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 14:41] – 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 of slump flow simulations. It is a typical test usually | + | This test is a typical test used to check consistency of a fresh concrete |
- | {{: | + | |{{: |
+ | |Fig.1: The geometry of Abrams cone slump test| | ||
- | === Computational Model === | + | ==== Computational Model ==== |
- | The mesh is shown on the next picture. It is refined near the botom surface to improve accuracy | + | Due to the rotational symmetry, |
- | The problem is solved in axisymmetric. The simulations were done using | + | *density 2300 kg/ |
- | Bingham model (corresponding to self compacting | + | *yield stress 40 Pa, |
- | following parameters: density 2300 kg/m3, yield stress 40 Pa, viscosity 20 Pa.s. The simulations were performed | + | *viscosity 20 Pa.s. |
- | different type of friction conditions assumed on horizontal plate. The full slip as well as | + | The simulations were performed |
- | different friction coefficients | + | different friction coefficients |
- | setting due to the rotational symmetry of the problem. | + | |
- | {{: | + | |
- | === Results === | + | |{{: |
- | On the next four videos, the influence | + | |Fig. 2: The setup of the computatinal model|Fig.3: The computational mesh| |
- | {{: | ||
- | {{: | + | The computational mesh is shown on the Figure 3. It has been refined near the botom surface to improve accuracy of the boundary layer prediction as well as improved interface capturing. The triangular elements with eqaul order interpolation of velocity and pressure fields have been used. Since that element is not satisfying LBB condition, PSPG stabilization is used for preventing oscilations in pressure field. SUPG stabilization improving accuracy in connection with non-linear convective term is also used. For further information, |
- | {{: | + | The example of OOFEM input file is available here: {{: |
- | {{:tailorcrete: | + | ==== 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]. | ||
- | On the next figure, influence of friction is shown. Final spreading shape of SCC is plotted for different values of friction. Comparison with analytical solution of simplified problem is made (for further reference, see: ROUSSEL N COUSSOT P, “Fifty-cent rheometer” for yield stress | + | |{{video> |
- | measurements | + | |Friction coefficient 0.0 | Friction coefficient 0.01 | |
- | 705-718.) | + | |{{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]) |
- | Example input file is here: {{: | + | |{{: |
+ | |Fig. 4: Final spreading shape or different values of friction coefficient.| | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== References ==== | ||
+ | [1] ROUSSEL N COUSSOT P, “Fifty-cent rheometer” for yield stress | ||
+ | measurements : from slump to spreading flow, Journal of Rheology, 49(3) (2005) | ||
+ | 705-718.) | ||
- | Description of input file can be found here: [[tailorcrete: | + | [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. | ||
+ | [3] TEZDUYAR, T : Stabilized Finite Element Formulations for Incompressible Flow Computations, | ||
+ | Applied Mechanics, Volume 28, 1991, Pages 1-44 | ||
tailorcrete/examples/slump-flow.1343220080.txt.gz · Last modified: 2012/07/25 14:41 by kolarfil