scholarly journals Improved color-gradient method for lattice Boltzmann modeling of two-phase flows

2021 ◽  
Vol 33 (8) ◽  
pp. 082110
Author(s):  
T. Lafarge ◽  
P. Boivin ◽  
N. Odier ◽  
B. Cuenot
Keyword(s):  
Gradient Method ◽  
Lattice Boltzmann ◽  
Two Phase Flows ◽  
Two Phase ◽  
Color Gradient ◽  
Lattice Boltzmann Modeling

scholarly journals Phase-field-based lattice Boltzmann modeling of large-density-ratio two-phase flows

2018 ◽  
Vol 97 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hong Liang ◽  
Jiangrong Xu ◽  
Jiangxing Chen ◽  
Huili Wang ◽  
Zhenhua Chai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Field ◽  
Lattice Boltzmann ◽  
Density Ratio ◽  
Two Phase Flows ◽  
Two Phase ◽  
Large Density ◽  
Large Density Ratio ◽  
Lattice Boltzmann Modeling

Study on C–S and P–R EOS in pseudo-potential lattice Boltzmann model for two-phase flows

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (09) ◽  
pp. 1750120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yong Peng ◽  
Yun Fei Mao ◽  
Bo Wang ◽  
Bo Xie
Keyword(s):  
Surface Tension ◽  
Lattice Boltzmann ◽  
Equations Of State ◽  
Density Ratio ◽  
Maximum Density ◽  
Lattice Boltzmann Model ◽  
Two Phase Flows ◽  
Two Phase ◽  
Spurious Currents ◽  
Pseudo Potential

Equations of State (EOS) is crucial in simulating multiphase flows by the pseudo-potential lattice Boltzmann method (LBM). In the present study, the Peng and Robinson (P–R) and Carnahan and Starling (C–S) EOS in the pseudo-potential LBM with Exact Difference Method (EDM) scheme for two-phase flows have been compared. Both of P–R and C–S EOS have been used to study the two-phase separation, surface tension, the maximum two-phase density ratio and spurious currents. The study shows that both of P–R and C–S EOS agree with the analytical solutions although P–R EOS may perform better. The prediction of liquid phase by P–R EOS is more accurate than that of air phase and the contrary is true for C–S EOS. Predictions by both of EOS conform with the Laplace’s law. Besides, adjustment of surface tension is achieved by adjusting [Formula: see text]. The P–R EOS can achieve larger maximum density ratio than C–S EOS under the same [Formula: see text]. Besides, no matter the C–S EOS or the P–R EOS, if [Formula: see text] tends to 0.5, the computation is prone to numerical instability. The maximum spurious current for P–R is larger than that of C–S. The multiple-relaxation-time LBM still can improve obviously the numerical stability and can achieve larger maximum density ratio.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document