- Journal Home
- Volume 36 - 2024
- Volume 35 - 2024
- Volume 34 - 2023
- Volume 33 - 2023
- Volume 32 - 2022
- Volume 31 - 2022
- Volume 30 - 2021
- Volume 29 - 2021
- Volume 28 - 2020
- Volume 27 - 2020
- Volume 26 - 2019
- Volume 25 - 2019
- Volume 24 - 2018
- Volume 23 - 2018
- Volume 22 - 2017
- Volume 21 - 2017
- Volume 20 - 2016
- Volume 19 - 2016
- Volume 18 - 2015
- Volume 17 - 2015
- Volume 16 - 2014
- Volume 15 - 2014
- Volume 14 - 2013
- Volume 13 - 2013
- Volume 12 - 2012
- Volume 11 - 2012
- Volume 10 - 2011
- Volume 9 - 2011
- Volume 8 - 2010
- Volume 7 - 2010
- Volume 6 - 2009
- Volume 5 - 2009
- Volume 4 - 2008
- Volume 3 - 2008
- Volume 2 - 2007
- Volume 1 - 2006
Commun. Comput. Phys., 35 (2024), pp. 859-904.
Published online: 2024-05
Cited by
- BibTex
- RIS
- TXT
In recent years, phase-field-based models for multiphase flows have gained significant popularity, particularly within the lattice Boltzmann (LB) community. These models typically use two lattice Boltzmann equations (LBEs), one for interface tracking and the other for solving hydrodynamic properties. However, for the purposes of this paper, we focus only on the LB model for hydrodynamics. Our goal is to undertake a comparative investigation into the differences between three classical hydrodynamic LB models proposed by Lee et al. [1], Liang et al. [2] and Fakhari et al. [3]. The interface-tracking equation used in this study is based on the conservative phase-field model. We provide a detailed derivation of the governing equations in each model using the Chapman-Enskog analysis. Additionally, three discretization methods for the interaction forces are introduced, and a modified method for the gradient term is proposed based on the nonequilibrium distribution method. The accuracy of three LB models in combination with four discretization methods is examined in this study. Based on the results, it appears that different combinations of models and methods are appropriate for different types of problems. However, some suggestions for the selection of hydrodynamic models and discrete methods for the gradient term are provided in this paper.
}, issn = {1991-7120}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.4208/cicp.RE-2023-0066}, url = {http://global-sci.org/intro/article_detail/cicp/23084.html} }In recent years, phase-field-based models for multiphase flows have gained significant popularity, particularly within the lattice Boltzmann (LB) community. These models typically use two lattice Boltzmann equations (LBEs), one for interface tracking and the other for solving hydrodynamic properties. However, for the purposes of this paper, we focus only on the LB model for hydrodynamics. Our goal is to undertake a comparative investigation into the differences between three classical hydrodynamic LB models proposed by Lee et al. [1], Liang et al. [2] and Fakhari et al. [3]. The interface-tracking equation used in this study is based on the conservative phase-field model. We provide a detailed derivation of the governing equations in each model using the Chapman-Enskog analysis. Additionally, three discretization methods for the interaction forces are introduced, and a modified method for the gradient term is proposed based on the nonequilibrium distribution method. The accuracy of three LB models in combination with four discretization methods is examined in this study. Based on the results, it appears that different combinations of models and methods are appropriate for different types of problems. However, some suggestions for the selection of hydrodynamic models and discrete methods for the gradient term are provided in this paper.