skip to main content
10.1145/3528233.3530737acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessiggraphConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access

Compact Poisson Filters for Fast Fluid Simulation

Published:24 July 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Poisson equations appear in many graphics settings including, but not limited to, physics-based fluid simulation. Numerical solvers for such problems strike context-specific memory, performance, stability and accuracy trade-offs. We propose a new Poisson filter-based solver that balances between the strengths of spectral and iterative methods. We derive universal Poisson kernels for forward and inverse Poisson problems, leveraging careful adaptive filter truncation to localize their extent, all while maintaining stability and accuracy. Iterative composition of our compact filters improves solver iteration time by orders-of-magnitude compared to optimized linear methods. While motivated by spectral formulations, we overcome important limitations of spectral methods while retaining many of their desirable properties. We focus on the application of our method to high-performance and high-fidelity fluid simulation, but we also demonstrate its broader applicability. We release our source code at https://github.com/Ubisoft-LaForge/CompactPoissonFilters .

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. A. Ahmadi, F. Manganiello, A. Khademi, and M. C. Smith. 2021. A Parallel Jacobi-Embedded Gauss-Seidel Method. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 32, 06 (2021), 1452–1464.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Gonçalo N. P. Amador and Abel João Padrão Gomes. 2010a. A CUDA-Based Implementation of Stable Fluids in 3D with Internal and Moving Boundaries. 2010 International Conference on Computational Science and Its Applications (2010), 118–128.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Gonçalo N. P. Amador and Abel João Padrão Gomes. 2010b. CUDA-Based Linear Solvers for Stable Fluids. 2010 International Conference on Information Science and Applications (2010), 1–8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Gonçalo N. P. Amador and Abel João Padrão Gomes. 2012. Linear Solvers for Stable Fluids: GPU vs CPU.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Marco Ament, Gunter Knittel, Daniel Weiskopf, and Wolfgang Strasser. 2010. A Parallel Preconditioned Conjugate Gradient Solver for the Poisson Problem on a Multi-GPU Platform. In 2010 18th Euromicro Conference on Parallel, Distributed and Network-based Processing. 583–592.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. John P. Boyd. 2001. Chebyshev and Fourier Spectral Methods(second ed.). Dover Publications, Mineola, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Tian Qi Chen, Yulia Rubanova, Jesse Bettencourt, and David Duvenaud. 2018. Neural Ordinary Differential Equations. CoRR abs/1806.07366(2018). arXiv:1806.07366Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Nuttapong Chentanez and Matthias Müller. 2011. A Fluid Pressure Solver Handling Separating Solid Boundary Conditions.83–90.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Keenan Crane, Clarisse Weischedel, and Max Wardetzky. 2017. The Heat Method for Distance Computation. Commun. ACM 60, 11 (2017), 90–99.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Qiaodong Cui, Pradeep Sen, and Theodore Kim. 2018. Scalable Laplacian Eigenfluids. ACM Trans. Graph. 37, 4, Article 87 (2018), 12 pages.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Tyler De Witt, Christian Lessig, and Eugene Fiume. 2012. Fluid Simulation Using Laplacian Eigenfunctions. ACM Trans. Graph. 31, 1, Article 10 (2012), 11 pages.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Lawrence C Evans. 1998. Partial differential equations. Graduate studies in mathematics 19, 4 (1998), 7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Ronald Fedkiw, Jos Stam, and Henrik Wann Jensen. 2001. Visual simulation of smoke. In Proceedings of the 28th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques. 15–22.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. O. Fialka and Martin Cadik. 2006. FFT and Convolution Performance in Image Filtering on GPU. In Tenth International Conference on Information Visualisation (IV’06). 609 – 614.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Stefan L. Glimberg, Kenny Erleben, and Jens C. Bennetsen. 2009. Smoke Simulation for Fire Engineering using a Multigrid Method on Graphics Hardware. In Workshop in Virtual Reality Interactions and Physical Simulation ”VRIPHYS” (2009), Hartmut Prautzsch, Alfred Schmitt, Jan Bender, and Matthias Teschner (Eds.). The Eurographics Association. https://doi.org/10.2312/PE/vriphys/vriphys09/011-020Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Gene H Golub, James M Ortega, 1992. Scientific computing and differential equations: an introduction to numerical methods. Academic press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Nolan Goodnight, Cliff Woolley, Gregory Lewin, David Luebke, and Greg Humphreys. 2005. A Multigrid Solver for Boundary Value Problems Using Programmable Graphics Hardware. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2005 Courses (Los Angeles, California) (SIGGRAPH ’05). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 193–es.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Thomas Guillet and Romain Teyssier. 2011. A simple multigrid scheme for solving the Poisson equation with arbitrary domain boundaries. J. Comput. Phys. 230, 12 (jun 2011), 4756–4771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2011.02.044Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Francis H Harlow and J Eddie Welch. 1965. Numerical calculation of time-dependent viscous incompressible flow of fluid with free surface. The physics of fluids 8, 12 (1965), 2182–2189.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Ronald D. Henderson. 2012. Scalable Fluid Simulation in Linear Time on Shared Memory Multiprocessors(DigiPro ’12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 43–52.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Markus Kettunen, Erik Härkönen, and Jaakko Lehtinen. 2019. Deep Convolutional Reconstruction for Gradient-Domain Rendering. ACM Trans. Graph. 38, 4, Article 126 (jul 2019), 12 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3306346.3323038Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Stefan Kindermann and Carmeliza Navasca. 2011. Analysis and Approximation of the Canonical Polyadic Tensor Decomposition. arxiv:1109.3832 [math.NA]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Jean Kossaifi, Yannis Panagakis, Anima Anandkumar, and Maja Pantic. 2019. TensorLy: Tensor Learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research 20, 26 (2019), 1–6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Zongyi Li, Nikola B. Kovachki, Kamyar Azizzadenesheli, Burigede Liu, Kaushik Bhattacharya, Andrew M. Stuart, and Anima Anandkumar. 2020. Fourier Neural Operator for Parametric Partial Differential Equations. CoRR abs/2010.08895(2020). arXiv:2010.08895Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Benjamin Long and Erik Reinhard. 2009a. Real-time fluid simulation using discrete sine/cosine transforms. In Proceedings of the 2009 Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics. ACM, 99–106.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Benjamin Long and Erik Reinhard. 2009b. Real-time fluid simulation using discrete sine/cosine transforms. In Proceedings of the 2009 symposium on Interactive 3D graphics and games. 99–106.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Wojciech Matusik. 2003. A data-driven reflectance model. Ph.D. Dissertation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Aleka McAdams, Eftychios Sifakis, and Joseph Teran. 2010. A Parallel Multigrid Poisson Solver for Fluids Simulation on Large Grids.65–73. https://doi.org/10.2312/SCA/SCA10/065-073Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Michael D McCool, Jason Ang, and Anis Ahmad. 2001. Homomorphic factorization of BRDFs for high-performance rendering. In Proceedings of the 28th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques. 171–178.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Tim Mcgraw. 2015. Fast Bokeh Effects Using Low-Rank Linear Filters. Vis. Comput. 31, 5 (2015), 601–611.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Olivier Mercier and Derek Nowrouzezahrai. 2020. Local Bases for Model-reduced Smoke Simulations. Comput. Graph. Forum 39, 2 (2020), 9–22.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Jeroen Molemaker, Jonathan M. Cohen, Sanjit Patel, and Jonyong Noh. 2008. Low viscosity flow simulations for animation. In SCA ’08.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Jorge Nocedal and Stephen Wright. 2006. Numerical optimization. Springer Science & Business Media.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Steven A. Orszag. 1969. Numerical Methods for the Simulation of Turbulence. The Physics of Fluids 12, 12 (1969), II–250–II–257. arXiv:https://aip.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1063/1.1692445Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Ari Silvennoinen and Peter-Pike Sloan. 2021. Moving Basis Decomposition for Precomputed Light Transport. Comput. Graph. Forum 40, 4 (2021), 127–137.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Peter-Pike Sloan, Jesse Hall, John Hart, and John Snyder. 2003. Clustered Principal Components for Precomputed Radiance Transfer. ACM Trans. Graph. 22, 3 (jul 2003), 382–391. https://doi.org/10.1145/882262.882281Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Jos Stam. 1999. Stable Fluids. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, SIGGRAPH 1999, Los Angeles, CA, USA, August 8-13, 1999, Warren N. Waggenspack (Ed.). ACM, 121–128.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Jos Stam. 2001. A Simple Fluid Solver based on the FFT. Journal of Graphics Tools 6 (2001), 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/10867651.2001.10487540Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Jonathan Tompson, Kristofer Schlachter, Pablo Sprechmann, and Ken Perlin. 2016. Accelerating Eulerian Fluid Simulation With Convolutional Networks. CoRR abs/1607.03597(2016). arXiv:1607.03597Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Lloyd N. Trefethen. 2000. Spectral Methods in MatLab. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, USA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Benjamin Ummenhofer, Lukas Prantl, Nils Thuerey, and Vladlen Koltun. 2020. Lagrangian Fluid Simulation with Continuous Convolutions. In International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. M. Alex O. Vasilescu and Demetri Terzopoulos. 2004. TensorTextures: Multilinear Image-Based Rendering. ACM Trans. Graph. 23, 3 (2004), 336–342.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Cheng Yang, Xubo Yang, and Xiangyun Xiao. 2016. Data-driven projection method in fluid simulation: Data-driven projection method in fluid simulation. Computer Animation and Virtual Worlds 27 (08 2016). https://doi.org/10.1002/cav.1695Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Compact Poisson Filters for Fast Fluid Simulation
    Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SIGGRAPH '22: ACM SIGGRAPH 2022 Conference Proceedings
      July 2022
      553 pages
      ISBN:9781450393379
      DOI:10.1145/3528233

      Copyright © 2022 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 24 July 2022

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate1,822of8,601submissions,21%
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)1,021
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)79

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format