Authors :
Jian Qin, Huachen Pan, Zefei Zhu, Xiaoqing Tian, and M. M. Rahman
Volume/Issue :
Volume 5 - 2020, Issue 3 - March
Google Scholar :
https://goo.gl/DF9R4u
Scribd :
https://bit.ly/39BkpTM
Abstract :
A comparative assessment between SIMPLE
and artificial SIMPLE (ASIMPLE) algorithms is
conducted based on two-dimensional buoyancy-driven
incompressible cavity flows, using a cell-centered finitevolume formulation on a non-orthogonal collocated grid.
Both methods are characteristically pressure-based;
however, the ASIMPLE scheme additionally combines
the concept of artificial compressibility with the
pressure Poisson equation, provoking density
perturbations that account for the transformation
between primitive and conservative variables. An
improved non-linear momentum interpolation scheme is
employed at the cell face in discretizing the continuity
equation, suppressing pressure oscillations effectively. A
range of values is considered for the thermal Grashof
number; excellent consistency is obtained between
results available in the literature and numerical
solutions adhering to both SIMPLE and ASIMPLE
solvers. Numerical experiments in reference to
buoyancy-driven cavity flows dictate that both
contrivances (e.g., SIMPLE and ASIMPLE) execute a
residual smoothing enhancement, facilitating an
avoidance of the velocity/pressure under-relaxation
(UR). However, compared with the SIMPLE approach,
included benefits of the ASIMPLE method are the use
of larger Courant numbers, enhanced robustness and
convergence. Both procedures adopt an unfactored
pseudo-time integration scheme and provide identical
results.
Keywords :
SIMPLE Algorithm, Artificial Compressibility, Sound Speed, Under-Relaxation (UR) Factor, Convergence and Robustness.
A comparative assessment between SIMPLE
and artificial SIMPLE (ASIMPLE) algorithms is
conducted based on two-dimensional buoyancy-driven
incompressible cavity flows, using a cell-centered finitevolume formulation on a non-orthogonal collocated grid.
Both methods are characteristically pressure-based;
however, the ASIMPLE scheme additionally combines
the concept of artificial compressibility with the
pressure Poisson equation, provoking density
perturbations that account for the transformation
between primitive and conservative variables. An
improved non-linear momentum interpolation scheme is
employed at the cell face in discretizing the continuity
equation, suppressing pressure oscillations effectively. A
range of values is considered for the thermal Grashof
number; excellent consistency is obtained between
results available in the literature and numerical
solutions adhering to both SIMPLE and ASIMPLE
solvers. Numerical experiments in reference to
buoyancy-driven cavity flows dictate that both
contrivances (e.g., SIMPLE and ASIMPLE) execute a
residual smoothing enhancement, facilitating an
avoidance of the velocity/pressure under-relaxation
(UR). However, compared with the SIMPLE approach,
included benefits of the ASIMPLE method are the use
of larger Courant numbers, enhanced robustness and
convergence. Both procedures adopt an unfactored
pseudo-time integration scheme and provide identical
results.
Keywords :
SIMPLE Algorithm, Artificial Compressibility, Sound Speed, Under-Relaxation (UR) Factor, Convergence and Robustness.
