4.7 Article

Three-dimensional flows of incompressible Navier-Stokes fluids in tubes containing a sinus, with varying slip conditions at the wall

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijengsci.2022.103749

关键词

Navier-Stokes fluid; Navier?s slip; Three-dimensional computer simulation; Extensional tube with sinus; Finite Element Method

资金

  1. Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic [NV19-04-00270]
  2. Czech Science Foundation (GA CR) [20-11027X]
  3. ERC-CZ, Czech Republic of the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport of the Czech Republic [LL2105]
  4. Charles University Research, Czech Republic program [UNCE/SCI/023]
  5. Office of Naval Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aims to understand the flow characteristics of three-dimensional incompressible Navier-Stokes fluid in tubes with a sinusoidal extension. The research is significant for its implications on blood flow through the aortic root, and reveals variations in flow attributes under different slip conditions.
The objective of this study is to understand the formation of vortices and other flow characteristics associated with the three-dimensional motions of an incompressible Navier-Stokes fluid in tubes containing a sinusoidal extension. The study has some bearing on two conjectures that da Vinci made concerning the flow of blood through the aortic root. We investigate how the flow attributes change with increasing sinus radius and with the nature of the slip at the tube wall characterized by the parameter theta, 0 <= theta <= 1, with theta values being 0 for free slip and 1 for the no-slip (adherence) condition. Two time-dependent solvers - one fully three-dimensional and the other based on the assumption that admissible flows are axially symmetric - are used to solve the equations governing the flow in a geometry associated with the inflow velocities and the other conditions closely related to flows of blood in a blood vessel containing the aortic root. Both these solvers passed a benchmark test based on steady flow in a cylinder with different slip conditions. Computing the flows systematically using both solvers, focusing first on problems with constant-in-time inflow, we have found that for the circular cylinder with constant cross-section, serving as the reference domain, the flow is steady and unidirectional for all boundary conditions that are considered, with maximal vorticity and dissipation for no-slip. For tubes with the sinus radius up to 16 mm the flow remains steady and axially symmetric, but the vorticity and the bulk dissipation in the sinus are maximal for theta between 0.6 and 0.7. For a tube with the sinus radius of 20 mm the flow remains steady and axially symmetric only for theta greater or equal than 0.9 including the case of no-slip. For theta below this value, not only does the solution become unsteady (oscillatory or even chaotic), it does not converge to the steady state and is thus different from the corresponding axially symmetric flows, and also the total dissipation and the vorticity depend on theta in a non-monotone manner. In particular, for a tube with sinus radius of 20 mm, the bulk dissipation and the vorticity are the highest for theta = 0, i.e. for (free) slip of the fluid at the wall. For tubes with the sinus radius of 20 mm and for theta below 0.9, we computed two different solutions (one steady, axially symmetric, the other unsteady, fully three-dimensional) to three-dimensional evolutionary incompressible Navier-Stokes equations for the same set of the initial and boundary data. This last result supports the idea that, under the conditions considered, the axially symmetric solution looses its stability. Finally, we computed the problems with a pulsatile inflow. For the tube with the largest sinus radius of 20 mm, we observed that the full problem is axially symmetric for the slip parameter theta >= 0.9, while for more significant slip, i.e. for theta < 0.9, we again obtained two different solutions under the same initial and boundary conditions.

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