164 views

Uploaded by Hamed Moqtaderi

- Paper fluids
- ALI2008 - The Lattice Boltzmann method on optimal sampling lattices
- Lattice Boltzmann and Applications
- Lattice Boltzmann
- Kuliah 4 5 Dan 6 Internal Incompressible
- Boltzmann
- Aiaa.paperOne-Step Aeroacoustics Simulation Using Lattice Boltzmann Method
- Lattice Boltzmann Simulation of Non-newtonian Fluid Flow in a Lid Driven Cavit
- Aerodynamics of Solar Cars
- Discharge _ Flow Rate _ Advance Engineering Mathematics Review
- Simulation of Rising Bubbles Dynamics Using LBM
- tutorial8_zhao
- Thermal Lattice Boltzmann Two-phase Flow Model for Fluid
- CSIRO presentation - Micro-channel Gas Flows
- Lattice Boltzmann Chen
- Lattice Boltzmann Intro Lectures
- Fluid mechncs by Mcdonald
- Modelling the Heat and Fluid Flow in the Welded Pool From High Power Arc Sources
- Lattice Boltzmann Method
- LBM_NN

You are on page 1of 7

Dustin Bespalko and Andrew Pollard

Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, K7L 3N6, Canada

Email: pollard@me.queensu.ca

superior accuracy. Also, the solution of the Poisson

In this paper, the Lattice Boltzmann Method (LBM) is

equation for pressure, which is the most computa-

considered as an alternative method for direct numer-

tionally expensive operation in most incompressible

ical simulation (DNS) of turbulent flows. The perfor-

methods, is reduced to a multiplication operation in

mance of the LBM for simulating wall-bounded tur-

spectral space. This makes the spectral method very

bulent flows is verified by performing a DNS of fully-

computationally efficient. The main disadvantage

developed turbulent channel flow and comparing the

of spectral methods is geometric inflexibility. For a

results to the database of [7]. Since the LBM used

simulation with complex geometry it becomes difficult

in this work is confined to a uniform grid, the mini-

to chose appropriate basis functions that satisfy the

mal channel of [6] was simulated instead of the full

boundary conditions.

channel. The minimal channel has smaller dimensions

in the stream-wise and span-wise directions and there-

fore does not accurately simulate the largest structures Finite volume methods have the advantage that they

in the channel. However, the near-wall turbulent struc- can be applied on irregular and unstructured meshes.

tures have been shown to be accurate [6]. The LBM re- For this reason, implementing finite volume methods

sults for the minimal channel show a directional match to solve problems with complex geometries is rela-

for the second order statistics but there are a number of tively simple. In the finite volume method, the NS

discrepancies, most notably a 10% over prediction of equations are integrated over each control volume and

the peak stream-wise velocity fluctuations. This was the convective and diffusive fluxes on the boundaries

initially thought to be a result of poor resolution, but of the control volume are estimated using a discretisa-

further simulations at higher resolution showed no im- tion scheme. The disadvantage of this approach is that

provement. A simulation is currently running in which truncation errors are introduced because the deriva-

the channel has been extended in the stream-wise di- tives in the NS equations are approximated by finite

rection. The statistics from this simulation, while not differences. For a turbulent flow this has the effect of

yet stationary, show an improvement over the minimal reducing the largest wavenumer that can be resolved

channel results. Statistically stationary results for this accurately by the computational grid. This means that

simulation will be presented in the conference presen- the finite volume method must be applied on a finer

tation. mesh than a spectral method to reduce the effect of the

truncation errors. Additionally, the Poisson equation

for pressure is solved in physical space, which is an

1 I NTRODUCTION extremely computationally expensive operation and

Direct numerical simulations (DNS) of turbulent accounts for up to 90% of the total computational time.

flows are generally performed using spectral or finite

volume methods. Spectral methods transform the In this work we consider the lattice Boltzmann method

Navier-Stokes (NS) equations into spectral space in (LBM) as a competitor to spectral and finite volume

order to represent the flow field as a finite set of basis methods for simulations with complex geometries.

functions. Since the derivatives in the NS equations do However, before performing simulations of comples

not need to be approximated in the spectral method, it turbulent flows, we rigorously test the application of

the LBM to turbulent channel flow by comparing with both position and velocity, and the collision integral

existing data available from the spectral simulation of is complex. The dependence of f on velocity is a

[7]. problem because it means that the solution domain

for the single particle distribution is six dimensional.

This means that f must be discretised in both physical

Past work has shown that the LBM is a promising tool

and velocity space. Additionally, if there are a wide

for DNS of turbulent flows; however, the majority of

range of particle velocities in the simulation, the

this work has been focused on free shear flows. This

hydrodynamic moments in equations 2 and 3 become

is because free shear flows can be simulated using

very expensive to compute. However, it can be

periodic and symmetry boundaries, which are straight-

shown that only a small set of particle velocities are

forward to implement in the LBM. Additionally, free

necessary for the Boltzmann equation to recover the

shear flows can be implemented with a spectral code

Navier-Stokes equations in the macroscopic limit. For

for the purpose of benchmarking the performance of

this reason, the Boltzmann equation can be simplified

the LBM. For the most part, detailed analysis, and

by restricting the particles to travel on a highly sym-

thus verification of, wall bounded turbulent flows

metric lattice. A further simplification can be made by

has been avoided. There are a few simulations of

replacing the collision integral with a relaxation type

turbulent channel flow in the literature but they are

model in which the current single particle distribution

either under-resolved [3] when compared to the

is relaxed towards its local equilibrium value. This is

standard channel flow database, or do not report data

called the BGK approximation, which is named for

for higher-order statistics [1].

Bhatnagar, Gross, and Krook [2].

2 T HE L ATTICE B OLTZMANN Boltzmann equation with the BGK approximation:

M ETHOD

The lattice Boltzmann method is a discrete particle ∂ fi (eq)

+ ci · ∇ fi = ω( fi − fi ) (4)

method based on kinetic theory. Instead of solving ∂t

for hydrodynamic variables (such as mass, momen-

tum, and energy), the working variable in the LBM (eq)

where ω is the relaxation parameter and fi is the

is the single particle distribution f (x, c,t). The single

local equilibrium value for fi . The discrete Boltzmann

particle distribution is a probability distribution func-

equation is a set of partial differential equations; one

tion that represents the expected mass density of par-

for each discrete velocity ci in the model. Since each

ticles located at position x and time t moving with a

fi is only a function of x and t these equations can be

velocity c. The governing equation for the single par-

discretised in space and time using a finite difference

ticle distribution is the Boltzmann equation [4]:

method. For the special case where ∆x = c∆t the lattice

Boltzmann equation is obtained.

∂f

+ c · ∇ f = Q( f , f ) (1)

∂t

(eq)

where Q( f , f ) is the collision integral, which is re- fi (x + ci∆t,t + ∆t) − fi(x,t) = ω( fi − fi ) (5)

sponsible for modelling the particle interactions. Once

the single particle distribution is known, the corre-

sponding hydrodynamic quantities can be determined This is the evolution equation used in the lattice Boltz-

by evaluating the velocity moments of f . For exam- mann method. The finite difference approximations

ple, the density and momentum can be calculated as for the spatial and temporal derivatives are only first

follows: order accurate, but it can be shown that the LBM is

second order if the viscosity is computed as follows

Z [9]:

ρ(x,t) = f (x, c,t)dc (2)

1 1 1

Z ν= − (6)

ρuα (x,t) = cα · f (x, c,t)dc (3) 3 ω 2

The Boltzmann equation is difficult to solve for two Once the fi ’s are known, the hydrodynamic quantities

reasons: the single particle distribution is a function of can be computed by the following summations:

W7−18 = 1/36

N−1

ρ(x,t) = ∑ fi (x,t) (7) (10)

i=0

ρuα (x,t) = ∑ ciα · fi (x,t) (8) an advection and collision step. In the collision step,

i=0 the single particle distributions are relaxed towards

their local equilibrium values by an amount dictated

The other two components of an LBM model are the

by the relaxation rate ω. Next, the new particle

lattice and the equilibrium distribution. In the simula-

distributions are streamed to their neighbouring lattice

tions used in this work, the D3Q19 lattice was used.

sites in the advection step. Using a multi-scale

This lattice has three dimensions, and 19 discrete ve-

expansion, the LBM can be shown to be equivalent

locities. The D3Q19 lattice velocities are shown in

to the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations in the

graphical form in figure 1.

low-Mach number limit.

advection process is linear; the pressure is calculated

using an equation of state, eliminating the need for

pressure velocity coupling; it is isotropic up to second

order, reducing the effect of grid orientation; and it is

simple to code for massive parallelisation.

3 S IMULATION D ETAILS

One major drawback of the LBM is that currently

it can only be used with a uniform grid. This

means that the grid resolution must be the same in

all three coordinate directions. In a simulation of

Figure 1: D3Q19 lattice velocities.

turbulent channel flow the grid resolution required in

The equilibrium distribution for the LBM is based on the wall-normal direction is much higher than that

the Maxwell distribution, which is the equilibrium dis- needed in the stream-wise and span-wise directions.

tribution for the Boltzmann equation. To generate the Ideally, a stretched grid would be implemented to

LBM equilibrium distribution function, a low-Mach exploit this feature to make the simulation more

number assumption is made. This assumption allows computationally efficient. Since this is currently not

the Maxwell distribution to be expanded as a Taylor possible with the LBM, the computational cost of

series about zero velocity. The terms up to second or- simulating a channel flow using the LBM is much

der in u are retained to give: greater than that of a simulation using a spectral

method. However, turbulent channel flow is an

ideal simulation to run in order to benchmark the

accuracy of the LBM for wall bounded turbulent flows.

3(ci · u) 9(ci · u)2 3u2

(eq)

fi = Wi ρ 1 + + − (9)

c2 2c4 2c2

In this work, the minimal flow unit was simulated

where the constants Wi are the quadrature coefficients instead of the channel of [7] to reduce the computa-

(eq) tional time. The minimal flow unit restricts the size

that ensure that the moments of fi corresponding to

of the channel in both the stream-wise and span-wise

the conserved quantities are identical to the moments

directions. Due to its smaller size, the minimal

of fi . The values of these coefficients for the D3Q19

channel is not large enough to accommodate all of the

lattice are:

largest scales in the channel, and thus there are errors

induced by enforcing periodic boundaries. However,

[6] showed that, provided the channel is larger than

W0 = 1/3 a critical size, the minimal channel can sustain a

W1−6 = 1/18 turbulent flow and the near-wall turbulence statistics

agree well with the data from the full channel. By B7−18 = 1/12

simulating the minimal channel, the LBM can be (12)

implemented with a uniform grid and the simulation

can be performed in a reasonable amount of time.

The LBM code has been parallelised using MPI as

the message passing API. The code was run on a

The Reynolds number, based on the mean center- SUN Fire 15K shared-memory machine using 64

line velocity and the channel half-width was 3300. processors. The simulation completed 12 million time

The dimensions of the simulation domain were steps, corresponding to approximately 8000 large

2δ × 0.3πδ × πδ for the wall-normal, span-wise, and eddy turn-over times.

stream-wise directions respectively. The domain was

meshed with a uniform grid with 181 × 86 × 282

nodes. This corresponds to a cell size of y+ = 2,

which is approximately equal to the Kolmogorov 4 R ESULTS

length scale. The probability density values for the During the simulation, all of the relevant time averaged

model were initialised to their equilibrium values quantities needed to compute turbulence statistics up

for Poiseuille flow. In order to induce turbulence, a to second order were recorded. These included:

random noise was applied directly to the populations

for a short time using a linear congruential random

number generator. • Density (ρ)

The wall boundaries were implemented using the

bounce-back boundary condition. In this method, the • Velocity (u, v, w).

particle distributions that stream to a boundary node

• Velocity squared (u2 , v2 , w2 ).

during the streaming step are simply reversed. If there

is no collision step performed at the boundary, this • Reynolds shear stresses per unit mass uv, vw, uw.

condition results in a wall located approximately half-

way between the boundary node and its neighbouring • Viscous shear stresses τxy , τyz , τxz

fluid node. The bounce-back boundary condition is

nominally first order accurate, but [5] showed that it In order to scale the statistics, the average wall shear

improves to second order when the flow is aligned stress was calculated by extrapolation. This value was

with one of the lattice directions. then used to calculate the friction velocity (uτ ) and the

viscous length scale (δν ).

