Fundamentals of

Computational
Fluid Dynamics
CFD
Fluid (gas and liquid) flows are governed by partial differential equations which represent
conservation laws for the mass, momentum, and energy. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is
the art of replacing such PDE systems by a set of algebraic equations which can be solved using
digital computers.

Members: Course: FEM & FVM Date: 12 July, 2017

 Syed Hasan Ali (AU-13029)
 Mohammad Anas Sohail (AU-13041)
 Syed Raza Imam Naqvi (AU-13049)
 Syed Mohammad Zuhaib Naqvi (AU-13050)
Fundamentals of
Computational
Fluid Dynamics Computational
CFD Fluid
Dynamics
This is a quick-and-dirty introduction to the basic concepts

Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

It is a branch of fluid
underlying CFD. The concepts are illustrated by applying
them to simple 1D model problems. We’ll invoke these mechanics that uses
concepts while performing “case studies” in FLUENT. numerical analysis and
Happily for us, these model-problem concepts extend to the data structures to solve
more general situations in the case studies in most
and analyze problems
instances. Since we’ll keep returning to these concepts while
that involve fluid flows.
performing the FLUENT case studies, it’s worth your time to
understand and digest these concepts. We discuss the
following topics briefly. These topics are the minimum
necessary to perform and validate the FLUENT calculations
to come later.

 The Need for CFD

 Applications of CFD
 The Strategy of CFD
 Discretization Using the Finite-Difference Method
 Discretization Using The Finite-Volume Method
 Assembly of Discrete System and Application of
Boundary Conditions
 Solution of Discrete System
 Grid Convergence
 Dealing with Nonlinearity
 Direct and Iterative Solvers
 Iterative Convergence
 Numerical Stability
 Turbulence modeling 1
 The Need for CFD
Applying the fundamental laws of mechanics to a fluid gives the governing
equations for a fluid. The conservation of mass equation is
𝜕𝜌
+ 𝛻 • (𝜌𝑉) = 0
𝜕𝑡
And the conservation of momentum equation is
𝜕𝑉
𝜌 + 𝜌(𝑉 · 𝛻)𝑉 = −𝛻𝑝 + 𝜌𝑔 + 𝛻 · 𝜏𝑖𝑗
𝜕𝑡
Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

These equations along with the conservation of energy equation form a set of
coupled, nonlinear partial differential equations. It is not possible to solve these
equations analytically for most engineering problems.

However, it is possible to obtain approximate computer-based solutions to the

governing equations for a variety of engineering problems. This is the subject
matter of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD).

Applications of CFD
CFD is useful in a wide variety of applications and here we note a few to give you
an idea of its use in industry. The simulations shown below have been performed
using the FLUENT software.

CFD can be used to simulate the flow over a vehicle. For instance, it can be used
to study the interaction of propellers or rotors with the aircraft fuselage. The
following figure shows the prediction of the pressure field induced by the
interaction of the rotor with a helicopter fuselage in forward flight. Rotors and
propellers can be represented with models of varying complexity.

2
The temperature distribution obtained from a CFD analysis of a mixing manifold is
shown below. This mixing manifold is part of the passenger cabin ventilation
system on the Boeing 767. The CFD analysis showed the effectiveness of a simpler
manifold design without the need for field testing.

Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

Bio-medical engineering is a rapidly growing field and uses CFD to study the
circulatory and respiratory systems. The following figure shows pressure contours
and a cutaway view that reveals velocity vectors in a blood pump that assumes the
role of heart in open-heart surgery.

CFD is attractive to industry since it is more cost-effective than physical testing.

However, one must note that complex flow simulations are challenging and error-
prone and it takes a lot of engineering expertise to obtain validated solutions.

The Strategy of CFD

Broadly, the strategy of CFD is to replace the continuous problem domain with a
discrete domain using a grid. In the continuous domain, each flow variable is
defined at every point in the domain. For instance, the pressure p in the
continuous 1D domain shown in the figure below would be given as 3

𝑝 = 𝑝(𝑥), 0 < 𝑥 < 1

 In the discrete domain, each flow variable is defined only at the grid points. So, in
the discrete domain shown below, the pressure would be defined only at the N
grid points.
𝑝𝑖 = 𝑝(𝑥𝑖 ), 𝑖 = 1, 2, . . . , 𝑁

Continuous Discrete Domain

Domain
x = x1 , x2 , … , xN
0 ≤ x ≤ 1
Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

x1 x𝑖 xN
x=0 x=1
Grid point
Coupled PDEs + boundary
Coupled algebraic equations. In
Conditions in continuous discrete variables
variables

In a CFD solution, one would directly solve for the relevant flow variables only at
the grid points. The values at other locations are determined by interpolating the
values at the grid points.

The governing partial differential equations and boundary conditions are defined
in terms of the continuous variables p, V etc. One can approximate these in the
discrete domain in terms of the discrete variables 𝑝𝑖 , 𝑉𝑖 etc. The discrete system is
a large set of coupled, algebraic equations in the discrete variables. Setting up the
discrete system and solving it (which is a matrix inversion problem) involves a very
large number of repetitive calculations, a task we humans palm over to the digital
computer.

This idea can be extended to any general problem domain. The following figure
shows the grid used for solving the flow over an airfoil. We’ll take a closer look at
this airfoil grid soon while discussing the finite-volume method.
4
Discretization Using the Finite-Difference Method

To keep the details simple, we will illustrate the fundamental ideas underlying CFD
by applying them to the following simple 1D equation:
𝑑𝑢
+ 𝑢𝑚 = 0; 0 ≤ 𝑥 ≤ 1; 𝑢(0) = 1
𝑑𝑥
We’ll first consider the case where m = 1 when the equation is linear. We’ll later
consider the m = 2 case when the equation is nonlinear.

We’ll derive a discrete representation of the above equation with m = 1 on the

Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

following grid:

This grid has four equally-spaced grid points with ∆x being the spacing between
successive points. Since the governing equation is valid at any grid point, we have
𝑑𝑢
( ) + 𝑢𝑖 = 0
𝑑𝑥 𝑖
Where the subscript “i” represents the value at grid point 𝑥𝑖 . In order to get an
expression for (du/dx)𝑖 in terms of u at the grid points, we expand 𝑢𝑖−1 in a
Taylor’s series:
𝑑𝑢
𝑢𝑖−1 = 𝑢𝑖 − ∆𝑥 ( ) + 𝑂(∆𝑥 2 )
𝑑𝑥 𝑖
Rearranging gives
𝑑𝑢 𝑢𝑖 − 𝑢𝑖−1
( ) = + 𝑂(∆𝑥)
𝑑𝑥 𝑖 ∆𝑥
The error in (du/dx) due to the neglected terms in the Taylor’s series is called the
truncation error. Since the truncation error above is O(∆x), this discrete
representation is termed first order accurate.
5
Using (3) in (2) and excluding higher-order terms in the Taylor’s series, we get the
following discrete equation:
 𝑢𝑖 − 𝑢𝑖−1
+ 𝑢𝑖 = 0
∆𝑥
Note that we have gone from a differential equation to an algebraic equation!

This method of deriving the discrete equation using Taylor’s series expansions is
called the finite-difference method. However, most commercial CFD codes use the
finite-volume or finite-element methods which are better suited for modeling flow
past complex geometries.

For example, the FLUENT code uses the finite-volume method whereas ANSYS uses
the finite-element method. We’ll briefly indicate the philosophy of the finite-
Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

volume method next but will keep using the finite-difference approach to illustrate
the underlying concepts which are very similar between the different approaches
with the finite-difference method being easiest to understand.

