
[Sponsors] 
February 27, 2010, 10:21 
Looking for simple, robust interface capturing algorithm

#1 
New Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 7 
I'm building a 2D simulation algorithm for a twophase incompressible viscous fluid simulation (water and air). My requirements are:
Currently, I have a working implementation of the Hirt & Nichols SOLAVOF scheme [1], but it has two problems: (1) unacceptable levels of volume change; (2) "flotsam and jetsam" all over the place. I tried the piecewise linear Youngs scheme [2]. Since I could not access the original paper online, I used the description by Rudman [3] to implement it. It's screens full of code with conditionals and tangents and cotangents and angles; and I've got a bug somewhere. So I feel this is too complex for my needs. I also looked at the MAC (markerandcell) style methods. In particular, I implemented something similar to Foster and Fedkiw [4]. But even with 25 markers per cell, they sometimes all advect out of a fluid cell, resulting in gaps in the fluid volume. Maybe it's possible to apply some correction to marker positions to prevent this? I would like to try the SLIC scheme by Noh and Woodward [5], because it sounds pretty simple, but I can't find the paper online. I am fairly new to the field of CFD, and I've been at this for two weeks now. Does anyone know a way to fix one of the algorithms I tried, or a suggestion for different algorithm altogether? [1] Hirt and Nichols, 1979, "Volume of Fluid (VOF) methods for the dynamics of free boundaries" [2] Youngs, 1982, "Timedependent multimaterial flow with large fluid distortion" [3] Rudman, 1997, "Volumetracking methods for interfacial flow calculations" [4] Foster and Fedkiw, 2001, "Practical animation of liquids" [5] Noh and Woodward, 1976, "SLIC (simple line interface calculation)" Last edited by ThomasTC; February 27, 2010 at 10:53. 

February 17, 2012, 11:57 

#2 
Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 59
Rep Power: 6 
I know this post is two years old and you probably aren't around anymore, but did you make any progess?


February 17, 2012, 13:45 

#3 
New Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 7 
You're in luck; I was subscribed to email updates
The only progress I recall that's not in my original post is a hack to fix most of the problems with VOF. Details are in my blog post here: http://frozenfractal.com/blog/2010/3...oblemssolved/ Here is the relevant section of code: Code:
for (size_t y = 1; y < d_ny  1; ++y) { for (size_t x = 1; x < d_nx  1; ++x) { switch (d_types(x, y)) { case SurfaceLeft: if (isInterior(x  1, y)) { float move = min(1.0f  d_vof(x  1, y), d_vof(x, y)); d_vof(x, y) = move; d_vof(x  1, y) += move; if (d_vof(x, y) > 1.0f && isInterior(x + 1, y)) { d_vof(x + 1, y) += d_vof(x, y)  1.0f; d_vof(x, y) = 1.0f; } } break; case SurfaceRight: if (isInterior(x + 1, y)) { float move = min(1.0f  d_vof(x + 1, y), d_vof(x, y)); d_vof(x, y) = move; d_vof(x + 1, y) += move; if (d_vof(x, y) > 1.0f && isInterior(x  1, y)) { d_vof(x  1, y) += d_vof(x, y)  1.0f; d_vof(x, y) = 1.0f; } } break; case SurfaceBottom: if (isInterior(x, y  1)) { float move = min(1.0f  d_vof(x, y  1), d_vof(x, y)); d_vof(x, y) = move; d_vof(x, y  1) += move; if (d_vof(x, y) > 1.0f && isInterior(x, y + 1)) { d_vof(x, y + 1) += d_vof(x, y)  1.0f; d_vof(x, y) = 1.0f; } } break; case SurfaceTop: if (isInterior(x, y + 1)) { float move = min(1.0f  d_vof(x, y + 1), d_vof(x, y)); d_vof(x, y) = move; d_vof(x, y + 1) += move; if (d_vof(x, y) > 1.0f && isInterior(x, y  1)) { d_vof(x, y  1) += d_vof(x, y)  1.0f; d_vof(x, y) = 1.0f; } } break; default: break; } } } 

February 17, 2012, 16:45 

#4  
Senior Member
Arjun
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Nurenberg, Germany
Posts: 374
Rep Power: 10 
From your blog:
Quote:
There is a very easy fix to fluid loss. I recently was thinking about coupling VOF with immersed boundary and there this loss is significant so i had to think about this issue. For me I am lucky whenever I run into problems I usually come up with neat solutions. I hope my luck not run out soon. In this case the solution is this: At the start calculate the total volume of fluid. After every step calculate the fluid loss. You have to make up for this loss. what you are supposed to do is add the this much fluid to the system so that volume of this fluid remain constant. Question is how do you do this. Easiest solution is that count the cells where volume fraction is between 0 and 1 , I used 0.1 and 0.9 as limit. Now add the lost fluid equally among them. That is add equally to the interface. If your time step was small this loss is usually small and you are adding very small values to each cell but keeping total volume constant. 

February 17, 2012, 16:47 

#5 
New Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 7 
I think I actually tried that at some point, but it came with its own set of problems. Unfortunately, I can't remember what those were...


February 17, 2012, 17:10 

#6  
Senior Member
Arjun
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Nurenberg, Germany
Posts: 374
Rep Power: 10 
Quote:
I did work for me but let me know of problems, there might be something i missed. With small delta it the redistribution works out easily. 

February 17, 2012, 19:13 

#7 
Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 59
Rep Power: 6 
That sounds like the level set methods where they reinitialize the LS function to conserve mass at each time step.
Anyone have experience with combing AMR with these two phase flow problems. I fear I have to head down that path to get the results i'm looking for. 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Wind turbine simulation  Saturn  CFX  34  October 16, 2014 05:27 
VOF Interface Tracking Algorithm  CFDtoy  FLUENT  4  August 5, 2010 04:41 
RPM in Wind Turbine  Pankaj  CFX  9  November 23, 2009 05:05 
what is Interface tracking?  gholamghar  Main CFD Forum  1  March 18, 2009 06:58 
Replace periodic by inletoutlet pair  lego  CFX  3  November 5, 2002 21:09 