Would you like to sign out?

Select Country

  • Afghanistan English
  • Albania English
  • Algeria English
  • American Samoa English
  • Andorra English
  • Angola English
  • Anguilla English
  • Antarctica English
  • Antigua and Barbuda English
  • Argentina Español
  • Armenia English
  • Aruba English
  • Australia English
  • Austria English
  • Azerbaijan English
  • Bahamas English
  • Bahrain English
  • Bangladesh English
  • Barbados English
  • Belarus English
  • Belgium English
  • Belize English
  • Benin English
  • Bermuda English
  • Bhutan English
  • Bolivia Español
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina English
  • Botswana English
  • Bouvet Island English
  • Brazil English
  • British Indian Ocean Territory English
  • British Virgin Islands English
  • Brunei English
  • Bulgaria English
  • Burkina Faso English
  • Burundi English
  • Cambodia English
  • Cameroon English
  • Canada English
  • Cape Verde English
  • Caribbean Netherlands English
  • Cayman Islands English
  • Central African Republic English
  • Chad English
  • Chile Español
  • Christmas Island English
  • Cocos (Keeling) Islands English
  • Colombia Español
  • Comoros English
  • Congo English
  • Cook Islands English
  • Costa Rica Español
  • Côte d’Ivoire English
  • Croatia English
  • Cuba Español
  • Curaçao English
  • Cyprus English
  • Czech Republic English
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo English
  • Denmark English
  • Djibouti English
  • Dominica English
  • Dominican Republic Español
  • Ecuador Español
  • Egypt English
  • El Salvador Español
  • Equatorial Guinea English
  • Eritrea English
  • Estonia English
  • Ethiopia English
  • Falkland Islands English
  • Faroe Islands English
  • Fiji English
  • Finland English
  • France English
  • French Guiana Español
  • French Polynesia English
  • French Southern Territories English
  • Gabon English
  • Gambia English
  • Georgia English
  • Germany English
  • Ghana English
  • Gibraltar English
  • Greece English
  • Greenland English
  • Grenada English
  • Guadeloupe Español
  • Guam English
  • Guatemala Español
  • Guernsey English
  • Guinea English
  • Guinea-Bissau English
  • Guyana English
  • Haiti Español
  • Heard Island and McDonald Islands English
  • Honduras Español
  • Hong Kong English
  • Hungary English
  • Iceland English
  • India English
  • Indonesia English
  • Iran English
  • Iraq English
  • Ireland English
  • Isle of Man English
  • Israel English
  • Italy English
  • Jamaica English
  • Japan 日本語
  • Jersey English
  • Jordan English
  • Kazakhstan English
  • Kenya English
  • Kiribati English
  • South Korea 한국어
  • Kuwait English
  • Kyrgyzstan English
  • Laos English
  • Latvia English
  • Lebanon English
  • Lesotho English
  • Liberia English
  • Libya English
  • Liechtenstein English
  • Lithuania English
  • Luxembourg English
  • Macau English
  • Madagascar English
  • Malawi English
  • Malaysia English
  • Maldives English
  • Mali English
  • Malta English
  • Marshall Islands English
  • Martinique English
  • Mauritania English
  • Mauritius English
  • Mayotte English
  • Mexico Español
  • Micronesia English
  • Moldova English
  • Monaco English
  • Mongolia English
  • Montenegro English
  • Montserrat English
  • Morocco English
  • Mozambique English
  • Myanmar English
  • Namibia English
  • Nauru English
  • Nepal English
  • Netherlands English
  • New Caledonia English
  • New Zealand English
  • Nicaragua Español
  • Niger English
  • Nigeria English
  • Niue English
  • Norfolk Island English
  • Northern Mariana Islands English
  • Norway English
  • Oman English
  • Pakistan English
  • Palau English
  • Palestine English
  • Panama Español
  • Papua New Guinea English
  • Paraguay Español
  • Peru Español
  • Philippines English
  • Pitcairn Islands English
  • Poland English
  • Portugal Español
  • Puerto Rico Español
  • Qatar English
  • Réunion English
  • Romania English
  • Russia English
  • Rwanda English
  • Saint Barthélemy Español
  • Saint Helena English
  • Saint Kitts and Nevis English
  • Saint Lucia English
  • Saint Martin Español
  • Saint Pierre and Miquelon English
  • Saint Vincent and the Grenadines English
  • Samoa English
  • San Marino English
  • São Tomé and Príncipe English
  • Saudi Arabia English
  • Senegal English
  • Serbia English
  • Seychelles English
  • Sierra Leone English
  • Singapore English
  • Sint Maarten English
  • Slovakia English
  • Slovenia English
  • Solomon Islands English
  • Somalia English
  • South Africa English
  • South Georgia English
  • South Sudan English
  • Spain English
  • Sri Lanka English
  • Sudan English
  • Suriname English
  • Svalbard and Jan Mayen English
  • Eswatini English
  • Sweden English
  • Switzerland English
  • Syria English
  • Taiwan English
  • Tajikistan English
  • Tanzania English
  • Thailand English
  • Togo English
  • Tokelau English
  • Tonga English
  • Trinidad and Tobago English
  • Tunisia English
  • Turkey English
  • Turkmenistan English
  • Turks and Caicos Islands English
  • Tuvalu English
  • U.S. Virgin Islands English
  • Uganda English
  • Ukraine English
  • United Arab Emirates English
  • United Kingdom English
  • United States English
  • U.S. Minor Outlying Islands English
  • Uruguay Español
  • Uzbekistan English
  • Vanuatu English
  • Vatican City English
  • Venezuela Español
  • Vietnam English
  • Wallis and Futuna English
  • Western Sahara English
  • Yemen English
  • Zambia English
  • Zimbabwe English
  • Åland Islands English
  • East Timor English
  • Netherlands Antilles English
  • Serbia and Montenegro English
  • North Macedonia English
  • Timor-Leste English
Blog

Sloshing Fluid Element Verification

2026.01.30

By
Tadavarthi Sree Harsha | Technical Manager
Rohith Swaminathan | Geotechnical Engineer

0. Introduction

Comparison of results with Westegaard’s added mass

The objective of this verification study is to model a 3D sloshing fluid domain using the slosh ing element tool available in Midas GTS NX and Midas FEA NX. A linear time-history dynamic analysis is carried out to simulate the hydrodynamic effects generated by ground motion.

 

1. Problem Statement

The primary intention of this report is to:

  1. Determine sloshing pressures on the vertical wall of a reservoir-like fluid domain in Midas GTSNX/FEANX.
  2. Extract the pressure distribution with depth along the upstream face of the wall.
  3. Perform a comparative verification against the classical Westergaard’s added-mass formulation for hydrodynamic pressure under seismic loading.

This comparison enables validation of the 3D sloshing fluid element and confirms the numerical model’s fidelity relative to established analytical solutions.

2. Model Creation

Step 1: Creating a New Model

Open a new file in Midas GTS NX. Select the Model Type as 3D and click OK.

 

Creating a new 3D model in Midas GTS NX

 

Step 2: Geometry Creation

Use the geometry creation tools to construct the model geometry as shown in Figure 3.

Model specifications

 

Step 3: Material and Element Property Definition

 

3D model showing water volume and wall

 

Define the Wall, Water, Fluid-Structure-Interface and Free Surface properties as per Table.1 and Table.2.

Material Material Type Elastic Modulus Bulk Modulus Poisson's ratio Unit weight
Wall Isotropic-Elastic 30 GPa - 0.2 20 kN/m3
Water Sloshing Medium - 2.2 GPa - 9.8 kN/m3

Table.1. Material properties used in the model

 

Element Property Element Type Material

Wall

3D Solid Wall
Water 3D Sloshing Water
Fluid Boundary Plane-Free Surface -
Fluid Boundary Plane-FSI -

Table.2. Element properties used in the model

 

Step 4: Mesh Generation

A structured hexahedral mesh is generated for both the wall and fluid regions. The meshing strategy for the model incorporates the following features:

  1. 3D mesh for wall and a continuous 3D mesh for water capable of supporting realistic sloshing wave propagation,
  2. FSI interface mesh,
  3. Planar mesh elements that accurately represent the free surface boundary.

 

Fixed Boundary Definition

 

Meshed model

 

 

Step 5: Boundary Conditions

Fixed Boundary (Wall)

  1. All translational degrees of freedom (DOFs) are constrained.
  2. Ensures that the wall behaves rigidly.

Sloshing Fluid Boundary (Fluid End Face)

  1. Applied to the far end of the water domain.
  2. Allows the water to respond dynamically without introducing wave reflection artifacts.
  3. Implements the appropriate hydraulic boundary behavior for sloshing analysis.

Fixed Boundary Definition

 

Sloshing Constraint Boundary Definition

 

3. Load Case Definition

Dynamic Load Case Definition

Adynamic ground acceleration load is defined to simulate earthquake-induced excitation of the fluid domain. The applied sinusoidal forcing function provides a controlled and repeatable excitation mechanism, enabling the generation of sloshing waves within the fluid.

 

 

Ground Motion Characteristics

  1. Acceleration amplitude: 0.3g
  2. Frequency: 5Hz (five cycles per second)
  3. Time variation: Pure sinusoidal loading

Time forcing function input window

 

4. Analysis Case Definition

A linear time-history (Direct) analysis is defined to compute the dynamic response of the fluid domain under the prescribed ground motion. The key analysis settings are as follows:

  1. Activated Elements: All mesh sets, boundary conditions and load definitions are activated.
  2. Time-step definition: The time step(0.1 sec) and time increment(0.001 sec) is selected to accurately capture half-cycle oscillations of the sinusoidal input, which is essential for re solving sloshing dynamics and results comparison.

Since Westergaard’s formulation represents the impulsive component of the hydrodynamic pressure—i.e., the pressure generated by the instantaneous inertial response of the reservoir during ground acceleration—the dynamic loading is applied only over the half–cycle of the excitation.

 

For an excitation frequency of 5Hz, the duration of one half–cycle is

Equation

 

Therefore, the hydrodynamic pressure is applied over a time period of 0.1s.

Analysis case definition

 

5. Results Extraction

After the dynamic analysis is completed, the following results are extracted to evaluate the hydro
dynamic behavior of the fluid:

 

(a) Sloshing Pressure

         • FromtheResultsworktree navigate to Absolute Max and select the 3D Pressure from Slosh ing Fluid Results,
        • Thepressure variation with depth can be seen from the contours. 

 

(b)  Pressure vs. Depth Plot 

Using the Cutting Diagram tool, the following steps are carried out:

• A vertical cutting plane is defined along the wall surface and pressure values are sampled continuously along the fluid depth.

• The tabulated dataset is exported for comparison.

 

 

📙 Want to read more?

 

 

 

 

Topics MIDAS GTS NX MIDAS FEA NX Geotechnical Engineering

Harsha Tadavarthi

Written by Harsha Tadavarthi

Harsha Tadavarthi is the Technical Manager for the Oceania region at MIDAS IT, with over 8 years of experience in geotechnical engineering. He specializes in advanced numerical modeling and provides expert support for geotechnical and structural analysis across dams, hydropower, underground, mining, and other critical infrastructure projects.Harsha’s expertise also includes thermal and seismic simulation of dams, as well as the design and analysis of complex geotechnical systems. He leads the seamless delivery of solutions in dam engineering, ensuring industry-leading support and innovation in geotechnical modeling.Through consultancy, training, and international workshops, he empowers professionals with both practical insights and theoretical foundations in geotechnical and structural modeling, fostering excellence across the engineering community.

Want Engineering tips
& Tech-trends in your inbox?