discontinuities in the flow field. For a
two-dimensional problem, a similar plot as shown
599
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)
in Fig. 2. can be generated by considering the
variation of (x, y) at a fixed x or y.
Once the grid points, through which the
discontinuities in the flow field pass, are detected,
a first order upwind procedure is utilized at these
nodes to compute the fluxes at the cell faces
surrounding them. A higher order upwind scheme
is safely applied to the remaining mesh points
without generating any spurious oscillations.
However, an important point concerning the
application of the first order and the higher order
upwind scheme must be taken into consideration.
It is well known that if the computational
molecule of a higher order expression crosses the
discontinuities, then spurious oscillatory
phenomena will occur. The second order upwind
biased interpolation procedure (Eq. 11a and 11b)
has a computational molecule spanning three
mesh points. Thus if the second order
interpolation procedure is applied to the mesh
points in the immediate vicinity of the point
identified as the peak of the test function (x, y)
at a constant x or y, it causes the solution to
oscillate. Therefore, first order upwinding
procedure is applied to a small region spanning
two nodes in the different coordinate directions
surrounding the node associated with the peak of
the test function. The second order upwinding is
applied outside this small region surrounding the
discontinuity.
2.3 Time integration
The solution vector U at any grid node (i, j) is
obtained at the new time level (n+1) through the
following predictor-corrector time integration
procedure:
 Predictor step
U *  U n  t [  x Fc i , j   x Fnc 
n n
i, j
  y Gc    y Gnc   J n ] (13)
n n
i,j
 Corrector step
U*  U n 1
 t [  x Fc i , j   x Fnc 
* *
U n 1 
2 2
  y Gc    y Gnc   J * ] (14)
* *
i, j
where  () ,  () and  () are the forward, backward
and central differencing operators, respectively,
with the central differencing operator calculating
the difference between i+1/2 and i-1/2 values. The
spatial derivatives occurring in the non-
convective flux part are discretized using a
strategy similar to the Hung and MacCormack
(1976). The x-derivative terms appearing in Fnc
are differenced in opposite direction to that used
for Fnc x , while the y-derivative terms are
approximated with central differences. Likewise,
the y-derivative terms appearing in Gnc are
differenced in the opposite direction to that used
for G nc y , while the x-derivative terms are
approximated with central differences.
The primary motivation in employing the particle
velocity for upwinding of convective terms comes
from the observation that the family of entropy
waves travels with the local fluid velocity. Further
in going from a 1-D situation to a full 3-D
situation, the number of wave speeds or
eigenvalues of the inviscid flux vector that equal
the local fluid velocity increases from one to three
respectively. Thus while the entropy family of
waves increases in number, the acoustic family
always comprises two members in a given
direction. It is therefore tempting to devise an
upwinding scheme based on entropy wave speeds.
From the physical point of view, the convective
term represents the rate of change of a fluid
property experienced by the fluid particle as it
moves in the flowfield. Therefore, an upwinding
procedure for the convective term must be based
upon the local fluid velocity. The essential idea in
devising such a scheme is to reduce the
computational overhead per grid point that is
associated with (a) the conventional flux vector
splitting and upwinding based on characteristic
speeds and (b) the usage of complex functions
representing different interaction strategies
between adjacent cells.
The main advantage of the proposed scheme as
compared with typical Godunov and Flux Vector
Splitting approaches lies in the simplification and
i, j
reduction in the computational overhead per grid
point. This is particularly desirable for computing
in multi-dimensions. It has been shown through a
series of benchmark problems involving Euler
and Navier-Stokes computations that the scheme
i,j
is quite accurate and robust. Thus the scheme is
i, j potentially attractive for use in multi-dimensional
flow problems. The next section presents
numerical examples involving computing of 1D
as well as 2D compressible flows of a perfect gas
by the proposed scheme.
600
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)
Table 1 Initial condition data for 1D Riemann problems in terms of primitive variables.
S. No. Lo uL ρL
1 0.5 0.0 1.0
2 0.5 -2.0 1.0
3. NUMERICAL TEST CASES
The proposed PVU scheme is tested on several
benchmark problems found in the literature. The
test cases comprise both inviscid and viscous
flows in one and two space dimensions. The test
problems presented in the following subsections
are:
a. Two 1D Riemann problems.
b. Inviscid shock-vortex interaction problem.
c. Inviscid supersonic flow past a 2D circular
cylinder.
d. Inviscid supersonic flow over a step in a
channel.
e. Viscous hypersonic flow past a flared body
configuration.
The 1D Riemann problems are selected to check
the robustness and accuracy of the scheme
because of the availability of analytical solutions
for these problems. The inviscid shock-vortex
problem serves as a model problem for the
generation of sound waves in a high speed flow.
The supersonic flow past the circular cylinder
serves as a model problem for blunt body
configuration case in which detached shocks are
formed. The inviscid step flow in a channel is a
severe test case as it comprises complex
interactions of shocks, reflection of shocks,
rarefactions and contact discontinuity. Finally the
viscous hypersonic flow past the flared body
configuration checks the capability of PVU
scheme for practical computations.
3.1 1D Riemann problems
The 1D Riemann problems, as suggested by Toro
(1999), often appear in modern research papers
for the validation of numerical schemes. The
problems are governed by 1D, unsteady Euler
equations. The spatial domain (0, L) of the
problem is broken into two intervals (0, Lo; Lo, L).
The left (x<Lo) and right (x>Lo) solution domains
of the problem are assigned different initial
conditions. The solution is then allowed to evolve
in time leading to the formations of shock,
expansion and contact discontinuities. Two
Riemann problems are selected to test the
performance of the PVU scheme. Table 1 shows
the initial condition data for all the two test cases
601
pL uR ρR pR
1.0 0.0 0.125 0.10
0.4 2.0 1 0.40
in terms of primitive variables. In all the cases the
ratio of the specific heats is γ=1.4. The numerical
computation is carried out on a constant spaced
grid of 200 grid points in the solution domain
with a non-dimensional time step of ∆t=10-3.
For the 1D Riemann problem cases, the results
are computed for both the first and second order
versions of PVU schemes. Comparisons of 1st
order PVU scheme results are made with those of
conventional first order schemes like Godunov,
Van Leer and AUSM as well as with the
analytical solutions. Further, the comparisons of
PVU 1st and 2nd order schemes with the
analytical solution are made, which is followed by
the convergence and computational performance
studies of the test cases.
The solution of test case 1 consists of a right
traveling shock wave, a contact wave and a left
expansion wave with a sonic point inside it. This
test assesses the entropy satisfaction property of
the numerical method. Fig. 3 compares the results
obtained by the 1st order PVU scheme with those
of conventional 1st order schemes along with the
analytical solutions. It can be seen that the
scheme resolves the sonic point very efficiently
and no expansion or bump is seen at the sonic
point as in Sun and Takayama (2003) for some of
the numerical schemes. This is an advantage of
the scheme that it does not encounter any
difficulty in resolving the flow correctly near the
sonic point. Also the performance of the 1st order
PVU scheme is quite comparable with those of
the conventional schemes for the same grid points
(N=200). The amount of diffusive character is
almost similar in all the schemes, with the
exception that for the present case a very small
oscillation can be seen in the AUSM and the PVU
scheme near the shock region. However it can be
seen that the amplitude of oscillation is large for
the AUSM scheme as compared to that of PVU
scheme.
Test case 2 is a receding flow problem. The
solution consists of two strong rarefactions and a
trivial stationary contact discontinuity. The
central region is close to a vacuum, which makes
this problem a suitable test case for assessing the
performance of the numerical schemes for low
density flows. Fig. 4 show the results obtained
from 1st order PVU scheme with those of
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)

1.1 1.1

1 Exact 1 Exact
st
st
PV U I O rder PV U I O rder
0.9 st
A U SM I O rder 0.9 A U SM I st O rder
st
st
G odunov I O rder G odunov I O rder
0.8 st
V anleer I O rder 0.8 st
V anleer I O rder

0.7 0.7

Density (Kg/m )
Pressure (N/m )

3
2

0.6 0.6

0.5 0.5

0.4 0.4

0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
x (m ) x (m )
(a) (b)
1.5
3.4 Exact 1.4
st
Exact
PV U I O rder st
st 1.3 PV U I O rder
3.2 A U SM I O rder
A U SM I st O rder
st
G odunov I O rder 1.2 G odunov I st O rder
st
3 V anleer I O rder st
V anleer I O rder
1.1
Internal Energy(J/Kg)

1
2.8

Velocity (m/s)
0.9
2.6 0.8
0.7
2.4
0.6
2.2 0.5
0.4
2
0.3
1.8 0.2

1.6 0.1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x(m ) x (m )

(c) (d)

Fig. 3 (a) Pressure, (b) Density, (c) Internal Energy and (d) Velocity profiles for test case 1 at t=0.25.

1.1
Exact
Exact
1
0.4 PVU Ist Order
PVU Ist Order st
AUSM I Order
0.9
AUSM I st Order st
Vanleer I Order
st
Vanleer I Order
0.8
0.3
0.7
Density (Kg/m )
Pressure(N/m )

3
2

0.6

0.2 0.5

0.4

0.3
0.1
0.2

0.1

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
x(m) x (m)
(a) (b)
1.1
2
Exact Exact
1 st PVU Ist Order
PVU I Order 1.5 st
AUSM I Order
AUSM Ist Order
st
0.9 Vanleer Ist Order Vanleer I Order
1
Internal Energy(J/Kg)

0.8
0.5
Velocity (m/s)

0.7
0
0.6
-0.5
0.5
-1
0.4

-1.5
0.3

-2
0.2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
x(m) x (m)
(c) (d)
Fig. 4 (a) Pressure, (b) Density, (c) Internal energy and (d) Velocity profile for test case 2 at t=0.15.

602
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)

3
EX A CT
st
conventional 1st order schemes. For the present
2 .4 P V U I o rd er
case the first order Godunov scheme fails to
1 .8 converge. The results obtained by the PVU, the
1 .2 AUSM and the Van-leer scheme are comparable.
Velocity (m/s)

0 .6 However in the internal energy case (Fig. 4(c)),

0 the PVU algorithm gives significantly less
-0 .6
diffusion compared with the AUSM and the Van-
-1 .2
leer scheme.
For test case 2 the effect of linear interpolation
-1 .8
0 .2 0 .4 0 .6 0 .8 1 and the usage of quadratic interpolation for the
x (m )
(a) face velocity uR and uL appears to be significant.
3 Fig. 5 shows the computation of this test case
with the linear interpolation as well as the
E x act
2 .5 P V U I st O rd er

2
quadratic interpolation for the facial velocity. It
1 .5
can be seen that for the linear interpolation case
Velocity (m/s)

1
there is a large overshoot and undershoot in the
0 .5
central region of the velocity profile. However the
0

-0 .5
usage of quadratic interpolation procedure
-1
radically improves the situation. Since for this
-1 .5
case the velocity at the center is very low i.e.
-2
0 0 .2 5 0 .5 0 .7 5 1
close to zero, an accurate computation of cell face
x (m ) value is very important. For all the other cases
(b) (1D Riemann problem, 2D inviscid and Viscous
Fig. 5 Facial velocity computation using flow) the quadratic interpolation is used which
(a) Linear interpolation and (b) Quadratic works quite well without showing any oscillatory
interpolation for test case 2. behavior.
Figs. 6 and 7 show the performance of the two

1 Exact 1 Exact
st st
PVU I Order PVU I Order
nd nd
PVU II Order PVU II Order

0.8 0.8
Density (Kg/m )
Pressure (N/m )

3
2

0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0 0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x (m) x (m)
(a) (b)
3.5 1.5
1.4
Exact Exact
3.25 st
PVU I Order 1.3 st
PVU I Order
nd nd
PVU II Order 1.2 PVU II Order

3 1.1
Internal Energy (J/Kg)

1
2.75 0.9
Velocity (m/s)

0.8
2.5 0.7
0.6
2.25 0.5
0.4
2 0.3
0.2
1.75 0.1
0
1.5 -0.1
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x (m) x (m)
(c) (d)

Fig. 6 Comparison of (a) Pressure, (b) Density, (c) Internal energy and (d) Velocity profile for the test case 1 at
t=0.25 for PVU 1st and 2nd order scheme with the exact solution.

603
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)

test cases on the same grid for 1st and 2nd order utilizing the 1D Riemann problems. The absolute
PVU schemes. It can be seen from the test cases error of the density for the three different points
that the 2nd order PVU scheme performs quite (mentioned in Fig. 8) for each test case has been
well and in most of the cases improves the computed for 5 grids (N=50, 100, 200, 400, 800).
resolution. Also the so called Gibbs oscillations The points are selected in the region where the
which often occur in the higher order smearing effects are high. Fig. 8 shows the plot of
discretization procedure for the hyperbolic absolute error versus the number of grid points. It
conservation laws are not visible in case of 2nd can be seen that for all the test cases the solution
order PVU scheme. converges as the number of grid points are
Finally, the PVU scheme is tested for increased. Table 2 gives the CPU time per time
convergence and for the computational efficiency step on a 32-bit Xeon Dual processor for different

0.5 1.2
Exact Exact
st
PVU I Order 1.1 PVU Ist Order
nd nd
PVU II Order PVU II Order
1
0.4
0.9

0.8

Density (Kg/m )
Pressure (N/m )

3
2

0.3 0.7

0.6

0.2 0.5

0.4

0.3
0.1
0.2

0.1

0 0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x (m) x (m)
(a) (b)
1.2 3
Exact Exact
1.1
st
PVU I Order PVU Ist Order
nd
PVU II Order PVU IInd Order
2
1

0.9
Internal Energy (J/Kg)

1
Velocity (m/s)

0.8

0.7 0

0.6
-1
0.5

0.4
-2
0.3

0.2 -3
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x (m) x (m)
(c) (d)

Fig. 7 Comparison of (a) Pressure, (b) Density, (c) Internal energy and (d) Velocity profile for the test case 2 at
t=0.15 for PVU 1st and 2nd order scheme with the exact solution.

0.2 0.35
0.325
x = 0.66 x = 0.80
0.175 0.3
x = 0.70 x = 0.85
x = 0.76 0.275 x = 0.90
0.15
0.25

0.125 0.225
Absolute Error

Absolute Error

0.2
0.1 0.175
0.15
0.075 0.125
0.1
0.05
0.075

0.025 0.05
0.025
0 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 200 400 600 800 1000
Grid (N) Grid (N)

(a) (b)
Fig. 8 Absolute error convergence for (a) Case 1 and (b) Case 2 for 1-D Riemann problem.

604
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)
Table 2 CPU time comparison for different
schemes.
S. No. Order Schemes CPU Time (s)
1 PVU Scheme 0.12812
Van Leer
2 0.14062
Scheme
3 AUSM Scheme 0.15625
Godunov
4 0.84375
Scheme
schemes against the first test case of the Riemann
problem. It can be concluded that the PVU
scheme is among the most computationally
efficient schemes and has almost the same spatial
resolution compared to conventional schemes.
3.2 2D-Shock vortex interaction
The two-dimensional shock vortex interaction
problem serves as a model problem for generation
of sound waves in a high speed flow. The test
problem is governed by the Euler equation and
comprises of a stationary normal shock wave in a
uniform flow in which a vortex is superimposed.
The dimensionless computational domain
stretches from [0,2]×[0,1] in x and y directions
respectively on a Cartesian grid system. A
stationary normal shock wave (Mach 1.1) is
placed at x=0.5 in the solution domain at t=0. The
left state of the stationary normal shock wave is
given by , u , v, p   (1,  ,0,1) where as right
state is computed using normal shock
relationships. For this problem the velocity scale
is taken to be M  RT as by Jiang and Shu
(1996). A small vortex is superimposed on to the
uniform flow toward the left side of the normal
shock wave having centre at (xc, yc)=(0.25,0.5).
The defined vortex is a steady state solution to the
two dimensional Euler equation which is defined
as a perturbation to the velocity, temperature and
entropy of the mean uniform flow. The
superimposed perturbation values of the vortex
are denoted by tilde and are given as,
~ 2
u  e  (1  ) sin  , (15)
~v   e  (1  2 ) cos  , (16)
2
~  (   1) 2 e 2 (1  ) , (17)
T
4
605
where τ=r/rc and r  ( x  xc )2  ( y  yc )2 . In
above equations ε indicates the strength of the
vortex, α controls the decay rate of the vortex, and
rc is the critical radius for which the vortex has the
maximum strength. In this test the following
values of these parameters have been employed
=0.3, rc=0.05 and α=0.204. These values are
essentially the same as assumed by Jiang and Shu
(1996).
A grid of 243×101 is used, which is uniformly
placed in y direction and concentrated in x
direction at a point where the normal shock wave
stands in the flow field. A non-dimensional time
step of ∆t=10-4 is employed for the computation.
The top and the bottom surfaces of the
computational domain are considered to be the
solid surfaces and hence no penetration velocity
boundary condition is imposed. All the other flow
field variables are computed using a first order
extrapolation procedure. At inflow supersonic
boundary condition is imposed and at the exit
boundary all the flow variables are extrapolated
(pressure first order extrapolation and all other
flow field variable through zero order
extrapolation) from the interior.
The pressure contours obtained from the proposed
scheme for different instants of time in the
interval [0.05, 0.6] is shown in the Fig. 9. The
perturbation given in the flow field in the form of
vortex is not damped or distorted because of the
inherent artificial viscosity of the scheme while
interacting with the shock wave. Contour patterns
appear to be in good agreement with those by
Jiang and Shu (1996).
3.3 Inviscid supersonic flow past a 2D
circular cylinder
In this case, a supersonic two-dimensional
inviscid flow past a circular cylinder is
investigated. The numerical simulation is carried
out for M∞=3 flow in a curvilinear coordinate (ξ,
η) system. In physical space, a cylinder of radius
r=1 is positioned at the origin, which is the center
of the cylinder. The outer boundary is also taken
to be circular in shape with R=10. The
computational domain is chosen to be [0,1]×[0,1]
on ξ-η plane. The mapping between the
computational domain and the physical domain is
done by solving elliptic partial differential
equation as in Anderson (1995).
An O-grid system of 120×150 with a non-
dimensional time step ∆t=10-3 is used for the
computation. At the surface (=0) normal
velocity is set to zero and all the other flow field
variables are extrapolated through first order
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)

extrapolation procedure from the interior. The 3.4 Inviscid step flow in a channel
supersonic inflow boundary condition is applied
This test problem was first introduced by Emery
at half of the outer boundary while over the
(1968) almost 30 years back and has been one of
remaining half a supersonic outflow condition,
the challenging problems for a large number of
comprising of extrapolation of all the flowfield
numerical schemes. The problem comprises of a
variables from the interior, is employed as in the
step placed in a channel of size 3×1 dimensionless
case of shock-vortex interaction problem.
units. The height of the step is 0.2 and is located
Figs. 10(a)-10(d) show the density, pressure,
at 0.6 units from the left end of the channel. The
temperature and Mach contours respectively for
step faces a uniform flow of P=1.0, ρ=1.4 and
Mach 3 flow past the cylinder. The results
M∞=3 with γ=1.4. A supersonic inflow boundary
obtained are in good agreement with those
condition is applied at the left end of the
obtained by Jiang and Shu (1996). The bow shock
computational domain and the outflow at the right
in front of the cylinder is sharply resolved by the
end where all the flow field variables are
PVU scheme.
extrapolated from the interior. At the solid wall
normal velocity is set equal to zero and all the
1.19

1.14
0.8 0.8
1.2
4

1.24
00
0.6 1.00 0.6

0.98 1.
0.95 91

1.23
0.
0.87
0.83 0.87 1.17
Y

Y
1.17

1.23
6
0.4 0.4

1.1
1

3
1.2

1.2
0.2 0.2 1.11
1.15

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

X X
t=0.10 t=0.20
1.21
1.15

0.8 0.8
1.
21

1.22
20

0.99
1.

0. 1.2
99 3
1.22

0.6 0.6
1.22

1.23
06

Y
Y

1.09
1.

1
8
1.1

1.15
1.1

0.4 0.4 1.19

0.99
0.99
3

1.19
1.2

1.20
1.14

1.20
0.2 0.2
1
1.2

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

X X
t=0.30 t=0.40
1. 1.19
1.10

1.19
20

1.25
0.8 0.8
1.08

1.25
1.23

1
1.28
1.24

1.2 1.20
0.6 1.19 0.6
1.14 1.15
1.10 1.12
Y

Y
1.07

1.14

0.4 0.4
9

8
1.1

1.1

1.20
1.16
1.24

0.2 0.2 1.23

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

X X
t=0.50 t=0.60
Fig. 9 Pressure contours for shock vortex interaction from t=0.1 to 0.6.

606
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)

8
2.6

5.57

1.
2.1

21
7.15

4
3.4

0.91
2.54
8
2.15

11.55
7.94
4.17

0.30
2.12
2.34
2.75
3.48 2.54

7.15
91
0.

5.57
2.68

1
1.2
14
2.
(a) Density (b) Pressure (c) Temperature (d) Mach
contour contour contour contour
Fig. 10 Supersonic flow past the supersonic inviscid cylinder at Mach 3.

1 1
3.0 3.0
0.8 0.8

0
0
1

4.5 9
3

3.0
4.5
2.3

2.

2.0
3
3.7
4.51

75
1 3.7

1
0.6 1

2.75
0.6
1

2.3
3.0

3.7
75
2.3

31

2.
0

3
2.

0.4 0.94 0.4 0.94

0.2 0.2
9.76
9.76

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
(a) Density contour (b) Pressure contour
1 1
1.
73 1.65
1.52

0.8 0.8

1.65
1.
1.73
52

3 2.02
2

98 1.
1.7
2.0

7
1.

77
0.6 1.7
5

0.6 1.65
1.6
3

2
1.8

0
0.4 4 2.1 0.4 2.
1.4 2.26 0
2.14
0.2 0.2
2.26

9
2.6

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
(c) Temperature contour (d) Mach contour

Fig. 11 Inviscid flow past a step in a channel at Mach 3.

other flow field variables are extrapolated using very accurately resolved by the PVU scheme as
first order extrapolation procedure from the compared with the results obtained in Jiang and
interior. Shu (1996). This is because the PVU scheme in
The computation is carried out on a Cartesian grid only second order accurate in space where as the
of 301×101 with the non-dimensional time step of scheme used by Jiang and Shu (1996) is fourth
∆t=10-3. For this case the density distribution is and higher order accurate in space. All the other
hardest to compute because of the Mach stem at flow features like shock wave and expansion
the upper wall which generates a contact waves are quite accurately resolved by the PVU
discontinuity and the singularity at the step corner scheme.
which is also a center of a rarefaction fan. For the
treatment of the singularity at the corner of the 3.5 Viscous hypersonic flow past cylindrical
step, we adopt the same technique used by flared body configuration
Woodward and Collela (1984) and by Donat and A hypersonic laminar viscous flow past a
Marquina (1996), which is based on the cylindrical flared body configuration is taken as a
assumption of conservation of entropy and model problem for accessing the ability of PVU
stagnation enthalpy in the nearly steady flow in scheme in high Mach number flow involving the
the region near the corner. effect of separation, strong shock wave and
Figs. 11(a)-11(d) show the density, pressure, boundary layer interactions. Fig. 12 shows the
temperature and Mach contours respectively for cylindrical flared body configuration, which
the flow past the step in a channel at Mach 3. The comprises of a hollow cylinder, with a sharp
length of the Mach stem at the solid surface is not

607
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)

leading edge, followed by a flare and terminated

by cylindrical part as used by Chanetz et al.
(1998). The characteristic length (L) considered is
0.0325 m

0.0575 m
30◦ the length of the cylindrical part in front of the
r
z 0.0225 m
o L=0.1017 m
flare. The flare angle is 30 , which leads to the
large separation. The numerical computations are
carried under axisymmetric flow assumptions
Fig. 12 Schematics of cylindrical flared junction. with incoming flow stream at M∞=9.91,
Re∞=18916 (based on characteristic length L) and
Pr∞=0.72. The computations are carried out in
curvilinear coordinate (ξ, η) system with the
transformation obtained from the (r, z) plane. At
the inflow all the flow field variables are specified
(P∞=6.3 Pa T∞=51 K, M∞=9.91). On the solid
8 surface the no-slip condition is specified on the
2.2
1.01 2 1.92 2
velocity and the wall temperature is maintained at
9.1
1.52
1.01 1.27
2.17 3.80
0.9
293 K. At the outflow boundary, the second
2.17
2.20 1.79
2.17
1.01 derivative of pressure and the first derivative of
1.01
1.52
1.79
0.60 0.37
0.43
0.60 0.77 velocity and temperature have been set equal to
zero. At the top exit boundary, the first
(a) derivatives of all the flow field variables in the y-
direction are assumed to be zero. A mesh of
295×180 is utilized to compute the solution. Figs.
22
.3
3
13(a)-13(d) show the contours of steady-state
1 9.1
3
6 .37 density, pressure, temperature and stream-trace
4.78
3.18
2.55
15.94 patterns respectively. The leading edge shock due
6.11
to the development of boundary layer on the
6
9.5

2.55 .61
3.35 3
6
3 .6
1 91 2.6 6.37
cylinder has been captured quite well. The
44

2.91 2.
2.

separation of the flow ahead of the flare and its

(b)
subsequent reattachment downstream of the flare
results in a region of recirculation which can be
observed in the solution as shown in Fig. 13(d).
4.6
9 The results obtained are compared with those
1.05 4.2
1
5.64
obtained by NASCA solver, DSMC solvers and
1.16
1.34
3.63 with the experimental results. Table 3 shows the
2.20
1.34 1.53
4.21
9.37 location of separation and reattachment points for
5.64
1.62 5.93 8.23 8.80
the different solvers. The results indicate that the
location of separation point and reattachment
(c)
points is predicted more accurately by the PVU
scheme as compared to NASCA and DSMC
solvers. Figs. 14(a)-14(c) show the variation of
pressure coefficient, Stanton number and skin
friction coefficient on the solid surface
respectively. The results compare quite well with
those obtained by Chanetz et al. (1998).

4. CONCLUSIONS

(d) A new spatial discretization strategy has been

proposed for the computing of the flow governed
Fig. 13 (a) Density, (b) Pressure, (c) Temperature by hyperbolic conservation laws. The convective
and (d) Streamtrace contours for the terms of the inviscid flux are discretized
cylindrical flared body junction at separately using the classical upwinding strategy
M∞=9.91.
which is not been implemented for the flow
governed by hyperbolic conservation laws. The

608
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)

Table 3 Comparison of separation and reattachment point values.

Abscissa (x/L) NASCA DSMC PVU 2nd Order Experimental

Separation 0.74 0.81 0.76 0.760.01
Reattachment 1.33 1.29 1.32 1.340.015

1.2 0.05
Experimental Experimental
1.1 NASCA
NASCA
DSMC DSMC
1 nd
PVU IInd Order 0.04 PVU II Order

0.9

0.8

0.7 0.03
Cp

0.6

St
0.5 0.02
0.4

0.3
0.01
0.2

0.1

0 0
0.5 1 1.5 0.5 1 1.5
x/L x/L
(a) (b)
0.08

0.07
NASCA steep gradients in the solution and then employing
DSMC
PVU IInd Order a first order upwind scheme in its neighborhood.
0.06
In regions, free from discontinuities or steep
0.05 gradients, a second order upwind scheme has
0.04
been utilized to maintain accuracy. The
convective term discretization strategy is
Cf

0.03
0.02
0.01
0
-0.01
0.5 1 1.5
x/L
(c)
Fig. 14 (a) Pressure coefficient, (b) Stanton number
and (c) Skin friction coefficient profiles along
the surface of the cylindrical flared junction at
M∞=9.91.
discretization of the convective fluxes is carried
out in a conservative manner by employing the
cell face values. The cell face value of the
convective flux is obtained by employing an
upwind biased stencil surrounding the cell face
under consideration. The usage of the fluid
particle velocity or the entropy wave speed at the
cell face to determine the upwind direction has
been proposed. In order to realize an oscillation
free solution near regions of large gradients and to
simultaneously maintain accuracy in the relatively
smooth regions of the flow field an adaptive
strategy has been proposed. This strategy consists
of detecting the location of the discontinuity or
combined with that of predictor-corrector type of
time integration technique, which results in
overall stable methodology for computing for the
flow governed by hyperbolic conservation laws.
The principal advantage of the scheme is the
reduction in the computational effort per grid
point in comparison with the other state of the art
schemes based on Riemann solvers or flux vector
splitting. The simplified scheme is targeted at the
computing of compressible flows in multiple
dimensions where the highly accurate
reconstruction evolution based schemes like ENO
and WENO become too costly to implement. The
robustness and accuracy of the scheme has been
demonstrated through a series of numerical test
cases involving the computing of one-
dimensional and two-dimensional flows. Both
inviscid and viscous flows have been considered.
From the results of these test cases, it can be
concluded that the proposed scheme captures the
discontinuities and regions of steep gradients
accurately without any oscillatory behavior.
Away from the discontinuities, the solution
obtained is quite accurate. The scheme does not
experience any specific difficulty in resolving the
flow near sonic-points as the acoustic wave
speeds do not enter into consideration of the
discretization strategy. The excellent performance

609
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)
of the scheme clearly opens up the important
issue of the consideration of the acoustic waves in
the discretization of hyperbolic conservation laws.
The spatial discretization strategy proposed in the
scheme can be implemented in a finite difference
or a finite volume framework and in principle,
can be combined with any time-integration
methodology. It is of interest to investigate the
performance of the scheme for flows in the low
subsonic and transonic Mach number regimes.
One of the principal difficulties in the computing
of these flows is that the acoustic waves travel
much faster than the fluid or the entropy waves.
In fact, as the incompressible limit is approached,
the problem becomes quite stiff with the speed of
the acoustic waves approaching infinity. Schemes
relying on acoustic wave speeds are more likely
to face this stiffness. In this regard the proposed
scheme is less likely to face this difficulty. Also,
the overall efficiency in terms of CPU timing and
grid resolution of the 2nd order PVU scheme in
comparison with the conventional schemes of
higher order also needs to be further investigated.
The performance of the scheme in low subsonic
and transonic Mach number regimes and the
comparisons of higher order conventional
schemes with the 2nd order PVU scheme is a
matter of further investigation and will be taken
up in further studies.
REFERENCES
1. Anderson JD (1995). Computational Fluid
Dynamic. McGraw-Hill, New York.
2. Boris JP, Book DL (1973). Flux-Correctored
Transport I. SHASTA, A fluid transport
algorithm that works. J. Comput. Phys.
11:38–69.
3. Chanetz B, Benay R, Bousquet JM, Bur R,
Pot T, Grass F, Moss J (1998). Experimental
and Numerical Study of the Laminar
Separation in Hypersonic Flow. Aerospace
Science and Technology 3:205–218.
4. Donat R, Marquina A (1996). Capturing
shock reflection: An improved flux formula. J.
Comput. Phys. 125:42–58.
5. Emery AF (1968). An evaluation of several
differencing methods for inviscid fluid flow
problems. J. Comput. Phys. 2:306–331.
6. Harten A, Lax PD, Van Leer B (1983). On
upstream differencing and Godunov-type
schemes for hyperbolic conservation laws.
SIAM Rev. 25:35–61.
7. Hirsch C (1990). Numerical computation of
internal and external flows. Volume 2:
610
Computational methods for Inviscid and
Viscous flows, Chichester: Wiley.
8. Hung CM, MacCormack RW (1976).
Numerical Solutions of Supersonic and
Hypersonic Laminar Compression Corner
Flows. AIAA Journal 14:475–481.
9. Jameson A (1995). Positive schemes and
shockmodeling for compressible flows. Intl. J.
Numr. Methods Fluids 20:743–776.
10. Jiang GS, Shu CW (1996). Efficient
implementation of Weight ENO schemes. J.
Comput. Phys. 126:202–228.
11. Kim KH, Kim C (2005). Accurate, efficient
and monotonic numerical methods for multi-
dimensional compressible flows Part I:
Spatial discretization. J. Comput. Phys.
208:527–569.
12. Laney CB (1998). Computational
Gasdynamics. First ed., Cambridge
University Press, United Kingdom.
13. Lax PD, Wendroff B (1960) Systems of
Conservation laws, Comm. Pure Appl. Math.
13:217–237.
14. Liou MS, Steffen CJ (1991). A new flux
splitting scheme. NASA Technical
Memorandum 104404.
15. Liou MS, Steffen CJ (1993). A new flux
splitting scheme. J. Comput. Phys. 107:23–29.
16. Pandolfi M, D’Ambrosio D (2001).
Numerical instabilities in upwind methods:
analysis and cures for the ‘‘Carbuncle’’
phenomenon, J. Comput. Phys. 166:271–301.
17. Pandolfi M, D’Ambrosio D (2002).
Performances of upwind methods in
predicting shear-like flows. Computers &
Fluids. 31:725–744.
18. Qamar A, Hasan N, Sanghi S (2005).
Numerical computation of surface mounted
obstacle in supersonic flows using a new
Particle Velocity Upwinding Scheme. 23rd
AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference,
2005, Canada.
19. Qamar A, Hasan N, Sanghi S (2006). A new
scheme for the computation of compressible
flows. AIAA Journal 44(5):1025–1039.
20. Quirk JJ (1994). A contribution to the great
Riemann solver debate. Intl. J. Numer. Meth.
Fluids 18:555–574.
21. Roe PL (1981). Approximate Riemann
solvers, parameter vectors, and difference
schemes. J. Comput. Phys. 43:357–372.
22. Sjogreen B, Yee HC (2003). Grid
convergence of high order methods for
multiscale complex unsteady viscous
compressible flows. J. Comput Phys. 185:1–
26.
 Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics Vol. 4, No. 4 (2010)

23. Sokolov IV, Timofeev EV, Sakai J,

Takayama K (2002). Artificial wind-A new
framework to construct simple and efficient
upwind shock-capturing schemes. J. Comput.
Phys. 181:354–393.
24. Steger JL, Warming RF (1981). Flux vector
splitting of the inviscid gasdynamic equations
with applications to finite difference methods.
J. Comput. Phys. 40:263–293.
25. Sun M, Takayama K (2003). An artificially
upstream flux splitting scheme for Euler
equations. J. Comput. Phys. 189:305–329.
26. Toro EF (1999). Riemann solvers and
numerical methods for fluid dynamics.
Second ed., Springer, Berlin.
27. Van Leer B (1982). Lecture notes in Physics
170. Springer-Verlag. New York/Berlin.
28. Woodward P, Collela P (1984). The
numerical simulation of two dimensional
fluid with strong shock. J. Comput. Phys.
54:115–173.

611