Theory ALE CFD SPH

RADIOSS THEORY MANUAL
10.0 version – January 2009

ALE, CFD, SPH
Altair Engineering, Inc., World Headquarters: 1820 E. Big Beaver Rd., Troy MI 48083-2031
USA
Phone: +1.248.614.2400 • Fax: +1.248.614.2411 • www.altair.com • info@altair.com
RADIOSS THEORY Version 10.0 CONTENTS
CONTENTS
1.0 ALE FORMULATION 3
1.1 REFERENTIAL DOMAIN 3
1.2 CONSERVATION OF MOMENTUM 4
1.2.1 MOMENTUM TRANSPORT FORCE 5
1.3 CONSERVATION OF MASS 5
1.4 CONSERVATION OF INTERNAL ENERGY 7
1.5 REZONED QUANTITIES 7
1.6 ALE MATERIALS 7
1.7 NUMERICAL INTEGRATION 8
1.8 IMPROVED INTEGRATION METHOD 9
1.9 MOMENTUM TRANSPORT FORCE 9
1.9.1 UPWINDING TECHNIQUE 10
1.10 STABILITY 10
1.11 ALE KINEMATIC CONDITIONS 10
1.11.1 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS 10
1.11.2 ALE LINKS 11
1.12 AUTOMATIC GRID COMPUTATION 12
1.12.1 /DONEA - J. DONEA GRID FORMULATION 12
1.12.2 /DISP - AVERAGE DISPLACEMENT FORMULATION 12
1.12.3 /SPRING - NONLINEAR SPRING FORMULATION 12
1.13 TYPE 1 INTERFACE - FLUID-STRUCTURE INTERACTION 13
1.14 ALE RIGID WALL 14
1.15 EXAMPLE 15
2.0 COMPUTATIONAL AERO-ACOUSTIC 17

2.1 MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION 18
2.1.1 COMPRESSIBLE NAVIER STOKES 18
2.1.2 TRANSIENT ANALYSIS, EXPLICIT FORMULATION 20
2.1.3 LARGE EDDY SIMULATION TURBULENCE MODELING 20
2.1.4 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS 21
2.1.5 FLUID STRUCTURE COUPLING 22
2.2 MODELING METHODOLOGY 23
2.2.1 MESH DEFINITION 23
2.2.2 POST PROCESSING 23
2.3 APPLICATION AND VALIDATION 24
2.4 CONCLUSION 24
3.0 SMOOTH PARTICLE HYDRODYNAMICS 26

3.1 SPH APPROXIMATION OF A FUNCTION 26
3.2 CORRECTED SPH APPROXIMATION OF A FUNCTION 27
3.3 SPH INTEGRATION OF CONTINUUM EQUATIONS 28
3.4 ARTIFICIAL VISCOSITY 29
3.5 STABILITY: TIME STEP CONTROL 30
3.5.1 CELL TIME STEP 30
3.5.2 NODAL TIME STEP 30
3.6 CONSERVATIVE SMOOTHING OF VELOCITIES 31
3.7 SPH CELL DISTRIBUTION 31
3.7.1 HEXAGONAL COMPACT NET 31
3.7.2 CUBIC NET 32
20-jan-2009 1
Chapter
ARBITRARY LAGRANGIAN
EULERIAN FORMULATION
20-jan-2009 2
RADIOSS THEORY Version 10.0 ALE FORMULATION
1.0 ALE FORMULATION

ALE or Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian formulation is used to model the interaction between fluids and solids; in
particular, the fluid loading on structures. It can also be used to model fluid like behavior, as seen in plastic
deformation of materials.
ALE derives its name from a combination of two different finite element modelling techniques.
• Lagrangian Formulation - where the observer follows material points.
• Eulerian Formulation - where the observer looks at fixed points in space.
• Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian Formulation - where the observer follows moving points in space.
1.1 Referential Domain

At any location in space x and time t, there is one material point, identified by its space coordinates x at time t=0,
and one grid point identified by its coordinates ⎩ at time t=0. Figure 1.1.1 provides a pictorial representation and
defines the velocities in each formulation.
Figure 1.1.1 ALE Formulation
The derivative of any physical quantity can be computed either following the material point or following the grid
point. They can then be related to each other.
Given that F is a function f of space and time representing a physical property:
The spatial domain is given by f(x,t).
The material domain is given by f*(X,t).
The mixed domain is given by f**( ξ , t).
20-jan-2009 3
Therefore:
∂f ∗ ∂f ∂f ∂x j ∂f ∂f (x, t )
= + × = + V j ( xk , t ) EQ. 1.1.0.1
∂t ∂t ∂x j ∂t ∂t ∂x j
X X X X t
Also:
∂f ∗ ∂f ∗∗ ∂f ( x, t )
= ξ + (V j − W j ) EQ. 1.1.0.2
∂t ∂t ∂x j
X t
This relates to acceleration by:

r
∂ v ∂ r
v ξ + (v j − w j )
r dv
γ = = vt EQ. 1.1.0.3
∂t ∂x
X
dt
where v = material velocity
w = grid velocity
1.2 Conservation of Momentum

Conservation of momentum, expressed in terms of a finite element formulation, is given by:
⎛ ∂vi ∂σ ij ⎞
∫ Φ ⎜⎜ ρ − − ρbi ⎟dV = 0
⎟
EQ. 1.2.0.4
⎝ ∂t ∂x j
I
V ⎠
where F I = the weight functions
ρ = Material density
v = Velocity
σij = Stress Matrix
bi = Body acceleration vector
V = Volume
This can be rewritten in a form similar to the explicit Lagrangian formulation with the addition of a new nodal
force ftrm , accounting for transport of momentum:
∂
M
∂t
{ } { } {
v = F ext − F int + F bod + F hgr + F trm } { } { } EQ. 1.2.0.5
where {F }= ∑ f
trm trm
The transport of momentum force is calculated by:

∂vi
f iItrm = (1 + η I )∫ ρΦ I (w j − v j ) dV EQ. 1.2.0.6
V
∂x j
where i,j = direction index
I = connectivity
ηI = Upwind factor
20-jan-2009 4
1.2.1 Momentum transport force

Momentum transport forces are computed using the relation:
∂vi
FiItrm = (1 + η I )ρΦ I (w j − v j ) V EQ. 1.2.1.1
∂x j
The upwinding technique is introduced to add numerical diffusion to the scheme, which otherwise is generally
under diffuse and thus unstable.
⎡ ∂Φ I ⎤
η I = ηsign ⎢ (v − w j )⎥ EQ. 1.2.1.2
⎣⎢ ∂x j
j
⎦⎥
0 ≤ η ≤ 1 Upwind coefficient given in input.

