A Lagrangian approach for modeling road collisions using second-order models of traffic flow

In [M. Herty, A. Klein, S. Moutari, V. Schleper, and G. Steinaur, IMA J. Appl. Math., 78(5), 1087–1108, 2013] and [M. Herty and V. Schleper, ZAMM J. Appl. Math. Mech., 91, 763–776, 2011], a macroscopic approach, derived from fluid-dynamics models, has been introduced to infer traffic conditions prone to road traffic collisions along highways’ sections. In these studies, the governing equations are coupled within an Eulerian framework, which assumes fixed interfaces between the models. A coupling in Lagrangian coordinates would enable us to get rid of this (not very realistic) assumption. In this paper, we investigate the well-posedness and the suitability of the coupling of the governing equations within the Lagrangian framework. Further, we illustrate some features of the proposed approach through some numerical simulations.

Comparison of lagrangian and eulerian simulations of slurry flows in a sudden expansion

From a review of technical literature, it was not apparent if the Lagrangian or the Eulerian dispersed phase modeling approach was more valid to simulate dilute erosive slurry flow. In this study, both modeling approaches were employed and a comparative analysis of performances and accuracy between the two models was carried out. Due to an impossibility to define, for the Eulerian model already implemented in FLUENT, a set of boundary conditions consistent with the Lagrangian impulsive equations, an Eulerian dispersed phase model was integrated in the FLUENT code using subroutines and user-defined scalar equations. Numerical predictions obtained from the two different approaches for two-phase flow in a sudden expansion were compared with the measured data. Excellent agreement was attained between the predicted and observed fluid and particle velocity in the axial direction and for the kinetic energy. Erosion profiles in a sudden expansion computed using the Lagrangian scheme yielded good qualitative agreement with measured data and predicted a maximum impact angle of 29 deg at the fluid reattachment point. The Eulerian model was adversely affected by the reattachment of the fluid phase to the wall and the simulated erosion profiles were not in agreement with the Lagrangian or measured data. Furthermore, the Eulerian model under-predicted the Lagrangian impact angle at all locations except the reattachment point. © 2010 American Society of Mechanical Engineers.