uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A Comparison of Linear and Nonlinear Finite Element Stabilization Techniques for Fluid Problems
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Mathematics and Computer Science, Department of Information Technology.
2015 (English)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

The standard Galerkin, entropy viscosity (EV) and streamline upwind Petrov Galerkin (SUPG) methods were implemented for the advection equation and the Navier-Stokes equations for an incompressible fluid to determine which of the methods is better in terms of accuracy and time requirements. For the advection equation a disk with a rotating stream was modeled for both a continuous and a discontinuous initial condition. For both cases the SUPG method wins in all categories and seems to keep doing it for an infinite refinement of the mesh. The second best results are produced by the EV method in both of the categories for both test cases and the worst method turns out to be the standard Galerkin method. As for the Navier-Stokes equations two kinematic viscosity cases were tested, one with a relatively low viscosity and one with a higher viscosity corresponding to a benchmark computation. The system in consideration was a wind tunnel topology with a cylindrical object in the flow. For the higher kinematic viscosity study the standard Galerkin method seems to be the better choice with the EV method coming in second place. The SUPG method starts showing off substantial time requirements with no or less gain in accuracy. As for the low kinematic viscosity study the standard Galerkin method exhibits unstable behavior and gives

unreasonably high velocities for most simulations, hence showing off the need for stabilization techniques. The EV method once again is the faster method for the simulation but no conclusion regarding which method yields the most accurate results can be made. Both methods yield the expected physical results with von Karman vortices forming and traveling down stream.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2015. , 44 p.
Series
IT, 15079
National Category
Engineering and Technology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-269190OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-269190DiVA: diva2:882397
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2015-12-14 Created: 2015-12-14 Last updated: 2015-12-14Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(14761 kB)182 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 14761 kBChecksum SHA-512
e7db1e114ae58d4f9be5ea7936364754c3cacf57371b1b9c99afae86f383503254a7a1f6bb8dbdd395ca39017b8797f3cccfcb9704faa25d727a724ee5aa2b15
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
Department of Information Technology
Engineering and Technology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 182 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 843 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf