Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 60 references

Adaptive criterion and modification of wave-particle decomposition in UGKWP method for high-speed flow simulation

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The UGKWP method can run high-speed multiscale flows 1.5 to 4 times faster by adding a mesh-based local Knudsen criterion and a side-split flux correction, with no loss of accuracy against UGKS and DSMC.

desk verdict A useful, well-validated speedup for UGKWP, with one ad hoc blending term that needs a sensitivity study and a grid-convergence check before I'd trust it in the transitional cells. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.12722 v1 pith:WEIX3PER submitted 2025-06-15 physics.comp-ph physics.flu-dyn

Junzhe Cao , Yufeng Wei , Wenpei Long , Chengwen Zhong , Kun Xu This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.comp-phphysics.flu-dyn
keywords unifiedgas-kineticwave-particlemethodmultiscalehypersonicflowdecompositionadaptivelocalKnudsencriterionmesh-size-basednumberChapman-EnskogcorrectionrarefiedgasdynamicsDSMCcomparison
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 claims that the unified gas-kinetic wave-particle (UGKWP) method can be made 1.5 to 4 times faster in hypersonic multiscale simulations by deciding, cell by cell, whether the gas should be evolved as a deterministic hydrodynamic wave or as stochastic particles, using a sharper local-scale measure than the original time-only criterion. The measure is the minimum of a gradient-based Knudsen number and a mesh-size-based Knudsen number, so the local mesh itself becomes the observation scale for how rarefied the flow is. The paper also modifies the flux evolution so that the wave and particle parts of the flux are evaluated with cell-based coefficients on each side of an interface, which prevents spurious mass storage where the wave-particle split changes sharply. Across four hypersonic test cases (cylinder, slender cavity, side jet, and a $70^\circ$ blunted cone with sting), the adaptive method matches UGKS and DSMC results for heat flux, shear stress, and flow structure while cutting particle counts substantially.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the local wave-particle weight $\eta(Kn_L)$, computed from $Kn_L=\min(Kn_\mathrm{GLL},Kn_\lambda)$. Here $Kn_\mathrm{GLL}=\lambda/(\rho/|\nabla\rho|)$ measures the density-variation length scale and $Kn_\lambda=\lambda/L_{\lambda,\mathrm{ref}}$ uses the local mesh size $L_{\lambda,\mathrm{ref}}=C\sqrt{\Omega_i}$ in two dimensions or $C\sqrt[3]{\Omega_i}$ in three dimensions with $C=20$; the paper motivates this by the principle that the mesh is the observation scale of a numerical multiscale scheme. A hyperbolic tangent of $Kn_L/Kn_\mathrm{ref}$ with $Kn_\mathrm{ref}=0.01$ gives $\eta\approx 1$ in rarefied cells and $\eta\approx 0$ in continuum cells, and exponential moving averaging damps stochastic noise in $\eta$ and $\rho$. The second mechanism is the side-split flux of Eqs. (27)--(28), which evaluates the UGKS time-integration coefficients $\delta_a,\dots,\delta_e$ and $\eta$ with cell values on each side of an interface instead of interface-averaged values, adding the correction term $[1-\eta(Kn_\lambda)]\hat{\delta}_f$ with $\hat{\delta}_f=-\tau^2(1-e^{-\Delta t/\tau})$ to recover viscosity when $\eta$ is small. Together these mechanisms set how many particles are sampled, where they are sampled, and how their macroscopic flux is reconciled with the hydrodynamic-wave flux.

