pith. sign in

arxiv: 2505.12539 · v2 · submitted 2025-05-18 · 💻 cs.GR

Penetration-free Solid-Fluid Interaction on Shells and Rods

Yuchen Sun , Jinyuan Liu , Yin Yang , Chenfanfu Jiang , Minchen Li , Bo Zhu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 14:04 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.GR
keywords fluid-solid interactionthin shellsrodsbarrier potentialslevel-set methodspenetration-free simulationphysics-based animationoptimization-based simulation
0
0 comments X

The pith

A barrier-augmented optimization system simulates fluid interactions with shells and rods without any penetration by enforcing explicit positional constraints and level-set incompressibility.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a method for simulating fluids interacting with thin elastic solids such as shells and rods while preventing any interpenetration. It centers on a single optimization problem that adds barrier potentials to keep solids and fluids apart, adjusts fluid level-set values to preserve volume, and minimizes the elastic energy stored in the solids. This differs from earlier approaches that only matched velocities at interfaces; instead it directly resolves positions for both the explicit solid meshes and the implicit fluid surface. A new distance function measures how far an arbitrary-codimension Lagrangian object sits from an implicit surface. The unified energy combines inertia, elasticity, damping, barriers, and incompressibility terms so that complex behaviors emerge naturally from the solver.

Core claim

We introduce a novel approach to simulate the interaction between fluids and thin elastic solids without any penetration. Our approach is centered around an optimization system augmented with barriers, which aims to find a configuration that ensures the absence of penetration while enforcing incompressibility for the fluids and minimizing elastic potentials for the solids. Unlike previous methods that primarily focus on velocity coherence at the fluid-solid interfaces, we demonstrate the effectiveness and flexibility of explicitly resolving positional constraints, including both explicit representation of solid positions and the implicit representation of fluid level-set interface. To ensure

What carries the argument

A unified optimization system augmented with barrier potentials that simultaneously resolves positional non-penetration constraints between explicit solids and implicit fluid level sets, enforces fluid incompressibility via level-set adjustment, and minimizes solid elastic potentials.

If this is right

  • Topology changes such as splitting or merging of fluid regions around thin objects occur automatically inside the solver.
  • Behaviors including bouncing, splashing, sliding, rolling, and floating of shells and rods arise from the same energy terms without case-by-case fixes.
  • The new distance metric allows consistent separation measurement for objects of any codimension interacting with level-set surfaces.
  • Level-set value adjustments preserve fluid volume while the barrier terms keep the interface penetration-free.
  • Inertia, damping, elasticity, barriers, and incompressibility are all satisfied inside one optimization step.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same barrier-plus-level-set pattern could be tested on rigid-body or cloth-fluid scenes by substituting the elastic potential.
  • High-speed impact tests with measured penetration depth would provide a direct numerical check on the method's claims.
  • If the optimizer converges for finer meshes, the approach may extend to multi-phase flows or thin films without additional machinery.
  • Connections to existing signed-distance or closest-point queries in graphics libraries could accelerate the new separation metric.

Load-bearing premise

A single optimization problem can reliably enforce positional non-penetration, fluid volume preservation, and elastic energy minimization together without numerical instability or extra post-processing steps.

What would settle it

Perform a simulation of a fast-moving fluid column striking a thin flexible rod at an oblique angle and inspect the final positions to determine whether any fluid particles lie inside the rod surface.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.12539 by Bo Zhu, Chenfanfu Jiang, Jinyuan Liu, Minchen Li, Yin Yang, Yuchen Sun.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Illustration of the geomet￾ric setup Geometric domain. We first define the geometric domain of our solid-fluid coupling problem. As shown in the inset figure, we denote the fluid domain as Ωf and the solid domain as Ωs, with their boundaries specified as ∂Ωf and ∂Ωs, respectively. The fluid domain is implic￾itly specified as a signed dis￾tance field ϕ such that ϕ < 0 indicates the fluid volume’s interior a… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The level-set unknowns for optimization encompass grid cells [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: A primitive pair between the Eulerian fluid and the Lagrangian [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Sample potential geometries depicted by the nodal level-set [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Left: Fluid-air interfaces (depicted in green) associated with the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A single solid vertex(red) collides with a fluid (pale) at high [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: A series of 2D validation tests. (a): Comparison of collision handling results between a fluid volume and a single fixed point using our method [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Relative volume of the level-set in the example Bouncing. Results [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Maximum number of Newton iterations at each frame under [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Comparison of liquid topology changes when water drops with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Droplets with varying surface tension bounce on a soft cloth. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Dam break intercepted by a non-permeable cloth, illustrating [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: A raindrop splashes down, causing deformation of a hydropho [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: A water drop falls onto an elastic rod and passes through it, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_18.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: A light, soft cloth initially hung by one side falls onto a tank of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Droplets with varying surface tension slide along a pair of paral [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_19.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Multiple water drops of varying sizes descend upon a square [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: When liquids with surface tension come into contact with a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Averaged time cost breakdown per time step for the droplet [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_22.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We introduce a novel approach to simulate the interaction between fluids and thin elastic solids without any penetration. Our approach is centered around an optimization system augmented with barriers, which aims to find a configuration that ensures the absence of penetration while enforcing incompressibility for the fluids and minimizing elastic potentials for the solids. Unlike previous methods that primarily focus on velocity coherence at the fluid-solid interfaces, we demonstrate the effectiveness and flexibility of explicitly resolving positional constraints, including both explicit representation of solid positions and the implicit representation of fluid level-set interface. To preserve the volume of the fluid, we propose a simple yet efficient approach that adjusts the associated level-set values. Additionally, we develop a distance metric capable of measuring the separation between an implicitly represented surface and a Lagrangian object of arbitrary codimension. By integrating the inertia, solid elastic potential, damping, barrier potential, and fluid incompressibility within a unified system, we are able to robustly simulate a wide range of processes involving fluid interactions with lower-dimensional objects such as shells and rods. These processes include topology changes, bouncing, splashing, sliding, rolling, floating, and more.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims to introduce a novel optimization-based approach for simulating penetration-free interactions between fluids and thin elastic solids such as shells and rods. The core is a unified optimization system augmented with barrier potentials that simultaneously enforces positional non-penetration (via explicit solid positions and implicit fluid level-set), fluid incompressibility (via level-set value adjustment for volume preservation), and minimization of solid elastic potentials, while incorporating inertia and damping. A codimension-agnostic distance metric is developed to measure separation between the implicit fluid surface and Lagrangian objects of arbitrary codimension. The method is presented as robustly handling a wide range of phenomena including topology changes, bouncing, splashing, sliding, rolling, and floating.

Significance. If the unified optimization converges reliably to penetration-free configurations while preserving the stated physical properties across topology changes, this would constitute a meaningful contribution to physics-based animation in computer graphics. It shifts from velocity-coherence coupling to explicit positional constraints, potentially reducing artifacts in complex fluid-thin structure interactions. The codimension-agnostic distance metric and simple level-set volume adjustment are potentially reusable ideas. However, the absence of solver details and stability analysis in the provided description limits the immediate assessed significance.

major comments (2)
  1. Abstract: The central claim that a single unified optimization simultaneously enforces barrier-based non-penetration, level-set volume adjustment for incompressibility, and elastic energy minimization without instability is load-bearing, yet the description provides no explicit formulation of the barrier potential, its gradient with respect to the implicit level-set, or how volume adjustments are prevented from violating the distance metric during topology changes. This interaction is the least secure link for the robustness claims.
  2. Abstract: No details are supplied on the numerical solver (e.g., Newton with line search), barrier parameter schedule, or termination criteria. Without these, it is impossible to verify whether the combined energy remains convex or well-conditioned when level-set adjustments interact with barriers under splashing or rolling, directly affecting the penetration-free guarantee.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract would be strengthened by a single sentence clarifying the optimization technique or solver employed to support the robustness claims.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions we will make to improve clarity and support for our claims.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Abstract: The central claim that a single unified optimization simultaneously enforces barrier-based non-penetration, level-set volume adjustment for incompressibility, and elastic energy minimization without instability is load-bearing, yet the description provides no explicit formulation of the barrier potential, its gradient with respect to the implicit level-set, or how volume adjustments are prevented from violating the distance metric during topology changes. This interaction is the least secure link for the robustness claims.

    Authors: We thank the referee for identifying this key aspect that requires clearer exposition. The barrier potential is defined in the full manuscript (Section 3) as a function of the codimension-agnostic distance metric between explicit solid positions and the implicit fluid level-set interface. Its gradient with respect to the level-set is obtained via the chain rule through the distance computation, ensuring the barrier acts directly on the interface. Volume adjustments for incompressibility are performed by globally shifting level-set values while the joint optimization enforces the barrier constraints at every iteration, preventing violations. The distance metric's codimension-agnostic design naturally accommodates topology changes without introducing penetrations, as validated in our experiments. We will revise the abstract to include a brief mention of the barrier formulation and distance metric, and we will add an explanatory paragraph in the introduction that summarizes these interactions. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Abstract: No details are supplied on the numerical solver (e.g., Newton with line search), barrier parameter schedule, or termination criteria. Without these, it is impossible to verify whether the combined energy remains convex or well-conditioned when level-set adjustments interact with barriers under splashing or rolling, directly affecting the penetration-free guarantee.

    Authors: We agree that explicit solver details are essential for assessing reliability and reproducibility. The unified optimization is solved using a Newton method with backtracking line search to guarantee descent. The barrier stiffness parameter follows a progressive schedule that begins with a moderate value and increases over iterations to enforce strict non-penetration. Termination is based on the infinity norm of the position update falling below a user-specified tolerance. We do not claim the combined energy is convex—the level-set volume adjustment introduces non-convexity—but the barrier terms and line search maintain practical stability, as demonstrated by the absence of penetrations in our splashing and rolling examples. We will add a dedicated implementation subsection with pseudocode, the exact barrier schedule, and termination criteria. A comprehensive theoretical stability analysis lies outside the current scope but can be noted as future work. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: new optimization formulation is self-contained

full rationale

The paper presents a novel barrier-augmented optimization system that integrates inertia, solid elastic potential, damping, barrier potential, and fluid incompressibility as a unified energy minimization problem. It introduces original components including a level-set value adjustment for volume preservation and a distance metric for implicit-explicit separation at arbitrary codimension. These elements are defined and combined directly within the new framework rather than reducing to prior fitted parameters, self-citations, or renamed empirical patterns by construction. The derivation chain is therefore independent and self-contained, with no load-bearing steps that equate outputs to inputs via definition or fitting.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 2 invented entities

Review performed on abstract only; ledger entries are inferred from stated components rather than explicit derivations.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The optimization problem can be solved to a configuration satisfying all constraints simultaneously.
    Implicit in the claim that the unified system robustly simulates the listed processes.
invented entities (2)
  • Barrier potential in the unified optimization system no independent evidence
    purpose: Enforce non-penetration between fluid level-set and Lagrangian solids
    Introduced to augment the optimization for positional constraints.
  • Codimension-agnostic distance metric between implicit surface and Lagrangian object no independent evidence
    purpose: Measure separation for shells and rods of arbitrary codimension
    Developed to support the positional constraint resolution.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5735 in / 1287 out tokens · 29968 ms · 2026-05-22T14:04:37.994299+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Simulating cross-scale solid-fluid interaction phenomena,

    J. Liu, “Simulating cross-scale solid-fluid interaction phenomena,” Ph.D. dissertation, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA, 2024

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Solid- fluid interaction with surface-tension-dominant contact,

    L. Ruan, J. Liu, B. Zhu, S. Sueda, B. Wang, and B. Chen, “Solid- fluid interaction with surface-tension-dominant contact,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2021

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Elastomonolith: A monolithic optimization-based liquid solver for contact-aware elastic-solid coupling,

    T. Takahashi and C. Batty, “Elastomonolith: A monolithic optimization-based liquid solver for contact-aware elastic-solid coupling,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2022. 15

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Two-way coupling of fluids to rigid and deformable solids and shells,

    A. Robinson-Mosher, T. Shinar, J. Gretarsson, J. Su, and R. Fedkiw, “Two-way coupling of fluids to rigid and deformable solids and shells,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2008

    work page 2008

  5. [5]

    Coupling water and smoke to thin deformable and rigid shells,

    E. Guendelman, A. Selle, F. Losasso, and R. Fedkiw, “Coupling water and smoke to thin deformable and rigid shells,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2005

    work page 2005

  6. [6]

    A fast variational framework for accurate solid-fluid coupling,

    C. Batty, F. Bertails, and R. Bridson, “A fast variational framework for accurate solid-fluid coupling,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2007

    work page 2007

  7. [7]

    A positive-definite cut-cell method for strong two-way coupling between fluids and deformable bodies,

    O. Zarifi and C. Batty, “A positive-definite cut-cell method for strong two-way coupling between fluids and deformable bodies,” inProceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics Symposium on Computer Animation, 2017

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    A hybrid par- ticle level set method for improved interface capturing,

    D. Enright, R. Fedkiw, J. Ferziger, and I. Mitchell, “A hybrid par- ticle level set method for improved interface capturing,”Journal of Computational physics, 2002

    work page 2002

  9. [9]

    An un- conditionally stable maccormack method,

    A. Selle, R. Fedkiw, B. Kim, Y. Liu, and J. Rossignac, “An un- conditionally stable maccormack method,”Journal of Scientific Computing, 2008

    work page 2008

  10. [10]

    Incremental po- tential contact: intersection-and inversion-free, large-deformation dynamics

    M. Li, Z. Ferguson, T. Schneider, T. R. Langlois, D. Zorin, D. Panozzo, C. Jiang, and D. M. Kaufman, “Incremental po- tential contact: intersection-and inversion-free, large-deformation dynamics.”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2020

    work page 2020

  11. [11]

    The flow from simulation to reality,

    K. Zsolnai-Feh ´er, “The flow from simulation to reality,”Nature Physics, 2022

    work page 2022

  12. [12]

    Level set methods for fluid inter- faces,

    J. A. Sethian and P . Smereka, “Level set methods for fluid inter- faces,”Annual review of fluid mechanics, 2003

    work page 2003

  13. [13]

    Visual simulation of smoke,

    R. Fedkiw, J. Stam, and H. W. Jensen, “Visual simulation of smoke,” inProceedings of the 28th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, 2001

    work page 2001

  14. [14]

    Clebsch gauge fluid,

    S. Yang, S. Xiong, Y. Zhang, F. Feng, J. Liu, and B. Zhu, “Clebsch gauge fluid,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2021

    work page 2021

  15. [15]

    A parallel multigrid pois- son solver for fluids simulation on large grids

    A. McAdams, E. Sifakis, and J. Teran, “A parallel multigrid pois- son solver for fluids simulation on large grids.” inSymposium on Computer Animation, 2010

    work page 2010

  16. [16]

    Spgrid: A sparse paged grid structure applied to adaptive smoke simula- tion,

    R. Setaluri, M. Aanjaneya, S. Bauer, and E. Sifakis, “Spgrid: A sparse paged grid structure applied to adaptive smoke simula- tion,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2014

    work page 2014

  17. [17]

    Liquid simulation with mesh-based surface tracking,

    C. Wojtan, M. M ¨uller-Fischer, and T. Brochu, “Liquid simulation with mesh-based surface tracking,” inACM SIGGRAPH 2011 Courses, 2011

    work page 2011

  18. [18]

    Position based fluids,

    M. Macklin and M. M ¨uller, “Position based fluids,”ACM Transac- tions on Graphics (TOG), 2013

    work page 2013

  19. [19]

    Sph fluids in computer graphics,

    M. Ihmsen, J. Orthmann, B. Solenthaler, A. Kolb, and M. Teschner, “Sph fluids in computer graphics,” 2014

    work page 2014

  20. [20]

    The affine particle-in-cell method,

    C. Jiang, C. Schroeder, A. Selle, J. Teran, and A. Stomakhin, “The affine particle-in-cell method,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2015

    work page 2015

  21. [21]

    Animating sand as a fluid,

    Y. Zhu and R. Bridson, “Animating sand as a fluid,”ACM Trans- actions on Graphics (TOG), 2005

    work page 2005

  22. [22]

    Simulation of bubbles,

    W. Zheng, J.-H. Yong, and J.-C. Paul, “Simulation of bubbles,” Graphical Models, 2009

    work page 2009

  23. [23]

    Hydropho- bic and hydrophilic solid-fluid interaction,

    J. Liu, M. Wang, F. Feng, A. Tang, Q. Le, and B. Zhu, “Hydropho- bic and hydrophilic solid-fluid interaction,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2022

    work page 2022

  24. [24]

    Codi- mensional surface tension flow on simplicial complexes,

    B. Zhu, E. Quigley, M. Cong, J. Solomon, and R. Fedkiw, “Codi- mensional surface tension flow on simplicial complexes,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2014

    work page 2014

  25. [25]

    Surface-only liquids,

    F. Da, D. Hahn, C. Batty, C. Wojtan, and E. Grinspun, “Surface-only liquids,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2016

    work page 2016

  26. [26]

    Thin-film smoothed particle hydrodynamics fluid,

    M. Wang, Y. Deng, X. Kong, A. H. Prasad, S. Xiong, and B. Zhu, “Thin-film smoothed particle hydrodynamics fluid,”ACM Trans- actions on Graphics (TOG), 2021

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    Position-based surface tension flow,

    J. Xing, L. Ruan, B. Wang, B. Zhu, and B. Chen, “Position-based surface tension flow,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2022

    work page 2022

  28. [28]

    A new incompress- ibility discretization for a hybrid particle mac grid representation with surface tension,

    W. Zheng, B. Zhu, B. Kim, and R. Fedkiw, “A new incompress- ibility discretization for a hybrid particle mac grid representation with surface tension,”J. of Computational Physics, 2015

    work page 2015

  29. [29]

    An implicit updated lagrangian formulation for liquids with large surface energy,

    D. A. Hyde, S. W. Gagniere, A. Marquez-Razon, and J. Teran, “An implicit updated lagrangian formulation for liquids with large surface energy,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2020

    work page 2020

  30. [30]

    Codimensional surface tension flow using moving-least-squares particles,

    H. Wang, Y. Jin, A. Luo, X. Yang, and B. Zhu, “Codimensional surface tension flow using moving-least-squares particles,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2020

    work page 2020

  31. [31]

    A multi-scale model for simulating liquid-hair interactions,

    Y. Fei, H. T. Maia, C. Batty, C. Zheng, and E. Grinspun, “A multi-scale model for simulating liquid-hair interactions,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2017

    work page 2017

  32. [32]

    A multi-scale model for simulating liquid-fabric interactions,

    Y. Fei, C. Batty, E. Grinspun, and C. Zheng, “A multi-scale model for simulating liquid-fabric interactions,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2018

    work page 2018

  33. [33]

    Smoothed particle hydrodynamics,

    J. J. Monaghan, “Smoothed particle hydrodynamics,”Reports on Progress in Physics, 2005

    work page 2005

  34. [34]

    Eulerian solid-fluid coupling,

    Y. Teng, D. I. Levin, and T. Kim, “Eulerian solid-fluid coupling,” ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2016

    work page 2016

  35. [35]

    Versatile rigid-fluid coupling for incompressible sph,

    N. Akinci, M. Ihmsen, G. Akinci, B. Solenthaler, and M. Teschner, “Versatile rigid-fluid coupling for incompressible sph,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2012

    work page 2012

  36. [36]

    A contact proxy splitting method for lagrangian solid-fluid coupling,

    T. Xie, M. Li, Y. Yang, and C. Jiang, “A contact proxy splitting method for lagrangian solid-fluid coupling,”ACM Trans. Graph. (SIGGRAPH), 2023

    work page 2023

  37. [37]

    A moving least squares material point method with displacement discontinuity and two-way rigid body coupling,

    Y. Hu, Y. Fang, Z. Ge, Z. Qu, Y. Zhu, A. Pradhana, and C. Jiang, “A moving least squares material point method with displacement discontinuity and two-way rigid body coupling,”ACM Transac- tions on Graphics (TOG), 2018

    work page 2018

  38. [38]

    Iq-mpm: an interface quadrature material point method for non-sticky strongly two-way coupled nonlinear solids and fluids,

    Y. Fang, Z. Qu, M. Li, X. Zhang, Y. Zhu, M. Aanjaneya, and C. Jiang, “Iq-mpm: an interface quadrature material point method for non-sticky strongly two-way coupled nonlinear solids and fluids,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2020

    work page 2020

  39. [39]

    Multi-species simulation of porous sand and water mixtures,

    A. P . Tampubolon, T. Gast, G. Kl ´ar, C. Fu, J. Teran, C. Jiang, and K. Museth, “Multi-species simulation of porous sand and water mixtures,”ACM Trans. Graph., vol. 36, no. 4, 2017

    work page 2017

  40. [40]

    A hybrid lagrangian-eulerian formulation for bubble generation and dy- namics,

    S. Patkar, M. Aanjaneya, D. Karpman, and R. Fedkiw, “A hybrid lagrangian-eulerian formulation for bubble generation and dy- namics,” inProceedings of the 12th ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics Symposium on Computer Animation, 2013

    work page 2013

  41. [41]

    Loki: a unified multiphysics simulation framework for production,

    S. Lesser, A. Stomakhin, G. Daviet, J. Wretborn, J. Edholm, N.- H. Lee, E. Schweickart, X. Zhai, S. Flynn, and A. Moffat, “Loki: a unified multiphysics simulation framework for production,”ACM Trans. Graph., 2022

    work page 2022

  42. [42]

    A unified approach to monolithic solid-fluid coupling of sub-grid and more resolved solids,

    D. A. Hyde and R. Fedkiw, “A unified approach to monolithic solid-fluid coupling of sub-grid and more resolved solids,”J. of Computational Physics, 2019

    work page 2019

  43. [43]

    Two-way coupling of fluids to reduced deformable bodies,

    W. Lu, N. Jin, and R. Fedkiw, “Two-way coupling of fluids to reduced deformable bodies,” inProceedings of the ACM SIG- GRAPH/Eurographics Symposium on Computer Animation, 2016

    work page 2016

  44. [44]

    A symmetric positive definite formulation for monolithic fluid structure inter- action,

    A. Robinson-Mosher, C. Schroeder, and R. Fedkiw, “A symmetric positive definite formulation for monolithic fluid structure inter- action,”J. of Computational Physics, 2011

    work page 2011

  45. [45]

    A geometrically consistent viscous fluid solver with two-way fluid-solid coupling,

    T. Takahashi and M. C. Lin, “A geometrically consistent viscous fluid solver with two-way fluid-solid coupling,” inComputer Graphics Forum. Wiley Online Library, 2019

    work page 2019

  46. [46]

    Free-flowing granular mate- rials with two-way solid coupling,

    R. Narain, A. Golas, and M. C. Lin, “Free-flowing granular mate- rials with two-way solid coupling,” inACM SIGGRAPH Asia 2010 papers, 2010, pp. 1–10

    work page 2010

  47. [47]

    Contact and friction simulation for computer graphics,

    S. Andrews, K. Erleben, and Z. Ferguson, “Contact and friction simulation for computer graphics,” inACM SIGGRAPH 2022 Courses, 2022

    work page 2022

  48. [48]

    Brogliato and B

    B. Brogliato and B. Brogliato,Nonsmooth mechanics. Springer, 1999

    work page 1999

  49. [49]

    Coping with friction for non-penetrating rigid body simulation,

    D. Baraff, “Coping with friction for non-penetrating rigid body simulation,”ACM SIGGRAPH computer graphics, 1991

    work page 1991

  50. [50]

    An implicit time-stepping scheme for rigid body dynamics with coulomb friction,

    D. Stewart and J. C. Trinkle, “An implicit time-stepping scheme for rigid body dynamics with coulomb friction,” inProceed- ings 2000 ICRA. Millennium Conference. IEEE International Confer- ence on Robotics and Automation. Symposia Proceedings (Cat. No. 00CH37065). IEEE, 2000

    work page 2000

  51. [51]

    Staggered projections for frictional contact in multibody systems,

    D. M. Kaufman, S. Sueda, D. L. James, and D. K. Pai, “Staggered projections for frictional contact in multibody systems,” inACM SIGGRAPH Asia 2008 papers, 2008

    work page 2008

  52. [52]

    Fast contact force computation for nonpenetrating rigid bodies,

    D. Baraff, “Fast contact force computation for nonpenetrating rigid bodies,” inProceedings of the 21st annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, 1994

    work page 1994

  53. [53]

    Fast continuous colli- sion detection between rigid bodies,

    S. Redon, A. Kheddar, and S. Coquillart, “Fast continuous colli- sion detection between rigid bodies,” inComputer graphics forum. Wiley Online Library, 2002

    work page 2002

  54. [54]

    Conjugate gradient type algorithms for frictional multi-contact problems: applications to granular materi- als,

    M. Renouf and P . Alart, “Conjugate gradient type algorithms for frictional multi-contact problems: applications to granular materi- als,”Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2005

    work page 2005

  55. [55]

    Primal/dual descent methods for dynamics,

    M. Macklin, K. Erleben, M. M ¨uller, N. Chentanez, S. Jeschke, and T.-Y. Kim, “Primal/dual descent methods for dynamics,” in Computer Graphics Forum. Wiley Online Library, 2020

    work page 2020

  56. [56]

    Using nesterov’s method to accelerate multibody dynamics with friction and con- tact,

    H. Mazhar, T. Heyn, D. Negrut, and A. Tasora, “Using nesterov’s method to accelerate multibody dynamics with friction and con- tact,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2015. 16

    work page 2015

  57. [57]

    Frictionalmonolith: a monolithic optimization-based approach for granular flow with contact- aware rigid-body coupling,

    T. Takahashi and C. Batty, “Frictionalmonolith: a monolithic optimization-based approach for granular flow with contact- aware rigid-body coupling,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2021

    work page 2021

  58. [58]

    Robust treatment of collisions, contact and friction for cloth animation,

    R. Bridson, R. Fedkiw, and J. Anderson, “Robust treatment of collisions, contact and friction for cloth animation,” inProceedings of the 29th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, 2002

    work page 2002

  59. [59]

    Continuous penalty forces,

    M. Tang, D. Manocha, M. A. Otaduy, and R. Tong, “Continuous penalty forces,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2012

    work page 2012

  60. [60]

    Implicit multibody penalty- baseddistributed contact,

    H. Xu, Y. Zhao, and J. Barbi ˇc, “Implicit multibody penalty- baseddistributed contact,”IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics, 2014

    work page 2014

  61. [61]

    Intersection-free rigid body dynamics,

    Z. Ferguson, M. Li, T. Schneider, F. Gil-Ureta, T. Langlois, C. Jiang, D. Zorin, D. M. Kaufman, and D. Panozzo, “Intersection-free rigid body dynamics,”ACM Transactions on Graphics, 2021

    work page 2021

  62. [62]

    Codimensional incremental potential contact,

    M. Li, D. M. Kaufman, and C. Jiang, “Codimensional incremental potential contact,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2021

    work page 2021

  63. [63]

