Conference proceeding
Efficiency of Diffuse and Sharp Interface Strongly Coupled Fluid Structure Interaction Methods in Fixed and Moving Boundaries
Volume 1A, Symposia: Turbomachinery Flow Simulation and Optimization; Applications in CFD; Bio-Inspired and Bio-Medical Fluid Mechanics; CFD Verification and Validation; Development and Applications of Immersed Boundary Methods; DNS, LES and Hybrid RANS/LES Methods; Fluid Machinery; Fluid-Structure Interaction and Flow-Induced Noise in Industrial Applications; Flow Applications in Aerospace; Active Fluid Dynamics and Flow Control — Theory, Experiments and Implementation, Vol.1
ASME 2016 Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting collocated with the ASME 2016 Heat Transfer Summer Conference and the ASME 2016 14th International Conference on Nanochannels, Microchannels, and Minichannels, Washington, DC, USA, Jul. 10 - 14, 2016
07/10/2016
DOI: 10.1115/FEDSM2016-7668
Abstract
Efficiency of different types of immersed boundary methods in the fluid structure interaction (FSI) analysis is studied for different cases. Two different formulations of smoothed profile method (SPM) [1, 2] as diffuse interface approaches are compared with the ghost fluid method (GFM) [3, 4] as sharp interface method (SIM) [5]. First, the original SPM which has two pressure Poisson equations (SPM2P) is modified to a novel formulation for SPM with only one pressure Poisson equation (SPM1P) and then validated. The efficiency study is performed for SPM1P, SPM2P and SIM. The results show that when the solid object is fixed, the explicit solution of SIM is faster than the two SPMs. However, when the solid is moving and strongly coupled formulations is used, SPM1P will be the fastest method. It is shown that the efficiency of the strongly coupled formulations depends on the number of subiterations required in each time step to reach the converged implicit solution. SPM1P and SPM2P need less number of subiterations in comparison with SIM and they are faster. When the added mass effect is high, the efficiency of SPM becomes more noticeable as the required number of subiterations is significantly less in SPM. Finally, SPM1P is faster than SPM2P in all cases however, the accuracy of SPM2P in predicting the flow pattern is better than SPM1P.
Details
- Title: Subtitle
- Efficiency of Diffuse and Sharp Interface Strongly Coupled Fluid Structure Interaction Methods in Fixed and Moving Boundaries
- Creators
- Fazlolah Mohaghegh - University of IowaH. S Udaykumar - University of Iowa
- Resource Type
- Conference proceeding
- Publication Details
- Volume 1A, Symposia: Turbomachinery Flow Simulation and Optimization; Applications in CFD; Bio-Inspired and Bio-Medical Fluid Mechanics; CFD Verification and Validation; Development and Applications of Immersed Boundary Methods; DNS, LES and Hybrid RANS/LES Methods; Fluid Machinery; Fluid-Structure Interaction and Flow-Induced Noise in Industrial Applications; Flow Applications in Aerospace; Active Fluid Dynamics and Flow Control — Theory, Experiments and Implementation, Vol.1
- Conference
- ASME 2016 Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting collocated with the ASME 2016 Heat Transfer Summer Conference and the ASME 2016 14th International Conference on Nanochannels, Microchannels, and Minichannels, Washington, DC, USA, Jul. 10 - 14, 2016
- DOI
- 10.1115/FEDSM2016-7668
- ISSN
- 0888-8116
- Publisher
- American Society of Mechanical Engineers
- Language
- English
- Date published
- 07/10/2016
- Academic Unit
- Injury Prevention Research Center; Mechanical Engineering
- Record Identifier
- 9984196553502771
Metrics
53 Record Views