Local Vorticity Computation in Double Distribution Functions based Lattice Boltzmann Methods for Flow and Scalar Transport

Farzaneh Hajabdollahi; Kannan N. Premnath

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 73 references

Local Vorticity Computation in Double Distribution Functions based Lattice Boltzmann Methods for Flow and Scalar Transport

T0 review · 3 major / 6 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 The paper derives a local, second-order-accurate formula for vorticity in double-distribution lattice Boltzmann simulations from second-order non-equilibrium moments of the flow and scalar schemes, without any finite-difference velocity…

desk verdict Genuinely local DDF-LB vorticity that works in the tested low-Mach, nonzero-scalar regime, but the analysis overclaims generality by dropping O(u^2) terms without a bound. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.06742 v1 pith:2G3K43VG submitted 2019-08-14 physics.flu-dyn physics.comp-ph

Farzaneh Hajabdollahi , Kannan N. Premnath This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.flu-dynphysics.comp-ph MSC 76M2876D05 PACS 47.11.-j47.32.-y

keywords vorticitydoubledistributionfunctionslatticeBoltzmannmethodscalartransportvelocitygradienttensormultiplerelaxationtimeslocalcomputationsecond-orderaccuracy

topics Navier-Stokes Regularity

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 establishes that in a double-distribution lattice Boltzmann simulation—one solver for the fluid, one for a passively transported scalar—the vorticity can be computed node-locally without finite-difference derivatives of velocity. The standard flow solver already gives the strain-rate (symmetric) part of the velocity gradient through its second-order non-equilibrium moments. The authors show that by giving the scalar solver's third-order off-diagonal moment equilibria a small prescribed anisotropy, that solver's second-order non-equilibrium moment supplies a second independent equation for the cross-derivatives of velocity. Solving the two equations together yields all components of the two-dimensional velocity gradient tensor, and the vorticity follows by subtraction. This matters because it turns a common simulation setup into one that reports complete flow kinematics locally, which vortex identification and complex-fluid models rely on.

What carries the argument

The mechanism is a pair of equations: the flow solver's second-order off-diagonal non-equilibrium moment gives $\partial_x u_y + \partial_y u_x = N_{xy}$, while the scalar solver, with anisotropic third-order equilibria of the form $\hat{\eta}^{eq'}_{xxy} = \beta_1 c_{s\phi}^2 \phi u_y + \phi u_x^2 u_y$ and $\hat{\eta}^{eq'}_{xyy} = \beta_2 c_{s\phi}^2 \phi u_x + \phi u_x u_y^2$, gives $\beta_1 \partial_x u_y + \beta_2 \partial_y u_x = N^\phi_{xy}$. Because $\beta_1 \neq \beta_2$, these two equations can be inverted to isolate the two cross-derivatives, and the antisymmetric combination gives the vorticity. The second-order non-equilibrium moments are read directly from the distribution functions as the deviation of the raw moments from their equilibria, so the whole computation uses only node-local data.

What would settle it

Run the paper's four-rolls mill benchmark with the usual flow field but replace the uniform scalar initialization of 2.0 by one that is zero on a patch of nodes (for instance, a strip through the domain). If the local vorticity formula is used as written, nodes where the scalar is zero should produce undefined or divergent values, confirming the hidden nonzero-scalar requirement.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the skew-symmetric velocity gradient tensor—i.e., the vorticity—is recoverable locally in a DDF-LB scheme by combining second-order non-equilibrium moments from the flow and scalar solvers, provided the scalar solver's third-order off-diagonal moment equilibria contain a small intentional anisotropy parametrized by $\beta_1$ and $\beta_2$. With $N_{xy}$ the flow solver's off-diagonal non-equilibrium moment (normalized) and $N^\phi_{xy}$ the corresponding scalar-solver combination, the two cross-derivatives separate as $\partial_x u_y = (N^\phi_{xy} - \beta_2 N_{xy})/(\beta_1-\beta_2)$ and $\partial_y u_x = (\beta_1 N_{xy} - N^\phi_{xy})/(\beta_1-\beta_2)$, so the vorticity is $\omega_z = [2N^\phi_{xy} - (\beta_1+\beta_2)N_{xy}]/(\beta_1-\beta_2)$. The diagonal velocity derivatives come from the flow solver's diagonal second-order moments. The paper derives these relations through a multiscale asymptotic expansion of the moment equations on a two-dimensional nine-velocity (D2Q9) lattice with multiple-relaxation-time collisions, and reports second-order convergence against analytical and finite-difference solutions for steady, unsteady, and cavity flows.

