1(example-petsc-navier-stokes)= 2 3# Compressible Navier-Stokes mini-app 4 5This example is located in the subdirectory {file}`examples/fluids`. 6It solves the time-dependent Navier-Stokes equations of compressible gas dynamics in a static Eulerian three-dimensional frame using unstructured high-order finite/spectral element spatial discretizations and explicit or implicit high-order time-stepping (available in PETSc). 7Moreover, the Navier-Stokes example has been developed using PETSc, so that the pointwise physics (defined at quadrature points) is separated from the parallelization and meshing concerns. 8 9## Running the mini-app 10 11```{include} README.md 12:start-after: inclusion-fluids-marker 13``` 14## The Navier-Stokes equations 15 16The mathematical formulation (from {cite}`giraldoetal2010`, cf. SE3) is given in what follows. 17The compressible Navier-Stokes equations in conservative form are 18 19$$ 20\begin{aligned} 21\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \bm{U} &= 0 \\ 22\frac{\partial \bm{U}}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{\bm{U} \otimes \bm{U}}{\rho} + P \bm{I}_3 -\bm\sigma \right) + \rho g \bm{\hat k} &= 0 \\ 23\frac{\partial E}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{(E + P)\bm{U}}{\rho} -\bm{u} \cdot \bm{\sigma} - k \nabla T \right) &= 0 \, , \\ 24\end{aligned} 25$$ (eq-ns) 26 27where $\bm{\sigma} = \mu(\nabla \bm{u} + (\nabla \bm{u})^T + \lambda (\nabla \cdot \bm{u})\bm{I}_3)$ is the Cauchy (symmetric) stress tensor, with $\mu$ the dynamic viscosity coefficient, and $\lambda = - 2/3$ the Stokes hypothesis constant. 28In equations {eq}`eq-ns`, $\rho$ represents the volume mass density, $U$ the momentum density (defined as $\bm{U}=\rho \bm{u}$, where $\bm{u}$ is the vector velocity field), $E$ the total energy density (defined as $E = \rho e$, where $e$ is the total energy), $\bm{I}_3$ represents the $3 \times 3$ identity matrix, $g$ the gravitational acceleration constant, $\bm{\hat{k}}$ the unit vector in the $z$ direction, $k$ the thermal conductivity constant, $T$ represents the temperature, and $P$ the pressure, given by the following equation of state 29 30$$ 31P = \left( {c_p}/{c_v} -1\right) \left( E - {\bm{U}\cdot\bm{U}}/{(2 \rho)} - \rho g z \right) \, , 32$$ (eq-state) 33 34where $c_p$ is the specific heat at constant pressure and $c_v$ is the specific heat at constant volume (that define $\gamma = c_p / c_v$, the specific heat ratio). 35 36The system {eq}`eq-ns` can be rewritten in vector form 37 38$$ 39\frac{\partial \bm{q}}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}) -S(\bm{q}) = 0 \, , 40$$ (eq-vector-ns) 41 42for the state variables 5-dimensional vector 43 44$$ 45\bm{q} = \begin{pmatrix} \rho \\ \bm{U} \equiv \rho \bm{ u }\\ E \equiv \rho e \end{pmatrix} \begin{array}{l} \leftarrow\textrm{ volume mass density}\\ \leftarrow\textrm{ momentum density}\\ \leftarrow\textrm{ energy density} \end{array} 46$$ 47 48where the flux and the source terms, respectively, are given by 49 50$$ 51\begin{aligned} 52\bm{F}(\bm{q}) &= 53\underbrace{\begin{pmatrix} 54 \bm{U}\\ 55 {(\bm{U} \otimes \bm{U})}/{\rho} + P \bm{I}_3 \\ 56 {(E + P)\bm{U}}/{\rho} 57\end{pmatrix}}_{\bm F_{\text{adv}}} + 58\underbrace{\begin{pmatrix} 590 \\ 60- \bm{\sigma} \\ 61 - \bm{u} \cdot \bm{\sigma} - k \nabla T 62\end{pmatrix}}_{\bm F_{\text{diff}}},\\ 63S(\bm{q}) &= 64- \begin{pmatrix} 65 0\\ 66 \rho g \bm{\hat{k}}\\ 67 0 68\end{pmatrix}. 69\end{aligned} 70$$ (eq-ns-flux) 71 72Let the discrete solution be 73 74$$ 75\bm{q}_N (\bm{x},t)^{(e)} = \sum_{k=1}^{P}\psi_k (\bm{x})\bm{q}_k^{(e)} 76$$ 77 78with $P=p+1$ the number of nodes in the element $e$. 