yade-users team mailing list archive

[David Alber <question693898@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Question #693898 on Yade changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/yade/+question/693898

    Status: Answered => Open

David Alber is still having a problem:
Dear Luc,

1)
I would have expected that. However, even if manually setting the interaction 'isOnJoint', the force between the two spheres is still calculated from the stiffness of the young module. This is demonstrated in the output of the minimal example: 
Output: 'isOnjoint' = True; 'kn' = 3e10 (which is the young module and NOT  jointNormalStiffness*phys->crossSection).
Is that related to the joint normal vector? 

2)
We want to compress a packing of spheres. A local non-viscous damping shall be represented by parallel bonds between every interaction to contribute to the energy loss in the system [1]. Hence, we seek for joints with set jointNormalStiffness between every interaction. This shall be achieved by the often cited formalism of Potyondy & Cundall 'A bonded particle model for rock' [2]. From the YADE launchpad question 635871 [3] I figured that the JCFpm related classes are an implementation of this formalism and would therefore be the right constitutive law.
Is that right?

3), 4) OK

[1]: [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921883118302061]
[2]: [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1365160904002874]
[3]: [https://answers.launchpad.net/yade/+question/635871]

-- 
You received this question notification because your team yade-users is
an answer contact for Yade.