variational Fluids Coupling applications

A Fast Variational
Framework for
Accurate Solid-Fluid
Coupling
Christopher Batty
Florence Bertails
Robert Bridson
University of British Columbia

Motivation
• Goal: Simulate fluids coupled to objects.
• Extend the basic Eulerian approach:
– Advect fluid velocities
– Add forces (eg. gravity)
– Enforce incompressibility via pressure projection
• See eg. [Stam ‘99, Fedkiw et al. ‘01, Foster & Fedkiw ‘01,
Enright et al. ‘02, etc.]

Motivation
• Cartesian grid fluid simulation is great!
– Simple
– Effective
– Fast data access
– No remeshing needed
• But…

Motivation
• Achilles’ heel: Real objects rarely align with grids.

Overview
Three parts to our work:
1) Irregular static objects on grids
2) Dynamic & kinematic objects on grids
3) Improved liquid-solid boundary conditions

Previous Work
• First solution  Voxelize
– [Foster & Metaxas ’96]
• Easy!
• “Stairstep” artifacts
• Artificial viscosity
• Doesn’t converge under refinement!

Previous Work
• Better solution  Subdivide nearby
– [Losasso et al. ‘04]
• Stairs are smaller
• But problem remains

Previous Work
• Better yet  Mesh to match objects
– [Feldman et al. ‘05]
• Accurate!
• Needs remeshing
• Slower data access
• Trickier interpolation
• Sub-grid objects?

And now… back to the future?
• We’ll return to regular grids
– But achieve results like tet meshes!

Pressure Projection
• Converts a velocity field to be
incompressible (or divergence-free)
• No expansion or compression
• No flow into objects
Images courtesy of [Tong et al. ‘03]

Pressure Projection
• We want the “closest” incompressible velocity
field to the input.
• It’s a minimization problem!

Key Idea!
• Distance metric in the space of fluid velocity fields is
kinetic energy.
• Minimizing KE wrt. pressure is equivalent to the
classic Poisson problem!




fluid
n
n
2
1
1
2
1
KE u


Minimization Interpretation
• Fluid velocity update is:
• Resulting minimization problem is:
p
t
n






u
u ~
1
2
~
2
1
min
arg  


fluid
p
p
t

 u

What changes?
• Variational principle automatically enforces boundary
conditions! No explicit manipulation needed.
• Volume/mass terms in KE account for partial fluid cells.
– Eg.
• Result: Easy, accurate fluid velocities near irregular
objects.
  2
2
/
1
2
/
1
2
/
1
2
1
KE 

  i
i
i u
vol


Discretization Details
• Normal equations always give an SPD linear system.
– Solve with preconditioned CG, etc.
• Same Laplacian stencil, but with new volume terms.
Classic:
Variational:
x
u
u
x
p
p
p i
i
i
i
i






 


 2
/
1
2
/
1
2
1
1 )
1
(
)
1
(
)
1
(
)
2
(
)
1
(
x
u
V
u
V
x
p
V
p
V
V
p
V i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i







 








 2
/
1
2
/
1
2
/
1
2
/
1
2
1
2
/
1
2
/
1
2
/
1
1
2
/
1 )
(
)
(
)
(
)
(
)
(

Object Coupling
• This works for static boundaries
• How to extend to…
– Two-way coupling?
• Dynamic objects fully interacting with fluid
– One-way coupling?
• Scripted/kinematic objects pushing the fluid

Object Coupling – Previous Work
• “Rigid Fluid” [Carlson et al ’04]
– Fast, simple, effective
– Potentially incompatible
boundary velocities, leakage
• Explicit Coupling [Guendelman
et al. ’05]
– Handles thin shells, loose
coupling approach
– Multiple pressure solves per
step, uses voxelized solve

Object Coupling – Previous Work
• Implicit Coupling [Klingner et al ‘06, Chentanez et al.’06]
– solves object + fluid motion simultaneously
– handles tight coupling (eg. water balloons)
– requires conforming (tet) mesh to avoid artifacts

A Variational Coupling Framework
Just add the object’s kinetic energy to the system.
Automatically gives:
– incompressible fluid velocities
– compatible velocities at object surface
 

fluid
solid V
M
V
u
*
2
1
2
1
KE
2


A Coupling Framework
Two components:
1) Velocity update:
How does the pressure force update the object’s
velocity?
2) Kinetic energy:
How do we compute the object’s KE?

Example: Rigid Bodies
1) Velocity update:
2) Kinetic Energy:
Discretize consistently with fluid, add to minimization, and solve.








solid
CM
solid
p
p
n
X
x
n
ˆ
)
(
Torque
ˆ
Force
2
2
2
1
2
1
KE Iω
v 
 m

One Way Coupling
• Conceptually, object mass  infinity
• In practice: drop coupling terms from matrix

Wall Separation
• Standard wall boundary condition is u·n = 0.
– Liquid adheres to walls and ceilings!
• Ideally, prefer u·n ≥ 0, so liquid can separate
– Analogous to rigid body contact.

Wall Separation - Previous Work
• If ũ·n ≥ 0 before projection, hold u fixed.
– [Foster & Fedkiw ’01, Houston et al ’03, Rasmussen et al ‘04]
• Inaccurate or incorrect in certain cases:

Wall Separation
• Two cases at walls:
– If p > 0, pressure prevents penetration (“push”)
– If p < 0, pressure prevents separation (“pull”)
• Disallow “pull” force:
– Add p ≥ 0 constraint to minimization
– Gives an inequality-constrained QP
– u·n ≥ 0 enforced implicitly via KKT conditions

Future Directions
• Robust air-water-solid
interfaces.
• Add overlapping ghost
pressures to handle
thin objects, à la [Tam
et al ’05]

Future Directions
• Explore scalable QP solvers for 3D wall-
separation.
• Extend coupling to deformables and other
object models.
• Employ linear algebra techniques to
accelerate rigid body coupling.

Summary
• Easy method for accurate sub-grid fluid
velocities near objects, on regular grids.
• Unified variational framework for coupling
fluids and arbitrary dynamic solids.
• New boundary condition for liquid allows
robust separation from walls.

variational Fluids Coupling applications

More Related Content

Similar to variational Fluids Coupling applications (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

variational Fluids Coupling applications