Table of Contents
Fetching ...

A robust computational framework for the mixture-energy-consistent six-equation two-phase model with instantaneous mechanical relaxation terms

Giuseppe Orlando, Ward Haegeman, Marica Pelanti, Marc Massot

Abstract

We present a robust computational framework for the numerical solution of a hyperbolic 6-equation single-velocity two-phase model. The model's main interest is that, when combined with instantaneous mechanical relaxation, it recovers the solution of the 5-equation model of Kapila. Several numerical methods based on this strategy have been developed over the years. However, neither the 5- nor 6-equation model admits a complete set of jump conditions because they involve non-conservative products. Different discretizations of these terms in the 6-equation model exist. The precise impact of these discretizations on the numerical solutions of the 5-equation model, in particular for shocks, is still an open question to which this work provides new insights. We consider the phasic total energies as prognostic variables to naturally enforce discrete conservation of total energy and compare the accuracy and robustness of different discretizations for the hyperbolic operator. Namely, we discuss the construction of an HLLC approximate Riemann solver in relation to jump conditions. We then compare an HLLC wave-propagation scheme which includes the non-conservative terms, with Rusanov and HLLC solvers for the conservative part in combination with suitable approaches for the non-conservative terms. We show that some approaches for the discretization of non-conservative terms fit within the framework of path-conservative schemes for hyperbolic problems. We then analyze the use of various numerical strategies on several relevant test cases, showing both the impact of the theoretical shortcomings of the models as well as the importance of the choice of a robust framework for the global numerical strategy.

A robust computational framework for the mixture-energy-consistent six-equation two-phase model with instantaneous mechanical relaxation terms

Abstract

We present a robust computational framework for the numerical solution of a hyperbolic 6-equation single-velocity two-phase model. The model's main interest is that, when combined with instantaneous mechanical relaxation, it recovers the solution of the 5-equation model of Kapila. Several numerical methods based on this strategy have been developed over the years. However, neither the 5- nor 6-equation model admits a complete set of jump conditions because they involve non-conservative products. Different discretizations of these terms in the 6-equation model exist. The precise impact of these discretizations on the numerical solutions of the 5-equation model, in particular for shocks, is still an open question to which this work provides new insights. We consider the phasic total energies as prognostic variables to naturally enforce discrete conservation of total energy and compare the accuracy and robustness of different discretizations for the hyperbolic operator. Namely, we discuss the construction of an HLLC approximate Riemann solver in relation to jump conditions. We then compare an HLLC wave-propagation scheme which includes the non-conservative terms, with Rusanov and HLLC solvers for the conservative part in combination with suitable approaches for the non-conservative terms. We show that some approaches for the discretization of non-conservative terms fit within the framework of path-conservative schemes for hyperbolic problems. We then analyze the use of various numerical strategies on several relevant test cases, showing both the impact of the theoretical shortcomings of the models as well as the importance of the choice of a robust framework for the global numerical strategy.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 20 sections, 87 equations, 14 figures, 4 tables.

Figures (14)

  • Figure 1: Sonic rarefaction test case with the coarse mesh, results at $t = T_{f}$. Top-left: volume fraction of phase $1$. Top-right: velocity. Bottom-left: pressure of phase $1$. Bottom-right: Pressure of phase $2$. Continuous black lines: HLLC-type wave-propagation scheme. Continuous blue lines: Rusanov flux in combination with BR approach \ref{['eq:fluxes_Orlando']}. Red dots: Rusanov flux in combination with BR approach \ref{['eq:fluxes_Tumolo']}. Green crosses: Rusanov flux in combination with the approach proposed in crouzet:2013. Yellow squares: HLLC flux in combination with BR approach \ref{['eq:fluxes_Orlando']}. Orange dots: HLLC flux in combination with BR approach \ref{['eq:fluxes_Tumolo']}. Blue diamonds: HLLC flux in combination with the approach proposed in crouzet:2013.
  • Figure 2: Sonic rarefaction test case with the fine mesh, results at $t = T_{f}$. Same description as Figure \ref{['fig:sonic_rarefaction']}.
  • Figure 3: Low-density flow test case with the coarse mesh, results at $t = T_{f}$. Top-left: volume fraction of phase $1$. Top-right: velocity. Bottom-left: mixture density. Bottom-right: mixture pressure. Continuous black lines: HLLC-type wave-propagation scheme. Continuous blue lines: Rusanov flux in combination with BR approach \ref{['eq:fluxes_Orlando']}. Red dots: Rusanov flux in combination with BR approach \ref{['eq:fluxes_Tumolo']}. Green crosses: Rusanov flux in combination with the approach proposed in crouzet:2013. Yellow squares: HLLC flux in combination with BR approach \ref{['eq:fluxes_Orlando']}. Orange dots: HLLC flux in combination with the BR approach \ref{['eq:fluxes_Tumolo']}.
  • Figure 4: Low-density flow test case with the fine mesh, results at $t = T_{f}$. Same description as Figure \ref{['fig:low_density']}.
  • Figure 5: Water-air shock tube test case with the coarse mesh, results at $t = T_{f}$. Top-left: volume fraction of phase $1$. Top-right: velocity. Bottom-left: Mixture density. Bottom-right: Mixture pressure. Continuous black lines: HLLC-type wave-propagation scheme. Blue diamonds: HLLC flux in combination with BR approach \ref{['eq:fluxes_Orlando']}. Red dots: HLLC flux in combination with BR approach \ref{['eq:fluxes_Tumolo']}.
  • ...and 9 more figures