Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T14:24:27.790Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A High Order Sharp-Interface Method with Local Time Stepping for Compressible Multiphase Flows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 August 2015

Angela Ferrari ,
Claus-Dieter Munz  and
Bernhard Weigand
Angela Ferrari*
Affiliation:
Institute of Aerodynamics and Gasdynamics, University of Stuttgart, Pfaffenwaldring 21, D-70569 Stuttgart, Germany
Claus-Dieter Munz*
Affiliation:
Institute of Aerodynamics and Gasdynamics, University of Stuttgart, Pfaffenwaldring 21, D-70569 Stuttgart, Germany
Bernhard Weigand*
Affiliation:
Institute of Aerospace Thermodynamics, University of Stuttgart, Pfaffenwaldring 31, D-70569 Stuttgart, Germany
*
Corresponding author.Email:[email protected]
Email:[email protected]
Email:[email protected]
Get access

Abstract

In this paper, a new sharp-interface approach to simulate compressible multiphase flows is proposed. The new scheme consists of a high order WENO finite volume scheme for solving the Euler equations coupled with a high order path-conservative discontinuous Galerkin finite element scheme to evolve an indicator function that tracks the material interface. At the interface our method applies ghost cells to compute the numerical flux, as the ghost fluid method. However, unlike the original ghost fluid scheme of Fedkiw et al. [15], the state of the ghost fluid is derived from an approximate-state Riemann solver, similar to the approach proposed in [25], but based on a much simpler formulation. Our formulation leads only to one single scalar nonlinear algebraic equation that has to be solved at the interface, instead of the system used in [25]. Away from the interface, we use the new general Osher-type flux recently proposed by Dumbser and Toro [13], which is a simple but complete Riemann solver, applicable to general hyperbolic conservation laws. The time integration is performed using a fully-discrete one-step scheme, based on the approaches recently proposed in [5,7]. This allows us to evolve the system also with time-accurate local time stepping. Due to the sub-cell resolution and the subsequent more restrictive time-step constraint of the DG scheme, a local evolution for the indicator function is applied, which is matched with the finite volume scheme for the solution of the Euler equations that runs with a larger time step. The use of a locally optimal time step avoids the introduction of excessive numerical diffusion in the finite volume scheme. Two different fluids have been used, namely an ideal gas and a weakly compressible fluid modeled by the Tait equation. Several tests have been computed to assess the accuracy and the performance of the new high order scheme. A verification of our algorithm has been carefully carried out using exact solutions as well as a comparison with other numerical reference solutions. The material interface is resolved sharply and accurately without spurious oscillations in the pressure field.

Keywords

76T1065M0865M60Sharp interface capturingcompressible multiphase flowsone-step time-integrationtime-accurate local time steppingmodified ghost fluid methodWENO schemesdiscontinuous Galerkin methods
Type
Research Article
Information
Communications in Computational Physics , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , January 2011 , pp. 205 - 230
Copyright
Copyright © Global Science Press Limited 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1]Abgrall, R., How to prevent pressure oscillations in multicomponent flow calculations: a quasi conservative approach, J. Comput. Phys., 125 (1996), 150–160.Google Scholar
[2]Abgrall, R. and Karni, S., Computations of compressible multifluids, J. Comput. Phys., 169 (2001), 594–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Chang, C.-H. and Liou, M.-S., A robust and accurate approach to computing compressible multiphase flow: stratified flow model and AUSM+$$–up scheme, J. Comput. Phys., 225 (2007), 840–873.Google Scholar
[4]Cockburn, B. and Shu, C. W., The Runge-Kutta discontinuous Galerkin method for conservation laws V: multidimensional systems, J. Comput. Phys., 141 (1998), 199–224.Google Scholar
[5] M.Dumbser, Balsara, D., Toro, E. F. and Munz, C. D., A unified framework for the construction of one-step finite-volume and discontinuous Galerkin schemes on unstructured meshes, J. Comput. Phys., 227 (2008), 8209–8253.Google Scholar
[6]Dumbser, M., Castro, M., Parés, C. and Toro, E. F., ADER schemes on unstructured meshes for nonconservative hyperbolic systems: applications to geophysical flows, Comput. Fluids., 38 (2009), 1731–1748.Google Scholar
[7]Dumbser, M., Enaux, C. and Toro, E. F., Finite volume schemes of very high order of accuracy for stiff hyperbolic balance laws, J. Comput. Phys., 227 (2008), 3971–4001.Google Scholar
[8]Dumbser, M., Hidalgo, A., Castro, M., Parés, C. and Toro, E. F., FORCE schemes on unstructured meshes II: non-conservative hyperbolic systems, Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng., 199 (2010), 625–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Dumbser, M. and Käser, M., Arbitrary high order non–oscillatory finite volume schemes on unstructured meshes for linear hyperbolic systems, J. Comput. Phys., 221 (2007), 693–723.Google Scholar
[10]Dumbser, M., Käser, M., Titarev, V. A. and Toro, E. F., Quadrature-free non-oscillatory finite volume schemes on unstructured meshes for nonlinear hyperbolic systems, J. Comput. Phys., 226 (2007), 204–243.Google Scholar
[11]Dumbser, M., Käser, M. and Toro, E. F., An arbitrary high order discontinuous Galerkin method for elastic waves on unstructured meshes V: local time stepping and p-adaptivity, Geophys. J. Int., 171 (2007), 695–717.Google Scholar
[12]Dumbser, M. and Munz, C.-D., Building blocks for arbitrary high order discontinuous Galerkin schemes, J. Sci. Comput., 27 (2006), 215–230.Google Scholar
[13]Dumbser, M. and Toro, E. F., A simple extension of the Osher Riemann solver to nonconservative hyperbolic systems, J. Sci. Comp., in press. DOI: 10.1007/s10915-010-9400-3Google Scholar
[14]Fedkiw, R. P., Aslam, T. and Xu, S., The ghost fluid method for deflagration and detonation discontinuities, J. Comput. Phys., 154 (1999), 393–427.Google Scholar
[15]Fedkiw, R., Aslam, T., Merriman, B. and Osher, S., A Non-oscillatory Eulerian approach to interfaces in multimaterial flows (the ghost fluid method), J. Comput. Phys., 152 (1999), 457–492.Google Scholar
[16]Ferrari, A., Dumbser, M., Toro, E. F. and Armanini, A., A new stable version of the SPH method in Lagrangian coordinates, Comm. Comput. Phys., 4(2) (2008), 378–404.Google Scholar
[17]Ferrari, A., Dumbser, M., Toro, E. F. and Armanini, A., A new 3D parallel SPH scheme for free surface flows, Comput. Fluids., 38 (2009), 1203–1217.Google Scholar
[18]Gassner, G., Lörcher, F. and Munz, C. D., A discontinuous Galerkin scheme based on a spacetime expansion II: viscous flow equations in multi dimensions, J. Sci. Comput., 34 (2008), 260–286.Google Scholar
[19]Harten, A., Engquist, B., Osher, S. and Chakravarthy, S., Uniformly high order essentially non-oscillatory schemes, III, J. Comput. Phys., 71 (1987), 231–303.Google Scholar
[20]Hirt, C. W. and Nichols, B. D., Volume of fluid (VOF) method for dynamics of free boundaries, J. Comput. Phys., 39 (1981), 201–225.Google Scholar
[21]Hu, X. Y., Adams, N. A. and Iaccarino, G., On the HLLC Riemann solver for interface interaction in compressible multi-fluid flow, J. Comput. Phys., 228 (2009), 6572–6589.Google Scholar
[22]Jenny, P. and Müller, B. and Thomann, H., Correction of conservative Euler solvers for gas mixtures, J. Comput. Phys., 132 (1997), 91–107.Google Scholar
[23]Jiang, G. S. and Shu, C. W., Efficient implementation of weighted ENO schemes, J. Comput. Phys., 126 (1996), 202–228.Google Scholar
[24]Liou, M.-S., A sequel to AUSM: AUSM+ˆ, J. Comput. Phys., 129 (1996), 364–382.Google Scholar
[25]Liu, T. G., Khoo, B. C. and Yeo, K. S., Ghost fluid method for strong shock impacting on material interface, J. Comput. Phys., 190 (2003), 651–681.Google Scholar
[26]Marchandise, E., Remacle, J.-F. and Chevaugeon, N., A quadrature-free discontinuous Galerkin method for the level set equation, J. Comput. Phys., 212 (2006), 338–357.Google Scholar
[27]Mulder, W., Osher, S. and Sethian, J. A., Computing interface motion in compressible gas dynamics, J. Comput. Phys., 100 (1992), 209–228.Google Scholar
[28]Munz, C.-D., Dumbser, M. and Roller, S., Linearized acoustic perturbation equations for low Mach number flow with variable density and temperature, J. Comput. Phys., 224 (2007), 352–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[29]Osher, S. and Solomon, F., Upwind differencescheme for hyperbolic conservation laws, Math. Comput., 38 (1982), 339–374.Google Scholar
[30]Parés, C., Numerical methods for nonconservative hyperbolic systems: a theoretical framework, SIAM J. Num. Anal., 44 (2006), 300–321.Google Scholar
[31]Qiu, J., Dumbser, M. and Shu, C. W., The discontinuous Galerkin method with Lax-Wendroff type time discretizations, Comput. Method. Appl. Math., 194 (2005), 4528–4543.Google Scholar
[32]Rhebergen, S., Bokhove, O. and van der Vegt, J. J. W., Discontinuous Galerkin finite element methods for hyperbolic nonconservative partial differential equations, J. Comput. Phys., 227 (2008), 1887–1922.Google Scholar
[33]Sussman, M., Smereka, P. and Osher, S., A level set approach for computing solutions to incompressible two-phase flow, J. Comput. Phys., 114 (1994), 146–159.Google Scholar
[34]Titarev, V. A. and Toro, E. F., ADER schemes for three-dimensional nonlinear hyperbolic systems, J. Comput. Phys., 204 (2005), 715–736.Google Scholar
[35]Toro, E. F., Riemann Solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics: A Practical Introduction, 2nd. ed., Springer, 1999.Google Scholar
[36]Toro, E. F. and Titarev, V. A., Solution of the generalized Riemann problem for advection-reaction equations, Proc. Roy. Soc. London. A., 458 (2002), 271–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[37]Toro, E. F. and Titarev, V. A., Derivative Riemann solvers for systems of conservation laws and ADER methods, J. Comput. Phys., 212 (2006), 150–165.Google Scholar
[38]Woodward, P. and Colella, P., The numerical simulation of two-dimensional fluid flow with strong shocks, J. Comput. Phys., 54 (1984), 115–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar