Alternative curved-boundary treatment for the lattice Boltzmann method and its application
in simulation of flow and potential fields
O. R. Mohammadipoor* and H. Niazmand
Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mechanical Engineering Department, Mashhad, Iran
S. A. Mirbozorgi
University of Birjand, Mechanical Engineering Department, Birjand, Iran
(Received 30 June 2013; revised manuscript received 25 September 2013; published 24 January 2014)
Since the lattice Boltzmann method originally carries out the simulations on the regular Cartesian lattices,
curved boundaries are often approximated as a series of stair steps. The most commonly employed technique
for resolving curved-boundary problems is extrapolating or interpolating macroscopic properties of boundary
nodes. Previous investigations have indicated that using more than one equation for extrapolation or interpolation
in boundary conditions potentially causes abrupt changes in particle distributions. Therefore, a curved-boundary
treatment is introduced to improve computational accuracy of the conventional stair-shaped approximation used
in lattice Boltzmann simulations by using a unified equation for extrapolation of macroscopic variables. This
boundary condition is not limited to fluid flow and can be extended to potential fields. The proposed treatment
is tested against several well-established problems and the solutions order of accuracy is evaluated. Numerical
results show that the present treatment is of second-order accuracy and has reliable stability characteristics.
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.89.013309
I. INTRODUCTION
o.r.mohammadipoor@gmail.com
niazmand@um.ac.ir
samirbozorgi@birjand.ac.ir
1539-3755/2014/89(1)/013309(12)
013309-1
(1)
(i = 0, 1,..., q 1) .
(i = 0),
(3a)
(i 1)
ci = (cos i , sin i )c i =
,i =14 ,
(3b)
2
(i 1)
ci = 2(cos i , sin i )c i =
+ , i =14 .
2
4
(3c)
In the above equation, c = x /t is the particle streaming
speed, x is the lattice space, and t is the time step size.
To solve the distribution function numerically, Eq. (2) is
discritized with time step and lattice space into
fi (r + ci t ,t + t ) fi (r,t) = i .
The most popular model, the lattice Bhatnagar-GrossKrook (LBGK) [28] is used in this paper, which approximates
the collision operator as a relaxation of the distribution
function f towards a local equilibrium distribution f eq ,
1 eq
fi (r,t) fi (r,t) .
(5)
fi = wi 1 +
Cs2
2Cs4
2Cs2
i =
wi = 4/9
(i = 0)
wi = 1/9
(i = 1 4)
wi = 1/36
(6b)
(i = 5 8),
fi ,
(7)
U=
1
fi ci .
i
(8)
In simulation of incompressible flows in a low Machnumber regime, the pressure p can be calculated by the
equation of state of an ideal gas,
p = Cs2 .
(9)
(2)
(4)
013309-2
Wall
(2
Pff
c1
c4
Wall
Pf
C
c8
Pb
Pwall
c7
-
)
c3
c5
c2
(2
c6
2
Mwall
Mf ,
2
2
8
(2
+
)(4
Mwall
(11)
2
Mf
(2 )
Mff .
(4 )
(12)
In above equations, Mb(1) and Mb(2) are extrapolated macroscopic values obtained from linear [Eq. (11)] and quadratic
[Eq. (12)] schemes, respectively, and * = /x is a
dimensionless boundary distance. For a Dirichlet boundary
condition, the fluid property of Mwall at the point Pwall is
given and an estimate of macroscopic property at the fluid
reference, e.g., Mf can also be found by evaluating the bilinear
interpolation between four surrounding fluid nodes of A, B, C,
and D as shown in Fig. 2.
Mf =
MC
MD
(xB xf )(yB yf ) + 2 (xf xA )(yA yf )
x2
x
+
MB
MA
(xD xf )(yf yD )+ 2 (xf xC )(yf yC ).
2
x
x
(13)
013309-3
2
Mb(2) +
Mb(1) .
2
2
(14)
f6 =
f3
Solid
f7
eq
f6
(15)
neq
f8 .
(17)
b+cd = 0
a + c + d = 0.
(19)
When distribution functions are known in opposite directions, the equality of the nonequilibrium parts also provides
some equations as
eq
eq
2hi = (fi fopp(i) ) fi fopp(i) ,
(20)
where the subscript opp is used to denote the opposite
direction. Finally, the system of equations can be closed by
setting the remained unknown corrective functions to be zero.
For a boundary node on a lower wall, the corrective functions
can be obtained from the following equation set:
b+cd = 0
a+c+d = 0
f5
f8
(18)
2b = f1 f3 23 ux
a = 0.
f1
f4
neq
i=1
f2
eq
f6
neq
f5 = f5 + f7
8
Fluid
eq
f2 = f2 + f4
(21)
013309-4
eq
fi
Wall
p +p
neq
fopp(i)
+
+ hi
eq
eq
f2 = f2 + f4 f4 h4 + h2
eq
eq
f5 = f5 + f7 f7 h7 + h5 .
eq
eq
f6 = f6 + f8 f8 h8 + h6
Wall
x
(22)
V. VALIDATION
013309-5
10-1
10 -1
10 -3
10 -5
10 -7
10 -9
10-11
10-13
10-15
10-17
uwall/Umax
10-2
-3
10-4
50
NR
0.6
0.8
100
150 200
1.4
1.6
1.8
= 0.25
10-3
present scheme
Mei et al. [16]
Bouzidi et al. [18]
Yu et al. [23]
Guo et al. [20]
10-4
10-5
(c)
1.2
10-2
uwall/Umax
10-7
present scheme
Mei et al. [16]
Bouzidi et al. [18]
Yu et al. [23]
Guo et al. [20]
(b)
uwall/Umax
10-6
slope -2
= 1.25
= 1.00
= 0.75
= 0.50
= 0.25
= 0.00
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
= 0.5
10 -2
10 -3
10 -4
10
present scheme
Mei et al. [16]
Bouzidi et al. [18]
Yu et al. [23]
Guo et al. [20]
-5
10 -6
0.6
0.8
(d)
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
= 0.75
10
uwall/Umax
Er(u)
10
10-5
= 0.0
-2
10-3
present scheme
Mei et al. [16]
Bouzidi et al. [18]
Yu et al. [23]
Guo et al. [20]
10-4
10-5
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
013309-6
= 0.75
10
0.8
present scheme
Mei et al. [16]
Bouzidi et al. [18]
Yu et al. [23]
Guo et al. [20]
10-3
10-4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
u/Umax
uwall/Umax
1
-2
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.4
y/h
0.6
0.8
,
(27)
=
U0
1 2 r
Ro
where U0 = Ri is the reference velocity and = Ri /Ro .
Determining the pressure constant by imposing p(Ro ) = 0,
the pressure distribution can be obtained from the following
equation [29]:
p(r)
1
=
2
2
U0
1 2
2
r2
Ro2
r
.
2 4 ln
Ro2
r
Ro
(28)
10-2
10-3
uwall/Umax
analytical solution
section A-A
section B-B
section C-C
0.2
10-4
p0
NR
10-5
slope -2
present study
a
B
p0+p
y
10-6
50
100
150 200
NR
b
0.8
-0.05
0.6
-0.10
Re = 6
Re = 10
Re = 10
p (mPa)
U (mm/s)
present study
Analytical solution
0.4
0.2
-0.15
Re = 6
-0.20
present study
Analytical solution
0
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
-0.25
0.5
0.6
r/R0
0.7
0.8
0.9
r/R0
FIG. 11. Comparison between numerical and analytical profiles for different Reynolds numbers: (a) velocity profiles and (b) pressure
profiles.
