Skip to content
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

Throw exception when running a dynamic LCM problem with no density (and other material parameters) specified #10

Open
ikalash opened this issue Apr 10, 2018 · 8 comments

Comments

@ikalash
Copy link
Collaborator

ikalash commented Apr 10, 2018

The default value of the density in the code is 1.0 which is non-physical. Exception should be thrown when not specifying density for dynamic problem to prevent user from running with density = 1.0 accidentally.

@djlittl
Copy link
Contributor

djlittl commented Apr 10, 2018

Agreed! A few years ago I spent several hours debugging a simulation, only to find that I had a typo in the input deck and Albany/LCM was using a default value for the elastic modulus. You guessed it, the default was 1.0, only off by ~9 orders of magnitude ...

@ikalash ikalash changed the title Throw exception when running a dynamic LCM problem with no density specified Throw exception when running a dynamic LCM problem with no density (and other material parameters) specified May 9, 2018
@ikalash
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ikalash commented May 9, 2018

@lxmota (others welcome to join in) : should we disallow default values for the material properties for all LCM problems or only dynamic ones? I hope to finally have time to fix this issue.

@lxmota
Copy link
Collaborator

lxmota commented May 9, 2018

I think there should not be any default values for anything related to material properties. It is dangerous and we have been burned by that many times.

@jwfoulk
Copy link
Contributor

jwfoulk commented May 9, 2018

I guess I'm tempted to disallow defaults in parameters that are requisite for solving the problem. In this sense, you don't need density for quasi-statics but it is needed for dynamics. Clearly, some constitutive model is needed in both cases so having default values for things like the modulus is probably not a good thing.

@ikalash
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ikalash commented May 9, 2018

@lxmota: This is what I thought based on our discussion yesterday, thanks for confirming. I can make this change. I anticipate having to modify a lot of input files that do make use of default values (whether intentionally or not).

@ikalash
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ikalash commented May 9, 2018

@jwfoulk : would you be able to give me a list of parameters that are requisite for solving LCM problems? Some are probably physics specific but I'd guess there are a lot required by all LCM problems.

@lxmota
Copy link
Collaborator

lxmota commented May 9, 2018

The parameters unfortunately are material dependent.

If you are using an isotropic elastic model, then one only needs E, nu, and for dynamics, rho.

But there are more complex material models, with many more parameters.

I guess the ConstitutiveModelInterface is where one would disable default values.

@jwfoulk
Copy link
Contributor

jwfoulk commented May 9, 2018

Yes. Great point. This is what Alejandro is getting at - defaulting any material property can lead to ruin.

@lxmota lxmota transferred this issue from sandialabs/Albany Apr 29, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants