4.7 Article

A sharp interface cartesian grid method for simulating flows with complex moving boundaries

期刊

JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL PHYSICS
卷 174, 期 1, 页码 345-380

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1006/jcph.2001.6916

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A Cartesian grid method for computing flows with complex immersed, moving boundaries is presented. The flow is computed on a fixed Cartesian mesh and the solid boundaries are allowed to move freely through the mesh. A mixed Eulerian-Lagrangian framework is employed, which allows us to treat the immersed moving boundary as a sharp interface. The incompressible Navier-Stokes equations are discretized using a second-order-accurate finite-volume technique, and a second-order-accurate fractional-step scheme is employed for time advancement. The fractional-step method and associated boundary conditions are formulated in a manner that property accounts for the boundary motion. A unique problem with sharp inter-face methods is the temporal discretization of what are termed freshly cleared cells, i.e., cells that are inside the solid at one time step and emerge into the fluid at the next time step. A simple and consistent remedy for this problem is also presented. The solution of the pressure Poisson equation is usually the most time-consuming step in a fractional step scheme and this is even more so for moving boundary problems where the flow domain changes constantly. A multigrid method is presented and is shown to accelerate the convergence significantly even in the presence of complex immersed boundaries. The methodology is validated by comparing it with experimental data on two cases: (1) the flow in a channel with a moving indentation on one wall and (2) vortex shedding from a cylinder oscillating in a uniform free-stream. Finally, the application of the current method to a more complicated moving boundary situation is also demonstrated by computing the flow inside a diaphragm-driven micropump with moving valves. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science.

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