Computational results obtained by using the three different finite volume methods such as Jameson et al. 's, Ni's, and Lerat et al.'s are compared. Computations are performed for the two test cases: the two dimensional transonic flow over 9% thickness circular are bump and that over the NACA 0012 airfoil. To provide a common basis for comparison of the different methods, identical grid structures, artificial dissipation, and far field boundary placement were taken for all the three methods considered. Discussed are the numerical properties of the individual methods such as the convergence history, shock capturing ability judged through the Mach number and pressure contours, and the distribution of total pressure loss. The computed results showed that all the three methods agreed well in the essential overall flow features. However, detailed comparison of the flow has demonstrated different characteristic behavior of the schemes, mainly near the shock locations. Convergence history showed that the local time stepping method is very efficient when the unsteady finite volume formulation is applied for the steady transonic flow solution.
