Reply by Author to R. Edelman and P.T. Harsha
Peter C. Sukanek · AIAA Journal · 1979
E and Harsha present two objections to our work. They claim, first, that the centerline formulation reported in Ref. 1 is not second-order accurate and introduces a spurious diffusion term; second, that the conservation statement employed in Ref. 2 is incorrect. These objections are interrelated, since it is our contention that the spurious diffusion term is necessary to preserve conservation. The finite differrence analog of the global conservation property used in Ref. 2 is identical to that reported by Edelman and Harsha, provided a consistent choice of \l/n is employed: