A comparison of hyperbolic solvers II: ausm-type and Hybrid Lax-Wendroff-Lax-Friedrichs methods for two-phase flows

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Coelho,R. M. L.
Data de Publicação: 2010
Outros Autores: Lage,P. L. C., Silva Telles,A.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-66322010000100014
Resumo: Riemann-solver based schemes are difficult and sometimes impossible to be applied for complex flows due to the required average state. Other methods that do not use Riemann-solvers are best suited for such cases. Among them, AUSM+, AUSMDV and the recently proposed Hybrid Lax-Friedrichs-Lax-Wendroff (HLFW) have been extended to two-phase flows. The eigenstructure of the two-fluid model is complex due to the phase interactions, leading to numerous numerical difficulties. One of them is the well-posedness of the equation system because it may lose hyperbolicity. Therefore, the methods that are not based on the wave structure and that are not TVNI could lead to strong oscillations. The common strategy to handle this problem is the adoption of a pressure correction due to interfacial effects. In this work, this procedure was applied to HLFW and AUSM-type methods and their results analyzed. The AUSM+ and AUSMDV were extended to achieve second-order using the MUSCL strategy for which a conservative and a non-conservative formulation were tested. Additionally, several AUSMDV weighting functions were compared. The first and second-order AUSM-type and HLFW methods were compared for the solution of the water faucet and the shock tube benchmark problems. The pressure correction strategy was efficient to ensure hyperbolicity, but numerical diffusion increased. The MUSCL AUSMDV and HLFW methods with pressure correction strategy were, on average, the best of the analyzed methods for these test problems. The HLFW was more stable than the other methods when the pressure correction was considered.
id ABEQ-1_440ebbb8e67057ea196c1459b074eaef
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0104-66322010000100014
network_acronym_str ABEQ-1
network_name_str Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering
repository_id_str
spelling A comparison of hyperbolic solvers II: ausm-type and Hybrid Lax-Wendroff-Lax-Friedrichs methods for two-phase flowsHyperbolic conservation lawsAUSM+AUMSDVHybrid schemesTwo-phase flowTwo-fluid modelRiemann-solver based schemes are difficult and sometimes impossible to be applied for complex flows due to the required average state. Other methods that do not use Riemann-solvers are best suited for such cases. Among them, AUSM+, AUSMDV and the recently proposed Hybrid Lax-Friedrichs-Lax-Wendroff (HLFW) have been extended to two-phase flows. The eigenstructure of the two-fluid model is complex due to the phase interactions, leading to numerous numerical difficulties. One of them is the well-posedness of the equation system because it may lose hyperbolicity. Therefore, the methods that are not based on the wave structure and that are not TVNI could lead to strong oscillations. The common strategy to handle this problem is the adoption of a pressure correction due to interfacial effects. In this work, this procedure was applied to HLFW and AUSM-type methods and their results analyzed. The AUSM+ and AUSMDV were extended to achieve second-order using the MUSCL strategy for which a conservative and a non-conservative formulation were tested. Additionally, several AUSMDV weighting functions were compared. The first and second-order AUSM-type and HLFW methods were compared for the solution of the water faucet and the shock tube benchmark problems. The pressure correction strategy was efficient to ensure hyperbolicity, but numerical diffusion increased. The MUSCL AUSMDV and HLFW methods with pressure correction strategy were, on average, the best of the analyzed methods for these test problems. The HLFW was more stable than the other methods when the pressure correction was considered.Brazilian Society of Chemical Engineering2010-03-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-66322010000100014Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering v.27 n.1 2010reponame:Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineeringinstname:Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Química (ABEQ)instacron:ABEQ10.1590/S0104-66322010000100014info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCoelho,R. M. L.Lage,P. L. C.Silva Telles,A.eng2010-04-15T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0104-66322010000100014Revistahttps://www.scielo.br/j/bjce/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phprgiudici@usp.br||rgiudici@usp.br1678-43830104-6632opendoar:2010-04-15T00:00Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering - Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Química (ABEQ)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv A comparison of hyperbolic solvers II: ausm-type and Hybrid Lax-Wendroff-Lax-Friedrichs methods for two-phase flows
title A comparison of hyperbolic solvers II: ausm-type and Hybrid Lax-Wendroff-Lax-Friedrichs methods for two-phase flows
spellingShingle A comparison of hyperbolic solvers II: ausm-type and Hybrid Lax-Wendroff-Lax-Friedrichs methods for two-phase flows
Coelho,R. M. L.
