|
From: | Georg Rempfer |
Subject: | Re: [ESPResSo-users] No conservation of momentum/mass in LBM ?? |
Date: | Wed, 16 Mar 2016 11:26:21 +0100 |
Now with attachment :)
Am 15/03/16 um 14:07 schrieb Ulf D Schiller:
> Did you check the flow rates directly, i.e., the momentum flux per plane? Your argument seems correct, so I can only guess that there's some
> flaw in the calculation of the mean velocity. I think there's an _expression_ for the flux in rectangular channels that one could use.
>
> Best,
> Ulf
>
> Sent from a mobile device.
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: "Wink, Markus" <address@hidden>
> Date: 3/15/2016 8:47 AM (GMT-05:00)
> To: 'Ivan Cimrak' <address@hidden>, address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [ESPResSo-users] No conservation of momentum/mass in LBM ??
>
> Hi Ivan, Hi Florian,
>
>
>
>>/How did you compute the expected maximum velocity? As far as I know, the poisseuille flow has an exact _expression_ for the velocity in the case
> of channel with circular cross section, and you have a rectangular one.///
>
> / /
>
> I know the velocity of the rhomboid. Thus I know the mean velocity of the fluid (assuming it is incompressible). I took that for calculating the
> Reynoldsnumber, pressure gradient and theoretical velocity profile (using the _expression_ in the book “Viscous Fluid Flow” of Frank M. White).
>
>
>
> /> //The boundaries are momentum sinks. (Florian)/
>
> /> Now I read the comment of Florian -//does that mean that amount of fluid is decreasing when no-slip is prescribed?/
>
> I still don’t get it. That the boundaries are momentum sinks, I agree. Due to the present of the walls and the “friction” of the fluid there, I
> achieve the poiseuille profile. But I still hold the opinion, that the mean velocity of the fluid should be the same.
> Imagine the following physical experiment: you have a syringe pump set up with a constant flow rate Q0 connected to a rectangular channel having
> a cross section A=w*h. The fluid in the channel then has a mean velocity of v_mean=Q/A. Assuming an incompressible medium, this means the
> velocity should be the same at every slice normal the direction of transport.
> In my simulation, the mean velocity should be velocity v0 of the rhomboid.
>
> So I still don’t get the deviation to the theoretical value…
>
> Greetings Markus
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Von:*espressomd-users-bounces+markus.wink=address@hidden
> [mailto:espressomd-users-bounces+markus.wink=address@hidden] *Im Auftrag von *Ivan Cimrak
> *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 15. März 2016 13:22
> *An:* address@hidden
> *Betreff:* Re: [ESPResSo-users] No conservation of momentum/mass in LBM ??
>
>
>
> Hi Markus,
>
>
>
> Hello Everybody,
>
>
>
> so far, in the LBM scheme only the body force is implemented and no velocity/pressure boundary condition. So I was thinking on a way of
> mimicking a “velocity boundary” condition without changing the source code. I am aware that one should, as a proper approach, using Zou/He
> boundary conditions and adjusting the distribution functions according to the boundary conditions.
>
>
>
> For that I have constructed a channel with rectangular cross section and put the fluid inside. Furthermore, two rhomboids where put inside,
> one at the inlet of the channel, one at the outlet. The cross section of the two rhomboids is equal to the cross section of the channel,
> furthermore they have a constant velocity v0.
>
> My idea was, that, since the no-slip boundary condition is implemented, I force the fluid nodes adjacent to the rhomboids to have a constant
> velocity, thus achieving constant velocity inlet/outlet condition.
>
>
>
> As a result I achieve a poiseuille profile in the middle of the channel (fully developed flow after inlet/outlet effects). The qualitative
> pressure gradient looks proper, too.
>
> Nevertheless, the maximum velocity is not the same as I expected (factor 3 to the expected one).
>
> How did you compute the expected maximum velocity? As far as I know, the poisseuille flow has an exact _expression_ for the velocity in the case
> of channel with circular cross section, and you have a rectangular one.
>
>
> I have checked the mean velocity. I would expect, that the mean velocity of the fluid should be the velocity v0 of the rhomboid (due to
> mass/momentum conservation), I get less (10 %).
>
> This is strange. The amount of fluid at the inlet (integral of velocity over the inlet surface, in this case is the velocity constant over the
> inlet surface) should be the same as integral over the middle cross section, as well as integral over the outlet surface.... Supposing you
> computed the average velocity as sum of velocities over the LB nodes at middle cross section divided by number of these nodes, you should have
> obtained the velocity at the inlet...
>
> Now I read the comment of Florian - does that mean that amount of fluid is decreasing when no-slip is prescribed?
>
> Ivan
>
>
>
> What is wrong with my idea stated here? Obviously, something is not correct, but I have no idea, what the reason for that is. Where does the
> momentum vanish?
>
>
>
> Does anybody have an idea?
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Markus
>
>
>
>
>
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |