Closed henrij22 closed 2 months ago
Attention: Patch coverage is 90.74074%
with 5 lines
in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
Project coverage is 86.76%. Comparing base (
d05187e
) to head (662e3ee
).
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
@rath3t There are some open points to discuss, but for a first review this is ready from my side.
@rath3t Then this is mergable?
This adds a Material Wrapper for vanishing strain, mostly used by plane strain, this should work similar to planeStress from the VanishingStress implementation, but without using a nonlinear solver and directly setting the fixed indices of the strains to zero Original implementation by @tarun-mitruka
Ive tested the plane Strain case against my own implementation, but I havn't wrote a formal test with some actual values. It passes the testmaterials test and an additional one where i compare plane strain and plane stress for $\nu = 0$ where the two 2d models should match.
TODO
MAYBE TODO
{0, 1, 5}
matter if the grid is defined in the XZ-plane or in the YZ-plane? - may be not if isotropy is assumedstoredEnergyImpl
? But this is a bit heavy and can be moved to a separate PR?OTHER PR
nonlinearelastic.hh
(this can be done in https://github.com/ikarus-project/ikarus/issues/285)maybeEnlarge
Function)DONE
LinearElastic
such that it is similar toNonlinearElastic
- This is necessary to makeLinearElastic
work for both plane strain and plane stress case. Consequently removeplaneStressLinearElasticMaterialTangent
andlinearElasticMaterialTangent3D
fromphysicshelper.hh
.VanishingStrain
and letplaneStrain
be a special caselinearElasticMaterialTangent3D
is removed, test if the material tangent is still correct for the 3D case (perhaps this is checked indirectly using the tests for result functions?)VanishingStrain
works correctly withfree
andfixed
indices different from plane strain caselinearelastic.hh