2002
DOI: 10.1002/nme.586
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An assessment of using the predictor–corrector technique to solve reactive transport equations

Abstract: SUMMARYWe examined, through comparison among the full-coupling (FC), operator-splitting (OS), and predictorcorrector (PC) techniques, the e ectiveness of using the PC technique to solve depth-averaged reactive transport equations in the shallow water domain. Our investigation has led to three major conclusions. Firstly, both the OS and PC techniques can e ciently solve reactive transport equations because the advection-di usion transport equations are solved outside the non-linear iteration loop and the reacti… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The proposed iterative scheme solves the upgraded non-linear convection-diffusion model between a predictor and a corrector phase (Goldschmit and Cavaliere, 1997;Cheng et al, 2003), taking into account the addition of thermodynamic relations. The heat of vaporization is included.…”
Section: Predictor-corrector Iterative Schemementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The proposed iterative scheme solves the upgraded non-linear convection-diffusion model between a predictor and a corrector phase (Goldschmit and Cavaliere, 1997;Cheng et al, 2003), taking into account the addition of thermodynamic relations. The heat of vaporization is included.…”
Section: Predictor-corrector Iterative Schemementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although operator-splitting methods are easy to implement and require less computational capability, they introduce operator-splitting error into the simulated results (Valocchi and Malmstead 1992;Lu et al 1996; Barry et al 1996aBarry et al , 1996bBarry et al , 2000Cheng et al 2003;Hammond et al 2004). Several investigators have analyzed the splitting error to advectiondispersion-reaction simulations (Valocchi and Malmstead 1992;Kaluarachchi and Morshed 1995;Morshed and Kaluarachchi 1995;Barry et al 1996aBarry et al , 1996bBarry et al , 2000Lanser and Verwer 1999;Carrayrou et al 2004).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The former would require much more refined grid to capture the flow field detail, and the latter would increases the number of species transport equations in each grid node and produces very stiff chemical source term in species transport and energy conservation equations. As a result, the main difficult encountered in numerical simulation of the combustion systems is that the Navier-Stokes equations extended to chemical reaction flow, containing stiff chemical reaction source, would be solved in an acceptable memory and computation time [1].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%