Modified mass-conservative curved boundary scheme for lattice Boltzmann simulations

Q. Li; Y. Yu; Z. X. Wen

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Modified mass-conservative curved boundary scheme for lattice Boltzmann simulations

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Two modified curved boundary schemes conserve mass in two-phase lattice Boltzmann simulations.

desk verdict A solid, modest methods paper: Scheme B's correction of Bao et al.'s position-dependent coefficient is the real contribution, and the two-phase mass-leakage diagnosis is credible; send it to review, ask for code and a convergence check. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.09235 v2 pith:HAGH3YRJ submitted 2019-08-24 physics.comp-ph

Y. Yu , Q. Li , Z. X. Wen This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.comp-ph PACS 47.11.Qr

keywords latticeBoltzmannmethodcurvedboundaryschememassleakageconservationtwo-phaseflowpseudopotentialmultiphasemodeldropletoncylinderinterpolatedbounce-back

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

This paper studies why droplets sitting on a circular cylinder “evaporate” in lattice Boltzmann (LB) simulations even under isothermal, no-slip conditions, and it identifies the cause as mass leakage at the curved boundary rather than physical evaporation. The authors show that three standard curved boundary schemes all lose droplet mass over time, and that the leak emerges from an imbalance between distribution functions streaming out of the system and those streaming back in at boundary nodes. They then build two modified schemes on the MLS curved boundary treatment: scheme A returns the leaked mass through the rest distribution function, and scheme B redefines the fictitious density at ghost nodes so that incoming and outgoing masses balance node by node. In droplet-on-cylinder tests, both modified schemes hold the normalized system mass to within about 0.01% over 20,000 time steps, whereas the original schemes lose tens of percent of droplet mass.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the boundary-node mass-leakage identity, Eq. (15): the change in mass at a boundary node is the difference between the mass streamed out by post-collision outgoing distributions and the mass streamed in by incoming distributions. Scheme A cancels that leak by adding the computed deficit to the rest distribution function. Scheme B enforces a zero deficit by choosing a fictitious density in the ghost-node equilibrium distribution, with the crucial detail that χ depends on the link fraction q and therefore cannot be pulled out of the summation. This distinction is what separates scheme B from the earlier Bao et al. correction, which treats χ as a common factor and still leaks mass in two-phase tests.

What would settle it

A concrete check is a single-node budget: record the outgoing and incoming distribution sums at every boundary node of the droplet-on-cylinder test and compare their difference with Eq. (15). If the node-level balance is restored in the modified schemes but negative rest densities appear, or if the residual mass drift scales with the virtual-wall density rather than with the link fraction q, then the proposed leakage mechanism and mass-conservation claim are not the whole story.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Under isothermal conditions, a droplet placed on a circular cylinder with three representative curved boundary schemes—the MLS scheme, the Bouzidi interpolated bounce-back scheme, and the Zhao-Yong single-node scheme—shrinks continuously as if evaporating. The paper attributes this to a node-level mass imbalance: the post-collision outgoing distribution functions carry more mass out of the fluid domain than the incoming distribution functions return. Guided by that mechanism, the authors modify the MLS scheme in two ways. Scheme A adds the computed mass leakage back to the rest distribution function at each boundary node. Scheme B instead adjusts the fictitious density in the ghost-node equilibrium distribution so that the outgoing and incoming sums match exactly, taking care that the interpolation-dependent parameter χ remains inside the summation. Both modified schemes reproduce the flow-past-a-cylinder benchmark accurately and conserve droplet mass in the two-phase test, while the original schemes and the previously proposed Bao et al. correction still leak mass.

Load-bearing premise

The argument rests on the assumption that the mass change at a curved boundary is completely captured by the difference between outgoing and incoming distribution sums, and that the constant virtual-wall density used to set the contact angle does not itself create or destroy mass.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Two-phase LB simulations with curved solid walls no longer need the stair-stepped halfway bounce-back approximation, so boiling on cylinders or other curved surfaces can be simulated without artificial nucleation sites.
Both modified schemes keep system mass variation to about 0.01% over 20,000 steps for contact angles of 30°, 90°, and 120°, a level small enough to attribute residual fluctuations to diffuse-interface initialization.
Scheme B provides the more principled conservation fix of the two because it enforces node-level balance by construction rather than adding mass back after the fact.
The finding that the earlier Bao et al. correction leaks in two-phase cases follows directly from treating χ as a common factor; moving χ inside the summation is what supplies the missing conservation.
The modified schemes also improve accuracy over the halfway bounce-back scheme in the steady flow-past-a-cylinder benchmark, removing the nonphysical penetration of velocity below the cylinder surface.

Reading between the lines

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

The same node-level balance condition could be applied to other curved boundary schemes, since any scheme whose unknown distributions depend on the link fraction should carry that fraction inside the mass-balance sum.
A natural testable extension is three dimensions: on D3Q19 or D3Q27 lattices, the scheme-B density correction could be averaged over all boundary links of a node, and one could check whether node-wise conservation still holds or only total mass.
Because scheme A modifies only the rest distribution, it is easier to implement in existing codes, but it may break positivity when the leakage is large; a positivity monitor on f0 would tell how far the fix can be pushed.
The constant virtual-wall density used for contact angles is an acknowledged possible source of spurious mass transfer, so testing the two schemes with an alternative contact-angle implementation would isolate boundary-scheme leakage from wetting artifacts.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: this is a useful, well-executed numerical-methods paper, and the genuinely new item is scheme B. The authors point out that Bao et al.'s mass-conserving curved boundary scheme moves the position-dependent coefficient chi outside the sum when computing the ghost-node density, which breaks the nodal mass balance in two-phase simulations. Keeping chi inside the sum (their Eq. (22)) corrects the balance. That is a small, concrete, and credible correction, and the derivation in Sec. 4.1 is algebraically explicit. Scheme A, adding the leaked mass to the rest distribution, is less novel—the idea originates with Aidun and Lu—and the authors themselves note the rest distribution can go negative.

The paper also earns credit for the diagnosis. The single-phase static-gravity tests quantify mass loss across q values for three curved-boundary families, and the droplet-on-cylinder tests show the original MLS scheme loses a large fraction of droplet mass while both modified schemes hold total mass variation to about 0.01%. The steady cylinder-flow benchmarks at Re = 20 and 40 provide independent evidence that the corrections do not degrade accuracy.

The soft spots are modest but real. No code or data are released, there is no grid-convergence study, no error bars, and the two-phase validation is essentially one geometry with three contact angles. Also, mass conservation is enforced by construction at each boundary node, so the conservation test is not a free empirical prediction; what it demonstrates is that the enforcement is compatible with the forcing scheme and wetting model in practice. The stress-test worry about the constant-virtual-wall-density contact angle creating a spurious mass-transfer layer is a fair confound to raise in principle, but it does not sink the comparison: the same wetting model is used for original and modified schemes, and swapping the boundary scheme changes the outcome from 40% mass loss to roughly 0.01%, so the boundary treatment is clearly the dominant factor. The residual could include a wetting-layer contribution, and a sentence acknowledging that would be appropriate, but the central claim holds.

Who this is for: LB practitioners doing two-phase flow, wetting, or boiling on curved surfaces. Citation pattern is fine; self-citations point to the relevant pseudopotential and forcing-scheme literature. I would bring it to a reading group and would cite it if I worked in the area. It deserves a serious referee. My recommendation: send it to review, and ask the authors for code/data and one grid-convergence check before publication.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper investigates mass leakage of three types of curved boundary schemes in two-phase lattice Boltzmann (LB) simulations by simulating a droplet resting on a circular cylinder. The authors show that the MLS, Bouzidi, and Zhao-Yong schemes all cause the droplet to 'evaporate' under isothermal no-slip conditions, and they attribute the loss to an imbalance between outgoing and incoming distribution functions at boundary nodes. Building on the MLS scheme, they propose two modified schemes: Scheme A adds the computed mass leakage to the rest distribution at each boundary node, and Scheme B redefines the ghost-node density so that the incoming and outgoing mass sums balance exactly. They validate the modified schemes against published results for steady flow past a cylinder and report that in droplet-on-cylinder tests the normalized system mass varies by only about 0.01% over 20,000 time steps, whereas the original schemes lose substantial mass (up to 40% for the Zhao-Yong scheme).

