arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2412.18751cond-mat.softphysics.flu-dyn
收藏

由扩散界面自由能模型构建的两种表观不同的界面应力公式

Two apparently different interfacial stress formulations constructed from the diffuse interface free energy model

Osaka Metropolitan University(大阪公立大学)

Takeshi Omori

AI总结:

本研究针对扩散界面方法中两种表观不同的毛细应力公式的混淆问题,从理论上分析单组分及多组分流体场景,明确二者分别对应毛细应力与非平衡不可逆过程应力,且单组分不可压缩流中二者速度场一致但压力场不同。

摘要:

为在扩散界面方法中表达毛细应力,文献中存在两种不同的公式:一种与密度成正比,另一种与密度梯度成正比。令人困惑的是,这两种表观不同的公式被广泛用于同一目的,却很少有人关注它们的差异。本研究从理论上证明,仅后者代表毛细应力,前者代表流体中非平衡不可逆过程产生的应力。研究不仅分析了单组分流体的公式,还分析了多组分流体的情况。在单组分流体不可压缩流动的预测中,两种公式得到的速度场相同,但即便在这种情况下,压力场也存在差异。

英文摘要:

To express the capillary stress in the diffuse interface method, there are two different formulations in the literature: one formulation is proportional to the density and the other is to the density gradient. Confusingly, these two apparently different formulations both have been widely used for the same purpose without much attention in the difference. In the present study, we theoretically show that only the latter represents the capillary stress and the former represents the stress due to the non-equilibrium irreversible process in the fluid. The formulations are analyzed not only for the one-component fluid but also for the multi-component fluid. In the prediction of the incompressible flow of one-component fluids, the two formulations turn out to give the identical velocity field, but not the pressure field even in this case.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