J. of Thermal Science, Vol.13, No.

Modified Moving Particle Semi-Implicit Meshless Method for Incompressible

Fluids
Jun G U O

Zhi TAO

Division 402, Department o f Jet Propulsion, Beijing University o f Aeronautics and Astronautics, Beijing
100083, P.R. China

A modified moving particle semi-implicit method (MPS) is presented for incompressible fluids. Modification is
on the removal of imaginary nodes to enforce the boundary conditions. Comparison with the original imaginarynode scheme has proved the validity of the proposed method. Performance of MPS method in general is also
investigated by comparing the results of Lid-driven and natural convection problems with finite volume method
(FVM). It is found that MPS method shows relatively strong numerical diffusion, and for convection problems,
MPS method appears to be less robust than FVM. Though better results could be obtained with different kernel
functions, such improvement is quite limited.

Keywords: meshless method; incompressible fluids; numerical diffusion; kernel function.

CLC number: O351.3
Document code: A
Article ID: 1003-2169(2004)03-0226-09

Introduction
Numerical simulation of fluid flow and heat transfer
process still remains a challenging problem, especially
for complex geometrical problems and large deformation
problems. The sticking point is that conventional computational methods require either structured or non-structured
grids for the discretization of governing equations. Need
of grids or meshes causes two major difficulties, i.e. the
generation of grids and the complexity of applying
governing equations upon them.
Recent developments in meshless methods have
gained significant attention in the computation community
for not relying on either structured or non-structured
meshes. Several meshless methods were proposed and
substantially improved, such as Smoothed Particle
Hydrodynamics (SPH), Element-Free Galerkin method
(EFG), Reproducing Kernel Particle method (RKPM),
etc. A comprehensive review of these methods could be
found in Belytschko et al. Ill and Liu 12].
The moving particle semi-implicit (MPS) method
was developed for incompressible fluids I3]. In MPS
method, governing equations are discretized by particle
interaction models and the arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian
(ALE) technique is implemented using the fractional step
method for time integration. MPS method has been
Received 2003
Jun GUO: Associate Professor

successfully applied in some areas, such as solid

mechanics, incompressible fluid dynamics, fluid-structure
interaction, gas-liquid two-phase flow, especially flud
fragmentation, which is difficult to be treated by traditional
methods [3-71. However, in its original formation, it still
has its disadvantages, especially the need of imaginary
nodes to enforce boundary conditions, which restrain its
application to complex geometries. This paper is twofold
in that it firstly studies the feasibility of discarding
imaginary nodes, and secondly the performance of MPS
method with different weight functions is investigated by
comparing simulation results with those of FVM for
natural convection and lid-driven flows within square
cavities.

MPS Meshless Method

Basic ideas
In MPS method a point interacts with its vicinities
covered with a weight function w(r, re), where r is the
distance between two discrete points, re is weight
radius within which weight function is non-zero, and is
usually optimally determined by the user. Suppose a
point j possesses physical quantities #j at ~j, then a
smooth quantity at any location ~ could be expressed as
weighted average of its neighbors:

Jun GUO et al.

Modified Moving Particle Semi-Implicit Meshless Method for Incompressible Fluids

I? fluid velocity vector
17c velocity of a computing point
Greek symbols
fl
coefficient of volumetric expansion
0
dimensionless temperature, 0 = (T - Tc)/(Th - T~)
p
dynamic viscosity
v
kinematic viscosity
p
fluid density
Superscripts
*
temporary value of computational step 1
L
temporary value of computational step 2
n
time-step value
Subscripts
i
the current computing point
j
neighbor of the current point

Nomenclature
thermal diffusivity
gravitational acceleration
characteristic scale
pressure
Pr Prandtl number, Pr = via
Ra Rayleighnumber, R a = g f l H 3 A T /va
Re Reynolds number, Re : uH/v
S
source term
T
temperature
Tc cool wall temperature
Th hot wall temperature
AT
temperature difference, AT = Th - Tc
At time increment
U, V dimensionless velocity component
u,v dimensional velocity component
a
g
H
p

(1)

w(i

'
-~t,~e)

Typical weight functions are as follows (for twodimensional problems):

(1) quadratic polynomial (denoted as W2)
2 - 4(r / re ) 2
w(r, re ) = l ~ r / r e - 2 )

227

the same weight radius, curves of different weight functions

are plotted in Fig.l, where abscissa is Z ~ ~ j - g l/re.
Weight radius is constant for uniform configuration o f
discrete points. For non-uniform configuration, it differs
from point to point to keep the m o d e l ' s symmetry [6]. W2
is the very first weight function of MPS methods. W3
and W5 are spline functions recommended in SPH
method, and spline functions are also demonstrated to be
a kind of much efficient tools in numerical approximation.

(O<r <O.5re)

3.0

(0.5r~ <_r <r~)

(re < r )

(2)

-.

2.5

mW2
"~

.....
....

"%

(2) cubic spline (W3)

W3
W5

2.0
-.

1 - 6(r / re ) 2 + 6(r / re ) 3
1.5

(0 _<r < 0.5r~)

w(r,r~) =

10

2(1-r/re) 3

1.0

(0.5re -< r < re)

7re(re / 2 ) 2

0.5

0
(re <- r)

(3)

0.0
0.0

0.2

0.4

(3) quintic spline (W5)

w(r,r~) =

0.6

0.8

1.0

478;'r(re / 3) 2

Fig.1 Curves of different weight function

Based on interpolation theory, MPS models o f
gradient, divergence and Laplacian operators could be
written as follows (refer to [6] for details):

~(3 - 3r / re)5 _ 6(2 - 3r / re)5 + 15(1 - 3r / re)5

(0-< r < Re/3)
(3 - 3r/re) s - 6(2 - 3r/r~) 5
(Re/3 _<r < 2/~/3)

(v~)k" = .k,-S

( 3 - 3r / re) 5

I~j - ~ 12

w(i ~j - ~ I,ro)

(2Re/3 < r < Re)

k = x, y

0
(Re < r)

(4)

Here r =l rj - ri I, ~ and ~j are position vectors o f the

computing point i and its neighbor j respectively. With

(5)

228

Journal of Thermal Science, Vol.13, No.3, 2004

2d
(V2~), =-T-Y'.{(Oj - ~,)w(t fj - 5 [,r~)}

(0)+:..

(7)

"~i j~i

16_ 12 w(l j-;,I,re)

2, = ~--~{]~j - ~ 12 w(lfj -f~ I,re)}

(8)
(9)

j~i

where d is space dimension number, here d=2.

InterpolationRegion

Governing equations and convection scheme

If the coordinates are moving with a velocity Iy~ ,
the continuity, momentum and energy equations for
incompressible viscous flows are:
V.V=O
01~ + ( V - ~ ' Q . V = - I v p + W Z f
0t
p
OT
- - + (V - Vc) V T = aVZT
Ot

+S

Current computing point i

(10)

fj

Other points

(11)

O (r)k Local gridpointsforpointi, k=-2,-l,+l.

The negative sign means upwind, while
positive sign means downstream.

(12)

An arbitrary calculation is allowed between fully

Lagrangian (pc = I? ) and Eulerian (~c = 0 ).
One-dimensional
flow-directional
interpolation
scheme is adopted for convection term, which consists of
three steps Is]. Firstly, a local grid is generated at each
computing_ point along the flow direction of
Vf =V~-Vf as shown in Fig.2. Distance between
interpolation points is At. Detailed configuration depends
on interpolation scheme. Then the values (~)k of local
grid points are determined according to equation (13),
while the region for weighted averaging is limited by a
circle of radius re and lines vertical to the flowdirectional local grid to avoid numerical diffusion
(shadow area in Fig.2) [3]. At last, the convection term is
solved according to the adopted difference scheme. In
the present study, first-order upwind scheme is applied,
thus the convection term could be written as:
(f~ _~.C). v#, :~.ia ~b, -(~)_,

Ar

Fig.2 Convection scheme based on flow-directional

local grid (QUICK scheme) [sl

(13)

With such method, local interpolation point may locate

outside the computing region for points near boundaries.
In this case, local interpolation point should be changed
to the intersection of the flow direction and the boundary
upstream, its physical parameters are interpolated from
nearby boundaries similar to the skew upstream difference
scheme. The value of parameter Ar of the corresponding
point should be adjusted to the real distance between the
computing point and the local interpolation point.

Boundary conditions and model parameters

Because of lack of interpolation characteristics,
disposal of essential boundary condition is more
problematic in meshless method. Several remedies have
been proposed, including Lagrange multipiers method,
penalty function method, combination with finite
elements, transformation method, etc [1'9]. Besides,
R-function meshless method is even more promising,
which could exactly satisfy all given boundary
conditions [11.
So far, boundary conditions in MPS haven't been
well treated yet. In the original MPS method, imaginary
nodes are introduced to model simple boundary
conditions [6l. The values of those imaginary nodes are
interpolated from inner points as conventional finite
difference method did. Fig.3 shows an example of using
imaginary nodes to deal with essential boundary
conditions and no-slip wall conditions, where the
superscripts indicate the layer number of nodes departing
from the wall. Governing equations are solved at the
boundaries in the same way as at the inner nodes [61. It is
easy to know that the values of imaginary nodes'
parameter are difficult to be determined for irregular/
curved surfaces (see Fig.4).
In this study, no image nodes are used, weighted
regions for points near boundaries only include those
inside the interesting region. Taking the boundary point i
in Fig.4 for example, its approximation is

E4w(i

i,r )

Zw(i

l,re)

Jun GUO et al. Modified Moving Particle Semi-Implicit Meshless Method for Incompressible Fluids
where j denote only those inside the computing domain
within the weight radius. The default thermal boundary
condition is adiabatic. Any nodes on surfaces are
effectively adiabatic, since there are no particles beyond,
with which they can exchange energy. While for
Dirichlet boundaries, the prescribed values are simply
imposed to the corresponding nodes, and approximation
calculations for these quantities are skipped.
T2

T1

TO

T-1

T-2

/22

/11

U0

/2 1

/1-2

V2

V1

V0

V I

V 2

~ @
I'~ @

@
@

0
0

0
0

70 =T~,

Sidewall
T=Tw, u =v=0

T -l = 2 T . - T ,

U0 : 0 ,

I1-1 =

V0 = 0 ,

V 1 = _V 1 ,

111 ,

T z =2T.

T2

ll 2 : _112

except for those points near boundaries mentioned above.

Favg is the average distance of the scattered points.
Numerical Implementation

Fractional step method is adopted for time integration,

which consists of three steps in each time step:
(1) The diffuse terms and source terms of momentum
equations are calculated explicitly as:

v-------L"- (v v~+s~.
15"At

V2p.+~=v./5"
At

~L _~.
At

Supportof boundary
nodeusingimaginarynodes
__@

'x:;I o
0 "0
0

1 Vp n+l

(16)

The computing points are moved to ~L = ~-. + ~-LAt ' and

the diffuse term in energy equation is explicitly solved:
T L - T"
-

Boundary
Imaginary
O Fluid

(15)

The temporal velocities are updated by adding the

pressure gradient term,
- -

Fig. 3 Modeling of essential boundaries using

imaginary nodes16]

(14)

(2) Pressure Poisson equation is then implicitly

solved as:

V-2=_V 2

Boundary Imaginarynode O Fluid

229

At

- aVeT"

(17)

(3) The new-time positions are determined by

adjusting the configuration of computing points, and
getting the velocity of computing points ~c = (?n+l _ Fn) / At.
Then the new-time values V"+land T"+lare obtained
through calculating convection terms. Here fully
Eulerian computation is used by assigning ~,+1 = F".

"o o~
vn+l

"~'U0

_ ~'L

At

*2

~(/?_/?c).v/SL=0

(18)

~(V-/?c).VTL =0

(19)

o
e~,-~

T,,+I _ T L

At
Supportof nodeP

Boundary

Fig.4 The support of nodes (that is the region

for weighted averaging of nodes)
Weight radius also has significant influence on
model's precision. On the one hand, it should be large
enough to ensure there are enough neighbors for
interpolation. On the other hand it should be small
enough to keep local characteristics. In the present study,
these parameters are determined according to referenceTM.
That is, weight radius is 2.0r~vg for the gradient and
divergence models, 3.0r~vgfor the Laplacian model,
while it's 1.5r~g for advection calculation. The
distance of local interpolation point Ar is also 1.5ravg

Detailed description could be found in reference [6].

Other numerical algorithm may also be used, such as
SIMPLE or artificial compressibility approach, to deal
with incompressible flow. Present fractional step method
could easily implement ALE calculation which is in
favor of simulating large deformation problems.
Numerical Experiments

In this section, the feasibility of discarding

imaginary nodes and the performance of the method are
discussed with Lid-driven and natural convection
problems in square cavities as numerical examples. All
calculation is conducted with uniform configuration of

230

Journal of Thermal Science, Vol.13, No.3, 2004

41x41 diverse points if there is no special statement,

fully Eulerian calculation is adopted, and dimensionless
equations are solved. (Pr=0.733 for all of the calculations). For natural convection problem, Boussinesq's
approximation is used to represent the buoyancy force.

Feasibility of discarding imaginary nodes

The feasibility of discarding images is tested for
Lid-driven and natural convection problems in square
cavities. Fig.5 and Fig.6 compare the numerical results
using imaginary nodes with those without using. Fig.5(a)
and Fig.5(b) are results using W5 as kernel function for
Re=I.OE2 of Lid-driven problems at central sections
X=0.5 and Y=0.5, while Fig.5(c) and Fig.5(d) are those
of W2. From these comparisons, it can be seen that the
resolutions of the same weight function with imaginary
nodes or not are nearly the same, indicating that the
effect of asymmetry of weight function's region near
boundaries is minimal. Fig.6 are results for Ra=I.OE2 of
natural convection in a square cavity at sections X=0.5
and Y=0.5 using W5 and W2 as kernels, which appear to
have the same characteristic.
i

1.0 Re=1.0E2
w5,x=0.5
0.8 [] Imaginray
0.6

More numerical tests for different Re and Ra

numbers of the problems have shown the same feature.

Numerical performance of MPS

In this section, numerical results predicted by the
present MPS method (no imaginary nodes are introduced)
are compared with those of traditional FVM, while FVM
calculations are conducted using first-order UDS with 40
40 meshes consisting with those of the present
method.
Fig.7 are velocity distributions at central sections
X=0.5 and Y=0.5 for lid-driven problem. It can be seen
that, generally speaking, the present method agrees well
with conventional FVM. Among the kemels used, W5
predicts better results, while W2 is the worst. This may
be explained from the weight curves in Fig. 1, where W5
is the steepest and W2 the gentlest, indicating W5 could
keep better local characteristics. It's clear that the
model's accuracy is, to some extent, weight function
dependent. Fig.7 also indicates that MPS results are not
as plump as those of FVM, showing the characteristics of
numerical diffusion.

0.12

0.2
.

~
Vj~

J
~

0.10

Re=I.0E2'
'
W5, Y=0.5
[] Imaginary
Non-Imaginary

0.08
0.0

0.06

.~

0.2

0.04

"~
> -0.1

0.0

0.02

-0.2

0.00
014

0:6 ' 018

-0.2
-0.3

1'.0

0'.0

Y
(a) W5 results at section X = 0.5
i

0.1

0.4

010 ' 0'.2

1.0 Re=1.0E2
W2oX=0.5
0.8
[] Imaginary.

0.2

0.10
V

~t~

0.6

0.08

0.1

0.06

0.0

0.04

> -0.1

0.2

016
018
110
X
(b) W5 results at section Y= 0.5
,

0.4

Re=I.0E2'
W2, Y=0.5
[] Imaginary
Non-Imaginar.

0.4
0.2
0.0

0.02

-0.2

0.00

010'0'.2'014

0'.6'0'.8'1.0

Y
(c) W2 results at section X = 0.5

-0.2
-0.3

0'.0 ' 0'.2 ' 0'.4 ' 016

018

X
(d) W2 results at section Y= 0.5

Fig.5 Velocity profiles for Lid-driven problem using imaginary nodes or not using
(Re = 1.0E2, At = 1.0E-3)

1.0

Jun GUO et al. Modified Moving Particle Semi-Implicit Meshless Method for Incompressible Fluids

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.2

~ 0.0
_o
>
-0.2

0.0
>

231

018

1.0

-0.2
-0.4

-0.4
I

0.0

012

0.4

016

018

010 ' 012

ll.O

0.4

016

Xor Y

Xor Y

(b) W2 results at sections X = 0.5, and Y= 0.5

(a) W5 results at sections X = 0.5, and Y= 0.5

Fig.6 Comparison of results for natural convection in a square cavity using imaginary nodes or not using
(Ra = 1.0E2, At = 1.0E-4)
i

1.0

0.10
....... W2

\ /

0.2

0.08

0.1

0.6

0.06

0.0

0.4

0.04

"~ o0.1
>

0.8

0.2

....... W2

0.02
-0.2

0.0

W5

0.00

-0.2

0'.0 ' 0:2 ' 0'.4 ' 0:6 ' 0'.8 ' l'.O
Y
(a) at section X = 0.5

-0.3

010 ' 012

014

016 ' 018

ll.0

X
(b) at section Y= 0.5

Fig.7 Results of Lid-driven problem (Re = 1.0E2, At = 1.0E 3)

Natural convection problems in square cavities were
also analyzed which are much sensitive to conservation.
Fig.8 and Fig.9 are results of natural convection in a
square cavity for R a = 1.0E2. Fig.8 are velocity profiles at
different sections X,Y=0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 with W5 as
kernels. At these sections, results of the present method
agree well with those of FVM. Fig.9.1 is the distribution
of major velocity component, while Fig.9.2 is the
secondar3, velocity component at central sections )(=0.5
and Y=0.5. It can be seen that for the secondary velocity
component, results of the present method diverge from
those of FVM, and the plot of the V component of the
velocity vector at X=0.5 even appears to have oscillatory
behavior near boundaries. This oscillation, however,
decreases greatly and the resolutions become much better
with finer diverse points, 81 81 nodes for example.
Fig.10 are results for R a = 1 . 0 E 5 at central sections. It
shows that MPS results of the major velocity are
reasonable compared with FVM, though it also shows
false diffusion characteristics. The secondary velocity
component appears to have stronger oscillatory behavior,

oscillation going deeper into the cavity. Analysis shows

that at the points where oscillation taking place,
buoyancy term are always much larger than diffuse term.
Finer point configuration (8181 nodes) again reduces
the oscillation greatly, that is, f'mer point configuration is
needed to get smooth resolutions compared with FVM,
indicating that the method's accuracy needs to be
improved. Special treatment must be introduced to
stabilize the resolution and improve its accuracy.
The answer to the method's low accuracy may be
found from the MPS model itself. The basic approximation equation (that is Eq.(1)) of MPS method corresponds
to using Shepard function as shape function, which is
only Co continuum.
Fig.11 are temperature profiles for Ra=I.0E2 and
R a = 1.0E5 at central sections. It is clear that the temperature
distributions predicted by the present method at different
R a number agree well with those of FVM. This indicates
that velocity distribution is more sensitive to the performance
of numerical method, especially the V component of velocity
vector, to which equation the buoyance term is enforced.

232

Journal of Thermal Science, Vol. 13, No.3, 2004

0.4

0.5

0.3.
0.2-

0.8

1.0

o.o

f"~--

-0.2

,,~
k

-0.3

V(X-0.6)

-0.2!

+ u(x-o.4)

.~

V(X=0.4)

-0.3-"

--MRS

-0.4-

0:0

0:2

0'4

0:6

0:8

l:o

0.0

0.2

(a) at sections X = 0.4, 0.6

i

OI

0.2

0.4

0.6

(b) at sections X = 0.2, 0.8

0.5

U(Y=0.4)
o V(Y=O.4)
V U(Y=0.6)
+
v(r=0.6)

0.3

[]

0.3

~)
v(r=0.2)

, uo,=o

0.4~ o
a

u(r=o.8) ~

~,.

+__ v(r 8) y

-,,.

0.2

0.1
~

"-6
> -0.1.

~ -0.1

0.4

.~ 0.1 i

0.0

-0.4

v(x=o8)/

0.2-"

0.1
~

D u(x=o.2)
0.4- o V(X=0.2)
0.3: + u(x-o.8) .o~

0.1

0.0

0.0

"~
-o.1 -.
>

-0.1i
-0.2-

-0.2-

-0.3 -~

-0.3-'

-o.41
i,

00

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

-0.4-

1.0

'
0.0

.
0.4

0'.2

. 0.6.

. 0.8

1.0

(c) at sections Y = 0.4, 0.6

(d) at sections Y= 0.2, 0.8

Fig.8 Velocity profiles for natural convection in a square cavity

(Ra = 1.0E2, At = 1.0E-4)
Scattered points are results of FVM, while lines are those of MPS
(W5, no imaginary nodes)

0.4

0.012 I
0.010 I

0.2

0.008 I
0.006 I

"~ 0.0
>O

>
-0.2

,~
I~VM '
-'
....... W5 41"41~
.---. o W5 81"81"

-'"/

iit

%%% Ij

"

~1

0.004
0.002
0.000
-0.002

-0.4

-0.004
0'.0

012

0'.4 ' 016 ' 0'.8

Xor Y

(a) major velocity component

1'.0

0.0

0.2
'

'o'. 4

0.6
'

0 '.8

Xor f
(b) secondary velocity component

Fig.9 Velocity profiles for natural convection in a square cavity at sections X = 0.5 & Y= 0.5
(Ra = i.0E2, At = 1.0E 4)

1.0
'

Jun GUO et al. Modified Moving Particle Semi-Implicit Meshless Method for Incompressible Fluids

~"

60-

**

V( Y-O, 5 )

./

401

"

I in

'----:- w'2

l II

i I

n
U(Y=0.5)
. ~

Ill

V(X=0.5)
i***.

u(x=o.5)
illll/

201

233

0.

mm

"

W3
W5
W5 8t'81

--

0
>O

-20

mm

-4

-40-

[] W3
- W5

-600

* L.W*
~,

0.2

0.4
0.6
0.8
Xor Y
(a) major velocity component

-8
0.0

1.0

FVM_V

**"* -

FVMU
I

0:2

014

0:6

018

1.0

1.2

X
(b) secondary velocity component

Fig.10 Velocity profiles for natural convection in a square cavity at center sections X = 0.5 & Y= 0.5
(Ra = 1.0E5, At = 1.0E-5 for 4l )<41 points, and At = 2.0e-6 for 81 81 points)
i

1.0

1.0.

0.53
~"
052~/

0.8
0.6

0.54

rw

. . . . . . W2

-~

l~a

" ~

~-

0.8.

x=o5

a-

0.4

0.50 ~

0.4.

0.49~
....

~" 0.2
0.0

o'.oo'.2o'.4o'.6o'.811o

0.48 ~

0.2.

0.47

0.0.

0.46

0'.0

Xor Y

0.2
'

014 . 0.6
. . . 0.8
. .

1.0

Xor Y

(a) Ra = 1.0E2, At = 1.0E-4

(b) Ra = 1.0E5, At=I.0E-5

Fig.ll Temperature profiles for natural convection in a square cavity at central sections

Conclusion
This paper extensively discussed various aspects of
applying MPS method to incompressible fluid dynamics
problems. The performance of the present method is
studied through the analysis of lid-driven and natural
convection problems in square cavities. Several conclusions
can be drawn as follows:
(1) Imaginary nodes are not necessary for boundary
condition disposal. Numerical analysis shows using or
not using images always reach nearly the same results.
(2) MPS method has much room to improve its
accuracy, numerical tests show its noticeable discrepancy
with the conventional FVM prediction. For natural
convection problem, MPS results of coarse point
configuration even appear to have oscillatory behavior
near boundaries, finer node distribution could reduce the
oscillation greatly, indicating that MPS is less robust than
FVM.
(3) Analysis of the effects of different kernels shows

that a better kernel may improve the accuracy of

prediction, however, this improvement is limited, other
methods must be introduced to improve MPS's accuracy,
such as using higher-order interpolation scheme, introducing
special treatment to improve its stabilization, etc.
Though MPS method has many attractive features,
such as on the simulation of large deformation problems
which is difficult for traditional method@ '7], it still has
fatal limits in its present formation. Much work has to be
done before it could match conventional methods.
Acknowledgments

This research is supported by the National Natural

Science Foundation of China Grant 50176002.

References
[1] Belytschko, T, Krongauz, Y, Organ, D, et al. Meshless
Methods: An Overview and Recent Developments.
Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 1996, 139:3--47

234
[2] Liu, W K, Jun, S, Sihling, D T, et al. Multiresolution
Reproducing Kernel Particle Method for Computational
Fluid Dynamics. Int. J. Numer. Methods fluids, 1997, 24:
1391--1415
[3] Yoon, H Y, Koshizuka, S, Oka, Y. A Particle-gridless
Hybrid Method for Incompressible Flows. Internat. J.
Numer. Meth. Fluids, 1999, 30:407--424
[4] Koshizuka, S, Yoon, H Y, Yamashita, D, et at. Numerical
Analysis of Natural Convection in a Square Cavity Using
MPS-MAFL. Comp. Fluid. Dynamic J., 2000, 8: 485-494
[5] Chikazawa, Y, Koshizuka, S, Oka, Y. A Particle Method
for Elastic and Visco-plastic Structures and Fluid-structure
Interactions. Comp. Mech., 2001, 27: 97--106
[6] Yoon, H Y, Koshizuka, S, Oka, Y. Direct Calculation of

Journal of Thermal Science, Vol.13, No.3, 2004

Bubble Growth, Departure, and Rise in Nucleate Pool
Boiling. Internat. J. Multiphase Flow, 2001, 27:277--298
[7] Koshizuka, S, Tamako, H, Oka, Y. A Particle Method for
Incompressible Viscous Flow with Fluid Fragmentation.
Journal Computational Fluid Dynamics, 1995, 4:29--46
[8 Cleary,P W. Modeling Confined Multi-material Heat and
Mass Flows Using SPH. Applied Math. Modelling, 1998,
22:981--993
[9] Chen, J S, Wang, H P. New Boundary Condition
Treatments in Mesh Free Computation of Contact
Problems. Comput Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 2000,
187:441--468
[10] Rvachev, V L, Sheiko, T I, Shapiro, V, et al. On
Completeness of RFM Solution Structures. Computational
Mechanics, 2000, 25: 305-- 316