-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 207
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Feature/shell contact using ghost particle #543
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Feature/shell contact using ghost particle #543
Conversation
@DongWuTUM Hi Dong, I opened a new PR for contact. I'll add the deleted test cases back later this week. |
…act_using_ghost_particle
Hi Weiyi, test_3d_shell_self_contact cannot run. When compling, it shows 'ParticleGeneratorSurface': base class undefined. Could you help me solve this? Thanks. |
@WeiyiVirtonomy Hi Weiyi, could you sent me the reference data (and test results if it is Okay from your side) of the test cases you have tested? Including the fluid-shell, shell-shell, shell-solid cases if possible. In this way, I don't need to collect these data again. Thank you! |
Hi, Dong, I have uploaded the reference data of FSI extracted from the figures and the SPH simulation results to Dropbox https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/oba51l7uyo9npoy9yzvo7/AE0wAqExM-eVyGO73uxLn4k?rlkey=llp63qrqteed0eyger2646veb&st=7koohawb&dl=0. As for the contact problems, I only created some simple tests without verification. |
Thank you!!! |
@WeiyiVirtonomy Could you also have a look on this problem? |
…act_using_ghost_particle
Three ring contactReference paper: Yang, Laursen ResultThe paper didn't provide the exact time of Fig. 16, so I only took some screenshots at time frames with similar deformation. InstabilityUnder a resolution of dp = thickness / 4.0, self-penetration of the medium ring is observed, probably because the displacement within one step is too large. |
Great!!! |
@DongWuTUM For a body named "body1" in contact with "body2" and "body3", I will need to name the repulsion densities as "RepulsionDensity_body1_body2" and "RepulsionDensity_body1_body3". However, if body2 and body3 are placed in one contact relation, I can only have one repulsion density registered for the contact of body1 to body2 and 3. Does it mean that I need to change contact to one-to-one for now? |
…act_using_ghost_particle
Hi Weiyi, |
Do you know if there's a way to get the type of bodies (solid or shell) automatically? |
The shell body is also defined as "SolidBody". Only particles are distinguished as "ShellParticles" and "SolidParticles". |
…act_using_ghost_particle
…act_using_ghost_particle
@DongWuTUM Hi, Dong. I have renamed the repulsion forces and densities according to the type of surface contact relations. Could you take a lot at them? If it's fine with you, we can start to finalize this PR. I still have one point to discuss: shall we unify the usage of "to" and "from" in the class naming? |
Hi Weiyi, thanks. I will have a look these days. Yes, we should unify the usage. Using "from contact body" and "to source body" (ContactForceFromWall and ContactForceToWall) should be better. |
Hi Weiyi, if this PR is Okay, please inform me, and then I will have a check. |
…act_using_ghost_particle
Hi, Dong. I have fixed some bugs after merging the master branch and added gtests / regression tests. I have run the three new tests locally and it should be ok now, but still need to see if the CI test can pass. |
@DongWuTUM Two problems:
|
The previous PR was closed due to the incorrect merge.
TODO: