A Lagrangian–Lagrangian Framework for the Simulation of Rigid and Deformable Bodies in Fluid

Chapter
Part of the Computational Methods in Applied Sciences book series (COMPUTMETHODS, volume 35)

Abstract

We present a Lagrangian–Lagrangian approach for the simulation of fully resolved Fluid Solid/Structure Interaction (FSI) problems. In the proposed approach, the method of Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) is used to simulate the fluid dynamics in a Lagrangian framework. The solid phase is a general multibody dynamics system composed of a collection of interacting rigid and deformable objects. While the motion of arbitrarily shaped rigid objects is approached in a classical 3D rigid body dynamics framework, the Absolute Nodal Coordinate Formulation (ANCF) is used to model the deformable components, thus enabling the investigation of compliant elements that experience large deformations with entangling and self-contact. The dynamics of the two phases, fluid and solid, are coupled with the help of Lagrangian markers, referred to as Boundary Condition Enforcing (BCE) markers which are used to impose no-slip and impenetrability conditions. Such BCE markers are associated both with the solid suspended particles and with any confining boundary walls and are distributed in a narrow layer on and below the surface of solid objects. The ensuing fluid–solid interaction forces are mapped into generalized forces on the rigid and flexible bodies and subsequently used to update the dynamics of the solid objects according to rigid body motion or ANCF method. The robustness and performance of the simulation algorithm is demonstrated through several numerical simulation studies.

References

  1. 1.
    Amini Y, Emdad H, Farid M (2011) A new model to solve fluid-hypo-elastic solid interaction using the smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) method. Eur J Mech B Fluids 30(2):184–194CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Andrews M, O’rourke P (1996) The multiphase particle-in-cell (MP-PIC) method for dense particulate flows. Int J Multiph Flow 22(2):379–402Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anitescu M, Hart GD (2004) A constraint-stabilized time-stepping approach for rigid multibody dynamics with joints, contact and friction. Int J Numer Meth Eng 60(14):2335–2371Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Antoci C, Gallati M, Sibilla S (2007) Numerical simulation of fluid-structure interaction by SPH. Comput Struct 85(11):879–890Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Atkinson K (1989) An introduction to numerical analysis. Wiley, USAMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Benz W (1986) Smoothed particle hydrodynamics: a review. In: Proceedings of the NATO advanced research workshop on the numerical modelling of nonlinear stellar pulsations problems and prospects, Les Arcs, France, 20–24 Mar. Kluwer Academic Publishers, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brenner H (1961) The slow motion of a sphere through a viscous fluid towards a plane surface. Chem Eng Sci 16(3):242–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chrono::Fluid (2014) An open source engine for fluid. Solid interaction. http://armanpazouki.github.io/chrono-fluid
  9. 9.
    Colagrossi A, Landrini M (2003) Numerical simulation of interfacial flows by smoothed particle hydrodynamics. J Comput Phys 191(2):448–475CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Davis RH, Serayssol JM, Hinch E (1986) Elastohydrodynamic collision of two spheres. J Fluid Mech 163:479–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dilts G (1999) Moving-least-squares-particle hydrodynamics-I. Consistency and stability. Int J Numer Methods Eng 44(8):1115–1155CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ding EJ, Aidun CK (2003) Extension of the lattice-Boltzmann method for direct simulation of suspended particles near contact. J Stat Phys 112(3–4):685–708CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Durlofsky L, Brady JF, Bossis G (1987) Dynamic simulation of hydrodynamically interacting particles. J Fluid Mech 180(1):21–49CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fan LS, Zhu C (2005) Principles of gas-solid flows. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gerstmayr J, Shabana A (2006) Analysis of thin beams and cables using the absolute nodal co-ordinate formulation. Nonlinear Dyn 45(1):109–130CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gidaspow D (1994) Multiphase flow and fluidization: continuum and kinetic theory descriptions. Academic Press, BostonMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Glowinski R, Pan T, Hesla T, Joseph D (1999) A distributed Lagrange multiplier/fictitious domain method for particulate flows. Int J Multiph Flow 25(5):755–794CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Haug E (1989) Computer aided kinematics and dynamics of mechanical systems. Allyn and Bacon, BostonGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hoberock J, Bell N Thrust: C++ template library for CUDA. http://thrust.github.com/
  20. 20.
    Hocking L (1973) The effect of slip on the motion of a sphere close to a wall and of two adjacent spheres. J Eng Math 7(3):207–221CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hu H, Patankar N, Zhu M (2001) Direct numerical simulations of fluid-solid systems using the arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian technique. J Comput Phys 169(2):427–462CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hu W, Tian Q, Hu H (2013) Dynamic simulation of liquid-filled flexible multibody systems via absolute nodal coordinate formulation and SPH method. Nonlinear Dyn, pp 1–19Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kruggel-Emden H, Simsek E, Rickelt S, Wirtz S, Scherer V (2007) Review and extension of normal force models for the discrete element method. Powder Technol 171(3):157–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kruggel-Emden H, Wirtz S, Scherer V (2008) A study on tangential force laws applicable to the discrete element method (DEM) for materials with viscoelastic or plastic behavior. Chem Eng Sci 63(6):1523–1541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ladd AJ (1994) Numerical simulations of particulate suspensions via a discretized Boltzmann equation. J Fluid Mech 271(1):285–339CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ladd AJ (1997) Sedimentation of homogeneous suspensions of non-brownian spheres. Phys Fluids 9:491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ladd A, Verberg R (2001) Lattice-Boltzmann simulations of particle-fluid suspensions. J Stat Phys 104(5–6):1191–1251CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lee CJK, Noguchi H, Koshizuka S (2007) Fluid-shell structure interaction analysis by coupled particle and finite element method. Comput Struct 85(11):688–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Liu M, Liu G (2010) Smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH): an overview and recent developments. Arch Computat Methods Eng 17(1):25–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    McLaughlin J (1994) Numerical computation of particles-turbulence interaction. Int J Multiph Flow 20:211–232CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Monaghan JJ (1988) An introduction to SPH. Comput Phys Comm 48(1):89–96CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Monaghan J (1989) On the problem of penetration in particle methods. J Comput Phys 82(1):1–15CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Monaghan JJ (1992) Smoothed particle hydrodynamics. Ann Rev Astron Astrophys 30:543–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Monaghan J (2005) Smoothed particle hydrodynamics. Rep Prog Phys 68(1):1703–1759CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Morris J, Fox P, Zhu Y (1997) Modeling low Reynolds number incompressible flows using SPH. J Computat Phys 136(1):214–226CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Negrut D, Tasora A, Mazhar H, Heyn T, Hahn P (2012) Leveraging parallel computing in multibody dynamics. Multibody Sys Dyn 27(1):95–117CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    NVIDIA: CUDA developer zone (2014). https://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-downloads
  38. 38.
    Pazouki A, Negrut D (2012) Direct simulation of lateral migration of buoyant particles in channel flow using GPU computing. In: Proceedings of the 32nd computers and information in engineering conference, CIE32, 12–15 Aug 2012. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Chicago, IL, USAGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pazouki A, Negrut D A numerical study of the effect of particle properties on the radial distribution of suspensions in pipe flow. Submitted to International Journal of Multiphase FlowGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sader J (1998) Frequency response of cantilever beams immersed in viscous fluids with applications to the atomic force microscope. J Appl Phys 84(1):64–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    SBEL: Vimeo page (2014). https://vimeo.com/uwsbel
  42. 42.
    Schörgenhumer M, Gruber PG, Gerstmayr J (2013) Interaction of flexible multibody systems with fluids analyzed by means of smoothed particle hydrodynamics. Multibody Sys Dyn, pp 1–24Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Schwab A, Meijaard J (2005) Comparison of three-dimensional flexible beam elements for dynamic analysis: finite element method and absolute nodal coordinate formulation. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2005 IDETC/CIE, Orlando, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Shabana A (2005) Dynamics of multibody systems. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Shabana A (1997) Flexible multibody dynamics: review of past and recent developments. Multibody Sys Dyn 1:339–348CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zhang D, Prosperetti A (1994) Averaged equations for inviscid disperse two-phase flow. J Fluid Mech 267:185–220CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations