# The 2D cylindrical shell benchmarks by Davies et al.
*This section was contributed by William Durkin and Wolfgang Bangerth.*
All of the benchmarks presented so far take place in a Cartesian domain.
Davies et al. describe a benchmark (in a paper that is currently still
being written) for a 2D spherical Earth that is nondimensionalized such that
```{table}
:name: tab:davies_et_al
| | |
|:------------------|:---------------------------------|
| $r_{\min}$ = 1.22 | $ T \|_{r_{min}} = 1$ |
| $r_{\max}$ = 2.22 | $ T \|_{r_{max}} = 0$ |
```
The benchmark is run for a series of approximations (Boussinesq, Extended
Boussinesq, Truncated Anelastic Liquid, and Anelastic Liquid), and
temperature, velocity, and heat flux calculations are compared with the
results of other mantle modeling programs. will output all of these values
directly except for the Nusselt number, which we must calculate ourselves from
the heat fluxes that can compute. The Nusselt number of the top and bottom
surfaces, ${Nu}_T$ and ${Nu}_B$, respectively, are defined by the authors of
the benchmarks as
```{math}
:label: eq:davies-NuTop
{Nu}_{T} = \frac{\ln(f)}{2{\pi}r_{\max}(1-f)}\int \limits_{0}^{2\pi} \frac{\partial T}{\partial r}\, \text{d}\theta
```
and
```{math}
:label: eq:davies-NuBottom
{Nu}_{B} = \frac{f \ln(f)}{2{\pi}r_{\min}(1-f)}\int \limits_{0}^{2\pi} \frac{\partial T}{\partial r}\, \text{d}\theta
```
where $f$ is the ratio $\frac{r_{\min}}{r_{\max}}$.
We can put this in terms of heat flux
```{math}
q_r = -k\frac{\partial T}{\partial r}
```
through the inner and outer
surfaces, where $q_r$ is heat flux in the radial direction. Let $Q$ be the
total heat that flows through a surface,
```{math}
Q = \int \limits_{0}^{2\pi} q_r\, \text{d}\theta,
```
then {math:numref}`eq:davies-NuTop` becomes
```{math}
{Nu}_{T} = \frac{-Q_{T}\ln(f)}{2\pi{r_{\max}}(1-f)k}
```
and similarly
```{math}
{Nu}_{B} = \frac{-Q_{B}f\ln(f)}{2\pi{r_{\min}}(1-f)k}.
```
$Q_T$ and $Q_B$ are
heat fluxes that can readily compute through the `heat flux statistics`
postprocessor (see {ref}`parameters:Postprocess/List_20of_20postprocessors`). For
further details on the nondimensionalization and equations used for each
approximation, refer to Davies et al.
The series of benchmarks is then defined by a number of cases relating to the
exact equations chosen to model the fluid. We will discuss these in the
following.
## Case 1.1: BA_Ra104_Iso_ZS.
This case is run with the following settings:
- Boussinesq Approximation
- Boundary Condition: Zero-Slip
- Rayleigh Number = $10^4$
- Initial Conditions: $D = 0, O = 4$
- $\eta(T) = 1$
where $D$ and $O$ refer to the degree and order of a spherical harmonic that
describes the initial temperature. While the initial conditions matter, what
is important here though is that the system evolve to four convective cells
since we are only interested in the long term, steady state behavior.
The model is relatively straightforward to set up, basing the input file on
that discussed in Section {ref}`sec:cookbooks:shell_simple_2d`. The full input
file can be found at [benchmarks/davies_et_al/case-1.1.prm](https://www.github.com/geodynamics/aspect/blob/main/benchmarks/davies_et_al/case-1.1.prm),
with the interesting parts excerpted as follows:
```{literalinclude} case-1.1.prm
```
We use the same trick here as in
{ref}`sec:cookbooks:convection-box` to produce a model in which the
density $\rho(T)$ in the temperature equation {math:numref}`eq:temperature` is
almost constant (namely, by choosing a very small thermal expansion
coefficient) as required by the benchmark, and instead prescribe the desired
Rayleigh number by choosing a correspondingly large gravity.
Results for this and the other cases are shown below.
## Case 2.1: BA_Ra104_Iso_FS.
Case 2.1 uses the following setup, differing only in the boundary conditions:
- Boussinesq Approximation
- Boundary Condition: Free-Slip
- Rayleigh Number = $10^4$
- Initial Conditions: $D = 0, O = 4$
- $\eta(T) = 1$
As a consequence of the free slip boundary conditions, any solid body rotation
of the entire system satisfies the Stokes equations with their boundary
conditions. In other words, the solution of the problem is not unique: given a
solution, adding a solid body rotation yields another solution. We select
arbitrarily the one that has no net rotation (see
{ref}`parameters:Nullspace_20removal`). The section in the
input file that is relevant is then as follows (the full input file resides at
[benchmarks/davies_et_al/case-2.1.prm](https://www.github.com/geodynamics/aspect/blob/main/benchmarks/davies_et_al/case-2.1.prm)):
```{literalinclude} case-2.1.prm
```
Again, results are shown below.
## Case 2.2: BA_Ra105_Iso_FS.
Case 2.2 is described as follows:
- Boussinesq Approximation
- Boundary Condition: Free-Slip
- Rayleigh Number = $10^5$
- Initial Conditions: Final conditions of case 2.1 (BA_Ra104_Iso_FS)
- $\eta(T) = 1$
In other words, we have an increased Rayleigh number and begin with the final
steady state of case 2.1. To start the model where case 2.1 left off, the
input file of case 2.1, [benchmarks/davies_et_al/case-2.1.prm](https://www.github.com/geodynamics/aspect/blob/main/benchmarks/davies_et_al/case-2.1.prm), instructs to
checkpoint itself every few time steps (see
{ref}`sec:checkpoint-restart`). If case 2.2 uses the same
output directory, we can then resume the computations from this checkpoint
with an input file that prescribes a different Rayleigh number and a later
input time:
```{literalinclude} case-2.2.prm
```
We increase the Rayleigh number to $10^5$ by increasing the magnitude of
gravity in the input file. The full script for case 2.2 is located in
[benchmarks/davies_et_al/case-2.2.prm](https://www.github.com/geodynamics/aspect/blob/main/benchmarks/davies_et_al/case-2.2.prm)
(sec:benchmarks:davies_et_al:case2.3)=
## Case 2.3: BA_Ra103_vv_FS.
Case 2.3 is a variation on the previous one:
- Boussinesq Approximation
- Boundary Condition: Free-Slip
- Rayleigh Number = $10^3$
- Initial Conditions: Final conditions of case 2.1 (BA_Ra104_Iso_FS)
- $\eta(T) = 1000^{-T}$
The Rayleigh number is smaller here (and is selected using the gravity
parameter in the input file, as before), but the more important change is that
the viscosity is now a function of temperature. At the time of writing, there
is no material model that would implement such a viscosity, so we create a
plugin that does so for us (see {ref}`cha:extending` and
{ref}`sec:extending:write-a-plugin` in general, and
{ref}`sec:extending:plugin-types:material-models` for material models in particular).
The code for it is located in
[benchmarks/davies_et_al/case-2.3-plugin/VoT.cc](https://www.github.com/geodynamics/aspect/blob/main/benchmarks/davies_et_al/case-2.3-plugin/VoT.cc) (where "VoT" is
short for "viscosity as a function of temperature") and is
essentially a copy of the `simpler` material model. The primary change
compared to the `simpler` material model is the line about the viscosity in
the following function:
```{code-block} c++
template
void
VoT::
evaluate(const typename Interface::MaterialModelInputs &in,
typename Interface::MaterialModelOutputs &out) const
{
for (unsigned int i=0; i
Davies et al. benchmarks: Final steady state temperature fields for the 2D cylindrical benchmark cases.
```
Secondly, {numref}`fig:davies-2DcylinderVrms` shows the root mean
square velocity as a function of time for the various cases. It is obvious
that they all converge to steady state solutions. However, there is an initial
transient stage and, in cases 2.2 and 2.3, a sudden jolt to the system at the
time where we switch from the model used to compute up to time $t=2$ to the
different models used after that.
```{figure-md} fig:davies-2DcylinderVrms
Davies et al. benchmarks: $V_{rms}$ for 2D Cylindrical Cases. Large jumps occur when transitioning from case 2.1 to cases 2.2 and 2.3 due to the instantaneous change of parameter settings.
```
These runs also produce quantitative data that will be published along with
the concise descriptions of the benchmarks and a comparison with other codes.
In particular, some of the criteria listed above to judge the accuracy of
results are listed in {numref}`tab:davies-et-al-results`.[^footnote1]
```{table} Davies et al. benchmarks: Numerical results for some of the output quantities required by the benchmarks and the various cases considered.
:name: tab:davies-et-al-results
| Case | $\left$ | $Nu_T$ | $Nu_B$ | $V_{\text{rms}}$ |
|:-----|:----------------:|:------:|:------:|:----------------:|
| 1.1 | 0.403 | 2.464 | 2.468 | 19.053 |
| 2.1 | 0.382 | 4.7000 | 4.706 | 46.244 |
| 2.2 | 0.382 | 9.548 | 9.584 | 193.371 |
| 2.3 | 0.582 | 5.102 | 5.121 | 79.632 |
```
[^footnote1]: The input files available in the `benchmarks/davies_et_al` directory use 5
global refinements in order to provide cases that can be run without excessive
trouble on a normal computer. However, this is not enough to achieve
reasonable accuracy and both the data shown below and the data submitted to
the benchmarking effort uses 7 global refinement steps, corresponding to a
mesh with 1536 cells in tangential and 128 cells in radial direction.
Computing on such meshes is not cheap, as it leads to a problem size of more
than 2.5 million unknowns. It is best done using a parallel computation.