Numerical methods finite difference formulation

The commercial CFD codes use the finite volume method, which was originally developed as a special finite difference formulation. The numerical algorithm consists of the following steps ... 

As (hi + 02) - 0, Eq. (4.32) reduces to Eq. (4.24), as expected. Boundary conditions associated with Eq. (4.32) will not be elaborated here because of space considerations. Having studied the finite-difference formulation of steady, multidimensional problems, we illustrate now a numerical solution of this formulation in terms of an iteration method. 

The Poisson equation has been used for both molecular mechanics and quantum mechanical descriptions of solvation. It can be solved directly using numerical differential equation methods, such as the finite element or finite difference methods, but these calculations can be CPU-intensive. A more efficient quantum mechanical formulation is referred to as a self-consistent reaction field calculation (SCRF) as described below. 

The independent variables on which fJK depends are k and t. The principal advantage of using this formulation is that spatial derivatives become summations over wavenumber space. The resulting numerical solutions have higher accuracy compared with finite-difference methods using the same number of grid points. 

The most common methodology when solving transient problems using the finite element method, is to perform the usual Garlerkin weighted residual formulation on the spatial derivatives, body forces and time derivative terms, and then using a finite difference scheme to approximate the time derivative. The development, techniques and limitations that we introduced in Chapter 8 will apply here. The time discretization, explicit and implicit methods, stability, numerical diffusion etc., have all been discussed in detail in that chapter. For a general partial differential equation, we can write... 

Finite-Difference Methods. The numerical analysis literature abounds with finite difference methods for the numerical solution of partial differential equations. While these methods have been successfully applied in the solution of two-dimensional problems in fluid mechanics and diffusion (24, 25), there is little reported experience in the solution of three-dimensional, time-dependent, nonlinear problems. Application of these techniques, then, must proceed by extending methods successfully applied in two-dimensional formulations to the more complex problem of solving (7). The various types of finite-difference methods applicable in the solution of partial differential equations and their advantages and disadvantages are discussed by von Rosenberg (26), Forsythe and Wasow (27), and Ames (2S). 

In Section S-3 we considered one-dimensional heat conduction and assumed heat conduction in other directions to be negligible. Many heat transfer problems encountered in practice can be approximated as being one-dimensional, but this is not always the case. Sometimes we need to consider heat transfer in other directions as well when the variation of temperature in other directions is significani. In this section we consider the numerical formulation and solution of two-dimensional steady lieat conduclion in rectangular coordinates using the finite difference method. The approach presented below can be extended to three-dimensional cases. 

The pairwise Brownian dynamics method has several advantages over numerical methods based on Smoluchowski s [9] approach (e.g., finite element method), and we discuss these here. The primary advantage of the method is the ease of mathematical formulation even for cases involving complex reaction site geometries, hydrodynamic interactions, charge effects, anisotropic diffusion and flow fields. Furthermore the method obviates the need to solve complex diffusion equations to obtain the concentration field from which the rate constant is calculated in the Smoluchowski method. In contrast, the rate constant is obtained directly in the pairwise Brownian dynamics method. The effective rate constants for different reaction conditions may be obtained from a single simulation this is not possible using the finite element method. 

There are many studies that imply numerical methods for the forward modelling of galvanic corrosion problem. These techniques are based mainly on boundary value problems (B VP) formulations in order to obtain or verify results, such as finite element method (FEM), finite difference method (FDM) or boundary element method (BEM). These methods are successfully used and showed to be very accurate to solve BVPs. Some of them are also implemented in commercial software. 

In the second chapter we consider steady-state and transient heat conduction and mass diffusion in quiescent media. The fundamental differential equations for the calculation of temperature fields are derived here. We show how analytical and numerical methods are used in the solution of practical cases. Alongside the Laplace transformation and the classical method of separating the variables, we have also presented an extensive discussion of finite difference methods which are very important in practice. Many of the results found for heat conduction can be transferred to the analogous process of mass diffusion. The mathematical solution formulations are the same for both fields. 

Numerical Solution. In the numerical formulation of THCC, Equations (2) and (3) are substituted into Equation (1). The resulting set of Nf, partial differential equations is transcribed into Nb finite-difference equations, using central differencing in space and the Crank-Nicolson method to obtain second-order accuracy in time. The set of unknowns consists of i = 1,..., ATft, and Pjt, k = 1,..., A/p, at each finite-difference node. Residue equations for the basis species are formed by algebraically summing all terms in the finite-difference forms of the transport equations. The finite-difference analogs of Equation (1) provide Ni, residue equations at each node the remaining Np residue equations are provided by the solubility products for the reactive solids. 

Numerically, it is now a common practice to calculate within the dielectric continuum formulation but employing cavities of realistic molecular shape determined by the van der Waals surface of the solute. The method is based upon finite-difference solution of the Poisson-Boltzmann equation for the electrostatic potential with the appropriate boundary conditions [214, 238, 239]. An important outcome of such studies is that even in complex systems there exists a strong linear correlation between the calculated outer-sphere reorganization energy and the inverse donor-acceptor distance, as anticipated by the Marcus formulation (see Fig. 9.6). More... 

Methods that approximate the spatial derivatives with fourth order accuracy using only three points are commonly called compact methods. They are known under different names in numerical mathematics, like Mehrstel-lenformeln and Hermitian Formulas [6]. Compact methods have been used with success in fluid mechanics [7, 8]. Two-dimensional compact discretizations are considered e.g. in [9], non-aequidistant formulations are derived in [10]. To our knowledge, compact finite differences have so far not been used in the solution of Chemical Engineering problems. 

In the following sections, implications resulting from the general treatment of the variable transformations are formulated for a couple of finite difference methods of an acceptable numerical truncation error of order h. The accuracy of the data produced by a proper computer implementation may be checked and improved by the Richardson extrapolation. 

To study the dynamic behavior of the BZ gels, we numerically integrate Eqs (8.1 -8.3) in two [1, 2] or three [3] dimensions using our recently developed gLSM. This method combines a finite-element approach for the spatial discretization of the elastodynamic equations and a finite-difference approximation for the reaction and diffusion terms. We used the gLSM approach to examine 2D confined films and 3D bulk samples here, we briefly discuss the more general 3D formulation [3]. 

---