4.7 Article

Assessment of a double-MRT pseudopotential lattice Boltzmann model for multiphase flow and heat transfer simulations

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2020.106536

关键词

Lattice Boltzmann; Multiphase flow; Heat transfer; Pseudopotential

资金

  1. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo (PB 2017-2019)
  2. ANPCyT-FONCyT [PICT 201-0937, 2016-0441]
  3. CONICET [PIP 112 201301-00829 CO]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study introduces a double-MRT lattice Boltzmann model for thermal multiphase flow, which can accurately simulate numerical tests with known analytical solutions and is validated through grid independency testing.
In this work, a double-MRT lattice Boltzmann (LB) model for thermal multiphase flow is presented and analyzed. The model is based on a pseudopotential scheme, and introduces a second equation with a non-diagonal relaxation matrix and an explicit definition of the equilibrium distribution in moment space. This alternative approach formally reproduces the target energy equation with no additional terms up to the relevant expansion scale, avoiding traditional explicit corrections in the source term or post-collision distributions. It also preserves the parallelization properties of the algorithm and proves that it can accurately simulate numerical tests with known analytical solutions, namely density and temperature distribution in a stratified van der Waals fluid, and interface evolution in a Stefan flow problem. Furthermore, a two-step grid independency test with fixed dimensionless numbers was analyzed and successfully applied in the simulation of bubble generation on a heated horizontal plate, showing that this methodology can be performed to prove consistency and order of convergence of the resulting LB scheme. For this particular problem, the influence of boundary conditions and numerical treatment of non-local terms in the energy equation are discussed in detail.

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

4.7
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