Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Relative accuracy of turbulence simulations using pseudo-spectral and finite difference solvers

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2508.10808 v1 pith:RJLCZX2G submitted 2025-08-14 physics.flu-dyn physics.comp-ph

Relative accuracy of turbulence simulations using pseudo-spectral and finite difference solvers

classification physics.flu-dyn physics.comp-ph
keywords turbulenceenergyfinite-differencemethodsspectralaccuracycounterpartnearly
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

For a single timestep, a spectral solver is known to be more accurate than its finite-difference counterpart. However, as we show in this paper, turbulence simulations using the two methods have nearly the same accuracy. In this paper, we simulate forced hydrodynamic turbulence on a uniform 256$^3$ grid for Reynolds numbers 965, 1231, 1515, and 1994. We show that the two methods yield nearly the same evolution for the total energy and the flow profiles. In addition, the steady-state energy spectrum, energy flux, and probability distribution functions of the velocity and its derivatives are very similar. We argue that within a turbulence attractor, the numerical errors are likely to get cancelled (rather than get added up), which leads to similar results for the finite-difference and spectral methods. These findings are very valuable, considering that a parallel finite-difference simulation is more versatile and efficient (for large grids) than its spectral counterpart.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.