Validation of numerical codes for impact and explosion cratering: Impacts on strengthless and metal targets

Abstract— Over the last few decades, rapid improvement of computer capabilities has allowed impact cratering to be modeled with increasing complexity and realism, and has paved the way for a new era of numerical modeling of the impact process, including full, three‐dimensional (3D) simulations. When properly benchmarked and validated against observation, computer models offer a powerful tool for understanding the mechanics of impact crater formation. This work presents results from the first phase of a project to benchmark and validate shock codes. A variety of 2D and 3D codes were used in this study, from commercial products like AUTODYN, to codes developed within the scientific community like SOVA, SPH, ZEUS‐MP, iSALE, and codes developed at U.S. National Laboratories like CTH, SAGE/RAGE, and ALE3D. Benchmark calculations of shock wave propagation in aluminum‐on‐aluminum impacts were performed to examine the agreement between codes for simple idealized problems. The benchmark simulations show that variability in code results is to be expected due to differences in the underlying solution algorithm of each code, artificial stability parameters, spatial and temporal resolution, and material models. Overall, the inter‐code variability in peak shock pressure as a function of distance is around 10 to 20%. In general, if the impactor is resolved by at least 20 cells across its radius, the underestimation of peak shock pressure due to spatial resolution is less than 10%. In addition to the benchmark tests, three validation tests were performed to examine the ability of the codes to reproduce the time evolution of crater radius and depth observed in vertical laboratory impacts in water and two well‐characterized aluminum alloys. Results from these calculations are in good agreement with experiments. There appears to be a general tendency of shock physics codes to underestimate the radius of the forming crater. Overall, the discrepancy between the model and experiment results is between 10 and 20%, similar to the inter‐code variability.

[1]  K. A. Holsapple,et al.  On the ''strength'' of the small bodies of the solar system: A review of strength theories and their implementation for analyses of impact disruptions , 2009 .

[2]  H. J. Melosh,et al.  A hydrocode equation of state for SiO2 , 2007 .

[3]  Kenneth S Edgett,et al.  Present-Day Impact Cratering Rate and Contemporary Gully Activity on Mars , 2006, Science.

[4]  S. Stewart,et al.  Impact crater formation in icy layered terrains on Mars , 2006 .

[5]  Gareth S. Collins,et al.  A strain-based porosity model for use in hydrocode simulations of impacts and implications for transient crater growth in porous targets , 2006 .

[6]  M. L. Norman,et al.  Simulating Radiating and Magnetized Flows in Multiple Dimensions with ZEUS-MP , 2005, astro-ph/0511545.

[7]  B. Ivanov.  Shock Melting of Permafrost on Mars: Water Ice Multiphase Equation of State for Numerical Modeling and Its Testing , 2005 .

[8]  Gareth S. Collins,et al.  Modeling damage and deformation in impact simulations , 2004 .

[9]  K. Zahnle,et al.  High-resolution simulations of the impacts of asteroids into the venusian atmosphere III: further 3D models , 2003 .

[10]  B. Ivanov,et al.  How strong was impact-induced CO2 degassing in the Cretaceous-Tertiary event? Numerical modeling of shock recovery experiments , 2002 .

[11]  T. Ahrens,et al.  Damage and rock-volatile mixture effects on impact crater formation , 2001 .

[12]  K. Zahnle,et al.  High-resolution calculations of asteroid impacts into the Venusian atmosphere. , 2000, Icarus.

[13]  V. Shuvalov,et al.  Multi-dimensional hydrodynamic code SOVA for interfacial flows: Application to the thermal layer effect , 1999 .

[14]  H. Melosh,et al.  Melt Production in Oblique Impacts , 1999 .

[15]  V.H.Y. Tam,et al.  Gas explosion generated drag loads in offshore installations , 1998 .

[16]  William K. Rule,et al.  A numerical scheme for extracting strength model coefficients from Taylor test data , 1997 .

[17]  David A. Young,et al.  A new prototype equation of state data library , 1997 .

[18]  Elisabetta Pierazzo,et al.  A Reevaluation of Impact Melt Production , 1997 .

[19]  B. Ivanov,et al.  Block Oscillation Model for Impact Crater Collapse , 1997 .

[20]  B. A. Ivanov,et al.  Implementation of dynamic strength models into 2D hydrocodes : Applications for atmospheric breakup and impact cratering , 1997 .

[21]  F. Swesty,et al.  Thermodynamically Consistent Interpolation for Equation of State Tables , 1996 .

[22]  A. Bakker.  Mechanical Behaviour of Materials , 1995 .

[23]  W. Benz,et al.  Simulations of brittle solids using smooth particle hydrodynamics , 1995 .

[24]  Erik Asphaug,et al.  Impact Simulations with Fracture. I. Method and Tests , 1994 .

[25]  J. M. McGlaun,et al.  CTH: A three-dimensional shock wave physics code , 1990 .

[26]  G. Kerley.  Equations of state and gas–gas separation in soft‐sphere mixtures , 1989 .

[27]  Charles E. Anderson,et al.  An overview of the theory of hydrocodes , 1987 .

[28]  Kevin R. Housen,et al.  Some recent advances in the scaling of impact and explosion cratering , 1987 .

[29]  K. Holsapple,et al.  Velocity scaling impact melt volume , 1987 .

[30]  H. Melosh.  Impact Cratering: A Geologic Process , 1986 .

[31]  D. Gault,et al.  Laboratory simulation of pelagic asteroidal impact Atmospheric injection, benthic topography, and the surface wave radiation field , 1982 .

[32]  H. M. Ruppel,et al.  SALE-3D: a simplified ALE computer program for calculating three-dimensional fluid flow , 1981 .

[33]  Kerley.  User's manual for PANDA II: A computer code for calculating equations of state , 1981 .

[34]  M. E. Kipp,et al.  Continuum modelling of explosive fracture in oil shale , 1980 .

[35]  C. W. Hirt,et al.  SALE: a simplified ALE computer program for fluid flow at all speeds , 1980 .

[36]  D. Steinberg,et al.  A constitutive model for metals applicable at high-strain rate , 1980 .

[37]  H. Jay Melosh,et al.  Acoustic fluidization: A new geologic process? , 1979 .

[38]  D. H. Martin.  Physics of the Earth (2nd edn) , 1978 .

[39]  J. Monaghan,et al.  Smoothed particle hydrodynamics: Theory and application to non-spherical stars , 1977 .

[40]  L. Lucy.  A numerical approach to the testing of the fission hypothesis. , 1977 .

[41]  Ernest Benck.  Dig Your Well by the Cottonwood , 2016 .

[42]  E. A. Murray,et al.  Quasi-Static Compression Stress-Strain Curves--IV, 2024-T3510 and 6061-T6 Aluminum Alloys , 1976 .

[43]  T. Ahrens,et al.  Equations of state and impact-induced shock-wave attenuation on the moon , 1976 .

[44]  F. D. Stacey.  Physics of the earth , 1977 .

[45]  S. L. Thompson,et al.  Improvements in the CHART D radiation-hydrodynamic code III: revised analytic equations of state , 1974 .

[46]  Albert C. Holt,et al.  Static and Dynamic Pore‐Collapse Relations for Ductile Porous Materials , 1972 .

[47]  R. Prater.  Hypervelocity Impact -- Material Strength Effects on Crater Formation and Shock Propagation in Three Aluminum Alloys , 1970 .

[48]  S. L. Thompson,et al.  IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CHART D RADIATION-HYDRODYNAMIC CODE I: ANALYTIC EQUATIONS OF STATE. , 1970 .

[49]  W. Herrmann.  Constitutive Equation for the Dynamic Compaction of Ductile Porous Materials , 1969 .

[50]  N. Lundborg,et al.  Strength of rock-like materials , 1968 .

[51]  J. H. Tillotson.  METALLIC EQUATIONS OF STATE FOR HYPERVELOCITY IMPACT , 1962 .