PARADISCYL:Cylinder-Benchmark: Difference between revisions
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
== Model geometries== |
== Model geometries== |
||
<gallery widths=" |
<gallery widths="200px" heights="200px"> |
||
Image:Cylinder_square_fig1.png |[Slip system] |
Image:Cylinder_square_fig1.png |[Slip system] |
||
</gallery> |
</gallery> |
||
Revision as of 22:53, 16 June 2010
Benchmarks to check PBC in cylinder code
ILL RYU
May 1, 2010
From these benchmarks, we like to confirm if the periodic boundary condition works properly. To do that, two models are prepared. In the first model, square dislocation loop is located at the center of the simulation domain. In the other model, square dislocation loop is split and is put into both top and the bottom surface, as shown in the following figures.
Model geometries
To check if PBC works, stresses on the surface are printed out in each cases. After stress components are shifted according to the geometry, values of stress are compared. For simplicity, one vertical line on the cylinder surface is chosen, where stresses are printed out(x and y are fixed). If stress output in both cases are the same, we can conclude PBC works well in the cylinder code.
Stress calculation in Cylinder code
In cylinder code, stress can be computed by the following equation.
where , and are the total stress, Infinite stress and the image stress. Therefore, each stresses are compared in both models.
Infinite stress
Image stress stress
Total stress
Conclusion
The reason why the infinite stress does not match each other is the infinite stress can have some inaccuracy near the boundary. From the plot, we can conclude that PBC works well in cylinder code, because the stress output fits well to each other. Moreover, we can see zero traction boundary condition is satisfied on the surface of the cylinder.