Metafor

ULiege - Aerospace & Mechanical Engineering

User Tools

Site Tools

You are here: metafor.ltas.ulg.ac.be » Commits » 2017 » Commit 2017-12-20
Trace:
commit:2017:12_20

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
commit:2017:12_20 [2017/12/20 10:49] – [Added [a] / deleted [d] / modified [m] / renamed [r] files/folders] boemercommit:2017:12_20 [2018/05/04 16:47] (current) – boman
Line 1: Line 1:
-====== Commit December 20, 2017 ======+====== Commit 2017-12-20 ======
  
 In this commit, the asperity crushing simulations in the generalized plane strain state created by Carretta for the Metalub/Metafor coupling were simplified as much as possible and corrected where necessary.  The scripts of these simulations can be found in: In this commit, the asperity crushing simulations in the generalized plane strain state created by Carretta for the Metalub/Metafor coupling were simplified as much as possible and corrected where necessary.  The scripts of these simulations can be found in:
Line 22: Line 22:
  
 Notice that the rolling direction in this model is aligned with the axis $\mathbf{z}$, while the vertical axis is $\mathbf{y}$ since plane strain simulations are usually represented in the $xy$-plane.  In Metalub, the rolling direction is $\mathbf{x}$ and the vertical direction is $\mathbf{y}$ since cold rolling was first modeled in 2D.  To extend the model to 3D, even another but more general choice was made in the reference document by Boemer, i.e.  the rolling direction is $\mathbf{x}$ and the vertical axis is $\mathbf{z}$.   Notice that the rolling direction in this model is aligned with the axis $\mathbf{z}$, while the vertical axis is $\mathbf{y}$ since plane strain simulations are usually represented in the $xy$-plane.  In Metalub, the rolling direction is $\mathbf{x}$ and the vertical direction is $\mathbf{y}$ since cold rolling was first modeled in 2D.  To extend the model to 3D, even another but more general choice was made in the reference document by Boemer, i.e.  the rolling direction is $\mathbf{x}$ and the vertical axis is $\mathbf{z}$.  
 +
 +
 +===== CMakeLists.txt =====
 +
 +The following line was added in the ''IF(MSVC)'' of the main CMakeLists.txt file to enable parallel compilation even without IncrediBuild:
 +
 +  SET(CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS "${CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS} /MP")
  
  
Line 198: Line 205:
 Either Godunov's method or the finite volume linear reconstruction method (see [[doc:user:ale:ale|]]) can be used for the convection step with sub-stepping depending on whether ''conv'' is equal to ''godunov'' or ''benson''.  Only the pressure is convected.  More precisely, to compute the pressure, Metafor computes a pressure increment at each time step based on the bulk modulus and the volume variation of the lubricant elements.  To compute the pressure at the following time step it is therefore necessary to convect the pressure. Either Godunov's method or the finite volume linear reconstruction method (see [[doc:user:ale:ale|]]) can be used for the convection step with sub-stepping depending on whether ''conv'' is equal to ''godunov'' or ''benson''.  Only the pressure is convected.  More precisely, to compute the pressure, Metafor computes a pressure increment at each time step based on the bulk modulus and the volume variation of the lubricant elements.  To compute the pressure at the following time step it is therefore necessary to convect the pressure.
  
-According to Carretta, the velocities and accelerations were not convected because they made the convergence more difficult.+According to Carretta, the velocities and accelerations were not convected because they made the convergence more difficult/impossible.
  
 :?: ** Why is only the convection of the pressure sufficient?  Is this sufficient to model the creation of a pressure gradient due to a convergent effect? I am not sure, if it is a good idea to not convect the velocities and accelerations since they are at the cause of creating pressure gradients, which might lead to the microhydrodynamism. ** :?: ** Why is only the convection of the pressure sufficient?  Is this sufficient to model the creation of a pressure gradient due to a convergent effect? I am not sure, if it is a good idea to not convect the velocities and accelerations since they are at the cause of creating pressure gradients, which might lead to the microhydrodynamism. **
Line 419: Line 426:
  
  
- --- // [[dominik.boemer@uliege.be|Domnik Boemer]] 2017/12/20 12:00 //+ --- // [[dominik.boemer@uliege.be|Dominik Boemer]] 2017/12/20 11:30 //
commit/2017/12_20.1513763372.txt.gz · Last modified: 2017/12/20 10:49 by boemer
Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki