yade-dev team mailing list archive

[Bruno Chareyre <bruno.chareyre@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

It sounds good to me, except for two ascpects :
- it will require different geometry classes for different constitutive 
laws, because if you don't have moment at contacts, you don't want a 
geometry class computing relative rotations (waste of time).
- less fundamentally : due to this change, old xml's can't be loaded in 
the new version (said Jerome Duriez).

Bruno



Václav Šmilauer a écrit :
> > > If the constitutive law is simple as
> > >
> > > // loop over interactions etc
> > > Fn=contactGeom->strainN()*crossSection*E;
> > > Ft=contactGeom->strainT()*crossSection*G;
> > > // apply forces here
> > >
> > > the code for computing strain being elsewhere, then that code is still
> > > in one place (and can be fixed at one place) and the constitutive law is
> > > not a mess of flags.
> > >     
> > >       
>
> Hi there, I implemented ElasticContactLaw2 (for ilustration) that
> behaves like ElasticContactLaw (except that all contact are cohesive
> (don't break) and there is no moment rotation law) and uses new
> SpheresContactGeometry code; the code is about 15 lines.
>
> This is the way I imagine all constitutive laws should eventually look
> like: relationship from relative displacements (computed in the contact
> geometry class) to forces, nothing else.
>
> Vaclav
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev
> Post to     : yade-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
>
>   


--

_______________
Chareyre Bruno
Maitre de conference

Grenoble INP
Laboratoire 3SR - bureau E145
BP 53 - 38041, Grenoble cedex 9 - France
Tél : 33 4 56 52 86 21
Fax : 33 4 76 82 70 43
________________