Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 72 references

A robust computational framework for the mixture-energy-consistent six-equation two-phase model with instantaneous mechanical relaxation terms

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper establishes that shock solutions of a six-equation two-phase flow model become discretization-dependent at extreme pressure ratios, and that a wave-propagation HLLC scheme with carefully chosen approximate jump conditions is a ro

desk verdict Useful comparison and a clean algebraic link between HLLC closures, but 'mesh convergence' is asserted, not measured, and that is the load-bearing point. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.26284 v3 pith:UF4S2ZWO submitted 2025-09-30 math.NA cs.NA

Giuseppe Orlando (CMAP) , Ward Haegeman (CMAP) , Marica Pelanti (ENSTA Paris) , Marc Massot (CMAP) This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.NAcs.NA MSC 65M0876T1035L65
keywords six-equationtwo-phasemodelnon-conservativeproductsHLLCRiemannsolverwave-propagationschemepath-conservativeschemesinstantaneousmechanicalrelaxationKapilashockjumpconditions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tackles a practical question: when a compressible two-phase flow is simulated with a six-equation model that is then relaxed to mechanical equilibrium, do different numerical methods give the same answer? Because the model contains non-conservative products, it has no complete set of jump conditions, so the answer is not guaranteed. The authors compare several first-order schemes on very fine meshes and find that for most configurations the methods agree, but under extreme pressure ratios they converge to different shock profiles even though total energy is conserved. They trace this to different partitions of phasic energies across the shock layer and argue that an HLLC wave-propagation scheme, together with a double-integration-by-parts treatment of non-conservative terms, forms a robust framework. The practical message is that for moderate conditions the five-equation model's solutions are insensitive to the discretization, while at extreme conditions the model itself does not single out one shock profile.

What carries the argument

The key object is the HLLC approximate Riemann solver for the six-equation system, whose intermediate states are closed by approximate jump conditions for the phasic total energies. The paper shows that two distinct closures found in the literature are two discretizations of the same condition, and that the closure adopted here gives a consistent representation of contact discontinuities, including the non-conservative term u·Σ. The fluctuation form of the wave-propagation method then treats non-conservative terms only at contacts, which is what makes it robust. A second mechanism is the reformulation of the double-integration-by-parts treatment as a path-conservative scheme, which places it

What would settle it

A grid-convergence study on the epoxy-spinel shock (for instance, 131,072 cells with measured L1 errors against a reference solution) that shows whether the spread between HLLC wave-propagation, HLLC plus double-integration-by-parts, and Rusanov plus double-integration-by-parts shrinks to zero. If the profiles collapse, the observed spread is under-resolution; if they persist while errors plateau, the non-uniqueness is a property of the model. A complementary test is to compute the intermediate volume fraction using a different path in a path-conservative scheme and check whether the value cha

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the six-equation single-velocity two-phase model, and therefore the five-equation model obtained from it by instantaneous pressure relaxation, does not determine a unique shock solution. At extreme pressure ratios, different discretizations of the non-conservative phasic-energy terms converge to different weak solutions, corresponding to different partitions of phasic energies across the shock, even though mixture momentum and total energy remain conserved. The paper also proves that the double-integration-by-parts treatment of non-conservative products, commonly used for diffusion operators, is precisely a path-conservative scheme with a linear path, which explains

Load-bearing premise

The conclusions about solver-dependent convergence rest on the assumption that the fine-mesh solutions have genuinely converged: the paper asserts mesh convergence from visual inspection of profiles on meshes up to 65,536 cells and reports no convergence rates or error norms.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For most practical two-phase flow configurations, all tested schemes agree after instantaneous mechanical relaxation, so the non-uniqueness has limited practical impact at moderate pressure ratios.
  • At extreme pressure ratios, the six-equation model without relaxation is not predictive at the level of shock profiles: different solvers select different weak solutions even on fine meshes.
  • HLLC-based schemes handle the water-air shock tube at standard Courant numbers, while Rusanov-based central-upwind schemes require smaller time steps, making HLLC wave-propagation the most robust of the tested strategies.
  • Because the double-integration-by-parts treatment is a path-conservative scheme, the known limitations of path-conservative methods, such as possible convergence to non-entropic weak solutions, carry over to that treatment.
  • For out-of-equilibrium flows where pressure relaxation is finite or absent, the six-equation model's shock non-uniqueness may become problematic, which argues for moving to better-posed seven-equation models.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The findings imply that a 'converged' shock profile for the five-equation model is actually one point in a family of weak solutions; code certification for high-pressure-ratio applications should include a sensitivity study over the discretization of the non-conservative product, not just mesh refinement.
  • A natural extension would be to parameterize the path in a path-conservative scheme and compute the resulting shock-layer partition of phasic energies, giving a quantitative map of the non-uniqueness without needing very fine meshes.
  • For finite-rate relaxation, where the six-equation model is a standalone model, the choice of interfacial pressure and the spatial discretization interact, so combined robustness tests are needed before trusting predictions near material interfaces.
  • Comparing converged six-equation solutions with those of the full seven-equation model under identical extreme conditions would reveal how much of the spread is an artifact of the reduced model's missing jump conditions.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies a six-equation single-velocity two-phase flow model with instantaneous mechanical relaxation, used as a numerical path to the five-equation Kapila model. The authors compare several first-order finite-volume discretizations of the homogeneous hyperbolic operator, including an HLLC wave-propagation scheme, Rusanov/HLLC fluxes combined with Bassi–Rebay or Crouzet-type treatments of non-conservative products. A central contribution is an algebraic equivalence result in Section 3.2 showing that two HLLC energy closures used in the literature are different discrete realizations of the same approximate jump condition, and a formal path-conservative reformulation of the BR approach in Section 5. Numerical tests cover homogeneous problems and cases with instantaneous mechanical relaxation. The paper's main claim is that, while most test cases give nearly identical results after relaxation, at extreme pressure ratios different schemes converge to different solutions, reflecting the absence of uniquely defined jump conditions for the model.

Significance. If the central claim is supported, the paper makes an important and cautionary contribution: shock solutions of the six-equation model, and hence some solutions of the Kapila model, are discretization-dependent at extreme pressure ratios even when global conservation is enforced. The algebraic analysis in Section 3.2 is a genuine clarification of the literature, and the path-conservative interpretation of BR-type discretizations in Section 5 is a useful conceptual bridge. The numerical study covers a wide range of benchmarks, including cavitation, strong shocks, and a 2D problem, and uses open-source code and no fitted parameters, which are methodological strengths. However, the paper's principal conclusion is explicitly tied to a claim of mesh convergence that is asserted but never quantitatively demonstrated, and this gap is load-bearing because the model is non-conservative and different schemes may converge to different weak limits.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4 (introductory paragraph), Section 8] The paper repeatedly asserts mesh convergence ('we employ the fine mesh, so as to achieve mesh convergence'; 'we have achieved mesh convergence'), but no mesh-refinement sequence, error norm, or convergence rate is reported anywhere. All fine-mesh comparisons are visual (e.g., Figs. 6, 8, 11, 12). This matters for the central claim of Section 1 and the conclusions: for a non-conservative system, first-order schemes have O(h) numerical layers, and different numerical viscosity models can have different convergence paths toward possibly different weak limits. Without measuring that each scheme's own solution is stationary as h→0, the spread in Fig. 12 could be an under-resolution artifact rather than a property of the non-unique jump conditions. I request a quantitative convergence study — e.g., L1 or L∞ errors of key variables (volume fraction, velocity, phasic pressures) for at least N =
  2. [Section 1 and Section 4.3] The phrasing 'different numerical schemes converge to different solutions' is stronger than what the evidence shows. In Section 4.3 the fine-mesh results still show visible differences, but the text only says different schemes 'can converge to different solutions.' The conclusion (Section 8) correctly softens to 'may tend towards different numerical solutions.' The central claim should be stated consistently in its falsifiable form, and the proposed convergence study should be used to decide whether 'converge' is warranted. Without that measurement, the unique-solution claim is not established.
  3. [Section 3.2, Eqs. (23)–(30)] The derivation linking the two HLLC closures is algebraically sound and a strength of the paper. However, the claim just before Eq. (30) that assuming (28) 'owing to (30) is now shown to also yield (24)' should be made explicit: the step from the sum of the two bracketed terms being zero and the second bracket being zero to the first bracket being zero is valid only if the prefactor ρk(u−S) is nonzero. For a stationary contact or a transonic configuration this degenerates. The authors should state this nondegeneracy condition or note that the closure is intended for genuinely supersonic shock waves.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 1] Typo: 'well-know' should be 'well-known'.
  2. [Section 3.2, display before Eq. (30)] The notation for the jump identity is confusing: the formula JϕψK = {{ϕ}}JψK + {{ψ}}JϕK is correct, but the surrounding text uses J·K with inconsistent subscripts (e.g., 'J ˜mkuK { {u} }' should be 'J ˜mkuK {{u}}' — check the placement of the average braces). Minor typographical issue.
  3. [Section 4.3] The comparison with the analytical Euler solution (Fig. 7) is interesting but should be qualified: the 6-equation model with finite-rate (here zero) relaxation is not identical to the Euler equations, even for quasi-pure phases, as the phasic energy equations and non-conservative terms change the shock structure. The text notes this informally, but a sentence making the caveat explicit would avoid a misleading reading.
  4. [Section 5] The reformulation of BR as a path-conservative scheme is a nice contribution, but the claim that this is 'the first rigorous analysis' linking these approaches would benefit from a more precise literature comparison: many works use double integration by parts for non-conservative terms (the paper cites some), and the novelty is the trapezoidal-rule path interpretation. A clearer statement of what exactly is new would help.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: numerical comparison is self-contained; the unmeasured mesh-convergence claim is a limitation, not a circular construction.

full rationale

This paper is a numerical-method comparison, not a derivation whose output is built into its inputs. No parameter is fitted to the target results, and no conclusion is defined in terms of the constants or closures it uses. The 6-equation model and the mechanical-relaxation solver are taken from prior work, including the authors' [51] and [50], but they are the objects under test rather than evidence for the central claim that different discretizations can drive different shock limits; that claim is supported by direct Riemann-problem computations against independent references (the analytical Euler solution, the [52] jump relations, and the BN results of [66]). The reformulation of the Bassi-Rebay treatment as a path-conservative scheme (Section 5, Eqs. (48)-(53)) is a mathematical equivalence, not a renaming of an empirical result. The only notable evidentiary weakness is that the paper asserts mesh convergence ('we employ the fine mesh, so as to achieve mesh convergence', Section 4; 'we have achieved mesh convergence', Section 8) without reporting convergence rates or error norms. That missing measurement weakens the force of the claim that the inter-scheme spread is a converged property, but it is not a circular step: no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction and no equation reduces to its input by construction. The self-citations [33, 50, 51] are not load-bearing in a circular sense; they supply the model and complementary context, while the paper's own conclusions are tested against external benchmarks. No circular step can be exhibited, so the score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted to data; all physical constants and EOS parameters are prescribed test inputs. The only modeling choices are the HLLC closure and the interfacial-pressure relaxation ansatz, listed as axioms. No new physical entities are introduced; the path-conservative reformulation is a mathematical framework, not an entity.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The six-equation model (1a)-(1f) with the stated non-conservative products and the Kapila limit (8) is the governing system; hyperbolicity and the relaxation limit are taken from prior literature [38, 51].
    Section 2 states the model without derivation; the entire study evaluates discretizations of this system only.
  • domain assumption HLLC intermediate states are closed by the approximate jump conditions (24), combined with the phasic momentum approximation (28), which neglects non-conservative contributions through shocks.
    Section 3.2 acknowledges that (24) and (28) are imposed closures, not consequences of the model. All HLLC-based numerical results depend on this choice.
  • standard math Path-conservative consistency with segment paths and trapezoidal quadrature is the relevant criterion for judging robustness of non-conservative discretizations.
    Section 5 uses the standard Parés framework; this criterion is used to explain why BR variants are more robust than the alternative from [19].
  • domain assumption The interfacial pressure is chosen as the acoustic-impedance average (57), and the linear p_I(alpha_1) ansatz (58) is adopted for the instantaneous pressure relaxation.
    Section 6 fixes one relaxation strategy; Section 7 results depend on this choice, although the companion paper [33] explores alternatives.
  • domain assumption First-order Godunov/wave-propagation schemes on 65,536-cell meshes at Courant number 0.9 are representative of the mesh-converged solutions of the non-conservative system.
    Sections 3 and 4 state this design choice, but no quantitative convergence test is reported; the attribution of scheme-to-scheme differences to the model's non-uniqueness relies on this assumption.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A robust computational framework for the mixture-energy-consistent six-equation two-phase model with instantaneous mechanical relaxation terms." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UF4S2ZWO

@misc{pith2026250926284,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A robust computational framework for the mixture-energy-consistent six-equation two-phase model with instantaneous mechanical relaxation terms},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UF4S2ZWO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.26284}
}
read the original abstract

We present a robust computational framework for the numerical solution of a hyperbolic 6-equation single-velocity two-phase system. The system's main interest is that, when combined with instantaneous mechanical relaxation, it recovers the solution of the 5-equation model of Kapila. Several numerical methods based on this strategy have been developed over the years. However, neither the 5- nor 6-equation model admits a complete set of jump conditions because they involve non-conservative products. Different discretizations of these terms in the 6-equation model exist. The precise impact of these discretizations on the numerical solutions of the 5-equation model, in particular for shocks, is still an open question to which this work provides new insights. We consider the phasic total energies as prognostic variables to naturally enforce discrete conservation of total energy and compare the accuracy and robustness of different discretizations for the hyperbolic operator. Namely, we discuss the construction of an HLLC approximate Riemann solver in relation to jump conditions. We then compare an HLLC wave-propagation scheme which includes the non-conservative terms, with Rusanov and HLLC solvers for the conservative part in combination with suitable approaches for the non-conservative terms. We show that some approaches for the discretization of non-conservative terms fit within the framework of path-conservative schemes for hyperbolic problems. We then analyze the use of various numerical strategies on several relevant test cases, showing both the impact of the theoretical shortcomings of the models as well as the importance of the choice of a robust framework for the global numerical strategy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.26284 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Sonic rarefaction test case with the coarse mesh, results at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Sonic rarefaction test case with the fine mesh, results at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Low-density flow test case with the coarse mesh, results at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Low-density flow test case with the fine mesh, results at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Water-air shock tube test case with the coarse mesh, results at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Water-air shock tube test case with the fine mesh, results at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Water-air shock tube test case with the fine mesh, results at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Epoxy-spinel shock test case with the fine mesh, results at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Water-air shock tube test case with instantaneous mechanical relaxation, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Double rarefaction test case with the fine mesh, results at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Epoxy-spinel shock test case with the fine mesh, results at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Epoxy-spinel shock test case with the fine mesh, intermediate state of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: 2D Riemann problem test case, results at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: 2D Riemann problem test case, computational mesh at different refinement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_14.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [60]

    Simple and efficient relaxation meth- ods for interfaces separating compressible fluids, cavitating flows and shocks in multiphase mixtures

    R. Saurel, F. Petitpas, and R.A. Berry. “Simple and efficient relaxation meth- ods for interfaces separating compressible fluids, cavitating flows and shocks in multiphase mixtures”. Journal of Computational Physics 228 (2009), pp. 1678– 1712

    2009

  2. [51]

    A mixture-energy-consistent six-equation two- phase numerical model for fluids with interfaces, cavitation and evaporation waves

    M. Pelanti and K.-M. Shyue. “A mixture-energy-consistent six-equation two- phase numerical model for fluids with interfaces, cavitation and evaporation waves”. Journal of Computational Physics 259 (2014), pp. 331–357

    2014

  3. [19]

    Approximate solutions of the Baer-Nunziato model

    F. Crouzet et al. “Approximate solutions of the Baer-Nunziato model”. ESAIM: Proceedings. Vol. 40. EDP Sciences. 2013, pp. 63–82

    2013

  4. [1]

    A high-order nonconservative ap- proach for hyperbolic equations in fluid dynamics

    R. Abgrall, P. Bacigaluppi, and S. Tokareva. “A high-order nonconservative ap- proach for hyperbolic equations in fluid dynamics”. Computers & Fluids 169 (2018), pp. 10–22

    2018

  5. [2]

    A comment on the computation of non-conservative products

    R. Abgrall and S. Karni. “A comment on the computation of non-conservative products”. Journal of Computational Physics 229 (2010), pp. 2759–2763

    2010

  6. [3]

    High order methods for CFD

    R. Abgrall and M. Ricchiuto. “High order methods for CFD”. Encyclopedia of Computational Mechanics (2017)

    2017

  7. [4]

    A five-equation model for the simulation of interfaces between compressible fluids

    G. Allaire, S. Clerc, and S. Kokh. “A five-equation model for the simulation of interfaces between compressible fluids”. Journal of Computational Physics 181 (2002), pp. 577–616

    2002

  8. [5]

    An efficient covariant frame for the spherical shallow water equations: well balanced DG approximation and application to tsunami and storm surge

    L. Arpaia et al. “An efficient covariant frame for the spherical shallow water equations: well balanced DG approximation and application to tsunami and storm surge”. Ocean Modelling 169 (2022), p. 101915

    2022

Show all 72 references
  1. [6]

    Arpaia et al

    L. Arpaia et al. A high-order matrix-free adaptive solver for the shallow water equations with irregular bathymetry . 2025. arXiv: 2505 . 18743 [cs.CE]. url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.18743

    2025 arXiv

  2. [7]

    A two-phase mixture theory for the deflagration- to-detonation transition (DDT) in reactive granular materials

    M.R. Baer and J.W. Nunziato. “A two-phase mixture theory for the deflagration- to-detonation transition (DDT) in reactive granular materials”. International Journal of Multiphase Flow 12 (1986), pp. 861–889

    1986

  3. [8]

    A High-order accurate discontinuous finite element method for the numerical solution of the compressible Navier-Stokes equations

    F. Bassi and S. Rebay. “A High-order accurate discontinuous finite element method for the numerical solution of the compressible Navier-Stokes equations”. Journal of Computational Physics 131 (1997), pp. 267–279

    1997

  4. [9]

    Multidimensional fully adaptive lattice Boltzmann methods with error control based on multiresolution analysis

    T. Bellotti et al. “Multidimensional fully adaptive lattice Boltzmann methods with error control based on multiresolution analysis”. Journal of Computational Physics 471 (2022), p. 111670

    2022

  5. [10]

    Vanishing viscosity solutions of nonlinear hyper- bolic systems

    S. Bianchini and A. Bressan. “Vanishing viscosity solutions of nonlinear hyper- bolic systems”. Annals of mathematics 161 (2005), pp. 223–342

    2005

  6. [11]

    F. Bouchut. Nonlinear stability of finite Volume Methods for hyperbolic conserva- tion laws: And Well-Balanced schemes for sources . Springer Science & Business Media, 2004

    2004

  7. [12]

    An entropy satisfying scheme for two-layer shal- low water equations with uncoupled treatment

    F. Bouchut and T.M. de Luna. “An entropy satisfying scheme for two-layer shal- low water equations with uncoupled treatment”.ESAIM: Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis 42 (2008), pp. 683–698

    2008

  8. [13]

    On thermodynamically compatible finite volume methods and path-conservative ADER discontinuous Galerkin schemes for turbulent shallow water flows

    S. Busto et al. “On thermodynamically compatible finite volume methods and path-conservative ADER discontinuous Galerkin schemes for turbulent shallow water flows”. Journal of Scientific Computing 88.1 (2021), p. 28. 34

    2021

  9. [14]

    High order finite volume schemes based on reconstruction of states for solving hyperbolic systems with nonconservative products. Applications to shallow-water systems

    M. Castro, J. Gallardo, and C. Par´ es. “High order finite volume schemes based on reconstruction of states for solving hyperbolic systems with nonconservative products. Applications to shallow-water systems”. Mathematics of computation 75.255 (2006), pp. 1103–1134

    2006

  10. [15]

    Why many theories of shock waves are necessary: Convergence error in formally path-consistent schemes

    M.J. Castro et al. “Why many theories of shock waves are necessary: Convergence error in formally path-consistent schemes”. Journal of Computational Physics 227.17 (2008), pp. 8107–8129

    2008

  11. [16]

    High order extensions of Roe schemes for two-dimensional nonconservative hyperbolic systems

    M.J. Castro et al. “High order extensions of Roe schemes for two-dimensional nonconservative hyperbolic systems”. Journal of Scientific Computing 39 (2009), pp. 67–114

    2009

  12. [17]

    A new comment on the computation of non-conservative products using Roe-type path conservative schemes

    C. Chalons and F. Coquel. “A new comment on the computation of non-conservative products using Roe-type path conservative schemes”. Journal of Computational Physics 335 (2017), pp. 592–604

    2017

  13. [18]

    A positive and entropy-satisfying finite volume scheme for the Baer-Nunziato model

    F. Coquel, J.-M. H´ erard, and K. Saleh. “A positive and entropy-satisfying finite volume scheme for the Baer-Nunziato model”. Journal of Computational Physics 330 (2017), pp. 401–435

    2017

  14. [20]

    Definition and weak stability of nonconservative products

    G. Dal Maso, P.G. LeFloch, and F. Murat. “Definition and weak stability of nonconservative products”. Journal de Math´ ematiques Pures et Appliqu´ ees 74 (1995), pp. 483–548

    1995

  15. [21]

    Simplified Second-Order Godunov-Type Methods

    S.F. Davis. “Simplified Second-Order Godunov-Type Methods”. SIAM Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing 9 (1988), pp. 445–473

    1988

  16. [22]

    HLLC-type and path-conservative schemes for a single-velocity six-equation two-phase flow model: A comparative study

    M. De Lorenzo, M. Pelanti, and Ph. Lafon. “HLLC-type and path-conservative schemes for a single-velocity six-equation two-phase flow model: A comparative study”. Applied Mathematics and Computation 333 (2018), pp. 95–117

    2018

  17. [23]

    A new efficient formulation of the HLLEM Rie- mann solver for general conservative and non-conservative hyperbolic systems

    M. Dumbser and D.S. Balsara. “A new efficient formulation of the HLLEM Rie- mann solver for general conservative and non-conservative hyperbolic systems”. Journal of Computational Physics 304 (2016), pp. 275–319

    2016

  18. [24]

    High-order unstructured Lagrangian one-step WENO finite volume schemes for non-conservative hyperbolic systems: applica- tions to compressible multi-phase flows

    M. Dumbser and W. Boscheri. “High-order unstructured Lagrangian one-step WENO finite volume schemes for non-conservative hyperbolic systems: applica- tions to compressible multi-phase flows”. Computers & Fluids 86 (2013), pp. 405– 432

    2013

  19. [25]

    A simple extension of the Osher Riemann solver to non-conservative hyperbolic systems

    M. Dumbser and E.F. Toro. “A simple extension of the Osher Riemann solver to non-conservative hyperbolic systems”. Journal of Scientific Computing 48 (2011), pp. 70–88

    2011

  20. [26]

    ADER schemes on unstructured meshes for nonconservative hyperbolic systems: Applications to geophysical flows

    M. Dumbser et al. “ADER schemes on unstructured meshes for nonconservative hyperbolic systems: Applications to geophysical flows”. Computers & Fluids 38.9 (2009), pp. 1731–1748

    2009

  21. [27]

    FORCE schemes on unstructured meshes II: Non-conservative hyperbolic systems

    M. Dumbser et al. “FORCE schemes on unstructured meshes II: Non-conservative hyperbolic systems”. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 199.9-12 (2010), pp. 625–647. 35

    2010

  22. [28]

    Upwind methods for the Baer-Nunziato equations and higher- order reconstruction using artificial viscosity

    F. Fraysse et al. “Upwind methods for the Baer-Nunziato equations and higher- order reconstruction using artificial viscosity”. Journal of Computational Physics 326 (2016), pp. 805–827

    2016

  23. [29]

    Discontinuous Galerkin schemes for hyperbolic systems in non-conservative variables: quasi-conservative formulation with subcell finite vol- ume corrections

    E. Gaburro et al. “Discontinuous Galerkin schemes for hyperbolic systems in non-conservative variables: quasi-conservative formulation with subcell finite vol- ume corrections”. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 431 (2024), p. 117311

    2024

  24. [30]

    Numerical modeling of two-phase flows using the two-fluid two-pressure approach

    T. Gallou¨ et, J.-M. H´ erard, and N. Seguin. “Numerical modeling of two-phase flows using the two-fluid two-pressure approach”. Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences 14.05 (2004), pp. 663–700

    2004

  25. [31]

    A scalable well-balanced numerical scheme for the modeling of two-phase shallow granular landslide consolidation

    F. Gatti et al. “A scalable well-balanced numerical scheme for the modeling of two-phase shallow granular landslide consolidation”. Journal of Computational Physics 501 (2024), p. 112798

    2024

  26. [32]

    An arbitrary high order well-balanced ADER-DG numerical scheme for the multilayer shallow-water model with variable density

    E. Guerrero Fern´ andez et al. “An arbitrary high order well-balanced ADER-DG numerical scheme for the multilayer shallow-water model with variable density”. Journal of Scientific Computing 90.1 (2022), p. 52

    2022

  27. [33]

    Numerical methods and relaxation techniques for diffuse interface models in high-velocity two-phase flow simulations

    W. Haegeman et al. “Numerical methods and relaxation techniques for diffuse interface models in high-velocity two-phase flow simulations”. 2024. doi: 10 . 23967/eccomas.2024.071. url: https://hal.science/hal-04796426

    2024

  28. [34]

    Haegeman et al

    W. Haegeman et al. An all-topology two-fluid model for two-phase flows de- rived through Hamilton ’s Stationary Action Principle. 2025. url: https://hal. science/hal-05249139

    2025

  29. [35]

    Multiresolution Algorithms for the Numerical Solution of Hyperbolic Conservation Laws

    A. Harten. “Multiresolution Algorithms for the Numerical Solution of Hyperbolic Conservation Laws”. Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics 48.12 (1995), pp. 1305–1342

    1995

  30. [36]

    Two approaches to compute unsteady compress- ible two-phase flow models with stiff relaxation terms

    J.-M. H´ erard and G. Jom´ ee. “Two approaches to compute unsteady compress- ible two-phase flow models with stiff relaxation terms”. ESAIM: Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis 57.6 (2023), pp. 3537–3583

    2023

  31. [37]

    Why nonconservative schemes converge to wrong solutions: error analysis

    T.Y. Hou and P.G. LeFloch. “Why nonconservative schemes converge to wrong solutions: error analysis”. Mathematics of computation 62 (1994), pp. 497–530

    1994

  32. [38]

    Two-phase modeling of deflagration-to-detonation transition in granular materials: Reduced equations

    A.K. Kapila et al. “Two-phase modeling of deflagration-to-detonation transition in granular materials: Reduced equations”. Physics of fluids 13 (2001), pp. 3002– 3024

    2001

  33. [39]

    Ketcheson, R.J

    D.I. Ketcheson, R.J. LeVeque, and M.J. Del Razo. Riemann problems and Jupyter solutions. Vol. 16. SIAM, 2020

    2020

  34. [40]

    High-order wave propagation algorithms for hyperbolic systems

    D.I. Ketcheson, M. Parsani, and R.J. LeVeque. “High-order wave propagation algorithms for hyperbolic systems”. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing 35 (2013), A351–A377

    2013

  35. [41]

    The Noble-Abel Stiffened-Gas equation of state

    O. Le M´ etayer and R. Saurel. “The Noble-Abel Stiffened-Gas equation of state”. Physics of Fluids 28 (Apr. 2016), p. 046102

    2016

  36. [42]

    R.J. LeVeque. Finite volume methods for hyperbolic problems. Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 2002. 36

    2002

  37. [43]

    HLLC-type Riemann solver with approximated two-phase con- tact for the computation of the Baer-Nunziato two-fluid model

    H. Lochon et al. “HLLC-type Riemann solver with approximated two-phase con- tact for the computation of the Baer-Nunziato two-fluid model”. Journal of Com- putational Physics 326 (2016), pp. 733–762

    2016

  38. [44]

    A five equation reduced model for compressible two phase flow problems

    A. Murrone and H. Guillard. “A five equation reduced model for compressible two phase flow problems”. Journal of Computational Physics 202 (2005), pp. 664–698

    2005

  39. [45]

    A path-conservative finite volume scheme for compressible multi-phase flows with surface tension

    N.T. Nguyen and M. Dumbser. “A path-conservative finite volume scheme for compressible multi-phase flows with surface tension”. Applied Mathematics and Computation 271 (2015), pp. 959–978

    2015

  40. [46]

    Modelling and simulations of two-phase flows including geometric variables

    G. Orlando. “Modelling and simulations of two-phase flows including geometric variables”. http://hdl.handle.net/10589/198599 . PhD thesis. Politecnico di Milano, 2023

    2023

  41. [47]

    A comparative Fourier analysis of discontinuous Galerkin schemes for advection-diffusion with respect to BR1, BR2, and local discontinuous Galerkin diffusion discretization

    S. Ortleb. “A comparative Fourier analysis of discontinuous Galerkin schemes for advection-diffusion with respect to BR1, BR2, and local discontinuous Galerkin diffusion discretization”. Mathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences 43.13 (2020), pp. 7841–7863

    2020

  42. [48]

    Numerical methods for nonconservative hyperbolic systems: a theo- retical framework

    C. Par´ es. “Numerical methods for nonconservative hyperbolic systems: a theo- retical framework”. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis 44 (2006), pp. 300– 321

    2006

  43. [49]

    Wave structure similarity of the HLLC and Roe Riemann solvers: Application to low Mach number preconditioning

    M. Pelanti. “Wave structure similarity of the HLLC and Roe Riemann solvers: Application to low Mach number preconditioning”. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing 40.3 (2018), A1836–A1859

    2018

  44. [50]

    Arbitrary-rate relaxation techniques for the numerical modeling of compressible two-phase flows with heat and mass transfer

    M. Pelanti. “Arbitrary-rate relaxation techniques for the numerical modeling of compressible two-phase flows with heat and mass transfer”. International Journal of Multiphase Flow 153 (2022), p. 104097

    2022

  45. [52]

    A relaxation-projection method for compressible flows. Part II: Artificial heat exchanges for multiphase shocks

    F. Petitpas et al. “A relaxation-projection method for compressible flows. Part II: Artificial heat exchanges for multiphase shocks”. Journal of Computational Physics 225 (2007), pp. 2214–2248

    2007

  46. [53]

    A pressure-based method for weakly compressible two- phase flows under a Baer-Nunziato type model with generic equations of state and pressure and velocity disequilibrium

    B. Re and R. Abgrall. “A pressure-based method for weakly compressible two- phase flows under a Baer-Nunziato type model with generic equations of state and pressure and velocity disequilibrium”. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids 94.8 (2022), pp. 1183–1232

    2022

  47. [54]

    Discontinuous Galerkin finite element methods for hyperbolic nonconservative partial differential equa- tions

    S. Rhebergen, O. Bokhove, and J.J.W. van der Vegt. “Discontinuous Galerkin finite element methods for hyperbolic nonconservative partial differential equa- tions”. Journal of Computational Physics 227.3 (2008), pp. 1887–1922

    2008

  48. [55]

    An accurate and efficient semi-implicit method for section- averaged free-surface flow modelling

    G. Rosatti et al. “An accurate and efficient semi-implicit method for section- averaged free-surface flow modelling.” International Journal of Numerical Meth- ods in Fluids 65 (2011), pp. 448–473

    2011

  49. [56]

    The calculation of the interaction of non-stationary shock waves and obstacles

    V. Rusanov. “The calculation of the interaction of non-stationary shock waves and obstacles”. USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics 1 (1962), pp. 304–320. 37

    1962

  50. [57]

    A relaxation scheme for a hyperbolic multiphase flow model - Part I: Barotropic EOS

    K. Saleh. “A relaxation scheme for a hyperbolic multiphase flow model - Part I: Barotropic EOS”. ESAIM: Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis 53.5 (2019), pp. 1763–1795

    2019

  51. [58]

    A Multiphase Godunov Method for Compressible Multifluid and Multiphase Flows

    R. Saurel and R. Abgrall. “A Multiphase Godunov Method for Compressible Multifluid and Multiphase Flows”. Journal of Computational Physics 150 (1999), pp. 425–467

    1999

  52. [59]

    Modelling phase transition in metastable liquids: application to cavitating and flashing flows

    R. Saurel, F. Petitpas, and R. Abgrall. “Modelling phase transition in metastable liquids: application to cavitating and flashing flows”. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 607 (2008), pp. 313–350

    2008

  53. [61]

    Shock Jump Relations for Multiphase Mixtures with Stiff Me- chanical Relaxation

    R. Saurel et al. “Shock Jump Relations for Multiphase Mixtures with Stiff Me- chanical Relaxation”. Shock Waves 16.3 (2007), pp. 209–232

    2007

  54. [62]

    Modelling interactions between waves and diffused in- terfaces

    K. Schmidmayer et al. “Modelling interactions between waves and diffused in- terfaces”. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids 95.2 (2023), pp. 215–241

    2023

  55. [63]

    The Riemann problem and a high-resolution Godunov method for a model of compressible two-phase flow

    D.W. Schwendeman, C.W. Wahle, and A.K. Kapila. “The Riemann problem and a high-resolution Godunov method for a model of compressible two-phase flow”. Journal of Computational Physics 212.2 (2006), pp. 490–526

    2006

  56. [64]

    Mixture-conservative temperature-based Baer-Nunziato solver for efficient full-disequilibrium simulations of real fluids

    G. Sirianni, B. Re, and R. Abgrall. “Mixture-conservative temperature-based Baer-Nunziato solver for efficient full-disequilibrium simulations of real fluids”. Computers & Fluids (2025), p. 106761

    2025

  57. [65]

    An explicit primitive conservative solver for the Euler equations with arbitrary equation of state

    G. Sirianni et al. “An explicit primitive conservative solver for the Euler equations with arbitrary equation of state”. Computers & Fluids 279 (2024), p. 106340

    2024

  58. [66]

    HLLC-type Riemann solver for the Baer-Nunziato equations of compressible two-phase flow

    S.A. Tokareva and E.F. Toro. “HLLC-type Riemann solver for the Baer-Nunziato equations of compressible two-phase flow”. Journal of Computational Physics 229 (2010), pp. 3573–3604

    2010

  59. [67]

    E. Toro. Riemann Solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics: A Prac- tical Introduction. Springer, 2009

    2009

  60. [68]

    A semi-implicit, semi-Lagrangian discontinu- ous Galerkin framework for adaptive numerical weather prediction

    G. Tumolo and L. Bonaventura. “A semi-implicit, semi-Lagrangian discontinu- ous Galerkin framework for adaptive numerical weather prediction”. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society 141 (2015), pp. 2582–2601

    2015

  61. [69]

    A limiter-based well-balanced discontin- uous Galerkin method for shallow-water flows with wetting and drying: Trian- gular grids

    S. Vater, N. Beisiegel, and J. Behrens. “A limiter-based well-balanced discontin- uous Galerkin method for shallow-water flows with wetting and drying: Trian- gular grids”. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids 91.8 (2019), pp. 395–418

    2019

  62. [70]

    Numerical Treatment of the Nonconservative Product in a Multiscale Fluid Model for Plasmas in Thermal Nonequilibrium: Application to Solar Physics

    Q. Wargnier et al. “Numerical Treatment of the Nonconservative Product in a Multiscale Fluid Model for Plasmas in Thermal Nonequilibrium: Application to Solar Physics”. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing 42.2 (2020), B492–B519

    2020

  63. [71]

    A. B. Wood. A Textbook of Sound . London: G. Bell and Sons Ltd., 1930. 38

    1930

  64. [72]

    Modeling phase transition for compress- ible two-phase flows applied to metastable liquids

    A. Zein, M. Hantke, and G. Warnecke. “Modeling phase transition for compress- ible two-phase flows applied to metastable liquids”. Journal of Computational Physics 229 (2010), pp. 2964–2998. 39

    2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.