doi: 10.52899/24141437_2025_02_215
UDK: 539.422.224:004.942

Potential of Meshless Numerical Methods for Mechanical Simulation of Ice Environment

Родионов А. А., Рябушкин С. В. Article language: English
Citation Link: Rodionov AA, Ryabushkin SV. Potential of Meshless Numerical Methods for Mechanical Simulation of Ice Environment. Transactions of the Saint Petersburg State Marine Technical University. 2025;4(2):215–228. DOI: 10.52899/24141437_2025_02_215 EDN: QKTZDF

Annotation

BACKGROUND: Modern numerical modeling tools provide ample opportunities for solving current applied problems of ice mechanics. However, ice is difficult to model and it requires the development of appropriate approaches to the mathematical description of its behavior. AIM: To review and study the capabilities of contemporary numerical ice modeling methods and develop our own mathematicalmodel to solve ice interaction problems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The application of numerical methods in ice mechanics is analyzed based on a review of relevant publications in scientific and technical journals. The main study method is a computational experiment using various approaches to describing the on-load behavior of the material. RESULTS: We defined a mathematical ice model using the smoothed particle hydrodynamics method. We simulated standard mechanical tests of ice samples to test the method and adjust the material model. CONCLUSIONS: The calculations are consistent with the experimental data. In the future, the developed model can be used to solve problems of engineering structures and ice interaction. Keywords: numerical modeling; ice medium; ice mechanics; meshless methods; smoothed particle hydrodynamics method; Johnson–Holmquist damage model

Bibliography

1. Politko VA, Solomatin SV, Karakozova AI, Truskov PA. Improving calculation methods taking into account the impact of ice on hydraulic structures. Vestnik MGSU. 2020;15(5):701–711. (In Russ.) EDN: FDNHQC doi: 10.22227/1997-0935.2020.5.701-711
2. Gogoladze DZ, Bekker AT. Numerical Modeling of the Ice-Conical Structure Interaction Process Using Element Erosion Technique. IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Envir. Sci. 2022;988. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/988/5/052056
3. Cervera M, Barbat GB, Chiumenti M, Wu J-Y. Comparative Review of XFEM, Mixed FEM and Phase-Field Models for quasi-brittle cracking. Arch Computat Methods Eng. 2022;29:1009–1083. doi: 10.1007/s11831-021-09604-8
4. Mulmule S, Dempsey J. A viscoelastic fictitious crack model for the fracture of sea ice. Mechanics of Time-Dependent Materials. 1997;1:331–356. doi: 10.1023/A:1008063516422
5. Mulmule S, Dempsey J. Stress-Separation Curves for Saline Ice Using Fictitious Crack Model. Journal of Engineering Mechanics. 1997;123(8):870–877. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1997)123:8(870)
6. Li Zhou, Feng Wang, Feng Diao, et al. Simulation of Ice-Propeller Collision with Cohesive Element Method. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019;7(10). doi: 10.3390/jmse7100349
7. Korshunov VA, Mudrik RS, Ponomarev DA, Rodionov AA. Modeling of ice destruction processes using the methodology of interlocking elements. Morskie intellektualnye tekhnologii. 2019;1(4):34–44. (In Russ.) EDN: CUYXIY
8. Patil A, Sand B, Cwirzen A, Fransson L. Numerical prediction of ice rubble field loads on the Norströmsgrund lighthouse using cohesive element formulation. Ocean Engineering. 2021;223(14). doi: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.108638
9. Makarov AO, Bekker AT. Modelling of Ice Impacts Using Cohesive Element Method: Influence of Element Shape. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ.Sci. 2021;666. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/666/3/032014
10. Huerta A, Belytschko T, Fernandez-Mendez S, Rabczuk T. MeshfreeMethods. In: Encyclopedia of Computational Mechanics. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2004;1:279–309. doi: 10.1002/0470091355.ecm005
11. Deb D, Pramanik R. Failure process of brittle rock using smoothed particle hydrodynamics. Journal of Engineering Mechanics. 2013;139(11):1551–1565. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000592
12. Gray JP, Monaghan JJ, Swift RP. SPH elastic dynamics. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering. 2001;190(49–50):6641–6662. EDN: ARJJXB
13. Zhang N, Zheng X, Ma Q. Updated Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics for Simulating Bending and Compression Failure Progress of Ice. Water. 2017;9(11):3–24. doi: 10.3390/w9110882
14. Filatov AR. Outlook for application of smooth particle hydrodynamics for numerical modeling of ice loads. Transactions of the Krylov State Research Centre. 2022;2(400):24–39. doi: 10.24937/2542-2324-2022-2-400-24-39
15. Pan W, Tartakovsky AM, Monaghan JJ. A smoothed-particle hydrodynamics model for ice-sheet and ice-shelf dynamics. Journal of Glaciology. 2012;58(208):216–222. doi: 10.3189/2012JoG11J084
16. Staroszczyk R. SPH Modeling of Sea-ice Pack Dynamics. Archives of Hydro-Engineering and Environmental Mechanics. 2017;64(2):115–137. doi: 10.1515/heem-2017-0008
17. Shen HT, Su J, Liu L. SPH Simulation of River Ice Dynamics. Journal of Computational Physics. 2000;165(2):752–770. doi: 10.1006/jcph.2000.6639
18. Wu Y, Hu W, Pan X, Wu СТ. Recent development of Smoothed Particle Galerkin (SPG) Method for Joint Modeling. In: 16th International LS-DYNA Users Conference; 2020. Berkeley: ANSYS, 2020.
19. Wu Y, Guo Y, Hu W. An Introduction to the LS-DYNA Smoothed ParticleGalerkin Method for Severe Deformation and Failure Analyses in solids. In: 13th LS-DYNA Users Conference; 2014. Berkeley: ANSYS, 2020.
20. Wu Y, Wu СТ, Hu W. Parametric and convergence studies of the smoothed particle Galerkin (SPG) method in semi-brittle and ductile material failure analyses. In: 15th International LS-DYNA Users Conference, 2018. Berkeley: ANSYS; 2020.
21. Filatov AR. Numerical modeling of ice loads using meshless SPH and SPG methods. Transactions of the Krylov State Research Centre. 2022;S1:7–10. (In Russ.) EDN: TVIADE doi: 10.24937/2542-2324-2022-1-S-I-7-10
22. Tong Z, et al. Simulation analysis on collision performance of polar cruise vessel based on JH-2 sea ice mod-el. Chinese Journal of Ship Research. 2021;16(5):87–94.
23. Grinevich DV. Review of the application of numerical methods for modeling ice deformation and destruction. Trudy VIAM. 2020;8(90):109–122.
(In Russ.) EDN: WQNHTP doi: 10.18577/2307-6046-2020-0-8-109-122
24. Williams JR, et al. The Theoretical Basis of the Discrete Element Method. In: Proceedings from Conference Numerical Methods of Engineering, Theory and Applications. 1985:897–906.
25. Cundall PA, Strack ODL. A discrete numerical model for granular assemblies. Géotechnique. 1979;29(1):47–65. doi: 10.1680/geot.1979.29.1.47
26. Potyondy DO, Cundall PA. A bonded-particle model for rock. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Minimg Sciences. 2004;41(8):1329–1364. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2004.09.011
27. Ji S, Di S, Long X. DEM Simulation of Uniaxial Compressive and Flexural Strength of Sea Ice: Parametric Study. Journal of Engineering Mechanics. 2017;143(1):4–11. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000996
28. Ji S. Discrete Element Modeling of Ice Loads on Ship and Offshore Structures. In: Li, X., Feng, Y., Mustoe, G. (eds) Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Discrete Element Methods. DEM 2016. Springer Proceedings in Physics. Singapore: Springer; 2017;188. doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-1926-5_6
29. Jou O, Celigueta MA. A bonded discrete element method for modeling ship–ice interactions in broken and unbroken sea ice fields. Comp. Part. Mech. 2019;6(6):739–765, doi: 10.1007/s40571-019-00259-8
30. Hu B, Liu L, Wang D, et al. GPU-Based DEM Simulations of Global Ice Resistance on Ship Hull During Navigation in Level Ice. China Ocean. Eng. 2021;35:228–237. doi: 10.1007/s13344-021-0020-5
31. Hisette Q, Alekseev A, Seidel J. Discrete Element Simulation of Ship Breaking Through Ice Ridges. In: Proceedings from the 27th International Ocean and Polar Engineering Conference. San Francisco: ISOPE; 2017:1–15.
32. Neto AV. Improvement of Rubble Ice Generation in Numerical Simulation of Ice Ridge and Structure Interaction. [Master thesis] Liège; 2017.
33. Polojärvi A. Sea ice ridge keel punch through experiments: model experiments and numerical modeling with discrete and combined finitediscrete element methods [Doctoral theses] Espoo; 2013.
34. Tuhkuri J, Polojärvi A. A review of discrete element simulation of icestructure interaction. Philosophical transactions. Series A: Mathematical,physical, and engineering sciences. 2018;376(2129). doi: 10.1098/rsta.2017.0335
35. Rodionov AA, Ryabushkin SV. Use of meshless procedures for numerical modeling of mechanical behavior of ice in a wide range of externalinfluences. Morskie intellektualnye tekhnologii. 2024;3-2(65):83–94. (In Russ.) EDN: GJPHAD doi: 10.37220/MIT.2024.65.3.011
36. Rodionov AA, Ryabushkin SV. Numerical modeling of mechanical behavior of ice under quasi-static and dynamic loads. Morskie intellektualnye tekhnologii. 2023;4-2:99–105. (In Russ.) EDN: KSEFLM doi: 10.37220/MIT.2023.62.4.051
37. Johnson GR, Holmquist TJ. An improved computational constitutive model for brittle materials. AIP Conf. Proc. 1994;309:981–984. doi: 10.1063/1.46199
38. Gazonas G. Implementation of Johnson-Holmquist II (JH-2) Constitutive Model into DYNA3D. Aberdeen: Army Research Laboratory; 2002.