•  English
    • Persian
    • English
  •   Login
  • Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
  • |
  • Information Center and Central Library
    • Persian
    • English
  • Home
  • Source Types
    • Journal Paper
    • Ebook
    • Conference Paper
    • Standard
    • Protocol
    • Thesis
  • Use Help
View Item 
  •   FUM Digital Library
  • Fum
  • Articles
  • ProfDoc
  • View Item
  •   FUM Digital Library
  • Fum
  • Articles
  • ProfDoc
  • View Item
  • All Fields
  • Title
  • Author
  • Year
  • Publisher
  • Subject
  • Publication Title
  • ISSN
  • DOI
  • ISBN
Advanced Search
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Evaluation of level set and phase field methods in modeling two phase flow with viscosity contrast through dual-permeability porous medium

Author:
حسینعلی اخلاقی امیری
,
Aly A. Hamouda
,
Hossein Ali Akhlaghi Amiri
Year
: 2013
Abstract: This work assesses conservative level set method (LSM) and Cahn–Hilliard phase field method (PFM) in modeling 2D two-phase flow through porous media, based on their ability to capture different phenomena associated with the medium permeability and fluid viscosity contrasts. The assessment includes their accuracy and running time. For this purpose, a robust finite element solver (COMSOL Multiphysics™) is used here to do the computations. To start with, the main parameters of the methods including the interface thickness, mesh size and diffusion coefficient are studied. Rectangular bubble relaxation is simulated to compare the two methods in capturing the physics of the bubble evolution. The comparison is also made for a stratified two-phase flow and flow in different single pore elements. Two models are then constructed to simulate two-phase flow with viscosity contrast through complex porous media, including homogenous medium with obstacle and dual-permeability medium. Both methods are able to capture the basic phenomena; however PFM is more successful in capturing the physical details especially in complicated porous media, compared to LSM. PFM results such as pressure gradients and fluid profiles in the media are more realistic. While LSM is unsuccessful in volume conservation and modeling no-slip boundary conditions. In addition, the running times are considerably less for PFM in simulation of different scenarios.
URI: https://libsearch.um.ac.ir:443/fum/handle/fum/3360865
Keyword(s): Two phase flow,Level set method,Phase field method,Viscosity,Permeability,Surface tension
Collections :
  • ProfDoc
  • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
  • Statistics

    Evaluation of level set and phase field methods in modeling two phase flow with viscosity contrast through dual-permeability porous medium

Show full item record

contributor authorحسینعلی اخلاقی امیریen
contributor authorAly A. Hamoudaen
contributor authorHossein Ali Akhlaghi Amirifa
date accessioned2020-06-06T13:35:07Z
date available2020-06-06T13:35:07Z
date issued2013
identifier urihttps://libsearch.um.ac.ir:443/fum/handle/fum/3360865
description abstractThis work assesses conservative level set method (LSM) and Cahn–Hilliard phase field method (PFM) in modeling 2D two-phase flow through porous media, based on their ability to capture different phenomena associated with the medium permeability and fluid viscosity contrasts. The assessment includes their accuracy and running time. For this purpose, a robust finite element solver (COMSOL Multiphysics™) is used here to do the computations. To start with, the main parameters of the methods including the interface thickness, mesh size and diffusion coefficient are studied. Rectangular bubble relaxation is simulated to compare the two methods in capturing the physics of the bubble evolution. The comparison is also made for a stratified two-phase flow and flow in different single pore elements. Two models are then constructed to simulate two-phase flow with viscosity contrast through complex porous media, including homogenous medium with obstacle and dual-permeability medium. Both methods are able to capture the basic phenomena; however PFM is more successful in capturing the physical details especially in complicated porous media, compared to LSM. PFM results such as pressure gradients and fluid profiles in the media are more realistic. While LSM is unsuccessful in volume conservation and modeling no-slip boundary conditions. In addition, the running times are considerably less for PFM in simulation of different scenarios.en
languageEnglish
titleEvaluation of level set and phase field methods in modeling two phase flow with viscosity contrast through dual-permeability porous mediumen
typeJournal Paper
contenttypeExternal Fulltext
subject keywordsTwo phase flowen
subject keywordsLevel set methoden
subject keywordsPhase field methoden
subject keywordsViscosityen
subject keywordsPermeabilityen
subject keywordsSurface tensionen
journal titleInternational Journal of Multiphase Flowfa
pages22-34
journal volume52
journal issue1
identifier linkhttps://profdoc.um.ac.ir/paper-abstract-1063011.html
identifier articleid1063011
  • About Us
نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
DSpace software copyright © 2019-2022  DuraSpace