Research Papers: CFD and VIV

Finite Element and Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics Modeling of Fluid–Structure Interaction Using a Unified Computational Methodology

[+] Author and Article Information
Ravi Challa

School of Civil and Construction Engineering,
Oregon State University,
Corvallis, OR 97331

Solomon C. Yim

Fellow ASME
School of Civil and Construction Engineering,
Oregon State University,
Corvallis, OR 97331

Contributed by the Ocean, Offshore, and Arctic Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF OFFSHORE MECHANICS AND ARCTIC ENGINEERING. Manuscript received July 22, 2015; final manuscript received January 5, 2018; published online June 13, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Robert Seah.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 140(6), 061801 (Jun 13, 2018) (14 pages) Paper No: OMAE-15-1072; doi: 10.1115/1.4038939 History: Received July 22, 2015; Revised January 05, 2018

This study illustrates a comparison of two numerical methods under a unified computational platform for solving fluid–structure interaction (FSI) problems. The first is an arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian (ALE)-based fluid model coupled to a structural finite element (FE) method (ALE-FE/FE), and the second is a smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) method coupled to the same structural FE code (SPH/FE). The predictive capabilities and computational efficiency of both the numerical methods are evaluated and validated against a canonical problem of a rapidly varying flow past an elastic gate for which experimental data are available. In both numerical solutions, the fluid flow is governed by the Navier–Stokes equation, and the elastic gate is modeled as a flexible structure. Numerical simulation results show that the ALE-FE/FE continuum approach not only captures the dynamic behavior properly but also predicts the water-free surface profiles and the elastic gate deformations accurately. On the other hand, the coupled purely Lagrangian approach of the SPH/FE under an identical computational platform is found to be less accurate and efficient in predicting the dynamics of the elastic gate motion and the water-free surface profiles.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Hughes, T. , Liu, W. , and Zimmerman, T. , 1981, “ Lagrangian-Eulerian Finite Element Formulation for Incompressible Viscous Flows,” Comput. Methods Appl. Math., 29(3), pp. 329–349.
Rugonyi, S. , and Bathe, K. J. , 2001, “ On Finite Element Analysis of Fluid Flows Fully Coupled With Structural Interactions,” Comput. Model. Eng. Sci., 2(2), pp. 195–212. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=
Bathe, K. J. , and Zhang, H. , 2004, “ Finite Element Developments for General Fluid Flows With Structural Interactions,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 60(1), pp. 213–232. [CrossRef]
Lee, S. , Cho, J. , Part, T. , and Lee, W. , 2002, “ Baffled Fuel-Storage Container: Parametric Study on Transient Dynamic Characteristics,” Struct. Eng. Mech., 13(6), pp. 653–670. [CrossRef]
Zhong, Z. , 1993, Finite Element Procedures for Contact-Impact Problems, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Donea, J. , Huerta, A. , Ponhot, J. P. , and Rodriguez-Ferran, A. , 2004, “ Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian Methods,” Encyclopedia of Computational Mechanics, Wiley, New York.
Gingold, R. A. , and Monaghan, J. J. , 1977, “ Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics: Theory and Application to Non-Spherical Stars,” R. Astron. Soc., 181(3), pp. 375–389. [CrossRef]
Lucy, L. B. , 1997, “ A Numerical Approach to the Testing of the Fission Hypothesis,” Astron. J., 82, pp. 1013–1024. [CrossRef]
Randles, P. W. , and Libersky, L. D. , 1996, “ Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics: Some Recent Improvements and Applications,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 139(1–4), pp. 375–408. [CrossRef]
Monaghan, J. J. , and Kos, A. , 1999, “ Solitary Waves on a Cretan Beach,” J. Waterw. Port Coastal Ocean Eng., 125(3), pp. 145–154. [CrossRef]
Colagrossi, A. , and Landrini, M. , 2003, “ Numerical Simulation of Interfacial Flows by Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics,” J. Comput. Phys., 191(2), pp. 448–475. [CrossRef]
Souto-Iglesias, A. , Idelsohn, S. , Marti, J. , Zamora-Rodriguez, R. , and Onate, E. , 2008, “ Modeling of Free Surface Flows With Elastic Bodies Interactions,” 27th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Seoul, Korea Oct. 5–10. http://oa.upm.es/3462/3/INVE_MEM_2008_54974.pdf
Delorme, L. , Colagrossi, A. , Souto-Iglesias, A. , Zamora Rodriguez, R. , and Botia-Vera, E. , 2009, “ A Set of Canonical Problems in Sloshing—Part I: Pressure Field in Forced Roll–Comparison Between Experimental Results and SPH,” Ocean Eng., 36(2), pp. 168–178. [CrossRef]
Antoci, C. , Gallati, M. , and Sibilla, S. , 2007, “ Numerical Simulation of Fluid-Structure Interaction by SPH,” J. Comput. Struct., 85(11–14), pp. 879–890. [CrossRef]
Souli, M. , and Benson, D. J. , 2010, Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian and Fluid-Structure Interaction Numerical Simulation, Wiley, New York.
van Leer, B. , 1977, “ Towards the Ultimate Conservative Difference Scheme—IV: A New Approach to Numerical Convection,” J. Comput. Phys., 23(7), pp. 276–299. [CrossRef]
Souli, M. , and Zholesio, J. , 2001, “ Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian and Free Surface Methods in Fluid Mechanics,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 191(3–5), pp. 451–466. [CrossRef]
Woodward, P. , and Collela, P. , 1982, “ The Numerical Simulation of Two-Dimensional Fluid Flow With Strong Shocks,” Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, Report No. UCRL-86952.
Monaghan, J. J. , and Gingold, R. A. , 1983, “ Shock Simulation by the Particle Method SPH,” J. Comput. Phys., 52(2), pp. 374–389. [CrossRef]
Monaghan, J. J. , 1992, “ Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics,” Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys., 30, pp. 543–574. [CrossRef]
Monaghan, J. J. , 1994, “ Simulating Free Surface Flows With SPH,” J. Comput. Phys., 110(2), pp. 399–406. [CrossRef]
Liu, G. R. , and Liu, M. B. , 2003, Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics: A Mesh-Free Particle Method, World Scientific, Singapore.
Hallquist, J. O. , 2006, LS-DYNA Theoretical Manual, Livermore Software Technology Corporation, Livermore, CA.
Schwer, L. , 2009, “ Aluminum Plate Perforation: A Comparative Case Study Using Lagrange With Erosion, Multi-Material ALE, and Smooth Particle Hydrodynamics,” Seventh European LS-DYNA Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, June 10. https://www.dynalook.com/european-conf-2009/J-I-01.pdf
Belytschko, T. , Flanagran, D. F. , and Kennedy, J. M. , 1982, “ Finite Element Methods With User-Controlled Meshes for Fluid-Structure Interactions,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 33(1–3), pp. 689–723. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/004578258290127X
Dalrymple, R. A. , and Rogers, B. D. , 2006, “ Numerical Modeling of Water Waves With the SPH Method,” Coastal Eng. J., 53(2), pp. 141–147. [CrossRef]
Belytschko, T. , Krogauz, Y. , Dolbow, J. , and Gerlach, J. , 1998, “ On the Completeness of Mesh-free Particle Methods,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 43(5), pp. 785–819. [CrossRef]
Dilts, G. , 1999, “ Moving-Least-Squares-Particle Hydrodynamics—I: Consistency and Stability,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 44(8), pp. 1115–1155. [CrossRef]
Selhammar, M. , 1997, “ Modified Artificial Viscosity in Smooth Particle Hydrodynamics,” J. Astron. Astrophys., 325, pp. 857–865. http://aa.springer.de/bibs/7325002/2300857/small.htm
Challa, R. , Yim, S. C. , Idichandy, V. G. , and Vendhan, C. P. , 2014, “ Rigid-Object Water-Entry Impact Dynamics: Finite-Element/Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics Modeling and Experimental Calibration,” ASME J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng., 136(3), p. 031102. [CrossRef]
Challa, R. , Yim, S. C. , Idichandy, V. G. , and Vendhan, C. P. , 2013, “ Rigid-Object Water-Surface Impact Dynamics: Experiment and Semi-Analytical Approximation,” ASME J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng., 136(1), p. 011102. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of water tank and elastic gate: (a) lateral and (b) frontal view

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematic of the contact algorithm used in FSI

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Penalty based coupling mechanism for FSI

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Flowchart showing the coupled domain decomposition for FSI

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

ALE-FE/FE computational domain (3D): (a) side view and (b) isometric view

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

SPH/FE computational domain (3D): (a) side view and (b) isometric view

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Illustration from numerical simulations (at 0.04 s intervals from t = 0 s to t = 0.4 s): (a) ALE-FE/FE and (b) SPH/FE

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Horizontal and vertical displacements of the free end of the gate: (a) ALE-FE/FE and (b) SPH/FE

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Water level in the tank for ALE-FE/FE and SPH/FE simulations: (a) just behind the gate and (b) 5 cm from gate

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Horizontal (X) and vertical (Y) displacement time histories of the free end of the elastic gate for different smoothing lengths (SPH/FE)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Stress distribution on the elastic gate: (a) ALE-FE/FE simulation, σyyatt=0.12 s:σyy=−414,000N/m2(back surface)toσyy=401,900 N/m2(top 70 % of the elastic gate)and(b)(SPH/FE) simulation,σxxatt=0.19s:σxx=−2458 N/m2(bottom10-30 % of the elastic gate)toσxx=7406 N/m2 (top 70 % of the elastic gate)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Horizontal and vertical displacement of the free end of the gate (ALE mesh size variations—“ds” represents the ALE-FE mesh size)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Horizontal and vertical displacement of the free end of the gate (SPH particle resolution)



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In