Hi,
Thanks for the prompt response
I followed the case illustrated in Cox et al article
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021999116001686?casa_token=Vpk3uWyaxE0AAAAA:IGLI-wLZFaIwfIIOyPM1OZH6-TphsFXG3nTrgAbaSuJkzNJrUbAYDcL-qc9R1WINd9qGIA
It is a double periodic 2D manufactured solution case, the u, v source
terms are evaluated using Mathematica
I attach the ini file here
The Re = 10
I calculated the order of accuracy in the manner described in the article
which is fairly straightforward
[image: image.png]
[image: image.png]
where eps_k is the difference between the exact solution and the numerical
solution.
I used the same meshes resolutions as the article 4x4, 8x8, 16x16, 32x32
with double periodic bcs generated using gmsh

For now, I am only trying to verify the spatial accuracy so following the
article's example I am using very small dt
I tried different zeta values, different pseudo-dt,, more pseudo-niters-max
going as high as 50 which is killing my performance
the only part I did not mess with is the LDG  beta and tau
I double-checked the source terms several times but it seems okay
So I am not sure what could be the problem.

Appreciate your help.
M Kamra



On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 23:51 Vincent, Peter E <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi M Karma,
>
> Could you provide more details of the test case, the way your are
> obtaining the order of accuracy, and the results that you are getting.
>
> Thanks
>
> Peter
>
> Professor of Computational Fluid Dynamics and EPSRC Fellow
> Department of Aeronautics
> Imperial College London
> South Kensington
> London
> SW7 2AZ
> UK
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 6 Oct 2020, at 15:47, mkamra <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hello Everyone,
>
> I have a question regarding the order of accuracy of the ACM method; Have
> you done any tests using the method of manufactured solutions ( published
> or otherwise) ?
>
> I tried the 2D taylor green benchmark but the order of accuracy I am
> getting is nowhere near what it should be. When comparing with exact
> solution I used the solution points directly not the subdivided solution in
> the vtu file to avoid interpolation issues polluting the order of accuracy
>
> Also regarding the ACM, how would one obtain the residual of the
> continuity and momentum equations? Pseudo-stats only report the change
> between two consecutive pseudo iterations
>
>
> Regards,
>
> M Kamra
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PyFR Mailing List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pyfrmailinglist/fc58961d-02b2-4e7b-a05b-62af91f93537n%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pyfrmailinglist/fc58961d-02b2-4e7b-a05b-62af91f93537n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PyFR 
Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pyfrmailinglist/CAHrgCm7h18kXm-dUA%2BmfZH%2BK8bw1kfbpBnEdLyxORnpfV%3DFvrw%40mail.gmail.com.

Attachment: tg2d.ini
Description: application/ini

Reply via email to