Discretization Using the Finite-Volume Method

If you look closely at the airfoil grid shown earlier, you’ll see that it consists of
quadrilaterals. In the finite-volume method, such a quadrilateral is commonly
referred to as a “cell” and a grid point as a “node”. In 2D, one could also have
triangular cells. In 3D, cells are usually hexahedral, tetrahedral, or prisms. In the
finite-volume approach, the integral form of the conservation equations are
applied to the control volume defined by a cell to get the discrete equations for
the cell. The integral form of the continuity equation for steady, incompressible
flow is

∫ 𝑉 · 𝑛ˆ 𝑑𝑆 = 0

The integration is over the surface S of the control volume and nˆ is the outward
normal at the surface. Physically, this equation means that the net volume flow
into the control volume is zero.

Consider the rectangular cell shown below.

6
The velocity at face i is taken to be 𝑉𝑖 = 𝑢𝑖 ˆ𝑖 + 𝑣𝑖 ˆ𝑗. Applying the mass
conservation equation (5) to the control volume defined by the cell gives

−𝑢1 ∆𝑦 − 𝑣2 ∆𝑥 + 𝑢3 ∆𝑦 + 𝑣4 ∆𝑥 = 0
This is the discrete form of the continuity equation for the cell. It is equivalent to
summing up the net mass flow into the control volume and setting it to zero. So it
ensures that the net mass flow into the cell is zero i.e. that mass is conserved for
the cell. Usually, though not always, the values at the cell centers are solved for
directly by inverting the discrete system. The face values u1, v2, etc. are obtained
by suitably interpolating the cell-center values at adjacent cells.

Similarly, one can obtain discrete equations for the conservation of momentum

Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

and energy for the cell. One can readily extend these ideas to any general cell
shape in 2D or 3D and any conservation equation. Take a few minutes to contrast
the discretization in the finite-volume approach to that in the finite-difference
method discussed earlier.

Look back at the airfoil grid. When you are using FLUENT, it’s useful to remind
yourself that the code is finding a solution such that mass, momentum, energy and
other relevant quantities are being conserved for each cell. Also, the code directly
solves for values of the flow variables at the cell centers; values at other locations
are obtained by suitable interpolation.

Assembly of Discrete System and Application of Boundary

Conditions
Recall that the discrete equation that we obtained using the finite-difference
method was
𝑢𝑖 − 𝑢𝑖−1
+ 𝑢𝑖 = 0
∆𝑥
Rearranging, we get

− 𝑢𝑖−1 + (1 + ∆𝑥)𝑢𝑖 = 0
Applying this equation to the 1D grid shown earlier at grid points i = 2, 3, 4 gives

− 𝑢1 + (1 + ∆𝑥)𝑢2 = 0 (i = 2) 7
− 𝑢2 + (1 + ∆𝑥)𝑢3 = 0 (i = 3)

− 𝑢3 + (1 + ∆𝑥)𝑢4 = 0 (i = 4)
 The discrete equation cannot be applied at the left boundary (i=1) since 𝑢𝑖−1is not
defined here. Instead, we use the boundary condition to get

𝑢1 = 1
Equations (6)-(9) form a system of four simultaneous algebraic equations in the
four unknowns 𝑢1 ,𝑢2 , 𝑢3 and 𝑢4 . It’s convenient to write this system in matrix
form:
Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

In a general situation, one would apply the discrete equations to the grid points
(or cells in the finite-volume method) in the interior of the domain. For grid points
(or cells) at or near the boundary, one would apply a combination of the discrete
equations and boundary conditions. In the end, one would obtain a system of
simultaneous algebraic equations with the number of equations being equal to the
number of independent discrete variables. The process is essentially the same as
for the model equation above with the details being much more complex.

FLUENT, like other commercial CFD codes, offers a variety of boundary condition
options such as velocity inlet, pressure inlet, pressure outlet, etc. It is very
important that you specify the proper boundary conditions in order to have a well-
defined problem. Also, read through the documentation for a boundary condition
option to understand what it does before you use it (it might not be doing what
you expect). A single wrong boundary condition can give you a totally wrong result.

Solution of Discrete System

The discrete system (10) for our own humble 1D example can be easily inverted to
obtain the unknowns at the grid points. Solving for 𝑢1 ,𝑢2 , 𝑢3 and 𝑢4 in turn and
using ∆x = 1/3, we get
3 9 27
𝑢1 = 1 𝑢2 = 4 , 𝑢3 = 16 𝑢4 = 64

The exact solution for the 1D example is easily calculated to be

8
𝑢𝑒𝑥𝑎𝑐𝑡 = exp(−𝑥)
The figure below shows the comparison of the discrete solution obtained on the
four-point grid with the exact solution. The error is largest at the right boundary
where it is equal to 14.7%.

Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

In a practical CFD application, one would have thousands to millions of unknowns
in the discrete system and if one uses, say, a Gaussian elimination procedure
naively to invert the matrix, you’d graduate before the computer finishes the
calculation. So a lot of work goes into optimizing the matrix inversion in order to
minimize the CPU time and memory required. The matrix to be inverted is sparse
i.e. most of the entries in it are zeroes since the discrete equation at a grid point
or cell will contain only quantities at the neighboring points or cells; verify that this
is indeed the case for our matrix system (10). A CFD code would store only the
non-zero values to minimize memory usage. It would also generally use an
iterative procedure to invert the matrix; the longer one iterates, the closer one
gets to the true solution for the matrix inversion.

Grid Convergence
While developing the finite-difference approximation for the 1D example, we saw
that the truncation error in our discrete system is O(∆x). So one expects that as
the number of grid points is increased and ∆x is reduced, the error in the numerical 9
solution would decrease and the agreement between the numerical and exact
solutions would get better.
 Let’s consider the effect of increasing the number of grid points N on the numerical
solution of the 1D problem. We’ll consider N = 8 and N = 16 in addition to the N =
4 case solved previously. We repeat the above assembly and solution steps on
each of these additional grids. The resulting discrete system was solved using
MATLAB. The following figure compares the results obtained on the three grids
with the exact solution. As expected, the numerical error decreases as the number
of grid points is increased.
Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

When the numerical solutions obtained on different grids agree to within a level
of tolerance specified by the user, they are referred to as “grid converged”
solutions. The concept of grid convergence applies to the finite-volume approach
also where the numerical solution, if correct, becomes independent of the grid as
the cell size is reduced. It is very important that you investigate the effect of grid
resolution on the solution in every CFD problem you solve. Never trust a CFD
solution unless you have convinced yourself that the solution is grid converged to
an acceptance level of tolerance (which would be problem dependent).

Dealing with Nonlinearity

The momentum conservation equation for a fluid is nonlinear due to the
convection term (V · ∇) V. Phenomena such as turbulence and chemical reaction
introduce additional nonlinearities. The highly nonlinear nature of the governing
10
equations for a fluid makes it challenging to obtain accurate numerical solutions
for complex flows of practical interest. We will demonstrate the effect of
nonlinearity by setting m = 2 in our simple 1D example (1):
 𝑑𝑢
+ 𝑢2 = 0; 0 ≤ 𝑥 ≤ 1; 𝑢(0) = 1
𝑑𝑥
A first-order finite-difference approximation to this equation, analogous to that in
(4) for m = 1, is
𝑢𝑖 − 𝑢𝑖−1
+ 𝑢𝑖 2 = 0
∆𝑥
This is a nonlinear algebraic equation with the 𝑢𝑖 2 term being the source of the
nonlinearity.

The strategy that is adopted to deal with nonlinearity is to linearize the equations
about a guess value of the solution and to iterate until the guess agrees with the

Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

solution to a specified tolerance level. We’ll illustrate this on the above example.
Let 𝑢𝑔𝑖 be the guess for 𝑢𝑖 . Define

∆𝑢𝑖 = 𝑢𝑖 − 𝑢𝑔𝑖

Rearranging and squaring this equation gives

∆𝑢𝑖 2 = 𝑢𝑔𝑖 2 + 2𝑢𝑔𝑖 ∆𝑢𝑖 + (∆𝑢𝑖 )2

Assuming that ∆𝑢𝑖 ≪ 𝑢𝑔𝑖 , we can neglect the ∆𝑢𝑖 2 term to get

𝑢𝑖 2 ≅ 𝑢𝑔𝑖 2 + 2𝑢𝑔𝑖 ∆𝑢𝑖 = 𝑢𝑔𝑖 2 + 2𝑢𝑔𝑖 (𝑢𝑖 − 𝑢𝑔𝑖 )

Thus,

𝑢𝑖 2 ≅ 2𝑢𝑔𝑖 𝑢𝑖 −𝑢𝑔𝑖 2

The finite-difference approximation (11) after linearization becomes

𝑢𝑖 − 𝑢𝑖−1
+ 2𝑢𝑔𝑖 𝑢𝑖 −𝑢𝑔𝑖 2 = 0
∆𝑥

Since the error due to linearization is 𝑂(∆𝑢2 ), it tends to zero as 𝑢𝑔 → u.

In order to calculate the finite-difference approximation (12), we need guess

values 𝑢𝑔 at the grid points. We start with an initial guess value in the first
iteration. For each subsequent iteration, the u value obtained in the previous
iteration is used as the guess value. 11

Iteration 1: 𝑢𝑔 (1) = Initial guess

 Iteration 2: 𝑢𝑔 (2) = 𝑢(1)

Iteration l: 𝑢𝑔 (𝑙) = 𝑢(𝑙−1)

The superscript indicates the iteration level. We continue the iterations until they
converge. We’ll defer the discussion on how to evaluate convergence until a little
later.
Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

This is essentially the process used in CFD codes to linearize the nonlinear terms
in the conservations equations, with the details varying depending on the code.
The important points to remember are that the linearization is performed about a
guess and that it is necessary to iterate through successive approximations until
the iterations converge.

Direct and Iterative Solvers

We saw that we need to perform iterations to deal with the nonlinear terms in the
governing equations. We next discuss another factor that makes it necessary to
carry out iterations in practical CFD problems.

Verify that the discrete equation system resulting from the finite-difference
approximation (12) on our four-point grid is
In a practical problem, one would usually have thousands to millions of grid points
or cells so that each dimension of the above matrix would be of the order of a
million (with most of the elements being zeroes). Inverting such a matrix directly
would take a prohibitively large amount of memory. So instead, the matrix is

inverted using an iterative scheme as discussed below.

12 Rearrange the finite-difference approximation (12) at grid point i so that 𝑢𝑖 is
expressed in terms of the values at the neighboring grid points and the guess
values
If a neighboring value at the current iteration level is not available, we use the
guess value for it. Let’s say that we sweep from right to left on our grid i.e. we
update 𝑢4 , then 𝑢3 and finally 𝑢2 in each iteration. In the 𝑚𝑡ℎ iteration, 𝑢𝑖−1 (𝑙) is
not available while updating 𝑢𝑖 𝑚 and so we use the guess value 𝑢𝑔𝑖−1 (𝑙) for it
instead:

Since we are using the guess values at neighboring points, we are effectively
obtaining only an approximate solution for the matrix inversion in (13) during each
iteration but in the process have greatly reduced the memory required for the

Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

inversion. This tradeoff is good strategy since it doesn’t make sense to expend a
great deal of resources to do an exact matrix inversion when the matrix elements
depend on guess values which are continuously being refined. In an act of
cleverness, we have combined the iteration to handle nonlinear terms with the
iteration for matrix inversion into a single iteration process. Most importantly, as
the iterations converge and 𝑢𝑔 → u, the approximate solution for the matrix
inversion tends towards the exact solution for the inversion since the error
introduced by using 𝑢𝑔 instead of u in (14) also tends to zero.

Thus, iteration serves two purposes:

 It allows for efficient matrix inversion with greatly reduced memory

requirements.
 It is necessary to solve nonlinear equations.
In steady problems, a common and effective strategy used in CFD codes is to solve
the unsteady form of the governing equations and “march” the solution in time
until the solution converges to a steady value. In this case, each time step is
effectively an iteration, with the guess value at any time level being given by the
solution at the previous time level.

Iterative Convergence
Recall that as 𝑢𝑔 → u, the linearization and matrix inversion errors tends to zero.
So we continue the iteration process until some selected measure of the
difference between 𝑢𝑔 and u, referred to as the residual, is “small enough”. We
13
could, for instance, define the residual R as the RMS value of the difference
between u and 𝑢𝑔 on the grid:
 It’s useful to scale this residual with the average value of u in the domain. An
unscaled residual of, say, 0.01 would be relatively small if the average value of u
in the domain is 5000 but would be relatively large if the average value is 0.1.
Scaling ensures that the residual is a relative rather than an absolute measure.
Scaling the above residual by dividing by the average value of u gives
Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

For the nonlinear 1D example, we’ll take the initial guess at all grid points to be
equal to the value at the left boundary i.e. 𝑢𝑔 (1) = 1. In each iteration, we
update 𝑢𝑔 , sweep from right to left on the grid updating, in turn, u4, u3 and u2
using (14) and calculate the residual using (15). We’ll terminate the iterations
when the residual falls below 10−9 (which is referred to as the convergence
criterion). Take a few minutes to implement this procedure in MATLAB which will
help you gain some familiarity with the mechanics of the implementation. The
variation of the residual with iterations obtained from MATLAB is shown below.
Note that logarithmic scale is used for the ordinate. The iterative process
converges to a level smaller than 10−9 in just 6 iterations. In more complex
problems, a lot more iterations would be necessary for achieving convergence.

14
The solution after 2, 4 and 6 iterations and the exact solution are shown below. It
can easily be verified that the exact solution is given by
1
𝑢𝑒𝑥𝑎𝑐𝑡 =
𝑥+1
The solutions for iterations 4 and 6 are indistinguishable on the graph. This is
another indication that the solution has converged. The converged solution
doesn’t agree well with the exact solution because we are using a coarse grid for
which the truncation error is relatively large. The iterative convergence error,
which is of order 10−9 , is swamped out by the truncation error of order10−1 . So
driving the residual down to 10−9 when the truncation error is of order 10−1 is a

Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

waste of computing resources. In a good calculation, both errors would be of
comparable level and less than a tolerance level chosen by the user. The
agreement between the numerical and exact solutions should get much better on
refining the grid as was the case for m = 1.

Some points to note:

 Different codes use slightly different definitions for the residual. Read the
documentation to understand how the residual is calculated.
 In the FLUENT code, residuals are reported for each conservation equation. 15
A discrete conservation equation at any cell can be written in the form LHS
= 0. For any iteration, if one uses the current solution to compute the LHS,
it won’t be exactly equal to zero, with the deviation from zero being a
 measure of how far one is from achieving convergence. So FLUENT
calculates the residual as the (scaled) mean of the absolute value of the
LHS over all cells.
 The convergence criterion you choose for each conservation equation is
problem- and code-dependent. It’s a good idea to start with the default
values in the code. One may then have to tweak these values.

Numerical Stability
In our previous 1D example, the iterations converged very rapidly with the residual
falling below the convergence criterion of 10−9in just 6 iterations. In more
complex problems, the iterations converge more slowly and in some instances,
Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

may even diverge. One would like to know a priori the conditions under which a
given numerical scheme converges. This is determined by performing a stability
analysis of the numerical scheme. A numerical method is referred to as being
stable when the iterative process converges and as being unstable when it
diverges. It is not possible to carry out an exact stability analysis for the Euler or
Navier-Stokes equations. But a stability analysis of simpler, model equations
provides useful insight and approximate conditions for stability. A common
strategy used in CFD codes for steady problems is to solve the unsteady equations
and match the solution in time until it converges to a steady state. A stability
analysis is usually performed in the context of time-marching.

While using time-marching to a steady state, we are only interested in accurately

obtaining the asymptotic behavior at large times. So we would like to take as large
a time-step ∆t as possible to reach the steady state in the least number of time-
steps. There is usually a maximum allowable time-step ∆t max beyond which the
numerical scheme is unstable. If ∆t > ∆t max , the numerical errors will grow
exponentially in time causing the solution to diverge from the steady-state result.
The value of ∆t max depends on the numerical discretization scheme used. There
are two classes of numerical schemes, explicit and implicit, with very different
stability characteristics as we’ll briefly discuss next.

Explicit and Implicit Schemes

The difference between explicit and implicit schemes can be most easily illustrated
by applying them to the wave equation

16
Where c is the wave speed. One possible way to discretize this equation at grid point
i and time-level n is

The crucial thing to note here is that the spatial derivative is evaluated at the n−1 time-
level. Solving for u𝑖 𝑛 gives

This is an explicit expression i.e. the value of u𝑖 𝑛 at any grid point can be calculated

Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

directly from this expression without the need for any matrix inversion. The scheme
in (16) is known as an explicit scheme. Since u𝑖 𝑛 at each grid point can be updated
independently, these schemes are easy to implement on the computer. On the
downside, it turns out that this scheme is stable only when

Where C is called the Courant number. This condition is referred to as the Courant-
Friedrichs-Lewy or CFL condition. While a detailed derivation of the CFL condition
through stability analysis is outside the scope of the current discussion, it can see that
the coefficient of u𝑖 𝑛−1 in (17) changes sign depending on whether C > 1 or C < 1
leading to very different behavior in the two cases. The CFL condition places a rather
severe limitation on ∆tmax .

In an implicit scheme, the spatial derivative term is evaluated at the n time-level:

In this case, we can’t update u𝑖 𝑛 at each grid point independently. We instead need
to solve a system of algebraic equations in order to calculate the values at all grid
points simultaneously. It can be shown that this scheme is unconditionally stable for
the wave equation so that the numerical errors will be damped out irrespective of
how large the time-step is.

The stability limits discussed above apply specifically to the wave equation. In general, 17
explicit schemes applied to the Euler or Navier-Stokes equations have the same
restriction that the Courant number needs to be less than or equal to one. Implicit
schemes are not unconditionally stable for the Euler or Navier-Stokes equations since
 the nonlinearities in the governing equations often limit stability. However, they allow
a much larger Courant number than explicit schemes. The specific value of the
maximum allowable Courant number is problem dependent.

Some points to note:

 CFD codes will allow you to set the Courant number (which is also referred to
as the CFL number) when using time-stepping. Taking larger time-steps leads
to faster convergence to the steady state, so it is advantageous to set the
Courant number as large as possible, within the limits of stability, for steady
problems.
 You may find that a lower Courant number is required during startup when
Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

changes in the solution are highly nonlinear but it can be increased as the
solution progresses.

Turbulence Modeling
There are two radically different states of flows that are easily identified and
distinguished: laminar flow and turbulent flow. Laminar flows are characterized by
smoothly varying velocity fields in space and time in which individual “laminate”
(sheets) move past one another without generating cross currents. These flows
arise when the fluid viscosity is sufficiently large to damp out any perturbations to
the flow that may occur due to boundary imperfections or other irregularities.
These flows occur at low-to-moderate values of the Reynolds number. In contrast,
turbulent flows are characterized by large, nearly random fluctuations in velocity
and pressure in both space and time. These fluctuations arise from instabilities
that grow until nonlinear interactions cause them to break down into finer and
finer whirls that eventually are dissipated (into heat) by the action of viscosity.
Turbulent flows occur in the opposite limit of high Reynolds numbers.

