4.7 Article

Study on multicomponent pseudo-potential model with large density ratio and heat transfer

Journal

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2017.07.007

Keywords

Pseudo-potential model; Large density ratio; Spurious current; Thermal multiphase flow

Funding

  1. Open Fund of Science and Technology on Scramjet Laboratory [20140103006]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for Central Universities [HEUCFM170205]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Large density ratio multiphase flow is a persistent challenge within the field of computational fluid dynamics. This paper investigates improvements to the lattice Boltzmann based large density ratio multicomponent multiphase pseudo-potential model. The improvements include: the multiple-relaxation-time (MRT) collision operator; the exact difference method scheme; the Carnahan-Starling equation of state; and an addition of correction factor k to the equation of state. The improved model can be used for simulating large density ratio (0 (1000)) multiphase flow with small spurious current and better numerical stability. The smaller spurious current can be obtained by decreasing k value, and yet interface thickness increases. The density ratio is 1284 for k = 0.1 and the spurious current is reduced to 0.0069, which is much smaller than that of 0.033 in literature. The interfacial tension can be adjusted independently from density ratio by changing k value. A thermal multiphase flow model is developed based on the large density ratio pseudo-potential model. The model is validated by using static heat conduction and dynamic flow simulations. The result of the static heat conduction of the flat interface has smaller error with the theoretical solution than that of droplet. The result of thermocapillary migration is comparable with the theoretical prediction. Finally, the heat conduction melting is simulated by coupling the enthalpy-based method.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available