Skip to main content
Log in

Computational error estimation for the Material Point Method

  • Published:
Computational Particle Mechanics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A common feature of many methods in computational mechanics is that there is often a way of estimating the error in the computed solution. The situation for computational mechanics codes based upon the Material Point Method is very different in that there has been comparatively little work on computable error estimates for these methods. This work is concerned with introducing such an approach for the Material Point Method. Although it has been observed that spatial errors may dominate temporal ones at stable time steps, recent work has made more precise the sources and forms of different MPM errors. There is then a need to estimate these errors through computable estimates of different errors in the Material Point Method. The approach used involves linearity-preserving extensions of existing methods, which allow estimates of different spatial errors in the Material Point Method to be derived based upon nodal derivatives of different physical variables in MPM. These derivatives are then estimated using standard difference approximations calculated on the background mesh. The use of these estimates of the spatial error makes it possible to measure the growth of errors over time. A number of computational experiments are used to illustrate the performance of the computed error estimates for both the original MPM method and the GIMP method, when modified to preserve linearity. Finally, the form of the computed estimates also makes it possible to identify the order of the accuracy of the methods in space and time. For these methods, including the linearity preservation is clearly beneficial, as regards accuracy while not changing the preference for GIMP over MPM

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bardenhagen S (2002) Energy conservation error in the material point method for solid mechanics. J Comput Phys 180:383–403

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Bardenhagen S, Kober E (2004) The generalized interpolation material point method. Comput Model Eng Sci 5:477–495

    Google Scholar 

  3. Berzins M (2018) Nonlinear stability and time step selection in the material point method. Comput Particle Mech 5:455–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Berzins M (2021) Symplectic time integration methods for the material point method, experiments, analysis and order reduction. In: WCCM-ECCOMAS2020 virtual conference proceedings

  5. Berzins M (2022) Energy conservation and accuracy of some MPM methods. Comput Particle Mech

  6. Berzins M (2022) Time stepping with space and time errors and stability of the material point method. In: Wriggers P, Bischoff M, Nate EO, Bischoff M, Duster A, Zohdi T (eds) VII international conference on particle-based methods PARTICLES 2021 proceedings (to appear) 2022. http://www.sci.utah.edu/publications/Ber2021c/Berzins_particles2021.pdf

  7. Berzins M (1988) Global error estimation in the method of lines for parabolic equations. SIAM J Sci Comput 9:687–703

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Berzins M (1995) Temporal error control for convection-dominated equations in two space dimensions. SIAM J Sci Comput 16(3):558–580

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Cremonesi M, Franci A, Idelsohn S et al (2020) A state of the art review of the particle finite element method (PFEM). Arch Comput Methods Eng 27:1709–1735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-020-09468-4

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Grigoryev YN, Vshivkov VA, Fedoruk MP (2012) Numerical particle-in-cell methods: theory and applications. De Gruyter https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110916706

  11. Gritton C, Berzins M (2017) Improving accuracy in the MPM method using a null space filter. Comput Particle Mech 4:131–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Raviart PA (1985) An analysis of particle methods. In Brezzi F (ed) i numerical methods in fluid dynamics. lecture notes in mathematics, vol 1127. 1985 243-324. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0074532

  13. Solowski WT, Berzins M, Coombs WM, Guilkey JE, Moller M, Tran QA, Soga K (2021) Material point method: overview and challenges ahead. Adv Appl Mech 54:113–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Steffen M, Kirby RM, Berzins M (2008) Analysis and reduction of quadrature errors in the material point method (MPM). Int J Numer Methods Eng 76(6):922–948

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. 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):107–127

    Google Scholar 

  16. Steffen M, Kirby RM, Berzins M (2010) Decoupling and balancing of space and time errors in the material point method (MPM). Int J Numer Methods Eng 82(10):1207–1243

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Sulsky D, Chen Z, Schreyer HL (1994) A particle method for history-dependent materials. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 118:179–196

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Sulsky D, Zhou S-J, Schreyer HL (1995) Application of a particle-in-cell method to solid mechanics. Comput Phys Commun 87:236–252

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Tan H, Nairn JA (2002) Hierarchical, adaptive, material point method for dynamic energy release rate calculations. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 191:2123–2137

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Thielmann M, May DA, Kaus BJP (2014) Discretization errors in the hybrid finite element particle-in-cell method. Pure Appl Geophys 171:2165–2184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Tran LT, Kim J, Berzins M (2010) Solving time-dependent PDEs using the material point method, a case study from gas dynamics. Int J Numer Methods Fluids. https://doi.org/10.1002/fld.2031

  22. Tran QA, Solowski W, Berzins M, Guilkey J (2019) A convected particle least square interpolation material point method. Int J Numer Methods Eng

  23. de Vaucorbeil A, Nguyen VP, Sinaie S, Wu JY (2020) Chapter two - material point method after 25 years: theory, implementation, and applications. In: Stéphane PA, Bordas DS (eds) Balint, advances in applied mechanics, Elsevier 53, 185–398

  24. Vidsal Y, Bonet J, Huerta A (2007) Stabilized updtaed Lagrangian corrected SPG+H for explicit dynamics methods. Int J Numer Meth Eng 69(13):2687–2710

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 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):9628–9642

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Tong Z, ShiShun L (2017) A posteriori error estimates of finite element method for the time-dependent Navier-Stokes equations. Appl Math Comput 315:13–26

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Xiong Z, Zhen C, Yan L (2017) The material point method. Academic Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The original GIMP code written by Chris Gritton for [11] was used as the starting point for the code developed here. 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 author and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the Army Research Laboratory or the US Government. Finally, the author would like to thank the reviewers for their helpful and insightful comments that have helped to improve this paper

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Berzins.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The 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

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Berzins, M. Computational error estimation for the Material Point Method. Comp. Part. Mech. 10, 865–886 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40571-022-00530-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40571-022-00530-5

Keywords

Navigation