Dear Pablo, First of all I want to ask you about where you have read the statement that the brick is not functional. This must be some old leftover that we have to remove. The brick is in quite reasonable state and has been used to produced many different results.
The main trick for using the brick is the choice of the augmentation parameter and the release distance. The augmentation parameter should be in the order of the modulus of elasticity of the materials in contact (you can try values from 1000 times smaller to 1000 times larger). Your choice about the release distance sounds reasonable, maybe to be on the safe side you could increase it to 10 times the element size instead of 3 time the element size. Have you checked the corresponding included demo http://git.savannah.nongnu.org/gitweb/?p=getfem.git;a=blob;f=interface/tests/python/demo_large_sliding_contact.py ? BR Kostas On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 10:46 AM Pablo Arturo Alvarez Corrales < pabar....@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear getfem users, > > I've been trying to implement an elastostatic problem with contacts using > the python wrapper for GetFEM v5.3. At first, I tried the contact bricks > with non-matching meshes without any issues. However, since my problem > considers large deformation, this approximation to contacts is not > satisfying. > > I then tried the large sliding large deformation contact brick as > following: > > md.add_filtered_fem_variable('lambda_n', mfu, CONTACT) > contact_bid = md.add_integral_large_sliding_contact_brick_raytracing('r', > release_dist) > md.add_slave_contact_boundary_to_large_sliding_contact_brick(contact_bid, > mim, CONTACT, 'u', 'lambda_n') > md.add_master_contact_boundary_to_large_sliding_contact_brick(contact_bid, > mim_c, CONTACT_C, 'u_c') > > where u, u_c, CONTACT and CONTACT_C represent the displacements and > contact boundaries for the slave and master meshes respectively. > > Even though I get no errors at solving, the result appears to be > incorrect. After deformation, penetration between slave and master meshes > is significant, and changing the release distance for the raytracing > transformation does not seem to help (here I used three times the mean > element size). Also, I get a bunch of these in the console: > > Level 1 Warning in getfem_contact_and_friction_common.cc, line 47: > Inverted element !-0.20579 > > I did read the note in the documentation saying that the brick is not > working. However, it does not specify for which version so I wanted to be > sure. > > Is this brick working properly and if not, is there any version of GetFEM > in the repository that has one working version ? > > Thank you in advance, > > Pablo > > PD. Keep up the good work, this is an amazing library ! >
