Lattice Discrete Particle Model (LDPM): Comparison of Various Time Integration Solvers and Implementations

ABSTRACT 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 as well as implementations for central processing unit (CPU) and 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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics
Published
2026-03-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.70286
Primary Topic
Numerical methods in engineering
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Lattice Discrete Particle Model (LDPM): Comparison of Various Time Integration Solvers and Implementations

Lei Shen, Jan Eliáš, Gianluca Cusatis, Monika Středulová et al.
International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics
Numerical methods in engineering
article

Lattice Discrete Particle Model (LDPM): Comparison of Various Time Integration Solvers and Implementations

Lei Shen, Jan Eliáš, Gianluca Cusatis, Monika Středulová, Madura Pathirage, Alessandro Tasora, Baixi Chen, Ke Yu, Ioannis Koutromanos, Yuhui Lyu, Bahar Ayhan, Erol Lale, Matthew Troemner, G. Di Luzio, Limin Yang, Gilles Pijaudier‐Cabot, Tianju Xue, J. Khoury, Alessandro Fascetti, Jiawei Zhong
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT 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 as well as implementations for central processing unit (CPU) and 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.

International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics
Northwestern University (US), University of Parma (IT), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR), Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour (FR), Hohai University (CN), City University of Hong Kong (HK), University of New Mexico (US), University of Pittsburgh (US), Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK), Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HK), Istanbul Technical University (TR), Brno University of Technology (CZ), Virginia Tech (US), University of Hong Kong (HK), Politecnico di Milano (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 30%
Numerical methods in engineering
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.