10-1
10-3
10-2
Er(p)
Er(u)
10-2
10-4
10-5
10-3
slope -2
Guo et al. [20]
Verschaeve and Muller [24]
present study
20
40
10-4
60 80
NR
slope -1
Guo et al. [20]
Verschaeve and Muller [24]
present study
20
40
60 80
NR
013309-8
(a)
R e = 10
10D
U0
30D
10D
U/x = 0
10D
(b)
R e = 20
(c)
R e = 40
013309-9
Re = 20
2L/D
Re = 40
2L/D
1.82
4.48
1.86
4.62
0.5
29.7 1.8
44.1 4.2
54.8
1.8
4.40
0.504 30
0.51 28.1
1.84
1.86
1.86
44.1
42.5
4.40
4.4
4.58
53.5
53.1
Re = 10
Re = 20
Re = 40
3.049
3.07
3.177
2.828
2.888
2.048
2.18
2.0001
2.253
2.053
2.077
1.475
1.173
1.498
1.675
1.550
1.561
10-3
Er()
slope -2
= 0.25
= 0.5
= 0.75
10-2
CD
10-4
be seen from Fig. 16 that the present results agree well with
those in the literature.
10-5
10
1 2
1
2
2 =
r
+ 2 2 + 2 = 0.
(30)
r r
r
r
z
The lattice Boltzmann evolution equation for potential
on 2D discrete lattices can be written as [40]
1 eq
g (r,t) gi (r,t) .
gi (r + ci t ,t + t ) gi (r,t) =
i
(31)
The corresponding equilibrium distribution of g eq on the
D2Q9 discrete lattice takes the following form:
wi (1/k)
i>0
eq
gi =
,
(32)
eq
i=0 gi
i=0
= 1/3 and w58
= 1/12 are weight factors and k is
where w14
a numerical parameter to control the dimensionless relaxation
Cp
0.5
-0.5
-1
30
60
90
120
150
180
NR
20
30 40 50
time , defined as
= k
t
1
+ .
2
x
2
(33)
r
1
log
=
+ 1,
o
log(Ro /Ri )
Ro
(34)
where Ri and Ro are inner and outer cylinder radii, respectively, and = o /i . For modeling, NR = 5, 10, 20, 40 nodes
are considered for inner cylinder radius along lattice rows.
Figure 17 shows the dependence of the potential relative error
Er () on lattice resolution. It is clear that the present boundary
treatment satisfies the integrity of the curved boundary to the
second order of accuracy.
VI. CONCLUSION
013309-10
F/H
F/H
E/G
F/H
G/H
G
E/G
H
E
E/G
F/H
E/F E/G
C
E/G
G/H
C
E/G
F/H
E/F F/H
2a = f2 f4 2uy /3
b=0
Node type of B
c = (a + b)/2
d = (a b)/2
2d = f6 f8 (uy ux )/6
c=0
Node type of C
a = c d
b = c + d
2c = f5 f7 uy + ux /6
d=0
Node type of D
a = c d
b = c + d.
2b = f1 f3 2ux /3
a=0
Node type of A
c = (a + b)/2
d = (a b)/2
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
(A1)
(A3)
(A4)
APPENDIX
In the present boundary treatment, a series of corrective functions is employed to satisfy the no-slip condition in all directions for boundary nodes. According to
Eq. (18), there are four unknowns to evaluate corrective
functions. In this appendix, a system of equations, which
is required to determine these functions, is provided for
12 types of boundaries in a 2D configuration as shown in
Fig. 18.
Boundary nodes with three unknown distribution functions
are denoted by A, B, C, and D in Fig. 18. For these nodes, the
definition of velocity provides two equations and the equality
of the nonequilibrium parts in known opposite directions
provides the third one. Finally, the system of equations can be
closed by setting the remaining unknown corrective function
to be zero as follows:
(A2)
Node type of E
Node type of F
Node type of G
Node type of H
2b = f1 f3 2ux /3
2d = f6 f8 (uy ux )/6
c =d b
a = b 2d
2b = f1 f3 2ux /3
2c = f5 f7 (uy + ux )/6
d =c+b
a = b 2c
2a = f2 f4 2uy /3
2d = f6 f8 (uy ux )/6
c = a d
b = a + 2d
2a = f2 f4 2uy /3
2c = f5 f7 (uy + ux )/6
d = a c
b = a 2c.
(A5)
(A6)
(A7)
(A8)
For boundary nodes with one unknown distribution function, evaluation of corrective functions is similar to nodes with
two unknown distribution functions.
013309-11
[32]
[33]
[34]
[35]
[36]
[37]
[38]
[39]
[40]
013309-12