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
-- http://www.imperial.ac.uk/people/colin.cotter www.cambridge.org/9781107663916