Thank you all for the responses.


Colin: you're right no need to specify zero pressure strongly. Yes I'm checking against exact solution  U_x = y(1-y), U_y = 0.


Stephan: I think I understand what you mean but  can you just check below. I have tried specifying tangential velocity on the boundary strongly - that did not work (solution just didn't anything like the exact). So I tried adding the boundary integral term into the formulation weakly following the reasoning below:


when I include that term, however the L2 norm drops only by a half (and I still get vertical flow near boundary), that is:

without the boundary integral term L2 = 0.00677501099488

with the boundary term L2 = 0.00339740206367

excluding the (d v_j / d x_i ) term by hand gives  L2 = 5.86838100481e-14 ...


I must be doing something wrong.




From: firedrake-bounces@imperial.ac.uk <firedrake-bounces@imperial.ac.uk> on behalf of Colin Cotter <colin.cotter@imperial.ac.uk>
Sent: 23 April 2016 08:56
To: firedrake
Subject: Re: [firedrake] Pressure outlet boundary condition in plane poiseuille flow
 
Oh yeah, I temporarily forgot about viscosity! I'm so used to developing inviscid models...

--cjc

On 22 April 2016 at 20:56, Kramer, Stephan <s.kramer@imperial.ac.uk> wrote:
On 22/04/16 18:49, Colin Cotter wrote:
> OK, are you trying to match an analytical solution?
>
> I think it depends on whether you integrated by parts in the grad term,
> or the divergence. If you integrated by parts in the grad term, then you
> can get the 0 pressure boundary condition naturally i.e. without setting
> anything.
>
> all the best
> --cjc

To add to that, the natural ("do nothing") boundary condition leads to a
zero stress condition. This is I think also where the difference between
including and excluding the grad-div term comes from. The tangential
component of stress is different (dv/dx vs. dv/dx+du/dy) and is not
sufficiently constrained by the boundary conditions. If you include the
grad-div term the tangential stress is non-zero and so you either have
to explicitly add that as a boundary term to weakly enforce the correct
value of dv/dx+du/dy, or you apply a strong dirichlet on the tangential
component of velocity. Without the grad-div term the "do-nothing" bc for
the tangential stress automatically enforces dv/dx=0.

Cheers
Stephan

_______________________________________________
firedrake mailing list
firedrake@imperial.ac.uk
https://mailman.ic.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/firedrake



--