Mass Conservation for S-CLSVOF

ashish.vinayak · March 18, 2019, 05:47

Hello all,

I have implemented the S-CLSVOF method (Albadawi et al. 2013) in OpenFOAM-5.x. However, I am facing some serious issues with mass conservation for the benchmark circular bubble at equilibrium test case (also tested in the original paper). Has anyone implemented the method and can provide some support?

In the images, fig 1 shows the average void fraction over time, fig 2 shows the development of curvature error over time. I am unable to produce the same curvature error as the paper says. I find that really weird. I am certain that there are no errors in programming.

Thank you.

kk415 · August 10, 2019, 06:10

Hello Ashish,

I have also observed the same thing when applied CLSVOF. It shows poor mass conversation than VOF provided you calculating density as a function of Heaviside.

ashish.vinayak · August 10, 2019, 08:13

Hey Krishna,

I tried it with and without the heaviside*function. It didn't make a huge difference regarding mass conservation.

I have since then migrated to isoAdvector.

Good luck !

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Match Pressure Inlet/Outlet Boundary Condition Mass Flow Rate	MSchneid	Fluent UDF and Scheme Programming	3	February 23, 2019 07:00
Can FVM have mass sinks/ mass conservation problems?	whuup	FLUENT	0	March 8, 2014 19:48
mass conservation in VOF method	meith	Main CFD Forum	2	August 12, 2010 12:30
lost of mass conservation	jjchristophe	FLUENT	0	June 18, 2010 06:44
Mass Conservation in LES	Jaswant	Main CFD Forum	8	July 4, 2005 23:32

August 10, 2019, 06:10		#2
kk415 Senior Member krishna kant Join Date: Feb 2016 Location: Hyderabad, India Posts: 133 Rep Power: 10	Hello Ashish, I have also observed the same thing when applied CLSVOF. It shows poor mass conversation than VOF provided you calculating density as a function of Heaviside.

August 10, 2019, 08:13		#3
ashish.vinayak Member Ashish Vinayak Join Date: Mar 2015 Location: Wuppertal, Germany Posts: 50 Rep Power: 11	Hey Krishna, I tried it with and without the heaviside*function. It didn't make a huge difference regarding mass conservation. I have since then migrated to isoAdvector. Good luck !