Significance. The paper addresses a real and practically important issue: mass conservation of curved boundary treatments in two-phase LB, which matters for phase-change and wetting simulations. The derivations of the two modifications are explicit and transparent, and the comparison with the scheme of Bao et al. is a useful clarification of the role of the q-dependent parameter chi. The numerical evidence for mass conservation is visually and quantitatively striking. However, the central empirical claim rests on a single test configuration, and the paper acknowledges but does not isolate the unphysical mass-transfer layer of the contact-angle model; the recommendation below therefore requires additional diagnostics to remove the confounding risk.

major comments (3)

[Sec. 3.2 and Sec. 4.2] The contact-angle implementation via a constant virtual wall density is acknowledged in Sec. 3.2 to 'usually lead to an unphysical mass-transfer layer near the solid boundary,' and the paper asserts that this does not affect the conclusions without providing supporting evidence. Because Eq. (15) counts only distribution functions crossing the curved wall, while the wetting force enters through the forcing term and can alter post-collision values at boundary nodes, the residual 0.01% mass variation observed for schemes A and B could in principle be dominated by the wetting model's own mass transfer. The comparison between original and modified schemes therefore does not by itself isolate the boundary-scheme contribution. Please provide an explicit test that isolates the boundary contribution, for example by tracking the cumulative sum of Eq. (15) at boundary nodes for schemes A and B, or by repeating the droplet test with a different (e.g., geometric) contact-angle implementation and showing that the same near-exact mass conservation is obtained.
[Sec. 4.1, Eq. (18)] Scheme A as defined by Eq. (18) adds the entire mass leakage to the rest distribution f0, and the authors note that f0 'may become negative in certain cases.' The manuscript does not report whether negative rest distributions occurred in any of the simulations of Sec. 4.2, nor how such values were handled (e.g., clipping, renormalization, or leaving them). If negative populations or clipping are present, the mass-conservation result is no longer a clean demonstration of Eq. (18). Please report the minimum value of f0(x_b, t+delta_t) encountered at boundary nodes in the droplet simulations and state explicitly how any negative values were treated.
[Sec. 4.2] The two-phase mass-conservation claim is supported by a single grid resolution (300x350 with R=70, r=50) and three contact angles, and the single-phase validation in Table 1 is at a single resolution. Because the boundary fraction q varies over the circular cylinder, the exactness of schemes A and B in conserving mass is an algebraic property only if the sums in Eqs. (18) and (22) cancel exactly; a numerical demonstration at one resolution does not establish the property as independent of grid and geometry. Please add a resolution study (at least one finer and one coarser grid) or report a per-node mass-balance diagnostic showing that the cumulative sum of Eq. (15) at boundary nodes is zero to machine precision for the modified schemes in the two-phase tests.

minor comments (5)

[Sec. 3.2] Typos: 'ultilized' should be 'utilized', and later in Sec. 3.2 'doplet' should be 'droplet'.
[Fig. 5] The legend in Fig. 5 uses 'I-Bouzidi scheme' while the text and Fig. 4 use 'L-Bouzidi scheme'; these should be consistent.
[Sec. 2.2, Eq. (7)] The notation in Eq. (7) introduces a 'post-collision density distribution function at the solid node' f_alpha_eq(rho_s, u_s; x_s); since x_s is a ghost node, the definition should be stated more explicitly to avoid implying that actual post-collision data exist there.
[Sec. 4.1, Eq. (22)] The denominator in Eq. (22) is a sum of chi-weighted equilibrium terms; the paper does not discuss configurations in which this denominator could vanish or become very small, which may affect the robustness of Scheme B.
[References] Reference Li et al. (2019) is cited as 'In press'; if the final published version is now available, the citation should be updated.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Mass-conservation claim is built into the modified schemes by construction; accuracy benchmarks are independent but the central conservation result is not an empirical prediction.

