4.7 Article

Coupled lattice Boltzmann method for simulating electrokinetic flows: A localized scheme for the Nernst-Plank model

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2014.03.005

关键词

Nernst-Planck equation; Electro-osmotic flow; Electrical double layer; Lattice Boltzmann method

资金

  1. MEXT program Elements Strategy Initiative to Form Core Research Center

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present a coupled lattice Boltzmann method (LBM) to solve a set of model equations for electrokinetic flows in micro-/nano-channels. The model consists of the Poisson equation for the electrical potential, the Nernst-Planck equation for the ion concentration, and the Navier-Stokes equation for the flows of the electrolyte solution. In the proposed LBM, the electrochemical migration and the convection of the electrolyte solution contributing to the ion flux are incorporated into the collision operator, which maintains the locality of the algorithm inherent to the original LBM. Furthermore, the Neumann-type boundary condition at the solid/liquid interface is then correctly imposed. In order to validate the present LBM, we consider an electro-osmotic flow in a slit between two charged infinite parallel plates, and the results of LBM computation are compared to the analytical solutions. Good agreement is obtained in the parameter range considered herein, including the case in which the nonlinearity of the Poisson equation due to the large potential variation manifests itself. We also apply the method to a two-dimensional problem of a finite-length microchannel with an entry and an exit. The steady state, as well as the transient behavior, of the electro-osmotic flow induced in the microchannel is investigated. It is shown that, although no external pressure difference is imposed, the presence of the entry and exit results in the occurrence of the local pressure gradient that causes a flow resistance reducing the magnitude of the electro-osmotic flow. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.7
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