The flow in the channel was driven using a body force,

and periodic boundaries were used in the stream-wise The mean velocity profile for the channel is shown in

and span-wise directions. A body force was used in Figure 2. The mean velocity is scaled by uτ and the

favour of a pressure gradient in order to minimise the distance from the wall is scaled by δν . The points

effect of compressibility. The LBM is equivalent to in the figure represent the data from both sides of the

solving the compressible NS equations with a constant channel simulated using the LBM. The solid line is the

temperature and sound speed. Therefore, if a pressure data from the spectral simulation of Kim, Moin, and

gradient was established across the channel, it would Moser [7]. As this figure shows, the mean velocity

lead to a corresponding density gradient as well. The profile produced by the LBM simulation matches the

body force is implemented by adjusting the particle database to within approximately 1%. Figure 3 shows

distributions at each lattice site after the collision pro- a comparison of the mean pressure profile for the LBM

cess. This was done using the following equation: simulation and the channel flow database. The pres-

sure in the LBM simulation is computed from the den-

fi = fi + Bi ρ(ci · g) (11) sity using the ideal gas law, which for the LBM is:

ρ

where g is the body force vector and the weighting fac- p= (13)

tors Bi are equal to: 3

The pressure is scaled using the mean wall shear stress

and plotted relative to the pressure on the wall. The

B1−6 = 1/6 LBM simulation is within approximately 10% of the

20 run with a resolution of 1.5 wall units that showed no

appreciable change.

15

3.0

u+

10

2.5

5 2.0

u′ rms

1.5

+

0

1.0 10.0 100.0 1.0

y+ 0.5

0.0

Figure 2: LBM results for the mean velocity profile:

1.0 10.0 100.0

◦ lower wall, + upper wall, — Kim, Moser, Moin

+

(1987) [7] y

0

ity fluctuations: ◦ lower wall, + upper wall, — Kim,

−0.2 Moser, Moin (1987) [7]

−0.4

1.5

p+

−0.6

−0.8 1.0

v′ rms

+

−1

1.0 10.0 100.0 0.5

+

y

◦ lower wall, + upper wall, — Kim, Moser, Moin 1.0 10.0 100.0

(1987) [7] y +

results from [7]. Figure 5: LBM results for the wall-normal RMS veloc-

ity fluctuations: ◦ lower wall, + upper wall, — Kim,

Moser, Moin (1987) [7]

The root-mean-square velocity fluctuations in the

stream-wise, wall-normal, and span-wise directions

Currently, a simulation is running in which the length

are shown in figures 4 - 6. These figures show a

of the channel has been extended in the stream-wise

good match for the wall-normal velocity fluctuations,

direction. The new dimensions of this channel

but significant discrepancies in the stream-wise and

are 2δ × δ × 16δ, and the resolution in each of the

span-wise directions. The most significant difference

directions is 2 wall units. This channel is more than

between the two simulations is an over prediction of

four times longer than the minimal channel in the

the stream-wise velocity fluctuations by over 10%

stream-wise directions, and thus uses approximately

at the peak value. Initially, this discrepancy was

four times the number of lattice sites.

explained as a resolution problem because it was not

observed in the minimal channel simulation of [6] and

an over prediction of the peak stream-wise velocity Given the fact that this simulation contains roughly

fluctuations has been shown by [8] to be caused by four times as many computational nodes, it theoreti-

insufficient resolution. However, a simulation was cally should take four times longer to run. However,

1.5 time averaged over a much larger interval in order for

the statistics to become stationary.

completed 650, 000 iterations, which corresponds to

w′ rms

+

0.5 statistics for this simulation are not yet stationary, but

they already show an improvement for the stream-wise

and span-wise velocity fluctuations (figures 8 and 9).

This simulation will be continued and statistically

0.0 stationary results will be presented in the conference

1.0 10.0 100.0

presentation.

+

y

ity fluctuations: ◦ lower wall, + upper wall, — Kim, 3

Moser, Moin (1987) [7] 2.5

2

1.0

u′ rms

1.5

0.8 +

1

0.6

0.5

+

u ′ v′

0.4 0

1.0 10.0 100.0

0.2 +

y

0.0

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Figure 8: LBM results for the stream-wise RMS ve-

locity fluctuations (long channel simulation): ◦ lower

y+ wall, + upper wall, — Kim, Moser, Moin (1987) [7]

◦ lower wall, + upper wall, — Kim, Moser, Moin

(1987) [7] 1.5

1.25

in practice the statistics for this simulation converge

faster than those from the minimal channel simulation. 1

w′ rms

+

near only one wall. In this state the flow on the 0.5

non-turbulent wall is not steady, but has a small

temporal variation and is nearly two-dimensional [6]. 0.25

The turbulence periodically shifts from one wall to 0

the other, with a brief interval in between in which 1.0 10.0 100.0

the flow on both walls is turbulent. In the minimal +

y

channel simulation of [6] this periodic transition was

shown to have only a small effect on the low order

statistics. However, due to the fact that switching of Figure 9: LBM results for the span-wise RMS velocity

the turbulence from one wall to the other occurs over fluctuations (long channel simulation): ◦ lower wall,

a long characteristic time (approximately 1000 large + upper wall, — Kim, Moser, Moin (1987) [7]

eddy turn-over times), the minimal channel must be

5 C ONCLUSIONS AND F UTURE W ORK Review E, 55(6):6985–6988, June 1997.

In this work fully developed turbulent channel flow [2] P. Bhatnagar, E. Gross, and M. Krook. A model

was simulated with the LBM in order to benchmark for collision processes in gases. I. small amplitude

its accuracy when simulating wall bounded turbulent processes in charged and neutral one-component

flows. The minimal channel was originally simulated systems. Physical Review, 94(3):511–525, 1954.

in order to reduce computational time. This was a

concern due to the fact that the LBM is currently [3] J. Eggels. Direct and large-eddy simulation of

restricted to a uniform grid, and thus the resolution turbulent fluid flow using the lattice-Boltzmann

could not be decreased in the stream-wise and span- scheme. International Journal of Heat and Fluid

wise directions. The second order statistics for this Flow, 17(3):307–323, 1996.

simulation showed a directional match with the spec-

[4] S. Harris. An Introduction to the Theory of the

tral simulation of [7]. However, there were a number

Boltzmann Equation. Dover Publications Inc.,

of discrepancies between the two simulations, most

2004.

notably the LBM over predicted the peak stream-wise

velocity fluctuations by over 10%. [5] X. He, Q. Zou, L.-S. Luo, and M. Dembo. An-

alytic solutions of simple flows and analysis of

A new simulation is currently running in which the nonslip boundary conditions for the lattice Boltz-

channel has been extended by four times in the stream- mann BGK model. Journal of Statistical Physics,

wise direction. The results from this simulation, while 87:115–136, 1997.

not yet statistically stationary, show a much more [6] J. Jiméniz and P. Moin. The minimal flow unit in

promising match with the channel flow database. The near-wall turbulence. Journal of Fluid Mechanics,

statistically stationary results for this simulation will 225:213–240, 1991.

be presented in the conference presentation.

[7] J. Kim, P. Moin, and R. Moser. Turbulence

statistics in fully developed channel flow at low

Reynolds number. Journal of Fluid Mechanics,

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 177:133–166, 1987.

The authors would like to thank the Natural Science [8] A. G. Kravchenko and P. Moin. On the effect of

and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) for fi- numerical errors in large eddy simulations of tur-

nancial support of this project, and the High Perfor- bulent flows. Journal of Computational Physics,

mance Computing Virtual Laboratory (HPCVL) for 131:310–322, 1997.

the use of their computational resources.

[9] D. A. Wolf-Gladrow. Lattice-Gas Cellular Au-

tomata and Lattice Boltzmann Models. Lecture

R EFERENCES Notes in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, 2000.

[1] G. Amati, R. Benzi, and S. Succi. Extended self-

similarity in boundary layer turbulence. Physical

- Paper fluidsUploaded byajeeshsbabu
- ALI2008 - The Lattice Boltzmann method on optimal sampling latticesUploaded bynenerereide
- Lattice Boltzmann and ApplicationsUploaded byZoel Zam
- Lattice BoltzmannUploaded bycopymaster2000
- Kuliah 4 5 Dan 6 Internal IncompressibleUploaded byEko Hermawan
- BoltzmannUploaded byalikaya12002
- Aiaa.paperOne-Step Aeroacoustics Simulation Using Lattice Boltzmann MethodUploaded bykeepmoshing
- Lattice Boltzmann Simulation of Non-newtonian Fluid Flow in a Lid Driven CavitUploaded byIAEME Publication
- Aerodynamics of Solar CarsUploaded byNeil Wu
- Discharge _ Flow Rate _ Advance Engineering Mathematics ReviewUploaded byimrancenakk
- Simulation of Rising Bubbles Dynamics Using LBMUploaded by29mmch
- tutorial8_zhaoUploaded byZoel Zam
- Thermal Lattice Boltzmann Two-phase Flow Model for FluidUploaded byyounessaid
- CSIRO presentation - Micro-channel Gas FlowsUploaded bynomadic_justice
- Lattice Boltzmann ChenUploaded byZoel Zam
- Lattice Boltzmann Intro LecturesUploaded byVikram Singh
- Fluid mechncs by McdonaldUploaded bySneha Solanki
- Modelling the Heat and Fluid Flow in the Welded Pool From High Power Arc SourcesUploaded byIoan Sorin Leoveanu
- Lattice Boltzmann MethodUploaded byclausse
- LBM_NNUploaded byyounessaid
- A Lattice-Boltzmann Model for Interacting Amphiphilic _001Uploaded byrendydun
- fluid assignmentUploaded byterbitanyop
- CorrectionUploaded byskr2010
- Pipe Friction ExperimentUploaded byCstiosen
- Faculty of Mechanical Engineering - Flow Phenomena and Heat Transfer of Journal Bearings - FH MünsterUploaded byJAGADEESH
- GetPDFServletUploaded byManish Kumar
- Mokkapati ThesisUploaded byTuan Nguyen Quoc
- DePietro-2015Uploaded bypedro
- Reynolds-Number-Ed-Ryan-Ruales.docxUploaded byAdoration Faith Matas
- Pat Ankar 1981Uploaded byHenrique Neiva Guimaraes

- Application of lattice Boltzmann method, ﬁnite element method, and cellular automata and their coupling to wave propagation problemsUploaded byHamed Moqtaderi
- riazi mohandesi parsehUploaded byHamed Moqtaderi
- TP-2002-211556Uploaded byClaudia Stanciu
- Two-Dimensional Lattice Boltzmann Model for Droplet Impingement and Breakup in Low Density Ratio LiquidsUploaded byHamed Moqtaderi
- Design and Analysis of Gasket Sealing of Cylinder Head Under Engine Operation ConditionsUploaded bysvijay
- REAL-TIME_PCR_IN_MICROBIOLOGYUploaded byPrasath

- Solutions to Levi Applied Quantum Mechanics 2nd EdUploaded bySam Johnson
- Van Der Waals Equation to Joule ThomsonUploaded bykerem__22
- PETSOC-86!04!02 Skin Factor and Flow Efficiency in Wells ProUploaded byMiguel Angel Gonzales
- Simulation of Roll Passes for Section RollingUploaded byMostafaGaber
- HSP Maths F5Uploaded bybmasniah
- 1-Introduction (Class Rules Regulations)Uploaded bytkjing
- Truss CalculationUploaded bywanizzuddin93
- Header Plate ConnectionUploaded bycretz2
- 042010083441 Mobil DTE 10 Exce- Product Data Sheet[2]Uploaded byDavid Lie
- Hany General Brochure 2016 EnglishUploaded byjgiraolewis
- Tips on ExamUploaded byB ruikar
- sc.pdfUploaded byMohammed Eljammal
- Elementary Mathematics for EconomicsUploaded byDavid Jack
- The Relationship Between Finite ElementUploaded byXavi Vergara
- exam2Uploaded byAhmad Shulhany
- IJETR041349Uploaded byerpublication
- Chemistry SPM Question Bank Chapter 14Uploaded byAbdul Manaf
- Silicon SupportUploaded bySurya Kumar
- Results of Poor Compaction & Types of Compacting EquipmentsUploaded byGrace Talaroc Superales
- tmp6C17.tmpUploaded byFrontiers
- SEM 3 BC0043 1 Computer Oriented Numerical MethodsUploaded byRajat Nandy
- Industrial Revolution WorksheetUploaded bykailmaxim
- ap08_physics_c_mech_frqUploaded byeljo1
- Control BoostUploaded byNikunj Agarwal
- dynamic.pdfUploaded byHeading Out Winnie
- Biocementation for Ground ImprovementUploaded bysathiyasuthan
- Airlift - three phaseUploaded bylrodriguez_892566
- Wavelet PaperUploaded byfrenki_c
- 2015MENDESNanoparticlesincementbasedmaterials-AreviewUploaded byAgostinho Marinho
- CSHM 2016 - FinalUploaded byharitec2