yade-users team mailing list archive

[Chareyre <question212881@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Question #212881 on Yade changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/yade/+question/212881

Description changed to:
Hi,

I'm not sure how to compare those two engines. What are the reason to choose one instead of the other?
The question is mostly for Jan, but I'm opening the discussion here since many users may face this choice.
Feedback from other users of these engines is welcome.

This is what can be done in a simulation with  PeriTriaxController:
- all 9 components of the velocity gradient can be user defined (actually, it doesn't need a controller at all)
- 3 components of the final strain can be prescribed: exx, eyy, ezz 
- 3 stress components can be prescribed: sxx, syy, szz (obviously, we can't impose at he same time exx and sxx)

- The stress can be controlled with two different algorithms:
* static algorithm: de = ds / E, where ds is the difference (goal - currentStress) and E is a stiffness evaluated from the current contact list (estimating E is the tricky part and weakness of the algorithm in the general case, the definition should depend on the contact law and other things, is has no exact definition to this date in the general case)
* dynamic algorithm d²e/dt² = ds/m, where "m" is user defined mass. More robust than the previous one (works whatever the contact law), but needs m to be defined carefully.

Typical situations where PeriTriax can be used are triaxial-like loading
paths, but it is also possible to use it in simple shear with imposed
vertical pressure (for instance).

What are the situations covered by Peri3D only?
Is it easier or more difficult to use Peri3D instead of PeriTriax?

-- 
You received this question notification because you are a member of
yade-users, which is an answer contact for Yade.