Lubachevsky–Stillinger algorithm: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 03:55, 22 April 2011

Revision as of 12:44, 22 April 2011

Line 55:

The flow is rendered as a

[[discrete event simulation]],

the events being particle-particle or particle-boundary collisions.

If the computations were thought of as

with jamming ideally occurring after infinitely many

being performed

collisions and infinitely lengthy calculations.

with the infinite precision,

In practice, the calculations are finite,

then the jamming would have

they are stopped

occurred [[ad infinitum]],

when inter-collision particle runs (except those for the

past simulating infinitely many

rattlers) become

collisions.

smaller than an explicitly specified small threshold

In reality, the precision is finite as

or when they become smaller than an implicit threshold,

is the available resolution of representing

such as a threshold implied

the real numbers in the [[computer memory]],

by the computing resolution (for example, by the

for example, a [[double -precision]] resolution).

InThe practice, thereal calculations are finite, stopped

The key to the algorithm efficiency is that

when inter-collision runs of the non-rattler particles

the calculations are done essentially in an

become

smaller than an explicitly specifiedor small thresholdimplicitly

specified small threshold.

The LSA is efficient in the sense that

the calculationsevent are doneprocessed essentially in an

[[event-driven]] fashion, rather than in a

time-driven fashion. This means that almost

Line 77 ⟶ 82:

the same task of simulating [[granular flow]],

like, for example, the algorithm of Rapaport

<ref> D.C. Rapaport,

The Event Scheduling Problem in Molecular Dynamic Simulation,

Journal of Computational Physics

Volume 34 Issue 2, 1980

</ref>

the LSA is distinguished by a simpler data structure