Full upwind η = 1 (default value) is generally used.
Development of less diffusive flux calculation is currently under investigation.
1.3 Conservation of Mass

The finite element formulation of the Lagrangian form of the mass conservation equation is given by:
dρ
= −( ρ / V )
dV
X X EQ. 1.3.0.2
dt dt
When transformed into the ALE formulation it gives:
∂ρ ⎛ ∂ρ ⎞ ∂v
ξ − ⎜⎜ (wi − vi ) ⋅ ⎟⎟ + ρ K =0 EQ. 1.3.0.3
∂t ∂xi ∂xK
t t
⎝ ⎠
Applying a Galerkin variation form for the solution of equation 1.3.0.3:
⎛ ∂ρ ⎛ ∂ρ ⎞ ∂v ⎞
∫ψ ⎜⎜ ∂t ξ − ⎜⎜ (wi − vi ) ⋅ ⎟⎟ + ρ K ⎟=0
⎟ EQ. 1.3.0.4
∂xi ∂xK
t t
V ⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠
where ψ = Weighting function
Using a finite volume formulation:
20-jan-2009 5
where ψ =1
ρ = constant density over control volume V
Therefore:
∂ρ ∂vK
∫ ∂t dV + ∫ ρ ∂x
V V K
dV = 0 EQ. 1.3.0.5
Using the divergence theorem leads to:

∂ρ
∫ ∂t dV + ∫ ρ (v
V S
j ⋅ n j )dS = 0 EQ. 1.3.0.6
Further expansion gives:
ρdV = ∫ ρ (w j − v j )n j dS
d
dt V∫
EQ. 1.3.0.7
S
1442443
mass flux
This formula is still valid if density p is not assumed uniform over volume V.
The mass flux across a surface is shown in Figure 1.3.1.
Figure 1.3.1 Mass Flux
The density, ρi, is given computed:

1 1
ρ i = ρ I {1 − ηsign(φi )}+ ρ J {1 + ηsign(φi )} EQ. 1.3.0.8
2 2
where 0 ≤ η ≤1 is the upwind coefficient given on the input card.
ρI + ρJ
If η = 0 , there is no upwind. Therefore: ρ i =
2
If η = 1 , there is full upwind.
The smaller the upwind factor, the faster the solution; however, the solution is more stable with a large upwind
factor.
20-jan-2009 6
For a free surface: ρJ = ρI
1.4 Conservation of Internal Energy

Conservation of internal energy is used to model temperature dependent material behavior. It also allows an
energy balance evaluation. However, internal energy is only calculated if it is turned on, to reduce computation
time in problem s not involving heat transfer.
The conservation of energy is given by:
∂ρe ⎛ ∂ρe ⎞ ∂v
− ⎜⎜ (wi − vi ) ⋅ ⎟⎟ + (ρe + ρ ) K = 0 EQ. 1.4.0.9
∂t ⎝ ∂xi ⎠ ∂xK
where e = Internal energy in Joules (Nm)
p = Fluid pressure
Applying a Galerkin variation form for the solution gives:
⎛ ∂ρe ⎛ ∂ρe ⎞ ∂v ⎞
∫ψ ⎜⎜ − ⎜⎜ (wi − vi ) ⋅ ⎟⎟ + (ρe + ρ ) k ⎟=0
⎟ EQ. 1.4.0.10
V ⎝ ∂t ⎝ ∂xi ⎠ ∂xk ⎠
Making the following assumptions:
ψ =1
ρe = constant over control volume V
Equation 1.4.0.10. reduces to:
∂ρe ∂v
∫ dV + ∫ (ρe + ρ ) k dV = 0 EQ. 1.4.0.11
V
∂t V
∂xk
Applying the divergence theorem gives:
∂ρe ∂v
∫ dV + ∫ (ρe(v j ⋅ n j )dS ) + ∫ ρ k = 0 EQ. 1.4.0.12
V
∂t S V
∂xk
Hence:
∂v
ρedV = ∫ ρe(w j − v j )n j dS − ∫ ρ k dV
d
∫
dt V S V
∂xk
EQ. 1.4.0.13
This formula is still valid if 〉 e is not assumed uniform over volume V.
1.5 Rezoned Quantities

The deviatoric stress tensor and the equivalent plastic strain must be rezoned and recalculated after every time
step due to the ability of one element to contain a different amount of material.
1.6 ALE Materials

The following materials may be used with the ALE formulation.
20-jan-2009 7
ALE Materials
Law Number Description
Elasto-plastic
2
/MAT/PLAS_JOHN
Elasto-plastic-Hydrodynamic
3
/MAT/HYDPLA
Johnson Cook
4
/MAT/HYD_JCOOK
Hydrodynamic Viscous
6
/MAT/HYD_VISC
Rock Concrete Foam
10 & 21
/MAT/LAW10 or /MAT/DPRAG
Elasto-plastic with Damage
22 & 23
/MAT/DAMA or /MAT/LAW23
Bimaterial
20
/MAT/BIMAT
Hydrodynamic - Bi-phase liquid gas
37
/MAT/BIPHAS
Boundary - Stagnation conditions in flow calculations
11
/MAT/BOUND
Gray model - Multiphase Gray E.O.S + Johnson's shear law
16
/MAT/GRAY
Thermal conductivity, purely thermal material
18
/MAT/THERM
For the rest, refer to the next version of the theory manual.
1.7 Numerical Integration

The numerical integration techniques used are the same as those used for any other analysis type.
The flow chart of calculations can be seen in Figure 1.7.1.
20-jan-2009 8
1
Figure 1.7.1 Flow Chart
1. Simplified Flow Chart
1.8 Improved integration method

This method can only be used with the CFD version of RADIOSS, and only available in Eulerian formulation.
An eight Gauss point integration scheme is used to determine the shape functions. The shape functions are
condensed to one point. This gives an eight point integration scheme with constant stress.
1.9 Momentum Transport Force

This scheme is only used with the ALE formulation (Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian) and in the CFD version of
RADIOSS. The force is calculated using the relation:
∂vi
trm
Fi I = (1 + η I )ρΦ I (w j − v j ) V. EQ. 1.9.0.14
∂X j
where w = grid velocity
v = material velocity
V = element volume
η = upwind coefficient (user defined, default = 1 for full upwind)
When a Lagrangian formulation is used, the values of wj and vj are equal. Thus, EQ. 1.9.0.14 is equal to zero.
20-jan-2009 9
1.9.1 UPWINDING TECHNIQUE

An upwinding technique is introduced to add numerical diffusion to the scheme, otherwise it is generally under
diffusive and thus unstable. The upwind coefficient used in EQ. 1.9.0.14 is calculated by:
⎛ ∂Φ I ⎞
η I = ηsign⎜⎜ (v − w j )⎟
⎟
EQ. 1.9.1.1
⎝ ∂X j
j
⎠
Development of a less diffusive flux calculation is currently under investigation.
∂Φ I
Fi I = σ ij ∫ dV EQ. 1.9.1.2
V
∂X j
This option is activated with the flag INTEG (only in the CFD version).
1.10 Stability
The Courant condition (neglecting viscosity effects) is used to determine the stability of an ALE process. The
maximum time step is calculated by:
Δl
Δt ≤ k EQ. 1.10.0.3
c+v−w
where k = coefficient
Δl = Smallest characteristic length of an element
c = Material speed of sound
v = Material velocity
w = Grid velocity
The speed of sound is determined by:
1 ∂ρ 4 μ
c= + EQ. 1.10.0.4
ρ ∂ρ 3 ρ
where ρ = Density
μ = Dynamic viscosity
p = Pressure
The relative velocity between the material and grid motion (v-w) is computed by:
∑∑ (v )
3
1 N
2
v−w= i
I
− wiI EQ. 1.10.0.5
N i =1 I =1
where N = Number of nodes of the considered element (usually N=8)
1.11 ALE Kinematic Conditions
1.11.1 Boundary Conditions

Boundaries with Lagrangian materials are declared automatically Lagrangian.
Nodes can be declared Lagrangian.
20-jan-2009 10
Constraints can be applied separately or simultaneously on:

• Material velocity
• Grid velocity
These constraints can be applied in one or several directions of a skew reference frame.
When the flag is set to 1, boundary condition is activated w.r.t. global reference frame or skew reference frame.
i = d.o.f with respect to global reference frame or skew reference frame

VELOCITY: Vi = 0
ACCELERATION: Π i = 0
/The boundary conditions can be changed during engine runs with /BCS or /BCSR engine options.
1.11.2 ALE Links

An ALE link is identical to a rigid link. The slave node sets' grid velocity can be controlled by two master nodes,
M1 and M2.
There are three options to choose from:
Option 0:
Velocity is linearly interpolated with respect to order of input.
I
WNI = WM 1 + (WM 2 − WM 12 ) EQ. 1.11.2.1
N +1
Option 1:
Velocity is set to maximum absolute velocity of master nodes.
WNI = WM 1 if WM 1 > WM 2 EQ. 1.11.2.2
Option 2:
Velocity is set to minimum absolute velocity of master nodes.
20-jan-2009 11
WM 1 < WM 2
WNI = WM 1 if EQ. 1.11.2.3
The input data is specified at each restart run.
1.12 Automatic Grid Computation

There are three different grid velocity formulations that can be used in an ALE simulation. New keywords define
the type of method used. The different formulations are:
• 0 - J. Donea Grid Formulation: use keyword /DONEA
(NWALE =0 for version <4.1)
• 1 - Average Displacement Formulation: use keyword /DISP
• 2 - Nonlinear Spring Formulation: use keyword /SPRING
1.12.1 /DONEA - J. Donea Grid Formulation

This formulation [8], [72] computes grid velocity using:
1 1 α u (t ) − u I (t )
WI (t + Δt / 2 ) = ∑ WJ (t − Δt / 2 ) + 2 ∑ LIJ (t )∑ J EQ. 1.12.1.1
N J N Δt J J LIJ (t )
w
where, 1 − γ ≤ ≤ 1+ γ
v
N = Number of nodes connected to node I
LIJ = Distance between node I and node J

α ,γ = adimensional factors given in input
Therefore, the grid displacement is given by:
u (t + Δt ) = u (t ) + w(t + Δt / 2 )Δt EQ. 1.12.1.2
1.12.2 /DISP - Average Displacement Formulation

The average displacement formulation calculates average velocity to determine average displacement.
1
u (t + Δt ) = ∑ w j (t ) EQ. 1.12.2.1
N J
1.12.3 /SPRING - Nonlinear Spring Formulation

Each grid node is connected to neighboring grid nodes through a non-linear viscous spring, similar to that shown
in Figure 1.12.1.
20-jan-2009 12
Figure 1.12.1 Spring Force Graph
The input parameters required are:
ΔT0 = typical time step (Must be greater than the time step of the current run.)
0 < γ < 1 = Nonlinearity factor
η = Damping coefficient
v= Shear factor (stiffness ratio between diagonal springs and springs along connectivities)
This formulation is the best of the three, but it is the most computationally expensive.
1.13 Type 1 interface - Fluid-Structure Interaction

Type 1 interface is used to model fluid-structure interactions, as shown in Figure 1.13.1
Figure 1.13.1 Fluid-Structure Interaction
This interface allows Lagrangian elements (structure) to interact with ALE (Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian)
elements, which model a viscous fluid. Full slip conditions are applied at the boundary between the two
domains.
The acceleration of the Lagrange node is computed by:
r r
r Fl + Fa
γl = EQ. 1.13.0.1
ml + ma
20-jan-2009 13
The acceleration of the ALE node is computed by:

r
r Fa
γa = EQ. 1.13.0.2
ma
The grid velocity of the ALE node is equal to the material velocity of the Lagrange node:
r r
wa = vl EQ. 1.13.0.3
The normal material velocities of Lagrange and ALE nodes are equal. Therefore:
r r r r
va ⋅ n = vl ⋅ n EQ. 1.13.0.4
1.14 ALE Rigid Wall

An ALE rigid wall has similar properties to other types of rigid walls. There are two different types:
1. Shaped Charged : use keyword /DFS/WALL_SHAP
2. Penetration: use keyword /DFS/WALL_PEN
(For further explanation of each rigid wall, contact Altair Development France).
Impacting nodes can either have a sliding contact or be tied to the rigid surface contact point. The wall can also
be moving.
An example of an object impacting an ALE rigid wall can be seen in Figure 1.14.1.
Figure 1.14.1 ALE Rigid Wall Impact
A gap is required for the wall, Figure 1.14.1. When a slave node distance to the rigid wall is within the gap:
• Nodes are forced onto the rigid wall and set as Lagrangian.
• Zero volume elements are emptied into neighboring elements and deleted.
In addition to the information explained above, an ALE rigid wall definition requires the number of nodes
impacting simultaneously to be defined, along with the order of slave node impact.
20-jan-2009 14
1.15 Example
A typical application of the ALE method is using high velocity impacts. Below, a cylinder, moving at 227 m/s,
impacts with a rigid wall. The material is copper, with a yield stress of 400 MPa. The initial diameter is 6.4 mm
and initial length is 32.4 mm. The simulation was performed using two different methods: ALE and standard
Lagrangian. The results can be seen in Figure 1.15.1.
Figure 1.15.1 Cylinder Impact Deformation
It can be seen that the cylinder mesh using ALE remains regular, unlike the Lagrange method, where large
element deformation creates very small and skewed elements. This reduces the time step, leading to more time
step cycles. However, each ALE cycle takes longer than a Lagrangian.
20-jan-2009 15
RADIOSS THEORY Version 10.0 COMPUTATIONAL AERO-ACOUSTIC
Chapter
COMPUTATIONAL AERO-ACOUSTIC
20-jan-2009 16
2.0 COMPUTATIONAL AERO-ACOUSTIC

This chapter presents a resumed state-of-the-art of simulation in aero-acoustic domain as presented in [88].
Aero-Acoustics is the engineering field dealing with noise generated generally (but not necessarily) by a
turbulent fluid flow interacting with a vibrating structure. This field differs from the pure acoustic domain where
the object is the propagation of acoustic pressure waves, including reflections, diffractions and absorptions, in a
medium at rest. Aero-Acoustic questions arise in many industrial design problems and are heavily represented in
the noise nuisances related to the transportation industry.
A classification of Aero-Acoustic problems can be made using the following three categories:
• External wind noise transmitted to the inside through a structure: In the automotive industry, a
pillar, side mirror and windshield wipers noise are typical problems of this category.
• Internal flow noise transmitted to the outside through a structure: Examples of this class of
problems are exhaust, HVAC and Intakes noises.
• Rotating machines noise: Axial and centrifugal fans are noisy components that bring with them many
interesting Aero-Acoustic problems.
Most of the Aero-Acoustic R&D works are performed experimentally but this method has some critical pitfalls.
Although it is relatively simple to setup a microphone, measure a noise level and derive a spectrum at any given
location in space, the correct analysis of an Aero Acoustic problem involves the use of advanced experimental
techniques and is complex to use. The Aero Acoustic engineering community seeks more and more the help of
CAE tools as they become available. Those tools complement the experimentations and allow a thorough
visualization and understanding of the pressure and velocity fields as well as the structural vibrations.
Furthermore, parametric studies can be carried out with little added cost since a numerical model modification is
often straightforward and the CPU time is becoming cheaper and cheaper.
CFD codes are available since over several years, able to predict with a reasonable precision steady state flows
(drag and lift) and slow transient flows like heating and defrosting. Highly transient flows involved in the Aero-
Acoustic phenomena have not been treated since they were not in the bulk of the needs and they required way
too much CPU to be industrially feasible. Acoustic Propagation numerical tools have also been industrially
available since quite a few years. These tools operate in the frequency domain and are able to propagate a given
boundary condition signal in a fluid at rest, including the noise reflections, diffractions, transmissions and
attenuations thanks to the various geometrical obstacles and different materials.
Attempts have been made to combine existing CFD and Acoustic propagation tools to predict Aero-Acoustic
problems. Most methodologies are based on the Lighthill &Curle method, developed in the mid 50’s and Ffowcs
Williams & Hawkings contributions made in the late 60 ’s [67], [68], [69], [70]. The ideas underlying these
methods are to decouple the flow pressure field and the acoustic pressure field. The fluid flow can then be
computed by a standard CFD code and the noise derived from the curvature and turbulent intensities of the flow.
A propagation tool is then used to compute the noise on a sub grid of the CFD computational domain loosing
therefore quite some local information and high frequency content. First attempts were made with
incompressible steady state CFD simulations and were not able to deliver valuable result in many cases. A good
example of these limitations is highlighted by the study of the noise generated by a simple ‘side mirror’ shape
written by R. Siegert [71]. Recent developments of this family of techniques require the use of transient
simulations and filtering to avoid loosing to much information on the coarser acoustic mesh. Reasonable success
has been met in specific areas involving low frequencies (up to a couple hundred Hz) and considerable CPU time
is needed.
An alternative methodology is to incorporate in a single numerical tool, right from the beginning, the ingredients
that are necessary to perform direct Aero-Acoustic numerical simulation. They are:
20-jan-2009 17
• Compressible Navier Stokes: To be able to propagate pressure waves and therefore take into account
in a single simulation the flow and the noise, including all possible cavity modes.
• Fluid structure coupling: To be able to treat the problems involving a turbulent flow on one side of
the structure and the noise radiation on the other side.
• Small time step: To be able to deal accurately with frequencies going up to several thousand Hertz.
• Transient turbulence modeling: Unlike the Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes (RANS) methods that
makes the assumption that the flow is a combination of a steady state and turbulent fluctuations. Aero-
Acoustic noise is directly linked to the small scale turbulence fluctuations and strongly time dependant.
• Acoustic boundaries with prescribed impedance: This is a critical point of a good Aero-Acoustic
simulation. Boundaries need to be able to perform tasks such as giving a free field impedance to an inlet
with fixed velocity, prescribing a specific impedance at the outlet of a duct to make sure long
wavelength stay trapped inside, treat exterior air impedance effect on a vibrating structure and be used
to model absorbing materials (carpet, foams …) that are used to coat many components.
These ingredients have been implemented in a single numerical code. The outcome is RADIOSS solver which is
different from the existing CFD codes in its capabilities and particularly well suited to short time transient
analysis.
2.1 Mathematical Formulation

