Rebeca,

Great explanation! I couldn't have said it better :)

Nothing to add, except maybe that, if you have access to even better hardware 
(e.g., a box with two GPUs, although one will also work) and are willing to pay 
the extra computational cost, you may want to also look at DEM - see 
https://github.com/projectchrono/DEM-Engine

--Radu

________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf 
of Rebeca Guimarães <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2025 6:05:17 AM
To: ProjectChrono <[email protected]>
Subject: [chrono] Re: Differences between SPH and SCM in Simulating Tire 
Experiments


Hello there, Chen!

I'm a fellow user, currently working on a thesis specifically comparing SPH and 
SCM for lunar rover Terramechanics, so I might be able to shed some light on 
this.

What you are observing is indeed expected behavior due to the fundamental 
differences in how these methods model the soil physics:

  *   SCM (Semi-empirical): This method relies on relations like Bekker-Wong 
and Janosi-Hanamoto, deduced during the 50s and 60s. In the Janosi shear 
equation, the shear stress asymptotically approaches a maximum value as 
displacement increases. Therefore, at high slip ratios (where displacement is 
huge), SCM predicts that the traction force saturates at the soil's shear 
strength limit. It is a quasi-static approximation, based off the Mohr-Coulomb 
yield criterion.

  *   SPH (Physics-based / CRM): At high slip ratios (>0.8), the wheel acts 
less like a rolling element and more like an excavator/pump, displacing a 
significant mass of soil (creating the rooster tail effect). Chrono CRM-SPH use 
inertial rheology and very comprehensive constituive relations and are able to 
capture the inertial forces required to accelerate these particles and the 
complex soil deformation/jamming. This dynamic interaction often leads to 
forces that continue to increase or fluctuate significantly, unlike the capped 
curve of SCM. It is way more costly in computational terms, but way more 
precise.

Chrono is really good precisely by being able to run physics based simulations, 
so if you have hardware capability, I would recommend you to use CRM-SPH.


So, to answer your question: trust the SPH results for high-slip dynamics. SCM 
is excellent for efficiency in low-slip, steady-state scenarios, but it cannot 
simulate the complex soil displacement and dynamic excavation that happens at 
high slip.

If you want to dive deeper, the Chrono team has excellent resources and plenty 
of articles. I highly recommend checking this Workshop presentation: 
https://sbel.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/569/2023/04/TR-2023-02.pdf. If 
you are interested in going further into the physics, I'd advise you to read 
into granular media.

Hope this helps!

Best regards,

Rebeca

Em segunda-feira, 8 de dezembro de 2025 às 01:42:25 UTC-3, [email protected] 
escreveu:
Hello
I encountered some result issues while using SPH and SCM tire longitudinal test 
benches. When the tire is in the high slip zone (slip ratio>0.8), the 
calculated results of the two seem to be inconsistent. The SCM results indicate 
that the longitudinal force of the tire is saturated, but the SPH calculation 
results show that the longitudinal force increases when the slip ratio is 
greater than 0.8.
After studying the literature, I found that both of these situations have 
occurred. Which simulation result should I trust? Is the reason for this 
phenomenon that SCM cannot simulate soil deformation under high slip conditions 
during the calculation process using empirical models? If possible, I would 
greatly appreciate it if you could provide relevant suggestions.
The attachment is a comparison of the simulation results of SPH and SCM in the 
literature "An Overview of Tire Ground Contact Modeling Approaches for Surface 
Mobility Applications", which is consistent with my experimental results.
Thanks.
Chen

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ProjectChrono" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/projectchrono/087f73ed-d5cf-499e-bc2b-d9995e6a24dfn%40googlegroups.com<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/projectchrono/087f73ed-d5cf-499e-bc2b-d9995e6a24dfn*40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer__;JQ!!Mak6IKo!P0O0mGDs7AxBjPl8qVJO4igRGdlA2LQ_IF_iKtxhdplzvkvnBTBAiRxldbDvZUdnHdySspqhTvsVOAsncjQ$>.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ProjectChrono" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/projectchrono/CH3PPF46CDC2185E9946C7E3245E2CB07BEA7ACA%40CH3PPF46CDC2185.namprd06.prod.outlook.com.

Reply via email to