Elsevier

Journal of Computational Physics

Volume 377, 15 January 2019, Pages 89-116
Journal of Computational Physics

A-SLEIPNNIR: A multiscale, anisotropic adaptive, particle level set framework for moving interfaces. Transport equation applications

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2018.10.031Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Anisotropic, particle level set technique for moving interfaces.

  • Semi-Lagrangian, finite element implementation with quadratic polynomials.

  • Anisotropic mesh refinement offers accuracy similar to isotropic at a lower cost.

  • Marker particles provide enhanced shape preservation.

  • Robustness, accuracy, flexibility and efficiency in pure advection problems.

Abstract

We introduce in this paper ‘A-SLEIPNNIR’ (“Adaptive Semi-Lagrangian Ensemble Implementation of Particle level set for Newtonian and non-Newtonian Interfacial Rheology”). The proposed method combines a semi-Lagrangian approach for the transport operator, a particle level set technique for interface capturing featuring second-order accurate redistancing, and anisotropic mesh refinement for spatial resolution. The high-order, quadratic Finite Element discretization, together with an a posteriori error analysis produce a metric tensor that is passed on to an anisotropic mesh generator. We explore the peculiar features of the numerical scheme such as the impact of the marker particles, the reinitialization procedure or the Adaptive Mesh Refinement (AMR) strategy, in a series of benchmark problems for the solution of the interface transport equation with analytically supplied, divergence-free velocity fields. The results show that our approach yields an accurate and robust, yet computationally inexpensive framework for moving interfaces suitable for Scientific and Engineering applications.

Introduction

Moving interfaces are at the heart of myriad Scientific and Engineering applications; from crystal growth [1] to tumor growth [2]; from biological systems [3] to shape optimization [4]; from bubble dynamics [5], [6] to simulations of shock-driven, gas-particle flows [7] — the significance of a robust, accurate and computationally inexpensive method capable of representing the interface with precision and flexibility cannot be overstated.

In a first step toward devising such an ideal method, the computational scientist is confronted with a choice between two large classes of schemes concerning spatial discretization: meshfree (or “meshless”) and mesh-based methods. For interface problems, meshless methods [8] stand out due to the natural handling of large deformations, the ease of implementation of higher-order approximations, and the independence between integration points and interpolation nodes; however, this comes at a cost, usually in the form of an increased computational effort (especially in weak-form methods) and/or lack of robustness (particularly in strong-form, collocation methods). Among meshfree methods, Smooth Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) is arguably the most widely used technique for multiphase/free-surface flows [9]. On the other hand, mesh-based methods [10] still hold a prevalent position in the community, with more than half a century of developments and accomplishments; they are customarily divided into interface tracking and interface capturing methods depending on whether the interface is explicitly described (Lagrangian approach), or defined implicitly by an auxiliary function (Eulerian approach). In the former group we find the front-tracking [11], and Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian (ALE) methods [12], [13]. Instances of interface-capturing schemes are the Volume-Of-Fluid (VOF) method [14] and improvements such as the PLIC (‘Piecewise Linear Interface Calculation’) schemes [15] or the hybrid geometric/algebraic VOF approach [16], all of them featuring excellent mass conservation properties; the Phase-Field (PF) method [17], whose diffuse interface technique offers advantages when modeling physical systems such as fracture propagation [18] or biological membranes [19]; the Immersed Boundary Method and the Level Set (LS) method [20], [21], [22], of widespread use in moving-interface problems due to its flexibility when dealing with topologically complex domains. Many other techniques build upon the previous mesh-based methods: thus, the Particle Level Set (PLS) method by Enright and co-workers [23], [24], the Moment-Of-Fluid (MOF) method by Dyadechko & Shashkov [25], the hybrid particle MAC method by Zheng et al. [26], the Cellwise Conservative Unsplit VOF method by Comminal and collaborators [27], or the improved Polygonal Area Mapping (iPAM) approach by Zhang and Fogelson [28], [29]. And yet, in a number of situations (thin filaments, stretching flows, boundary layers, interface merging/breaking, etc.), the spatial resolution required by mesh-based methods takes such a toll on their computational efficiency as to render them unsuitable for everyday engineering practice. In this context, Adaptive Mesh Refinement (AMR) presents itself as an invaluable tool.

