Parallel Processing Transport Model MT3DMS by Using OpenMP

Solute transport modeling resolves advection, dispersion, and chemical reactions in groundwater systems with its accuracy depending on the resolution of domain at all scales, thus the computational efficiency of a simulator becomes a bottleneck for the wide application of numerical simulations. However, the traditional serial numerical simulators have reached their limits for the prohibitive computational time and memory requirement in solving large-scale problems. These limitations have greatly hindered the wide application of groundwater solute transport modeling. Thus, the development of an efficient method for handling large-scale groundwater solute transport simulation is urgently required. In this study, we developed and assessed a parallelized MT3DMS (Modular Three-Dimensional Multispecies Transport Model) by using OpenMP (Open specifications for Multi-Processing) to accelerate the solute transport simulation process. The parallelization was achieved by adding OpenMP compile directives (i.e., defining various types of parallel regions) into the most time-consuming packages, including the Advection package (ADV), Dispersion package (DSP), and Generalized Conjugate Gradient Solver package (GCG). This allows parallel processing on shared-memory multiprocessors, i.e., both the memory requirement and computing efforts are automatically distributed among all processors. Moreover, we discussed two different parallelization strategies for handling numerical models with either many layers or few layers. The performance of parallelized MT3DMS was assessed by two benchmark numerical models with different model domain sizes via a workstation with two quad-core processors. Results showed that the running time of parallelized MT3DMS can be 4.15 times faster than that using sequential MT3DMS. The effects of using different preconditioners (procedures that transform a given problem into a form that is more suitable for numerical solving methods) in the GCG package were additionally evaluated. The modified strategy for handling numerical models with few layers also achieved satisfactory results with running time two times faster than that via sequential simulation. Thus, the proposed parallelization allows high-resolution groundwater transport simulation with higher efficiency for large-scale or multimillion-cell simulation problems.

[1]  Edward D. Lazowska,et al.  Speedup Versus Efficiency in Parallel Systems , 1989, IEEE Trans. Computers.

[2]  Paul P. Wang,et al.  MT3DMS: A Modular Three-Dimensional Multispecies Transport Model for Simulation of Advection, Dispersion, and Chemical Reactions of Contaminants in Groundwater Systems; Documentation and User's Guide , 1999 .

[3]  Karsten Pruess,et al.  User's Guide for TOUGH2-MP - A Massively Parallel Version of the TOUGH2 Code , 2008 .

[4]  Yu-Shu Wu,et al.  Parallel computing simulation of fluid flow in the unsaturated zone of Yucca Mountain, Nevada. , 2003, Journal of contaminant hydrology.

[5]  R. Healy,et al.  Modeling Variably Saturated Subsurface Solute Transport with MODFLOW‐UZF and MT3DMS , 2012, Ground water.

[6]  Rohit Chandra,et al.  Parallel programming in openMP , 2000 .

[7]  D. A. Barry,et al.  MODFLOW/MT3DMS‐Based Reactive Multicomponent Transport Modeling , 2003, Ground water.

[8]  P. Raats,et al.  Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media , 1973 .

[9]  L. Dagum,et al.  OpenMP: an industry standard API for shared-memory programming , 1998 .

[10]  L. L. Rogers,et al.  Optimization of groundwater remediation using artificial neural networks with parallel solute transport modeling , 1994 .

[11]  T. Harter,et al.  Parallel simulation of groundwater non-point source pollution using algebraic multigrid preconditioners , 2014, Computational Geosciences.

[12]  Ying Zhang,et al.  OpenMP parallelization of a gridded SWAT (SWATG) , 2017, Comput. Geosci..

[13]  Frank T.-C. Tsai,et al.  Constructive epistemic modeling of groundwater flow with geological structure and boundary condition uncertainty under the Bayesian paradigm , 2014 .

[14]  Kai Hwang,et al.  Advanced computer architecture - parallelism, scalability, programmability , 1992 .

[15]  Rohit Pathak,et al.  MPI and PVM based HPC Setup for Multi Scale Modeling , 2009 .

[16]  Robert B. Ross,et al.  Using MPI-2: Advanced Features of the Message Passing Interface , 2003, CLUSTER.

[17]  Eduardo F. D'Azevedo,et al.  HBGC123D: a high-performance computer model of coupled hydrogeological and biogeochemical processes , 2001 .

[18]  Guomin Li,et al.  A Parallel PCG Solver for MODFLOW , 2009, Ground water.

[19]  Christina Freytag,et al.  Using Mpi Portable Parallel Programming With The Message Passing Interface , 2016 .

[20]  Ming Ye,et al.  Parallel Inverse Modeling and Uncertainty Quantification for Computationally Demanding Groundwater-Flow Models Using Covariance Matrix Adaptation , 2015 .

[21]  Satish Karra,et al.  PFLOTRAN User Manual A Massively Parallel Reactive Flow and Transport Model for Describing Surface and Subsurface Processes , 2015 .

[22]  Michael N Fienen,et al.  High-throughput computing versus high-performance computing for groundwater applications. , 2015, Ground water.

[23]  Yi‐Feng Chen,et al.  Nonlinear flow behavior at low Reynolds numbers through rough-walled fractures subjected to normal compressive loading , 2015 .

[24]  K. Chau,et al.  Three-dimensional pollutant transport model for the Pearl River Estuary. , 2002, Water research.

[25]  E. Bair,et al.  Applied Groundwater Modeling—Simulation of Flow and Advective Transport , 2016 .

[26]  Kwok-wing Chau,et al.  Assessment of River Water Quality Based on Theory of Variable Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Binary Comparison Method , 2014, Water Resources Management.

[27]  Jens Schumacher,et al.  PPAPI: A Program for Groundwater Modeling Tasks in Distributed Parallel Computing Environments , 2018, Ground water.

[28]  Franck Cappello,et al.  MPI versus MPI+OpenMP on the IBM SP for the NAS Benchmarks , 2000, ACM/IEEE SC 2000 Conference (SC'00).

[29]  Haoqiang Jin,et al.  Comparing the OpenMP, MPI, and Hybrid Programming Paradigm on an SMP Cluster , 2003 .

[30]  Jared D. McLaughlin.  Parallel Processing of Reactive Transport Models Using OpenMP , 2008 .

[32]  Jozsef Hecht-Méndez,et al.  Evaluating MT3DMS for Heat Transport Simulation of Closed Geothermal Systems , 2010, Ground water.

[33]  M. J. Quinn,et al.  Parallel Computing: Theory and Practice , 1994 .

[34]  J. Bear.  Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media , 1975 .

[35]  Hai Ha Le,et al.  MT3DMSP – A parallelized version of the MT3DMS code , 2014 .

[36]  S. Ashby,et al.  A parallel multigrid preconditioned conjugate gradient algorithm for groundwater flow simulations , 1996 .

[37]  Georg Hager,et al.  Hybrid MPI/OpenMP Parallel Programming on Clusters of Multi-Core SMP Nodes , 2009, 2009 17th Euromicro International Conference on Parallel, Distributed and Network-based Processing.

[38]  Yi‐Feng Chen,et al.  The Friction Factor in the Forchheimer Equation for Rock Fractures , 2016, Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering.

[39]  Yu-Shu Wu,et al.  An efficient parallel-computing method for modeling nonisothermal multiphase flow and multicomponent transport in porous and fractured media , 2002 .

[40]  Barbara Chapman,et al.  Using OpenMP - portable shared memory parallel programming , 2007, Scientific and engineering computation.

[41]  Md. Jalil Piran,et al.  Survey of computational intelligence as basis to big flood management: challenges, research directions and future work , 2018 .