Alternative least‐squares finite element models of Navier‐Stokes equations for power‐law fluids

Alternative least‐squares finite element models of Navier‐Stokes equations for power‐law... Purpose – Most studies of power‐law fluids are carried out using stress‐based system of Navier‐Stokes equations; and least‐squares finite element models for vorticity‐based equations of power‐law fluids have not been explored yet. Also, there has been no study of the weak‐form Galerkin formulation using the reduced integration penalty method (RIP) for power‐law fluids. Based on these observations, the purpose of this paper is to fulfill the two‐fold objective of formulating the least‐squares finite element model for power‐law fluids, and the weak‐form RIP Galerkin model of power‐law fluids, and compare it with the least‐squares finite element model. Design/methodology/approach – For least‐squares finite element model, the original governing partial differential equations are transformed into an equivalent first‐order system by introducing additional independent variables, and then formulating the least‐squares model based on the lower‐order system. For RIP Galerkin model, the penalty function method is used to reformulate the original problem as a variational problem subjected to a constraint that is satisfied in a least‐squares (i.e. approximate) sense. The advantage of the constrained problem is that the pressure variable does not appear in the formulation. Findings – The non‐Newtonian fluids require higher‐order polynomial approximation functions and higher‐order Gaussian quadrature compared to Newtonian fluids. There is some tangible effect of linearization before and after minimization on the accuracy of the solution, which is more pronounced for lower power‐law indices compared to higher power‐law indices. The case of linearization before minimization converges at a faster rate compared to the case of linearization after minimization. There is slight locking that causes the matrices to be ill‐conditioned especially for lower values of power‐law indices. Also, the results obtained with RIP penalty model are equally good at higher values of penalty parameters. Originality/value – Vorticity‐based least‐squares finite element models are developed for power‐law fluids and effects of linearizations are explored. Also, the weak‐form RIP Galerkin model is developed. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Engineering Computations Emerald Publishing

Alternative least‐squares finite element models of Navier‐Stokes equations for power‐law fluids

Engineering Computations, Volume 28 (7): 25 – Oct 11, 2011

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/alternative-least-squares-finite-element-models-of-navier-stokes-QksSiF6XnF
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2011 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
ISSN
0264-4401
DOI
10.1108/02644401111178785
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – Most studies of power‐law fluids are carried out using stress‐based system of Navier‐Stokes equations; and least‐squares finite element models for vorticity‐based equations of power‐law fluids have not been explored yet. Also, there has been no study of the weak‐form Galerkin formulation using the reduced integration penalty method (RIP) for power‐law fluids. Based on these observations, the purpose of this paper is to fulfill the two‐fold objective of formulating the least‐squares finite element model for power‐law fluids, and the weak‐form RIP Galerkin model of power‐law fluids, and compare it with the least‐squares finite element model. Design/methodology/approach – For least‐squares finite element model, the original governing partial differential equations are transformed into an equivalent first‐order system by introducing additional independent variables, and then formulating the least‐squares model based on the lower‐order system. For RIP Galerkin model, the penalty function method is used to reformulate the original problem as a variational problem subjected to a constraint that is satisfied in a least‐squares (i.e. approximate) sense. The advantage of the constrained problem is that the pressure variable does not appear in the formulation. Findings – The non‐Newtonian fluids require higher‐order polynomial approximation functions and higher‐order Gaussian quadrature compared to Newtonian fluids. There is some tangible effect of linearization before and after minimization on the accuracy of the solution, which is more pronounced for lower power‐law indices compared to higher power‐law indices. The case of linearization before minimization converges at a faster rate compared to the case of linearization after minimization. There is slight locking that causes the matrices to be ill‐conditioned especially for lower values of power‐law indices. Also, the results obtained with RIP penalty model are equally good at higher values of penalty parameters. Originality/value – Vorticity‐based least‐squares finite element models are developed for power‐law fluids and effects of linearizations are explored. Also, the weak‐form RIP Galerkin model is developed.

Journal

Engineering ComputationsEmerald Publishing

Published: Oct 11, 2011

Keywords: Finite element method; Least‐squares models; Power‐law fluids; Viscous incompressible fluids; Fluid dynamics; Mathematical modelling

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off