Three-dimensional Hybrid Continuum-Atomistic Simulations For Multiscale Hydrodynamics

[+] Author and Article Information
H. S. Wijesinghe, N. G. Hadjiconstantinou

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA

R. D. Hornung

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA

A. L. Garcia

San Jose State University, San Jose, CA

J. Fluids Eng 126(5), 768-777 (Dec 07, 2004) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1792275 History: Received August 21, 2003; Revised March 29, 2004; Online December 07, 2004
Copyright © 2004 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Abraham,  F. F., Broughton,  J. Q., Bernstein,  N., and Kaxiras,  E., 1998, “Spanning the continuum to quantum length scales in a dynamic simulation of brittle fracture,” Europhys. Lett., 44, pp. 783–787.
Rudd,  R. E., and Broughton,  J. Q., 2000, “Concurrent coupling of length scales in solid state systems,” Phys. Status Solidi B, 217, pp. 251–291.
Shenoy,  V. B., Miller,  R., Tadmor,  E. B., Rodney,  D., Phillips,  R., and Ortiz,  M., 1999, “An Adaptive Finite Element Approach to Atomic-Scale Mechanics—The Quasicontinuum Method,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 47, pp. 611–642.
O’Connell,  S. T., and Thompson,  P. A., 1995, “Molecular dynamics-continuum hybrid computations: A tool for studying complex fluid flows,” Phys. Rev. E, 52, pp. R5792–R5795.
Hadjiconstantinou,  N. G., 1999, “Hybrid Atomistic-Continuum Formulations and the Moving Contact-Line Problem,” J. Comput. Phys., 154, pp. 245–265.
Li,  J., Liao,  D., and Yip,  S., 1998, “Coupling continuum to molecular-dynamics simulation: Reflecting particle method and the field estimator,” Phys. Rev. E, 57, pp. 7259–7267.
Flekkoy,  E. G., Wagner,  G., and Feder,  J., 2000, “Hybrid model for combined particle and continuum dynamics,” Europhys. Lett., 52, pp. 271–276.
Wadsworth, D. C., and Erwin, D. A., 1990, “One-Dimensional Hybrid Continuum/Particle Simulation Approach for Rarefied Hypersonic Flows,” AIAA Paper 90-1690.
Hash, D., and Hassan, H., 1996, “A Decoupled DSMC/Navier-Stokes Analysis of a Transitional Flow Experiment,” AIAA Paper 96-0353.
Bourgat,  J., Le Tallec,  P., and Tidriri,  M., 1996, “Coupling Boltzmann and Navier-Stokes Equations by Friction,” J. Comput. Phys., 127, pp. 227–245.
Alder,  B. J., 1997, “Highly discretized dynamics,” Physica A, 240, pp. 193–195.
Le Tallec,  P., and Mallinger,  F., 1997, “Coupling Boltzmann and Navier-Stokes Equations by Half Fluxes,” J. Comput. Phys., 136, pp. 51–67.
Tiwari,  S., and Klar,  A., 1998, “Coupling of the Boltzmann and Euler equations with adaptive domain decomposition procedure,” J. Comput. Phys., 144, pp. 710–726.
Garcia,  A. L., Bell,  J., Crutchfield,  W. Y., and Alder,  B. J., 1999, “Adaptive Mesh and Algorithm Refinement using Direct Simulation Monte Carlo,” J. Comput. Phys., 154, pp. 134–155.
Aktas,  O., and Aluru,  N. R., 2002, “A Combined Continuum/DSMC Technique for Multiscale Analysis of Microfluidic Filters,” J. Comput. Phys., 178, pp. 342–372.
Roveda,  R., Goldstein,  D. B., and Varghese,  P. L., 2000, “Hybrid Euler/direct simulation Monte Carlo calculation of unsteady slit flow,” J. Spacecr. Rockets, 37(6), pp. 753–760.
Hornung,  R. D., and Kohn,  S. R., 2002, “Managing Application Complexity in the SAMRAI Object-Oriented Framework,” Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 14, pp. 347–368.
Quarteroni, A., 1999, Domain decomposition methods for partial differential equations, Oxford, New York; Clarendon Press, Oxford, New York.
Berger,  M., and Oliger,  J., 1984, “Adaptive Mesh Refinement for Hyperbolic Partial Differential Equations,” J. Comput. Phys., 53, pp. 484–512.
Berger,  M., and Colella,  P., 1989, “Local Adaptive Mesh Refinement for Shock Hydrodynamics,” J. Comput. Phys., 82, pp. 64–84.
Colella,  P., 1985, “A Direct Eulerian MUSCL Scheme for Gas Dynamics,” SIAM (Soc. Ind. Appl. Math.) J. Sci. Stat. Comput., 6, pp. 104–117.
Colella,  P., and Glaz,  H. M., 1985, “Efficient Solution Algorithms for the Riemann Problem for Real Gases,” J. Comput. Phys., 59, pp. 264–289.
Saltzman,  J., 1994, “An Unsplit 3D Upwind Method for Hyperbolic Conservation Laws,” J. Comput. Phys., 115, pp. 153–167.
Hadjiconstantinou,  N. G., and Simek,  O., 2002, “Constant-Wall-Temperature Nusselt Number in Micro and Nano-Channels,” J. Heat Transfer, 124, pp. 356–364.
Hadjiconstantinou,  N. G., 2002, “Sound wave propagation in transition-regime micro- and nanochannels,” Phys. Fluids, 14, pp. 802–809.
Hadjiconstantinou,  N. G., 2003, “Comment on Cercignani’s second-order slip coefficient,” Phys. Fluids, 15, pp. 2352–2354.
Hadjiconstantinou,  N. G., and Simek,  O., 2003, “Sound propagation at small scales under continuum and non-continuum transport,” J. Fluid Mech., 488, pp. 399–408.
Zheng,  Y., Garcia,  A. L., and Alder,  B. J., 2002, “Comparison of kinetic theory and hydrodynamics for Poiseuille Flow,” J. Stat. Phys., 109, pp. 495–505.
Bird, G. A., 1994, Molecular Gas Dynamics and the Direct Simulation of Gas Flows, Clarendon, Oxford.
Allen, M. P., and Tildesley, D. J., 1987, Computer Simulation of Liquids, Clarendon, Oxford.
Garcia,  A. L., and Wagner,  W., 2000, “Time step truncation error in direct simulation Monte Carlo,” Phys. Fluids, 12, pp. 2621–2633.
Hadjiconstantinou,  N. G., 2000, “Analysis of Discretization in the Direct Simulation Monte Carlo,” Phys. Fluids, 12, pp. 2634–2638.
Wagner,  W., 1992, “A Convergence Proof for Bird’s Direct Simulation Monte Carlo Method for the Boltzmann Equation,” J. Stat. Phys., 66, pp. 1011–1044.
Garcia,  A. L., and Alder,  B. J., 1998, “Generation of the Chapman-Enskog Distribution,” J. Comput. Phys., 140, pp. 66–70.
Bird,  G. A., 1970, “Breakdown of Translational and Rotational Equilibrium in Gaseous Expansions,” Am. Inst. Aeronaut. Astronaut. J., 8, p. 1998.
Trangenstein,  J. A., and Pember,  R. B., 1992, “Numerical Algorithms for Strong Discontinuities in Elastic-Plastic Solids,” J. Comput. Phys., 103, pp. 63–89.
Hadjiconstantinou,  N. G., Garcia,  A. L., Bazant,  M. Z., and He,  G., 2003, “Statistical error in particle simulations of Hydrodynamic Phenomena,” J. Comput. Phys., 187, pp. 274–297.
Alexander,  F., Garcia,  A. L., and Tartakovsky,  D., 2002, “Algorithm Refinement for Stochastic Partial Diffential Equations: I. Linear Diffusion,” J. Comput. Phys., 182(1), pp. 47–66.
Hirschfelder, J. O., Curtiss, C. F., and Bird, B., 1964, Molecular theory of gases and liquids, Wiley, New York.
Schmidt,  B., and Worner,  M., 1983, “Problems with the Computation of the Shock Structure in Binary Gas Mixtures Using the Direct Simulation Monte Carlo Method,” Acta Mech., 1–4, pp. 59–55.
Arora,  M., and Roe,  P. L., 1997, “On Postshock Oscillations Due to Shock Capturing Schemes in Unsteady Flows,” J. Comput. Phys., 130, pp. 25–40.
Woodward,  P. R., and Colella,  P., 1984, “The Numerical Simulation of Two-dimensional Fluid Flow with Strong Shocks,” J. Comput. Phys., 54, pp. 115–173.
Meshkov,  E. E., 1969, “Instability of the Interface of two Gases Accelerated by a Shock Wave,” Fluid Dyn., 43(5), pp. 101–104.
Meshkov, E. E., 1970, “Instability of a Shock Wave Accelerated Interface between two Gases,” NASA Tech. Trans., F-13074.
Richtmyer,  R. D., 1960, “Taylor Instability in Shock Acceleration of Compressible Fluids,” Commun. Pure Appl. Math., 13, pp. 297–319.
Brouillette,  M., 2002, “The Richtmyer-Meshkov Instability,” Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech., 34, pp. 445–468.
Holmes,  R. L., Dimonte,  G., Fryxell,  B., Gittings,  M. L., Grove,  J. W., Schneider,  M., Sharp,  D. H., Velikovich,  A. L., Weaver,  R. P., and Zhang,  Q., 1999, “Richtmyer-Meshkov Instability Growth: Experiment, Simulation and Theory,” J. Fluid Mech., 389, pp. 55–79.


Grahic Jump Location
Outline of AMAR hybrid: (a) Beginning of a time step; (b) advance the continuum grid; (c) create buffer particles; (d) advance DSMC particles; (e) refluxing; (f ) reset overlying continuum grid.
Grahic Jump Location
Multiple DSMC regions are coupled by copying particles from one DSMC region (upper left) to the buffer region of an adjacent DSMC region (lower right). After copying, regions are integrated independently over the same time increment.
Grahic Jump Location
3D AMAR computational domain for investigation of tolerance parameter variation with number of particles in DSMC cells
Grahic Jump Location
Variation of density gradient tolerance with number of DSMC particles N. Here we use N because in our implementation Ncell=N.
Grahic Jump Location
Average density for stationary fluid Euler-DSMC hybrid simulation with Ncell=80. Error bars give one standard deviation over 10 samples.
Grahic Jump Location
Computational domain for uniform field test
Grahic Jump Location
Particle increase in the DSMC domain resulting from net heat flux transfer from the DSMC to the Euler region
Grahic Jump Location
Computational domain for self-diffusion interface tracked adaptively. The borders of DSMC patches are indicated by the boxes near the middle of the domain. The Euler model is applied in the remainder of the domain.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of profiles obtained simulating diffusion with AMAR with theoretical diffusion profiles. Both self-diffusion and two-species diffusion are shown. Note λ refers to the Ar-Ar mean free path. The mean collision time τm is also associated with the Ar-Ar system.
Grahic Jump Location
Argon gas density profile evolution to equilibrium. τm is the mean collision time.
Grahic Jump Location
Equilibrium shock wave profiles for density, temperature and velocity in a stationary Argon shock. The solid line connects the Rankine-Hugoniot jump values through a sharp jump centered on the AMAR shock location as determined by the AMAR density profile. The solid-square line is the AMAR result. Note that the AMAR temperature jump “leads” the AMAR density jump as documented in Ref. 29. The agreement between AMAR and Rankine-Hugoniot jump values is excellent.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of He-Xe binary gas shock wave equilibrium profiles computed with AMAR (blue lines) and with DSMC alone (red lines). The mixture mean free path λ=0.46 mm for this test.
Grahic Jump Location
A moving Mach 5 shock wave though Argon. The AMAR algorithm tracks the shock by adaptively moving the DSMC region with the shock front.
Grahic Jump Location
A moving Mach 5 shock wave though Argon. The AMAR profile (red dots) is compared with the analytical time evolution of the initial discontinuity (blue lines). τm is the mean collision time.
Grahic Jump Location
Computational domain for Richtmyer-Meshkov instability simulation
Grahic Jump Location
Richtmyer-Meshkov instability simulation, time t=1.3τm where τm is the Argon-Argon mean collision time. The shock wave is ahead of the gas-gas interface.
Grahic Jump Location
Richtmyer-Meshkov instability simulation, time t=26.0τm where τm is the Argon-Argon mean collision time. The shock wave intercepts the gas-gas interface.
Grahic Jump Location
Richtmyer-Meshkov instability simulation, time t=170.1τm where τm is the Argon-Argon mean collision time. The shock wave has passed the gas-gas interface.




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In