Linear elastoplasticity #62
Conversation
|
This is still a WIP, so please do not review or merge this yet. |
|
@dealii/dealii I've just finished this code-gallery example. It would be nice if someone could quickly skim over the README file to proof read it. Otherwise, I guess I'll merge it in a couple of days time. |
|
I'll have a look at the code. Give till the weekend! |
| { | ||
| prm.enter_subsection("Finite element system"); | ||
| { | ||
| prm.declare_entry("Polynomial degree", "1", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You could use ParameterHandler::add_parameter() instead of declare_entry() + get()
|
|
||
| // @sect3{Time incrementation} | ||
|
|
||
| class Time |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You could use the DiscreteTime time class here.
| const SymmetricTensor<4,dim> K_e | ||
| = (kappa_e - 2.0/dim*mu_e)*Physics::Elasticity::StandardTensors<dim>::IxI | ||
| + (2.0*mu_e)*Physics::Elasticity::StandardTensors<dim>::S; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would it be possible to make the formula consistent with the documentation. Maybe also you could the number of the equation in the latex document.
| quadrature_point_history.initialize(triangulation.begin_active(), | ||
| triangulation.end(), | ||
| n_q_points_cell); | ||
| for (typename DoFHandler<dim>::active_cell_iterator |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You could use a range-based iterator here.
| solve (); | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| while (time.current() < time.end()+0.01*time.get_delta_t()) |
| const SymmetricTensor<4,dim> K_p_correction | ||
| = - (Utilities::fixed_power<2>(2.0*mu_e))/(2.0*mu_e + 2.0/dim*kappa_e)*n_t_x_n_t | ||
| - (Utilities::fixed_power<2>(2.0*mu_e)*delta_lambda_t)/(sigma_dev_trial_norm)*(I_dev - n_t_x_n_t); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess this is equ 21-22. Isn't a term missing?
|
Thanks for reviewing this a few days ago @peterrum. I just wanted to drop by to say thanks, and that your comments have lead me to doing a bit more work on this (I added in a check, and the LHS and RHS of this equality don't match, making me wonder what the source of the discrepancy is). So I'm not ignoring your comments, but am rather trying to figure that potential issue out. Any rewrite parts of the theory along the way >:-| |
Linear elastoplasticity with linear isotropic hardening. Geometries include a notched cylindrical specimen and a tensile specimen.