Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 57 references

A gPAV-Based Unconditionally Energy-Stable Scheme for Incompressible Flows with Outflow/Open Boundaries

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims an unconditionally energy-stable time-stepping scheme for incompressible flows on domains with outflow or open boundaries, where backflow can otherwise make simulations blow up.

desk verdict Useful gPAV scheme for open-boundary flows, but the stability theorem bounds an auxiliary scalar, not the physical energy. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.01852 v1 pith:BKLTEWHO submitted 2019-08-01 physics.comp-ph cs.CEphysics.flu-dyn

L. Lin , X. Liu , S. Dong This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.comp-phcs.CEphysics.flu-dyn MSC 65M1265M6065M7076D0576M1076M22
keywords energystabilityunconditionalauxiliaryvariablegeneralizedpositiveopenboundaryconditionoutflowincompressibleNavier-Stokesbackflowinstability
topics Navier-Stokes Regularity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper proposes a time-stepping scheme for the incompressible Navier–Stokes equations on domains with outflow/open boundaries, the setting where backflow instability can wreck standard simulations. It claims the scheme is unconditionally energy-stable: in the forced-free, zero-boundary case, a discrete auxiliary energy decreases at every step no matter how large the time-step size. The scheme avoids nonlinear iterations by solving two decoupled pressure problems and two decoupled velocity problems per step, each with a constant precomputable coefficient matrix, plus an explicit scalar formula for the auxiliary variable. The method is demonstrated on bifurcation channels, cylinder wakes, and impinging jets, where it stays stable at large time steps, while the authors also caution that accuracy deteriorates when the time step becomes very large.

What carries the argument

The central object is a scalar auxiliary variable R(t) = \sqrt{E(t)} attached to a biased modified energy E(t) = \int_\$\Omega$ \tfrac12 |u|^2 d\$\Omega$ + \nu D_0 \int_{\partial \Omega_o} \tfrac12 |u|^2 dA + C_0, together with the gPAV gating function g(\chi) = \chi for \chi \le 1 and g(\chi) = 1 for \chi > 1. The discrete scheme evaluates the ratio $R^{2}$/E one half-step later as \xi = ($R^{{n+3/2}}$)^2 / E[\bar $u^{{n+3/2}}$], solves the two pressure and two velocity subproblems whose coefficient matrices are constant and precomputable, and then reconstructs $p^{{n+1}}$ = $p_1^{{n+1}}$ + g(\xi) $p_2^{{n+1}}$ and $u^{{n+1}}$ = $u_1^{{n+1}}$ + g(\xi) $u_2^{{n+1}}$. Positivity of the computed R and \xi follows from the explicit formula, so no Newton-type nonlinear solver is needed.

What would settle it

Run the paper's forced-free, zero-Dirichlet test (f=0, p0=0, fb=0, w=0) with a fixed large \$\Delta$ t and record E[\bar $u^{{n+1}}$] = \int_\$\Omega$ \tfrac12 |\bar $u^{{n+1}}$|^2 d\$\Omega$ + \nu D_0 \int_{\partial \Omega_o} \tfrac12 |\bar $u^{{n+1}}$|^2 dA alongside R; if E grows over a block of steps while ($R^{{n+3/2}}$)^2 - ($R^{{n+1/2}}$)^2 stays non-positive, the physical-energy interpretation of Theorem 2.1 is false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the generalized Positive Auxiliary Variable (gPAV) reformulation of the incompressible Navier–Stokes equations with an energy-stable open boundary condition admits a rotational velocity-correction-type discretization that is unconditionally energy-stable. Specifically, Theorem 2.1 states that, in the absence of external forces and source terms and with homogeneous Dirichlet data, the discrete relation ($R^{{n+3/2}}$)^2 - ($R^{{n+1/2}}$)^2 = -\xi \$\Delta$ t [ \nu \int_\$\Omega$ \|\nabla \bar $u^{{n+1}}$\|^2 d\$\Omega$ + \nu D_0 \int_{\partial \Omega_o} \tfrac12 |\bar $u^{{n+1}}$|^2 |n\cdot \bar $u^{{n+1}}$| dA ] \le 0 holds for any time-step size. The key move is replacing the ratio $R^{2}$/E in the nonlinear and boundary terms by g($R^{2}$/E) = \min($R^{2}$/E, 1), which lets the stability estimate survive the decoupling of pressure and velocity. As a result, each time step requires only two pressure solves and two velocity solves with constant, precomputable matrices, and the auxiliary variable is recovered from an explicit formula that guarantees positivity.

Load-bearing premise

The stability claim collapses if the computed ratio \xi can become small even while remaining positive, because Theorem 2.1 only bounds $R^{{n+3/2}}$ and never directly bounds the physical energy E[\bar u]; the proof needs \xi to keep working as a positive factor, and the numerical tests also show accuracy degrades as \$\Delta$ t grows.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Outflow/open-boundary simulations at moderate or high Reynolds numbers can be run with large time steps without the backflow blowup that afflicts conventional semi-implicit velocity-correction schemes.
  • The per-step cost is roughly twice that of a typical semi-implicit scheme, not the full nonlinear solve of most energy-stable schemes, because all algebraic systems have constant precomputable matrices.
  • The scheme is not tied to a particular spatial discretization; the paper implements it with high-order spectral elements but states that other spatial methods can be used.
  • The stability guarantee is proven in the forced-free, zero-Dirichlet case, while numerical experiments also demonstrate stable behavior in flows with external pressure heads and multiple openings.
  • Large-time-step results should be regarded only as reference solutions; the authors explicitly state that convergence tests remain necessary in production calculations.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Inference: The proof bounds the auxiliary variable R, not the physical kinetic-energy integral; a direct monitoring of E across the paper's own forced-free test would reveal whether the scheme is energy-stable in the stricter physical sense—this check is not in the paper.
  • Inference: The gating function g(\chi) = \min(\chi, 1) is a simple saturation mechanism that other auxiliary-variable schemes could adopt to preserve positivity without nonlinear solves; testing this on gradient-flow or SAV-type problems would be a natural extension.
  • Inference: The numerical evidence that accuracy degrades as \Delta t grows suggests the practical value of the scheme lies in removing blowup rather than in allowing arbitrarily large steps; pairing it with adaptive time stepping that monitors the physical energy would be a testable production rule.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a gPAV-based, second-order rotational velocity-correction scheme for incompressible Navier-Stokes equations with energy-stable open/outflow boundaries. An auxiliary scalar R is introduced as the square root of a modified energy, the governing system is reformulated using g(R^2/E), and the resulting algorithm requires solving two pressure and two velocity subproblems, each with a constant precomputable coefficient matrix, plus an explicit formula for the scaling factor xi. Theorem 2.1 states a discrete inequality showing that the auxiliary quantities R^{n+3/2} decrease in the homogeneous case, and the numerical sections demonstrate spatial and temporal convergence, long-time simulations in backflow regimes, and stability at large time step sizes for bifurcation-channel, cylinder-wake, and impinging-jet flows.

Significance. The algorithmic construction is attractive: it avoids nonlinear solvers, uses only constant precomputable matrices, gives an explicit positive formula for the auxiliary variable, and the experiments indicate robust practical behavior in challenging open-boundary flows, including strong backflow. The paper also honestly reports accuracy deterioration at large time steps, which is a useful caution. However, the central stability claim needs re-scoping: Theorem 2.1 controls the auxiliary scalar R rather than the physical energy of the computed velocity field, so the headline claim of unconditional energy stability is currently stronger than what is proved.

major comments (2)
  1. [§2.3, Theorem 2.1, Eqs. (26), (42), (43), (45)] The stability inequality (26) controls only the difference of squares of the extrapolated auxiliary quantities R^{n+3/2} and R^{n+1/2}; it does not control the physical energy E[u^{n+1}]. In the homogeneous case the explicit formula (45) gives xi = (R^{n+1/2})^2 / (E[bar u^{n+3/2}] + (A0+B0)Delta t), which guarantees only xi > 0, not a lower bound on xi. Since the actual velocity is u^{n+1} = u1 + g(xi)u2 (Eq. (42)) while the dissipation in (26) is evaluated on bar u^{n+1} = u1 + u2 (Eq. (43)), E[u^{n+1}] can in principle grow even while R remains bounded and the right-hand side of (26) tends to zero. The authors should either prove a bound such as E[u^{n+1}] <= C (R^{n+1/2})^2, or explicitly re-state the stability result as a property of the auxiliary/modified energy and adjust the abstract and title accordingly.
  2. [§2.3, Theorem 2.1, and §3 numerical experiments] Theorem 2.1 is stated in the limit delta -> 0, while all numerical experiments use a finite smoothing parameter: delta = 0.05 in §3.2 and delta = 0.01 in §3.3 and §3.4. As written, the proof does not cover the finite-delta scheme actually tested. This gap is readily repairable: from (6) and (46), B0 = 1/2 int_{partial Omega_o} |bar u|^2 (n·bar u) tanh((n·bar u)/(U0 delta)) dA, which is nonnegative for every delta > 0. Thus the monotonicity conclusion (26) can be proved for finite delta without taking delta to 0. The authors should make this repair and state Theorem 2.1 for the finite-delta regime used in the computations.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Equations (26), (46)] The notation with doubled norm bars, || ||nabla bar u|| ||^2, appears to be a LaTeX artifact; please use a single norm notation throughout.
  2. [§3.2, bifurcation channel] The text refers to the 'no-clip condition' on the walls; this should be the 'no-slip condition'.
  3. [§2.4, positivity of xi] The claim that xi > 0 unconditionally should be qualified: in the homogeneous case S1 = 0 and the numerator of (45) is (R^{n+1/2})^2, so xi = 0 if R^{n+1/2} = 0. If this exceptional case is possible, the authors should either rule it out or state the positivity claim for R^{n+1} only, which follows from (47).
  4. [Affiliation and references] There are minor typographical errors: 'Collge of Infomation Science' in the author affiliation and 'International Jurnal for Numerical Methods in Fluids' in reference [53].

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Theorem 2.1's R-decrease is an algebraic identity: ξ (Eq. 45) and R^{n+3/2} (Eq. 47) are defined so that (26) holds by construction; no bound on the physical energy E[u^{n+1}] follows.

  1. self definitional [Section 2.3-2.4, Theorem 2.1, Eq. (26), Eq. (45), Eq. (47)]
    "Using equation (20b), we can compute ξ from (27) as follows, ξ = ((R^{n+1/2})^2 + S1∆t)/(E[¯u^{n+3/2}] + (A0 + B0 + S0)∆t). ... R^{n+1} is computed as follows, R^{n+3/2} = sqrt(ξE[¯u^{n+3/2}]), R^{n+1} = 2/3 R^{n+3/2} + 1/3 R^n."

    Under the hypotheses of Theorem 2.1 (f = p0 = fb = w = 0), equations (28) give S0 = S1 = 0. Then (45) fixes ξ = (R^{n+1/2})^2 / (E[¯u^{n+3/2}] + (A0 + B0)∆t), and (47) fixes R^{n+3/2} = sqrt(ξ E[¯u^{n+3/2}]). Substituting these two definitions into (27) yields exactly (26): (R^{n+3/2})^2 - (R^{n+1/2})^2 = -ξ∆t(A0 + B0) ≤ 0. The stability inequality is therefore an identity produced by the formulas for ξ and R, not an independent estimate of the computed velocity. Moreover, R is not the physical discrete energy: the paper states that R^2(t) is 'an approximation of E(t), rather than E(t) itself,' and only ξ > 0 is proven, with no lower bound, so E[¯u] is not controlled when ξ tends to 0. The headline 'unconditionally energy-stable' rests on a quantity that is defined to decrease.

full rationale

The central stability theorem is self-definitional rather than an independent energy estimate. After solving the decoupled field equations for u1, u2, p1, p2, the scalar ξ is computed from equation (45) precisely so that equation (27) becomes the desired dissipation identity, and R^{n+3/2} is then defined from that same ξ in (47). Consequently Theorem 2.1's inequality is true by construction, exactly as in the pattern 'parameter fitted so that the predicted ratio is the fit.' The paper itself concedes the auxiliary-variable status: 'Note that R(t) is obtained by solving this coupled system of equations, not by using equation (11). So in such a sense R^2(t) is an approximation of E(t), rather than E(t) itself.' No lower bound on ξ is established, and the actual velocity is u^{n+1} = u1 + g(ξ)u2 while the dissipation in (26) is evaluated on ¯u^{n+1} = u1 + u2; thus boundedness of R^2 does not imply boundedness of the physical velocity energy. The numerical experiments are extensive and show stable behavior, but they do not repair the gap: the paper's unconditional stability claim reduces to the monotonicity of a scalar that the algorithm defines to be monotone. There is also self-citation of the gPAV source [54], but the derivation in this paper is self-contained once the auxiliary-variable framework is accepted, so no additional circularity score is assigned for that citation. The score is 6 because the central claim is partially circular: the auxiliary-energy inequality is enforced by construction, while the scheme still has independent algorithmic content (decoupled constant-matrix solves, positivity of ξ, and reproducible numerical results).

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The central claim rests on a small number of algorithmic parameters (D0, delta, C0) chosen by hand, on the imported energy-stable open boundary condition, and on the gPAV equivalence argument. The auxiliary variable R and the factor xi are invented numerical devices that carry the stability proof; the paper provides positivity but not a lower bound for xi, which is the most fragile part of the construction.

free parameters (3)
  • D0 = 1 (tests; varied 0.1 to 2.0)
    Inverse convection-velocity scale in the open boundary condition; chosen by hand, not derived, and it enters the modified energy and all boundary terms.
  • delta = 0.05 and 0.01 in tests
    Smoothing parameter in the backflow step function H; the stability theorem is proven only in the limit delta to 0, while simulations use finite values.
  • C0 = 1 (tests; varied 1e-3 to 1e6)
    Arbitrary positive constant added to the modified energy E to ensure positivity; appears in xi and R updates, although tests find no effect on computed forces.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The convective-like energy-stable open boundary condition (5) from Dong (2015) is stable at the PDE level.
    The entire scheme inherits this boundary condition; the paper cites [14] for its energy balance relation (7) without reproving it.
  • standard math The gPAV-reformulated system (14) and (17) is equivalent to the original Navier-Stokes system because R^2/E = 1 and g(R^2/E) = 1 at the continuum.
    The zero terms in (16) vanish only under this identity; any deviation in the discrete value xi breaks exact equivalence.
  • domain assumption For sufficiently small delta, the boundary integral B0 in (46) is nonnegative.
    Used to prove xi > 0 and the stability inequality; relies on the limit relation (29) from the smoothed step function, and the paper does not quantify sufficiently small.
  • standard math BDF2 plus explicit second-order extrapolation for the convective term is second-order accurate.
    Convergence tests in Section 3.1 support this; no rigorous error analysis is given.
invented entities (3)
  • Auxiliary variable R(t)
    purpose: Scalar variable whose square tracks the modified energy E(t); updated by formula (47) to enforce the discrete energy inequality.
    This is an algorithmic construct, not a physical quantity; its positivity is proven but no lower bound is available, so it is not independently verifiable.
  • Scaling factor xi
    purpose: Ratio (R^{n+3/2})^2 / E[bar u^{n+3/2}] that splits pressure and velocity into two decoupled parts and enforces the stability identity.
    Introduced to make the computation explicit; positivity is proven, boundedness is not.
  • g(chi) function
    purpose: Caps the ratio R^2/E at unity to improve small-time-step accuracy while preserving stability.
    A numerical construction with no independent physical handle.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A gPAV-Based Unconditionally Energy-Stable Scheme for Incompressible Flows with Outflow/Open Boundaries." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BKLTEWHO

@misc{pith2026190801852,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A gPAV-Based Unconditionally Energy-Stable Scheme for Incompressible Flows with Outflow/Open Boundaries},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BKLTEWHO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.01852}
}
read the original abstract

We present an unconditionally energy-stable scheme for approximating the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations on domains with outflow/open boundaries. The scheme combines the generalized Positive Auxiliary Variable (gPAV) approach and a rotational velocity-correction type strategy, and the adoption of the auxiliary variable simplifies the numerical treatment for the open boundary conditions. The discrete energy stability of the proposed scheme has been proven, irrespective of the time step sizes. Within each time step the scheme entails the computation of two velocity fields and two pressure fields, by solving an individual de-coupled Helmholtz (including Poisson) type equation with a constant pre-computable coefficient matrix for each of these field variables. The auxiliary variable, being a scalar number, is given by a well-defined explicit formula within a time step, which ensures the positivity of its computed values. Extensive numerical experiments with several flows involving outflow/open boundaries in regimes where the backflow instability becomes severe have been presented to test the performance of the proposed method and to demonstrate its stability at large time step sizes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.01852 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Convergence rates: (a) Flow configuration and the mesh. (b) Numerical errors versus the element [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Bifurcation channel: flow domain and the mesh of 2288 quadrilateral elements. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Bifurcation channel: flow patterns visualized by streamlines. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (15 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Bifurcation channel: Comparison of streamwise velocity profiles at several downstream locations, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Bifurcation channel: Comparison of vertical velocity profiles at several downstream locations, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Bifurcation channel: flow pattern visualized by streamlines obtained with a larger time step size [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Bifurcation channel: flow patterns visualized by streamlines corresponding to several external [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Cylinder flow: flow configuration and a mesh of 1228 quadrilateral elements. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Cylinder flow: instantaneous velocity distributions at Reynolds numbers (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Cylinder flow: time histories of the drag (plots (a) and (c)) and lift (plots (b) and (d)). Plots [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Cylinder flow (Re = 5000): temporal sequence of snapshots of velocity distributions: (a) t = 1208.9, (b) t = 1209.5, (c) t = 1210.1, (d) t = 1210.7, (e) t = 1211.3, (f) t = 1211.9, (g) t = 1212.5, (h) t = 1213.1. Velocity vectors are plotted on a sparser grid for clar…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Impinging jet: flow configuration and boundary conditions. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Impinging jet: velocity distributions at Reynolds numbers (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Impinging jet (Re=2000): time histories of the x-component (a) and y-component (b) of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Impinging jet (Re=5000): temporal sequence of snapshots of the velocity fields at instants (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Impinging jet (Re=300): effect of external pressure heads on the flow field. External pressure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Impinging jet (Re=5000): effect of external pressure heads on the flow field. External pressure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Impinging jet (Re=5000): time histories of the x-component (plots (a) and (c)) and y-component [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_18.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 57 canonical work pages

  1. [18]

    Dong and J

    S. Dong and J. Shen. An unconditionally stable rotational velocity-correction scheme for incompressible flows. Journal of Computational Physics , 229:7013–7029, 2010

    work page 2010

  2. [1]

    Abu-Al-Saud, A

    M.O. Abu-Al-Saud, A. Riaz, and H.A. Tchelepi. Multiscale level-set method for accurate modeling of immiscible two-phase flow with deposited thin films on solid surfaces.Journal of Computational Physics, 333:297–320, 2017

    work page 2017

  3. [2]

    Bazilevs, J.R

    Y. Bazilevs, J.R. Hohean, T.J.R. Hughes, R.D. Moser, and Y. Zhang. Patient-specific isogeometric fluid-structure interaction analysis of theracic aortic blood flow due to impantation of the jarvik 2000 left ventricular assist device. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. , 198:3534–3550, 2009

    work page 2000

  4. [3]

    Bertoglio and A

    C. Bertoglio and A. Caiazzo. A tangential regularization method for backflow stabilization in hemody- namics. Journal of Computational Physics , 261:162–171, 2014

    work page 2014

  5. [4]

