Hello sfepy developers and users!
I am modelling a simple linear elastic sheet under isotropic stress with an elliptical hole in the center (and I have it working under sfepy, great little platform!).
It is obvious the model should initially yield more easily in the direction of the short axis of the ellipse. What is not so obvious to me is what should happen in the limit as stress goes to infinity. Part of me wants to believe that the hole should eventually become a circular, but the results of the simulation show that the ellipse eventually switches its aspect ratio with what was the the short axis becoming the long axis and viceversa.
My question is whether: A: The finite element result is the product of a smalldisplacement/nonmoving mesh artifact (and if so, if there is a way to get the correct behavior using sfepy...) OR B: My intuition about the physical behavior of this ideal system is incorrect and the ellipse really wouldn't round out into a circle under increasingly large stress (aka, the FE model is still physical/correct with large displacements).
This might be obvious to people who have done more finite element modeling than I have, but thanks anyway! I'm attaching a picture to make it easier to see at a glance (quarterellipse with x and y symmetry boundary conditions and equal tractions applied at the top and right boundaries).
Thanks! David Mashburn
Hi David!
On 02/15/2013 09:18 PM, David N. Mashburn wrote:
Hello sfepy developers and users!
I am modelling a simple linear elastic sheet under isotropic stress with an elliptical hole in the center (and I have it working under sfepy, great little platform!).
It is obvious the model should initially yield more easily in the direction of the short axis of the ellipse. What is not so obvious to me is what should happen in the limit as stress goes to infinity. Part of me wants to believe that the hole should eventually become a circular, but the results of the simulation show that the ellipse eventually switches its aspect ratio with what was the the short axis becoming the long axis and viceversa.
My question is whether: A: The finite element result is the product of a smalldisplacement/nonmoving mesh artifact (and if so, if there is a way to get the correct behavior using sfepy...)
From the picture I would say the deformation is well outside of the validity of the linear elasticity theory. You could try using a hyperelastic formulation such as the one described in [1]. Caveat: I have never tested those terms in 2D, so if you find that something does not work, let us know, please.
OR B: My intuition about the physical behavior of this ideal system is incorrect and the ellipse really wouldn't round out into a circle under increasingly large stress (aka, the FE model is still physical/correct with large displacements).
I cannot help you with this one  my physical intuition fails me all the time :)
This might be obvious to people who have done more finite element modeling than I have, but thanks anyway! I'm attaching a picture to make it easier to see at a glance (quarterellipse with x and y symmetry boundary conditions and equal tractions applied at the top and right boundaries).
I would a) try to google the problem  I am sure there are analytical expressions for stress concentration in a plate with a circular hole, so there might be something for your case too. Then b) use the large deformation formulation.
Cheers, r.
[1] http://sfepy.org/docdevel/examples/large_deformation/hyperelastic.html
Thanks Robert, that already helps a lot. Glad to know it is a nontrivial question.
We are actually trying to crosscheck some analytical solutions, so I would like to get this to work at least to some degree of confidence.
I've tried swapping out a simple neohookean system with bulk penalty and all that like in the example. A warp violation seems to be causing an exception after one iteration with a nominal amount of stress.
I've been digging through the nonlinear solver's parameters and can't find a way to shrink the initial step size. The other workaround I can think of is to use a time stepper to gradually increase the stress. Is there another/easier way to do this?
Also, is it normal for a system with a fairly large deformation to throw a warp violation and then still recover afterwards (if so, then maybe this exception is a bug?)
Thanks! David
Hi David,
On 02/22/2013 06:40 PM, David Mashburn wrote:
Thanks Robert, that already helps a lot. Glad to know it is a nontrivial question.
We are actually trying to crosscheck some analytical solutions, so I would like to get this to work at least to some degree of confidence.
Do you think that those would be a good tests to add to sfepy test suite?
I've tried swapping out a simple neohookean system with bulk penalty and all that like in the example. A warp violation seems to be causing an exception after one iteration with a nominal amount of stress.
I've been digging through the nonlinear solver's parameters and can't find a way to shrink the initial step size. The other workaround I can think of is to use a time stepper to gradually increase the stress. Is there another/easier way to do this?
Yes, this is the way to do it  use time stepping to increase the load gradually. I am not aware of other ways. In nonlinear analysis with the Newton solver, a good initial guess is required.
Also, is it normal for a system with a fairly large deformation to throw a warp violation and then still recover afterwards (if so, then maybe this exception is a bug?)
How does it recover? I assume it just throws off the warped solution and the nonlinear iteration does not converge, right?
r.
Hello again Robert,
I'm finally coming back around to this project.
I see that using a time stepper with gradual load increase is the way to go for a very large deformation solution; is there a recommended way to go about this in sfepy? Is there a way to implement an increasing variable into the builtin time solver, or is it better to run the simulation in a python loop and modify the inputs manually?
I am also not clear on whether the original mesh is suitable for every time step or if it will need to be updated.
And yes, I think this would certainly be an interesting test when it's completed, especially if we can compare to known analytical solutions.
Thanks for your help!
Cheers, David
On 02/23/2013 06:13 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote:
Hi David,
On 02/22/2013 06:40 PM, David Mashburn wrote:
Thanks Robert, that already helps a lot. Glad to know it is a nontrivial question.
We are actually trying to crosscheck some analytical solutions, so I would like to get this to work at least to some degree of confidence.
Do you think that those would be a good tests to add to sfepy test suite?
Certainly.
I've tried swapping out a simple neohookean system with bulk penalty and all that like in the example. A warp violation seems to be causing an exception after one iteration with a nominal amount of stress.
I've been digging through the nonlinear solver's parameters and can't find a way to shrink the initial step size. The other workaround I can think of is to use a time stepper to gradually increase the stress. Is there another/easier way to do this?
Yes, this is the way to do it  use time stepping to increase the load gradually. I am not aware of other ways. In nonlinear analysis with the Newton solver, a good initial guess is required.
Ok, that makes sense now.
Also, is it normal for a system with a fairly large deformation to throw a warp violation and then still recover afterwards (if so, then maybe this exception is a bug?)
How does it recover? I assume it just throws off the warped solution and the nonlinear iteration does not converge, right?
Right.
r.
Hello David,
On 01/10/2014 10:51 AM, David N. Mashburn wrote:
Hello again Robert,
I'm finally coming back around to this project.
I see that using a time stepper with gradual load increase is the way to go for a very large deformation solution; is there a recommended way to go about this in sfepy? Is there a way to implement an increasing variable into the builtin time solver, or is it better to run the simulation in a python loop and modify the inputs manually?
Have a look at the perfusion example [1]  there is a pressure traction term with pressure depending on time (function get_traction()). Ignore the variables and terms you do not need  the traction is applied using dw_tl_surface_traction term. Let me know if this helps.
I am also not clear on whether the original mesh is suitable for every time step or if it will need to be updated.
The total Lagrangian formulation integrates over the undeformed domain, and it should work up to a pretty large deformation. Be sure the mesh is fine enough, and that the load increments are such that the nonlinear solver in each time step converges. When you have your problem description written down, send me the complete example in case of convergence problems.
Cheers, r.
[1] http://sfepy.org/docdevel/examples/large_deformation/perfusion_tl.html
On 02/23/2013 06:13 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote:
Hi David,
On 02/22/2013 06:40 PM, David Mashburn wrote:
Thanks Robert, that already helps a lot. Glad to know it is a nontrivial question.
We are actually trying to crosscheck some analytical solutions, so I would like to get this to work at least to some degree of confidence.
Do you think that those would be a good tests to add to sfepy test suite?
Certainly.
I've tried swapping out a simple neohookean system with bulk penalty and all that like in the example. A warp violation seems to be causing an exception after one iteration with a nominal amount of stress.
I've been digging through the nonlinear solver's parameters and can't find a way to shrink the initial step size. The other workaround I can think of is to use a time stepper to gradually increase the stress. Is there another/easier way to do this?
Yes, this is the way to do it  use time stepping to increase the load gradually. I am not aware of other ways. In nonlinear analysis with the Newton solver, a good initial guess is required.
Ok, that makes sense now.
Also, is it normal for a system with a fairly large deformation to throw a warp violation and then still recover afterwards (if so, then maybe this exception is a bug?)
How does it recover? I assume it just throws off the warped solution and the nonlinear iteration does not converge, right?
Right.
r.
Thanks Robert.
I'll keep you posted on how it goes.
On Jan 10, 2014, at 7:02 AM, Robert Cimrman cimr...@ntc.zcu.cz wrote:
Hello David,
On 01/10/2014 10:51 AM, David N. Mashburn wrote: Hello again Robert,
I'm finally coming back around to this project.
I see that using a time stepper with gradual load increase is the way to go for a very large deformation solution; is there a recommended way to go about this in sfepy? Is there a way to implement an increasing variable into the builtin time solver, or is it better to run the simulation in a python loop and modify the inputs manually?
Have a look at the perfusion example [1]  there is a pressure traction term with pressure depending on time (function get_traction()). Ignore the variables and terms you do not need  the traction is applied using dw_tl_surface_traction term. Let me know if this helps.
I am also not clear on whether the original mesh is suitable for every time step or if it will need to be updated.
The total Lagrangian formulation integrates over the undeformed domain, and it should work up to a pretty large deformation. Be sure the mesh is fine enough, and that the load increments are such that the nonlinear solver in each time step converges. When you have your problem description written down, send me the complete example in case of convergence problems.
Cheers, r.
[1] http://sfepy.org/docdevel/examples/large_deformation/perfusion_tl.html
On 02/23/2013 06:13 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote: Hi David,
On 02/22/2013 06:40 PM, David Mashburn wrote: Thanks Robert, that already helps a lot. Glad to know it is a nontrivial question.
We are actually trying to crosscheck some analytical solutions, so I would like to get this to work at least to some degree of confidence.
Do you think that those would be a good tests to add to sfepy test suite?
Certainly.
I've tried swapping out a simple neohookean system with bulk penalty and all that like in the example. A warp violation seems to be causing an exception after one iteration with a nominal amount of stress.
I've been digging through the nonlinear solver's parameters and can't find a way to shrink the initial step size. The other workaround I can think of is to use a time stepper to gradually increase the stress. Is there another/easier way to do this?
Yes, this is the way to do it  use time stepping to increase the load gradually. I am not aware of other ways. In nonlinear analysis with the Newton solver, a good initial guess is required.
Ok, that makes sense now.
Also, is it normal for a system with a fairly large deformation to throw a warp violation and then still recover afterwards (if so, then maybe this exception is a bug?)
How does it recover? I assume it just throws off the warped solution and the nonlinear iteration does not converge, right?
Right.
r.
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sfepydevel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sfepydevel...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sfepy...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sfepydevel.
Robert,
Ok, I've managed to make the functions work, but now I'm having trouble getting the time stepper work. I am using the directstyle script (so that it runs standalone, without simple.py). This has worked out great so far, but I cannot find a good way to run the time solver without a ProblemConf. Is there a recommended way to solve timedependent problems in the direct style?
I could go into a lot more specifics about things that I've tried, so let me know if you need more information.
Thanks, David
On 01/10/2014 07:02 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote: Hello David,
On 01/10/2014 10:51 AM, David N. Mashburn wrote: Hello again Robert,
I'm finally coming back around to this project.
I see that using a time stepper with gradual load increase is the way to go for a very large deformation solution; is there a recommended way to go about this in sfepy? Is there a way to implement an increasing variable into the builtin time solver, or is it better to run the simulation in a python loop and modify the inputs manually?
Have a look at the perfusion example [1]  there is a pressure traction term with pressure depending on time (function get_traction()). Ignore the variables and terms you do not need  the traction is applied using dw_tl_surface_traction term. Let me know if this helps.
I am also not clear on whether the original mesh is suitable for every time step or if it will need to be updated.
The total Lagrangian formulation integrates over the undeformed domain, and it should work up to a pretty large deformation. Be sure the mesh is fine enough, and that the load increments are such that the nonlinear solver in each time step converges. When you have your problem description written down, send me the complete example in case of convergence problems.
Cheers, r.
[1] http://sfepy.org/docdevel/examples/large_deformation/perfusion_tl.html
On 02/23/2013 06:13 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote: Hi David,
On 02/22/2013 06:40 PM, David Mashburn wrote: Thanks Robert, that already helps a lot. Glad to know it is a nontrivial question.
We are actually trying to crosscheck some analytical solutions, so I would like to get this to work at least to some degree of confidence.
Do you think that those would be a good tests to add to sfepy test suite?
Certainly.
I've tried swapping out a simple neohookean system with bulk penalty and all that like in the example. A warp violation seems to be causing an exception after one iteration with a nominal amount of stress.
I've been digging through the nonlinear solver's parameters and can't find a way to shrink the initial step size. The other workaround I can think of is to use a time stepper to gradually increase the stress. Is there another/easier way to do this?
Yes, this is the way to do it  use time stepping to increase the load gradually. I am not aware of other ways. In nonlinear analysis with the Newton solver, a good initial guess is required.
Ok, that makes sense now.
Also, is it normal for a system with a fairly large deformation to throw a warp violation and then still recover afterwards (if so, then maybe this exception is a bug?)
How does it recover? I assume it just throws off the warped solution and the nonlinear iteration does not converge, right?
Right.
r.
Hi David,
On 01/13/2014 03:35 PM, David N. Mashburn wrote:
Robert,
Ok, I've managed to make the functions work, but now I'm having trouble getting the time stepper work. I am using the directstyle script (so that it runs standalone, without simple.py). This has worked out great so far, but I cannot find a good way to run the time solver without a ProblemConf. Is there a recommended way to solve timedependent problems in the direct style?
It depends on what level you want to do the timestepping. Do you want to write down the timeloop yourself? Or do you just want to setup and call the standard implicit timestepper? In the latter case, you would need to create the time solver, specifically a SimpleTimeSteppingSolver instance (see sfepy/solvers/ts_solvers.py), similarly to how you created the Newton solver and then just call it.
I could go into a lot more specifics about things that I've tried, so let me know if you need more information.
It might help, see above :)
r.
Thanks, David
On 01/10/2014 07:02 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote: Hello David,
On 01/10/2014 10:51 AM, David N. Mashburn wrote: Hello again Robert,
I'm finally coming back around to this project.
I see that using a time stepper with gradual load increase is the way to go for a very large deformation solution; is there a recommended way to go about this in sfepy? Is there a way to implement an increasing variable into the builtin time solver, or is it better to run the simulation in a python loop and modify the inputs manually?
Have a look at the perfusion example [1]  there is a pressure traction term with pressure depending on time (function get_traction()). Ignore the variables and terms you do not need  the traction is applied using dw_tl_surface_traction term. Let me know if this helps.
I am also not clear on whether the original mesh is suitable for every time step or if it will need to be updated.
The total Lagrangian formulation integrates over the undeformed domain, and it should work up to a pretty large deformation. Be sure the mesh is fine enough, and that the load increments are such that the nonlinear solver in each time step converges. When you have your problem description written down, send me the complete example in case of convergence problems.
Cheers, r.
[1] http://sfepy.org/docdevel/examples/large_deformation/perfusion_tl.html
On 02/23/2013 06:13 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote: Hi David,
On 02/22/2013 06:40 PM, David Mashburn wrote: Thanks Robert, that already helps a lot. Glad to know it is a nontrivial question.
We are actually trying to crosscheck some analytical solutions, so I would like to get this to work at least to some degree of confidence.
Do you think that those would be a good tests to add to sfepy test suite?
Certainly.
I've tried swapping out a simple neohookean system with bulk penalty and all that like in the example. A warp violation seems to be causing an exception after one iteration with a nominal amount of stress.
I've been digging through the nonlinear solver's parameters and can't find a way to shrink the initial step size. The other workaround I can think of is to use a time stepper to gradually increase the stress. Is there another/easier way to do this?
Yes, this is the way to do it  use time stepping to increase the load gradually. I am not aware of other ways. In nonlinear analysis with the Newton solver, a good initial guess is required.
Ok, that makes sense now.
Also, is it normal for a system with a fairly large deformation to throw a warp violation and then still recover afterwards (if so, then maybe this exception is a bug?)
How does it recover? I assume it just throws off the warped solution and the nonlinear iteration does not converge, right?
Right.
r.
Hi Robert,
See below.
On 01/13/2014 09:03 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote:
Hi David,
On 01/13/2014 03:35 PM, David N. Mashburn wrote:
Robert,
Ok, I've managed to make the functions work, but now I'm having trouble getting the time stepper work. I am using the directstyle script (so that it runs standalone, without simple.py). This has worked out great so far, but I cannot find a good way to run the time solver without a ProblemConf. Is there a recommended way to solve timedependent problems in the direct style?
It depends on what level you want to do the timestepping. Do you want to write down the timeloop yourself? Or do you just want to setup and call the standard implicit timestepper? In the latter case, you would need to create the time solver, specifically a SimpleTimeSteppingSolver instance (see sfepy/solvers/ts_solvers.py), similarly to how you created the Newton solver and then just call it.
I'm perfectly happy either way so long as the solution is updated properly, since this is not a real timedependent simulation anyway, but more of a numerical device for solving the nonlinear equations.
I could go into a lot more specifics about things that I've tried, so let me know if you need more information.
It might help, see above :)
I tried creating a SimpleTimeSteppingSolver a number of different ways and kept bumping into problems because I've not defined a ProblemConf. It fails when I try to create it using "pb.get_time_solver" and the class SimpleTimeStepper expects a "conf" argument that I assume to be a ProblemConf. After digging around the source code and looking at error messages, I created a dummy Struct to try to see if I could hack around this and get something like "solve_evolutionary" to run, but after getting it to a certain point with it still not working, I thought I'd see if there was a better way. Here's a snippet of the code that doesn't quite work:
######################## ts_conf = Struct(t0=t0, t1=t1, dt=None, n_step=n_step, quasistatic=None,kind=None,name=None,ics=None,epbcs=None) tss = SimpleTimeSteppingSolver(ts_conf) ts = TimeStepper.from_conf(ts_conf)
pb = ProblemDefinition('elasticity', equations=eqs, nls=nls, ls=lin_solver, ts=ts ) pb.ts_conf=ts_conf pb.conf=ts_conf
pb.save_regions_as_groups('regions')
pb.time_update(ebcs=Conditions([fix_u_left,fix_u_bottom])) ## This sim is now failing here, whereas this used to work ##
vec = solve_evolutionary(pb) ########################
Is there a better way to be going about this? As I said above, I'm perfectly happy to manage my own time loop since if that would be easier, but I do like the flexibility of running everything via direct execution.
Thanks, David
r.
Thanks, David
On 01/10/2014 07:02 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote: Hello David,
On 01/10/2014 10:51 AM, David N. Mashburn wrote: Hello again Robert,
I'm finally coming back around to this project.
I see that using a time stepper with gradual load increase is the way to go for a very large deformation solution; is there a recommended way to go about this in sfepy? Is there a way to implement an increasing variable into the builtin time solver, or is it better to run the simulation in a python loop and modify the inputs manually?
Have a look at the perfusion example [1]  there is a pressure traction term with pressure depending on time (function get_traction()). Ignore the variables and terms you do not need  the traction is applied using dw_tl_surface_traction term. Let me know if this helps.
I am also not clear on whether the original mesh is suitable for every time step or if it will need to be updated.
The total Lagrangian formulation integrates over the undeformed domain, and it should work up to a pretty large deformation. Be sure the mesh is fine enough, and that the load increments are such that the nonlinear solver in each time step converges. When you have your problem description written down, send me the complete example in case of convergence problems.
Cheers, r.
[1] http://sfepy.org/docdevel/examples/large_deformation/perfusion_tl.html
On 02/23/2013 06:13 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote: Hi David,
On 02/22/2013 06:40 PM, David Mashburn wrote: Thanks Robert, that already helps a lot. Glad to know it is a nontrivial question.
We are actually trying to crosscheck some analytical solutions, so I would like to get this to work at least to some degree of confidence.
Do you think that those would be a good tests to add to sfepy test suite?
Certainly.
I've tried swapping out a simple neohookean system with bulk penalty and all that like in the example. A warp violation seems to be causing an exception after one iteration with a nominal amount of stress.
I've been digging through the nonlinear solver's parameters and can't find a way to shrink the initial step size. The other workaround I can think of is to use a time stepper to gradually increase the stress. Is there another/easier way to do this?
Yes, this is the way to do it  use time stepping to increase the load gradually. I am not aware of other ways. In nonlinear analysis with the Newton solver, a good initial guess is required.
Ok, that makes sense now.
Also, is it normal for a system with a fairly large deformation to throw a warp violation and then still recover afterwards (if so, then maybe this exception is a bug?)
How does it recover? I assume it just throws off the warped solution and the nonlinear iteration does not converge, right?
Right.
r.
On 01/13/2014 05:25 PM, David N. Mashburn wrote:
Hi Robert,
See below.
On 01/13/2014 09:03 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote:
Hi David,
On 01/13/2014 03:35 PM, David N. Mashburn wrote:
Robert,
Ok, I've managed to make the functions work, but now I'm having trouble getting the time stepper work. I am using the directstyle script (so that it runs standalone, without simple.py). This has worked out great so far, but I cannot find a good way to run the time solver without a ProblemConf. Is there a recommended way to solve timedependent problems in the direct style?
It depends on what level you want to do the timestepping. Do you want to write down the timeloop yourself? Or do you just want to setup and call the standard implicit timestepper? In the latter case, you would need to create the time solver, specifically a SimpleTimeSteppingSolver instance (see sfepy/solvers/ts_solvers.py), similarly to how you created the Newton solver and then just call it.
I'm perfectly happy either way so long as the solution is updated properly, since this is not a real timedependent simulation anyway, but more of a numerical device for solving the nonlinear equations.
I could go into a lot more specifics about things that I've tried, so let me know if you need more information.
It might help, see above :)
I tried creating a SimpleTimeSteppingSolver a number of different ways and kept bumping into problems because I've not defined a ProblemConf. It fails when I try to create it using "pb.get_time_solver" and the class SimpleTimeStepper expects a "conf" argument that I assume to be a ProblemConf. After digging around the source code and looking at error messages, I created a dummy Struct to try to see if I could hack around this and get something like "solve_evolutionary" to run, but after getting it to a certain point with it still not working, I thought I'd see if there was a better way. Here's a snippet of the code that doesn't quite work:
######################## ts_conf = Struct(t0=t0, t1=t1, dt=None, n_step=n_step, quasistatic=None,kind=None,name=None,ics=None,epbcs=None) tss = SimpleTimeSteppingSolver(ts_conf) ts = TimeStepper.from_conf(ts_conf)
pb = ProblemDefinition('elasticity', equations=eqs, nls=nls, ls=lin_solver, ts=ts ) pb.ts_conf=ts_conf pb.conf=ts_conf
pb.save_regions_as_groups('regions')
pb.time_update(ebcs=Conditions([fix_u_left,fix_u_bottom])) ## This sim is now failing here, whereas this used to work ##
vec = solve_evolutionary(pb)
What version of sfepy do you use? solve_evolutionary() has been removed a year ago.
########################
Is there a better way to be going about this? As I said above, I'm perfectly happy to manage my own time loop since if that would be easier, but I do like the flexibility of running everything via direct execution.
As I do not have a simple example ready (using mostly the problem conf. approach with timedependent problems), it would be handy if you send me a working (up to the point it fails now) script + mesh, so that I could play with it. You can send it offlist, if the mesh is big...
r.
Thanks, David
r.
Thanks, David
On 01/10/2014 07:02 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote: Hello David,
On 01/10/2014 10:51 AM, David N. Mashburn wrote: Hello again Robert,
I'm finally coming back around to this project.
I see that using a time stepper with gradual load increase is the way to go for a very large deformation solution; is there a recommended way to go about this in sfepy? Is there a way to implement an increasing variable into the builtin time solver, or is it better to run the simulation in a python loop and modify the inputs manually?
Have a look at the perfusion example [1]  there is a pressure traction term with pressure depending on time (function get_traction()). Ignore the variables and terms you do not need  the traction is applied using dw_tl_surface_traction term. Let me know if this helps.
I am also not clear on whether the original mesh is suitable for every time step or if it will need to be updated.
The total Lagrangian formulation integrates over the undeformed domain, and it should work up to a pretty large deformation. Be sure the mesh is fine enough, and that the load increments are such that the nonlinear solver in each time step converges. When you have your problem description written down, send me the complete example in case of convergence problems.
Cheers, r.
[1] http://sfepy.org/docdevel/examples/large_deformation/perfusion_tl.html
On 02/23/2013 06:13 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote: Hi David,
> On 02/22/2013 06:40 PM, David Mashburn wrote: Thanks Robert, that > already helps a lot. Glad to know it is a nontrivial question. > > We are actually trying to crosscheck some analytical solutions, so > I would like to get this to work at least to some degree of > confidence.
Do you think that those would be a good tests to add to sfepy test suite?
Certainly.
> I've tried swapping out a simple neohookean system with bulk penalty > and all that like in the example. A warp violation seems to be > causing an exception after one iteration with a nominal amount of > stress. > > I've been digging through the nonlinear solver's parameters and > can't find a way to shrink the initial step size. The other > workaround I can think of is to use a time stepper to gradually > increase the stress. Is there another/easier way to do > this?
Yes, this is the way to do it  use time stepping to increase the load gradually. I am not aware of other ways. In nonlinear analysis with the Newton solver, a good initial guess is required.
Ok, that makes sense now.
> Also, is it normal for a system with a fairly large deformation to > throw a warp violation and then still recover afterwards (if so, > then maybe this exception is a bug?)
How does it recover? I assume it just throws off the warped solution and the nonlinear iteration does not converge, right?
Right.
r.
Robert,
I'm still at version 12.something, but I can update everything before we proceed too much further.
After that, I'll be glad to send along a script; thanks for the offer to look it over.
Thanks, David
On Jan 13, 2014, at 12:46 PM, Robert Cimrman cimr...@ntc.zcu.cz wrote:
On 01/13/2014 05:25 PM, David N. Mashburn wrote: Hi Robert,
See below.
On 01/13/2014 09:03 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote: Hi David,
On 01/13/2014 03:35 PM, David N. Mashburn wrote: Robert,
Ok, I've managed to make the functions work, but now I'm having trouble getting the time stepper work. I am using the directstyle script (so that it runs standalone, without simple.py). This has worked out great so far, but I cannot find a good way to run the time solver without a ProblemConf. Is there a recommended way to solve timedependent problems in the direct style?
It depends on what level you want to do the timestepping. Do you want to write down the timeloop yourself? Or do you just want to setup and call the standard implicit timestepper? In the latter case, you would need to create the time solver, specifically a SimpleTimeSteppingSolver instance (see sfepy/solvers/ts_solvers.py), similarly to how you created the Newton solver and then just call it.
I'm perfectly happy either way so long as the solution is updated properly, since this is not a real timedependent simulation anyway, but more of a numerical device for solving the nonlinear equations.
I could go into a lot more specifics about things that I've tried, so let me know if you need more information.
It might help, see above :)
I tried creating a SimpleTimeSteppingSolver a number of different ways and kept bumping into problems because I've not defined a ProblemConf. It fails when I try to create it using "pb.get_time_solver" and the class SimpleTimeStepper expects a "conf" argument that I assume to be a ProblemConf. After digging around the source code and looking at error messages, I created a dummy Struct to try to see if I could hack around this and get something like "solve_evolutionary" to run, but after getting it to a certain point with it still not working, I thought I'd see if there was a better way. Here's a snippet of the code that doesn't quite work:
######################## ts_conf = Struct(t0=t0, t1=t1, dt=None, n_step=n_step, quasistatic=None,kind=None,name=None,ics=None,epbcs=None) tss = SimpleTimeSteppingSolver(ts_conf) ts = TimeStepper.from_conf(ts_conf)
pb = ProblemDefinition('elasticity', equations=eqs, nls=nls, ls=lin_solver, ts=ts ) pb.ts_conf=ts_conf pb.conf=ts_conf
pb.save_regions_as_groups('regions')
pb.time_update(ebcs=Conditions([fix_u_left,fix_u_bottom])) ## This sim is now failing here, whereas this used to work ##
vec = solve_evolutionary(pb)
What version of sfepy do you use? solve_evolutionary() has been removed a year ago.
########################
Is there a better way to be going about this? As I said above, I'm perfectly happy to manage my own time loop since if that would be easier, but I do like the flexibility of running everything via direct execution.
As I do not have a simple example ready (using mostly the problem conf. approach with timedependent problems), it would be handy if you send me a working (up to the point it fails now) script + mesh, so that I could play with it. You can send it offlist, if the mesh is big...
r.
Thanks, David
r.
Thanks, David
On 01/10/2014 07:02 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote: Hello David,
On 01/10/2014 10:51 AM, David N. Mashburn wrote: Hello again Robert,
I'm finally coming back around to this project.
I see that using a time stepper with gradual load increase is the way to go for a very large deformation solution; is there a recommended way to go about this in sfepy? Is there a way to implement an increasing variable into the builtin time solver, or is it better to run the simulation in a python loop and modify the inputs manually?
Have a look at the perfusion example [1]  there is a pressure traction term with pressure depending on time (function get_traction()). Ignore the variables and terms you do not need  the traction is applied using dw_tl_surface_traction term. Let me know if this helps.
I am also not clear on whether the original mesh is suitable for every time step or if it will need to be updated.
The total Lagrangian formulation integrates over the undeformed domain, and it should work up to a pretty large deformation. Be sure the mesh is fine enough, and that the load increments are such that the nonlinear solver in each time step converges. When you have your problem description written down, send me the complete example in case of convergence problems.
Cheers, r.
[1] http://sfepy.org/docdevel/examples/large_deformation/perfusion_tl.html
> On 02/23/2013 06:13 AM, Robert Cimrman wrote: Hi David, > >> On 02/22/2013 06:40 PM, David Mashburn wrote: Thanks Robert, that >> already helps a lot. Glad to know it is a nontrivial question. >> >> We are actually trying to crosscheck some analytical solutions, so >> I would like to get this to work at least to some degree of >> confidence. > > Do you think that those would be a good tests to add to sfepy test > suite? Certainly. >> I've tried swapping out a simple neohookean system with bulk penalty >> and all that like in the example. A warp violation seems to be >> causing an exception after one iteration with a nominal amount of >> stress. >> >> I've been digging through the nonlinear solver's parameters and >> can't find a way to shrink the initial step size. The other >> workaround I can think of is to use a time stepper to gradually >> increase the stress. Is there another/easier way to do >> this? > > Yes, this is the way to do it  use time stepping to increase the > load gradually. I am not aware of other ways. In nonlinear analysis > with the Newton solver, a good initial guess is required. Ok, that makes sense now. >> Also, is it normal for a system with a fairly large deformation to >> throw a warp violation and then still recover afterwards (if so, >> then maybe this exception is a bug?) > > How does it recover? I assume it just throws off the warped solution > and the nonlinear iteration does not converge, right? Right. > r.
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sfepydevel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sfepydevel...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sfepy...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sfepydevel.
On 01/13/2014 07:18 PM, David N Mashburn wrote:
Robert,
I'm still at version 12.something, but I can update everything before we proceed too much further.
Yes, please  a number of bugs has been fixed in the meantime :)
After that, I'll be glad to send along a script; thanks for the offer to look it over.
Ok!
r.
participants (4)

David Mashburn

David N Mashburn

David N. Mashburn

Robert Cimrman