A comparative study of immersed boundary method and interpolated bounce-back scheme for no-slip boundary treatment in the lattice Boltzmann method: Part II, turbulent flows
A comparative study of immersed boundary method and interpolated bounce-back scheme for no-slip boundary treatment in the lattice Boltzmann method: Part II, turbulent flows
复制标题
格子玻尔兹曼法中无滑移边界处理的浸没边界法和插值反弹方案的比较研究：第二部分，湍流
DOI：
10.1016/j.compfluid.2019.104251
复制
发表时间：
2019
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Lian-Ping Wang
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Cheng Peng;Orl;o M.Ayala;Jorge César Brändle de Motta;Lian-Ping Wang
插值反弹格式和浸入边界法是格子Boltzmann方法中处理曲面无滑移边界的两种常用算法。虽然这些算法经常在涉及复杂几何形状的数值模拟中实现，例如颗粒负载流，但它们的性能很少在相同的上下文中对相同的局部量进行系统地比较。本文通过对四个二维和三维层流问题的理论分析和数值模拟，对几种常用和最先进的插值反弹格式和浸入边界方法进行了系统的比较研究。我们的分析表明，浸入边界法（IBM）通常会产生一阶精度时，正则化的δ函数插值速度从欧拉拉格朗日网格，并产生的边界力回到欧拉网格。这一顺序的准确性IBM观察到的本地速度和水动力/扭矩，显然不同于二阶精度有时声称在文献中。浸入边界法的另一个问题是扩散的流体-固体界面内的局部应力往往被显著低估。另一方面，内插反弹一般具有二阶精度的速度，水动力/扭矩，和局部应力场。内插反弹方案的主要缺点是当固体物体移动穿过网格线时，其计算的水动力/扭矩的波动水平较高。一般的指导方针也提供了必要的网格分辨率在这两种方法，以准确地模拟流过固体颗粒。
The interpolated bounce-back schemes and the immersed boundary method are the two most popular algorithms in treating a no-slip boundary on curved surfaces in the lattice Boltzmann method. While those algorithms are frequently implemented in the numerical simulations involving complex geometries, such as particle-laden flows, their performances are seldom compared systematically over the same local quantities within the same context. In this paper, we present a systematic comparative investigation on some frequently used and most state-of-the-art interpolated bounce-back schemes and immersed boundary methods, based on both theoretical analyses and numerical simulations of four selected 2D and 3D laminar flow problems. Our analyses show that immersed boundary methods (IBM) typically yield a first-order accuracy when the regularized delta-function is employed to interpolate velocity from the Eulerian to Lagrangian mesh, and the resulting boundary force back to the Eulerian mesh. This first order in accuracy for IBM is observed for both the local velocity and hydrodynamic force/torque, apparently different from the second-order accuracy sometime claimed in the literature. Another problem of immersed boundary methods is that the local stress within the diffused fluid-solid interface tends to be significantly underestimated. On the other hand, the interpolated bounce-back generally possesses a second-order accuracy for velocity, hydrodynamic force/torque, and local stress field. The main disadvantage of the interpolated bounce-back schemes is its higher level of fluctuations in the calculated hydrodynamic force/torque when a solid object moves across the grid lines. General guidelines are also provided for the necessary grid resolutions in the two approaches in order to accurately simulate flows over a solid particle.