Comparative study of WCSPH, EISPH and explicit incompressible-compressible SPH (EICSPH) for multi-phase flow with high density difference

Abstract

This study presents three Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) methods capable of handling high-density differences in violent incompressible multiphase flows. The conventional Weakly Compressible SPH (WCSPH) is reformulated into a quasi-Lagrangian framework based on Arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian (ALE) context. The Explicit Incompressible SPH (EISPH) method is extended to handle multiphase flows and reformulated in the ALE framework. The Explicit Incompressible-Compressible SPH (EICSPH) method, which can handle both compressible and incompressible phases, is developed by combining these two approaches in a fully explicit algorithm. The proposed methods are validated and compared through four benchmark problems including Rayleigh-Taylor instability, hydrostatic, liquid sloshing and dam break problems. Firstly, the stability and accuracy of interface modeling of the three methods were verified through Rayleigh-Taylor instability with small density differences. In the hydrostatic problem with a large density difference, the results from all three methods exhibit good agreement in the pressure distribution. Particularly, EICSPH demonstrates the faster convergence when compared to WCSPH, with EISPH showing fastest convergence overall. In the transient sloshing problem, all three methods quantitatively converged to the experimental results and exhibited good agreement, although slight pressure noise was observed in WCSPH initially. Finally, in the dam break problem, all three methods successfully simulated sharp interfaces without non-physical voids. The temporal variations of pressure and height were well predicted by all three methods, with EISPH showing better conformity to the water-air interface morphology obtained from other incompressible numerical methods compared to WCSPH and EICSPH. Additionally, the impact of air speed of sound was examined in EICSPH, where while the difference in pressure variation at the probe was minimal, differences were observed in energy dissipation and the progression of the free surface due to the air cushion effect.