self definitional [Sec. 4.1, Eq. (18) and Sec. 4.2, Fig. 11]
"If the mass leakage is averagely added to the known distribution functions, the momentum at the boundary node may be changed. Hence the mass leakage given by Eq. (15) can be added to the rest distribution function and the following formula is obtained: [Eq. (18)]. ... In the remaining of the present paper, this modified MLS scheme is referred to as the modified scheme A."

Eq. (15) defines the boundary-node mass leakage as the imbalance between outgoing and incoming distribution functions. Eq. (18) then adds that exact imbalance to the rest distribution function at the same node. Therefore the modified scheme enforces zero net boundary mass leakage by construction. The later two-phase demonstration (Sec. 4.2, Fig. 11) that the normalized mass changes by only about 0.01% is a check of this construction, not an independent prediction of mass conservation. The observed residual is small and attributed to interface/wetting effects, but the central claim that schemes A and B 'are capable of conserving mass' reduces to the definition of the correction.
self definitional [Sec. 4.1, Eqs. (19)-(22)]
"On the other hand, the mass of a system can also be conserved by guaranteeing the balance between the amount of mass carried by the outgoing and incoming distribution functions at each boundary node. When [Eq. (15)] is set to zero, we can obtain [Eq. (19)]. ... Combining Eq. (21) with Eq. (20), the fictitious density in Eq. (20) can be obtained as follows: [Eq. (22)]."

Scheme B is derived by imposing the condition that the mass-leakage expression in Eq. (15) is exactly zero at every boundary node, and then solving for the fictitious density in Eq. (22) to satisfy that condition. Thus the mass-conservation property is not an emergent numerical finding; it is the equation that defines the scheme. The two-phase simulations then confirm that the implemented scheme realizes the imposed balance, which is a self-consistency test rather than an independent validation of a mass-conservation claim.

full rationale

The paper's external accuracy validation is genuinely independent: Table 1 compares wake length, separation angle, and drag coefficient for flow past a circular cylinder with published results from Dennis and Chang, Takeshi et al., and Niu et al., so the claim that the modified schemes are accurate is anchored outside the paper's own construction. The mass-conservation claim, however, is different. Scheme A is literally the operation of adding the Eq. (15) mass-leakage term to the rest distribution function, and Scheme B is literally the enforcement of a zero value of that same Eq. (15) term. Demonstrating that total normalized mass stays near 1.0 in the droplet-on-cylinder test is therefore equivalent to checking that the implemented code applies the defining correction, not to discovering or predicting mass conservation. The paper itself acknowledges a potential confound: the constant virtual wall density used for contact angles 'usually leads to an unphysical mass-transfer layer near the solid boundary,' though it asserts this does not affect conclusions. That caveat is a correctness risk rather than a circularity, because the central conservation result is already definitional. Self-citations appear (e.g., Li et al. 2019) but are not load-bearing for the conservation argument. Overall, the accuracy part of the paper is self-contained and externally benchmarked, while the headline mass-conservation capability is constructed rather than predicted, warranting a partial circularity score of 6.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The schemes introduce no fitted parameters; they build on standard LB, pseudopotential, and forcing models. The key assumptions are listed above.

assumptions (4)

standard math The lattice Boltzmann BGK equation with D2Q9 and standard forcing term recovers the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations through Chapman-Enskog analysis.
Sec. 2.1 invokes the standard LB formulation without re-derivation; the central claim assumes the LB model is valid.
domain assumption The pseudopotential model with psi = psi0 * exp(-rho/rho0) and G = -10/3 yields equilibrium liquid and vapor densities rho_L approx 2.783 and rho_V approx 0.3675.
Sec. 3.2 sets these values from prior work (Li et al. 2016b); the two-phase test is built on them.
domain assumption The virtual-wall-density contact angle scheme does not qualitatively affect mass leakage conclusions.
Sec. 3.2 states that the contact angle implementation does not affect the conclusions.
domain assumption At each boundary node, the only mass exchange with the system occurs through the distribution functions crossing the wall; Eq. (15) captures all leakage.
Sec. 3.1 defines mass leakage this way; the claim that schemes conserve mass relies on this accounting.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Modified mass-conservative curved boundary scheme for lattice Boltzmann simulations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HAGH3YRJ

@misc{pith2026190809235,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Modified mass-conservative curved boundary scheme for lattice Boltzmann simulations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HAGH3YRJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.09235}
}

read the original abstract

The lattice Boltzmann (LB) method has gained much success in a variety of fields involving fluid flow and/or heat transfer. In this method, the bounce-back scheme is a popular boundary scheme for treating nonslip boundaries. However, this scheme leads to staircase-shaped boundaries for curved walls. Therefore many curved boundary schemes have been proposed, but mostly suffer from mass leakage at the curved boundaries. Several correction schemes have been suggested for simulating single-phase flows, but very few discussions or studies have been made for two-phase LB simulations with curved boundaries. In this paper, the performance of three well-known types of curved boundary schemes in two-phase LB simulations is investigated through modeling a droplet resting on a circular cylinder. For all of the investigated schemes, the results show that the simulated droplet rapidly "evaporates" under the nonslip and isothermal conditions, owing to the imbalance between the mass streamed out of the system by the outgoing distribution functions and the mass streamed into the system by the incoming distribution functions at each boundary node. Based on the numerical investigation, we formulate two modified mass-conservative curved boundary schemes for two-phase LB simulations. The accuracy of the modified curved boundary schemes and their capability of conserving mass in two-phase LB simulations are numerically demonstrated.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Implementation of contact angles in the pseudopotential lattice Boltzmann simulations with curved boundaries
physics.comp-ph 2019-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A local-virtual-density scheme for imposing contact angles at curved boundaries in pseudopotential lattice Boltzmann simulations removes the unphysical mass-transfer layer and keeps spurious currents low.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Lattice-Boltzmann method for complex flows

Aidun, C.K., Clausen, J.R., 2010. Lattice-Boltzmann method for complex flows. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 42, 439-472

work page 2010
[2]

Lattice Boltzmann simulation of solid particles suspended in fluid

Aidun, C.K., Lu, Y ., 1995. Lattice Boltzmann simulation of solid particles suspended in fluid. Journal of Statistical Physics 81, 49-61

work page 1995
[3]

A mass conserving boundary condition for the lattice Boltzmann 24 equation method

Bao, J., Yuan, P., Schaefer, L., 2008. A mass conserving boundary condition for the lattice Boltzmann 24 equation method. Journal of Computational Physics 227, 8472-8487

work page 2008
[4]

Mesoscopic modeling of a two-phase flow in the presence of boundaries: the contact angle

Benzi, R., Biferale, L., Sbragaglia, M., Succi, S., Toschi, F., 2006. Mesoscopic modeling of a two-phase flow in the presence of boundaries: the contact angle. Phys. Rev. E 74, 021509

work page 2006
[5]

Momentum transfer of a Boltzmann-lattice fluid with boundaries

Bouzidi, M.h., Firdaouss, M., Lallemand, P., 2001. Momentum transfer of a Boltzmann-lattice fluid with boundaries. Phys. Fluids 13, 3452-3459

work page 2001
[6]

Lattice Boltzmann method for fluid flows

Chen, S., Doolen, G .D., 1998. Lattice Boltzmann method for fluid flows. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 30, 329-364

work page 1998
[7]

Numerical solutions for steady flow past a circ ular cylinder at Reynolds numbers up to 100

Dennis, S.C.R., Chang, G.-Z., 1970. Numerical solutions for steady flow past a circ ular cylinder at Reynolds numbers up to 100. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 42, 471-489

work page 1970
[8]

Grid Refinement for Lattice-BGK Models

Filippova, O., Hänel, D., 1998. Grid Refinement for Lattice-BGK Models. Journal of Computational Physics 147, 219-228

work page 1998

Show all 38 references

[9]

Multireflection boundary conditions for lattice Boltzmann models

Ginzburg, I., d’Humières, D., 2003. Multireflection boundary conditions for lattice Boltzmann models. Phys. Rev. E 68, 066614

2003
[10]

Lattice Boltzmann Method and Its Applications in Engineering

Guo, Z., Shu, C., 2013. Lattice Boltzmann Method and Its Applications in Engineering. World Scientific

2013
[11]

Discrete lattice effects on the forcing term in the lattice Boltzmann method

Guo, Z., Zheng, C., Shi, B., 2002. Discrete lattice effects on the forcing term in the lattice Boltzmann method. Phys. Rev. E 65, 046308

2002
[12]

Latti ce Boltzmann methods for single-phase and solid-liquid phase-change heat transfer in porous media: A review

He, Y .-L., Liu, Q., Li, Q., Tao, W.-Q., 2019. Latti ce Boltzmann methods for single-phase and solid-liquid phase-change heat transfer in porous media: A review. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 129, 160-197

2019
[13]

Multiphase lattice Boltzmann methods: Theory and application

Huang, H., Sukop, M., Lu, X., 2015. Multiphase lattice Boltzmann methods: Theory and application. John Wiley & Sons

2015
[14]

One-point boundary condition for the lattice Boltzmann method

Junk, M., Yang, Z., 2005. One-point boundary condition for the lattice Boltzmann method. Phys. Rev. E 72, 066701. K. P. Sanjeevi, S., Zarghami, A., Padding, J., 2018. Choice of no-slip curved boundary condition for lattice Boltzmann simulations of high-Reynolds-number flows. P...

2005
[15]

Pool boiling heat transfer from an inclined tube bundle

Kang, M.-G ., 2016. Pool boiling heat transfer from an inclined tube bundle. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 101, 445-451

2016
[16]

An investigation into curved and moving boundary treatments in the lattice Boltzmann method

Kao, P.H., Yang, R.J., 2008. An investigation into curved and moving boundary treatments in the lattice Boltzmann method. Journal of Computational Physics 227, 5671-5690. Krüger, T., Kusumaatmaja, H., Kuzmin, A., Shardt, O., Silva, G., Viggen, E.M., 2017. The Lattice Boltzmann...

2008
[17]

, He, Y .L., Luo, K.H., 2015

Li, Q., Kang, Q.J., Francois, M.M. , He, Y .L., Luo, K.H., 2015. Lattice Boltzmann modeling of boiling heat transfer: The boiling curve and the effects of wettability. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 85, 787-796

2015
[18]

Cont act angles in the pseudopotential lattice Boltzmann modeling of wetting

Li, Q., Luo, K.H., Kang, Q.J., Chen, Q., 2014. Cont act angles in the pseudopotential lattice Boltzmann modeling of wetting. Phys. Rev. E 90, 053301

2014
[19]

Lattice Boltzmann mode ling of multiphase flows at large density ratio with an improved pseudopotential model

Li, Q., Luo, K.H., Li, X.J., 2013. Lattice Boltzmann mode ling of multiphase flows at large density ratio with an improved pseudopotential model. Phys. Rev. E 87, 053301

2013
[20]

Implementation of co ntact angles in the pseudopotential lattice Boltzmann simulations with curved boundaries

Li, Q., Yu, Y ., Luo, K.H., 2019. Implementation of co ntact angles in the pseudopotential lattice Boltzmann simulations with curved boundaries. Physical Review E, In press

2019
[21]

Enhancement of boiling heat transfer using hydrophilic-hydrophobic mixed surfaces: A lattice Boltzmann study

Li, Q., Yu, Y ., Zhou, P., Yan, H.J., 2018. Enhancement of boiling heat transfer using hydrophilic-hydrophobic mixed surfaces: A lattice Boltzmann study. Applied Thermal Engineering 132, 490-499

2018
[22]

Lattice Boltzmann simulation on liquid flow and mass transport in a bioreactor with cylinder bundle fo r hydrogen production

Liao, Q., Yang, Y .X., Zhu, X., Wang, H., Ding, Y .D., 2015. Lattice Boltzmann simulation on liquid flow and mass transport in a bioreactor with cylinder bundle fo r hydrogen production. Heat & Mass Transfer 51, 859-873

2015
[23]

Modeling and simulation of thermocapillary flows using lattice Boltzmann method

Liu, H., Zhang, Y ., Valocchi, A.J., 2012. Modeling and simulation of thermocapillary flows using lattice Boltzmann method. Journal of Computational Physics 231, 4433-4453

2012
[24]

An accurate curved boundary treatment in the lattice Boltzmann method

Mei, R., Luo, L.-S., Shyy, W., 1999. An accurate curved boundary treatment in the lattice Boltzmann method. Journal of Computational Physics 155, 307-330

1999
[25]

A momentum exchange-based immersed boundary-lattice Boltzmann method for simulating incompressible viscous flows

Niu, X.D., Shu, C., Chew, Y .T., Peng, Y ., 2006. A momentum exchange-based immersed boundary-lattice Boltzmann method for simulating incompressible viscous flows. Physics Letters A 354, 173-182

2006
[26]

Lattice BGK models for Navier-Stokes equation

Qian, Y .H., d'Humières, D., Lallemand, P., 1992. Lattice BGK models for Navier-Stokes equation. Europhysics Letters 17, 479-484

1992
[27]

Force evaluation in the lattice Boltzmann method involving curved geometry

Renwei, M., Dazhi, Y ., Wei, S., Li-Shi, L., 2002. Force evaluation in the lattice Boltzmann method involving curved geometry. Physical Review E Statistical Nonlinear & Soft Matter Physics 65, 041203

2002
[28]

Lattice Boltzmann model for simulating flows with multiple phases and 26 components

Shan, X., Chen, H., 1993. Lattice Boltzmann model for simulating flows with multiple phases and 26 components. Phys. Rev. E 47, 1815-1820

1993
[29]

Simulation of nonideal gases and liquid-gas phase transitions by the lattice Boltzmann equation

Shan, X., Chen, H., 1994. Simulation of nonideal gases and liquid-gas phase transitions by the lattice Boltzmann equation. Phys. Rev. E 49, 2941-2948

1994
[30]

Implicit-correction-based immersed boundary-lattice Boltzmann method with two relaxation times

Takeshi, S., Roberto, R., Kosuke, H., Akio, T., 2014. Implicit-correction-based immersed boundary-lattice Boltzmann method with two relaxation times. Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys 89, 023307-023307

2014
[31]

One-point second-order curved boundary condition for lattice Boltzmann simulation of suspended particles

Tao, S., He, Q., Chen, B., Yang, X., Huang, S., 2018 . One-point second-order curved boundary condition for lattice Boltzmann simulation of suspended particles. Computers & Mathematics with Applications 76, 1593-1607

2018
[32]

Lattice Boltzmann modeling of transport phenomena in fuel cells and flow batteries

Xu, A., Shyy, W., Zhao, T., 2017. Lattice Boltzmann modeling of transport phenomena in fuel cells and flow batteries. Acta Mechanica Sinica 33, 555-574

2017
[33]

A three-dimensional pseudo-potential-based lattice Boltzmann model for multiphase flows with large density ratio and vari able surface tension

Xu, A., Zhao, T.S., An, L., Shi, L., 2015. A three-dimensional pseudo-potential-based lattice Boltzmann model for multiphase flows with large density ratio and vari able surface tension. Intern ational Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 56, 261-271

2015
[34]

Viscous flow computations with the method of lattice Boltzmann equation

Yu, D., Mei, R., Luo, L.-S., Shyy, W., 2003. Viscous flow computations with the method of lattice Boltzmann equation. Progress in Aerospace Sciences 39, 329-367

2003
[35]

Boiling heat transfer on hydrophilic-hydrophobic mixed surfaces: A 3D lattice Boltzmann study

Yu, Y ., Wen, Z.X., Li, Q., Zhou, P., Yan, H.J., 2018. Boiling heat transfer on hydrophilic-hydrophobic mixed surfaces: A 3D lattice Boltzmann study. Applied Thermal Engineering 142, 846-854

2018
[36]

Three-dimensional multi-relaxation time lattice-Boltzmann model for the drop impact on a dry surface at large density ra tio

Zhang, D., Papadikis, K., Gu, S., 2014. Three-dimensional multi-relaxation time lattice-Boltzmann model for the drop impact on a dry surface at large density ra tio. International Journal of Multiphase Flow 64, 11-18

2014
[37]

Single-node second-order boundary schemes for the lattice Boltzmann method

Zhao, W., Yong, W.-A., 2017. Single-node second-order boundary schemes for the lattice Boltzmann method. Journal of Computational Physics 329, 1-15

2017
[38]

On pressure and velocity bo undary conditions for the lattice Boltzmann BGK model

Zou, Q., He, X., 1997. On pressure and velocity bo undary conditions for the lattice Boltzmann BGK model. Phys. Fluids 9, 1591-1598

1997

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Lattice-Boltzmann method for complex flows

Aidun, C.K., Clausen, J.R., 2010. Lattice-Boltzmann method for complex flows. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 42, 439-472

work page 2010

[2] [2]

Lattice Boltzmann simulation of solid particles suspended in fluid

Aidun, C.K., Lu, Y ., 1995. Lattice Boltzmann simulation of solid particles suspended in fluid. Journal of Statistical Physics 81, 49-61

work page 1995

[3] [3]

A mass conserving boundary condition for the lattice Boltzmann 24 equation method

Bao, J., Yuan, P., Schaefer, L., 2008. A mass conserving boundary condition for the lattice Boltzmann 24 equation method. Journal of Computational Physics 227, 8472-8487

work page 2008

[4] [4]

Mesoscopic modeling of a two-phase flow in the presence of boundaries: the contact angle

Benzi, R., Biferale, L., Sbragaglia, M., Succi, S., Toschi, F., 2006. Mesoscopic modeling of a two-phase flow in the presence of boundaries: the contact angle. Phys. Rev. E 74, 021509

work page 2006

[5] [5]

Momentum transfer of a Boltzmann-lattice fluid with boundaries

Bouzidi, M.h., Firdaouss, M., Lallemand, P., 2001. Momentum transfer of a Boltzmann-lattice fluid with boundaries. Phys. Fluids 13, 3452-3459

work page 2001

[6] [6]

Lattice Boltzmann method for fluid flows

Chen, S., Doolen, G .D., 1998. Lattice Boltzmann method for fluid flows. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 30, 329-364

work page 1998

[7] [7]

Numerical solutions for steady flow past a circ ular cylinder at Reynolds numbers up to 100

Dennis, S.C.R., Chang, G.-Z., 1970. Numerical solutions for steady flow past a circ ular cylinder at Reynolds numbers up to 100. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 42, 471-489

work page 1970

[8] [8]

Grid Refinement for Lattice-BGK Models

Filippova, O., Hänel, D., 1998. Grid Refinement for Lattice-BGK Models. Journal of Computational Physics 147, 219-228

work page 1998