Add 3D circular beam bending validation: SOFA vs FreeFEM - #42
Open
Fimache wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Context
Adds a new SOFA vs FreeFEM cross-validation case: a 3D circular
cross-section beam, cantilevered at one end, subjected to a transverse
(bending) load on the opposite face. Complements the existing 3D
validation cases (axial traction on circular section, torsion,
distributed load).
Contents
beam3d_circular_tet.py: tetrahedral mesh generation (gmsh) for acircular beam, with 3 physical groups (fixed face, loaded face, lateral
surface).
sofa_beam3d_circle_bending.py: SOFA scene — beam clamped at x_min(
FixedProjectiveConstraint), transverse load applied on the x_max facevia consistent nodal traction forces (integrated over the loaded
triangular faces).
freefem_beam3d_circle_bending.edp: FreeFEM solve of the sameproblem (same geometry, same boundary conditions).
comparaison_script3d_circle_bending.py: node matching bycoordinates between the two solvers, RMS computed on the three
displacement components (ux, uy, uz).
params.json/params_beam3d_circle_bending.json: geometry,material, and load parameters.
Known limitation
Unlike the axial traction case (compared against the Saint-Venant
analytical solution), this bending case does not yet have an
analytical reference.