DOE OSTI2020
Numerical difficulties, notably the non-monotonic behavior of the Wood speed of sound and the volume fraction positivity, associated with the reduced five-equation two-phase flow model of Kapila et al. (2001) [A.K. Kapila, R. Menikoff, J.B. Bdzil, S.F. Son, D.S. Stewart, 2001. Two-phase modeling of deflagration-to-detonation transition in granular materials: reduced equations, Physics of Fluids 13(10), 3002–3024] have been resolved in the past through the introduction of a frozen speed of sound and an algebraic approach for mechanical relaxation afforded by a pressure non-equilibrium six-equation model proposed by [R. Saurel, F. Petitpas, R.A. Berry, 2009. Simple and efficient relaxation methods for interfaces separating compressible fluids, cavitating flows and shocks in multiphase mixture, J. Comput. Phys. 228, 1678–1712]. By contrast, it is explored and demonstrated in this work that these difficulties can in fact still be resolved within the numerical scheme for solving the reduced five-equation model by numerically replacing the Wood speed of sound for the estimates of wave speeds in the approximate Riemann solver HLLC with the monotonic mixture speed of sound for a transport five-equation model. For shock interface (artificial mixture separating pure or nearly pure fluids) interaction problems, with the apparent advantage of monotonic behavior of the speed of sound in the interface, the effect of the numerical replacement is also confined to the interface. Differences other than the behavior of the speed of sound within the interface in the solutions due to the replacement diminish with increasing resolution when reasonable solution can be obtained with Wood speed of sound. For cavitating/expansion problems in physical fluid mixture, it is pointed out and explained why acoustics in the numerical solutions still propagate at the Wood speed of sound (therefore consistent with the reduced five-equation model) even though in some cases a much higher speed of sound like the numerical replacement above for solving the reduced five-equation model or the frozen speed of sound for solving a six-equation model is used for the estimates of wave speeds in the HLLC scheme. A variant of the five-equation two-phase flow model by Saurel et al. (2008) [R. Saurel, F. Petitpas, R. Abgrall, 2008. Modelling phase transition in metastable liquids: application to cavitating and flashing flows, J. Fluid Mech. 607, 313–350] is then constructed for liquid-vapor phase transition in cavitating flows. The relaxation toward thermo-chemical equilibrium during phase transition is achieved by solving a simple system of algebraic equations for the equilibrium state variables for better efficiency, following Pelanti and Shyue (2014) [M. Pelanti, K.-M. Shyue, 2014. A mixture-energy-consistent six-equation two-phase numerical model for fluid with interfaces, cavitation and evaporation waves. J. Comput. Phys. 259, 331–357]. Therefore, the current model retains both the simplicity afforded by the five-equation model and the efficiency of the algebraic relaxation solver. An alternative algebraic approach for handling the non-conservative term (the so-called K∇ · u term) in the reduced five-equation model for mechanical equilibrium of a liquid-vapor mixture is also explored by enforcing the thermal equilibrium at the same time. Finally, numerical results of sample tests in both one and two dimensions in the literature as well as that in three dimensions demonstrate the effectiveness and ability of the proposed model to simulate cavitating flows. An interesting mechanism of shock generation by acoustics in water due to phase transition is then found by the numerical simulations.
71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