Radiative heat transfer in strongly forward scattering media using the discrete ordinates method

Abstract

The discrete ordinates method (DOM) is widely used to solve the radiative transfer equation, often yielding satisfactory results. However, in the presence of strongly forward scattering media, this method does not generally conserve the scattering energy and the phase function asymmetry factor. Because of this, the normalization of the phase function has been proposed to guarantee that the scattering energy and the asymmetry factor are conserved. Various authors have used different normalization techniques. Three of these are compared in the present work, along with two other methods, one based on the finite volume method (FVM) and another one based on the spherical harmonics discrete ordinates method (SHDOM). In addition, the approximation of the Henyey–Greenstein phase function by a different one is investigated as an alternative to the phase function normalization. The approximate phase function is given by the sum of a Dirac delta function, which accounts for the forward scattering peak, and a smoother scaled phase function. In this study, these techniques are applied to three scalar radiative transfer test cases, namely a three-dimensional cubic domain with a purely scattering medium, an axisymmetric cylindrical enclosure containing an emitting–absorbing–scattering medium, and a three-dimensional transient problem with collimated irradiation. The present results show that accurate predictions are achieved for strongly forward scattering media when the phase function is normalized in such a way that both the scattered energy and the phase function asymmetry factor are conserved. The normalization of the phase function may be avoided using the FVM or the SHDOM to evaluate the in-scattering term of the radiative transfer equation. Both methods yield results whose accuracy is similar to that obtained using the DOM along with normalization of the phase function. Very satisfactory predictions were also achieved using the delta-M phase function, while the delta-Eddington phase function and the transport approximation may perform poorly.