Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

New features!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

123 submissions , 104 unreviewed
3,547 questions , 1,198 unanswered
4,552 answers , 19,366 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
411 active unimported users
More ...

How can one build a multi-scale physics model of fluid flow phenomena?

+ 8 like - 0 dislike
14 views

I am working on a problem in Computational Fluid Dynamics, modeling multi-phase fluid flow through porous media. Though there are continuum equations to describe macroscopic flow (darcy's law, buckley leverett equations, etc), these models do not apply for heterogenous media (with transport properties). We could, however, try to use the microscopic model (lattice boltzmann, or pore network models) which would be more faithful to the dynamics of the macroscopic heterogeoneous media. But any computational simulation of this model would run too slowly to be worth it. The principals of conservation laws apply at both scales (conservation of mass, momentum, energy), but the equations that describe these laws differ at each scale. How then, can we upscale microscopic physics in a computationally efficient manner? Are there any techniques for describing microscopic phenomena at the macroscopic level without such a heavy computational cost? Is there any technique to build a continuum description at all scales of the problem?

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
asked Jan 15, 2012 in Theoretical Physics by Paul_3 (40 points) [ no revision ]
How is this question related to lattice QFT? Also, I don't understand why you want to use a microscopic model. Probably you just need to generalize a bit the macroscopic equations you started with. I must say I don't quite understand what you mean by heterogenous media. But then I don't know much about fluid dynamics so feel free to ignore my comments (except the first one)

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
Sorry... I would have tagged it as lattice-boltzmann, if I had the reputation points to do so.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
This is not my area at all, so this might be a particularly ignorant comment, but can you not simply simulate a small section at the microscopic level for a range of different conditions for the boundaries, and then piece together these into a solution for a larger volume, repeating several times if necessary? The basic idea being that there are many areas for which exactly the same calculation is necessary, and probably relatively few distinct such calculations, so better to build a lookup table than to calculate anew each time.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)

1 Answer

+ 4 like - 0 dislike

Your problem is highly nontrivial. The theoretical tool to be used is the renormalization group, which extracts the relevant dynamics of the large scales of the system. But if we were able to use it "in a blind way", then we would have a technique to study the macroscopic dynamics of any microscopic system... and this would made a lot of my colleagues unemployed :) The basic idea is to make "blocks" or perform a bit of "coarse-graining" in your original system and see if you can describe the resulting dynamics with the same microscopic laws, but changing a bit the parameters. If you can, then you're lucky. You get a "flow" in your parameter space, and the fixed points give you the macroscopical dynamics: how the system will behave in the thermodynamic limit.

The alternative approach, which is used very often, is to try to write the most general local partial differential equation which is compatible with all your physical requirements and symmetries. These equations will have "open" parameters that you will put later on, in a semi-empirical way. You can see examples in A.L. Barabasi and E.H. Stanley, "Fractal concepts in surface growth", and many other places.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
answered Jan 17, 2012 by Javier Rodriguez Lag (315 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$ysi$\varnothing$sOverflow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...