SAND2 013-4692C

Exceptional service in the national interest

Sandia
National
Laboratories

Estimation of the Critical Time Step

for Peridynamic Models
SIAM Conference on Mathematical Aspects of Materials Science
12 June 2013

David Littlewood
Jesse Thomas
Timothy Shelton
U S. DEPARTMENT OF

ENERGY

m M 'wi
arSec i ti A I i t to

Sandia National Laboratories is a multi-program laboratory managed and operated by Sandia Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin
Corporation, for the U S. Department of Energys National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. SAND NO. 2011-XXXXP

Sandia

SSnes

PERIDYNAMICS IS UNIQUE IN ITS ABILITY TO CAPTURE PERVASIVE MATERIAL FAILURE

Potential to enable rigorous simulation of failure and fracture

Directly applicable to Sandia's national security missions
SIERRA CODE SUITE

Engineering mechanics simulation code suite supporting the

nation's nuclear weapons mission as well as other customers

Advanced Simulation and Computing (ASC) code

Peridynamic modeling for explicit transient dynamics

IMPORTANCE OF THE CRITICAL TIME STEP ESTIMATE

Necessary condition for stable simulation

Directly impacts computational expense

Sierra/SolidMechanics
Simulation of brittle fracture

Successful application of peridynamics for engineering analyses

requires an accurate estimate of the critical time step
2

Peridynamic Theory of Solid Mechanics

Sandia
National
Laboratories

Peridynamics is a mathematical theory that unifies the mechanics of

continuous media, cracks, and discrete particles
Peridynamics is a nonlocal extension of continuum mechanics
Remains valid in presence of discontinuities, including cracks
Balance of linear momentum is based on an integral equation
p(x)ii(x,t) = [ {T[x,] (x' x) -T'[x',i] (x x')} dV"x/ +b(x,)

Jm

"------------------------ v------------------------ '

Divergence of stress replaced with
integral of nonlocal forces.

Peridynamic bonds connect any two material points that interact directly
Peridynamic forces are determined by force states acting on bonds
A peridynamic body may be discretized by a finite number of elements
N

p(x)uh(x, t) = ^2 {T[x> t] <x' -x) - T'[x',t] <x-x')} Ayxz + b(x, t)

2=0

S.A. Silling. Reformulation of elasticity theory for discontinuities and long-range forces. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 48:175-209, 2000.
Silling, S.A. and Lehoucq, R. B. Peridynamic Theory of Solid Mechanics. Advances in Applied Mechanics 44:73-168, 2010.

Constitutive Models for Peridynamics

Sandia
National
Laboratories

MATERIAL MODEL FORMULATION STRONGLY AFFECTS CRITICAL TIME STEP

Presence of multiple length scales differs from the classical (local) approach
Complex deformation modes possible within a nonlocal neighborhood
Material failure through the breaking of bonds may alter the stable time step
Linear Peridynamic Solid

Microelastic Material

Bond-based constitutive model

Pairwise forces are a function of bond

Deformation decomposed into deviatoric and

stretch

dilatational components

y-x

9 = [ (u x) edV

s =

mJn
Magnitude of pairwise force given by

18k

State-based constitutive model

t=nS*S

ed = e
-

"

Q
3

Magnitude of pairwise force given by

3 kO
15 fi
d
t =------ wx-|----------- uj e
m
m

S.A. Silling, M. Epton, O. Weckner, J. Xu, and E. Askari, Peridynamic states and constitutive modeling, Journal of Elasticity, 88, 2007.

Classical Material Models Can Be Applied in Peridynamics

UEJiiSnes

WRAPPER APPROACH RESULTS IN A NON-ORDINARY STATE-BASED MATERIAL MODEL

Approximate deformation gradient based on initial and current locations of

material points in family
Approximate Deformation Gradient
/ N

F=

^YiSXjAli,

\ %=0

Shape Tensor
^

K"1

K = 2jyiX,Xi A14,

i=0

Kinematic data passed to classical material model

Classical material model computes stress

Stress converted to pairwise forces

T (xz x) = cvdK-1

(xz

x)

Suppression of zero-energy models (optional)

S.A. Silling, M. Epton, 0. Weckner, J. Xu, and E. Askari, Peridynamic states and constitutive modeling, Journal of Elasticity, 88, 2007.

Candidate Approaches for Estimating the Critical Time Step cEJaS*

INVESTIGATE MULTIPLE APPROACHES

Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy condition (CFL number) or Courant condition

von Neumann approach of Silling and Askari for microelastic models

Generalized von Neumann approach incorporating bond angles

Global estimate using the Lanczos method

Largest eigenvalue of 3x3 nodal stiffness matrix

MEASURES OF SUCCESS

Accuracy of estimate

Computational expense

STRATEGY FOR ACCESSING CRITICAL TIME STEP ESTIMATES

Evaluate via test simulations

Compare against empirical result

Stable time step determined by numerical experiment

Silling, S.A. and Askari, E. A meshfree method based on the peridynamic model of solid mechanics. Computers and Structures 83:1526-1535, 2005.

Lanczos Global Critical Time Step Estimate

Sandia
National
Laboratories

After FEM spatial discretization, linearization, and global assembly

Mil + Ku = f
Explicit transient dynamics: central difference time integration; lumped diagonal
mass matrix M; real, symmetric, and positive-definite tangent stiffness matrix K.

Global critical time step

A tc =
where X is the maximum eigenvalue, and u the associated eigenvector, of the
generalized eigenvalue problem

(K AM) u = 0

This requires an efficient algorithm to find the maximum eigenvalue.

Lanczos Global Critical Time Step Estimate

Sandia
National
Laboratories

Power Method: Given a matrix A and a starting vector x0, the series
xn

for systems derived from classical FEM will (usually) converge such that
A=^
1
Lanczos Algorithm: At each step of the Power Methods, define
w n = AnVn_i
with v0 = x0

The Lanczos Algorithm uses vn_2 and

to re-orthogonalize wn > vn

For problems of interest, Lanczos converges to X much quicker than the Power
Method
Implementation Efficiency: For an iteration of the Lanczos method we must
evaluate both
and Kvn_v The former is inexpensive because M is diagonal,
and the second is simply the internal force vector.
[Anvn_i]i = rriiVi n-1 +TT(V-1)
8

Sandia
National
Laboratories

Bond-Based (von Neumann) Estimate

For the case of a ID bond-based analysis (Silling and Askari, 2005)

Atc = \f^Jt^P
(where p is the nodal mass, p iterates over all bonds at node /, Vp is the volume
associated with each bond, and Cip is the micromodulus between nodes / and p).

Multiple dimensions and nonlinear materials (Silling and Askari, 2005)

df
drj
(where the f is the force function of each bond and r\ is the relative displacement
of the nodes in the bond).
The suggested multi-dimensional measure represents the worst case scenario of
all bonds being aligned.

Multi-Dimensional Bond-Based Estimate

Sandia
National
Laboratories

We investigate using the assembled bond structure in the critical time step
estimate

At C

where the for the jk component of Cip we have

[C'zpjjk = ^ipCLjCLk
(where Cip is the scalar linearized bond stiffness and oy. are the direction cosines
associated with the bond p orientation).
The norm we use is the maximum principal stiffness, i.e. in three dimensions the
maximum eigenvalue of the assembled 3x3 nodal stiffness IpVpCip.

10

Multi-Dimensional Probe-Based Estimate

Sandia
National
Laboratories

Linearized bond-based and state-based peridynamic equation of motion (EOM)

(Silling, 2000; Silling, 2010)

pu= [ C (x, q) (u(q, t) u(x, t)) AVq + b(x, t)

J 3S
where the two theories denote different mathematical objects but similar
formulations.
Rewriting the EOM

pii = f C (x, q) u(q, t)dVq - P(x)u(x, t) + b(x, t)

J
where

P(x)

(x, q) AVq
11

Multi-Dimensional Probe-Based Estimate

Sandia
National
Laboratories

After discretization, P(x) is the denominator of the multi-dimensional bond-based

time step estimate

p(x) =

fJsg C (x, q) AVq to Vp VpCip

Given a displacement field such that at x0 the displacement is e and everywhere

else it is 0, we have the following interpretation (Silling, 2010):
The value of the vector P(x0)e is therefore the force density (per unit volume)
at x0 required to displace x0 by the vector e, holding all other points fixed.
A nodal probe at x0 will return P(x0)e. Probing in all dimensions will allow recovery
of P(x0), giving the denominator in the critical time step estimate.
We investigate the applicability of probing to obtain the nodal 3x3 stiffness and
subsequent time step estimate for both bond-based and state-based analyses.
12

Sandia
National
Laboratories

Test Case: Elastic Wave Propagation

Investigate material models

Microelastic bond-based

Linear peridynamic solid state-based

Wrapped classical elastic model (nosb)

Investigate critical time step estimates

Empirical

ID von Neumann [Silling and Askari, 2005]

Generalized von Neumann

Element time step (3x3 stiffness probe)

Lanczos global estimate

Simulation

Material Parameters
Density

7.8 g/cm3

Youngs Modulus

3.0e12 dyne/cm2

Poissons Ratio

0.25

Horizon

0.5075 cm

Fixed displacement in
longitudinal direction
Initial velocity in
longitudinal direction

Velocity (cm/s)
1500

Bar Length

10.0 cm

Bar Width

1.0 cm

Initial Velocity

1000.0 cm/s

1800

Time Step

4.8e-7 s

1400

--------------- >

11200

Silling, S.A. and Askari, E. A meshfree method based on the peridynamic model of solid mechanics. Computers and Structures 83:1526-1535, 2005.

13

Microelastic Bond-Based Material Model

Sandia
National
Laboratories

1D von Neumann

Time Step

Kinetic Energy
3.51 J
3.51 J
3.51 J

max. time step = 0.241 ps

max. kinetic energy = 3.51 J
Generalized von Neumann
max. time step = 0.414 ps
max. kinetic energy = 3.51 J

3.51 J
14.1 J

Nodal Stiffness Matrix

max. time step = 0.414 ps
max. kinetic energy = 3.51 J

Empirical Observation
max. time step = 0.499 ps
max. kinetic energy = 3.51 J

1.75e+299 J
Global Lanczos
max. time step = 0.500 ps
max. kinetic energy = 3.51 J

14

Linear Peridynamic Solid State-Based Material Model

Time Step

Kinetic Energy

0.1 /us

3.51 J

Nodal Stiffness Matrix

0.2 /us

3.51 J

max. time step = 0.314 ps

max. kinetic energy = 3.51 J

0.3 /us

3.51 J

0.4 /us

NaN

Empirical Observation

0.5 /us

NaN

0.6 /us

NaN

max. time step = 0.381 ps

max. kinetic energy = 3.51 J

0.7 /us

NaN

0.8 /us

NaN

0.9 /us

NaN

1.0 /us

NaN

Sandia
National
Laboratories

Global Lanczos
max. time step = 0.381 ps
max. kinetic energy = 3.51 J

15

Sandia
National
Laboratories

Wrapped Classical Material Model

Time Step

Kinetic Energy

0.1

fis

3.51 J

Empirical Observation

0.2

(is

3.51 J

0.3

[is

3.51 J

max. time step = 0.490 ps

max. kinetic energy = 3.51 J

0.4

yLtS

3.51 J

0.5 /is

1.33e+135 J

0.6

/is

3.08e+151 J

0.7 /is

1.73e+109 J

yUS

2.17e+124 J

0.9 /is

2.66e+116 J

yUS

4.86e+208 J

0.8

1.0

Global Lanczos
max. time step = 0.490 ps
max. kinetic energy = 3.51 J

Nodal Stiffness Matrix

max. time step = 0.498 ps
max. kinetic energy = unstable

16

Sandia
National
Laboratories

Behavior of the Lanczos Estimate over the Simulation

Linear Peridynamic Solid

Microelastic Material

Wrapped Classical Model

4.91e-07

5.005e-07
3.815e-07
4.905e-07

3.805e-07
4.895e-07
4.99e-07
3.8e-07

4.985e-07 ------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------0

2e-05
4e-05
6e-05
8e-05
Time (s)

0.0001

2e-05

4e-05
Time (s)

6e-05

8e-05

0.0001

2e-05

4e-05

6e-05

8e-05

Time (s)

17

Sandia
National
Laboratories

The Influence Function Affects the Critical Time Step

Choice of influence function affects

critical time step

Parabolic decay
influence function

Lanczos algorithm successfully detects

changes in critical time step
Observation: Influence function that
decays with increasing bond length
results in reduced critical time step

Distance from Node / Horizon

0.6

0.4

Constant
influence function

0.3

0.4

0.6

0.8

Distance from Node / Horizon

Peridynamic Linear Solid

Wrapped Classical Material Model

Parabolic decay
influence function

Constant
influence function

Parabolic decay
influence function

Constant
influence function

Max. Lanczos
time step

0.381 ps

0.434 ps

Max. Lanczos
time step

0.490 ps

0.549 ps

Empirical result

0.381 ps

0.434 ps

Empirical result

0.490 ps

0.549 ps

14% Increase

12% Increase
18

Sandia
National
Laborato

Test Case: Fragmenting Ring

Investigate material models

Microelastic bond-based

Linear peridynamic solid state-based

Wrapped classical elastic model (nosb)

Investigate critical time step estimates

Empirical

ID von Neumann [Silling and Askari, 2005]

Generalized von Neumann

Element time step (3x3 stiffness probe)

Lanczos global estimate

Material Parameters
Density

7.8 g/cm3

Youngs Modulus

3.0e12 dyne/cm2

Poissons Ratio

0.25

Critical Stretch

0.01 cm/cm

Horizon

0.603 cm

Simulation
Ring Diameter

4.5 cm

Ring Width

1 cm

Initial Radial Velocity

2.0e4 cm/s

Silling, S.A. and Askari, E. A meshfree method based on the peridynamic model of solid mechanics. Computers and Structures 83:1526-1535, 2005.

19

Unstable Time Step Manifests as Increased Bond Failure

Time Step

Percentage of
Broken Bonds

Maximum Kinetic
Energy (t > 10 /is)

0.01 /us

44.3 %

3.83 kJ

0.1 /is

44.5 %

3.82 kJ

0.2 /is

44.7 %

3.82 kJ

0.3 /is

45.3 %

3.82 kJ

0.4 /is

45.3 %

3.82 kJ

0.5 /us

45.4 %

3.82 kJ

0.6 /is

46.7 %

3.81 kJ

0.7 yus

49.1 %

3.83 kJ

0.8 /is

73.5 %

3.82 kJ

0.9 /us

95.3 %

4.39 kJ

1.0 /us

99.1 %

6.40 kJ

122/1=15=

Time step = 5.0 ps

46.7% of bonds broken

^=0.25

Time step = 7.5 ps

62.7 % of bonds broken

20

Sandia
National
Laboratories

Microelastic Bond-Based Material Model

1D von Neumann
max. time step = 0.290 ps
percentage of broken bonds = 44.7 %
max. kinetic energy = 3.82 kJ
Time Step

Percentage of
Broken Bonds

Maximum Kinetic
Energy (t > 10 /xs)

44.3 %

3.83 kJ

Nodal Stiffness Matrix

max. time step = 0.485 ps
percentage of broken bonds = 45.4 %
max. kinetic energy = 3.82 J

Generalized von Neumann

max. time step = 0.486 ps
percentage of broken bonds = 45.4 %
max. kinetic energy = 3.82 kJ
Global Lanczos
max. time step = 0.682 ps
percentage of broken bonds = 46.0 %
max. kinetic energy = 3.83 kJ
Empirical Observation
max. time step = 0.707 ps
percentage of broken bonds = 50.0 %
max. kinetic energy = 3.83 kJ

21

Linear Peridynamic Solid State-Based Material Model

Time Step

Percentage of
Broken Bonds

Maximum Kinetic
Energy (t > 10 /us)

0.01 /us

40.3 %

3.43 kJ

0.1 /us

40.2 %

3.43 kJ

0.2 /us

40.4 %

3.43 kJ

0.3 /us

41.6 %

3.42 kJ

Empirical Observation

0.4 /us

42.0 %

3.44 kJ

0.5 /us

44.7 %

3.45 kJ

0.6 /us

95.6 %

4.33 kJ

max. time step = 0.509 ps

percentage of broken bonds = 50.0 %
max. kinetic energy = 3.46 kJ

0.7 /us

97.3 %

5.54 kJ

0.8 /us

98.6 %

7.14 kJ

0.9 /us

99.4 %

19.8 kJ

1.0 /us

99.8 %

62.8 kJ

Sandia
National
Laboratories

Global Lanczos
max. time step = 0.494 ps
percentage of broken bonds = 42.8 %
max. kinetic energy = 3.43 kJ

Nodal Stiffness Matrix

max. time step = 0.581 ps
percentage of broken bonds = unstable
max. kinetic energy = unstable

22

Behavior of the Lanczos Estimate over the Simulation

Microelastic Material

Linear Peridynamic Solid

.!

Time (ms)

Sandia
National
Laboratories

0.35

Time (ms)

23

Sandia
National
Laboratories

Questions?

David Littlewood
dilittl@sandia.gov

Advanced Simulation and Computing (ASC)

http://www.sandia.gov/asc/

24

Sandia
National
Laboratories

Suppression of Zero-Energy Modes

APPROACH: PNALIZE DEFORMATION THAT DEVIATES FROM REGULARIZED
DEFORMATION GRADIENT

Predicted location of neighbor

Hourglass vector

= xn + Fn (x' - x0

rhg

Xn Xn

Snape lensor

Hourglass vector projected onto bond

7hg Thg. (xn Xn)

Hourglass force

fhg

Chj

18k
tr54

7hg
- X0

xn x n

AVX AV7'
X'

xn xn
--------- v----------

micromodulus

hourglass
stretch

bond unit
vector

S.A. Silling, M. Epton, 0. Weckner, J. Xu, and E. Askari, Peridynamic states and constitutive modeling, Journal of Elasticity, 88, 2007.

25