Hi Vaclav,
sorry but I cannot get why it shouldn't. So if I do that (as it is yet made by the Ip2_FrictMat_FrictMat_Basic) which would be the consequence? Generally speaking, which is this design issue you mentioned? cheers, Chiara ---------- Initial Header ----------- >From : [email protected] To : [email protected] Cc : Date : Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:38:44 +0100 Subject : Re: [Yade-dev] Assignment of kn and ks > > just for curiosity, why you decide to not assign kn and ks in > > Ip2_CpmMat_CpmMat_CpmPhys? Any particular reason? > I am actually not using those stiffnesses, but they are assigned for > compatibility (for post-processing, for instance) in > Law2_Dem3DofGeom_CpmPhys_Cpm, along with crossSection. > > The reason is (and it is a design issue of yade, but I see no really > good solution) that Ip2_* functors shouldn't access intrGeom, so I > postpone that to the law functor if called for the first time. > > The model itself is formulated in terms of strains and stresses (rather > than displacements and forces), so I use E and G for moduli. > > I hope it is clearer, but I might be writing nonsense at this time of > the day. > > Cheers, Vaclav > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
