Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Next revision | Previous revision Next revision Both sides next revision | ||
test_cases:seven [2014/07/29 17:56] grenier created |
test_cases:seven [2014/12/19 14:25] grenier |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | ... | + | Advection with constant velocity is here added to conduction and phase change. Analytical solution are proposed from Kurylyk et al. 2014 paper based on a reassessment of solutions by Lunardini. Although not physically realistic (constant velocity) these solutions can be used for benchmarking purposes: "Lack of fidelity to physical processes does not limit ability to serve as benchmark" |
+ | |||
+ | The paper Kurylyk et al. 2014 describes at depth the analytical solutions available, the suggested benchmark cases and SUTRA code runs to compare with these solutions. One may refer to " | ||
+ | |||
+ | A presentation of the TH1 Case by Barret Kurylyk was made during the kick off meeting ({{: | ||
+ | |||
+ | The recommanded benchmark Kurylyk et al 2014 Cases 2 and 3 are included in the InterFrost project as two TH1 cases differing by the flow velocity considered. Benchmark 1 (Neuman case) recommanded by Kurylyk et al 2014 is an option to complement the Lunardini case provided in the InterFrost project as T1. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | **TH1 Test Case** | ||
+ | |||
+ | Initial and boundary conditions: | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | Parameter set: | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | |||
+ | The analytical solutions of Kurylyk et al 2014 are accessible here as as xls {{: | ||
+ | |||
+ | The approach used for SUTRA code is summed up in two figures from Kurylyk et al 2014 as a source of inspiration. They provide the simulated domain and the approach for the freezing curve function in order to approximate the step function with a linear curve: | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ : | ||