2
$\begingroup$

I am trying to derivative the equations from [1] for a compressible Volume-of-fluids formulation but I am stuck in one of the last steps and would like to request some help to solve it.

The governing equations are:

Mass conservation: $$ \frac{\partial (\alpha_k \rho_k)}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot (\alpha_k \rho_k \vec{v}) = 0 \: \:, k={1,2} \: \:\:\: (1) $$

Phase transport: $$ \frac{\partial (\alpha_1)}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot (\alpha_1 \vec{v}) = 0 \:\:\:\: (2) $$

With

$$ \alpha_1 + \alpha_2 = 1 \:\:\:\: (3) $$

I can take equation (1) and expand it into:

$$ \alpha_k \left [\frac{\partial (\rho_k)}{\partial t} + \vec{v} \cdot \nabla(\rho_k) \right ] + \rho_k \left[ \frac{\partial (\alpha_k)}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot (\alpha_k \vec{v}) \right ] = 0 $$

$$ \frac{\partial (\alpha_k)}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot (\alpha_k \vec{v}) = -\frac{\alpha_k}{\rho_k} \left [\frac{\partial (\rho_k)}{\partial t} + \vec{v} \cdot \nabla(\rho_k) \right ] \:\:\:\: (4) $$

Given that $\rho$ depends on $p$, and that $\frac{\partial \rho_k}{\partial p_k} = \psi_k$, through the chain derivation rule I get:

$$ \frac{\partial (\alpha_k)}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot (\alpha_k \vec{v}) = -\frac{\alpha_k \psi_k}{\rho_k} \left [\frac{\partial (p)}{\partial t} + \vec{v} \cdot \nabla(p) \right ] \:\:\:\: (5) $$

Summing equation (5) for both phases, and attending to equation(3), I end up with:

$$ \nabla \cdot \vec{v} = - \left( \frac{\alpha_1 \psi_1}{\rho_1} + \frac{\alpha_2 \psi_2}{\rho_2} \right )\left [\frac{\partial (p)}{\partial t} + \vec{v} \cdot \nabla(p) \right ] \:\:\:\: (6) $$

Here is the part I cannot yet grasp:

The end result should be:

$$ \frac{\partial \alpha_1}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot (\alpha_1 \vec{v}) - \alpha_1 (\nabla \cdot \vec{v}) = \alpha_1(1-\alpha_1) \left( \frac{\psi_2}{\rho_2} - \frac{\psi_1}{\rho_1} \right ) \left [\frac{\partial (p)}{\partial t} + \vec{v} \cdot \nabla(p) \right ] $$

If I expand equation (2), I can get:

$$ \frac{\partial (\alpha_1)}{\partial t} + \alpha_1 (\nabla \cdot \vec{v}) + \vec{v} \cdot \nabla \alpha_1= 0 $$

Moving $\alpha_1 (\nabla \cdot \vec{v})$ to the RHS and replacing the velocity divergence with Equation (6), I get:

$$ \frac{\partial (\alpha_1)}{\partial t} + \vec{v} \cdot \nabla \alpha_1 = -\alpha_1 \left (- \left( \frac{\alpha_1 \psi_1}{\rho_1} + \frac{\alpha_2 \psi_2}{\rho_2} \right )\left [\frac{\partial (p)}{\partial t} + \vec{v} \cdot \nabla(p) \right ] \right) $$

Knowing that: $$ \frac{\partial (\phi)}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot (\vec{v} \phi) = \frac{\partial (\phi)}{\partial t} + \phi (\nabla \cdot \vec{v}) + \vec{v} \cdot \nabla \phi $$

$$ \frac{\partial (\phi)}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot (\vec{v} \phi) - \phi (\nabla \cdot \vec{v}) = \frac{\partial (\phi)}{\partial t} + \vec{v} \cdot \nabla \phi $$

I can replace the LHS with:

$$ \frac{\partial (\alpha_1)}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot( \alpha_1 \vec{v} ) - \alpha_1(\nabla \cdot \vec{v}) = -\alpha_1 \left (- \left( \frac{\alpha_1 \psi_1}{\rho_1} + \frac{\alpha_2 \psi_2}{\rho_2} \right )\left [\frac{\partial (p)}{\partial t} + \vec{v} \cdot \nabla(p) \right ] \right) \: \: \: \: (7) $$

The question is: How can I get the RHS correctly?

Best Regards!

[1] - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compfluid.2013.04.002

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Have you asked the authors of that paper? $\endgroup$ Nov 3, 2021 at 4:47
  • $\begingroup$ Hi. As a matter of fact, I did. But have not received any reply. $\endgroup$ Nov 3, 2021 at 13:50

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

You have a problem with the equation after "the end result should be", which seems clear because you don't have any mixed terms involving $\alpha_i$ and $\rho_j$ with $i \ne j$. They get these when going from (15) to (16) in the paper. For example, taking (15) from the paper and substituting $$\frac{\alpha_1 \rho_{1,p}}{\rho_1} + \frac{\alpha_2 \rho_{2,p}}{\rho_2} \to \alpha_1\alpha_2 \left( \frac{\rho_{1,p}}{\alpha_2 \rho_1} + \frac{\rho_{2,p}}{\alpha_1 \rho_2} \right) \to \dots$$ and you see these terms. One thing I do find confusing in their formulation is the use of both $\psi_k$ and $\rho_{k,p}$...

One sees the same situation unfolding in the original Kapila model: https://aip.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1063/1.1398042

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.