The objective of the development described in this document is underlined by the search for fully suited
numerical technologies in order to model all physical phenomena involved in noise source generation. This
criteria will be used to perform all the major numerical choices described here below without any trade-off tight
to other applications.
2.1.1 Compressible Navier Stokes

Correct prediction of Aero-Acoustic phenomena must obviously include a solution of the 3D Navier Stokes
equations since noise sources lie in a turbulent viscous fluid flow. The equations have been written with the
Arbitrary Lagrange Euler (ALE) formulation [8].This means that an arbitrarily moving frame is used in order to
be able to have a fluid grid that can undergo deformation. The deformation can range from small vibrations (an
exhaust pipe) to large deformations (a door slamming). The conservation equations are written for mass,
momentum and energy:
∂ρ
Mass + ((u − w ).∇ )ρ + ρ∇.u = 0 EQ. 2.1.1.1
∂t
∂u
Momentum ρ + ρ ((u − w ).∇ )u − ∇τ + ∇p = 0 EQ. 2.1.1.2
∂t
∂ρe
Energy + ((u − w ).∇ )ρe + (ρe + p )∇.u = 0 EQ. 2.1.1.3
∂t
Where u is the fluid velocity, w the grid velocity, ρ the density, p the pressure e the energy and τ the stress
tensor.
NOTE: In case of w=u, the system degenerates into the Lagrangian formulation, meanwhile w=0 describes the
classical Eulerian formulation. Lagrangian formulation will be used for the structures when needed. An
ALE fluid mesh is attached to the structure mesh, therefore able to undergo deformations tight to the
structural vibrations.
20-jan-2009 18
Acoustic phenomena are driven by pressure waves propagating in the materials. Those waves velocity, the sound
speed velocity c can be expressed by the following equations:
∂P
c=
∂ρ EQ. 2.1.1.4
Another useful relation defining c as a function of the material characteristics is:
K
c= EQ. 2.1.1.5
ρ
where K is the bulk modulus of the material.
In the usual engineering fields, the sound speed is about 340 m/s for air and 1500 m/s for water.
Most of the CAA research in the industry is aimed at flow motions of relatively small Mach numbers.
Therefore, CFD codes have widely used the incompressibility hypothesis which allows a fair simplification of
the Navier Stokes equations. An incompressible flow is a flow for in which:
Dρ ∂ρ ⎛ ∂u ∂v ∂w ⎞
= + u.∇ρ << ρ ⎜⎜ + + ⎟
⎟ EQ. 2.1.1.6
Dt ∂t ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂z ⎠
If this condition is fulfilled the mass conservation equation can be rewritten.
∇u = 0 EQ. 2.1.1.7
It has to be noted that an incompressible flow does not necessarily implies that ρ remains constant throughout
the flow but that ρ remains constant along a streamline since one can substitute EQ.2.1.1.6 in EQ.2.1.1.1.
Practically, this condition can be reasonably assumed for Mach numbers lower than 0.3 and in the case of
transient flows, if the time rate of velocity change is long compared to the time for a sound wave to traverse the
flow field. Thus, the incompressibility hypothesis yields an instantaneous transmission of pressure waves in the
fluid domain. Incompressible approach will not be able to simulate the propagation of acoustic waves nor the
cavity modes tight to composition of reflected waves on a given geometry. It then becomes necessary to apply
one of the following techniques:
• Solve the compressible Navier Stokes equations to capture correctly the propagative nature of the noise
waves.
• Use additional equations to derive the noise sources from the flow field.
Accordingly to the base criteria of always to the best solution for CAA, it has been decided to follow the first
path that requires no specific assumptions and is physically and mathematically much better grounded. By
solving the fully compressible Navier Stokes equations, it becomes possible to compute in a single simulation
the flow and the sound pressure wave’s propagation. Since there is a large gap between the flow pressure
variations (in the order of hundreds of Pa in most cases) and the acoustic pressure variations (in the order of 1 Pa
~94 dB), it has become critical to use 64 bits double precision arithmetic. Using 32 bits would yield flawed
results because the acoustic pressure levels would not be handled properly in many cases.
The spatial integration of momentum equation is performed with a Finite Element integration using Streamline
Upwind Petrov Galerkin (SUPG) scheme [72], which was shown accurate enough to capture flow instabilities.
Advection of state variables is achieved via a simple finite volume technique as in Donea's original paper [8].
20-jan-2009 19
2.1.2 Transient analysis, explicit formulation

Sound pressure waves and acoustic phenomena are transient per fundamental nature. Therefore, a transient
solution of the full compressible Navier-Stokes equations has been developed, allowing the propagation of
pressure waves as well as transient fluid flow simulation.
For time integration, two techniques are available, implicit and explicit. Implicit methods are unconditionally
stable; therefore allowing the use of an arbitrary large time step; meanwhile the explicit formulation is
conditionally stable. A Courant Friedrichs Levy condition [56] has to be verified at each time step of the
simulation:
⎛ l ⎞
dt ≤ Min⎜⎜ ⎟ EQ. 2.1.1.8
⎝ (c + u − w ) ⎟⎠
where l is the characteristic element size, c the sound speed, u the flow velocity and w the grid velocity. Typical
values of dt for CAA applications are in 1 to 5 μ s range.
The choice of one formulation or the other will actually be dictated by the minimization of the CPU time for the
considered application. Shall the goal be to simulate the defrosting of a windshield lasting about 5 minutes, with
low flow velocities, the several second time step allowed by the implicit scheme will be much more efficient. In
the CAA case however, the frequencies of interest are going up to 5 to 10 kHz and the Nyquist criteria and anti
aliasing filtering imposes a sampling for the time domain recording of 20 to 40 kHz. Therefore, the maximum
time step that can be used in implicit will be 5x10-5s.The explicit time step being in the range of 2x10-6s, one has
to compare the cost of one implicit time step to 25 explicit time steps. A survey yield a ratio of about two orders
of magnitude between the CPU cost of both schemes in favor of the explicit and therefore, the explicit scheme
CPU efficiency has been considered superior for CAA applications.
2.1.3 Large Eddy Simulation Turbulence modeling

