Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Acknowledgements
Prof. Dan Negrut Prof. Darryl Thelen Prof. Michael Zinn SBEL Colleagues: Hammad Mazar, Toby Heyn, Manoj Kumar
Outline
Motivation Lumped Mass Model
Model properties Simulation results
Conclusion
3
Technical Background
Current simulation tools: (BEM, FDTD, FEM, ) The majority solves the linear wave equation Most methods are mesh-based Mostly Eulerian methods Disadvantages: Limited to small amplitudes & low frequencies No incontinuities as given in shock waves No aero-acoustical effects Moving boundaries are hard to model
5
Model Properties
One-dimensional model consists of N masses which are connected via nonlinear springs Masses represent the inertia of certain gas volume Spring forces replace pressure forces
Equation of motion for each mass:
Model Parameters
mean pressure
spring elongation
cross section
mean density
The model does not draw on any linearization Second order accuracy Implementation & visualization in Matlab
Example with 9 Masses and Sinusoidal Excitation
10
Simulation results
Pressure can be calculated from spring forces at each point Example with 300 mass points and sinusoidal excitation: Nonlinear Springs Linear Springs
11
Simulation results
Soliton Waves
Stable soliton waves can be modeled Propagation speed of soliton waves depends on their amplitude
12
Conclusion/Limitations
Pro: Speed of sound is modeled accurately Known nonlinear effects can be reproduced Implementation is straightforward because of the simple model Contra: Stability of soliton waves depends on discretization Due to the fixed connectivity, it is not a real meshless method The transfer in two or three dimensional implementation is challenging
Move to a more promising method, called Smoothed particle Hydrodynamics (SPH)
13
14
Field variables and their derivatives can be approximated with the following integrations:
15
The surface integral is zero if the kernel doesnt intersect domain boundaries The Integration can be approximated by a summation
16
The right hand side is replaced by SPH approximations for field function derivatives The equation of state closes the formulation, relating pressure to density and internal energy
Ideal Gas: Water:
17
Boundary Formulations
The Achilles heel of SPH (due to the kernel approximation)
Requirements on boundary formulations in acoustics: No boundary penetration Accurate sound wave reflection Accurate sound excitation (moving boundaries) No disturbances
18
19
Mirror Particles
Pro: Theoretical exact boundary treatment due to symmetry Less disturbances Contra: Boundary penetration is possible:
20
Repulsive Forces
Pro: No boundary penetration Easy to implement Contra: Large disturbances
21
The surface integral can be used efficiently if two assumptions are made: The field function is constant on the boundary The field function value is equal to or slightly higher than the particle field function value (self interaction)
22
SPH - Implementation
Structure and functionality of a basic SPH implementations:
2D Implementation in Matlab
25
2D Hydrodynamic Tests
Water flow into a basin
SPH liquid particles are poured with a constant initial velocity Boundary treatment through the new developed method
26
2D Hydrodynamic Tests
The classic SPH test simulation: Dam break experiment
A square of water is discretized by 7,225 SPH particles Boundary treatment through dynamic boundary particles
27
Three dimensional Implementation using C++ and CUDA CUDA API (programming tools for NVIDIA GPUs) Simulations with up to 3.5 million particles are currently possible Speed up of about 4,000 compared to Matlab
28
3D Hydrodynamic Tests
Droplet simulation
Parameters
Number of particles: 250,000 Fluid properties: Water Boundary formulation: Surface integrals Time stepping: t=5.0e-5s Length: T=1.0s Computation time: 2 hours
29
3D Hydrodynamic Tests
Different Viscosities
Parameters
Number of particles: 82,000 Fluid properties: Water/Jelly Boundary formulation: Surface integrals Time stepping: t=1.0e-5s Length: T=1.5s Computation time: 4 hours
30
Fluid-Structure Interaction
Boundary formulations typically require the following information: Boundary position Surface normal Can be describe analytically for simple shapes Using spherical decomposition, arbitrary shaped boundaries can be discretized by boundary particles.
position
CAD geometry
Surface normal
Fluid-Structure Interaction
Water flow on a trough
Parameters
Number of particles: 250,000 Fluid properties: Water Boundary formulation: Surface integrals Time stepping: t=0.5e-5s Length: T=4.5s Computation time: 10 hours
32
2D Sound propagation
FDTD SPH
34
35
3D Sound Excitation/Reflection
3D sound excitation in a tube
Pressure wave excitation through the moving piston Analytic solution is a traveling step function Modeled with 270,000 SPH particles Boundaries are first modeled with dynamic boundary particles and then with a combination of mirror and dynamic boundary particles
36
3D Sound Excitation/Reflection
Boundaries:
Pressure loss at the edges:
37
3D Sound Excitation/Reflection
Dynamic Boundar y Particles
Computational Efficiency
3D experiment with concentric sound propagation six different resolutions are analyzed The pressure at 1,000 positions after a certain simulation time is compared with results from FDTD
39
40
Summary of contributions
Analysis of meshless Lagrangian methods with focus on applicability in acoustical engineering Lumped mass model of one-dimensional nonlinear sound propagation Implementation of SPH on the CPU using Matlab and on the GPU using CUDA Method to model fluid structure interaction through spherical decomposition Analysis of the impact of smoothing length on wave speed Analysis of sound excitation due to moving boundaries New, surface integral based, boundary formulation Work-precision diagram for an acoustic SPH simulation
41
42
Conclusion
It is generally possible to use SPH in acoustic simulations The scaling of the GPU implementation is good Boundary formulations need to be improved Simulating acoustic problems is not straightforward in SPH Exact and noise free boundary enforcement Particle placement Right choice of parameters Potential applications of SPH in Acoustics: aero-acoustic problems complex and changing domain topologies domains with multiple propagation media domains with high temperature or density gradients nonlinear acoustics and shock waves with fluid-structure interaction
43
44