A comparative study of Newtonian and non-Newtonian blood flow through Bi-Leaflet Mechanical Heart Valve

IF 2.5 3区 工程技术 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS Computers & Fluids Pub Date : 2024-06-10 DOI:10.1016/j.compfluid.2024.106337
Nandan Sarkar , Siddharth D. Sharma , Suman Chakraborty , Somnath Roy
{"title":"A comparative study of Newtonian and non-Newtonian blood flow through Bi-Leaflet Mechanical Heart Valve","authors":"Nandan Sarkar ,&nbsp;Siddharth D. Sharma ,&nbsp;Suman Chakraborty ,&nbsp;Somnath Roy","doi":"10.1016/j.compfluid.2024.106337","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The present study examines flow through Bi-Leaflet Mechanical Heart Valves (BMHV) at physiological conditions considering both Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluid models for blood rheology. It is well known that the non-Newtonian effects of blood are pronounced in small diameter arteries. Most of the earlier works on Mechanical Heart Valves (MHV) have considered blood as a Newtonian fluid as the flow involves large-diameter artery such as the aorta. In this work, we have reported the predicted parameters, such as leaflet kinematics, vortex structures, wall shear stress, and blood damage index for both blood models. It is found that the leaflet attributes smaller asynchronous motion in the case of non-Newtonian Carreau fluid model with slightly reduced angular velocity compared to the Newtonian assumption. Predictions on the blood damage index suggest a 21% higher damage while using non-Newtonian model than Newtonian model, which may be attributed to higher levels of mechanical stress within the fluid. However, vortex structures, time-averaged wall shear stress (TAWSS), and oscillatory shear index (OSI) are found to be similar in predictions using both the fluid models. We have used an in-house sharp interface immersed boundary method with fluid–structure interaction to simulate the coupled action of moving valves and pulsatile blood flow. Our findings suggest that the general consensus of using Newtonian model in large arteries may not be appropriate for prediction of leaflet kinematics and blood damage index in Mechanical heart valves.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":287,"journal":{"name":"Computers & Fluids","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers & Fluids","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045793024001695","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present study examines flow through Bi-Leaflet Mechanical Heart Valves (BMHV) at physiological conditions considering both Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluid models for blood rheology. It is well known that the non-Newtonian effects of blood are pronounced in small diameter arteries. Most of the earlier works on Mechanical Heart Valves (MHV) have considered blood as a Newtonian fluid as the flow involves large-diameter artery such as the aorta. In this work, we have reported the predicted parameters, such as leaflet kinematics, vortex structures, wall shear stress, and blood damage index for both blood models. It is found that the leaflet attributes smaller asynchronous motion in the case of non-Newtonian Carreau fluid model with slightly reduced angular velocity compared to the Newtonian assumption. Predictions on the blood damage index suggest a 21% higher damage while using non-Newtonian model than Newtonian model, which may be attributed to higher levels of mechanical stress within the fluid. However, vortex structures, time-averaged wall shear stress (TAWSS), and oscillatory shear index (OSI) are found to be similar in predictions using both the fluid models. We have used an in-house sharp interface immersed boundary method with fluid–structure interaction to simulate the coupled action of moving valves and pulsatile blood flow. Our findings suggest that the general consensus of using Newtonian model in large arteries may not be appropriate for prediction of leaflet kinematics and blood damage index in Mechanical heart valves.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
牛顿和非牛顿血流通过双叶机械心脏瓣膜的比较研究
考虑到血液流变学的牛顿和非牛顿流体模型,本研究对生理条件下流经双叶机械心脏瓣膜(BMHV)的流量进行了研究。众所周知,血液的非牛顿效应在小直径动脉中非常明显。机械心脏瓣膜(MHV)的早期研究大多将血液视为牛顿流体,因为血液流动涉及大直径动脉(如主动脉)。在这项工作中,我们报告了两种血液模型的预测参数,如瓣叶运动学、涡流结构、壁面剪应力和血液损伤指数。研究发现,与牛顿假设相比,在非牛顿卡勒流体模型中,小叶的异步运动较小,角速度略有降低。对血液损伤指数的预测表明,使用非牛顿模型比牛顿模型的损伤指数高 21%,这可能是由于流体内的机械应力水平较高。不过,在使用这两种流体模型进行预测时,我们发现涡流结构、时间平均壁面剪切应力(TAWSS)和振荡剪切指数(OSI)都很相似。我们使用了一种具有流体-结构相互作用的内部尖锐界面沉浸边界法来模拟运动瓣膜和脉动血流的耦合作用。我们的研究结果表明,在大动脉中使用牛顿模型的普遍共识可能并不适合机械心脏瓣膜的瓣叶运动学和血液损伤指数预测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Computers & Fluids
Computers & Fluids 物理-计算机:跨学科应用
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
242
审稿时长
10.8 months
期刊介绍: Computers & Fluids is multidisciplinary. The term ''fluid'' is interpreted in the broadest sense. Hydro- and aerodynamics, high-speed and physical gas dynamics, turbulence and flow stability, multiphase flow, rheology, tribology and fluid-structure interaction are all of interest, provided that computer technique plays a significant role in the associated studies or design methodology.
期刊最新文献
Optimal reconstruction of water-waves from noisy pressure measurements at the seabed Highly resolved peta-scale direct numerical simulations: Onset of Kelvin–Helmholtz Rayleigh–Taylor instability via pressure pulses Probabilistic machine learning to improve generalisation of data-driven turbulence modelling Ablation and molten layer flow simulation for plate model of SiO2f/SiO2 composite material using particle method MH-DCNet: An improved flow field prediction framework coupling neural network with physics solver
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1