yade-users team mailing list archive

[Jan Stránský <question703081@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Question #703081 on Yade changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/yade/+question/703081

    Status: Open => Answered

Jan Stránský proposed the following answer:
>> One option would be to add a facet cylinder and to grow particles until you meet the target porosity.
> for understanding:
> the filtering process is skipped as the porosity of my particle cloud is performed by enlarging the spheres in the same cylinder vessel in which the oedometer simulation is subsequently performed?

yes

> So far, I wanted to achieve the setting of the correct porosity by
"external" compaction, because I can not estimate how much a different
particle size has influence on the material calibration by oedometer and
direct shear test. In addition, settlement should be calculated in the
future.

particle growth is just one option.
You can e.g. perform simple gravity deposition or directly oedometric compression.

> It is probably not very helpful to compress the particle cloud with
PeriTriaxController to the desired pore number, because mainly the
deletion of overlapping spheres in the edge region of the predicate are
the cause for the too high porosity?

seems reasonable to me (according to so far results)

> Can oedometer and direct shear tests be described and
modelled/simulated with periodic boundary conditions and if so, would
this be a solution for the boundary effect problem when it comes to
having the right porosity?

for oedometric case, yes and yes

for direct shear test, in **my opinion**, no and no

Cheers
Jan

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