On the effect of linear algebra implementations in real-time multibody system dynamics

This paper compares the efficiency of multibody system (MBS) dynamic simulation codes that rely on different implementations of linear algebra operations. The dynamics of an N-loop four-bar mechanism has been solved with an index-3 augmented Lagrangian formulation combined with the trapezoidal rule as numerical integrator. Different implementations for this method, both dense and sparse, have been developed, using a number of linear algebra software libraries (including sparse linear equation solvers) and optimized sparse matrix computation strategies. Numerical experiments have been performed in order to measure their performance, as a function of problem size and matrix filling. Results show that optimal implementations can increase the simulation efficiency in a factor of 2–3, compared with our starting classical implementations, and in some topics they disagree with widespread beliefs in MBS dynamics. Finally, advices are provided to select the implementation which delivers the best performance for a certain MBS dynamic simulation.

[1]  Javier García de Jalón,et al.  Kinematic and Dynamic Simulation of Multibody Systems , 1994 .

[2]  Stefan Turek,et al.  The FEAST indices—realistic evaluation of modern software components and processor technologies , 2001 .

[3]  Anshul Gupta,et al.  Recent advances in direct methods for solving unsymmetric sparse systems of linear equations , 2002, TOMS.

[4]  Daniel Dopico,et al.  Two implementations of IRK integrators for real-time multibody dynamics , 2006 .

[5]  Javier Cuadrado,et al.  A comparison in terms of accuracy and efficiency between a MBS dynamic formulation with stress analysis and a non‐linear FEA code , 2001 .

[6]  Rudranarayan M. Mukherjee,et al.  POEMS: Parallelizable Open-Source Efficient Multibody Software , 2005 .

[7]  U. Lugrís,et al.  A benchmarking system for MBS simulation software: Problem standardization and performance measurement , 2006 .

[8]  K. Anderson,et al.  Improved `Order-N' Performance Algorithm for the Simulation of Constrained Multi-Rigid-Body Dynamic Systems , 2003 .

[9]  Jen-Shiang K. Yu,et al.  Recent Advances in PC-Linux Systems for Electronic Structure Computations by Optimized Compilers and Numerical Libraries , 2002, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[10]  Daniel Dopico,et al.  A Combined Penalty and Recursive Real-Time Formulation for Multibody Dynamics , 2004 .

[11]  Yuefan Deng,et al.  New trends in high performance computing , 2001, Parallel Computing.

[12]  Javier García de Jalón,et al.  Kinematic and Dynamic Simulation of Multibody Systems: The Real Time Challenge , 1994 .

[13]  Nicholas I. M. Gould,et al.  An Evaluation of Sparse Direct Symmetric Solvers: An Introduction and Preliminary Findings , 2004, PARA.

[14]  R. Ledesma,et al.  Augmented lagrangian and mass-orthogonal projection methods for constrained multibody dynamics , 1996 .

[15]  Jung Keun Lee,et al.  An explicit integration method for realtime simulation of multibody vehicle models , 2000 .

[16]  Javier Cuadrado,et al.  Modeling and Solution Methods for Efficient Real-Time Simulation of Multibody Dynamics , 1997 .

[17]  Vipin Kumar,et al.  WSSMP: A High-Performance Serial and Parallel Symmetric Sparse Linear Solver , 1998, PARA.

[18]  Jack J. Dongarra,et al.  Automated empirical optimizations of software and the ATLAS project , 2001, Parallel Comput..

[19]  YANQING CHEN,et al.  Algorithm 8 xx : CHOLMOD , supernodal sparse Cholesky factorization and update / downdate ∗ , 2006 .

[20]  Timothy A. Davis,et al.  Algorithm 832: UMFPACK V4.3---an unsymmetric-pattern multifrontal method , 2004, TOMS.

[21]  James Demmel,et al.  A Supernodal Approach to Sparse Partial Pivoting , 1999, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl..