Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics: Benchmarking on Selected Test Cases Within the NextMuSE Initiative

Abstract

In this paper are presented comparisons of SPH variants on academic test cases classically used to validate numerical fluid dynamics software. These comparisons are extracted from NextMuSE FP7 project activities which will be published more extensively in the near future. One of the goals of this project was to better understand the SPH method and to leave the path to its establishment within CFD methods. An important work load was thus dedicated to benchmark SPH variants on selected test cases. A number of results and conclusions of this comparative study are presented in this paper. The studied variants are: standard weekly-compressible SPH, δ-SPH, Riemann-SPH, incompressible SPH, and FVPM. The majority of the test cases also present a reference solution, either experimental or computed using a mesh-based solver. Test cases include: wave propagation, flow past a cylinder, jet impact, floating body, bubble rise, dam break on obstacle, floating body dynamics, etc. Conclusions may help SPH practitioners to choose one variant or another and shall give detailed understanding necessary to derive further improvements of the method.

A detailed study of lid‐driven cavity flow at moderate Reynolds numbers using Incompressible SPH

“…The velocity profiles along cavity centerlines generated by the present ISPH simulation, employing the same spatial resolution suggested by Le Touzé et al , are shown in Figure . It can be seen that these profiles are in very good agreement with the corresponding results of Ghia et al .…”

“…In this case, a comparison is made with the reference data of Ghia et al only. Le Touzé et al also carried out SPH simulations for this flow regime employing a spatial resolution of L /200. Unfortunately, because of the low quality of the figures in , data for a direct comparison could not be obtained.…”

“…Le Touzé et al also carried out SPH simulations for this flow regime employing a spatial resolution of L /200. Unfortunately, because of the low quality of the figures in , data for a direct comparison could not be obtained. However, those authors concluded that their SPH method, using the resolution above, was not able of adequately reproducing the results of Ghia et al .…”