4.4 Article

Inverted stochastic lattice Boltzmann-Lagrangian model for identifying indoor particulate pollutant sources

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00162-023-00675-w

关键词

Boltzmann method; Transmission path; Inverse problem; Particle-wall collision; Indoor air pollution

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper investigates the inverted stochastic lattice Boltzmann-Lagrangian approach for identifying indoor particulate pollutant sources. The dynamics of indoor air and the transport of particles are solved using the lattice Boltzmann method, while the interaction between lattice fluid and particle movement is calculated through interaction force and void fraction. Based on the softball model, the particle-wall collision process is described to understand the dynamic characteristics of the particles. The results demonstrate that this approach provides a clear understanding of particle paths and mechanism, enabling the accurate identification of indoor particulate pollutant sources. This research contributes to the theoretical modeling of multi-phase particle fluids.
This paper studies the inverted stochastic lattice Boltzmann-Lagrangian approach for identifying indoor particulate pollutant sources. The dynamics of the fluid (indoor air) as well as the transport of the particles in the Eulerian description are solved using the lattice Boltzmann method. The particles regard as rigid bodies, and the data interactions between lattice fluid and particle movement are implemented by calculating for interaction force and void fraction. Particle-wall collision process is based on the softball model which describes the dynamic characteristics of particles in microscopic state. The results are shown that the particle forward and inverted drifting paths and its mechanisms are investigated clearly than previous methods. Indoor particulate pollutant sources can exactly identify with this approach. This research can offer theoretical relevance to the modeling of multi-phase particle fluid.

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

4.4
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