Abstract

This paper presents an implementation and a comparison of two spatial discretisation schemes over a hexagonal geometry for the two-dimensional discrete ordinates transport equation. The methods are a high-order Discontinuous Galerkin (DG) finite element scheme and a high-order Diamond Differencing (DD) scheme. The DG method has been, and is being, studied on the hexagonal geometry, also called a honeycomb mesh – but not the DD method. In this research effort, it was chosen to divide the hexagons into (at least) three lozenges. An affine transformation is then applied onto said lozenges to cast them into the reference quadrilaterals usually studied in finite elements. In practice, this effectively means that the equations used in Cartesian geometry have their terms and operators altered using the Jacobian matrix of the transformation. This was implemented in the discrete ordinates solver of the code DRAGON5. Two 2D benchmark problems were then used for the verification and validation, including one based on the Monju 3D reactor benchmark. It was found that the diamond-differencing scheme seemed better. It converged much faster towards the solution at comparable mesh refinements for first-order expansion of the flux. Even if this difference was not present for second-order, DG was slower, about two to four times slower.

Highlights

  • There are several ways of dealing with this geometry

  • The two methods have been respectively implemented in the French Discontinuous Galerkin (DG) solvers MINARET and ERANOS [1]

  • There does not exist a comparison of the two schemes on hexagons for eigenvalue problems

Read more

Summary

Introduction

There are several ways of dealing with this geometry. The hexagon can be kept whole and a Discontinuous Galerkin (DG) formulation using fairly exotic basis functions can be built upon it. The hexagon can be sub-divided into six triangular or three lozenge elements - which can be further refined. The two methods have been respectively implemented in the French DG solvers MINARET and ERANOS [1]. Neither triangular nor lozenge sub-elements of a hexagonal mesh have been investigated for DD. There does not exist a comparison of the two schemes on hexagons for eigenvalue problems.

Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call