The weak coupling between MPS and BEM for wave structure interaction simulation

Abstract

As a Lagrangian type meshless method, the MPS is suitable for violent free surface problems. In this paper, for problems where violent free surface deformation only occur in a constrained area, the efficiency of MPS is further improved by weak coupling with BEM. More specifically, the whole computational domain is modelled by BEM whereas the MPS model only covers the violent flow area. Since the computational time of BEM is negligible compared with the time required by MPS, the overall computational efficiency could be improved by this coupling scheme (depends on how much of the MPS domain is replaced by BEM). The MPS model is advanced by the information from BEM result at each time step up to the time when the free surface is about to break. The MPS solver will continue the simulation with the "old" BEM information just before breaking, based on the assumption that the flow change at the MPS-BEM interface area is small enough. The proposed scheme is validated by two problems and a relatively good accuracy is obtained by comparing with published results in the literature.

Bow Flare Water Entry Impact Prediction and Simulation Based on Moving Particle Semi‐Implicit Turbulence Method

“…A new and simple free surface detection criterion is proposed by Wang et al [26] to enhance the free surface recognition in the MPS method. Sun et al [27] used a weak coupling between MPS and BEM method to improve the computational efficiency for wave structure interaction simulation; better accuracy is obtained compared with published results. A multiphase MPS method is presented by Nabian and Farhadi [28] to develop a straightforward, robust, stable, and accurate meshfree numerical technique for modeling the dynamic behavior of free surface, incompressible, multiphase granular flows.…”

“…Kernel function is very important in the MPS method; the force between particles is defined based on kernel function, which is a weight function in number density model, Laplacian model, and gradient model. Different kernel functions have great influence on the MPS numerical simulation results; based on the conclusion obtained by Ataie-Ashtiani and Farhadi [46], (27) can give the best stability for MPS method, which is proposed by Shao and Lo [47].…”

Characterization and quantification of microplastics in indoor environments

“…MPs come from a wide range of sources, especially in aquatic and terrestrial environments. Over time, MPs continue to physically break down into smaller particles [ 6 , 7 ]; therefore, they are widely eaten by terrestrial and aquatic organisms [ 8 , 9 ]. MPs can be found in many environmental mediums, such as brine, freshwater, potable water, outlet water, soil, sludge, precipitate, and submarine sandstone.…”

Border mapping multi-resolution (BMMR) technique for incompressible projection-based particle methods

“…Generally, two different strategies are adopted to tackle such shortcoming. The first approach is the coupling between the particle method, which is used to simulate only the concerning region (near field), and other less computer-intensive method, which is adopted to model the remaining of the domain (far field), e.g., particle methods coupled to boundary element method (BEM) (Sun, et al, 2017), non-hydrostatic wave-flow model (Altomare, et al, 2018), finite volume method (FVM) Di Mascio, et al, 2021), and non-linear potential flow (Verbrugghe, et al, 2018). The main challenge of such approach is to guarantee consistent coupling between the domains modeled by different methods when applied to violent freesurface motion.…”