-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 202
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add shell cases for test. #160
Conversation
@BenceVirtonomy I create a new branch now that the master code has been updated and the bug in the shell particle reload has been fixed. (However, I later noticed that you had updated the branch feature/analytical 3d roof.) |
Great, thank you! The hourglass implementation was incorrect? I will pull this fix into my branch and test the hourglass again. |
Is it possible that it's due to the damping? That is inversely related to the particle size, so I wonder if the damping is so high that the structure deforms less... |
Okey, thanks. I would suggest plotting log x axis and keeping the refinement ratio constant.
Sent from Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
…________________________________
From: Dong Wu ***@***.***>
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2022 9:16:58 PM
To: Xiangyu-Hu/SPHinXsys ***@***.***>
Cc: Bence.Rochlitz ***@***.***>; Mention ***@***.***>
Subject: Re: [Xiangyu-Hu/SPHinXsys] Add shell cases for test. (PR #160)
I just checked the previously saved results. The damping physical_viscosity = 7.0e3, and the curve is below when particle_number = 30.
You may be right, and I will recalculate the roof case and share the new results. But as the second figure shows, the displacement gap between the two resolutions is decreasing.
[https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/100197018/200662742-f6f4db4f-49f4-4b0f-8590-a9fa5f08eedc.png]<https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/100197018/200662742-f6f4db4f-49f4-4b0f-8590-a9fa5f08eedc.png>[https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/100197018/200665625-1ae57181-557d-43e6-9aad-cb60b35c8809.png]<https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/100197018/200665625-1ae57181-557d-43e6-9aad-cb60b35c8809.png>
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#160 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ASUXTH4O4KUPJCB4LC4R2BDWHKYLVANCNFSM6AAAAAAR2SLNV4>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
Thank you! Your suggestions and opinions are nice and useful. |
That's great, thanks. I remember now I actually ran it with the B_ removed, that might be the difference for me. I will run it again and check. |
# Conflicts: # SPHINXsys/src/shared/particle_dynamics/solid_dynamics/thin_structure_dynamics.cpp
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
All the new cases should have data for regression test.
That's great, do you have a reliable time step calculation? @DongWuTUM |
Not yet... |
Okay. |
Okay, but great that it's stable in general:) |
@DongWuTUM @Xiangyu-Hu I agree that the sideways gravity is a better test. For me it's fine too but it gets hourglassed after a certain strain: It's nice with hourglass control - I'm using: 'dt = 0.5 * computing_time_step_size.parallel_exec();' and it's stable all the way till the last time step. You can check it out on my branch: |
Observations & Following work
Bug correction
Test case 1: Pinched cylinder
Reference: https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-874X(94)90097-3, https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.2316
Test case 2: Spherical cap
Reference: Owen, D.R.J., 1980. Finite elements in plasticity, theory and practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-017-1498-9