What would settle it

Run the AUGKWP method on a cold-wall hypersonic boundary layer or shock-separated flow where wall heat flux is highly sensitive, with the same $C=20$ and $Kn_\mathrm{ref}=0.01$, and compare cell-by-cell heat flux and shear stress with UGKS or DSMC in the strip of cells where $\eta$ crosses from 0 to 1; a systematic deviation there, or a spurious mass accumulation at the wave-particle interface, would show that the modified flux evolution does not generalize beyond the reported cases.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the original UGKWP partition weight $e^{-\Delta t/\tau}$, based only on a global time step versus local relaxation time, misclassifies large near-equilibrium regions of hypersonic flows as rarefied, and that this misclassification can be repaired with a three-part local-scale criterion. The paper replaces the weight by $\eta(Kn_L)\,e^{-\Delta t/\tau}$ with $Kn_L=\min(Kn_\mathrm{GLL},Kn_\lambda)$, where $Kn_\mathrm{GLL}$ measures the density-gradient length scale and $Kn_\lambda$ compares the mean free path with the local mesh size, and $\eta$ is a hyperbolic-tangent switch centered at $Kn_\mathrm{ref}=0.01$. To align the deterministic wave evolution with the particle evolution in cells where $\eta$ and $\tau$ change strongly across an interface, the equilibrium flux and the free-transport wave flux are computed separately on each side of the interface (Eqs. 27--28), with a Chapman-Enskog correction $[1-\eta(Kn_\lambda)]\hat{\delta}_f$ added to restore viscous fluxes in continuum cells. The paper reports that this reduces particle numbers by a factor between roughly 1.5 and 4 in the tested cases while stagnation-line and wall distributions of pressure, shear stress, and heat flux agree with UGKS and DSMC references.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the ad hoc Chapman-Enskog correction added in Eq. (28), with prefactor $[1-\eta(Kn_\lambda)]$ and $\hat{\delta}_f=-\tau^2(1-e^{-\Delta t/\tau})$, recovers the correct viscous stress and heat flux in cells where the scale changes rapidly; the term is chosen to match the continuum limit, not derived from the integral solution, so if it is wrong the accuracy in transition regions degrades even though the test cases match.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In the cylinder case at $Kn_\infty=0.001$, the $Kn_L$ criterion reduces particles from 1483k (original UGKWP) to 313k and per-step CPU time from 2.24 s to 0.83 s, a factor of about 2.7.
  • At $Kn_\infty=0.1$, the adaptive criterion gives essentially no gain over the original method, showing that the savings are specific to near-continuum regions rather than rarefied flows.
  • In the side-jet case, which is mostly continuum with a small locally rarefied region, the method uses about 97k particles versus 724k for the original UGKWP and keeps the DSMC flow features (penetration height and recirculation lengths within about 20%).
  • Wherever $\eta=0$, the scheme reduces to the gas-kinetic scheme, so the adaptive method continuously spans particle, hybrid wave-particle, and fully deterministic wave limits.
  • The mesh-based $Kn_\lambda$ makes the physical regime classification depend on discretization, meaning that mesh refinement in a boundary layer or stagnation region pushes those cells toward the continuum description.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the Chapman-Enskog correction in Eq. (28) is an ad hoc adjustment rather than a term derived from the integral solution, its viscous and heat-flux behavior in transitional cells is only calibrated by the four reported test cases; cases with strong thermal non-equilibrium or different Prandtl numbers could expose errors that these comparisons do not.
  • A focused sensitivity study of the pre-shock temperature deviation the authors report at $Kn_\infty=0.01$ (Fig. 6d), attributed to an under-resolved discontinuity and to particles being abruptly released and reabsorbed, would show whether the EMA time scale or the smoothness of $\eta$ needs adjustment rather than the flux correction.
  • The side-split flux repair suggests a general design rule for hybrid wave-particle schemes: whenever the wave-particle weight varies steeply across an interface, cell-based coefficients should be used on each side rather than an interface average; this rule may transfer to other kinetic particle-continuum hybrids beyond UGKWP.
  • Since $Kn_\lambda$ depends on the local mesh, the adaptive classification will change if the mesh is adapted; using $\eta$ or $Kn_L$ as an error indicator for mesh refinement could let users place particles exactly where the flow is rarefied, a feedback loop the paper does not explore.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript extends the adaptive unified gas-kinetic wave-particle (AUGKWP) method for high-speed multiscale flows. It introduces a composite local Knudsen number KnL = min(KnGLL, Knλ), an exponential moving average for noise reduction, and a modified interface flux (Eqs. 27-28) that splits the hydrodynamic and free-transport fluxes by left/right cell states and adds a Chapman-Enskog correction weighted by [1−η(Knλ)]. The method is validated on four hypersonic configurations: flow around a cylinder at Kn∞ = 0.1, 0.01, and 0.001, a slender cavity, a side-jet impingement, and a 70-degree blunted cone with a sting. The central claim is that the adaptive criterion and the flux modification improve efficiency by a factor of about 1.5 to 4 while matching UGKS, DSMC, and experimental reference data.

