Advertisement

Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering

, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp 364–379 | Cite as

Maximum entropy based finite element analysis of porous media

  • Emad Norouzi
  • Hesam Moslemzadeh
  • Soheil MohammadiEmail author
Research Article
  • 46 Downloads

Abstract

The maximum entropy theory has been used in a wide variety of physical, mathematical and engineering applications in the past few years. However, its application in numerical methods, especially in developing new shape functions, has attracted much interest in recent years. These shape functions possess the potential for performing better than the conventional basis functions in problems with randomly generated coarse meshes. In this paper, the maximum entropy theory is adopted to spatially discretize the deformation variable of the governing coupled equations of porous media. This is in line with the well-known fact that higher-order shape functions can provide more stable solutions in porous problems. Some of the benchmark problems in deformable porous media are solved with the developed approach and the results are compared with available references.

Keywords

maximum entropy FEM fully coupled multi-phase system porous media 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the High Performance Computing Laboratory (HPC Lab), University of Tehran for the technical support. The authors wish to express their thanks to Professor N. Sukumar for his maximum entropy code. The financial support of Iran National Science Foundation (INSF) is gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. 1.
    Touma J, Vauclin M. Experimental and numerical analysis of twophase infiltration in a partially saturated soil. Transport in Porous Media, 1986, 1(1): 27–55Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Faust C R, Guswa J H, Mercer JW. Simulation of three-dimensional flow of immiscible fluids within and below the unsaturated zone. Water Resources Research, 1989, 25(12): 2449–2464Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ataie-Ashtiani B, Raeesi-Ardekani D. Comparison of numerical formulations for two-phase flow in porous media. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 2010, 28(4): 373–389Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Durlofsky L J. A triangle based mixed finite element—finite volume technique for modeling two phase flow through porous media. Journal of Computational Physics, 1993, 105(2): 252–266zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Forsyth P A, Wu Y, Pruess K. Robust numerical methods for saturated-unsaturated flow with dry initial conditions in heterogeneous media. Advances in Water Resources, 1995, 18(1): 25–38Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jenny P, Lee S H, Tchelepi H A. Adaptive multiscale finite-volume method for multiphase flow and transport in porous media. Multiscale Modeling & Simulation, 2005, 3(1): 50–64MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Klieber W, Rivière B. Adaptive simulations of two-phase flow by discontinuous Galerkin methods. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2006, 196(1–3): 404–419MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Epshteyn Y, Rivière B. Fully implicit discontinuous finite element methods for two-phase flow. Applied Numerical Mathematics, 2007, 57(4): 383–401MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Li X, Zienkiewicz. Multiphase flow in deforming porous media and finite element solutions. Computers & Structures, 1992, 45(2): 211–227MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rahman N A, Lewis R W. Finite element modelling of multiphase immiscible flow in deforming porous media for subsurface systems. Computers and Geotechnics, 1999, 24(1): 41–63Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Laloui L, Klubertanz G, Vulliet L. Solid–liquid–air coupling in multiphase porous media. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 2003, 27(3): 183–206zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oettl G, Stark R, Hofstetter G. Numerical simulation of geotechnical problems based on a multi-phase finite element approach. Computers and Geotechnics, 2004, 31(8): 643–664Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stelzer R, Hofstetter G. Adaptive finite element analysis of multiphase problems in geotechnics. Computers and Geotechnics, 2005, 32(6): 458–481Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Callari C, Abati A. Finite element methods for unsaturated porous solids and their application to dam engineering problems. Computers & Structures, 2009, 87(7–8): 485–501Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nguyen V P, Lian H, Rabczuk T, Bordas S. Modelling hydraulic fractures in porous media using flow cohesive interface elements. Engineering Geology, 2017, 225: 68–82Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Samimi S, Pak A. Three-dimensional simulation of fully coupled hydro-mechanical behavior of saturated porous media using Element Free Galerkin (EFG) method. Computers and Geotechnics, 2012, 46: 75–83Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Goudarzi M, Mohammadi S. Weak discontinuity in porous media: an enriched EFG method for fully coupled layered porous media. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 2014, 38(17): 1792–1822Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goudarzi M, Mohammadi S. Analysis of cohesive cracking in saturated porous media using an extrinsically enriched EFG method. Computers and Geotechnics, 2015, 63: 183–198Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Samimi S, Pak A. A three-dimensional mesh-free model for analyzing multi-phase flow in deforming porous media. Meccanica, 2016, 51(3): 517–536MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mohammadnejad T, Khoei A. Hydro-mechanical modeling of cohesive crack propagation in multiphase porous media using the extended finite element method. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 2013, 37(10): 1247–1279Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Goodarzi M, Mohammadi S, Jafari A. Numerical analysis of rock fracturing by gas pressure using the extended finite element method. Petroleum Science, 2015, 12(2): 304–315Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mohammadnejad T, Khoei A R. An extended finite element method for hydraulic fracture propagation in deformable porous media with the cohesive crack model. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 2013, 73: 77–95MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhuang X, Wang Q, Zhu H. A 3D computational homogenization model for porous material and parameters identification. Computational Materials Science, 2015, 96: 536–548Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zhu H, Wang Q, Zhuang X. A nonlinear semi-concurrent multiscale method for fractures. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2016, 87: 65–82Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bayesteh H, Mohammadi S. Micro-based enriched multiscale homogenization method for analysis of heterogeneous materials. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 2017, 125: 22–42Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fatemi Dehaghani P, Hatefi Ardakani S, Bayesteh H, Mohammadi S. 3D hierarchical multiscale analysis of heterogeneous SMA based materials. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 2017, 118–119: 24–40Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Beltzer A I. Entropy characterization of finite elements. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 1996, 33(24): 3549–3560zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shannon C E. Communication theory of secrecy systems. Bell Labs Technical Journal, 1949, 28(4): 656–715MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sukumar N. Construction of polygonal interpolants: a maximum entropy approach. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2004, 61(12): 2159–2181MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Arroyo M, Ortiz M. Local maximum-entropy approximation schemes: a seamless bridge between finite elements and meshfree methods. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2006, 65(13): 2167–2202MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Millán D, Sukumar N, Arroyo M. Cell-based maximum-entropy approximants. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2015, 284: 712–731MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ortiz A, Puso M, Sukumar N. Maximum-entropy meshfree method for compressible and near-incompressible elasticity. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2010, 199(25): 1859–1871MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ortiz A, Puso M, Sukumar N. Maximum-entropy meshfree method for incompressible media problems. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 2011, 47(6): 572–585MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Quaranta G, Kunnath S K, Sukumar N. Maximum-entropy meshfree method for nonlinear static analysis of planar reinforced concrete structures. Engineering Structures, 2012, 42: 179–189Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ullah Z, Coombs W, Augarde C. An adaptive finite element/ meshless coupled method based on local maximum entropy shape functions for linear and nonlinear problems. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2013, 267: 111–132MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Amiri F, Anitescu C, Arroyo M, Bordas S P A, Rabczuk T. XLME interpolants, a seamless bridge between XFEM and enriched meshless methods. Computational Mechanics, 2014, 53(1): 45–57MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Amiri F, Millán D, Shen Y, Rabczuk T, Arroyo M. Phase-field modeling of fracture in linear thin shells. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 2014, 69: 102–109Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Amiri F, Millán D, Arroyo M, Silani M, Rabczuk T. Fourth order phase-field model for local max-ent approximants applied to crack propagation. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2016, 312: 254–275MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wu C, Young D, Hong H. Adaptive meshless local maximumentropy finite element method for convection-diffusion problems. Computational Mechanics, 2014, 53(1): 189–200MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kardani O, Nazem M, Kardani M, Sloan S. On the application of the maximum entropy meshfree method for elastoplastic geotechnical analysis. Computers and Geotechnics, 2017, 84: 68–77Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nazem M, Kardani M, Bienen B, Cassidy M. A stable maximumentropy meshless method for analysis of porous media. Computers and Geotechnics, 2016, 80: 248–260Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Navas P, López-Querol S, Yu R C, Li B. Meshfree Methods Applied to Consolidation Problems in Saturated Soils. In: Weinberg K, Pandolfi A, eds. Innovative Numerical Approaches for Multi-Field and Multi-Scale Problems. Springer, 2016, 241–264Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Navas P, López-Querol S, Yu R C, Li B. B-bar based algorithm applied to meshfree numerical schemes to solve unconfined seepage problems through porous media. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 2016, 40(6): 962–984Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Navas P, Yu R C, López-Querol S, Li B. Dynamic consolidation problems in saturated soils solved through uw formulation in a LME meshfree framework. Computers and Geotechnics, 2016, 79: 55–72Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Zakrzewski N, Nazem M, Sloan S W, Cassidy M. On application of the maximum entropy meshless method for large deformation analysis of geotechnical problems. In: Gu Y, Guan H, Sauret E, Saha S, Zhan H, Persky R, eds. Applied Mechanics and Materials. Trans Tech Publ, 2016, 331–335Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lewis R W, Schrefler B A. The finite Element Method in the Static and Dynamic Deformation and Consolidation of Porous Media. John Wiley& Sons, 1998zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Jaynes E T. On the rationale of maximum-entropy methods. Proceedings of the IEEE, 1982, 70(9): 939–952Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gull S F, Skilling J. Maximum entropy method in image processing. In: IEE Proceedings F-Communications, Radar and Signal Processing. IET, 1984Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Golan A, Judge G G, Miller D. Maximum Entropy Econometrics. John Wiley & Sons, 1996zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Karmeshu J. Entropy Measures, Maximum Entropy Principle and Emerging Applications. Springer Science & Business Media, 2003zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Jaynes E T. Information theory and statistical mechanics. Physical Review, 1957, 106(4): 620–630MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Gawin D, Baggio P, Schrefler B A. Coupled heat, water and gas flow in deformable porous media. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, 1995, 20(8–9): 969–987zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Khoei A, Mohammadnejad T. Numerical modeling of multiphase fluid flow in deforming porous media: a comparison between twoand three-phase models for seismic analysis of earth and rockfill dams. Computers and Geotechnics, 2011, 38(2): 142–166Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Schrefler B A, Scotta R. A fully coupled dynamic model for twophase fluid flow in deformable porous media. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2001, 190(24–25): 3223–3246zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Brooks R H, Corey A T. Hydraulic properties of porous media and their relation to drainage design. Transactions of the ASAE. American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 1964, 7(1): 26–28Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Booker J R, Small J. Finite layer analysis of consolidation. I. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 1982, 6(2): 151–171zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Booker J, Small J. A method of computing the consolidation behaviour of layered soils using direct numerical inversion of Laplace transforms. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 1987, 11(4): 363–380zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Gibson R, Schiffman R, Pu S. Plane strain and axially symmetric consolidation of a clay layer on a smooth impervious base. Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics, 1970, 23(4): 505–520zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Aboustit B, Advani S, Lee J. Variational principles and finite element simulations for thermo-elastic consolidation. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 1985, 9(1): 49–69MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Liakopoulos A C. Transient Flow Through Unsaturated Porous Media. Dissertation for PhD degree. University of California, Berkeley. 1964Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Narasimhan T N, Witherspoon P. Numerical model for saturatedunsaturated flow in deformable porous media: 3. Applications. Water Resources Research, 1978, 14(6): 1017–1034Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Schrefler B, Simoni L. A unified approach to the analysis of saturated-unsaturated elastoplastic porous media. Numerical Methods in Geomechanics, 1988, 1: 205–212Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Zienkiewicz O, Xie Y M, Schrefler B A, Ledesma A, Bicanic N. Static and dynamic behaviour of soils: a rational approach to quantitative solutions. II. Semi-saturated problems. In: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. The Royal Society, 1990Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Schrefler B, Zhan X. A fully coupled model for water flow and airflow in deformable porous media. Water Resources Research, 1993, 29(1): 155–167Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Gawin D, Schrefler B A, Galindo M. Thermo-hydro-mechanical analysis of partially saturated porous materials. Engineering Computations, 1996, 13(7): 113–143zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Wang X W, Schrefler B. Fully coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical analysis by an algebraic multigrid method. Engineering Computations, 2003, 20(2): 211–229zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Ehlers W, Graf T, Ammann M. Deformation and localization analysis of partially saturated soil. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2004, 193(27): 2885–2910zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emad Norouzi
    • 1
  • Hesam Moslemzadeh
    • 1
  • Soheil Mohammadi
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.High Performance Computing Laboratory, School of Civil Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringUniversity of TehranTehranIran

Personalised recommendations