Isotropic adaptation has been extensively used to account for the large disparity of scales found in many interface problems. The idea is to compute the solution up to a certain accuracy defined by an error tolerance, according to proper error estimators; in this sense, we highlight the pioneering work on error estimators by Babuška and Rheinboldt [30] within a Finite Element framework. Improvements on mesh-based methods such as the Narrow-Band Level Set method by Gómez, Hernández and López [31], the Adaptive Moment-Of-Fluid (AMF-MOF) method by Ahn & Shashkov [32], the reconnection-based scheme by Bo and Shashkov [33], the 3D AMR-capable level set method by Morgan and Waltz [34], the adaptive, Fixed-Mesh ALE method by Baiges et al. [35], or the Discontinuous-Galerkin AMR algorithm by Papoutsakis and co-workers [36] are all examples of isotropic AMR. When the solution shows directional features, anisotropic mesh refinement [37], [38], [39] has an edge over the isotropic approach: the ability to prescribe not only the size, but also the shape and orientation of the elements comprising the mesh allows for similar levels of accuracy with fewer degrees of freedom. Recent developments of anisotropic AMR for interface problems include the anisotropic Level Set method by Bui and collaborators [40], the domain meshing technique by Dapogny and co-workers [41], the anisotropic Level Set – Immersed Boundary Method by Abgrall et al. [42], the norm-oriented formulation proposed by Brèthes and Dervieux [43], or the adaptive ALE method by Barral, Olivier and Alauzet [44]. Moreover, the development of efficient and scalable, quality anisotropic mesh generators that integrate seamlessly within a Finite Element framework is a topic of active research [45]. Though with a phenomenal potential, anisotropic AMR for moving interfaces is still in its infancy [46].

A key component to all methods dealing with moving interfaces is the discretization of the transport operator (“total” or “material derivative”) representing the bulk motion of a certain scalar or vector quantity. This is especially relevant in Fluid Mechanics, where a great number of applications (viscoelastic, multiphase, combustion or turbulent flows, to name a few) can be formulated as a system of convection–reaction–diffusion equations in which the convective terms, dominant for high Peclet numbers, arise as a well-known source of numerical difficulties [47], [48], [49]. In contrast to Eulerian techniques, semi-Lagrangian schemes [50], [51] offer excellent stability properties by circumventing the Courant–Friedrichs–Lewy (CFL) condition, facilitating spatial mesh refinement along with large time steps.

Our purpose in this paper is to introduce ‘A-SLEIPNNIR’ (“Adaptive Semi-Lagrangian Ensemble Implementation of Particle level set for Newtonian and non-Newtonian Interfacial Rheology”), a robust, accurate and efficient technique suitable for moving interface problems. This method features a unified approach leveraging the techniques outlined above: a particle level set method for interface capturing [52], (an)isotropic refinement for spatial resolution [53], and semi-Lagrangian schemes for transport equations [54]. Especially relevant to the method is the role played by the “massless” particles that are passively advected by the velocity field (in a Lagrangian manner), helping us to correct the global level set function at the sub-mesh scale (thus acting as “markers”) by defining local level sets; attending to that dual character, they are denoted interchangeably “Lagrangian particles” and “marker particles” throughout the paper. As such particle correction relies on the level set function keeping a signed-distance character, a re-distancing step, accomplished here by an eikonal-based reinitialization procedure, is mandatory, at least within the region around the interface where particles are used. To the best of our knowledge, there is no previous work on particle level set methods with anisotropic mesh refinement. The merits of the proposed framework are showcased by a series of benchmark problems for interface transport in 2D configurations with analytically supplied, divergence-free velocity fields, while a future work will explore the flexibility of the technique in multiphase flows of incompressible, Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids. The structure of the paper is straightforward: after this Introduction, we present in Section 2 the method proper, describing the numerical tools involved in A-SLEIPNNIR and showing the full time-stepping algorithm; then, we test in Section 3 our method in benchmark problems, analyzing its numerical behavior and comparing the results with the literature; finally, we summarize the main findings of this study in Section 4, highlighting the advantages and drawbacks of the technique.

Section snippets

A-SLEIPNNIR for interface transport problems

This Section presents the mathematical background for the numerical solution of moving interfaces in pure advection problems for which we solve the interface transport equation according to the A-SLEIPNNIR technique. We first provide a description of the interface capturing method employed to tackle the problem at hand; then, we discuss the semi-Lagrangian approach used to advect the level set function, together with the time and space discretizations in a finite element framework; after that,

Numerical results

In this section, we carry out a series of 2D numerical experiments to assess the capabilities of the A-SLEIPNNIR method in passive interface transport using analytically supplied, divergence-free velocity fields.

Remark 4

In the simulations performed in this paper, we choose a fixed, small time step size Δt that, along with a sufficiently high-order explicit Runge–Kutta method, produce a time discretization error low enough to be negligible when compared to the spatial error. The advantage of such

Conclusions

In this work we have introduced A-SLEIPNNIR, a technique suitable for moving interface problems. As shown by an in-depth comparison with the existing literature, the unique combination of a particle level set method for interface capturing, a second-order accurate reinitialization procedure, anisotropic mesh refinement for spatial adaptation, along with a quadratic, semi-Lagrangian advection scheme translates into a computationally cheap method offering state-of-the-art shape preservation,

Acknowledgements

Financial support from project MTM2015-67030-P from Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte, is gratefully acknowledged. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References (82)

  • B. Xie et al.

    Toward efficient and accurate interface capturing on arbitrary hybrid unstructured grids: the THINC method with quadratic surface representation and Gaussian quadrature

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2017)
  • D. Jacqmin

    Calculation of two-phase Navier–Stokes flows using phase-field modeling

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (1999)
  • T. Wick

    Coupling fluid–structure interaction with phase-field fracture

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2016)
  • S. Osher et al.

    Fronts propagating with curvature-dependent speed: algorithms based on Hamilton–Jacobi formulations

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (1988)
  • F. Gibou et al.

    A review of level-set methods and some recent applications

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2018)
  • D. Enright et al.

    A hybrid particle level set method for improved interface capturing

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2002)
  • D. Enright et al.

    A fast and accurate semi-Lagrangian particle level set method

    Comput. Struct.

    (2005)
  • V. Dyadechko et al.

    Reconstruction of multi-material interfaces from moment data

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2008)
  • W. Zheng et al.

    A new incompressibility discretization for a hybrid particle MAC grid representation with surface tension

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2015)
  • R. Comminal et al.

    Cellwise conservative unsplit advection for the volume of fluid method

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2015)
  • H.T. Ahn et al.

    Adaptive moment-of-fluid method

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2009)
  • W. Bo et al.

    Adaptive reconnection-based arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian method

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2015)
  • N. Morgan et al.

    3D level set methods for evolving fronts on tetrahedral meshes with adaptive mesh refinement

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2017)
  • J. Baiges et al.

    An adaptive fixed-mesh ALE method for free surface flows

    Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng.

    (2017)
  • A. Papoutsakis et al.

    An efficient Adaptive Mesh Refinement (AMR) algorithm for the discontinuous Galerkin method: applications for the computation of compressible two-phase flow

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2018)
  • P.-J. Frey et al.

    Anisotropic mesh adaptation for CFD computations

    Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng.

    (2005)
  • V. Dolejší et al.

    A continuous hp-mesh model for adaptive discontinuous Galerkin schemes

    Appl. Numer. Math.

    (2018)
  • C. Dapogny et al.

    Three-dimensional adaptive domain remeshing, implicit domain meshing, and applications to free and moving boundary problems

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2014)
  • R. Abgrall et al.

    An immersed boundary method using unstructured anisotropic mesh adaptation combined with level-sets and penalization techniques

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2014)
  • G. Brèthes et al.

    Anisotropic norm-oriented mesh adaptation for a Poisson problem

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2016)
  • N. Barral et al.

    Time-accurate anisotropic mesh adaptation for three-dimensional time-dependent problems with body-fitted moving geometries

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2017)
  • F. Alauzet et al.

    A decade of progress on anisotropic mesh adaptation for computational fluid dynamics

    Comput. Aided Des.

    (2016)
  • C.-W. Shu

    High order WENO and DG methods for time-dependent convection-dominated PDEs: a brief survey of several recent developments

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2016)
  • H. Aguerre et al.

    An oscillation-free flow solver based on flux reconstruction

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2018)
  • J. Strain

    Semi-Lagrangian methods for level set equations

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (1999)
  • J.L. Prieto

    SLEIPNNIR: a multiscale, particle level set method for Newtonian and non-Newtonian interface flows

    Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng.

    (2016)
  • J. Carpio et al.

    An anisotropic, fully adaptive algorithm for the solution of convection dominated equations with semi-Lagrangian schemes

    Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng.

    (2014)
  • J. Carpio et al.

    A local anisotropic adaptive algorithm for the solution of low-Mach transient combustion problems

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2016)
  • S. Zahedi et al.

    Delta function approximations in level set methods by distance function extension

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2010)
  • L. Jiang et al.

    A fast particle level set method with optimized particle correction procedure for interface capturing

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (2015)
  • S.T. Zalesak

    Fully multidimensional flux-corrected transport algorithms for fluids

    J. Comput. Phys.

    (1979)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text