Significance. If the accuracy and efficiency claims hold, the proposed method is practically valuable for hypersonic vehicle simulations, where continuum and rarefied regions coexist and deterministic velocity-space solvers are prohibitively expensive. The numerical evidence is extensive: multiple Knudsen numbers for the cylinder case, comparisons with DSMC for the cavity and side-jet cases, a three-dimensional test, wall heat-flux and force comparisons, and single-core CPU timings that make the speedup claim concrete rather than rhetorical. The validation is non-circular because accuracy is checked against external benchmarks. However, the central method depends on an ad hoc Chapman-Enskog correction term and on several free constants whose influence is not quantified; these issues need to be addressed before the efficiency-accuracy trade-off can be regarded as fully established.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 4.2, Eq. (28)] The added term [1−η(Knλ)] δ̂f ∫ Ψ(∂g^h/∂x·u + ∂g^h/∂t) is introduced as a Chapman-Enskog correction, but it is not derived from the integral solution in Eq. (5), and the prefactor [1−η(Knλ)] is described only as an "adjusting parameter." The paper should provide a derivation or at least an asymptotic analysis showing that, in the combined left/right formulation, this term recovers the Navier-Stokes stress and heat flux with the intended viscosity in the continuum limit, and it should quantify the error introduced when η(Knλ) varies rapidly between neighboring cells. The present validation does not isolate this term, because every test case exercises the correction together with the new adaptive criterion.
  2. [Sec. 3.2, Eqs. (13) and (16)] Since W^hp = e^{−Δt/τ} ρ^h, the DVM free-transport flux subtracted in Eq. (16) should be proportional to e^{−Δt/τ}, but the equation displays e^{Δt/τ}. In addition, expanding f(−ut,0) = g^h(0,0) − t u·∂g^h/∂x gives a minus sign for the time-integrated gradient term, yet Eq. (16) shows a plus sign. This apparent inconsistency propagates into Eqs. (20) and (28). Please correct the notation or explain the convention; if the implementation follows the printed formulas, the claimed particle-wave flux balance is not the one derived from Eq. (13).
  3. [Sec. 5.1, Fig. 6(d)] The paper reports a visible deviation of the AUGKWP temperature from UGKS in the pre-shock region at Kn∞ = 0.01 and attributes it to mesh under-resolution and to particles being released and absorbed abruptly. This region is precisely the drastic scale-variation situation that the modified flux in Sec. 4.2 is designed to handle, so the attribution needs direct support. A grid-convergence study at this condition, with and without the Sec. 4.2 modification, is necessary to show that the deviation is a resolution artifact rather than a modeling error in Eq. (28).
  4. [Sec. 4.1 and Tables 1-2] The method depends on Kn_ref = 0.01, C = 20, NEMA = 100, and N_hp,ref = 100, but no sensitivity analysis is reported. These constants directly determine the location and sharpness of the wave-particle transition and therefore influence both accuracy and the reported speedup. The paper should include at least a sensitivity test for Kn_ref and C, and ideally for NEMA, to show that the efficiency gains are not an artifact of fine-tuned parameters and that accuracy is robust to plausible variations.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 4.2, Eq. (28)] The notation η(Knλ) is not previously defined; Sec. 4.1 defines η(KnL) with KnL = min(KnGLL, Knλ). Please define η(Knλ) explicitly and state why the blending uses only the Knλ component rather than KnL.
  2. [Sec. 5.4] The statement "the third case of the experiment" should specify which case in Refs. [55,56] is used and should give the corresponding free-stream conditions that were actually simulated, since the comparison in Fig. 20 depends on those conditions.
  3. [Sec. 5.1, Fig. 6(d)] In Fig. 6(d) the caption states that velocity is nondimensionalized by the inflow sound speed, but the normalization for temperature is not stated; please clarify both axes and their legends.
  4. [Sec. 4.1, Eq. (18)] The transition width in the tanh argument is set by Kn_ref itself (the denominator inside the tanh), which is an unusual choice; a sentence explaining this scaling and its sensitivity to the numerical value would help the reader.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the modified UGKWP flux is constructed explicitly from the integral solution and validated against external UGKS, DSMC, and experimental benchmarks.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The UGKWP flux follows openly from the integral solution (Eq. 5) with coefficients (Eq. 9); the adaptive modification is an explicit replacement (Eqs. 19-20) and a split-side reformulation (Eqs. 27-28). Accuracy is measured against UGKS, DSMC, and experimental data in Sections 5.1-5.4, so the central claim that the method matches these benchmarks is not fixed by construction. The parameters Knref = 0.01, C = 20, and NEMA = 100 are adopted from prior work or stated as settings, but none is fitted to the quantities later called predictions (stagnation-line profiles, heat-flux coefficients, aerodynamic coefficients); those outputs are generated by the full scheme and compared with external references. The [1 − η(Knλ)] CE-blending in Eq. (28) is explicitly described as 'an adjusting parameter'; this is an acknowledged heuristic and a robustness concern, not a circular reduction. Self-citations [29,20] identify the base AUGKWP method but do not by themselves force the present validation results, which rest on independent benchmarks.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method introduces no new physical entities or conserved quantities. It relies on several hand-chosen numerical constants (C, NEMA, Kn_ref, N_hp,ref) and two ad hoc modeling assumptions for the adaptive criterion and the flux correction. These are the main sources of uncertainty in the claimed efficiency and accuracy.