Hyperbolic conservation laws
AUSM+
AUMSDV
Hybrid schemes
Two-phase flow
Two-fluid model
title_short A comparison of hyperbolic solvers II: ausm-type and Hybrid Lax-Wendroff-Lax-Friedrichs methods for two-phase flows
title_full A comparison of hyperbolic solvers II: ausm-type and Hybrid Lax-Wendroff-Lax-Friedrichs methods for two-phase flows
title_fullStr A comparison of hyperbolic solvers II: ausm-type and Hybrid Lax-Wendroff-Lax-Friedrichs methods for two-phase flows
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of hyperbolic solvers II: ausm-type and Hybrid Lax-Wendroff-Lax-Friedrichs methods for two-phase flows
title_sort A comparison of hyperbolic solvers II: ausm-type and Hybrid Lax-Wendroff-Lax-Friedrichs methods for two-phase flows
author Coelho,R. M. L.
author_facet Coelho,R. M. L.
Lage,P. L. C.
Silva Telles,A.
author_role author
author2 Lage,P. L. C.
Silva Telles,A.
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Coelho,R. M. L.
Lage,P. L. C.
Silva Telles,A.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Hyperbolic conservation laws
AUSM+
AUMSDV
Hybrid schemes
Two-phase flow
Two-fluid model
topic Hyperbolic conservation laws
AUSM+
AUMSDV
Hybrid schemes
Two-phase flow
Two-fluid model
description Riemann-solver based schemes are difficult and sometimes impossible to be applied for complex flows due to the required average state. Other methods that do not use Riemann-solvers are best suited for such cases. Among them, AUSM+, AUSMDV and the recently proposed Hybrid Lax-Friedrichs-Lax-Wendroff (HLFW) have been extended to two-phase flows. The eigenstructure of the two-fluid model is complex due to the phase interactions, leading to numerous numerical difficulties. One of them is the well-posedness of the equation system because it may lose hyperbolicity. Therefore, the methods that are not based on the wave structure and that are not TVNI could lead to strong oscillations. The common strategy to handle this problem is the adoption of a pressure correction due to interfacial effects. In this work, this procedure was applied to HLFW and AUSM-type methods and their results analyzed. The AUSM+ and AUSMDV were extended to achieve second-order using the MUSCL strategy for which a conservative and a non-conservative formulation were tested. Additionally, several AUSMDV weighting functions were compared. The first and second-order AUSM-type and HLFW methods were compared for the solution of the water faucet and the shock tube benchmark problems. The pressure correction strategy was efficient to ensure hyperbolicity, but numerical diffusion increased. The MUSCL AUSMDV and HLFW methods with pressure correction strategy were, on average, the best of the analyzed methods for these test problems. The HLFW was more stable than the other methods when the pressure correction was considered.
publishDate 2010
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2010-03-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-66322010000100014
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-66322010000100014
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S0104-66322010000100014
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Society of Chemical Engineering
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Society of Chemical Engineering
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering v.27 n.1 2010
reponame:Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering
instname:Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Química (ABEQ)
instacron:ABEQ
instname_str Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Química (ABEQ)
instacron_str ABEQ
institution ABEQ
reponame_str Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering
collection Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering - Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Química (ABEQ)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv rgiudici@usp.br||rgiudici@usp.br
_version_ 1754213173097922560