OpenFOAM® pp 281-296 | Cite as

IsoAdvector: Geometric VOF on General Meshes

  • Johan RoenbyEmail author
  • Henrik Bredmose
  • Hrvoje Jasak


In a recent publication, we presented a novel geometric VOF interface advection algorithm, denoted isoAdvector (Roenby et al. in R Soc Open Sci 3:160405 2016, [1]). The OpenFOAM\(^{\textregistered }\) implementation of the method was publicly released to allow for more accurate and efficient two-phase flow simulations in OpenFOAM\(^{\textregistered }\) (Roenby in isoAdvector, [2]). In the present paper, we give a brief outline of the isoAdvector method and test it with two pure advection cases. We show how to modify interFoam so as to use isoAdvector as an alternative to the currently implemented MULES limited interface compression method. The properties of the new solver are tested with two simple interfacial flow cases, namely the damBreak case and a steady stream function wave. We find that the new solver is superior at keeping the interface sharp, but also that the sharper interface exacerbates the well-known spurious velocities in the air phase close to an air–water interface. To fully benefit from the accuracy of isoAdvector, there is a need to modify the pressure–velocity coupling algorithm of interFoam, so it more consistently takes into account the jump in fluid density at the interface. In our future research, we aim to solve this problem by exploiting the subcell information provided by isoAdvector.


  1. 1.
    J. Roenby, H. Bredmose, and H. Jasak, “A computational method for sharp interface advection,” Royal Society Open Science, vol. 3, p. 160405, 2016.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. Roenby, “isoAdvector.”
  3. 3.
    S. S. Deshpande, L. Anumolu, and M. F. Trujillo, “Evaluating the performance of the two-phase flow solver interFoam,” Computational Science & Discovery, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 014016, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. T. Zalesak, “Fully multidimensional flux-corrected transport algorithms for fluids,” Journal of Computational Physics, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 335–362, 1979.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. López, C. Zanzi, P. Gómez, F. Faura, and J. Hernández, “A new volume of fluid method in three dimensions–part II: Piecewise-planar interface reconstruction with cubic-bézier fit,” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, vol. 58, no. 8, pp. 923–944, 2008.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    “cfMesh.” Accessed: 2016-12-09.
  7. 7.
    L. Lobovsk, E. Botia-Vera, F. Castellana, J. Mas-Soler, and A. Souto-Iglesias, “Experimental investigation of dynamic pressure loads during dam break,” Journal of Fluids and Structures, vol. 48, pp. 407–434, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. D. Fenton, “Numerical methods for nonlinear waves,” in Advances in Coastal and Ocean Engineering, vol. 5, pp. 241–324, World Scientific, July 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    B. T. Paulsen, H. Bredmose, H. Bingham, and N. Jacobsen, “Forcing of a bottom-mounted circular cylinder by steep regular water waves at finite depth,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, vol. 755, pp. 1–34, 2014.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.StromningKøbenhavn KDenmark
  2. 2.DHIHørsholmhDenmark
  3. 3.DTU Wind EnergyLyngbyDenmark
  4. 4.Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval ArchitectureHrvoje Jasak University of ZagrebZagrebCroatia

Personalised recommendations