Load-bearing premise

The vorticity formula divides by the value of the transported scalar field in the definition of the normalized scalar moment, so the local construction requires that field to be nonzero at every node where vorticity is wanted; the paper never states this limitation and all of its benchmarks keep the scalar strictly positive.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Any lattice pair that supports third-order off-diagonal moments—D2Q9 in two dimensions and, by the paper's argument, D3Q15, D3Q19, and D3Q27 in three—can carry this local vorticity algorithm; the previous local approach required a lattice supporting fifth-order moments.
Because the flow solver's equilibria are left untouched, the method can be grafted onto existing MRT, SRT, or central-moment flow solvers by modifying only the scalar solver's third-order equilibria.
In the four-rolls mill benchmark the global relative error of the vorticity decreases with slope -2.0 on a log-log grid-refinement plot, so the vorticity field inherits the lattice Boltzmann schemes' second-order accuracy.
Vorticity computed this way is a combination of local moments, not a finite-difference stencil, so the approach is naturally suited to parallel implementations and to on-the-fly extraction of vortex-identification quantities.

Reading between the lines

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

The same anisotropic-moment trick could be reused in any double-distribution simulation where the second distribution carries a nonzero scalar, so thermal convection, combustion, or phase-field multiphase simulations could obtain local vorticity 'for free'—subject to the nonzero-scalar condition.
Because the defining equation for the normalized scalar moment divides by the scalar value, applying the method to sign-changing or zero-valued scalar fields (common in phase-field models) would require regularization or a different normalization; the paper's benchmarks all keep the scalar positive, so this boundary of validity is untested.
The two-equation inversion is not limited to the antisymmetric derivative: choosing different anisotropies or using higher-order moments may let other local kinematic quantities, such as the convective acceleration or the Lamb vector, be extracted node-locally as well.

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

The short version: they found a genuinely new way to compute vorticity locally in double-distribution-function lattice Boltzmann methods. Instead of modifying the flow solver's fifth-order moments as Peng et al. did for D3Q27, they introduce an intentional anisotropy into the scalar solver's third-order off-diagonal moment equilibria. That lets them combine the flow and scalar second-order non-equilibrium moments to get the skew-symmetric velocity gradient, and it works on D2Q9 and should work on other standard lattices. The central formulas, Eqs. (42)–(44), are simple and the Chapman-Enskog derivation is conventional. The benchmark set is decent — Poiseuille, four-rolls mill, Womersley, lid-driven cavity — and the observed second-order convergence is clean evidence that the method works as advertised in the tested regime. The appendices extending the idea to SRT and central-moment schemes are a useful gesture, though they are not numerically tested here.

The soft spots are real but not fatal. The stress-test concern about Eq. (38) is on the mark: the derivation drops ∂t0(φuxuy) and other O(u^2) terms without quantifying when that is safe. The Womersley test uses a period of T = 10000, so it does not probe the strongly unsteady regime where the dropped time-derivative term can grow. If the paper claims generality for unsteady flows, it needs a Strouhal-number bound or at least a more demanding unsteady test. Second, the small denominator β1−β2 = 0.1 (with β1=1, β2=0.9) could amplify numerical noise by a factor of ten; a sensitivity study on the choice of βs would be cheap and reassuring. Third, the formula is singular at φ=0, as Eq. (41b) admits, but the abstract's unqualified generality claim overstates the scope. For concentration fields that vanish locally, this matters. Finally, the claim that any lattice pair supporting third-order off-diagonal moments works is plausible but only D2Q9 MRT is actually validated.

Who is this for? Anyone doing DDF-LB for flows with scalar transport who needs vorticity for vortex identification or complex-fluid models. It is not a replacement for finite-difference vorticity in general, but it gives a local, parallel-friendly option and the idea is worth knowing. It deserves a serious referee; I would send it out with a request to address the unsteady truncation bound and the zero-scalar limitation, plus a small sensitivity test on β1−β2.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a local, finite-difference-free formula for computing vorticity within double-distribution-function lattice Boltzmann simulations of flow and scalar transport. The idea is to introduce an intentional anisotropy through the parameters β1 and β2 in the third-order off-diagonal equilibrium moments of the scalar distribution function, then combine the second-order non-equilibrium off-diagonal moment of the scalar scheme, obtained from a Chapman-Enskog analysis, with the corresponding moment of the flow scheme. The central result is Eq. (44), which expresses ωz in terms of Nxy and Nφxy, both evaluated from local moments. The derivation is carried out for an MRT-LB scheme on D2Q9, and the appendices sketch extensions to SRT and central-moment collision models. Validation is reported for Poiseuille flow, four-roll mill flow with a grid-convergence study, Womersley flow, and lid-driven cavity flow.

Significance. If the result holds, it gives a cheap, local way to obtain the complete velocity gradient tensor, including its skew-symmetric part, in DDF-LB simulations, which is relevant for vortex identification, complex-fluid modeling, and parallel implementations. The construction is not circular: β1 and β2 are chosen a priori and cancel in exact arithmetic, and the relation is grounded in a standard Chapman-Enskog expansion rather than fitted to benchmark data. The four-roll-mill convergence study provides the right kind of evidence, with a measured second-order slope. The main strengths are the clean derivation of the two-equation reconstruction, the explicit treatment of the D2Q9 MRT case, and the validation against analytical solutions. The limitations identified below concern the unquantified truncation of O(u^2) terms in the scalar moment balance, the singular behavior when the scalar field vanishes, and the conditioning of the β1−β2 denominator; these are addressable but currently prevent the unqualified form of the claim in the abstract.

major comments (3)

[Section 3.1, Eq. (38)] The central relation (38) is obtained from Eq. (35f) by dropping ∂t0(φuxuy), ∂x(φux^2uy), and ∂y(φuxuy^2) with the statement that terms of O(u^2) and higher are eliminated. These terms are O(Ma^2) relative to the retained βc_{sφ}^2∂(φu) terms under convective scaling, but the time-derivative term scales as O(Ma^2 St) and can be large under strong unsteadiness; no Strouhal-number bound is given. Since Eq. (38) feeds directly into Nφxy and hence into Eqs. (42)–(44), the claim that Eq. (44) gives the local vorticity is currently validated only for steady or very slow flows, such as the Womersley case with T = 10,000. Please provide an explicit error bound or additional tests that exercise the dropped terms.
[Section 4, Eq. (41b)] The definition of Nφxy divides by φ, so the local vorticity formula is singular at any node where the scalar field vanishes. The manuscript does not state this restriction in the abstract or conclusions, and all four benchmarks use strictly positive scalar fields: φL = 1, φH = 2 in Sections 5.1 and 5.3, uniform φ = 2 in Section 5.2, and φ = 1 on the cavity walls in Section 5.4. The tests therefore do not exercise the singular case. The paper should either explicitly qualify the general claim to φ ≠ 0 or provide a regularized local treatment for zero or sign-changing scalar fields.
[Section 4, Eqs. (42)–(44)] The reconstructed cross-derivatives and the vorticity contain the factor 1/(β1−β2), and the paper fixes β1 = 1, β2 = 0.9 without any sensitivity study. In exact arithmetic the β-dependence cancels, but any numerical error in Nxy or Nφxy is amplified by 1/(β1−β2), which is a factor of 10 at the chosen parameters, and the conditioning degrades as β1 approaches β2. Since β1 and β2 are free parameters, the manuscript should report how the result depends on their separation and recommend a practical range.

minor comments (6)

[Eqs. (35b)–(35e)] The terms c_{sφ}^2 and 2c_{sφ}^2 appear without the factor φ; they should read c_{sφ}^2 φ and 2c_{sφ}^2 φ to be consistent with Eq. (31) and with the subsequent first-order moment relations in Eq. (37).
[Section 5.1] The text states that five maximum centerline velocities are considered, but only four values are listed: Umax = 0.01, 0.03, 0.05, and 0.08. Please correct the count or add the missing case.
[Abstract and Introduction] The phrase "intensional anisotropy" appears to be a typo for "intentional anisotropy".
[Section 5.4, Fig. 6 caption] The caption begins with an extra colon (": :").
[Abstract and Summary] The broad claim that any pair of lattice sets supporting third-order off-diagonal moments enables local vorticity computation is not demonstrated in this paper; the detailed derivation and all validations are for D2Q9, and the three-dimensional extension is explicitly deferred to future work.
[Introduction, Section 6] Minor language issues: "The since method is based" and "deveopment" should be corrected.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the vorticity formula is derived from Chapman-Enskog analysis of two MRT-LBMs and validated against external analytical benchmarks, with free parameters not fitted to data.

full rationale

The central result Eq. (44) follows algebraically from the two independent moment relations (40a) and (40b), obtained by separate Chapman-Enskog analyses of the flow and scalar MRT-LBMs. The anisotropy parameters β1 and β2 are prescribed a priori (β1=1, β2=0.9) and cancel in exact arithmetic; they are not calibrated to the benchmark vorticity fields. The derivation is self-contained: every step from the moment equilibria in Eq. (31) through the C-E equations (35f), (37a), (37b), and (41a)-(41b) is explicitly written out, and the final vorticity is then tested against independent analytical solutions for Poiseuille flow, four-rolls mill flow, Womersley flow, and lid-driven cavity flow, exhibiting second-order convergence. The paper's self-citations, notably [57] and [62], acknowledge the authors' prior development of the underlying LB collision models and the philosophical idea of exploiting scalar-field degrees of freedom, but none of these citations supplies a load-bearing theorem or fitted value; the present manuscript contains the complete derivation and numerical validation. The limitations identified by the skeptic, such as neglect of O(u^2) terms in Eq. (38) and the φ≠0 requirement in Eq. (41b), are accuracy/scope caveats rather than circular reasoning. No equation is equivalent to its inputs by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central construction introduces two free coefficients beta1 and beta2 in the scalar third-order moment equilibrium; they are not fitted to benchmark data, but they are hand-chosen and no sensitivity study is given. The main unstated domain restriction is the requirement of a positive scalar field, since Eq. (41b) divides by phi. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)

beta1 = 1.0
Coefficient controlling the anisotropy of the scalar flux component phi*u_y in the third-order moment equilibrium eta^eq'_xxy (Eq. 31). Chosen a priori; the exact vorticity does not depend on it, but it sets the conditioning of the linear system.
beta2 = 0.9
Coefficient controlling the anisotropy of phi*u_x in eta^eq'_xyy (Eq. 31). Must differ from beta1; the value 0.9 is not justified and the small difference amplifies errors in Eq. (44).

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The flow is in the incompressible, low-Mach limit and terms of O(u^2) and higher are negligible in the Chapman-Enskog analysis.
Used to reduce Eq. (35f) to Eq. (38) and to derive the vorticity formulas in Sec. 4; no error estimates for this truncation are provided in the benchmarks.
domain assumption The scalar field phi is nonzero wherever the vorticity is computed.
Eq. (41b) divides by phi; all test cases choose nonzero phi but the paper does not acknowledge the restriction.
standard math The D2Q9 lattice and the natural non-orthogonal moment basis are nonsingular and support independent third-order off-diagonal moment equilibria.
Required for the moment transformation in Secs. 2 and 3; standard for D2Q9.
standard math The Chapman-Enskog expansion and discrete Maxwellian equilibria recover the Navier-Stokes and convection-diffusion equations.
Background assumption of all lattice Boltzmann derivations, used in Secs. 2.1 and 3.1.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Local Vorticity Computation in Double Distribution Functions based Lattice Boltzmann Methods for Flow and Scalar Transport." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2G3K43VG

@misc{pith2026190806742,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Local Vorticity Computation in Double Distribution Functions based Lattice Boltzmann Methods for Flow and Scalar Transport},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2G3K43VG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.06742}
}

read the original abstract

Computation of vorticity in conjunction with the strain rate tensor, plays an important role in fluid mechanics in vortical structure identification and in the modeling of various complex fluids. For the simulation of flows accompanied by the advection-diffusion transport of a scalar field, double distribution functions (DDF) based lattice Boltzmann methods (LBMs) are commonly used. We present a new local vorticity computation approach by introducing an intensional anisotropy of the scalar flux in the third order, off-diagonal moment equilibria of the LB scheme for the scalar field, and then combining the second order non-equilibrium components of both the LBMs. As such, any pair of lattice sets in the DDF formulation that can independently support the third order off-diagonal moments would enable local determination of the complete flow kinematics, with the LBMs for the fluid motion and the transport of the passive scalar respectively providing the necessary moment relationships to determine the symmetric and skew-symmetric components of the velocity gradient tensor. Since the resulting formulation is completely local and do not rely on finite difference approximations for velocity derivatives, it is by design naturally suitable for parallel computation. As an illustration of our approach, we formulate a DDF-LB scheme for local vorticity computation using a pair of multiple relaxation times (MRT) based collision approaches on two-dimensional, nine velocity (D2Q9) lattices, where the necessary moment relationships to determine the velocity gradient tensor and the vorticity are established via a Chapman-Enskog analysis. Simulations of various benchmark flows demonstrate good accuracy of the predicted vorticity fields, with a second order convergence. Furthermore, extensions of our formulation for a variety of collision models to enable local vorticity computation are presented.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.06742 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Comparison of the spatial distribution of the computed vorticity field with the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Comparison of computed profiles of the vorticity field and the analytical solution [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Evaluation of the order of accuracy of the present DDF MRT-LB scheme for vorticity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Comparison of computed profiles of the vorticity field and the analytical solution in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: : Comparison of computed contours of the vorticity field obtained using the DDF [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 73 canonical work pages

[1]

P. G. Saﬀman, Vortex dynamics, Cambridge university press, 1992

work page 1992
[2]

Wu, H.-Y

J.-Z. Wu, H.-Y. Ma, M.-D. Zhou, Vorticity and vortex dynamics, Springer Science & Business Media, 2007

work page 2007
[3]

Helmholtz, LXIII

H. Helmholtz, LXIII. On integrals of the hydrodynamical equations, which express vortex-motion, The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 33 (226) (1867) 485–512

work page
[4]

Aref, 150 years of vortex dynamics, Theoretical and Computational Fluid Dynamics 24 (2010) 1–7

H. Aref, 150 years of vortex dynamics, Theoretical and Computational Fluid Dynamics 24 (2010) 1–7

work page 2010
[5]

Truesdell, The kinematics of vorticity, Courier Dover Publications, 2018

C. Truesdell, The kinematics of vorticity, Courier Dover Publications, 2018

work page 2018
[6]

Lamb, Hydrodynamics, Cambridge university press, London, 1932

H. Lamb, Hydrodynamics, Cambridge university press, London, 1932

work page 1932
[7]

Truesdell, Two measures of vorticity, Journal of Rational Mechanics and Analysis 2 (1953) 173–217

C. Truesdell, Two measures of vorticity, Journal of Rational Mechanics and Analysis 2 (1953) 173–217

work page 1953
[8]

J. C. Hunt, A. A. Wray, P. Moin, Eddies, streams, and convergence zones in turbulent ﬂows, Center for Turbulence Research Report CTR-S88 (1988) 193–208

work page 1988

Show all 73 references

[9]

M. S. Chong, A. E. Perry, B. J. Cantwell, A general classiﬁcation of three- dimensional ﬂow ﬁelds, Physics of Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics 2 (5) (1990) 765–777

1990
[10]

Jeong, F

J. Jeong, F. Hussain, On the identiﬁcation of a vortex, Journal of ﬂuid mechanics 285 (1995) 69–94

1995
[11]

J. Zhou, R. J. Adrian, S. Balachandar, T. Kendall, Mechanisms for gener- ating coherent packets of hairpin vortices in channel ﬂow, Journal of ﬂuid mechanics 387 (1999) 353–396. 42

1999
[12]

P.Chakraborty, S.Balachandar, R.J.Adrian, Ontherelationshipsbetween local vortex identiﬁcation schemes, Journal of ﬂuid mechanics 535 (2005) 189–214

2005
[13]

Haller, An objective deﬁnition of a vortex, Journal of ﬂuid mechanics 525 (2005) 1–26

G. Haller, An objective deﬁnition of a vortex, Journal of ﬂuid mechanics 525 (2005) 1–26

2005
[14]

Zhang, D

S. Zhang, D. Choudhury, Eigen helicity density: a new vortex identiﬁcation scheme and its application in accelerated inhomogeneous ﬂows, Physics of ﬂuids 18 (5) (2006) 058104

2006
[15]

Kolář, Vortex identiﬁcation: New requirements and limitations, Inter- national Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 28 (4) (2007) 638–652

V. Kolář, Vortex identiﬁcation: New requirements and limitations, Inter- national Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 28 (4) (2007) 638–652

2007
[16]

Haller, A

G. Haller, A. Hadjighasem, M. Farazmand, F. Huhn, Deﬁning coherent vor- tices objectively from the vorticity, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 795 (2016) 136–173

2016
[17]

Elsas, L

J. Elsas, L. Moriconi, Vortex identiﬁcation from local properties of the vorticity ﬁeld, Physics of Fluids 29 (1) (2017) 015101

2017
[18]

Y. Gao, C. Liu, Rortex and comparison with eigenvalue-based vortex iden- tiﬁcation criteria, Physics of Fluids 30 (8) (2018) 085107

2018
[19]

S. Tian, Y. Gao, X. Dong, C. Liu, Deﬁnitions of vortex vector and vortex, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 849 (2018) 312–339

2018
[20]

8549–8570

B.Epps, Reviewofvortexidentiﬁcationmethods, in: 55thAIAAAerospace Sciences Meeting, 2017, pp. 8549–8570

2017
[21]

C. W. Hamman, J. C. Klewicki, R. M. Kirby, On the Lamb vector di- vergence in Navier–Stokes ﬂows, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 610 (2008) 261–284

2008
[22]

M. S. Howe, Theory of vortex sound, Vol. 33, Cambridge University Press, 2003. 43

2003
[23]

Pope, A more general eﬀective-viscosity hypothesis, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 72 (2) (1975) 331–340

S. Pope, A more general eﬀective-viscosity hypothesis, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 72 (2) (1975) 331–340

1975
[24]

F. M. Leslie, Theory of ﬂow phenomena in liquid crystals, in: Advances in liquid crystals, Vol. 4, Elsevier, 1979, pp. 1–81

1979
[25]

A. N. Beris, B. J. Edwards, B. J. Edwards, Thermodynamics of ﬂowing systems: with internal microstructure, no. 36, Oxford University Press, 1994

1994
[26]

R. G. Larson, The structure and rheology of complex ﬂuids, Vol. 150, Ox- ford university press, 1999

1999
[27]

Deville, T

M. Deville, T. B. Gatski, Mathematical modeling for complex ﬂuids and ﬂows, Springer Science & Business Media, 2012

2012
[28]

S.R.DeGroot, P.Mazur, Non-equilibriumthermodynamics, CourierDover Publications, 2013

2013
[29]

Hansen, P

J. Hansen, P. J. Daivis, B. Todd, Molecular spin in nano-conﬁned ﬂuidic ﬂows, Microﬂuidics and nanoﬂuidics 6 (6) (2009) 785–795

2009
[30]

J. S. Hansen, J. C. Dyre, P. J. Daivis, B. Todd, H. Bruus, Nanoﬂow hy- drodynamics, Physical Review E 84 (3) (2011) 036311

2011
[31]

J. S. Hansen, J. C. Dyre, P. Daivis, B. D. Todd, H. Bruus, Continuum nanoﬂuidics, Langmuir 31 (49) (2015) 13275–13289

2015
[32]

He, L.-S

X. He, L.-S. Luo, Theory of the lattice Boltzmann method: From the Boltzmann equation to the lattice Boltzmann equation, Phys. Rev. E. 56 (1997) 6811–6817

1997
[33]

d’Humieres, I

D. d’Humieres, I. Ginzburg, M. Krafczyk, P. Lallemand, L.-S. Luo., Multiple-relaxation-time lattice Boltzmann models in three dimensions, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A. 360 (2002) 437–451. 44

2002
[34]

Succi, The Lattice Boltzmann equation for ﬂuid dynamics and beyond, Oxford University Press., New York, 2001

S. Succi, The Lattice Boltzmann equation for ﬂuid dynamics and beyond, Oxford University Press., New York, 2001

2001
[35]

C. K. Aidun, J. R. Clausen, Lattice-Boltzmann method for complex ﬂows, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 42 (2010) 439–472

2010
[36]

L.-S. Luo, M. Krafczyk, W. Shyy, Lattice Boltzmann method for compu- tational ﬂuid dynamics, Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering 56 (2010) 651–660

2010
[37]

Z. Guo, C. Shu, Lattice Boltzmann algorithms and its application in engi- neering, Vol. 3, World Scientiﬁc, 2013

2013
[38]

Geier, M

M. Geier, M. Schonherr, A. Pasquali, M. Krafczyk, The cumulant lattice Boltzmann equation in three dimensions: Theory and validation, Comp. Math. Appl. 704 (2015) 507–547

2015
[39]

Kruger, H

T. Kruger, H. Kusumaatmaja, A. Kuzmin, O. Shardt, G. Silva, E. Viggen, The Lattice Boltzmann Method - Principles and Practice, Springer, 2016

2016
[40]

Krüger, F

T. Krüger, F. Varnik, D. Raabe, Second-order convergence of the deviatoric stress tensor in the standard Bhatnagar-Gross-Krook lattice Boltzmann method, Physical Review E 82 (2) (2010) 025701

2010
[41]

Yong, L.-S

W.-A. Yong, L.-S. Luo, et al., Accuracy of the viscous stress in the lattice Boltzmann equation with simple boundary conditions, Physical Review E 86 (6) (2012) 065701

2012
[42]

Y. Ning, K. N. Premnath, D. V. Patil, Numerical study of the properties of the central moment lattice Boltzmann method, Int. J. Numer Meth Fluids 82 (2016) 59–90

2016
[43]

C. Peng, Z. Guo, L.-P. Wang, Lattice Boltzmann model capable of meso- scopic vorticity computation, Physical Review E 96 (5) (2017) 053304

2017
[44]

Ponce Dawson, S

S. Ponce Dawson, S. Chen, G. D. Doolen, Lattice Boltzmann computations for reaction-diﬀusion equations, J. Chem. Phys. 98 (2) (1993) 1514–1523. 45

1993
[45]

X. He, S. Chen, G. D. Doolen, A novel thermal model for the lattice Boltz- mann method in incompressible limit, J. Comp. Phys. 146 (1) (1998) 282– 300

1998
[46]

Van der Sman, M

R. Van der Sman, M. Ernst, Convection-diﬀusion lattice Boltzmann scheme for irregular lattices, J. Comp. Phys. 160 (2) (2000) 766–782

2000
[47]

P.Lallemand, L.-S.Luo, TheoryofthelatticeBoltzmann method: Acoustic and thermal properties in two and three dimensions, Phys. Rev. E 68 (3) (2003) 036706

2003
[48]

Rasin, S

I. Rasin, S. Succi, W. Miller, A multi-relaxation lattice kinetic method for passive scalar diﬀusion, Journal of Computational Physics 206 (2) (2005) 453–462

2005
[49]

Chopard, J

B. Chopard, J. Falcone, J. Latt, The lattice Boltzmann advection-diﬀusion model revisited, Euro. Phys. J.-Special Topics 171 (1) (2009) 245–249

2009
[50]

Yoshida, M

H. Yoshida, M. Nagaoka, Multiple-relaxation-time lattice Boltzmann model for the convection and anisotropic diﬀusion equation, J. Comp. Phys. 229 (20) (2010) 7774–7795

2010
[51]

J. Wang, D. Wang, P. Lallemand, L.-S. Luo, Lattice Boltzmann simulations of thermal convective ﬂows in two dimensions, Comp. Math. Appl. 65 (2) (2013) 262–286

2013
[52]

Z. Chai, T. S. Zhao, Lattice Boltzmann model for the convection-diﬀusion equation, Physical Review E 87 (2013) 063309

2013
[53]

Contrino, P

D. Contrino, P. Lallemand, P. Asinari, L. Luo, Lattice-Boltzmann simula- tions of the thermally driven 2D square cavity at high Rayleigh numbers, J. Comput. Phys 257 (2014) 257–272

2014
[54]

Hajabdollahi, K

F. Hajabdollahi, K. Premnath, Central moments-based cascaded lattice Boltzmann method for thermal convective ﬂows in three-dimensions, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 120 (2018) 838–850. 46

2018
[55]

Hajabdollahi, K

F. Hajabdollahi, K. N. Premnath, Symmetrized operator split schemes for force and source modeling in cascaded lattice Boltzmann methods for ﬂow and scalar transport, Physical Review E 97 (6) (2018) 063303

2018
[56]

Hajabdollahi, K

F. Hajabdollahi, K. N. Premnath, S. W. Welch, Cascaded lattice Boltz- mann method based on central moments for axisymmetric thermal ﬂows including swirling eﬀects, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 128 (2019) 999–1016

2019
[57]

thesis, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, CO (March 2019)

F.Hajabdollahi, Cascaded latticeBoltzmannmethods basedoncentralmo- ments for thermal convection, multiphase ﬂows and complex ﬂuids, Ph.D. thesis, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, CO (March 2019)

2019
[58]

K. N. Premnath, S. Banerjee, Incorporating forcing terms in cascaded lat- tice Boltzmann approach by method of central moments, Phys. Rev. E 80 (2009) 036702

2009
[59]

X.He, S.Chen, G.Doelen, AnovelthermalmodelforthelatticeBoltzmann method in incompressible limit, J. Comput. Phys 146 (1998) 282–300

1998
[60]

X. He, S. Chen, R. Zhang, A lattice Boltzmann scheme for incompress- ible multiphase ﬂow and its application in simulation of Rayleigh-Taylor instability, J. Comput. Phys 152 (1999) 642–663

1999
[61]

Chapman, T

S. Chapman, T. G. Cowling, The mathematical theory of non-uniform gases: an account of the kinetic theory of viscosity, thermal conduction and diﬀusion in gases, Cambridge university press, 1990

1990
[62]

Hajabdollahi, K

F. Hajabdollahi, K. N. Premnath, Galilean-invariant preconditioned central-moment lattice Boltzmann method without cubic velocity errors for eﬃcient steady ﬂow simulations, Physical Review E 97 (5) (2018) 053303

2018
[63]

I. G. Currie, Fundamental mechanics of ﬂuids, CRC Press, 2002

2002
[64]

U. Ghia, K. N. Ghia, J. Shin, High-Re solutions for incompressible ﬂow using the Navier-Stokes equations and a multigrid method, J. Comput. Phys 48 (1982) 387–411. 47

1982
[65]

Erturk, T

E. Erturk, T. C. Corke, C. Gökçöl, Numerical solutions of 2-d steady in- compressible driven cavity ﬂow at high reynolds numbers, International journal for Numerical Methods in ﬂuids 48 (7) (2005) 747–774

2005
[66]

Bruneau, M

C.-H. Bruneau, M. Saad, The 2d lid-driven cavity problem revisited, Com- puters & Fluids 35 (3) (2006) 326–348

2006
[67]

Premnath, F

K. Premnath, F. Hajabdollahi, Local computation of skew-symmetric ve- locity gradient tensor using double distribution functions-based lattice Boltzmann schemes on standard lattices in three-dimensions, Tech. rep., University of Colorado Denver, Denver, CO (2019)

2019
[68]

P. J. Dellar, Lattice kinetic formulation for ferroﬂuids, Journal of statistical physics 121 (1-2) (2005) 105–118

2005
[69]

Denniston, E

C. Denniston, E. Orlandini, J. Yeomans, Lattice boltzmann simulations of liquid crystal hydrodynamics, Physical Review E 63 (5) (2001) 056702

2001
[70]

Dahler, L

J. Dahler, L. Scriven, Theory of structured continua i. general consideration of angular momentum and polarization, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 275 (1363) (1963) 504–527

1963
[71]

A. C. Eringen, Theory of micropolar ﬂuids, Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics (1966) 1–18

1966
[72]

A. C. Eringen, Simple microﬂuids, International Journal of Engineering Science 2 (2) (1964) 205–217

1964
[73]

Geier, J

M. Geier, J. Greiner, F. Korvink, Cascaded digital lattice Boltzmann au- tomata for high Reynolds number ﬂow, Phys. Rev. E 73 (2006) 066705. 48

2006

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

P. G. Saﬀman, Vortex dynamics, Cambridge university press, 1992

work page 1992

[2] [2]

Wu, H.-Y

J.-Z. Wu, H.-Y. Ma, M.-D. Zhou, Vorticity and vortex dynamics, Springer Science & Business Media, 2007

work page 2007

[3] [3]

Helmholtz, LXIII

H. Helmholtz, LXIII. On integrals of the hydrodynamical equations, which express vortex-motion, The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 33 (226) (1867) 485–512

work page

[4] [4]

Aref, 150 years of vortex dynamics, Theoretical and Computational Fluid Dynamics 24 (2010) 1–7

H. Aref, 150 years of vortex dynamics, Theoretical and Computational Fluid Dynamics 24 (2010) 1–7

work page 2010

[5] [5]

Truesdell, The kinematics of vorticity, Courier Dover Publications, 2018

C. Truesdell, The kinematics of vorticity, Courier Dover Publications, 2018

work page 2018

[6] [6]

Lamb, Hydrodynamics, Cambridge university press, London, 1932

H. Lamb, Hydrodynamics, Cambridge university press, London, 1932

work page 1932

[7] [7]

Truesdell, Two measures of vorticity, Journal of Rational Mechanics and Analysis 2 (1953) 173–217

C. Truesdell, Two measures of vorticity, Journal of Rational Mechanics and Analysis 2 (1953) 173–217

work page 1953

[8] [8]

J. C. Hunt, A. A. Wray, P. Moin, Eddies, streams, and convergence zones in turbulent ﬂows, Center for Turbulence Research Report CTR-S88 (1988) 193–208

work page 1988