1: \begin{abstract}

2:   Modeling blood flow in larger vessels using lattice-Boltzmann

3:   methods comes with a challenging set of constraints: a complex

4:   geometry with walls and inlet/outlets at arbitrary orientations with

5:   respect to the lattice, intermediate Reynolds number, and unsteady

6:   flow. Simple bounce-back is one of the most commonly used, simplest,

7:   and most computationally efficient boundary conditions, but many

8:   others have been proposed. We implement three other methods

9:   applicable to complex geometries (Guo, Zheng and Shi, Phys Fluids

10:   (2002); Bouzdi, Firdaouss and Lallemand, Phys. Fluids (2001); Junk

11:   and Yang Phys. Rev. E (2005)) in our open-source application

12:   \HemeLB{}. We use these to simulate Poiseuille and Womersley flows

13:   in a cylindrical pipe with an arbitrary orientation at

14:   physiologically relevant Reynolds (1--300) and Womersley (4--12)

15:   numbers and steady flow in a curved pipe at relevant Dean number

16:   (100--200) and compare the accuracy to analytical solutions. We find

17:   that both the Bouzidi-Firdaouss-Lallemand and Guo-Zheng-Shi methods

18:   give second-order convergence in space while simple bounce-back

19:   degrades to first order. The BFL method appears to perform better

20:   than GZS in unsteady flows and is significantly less computationally

21:   expensive. The Junk-Yang method shows poor stability at larger

22:   Reynolds number and so cannot be recommended here. The choice of

23:   collision operator (lattice Bhatnagar-Gross-Krook vs.\ multiple

24:   relaxation time) and velocity set (D3Q15 vs.\ D3Q19 vs.\ D3Q27) does

25:   not significantly affect the accuracy in the problems studied.

26: \end{abstract}

27: