Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Study on the fully coupled thermodynamic fluid–structure interaction with the material point method

  • Published:
Computational Particle Mechanics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The material point method (MPM) has not been evaluated in a systematic manner for the fully coupled thermodynamic fluid–structure interaction (FSI) cases. Since the constitutive models and heat transfer in solid and fluid materials are quite different, a fully coupled computational scheme is designed in this paper for simulating the FSI with the MPM, in which the governing equations for both solid and fluid material points are related to each other. A simply supported beam with a temperature difference between the top and bottom, and a cantilever beam immersed in an isothermal fluid environment are firstly considered for demonstrating the reasonable agreement with available analytical solutions. The aforementioned beam samples are then, respectively, immersed in a fluid environment involving heat transfer to study the thermal effect on the dynamic structural responses. It is illustrated that the thermal effect would induce a thermal pressure wave propagating from the high- to low-temperature ends. Furthermore, this pressure wave would affect the vibration responses of both the cantilever and simply supported beams in different ways due to its wavefront direction that is, respectively, perpendicular and parallel to the longitudinal axis of the cantilever and simply supported beams. The thermal pressure waves with the two propagating directions would also affect the buckling and flexural behaviors, respectively. The obtained results demonstrate the potential of the proposed numerical scheme in evaluating fully coupled thermodynamic FSI responses such as composites subject to extreme loadings.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bathe KJ, Zhang H (2004) Finite element developments for general fluid flows with structural interactions. Int J Numer Methods Eng 60(1):213–232

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Bungartz HJ, Schäfer M (eds) (2006) Fluid–structure interaction: modelling, simulation, optimisation, vol 53. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Sigrist JF (2015) Fluid–structure interaction: an introduction to finite element coupling. Wiley, Hoboken

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Vierendeels J, Dumont K, Dick E, Verdonck P (2005) Analysis and stabilization of fluid–structure interaction algorithm for rigid-body motion. AIAA J 43(12):2549–2557

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dowell EH, Hall KC (2001) Modeling of fluid–structure interaction. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 33(1):445–490

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Hübner B, Walhorn E, Dinkler D (2004) A monolithic approach to fluid–structure interaction using space–time finite elements. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 193(23–26):2087–2104

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Kareem A (1992) Dynamic response of high-rise buildings to stochastic wind loads. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 42(1–3):1101–1112

    Google Scholar 

  8. Farhat C, Lesoinne M, Le Tallec P (1998) Load and motion transfer algorithms for fluid/structure interaction problems with non-matching discrete interfaces: momentum and energy conservation, optimal discretization and application to aeroelasticity. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 157(1–2):95–114

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Kamakoti R, Shyy W (2004) Fluid–structure interaction for aeroelastic applications. Prog Aerosp Sci 40(8):535–558

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Piperno S (1997) Explicit/implicit fluid/structure staggered procedures with a structural predictor and fluid subcycling for 2D inviscid aeroelastic simulations. Int J Numer Methods Fluids 25(10):1207–1226

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Bazilevs Y, Hsu MC, Kiendl J, Wüchner R, Bletzinger KU (2011) 3D simulation of wind turbine rotors at full scale. Part II: fluid–structure interaction modeling with composite blades. Int J Numer Methods Fluids 65(1–3):236–253

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Hsu MC, Bazilevs Y (2012) Fluid–structure interaction modeling of wind turbines: simulating the full machine. Comput Mech 50(6):821–833

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Bazilevs Y, Hsu MC, Scott MA (2012) Isogeometric fluid–structure interaction analysis with emphasis on non-matching discretizations, and with application to wind turbines. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 249:28–41

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Hirt CW, Amsden AA, Cook JL (1974) An arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian computing method for all flow speeds. J Comput Phys 14(3):227–253

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Takashi N, Hughes TJ (1992) An arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian finite element method for interaction of fluid and a rigid body. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 95(1):115–138

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Donea J, Giuliani S, Halleux JP (1982) An arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian finite element method for transient dynamic fluid–structure interactions. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 33(1–3):689–723

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Von Estorff O, Firuziaan M (2000) Coupled BEM/FEM approach for nonlinear soil/structure interaction. Eng Anal Bound Elem 24(10):715–725

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Mittal R, Iaccarino G (2005) Immersed boundary methods. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 37:239–261

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Wu Y, Cai XC (2014) A fully implicit domain decomposition based ALE framework for three-dimensional fluid–structure interaction with application in blood flow computation. J Comput Phys 258:524–537

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Basting S, Quaini A, Čanić S, Glowinski R (2017) Extended ALE method for fluid–structure interaction problems with large structural displacements. J Comput Phys 331:312–336

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Soares D Jr, Von Estorff O, Mansur WJ (2005) Efficient non-linear solid–fluid interaction analysis by interactive BEM/FEM coupling. Int J Numer Methods Eng 64(11):1416–1431

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Elleithy WM, Al-Gahtani HJ, El-Gebeily M (2001) Iterative coupling of BE and FE methods in elastostatics. Eng Anal Bound Elem 25(8):685–695

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Sulsky D, Chen Z, Schreyer HL (1994) A particle method for history-dependent materials. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 118(1–2):179–196

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Bardenhagen SG, Brackbill JU, Sulsky D (2000) The material-point method for granular materials. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 187(3–4):529–541

