- Journal Home
- Volume 36 - 2024
- Volume 35 - 2024
- Volume 34 - 2023
- Volume 33 - 2023
- Volume 32 - 2022
- Volume 31 - 2022
- Volume 30 - 2021
- Volume 29 - 2021
- Volume 28 - 2020
- Volume 27 - 2020
- Volume 26 - 2019
- Volume 25 - 2019
- Volume 24 - 2018
- Volume 23 - 2018
- Volume 22 - 2017
- Volume 21 - 2017
- Volume 20 - 2016
- Volume 19 - 2016
- Volume 18 - 2015
- Volume 17 - 2015
- Volume 16 - 2014
- Volume 15 - 2014
- Volume 14 - 2013
- Volume 13 - 2013
- Volume 12 - 2012
- Volume 11 - 2012
- Volume 10 - 2011
- Volume 9 - 2011
- Volume 8 - 2010
- Volume 7 - 2010
- Volume 6 - 2009
- Volume 5 - 2009
- Volume 4 - 2008
- Volume 3 - 2008
- Volume 2 - 2007
- Volume 1 - 2006
Commun. Comput. Phys., 9 (2011), pp. 807-827.
Published online: 2011-03
Cited by
- BibTex
- RIS
- TXT
In this paper we consider two commonly used classes of finite volume weighted essentially non-oscillatory (WENO) schemes in two dimensional Cartesian meshes. We compare them in terms of accuracy, performance for smooth and shocked solutions, and efficiency in CPU timing. For linear systems both schemes are high order accurate, however for nonlinear systems, analysis and numerical simulation results verify that one of them (Class A) is only second order accurate, while the other (Class B) is high order accurate. The WENO scheme in Class A is easier to implement and costs less than that in Class B. Numerical experiments indicate that the resolution for shocked problems is often comparable for schemes in both classes for the same building blocks and meshes, despite of the difference in their formal order of accuracy. The results in this paper may give some guidance in the application of high order finite volume schemes for simulating shocked flows.
}, issn = {1991-7120}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.4208/cicp.291109.080410s}, url = {http://global-sci.org/intro/article_detail/cicp/7522.html} }In this paper we consider two commonly used classes of finite volume weighted essentially non-oscillatory (WENO) schemes in two dimensional Cartesian meshes. We compare them in terms of accuracy, performance for smooth and shocked solutions, and efficiency in CPU timing. For linear systems both schemes are high order accurate, however for nonlinear systems, analysis and numerical simulation results verify that one of them (Class A) is only second order accurate, while the other (Class B) is high order accurate. The WENO scheme in Class A is easier to implement and costs less than that in Class B. Numerical experiments indicate that the resolution for shocked problems is often comparable for schemes in both classes for the same building blocks and meshes, despite of the difference in their formal order of accuracy. The results in this paper may give some guidance in the application of high order finite volume schemes for simulating shocked flows.