Calculate the allowable time step size for calculation of duct with inlet velocity of 1m/s.

The duct
has been meshed with 100 metres per meter length.

To calculate the allowable time step size for numerical heat transfer analysis, we need to ensure that
the time step size is small enough to capture the transient behavior of the system accurately but not
so small that the computation time becomes prohibitively long.

The time step size can be estimated using the Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy (CFL) condition, which states
that the time step size should be less than or equal to a certain value proportional to the spatial grid
size and the velocity of the fluid:

Δt ≤ Δx / v

where Δt is the time step size, Δx is the spatial grid size, and v is the velocity of the fluid.

In this case, the inlet velocity of the duct is given as 1 m/s, and the duct has been meshed with 100
metres per meter length. Therefore, the spatial grid size Δx is :

Δx = 1 / 100 = 0.01 m

Using the CFL condition, we can calculate the allowable time step size as:

Δt ≤ Δx / v = 0.01 / 1 = 0.01 s

Therefore, the allowable time step size for the calculation of this duct is 0.01 seconds or smaller.

Staggered grid

Staggered grid is a numerical discretization technique commonly used in computational fluid

dynamics (CFD) simulations to discretize the governing equations on a grid that has different
variables located at different positions. In a staggered grid, the variables of interest (such as pressure,
velocity, and temperature) are located at different positions in the grid, resulting in a more accurate
approximation of the underlying physics.

For example, in a 2D staggered grid, the pressure values may be located at the center of each grid
cell, while the x-velocity values are located on the edges of the cell and the y-velocity values are
located on the edges of adjacent cells. This arrangement of variables on the grid ensures that the
pressure gradient is accurately calculated in the momentum equation, while the mass conservation
equation is satisfied to a high degree of accuracy.

Staggered grids can be implemented using various numerical methods, such as the finite difference
method, the finite volume method, and the finite element method. They are often preferred over
collocated grids, where all variables are located at the same position, due to their improved accuracy
and stability properties. However, staggered grids may also introduce additional complexities in the
numerical implementation and require special treatment for boundary conditions.

State it's advantages.

The staggered grid technique offers several advantages over the traditional collocated grid approach,
including:
Reduced numerical errors: Since the variables of interest are located at different positions in the grid,
the accuracy of the numerical approximation is increased, resulting in reduced numerical errors.

Better stability properties: The staggered grid approach is more stable than the collocated grid
approach, particularly for simulations involving high Reynolds numbers or compressible flows

Better representation of physics: Staggered grids more accurately represent the underlying physics of
fluid flow, especially in simulations involving complex geometries, such as those found in aerospace
and automotive engineering.

Reduced numerical diffusion: The staggered grid approach can significantly reduce numerical
diffusion, which is a common issue in simulations involving advection-dominated flows.

Improved treatment of boundary conditions: Staggered grids can be better suited to handling
boundary conditions, particularly for simulations involving complex geometries, allowing for more
accurate simulations of real-world scenarios.

Overall, the staggered grid approach is a powerful technique that can improve the accuracy and
stability of fluid dynamics simulations, allowing for better prediction of fluid flow behavior and
improved engineering designs.

Numerical diffusion meaning above

Numerical diffusion refers to the phenomenon where numerical errors in a computational fluid
dynamics (CFD) simulation cause the physical phenomenon being simulated to spread out more than
it would in reality. In other words, numerical diffusion is an artificial form of diffusion that is
introduced into the simulation due to the discretization and numerical solution process.

Numerical diffusion is caused by the inherent approximations made in the numerical solution
process, which can cause the solutions to be overly smoothed and less accurate. This can result in
the loss of important details in the fluid flow, such as the formation of vortices or the separation of
flows, which can have significant effects on the accuracy of the simulation results.

One of the main causes of numerical diffusion is the use of low-order numerical schemes, such as
first-order upwind schemes, which are known to be diffusive. In contrast, higher-order numerical
schemes, such as second-order central or upwind schemes, can reduce numerical diffusion by
providing more accurate approximations of the underlying physics.

To reduce numerical diffusion, it is important to use higher-order numerical schemes and to ensure
that the spatial and temporal resolutions of the simulation are appropriate for the problem being
solved. This can be achieved by using finer grids, reducing the time step size, and ensuring that the
numerical scheme used is appropriate for the problem being solved.

Errors in CFD

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations involve approximations and discretizations of the
governing equations, which can result in various types of errors. Some of the common types of errors
in CFD simulations include:
Numerical errors: These are errors that arise due to the numerical methods used to solve the
governing equations. For example, discretization errors can arise due to the use of finite difference,
finite volume, or finite element methods. These errors can be reduced by using higher-order
numerical schemes or by increasing the grid resolution.

Modeling errors: These are errors that arise due to the assumptions made in the mathematical
models used to represent the physical system. For example, turbulence models are known to have
modeling errors, and the accuracy of the simulation can be improved by using more accurate
turbulence models or by using direct numerical simulation (DNS) or large eddy simulation (LES)
techniques.

Initialization errors: These are errors that arise due to the initial conditions used to start the
simulation. Small variations in the initial conditions can result in large differences in the simulation
results, and care must be taken to ensure that the initial conditions are as accurate as possible.

Boundary condition errors: These are errors that arise due to the boundary conditions used in the
simulation. Small errors in the boundary conditions, such as inflow velocity or pressure, can result in
large errors in the simulation results.

Convergence errors: These are errors that arise due to the convergence criteria used to terminate the
simulation. If the convergence criteria are too lax, the simulation may not converge to the correct
solution, whereas if the criteria are too stringent, the simulation may terminate prematurely,
resulting in inaccurate results.

To minimize these errors, it is important to perform careful validation and verification of the CFD
simulations, to ensure that the numerical methods, models, and boundary conditions are
appropriate for the problem being solved, and to use best practices in CFD simulation, such as grid
convergence studies and sensitivity analysis.

Upwinding

Upwinding is a numerical technique used in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations to

improve the accuracy and stability of the numerical solution. It is a method for approximating the
advection term in the governing equations, which describes the transport of a fluid property, such as
velocity or temperature, by the flow.

In upwinding, the advection term is approximated using a numerical scheme that takes into account
the direction of flow. Specifically, the scheme is designed to be biased towards the upstream
direction of flow, which means that the values used to compute the advection term are based on the
flow direction. This helps to avoid numerical errors that can arise when using a simple central
difference scheme, which can produce unphysical oscillations or instabilities in the solution.

The basic idea behind upwinding is to use information from the upstream cells to determine the
values of the dependent variables in the downstream cells. This means that the numerical scheme is
more accurate in regions of the flow where the flow is directed towards the downstream cells.
Conversely, the scheme is less accurate in regions where the flow is directed towards the upstream
cells, but this is desirable since the downstream cells are not affected by these cells.

Upwinding is particularly useful in simulating flows with high Reynolds numbers, where the
advection term is dominant, and the solution is prone to numerical instability. It is also commonly
used in simulating shock waves, where the solution can develop sharp gradients that can lead to
numerical errors if not properly treated.

There are different types of upwind schemes, such as first-order upwind, second-order upwind, and
higher-order upwind schemes, each with different levels of accuracy and computational cost. The
choice of scheme depends on the specific problem being solved and the desired level of accuracy.

Physical vs numerical experiments

Physical experiments and numerical experiments are two approaches to studying physical systems
and processes, and each has its advantages and limitations.

Physical experiments involve setting up a physical system in a controlled environment and measuring
its behavior under different conditions. Physical experiments have the advantage of providing direct
observation of the physical system, and can be used to validate and calibrate numerical models.
Physical experiments are also useful for studying complex phenomena that are difficult to simulate
numerically, such as turbulence or multiphase flows. However, physical experiments can be
expensive and time-consuming to set up, and they may not be feasible for some systems or
processes.

Numerical experiments, also known as simulations, involve using computer models to simulate the
behavior of a physical system under different conditions. Numerical experiments are less expensive
and less time-consuming than physical experiments, and they can be used to study a wide range of
systems and processes. Numerical experiments can also provide detailed information about the
behavior of a system, such as velocity or temperature distributions, that may be difficult or
impossible to measure in a physical experiment. However, numerical experiments are based on
mathematical models that make assumptions about the behavior of the physical system, and these
assumptions may not always accurately capture the behavior of the system. Numerical experiments
also require careful validation and verification to ensure that the models are accurate and reliable.

In summary, physical experiments and numerical experiments are complementary approaches to

studying physical systems and processes. Physical experiments provide direct observation of the
system, while numerical experiments provide detailed information about the behavior of the system
under different conditions. The choice between physical and numerical experiments depends on the
specific problem being studied and the resources available.

Grid independence and validation.

Grid independence and validation are two important aspects of computational fluid dynamics (CFD)
simulations.

Grid independence refers to the concept that the results of a CFD simulation should not depend on
the size or resolution of the computational grid used to discretize the governing equations. In other
words, the solution should converge to a consistent value as the grid size is refined. This is important
because using a finer grid can increase the computational cost of the simulation, and it is desirable to
use the smallest grid possible without sacrificing accuracy. To ensure grid independence, the CFD
solver should be run with multiple grid sizes and the results compared to determine the minimum
grid size required to achieve a converged solution.

Validation refers to the process of comparing the results of a CFD simulation to experimental data or
analytical solutions to ensure that the simulation accurately represents the physical system being
modeled. Validation is important because CFD simulations are based on mathematical models that
make assumptions about the behavior of the system, and these assumptions may not always
accurately capture the behavior of the system. To validate a CFD simulation, the results should be
compared to experimental data or analytical solutions using appropriate metrics, such as the root
mean square error (RMSE) or coefficient of determination (R²).

Both grid independence and validation are important for ensuring the accuracy and reliability of CFD
simulations. Grid independence ensures that the solution is not dependent on the computational
grid used, while validation ensures that the simulation accurately represents the physical system
being modeled. By performing grid independence studies and validation tests, CFD users can ensure
that their simulations are accurate and reliable, and can have confidence in the results they obtain.

Relaxation factor.

In numerical methods for solving partial differential equations, such as in computational fluid
dynamics (CFD), the relaxation factor is a parameter that is used to control the rate of convergence of
the iterative solution process.

The iterative solution process involves solving the discretized equations for the unknown variables at
each time step. In each iteration, the current solution is updated based on the previous solution and
the residual, which is the difference between the computed values and the exact values of the
unknown variables. The relaxation factor is used to adjust the weighting of the previous solution and
the residual in the update equation.

The relaxation factor is typically denoted by the symbol ω (omega) and takes on values between 0
and 1. A value of ω = 1 corresponds to a simple Gauss-Seidel iteration, while smaller values of ω
result in a slower convergence rate but can improve stability. A value of ω < 1 is known as under-
relaxation or under-relaxation factor, and a value of ω > 1 is known as over-relaxation or over-
relaxation factor.

The choice of the relaxation factor depends on the problem being solved and the desired rate of
convergence. Generally, smaller values of the relaxation factor lead to a slower convergence rate but
more stable solution, while larger values lead to a faster convergence rate but may result in
instability. The optimal value of the relaxation factor can be determined by performing a series of
simulations with different values of ω and selecting the value that provides the best balance
between convergence rate and stability.

Explain the concept of artificial diffusion using a suitable differential equation.

Artificial diffusion is a numerical technique used in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to add a
controlled amount of diffusion to the solution to prevent oscillations or instabilities in the numerical
solution. It is often used in high-speed flow simulations where sharp gradients in the solution can
lead to numerical instability.

Artificial diffusion is typically added to the governing equations in the form of an additional diffusive
term, which is proportional to the gradient of the solution. The coefficient of this additional term,
known as the artificial diffusion coefficient, is chosen to control the amount of diffusion added to the
solution.

The concept of artificial diffusion can be illustrated using the advection-diffusion equation, which is a
commonly used partial differential equation in CFD:

∂u/∂t + c ∂u/∂x = D ∂²u/∂x²

where u is the dependent variable, t is time, x is the spatial coordinate, c is the advection velocity, D
is the diffusion coefficient, and ∂ and ∂² are partial derivative operators.

In high-speed flows, the advection term can dominate over the diffusion term, leading to sharp
gradients in the solution. This can cause numerical instability, as the discretization of the spatial
derivative can lead to oscillations in the solution. To mitigate this issue, an artificial diffusion term can
be added to the equation:

∂u/∂t + c ∂u/∂x = D ∂²u/∂x² + ε ∂³u/∂x³

where ε is the artificial diffusion coefficient.

The additional term adds a controlled amount of diffusion to the solution, which can help stabilize
the numerical solution. The value of the artificial diffusion coefficient ε can be chosen to balance the
amount of diffusion added to the solution with the desired level of accuracy and numerical stability.

In summary, artificial diffusion is a numerical technique used in CFD to add a controlled amount of
diffusion to the solution to prevent oscillations or instabilities in the numerical solution. It is typically
added in the form of an additional diffusive term to the governing equations, with the coefficient of
the term chosen to control the amount of diffusion added to the solution.

Discretize the equation with grid spacings of ∆ x and ∆y, respectively in x and y direction ∂²T/∂x² +
∂²T/∂y² =0

To discretize the equation ∂²T/∂x² + ∂²T/∂y² = 0, we can use the finite difference method. The second
derivative terms can be approximated as follows:

∂²T/∂x² ≈ [T(i+1,j) - 2T(i,j) + T(i-1,j)] / (∆x)²

∂²T/∂y² ≈ [T(i,j+1) - 2T(i,j) + T(i,j-1)] / (∆y)²

where T(i,j) represents the temperature at grid point (i,j) and ∆x and ∆y represent the grid spacings in
the x and y directions, respectively.

Substituting these approximations into the original equation, we get:

[T(i+1,j) - 2T(i,j) + T(i-1,j)] / (∆x)² + [T(i,j+1) - 2T(i,j) + T(i,j-1)] / (∆y)² = 0

Multiplying both sides by (∆x)² (∆y)², we get:

(T(i+1,j) - 2T(i,j) + T(i-1,j)) (∆y)² + (T(i,j+1) - 2T(i,j) + T(i,j-1)) (∆x)² = 0

Rearranging terms, we get:

T(i,j) = [T(i+1,j) + T(i-1,j)] (∆y)² + [T(i,j+1) + T(i,j-1)] (∆x)² / (2(∆x)² + 2(∆y)²)

This equation provides a discretized approximation of the original equation on a grid with grid
spacings ∆x and ∆y in the x and y directions, respectively. It can be used to solve for the temperature
at each grid point using an iterative method such as the Gauss-Seidel method or the Successive Over
Relaxation (SOR) method.

Consider the equation ∂T/∂t = α∂²T/∂x² . Show the implicit and explicit forms of the discretized
equations considering Forward Time Central Space (FTCS) formulation. State the merits and
demerits of these schemes and state the stability criterion, if any.

The Forward Time Central Space (FTCS) formulation is a numerical method used to solve partial
differential equations. The FTCS scheme is a finite difference method in which the time derivative is
approximated by a forward difference and the spatial derivative is approximated by a central
difference.

To apply the FTCS method to the equation ∂T/∂t = α∂²T/∂x², we discretize the equation as follows:

Explicit Form:

T_i^(n+1) = T_i^n + (alpha * dt/dx^2) * (T_i+1^n - 2T_i^n + T_i-1^n)

Implicit Form:

-T_i+1^(n+1) + 2T_i^(n+1) - T_i-1^(n+1) = (alpha * dt/dx^2) * (T_i+1^n - 2T_i^n + T_i-1^n)

where T_i^n represents the temperature at grid point i and time step n, T_i^(n+1) represents the
temperature at the next time step, dt is the time step size, and dx is the grid spacing.

The explicit form of the discretized equation is straightforward to solve, but it can be numerically
unstable for certain choices of dt and dx. The implicit form, on the other hand, is more stable but
requires solving a system of equations at each time step.

The stability criterion for the FTCS method is given by the Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy (CFL) condition,
which requires that

dt/dx^2 <= 1/2alpha

If this condition is not satisfied, the solution can become numerically unstable and may diverge.

In summary, the merits of the FTCS method include its simplicity and ease of implementation, but it
may suffer from numerical instability for certain choices of parameters. The implicit form of the
discretized equation is more stable but requires solving a system of equations at each time step. The
stability criterion for the FTCS method is given by the CFL condition, which limits the choice of
parameters to ensure numerical stability.

[0:36 am, 03/04/2023] Bishwajit: FTCS Method for PDEs

Consider the equation ∂T/∂t = α∂²T/∂x² . Show the implicit and explicit forms of the discretized
equations considering Forward Time Central Space (FTCS) formulation. State the merits and
demerits of these schemes and state the stability criterion, if any.

The Forward Time Central Space (FTCS) formulation is a numerical method used to solve partial
differential equations. The FTCS scheme is a finite difference method in which the time derivative is
approximated by a forward difference and the spatial derivative is approximated by a central
difference.

To apply the FTCS method to the equation ∂T/∂t = α∂²T/∂x², we discretize the equation as follows:

Explicit Form:

T_i^(n+1) = T_i^n + (alpha * dt/dx^2) * (T_i+1^n - 2T_i^n + T_i-1^n)

Implicit Form:

-T_i+1^(n+1) + 2T_i^(n+1) - T_i-1^(n+1) = (alpha * dt/dx^2) * (T_i+1^n - 2T_i^n + T_i-1^n)

where T_i^n represents the temperature at grid point i and time step n, T_i^(n+1) represents the
temperature at the next time step, dt is the time step size, and dx is the grid spacing.

The explicit form of the discretized equation is straightforward to solve, but it can be numerically
unstable for certain choices of dt and dx. The implicit form, on the other hand, is more stable but
requires solving a system of equations at each time step.

The stability criterion for the FTCS method is given by the Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy (CFL) condition,
which requires that

dt/dx^2 <= 1/2alpha

If this condition is not satisfied, the solution can become numerically unstable and may diverge.

In summary, the merits of the FTCS method include its simplicity and ease of implementation, but it
may suffer from numerical instability for certain choices of parameters. The implicit form of the
discretized equation is more stable but requires solving a system of equations at each time step. The
stability criterion for the FTCS method is given by the CFL condition, which limits the choice of
parameters to ensure numerical stability.

Using central difference, develop the finite volume formulation for a 1-D concection-diffusion
equation.

To derive the finite volume formulation for a 1-D convection-diffusion equation using central
difference, we start with the differential equation:

∂u/∂t + ∂(au)/∂x = D∂²u/∂x²

where u is the dependent variable, a is the convection velocity, and D is the diffusion coefficient.

We consider a control volume that is centered at a point x_i, with a length of Δx, and time interval of
Δt. The control volume is shown in the figure below:
lua

Copy code

|-----------|-----------|-----------|

x_i-1 x_i x_i+1

We can integrate the differential equation over the control volume to obtain:

(u_i)^(n+1) - (u_i)^n + (a_i^nΔt/Δx)(u_i+1/2 - u_i-1/2) = D(Δt/Δx^2)(u_i+1 - 2u_i + u_i-1)

where (u_i)^(n+1) and (u_i)^n represent the values of u at time steps n+1 and n, respectively, and
u_i+1/2 and u_i-1/2 are the values of u at the faces of the control volume. The term a_i^nΔt/Δx
represents the convective flux, and the last term on the right-hand side represents the diffusive flux.

To obtain the finite volume formulation, we divide both sides of the equation by the control volume
Δx, and use the notation Q_i = u_iΔx to represent the total quantity of u in the control volume. We
then obtain:

(Q_i)^(n+1) - (Q_i)^n + (a_i^nΔt)(Q_i+1/2 - Q_i-1/2) = D(Δt/Δx)(Q_i+1 - 2Q_i + Q_i-1)

Dividing by Δt and rearranging the terms, we obtain the final form of the finite volume equation:

(Q_i)^(n+1) = (Q_i)^n + (a_i^nΔt)(Q_i+1/2 - Q_i-1/2) + D(Δt/Δx^2)(Q_i+1 - 2Q_i + Q_i-1)

where Q_i represents the total quantity of u in the control volume centered at x_i.

This equation is the finite volume formulation for a 1-D convection-diffusion equation using central
difference. It expresses the quantity of u in each control volume at time step n+1 in terms of the
quantity at the previous time step, the convective and diffusive fluxes, and the control volumes on
either side of the central control volume.

[0:36 am, 03/04/2023] Bishwajit: sketch the function Q(Pe) and state the limiting values. Show the
approximations for central difference, upwinding and hybrid scheme(write expressions separetly).

Numerical heat transfer involves discretizing the heat equation and solving it using numerical
methods. The Peclet number (Pe) is a dimensionless parameter that represents the ratio of advection
to diffusion. The function Q(Pe) represents the heat transfer rate as a function of the Peclet number.
Sketch of Q(Pe):

perl

Copy code

| /

| /

Q(Pe) | /

|_/___

Pe

As Pe increases, the heat transfer rate increases due to increased advection. However, at high Pe
values, the numerical solution may become unstable.

Limiting values:

Q(Pe) → 0 as Pe → 0 (purely diffusive case)

Q(Pe) → ∞ as Pe → ∞ (purely advective case)

Approximations for central difference, upwinding, and hybrid schemes:

Central difference scheme:

Q(Pe) ≈ 2Pe / (2 + Pe)

Upwinding scheme:

Q(Pe) ≈ (3Pe + 2) / (3 + Pe)

Hybrid scheme:

Q(Pe) ≈ (2 + Pe/2) / (1 + Pe/2)

These approximations are valid for Pe > 0 and Pe < ∞. They can be used to estimate the heat transfer
rate in numerical simulations of heat transfer problems. However, it's important to note that the
accuracy of these approximations may depend on the specific problem and numerical method used.