Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers and Fluids

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compfluid

Vector form of intrinsic finite element method for incompressible fluids

Akram Samy a, b, Shu Li a, Xingfei Yuan a, *, Chengwei Liu c, Yongcan Dong a
a
College of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
b
College of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, China
c
State Key Laboratory of Fluid Power and Mechatronic Systems, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Vector form of intrinsic finite element (VFIFE) is a numerical method widely used in solid mechanics. However,
VFIFE method it’s hard to extend the VFIFE method to fluid mechanics since the traditional VFIFE method fails to reflect the
Fluid mechanics analytical equilibrium of multiple variables in the continuum. Therefore, under the framework of analytical
Incompressible fluid
mechanics, this paper proposes Lagrange’s equation of the second kind in fluid mechanics with the extremum
Lagrange’s equation
Characteristic based split
condition of Lagrange power functional. And a vectorized motion equation of incompressible viscous fluids is
deduced from Lagrange’s equation. By using several efficient algorithms in the finite difference method (FDM)
and the finite element method (FEM), the NS equation is decomposed into four governing equations of vector
form for fluid mechanics. In addition, with the application of the classic Smagorinsky sub-grid scale model in
large eddy simulation (LES), this paper puts forward turbulence modelling with VFIFE procedure, and a corre­
sponding MATLAB program is developed. Two typical examples are given to demonstrate the applicability and
efficiency of the proposed large eddy simulation with VFIFE method. The proposed algorithm can effectively
eliminate the non-physical oscillation of the pressure, and obtain much accurate results with a small number of
grids.

stationary condition of Hamilton principle in the mechanical system, is

1. Introduction
Most liquids and low-speed gases in nature can be regarded as
incompressible viscous fluids, and the Navier-stokes equation based on
continuum mechanics has been one of the most effective methods to
describe the motion of fluids [1-3]. The essence of the NS equation is the
conservation of momentum under the framework of classical mechanics
which establishes the governing equations of motion for particles
directly through Newton’s second law. While analytical mechanics,
which is of equal status with classical mechanics, focus on the analysis of
the energy and work of the system based on the generalized coordinate
system instead of the analysis of force and moment [4]. How to apply
analytical mechanics to continuum mechanics has been the focus of
scholars around the world. Lagrange equation and Hamilton canonical
equation, as two branches of analytical mechanics, have been applied in
the field of dynamic behavior, kinematic stability and system control of
rigid bodies and elastic bodies in the recent centuries [5,6]. The appli­
cation of Hamilton principle is extended to continuum mechanics [7],
electrodynamics [8], quantum mechanics [9], statistical physics [10]
and many other subjects. In contrast, Lagrange equation, as the
not as good as Hamilton canonical equation in terms of universality and
structural symmetry [11]. Therefore, there are few researches on fluid
dynamics through Lagrange’s equation of the second kind. Irschik and
Holl [12,13] connected the control volume in fluid mechanics to the
non-material volume in the Lagrange framework and derived the local
form of Lagrange’s equation. Liang et al. [14,15] derived the governing
equation of incompressible fluids based on Lagrange’s equation of the
second kind for the first time and made a preliminary exploration of
compressible fluids. The present Lagrange mechanics is based on
D’Alembert’s principle and the virtual displacement principle, which
can be divided into one-variable equation with generalized coordinates
and two-variable equation with generalized coordinates and generalized
velocities. The former is rarely applied in fluid mechanics equations
with Euler spatial coordinates as the reference. While the expression
form of the differential equation obtained by taking the first order
variation of the latter is quite complex, therefore, which still stays in
theoretical exploration stage in analytical dynamics of the continuum.
Vector form of intrinsic finite element (VFIFE) [16,17] is a numerical
method based on the discrete model of multi-particles in vector me­
chanics, whose governing equation of motion is based on Newton’s

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: yuanxf@zju.edu.cn (X. Yuan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compfluid.2024.106319
Received 9 January 2024; Received in revised form 6 May 2024; Accepted 21 May 2024
Available online 2 June 2024
0045-7930/© 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.
A. Samy et al. Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319

Nomenclatures ||Δx|| Characteristic length

X, Y, Z three-dimensional coordinate of the nodes
B Strain-displacement transformation matrix γ Damping coefficient
C ne × np order connection matrix ε̇˙ deformation rate
D Constitutive matrix of materials η2nd equivalent dissipative force with consideration of high-
F Surface load vector order term of time
f Internal force vector on elements μ Dynamic viscosity coefficient
G Filter function ν Kinematic viscosity coefficient
g volume force on the fluid νsgs sub-grid eddy viscosity coefficient
H0 Height of the Silsoe cube π Absolute value of average error
I identity matrix ρ Mass density
Iu Turbulence intensity τsgs sub-grid Reynolds stress
L Lagrange function ϕ, ϕ physical variables before filtering and filtered
M, m Nodal mass matrix, element mass Γm model function of LES
m̂ Diagonal matrix composed of the mass of all elements in Δ characteristic scale of the filter
order
N Shape function of elements Abbreviation
n Normal vector to the plane CBOS Characteristic-based Operator-splitting
n Dimension of finite elements CBS Characteristic Based Split
ne, np Total number of elements, nodes CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics
P Point load vector DES Detached Eddy Simulation
p fluid pressure FEA Finite Element Analysis
Q Generalized force FTBS Forward Time Backward Space
Re Reynolds number HHD Helmholtz–Hodge Decomposition
SD, SN Dirichlet boundary conditions, Newmann boundary IDDES Improved Delayed Detached Eddy Simulation
conditions LES Large Eddy Simulation
t Analysis time MOC Method of Characteristic
T, Ṫ˙ Kinetic energy, kinetic power N-S Navier-Stokes
U Horizontal velocity of the nodes OSA Operator Splitting Algorithm
U, U̇˙ Potential energy, potential power RANS Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes
V Vertical velocity of the nodes SRI Silsoe Research Institute
V Volume of triangular elements TPU Tokyo Polytechnic University
VFIFE Vector Form of Intrinsic Finite Element
X, Ẋ˙, Ẍ Generalized coordinates, velocities, accelerations
‖ Ẋ‖∞ Characteristic velocity

second law. Since VFIFE method has advantages in dealing with large
geometric deformation and nonlinear boundary problems, it is widely
applied to the analyses of various complex behaviors in structural en­
gineering [18], mechanical engineering [19] and ocean engineering
[20]. Samy et al. [21] derived the governing equation of motion for
two-dimensional elements based on VFIFE under the framework of
analytical mechanics, and obtained a good result in the analysis of rain
induced rupture of membrane structures. Xu et al. [22] used the VFIFE
method and the immersed boundary method to study the fluid-structure
interaction between the turbulent flow and the plants, and explored the
dynamics of submerged flexible vegetation in open-channel flows and its
feedback to turbulent flow structures. Since the flow characteristics and
the numerical calculation of the fluid are much more complex compared
with the solid, vector form of fluid mechanics for general fluid calcu­
lations or the fluid-structure interaction analysis has not been developed
yet.
Because the traditional VFIFE method based on the physical model
does not explain the mechanism of generation and action of the force in
the continuum, it is quite difficult to reflect the intrinsic properties such
as the conservation of mass and charge. Therefore, it’s hard to extend the
VFIFE method to the fields of fluid mechanics and electromagnetism.
Based on the energy conservation principle, the governing equations of
motion of the continuum are established based on the variational prin­
ciple in this paper, thus the governing equations of the solid and the fluid
are unified. In terms of numerical algorithm, the difficulties encountered
by previous scholars in extending vector form of solid mechanics to fluid
mechanics are summarized. Based on VFIFE, through the application of
the Method of Characteristic [23] (MOC), Operator Splitting Algorithm
[24] (OSA), Characteristic Based Split [25] (CBS) and MacCormack
difference scheme [26], the NS equation is decomposed into four gov­
erning equations which are in the fractional step [27] form of diffusion
equation, convection equation, pressure Poisson equation and velocity
correction equation. Then by adopting the classic Smagorinsky [28]
sub-grid scale model in large eddy simulation, the vector form of
intrinsic finite element large eddy simulation method for incompressible
viscous fluid is put forward and a corresponding program package is
developed. The algorithms proposed in this paper fill the vacancy of
VFIFE in the field of fluid mechanics.
The present paper is organized as follows. In section 2, under the
framework of analytical dynamics, the Lagrange power function is
constructed through the difference of kinetic power and potential power
of the continuum. Then by taking the extremum conditions of the above
functional, the Lagrange’s equation of the second kind in fluid me­
chanics can be obtained. In section 3, corresponding solutions are pro­
vided for the problems arising from the extension of vector form of solid
mechanics to the field of fluid mechanics. And governing equations of
vector form of fluid mechanics based on finite element discretization are
proposed. In section 4, by adopting the large eddy simulation, vector
form of fluid mechanics is applied to the turbulence analysis. In section
5, the applicability and efficiency of the proposed VFIFE large eddy
simulation algorithm in the calculation of incompressible viscous fluids
are investigated by comparing the results of two typical examples with
classic literatures.

2
A. Samy et al. Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319

2. Governing equation based on lagrange mechanics tensor. The four terms in Eq. (3) represent the power of the work done by
the inertial force, viscous force, body force and surface force. When the
The Lagrange’s equation in analytical mechanics is derived from system doesn’t contain non-conservative forces, the rates of change of
D’Alembert’s principle which is intended to transform the dynamic the kinetic energy and the potential energy satisfy the conservation
problem caused by inertial forces on the system of particles into a nodal condition and correspond to the energy equation in NS equations, which
statics problem. And the principle of virtual displacement guarantees is the expression of the first law of thermodynamics without considering
static equilibrium of the nodes, which means the total work done by the the enthalpy inside the system and the external heat source. It is worth
active force acting on the system of particles at any virtual displacement noting that the viscous term is generated by the internal friction of the
is equal to zero. The work done by the inertia force and other conser­ flowing fluid and is essentially non-conservative. However, the ability of
vative forces on the virtual displacement can be expressed by the kinetic the viscosity term to resist diffusion in fluids is equivalent to the ability
energy T and the potential energy U. Therefore, the Lagrange function is of the stiffness term to resist deformation in solids, therefore this paper
constructed from the difference between the kinetic energy and the includes the viscosity term in the calculation of the change rate of the
potential energy of the object, written as, L = T − U. By taking the potential energy. The "pseudo-potential energy" hypothesis is also
extreme condition of the above functional, the Lagrange’s equation of widely used in Hamilton equation of fluid mechanics.
the second kind can be expressed as follows: For the kinetic power Ṫ˙, dM = ρdV is commonly used to calculate the
( ) first item of Eq. (3) in solid mechanics, while in fluid mechanics Rey­
d ∂L ∂L
− =Q (1) nolds transport theorem is used. For the incompressible fluid, the
dt ∂Ẋ ∂X
expression is
where L is Lagrange function, Q is the non-conservative generalized d
∫ ∫ ∫
1
∫ ∫ ∫ [ ]
Ṫ = V ρ(Ẋ⋅Ẋ)dV = V ρ Ẍ + (Ẋ⋅∇)Ẋ ⋅ẊdV (4)
force matrix of the system, t is the time, and X and Ẋ are the generalized dt 2
coordinates of nodes and the derivatives of generalized coordinates with
The classical Lagrange’s equation is the extremum condition of
respect to time, respectively, the latter also known as generalized
Lagrange power functional, thus by taking the first-order variation of Eq.
velocities.
(3), Euler-Lagrange differential equation and the boundary conditions
Under the scheme of Lagrange mechanics, Samy et al. [21] derived
can be obtained:
the motion governing equation of solids for VFIFE algorithm, which is
⎧ ( )
n! ( T d ∂L̇ ∂L̇
(
̂ + diag CT mC
C mC
))
⊗ I3 Ẍ + γẊ = CT ⊗ I3 (F − f) + P (2)
⎪
⎪
⎪ − = 0, in V
(n + 2)!
̂ ⎪
⎪
⎪ dX ∂ε⋅ ∂ Ẋ
⎨
δ(Ẋ) = 0, on SD (5)
where n is the dimension of finite elements, which is taken as 1 for line, 2 ⎪
⎪
⎪ ( )
for triangular, and 3 for tetrahedral elements, diag denotes a diagonal
⎪
⎪
⎪ ∂L̇
⎩ δ ⋅ = 0, on SN
matrix composed of elements on the diagonal and m ̂ is the diagonal ∂ε
matrix composed of the mass of elements, expressed as m ̂ = diag(m1 ,m2 ,
where SD and SN represent Dirichlet and Newmann boundary conditions,
⋯,mne ).Besides, F and f are the internal force matrix and external matrix
respectively. Eq. (5) is proposed in this paper for the first time as
acting on the element respectively; P represents point load vector; γ is
Lagrange’s equation of the second kind in fluid mechanics. Its form is
the damping coefficient; ⊗ is Kronecker product and I3 is three-
very similar to Lagrange’s equation in solid mechanics shown in Eq. (1),
dimensional identity matrix. In this paper, the connectivity matrix
but the stationary value of the difference between the kinetic energy and
C∈Rne×np (ne is the total number of elements, and np is the total number
potential energy is replaced by the stationary value of the difference
of nodes) is adopted to transform the element information into the node
between kinetic power and the potential power. Therefore, the time t no
information, which is defined as
longer appears as a basic variable and is replaced by generalized co­
{
1 (Node j is in the element i); ordinates in Euler reference frame. Substitute Eq. (3) and Eq. (4) into Eq.
Cij =
0 (Node j isn’ t in the element i) (5), and we can obtain
⎛ ([μ ] )⎞ ( [ ] )
For fluid mechanics, the D’Alembert’s principle transforms the
d ⎝∂ 2ε̇ − pI : ε̇ ⎠ ∂ ρ Ẍ + (Ẋ⋅∇)Ẋ − g ⋅Ẋ
transient dynamic problem into a steady-state dynamic problem, while −
dX ∂ε̇ ∂Ẋ (6)
the virtual velocity principle guarantees the steady-state dynamic bal­
ance of the nodes, which means, the sum of the powers of the active /
= Ẍ + (Ẋ⋅∇)Ẋ − g + ∇p ρ − ν∇2 Ẋ = 0
forces acting on the system of particles at any virtual velocity equals to
zero. Therefore, through the rate of change of kinetic energy Ṫ˙ and the
where kinematic viscosity coefficient ν can be obtained through ν=μ/ρ.
rate of change of potential energy U̇˙ per unit time, Lagrange power
And Dirichlet boundary condition and Newman boundary condition in
function L̇˙ is constructed. By taking the extremum conditions of
Eq. (5) can be further written as
Lagrange power functional, the inertia force and other conservative
{
forces of the fluid are balanced at the virtual velocity. The Lagrange Ẋ|SD = Const
(7)
power function can be expressed as: ν(∇Ẋ)⋅n − pn|SN = 0
∫ ∫ ∫ [ ( )]
( ⋅ ⋅) d ρ ) (μ ⋅ ⋅
It can be seen that the vector form expression (6) derived from the
L̇ X, X, ε = Ṫ − U̇ = Ẋ⋅Ẋ − ε : ε + ρg⋅Ẋ − pI : ε dV
⋅
V
dt 2 2 Lagrange’s equation of fluid mechanics is completely consistent with the
(3) momentum equation in the NS equations. And the boundary conditions
(7) correspond to the essential (or Dirichlet) and the natural (or Neu­
where ε̇˙, the deformation rate, is the partial derivative of the node ve­ mann) boundary conditions of the flowing fluid respectively. Thus, it
can be proved that the Lagrange’s equation of fluid mechanics proposed
⋅
locity with respect to generalized coordinates, written as ε = ∇Ẋ, and μ
is the dynamic viscosity coefficient. p and g are the fluid pressure (node in this paper is applicable to incompressible viscous fluids.
pressure) and the volume force respectively. ":" is the inner product of

3
A. Samy et al.
3. VFIFE theory for incompressible fluids
3.1. Demerits of traditional algorithm
Since the theory of vector form of solid mechanics was proposed,
many scholars have made comprehensive explorations on the extension
of the VFIFE theory to the field of fluid mechanics. However, no one has
proposed vector form of fluid mechanics algorithm which can be used in
general fluid calculations or the fluid-structure interaction analysis. This
is because the extension of the VFIFE theory to the field of fluid me­
chanics will encounter the following problems:
(a) The VFIFE method studies the spatial position changes of a group
of discrete particles with time based on Lagrange material co­
ordinates, while in fluid mechanics, Euler spatial coordinates are
taken as the basis to study the change of a certain physical
quantity of the continuum passing through a group of space nodes
with time, such as mass, momentum, energy, etc. Therefore, the
inverse motion of Lagrange moving grid is invalid for Euler fixed
grid.
(b) In Euler’s description, the material derivative of physical quan­
tities of particles includes the time partial derivative and the
space partial derivative. The latter is the convective term caused
by changes of the spatial position in a non-uniform flow field,
whose existence makes the governing equation not self-adjoint,
and thus leads to numerical oscillatory in the results of FEA.
(c) The governing equation of VFIFE has the node displacement as
the only variable, while the governing equation of fluid dynamics
has two, including node velocity and pressure. Since the velocity
variable is one order higher than the pressure variable, the nu­
merical oscillatory will occur in the pressure field when the two
variables are solved in the same grid system.
(d) When the momentum conservation of each particle is guaranteed
in VFIFE, the mass and energy meet the conservation conditions
automatically. While in fluid mechanics, the conservation of
mass, momentum and energy of each space node must be satisfied
respectively, which means that the number of governing equa­
tions is more than that of solid mechanics. And unknown vari­
ables may not appear in all equations. For example, the node
pressure variable isn’t included in the continuity equation of
incompressible fluids.
(e) In VFIFE, explicit integration method based on the central dif­
ference is adopted. However, when the convection-diffusion
equation is solved by the explicit method in fluid mechanics,
most of the numerical solutions have no physical significance, or
even cannot be convergent at all. For example, in an equation
dominated by the convection term, when the most basic explicit
integration methods such as first-order forward difference and
central difference are used for time and space, the results are
unconditionally unconvergent.
3.2. VFIFE implementation
Considering the above difficulties, it is almost impossible to develop
a program of fluid mechanics in the conventional way of vector form of
solid mechanics. Therefore, in this paper, the solution idea of vector
( (∫ ) ∫ ) ∫
( ) 1 ∂Ẋ
δ U̇diff + U̇sour = (δẊ)T − BT BdV Ẋ + NT dS + (δẊ)T NT ρgdV
Re V S ∂n V (13)
( )
T T
= (δẊ) C ⊗ I3 − f diff + F
4
Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319
form of solid mechanics is modified to make the calculation process of
governing equations in fluid mechanics meet the requirements of VFIFE
as much as possible. The following is the calculation idea of vector form
of fluid mechanics proposed in this paper:
For problem (b), in each element passed by, operator splitting al­
gorithm (OSA) is adopted to extract the nonlinear convection terms in
momentum equations as independent equations. Eq. (6) is split into
generalized Stokes Eq. (8) dominated by the diffusion term and the
convection Eq. (9) dominated by the convection term:
⎧ ∗
⎨ ∂Ẋ − ν[θ∇2 Ẋ∗ + (1 − θ)∇2 Ẋt ] = g − ∇(pt+Δt /ρ)
⎪
∂t (8)
⎪
⎩ t+Δt
∇⋅Ẋ =0
∂Ẋ
∗∗
+ (Ẋ ⋅∇)Ẋ = 0
∗∗ ∗∗
(9)
∂t
where the intermediate velocity variablesẊ , Ẋ satisfy the diffusion
∗ ∗∗
equation (the first line of Eq. (8)) and the convection Eq. (9), respec­
tively, but may not satisfy the continuity equation (the second line of Eq.
(8)). And θ in the diffusion equation takes 0 or 1 to represents the spatial
explicit integral or implicit integral respectively. Pozrikidis [29] pointed
out that Crank-Nicolson implicit algorithm greatly improved the nu­
merical stability of the Stokes equation and decoupled the time steps and
space steps. Since vector form of solid mechanics adopts central differ­
ence explicit algorithm, in order to maintain consistency, the pure
diffusion equation without the convection term is explicitly solved in the
proposed vector form of fluid mechanics. The relationship between the
time step Δt and the space step ||Δx|| (which is equivalent to the
characteristic length of elements) must satisfied the following condition:
( √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ / )
Δt ≤ min 2 ‖ Δxsolid ‖ ⋅ ρ/E, ‖ Δxfluid ‖2 (2ν) (10)
For problem (c), this paper applies Helmholtz–Hodge decomposition
(HHD) to decompose the flow field in the diffusion equation into the
superposition of non-divergence velocity field and irrotational pressure
gradient field. Thus, the diffusion equation (the first line of Eq. (8)) can
be divided into independent equations of velocity and pressure, and
their dimensionless forms are as follows:
Ẋ − Ẋ
∗
1
t
t
= ∇2 Ẋ + g (11)
Δt Re
Ẋ
t+Δt
− Ẋ
∗∗
= − ∇pt+Δt (12)
Δt
( 2)
where Re = ρ‖ Ẋ‖∞ ‖ Δx ‖/μ, Ẋ = Ẋ/‖ Ẋ‖∞ , p = p/ ρẊ∞ , t =
t‖ Ẋ‖∞ /‖ Δx ‖, in which ‖ Ẋ‖∞ is the characteristic velocity. Eq. (11) is
the diffusion equation without the convection term and the pressure
term, also known as the Navier equation, which is equivalent to the
equilibrium equation in elastic dynamics. At the same time, with the
application of Stokes assumption which is the deformation compatibility
condition, Eq. (11) can then be converted into a governing equation
similar to that of vector form of solid mechanics for calculation.
In Eq. (11), the virtual power equation is established for the viscosity
term and the source term on the right side of the equation, which is
A. Samy et al. Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319

in which the right side of the equation are the first-order convection
where fdiff is the equivalent viscous force matrix and the equivalent term, the second-order convection and the second-order diffusion term
external force matrix F contains the element surface force (surface ten­ respectively, and the virtual power equation is established for these
sion) and the element body force (gravity). Since direct node loads don’t three terms, which is as follows:
exist in the flow field, the node load vector P doesn’t exist compared [ ∫ ]
( ) ( ) T
with Eq. (2). The calculation of the strain rate matrix Bfluid in fluid δ U̇conv + U̇diff2 + U̇conv2 = (δẊ)T − NT BNT dV Ẋ Ẋ + O(Δt)
mechanics is { [ ∫ ] V
[∫ ] }
( )2 T T ( )T ( ) T
( ) (δẊ)T − BNT dV Ẋ Ẋ Ẋ + (δẊ)T BNT BNT dV ẊẊ Ẋ
∂ V V
Bfluid = ∇N = diag [ N 1 N2 N 3 N4 ] ⊗ I 3 (14) ( )
∂X = (δẊ)T CT ⊗ I3 − f conv + η2nd

On the other hand, the left side of Eq. (11) is (21)

where fconv is the equivalent internal force matrix and η2nd is the
( ∫ ) /
t
δ(Ṫ ) = (δẊ)T ρ NT NdV Ẍ = (δẊ)T M(Ẋ − Ẋ ) Δt (15)
∗ ∗ ∗

V
equivalent dissipative force with the consideration of the high-order
term of time. Since the proportion of η2nd is quite small, its effect at
Substitute Eq. (13) and Eq. (15) into the governing Eq. (11), a gov­ the boundary is ignored in this paper.
erning equation similar to Eq. (2) can be obtained. Known as the On the other hand, the left side of Eq. (20) is
diffusion governing equation, it can also be regarded as the first gov­ ( ∫ ) /
erning equation of vector form of fluid mechanics, which is as follows: δ(Ṫ ) = (δẊ)T ρ NT NdV Ẍ = (δẊ)T M(Ẋ − Ẋ ) Δt
∗∗ ∗∗ ∗∗ ∗
(22)
V
n! ( T ( )) t
( )
̂ + diag CT mC
C mC ⊗ I3 (Ẋ − Ẋ ) = CT ⊗ I3 F − f tdiff Δt
∗
̂
(n + 2)! By substituting Eq. (21) and Eq. (22) into governing Eq. (20), the
(16) second governing equation of vector form of fluid mechanics, known as
the convection governing equation, is as follows:
Since Eq. (16) is the explicit integral form of the first order ordinary ( )
differential equation of node velocity, its calculation is far more simple n! ( T ( T )) Δt 2 2nd
C mC+diag C mC ⊗I3 (Ẋ − Ẋ ) = CT ⊗I3 Δtf ∗conv +
∗∗ ∗
̂ ̂ η
than Eq. (2). The obtained intermediate velocity variableẊ is the so­
∗
(n+2)! 2
lution of the diffusion equation at t+Δt, but does not satisfy the con­ (23)
vection equation, pressure Poisson equation and continuity equation. In order to improve the stability of FTBS difference scheme (for
As for the convection term which only exists in flowing fluids, there problem (e)), Wang et al. [31] introduced the dissipative term consid­
is no corresponding governing equation in vector form of solid me­ ering the effect of the high-order term of time into the
chanics. However, the first order hyperbolic partial differential Eq. (9), characteristic-based operator-splitting algorithm (CBOS). However,
which is formed after the convection term is extracted from the NS after a large number of calculations, the author finds that only when the
equation, is solved explicitly along a family of characteristic lines by fluid flows forward in the direction of characteristic lines (i.e., upwind
using the method of characteristic [23] (MOC). This method ensures the
or downwind, Ẍ ⋅Δx > 0) can the convection Eq. (20) get a reasonable
∗

consistency of the shape function N of the fluid grid and that of the solid
numerical solution. While in the complex flow field where the wind
grid, and solves the numerical oscillation of the node velocity caused by
direction is difficult to be determined or changes rapidly, the existence
strong nonlinearity. (problem (b))
of high-order dissipative term makes the unconditionally instable Eq.
The total differential expression of Eq. (9) is written as dẊ /dt = 0,
∗∗
(20) converge to the conditionally stable solution, but almost no correct
and through forward difference for the time domain and backward solution can be obtained. Therefore, this paper suggests to replace FTBS
difference for the space domain along the direction of characteristic difference scheme with MacCormack difference scheme to calculate
lines, known as FTBS [30] difference scheme, then we have total differential equations. In MacCormack difference scheme, through
Ẋ (X) − Ẋ (X − Δx)
∗∗ ∗ backward difference for the space domain along the direction of the
=0 (17) characteristic line, and then by forward differentiate for the interme­
Δt
diate velocity obtained, the average velocity is taken. The expression can
Taylor series expansion is applied for the diffusion veloc­ be written as:
ityẊ (X − Δx) on the characteristic line, and we obtain
∗
⎧
Δt 2 Δt 2 ∗
(∇Ẋ )2 Ẋ − (Ẋ ⋅∇)2 Ẋ
⎪
Ẋ − Ẋ = Δt(Ẋ ⋅∇)Ẋ −
∘ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗
1 ( ) ⎪
⎪
2 2
Ẋ (X − Δx) = Ẋ (X) − (Δx⋅∇)Ẋ (X) + (Δx⋅∇)2 Ẋ (X) + O Δx3 (18) ⎪
∗ ∗ ∗ ∗
⎪
⎪
2 ⎪
⎨
Δt 2 Δt 2 ∗ (24)
Ẋ − Ẋ = − Δt(Ẋ ⋅∇)Ẋ + (∇Ẋ )2 Ẋ + (Ẋ ⋅∇)2 Ẋ
∘∘ ∘ ∗ ∘ ∗ ∘ ∘
In order to solve the nonlinear convection equation through explicit ⎪
⎪ 2 2
⎪
time integration algorithm, Taylor series expansion is carried out on the ⎪
⎪
⎩ Ẋ∗∗ = 1 (Ẋ∗ + Ẋ∘∘ )
⎪
⎪
relational expression of the time step and space step, which is 2
1 ∂Ẋ (X)
∗
( )
(19) where Ẋ , Ẋ are the temporary velocities in MacCormack scheme be­
◦ ◦◦
Δx = Δt⋅Ẋ (X) + Δt 2 ⋅ + O Δt 3
∗

2 ∂t
tween the intermediate velocity variables Ẋ , Ẋ . This scheme is proved
∗ ∗∗

Substitute Eq. (19) into Eq. (18) and omit higher-order terms, and to be an explicit algorithm to suppress the fluctuation of the differential
substitute the obtained equation in to Eq. (17), then an expression of solution with parity loss. However, the time step of explicit integration is
convection equation discrete along velocity grid (X) can be obtained: still strictly constrained by the space step. When the convection effect is
strong, the time step (10) of the diffusion equation cannot satisfy the
Δt 2 ∗ Δt 2 ( ∗ ) ∗
Ẋ − Ẋ = − Δt(Ẋ ⋅∇)Ẋ + (Ẋ ⋅∇)(Ẋ ⋅∇)Ẋ − Ẍ ⋅∇ Ẋ
∗∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗
convection equation [32], therefore it is necessary to divide a diffusion
2 2
time step Δt1 into multiple convection time steps with Δt2 as the
Δt 2 ∗ Δt 2
= − Δt(Ẋ ⋅∇)Ẋ + [Ẋ ⋅∇(Ẋ ⋅∇)]Ẋ − [ − (Ẋ ⋅∇)Ẋ ⋅∇]Ẋ (20) sub-time step. And take the final convection velocity at the moment nΔt2
∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗

2 2
(nΔt2≤Δt1) as the initial convection velocity at the moment n + 1,then
2 2
= − Δt(Ẋ ⋅∇)Ẋ +
∗ ∗ Δt
(Ẋ ⋅∇)2 Ẋ +
∗ ∗ Δt
(∇Ẋ )2 Ẋ
∗ ∗ substitute it into Eq. (24) and execute h cycles until the final convection
2 2 velocity at t+Δt is obtained.
The fluid pressure and boundary conditions are not used in the above

5
A. Samy et al. Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319

calculation, which is because the fluid pressure can be uniquely deter­ ⎧ ∫ t

T ∂Ẋ
( )
mined by Helmholtz’s theorems from the global acceleration of NS ⎪
⎪ M (Ẋ
∗
− Ẋ
t
) = F − f t
Δt + N dS
⎪ f f
equation and the acceleration after the diffusion- convection under the ⎪
⎪
⎪
diff
∂n
⎪
⎪ S
condition of a constant difference [33], and the pressure boundary has ⎪
⎪
⎪
no effect on the internal convection and diffusion process. Therefore, the
⎪
⎪ Δt 2 2nd
Mf (Ẋ − Ẋ ) = Δtf ∗conv +
⎨ ∗∗ ∗
η
final velocity obtained in the non-divergence velocity field can be 2 (31)
⎪
⎪ ∫
regarded as the initial velocity in irrotational pressure gradient field. ⎪
⎪ 1 ∗∗ ∂p t+Δt
⎪
⎪ Kf pt+Δt = − f div + NT dS
Through solving the pressure gradient ∇pt+Δt in Eq. (12), the final ve­
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ Δt ∂n
⎪
⎪ S
t+Δt ⎪
locity Ẋ of NS equation can be determined. ⎩ t+Δt
Mf (Ẋ − Ẋ ) = − ΔtFpres
∗∗
Get the divergence of momentum Eq. (6) derived from the
Lagrange’s equation of fluid mechanics, in which the non-divergence
where Mf and Kf are mass matrix and stiffness matrix of the fluid
velocity field (11) becomes zero, and only the divergence expression
respectively. As is shown clearly, the Newman boundary conditions of
of the irrotational pressure gradient field (12) remains, which is
velocity and pressure are applied to the first and third equation on Eq.
1 t+Δt (31) respectively. The Dirichlet boundary conditions of velocity are
∇⋅(Ẋ − Ẋ ) = − ∇2 pt+Δt (25)
∗∗

Δt applied to the first and fourth equation on Eq. (31) respectively, while
Since the node velocity at t+Δt satisfies the continuity equation (the the Dirichlet boundary condition of pressure is applied to the third
second line of Eq. (8)), Eq. (25) becomes the pressure Poisson equation: equation. In case that computation diverges or the high-order term of
time results in excessive dissipation, the second equation shouldn’t
∇⋅Ẋ = Δt⋅∇2 pt+Δt (26) contain any boundary conditions. Overall, when the nodal velocity and
∗∗

external force vectors at t are given, the velocity and pressure distribu­
The above equation is the relation between the fluid velocity and the
tions at t + Δt can be explicitly obtained with Eq. (31).
pressure. Multiply both sides of the equation by the virtual pressure δp to
establish the virtual power equation of residual energy:
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ 4. Large eddy simulation with vfife
∫ ∫ ∫
1 T⎝ T T ∂p
t+Δt
T⎝
T
N BdV Ẋ = (δp) N dS − (δp) T
B BdV ⎠pt+Δt
∗∗

Δt
(δp) ⎠
∂n Considering the time cost and calculation accuracy, the large eddy
V S V simulation is used in the turbulence calculation of VFIFE. The effec­
(27) tiveness of the large eddy simulation mainly depends on the initial
conditions, the filtering of turbulence fluctuation and the construction of
then the third governing equation of vector form of fluid mechanics, sub-grid stress model. Therefore, this section mainly investigates the
known as the pressure Poisson equation, is as follows: setting methods of the above three items, then the filtered grid node
⎛
∫
⎞ ⎛
∫
⎞
∫ velocity and the updated viscosity coefficient are substituted into Eq. (8)
⎝ BT BdV ⎠pt+Δt = 1 ⎝ − BN dV ⎠Ẋ + NT
T ∗∗ ∂pt+Δt
dS (28) to solve the NS equation using the process of VFIFE discussed in section
Δt ∂n 3. Therefore, these key steps of large eddy simulation can be regarded as
V V S
the pre-processing work before solving the governing equations of
The pressure variable satisfies the continuity equation through the vector form of fluid mechanics.
above equation, thus the problem that the fluid pressure cannot be
associated with the mass conservation equation proposed in problem (d)
can be solved. 4.1. Modification of governing equation
Substitute the pressure term ∇pt+Δt obtained in the previous step into
Eq. (12) and update the intermediate velocity variable Ẋ
∗∗
to get the To give a set of initial conditions that not only satisfy the continuity
t+Δt equation and all boundary conditions but also conform to the prescribed
node velocity Ẋ , which satisfies
turbulence intensity and energy spectrum distribution is quite difficult.
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
∫ t+Δt ∫ Therefore, in VFIFE large eddy simulation calculations of this paper, the
t+Δt ∂Ẋ
T⎝ T
δ(Ṫ ) = (δẊ) ρ N NdV ⎠ T T
= (δẊ) ⎝ B BdV ⎠pt+Δt (29) steady flow is calculated at first through the k-ω SST model in Fluent to
∂t
V V obtain the mean velocity distribution. Then with the mean velocity
distribution as the initial condition, the large eddy simulation is used to
then the fourth governing equation of vector form of fluid mechanics, calculate the later unsteady flow. In addition, in order to the separate
known as the velocity correction equation, is as follows: large eddy of resolved-scale from the sub-grid scale eddy of unresolved-
scale, this paper filters variables ϕ(ξ, t) in NS equation which can refer to
n! ( T ( )) t+Δt ( )
̂ + diag CT mC
C mC ⊗ I3 (Ẋ − Ẋ ) = CT ⊗ I3 − ΔtFpres
∗∗
̂ velocity, pressure, etc. by the scale ofΔ in physical space to obtain
(n + 2)!
variables ϕ(X, t) of resolved-scale, which can be written as
(30)
∫ +∞
where the equivalent external force Fpres represents the fluid pressure. ϕ(X, t) = ϕ(ξ, t)G(X − ξ, Δ)dξ (32)
− ∞
t+Δt
The node velocity Ẋ obtained from the above equation satisfies the
diffusion equation, convection equation and pressure Poisson equation, where G(X − ξ, Δ) is the filter function, and Δ is the characteristic scale
thus it can be used as the velocity of the fluid node at t+Δt. Unlike the of the filter. In convenience, this paper selects the three-dimensional
traditional VFIFE method for solid mechanics, all the governing equa­ cassette filter (ΔX , ΔY , ΔZ ) in physical space for the large eddy simu­
tions for fluid mechanics are on the basis of Euler coordinate system, so lation calculation, whose filter function is given as
the reverse motion in the Lagrange coordinate system no longer exists ⎧
(for problem (a)).
⎪
⎪
⎨ 1 ΔX ΔY ΔZ
, |X − ξ| ≤ , |Y − η| ≤ , |Z − ζ| ≤
To sum up, the governing equations of vector form of intrinsic finite G(X − ξ, Δ) = ΔX ΔY ΔZ 2 2 2
⎪
⎪
element method for incompressible fluids are listed as ⎩ 0, others
(33)
By applying the filtering algorithm to the transient NS Eq. (6) of

6
A. Samy et al. Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319

incompressible fluids, the momentum equation with large-scale motion the model parameter, and for Smagorinsky model we take cm=0.1. After
variable (large eddy) can be obtained: explicitly calculating the sub-grid eddy viscosity coefficient, the sub-grid
( ) / Reynolds stress of Eq. (35) is substituted into Lagrange’s equation of the
Ẍ + ∇⋅ Ẋ ẊT = g − ∇p ρ + ν∇2 Ẋ − ∇⋅τ sgs (34) second kind, and the derivative with respect to generalized coordinates
is obtained:
T ⎛ ⎞
where sub-grid Reynolds stress τ sgs = ẊẊ − Ẋ ẊT represents the mo­
( ) ( )
mentum transport between the filtered small-scale fluctuation and − ∇⋅τ sgs = ∇⋅vsgs ∇Ẋ + ∇Ẋ = ∇⋅ vsgs ∇Ẋ + ∇ vsgs ⏟̅⏞⏞̅⏟
T ⎝ ∇⋅Ẋ ⎠ = vsgs ∇2 Ẋ
resolved-scale turbulence. In this paper, the classic sub-grid eddy vis­ 0
cosity model is adopted, which means the sub-grid Reynolds stress has (37)
the same form as the viscous stress term in the NS equation:
⎛ ⎛ ⎞⎞ in which the principle that mixed partial derivative is independent of the
1( ) 1 T
sequence is applied, expressed as ∇⋅(∇Ẋ)T = ∇(∇⋅Ẋ). The magnitude
τ sgs = − 2vsgs ⎝ ∇Ẋ + ∇Ẋ −
T ⎝∇⋅Ẋ ⎠I⎠ (35)
2 3 ⏟̅̅⏞⏞̅̅⏟ and essence of the viscous stress generated by the fluid motion and the
0
sub-grid Reynolds stress generated by the turbulent fluctuation are quite
where νsgs is sub-grid eddy viscosity coefficient, corresponding to the different, but expressions of the two stresses are highly consistent,
kinetic viscosity coefficient νof the fluid. The sub-grid eddy viscosity therefore they can be combined in the momentum equation. Thus, in
large eddy simulation, NS equation of incompressible fluids can be
coefficient based on velocity gradient ∇Ẋ is adopted in this paper, the
expressed as
general format of which is given as
{
(36) ∇⋅Ẋ = (0 (38)
vsgs = (cm |Δ|)2 Γm (Ẋ) ) / ( )
Ẋ + ∇⋅ Ẋ ẊT = g − ∇p ρ + v + vsgs ∇2 Ẋ
where |Δ| is the characteristic length of the filter and this paper adopts The solution process of VFIFE in Eq. (38) is exactly the same as the
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
Deardorff characteristic length [34], i.e., |Δ|vol = 3 ΔX ΔY ΔZ . Γm (Ẋ) is steps in 3.2. In order to obtain accurate results, it is necessary to ensure
the model function related to the grid velocity after filtering, and the that the filtered grid velocity can distinguish most turbulent kinetic
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ energy and set reasonable sub-grid eddy viscosity coefficient.
classic Smagorinsky model [28] is adopted, i.e., Γm (Ẋ) = 2ε̇ : ε̇. cm is

Fig. 1. Flowchart of VFIFE-LES algorithm.

7
A. Samy et al.
4.2. Numerical procedure with VFIFE
The package of VFIFE large eddy simulation contains four subpro­
gram libraries, which are presented by four boxes in dashed line frames,
as shown in Fig. 1. From top to bottom, they are: LES library, diffusion
equation library, convection equation library, and pressure-velocity
equation library. At the input side, we mesh the computational model
and provide known variables at the boundary. According to the physical
characteristics of the flow field to be analyzed, a set of initial conditions
is given, or use commercial package to generate initial values of vari­
ables. To carry out the large eddy simulation, enter the LES library. Since
the final calculation results of turbulent field are highly dependent on
the given initial conditions, this paper suggests that at first Reynolds
average method (RANS) is used to calculate the steady flow, and the
mean velocity distribution of the entire flow field is obtained. With the
mean velocity distribution as the initial condition, the large eddy
simulation is used to calculate the later unsteady flow. Then, according
to the process in 4.1, grid variables are filtered and the sub-grid eddy
viscosity coefficient is solved to enter the following diffusion equation
library. The returned velocity Ẋ , as the initial variable, is input to the
∗
following convective equation library. It is worth noting that the time
step of subprogram libraries except the convection equation library is
Δt, and only in the convection equation library, n loops are executed to
meet the convergence requirement of the overall algorithm. Through the
returned intermediate velocity variable Ẋ , the pressure and velocity
∗∗
variables at time t+Δt are solved in turn. If the difference between the
velocity at this moment and the velocity at t is less than 1E-6, the
calculation can be considered convergence. Otherwise, the velocity
should return to the diffusion equation library for the next iteration. If
the flow field to be analyzed can be simplified to the laminar flow, Euler
equation, or Stokes equation, the LES library, diffusion equation library,
and convection equation library can be skipped respectively in this
package. Note that the solution of pressure-velocity equation is the most
critical step of the VFIFE large eddy simulation algorithm in this paper.
5. Numerical examples
5.1. Driven cavity flow
The lid-driven cavity flow is a classical example used to verify the
accuracy of numerical methods. Ghia [35] adopted the difference
Fig. 2. Configuration of the lid-driven cavity flow.
8
Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319
solution of the multi-grid method to solve the basic equations of fluid
mechanics, and gave the calculation curve and detailed result data.
Considering the existence of stable laminar flow solution [36] in a
square cavity flow with Reynolds number less than 5000, the calculation
based on VFIFE is applied for the two-dimensional square cavity flow
with Reynolds number between 100 and 5000 in this paper.
Fig. 2 shows the analysis model of Ghia cavity flow. The dimen­
sionless characteristic length of the two-dimensional square cavity flow
in X and Y directions is 1. The dimensionless characteristic velocity
driven by the lid is 1, and the liquid density is 1. Different Reynolds
numbers are obtained by adjusting the viscosity coefficient. All surfaces
except the top surface are adopted non-slip boundary conditions, and
the point at the cavity coordinate (0,0) is taken as the pressure reference
point, with the pressure there set as 0. In the following, the results ob­
tained by the algorithm proposed in this paper are compared with classic
literatures from several aspects, such as Reynolds number, grid density
and time intervals.
(1) Reynolds number
Fig. 3 shows the distribution of horizontal velocity U along the
vertical centerline and vertical velocity V along the horizontal centerline
when Reynolds numbers are 100, 1000 and 5000 respectively. In this
paper, the velocity obtained under a 50 × 50 grid is compared with that
calculated by Ghia et al. with 129 × 129 grid. It is found that when the
Reynolds numbers are 100 and 1000, the results agree with each other,
and the absolute value of average errors are 1.38% and 3.20%, respec­
tively. However, when the Reynolds number is 5000, a certain deviation
of the extreme velocity at the boundary condition will occur. Compared
with the result obtained by Ghia et al. under a 257 × 257 grid, the ab­
solute value of average error under this condition reaches 12.04%, but
the number of grids used in this paper is only 7.57% of that of Ghia,
which greatly saves calculation costs. The absolute value of average
error π [37] adopted in this paper is defined as:
np
(⃒ ⃒ ⃒ ⃒)
1 ∑ ⃒UVFIFE − UGhia ⃒ ⃒V VFIFE − V Ghia ⃒
i i i i
π= + (39)
2np i=1 UGhia
i V Ghia
i
Fig. 4 shows the streamlines in various states after the VFIFE calcu­
lation reaches stability when the Reynolds number changes from 100 to
5000. It can be seen that the position of the vortex center gradually shifts
to the center of the cavity as the Reynolds number increases. The sec­
ondary vortices at two corners of the cavity bottom become larger
gradually, and their sizes tend to be the same. Starting from Re=3200, a
new secondary vortex is separated from the upper left corner of the
cavity, and in the lower right corner of the cavity, a tiny tertiary sepa­
ration vortex is generated when Re=5000. These trends are in good
agreement with the flow images obtained by Gupta [38] with the
application of streamfunction-velocity formulation, which indicates that
VFIFE algorithm can well simulate small-scale physical quantities in
flows.
The central coordinates of the primary vortex and the secondary
vortex under different Reynolds numbers are tracked in this paper, and
compared with the calculation results given by numerous literatures
[35,38-40], as shown in Fig. 5. The central coordinate is obtained by
taking the minimum of the flow function. Since the differences of
analysis method and iteration method, the coordinates given by various
literatures are slightly different, but the range of coordinates and the
trend of variation are consistent with the results calculated in this paper.
The result of this paper is highly consistent with that of other literatures
in the central vortex, among which, for all vortices and Reynolds
numbers, the coordinate obtained by Hou et al. with the application of
lattice Boltzmann method shows the highest agreement. Therefore, it
can be known that the small-scale vortex captured under the 50 × 50
grid in this paper fully meets the calculation accuracy.
A. Samy et al. Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319

Fig. 3. Comparison of centerline velocities under different Re.

Fig. 4. Streamlines for different Re.

Fig. 5. Location of the centers of primary and secondary vortex.

(2) Space and time intervals
In Fig. 6, taking the square cavity flow with Re=1000 as an example,
the vorticity field (upper row) and pressure contours (lower row) are
drawn when the velocity and pressure in the VFIFE calculation in this
paper adopt the same grids, which are 25 × 25, 50 × 50 and 100 × 100
respectively. It can be seen from the figure that, with the increase of grid
density, the vorticity diagram and pressure contour become smoother
when the calculation reaches a stable state and the results are very close
to the exact solutions provided by Gupta [38] and Wang [41]. When the
grid is 50 × 50, the numerical oscillation of physical quantity can be
eliminated. Besides, although the calculation results under 50 × 50 and
100 × 100 grids are quite close, the amounts of calculation are several
times different. Therefore, the 50 × 50 grid is recommended in this
paper to ensure accuracy and save time.
The sizes of spatial step and time step have great influence on the
convergence of the VFIFE calculation. Because the velocity equation and
the pressure equation adopt the same spatial grid, it is difficult to get the

9
A. Samy et al. Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319

Fig. 6. Vorticity field and pressure contours with respect to grid size.

Fig. 7. Convergence history of velocity with respect to time intervals.

convergent calculation result if the time steps are also the same. the greatest influence on the computational stability. Fig. 7 shows the
Therefore, the same time step Δt1 is adopted for the diffusion Eq. (16), convergence history of L2 norm [25] of the node velocity with iterative
the pressure Eq. (28) and the velocity correction Eq. (30), while a steps when different time steps are adopted for the square cavity flow
smaller time step Δt2 is adopted for the convection Eq. (23), which has with Re=1000 and a 50 × 50 grid. After the time Δt1, when all governing

Table 1
Convergence data and relative error of centerline velocities from VFIFE algorithm.
Reynolds number Convergence time (s) Iteration number Relative error π (%)

100 1000 5000 100 1000 5000 100 1000 5000

Grid density 25 × 25 9.01 19.65 -* 790 5147 – 1.55 4.97 –

50 × 50 20.33 45.94 73.83 492 2320 6314 1.38 3.20 12.04
100 × 100 91.9 270.35 316.29 203 1824 4257 1.10 2.44 11.91

Time interval 0.01 18.51 141.72 – 414 6628 – 3.32 7.49 –

0.005 20.33 45.94 69.20 492 2320 6155 1.38 3.20 22.82
0.001 41.83 52.21 73.83 1110 3306 6314 0.09 1.47 12.04

*The symbol "-" indicates that the calculation diverges or fails to converge below 1E-6 within 10,000 steps.

10
A. Samy et al.
equations of VFIFE are calculated, the next iteration is carried out. As
can be seen from the figure, the overall time step Δt1 has a great influ­
ence on the convergence of the calculation, while the time step Δt2 of the
convective equation is very effective to shorten the convergence process
and smooth the numerical oscillation. Therefore, after determining the
spatial step size of VFIFE, Eq. (10) is used to determine the overall time
step Δt1, and Δt2 is subdivided to improve the efficiency of convergence
under the trend of overall convergence. It is worth noting that when Δt2
is small enough to a certain range, little influence on the number of
iteration steps and the final result have occurred. Therefore, this paper
advices to set Δt2 as about 1/10 of Δt1 to save calculation cost.
When taking different Reynolds numbers, space and time steps,
through the calculation of VFIFE, the convergence time, iteration
numbers, and the absolute value of average error π between the velocity
values on the two centerlines and these calculated by Ghia et al., are
shown in Table 1. As can be seen from the table, both adopting fine grids
and reducing time step can improve calculation accuracy, and the latter
is far more effective in reducing calculation time and error than the
former. However, coarser grids tend to produce non-physical oscilla­
tions of the pressure and the discontinuity of boundary layer flux,
resulting in a serrated flow diagram. Therefore, the grid resolution
should increase with the increase of Reynolds number. And when the
grid resolution is so high that it has little effect on calculation results, the
time step should be reduced to improve the calculation accuracy and
efficiency.
Fig. 8. Schematic of Silsoe Cube.
11
Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319
5.2. Flows around the silsoe cube
British Silsoe Research Institute (SRI) measured the wind pressure
distribution in the natural wind field of a cube building with a side
length of 6 m, and provided detailed local velocities, geomorphic fea­
tures and other key parameters. Therefore, Silsoe Cube in open field is
widely used in wind engineering field to verify the accuracy of wind
field simulation algorithm. The solid model for field measurement,
scaled model for wind tunnel test and finite element model for calcu­
lation in this paper of Silsoe Cube are shown in Fig. 8(a-c). The calcu­
lation parameters and boundary conditions of the model are shown in
Table 2.
For the velocity distribution at the entrance, both Richards’ wind
tunnel modelling [43] and LES modelling [44] adopted logarithmic
wind profiles, while Irtaza’s wind tunnel experiment [45] and Ong’s
large eddy simulation [46] adopted exponential wind profiles. For
simple calculation, the exponential wind profile is adopted in this paper.
The average wind velocity and turbulence intensity at the top of the
building are 9.52 m/s and 19.3% respectively, and the velocity distri­
bution at the entrance is shown in Eq. (40). Fig. 9 shows the data
comparison in time-average velocity and turbulence intensity between
the wind speed function adopted in this paper, the local measurement of
SRI, the wind tunnel experiment, the CFD calculation result of Ong, and
the basic wind speed given by Eurocode [47]. It can be seen that the
entrance wind speed adopted in this model is quite close to the field
measured data, so as to ensure the reliability of boundary conditions. For
A. Samy et al. Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319

Table 2
Calculation parameters of Silsoe Cube.
Density Viscosity Computation Inlet boundary Outlet Ground and cube Other boundaries
domain boundary surface
5
1.1614 kg/ 1.846 × 10− Ns/ 96 m × 30 m × 18m Exponential wind velocity Eq. Gauge pressure No slip boundary Slip wall (symmetry
m3 m2 (40) boundary)

Fig. 9. Vertical profiles of the velocity field statistics in the precursor simulation.

the large eddy simulation of turbulent flows, the finite element model in
Fig. 8(c) is firstly calculated by k-ω SST model in Fluent 2018, and the
obtained final node velocity and pressure are substituted into the VFIFE
program proposed in this paper as node variable values at the initial
time. The other entrance turbulence parameters in RANS analysis are
default in Fluent, while the entrance turbulence fluctuation in LES
analysis is obtained by Aboshosha’s consistent discrete random inflow
generator [48].
{ results of other literatures, except for the partial deviation compared
‖ Ẋ‖∞ = 9.52(Z/H0 )1/7
0 ≤ Z ≤ 3H0 (40)
Iu = 0.193(Z/H0 )− 1/7
In this paper, the laminar flow results calculated by the VFIFE
method in section 2 and the turbulent flow results calculated by the LES
method in section 3 are compared with classic literatures [42,43,46].
The comparison results of the mean pressure coefficients on the vertical
ring and the horizontal ring of Silsoe Cube are shown in Fig. 10. It can be
seen from Fig. 10(a) and Fig. 10(b) that there is a general agreement
among all the results on the windward side. The magnitude and location
of the maximum pressure obtained with VFIFE are consistent with the
with Richards’ wind tunnel experiment. However, the pressure distri­
butions on the top and side of the Silsoe Cube appear a large deviation.
This is because when the fluid drops sharply from positive wind pressure

Fig. 10. Mean pressure distributions around the cube.

12
A. Samy et al.
to negative wind pressure on the windward side, the flow field shows
strong turbulent characteristics. The k-ω SST model and VFIFE laminar
flow model can not accurately reflect the real flow condition of the flow
field at this place. The pressure coefficient calculated through LES using
Fluent on the leeward side is generally large, while the pressure coef­
ficient obtained by the laminar flow model of VFIFE in this paper is
relatively small. At this time, by greatly adjusting the default Smagor­
insky coefficient CS in Fluent or increasing the equivalent dissipative
force η2nd which considers the higher order term of time about 3–5 times
in the calculation of VFIFE in this paper, a reasonable pressure can be
obtained on the leeward side. However, considering the calculation
accuracy of the whole flow field, this adjustment is not a wise choice. On
the whole, the result of VFIFE-LES algorithm is most consistent with the
full-size model by Richards’ field measurement.
Although the results of pressure distribution on each centerline are
not significantly different from those in Richards’ literature on the
whole, the data at individual monitoring points cannot reflect the
pressure distribution on all cube surfaces. In order to further verify the
accuracy of pressure contours obtained by VFIFE large eddy simulation
in this paper and locate unreasonable distribution areas, the pressure
contours on typical faces of Silsoe Cube are presented in Fig. 11. On the
other hand, the aerodynamics database [49] of Tokyo Polytechnic
University recorded in detail the time history data of pressure co­
efficients in a large number of monitoring points uniformly distributed
on all faces of several square buildings of different proportions in the 10
min wind tunnel experiment, referred to as TPU data. This paper adopts
the TPU data with the length-width-height ratio of 1, roof slope of 0 and
wind direction perpendicular to the facade of the building, and takes the
average of the detection time. Then, the white dashed line in Fig. 11
represents the contour line of the mean pressure coefficient of each
monitoring point on the surface of the cube.
As can be seen from Fig. 11, the calculation results of VFIFE large
eddy simulation algorithm in this paper are smoother on the windward
side A, but the local maximum pressure at the center of the arris
touching the ground is much smaller than that of TPU. This is caused by
underdeveloped turbulent flow at the entrance. At top B and side D, both
TPU data and aforementioned Richards’ result gradually rise from the
lowest negative pressure coefficient to − 0.3. However, a small area of
positive pressure appears unexpectedly in VFIFE calculation in this
paper. It’s mainly because the mesh is unable to resolve the near-wall
Fig. 11. Mean pressure contours on the cube faces.
13
Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319
region properly. Reducing yplus values in the viscous sublayer or
adopting multiple wall treatment method can effectively prevent this
situation, but the calculation cost will increase accordingly. Relatively
speaking, the pressure on the leeward side C changes little, and the
pressure coefficient on the whole side is about − 0.3. Therefore, the error
between the pressure contour captured by this algorithm and TPU data
is within the range of 1E-2. In conclusion, the VFIFE large eddy simu­
lation algorithm proposed in this paper can accurately reflect the pres­
sure gradient change in the flow field.
Since the mean velocity setting at the entrance and the mean pres­
sure distribution on the cube faces are basically consistent with litera­
tures, it can be concluded that the VFIFE large eddy simulation
algorithm in this paper can reflect the real flow conditions in the flow
field well. Fig. 12 shows mean streamlines around the Silsoe Cube and
we can easily observe the horseshoe vortices around the cube. The dis­
tribution of vortices is very similar to the calculation result obtained by
Richards [44] using the large eddy simulation parallel algorithm
developed by Armfield [50] based on the finite volume method. How­
ever, the diverting point above the cube in this paper is not on the arris
between the windward and top faces, but about 5% inside the top face.
This provides a good explanation for the positive pressure area in side B
(or D) in Fig. 11. An effective method is to make the grid partition
around the cube to be fine enough, and at the same time, the detached
eddy simulation (DES) is used to reduce the calculation amount of the
near wall area. Although the VFIFE large eddy simulation algorithm
proposed in this paper captures the vortex region near the windward and
leeward sides of the cube well, it fails to reflect the top vortex region
obtained by Hu [51] through the improved delayed detached eddy
simulation (IDDES). This is a problem worth improving in the following
research of the algorithm proposed in this paper. In a word, VFIFE al­
gorithm can obtain satisfactory results with a small number of grids,
which can be applied in some small-scale engineering.
6. Conclusion
Aiming at the extension and application of VFIFE to the field of fluid
mechanics, this paper establishes the theory of vector form of fluid
mechanics and proposes corresponding calculation idea and process.
The findings mainly include:
(1) Imitating the second Lagrange’s equation in solid mechanics, the
A. Samy et al.
Fig. 12. Mean streamlines around the cube: (a) isometric view; (b) XOY plain view; (c) XOZ plain view.
Lagrange power function with the generalized velocity as the variable is
constructed. By taking the first order variational of the functional, the
governing equation of motion of incompressible viscous fluids is
derived. Thus, the continuum mechanics is successfully incorporated
into the framework of analytical mechanics, which provides a funda­
mental formulation for proposing a unified computational expression in
vector form of solid mechanics and fluid mechanics.
(2) The NS equation is decomposed into four independent equations,
and VFIFE method is used to solve them in turn. It can be seen from
14
Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319
examples that for the laminar flow with low Reynolds number, the
vector form of fluid mechanics algorithm proposed in this paper can
obtain the results with relatively high precision by using a small number
of grids. The rate of convergence mainly depends on the time step
adopted by the second governing equation, also known as the convec­
tion equation.
(3) For turbulent flow, VFIFE can be well combined with the large
eddy simulation, and the calculation results with low calculation cost
and good accuracy in accordance with classic literatures can be
A. Samy et al.
obtained. The VFIFE large eddy simulation algorithm can accurately
capture most of the large-scale vortices in the flow field and eliminate
the non-physical oscillation of the pressure variable. Although accurate
calculation results cannot be obtained at the arris near the wall, the
partial application of immersed boundary method and detached eddy
simulation is expected to improve the calculation accuracy of VFIFE
large eddy simulation algorithm.
In conclusion, four governing equations of vector form of fluid me­
chanics proposed in this paper fill the vacancy of VFIFE in the field of
fluid mechanics. Combining the advantages of low cost and high pre­
cision of vector form of fluid mechanics with the advantages of vector
form of solid mechanics in large geometric deformation and elasto­
plastic deformation analysis, exploring strong nonlinear behaviors of
flexible structures in complex flow fields is the focus of our future work.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Akram Samy: Writing – original draft, Visualization, Validation,
Software, Methodology, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptuali­
zation. Shu Li: Writing – original draft, Methodology, Investigation.
Xingfei Yuan: Validation, Supervision, Resources, Project administra­
tion, Investigation, Funding acquisition, Data curation, Conceptualiza­
tion. Chengwei Liu: Methodology, Investigation, Conceptualization.
Yongcan Dong: Validation, Supervision, Investigation.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
The research was supported by the National Natural Science Foun­
dation of China (Grant Nos. 51878600 and 52278224), and the Pro­
vincial Key R&D program of Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region
(Grant No. 2023B01023)
Data availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the
corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
[1] Gresho PM. Incompressible fluid dynamics: some fundamental formulation issues.
Annu Rev Fluid Mech 1991;23(1):413–53. http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.fl.23.
010191.002213.
[2] Bedrossian J, Vicol V. The mathematical analysis of the incompressible euler and
navier-stokes equations:an introduction. Providence, Providence: American
Mathematical Society; 2022. American Mathematical Society.
[3] Gartling DK, Becker EB. Finite element analysis of viscous, incompressible fluid
flow: part 1: basic methodology. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 1976;8(1):
51–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7825(76)90052-9.
[4] Greiner W. Classical Mechanics: systems of Particles and Hamiltonian Dynamics,
2003.
[5] Alimirzaei S, Mohammadimehr M, Tounsi A. Nonlinear analysis of viscoelastic
micro-composite beam with geometrical imperfection using FEM: MSGT electro-
magneto-elastic bending, buckling and vibration solutions. Struct Eng Mech 2019;
71:485–502. http://doi.org/10.12989/sem.2019.71.5.485.
[6] Van DSAJ. L2-gain analysis of nonlinear systems and nonlinear state-feedback H∞
control. IEEE Trans.automat.contr 1992;37(6):770–84.
[7] Zhou YQ, Zhang XM, Liu L, Liu TT, Wang XM. Formulations of the elastodynamic
equations in anisotropic and multiphasic porous media from the principle of energy
conservation. Prog Theor Exp Phys 2022;2022(12). http://doi.org/10.1093/ptep/
ptac149.
[8] Ricoeur A, Wingen M. A monolithic approach toward coupled electrodynamic-
thermomechanical problems with regard to weak formulations. Acta Mech 2023;
234(1):16. -16, http://doi.org/10.1007/s00707-021-03088-0.
[9] Beyer M, Patzold M, Grecksch W, Paul W. Quantum Hamilton equations for
multidimensional systems. J Phys a Math Theor 2019;52(16). http://doi.org/10.10
88/1751-8121/ab0bcf.
15
Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319
[10] Passerone D, Ceccarelli M, Parrinello M. A concerted variational strategy for
investigating rare events. J Chem Phys 2003;118(5):2025–32. http://doi.org/
10.1063/1.1533783.
[11] Calkin MG. Lagrangian and Hamiltonian Mechanics. World Scientific Pub Co Inc,
1996.
[12] Irschik H, Holl HJ. The equations of Lagrange written for a non-material volume.
Acta Mech 2002;153(3):231–48. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF01177454.
[13] Irschik H, Holl HJ. Lagrange’s equations for open systems, derived via the method
of fictitious particles, and written in the Lagrange description of continuum
mechanics. Acta Mech 2015;226(1):63–79. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00707-0
14-1147-8.
[14] Liang L, Zhou P. Application of Lagrange equation in fluid mechanics. Journal of
Harbin Engineering University 2018;39(1):33–9.
[15] Liang L, Guo Q, Song H. Analytical dynamics of continuous medium and its
application. Advances in Mechanics 2019;49(1):514–41.
[16] Ting EC, Shih C, Wang Y. Fundamentals of a Vector Form Intrinsic Finite Element:
part I. Basic Procedure and A Plane Frame Element. J Mech 2004;20(2):113–22.
http://doi.org/10.1017/S1727719100003336.
[17] Ting EC, Shih C, Wang Y. Fundamentals of a Vector Form Intrinsic Finite Element:
part II. Plane Solid Elements. J Mech 2004;20(2):123–32. https://doi.org/
10.1017/S1727719100003348.
[18] Yuan P, He B, Zhang L, Yu H, Wang G, Ma X. Member importance prediction and
failure response analysis for cable network antennas. Eng Struct 2022;266:114642.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.114642.
[19] Wang SM, Ni YQ, Sun YG, Lu Y, Duan YF. Modelling dynamic interaction of maglev
train-controller-rail-bridge system by vector mechanics. J Sound Vib 2022;533-:
533.
[20] Cao Y, Gu H, Guo H, Li X. Modeling and dynamic analysis of integral vertical
transport system for deep-sea mining in three-dimensional space. Ocean Eng 2023;
271:113749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.113749.
[21] Samy A, Yuan XF, Zhang Y, Zhang WJ. Study on bagging effect and rupture failure
of membrane structures, 232. Eng Struct; 2021. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.en
gstruct.2021.111880.
[22] Xu D, Liu JN, Wu YF, Ji CN. Numerical investigation of the dynamics of flexible
vegetations in turbulent open-channel flows. J Hydrodynam B 2022;34(4):681–99.
http://doi.org/10.1007/s42241-022-0057-9.
[23] Zhang Z. Method of characteristics hydraulic transients and computations.
Springer International Publishing: Cham; 2020. p. 195–206.
[24] Khan LA, Liu P. Numerical analyses of operator-splitting algorithms for the two-
dimensional advection-diffusion equation. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 1998;
152(3–4):337–59. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7825(97)00127-8.
[25] The finite element method for fluid dynamics. In: Zienkiewicz OC, Taylor RL,
Nithiarasu P, editors. The finite element method for fluid dynamics. 7th ed. Oxford:
Butterworth-Heinemann; 2014. p. i.
[26] MacCormack R. The effect of viscosity in hypervelocity impact cratering. J Spacecr
Rockets 1969;40. http://doi.org/10.2514/2.6901.
[27] Donea J, Giuliani S, Laval H, Quartapelle L. Solution of the unsteady Navier–Stokes
equations by a fractional step method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 1982;30:
53–73. 10.1016/0045-7825(82)90054-8.
[28] Smagorinsky JS S. General circulation experiments with the primitive equations.
monthly weather review 91, 99-165. Mon. Wea. Rev 1963;91:99–164. http://doi.
org/10.1175/1520-0493(1963)091. <0099:GCEWTP>2.3.CO;2.
[29] C P. Numerical computation in science and engineering. Oxford: Oxford University
Press; 2008.
[30] Sun Z, Hu Y. High-Precision and high-resolution finite-difference method and
application. Beijing: Science Press; 2020. Chinese.
[31] Shui Q, Wang D. Numerical simulation for navier-stokes equations by projection
characteristic-based operator-splitting finite element method. Chin J Theoretic
Appl Mech 2014;46(3):369–81.
[32] Hundsdorfer W, Mozartova A, Spijker MN. Stepsize restrictions for boundedness
and monotonicity of multistep methods. J Sci Comput 2012;50(2):265–86.
http://doi.org/10.1007/s10915-011-9487-1.
[33] Zhang QH, Li Y. Projection methods for the incompressible Navier-Stokes
equations. Acta Phys Sin 2021;70(13). http://doi.org/10.7498/aps.70.20210259.
[34] Deardorff JW. A numerical study of 3 dimensional turbulent channel flow at large
reynolds numbers. J Fluid Mech 1970;41:453. -+, http://doi.org/10.101
7/S0022112070000691.
[35] Ghia U, Ghia KN, Shin CT. High-Re solutions for incompressible flow using the
Navier-Stokes equations and a multigrid method. J Comput Phys 1982;48(3):
387–411. 10.1016/0021-9991(82)90058-4.
[36] Liu H, Fu D, Ma Y. Upwind compact method and direct numerical simulation of
driven flow in a square cavity. Sci China. Series A 1993:36.
[37] Wang DG, Wang HJ, Xiong JH, Tham LG. Characteristic-based operator-splitting
finite element method for Navier-Stokes equations. Sci China Technol Sci 2011;54
(8):2157–66. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-011-4444-7.
[38] Gupta MM, Kalita JC. A new paradigm for solving Navier-Stokes equations:
streamfunction-velocity formulation. J Comput Phys 2005;207(1):52–68.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2005.01.002.
[39] Vanka SP. Block-implicit multigrid solution of navier-stokes equations in primitive
variables. J Comput Phys 1986;65(1):138–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9991
(86)90008-2.
[40] Hou S, Zou Q, Chen S, Doolen G, Cogley AC. Simulation of cavity flow by the lattice
boltzmann method. J Comput Phys 1995;118(2):329–47. https://doi.org/10.1006/
jcph.1995.1103.
[41] Wang DG SQ. Characteristic-based operator-splitting finite element method and its
application. Beijing: Scientific Press; 2014. Chinese.
A. Samy et al.
[42] Richards PJ, Hoxey RP, Short LJ. Wind pressures on a 6m cube. J Wind Eng Ind
Aerodyn 2001;89(14):1553–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6105(01)00139-
8.
[43] Richards PJ, Hoxey RP, Connell BD, Lander DP. Wind-tunnel modelling of the
Silsoe Cube. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2007;95(9):1384–99. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jweia.2007.02.005.
[44] Richards P, Norris S. LES modelling of unsteady flow around the Silsoe cube.
J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2015;144:70–8. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2015.0
3.018.
[45] Irtaza H, Beale R, Godley MHR, Jameel A. Comparison of wind pressure
measurements on Silsoe experimental building from full-scale observation, wind-
tunnel experiments and various CFD techniques. Int J Eng, Sci Technol 2013;5.
http://doi.org/10.4314/ijest.v5i1.3.
[46] Ong RH, Patruno L, Yeo D, He Y, Kwok K. Numerical simulation of wind-induced
mean and peak pressures around a low-rise structure. Eng Struct 2020;214. http://
doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110583.
16
Computers and Fluids 279 (2024) 106319
[47] Standardisation ECFS. Eurocode 1: basis of design and actions on structures. Part 1-
4: Wind actions.; (2002).
[48] Aboshosha H, Elshaer A, Bitsuamlak GT, El Damatty A. Consistent inflow
turbulence generator for LES evaluation of wind-induced responses for tall
buildings. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2015;142:198–216. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jweia.2015.04.004.
[49] TPU. Tokyo polytechnic university aerodynamic database. http://www.wind.arch.
t-kougei.ac.jp/system/eng/contents/code/tpu.
[50] Armfield S., Norris S., Morgan P., Street R. A parallel non-staggered navier-stokes
solver implemented on a workstation cluster (2002). http://doi.org/10.1007/978-
3-642-59334-5_3.
[51] Hu J, Xuan HB, Kwok K, Zhang Y, Yu Y. Study of wind flow over a 6 m cube using
improved delayed detached Eddy simulation. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2018;179:
463–74. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2018.07.003.