Question #642544 on Yade changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/yade/+question/642544
Status: Open => Answered
Jérôme Duriez proposed the following answer:
Hi,
Both mentioned models let indeed specify cohesive strength for
interaction.
In both cases, the interaction cohesive strength (like any other interaction
properties, as a general rule in Yade) are derived from the Material parameters
(either JCFpmMat or CohFrictMat) through corresponding "Ip2", see
Ip2_JCFpmMat_JCFpmMat_JCFpmPhys or Ip2_CohFrictMat_CohFrictMat_CohFrictPhys.
See also the doc [1,2] for general explanations about these "Ip2".
This being said, an exact understanding of the differences between the two
models requires some time to fully grasp each one in details.
It has also been often discussed here on the mailing list (you may browse the
archives through [3]).
As an incomplete answer, let me say for instance that
- JCFpm model (designed with fractured rock in mind) let one easily play with
the interaction normal (for it to be different than the normal deduced from the
particle spherical geometries) and automatically takes the normal overlap at
interaction creation as "equilibrium overlap" corresponding to zero normal
force. Depending on your simulation workflow, this equilibrium overlap may thus
be non-zero
- CohFrictMat (designed with cohesive granular materials in mind) does
not include the two above features, and includes "rolling resistance"
with interaction torques opposing changes in particles relative
orientation.
[1] https://yade-dem.org/doc/introduction.html#dispatchers-and-functors
[2] https://yade-dem.org/doc/user.html#ip2-functors
[3] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
--
You received this question notification because your team yade-users is
an answer contact for Yade.
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~yade-users
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~yade-users
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
