tailorcrete:examples:slump-flow
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
tailorcrete:examples:slump-flow [2012/07/25 13:22] – kolarfil | tailorcrete:examples:slump-flow [2012/09/13 09:54] (current) – improved formatting, corrected some typos bp | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | ==== Slump flow test ==== | + | ===== Slump flow test ===== |
- | === Test setup and Geometry === | + | ==== Test setup and Geometry |
- | This section presents results | + | This test is a typical test used to check consistency |
- | setting | + | |
- | Bingham model (corresponding to self compacting concrete with very low yield stress) with the | + | |
- | following parameters: density 2300 kg/m3, yield stress 40 Pa, viscosity 20 Pa.s. The simulations were performed for | + | |
- | different type of friction conditions assumed on horizontal plate. The full slip as well as | + | |
- | different friction coefficients has been considered. The friction coefficient is sequentially equal to 0.0, 0.01, 0.1 and 5.0. Significant difference in flows for different friction coefficient can be observed. | + | |
- | === Computational Model === | + | |{{: |
+ | |Fig.1: The geometry of Abrams cone slump test| | ||
- | {{:tailorcrete: | + | ==== Computational Model ==== |
+ | Due to the rotational symmetry, the problem is modeled in axisymmetric setting. The setup of computational domain, together with the description of boundary conditions and used materials is illustrated on Fig. 2. The whole problem is modeled as a two-phase flow problem, considering fresh concrete and air as the two immiscible phases. The mutual interface between the twofluids is tracked using the Level Set Method [2]. The air phase is modeled as a newtonian fluid, the fresh concrete suspension as non-Newtonian, | ||
+ | *density 2300 kg/m3, | ||
+ | *yield stress 40 Pa, | ||
+ | *viscosity 20 Pa.s. | ||
+ | The simulations were performed with different type of friction conditions assumed on horizontal plate. The full slip as well as | ||
+ | different friction coefficients have been considered. The friction coefficient has been set to 0.0, 0.01, 0.1 and 5.0. A significant difference in flow patterns for different friction coefficient can be observed. | ||
- | The mesh is shown on the next picture. It is refined near the botom surface to improve accuracy | + | |{{: |
+ | |Fig. 2: The setup of the computatinal model|Fig.3: The computational mesh| | ||
- | {{: | ||
- | === Results === | + | The computational mesh is shown on the Figure 3. It has been refined near the botom surface to improve accuracy |
- | On the next four videos, | + | |
- | {{: | + | The example of OOFEM input file is available here: {{: |
- | {{: | + | ==== Results ==== |
+ | On the next four videos, the influence of boundary condition on the flow is illustrated. The Different values of friction coefficient were assumed (equal to 0, 0.01, 0.1 and 5.). Parameters of the Bingham model for concrete were following: yeld stress 40 [Pa], plastic viscosity 20 [Pa.s], and density 2300 [kg/m3]. | ||
- | {{: | + | |{{video> |
+ | |Friction coefficient 0.0 | Friction coefficient 0.01 | | ||
+ | |{{video> | ||
+ | |Friction coefficient 0.1 | Friction coefficient 5.0 | | ||
- | {{:tailorcrete: | + | On the next figure, the overall influence of friction is illustrated. Final spreading shape of SCC is plotted for different values of friction coefficient. Comparison with analytical solution of simplified problem is made (for further reference, see: [1]) |
- | On the next figure, influence of friction is shown. Final spreading shape of SCC is plotted for different values of friction. | + | |{{: |
+ | |Fig. 4: Final spreading shape or different values of friction | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== References ==== | ||
+ | [1] ROUSSEL N COUSSOT P, “Fifty-cent rheometer” for yield stress | ||
measurements : from slump to spreading flow, Journal of Rheology, 49(3) (2005) | measurements : from slump to spreading flow, Journal of Rheology, 49(3) (2005) | ||
705-718.) | 705-718.) | ||
- | {{: | + | [2] BARTH, T.; SETHIAN, J.A. (2009), Numerical Schemes for the HamiltonJacobi and Level Set Equations on Triangu- |
- | + | lated Domains. Journal of computational physics, 145 1-40. | |
- | Example input file is here: {{: | + | |
- | + | ||
- | Description of input file can be found here: [[tailorcrete: | + | |
+ | [3] TEZDUYAR, T : Stabilized Finite Element Formulations for Incompressible Flow Computations, | ||
+ | Applied Mechanics, Volume 28, 1991, Pages 1-44 | ||
tailorcrete/examples/slump-flow.1343215330.txt.gz · Last modified: 2012/07/25 13:22 by kolarfil