Lattice Discrete Particle Model (LDPM): Comparison of Various Time Integration Solvers and Implementations
Fuente:
arXiv
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866908884598259712 |
|---|---|
| author | Lale, Erol Eliáš, Jan Yu, Ke Troemner, Matthew Středulová, Monika Khoury, Julien Xue, Tianju Koutromanos, Ioannis Fascetti, Alessandro Ayhan, Bahar Chen, Baixi Di Luzio, Giovanni Lyu, Yuhui Pathirage, Madura Pijaudier-Cabot, Gilles Shen, Lei Tasora, Alessandro Yang, Lifu Zhong, Jiawei Cusatis, Gianluca |
| author_facet | Lale, Erol Eliáš, Jan Yu, Ke Troemner, Matthew Středulová, Monika Khoury, Julien Xue, Tianju Koutromanos, Ioannis Fascetti, Alessandro Ayhan, Bahar Chen, Baixi Di Luzio, Giovanni Lyu, Yuhui Pathirage, Madura Pijaudier-Cabot, Gilles Shen, Lei Tasora, Alessandro Yang, Lifu Zhong, Jiawei Cusatis, Gianluca |
| contents | This article presents a comparison of various implementations of the Lattice Discrete Particle Model (LDPM) for the numerical simulation of concrete and other heterogeneous quasibrittle materials. The comparison involves the use of transient implicit and explicit solvers and steady-state (static) solvers and implementations for Central Processing Unit (CPU) as well as Graphics Processing Unit (GPU). The various implementations are compared on the basis of a set of benchmarks tests describing behaviors of increasing computational complexity. They include elastic vibrations, confined strain-hardening compressive response, tensile fracture, and unconfined strain-softening compressive response. Metrics of interest extracted from the simulations include macroscopic stress versus strain responses, computational times, number of iterations, and energy balance error. Pairwise comparison of final crack patterns is provided through the correlation coefficient and normalized root mean square error of the crack opening vectors. Moreover, for the most numerically challenging case of unconfined compression with sliding boundary conditions, the stability of the strain-softening response is tested by perturbing the solutions as well as changing the convergence criteria and time step size. Attached to this paper is the complete input data of the benchmark tests; this will allow researchers to run the examples and compare them with their own implementations. In addition, most of the reported implementations are publicly available in open source packages. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2603_13190 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Lattice Discrete Particle Model (LDPM): Comparison of Various Time Integration Solvers and Implementations Lale, Erol Eliáš, Jan Yu, Ke Troemner, Matthew Středulová, Monika Khoury, Julien Xue, Tianju Koutromanos, Ioannis Fascetti, Alessandro Ayhan, Bahar Chen, Baixi Di Luzio, Giovanni Lyu, Yuhui Pathirage, Madura Pijaudier-Cabot, Gilles Shen, Lei Tasora, Alessandro Yang, Lifu Zhong, Jiawei Cusatis, Gianluca Computational Engineering, Finance, and Science Materials Science This article presents a comparison of various implementations of the Lattice Discrete Particle Model (LDPM) for the numerical simulation of concrete and other heterogeneous quasibrittle materials. The comparison involves the use of transient implicit and explicit solvers and steady-state (static) solvers and implementations for Central Processing Unit (CPU) as well as Graphics Processing Unit (GPU). The various implementations are compared on the basis of a set of benchmarks tests describing behaviors of increasing computational complexity. They include elastic vibrations, confined strain-hardening compressive response, tensile fracture, and unconfined strain-softening compressive response. Metrics of interest extracted from the simulations include macroscopic stress versus strain responses, computational times, number of iterations, and energy balance error. Pairwise comparison of final crack patterns is provided through the correlation coefficient and normalized root mean square error of the crack opening vectors. Moreover, for the most numerically challenging case of unconfined compression with sliding boundary conditions, the stability of the strain-softening response is tested by perturbing the solutions as well as changing the convergence criteria and time step size. Attached to this paper is the complete input data of the benchmark tests; this will allow researchers to run the examples and compare them with their own implementations. In addition, most of the reported implementations are publicly available in open source packages. |
| title | Lattice Discrete Particle Model (LDPM): Comparison of Various Time Integration Solvers and Implementations |
| topic | Computational Engineering, Finance, and Science Materials Science |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.13190 |