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Zheng Y, Gao F, Zhang H, Lu M (2013) Improved convected particle domain interpolation method for coupled dynamic analysis of fully saturated porous media involving large deformation. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 257:150–163

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Jiang S, Chen Z, Sewell TD, Gan Y (2015) Multiscale simulation of the responses of discrete nanostructures to extreme loading conditions based on the material point method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 297:219–238

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Jiang S, Tao J, Sewell TD, Chen Z (2017) Hierarchical multiscale simulations of crystalline β-octahydro-1,3,5,7-tetranitro-1,3,5,7-tetrazocine (β-HMX): generalized interpolation material point method simulations of brittle fracture using an elastodamage model derived from molecular dynamics. Int J Damage Mech 26(2):293–313

    Google Scholar 

  28. He N, Liu Y, Zhang X (2017) Seamless coupling of molecular dynamics and material point method via smoothed molecular dynamics. Int J Numer Methods Eng 112(4):380–400

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. York AR, Sulsky D, Schreyer HL (2000) Fluid-membrane interaction based on the material point method. Int J Numer Methods Eng 48(6):901–924

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Lian YP, Liu Y, Zhang X (2014) Coupling of membrane element with material point method for fluid–membrane interaction problems. Int J Mech Mater Des 10(2):199–211

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hu W, Chen Z (2006) Model-based simulation of the synergistic effects of blast and fragmentation on a concrete wall using the MPM. Int J Impact Eng 32(12):2066–2096

    Google Scholar 

  32. Li JG, Hamamoto Y, Liu Y, Zhang X (2014) Sloshing impact simulation with material point method and its experimental validations. Comput Fluids 103:86–99

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Zhang F, Zhang X, Sze KY, Lian Y, Liu Y (2017) Incompressible material point method for free surface flow. J Comput Phys 330:92–110

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Bardenhagen SG, Kober EM (2004) The generalized interpolation material point method. Comput Model Eng Sci 5(6):477–496

    Google Scholar 

  35. Tao J, Zheng Y, Chen Z, Zhang H (2016) Generalized interpolation material point method for coupled thermo-mechanical process. Int J Mech Mater Des 12(4):577–595

    Google Scholar 

  36. Tao J, Zhang H, Zheng Y, Chen Z (2018) Development of generalized interpolation material point method for simulating fully coupled thermomechanical failure evolution. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 332(15):325–342

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  37. Gan Y, Chen Z, Gangopadhyay K, Bezmelnitsyn A, Gangopadhyay S (2010) An equation of state for the detonation product of copper oxide/aluminum nanothermite composites. J Nanopart Res 12(3):719–726

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hu W, Chen Z (2003) A multi-mesh MPM for simulating the meshing process of spur gears. Comput Struct 81(20):1991–2002

    Google Scholar 

  39. Zhang X, Chen Z, Liu Y (2016) The material point method—a continuum-based particle method for extreme loading cases. Academic, London

    Google Scholar 

  40. Sack RL (1989) Matrix structural analysis. PWS-KENT, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  41. Becker P, Idelsohn SR, Oñate E (2015) A unified monolithic approach for multi-fluid flows and fluid–structure interaction using the particle finite element method with fixed mesh. Comput Mech 55(6):1091–1104

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Chopra AK (2007) Dynamics of structures: theory and applications to earthquake engineering, 2nd edn. Pearson, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  43. Van Eysden CA, Sader JE (2006) Resonant frequencies of a rectangular cantilever beam immersed in a fluid. J Appl Phys 100(11):114916

    Google Scholar 

  44. Lindeburg MR, McMullin KM (2014) Seismic design of building structures: a professional’s introduction to earthquake forces and design details. Professional Publications Inc., Belmont

    Google Scholar 

  45. Coombs WM, Charlton TJ, Cortis M, Augarde CE (2018) Overcoming volumetric locking in material point methods. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 333:1–21

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  46. Hamad F, Więckowski Z, Moormann C (2017) Interaction of fluid–solid–geomembrane by the material point method. Comput Geotech 81:112–124

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was partially supported by a subcontract from the University of Mississippi as part of a major research grant with the US Army Corp of Engineers laboratory (Engineering Research and Development Center at Vicksburg, MS). The authors appreciate the review comments on the original version of the paper, as well as the suggestions made by Dr. Rajendran at University of Mississippi when revising the paper. This work was also partially supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan under the Contract No. MOST 107-2221-E-492-014. JL appreciates the computational time and resources as obtained from National Center for High-Performance Computing, Taiwan.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Environment Engineering, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA

    Yu-Chen Su & Zhen Chen

  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Mississippi, University, MS, 38677, USA

    Jun Tao & Shan Jiang

  3. National Center for High-Performance Computing, National Applied Research Laboratories, Tainan City, 74147, Taiwan

    Jian-Ming Lu

  4. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Southern Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Tainan City, 71005, Taiwan

    Jian-Ming Lu

Authors
  1. Yu-Chen Su
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jun Tao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shan Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zhen Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jian-Ming Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Shan Jiang or Zhen Chen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have 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

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Su, YC., Tao, J., Jiang, S. et al. Study on the fully coupled thermodynamic fluid–structure interaction with the material point method. Comp. Part. Mech. 7, 225–240 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40571-019-00261-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40571-019-00261-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation