Comparison of interface capturing methods for the simulation of two-phase flow in a unified low-Mach framework
Victor Boniou (EM2C), Thomas Schmitt (EM2C), Aymeric Vi\'e (EM2C)

TL;DR
This study compares four interface capturing methods within a unified low-Mach framework, evaluating their accuracy, conservation, and suitability for simulating two-phase flows, especially in capillary-driven scenarios.
Contribution
It introduces a comprehensive comparison of VOF, SLS, ACLS, and CLSVOF methods within a unified low-Mach framework, highlighting CLSVOF as the most promising for two-phase flow simulations.
Findings
CLSVOF shows superior conservation and topology accuracy.
VOF, CLSVOF, and ACLS tend to create artificial structures.
SLS suffers from conservation issues at mesh resolution limits.
Abstract
This paper proposes a comparison of four popular interface capturing methods : the volume of fluid (VOF), the standard level set (SLS), the accurate conservative level set (ACLS) and the coupled level set and volume of fluid (CLSVOF). All methods are embedded into a unified low-Mach framework based on a Cartesian-grid finite-volume discretization. This framework includes a sharp transport of the interface, a wellbalanced surface tension discretization and a consistent mass and momentum transport which allows capillary-driven simulations with high density ratio. The comparison relies on shared metrics for geometrical accuracy, mass and momentum conservation which exposes the weakness and strengths of each method. Finally, the versatility and capabilities of the proposed solver are demonstrated on the simulation of a 3D head-on collision of two water droplets. Overall, all methods manage…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
