Comparison of SPH and MLSM for Powder Particle Impact Modelling

Roman Olegovich Cherepanov; Alexander Vladimrovich Gerasimov

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.743.142

Paper Titles

Modification of Calcium Phosphate Microarc Coatings Surface by Boehmite Nanoparticles
p.124

Plasma-Immersion Modification of Nitinol Surface with Silicon to Improve the Corrosion Resistance of the Alloy in Biological Media
p.129

Creation of the Combined Heat-Resistant Coating with Gradient Modification of Layers and Methods of its Testing
p.135

The Mathematical Modeling of the Initial Stage of Ion Implantation into the Target with Coating
p.138

Comparison of SPH and MLSM for Powder Particle Impact Modelling
p.142

Mechanical Properties and Structure of the Hypereutectic Silumin Treated by an Electron Beam
p.146

A Three-Dimensional BEM for Dynamic Analysis of Anisotropic Elastic Multi-Connected Bodies
p.153

Modeling of Wave Propagation in the Unsaturated Soils Using Boundary Element Method
p.158

Determination of Ultimate Dimensions of Crack-Like Defects in a Wall of Vertical Steel Tanks with Specified Volume of 20000m³
p.162

HomeKey Engineering MaterialsKey Engineering Materials Vol. 743Comparison of SPH and MLSM for Powder Particle...

Comparison of SPH and MLSM for Powder Particle Impact Modelling

Abstract:

In this article, SPH and MLSM methods are compared in application to particle impact modelling. It is shown, that both methods has important disadvantages because nonzero acceleration appears in the case of constant stress field with nonsymmetrical distribution of nodes in space. Some reasons of incorrect acceleration calculation are discussed.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

High Technology: Research and Applications 2016

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Key Engineering Materials (Volume 743)

Pages:

142-145

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.743.142

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

July 2017

Authors:

Roman Olegovich Cherepanov*, Alexander Vladimrovich Gerasimov

Keywords:

Impact, Moving Least Square Method, Numerical Modelling, Smoothed Particles Hydrodynamics

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

References

[1] Li Shaofan, Liu Wing Kam, Meshfree Particle Methods, Springer Science & Business Media, (2007).

Google Scholar

[2] L.B. Lucy. A Numerical Approach to the Testing of Fusion Hypothesis. Astron. J. 1977; 82: 1013-1024.

Google Scholar

[3] D.J. Price, J.J. Monaghan, Smoothed particle magnetohydrodynamics: II. Variational principles and variable smoothing length terms. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 348, 139–52.

DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2004.07346.x

Google Scholar

[4] M.B. Liu, G.R. Liu, Restoring particle consistency in smoothed particle hydrodynamics. Applied Numerical Mathematics, 56(1), 19-36 (2006).

DOI: 10.1016/j.apnum.2005.02.012

Google Scholar

[5] J. J. Monaghan. On the problem of penetration in particle methods. Journal of computational physics, 82: 1–15, (1989).

Google Scholar