free parameters (4)
  • C = 20
    Coefficient in Eq. (22) defining the reference length Lλ,ref from mesh size; chosen by hand, no sensitivity study.
  • NEMA = 100
    Window size of exponential moving average for density and η; chosen by hand.
  • Kn_ref = 0.01
    Critical Knudsen number in the η function Eq. (18); taken from Refs. [29,20].
  • N_hp,ref = 100
    Reference particle number per cell in Eq. (14); fixed for all cases.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The Shakhov kinetic model accurately represents the gas physics for the studied hypersonic flows.
    The method solves the Shakhov model (Eq. 2); real-gas effects such as chemical reactions and internal energy relaxation are not modeled.
  • ad hoc to paper The tanh blending function η(KnL) with Kn_ref=0.01 provides a reasonable smooth transition between continuum and rarefied regimes.
    No derivation is given; the functional form and threshold are adapted from prior work [29,20].
  • ad hoc to paper The added Chapman-Enskog correction term [1−η(Knλ)]δ̂f is necessary and sufficient to recover the Navier-Stokes viscosity in the continuum limit.
    Introduced as an 'adjusting parameter' in Sec. 4.2 without formal derivation from the integral solution.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Adaptive criterion and modification of wave-particle decomposition in UGKWP method for high-speed flow simulation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WEIX3PER

@misc{pith2026250612722,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Adaptive criterion and modification of wave-particle decomposition in UGKWP method for high-speed flow simulation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WEIX3PER}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.12722}
}
abstract

Benefitting from the direct modeling of physical laws in a discretized space and the automatic decomposition of hydrodynamic waves and particles, the unified gas-kinetic wave-particle (UGKWP) method offers notable advantages in various multiscale physics, such as hypersonic flow, plasma transport and radiation transport. Aiming at achieving a more suitable and efficient wave-particle decomposition in high-speed flow simulation and enhancing the performance in the drastic scale variation region, in this work, the scale adaptive criterion is studied and the flux evolution of UGKWP method is modified. Specifically, besides the perspective of time which is naturally considered in the time-dependent distribution function of UGKWP method, two more criteria from views of space and gradient are utilized to identify the local scale, and to reduce the computational consumption of particles on describing the near-equilibrium microscopic gas distribution function. Moreover, corresponding to the coefficients in the time integration flux of unified gas-kinetic scheme (UGKS), the evolution of hydrodynamic wave is modified to be more consistent with particles, which is essential when the scale changes intensely in different cells. A variety of test cases are conducted to validate the performance of the adaptive UGKWP method, including hypersonic flows around a cylinder at multiple inflow Knudsen numbers, hypersonic flow over a slender cavity, side-jet impingement on hypersonic flow and three-dimensional hypersonic flows over a $70^{\circ}$ blunted cone with a cylindrical sting.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.12722 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Diagram to illustrate the algorithm of UGKWP method: (a) In [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Diagram to illustrate the function η (KnL). 4.1. KnGLL, Knλ and exponential moving average In this work, KnL is calculated by following equations, KnL = min (KnGLL, Knλ), KnGLL = λ ρ/ |∇ρ| , Knλ = λ Lλ,ref . (21) As in Ref. [29, 38–40], KnGLL is widely used to measure the non-equilibrium degree, which mainly has advantages in the equilibrium state of the free inflow. The gradient of density is used to find the inten… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Diagram to illustrate the intense change of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (18 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Diagram to illustrate the algorithm of AUGKWP method: (a) I [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of ratio of particles at Kn∞ = 0.01: (a) Original UGKWP method, (b) AUGKWP method with KnGLL, (c) AUGKWP method with KnL, (d) details along the stagnation line of three approaches. (a) (b) (c) (d) φ (e) φ (f) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Results of AUGKWP method at Kn∞ = 0.01: (a) Temperature contour, (b) particle number contour, (c) density along the stagnation line, (d) velocity and temperature along the stagnation line, (e) pressure coefficient at the wall, (f) shear stress and heat flux coefficient…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison of ratio of particles at Kn∞ = 0.001: (a) Original UGKWP method, (b) AUGKWP method with KnGLL, (c) AUGKWP method with KnL, (d) details along the stagnation line of three approaches. (a) (b) (c) (d) φ (e) φ (f) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Results of AUGKWP method at Kn∞ = 0.001: (a) Temperature contour, (b) particle number contour, (c) density along the stagnation line, (d) velocity and temperature along the stagnation line, (e) pressure coefficient at the wall, (f) shear stress and heat flux coefficien…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Comparison of ratio of particles at Kn∞ = 0.1: (a) Original UGKWP method, (b) AUGKWP method with KnGLL, (c) AUGKWP method with KnL, (d) details along the stagnation line of three approaches. (a) (b) (c) (d) φ (e) φ (f) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Results of AUGKWP method at Kn∞ = 0.1: (a) Temperature contour, (b) particle number contour, (c) density along the stagnation line, (d) velocity and temperature along the stagnation line, (e) pressure coefficient at the wall, (f) shear stress and heat flux coefficient…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: When using the original [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_12.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Contours simulated by AUGKWP method (unit: m): (a) Den [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Comparison of ratio of particles (unit: m): (a) Original UG [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Results simulated by AUGKWP method: (a) Temperature a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Contours simulated by AUGKWP method (unit: m): (a) Tem [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Comparison of ratio of particles (unit: m): (a) Original UG [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Geometric profile at symmetry plane of 70 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Pressure coefficient contours at the surface and part [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Temperature contours and streamlines at the symmetr [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Three-dimensional streamlines at 30◦ angle attack. 26 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Quantitative comparison between experiment, DSMC and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_20.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [29]

    Y. Wei, J. Cao, X. Ji, K. Xu, Adaptive wave-particle decompositio n in ugkwp method for high-speed flow simulations, Advances in Aerodynamics 5 (2023) 25. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s42774-023-00156-y

    doi:10.1186/s42774-023-00156-y 2023

  2. [1]

    G. A. Bird, Molecular gas dynamics and the direct simulation of gas fl ows, Clarendon Press, 1994. 27

    work page 1994

  3. [2]

    Xu, Direct modeling for computational fluid dynamics: Constru ction and application of unified gas-kinetic schemes, World Scientific, 2015

    K. Xu, Direct modeling for computational fluid dynamics: Constru ction and application of unified gas-kinetic schemes, World Scientific, 2015

    work page 2015

  4. [3]

    W. Long, Y. Wei, K. Xu, Nonequilibrium flow simulations using unified gas-kinetic wave-particle method, AIAA Journal 62 (4) (2024) 14 11–1433. doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J063641

    doi:10.2514/1.j063641 2024

  5. [4]

    Li, A.-P

    Z.-H. Li, A.-P. Peng, Q. Ma, L.-N. Dang, X.-W. Tang, X.-Z. Sun, Gas -kinetic unified algorithm for computable modeling of Boltzmann equation and application to aer othermodynamics for falling disintegration of uncontrolled Tiangong-No.1 spacecraft, Ad vances in Aerodynamics 1 (2019) 4. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s42774-019-0009-4

    work page doi:10.1186/s42774-019-0009-4 2019

  6. [5]

    Y. Wang, S. Liu, C. Zhuo, C. Zhong, Investigation of nonlinear sq ueeze-film damping involv- ing rarefied gas effect in micro-electro-mechanical systems, Comp uters & Mathematics with Applications 114 (2022) 898–1221. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2022.03.045

    work page doi:10.1016/j.camwa.2022.03.045 2022

  7. [6]

    J. Zeng, Y. Zhang, L. Wu, GSIS-ALE for moving boundary proble ms in rarefied gas flows, Journal of Computational Physics 525 (2025) 113761. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2025.113761

    work page arXiv 2025

  8. [7]

    Jiang, M

    D. Jiang, M. Mao, J. Li, X. Deng, An implicit parallel UGKS solver for flows covering various regimes, Advances in Aerodynamics 1 (20 19) 8. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s42774-019-0008-5

    doi:10.1186/s42774-019-0008-5

Show all 60 references
  1. [8]

    L. Mieussens, Discrete-velocity models and numerical schemes f or the Boltzmann-BGK equa- tion in plane and axisymmetric geometries, Journal of Computationa l Physics 162 (2) (2000) 429–466. doi:https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.2000.6548

    2000

  2. [9]

    Pieraccini, G

    S. Pieraccini, G. Puppo, Implicit-explicit schemes for BGK kinetic eq uations, Journal of Scientific Computing 32 (2007) 1–28. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10915-006-9116-6

    2007 doi

  3. [10]

    Li, H.-X

    Z.-H. Li, H.-X. Zhang, Gas-kinetic numerical studies of three-d imensional complex flows on spacecraft re-entry, Journal of Computational Physics 228 (4) (2009) 1116–1138. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2008.10.013

    2009 doi

  4. [11]

    Xu, J.-C

    K. Xu, J.-C. Huang, A unified gas-kinetic scheme for continuum a nd rar- efied flows, Journal of Computational Physics 229 (20) (2010) 77 47–7764. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2010.06.032

    2010 doi

  5. [12]

    Z. Guo, K. Xu, R. Wang, Discrete unified gas-kinetic scheme for all Knudsen num- ber flows: Low-speed isothermal case, Physical Review E 88 (3) (2 013) 033305. doi:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.88.033305

    doi

  6. [13]

    W. Su, L. Zhu, P. Wang, Y. Zhang, L. Wu, Can we find steady-st ate solutions to multiscale rarefied gas flows within dozens of iterations?, Journal of Comput ational Physics 407 (2020) 109245. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2020.109245

    2020

  7. [14]

    W. Ren, H. Liu, S. Jin, An asymptotic-preserving Monte Carlo me thod for the Boltzmann equation, Journal of Computational Physics 276 (2 014) 380–404. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2014.07.029. 28

    2014 doi

  8. [16]

    Fei, A time-relaxed Monte Carlo method preserving the Navier - Stokes asymptotics, Journal of Computational Physics 486 (202 3) 112128

    F. Fei, A time-relaxed Monte Carlo method preserving the Navier - Stokes asymptotics, Journal of Computational Physics 486 (202 3) 112128. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2023.112128

    2023

  9. [17]

    C. Liu, Y. Zhu, K. Xu, Unified gas-kinetic wave-particle methods I: Contin- uum and rarefied gas flow, Journal of Computational Physics 401 ( 2020) 108977. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2019.108977

    2020

  10. [18]

    X. Xu, Y. Zhu, C. Liu, K. Xu, UGKS-based implicit iterative method for multiscale nonequi- librium flow simulations, SIAM Journal of Scientific Computing 44 (4) (2 022) B996–B1017. doi:https://doi.org/10.1137/21M1421398

    doi

  11. [19]

    Y. Wei, W. Long, K. Xu, Adaptive unified gas-kinetic scheme for d iatomic gases with rota- tional and vibrational nonequilibrium, Computer Physics Communicat ions 305 (2024) 109324. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2024.109324

    2024

  12. [20]

    W. Long, Y. Wei, K. Xu, An implicit adaptive unified gas-kinetic sche me for steady- state solutions of nonequilibrium flows, Physics of Fluids 36 (10) (202 4) 106114. doi:https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0232275

    doi

  13. [21]

    Zhang, S

    R. Zhang, S. Liu, J. Chen, H. Jin, C. Zhuo, C. Zhong, Implicit unifi ed gas-kinetic scheme for steady state solution of hypersonic thermodynamic no n-equilibrium flows, Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation 140 (202 5) 108367. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j...

  14. [22]

    C. Liu, K. Xu, A unified gas-kinetic scheme for micro flow simulation based on linearized kinetic equation, Advances in Aerodynamics 2 (20 20) 1. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s42774-020-00045-8

    doi

  15. [23]

    C. Liu, K. Xu, A unified gas kinetic scheme for continuum and rare fied flows V: Multiscale and multi-component plasma transport, Communications in Computa tional Physics 22 (5) (2017) 1175–1223. doi:https://doi.org/10.4208/cicp.OA-2017-0102

    2017 doi

  16. [24]

    M. Quan, X. Yang, Y. Wei, K. Xu, Radiative hydrodynamic equatio ns with nonequilibrium radiative transfer, Physical Review D 111 (2025) 103038. doi:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.111.103038

    2025 doi

  17. [25]

    Z. Guo, J. Li, K. Xu, Unified preserving properties of kinetic sch emes, Physical Review E 107 (2) (2023) 025301. doi:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.107.025301

    2023 doi

  18. [26]

    Y. Zhu, C. Liu, C. Zhong, K. Xu, Unified gas-kinetic wave-partic le methods. II. Multiscale simulation on unstructured mesh, Physics of Fluids 31 (201 9) 067105. doi:https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5097645. 29

    doi

  19. [27]

    K. Xu, A gas-kinetic BGK scheme for the Navier-Stokes equatio ns and its connection with artificial dissipation and Godunov method, Journal of Computation al Physics 171 (20) (2001) 289–335. doi:https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.2001.6790

    2001

  20. [28]

    Z. Guo, Y. Zhu, K. Xu, Kinetic representation of the unified gas -kinetic wave-particle method and beyond (2024). arXiv:2408.05691

    2024 arXiv

  21. [30]

    S. Liu, C. Zhong, M. Fang, Simplified unified wave-particle method with quantified model- competition mechanism for numerical calculation of multiscale flows, P hysical Review E 102 (2020) 013304. doi:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.102.013304

    2020 doi

  22. [31]

    L. M. Yang, Z. H. Li, C. Shu, Y. Y. Liu, J. Wu, Discrete unified gas -kinetic wave- particle method for flows in all flow regimes, Physical Review E 108 (20 23) 015302. doi:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.108.015302

    doi

  23. [32]

    Y. Wei, Y. Zhu, K. Xu, Unified gas-kinetic wave-particle methods VII: Diatomic gas with rota- tional and vibrational nonequilibrium, Journal of Computational Ph ysics 497 (2024) 112610. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2023.112610

    2024

  24. [33]

    X. Yang, Y. Wei, S. Wei, K. Xu, Unified gas-kinetic wave-particle m ethod for three- dimensional simulation of gas-particle fluidized bed, Chemical Enginee ring Journal 497 (2024) 112610. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2022.139541

    2024

  25. [34]

    X. Yang, Y. Zhu, C. Liu, K. Xu, Unified gas-kinetic wave-particle method for frequency- dependent radiation transport equation, Journal of Computatio nal Physics 522 (2025) 113587. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2024.113587

    2025

  26. [35]

    Z. Pu, K. Xu, Unified gas-kinetic wave-particle method for multis cale flow sim- ulation of partially ionized plasma, Journal of Computational Physics (2025) 113918doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2025.113918

    2025

  27. [36]

    X. Yang, K. Xu, Wave-particle based multiscale modeling and simula tion of non-equilibrium turbulent flows (2025). arXiv:2503.07207

    2025 arXiv

  28. [37]

    X. Xu, Y. Chen, K. Xu, Modeling and computation for non-equilibr ium gas dynam- ics: Beyond single relaxation time kinetic models, Physics of Fluids 33 (2 021) 011703. doi:https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0036203

    doi

  29. [38]

    D. B. Hash, H. A. Hassan, Assessment of schemes for coupling Monte Carlo and Navier- Stokes solution methods, Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Tra nsfer 10 (1996) 242–249. doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/3.781

    1996 doi

  30. [39]

    Q. Sun, I. D. Boyd, G. V. Candler, A hybrid continuum/particle a pproach for model- ing subsonic, rarefied gas flows, Journal of Computational Physic s 194 (2004) 256–277. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2003.09.00. 30

    2004 doi

  31. [40]

    T. E. Schwartzentruber, L. C. Scalabrin, I. D. Boyd, A modula r particle-continuum numerical method for hypersonic non-equilibrium gas flows, Journal of Compu tational Physics 225 (2007) 1159–1174. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2007.01.022

    2007 doi

  32. [41]

    E. M. Shakhov, Generalization of the Krook kinetic relaxation eq uation, Fluid Dynamics 3 (1968) 95–96. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01029546

    1968 doi

  33. [42]

    P. L. Bhatnagar, E. P. Gross, M. Krook, A model for collision pr ocesses in gases. I. Small amplitude processes in charged and neutral one-component syst ems, Physical Review Journals Archive 94 (1954) 511–525. doi:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.94.511

    1954 doi

  34. [43]

    X. Xu, Y. Chen, C. Liu, Z. Li, K. Xu, Unified gas-kinetic wave-par ticle meth- ods V: Diatomic molecular flow, Journal of Computational Physics 44 2 (2021) 110496. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2021.110496

    2021

  35. [44]

    G. May, B. Srinivasan, A. Jameson, An improved gas-kinetic BGK finite-volume method for three-dimensional transonic flow, Journal of Computational Phy sics 220 (2) (2007) 856–878. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2006.05.027

    2007 doi

  36. [45]

    C. Liu, G. Zhou, W. Shyy, K. Xu, Limitation principle for computat ional fluid dynamics, Shock Waves 29 (2019) 1083–1102. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00193-018-0881-6

    2019 doi

  37. [46]

    L. Luo, L. Wu, Multiscale simulation of rarefied gas dynamics via dir ect in- termittent GSIS-DSMC coupling, Advances in Aerodynamics 6 (2024 ) 22. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s42774-024-00188-y

    2024 doi

  38. [47]

    van Leer, Towards the ultimate conservative difference sch eme

    B. van Leer, Towards the ultimate conservative difference sch eme. V. A second-order se- quel to Godunov’s method, Journal of Computational Physics 32 ( 1) (1979) 101–136. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9991(79)90145-1

    1979 doi

  39. [48]

    J. A. White, H. Nishikawa, R. A. Baurle, Weighted least-squares cell-average gradient construction methods for the VULCAN-CFD second-order accur ate unstructured grid cell- centered finite-volume solver, 2019

    2019

  40. [49]

    Venkatakrishnan, Convergence to steady state solutions of the Euler equations on un- structured grids with limiters, Journal of Computational Physics 1 18 (1) (1995) 120–130

    V. Venkatakrishnan, Convergence to steady state solutions of the Euler equations on un- structured grids with limiters, Journal of Computational Physics 1 18 (1) (1995) 120–130. doi:https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.1995.1084

    1995

  41. [50]

    Blazek, Computational fluid dynamics: Principles and applicatio ns, Elsevier, 2005

    J. Blazek, Computational fluid dynamics: Principles and applicatio ns, Elsevier, 2005

    2005

  42. [51]

    R. C. Palharini, T. J. Scanlon, C. White, Chemically reacting hyper sonic flows over 3D cavities: Flowfield structure characterisation, Computers and Flu ids 165 (2018) 173–187. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compfluid.2018.01.029

    2018 doi

  43. [52]

    G. E. Palmer, M. Pulsonetti, W. A. Wood, S. Alter, P. Gnoffo, C. T ang, Computational assessment of thermal protection system damage experienced d uring STS-118, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 46 (6) (2009) 1110–1116. doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/1.40478. 31

    2009 doi

  44. [53]

    G. Guo, Q. Luo, J. Wu, Numerical investigation on flow and aerot hermal characteristics of rarefied hypersonic flows over slender cavities, Aerospace Scienc e and Technology 144 (2024) 108768. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2023.108768

    2024

  45. [54]

    I. T. Karpuzcu, D. A. Levin, Study of side-jet interactions ov er a hyper- sonic cone flow using kinetic methods, AIAA Journal 61 (11) (2023) 4741–4751. doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J063020

    2023 doi

  46. [55]

    All` egre, D

    J. All` egre, D. Bisch, J. C. Lengrand, Experimental rarefied aerodynamic forces at hypersonic conditions over 70-degree blunted cone, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets 34 (6) (1997) 719–

    1997

  47. [56]

    All` egre, D

    J. All` egre, D. Bisch, J. C. Lengrand, Experimental rarefied heat transfer at hypersonic condi- tions over 70-degree blunted cone, Journal of Spacecraft and R ockets 34 (6) (1997) 724–728. doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/2.3302

    1997 doi

  48. [57]

    Schouler, Y

    M. Schouler, Y. Pr´ evereaud, L. Mieussens, Survey of flight a nd numerical data of hypersonic rarefied flows encountered in earth orbit and atmospheric reentr y, Progress in Aerospace Sciences 118 (2020) 100638. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2020.100638

    2020

  49. [58]

    J. Cao, S. Liu, C. Zhong, C. Zhuo, K. Xu, Multiple solutions of non lin- ear coupled constitutive relation model and its rectification in non-e quilibrium flow computation, Computers & Mathematics with Applications 174 (2 024) 1–17. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2024.08.017

    doi

  50. [59]

    S. Zeng, Z. He, W. Zhao, W. Chen, A computational strategy f or nonlinear coupled constitu- tive relations of rarefied nonequilibrium flows on unstructured grids , Aerospace Science and Technology 141 (2023) 108477. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2023.108477

    2023

  51. [60]

    J. Moss, V. Dogra, J. Price, D. Hash, Comparison of DSMC and e x- perimental results for hypersonic external flows, 1995, pp. AIA A 95–2028. doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1995-2028. 32

    1995 doi

  52. [723]

    doi:https://doi.org/10.2514/2.3301

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.