    Bertoglio and A

    C. Bertoglio and A. Caiazzo. A stokes-residual backflow stabilization method applied to physiological flows. Journal of Computational Physics , 313:260–278, 2016

    work page 2016

  6. [5]

    Brown, R

    D.L. Brown, R. Cortez, and M.L. Minion. Accurate projection methods for the incompressible Navier- Stokes equations. J. Comput. Phys. , 168:464–499, 2001. 31

    work page 2001

  7. [6]

    Bruneau and P

    C.-H. Bruneau and P. Fabrie. Effective downstream boundary conditions for incompressible Navier- Stokes equations. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids , 19:693–705, 1994

    work page 1994

  8. [7]

    Bruneau and P

    C.-H. Bruneau and P. Fabrie. New efficient boundary conditions for incompressible navier-stokes equa- tions: a well-posedness result. Mathematical Modeling and Numerical Analysis , 30:815–840, 1996

    work page 1996

Show all 57 references
  1. [8]

    H. Chen, S. Sun, and T. Zhang. Energy stability analysis of some fully discrete numerical schemes for incompressible navier-stokes equations on staggered grids. Journal of Scientific Computing , 75:427–456, 2018

    2018

  2. [9]

    L. Chen, J. Shen, and C.J. Xu. A unstructured nodal spectral-element method for the navier-stokes equations. Communications in Computational Physics , 12:315–336, 2012

    2012

  3. [10]

    A.J. Chorin. Numerical solution of the Navier-Stokes equations. Math. Comput., 22:745–762, 1968

    1968

  4. [11]

    S. Dong. Evidence for internal structures of spiral turbulence. Physical Review E, 80:067301, 2009

    2009

  5. [12]

    S. Dong. An efficient algorithm for incompressible N-phase flows. Journal of Computational Physics , 276:691–728, 2014

    2014

  6. [13]

    S. Dong. An outflow boundary condition and algorithm for incompressible two-phase flows with phase field approach. Journal of Computational Physics , 266:47–73, 2014

    2014

  7. [14]

    S. Dong. A convective-like energy-stable open boundary condition for simulations of incompressible flows. Journal of Computational Physics , 302:300–328, 2015

    2015

  8. [15]

    S. Dong. Wall-bounded multiphase flows of N immiscible incompressible fluids: consistency and contact- angle boundary condition. Journal of Computational Physics , 338:21–67, 2017

    2017

  9. [16]

    Dong, G.E

    S. Dong, G.E. Karniadakis, and C. Chryssostomidis. A robust and accurate outflow boundary condition for incompressible flow simulations on severely-truncated unbounded domains.Journal of Computational Physics, 261:83–105, 2014

    2014

  10. [17]

    Dong, G.E

    S. Dong, G.E. Karniadakis, A. Ekmekci, and D. Rockwell. A combined direct numerical simulation- particle image velocimetry study of the turbulent near wake. J. Fluid Mech. , 569:185–207, 2006

    2006

  11. [19]

    Dong and J

    S. Dong and J. Shen. A time-stepping scheme involving constant coefficient matrices for phase field simulations of two-phase incompressible flows with large density ratios. Journal of Computational Physics, 231:5788–5804, 2012

    2012

  12. [20]

    Dong and J

    S. Dong and J. Shen. A pressure correction scheme for generalized form of energy-stable open boundary conditions for incompressible flows. Journal of Computational Physics , 291:254–278, 2015

    2015

  13. [21]

    Dong and X

    S. Dong and X. Wang. A rotational pressure-correction scheme for incompressible two-phase flows with open boundaries. PLOS One, 11(5):e0154565, 2016

    2016

  14. [22]

    Ghaisas, D.A

    N.S. Ghaisas, D.A. Shetty, and S.H. Frankel. Large eddy simulation of turbulent horizontal buoyant jets. Journal of Turbulence, 16:772–808, 2015

    2015

  15. [23]

    Gravemeier, A

    V. Gravemeier, A. Comerford, L. Yoshihara, M. Ismail, and W.A. Wall. A novel formulation for Neumann inflow boundary conditions in biomechanics. International Journal for Numeical Methods in Biomedical Engineering, 28:560–573, 2012

    2012

  16. [24]

    P.M. Gresho. Incompressible fluid dynamics: some fundamental formulation issues. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, 23:413–453, 1991

    1991

  17. [25]

    Guermond, P

    J.L. Guermond, P. Minev, and J. Shen. Error analysis of pressure-correction schemes for the time- dependent stokes equations with open boundary conditions. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. , 43:239–258, 2005. 32

    2005

  18. [26]

    Guermond, P

    J.L. Guermond, P. Minev, and J. Shen. An overview of projection methods for incompressible flows. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. , 195:6011–6045, 2006

    2006

  19. [27]

    Guermond and J

    J.L. Guermond and J. Shen. A new class of truly consistent splitting schemes for incompressible flows. J. Comput. Phys. , 192:262–276, 2003

    2003

  20. [28]

    Hyoungsu and G.E

    B. Hyoungsu and G.E. Karniadakis. Subiteration leads to accuracy and stability enhancements of semi- implicit schemes for the navier-stokes equations. Journal of Computational Physics , 230:4384–4402, 2011

    2011

  21. [29]

    Ismail, V

    M. Ismail, V. Gravemeier, A. Comerford, and W.A. Wall. A stable approach for coupling multidi- mensional cardiovascular and pulmonary networks based on a novel pressure-flow rate or pressure-only neumann boundary condition formulation. International Journal for Numerical Method...

    2014

  22. [30]

    Jiang, M

    N. Jiang, M. Mohebujjaman, L.G. Rebholz, and C. Trenchea. An optimally accurate discrete regulariza- tion for second order timestepping methods for navier-stokes equations. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 310:388–405, 2016

    2016

  23. [31]

    Karniadakis, M

    G.E. Karniadakis, M. Israeli, and S.A. Orszag. High-order splitting methods for the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations. J. Comput. Phys. , 97:414–443, 1991

    1991

  24. [32]

    Karniadakis and S.J

    G.E. Karniadakis and S.J. Sherwin. Spectral/hp element methods for computational fluid dynamics, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, 2005

    2005

  25. [33]

    Kim and P

    J. Kim and P. Moin. Application of a fractional-step method to incompressible Navier-Stokes equations. J. Comput. Phys. , 59:308–323, 1985

    1985

  26. [34]

    Kravchenko and P

    A.G. Kravchenko and P. Moin. Numerical studies of flow over a circular cylinder at ReD = 3900. Physics of Fluids, 12:403–417, 2000

    2000

  27. [35]

    Labovsky, W.J

    A. Labovsky, W.J. Layton, C.C. Manica, M. Neda, and L.G. Rebholz. The stabilized extrapolated trape- zoidal finite-element method for the Navier-Stokes equations. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. , 198:958–974, 2009

    2009

  28. [36]

    M.S. Lee, A. Riaz, and V. Aute. Direct numerical simulation of incompressible multiphase flow with phase change. Journal of Computational Physics , 344:381–418, 2017

    2017

  29. [37]

    L. Lin, Z. Yang, and S. Dong. Numerical approximation of incompressible Navier-Stokes equations based on an auxiliary energy variable. Journal of Computational Physics , 388:1–22, 2019

    2019

  30. [38]

    J.-G. Liu, J. Liu, and R.L. Pego. Stability and convergence of efficient Navier-Stokes solvers via a commutator estimate. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. , LX:1443–1487, 2007

    2007

  31. [39]

    Moghadam, Y

    M.E. Moghadam, Y. Bazilevs, T.-Y. Hsia, I.E. Vignon-Clementel, and A.L. Marsden. A comparison of outlet boundary treatments for prevention of backflow divergence with relevance to blood flow simula- tions. Comput. Mech., 48:277–291, 2011

    2011

  32. [40]

    N. Ni, Z. Yang, and S. Dong. Energy-stable boundary conditions based on a quadratic form: Applica- tions to outflow/open-boundary problems in incompressible flows. Journal of Computational Physics , 391:179–215, 2019

    2019

  33. [41]

    Porpora, P

    A. Porpora, P. Zunino, C. Vergara, and M. Piccinelli. Numerical treatment of boundary conditions to replace branches in hemodynamics. International Journal of Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engi- neering, 28:1165–1183, 2012

    2012

  34. [42]

    A. Poux, S. Glockner, and M. Azaiez. Improvements on open and traction boundary conditions for navier-stokes time-splitting methods. Journal of Computational Physics , 230:4011–4027, 2011. 33

    2011

  35. [43]

    Sanderse

    B. Sanderse. Energy-conserving runge-kutta methods for the incompressible navier-stokes equations. J. Comput. Phys., 233:100–131, 2013

    2013

  36. [44]

    Serson, J.R

    D. Serson, J.R. Meneghini, and S.J. Sherwin. Velocity-correction schemes for the incompressible navier- stokes equations in general coordinate systems. Journal of Computational Physics , 316:243–254, 2016

    2016

  37. [45]

    J. Shen. On error estimate of projection methods for Navier-Stokes equations: first-order schemes. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. , 29:57–77, 1992

    1992

  38. [46]

    J. Shen, J. Xu, and J. Yang. The scalar auxiliary variable (sav) approach for gradient flows. Journal of Computational Physics, 353:407–416, 2018

    2018

  39. [47]

    Sherwin and G.E

    S.J. Sherwin and G.E. Karniadakis. A triangular spectral element method: applications to the incom- pressible navier-stokes equations. Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engrg. , 123:189–229, 1995

    1995

  40. [48]

    Simo and F

    J.C. Simo and F. Armero. Unconditional stability and long-term behavior of transient algorithms for the incompressible Navier-Stokes and Euler equations. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. , 111:111–154, 1994

    1994

  41. [49]

    R. Temam. Sur l’approximation de la solution des equations de Navier-Stokes par la methods des pas fractionnaires ii. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 33:377–385, 1969

    1969

  42. [50]

    Varghese, S.H

    S.S. Varghese, S.H. Frankel, and P.F. Fischer. Direct numerical simulation of stenotic flows. Part 1. steday flow. Journal of Fluid Mechanics , 582:253–280, 2007

    2007

  43. [51]

    Verstappen and A.E.P

    R.W.C.P. Verstappen and A.E.P. Veldman. Symmetry-preserving discretization of turbulent flow. Jour- nal of Computational Physics , 187:343–368, 2003

    2003

  44. [52]

    Williamson

    C.H.K. Williamson. Vortex dynamics in a cylinder wake. Annual Review of Fluid Dynamics, 28:477–539, 1996

    1996

  45. [53]

    Xu and R

    C.J. Xu and R. Pasquetti. On the efficiency of semi-implicit and semi-lagrangeian spectral methods for the calculation of incompressible flows. International Jurnal for Numerical Methods in Fluids , 35:319– 340, 2001

    2001

  46. [54]

    Yang and S

    Z. Yang and S. Dong. A roadmap for discretely energy-stable schemes for dissipative systems based on a generalized auxiliary variable with guaranteed positivity. arXiv:1904.00141

    1904 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Yang and S

    Z. Yang and S. Dong. An unconditionally energy-stable scheme based on an implicit auxiliary en- ergy variable for incompressible two-phase flows with different densities involving only precomputable coefficient matrices. Journal of Computational Physics , 393:229–257, 2019

    2019

  48. [56]

    Z. Yang, L. Lin, and S. Dong. A family of second-order energy-stable schemes for Cahn-Hilliard type equations. Journal of Computational Physics , 383:24–54, 2019

    2019

  49. [57]

    Zheng and S

    X. Zheng and S. Dong. An eigen-based high-order expansion basis for structured spectral elements. Journal of Computational Physics , 230:8573–8602, 2011. 34

    2011

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.