Surface chemistry #503
Replies: 2 comments 1 reply
-
Just want to make sure I'm understanding this. I don't have strong opinions on whether an iterative approach for this term or lagging it in the SDC would be better. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
That would be exactly the idea, yes - happy to take other suggestions, but the heterogeneous reactions would basically only be considered as part of the boundary condition and species would diffuse into/out of the domain via the reactive walls, and not integrated 'in-the-domain' per se. Lagging with the SDC will be easier to immediately set up and be notably cheaper, but I think we'd have to do some verifications to make sure that it's giving the right answer. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
I want to add surface chemistry to LMeX, but I am wondering if people have some thoughts on the correct treatment for the boundary condition. For the moment, we would just look at non-EB boundaries until we have the option of inhomogeneous Neumann boundaries for EB (AMReX-Codes/amrex#4402).
The boundary condition would look something like
$$\rho D_{i}\nabla Y_{i} = \dot{\omega}_{i,\text{hetero}}$$ (+ Soret (#391) ).
What are the thoughts on using a lagged source term for the diffusion solve vs. an iterative approach?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions