A quantitative comparison of numerical methods for the compressible Euler equations: fifth-order WENO and piecewise-linear Godunov

  • Authors:

  • J. A. Greenough;W. J. Rider

  • Affiliations:

  • AX-Division, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, MS L-031, Livermore, CA;Computer and Computational Sciences Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory MS D413, Los Alamos, NM

  • Venue:
  • Journal of Computational Physics
  • Year:
  • 2004

Quantified Score

Hi-index 31.48

Visualization

Abstract

A numerical study is undertaken comparing a fifth-order version of the weighted essentially non-oscillatory numerical (WENO5) method to a modern piecewise-linear, second-order, version of Godunov's (PLMDE) method for the compressible Euler equations. A series of one-dimensional test problems are examined beginning with classical linear problems and ending with complex shock interactions. The problems considered are: (1) linear advection of a Gaussian pulse in density, (2) Sod's shock tube problem, (3) the "peak" shock tube problem, (4) a version of the Shu and Osher shock entropy wave interaction and (5) the Woodward and Colella interacting shock wave problem. For each problem and method, run times, density error norms and convergence rates are reported for each method as produced from a common code test-bed. The linear problem exhibits the advertised convergence rate for both methods as well as the expected large disparity in overall error levels; WENO5 has the smaller errors and an enormous advantage in overall efficiency (in accuracy per unit CPU time). For the nonlinear problems with discontinuities, however, we generally see both first-order self-convergence of error as compared to an exact solution, or when an analytic solution is not available, a converged solution generated on an extremely fine grid. The overall comparison of error levels shows some variation flom problem to problem. For Sod's shock tube, PLMDE has nearly half the error, while on the peak problem the errors are nearly the same. For the interacting blast wave problem the two methods again produce a similar level of error with a slight edge for the PLMDE. On the other hand, for the Shu-Osher problem, the errors are similar on the coarser grids, but favors WENO by a factor of nearly 1.5 on the finer grids used. In all cases holding mesh resolution constant though, PLMDE is less costly in terms of CPU time by approximately a factor of 6. If the CPU cost is taken as fixed, that is run times are equal for both numerical methods, then PLMDE uniformly produces lower errors than WENO for the fixed computation cost on the test problems considered here.