层流条件下 FDA 基准喷嘴几何形状内的血液损伤分析:预测对软件和非牛顿粘度模型的敏感性

Symmetry Pub Date : 2024-09-06 DOI:10.3390/sym16091165
Gautham Krishnamoorthy, Nasim Gholizadeh
{"title":"层流条件下 FDA 基准喷嘴几何形状内的血液损伤分析:预测对软件和非牛顿粘度模型的敏感性","authors":"Gautham Krishnamoorthy, Nasim Gholizadeh","doi":"10.3390/sym16091165","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is a prevailing consensus that most Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) frameworks can accurately predict global variables under laminar flow conditions within the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) benchmark nozzle geometry. However, variations in derived variables, such as strain rate and vorticity, may arise due to differences in numerical solvers and gradient evaluation methods, which can subsequently impact predictions related to blood damage and non-Newtonian flow behavior. To examine this, flow symmetry indices, vortex characteristics, and blood damage—were assessed using Newtonian and four non-Newtonian viscosity models with CFD codes Ansys Fluent and OpenFOAM on identical meshes. At Reynolds number (Re) 500, symmetry breakdown and complex vortex shapes were predicted with some non-Newtonian models in both OpenFOAM and Ansys Fluent, whereas these phenomena were not observed with the Newtonian model. This contradicted the expectation that employing a non-Newtonian model would delay the onset of turbulence. Similarly, at Re 2000, symmetry breakdown occurred sooner (following the sudden expansion section) with the non-Newtonian models in both Ansys Fluent and OpenFOAM. Vortex identification based on the Q-criterion resulted in distinctly different vortex shapes in Ansys Fluent and OpenFOAM. Blood damage assessments showed greater prediction variations among the non-Newtonian models at lower Reynolds numbers.","PeriodicalId":501198,"journal":{"name":"Symmetry","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Blood Damage Analysis within the FDA Benchmark Nozzle Geometry at Laminar Conditions: Prediction Sensitivities to Software and Non-Newtonian Viscosity Models\",\"authors\":\"Gautham Krishnamoorthy, Nasim Gholizadeh\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/sym16091165\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There is a prevailing consensus that most Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) frameworks can accurately predict global variables under laminar flow conditions within the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) benchmark nozzle geometry. However, variations in derived variables, such as strain rate and vorticity, may arise due to differences in numerical solvers and gradient evaluation methods, which can subsequently impact predictions related to blood damage and non-Newtonian flow behavior. To examine this, flow symmetry indices, vortex characteristics, and blood damage—were assessed using Newtonian and four non-Newtonian viscosity models with CFD codes Ansys Fluent and OpenFOAM on identical meshes. At Reynolds number (Re) 500, symmetry breakdown and complex vortex shapes were predicted with some non-Newtonian models in both OpenFOAM and Ansys Fluent, whereas these phenomena were not observed with the Newtonian model. This contradicted the expectation that employing a non-Newtonian model would delay the onset of turbulence. Similarly, at Re 2000, symmetry breakdown occurred sooner (following the sudden expansion section) with the non-Newtonian models in both Ansys Fluent and OpenFOAM. Vortex identification based on the Q-criterion resulted in distinctly different vortex shapes in Ansys Fluent and OpenFOAM. Blood damage assessments showed greater prediction variations among the non-Newtonian models at lower Reynolds numbers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501198,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Symmetry\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Symmetry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/sym16091165\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Symmetry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/sym16091165","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们普遍认为,大多数计算流体动力学(CFD)框架都能准确预测食品药品管理局(FDA)基准喷嘴几何形状内层流条件下的全局变量。然而,由于数值求解器和梯度评估方法的不同,应变率和涡度等衍生变量可能会出现差异,进而影响与血液损伤和非牛顿流体行为相关的预测。为了研究这一点,我们使用牛顿粘度模型和四种非牛顿粘度模型,在相同网格上使用 CFD 代码 Ansys Fluent 和 OpenFOAM 对流动对称性指数、涡流特征和血液损伤进行了评估。在雷诺数 (Re) 500 时,OpenFOAM 和 Ansys Fluent 中的一些非牛顿模型预测出了对称性破坏和复杂的涡旋形状,而牛顿模型则没有观察到这些现象。这与采用非牛顿模型会延迟湍流发生的预期相矛盾。同样,在 Re 2000 时,Ansys Fluent 和 OpenFOAM 中的非牛顿模型更早出现对称性破坏(在突然膨胀部分之后)。在 Ansys Fluent 和 OpenFOAM 中,基于 Q 标准的涡流识别导致了截然不同的涡流形状。在较低雷诺数下,血液损伤评估显示非牛顿模型之间的预测差异更大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Blood Damage Analysis within the FDA Benchmark Nozzle Geometry at Laminar Conditions: Prediction Sensitivities to Software and Non-Newtonian Viscosity Models
There is a prevailing consensus that most Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) frameworks can accurately predict global variables under laminar flow conditions within the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) benchmark nozzle geometry. However, variations in derived variables, such as strain rate and vorticity, may arise due to differences in numerical solvers and gradient evaluation methods, which can subsequently impact predictions related to blood damage and non-Newtonian flow behavior. To examine this, flow symmetry indices, vortex characteristics, and blood damage—were assessed using Newtonian and four non-Newtonian viscosity models with CFD codes Ansys Fluent and OpenFOAM on identical meshes. At Reynolds number (Re) 500, symmetry breakdown and complex vortex shapes were predicted with some non-Newtonian models in both OpenFOAM and Ansys Fluent, whereas these phenomena were not observed with the Newtonian model. This contradicted the expectation that employing a non-Newtonian model would delay the onset of turbulence. Similarly, at Re 2000, symmetry breakdown occurred sooner (following the sudden expansion section) with the non-Newtonian models in both Ansys Fluent and OpenFOAM. Vortex identification based on the Q-criterion resulted in distinctly different vortex shapes in Ansys Fluent and OpenFOAM. Blood damage assessments showed greater prediction variations among the non-Newtonian models at lower Reynolds numbers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信