The quest for a conservative, accurate, and physically realistic yet computationally efficient numerical method for advective transport continues to pervade the physical sciences. The authors are to be commended for a paper contributing to this topic of seemingly never-ending interest. The aim of this discussion is to comment on some aspects of advection modeling in the hope of providing clarification for fellow modelers. One of the advection schemes used by the authors is a nonconservative Eulerian-Lagrangian (EL) method. Not surprisingly, in their practical application the authors have found (as have other workers) that this type of method introduces significant errors into solute transport computations. The authors indicate that these errors are mass conservation errors. Are the authors aware that there is a relatively simple way of eliminating these errors to create conservative EL methods? All that is required is to cast the EL method in an appropriately constructed mass balance form. Although this may be accomplished in a number of apparently different ways, the essential ingredients are the tracking of fluid control volumes and the spatial interpolation of solute mass, a general approach for one-dimensional unsteady non-uniform advection-diffusion, as described in Manson and Wallis (1999) and earlier papers referenced therein. Note that nonconservative EL methods involve the spatial interpolation of solute concentrations in the absence of a strict mass balance. In non-uniform flows, such methods do not conserve mass. The discussers support the authors in expounding the good aspects of the QUICKEST scheme. The discussers are only surprised that it seems to have taken almost twenty years for water industry modelers to recognize the merits of the scheme. Readers should be aware, however, that there is some confusion over the nature of the scheme. It is most often thought of as a Eulerian scheme, since in the original paper (Leonard 1979) it appears as an extension of the Eulerian QUICK scheme, an extension specifically for unsteady state transport. Strictly speaking, however, the scheme is more closely allied to EL methods because in Leonard’s paper, the advective transport terms are derived in exactly the same way as is used in one method of constructing conservative EL methods, i.e., by using a control volume mass balance with Lagrangian integrals. In this, spatial interpolation of solute concentrations is used to estimate the solute fluxes at the control volume faces. However, QUICKEST is a special, i.e., restricted, EL scheme because the particular Lagrangian integrals account for material being swept downstream only from the nearest upstream cell, whereas a general EL scheme is unlimited in from how far upstream material can be tracked. This is why QUICKEST has a Courant number‐based stability limit while general EL methods do not. In particular, for 1D pure advection with QUICKEST the upper limit for the Courant number is one, but for 1D advection-diffusion the upper limit apa
Read full abstract