Skip to main content
Cornell University
We gratefully acknowledge support from the Simons Foundation, member institutions, and all contributors. Donate
arxiv logo > physics > arXiv:1310.8412

Help | Advanced Search

arXiv logo
Cornell University Logo

quick links

  • Login
  • Help Pages
  • About

Physics > Fluid Dynamics

arXiv:1310.8412 (physics)
[Submitted on 31 Oct 2013]

Title:Wetting Boundary Conditions in Phase-Field-Based Simulation of Binary Fluids: Some Comparative Studies and New Development

Authors:Jun-Jie Huang, Haibo Huang, Xinzhu Wang
View a PDF of the paper titled Wetting Boundary Conditions in Phase-Field-Based Simulation of Binary Fluids: Some Comparative Studies and New Development, by Jun-Jie Huang and Haibo Huang and Xinzhu Wang
View PDF
Abstract:We studied several wetting boundary conditions (WBCs) in the simulation of binary fluids based on phase-field theory. Five WBCs, three belonging to the surface energy (SE) formulation using the linear, cubic and sine functions (denoted as LinSE, CubSE and SinSE), the fourth using a geometric formulation (Geom), and the fifth using a characteristic interpolation (CI), were compared with each other through the study of several problems: (1) the static contact angle of a drop; (2) a Poiseuille flow-driven liquid column; (3) a wettability gradient (WG)-driven liquid column; (4) drop dewetting. It was found that while all WBCs can predict the static contact angle fairly accurately, they may affect the simulation outcomes of dynamic problems differently, depending on the driving mechanism. For the flow-driven problem, to use different WBCs had almost no effect on the flow characteristics over a large scale. But for other capillarity-driven problems, the WBC had some noticeable effects. For the WG-driven liquid column, Geom gave the most consistent prediction between the drop velocity and dynamic contact angles, and LinSE delivered the poorest prediction in this aspect. Except for Geom, the dynamic contact angle differed from the prescribed (static) one when other WBCs were used. For drop dewetting, Geom led to the most violent drop motion whereas CubSE caused the weakest motion; the initial contact line velocity was also found to be dependent on the WBC. For several problems, CubSE and SinSE gave almost the same results, and those by Geom and CI were close as well, possibly due to similar consideration in their design. Besides various comparisons, a new implementation that may be used for all WBCs was proposed to mimic the wall energy relaxation and control the degree of slip. This new procedure made it possible to allow the simulations to match experimental measurements well.
Subjects: Fluid Dynamics (physics.flu-dyn)
Cite as: arXiv:1310.8412 [physics.flu-dyn]
  (or arXiv:1310.8412v1 [physics.flu-dyn] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1310.8412
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
Related DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/fld.3975
DOI(s) linking to related resources

Submission history

From: Jun-Jie Huang [view email]
[v1] Thu, 31 Oct 2013 07:15:27 UTC (1,300 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled Wetting Boundary Conditions in Phase-Field-Based Simulation of Binary Fluids: Some Comparative Studies and New Development, by Jun-Jie Huang and Haibo Huang and Xinzhu Wang
  • View PDF
  • TeX Source
  • Other Formats
view license
Current browse context:
physics.flu-dyn
< prev   |   next >
new | recent | 2013-10
Change to browse by:
physics

References & Citations

  • NASA ADS
  • Google Scholar
  • Semantic Scholar
export BibTeX citation Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

×
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy logo Reddit logo

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Recommenders and Search Tools

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
  • Author
  • Venue
  • Institution
  • Topic

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
  • About
  • Help
  • contact arXivClick here to contact arXiv Contact
  • subscribe to arXiv mailingsClick here to subscribe Subscribe
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Web Accessibility Assistance
  • arXiv Operational Status
    Get status notifications via email or slack