Conservative smoothing versus artificial viscosity
Conservative smoothing versus artificial viscosity
复制标题
保守平滑与人工粘度
DOI：
10.2172/10187573
复制
发表时间：
1994
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Swegle
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. Guenther;D. Hicks;J. Swegle
这份报告是由S.P.H.最近的一些调查激发的。（Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics）固体动力学计算与S.P.H.显示出不稳定的症状，这些症状不能通过人工粘度来消除。理论分析和实验结果均表明，保守平滑消除了S.P.H.人工粘性无法实现的计算。有人提出的问题是，保守的平滑是否会比人为粘度更严重地影响解决方案。保守平滑，正确使用，可以产生更准确的解决方案比冯纽南里希特迈尔Landshoff人工粘度已成为标准多年。我们说明了这一点，使用vNR计划的测试问题与已知的精确解，涉及在理想气体中的冲击碰撞。我们发现，保守平滑的误差的范数显着小于人工粘性的误差的范数。?这项工作在密歇根理工大学进行。这项工作是在桑迪亚国家实验室进行的，得到了美国国家实验室的支持。S.根据合同号DE-ACO 4 - 94 AL 85000，%P-e*tofEnergY。
This report was stimulated by some recent investigations of S.P.H. (Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics method). Solid dynamics computations with S.P.H. show symptoms of instabilities which are not eliminated by artificial viscosities. Both analysis and experiment indicate that conservative smoothing eliminates the instabilities in S.P.H. computations which artificial viscosities cannot. Questions were raised as to whether conservative smoothing might smear solutions more than artificial viscosity. Conservative smoothing, properly used, can produce more accurate solutions than the von Newnann Richtmyer Landshoff artificial viscosity which has been the standard for many years. We illustrate this using the vNR scheme on a test problem with known exact solution involving a shock collision in an ideal gas. We show that the norms of the errors with conservative smoothing are significantly smaller than the norms of the errors with artificial viscosity. ? This work was conducted at Michigan Technological University. ti' This work, conducted at Sandia National Laboratories, was supported by rbe U. s. %P-e*tofEnergY under Contract No. DE-ACO4-94AL85OO0.