The impact of the form of the Euler equations for radial flow in cylindrical and spherical coordinates on numerical conservation and accuracy

P. E. Crittenden,S. Balachandar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00193-017-0784-y
IF: 1.903
2018-03-03
Shock Waves
Abstract:The radial one-dimensional Euler equations are often rewritten in what is known as the geometric source form. The differential operator is identical to the Cartesian case, but source terms result. Since the theory and numerical methods for the Cartesian case are well-developed, they are often applied without modification to cylindrical and spherical geometries. However, numerical conservation is lost. In this article, AUSM+\documentclass[12pt]{minimal}\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage{wasysym}\usepackage{amsfonts}\usepackage{amssymb}\usepackage{amsbsy}\usepackage{mathrsfs}\usepackage{upgreek}\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt}\begin{document}$$^+$$\end{document}-up is applied to a numerically conservative (discrete) form of the Euler equations labeled the geometric form, a nearly conservative variation termed the geometric flux form, and the geometric source form. The resulting numerical methods are compared analytically and numerically through three types of test problems: subsonic, smooth, steady-state solutions, Sedov’s similarity solution for point or line-source explosions, and shock tube problems. Numerical conservation is analyzed for all three forms in both spherical and cylindrical coordinates. All three forms result in constant enthalpy for steady flows. The spatial truncation errors have essentially the same order of convergence, but the rate constants are superior for the geometric and geometric flux forms for the steady-state solutions. Only the geometric form produces the correct shock location for Sedov’s solution, and a direct connection between the errors in the shock locations and energy conservation is found. The shock tube problems are evaluated with respect to feature location using an approximation with a very fine discretization as the benchmark. Extensions to second order appropriate for cylindrical and spherical coordinates are also presented and analyzed numerically. Conclusions are drawn, and recommendations are made. A derivation of the steady-state solution is given in the Appendix.
mechanics
What problem does this paper attempt to address?