Moving Cylinder (Low-Mach)

The mv_cyl case verifies the low-Mach and moving-mesh capabilities in NekRS using a moving piston in a quasi-two-dimensional domain. The piston is located at , while a stationary wall is located at . The domain has width , and symmetry boundary conditions are imposed at .

Governing equations

Under the ideal-gas assumption, the nondimensional low-Mach governing equations are

(1)

Here, is the thermal divergence, is the thermodynamic pressure, is the hydrodynamic pressure, is the ratio of specific heats, is the strain-rate tensor, and is the identity tensor. The Reynolds and Péclet numbers are denoted by and , respectively.

Analytical solution

The piston is prescribed a sinusoidal velocity,

(2)

where is the piston velocity amplitude. The flow remains isentropic, and the analytical solution is

(3)

Here, is the piston location, is the initial domain volume, is the instantaneous domain volume, is the initial thermodynamic pressure, is the piston surface area, and is the spatially averaged temperature.

Verification criterion

The tests are qualified by evaluating the absolute errors in at a specified time. The volume, piston-position, and mean-temperature errors are compared with stored reference errors using a normalized regression limit of . Solver modes 3, 5, and 6 additionally require the Cardinal mesh-velocity error to be below . Solver modes 1 and 2 use the three physical regression checks in the overall pass criterion, while solver modes 3, 5, and 6 include the mesh-velocity check as well.

For the various tests, the mesh velocity is either prescribed analytically as,

(4)

or the mesh motion is computed using the elasticity solver with the piston velocity prescribed as a Dirichlet boundary condition. All routine regression configurations use polynomial order . The figures below present separate time-step-refinement studies and are not generated by the routine regression tests, which evaluate the qualifying errors at designated time-step sizes. They showcase temporal convergence at this fixed spatial discretization. The tests are organized into various solver modes, as follows:

Mode 1

This solver mode tests:

  • Low-Mach solver.

  • Passive scalar solver.

  • Prescribed moving mesh.

The regression errors are computed at . Figure 1 shows the corresponding time-step-refinement study.

Temporal convergence results for the moving-cylinder case using solver mode 1

Figure 1: Temporal convergence under time-step refinement for solver mode 1; the routine regression test uses polynomial order seven.

Mode 2

This solver mode tests:

  • All capabilities exercised in solver mode 1.

  • Characteristic subcycling.

The regression errors are computed at . Figure 2 shows the corresponding time-step-refinement study.

Temporal convergence results for the moving-cylinder case using solver mode 2

Figure 2: Temporal convergence under time-step refinement for solver mode 2; the routine regression test uses polynomial order seven.

Mode 3

This solver mode tests:

  • All capabilities exercised in solver mode 2.

  • Elasticity mesh solver.

  • Mesh projection.

The regression errors are computed at . Figure 3 shows the corresponding time-step-refinement study.

Temporal convergence results for the moving-cylinder case using solver mode 3

Figure 3: Temporal convergence under time-step refinement for solver mode 3; the routine regression test uses polynomial order seven.

Mode 5

This solver mode verifies the capabilities of solver mode 1 on an unaligned mesh. The regression errors are computed at . Figure 4 shows the corresponding time-step-refinement study.

Temporal convergence results for the moving-cylinder case using solver mode 5

Figure 4: Temporal convergence under time-step refinement for solver mode 5; the routine regression test uses polynomial order seven.

Mode 6

This solver mode verifies the capabilities of solver mode 3 on an unaligned mesh. The regression errors are computed at . Figure 5 shows the corresponding time-step-refinement study.

Temporal convergence results for the moving-cylinder case using solver mode 6

Figure 5: Temporal convergence under time-step refinement for solver mode 6; the routine regression test uses polynomial order seven.