Discontinuous Galerkin Method for Simulating an Ice Floe Impact on a Vertical Cylindrical Offshore Structure

  • V. A. MiryahaEmail author
  • I. B. Petrov


An approach to simulate the impact of an ice floe on a vertical cylindrical offshore structure and a detailed review of its related complications are presented. The information on the ice rheology of the continuum mechanics model used, which makes it possible to achieve a balance between the accuracy of the simulation results and the computational resources required, is presented. A numerical method and some features of the simulation and techniques, which allow us to overcome difficulties associated with the resource intensity of calculations, are described. Typical destruction patterns of the ice floes and pressure distributions on offshore structures are discussed. The numerical results obtained in this work demonstrate the applicability of the ice model and the implemented software to problems of the safety of oil and gas platforms on the Arctic shelf.


mathematical simulation continuum mechanics contact interaction strength destruction sea ice discontinuous Galerkin method 



The authors thank V.A. Pavlov, O.A. Verbitskaya, and A.T. Becker for their cooperation.

This work was supported by the Russian Science Foundation, grant no. 14-11-00434.


  1. 1.
    SNIP (Building Regulations) No. 2.06.04-82, Loads and impacts on hydraulic structures (wave, ice and from ships) (2012).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rules of the Russian Maritime Register of Shipping PBU/MSP (2014).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. Bergan, G. Cammaert, G. Skeie, and V. Tharigopula, “On the potential of computational methods and numerical simulation in ice mechanics,” IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 10, 012102 (2010).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. P. Dempsey, “Research trends in ice mechanics,” Int. J. Solids Struct. 37, 131–153 (2000).MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Z. P. Bažant, “Fracture analysis and size effects in failure of sea ice,” in The Mechanics of Solids: History and Evolution, A Festschrift in Honor of Arnold Kerr, Ed. by M. H. Santare and M. J. Chajes (Univ. of Delaware Press, Newark, Delaware, 2008), pp. 151–170.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. A. Nessim, M. S. Cheung, and I. J. Jordaan, “Ice action on fixed offshore structures: a state-of-the-art review,” Canad. J. Civ. Eng. 14, 381–407 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    W. Lu, S. Løset, and R. Lubbad, “Simulating ice-sloping structure interactions with the cohesive element method,” in Proceedings of the ASME 31st International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, 2012, pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. T. Bekker, Probabilistic Characteristics of Ice Loads on the Structures of the Continental Shelf (Dalnauka, Vladivostok, 2005) [in Russian].Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. Petrich and H. Eicken, “Growth, structure and properties of sea ice,” in Sea Ice - An Introduction to Its Physics, Biology, Chemistry and Geology, Ed. by D. N. Thomas and G. S. Dieckmann (Blackwell Scientific, London, 2010), pp. 22–77.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    E. Schulson and P. Duval, Creep and Fracture of Ice (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    V. N. Smirnov and V. U. Mironov, “Studies of the strength, morphometry and dynamics of ice in engineering problems during the development of the shelf in freezing seas,” Probl. Arktiki Antarktiki 85 (2), 5–15 (2010).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    L. Strub-Klein, “Field measurements and analysis of the morphological, physical and mechanical properties of level ice and sea ice ridges,” PhD Thesis (Norwegian Univ. Sci. Technol., Trondheim, 2012).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    R. V. Goldstein and N. M. Osipenko, “Some aspects of strength in sea ice mechanics,” Phys. Mesomech. 18, 139–148 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. Kovacs, “Sea ice, Part II. Estimating the full-scale tensile, flexural, and compressive strength of first-year ice,” CRREL Report 96–11 (1996).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    M. Gabrielsen et al., “Comparison of physical and mechanical properties of coastal ice and level ice,” in Proceedings of 19th IAHR International Symposium on Ice, Canada, 2008, pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    G. Timco and W. Weeks, “A review of the engineering properties of sea ice,” Cold Regions Sci. Technol. 60, 107–129 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. Palmer and K. Croasdale, Arctic Offshore Engineering (World Scientific, Singapore, 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    T. Sain and R. Narasimhan, “Constitutive modeling of ice in the high strain rate regime,” Int. J. Solids Struct. 48, 817–827 (2011).CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    M. Määttänen, “Numerical simulation of ice-induced vibrations in offshore structures,” in Keynote Lecture, Proceedings of the 14th Nordic Seminar on Computational Mechanics (Lund Univ., Lund, Sweden, 2001), pp. 13–28.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    R. Staroszczyk, “Loads on an off-shore structure due to an ice floe impact,” Arch. Hydro-Eng. Environ. Mech. 54, 77–94 (2007).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    K. Muggeridge and I. Jordaan, “Microstructural change in ice: III. Observations from an iceberg impact zone,” J. Glaciol. 45 (151), 449–455 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    I. Jordaan, “Mechanics of ice-structure interaction,” Eng. Fract. Mech. 68, 1923–1960 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    M. Lau, “A three-dimensional discrete element simulation of ice sheet impacting a 60o conical structure,” in Proceedings of the 16th International POAC Conference, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 2001.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hai Li, Yu Liu, Xiang Jun Bi, et al., “Numerical simulation of sea ice compressional strength with discrete element model,” Adv. Mater. Res. 268–270, 913-918 (2011).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    J. Paavilainen, J. Tuhkuri, and A. Polojarvi, “Discrete element simulation of ice pile-up against an inclined structure,” in Proceedings of the 18th IAHR International Symposium on Ice, 2006, pp. 177–184.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    M. Lau, K. P. Lawrence, and L. Rothenburg, “Discrete element analysis of ice loads on ships and structures,” Ships Offshore Struct. 6, 211–221 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    T. Berglund, “Ice fracture model for real-time ship simulator,” Ph.D. Thesis (Umeoa Univ., Dep. Phys., 2012).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Y. Yamauchi, K. Kamesaki, and M. Hyodo, “Numerical Simulation on Ice-Structure Interaction during Earthquakes,” in Proceedings of the 20th International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Beijing, 2010.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    E. Kim, “Experimental and numerical studies related to the coupled behavior of ice mass and steel structures during accidental collisions,” Ph. D. Thesis (Norwegian Univ. Sci. Technol., 2014).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    B. Sand, “Nonlinear finite element simulations of ice forces on offshore structure,” Doctoral Thesis (Luleoa Univ. Technol., 2008).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    I. J. Jordaan, J. Wells, J. Xiao, et al., “Ice crushing and cyclic loading in compression,” in Proceedings of the 19th IAHR International Symposium on Ice, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, 2008, pp. 1011–1023.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    D. Hilding, J. Forsberg, and A. Gurtner, “Simulation of loads from drifting ice sheets on offshore structures,” in Proceedings of the 12th International LS-DYNA Users Conference, 2012, pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    K. Hyunwook, “Simulation of compressive 'cone-shaped' ice specimen experiments using LS-DYNA,” in Proceedings of the 12th International LS-DYNA Users Conference, 2014, pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    D. Hamid and B. Sand, “Numerical simulation of the ice-structure interaction in LS-DYNA,” in Proceedings of the 8th European LS-DYNA Users Conference, Strasbourg, 2011, ID 8504.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    B. Sand and L. Fransson, “Numerical simulation of level ice loads on Norstromsgrund lighthouse,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Cold Climate Technology, Narvik, Norway, May 26–28, 2014.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    A. Derradji-Aouat and G. J. Earle, “Ship-structure collisions: development of a numerical model for direct impact simulations,” 5, 520–527 (2003).Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    R. E. Gagnon and J. Wang, “Numerical simulations of a tanker collision with a bergy bit incorporating hydrodynamics, a validated ice model and damage to the vessel,” Cold Regions Sci. Technol. 81, 26–35 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    J. Shunying and L. Shewen, “Interaction between sea ice/iceberg and ship structures: a review,” Adv. Polar Sci. 23, 187–195 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    S. Kan and W. Tangborn, “Calculation of the size of the iceberg struck by the oil tanker overseas Ohio,” in Proceedings of the 14th IAHR Symposium on Ice, 1997.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gao Yan, Hu Zhiqiang, and Wang Jin, “Sensitivity analysis for iceberg geometry shape in ship-iceberg collision in view of different material models,” Math. Probl. Eng. 2014, 414362 (2014).Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    I. A. Stepanyuk and V. N. Smirnov, Methods for Measuring the Dynamics of Sea Ice (Gidrometeoizdat, St. Petersburg, 2001) [in Russian].Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Z. Liu, J. Amdahl, and S. Loset, “Plasticity based material modelling of ice and its application to ship-iceberg impacts,” Cold Reg. Sci. Technol. 65, 326–334 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    D. Hilding, J. Forsberg, and A. Gurtner, “Simulation of ice action loads on offshore structures,” in Proceedings of the 8th European LS-DYNA Users Conference, Strasbourg, 2011.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Yan Gao, Zhiqiang Hu, J. W. Ringsberg, and Jin Wang, “An elastic-plastic ice material model for ship-iceberg collision simulations,” Ocean Eng. 102, 27–39 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    V. D. Ivanov, V. I. Kondaurov, I. B. Petrov, and A. S. Kholodov, “Calculation of dynamic deformation and destruction of elastoplastic bodies by grid-characteristic methods,” Mat. Model. 2 (11), 10–29 (1990).MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    V. A. Lobanov, “Ice modeling in problems with a finite element formulation,” Differ. Uravn. Protsess. Upravl., No. 4, 19–29 (2008).Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    A. N. Prokudin and V. N. Odinokov, “Numerical study of the process of destruction of ice cover, taking into account compressibility and heterogeneity,” Vychisl. Mekh. Splosh. Sred 6, 110–118 (2013).Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    W. F. Weeks, On Sea Ice (Univ. of Alaska Press, 2010).Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    G. E. Frankenstein and R. Garner, “Equation for determining the brine volume of sea ice from 0.5 to 22.9°C,” J. Glaciol. 6, 943–944 (1967).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Yu. N. Orlova, “Comprehensive theoretical and experimental study of the behavior of ice under shock and explosive loads,” Cand. Sci. Dissertation (Tomskii Gos. Univ., Tomsk, 2014).Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Abaqus Crushable Foam Plasticity Models. Accessed 2015.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    M. Torstein, “Iceberg shape characterization for damage assessment of accidental impacts with ships and offshore structures,” Master Thesis (2013).Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    R. Duddu and H. Waisman, “A nonlocal continuum damage mechanics approach to simulation of creep fracture in ice sheets,” Comput. Mech. 51, 961–974 (2013).CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    M. Dumbser and M. Kaser, “An arbitrary high order discontinuous Galerkin method for elastic waves on unstructured meshes II: the three-dimensional isotropic case,” Geophys. J. Int. 171, 1324 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    R. L. LeVeque, Finite Volume Methods for Hyperbolic Problems (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2002).CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    E. F. Toro, Riemann Solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics, 2nd ed. (Springer, Berlin, 1999).CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    L. C. Wilcox, G. Stadler, C. Burstedde, and O. Ghattas, “A high-order discontinuous Galerkin method for wave propagation through coupled elastic-acoustic media,” J. Comput. Phys. 229, 9373–9396 (2010).MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    A. G. Kulikovskii, N. V. Pogorelov, and A. Y. Semenov, Mathematical Aspects of Numerical Solution of Hyperbolic Systems (Fizmatlit, Moscow, 2001; Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, 2001).Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    M. Kaser and M. Dumbser, “An arbitrary high order discontinuous Galerkin method for elastic waves on unstructured meshes II: The three-dimensional isotropic case,” Geophys. J. Int. 171, 1324 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    C. Pelties et al., “Three-dimensional dynamic rupture simulation with a high-order discontinuous Galerkin method on unstructured tetrahedral meshes,” J. Geophys. Res.: Solid Earth 117 (2), 1–15 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    V. A. Miryaha, A. V. Sannikov, and I. B. Petrov, “Discontinuous Galerkin method for numerical simulation of dynamic processes in solids,” Math. Models Comput. Simul. 7, 446–455 (2015).MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    V. A. Biryukov, V. A. Miryakha, and I. B. Petrov, “Analysis of the dependence of the global load dependence on ice properties for the interaction between an ice field and a structure by a numerical simulation,” Dokl. Math. 474, 327–330 (2017).Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    V. A. Biryukov, V. A. Miryakha, I. B. Petrov, and N. I. Khoklov, “Simulation of elastic wave propagation in geological media: Intercomparison of three numerical methods,” Comput. Math. Math. Phys. 56, 1086–1095 (2016).MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Quasi-Static Analyses, Lecture 5, e-library ABAQUS. Scholar
  65. 65.
    G. van der Bergen, “Efficient collision detection of complex deformable models using AABB trees,” J. Graph. Tools 4 (2), 1–13 (1997).CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    A. V. Sannikov, V. A. Miryaha, and I. B. Petrov, “Numerical simulation of ice strength experiments,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Scientific Conference on Polar Mechanics, Sept. 27–30, 2016, Vladivostok, Russia, pp. 141–150.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Keldysh Institute of Applied Mathematics, Russian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia
  2. 2.Moscow Institute of Physics and TechnologyMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations