4.5 Article

Assessment of numerical methods for fully resolved simulations of particle-laden turbulent flows

期刊

COMPUTERS & FLUIDS
卷 179, 期 -, 页码 1-14

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compfluid.2018.10.016

关键词

Particle-laden flows; Finite-size particles; Turbulence; Direct numerical simulations

资金

  1. Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology [SFRH/BD/85501/2012]
  2. U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) [CBET-1706130]
  3. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BD/85501/2012] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

During the last decade, many approaches for resolved-particle simulation (RPS) have been developed for numerical studies of finite-size particle-laden turbulent flows. In this paper, three RPS approaches are compared for a particle-laden decaying turbulence case. These methods are, the Volume-of-Fluid Lagrangian method, based on the viscosity penalty method (VoF-Lag); a direct forcing Immersed Boundary Method, based on a regularized delta function approach for the fluid/solid coupling (IBM); and the Bounce Back scheme developed for Lattice Boltzmann method (LBM-BB). The physics and the numerical performances of the methods are analyzed. Modulation of turbulence is observed for all the methods, with a faster decay of turbulent kinetic energy compared to the single-phase case. Lagrangian particle statistics, such as the velocity probability density function and the velocity autocorrelation function, show minor differences among the three methods. However, major differences between the codes are observed in the evolution of the particle kinetic energy. These differences are related to the treatment of the initial condition when the particles are inserted in an initially single-phase turbulence. The averaged particle/fluid slip velocity is also analyzed, showing similar behavior as compared to the results referred in the literature. The computational performances of the different methods differ significantly. The VoF-Lag method appears to be computationally most expensive. Indeed, this method is not adapted to turbulent cases. The IBM and LBM-BB implementations show very good scaling. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据