Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

FSIS: a novel fluid–solid interaction solver for fracturing and fragmenting solids

  • Published:
Computational Particle Mechanics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Transient dynamics of fracturing media has received significant attention in recent years, and a number of simulation approaches have been developed. One of these is the combined finite-discrete element method (FDEM). FDEM produces complex fracture and fragmentation patterns in processes such as blast loads, blasting, impact, mining, and oil exploration. To address a wide range of multi-physics problems, numerous approaches have been undertaken to introduce fluid into the FDEM transient dynamics, ranging from application-specific gas models to more advanced hydraulic fracture processes and biomedical applications. None of these have been satisfactory in terms of robustness, accuracy or computational efficiency. In this work, a completely new explicit fluid solver has been tailor-made and fully integrated (as opposed to coupled) into the combined finite-discrete element method. The solver addresses transient pressure wave propagation in fluid, fluid viscosity, equation of state for the fluid, energy transport, momentum transport, and interaction with the fracturing solid domains, which is done through a novel immersed boundary approach. The solver is based on the governing equations being resolved using different control volume schemes, with discretization errors of either third, second, or first order. The solver is fully explicit and conditionally stable with a time step that is synchronized with the FDEM’s time step.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Fig. 23
Fig. 24
Fig. 25
Fig. 26
Fig. 27

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Barthès-Biesel D (1980) Motion of a spherical microcapsule freely suspended in a linear shear flow. J Fluid Mech 100(4):831–853. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112080001449

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Sigrist J-F (2015) Fluid structure interaction. Wiley, Hoboken. ISBN 978-1-119-95227-5

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Kim W, Choi H (2019) Immersed boundary methods for fluid–structure interaction: a review. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 75:301–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hirt CW, Amsden AA, Cook JL (1974) An arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian computing method for all flow speeds. J Comput Phys 14:227–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Souli M, Benson DJ (2010) Arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian fluid–structure interaction: numerical simulation. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  6. Peskin CS (1972) Flow patterns around heart valves: a numerical method. J Comput Phys 10:252–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Wang M, Feng YT, Owen DRJ, Qu TM (2019) A novel algorithm of immersed moving boundary scheme for fluid-particle interactions in DEM–LBM. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 346:109–125

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Frei S, Colciago C, Holm B, Richter T, Wick T, Yang H, Basting S, Birken P, van Brummelen EH, Canic S (2017) Fluid–structure interaction: modelling, adaptive discretisations and solvers. Radon series on computational and applied mathematics series, vol 20. De Gruyter, Berlin (ProQuest Ebook Central)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Wick T (2016) Coupling fluid–structure interaction with phase-field fracture. J Comput Phys 327:67–96

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Talemi RH, Brown S, Martynov S, Mahgerefteh H (2016) Hybrid fluid–structure interaction modelling of dynamic brittle fracture in steel pipelines transporting CO2 streams. Int J Greenh Gas Control 54(2):702–715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sudhakar Y, Wall WA (2018) A strongly coupled partitioned approach for fluid–structure–fracture interaction. Int J Numer Methods Fluids 87:90–108. https://doi.org/10.1002/fld.4483

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Chau VT, Bazant ZP, Su Y (2016) Growth model for large branched three-dimensional hydraulic crack system in gas and oil shale. Philos Trans R Soc A 374(2078):20150418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Rahimi-Aghdam S, Chau VT, Lee H, Nguyen H, Li W, Karra S, Rougier E, Viswanathan H, Srinivasan G, Bazant ZP (2019) Branching of hydraulic cracks enabling permeability of gas or oil shale with closed natural fractures. Proc Natl Acad Sci 116(5):1532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Munjiza A (2004) The combined finite-discrete element method. Wiley, London. ISBN 978-0-470-84199-0

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. Munjiza A, Knight EE, Rougier E (2011) Computational mechanics of discontinua. Wiley, London. ISBN 978-0-470-97080-5

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. Munjiza A, Rougier E, Knight EE (2015) Large strain finite element method: a practical course. Wiley, London. ISBN 978-1-118-40530-7

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Rougier E, Knight EE, Munjiza A (2012) Fluid driven rock deformation via the combined FEM/DEM methodology. In: Proceedings of the 46th US rock mechanics/geomechanics symposium. American Rock Mechanics Association

  18. Rougier E, Knight EE, Munjiza A (2019) Integrated solver for fluid driven fracture and fragmentation. US Patent #US10275551B2. Patent filed 07/24/2014 (#US20150032427A1)

  19. Lei Z, Rougier E, Munjiza A, Viswanathan H, Knight EE (2019) Simulation of discrete cracks driven by nearly incompressible fluid via 2D combined finite-discrete element method. Int J Numer Anal Meth Geomech. https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.2929

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Yan C, Zheng H (2016) A two-dimensional coupled hydro-mechanical finite-discrete model considering porous media flow for simulating hydraulic fracturing. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 88:115–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Yan C, Zheng H (2017) FDEM-flow3D: a 3D hydro-mechanical coupled model considering the pore seepage of rock matrix for simulating three-dimensional hydraulic fracturing. Comput Geotech 81:212–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lisjak A, Kaifosh P, Tatone B, Mahabadi O, Grasselli G (2017) A 2D, fully-coupled, hydro-mechanical, FDEM formulation for modelling fracturing processes in discontinuous, porous rock masses. Comput Geotech 81:1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Von Neumann J, Richtmyer RD (1950) A method for the numerical calculation of hydrodynamic shocks. J Appl Phys 21:232–237

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Reisner J, Serencsa J, Shkoller S (2013) A space–time smooth artificial viscosity method for nonlinear conservation laws. J Comput Phys 235:912–933

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Landau LD, Lifshitz EM (1987) Fluid mechanics. Volume 6 if course of theoretical physics second english edition, revised. Pergamon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  26. Munjiza A, Knight EE, Rougier E (2011) Computational mechanics of discontinua. Wiley series in computational mechanics. Wiley, Hoboken. ISBN 978-0-470-97080-5

    Book  Google Scholar 

  27. Watson I, Burnett AD (1995) Hydrology: an environmental approach. CRC Press, Boca Raton. ISBN 978-0-203-75144-2

    Google Scholar 

  28. Rathakrishnan E (2019) Applied gas dynamics, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken. ISBN 978-1-119-50045-2

    Book  Google Scholar 

  29. Erturk E (2009) Discussions on driven cavity flow. Int J Numer Meth Fluids 60:275–294

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  30. Botella O, Peyret R (1998) Benchmark spectral results on the lid-driven cavity flow. Comput Fluids 27(4):421–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. von Kármán T (1963) Aerodynamics. McGraw-Hill, New York. ISBN 978-0-07-067602-2

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Engelman MS, Jamnia M-A (1990) Transient flow past a circular cylinder: a benchmark solution. Int J Numer Methods Fluids 11:985–1000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Roshko A (1954) On the development of turbulent wakes from vortex streets. Report 1191. California Institute of Technology—work conducted for the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics

  34. Rougier E, Knight EE, Munjiza A (2013) LANL-CSM: HOSS—MUNROU technology overview. Presentation, LA-UR-13-23422

  35. Knight EE, Rougier E, Lei Z (2015) Hybrid optimization software suite (HOSS)—educational version. Technical report, Los Alamos National Laboratory. LA-UR-15-27013

  36. Knight EE, Rougier E, Munjiza A (2013) LANL-CSM: consortium proposal for the advancement of HOSS. Presentation, LA-UR-13-23409

  37. Rougier E, Knight EE, Lei Z, Munjiza A, Mustoe G, Sarg R (2013) HOSS technology overview: oil and gas, LA-UR-13-29117. Los Alamos National Laboratory, Santa Fe

    Google Scholar 

  38. Euser B, Rougier E, Lei Z, Knight EE, Frash L, Carey JW, Viswanathan H, Munjiza A (2019) Simulation of fracture coalescence in granite via the combined finite-discrete element method. Rock Mech Rock Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-019-01773-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Rougier E, Knight EE, Broome ST, Sussman AJ, Munjiza A (2014) Validation of a three-dimensional finite-discrete element method using experimental results of the split Hopkinson pressure bar test. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 70:101–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Carey JW, Lei Z, Rougier E, Mori H, Viswanathan H (2015) Fracture-permeability behavior of shale. J Unconv Oil Gas Resour 11:27–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Moore BA, Rougier E, O’Malley D, Srinivasan G, Hunter A, Viswanathan H (2018) Predictive modeling of dynamic fracture growth in brittle materials with machine learning. Comput Mater Sci 148:46–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Danaila I, Joly P, Kaber SM, Postel M (2007) Chapter 10: gas dynamics: the Riemann problem and discontinuous solutions: application to the shock tube problem. An introduction to scientific computing. Springer, New York. ISBN 978-0-387-30889-0

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy at Los Alamos National Laboratory under Contract No. DE-AC52-06NA25396 through the Laboratory Directed Research and Development program (award 20170109ER).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. FGAG, University of Split, Split, Croatia

    Antonio Munjiza

  2. Geophysics Group, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, USA

    Esteban Rougier, Zhou Lei & Earl Eugene Knight

Authors
  1. Antonio Munjiza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Esteban Rougier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zhou Lei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Earl Eugene Knight
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Esteban Rougier.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Munjiza, A., Rougier, E., Lei, Z. et al. FSIS: a novel fluid–solid interaction solver for fracturing and fragmenting solids. Comp. Part. Mech. 7, 789–805 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40571-020-00314-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40571-020-00314-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation