Comparison of volume-of-fluid methods for surface tension-dominant two-phase flows
By D. Gerlach, Gaurav Tomar, Gautam Biswas, Franz Durst. 2006
286 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Computational Mechanics
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/94538b7a18e29b09df1de8e82b4d4feb16afe782
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Computational Mechanics
- Shahriar Afkhami
- Markus Bussmann
- V. Steijn
- Duong A. Hoang
- C. Kleijn
- M. Kreutzer
- Luis M. Portela
- Anthony J. Robinson
Citations in the corpus
- Height functions for applying contact angles to 2D VOF simulations (2008, background): “Put together, VOF now appears to be a viable methodology for the accurate representation of surface tension-driven phenomena [2].”
- Benchmark numerical simulations of segmented two-phase flows in microchannels using the Volume of Fluid method (2013, methodology): “An easy way to suppress these artefacts is to compute the interface curvature j from a smoothed VOF function ~ a, which is calculated from the VOF function a by smoothing it over a finite region around the fluid interface [6,34].”
- Influence of surface tension implementation in Volume of Fluid and coupled Volume of Fluid with Level Set methods for bubble growth and detachment (2013, methodology): “The reader is referred to the review by Losasso et al. (2006) for other improvements to the LS methods.”
- An accurate adaptive solver for surface-tension-driven interfacial flows (2009, methodology): “For example a recent study by Gerlach et al. (2006) used this test case to assess the relative accuracies of a range of vof and vof/levelset techniques.”