ME 608 Numerical Methods in Heat, Mass, and Momentum Transfer Solution to Assignment No: 1 Due Date: January 24,

2011 Instructor: J. Murthy

1. The governing equation for unsteady ow of a Newtonian uid is: 2 P u V ( u) + ( uu) + ( vu) + ( wu) = + bx + 2 t x y z x x x 3 u v u w + + + + y y x z z x (a) Comparing with general scalar transport equation, =u, = and S =

P u v + + bx + x x x y x w 2 + ( V) z x 3 x

(b) When = constant and = constant, = u, = . Since V =0, we can show that S =

P + bx x

(c) When = constant and = constant, =u, = and S =

u v w P + + + bx + x x x y x z x

(d) When = constant and = constant, =u, = and S

P 2 + bx ( V) + ( V) x 3 x x P = + bx x
= S x =
xe xw

2. (a) Source integration:

50xdx = 50xPx

The discrete equations for cells 1,2, and 3 are:

31 22 33

2 + 225 1 + 3 + 75 = 2 + 1125
= = 1

Cell 1 2 3

Exact 203.125 384.375 490.625

Computed 206.25 393.75 506.25

% Error 1.54 % 2.44 % 3.18 %

Table 1: Comparison of Exact and Computed Solution for Problem 2

(b) Solving using Gauss-Seidel iteration, we get 1 = 206.25, 2 = 393.75, 3 = 506.25. (c) Computing the face uxes, we get: J f 1 = J f 1 i = f 1 (1 0 ) x/ 2 (2 1 ) J f 2 = J f 2 i = f 2 x (3 2 ) J f 3 = J f 3 i = f 3 x (4 3 ) J f 4 = J f 4 i = f 4 x/ 2 = = = = 212.5 187.5 112.5 12.5

(d) Conservation for each cell: J f 2 J f 1 = 187.5 + 212.5 = 25 J f 3 J f 2 = 112.5 + 187.5 = 75 J f 4 J f 3 = 12.5 + 112.5 = 1125 Overall conservation: J f 4 J f 1 = 12.5 + 212.5 = (e) Exact solution: 25 3 625 x + x + 100 3 3 The error with respect to exact solution is given in Table 1.

P=1,2,3

Sx = 225

(x) =

So we see that we get a exact balance for each cell and over the whole domain, even though the cell values have an error with respect to the exact solution. The solution is conservative but not exact. 3. (a) The discrete equation for point P is ( e w e w E + W + )P = x x x x

(b) The discretization of the non-conservative form is P d P d 2P P = ( + 0.5 )E + ( 0.5 )W x x dx x dx Notice that the coefcients multiplying E and W can become negative if d /dx is large enough or of the wrong sign.

Consider the case = 1 + 5x2. For this case w e P d dx The nite volume discretization for point P yields 27P = 21E + 6W This yields P = 411.11. The ux on the faces e and w are given by Je = Je i = 1866.67 Jw = Jw i = 1866.67 Thus conservation is satised. The non-conservative form gives 24.50P = 19.75E + 4.75W = 15
P

= = =

6 21 12.25

This yields P = 422.45. Since this P is different from that obtained by the nite volume method, and that P (= 411.11) satises conservation, this one cannot. 4. (a) The discrete equation for points 1,2, and 3 are:

1 22 3

= 2 + 10x = 1 + 3 = 2 10x

(b) We cannot nd a unique numerical solution because the three algebraic equations are not linearly independent. (You can get one by linear manipulation of the other two). Another way to look at this is to realize that the boundary uxes are equal. Thus they guarantee conservation over the whole domain. Thus, only two of the three cell equations can be independent. The third can always be deduced from the fact of overall conservation and the other two conservation equations. This is also consistent with the way the original partial differential equation and boundary conditions behave - they admit and + C as solutions. If we use an iterative scheme to nd a solution, we will get a solution that depends on the initial guess. The prole will be linear, but the level will depend on the initial guess. A direct method will encounter a singular matrix. One way to get around this is to arbitrarily set the value of at one grid point. For example, set 1 = 100. This would give 2 = 110 and 3 = 120. To set a value arbitrarily, we overwrite the discrete equation at that point. For point 1, for example, we write aP aE aW b = 1 = 0 = 0 = 100

This renders the coefcient matrix non-singular and allows us to use a direct method for the solution of the algebraic set. 3

We note that this equation set does not satisfy the Scarborough criterion. However, we should distinguish between this and the question of uniqueness. The original equation set does not admit a unique solution no matter which solution method we use. The Scarborough criterion is a sufcient criterion for a particular iterative method, the Gauss-Seidel method. (c) The exact solution has the form:

= Ax + B

but since both boundary conditions are of the Neumann type, we can nd A but not B. So the analytical solution can be determined only up to an additive constant. (d) The same logic would apply if S=10; and + C are still admissible solutions to the governing equations and boundary conditions, both analytically and for the numerical discretization. (e) If the source term were = 10 20 , and + C are no longer both solutions, either analytically or numerically. This happens because of the 20 component of the source term. Unique solutions, exponential in nature, are possible. Indeed, this is the form of the governing equation for n conduction (see the textbook Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer by Incropera, DeWitt, Bergman and Lavine, 6th Edition, for example).