A typical time history of the flow variable u at a fixed point in space is shown in
Fig. 1(a). The dashed line through the curve indicates the “average” velocity. We
can define three types of averages:

 Time average
 Volume average
 Ensemble average

18
 Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics
Figure 1: Example of a time history of a component of a fluctuating velocity at a
point in a turbulent flow. (a) Shows the velocity, (b) shows the fluctuating
component of velocity u’ ≡ u − u and (c) shows the square of the fluctuating
velocity. Dashed lines in (a) and (c) indicate the time averages.

The most mathematically general average is the ensemble average, in which you
repeat a given experiment a large number of times and average the quantity of
interest (say velocity) at the same position and time in each experiment. For
practical reasons, this is rarely done. Instead, a time or volume average (or
combination of the two) is made with the assumption that they are equivalent to
the ensemble average. For the sake of this discussion, let us define the time
average for a stationary flow1 as
19
 The deviation of the velocity from the mean value is called the fluctuation and is
usually defined as

Note that by definition u’ = 0 (the average of the fluctuation is zero). Consequently,

a better measure of the strength of the fluctuation is the average of the square of
a fluctuating variable. Figures 1(b) and 1(c) show the time evolution of the velocity
fluctuation, u’, and the square of that quantity, u’^2. Notice that the latter quantity
is always greater than zero as is its average. The equations governing a turbulent
flow are precisely the same as for a laminar flow; however, the solution is clearly
Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

much more complicated in this regime. The approaches to solving the flow
equations for a turbulent flow field can be roughly divided into two classes. Direct
numerical simulations (DNS) use the speed of modern computers to numerically
integrate the Navier Stokes equations, resolving all of the spatial and temporal
fluctuations, without resorting to modeling. In essence, the solution procedure is
the same as for laminar flow, except the numeric must contend with resolving all
of the fluctuations in the velocity and pressure. DNS remains limited to very simple
geometries (e.g., channel flows, jets and boundary layers) and is extremely
expensive to run.2 The alternative to DNS found in most CFD packages (including
FLUENT) is to solve the Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes (RANS) equations. RANS
equations govern the mean velocity and pressure. Because these quantities vary
smoothly in space and time, they are much easier to solve; however, as will be
shown below, they require modeling to “close” the equations and these models
introduce significant error into the calculation.

To demonstrate the closure problem, we consider fully developed turbulent flow

in a channel of height 2H. Recall that with RANS we are interested in solving for
the mean velocity u(y) only. If we formally average the Navier Stokes equations
and simplify for this geometry we arrive at the following

Subject to the boundary conditions

20
The kinematic viscosity ν=µ/ρ. The quantity u’ v’, known as the Reynolds stress, is
a higher order moment that must be modeled in terms of the known (i.e., u(y) and
its derivatives). This is referred to as the “closure” approximation. The quality of
the modeling of this term will determine the reliability of the computations.

Turbulence modeling is a rather broad discipline and an in-depth discussion is

beyond the scope of this introduction. Here we simply note that the Reynolds
stress is modeled in terms of two turbulence parameters, the turbulent kinetic
energy k and the turbulent energy dissipation rate defined below

Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics

Where (u’, v’, w’) is the fluctuating velocity vector. The kinetic energy is zero for
laminar flow and can be as large as 5% of the kinetic energy of the mean flow in a
highly turbulent case.

Summary
 CFD is a method to numerically calculate heat transfer and fluid flow.
 Currently, its main application is as an engineering method, to provide data
that is complementary to theoretical and experimental data. This is mainly
the domain of commercially available codes and in-house codes at large
companies.
 CFD can also be used for purely scientific studies, e.g. into the
fundamentals of turbulence. This is more common in academic institutions
and government research laboratories. Codes are usually developed to
specifically study a certain problem.

References
 Milne-Thomson, L.M. (1973). Theoretical Aerodynamics. Dover
Publications
 Richardson, L. F.; Chapman, S. (1965). Weather prediction by numerical
process. Dover Publications 21
 Hunt (1997). "Lewis Fry Richardson and his contributions to mathematics,
meteorology, and models of conflict". Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics