Paper detail

Performance evaluation of the general characteristics based off-lattice Boltzmann and DUGKS methods for low speed continuum flows: A comparative study

The general characteristics based off-lattice Boltzmann scheme (BKG) proposed by Bardow et~al.(2006), and the discrete unified gas kinetic scheme (DUGKS) are two methods that successfully overcome the time step restriction by the collision time, which is commonly seen in many other kinetic schemes. Basically, the BKG scheme is a time splitting scheme, while the DUGKS is an un-split finite volume scheme. In this work, we first perform a theoretical analysis of the two schemes in the finite volume framework by comparing their numerical flux evaluations. It is found that the effects of collision term are considered in the reconstructions of the cell-interface distribution function in both schemes, which explains why they can overcome the time step restriction and can give accurate results even as the time step is much larger than the collision time. The difference between the two schemes lies in the treatment of the integral of the collision term, in which the Bardow&#39;s scheme uses the rectangular rule while the DUGKS uses the trapezoidal rule. The performance of the two schemes, i.e., accuracy, stability, and efficiency are then compared by simulating several two dimensional flows, including the unsteady Taylor-Green vortex flow, the steady lid-driven cavity flow, and the laminar boundary layer problem. It is observed that, the DUGKS can give more accurate results than the BKG scheme. Furthermore, the numerical stability of the BKG scheme decreases as the Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy (CFL) number approaches to 1, while the stability of DUGKS is not affected by the CFL number apparently as long as CFL<1. It is also observed that the BKG scheme is about one time faster than the DUGKS scheme with the same computational mesh and time step.

preprint2015arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.