Computational Particle Mechanics

, Volume 5, Issue 4, pp 455–466 | Cite as

Nonlinear stability and time step selection for the MPM method

  • Martin Berzins


The Material Point Method (MPM) has been developed from the Particle in Cell (PIC) method over the last 25 years and has proved its worth in solving many challenging problems involving large deformations. Nevertheless there are many open questions regarding the theoretical properties of MPM. For example in while Fourier methods, as applied to PIC may provide useful insight, the non-linear nature of MPM makes it necessary to use a full non-linear stability analysis to determine a stable time step for MPM. In order to begin to address this the stability analysis of Spigler and Vianello is adapted to MPM and used to derive a stable time step bound for a model problem. This bound is contrasted against traditional Speed of sound and CFL bounds and shown to be a realistic stability bound for a model problem.


MPM non-linear stability 



Chris Gritton is thanked for the use of his code for the model problem used to obtain the results shown in Sect. 6. This research was partially sponsored by the Army Research Laboratory under Cooperative Agreement Number W911NF-12-2-0023. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the Army Research Laboratory or the U.S. Government.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The author states that there is no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Bardenhagen S (2002) Energy conservation error in the material point method for solid mechanics. J Comput Phys 180:383–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bardenhagen S, Kober E (2004) The generalized interpolation material point method. Comput Model Eng Sci 5:477–495Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Belytschko T, Guo Y, Liu Kam W, Xiao S Ping (2000) A unified stability analysis of meshless particle methods. Int J Numer Methods Eng 48(9):1359–1400MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Belytschko T, Krongauz Y, Dolbow J, Gerlach C (1998) On the completeness of meshfree particle methods. Int J Numer Methods Eng 43:785–819MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Belytschko T, Xiao S (2002) Stability analysis of particle methods with corrected derivatives. Comput Math Appl 43:329–350MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berzins M (2017) Non-linear stability of MPM. In: Wriggers P, Bischoff M, Onate E, Owen DRJ, Zohdi T (eds) Proceedings of V international conference on particle-based methods fundamentals and applications (Particles 2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brackbill J (1988) The ringing instability in particle-in-cell calculations of low-speed flow. J Comput Phys 75:469–492MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dilts GA (1999) Moving-least-squares-particle hydrodynamics consistency and stability. Int J Numer Methods Eng 44:1115–1155MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fekete I, Farago I (2014) Stability concepts and their applications. Comput Math Appl 67(12):2158–2170MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Farago I, Mincsovics ME, Fekete I (2012) Notes on the basic notions in non-linear numerical analysis. In: EJQTDE Proceedings of 9th Colloquium on QTDE, vol 6, pp 1–22Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gong M (2015) Improving the material point method, Ph.D. thesis, The University of New Mexico.
  12. 12.
    Gritton CE, Berzins M (2017) Improving accuracy in the MPM methods by using a null spaces filter. Comput Part Mech 4:131–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gritton C, Guilkey J, Hooper J, Bedrov D, Kirby RM, Berzins M (2017) Using the material point method to model chemical/mechanical coupling in the deformation of a silicon anode. Model Simul Mater Sci Eng 25(4):045005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hundsdorfer W, Verwer JG (2003) Numerical solution of time dependent advection-diffusion-reaction equations, vol 33. Springer series in computational mathematics. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Johnson GR, Beissel SR (1996) Normalized smoothing functions for SPH impact computations. Int J Numer Methods Eng 39:2725–2741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Keller HB (1975) Approximation methods for non-linear problems with application to two-point boundary value problems. Math Comput 130:464474Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leimkuhler B, Reich S (2004) Simulating hamiltonian dynamics. Cambridge monographs on applied and computational science. Cambridge University Press, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lpez-Marcos JC, Sanz-Serna JM (1988) A definition of stability for non-linear problems, I. Numer Treat Differ Equ 104:216226Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Monaghan JJ (2000) SPH without a tensile instability. J Comput Phys 159(2):290–311MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ortiz M (1986) A note on energy conservation and stability of non-linear time-stepping algorithms. Comput Struct 24(1):167–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sanz-Serna JM (1991) Two topics in non-linear stability. In: Light W (ed) Advances in numerical analysis, vol I. Oxford Science Publications, Oxford University Press, New York, pp 147–174Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sanz-Serna JM, Palencia C (1985) A general equivalence theorem in the theory of discretization methods. Math Comput 45(171):143152MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Spigler R, Vianello M (1995) Convergence analysis of the semi-implicit Euler method for abstract evolution equations. Numer Funct Anal Optim 16(5–6):785–803MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Steffen M, Wallstedt PC, Guilkey JE, Kirby RM, Berzins M (2008) Examination and analysis of implementation choices within the material point method (MPM). Comput Model Eng Sci 31(2):107–127Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stetter HJ (1973) Analysis of discretization methods for ordinary differential equations. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sulsky D, Chen Z, Schreyer HL (1994) A particle method for history-dependent materials. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 118:179–196MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sulsky D, Zhou S-J, Schreyer HL (1995) Application of a particle-in-cell method to solid mechanics. Comput Phys Commun 87:236–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Trenogin VA (1980) Functional analysis. Nauka, Moscow (in Russian)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wallstedt PC, Guilkey JE (2008) An evaluation of explicit time integration schemes for use with the generalized interpolation material point method. J Comput Phys 227(22):9628–9642MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© OWZ 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.SCI InstituteUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUSA

Personalised recommendations