Another critical aspect of a correct CAA modeling is to take into account properly the noise induced by turbulent
structures. Unfortunately, the turbulent structures that are simultaneously active at any given time range from the
full size of the problem to the microscopic Kolmogorov size. The ideal solution would be to use DNS but this is
unfortunately out of reach of today computers. Consequently, a turbulence model has to be used. The choice
among the turbulence models will be performed by evaluating their interest for the CAA simulation. Today,
there are two major families of turbulence models that are available for implementation in an industrial oriented
CFD code.
The Reynolds Average Navier-Stokes (RANS) turbulence models family relies on the assumption that the flow
can be separated between a steady state flow and a turbulent fluctuation. The steady state flow can be interpreted
as the spatial average of the flow field. Transient problems featuring vortex shedding cannot be treated this way
and therefore Unsteady Reynolds Average Navier-Stokes (URANS) have been developed in which the averaging
is performed on a considerably smaller time scale. Although RANS and URANS models are easy and cheap to
implement, the basic assumption that there is a combination of a steady state flow and turbulent fluctuations is
not very well suited to the CAA analysis where the key to the noise generation is the transient turbulent
behavior. The Large Eddy Simulation or LES family is based on a fully transient flow simulation. Large
turbulent scales which depend heavily on the boundary conditions are solved directly by the computational grid
and the small scales are assumed to be more or less non problem dependant, are solved by a model called a Sub
Grid Scale model (SGS).The Navier-Stokes equations are filtered in space and the spatial high frequency terms
(beyond the filter cutoff frequency) are modeled by the SGS .The SGS main role is to model the viscous
dissipation of the energy within the small scale eddies and absorbs energy from the large scales to this effect.
The filter used most often is actually the grid itself and the spatial cutoff is about 6 element size. The drawback
that prevents the LES to be used in many cases is the need for small elements for the base assumption to be valid
(independence of the modeled scales from the boundary conditions) and the transient assumption which requires
the use of a CFL condition on the time step to guarantee a correct simulation of the larger scales and yields large
CPU time when combined with classical implicit resolution techniques.
20-jan-2009 20
In our case, since it has already been chosen to solve the transient Navier Stokes equations with an explicit
scheme yielding a very small time step, the CFL condition does not imply any major constraint. Mesh size
criteria have been developed in order to ensure a good CAA behavior and LES accuracy (also see Modeling
Methodology in the next chapter).
In noise generation zones where most of the turbulence is generated and small vortices are very active, the mesh
criteria is:
⎛u ⎞
h < 0.1⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ EQ. 2.1.1.9
⎝f ⎠
Where h is the element size, u the flow velocity and f the highest frequency of interest. The last equation yields
the expression of local Reynolds number:
u.h ⎛ u2 ⎞
Re = < 0.1⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ EQ. 2.1.1.10
ν ⎝ f .ν ⎠
Usually, u is in the 20 m/s range, f is 2500 Hz and the air viscosity ν =1.5x10-5m2/s. This yields a local Reynolds
number of 1000. A reinforced mesh criteria applied close to the walls is to have a y+ lower than 100. Although,
these numbers might be considered as large by academic standards, it has been verified for various industrial
applications that the numerical predictions reasonably match the experimental data [73]. In the SGS model, the
sub grid scale level energy dissipation ε SGS is proportional to the resolved scales stress tensor S ij and the
modeled small scales stress tensor τ ij through a turbulent viscosity coefficient ν SGS .This turbulent viscosity is a
function of the filter width l (mesh size) and of the resolved scales (via the stress tensor).Cs is known as the
Smagorinsky constant and has been experimentally evaluated to be 0.18 (this constant can be tuned for specific
applications and 0.1 is used by default in RADIOSS).
ε SGS = −2ν SGS .S ij .S ij EQ. 2.1.1.11
ν SGS = (CS l )2 S ( ) EQ. 2.1.1.12
It has to be noted that an original pressure damping factor has been developed in order to better take into account
the absorption of the acoustic waves on the boundary layers.
The elements neighboring the walls have a specific treatment depending upon the element size. A logarithmic
velocity profile is assumed in the first layer of elements and the corresponding modified viscosity is derived.
2.1.4 Boundary Conditions

Non-reflective boundary conditions are critical for CFD simulations and it is obviously going to be even more
critical for CAA analysis. Acoustic boundary conditions treatment can be classified in three different categories:
• Non reflective fluid boundaries in the open field. Under this class lie the external wind noise
problems. Not only outlet and sides need to be treated but unless and infinite impedance or
supersonic conditions are assumed, the inlet shall be able to let acoustic waves go out of the
computational domain.
• Boundaries including geometrical details. Exhaust tailpipe for instance have a cutoff frequency
related to its diameter and shape.
• Exterior air boundaries. In order to correctly treat problems like an exhaust noise, the exterior air
impedance has to be applied to the structure in order to get the correct vibrations and noise. It has
to be noted that in the case of a duct surrounded by other structures (e.g. an exhaust line under a
car), the acoustic impedance of the exterior air is vastly different from the free field conditions and
non trivial to compute.
20-jan-2009 21
The goal of boundary conditions is to replace the influence of the exterior of the computational domain by a
condition that will let some frequencies go out and reflect others accordingly to the physical properties of the
surrounding materials. Acoustic impedance, defined by the ratio of the acoustic pressure ~p at a given location
over the acoustic velocity u n at the same location is a key notion.
~p
Z= EQ. 2.1.1.13
un
The important point to be reminded here is that ~

p and un differs from the traditional fluid dynamics pressure
and velocity since they are complex functions, solutions of Helmoltz equation which is describing the
propagation of waves in the frequency domain ω :
r r r
p (r , ω ) + k 2 ~
Δ~ p (r , ω ) = F (r , ω ) EQ. 2.1.1.14
With:
ω
k= EQ. 2.1.1.15
c
where c is the sound speed. In the acoustic works, items are classically described as a function of the frequency.
In particular, impedances describing the boundary conditions acoustic behavior. RADIOSS on the other hand is
based on a time domain description of the physical phenomena, it is therefore not possible to use directly those
data and it is required to impose time dependant boundary conditions. For the non-reflective boundary
conditions, it has been decided to implement the linearized Euler equation by Bayliss and Turkell [74 ]:
∂ρ ∂u
= ρc n +
c
( p∞ − p ) EQ. 2.1.1.16
∂t ∂t 2lc
Where n is the normal to the boundary surface and lc a relaxation factor toward the desired pressure p∞ .
Practically, the last equation matches the radiation of a monopole situated at a distance 2 lc inside the
computational domain.
2.1.5 Fluid Structure Coupling

Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) is an issue in many important sub domains of the CAA. Important applications
include and are of course not limited to:
• Duct noise: The noise radiated by a structural system of ducts whose vibrating walls are excited
by a turbulent flow inside. Among the many examples, exhausts and Heat Ventilation and Air
Conditioning (HVAC).
• Passenger perception of exterior wind noise transmitted by a side glass or plane cabin.
One might suggest that rather than using a complex FSI solution, a decoupled approach could be used. That is
performing a CFD (or pure fluid CAA) simulation on one hand and then apply to a structural model as a
boundary condition the computed pressure field. Beyond the mere inconvenience tight to the external coupling
of two numerical programs (flow and structure), this approach, which is reasonably grounded steady aero
elasticity phenomena and for low frequencies applications is not well suited to broad band CAA applications. It
is not practical to apply the transient pressure field with a sampling of 20 kHz on a fine mesh and even more
important, there is a dependency of the structure vibrations to the surrounding fluid impedances. This impedance
can be eventually modeled on the side where there is no flow but is extremely complex on the side exposed to
the turbulent airflow. Consequently, in most cases, a decoupled modeling will be flawed from the beginning.
20-jan-2009 22
Accordingly to our goal of modeling all physical phenomena important for CAA, a full FSI has been developed
between the well-established structural module of RADIOSS and the CFD/CAA module. Some specific options
have been developed in order to make this interface practical among which:
1. ALE Subcycling. In most applications, there are 95% fluid elements and 5% or less structural elements.
Unfortunately the sound speed is often one order of magnitude higher in the structure yielding a time
step decreased by the same factor. The 5% structure element will impose to the 95% a time step 10
times smaller, which is obviously not desirable. A specific subcycling has been developed in order to
compute the fluid elements with a decoupled time step from the structures.
2. Fluid – Structure interfaces have been developed to ease the mesh development. Those interfaces can be
used to stitch arbitrary meshes together and can be used in either fixed or sliding mode (fluid-fluid fixed
and sliding interfaces have also been developed to take care primarily of fan problems).
2.2 Modeling Methodology

The process of defining a numerical model for a given CAA application unfolds in four consecutive phases. The
quality of the results is directly tight to the quality of the numerical model developed in the points 1 and 2 below.
It is therefore critical to define precisely the questions the model is supposed to answer to before starting any
development:
1. Mesh definition: Targeting specific answers to engineering questions and constrained by the available
computer resources.
2. Numerical model construction, including material, boundary conditions and desired output.
3. Run monitoring.
4. Post processing of the time domain data. Including 3D visualization, time history and frequency content
analysis.
2.2.1 Mesh definition

The mesh building process is the art of building models able to solve the CFD and the CAA problem for a given
set of boundary conditions and range of frequencies while keeping the model as small as possible to minimize
the compute time. To do so, a set of practical rules have been developed. These rules should be used as initial
guidelines to get started on a given problem.
However each class of problems has its own requirements and subtleties and a good knowledge of the problem
physics through experimental data and/or numerical simulations will be necessary to refine these rules and get
the best possible results.
2.2.2 Post processing

Post processing of the numerical simulation is very similar to the post processing of a detailed experimental
study of the same problem. The analysis will be carried out by using:
• FFT’s of recorded time domain signal to access the frequency domain content at any given location of
the computational domain.
• Visualization and analysis of intensities on the structures
• Propagation in the far field (if and when needed) of the pressure signal. Typically, this is required for
simulations where the measurement locations are not located in the computational domain. In most of
the internal flow problems for instance the limit of the domain is the structure and a boundary elements
layer to represent the outside air impedance (exhaust, HVAC …).The noise is often measured at a given
distance outside the ducts in still air where there is no reason to have an expensive CAA solution. This
propagation can be performed by a simple monopolar approximation that gives satisfactory results in
the free conditions or by more sophisticated tools such as BEM methods.
• …
20-jan-2009 23
2.3 Application and Validation

As the aim of this manual is not to describe the modeling techniques, the readers are invited to consult the
available publications (for example [73], [75], [76], [77] and the proceeding of International RADIOSS User
Conference).
2.4 Conclusion
Along the whole development process, the CAA orientation has been kept in mind for all the decisions and lead
to the choice of the following methods:
• Compressible 3D Navier stokes solver
• Transient explicit time integration
• LES Turbulence
• Acoustic boundary conditions
• Fluid Structure coupling
These ingredients are needed to perform CAA simulations with no particular assumptions on the flow (excepted
of course the use of a turbulence model), the fluid structures coupling or the vibrations, making RADIOSS a
fairly general code.
Further developments are considered among which we can cite the ability to deal with bent flows. On the real
world, in many interesting cases, the object to be studied is not positioned on a flat ground but embedded within
a complex geometrical shape (for example a side mirror on a car).The flow, which hits the component, is
distorted by this geometry. Simulation of the whole vehicle with a CAA method is not practical beyond a few
hundred Hertz because of the huge number of elements needed in the propagation zone. Therefore, a method
mixing a steady state simulation of the far field to get proper bent boundary conditions and RADIOSS close to
the component and the acoustic sources zones is currently under development to perform CAA analysis of this
kind of problem well beyond 1000 Hz.
20-jan-2009 24
RADIOSS THEORY Version 10.0 SMOOTH PARTICLES HYDRODYNAMICS
Chapter
SMOOTH PARTICLE HYDRODYNAMICS
20-jan-2009 25
3.0 SMOOTH PARTICLE HYDRODYNAMICS

Smooth Particle Hydrodynamics SPH is a meshless numerical method based on interpolation theory. It allows
any function to be expressed in terms of its values at a set of disordered point’s so-called particles. SPH is not
based on the particle physics theory. The conservation laws of continuum dynamics, in the form of partial
differential equations, are transformed into integral equations through the use of kernel approximation. A
comprehensive state-of-the-art of the method is given in [78], [81], and [82]. These techniques were initially
developed in astrophysics [79], [80]. During the 1991-1995 periods, SPH has become widely recognized and has
been used extensively for fluid and solid mechanics type of applications. SPH method is implemented in
RADIOSS in Lagrangian approach whereby the motion of a discrete number of particles is followed in time.
SPH is a complementary approach with respect to ALE method. When the ALE mesh is too distorted to handle
good results (for example in the case of vortex creation), SPH method may allow getting a sufficiently accurate
solution.
3.1 SPH approximation of a function

Let ∏ f (x ) the integral approximation of a scalar function f in space:
∏ f (x ) = ∫ f ( y )W (x − y, h)dy EQ.3.1.0.1
Ω
with h the so-called smoothing length and W a kernel approximation such that:
∀x, ∫ W ( x − y, h )dy = 1 EQ. 3.1.0.2

Ω
and ∀x, lim h→0 W (x − y, h ) = δ ( x − y ) (in a suitable sense) EQ. 3.1.0.3
δ denotes the Dirac function.
Let a set of particles i=1, n at positions xi (i=1,n) with mass mi and density ρ i . The smoothed approximation of
the function f is (summation over neighbouring particles and the particle i itself):
m
∏ f (x ) = ∑ ρ f (x )W (x − y, h)
s
i =1, n
i
i EQ. 3.1.0.4
i
The derivatives of the smoothed approximation are obtained by ordinary differentiation.
∇f ( x ) = ∑ ρ f (x )∇W (x − y, h )
m i
i EQ. 3.1.0.5
i =1, n i
The following kernel [83] which is an approximation of Gaussian kernel by cubic splines was chosen (Figure
3.1.1):
3 ⎡ 2 ⎛ r ⎞ 2 1 ⎛ r ⎞3 ⎤
r ≤ h ⇒ W (r , h ) = ⎢ −⎜ ⎟ + ⎜ ⎟ ⎥ EQ. 3.1.0.6
2πh 3 ⎢⎣ 3 ⎝ h ⎠ 2 ⎝ h ⎠ ⎥⎦
3
1 ⎛ r⎞
h ≤ r ≤ 2h ⇒ W (r , h ) = 3 ⎜
2− ⎟ EQ. 3.1.0.7
4πh ⎝ h⎠
20-jan-2009 26
and 2h ≤ r ⇒ W (r , h ) = 0 EQ. 3.1.0.8
Figure 3.1.1 Kernel based on spline functions
W(r,h)
2h
This kernel has compact support, so that for each particle i, only the closest particles contribute to
approximations at i (this feature is computationally efficient). The accuracy of approximating EQ. 3.1.0.1 by EQ.
3.1.0.4 depends on the order of the particles.
3.2 Corrected SPH approximation of a function

Corrected SPH formulation [85], [86] has been introduced in order to satisfy the so-called consistency
conditions:
∫ W ( y − x, h) = 1, ∀x
Ω
EQ. 3.2.0.1
∫ ( y − x )W ( y − x, h) = 0, ∀x
Ω
EQ. 3.2.0.2
These equations insure that the integral approximation of a function f coincides with f for constant and linear
functions of space.
CSPH is a correction of the kernel functions :
[ ]
Wˆ j ( x, h ) = W j (x, h )α ( x ) 1 + β (x ) • (x − x j ) , with W j (x, h ) = W (x − x j , h ) EQ. 3.2.0.3
where the parameters α x and() β (x ) are evaluated by enforcing the consistency condition, now given by the
point wise integration as :
∑V Wˆ (x, h ) = 1, ∀x
j
j j EQ. 3.2.0.4
∑V (x − x )Wˆ (x, h ) = 0, ∀x
j
j j j EQ. 3.2.0.5
20-jan-2009 27
These equations enable the explicit evaluation of the correction parameters α (x ) and β (x ) as follows:
−1
⎡ ⎤
β ( x ) = ⎢∑ V j (x − x j ) ⊗(x − x j )W j ( x, h )⎥ ∑V (x j j − x )W j ( x, h ) EQ. 3.2.0.6
⎣ j ⎦ j
1
α (x ) =
[
∑V jW j (x, h) 1 + β (x ) • (x − x j ) ] EQ. 3.2.0.7
Since the evaluation of gradients of corrected kernel (which are used for the SPH integration of continuum
equations) becomes very expensive, corrected SPH limited to order 0 consistency has been introduced.
Therefore, the kernel correction reduces to the following equations :
Wˆ j ( x, h ) = W j ( x, h )α ( x ) EQ. 3.2.0.8
∑V Wˆ (x, h ) = 1, ∀x
j
j j EQ. 3.2.0.9
1
that is α (x ) = EQ. 3.2.0.10
∑V jW j (x, h)
j
Note that SPH corrections generally insure a better representation even if the particles are not organized into a
hexagonal compact net, especially close to the integration domain frontiers. SPH corrections also allow the
smoothing length h to values different to the net size Δx to be set.
3.3 SPH Integration of continuum equations

In order to keep an almost constant number of neighbors contributing at each particle we use smoothing length
varying in time and in space.
Consider d i the smoothing length related to particle i ;
⎛ di + d j ⎞ ⎡ ⎛ di + d j ⎞⎤
W j (i ) = Wˆ ⎜⎜ xi − x j , ⎟⎟ and ∇W j (i ) = grad xi ⎢Wˆ ⎜⎜ x − x j , ⎟⎟⎥ if kernel correction,
⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎣⎢ ⎝ 2 ⎠⎦⎥
EQ. 3.3.0.1
⎛ di + d j ⎞ ⎡ ⎛ d +dj ⎞⎤
or W j (i ) = W ⎜⎜ xi − x j , ⎟⎟ and ∇W j (i ) = grad xi ⎢W ⎜⎜ x − x j , i ⎟⎟⎥ without kernel correction.
⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎣ ⎝ 2 ⎠⎦
EQ. 3.3.0.2
At each time step, density is updated for each particle i, according to:
dρ
= −ρi∇ ⋅ v i EQ. 3.3.0.3
dt i
∑ ρ (v − v j ) ⋅ ∇W j (i )
mj
with ∇ ⋅ v i = i EQ. 3.3.0.4
j
( m j indicates the mass of a particle i, ρi its density, vi its velocity).
20-jan-2009 28
Strain tensor is obtained by the same way when non pure hydrodynamic laws are used or in the other words
when law uses deviatoric terms of the strain tensor:
dvα
β
dx i
m
= ∑ j viα − vαj
ρj
dW j
dx β
( )
(i ),α = 1...3, β = 1...3. EQ. 3.3.0.5
Next the constitutive law is integrated for each particle. Then Forces are computed according to :
mi
dv
[ ]
= −∑ViV j pi ∇W j (i ) − p j ∇Wi ( j ) − ∑ mi m jπ ij
[
∇W j (i ) − ∇Wi ( j ) ] EQ. 3.3.0.6
dt i j j 2
where pi and p j are pressures at particles i and j, and π ij is a term for artificial viscosity. The expression is
more complex for non pure hydrodynamic laws. Note that the previous equation reduces to the following one
when there is no kernel correction:
mi
dv
dt i
[ ]
= −∑ViV j pi + p j ∇W j (i ) − ∑ mi m jπ ij ∇W j (i ), since ∇Wi ( j ) = −∇W j (i ) EQ. 3.3.0.7
j j
Then, search distances are updated according to:
d (d i ) ∇⋅v i
= di EQ. 3.3.0.8
dt 3
in order particles to keep almost a constant number of neighbors into their kernels ( ρd is kept constant).
3
3.4 Artificial viscosity

As usual in SPH implementations [83], viscosity is rather an inter-particles pressure than a bulk pressure. It was
shown that the use of EQ. 3.4.0.1 and EQ. 3.4.0.2 generates a substantial amount of entropy in regions of strong
shear even if there is no compression.
ci + c j
− qb μij + qαμ ij2
π ij = 2
(ρ i + ρj)
EQ. 3.4.0.1
d ij (vi − v j ) • (X i − X j )
with μ ij = 2
EQ. 3.4.0.2
Xi − X j + εd ij2
where X i (resp. X j ) indicates the position of particle I (resp.j) and ci (resp cj) is the sound speed at location i
(resp.j), and qa and qb are constants. This leads us to introduce EQ. 3.4.0.3 and EQ. 3.4.0.4, as explained in [82].
The artificial viscosity is decreased in regions where vorticity is high with respect to velocity divergence.
ci + c j
− qb μij + qαμ ij2
π ij = 2
(ρ i + ρj)
EQ. 3.4.0.3
20-jan-2009 29
d ij (vi − v j )• (X i − X j ) ( f i + f j ) ∇⋅v k
with μ ij = 2
, fk = EQ. 3.4.0.4
Xi − X j + εd ij2 2 ∇⋅v k + ∇×v k +ε′
ck
dk
Default values for qa and qb are respectively set to 2 and 1.
3.5 Stability: Time step control

The stability conditions of explicit scheme in SPH formulation can be written over cells or on nodes.
3.5.1 Cell time step

In case of cell stability computation (when no nodal time step is used), the stable time step is computed as:
⎛ ⎞
Δt = Δtsca ⋅ min i ⎜
di ⎟, with α = ⎛⎜ qb + qa ⋅ μi ⋅ di ⎞⎟, and μi = max j (μij )
⎝ i i i (
⎜ c α + α 2 +1 ) ⎟
⎠
i ⎜
⎝ ci ⎟
⎠
EQ. 3.5.1.1
Δt sca is the user defined coefficient (RADIOSS option /DT or /DT/SPHCEL). The value of Δt sca =0.3 is
recommended in [83].
3.5.2 Nodal time step

In case of nodal time step, stability time step is computed in a more robust way:
2mi
Δti = at particle i EQ. 3.5.2.1
Ki
Using the following notations:
⎛ di + d j ⎞ ⎡ ⎛ di + d j ⎞⎤
W j (i ) = Wˆ ⎜⎜ xi − x j ′ ⎟⎟and ∇W j (i ) = grad xi ⎢Wˆ ⎜⎜ x − x j ′ ⎟⎟⎥ if kernel correction,
⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎣⎢ ⎝ 2 ⎠⎦⎥
EQ. 3.5.2.2
⎛ di + d j ⎞ ⎡ ⎛ d +dj ⎞⎤
or W j (i ) = W ⎜⎜ xi − x j ′ ⎟⎟and ∇W j (i ) = grad xi ⎢W ⎜⎜ x − x j ′ i ⎟⎟⎥ if no kernel correction,
⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎣ ⎝ 2 ⎠⎦
EQ. 3.5.2.3
Recalling that apart from the artificial viscosity terms:
[
Fi = ∑ Fij , Fij = ViV j pi ∇W j (i ) − p j ∇W j ( j ) ] EQ. 3.5.2.4
j
we write K ij =
dFij
d (ui − u j )
≤
d
d (ui − u j )
( [
ViV j pi ∇W j (i ) + p j ∇Wi ( j ) ]) EQ. 3.5.2.5
20-jan-2009 30
where ui-uj is the relative displacement of particles i and j. Keeping the only first order terms leads to :
⎡ dpi dp j ⎤
K ij ≤ ViV j ⎢ ∇W j (i ) + ∇Wi ( j ) ⎥
⎣⎢ d (ui − u j ) d (ui − u j )
EQ.3.5.2.6
⎦⎥
dρi dρi
∇W j (i ) = ViV j i ⋅ ∇W j (i ) = ViV j ci2 ∇W j (i )
dpi dp
d (ui − u j ) dρi d (ui − u j ) d (ui − u j )
where ViV j
EQ.3.5.2.7
∇W j (i ) = mi ci2V&j2 ∇W j (i )
dpi 2
d (ui − u j )
that is ViV j EQ.3.5.2.8
Same reasoning leads to :
dp j
∇Wi ( j ) = m j c 2jV&i 2 ∇Wi ( j )
2
d (ui − u j )
ViV j EQ.3.5.2.9
So that K ij ≤ mi ci V& j ∇W j (i ) + m j c j V&i ∇Wi ( j )

2 2 2 2 2 2
EQ.3.5.2.10
Stiffness around node i is then estimated as :
K i ≤ ∑ K ij EQ.3.5.2.11
j
3.6 Conservative smoothing of velocities

It can be shown that the SPH method is unstable in tension. The instability is shown to result from an effective
stress with a negative modulus (imaginary sound speed) being produced by the interaction between the
constitutive relation and the kernel function, and is not caused by the numerical time integration algorithm [84].
According to [82], we use special filtering of velocities (so called conservative smoothing, because momentum
quantities are not modified):
2m j Wi ( j ) + W j (i )
Vi (smoothed ) = vi + α cs ∑ (v − vi ) EQ.3.6.0.1
ρi + ρ j
j
j 2
3.7 SPH cell distribution

It is recommended to distribute the particles through a hexagonal compact or a cubic net.
3.7.1 Hexagonal compact net

A cubic centered faces net realizes a hexagonal compact distribution and this can be useful to build the net
(Figure 3.7.1). The nominal value h0 is the distance between any particle and its closest neighbour. The mass of
the particle mp may be related to the density of the material ρ and to the size h0 of the hexagonal compact net,
with respect to the following equation:
20-jan-2009 31
h03
mp ≈ ρ EQ.3.7.1.1
2
since the space can be partitioned into polyhedras surrounding each particle of the net, each one with a volume :
h03
Vp ≈ EQ.3.7.1.2
2
ρV
But, due to discretization error at the frontiers of the domain, mass consistency better corresponds to mP =
n
where V is the total volume of the domain and n the number of particles distributed in the domain.
Figure 3.7.1 Local view of hexagonal compact net and perspective view of cubic centered faces net
Note that choosing h0 for the smoothing length insures naturally consistency up to order 1 if the previous
equation is satisfied.
Weight functions vanish at distance 2h where h is the smoothing length. In an hexagonal compact net with size
h0, each particle has exactly 54 neighbors within the distance 2 h0 (Table 3.7.1).
Table 3.7.1 Number of neighbors in a hexagonal compact net.
distance d number of particles at distance d number of particles within distance d
h0 12 12
2h0 6 18
3h0 24 42
2h0 12 54
5h0 24 78
3.7.2 Cubic net

Let c the side length of each elementary cube into the net. The mass of the particles mp should be related to the
density of the material ρ and to the size c of the net, with respect to the following equation:
20-jan-2009 32
mp ≈ c3ρ EQ.3.7.1.3
By experience, a larger number of neighbors must be taken into account w.r.t. the hexagonal compact net, in
order to solve the tension instability as explained in following sections. A value of the smoothing length between
1.25c and 1.5c seems to be suitable. In the case of smoothing length h=1.5c, each particle has 98 neighbors
within the distance 2h.
Table 3.7.2 Number of neighbors in a cubic net
distance d number of particles at distance d number of particles within distance d
c 6 6
2c 12 18
3c 8 26
2c 6 32
5c 24 56
6c 24 80
2 2c 12 92
3c 6 98
20-jan-2009 33

Theory ALE CFD SPH

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Theory ALE CFD SPH

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

RADIOSS THEORY MANUAL

10.0 version – January 2009

2.0 COMPUTATIONAL AERO-ACOUSTIC 17

3.0 SMOOTH PARTICLE HYDRODYNAMICS 26

1.0 ALE FORMULATION

1.1 Referential Domain

This relates to acceleration by:

1.2 Conservation of Momentum

The transport of momentum force is calculated by:

1.2.1 Momentum transport force

0 ≤ η ≤ 1 Upwind coefficient given in input.

1.3 Conservation of Mass

Using a finite volume formulation:

Using the divergence theorem leads to:

Further expansion gives:

The density, ρi, is given computed:

For a free surface: ρJ = ρI

1.4 Conservation of Internal Energy

This formula is still valid if 〉 e is not assumed uniform over volume V.

1.5 Rezoned Quantities

1.6 ALE Materials

1.7 Numerical Integration

1. Simplified Flow Chart

1.8 Improved integration method

1.9 Momentum Transport Force

1.9.1 UPWINDING TECHNIQUE

where N = Number of nodes of the considered element (usually N=8)

1.11 ALE Kinematic Conditions

1.11.1 Boundary Conditions

Constraints can be applied separately or simultaneously on:

i = d.o.f with respect to global reference frame or skew reference frame

1.11.2 ALE Links

WNI = WM 1 if WM 1 > WM 2 EQ. 1.11.2.2

The input data is specified at each restart run.

1.12 Automatic Grid Computation

1.12.1 /DONEA - J. Donea Grid Formulation

N = Number of nodes connected to node I

LIJ = Distance between node I and node J

Therefore, the grid displacement is given by:

u (t + Δt ) = u (t ) + w(t + Δt / 2 )Δt EQ. 1.12.1.2

1.12.2 /DISP - Average Displacement Formulation

1.12.3 /SPRING - Nonlinear Spring Formulation

Figure 1.12.1 Spring Force Graph

The input parameters required are:

1.13 Type 1 interface - Fluid-Structure Interaction

The acceleration of the ALE node is computed by:

1.14 ALE Rigid Wall

2.0 COMPUTATIONAL AERO-ACOUSTIC

2.1 Mathematical Formulation

2.1.1 Compressible Navier Stokes

Another useful relation defining c as a function of the material characteristics is:

where K is the bulk modulus of the material.

2.1.2 Transient analysis, explicit formulation

2.1.3 Large Eddy Simulation Turbulence modeling

ε SGS = −2ν SGS .S ij .S ij EQ. 2.1.1.11

ν SGS = (CS l )2 S ( ) EQ. 2.1.1.12

2.1.4 Boundary Conditions

The important point to be reminded here is that ~

2.1.5 Fluid Structure Coupling

2.2 Modeling Methodology

2.2.1 Mesh definition

2.2.2 Post processing