Numerical study of PPE source term errors in the incompressible SPH models

In a recent work by Gui et al. [13], an incompressible SPH model was presented that employs a mixed pressure Poisson equation (PPE) source term combining both the density-invariant and velocity divergence-free formulations. The present work intends to apply the model to a wider range of fluid impact situations in order to quantify the numerical errors associated with different formulations of the PPE source term in incompressible SPH (ISPH) models. The good agreement achieved between the model predictions and the documented data is taken as a further demonstration that the mixed source term formulation can accurately predict the fluid impact pressures and forces, both in the magnitude and in the spatial and temporal patterns. Furthermore, an in-depth numerical analysis using either the pure density-invariant or velocity divergence-free formulation has revealed that the pure density-invariant formulation can lead to relatively large divergence errors while the velocity divergence-free formulation may cause relatively large density errors. As compared with these two approaches, the mixed source term formulation performs much better having the minimum total errors in all test cases. Although some recent studies found that the weakly compressible SPH models perform somewhat better than the incompressible SPH models in certain fluid impact problems, we have shown that this could be largely caused by the particular formulation of PPE source term in the previous ISPH models and a better formulation of the source term can significantly improve the accuracy of ISPH models. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  Afzal Suleman,et al.  A robust weakly compressible SPH method and its comparison with an incompressible SPH , 2012 .

[2]  Nikolaus A. Adams,et al.  An incompressible multi-phase SPH method , 2007, J. Comput. Phys..

[3]  S. Cummins,et al.  An SPH Projection Method , 1999 .

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

[5]  S. Shao,et al.  INCOMPRESSIBLE SPH METHOD FOR SIMULATING NEWTONIAN AND NON-NEWTONIAN FLOWS WITH A FREE SURFACE , 2003 .

[6]  Robert A. Dalrymple,et al.  Green water overtopping analyzed with a SPH model , 2005 .

[7]  M. Gómez-Gesteira,et al.  Boundary conditions generated by dynamic particles in SPH methods , 2007 .

[8]  A. Colagrossi,et al.  Numerical simulation of interfacial flows by smoothed particle hydrodynamics , 2003 .

[9]  Mark J. Cooker,et al.  Reflection of a high-amplitude solitary wave at a vertical wall , 1997, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[10]  Rui Xu,et al.  Comparisons of weakly compressible and truly incompressible algorithms for the SPH mesh free particle method , 2008, J. Comput. Phys..

[11]  Qiuhua Liang,et al.  Balancing the source terms in a SPH model for solving the shallow water equations , 2013 .

[12]  Hitoshi Gotoh,et al.  Enhancement of stability and accuracy of the moving particle semi-implicit method , 2011, J. Comput. Phys..

[13]  Abbas Khayyer,et al.  Modified Moving Particle Semi-implicit methods for the prediction of 2D wave impact pressure , 2009 .

[14]  Hitoshi Gotoh,et al.  ENHANCED PREDICTIONS OF WAVE IMPACT PRESSURE BY IMPROVED INCOMPRESSIBLE SPH METHODS , 2009 .

[15]  Xin Liu,et al.  An improved incompressible SPH model for simulation of wave–structure interaction , 2013 .

[16]  A. Colagrossi,et al.  δ-SPH model for simulating violent impact flows , 2011 .

[17]  Hitoshi Gotoh,et al.  A 3D higher order Laplacian model for enhancement and stabilization of pressure calculation in 3D MPS-based simulations , 2012 .

[18]  B. Rogers,et al.  State-of-the-art of classical SPH for free-surface flows , 2010 .

[19]  A. Chorin Numerical solution of the Navier-Stokes equations , 1968 .

[20]  Ping Dong,et al.  Wave Impact Simulations by an Improved ISPH Model , 2014 .

[21]  Nader A. Issa,et al.  Fluid motion generated by impact , 2003 .

[22]  Rui Xu,et al.  Accuracy and stability in incompressible SPH (ISPH) based on the projection method and a new approach , 2009, J. Comput. Phys..

[23]  Moo-Hyun Kim,et al.  Step-by-step improvement of MPS method in simulating violent free-surface motions and impact-loads , 2011 .

[24]  Zhi Zong,et al.  A comparative study of truly incompressible and weakly compressible SPH methods for free surface incompressible flows , 2013 .

[25]  Benedict D. Rogers,et al.  Shallow water SPH for flooding with dynamic particle coalescing and splitting , 2013 .

[26]  Tsang-Jung Chang,et al.  SPH Modeling of One-Dimensional Nonrectangular and Nonprismatic Channel Flows with Open Boundaries , 2013 .

[27]  H. R. Riggs,et al.  Experimental Investigation of Tsunami Bore Forces on Vertical Walls , 2013 .

[28]  Nikolaus A. Adams,et al.  A generalized wall boundary condition for smoothed particle hydrodynamics , 2012, J. Comput. Phys..

[29]  K. Szewc,et al.  Analysis of the incompressibility constraint in the smoothed particle hydrodynamics method , 2011, 1110.5752.

[30]  Wei Bai,et al.  Modelling of liquid sloshing with constrained floating baffle , 2013 .

[31]  J. Monaghan Smoothed particle hydrodynamics , 2005 .

[32]  Joe J. Monaghan,et al.  SPH particle boundary forces for arbitrary boundaries , 2009, Comput. Phys. Commun..

[33]  Yoshimi Sonoda,et al.  A Stabilized Incompressible SPH Method by Relaxing the Density Invariance Condition , 2012, J. Appl. Math..

[34]  D. Graham,et al.  Comparison of incompressible and weakly-compressible SPH models for free-surface water flows , 2010 .