    Medial ipc: accelerated incremental potential contact with medial elas- tics,

    L. Lan, Y. Yang, D. Kaufman, J. Yao, M. Li, and C. Jiang, “Medial ipc: accelerated incremental potential contact with medial elas- tics,”ACM Transactions on Graphics, 2021

    work page 2021

  64. [64]

    Affine body dynamics: fast, stable and intersection-free simulation of stiff materials,

    L. Lan, D. M. Kaufman, M. Li, C. Jiang, and Y. Yang, “Affine body dynamics: fast, stable and intersection-free simulation of stiff materials,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2022

    work page 2022

  65. [65]

    A barrier method for frictional contact on embedded interfaces,

    Y. Zhao, J. Choo, Y. Jiang, M. Li, C. Jiang, and K. Soga, “A barrier method for frictional contact on embedded interfaces,”Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2022

    work page 2022

  66. [66]

    A unified newton barrier method for multibody dynamics,

    Y. Chen, M. Li, L. Lan, H. Su, Y. Yang, and C. Jiang, “A unified newton barrier method for multibody dynamics,”ACM Transac- tions on Graphics (TOG), 2022

    work page 2022

  67. [67]

    A dynamic duo of finite elements and material points,

    X. Li, M. Li, X. Han, H. Wang, Y. Yang, and C. Jiang, “A dynamic duo of finite elements and material points,” inACM SIGGRAPH 2024 Conference Papers, 2024

    work page 2024

  68. [68]

    Discrete shells,

    E. Grinspun, A. N. Hirani, M. Desbrun, and P . Schr ¨oder, “Discrete shells,” inProceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics symposium on Computer animation. Citeseer, 2003

    work page 2003

  69. [69]

    Discrete elastic rods,

    M. Bergou, M. Wardetzky, S. Robinson, B. Audoly, and E. Grin- spun, “Discrete elastic rods,” inACM SIGGRAPH 2008 papers, 2008

    work page 2008

  70. [70]

    Position based dynamics,

    M. M ¨uller, B. Heidelberger, M. Hennix, and J. Ratcliff, “Position based dynamics,”Journal of Visual Communication and Image Repre- sentation, 2007

    work page 2007

  71. [71]

    Optimization integrator for large time steps,

    T. F. Gast, C. Schroeder, A. Stomakhin, C. Jiang, and J. M. Teran, “Optimization integrator for large time steps,”IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics, 2015

    work page 2015

  72. [72]

    Bridson,Fluid simulation for computer graphics

    R. Bridson,Fluid simulation for computer graphics. AK Peters/CRC Press, 2015

    work page 2015

  73. [73]

    Simulation and optimization of magnetoelastic thin shells,

    X. Chen, X. Ni, B. Zhu, B. Wang, and B. Chen, “Simulation and optimization of magnetoelastic thin shells,”ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 2022

    work page 2022

  74. [74]

    Jorge and J

    N. Jorge and J. W. Stephen,Numerical optimization. Spinger, 2006

    work page 2006

  75. [75]

    Amgcl: An efficient, flexible, and extensible alge- braic multigrid implementation,

    D. Demidov, “Amgcl: An efficient, flexible, and extensible alge- braic multigrid implementation,”Lobachevskii Journal of Mathemat- ics, 2019

    work page 2019

  76. [76]

    An advection- reflection solver for detail-preserving fluid simulation,

    J. Zehnder, R. Narain, and B. Thomaszewski, “An advection- reflection solver for detail-preserving fluid simulation,”ACM Trans. Graph., 2018

    work page 2018

  77. [77]

    Volume of fluid (vof) method for the dynamics of free boundaries,

    C. Hirt and B. Nichols, “Volume of fluid (vof) method for the dynamics of free boundaries,”Journal of Computational Physics, 1981. Y uchen Sunis Ph.D. student in the School of Interactive Computing at Georgia Tech, advised by Prof. Bo Zhu. He obtained his B.Sc. in Com- puter Science from Peking University in 2022. His research interest lies in computer gr...

    work page 1981