Preliminary validation of lava benchmark tests on the GPUSPH particle engine
Annals of Geophysics
Lava flow modeling is important in many practical applications, such as the simulation of potential hazard scenarios and the planning of risk mitigation measures, as well as in scientific research to improve our understanding of the physical processes governing the dynamics of lava flow emplacement. Existing predictive models of lava flow behavior include various methods and solvers, each with its advantages and disadvantages. Codes differ in their physical implementations, numerical accuracy,
... umerical accuracy, and computational efficiency. In order to validate their efficiency and accuracy, several benchmark test cases for computational lava flow modeling have been established. Despite the popularity gained by the Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) method in Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), very few validations against lava flows have been successfully conducted. At the Tecnolab of INGV-Catania we designed GPUSPH, an implementation of the weaklycompressible SPH method running fully on Graphics Processing Units (GPUs). GPUSPH is a particle engine capable of modeling both Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids, solving the three-dimensional Navier-Stokes equations, using either a fully explicit integration scheme, or a semi-implicit scheme in the case of highly viscous fluids. Thanks to the full coupling with the thermal equation, and its support for radiation, convection and phase transition, GPUSPH can be used to faithfully simulate lava flows. Here we present the preliminary results obtained with GPUSPH for a benchmark series for computational lava-flow modeling, including analytical, semi-analytical and experimental problems. The results are reported in terms of correctness and performance, highlighting the benefits and the drawbacks deriving from the use of SPH to simulate lava flows. 7 BENCHMARKING THE GPUSPH MODEL FIGURE 4. Under resolved flow front for BM1 IR at t = 500s: this is one of the resolution issues arising in BM1 as the flow evolves. FIGURE 5. Setup for BM2. [from Cordonnier et al., 2016].