79We use tensor-product bases $\psi_{kji} = h_i(X_0)h_j(X_1)h_k(X_2)$. 80 81For the time discretization, we use two types of time stepping schemes. 82 83- Explicit time-stepping method 84 85 The following explicit formulation is solved with the adaptive Runge-Kutta-Fehlberg (RKF4-5) method by default (any explicit time-stepping scheme available in PETSc can be chosen at runtime) 86 87 $$ 88 \bm{q}_N^{n+1} = \bm{q}_N^n + \Delta t \sum_{i=1}^{s} b_i k_i \, , 89 $$ 90 91 where 92 93 $$ 94 \begin{aligned} 95 k_1 &= f(t^n, \bm{q}_N^n)\\ 96 k_2 &= f(t^n + c_2 \Delta t, \bm{q}_N^n + \Delta t (a_{21} k_1))\\ 97 k_3 &= f(t^n + c_3 \Delta t, \bm{q}_N^n + \Delta t (a_{31} k_1 + a_{32} k_2))\\ 98 \vdots&\\ 99 k_i &= f\left(t^n + c_i \Delta t, \bm{q}_N^n + \Delta t \sum_{j=1}^s a_{ij} k_j \right)\\ 100 \end{aligned} 101 $$ 102 103 and with 104 105 $$ 106 f(t^n, \bm{q}_N^n) = - [\nabla \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N)]^n + [S(\bm{q}_N)]^n \, . 107 $$ 108 109- Implicit time-stepping method 110 111 This time stepping method which can be selected using the option `-implicit` is solved with Backward Differentiation Formula (BDF) method by default (similarly, any implicit time-stepping scheme available in PETSc can be chosen at runtime). 112 The implicit formulation solves nonlinear systems for $\bm q_N$: 113 114 $$ 115 \bm f(\bm q_N) \equiv \bm g(t^{n+1}, \bm{q}_N, \bm{\dot{q}}_N) = 0 \, , 116 $$ (eq-ts-implicit-ns) 117 118 where the time derivative $\bm{\dot q}_N$ is defined by 119 120 $$ 121 \bm{\dot{q}}_N(\bm q_N) = \alpha \bm q_N + \bm z_N 122 $$ 123 124 in terms of $\bm z_N$ from prior state and $\alpha > 0$, both of which depend on the specific time integration scheme (backward difference formulas, generalized alpha, implicit Runge-Kutta, etc.). 125 Each nonlinear system {eq}`eq-ts-implicit-ns` will correspond to a weak form, as explained below. 126 In determining how difficult a given problem is to solve, we consider the Jacobian of {eq}`eq-ts-implicit-ns`, 127 128 $$ 129 \frac{\partial \bm f}{\partial \bm q_N} = \frac{\partial \bm g}{\partial \bm q_N} + \alpha \frac{\partial \bm g}{\partial \bm{\dot q}_N}. 130 $$ 131 132 The scalar "shift" $\alpha$ scales inversely with the time step $\Delta t$, so small time steps result in the Jacobian being dominated by the second term, which is a sort of "mass matrix", and typically well-conditioned independent of grid resolution with a simple preconditioner (such as Jacobi). 133 In contrast, the first term dominates for large time steps, with a condition number that grows with the diameter of the domain and polynomial degree of the approximation space. 134 Both terms are significant for time-accurate simulation and the setup costs of strong preconditioners must be balanced with the convergence rate of Krylov methods using weak preconditioners. 135 136To obtain a finite element discretization, we first multiply the strong form {eq}`eq-vector-ns` by a test function $\bm v \in H^1(\Omega)$ and integrate, 137 138$$ 139\int_{\Omega} \bm v \cdot \left(\frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N) - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right) \,dV = 0 \, , \; \forall \bm v \in \mathcal{V}_p\,, 140$$ 141 142with $\mathcal{V}_p = \{ \bm v(\bm x) \in H^{1}(\Omega_e) \,|\, \bm v(\bm x_e(\bm X)) \in P_p(\bm{I}), e=1,\ldots,N_e \}$ a mapped space of polynomials containing at least polynomials of degree $p$ (with or without the higher mixed terms that appear in tensor product spaces). 143 144Integrating by parts on the divergence term, we arrive at the weak form, 145 146$$ 147\begin{aligned} 148\int_{\Omega} \bm v \cdot \left( \frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right) \,dV 149- \int_{\Omega} \nabla \bm v \!:\! \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N)\,dV & \\ 150+ \int_{\partial \Omega} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm q_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS 151 &= 0 \, , \; \forall \bm v \in \mathcal{V}_p \,, 152\end{aligned} 153$$ (eq-weak-vector-ns) 154 155where $\bm{F}(\bm q_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}}$ is typically replaced with a boundary condition. 156 157:::{note} 158The notation $\nabla \bm v \!:\! \bm F$ represents contraction over both fields and spatial dimensions while a single dot represents contraction in just one, which should be clear from context, e.g., $\bm v \cdot \bm S$ contracts over fields while $\bm F \cdot \widehat{\bm n}$ contracts over spatial dimensions. 159::: 160 161We solve {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns` using a Galerkin discretization (default) or a stabilized method, as is necessary for most real-world flows. 162 163Galerkin methods produce oscillations for transport-dominated problems (any time the cell Péclet number is larger than 1), and those tend to blow up for nonlinear problems such as the Euler equations and (low-viscosity/poorly resolved) Navier-Stokes, in which case stabilization is necessary. 164Our formulation follows {cite}`hughesetal2010`, which offers a comprehensive review of stabilization and shock-capturing methods for continuous finite element discretization of compressible flows. 165 166- **SUPG** (streamline-upwind/Petrov-Galerkin) 167 168 In this method, the weighted residual of the strong form {eq}`eq-vector-ns` is added to the Galerkin formulation {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns`. 169 The weak form for this method is given as 170 171 $$ 172 \begin{aligned} 173 \int_{\Omega} \bm v \cdot \left( \frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right) \,dV 174 - \int_{\Omega} \nabla \bm v \!:\! \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N)\,dV & \\ 175 + \int_{\partial \Omega} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS & \\ 176 + \int_{\Omega} \bm{P}(\bm v)^T \, \left( \frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} \, + \, 177 \nabla \cdot \bm{F} \, (\bm{q}_N) - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right) \,dV &= 0 178 \, , \; \forall \bm v \in \mathcal{V}_p 179 \end{aligned} 180 $$ (eq-weak-vector-ns-supg) 181 182 This stabilization technique can be selected using the option `-stab supg`. 183 184- **SU** (streamline-upwind) 185 186 This method is a simplified version of *SUPG* {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns-supg` which is developed for debugging/comparison purposes. The weak form for this method is 187 188 $$ 189 \begin{aligned} 190 \int_{\Omega} \bm v \cdot \left( \frac{\partial \bm{q}_N}{\partial t} - \bm{S}(\bm{q}_N) \right) \,dV 191 - \int_{\Omega} \nabla \bm v \!:\! \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N)\,dV & \\ 192 + \int_{\partial \Omega} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm{q}_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS & \\ 193 + \int_{\Omega} \mathcal{P}(\bm v)^T \, \nabla \cdot \bm{F} \, (\bm{q}_N) \,dV 194 & = 0 \, , \; \forall \bm v \in \mathcal{V}_p 195 \end{aligned} 196 $$ (eq-weak-vector-ns-su) 197 198 This stabilization technique can be selected using the option `-stab su`. 199 200In both {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns-su` and {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns-supg`, $\mathcal P$ is called the *perturbation to the test-function space*, since it modifies the original Galerkin method into *SUPG* or *SU* schemes. 201It is defined as 202 203$$ 204\mathcal P(\bm v) \equiv \left(\bm{\tau} \cdot \frac{\partial \bm{F}_{\text{adv}} (\bm{q}_N)}{\partial \bm{q}_N} \right)^T \, \nabla \bm v\,, 205$$ 206 207where parameter $\bm{\tau} \in \mathbb R^{3\times 3}$ (spatial indices) or $\bm \tau \in \mathbb R^{5\times 5}$ (field indices) is an intrinsic time scale matrix. 208This expression contains the flux Jacobian, which we express in variational notation by differentiating the advective flux $\bm F_{\text{adv}}$ of {eq}`eq-ns-flux` 209 210$$ 211\begin{aligned} 212\diff\bm F_{\text{adv}}(\diff\bm q; \bm q) &= \frac{\partial \bm F_{\text{adv}}}{\partial \bm q} \diff\bm q \\ 213&= \begin{pmatrix} 214\diff\bm U \\ 215(\diff\bm U \otimes \bm U + \bm U \otimes \diff\bm U)/\rho - (\bm U \otimes \bm U)/\rho^2 \diff\rho + \diff P \bm I_3 \\ 216(E + P)\diff\bm U/\rho + (\diff E + \diff P)\bm U/\rho - (E + P) \bm U/\rho^2 \diff\rho 217\end{pmatrix}, 218\end{aligned} 219$$ 220 221where $\diff P$ is defined by differentiating {eq}`eq-state`. 222In this notation, we may equivalently write the stabilization term as 223 224$$ 225\mathcal P(\bm v)^T \bm r = \nabla \bm v \bm\tau \diff\bm F_{\text{adv}}(\bm r), 226$$ 227 228where $\bm r$ is the strong form residual. 229Note that both $\nabla \bm v$ and $\diff \bm F$ are $5\times 3$ matrices and that $\bm\tau$ can be defined with spatial indices, or field indices, leading to a stabilization term of $(\nabla \bm v)_{\alpha i} \tau_{ij} \diff \bm F_{\alpha j}$ for spatial or $(\nabla \bm v)_{\alpha i} \tau_{\alpha \beta} \diff \bm F_{\beta i}$ for field, where $\alpha,\beta$ are field indices and $i,j$ are spatial indices. 230 231:::{dropdown} Stabilization scale $\bm\tau$ 232A velocity vector $\bm u$ can be pulled back to the reference element as $\bm u_{\bm X} = \nabla_{\bm x}\bm X \cdot \bm u$, with units of reference length (non-dimensional) per second. 233To build intuition, consider a boundary layer element of dimension $(1, \epsilon)$, for which $\nabla_{\bm x} \bm X = \bigl(\begin{smallmatrix} 2 & \\ & 2/\epsilon \end{smallmatrix}\bigr)$. 234So a small normal component of velocity will be amplified (by a factor of the aspect ratio $1/\epsilon$) in this transformation. 235The ratio $\lVert \bm u \rVert / \lVert \bm u_{\bm X} \rVert$ is a covariant measure of (half) the element length in the direction of the velocity. 236A contravariant measure of element length in the direction of a unit vector $\hat{\bm n}$ is given by $\lVert \bigl(\nabla_{\bm X} \bm x\bigr)^T \hat{\bm n} \rVert$. 237While $\nabla_{\bm X} \bm x$ is readily computable, its inverse $\nabla_{\bm x} \bm X$ is needed directly in finite element methods and thus more convenient for our use. 238If we consider a parallelogram, the covariant measure is larger than the contravariant measure for vectors pointing between acute corners and the opposite holds for vectors between oblique corners. 239 240The cell Péclet number is classically defined by $\mathrm{Pe}_h = \lVert \bm u \rVert h / (2 \kappa)$ where $\kappa$ is the diffusivity (units of $m^2/s$). 241This can be generalized to arbitrary grids by defining the local Péclet number 242 243$$ 244\mathrm{Pe} = \frac{\lVert \bm u \rVert^2}{\lVert \bm u_{\bm X} \rVert \kappa}. 245$$ (eq-peclet) 246 247For scalar advection-diffusion, the stabilization is a scalar 248 249$$ 250\tau = \frac{\xi(\mathrm{Pe})}{\lVert \bm u_{\bm X} \rVert}, 251$$ (eq-tau-advdiff) 252 253where $\xi(\mathrm{Pe}) = \coth \mathrm{Pe} - 1/\mathrm{Pe}$ approaches 1 at large local Péclet number. 254Note that $\tau$ has units of time and, in the transport-dominated limit, is proportional to element transit time in the direction of the propagating wave. 255For advection-diffusion, $\bm F(q) = \bm u q$, and thus the perturbed test function is 256 257$$ 258\mathcal P(v) = \tau \bm u \cdot \nabla v = \tau \bm u_{\bm X} \nabla_{\bm X} v. 259$$ (eq-test-perturbation-advdiff) 260 261See {cite}`hughesetal2010` equations 15-17 and 34-36 for further discussion of this formulation. 262 263For the Navier-Stokes and Euler equations in primitive variables, {cite}`whiting2003hierarchical` defines a $5\times 5$ diagonal stabilization consisting of 2641. continuity stabilization $\tau_c$ 2652. momentum stabilization $\tau_m$ 2663. energy stabilization $\tau_E$ 267 268However, since our equations are in conservative form, we follow {cite}`hughesetal2010` in defining a $3\times 3$ diagonal stabilization according to spatial criterion 2 (equation 27) as follows. 269 270$$ 271\tau_{ii} = c_{\tau} \frac{2 \xi(\mathrm{Pe})}{(\lambda_{\max \text{abs}})_i \lVert \nabla_{x_i} \bm X \rVert} 272$$ (eq-tau-conservative) 273 274where $c_{\tau}$ is a multiplicative constant reported to be optimal at 0.5 for linear elements, $\hat{\bm n}_i$ is a unit vector in direction $i$, and $\nabla_{x_i} = \hat{\bm n}_i \cdot \nabla_{\bm x}$ is the derivative in direction $i$. 275The flux Jacobian $\frac{\partial \bm F_{\text{adv}}}{\partial \bm q} \cdot \hat{\bm n}_i$ in each direction $i$ is a $5\times 5$ matrix with spectral radius $(\lambda_{\max \text{abs}})_i$ equal to the fastest wave speed. 276The complete set of eigenvalues of the Euler flux Jacobian in direction $i$ are (e.g., {cite}`toro2009`) 277 278$$ 279\Lambda_i = [u_i - a, u_i, u_i, u_i, u_i+a], 280$$ (eq-eigval-advdiff) 281 282where $u_i = \bm u \cdot \hat{\bm n}_i$ is the velocity component in direction $i$ and $a = \sqrt{\gamma P/\rho}$ is the sound speed for ideal gasses. 283Note that the first and last eigenvalues represent nonlinear acoustic waves while the middle three are linearly degenerate, carrying a contact wave (temperature) and transverse components of momentum. 284The fastest wave speed in direction $i$ is thus 285 286$$ 287\lambda_{\max \text{abs}} \Bigl( \frac{\partial \bm F_{\text{adv}}}{\partial \bm q} \cdot \hat{\bm n}_i \Bigr) = |u_i| + a 288$$ (eq-wavespeed) 289 290Note that this wave speed is specific to ideal gases as $\gamma$ is an ideal gas parameter; other equations of state will yield a different acoustic wave speed. 291 292::: 293 294Currently, this demo provides three types of problems/physical models that can be selected at run time via the option `-problem`. 295{ref}`problem-advection`, the problem of the transport of energy in a uniform vector velocity field, {ref}`problem-euler-vortex`, the exact solution to the Euler equations, and the so called {ref}`problem-density-current` problem. 296 297(problem-advection)= 298 299## Advection 300 301A simplified version of system {eq}`eq-ns`, only accounting for the transport of total energy, is given by 302 303$$ 304\frac{\partial E}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot (\bm{u} E ) = 0 \, , 305$$ (eq-advection) 306 307with $\bm{u}$ the vector velocity field. In this particular test case, a blob of total energy (defined by a characteristic radius $r_c$) is transported by two different wind types. 308 309- **Rotation** 310 311 In this case, a uniform circular velocity field transports the blob of total energy. 312 We have solved {eq}`eq-advection` applying zero energy density $E$, and no-flux for $\bm{u}$ on the boundaries. 313 314- **Translation** 315 316 In this case, a background wind with a constant rectilinear velocity field, enters the domain and transports the blob of total energy out of the domain. 317 318 For the inflow boundary conditions, a prescribed $E_{wind}$ is applied weakly on the inflow boundaries such that the weak form boundary integral in {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns` is defined as 319 320 $$ 321 \int_{\partial \Omega_{inflow}} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm q_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS = \int_{\partial \Omega_{inflow}} \bm v \, E_{wind} \, \bm u \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS \, , 322 $$ 323 324 For the outflow boundary conditions, we have used the current values of $E$, following {cite}`papanastasiou1992outflow` which extends the validity of the weak form of the governing equations to the outflow instead of replacing them with unknown essential or natural boundary conditions. 325 The weak form boundary integral in {eq}`eq-weak-vector-ns` for outflow boundary conditions is defined as 326 327 $$ 328 \int_{\partial \Omega_{outflow}} \bm v \cdot \bm{F}(\bm q_N) \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS = \int_{\partial \Omega_{outflow}} \bm v \, E \, \bm u \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}} \,dS \, , 329 $$ 330 331(problem-euler-vortex)= 332 333## Isentropic Vortex 334 335Three-dimensional Euler equations, which are simplified and nondimensionalized version of system {eq}`eq-ns` and account only for the convective fluxes, are given by 336 337$$ 338\begin{aligned} 339\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \bm{U} &= 0 \\ 340\frac{\partial \bm{U}}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{\bm{U} \otimes \bm{U}}{\rho} + P \bm{I}_3 \right) &= 0 \\ 341\frac{\partial E}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \frac{(E + P)\bm{U}}{\rho} \right) &= 0 \, , \\ 342\end{aligned} 343$$ (eq-euler) 344 345Following the setup given in {cite}`zhang2011verification`, the mean flow for this problem is $\rho=1$, $P=1$, $T=P/\rho= 1$ (Specific Gas Constant, $R$, is 1), and $\bm{u}=(u_1,u_2,0)$ while the perturbation $\delta \bm{u}$, and $\delta T$ are defined as 346 347$$ 348\begin{aligned} (\delta u_1, \, \delta u_2) &= \frac{\epsilon}{2 \pi} \, e^{0.5(1-r^2)} \, (-\bar{y}, \, \bar{x}) \, , \\ \delta T &= - \frac{(\gamma-1) \, \epsilon^2}{8 \, \gamma \, \pi^2} \, e^{1-r^2} \, , \\ \end{aligned} 349$$ 350 351where $(\bar{x}, \, \bar{y}) = (x-x_c, \, y-y_c)$, $(x_c, \, y_c)$ represents the center of the domain, $r^2=\bar{x}^2 + \bar{y}^2$, and $\epsilon$ is the vortex strength ($\epsilon$ < 10). 352There is no perturbation in the entropy $S=P/\rho^\gamma$ ($\delta S=0)$. 353 354(problem-density-current)= 355 356## Density Current 357 358For this test problem (from {cite}`straka1993numerical`), we solve the full Navier-Stokes equations {eq}`eq-ns`, for which a cold air bubble (of radius $r_c$) drops by convection in a neutrally stratified atmosphere. 359Its initial condition is defined in terms of the Exner pressure, $\pi(\bm{x},t)$, and potential temperature, $\theta(\bm{x},t)$, that relate to the state variables via 360 361$$ 362\begin{aligned} \rho &= \frac{P_0}{( c_p - c_v)\theta(\bm{x},t)} \pi(\bm{x},t)^{\frac{c_v}{ c_p - c_v}} \, , \\ e &= c_v \theta(\bm{x},t) \pi(\bm{x},t) + \bm{u}\cdot \bm{u} /2 + g z \, , \end{aligned} 363$$ 364 365where $P_0$ is the atmospheric pressure. 366For this problem, we have used no-slip and non-penetration boundary conditions for $\bm{u}$, and no-flux for mass and energy densities. 367