1 / 40

Fluid & Rigid Body Interaction

Fluid & Rigid Body Interaction. Comp 259 - Physical Modeling Craig Bennetts April 25, 2006. Motivation. Fluid/solid interactions are ubiquitous in our environment Realistic fluid/solid interaction is complex not feasible through manual animation. Types of Coupling.

tod
Download Presentation

Fluid & Rigid Body Interaction

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Fluid & Rigid Body Interaction Comp 259 - Physical Modeling Craig Bennetts April 25, 2006 University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  2. Motivation • Fluid/solid interactions are ubiquitous in our environment • Realistic fluid/solid interaction is complex • not feasible through manual animation University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  3. Types of Coupling • One-way solid-to-fluid reaction • One-way fluid-to-solid reaction • Two-way coupled interaction University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  4. Solid-to-Fluid Reaction • The solid moves the fluid without the fluid affecting the solid • Rigid bodies are treated as boundary conditions with set velocities • Foster and Metaxas, 1997 • Foster and Fedkiw, 2001 • Enright et al., 2002b University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  5. Fluid-to-Solid Reaction • The fluid moves the solid without the solid affecting the fluid • Solids are treated as massless particles • Foster and Metaxas,1996 University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  6. One-Way Inadequacy • Fails to simulate true fluid/solid interaction • Reactive as opposed to interactive University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  7. Two-Way Interaction Methods • Volume Of FluidandCubic Interpolated Propagation (VOFCIP) • Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian(ALE) • Distributed Lagrange Multiplier(DLM) • Rigid Fluid University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  8. VOFCIP method • Takahashi et al. (2002,2003) • Models forces due to hydrostatic pressure • neglects dynamic forces and torques due to the fluid momentum • Only approximates the solid-to-fluid coupling University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  9. ALE method • Originally used in the computational physics community [Hirt et al. (1974)] • Finite element technique • Drawbacks: • computational grid must be re-meshed when it becomes overly distortion • at least 2 layers of cell elements are required to separate solids as they approach University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  10. DLM method • Originally used to study particulate suspension flows [Glowinski et al. 1999] • Finite element technique • Does not require grid re-meshing • Ensures realistic motion for both fluid and solid University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  11. DLM Method (cont.) • Does not account for torques • Restricted to spherical solids • Surfaces restricted to be at least 1.5 times the velocity element size apart • requires application of repulsive force University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  12. Prior Two-Way Limitations • Solids simulated as fluids with high viscosity • ultimately results in solid deformation, which is undesirable in modeling rigid bodies • Do not account for torque on solids • Boundary proximity restrictions University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  13. Rigid Fluid Method • Carlson, 2004 • Extends the DLM method • except uses finite differences • Uses a Marker-And-Cell (MAC) technique • Pressure projection ensures the incompressibility of fluid University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  14. Rigid Fluid Method (cont.) • Treats the rigid objects as fluids: • Ensures rigidity through rigid-body-motion velocity constraints within the object • Avoids need to directly enforce boundary conditions between rigid bodies and fluid • approximately captured by the projection techniques • Uses conjugate-gradient solver University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  15. Semi-Lagrangian Method • Advantage: • simple to use • Disadvantage: • additional numerical dampening to the advection process • Uses conjugate-gradient solver University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  16. Computational Domains • Distinct computational domains for fluid (F) and rigid solids (R) within the entire domain (C): University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  17. Marker-And-Cell Technique • Harlow and Welch (1965) University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  18. MAC Technique (cont.) • Well suited to simulate fluids with relatively low viscosity • Permits surface ripples, waves, and full 3D splashes • Disadvantage: • cannot simulate high viscosity fluids (with free surfaces) without reducing time step significantly University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  19. MAC Boundary Conditions • Can use any combination of Dirichlet or Neumann boundary conditions between fluid and air • there must be at least one empty air cell represented in thematrix used to solve the system or will be singular (cannot be inverted uniquely) University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  20. Fluid Dynamics • Navier-Stokes Equations • Incompressible fluids • Conservation of mass: • Conservation of momentum: University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  21. Simplifying Assumption • For fluids of uniform viscosity • More familiar momentum diffusion form University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  22. Notation Fluid velocity: Time derivative: Kinematic viscosity: Fluid density: Scalar pressure field: University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  23. Differential Operators Gradient: Divergence: Vector Laplacian: Curl: University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  24. Conservation of Mass • Velocity field has zero divergence • amount of fluid entering the cell is equal to the amount leaving the cell University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  25. Conservation of Momentum • The advection term accounts for the direction in which the surrounding fluid pushes a small region of fluid University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  26. Conservation of Momentum • The momentum diffusion term describes how quickly the fluid damps out variation in the velocity surrounding a given point University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  27. Conservation of Momentum • Thepressure gradient describes how a small parcel of fluid is pushed in a direction from high to low pressure University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  28. Conservation of Momentum • The external forces per unit mass that act globally on the fluid • e.g. gravity, wind, etc. University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  29. Overview of Fluid Steps • Numerically solve for the best guess velocity without accounting for pressure gradient • Pressure projection to re-enforce the incompressibility constraint University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  30. 1. Best Guess Velocity University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  31. 2. Pressure Projection  Solve for p and plug back in to find un+1 University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  32. Rigid Body Dynamics • Typical rigid body solver: • rigidity is implicitly enforced due to the nature of affine transformations (translation and rotation about center of mass) • Rigid fluid solver: • rigid body motion is determined using the Navier-Stokes equations • requires a motion constraint to ensure rigidity of the solid University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  33. Conservation of Rigidity • Similar to the incompressibility constraint presented for fluids, but more strict • The rigidity constraint is not only divergence free, but deformation free • The deformation operator (D) for a vector velocity field (u) is: • Rigid body constraint is : (in R) University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  34. Conservation of Momentum • For fluid: • For rigid body: •  is implicitly defined as an extra part of the deformation stress University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  35. Governing Equations • For fluid (F): • For rigid body (R): University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  36. Implementation • Solve Navier-Stokes equations • Calculate rigid body forces • Enforce rigid motion University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  37. 1. Solve Navier-Stokes • Solve fluid equations for the entire computational domain: C = F  R • Rigid objects are treated exactly as if they were fluids • Perform two steps as described in fluid dynamics section • Result: • divergence-free intermediate velocity field • collision and relative density forces of the rigid bodies are not yet accounted for University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  38. 2. Calculate Rigid Body Forces • Rigid body solver applies collision forces to the solid objects as it updates their positions • These forces are included in the velocity field to properly transfer momentum between the solid and fluid domains • Account for forces due to relative density differences between rigid body and fluid: sinks rises and floats University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  39. 3. Enforce Rigid Motion • Use conservation of rigidity and solve for the rigid body forces, R • similar to the pressure projection step in the fluid dynamics solution (: but crazier :) University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

  40. Rigid Fluid Advantages • Relatively straightforward to implement • Low computational overhead • scales linearly with the number of rigid bodies • Can couple independent fluid and rigid body solvers • Permits variable object densities and fluid viscosities • Allows dynamic forces and torques University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill

More Related