Suppr超能文献

商业计算流体动力学(CFD)软件包中粒子追踪算法的比较:沉降与扩散

Comparison of particle tracking algorithms in commercial CFD packages: sedimentation and diffusion.

作者信息

Robinson Risa J, Snyder Pam, Oldham Michael J

机构信息

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, New York 14623, USA.

出版信息

Inhal Toxicol. 2007 May;19(6-7):517-31. doi: 10.1080/08958370701260889.

Abstract

Computational fluid dynamic modeling software has enabled microdosimetry patterns of inhaled toxins and toxicants to be predicted and visualized, and is being used in inhalation toxicology and risk assessment. These predicted microdosimetry patterns in airway structures are derived from predicted airflow patterns within these airways and particle tracking algorithms used in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software packages. Although these commercial CFD codes have been tested for accuracy under various conditions, they have not been well tested for respiratory flows in general. Nor has their particle tracking algorithm accuracy been well studied. In this study, three software packages, Fluent Discrete Phase Model (DPM), Fluent Fine Particle Model (FPM), and ANSYS CFX, were evaluated. Sedimentation and diffusion were each isolated in a straight tube geometry and tested for accuracy. A range of flow rates corresponding to adult low activity (minute ventilation = 10 L/min) and to heavy exertion (minute ventilation = 60 L/min) were tested by varying the range of dimensionless diffusion and sedimentation parameters found using the Weibel symmetric 23 generation lung morphology. Numerical results for fully developed parabolic and uniform (slip) profiles were compared respectively, to Pich (1972) and Yu (1977) analytical sedimentation solutions. Schum and Yeh (1980) equations for sedimentation were also compared. Numerical results for diffusional deposition were compared to analytical solutions of Ingham (1975) for parabolic and uniform profiles. Significant differences were found among the various CFD software packages and between numerical and analytical solutions. Therefore, it is prudent to validate CFD predictions against analytical solutions in idealized geometry before tackling the complex geometries of the respiratory tract.

摘要

计算流体动力学建模软件已能够预测并可视化吸入毒素和毒物的微剂量模式,且正应用于吸入毒理学和风险评估。气道结构中这些预测的微剂量模式源自这些气道内预测的气流模式以及计算流体动力学(CFD)软件包中使用的颗粒追踪算法。尽管这些商业CFD代码已在各种条件下进行了准确性测试,但总体而言,它们尚未针对呼吸气流进行充分测试。其颗粒追踪算法的准确性也未得到充分研究。在本研究中,对三个软件包进行了评估,即Fluent离散相模型(DPM)、Fluent细颗粒模型(FPM)和ANSYS CFX。分别在直管几何形状中分离沉降和扩散,并测试其准确性。通过改变使用Weibel对称23级肺形态学得到的无量纲扩散和沉降参数范围,测试了一系列对应于成人低活动量(分钟通气量 = 10 L/min)和剧烈运动(分钟通气量 = 60 L/min)的流速。分别将充分发展的抛物线型和均匀(滑移)型剖面的数值结果与Pich(1972年)和Yu(1977年)的解析沉降解进行比较。还比较了Schum和Yeh(1980年)的沉降方程。将扩散沉积的数值结果与Ingham(1975年)针对抛物线型和均匀型剖面的解析解进行比较。在各种CFD软件包之间以及数值解与解析解之间发现了显著差异。因此,在处理呼吸道的复杂几何形状之前,根据理想化几何形状中的解析解验证CFD预测是谨慎的做法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验