Domain decomposition based coupling between the lattice Boltzmann method and traditional CFD methods—Part I: Formulation and application to the 2-D Burgers’ equation

Velivelli, Aditya C.; Bryden, Kenneth M.

doi:10.1016/j.advengsoft.2014.01.012

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is expected that the coupled method will further reduce the CPU time for problems with increasing fine grid block regions. It is also expected that parallelization of the algorithms will result in a more efficient coupled LBM-VSM solver relative to the multiblock VSM solver [19]. 39 Table 3.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Domain decomposition based coupling between the lattice Boltzmann method and traditional CFD methods – Part II: Numerical solution to the backward facing step flow

Velivelli

Bryden

2015

Advances in Engineering Software

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The lattice Boltzmann method (LBM) and traditional finite difference methods have separate strengths when solving the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations. The LBM is an explicit method with a highly local computational nature that uses floatingpoint operations that involve only local data and thereby enables easy cache optimization and parallelization. However, because the LBM is an explicit method, smaller grid spacing requires smaller numerical time steps during both transient and steady state computations. Traditional implicit finite difference methods can take larger time steps as they are not limited by the CFL condition, but only by the need for time accuracy during transient computations. To take advantage of the strengths of both methods, a multiple solver, multiple grid block approach was implemented and validated for the 2-D Burgers' equation in Part I of this work. Part II implements the multiple solver, multiple grid block approach for the 2-D backward step flow problem. The coupled LBM-VSM solver is found to be faster by a factor of 2.90 (2.87 and 2.93 for Re = 150 and Re = 500, respectively) on a single processor than the VSM for the 2-D backward step flow problem while maintaining similar accuracy. c

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Domain decomposition based coupling between the lattice Boltzmann method and traditional CFD methods – Part II: Numerical solution to the backward facing step flow

Velivelli

Bryden

2015

Advances in Engineering Software

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The LBM and the FVM solver can be combined together to solve the rigid body problem. Following this development, various other simulations were conducted utilizing this coupling method [ 4 , 21 – 23 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lattice Boltzmann Model of 3D Multiphase Flow in Artery Bifurcation Aneurysm Problem

Abas

Mokhtar

Ishak

et al. 2016

Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper simulates and predicts the laminar flow inside the 3D aneurysm geometry, since the hemodynamic situation in the blood vessels is difficult to determine and visualize using standard imaging techniques, for example, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Three different types of Lattice Boltzmann (LB) models are computed, namely, single relaxation time (SRT), multiple relaxation time (MRT), and regularized BGK models. The results obtained using these different versions of the LB-based code will then be validated with ANSYS FLUENT, a commercially available finite volume- (FV-) based CFD solver. The simulated flow profiles that include velocity, pressure, and wall shear stress (WSS) are then compared between the two solvers. The predicted outcomes show that all the LB models are comparable and in good agreement with the FVM solver for complex blood flow simulation. The findings also show minor differences in their WSS profiles. The performance of the parallel implementation for each solver is also included and discussed in this paper. In terms of parallelization, it was shown that LBM-based code performed better in terms of the computation time required.

show abstract

“…This makes the classical CFD methods more efficient. Differently from [9] here the DD strategy is able to deal with a dynamic change of the sub-domains topology, allowing a much more flexible tool for bodies moving freely inside the whole computational domain. This numerical feature is needed when the sub-domains, with different time-scale, modify.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic Domain Decomposition Strategy Coupling Lattice Boltzmann Methods With Finite Differences Approximations of the Navier-Stokes Equations to Study Bodies in Current

Colicchio

Lugni

Greco

et al. 2015

Volume 11: Prof. Robert F. Beck Honoring Symposium on Marine Hydrodynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Domain decomposition based coupling between the lattice Boltzmann method and traditional CFD methods—Part I: Formulation and application to the 2-D Burgers’ equation

Cited by 11 publications

References 10 publications

Domain decomposition based coupling between the lattice Boltzmann method and traditional CFD methods – Part II: Numerical solution to the backward facing step flow

Domain decomposition based coupling between the lattice Boltzmann method and traditional CFD methods – Part II: Numerical solution to the backward facing step flow

Lattice Boltzmann Model of 3D Multiphase Flow in Artery Bifurcation Aneurysm Problem

Dynamic Domain Decomposition Strategy Coupling Lattice Boltzmann Methods With Finite Differences Approximations of the Navier-Stokes Equations to Study Bodies in Current

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About