Václav Šmilauer a écrit : >> Whatever the method you use to damp particle movements I suspect the >> system to reach a vanishing value of kinetic energy asymptotically. >> Thus, if it the case, you can wait a very long time to obtain values >> of kinetic energy as small as you want... > Sorry to be unclear: the kinetic energy doesn't decrease from the point > where it hits some bottom line (around 1e-9 in this case), and > oscillates around this value. I suspect the way Cundall damps motion to > be blamed. Well, I will try and see. Best, Vaclav The critical question : is 1e-9 more than what you would get from rounding errors? Come on, you need to compare this 1e-9 with another value!
Another possible normalisation, provided you have a speed defined somewhere (like triaxial test at constant strain) : divide by the kinetic energy of the homogeneous-continuum-like velocity field. If your configuration is purely static, I have no other idea than elastic energy. And about Cundall's damping being "the best" (in my previous message), note that it only applies to confined packings in quasi-static conditions. As suggested by Feng, non-viscous damping gives unrealistic motions in some dynamic problems. Bruno > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev > Post to : [email protected] > 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 ________________ _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~yade-users Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~yade-users More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ yade-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/yade-users
