XFEM Method for crack propagation
-
- Posts: 28
- Joined: 10 Jul 2019, 17:12
- Antispam: Yes
XFEM Method for crack propagation
In Code_Aster, there is XFEM method implmented for crack propagation. Do we have any plans to implement this in Elmer in future? Will it complicate to implement this one?
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4812
- Joined: 22 Aug 2009, 11:57
- Antispam: Yes
- Location: Espoo, Finland
- Contact:
Re: XFEM Method for crack propagation
Hi James,
Unfortunately there are currently no plans to implement this. Not at least by the Elmer team. Would there be some researcher interested in the implementation we are however open for discussions on how this could be done. Elmer project is open for contributions.
-Peter
Unfortunately there are currently no plans to implement this. Not at least by the Elmer team. Would there be some researcher interested in the implementation we are however open for discussions on how this could be done. Elmer project is open for contributions.
-Peter
Re: XFEM Method for crack propagation
Hi James,JamesMarine wrote: ↑10 Jul 2019, 18:16 In Code_Aster, there is XFEM method implmented for crack propagation. Do we have any plans to implement this in Elmer in future? Will it complicate to implement this one?
Recently, I am also considering to implement XFEM in Elmer.
In this forum, I notice more than one researchers or engineers posted the topic relates to XFEM in Elmer. Maybe we can collaborate to create an additional module in Elmer.
viewtopic.php?t=2597
Best Regards,
Jenwel
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4812
- Joined: 22 Aug 2009, 11:57
- Antispam: Yes
- Location: Espoo, Finland
- Contact:
Re: XFEM Method for crack propagation
Hi Jenwel
I don't think the old thread is relevant. However, the idea is still good.
This seems to recap some of the ideas nicely:
https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/specia ... I/XFEM.pdf
Are your thoughts in line with the presentation or do you have some other ideas?
The complexity of the implementation is not insignificant. The are many details to consider. I guess 2D is significantly easier than 3D? The way how a levelset cuts through 3D elements would result to some challenges in the subdivision etc.
-Peter
I don't think the old thread is relevant. However, the idea is still good.
This seems to recap some of the ideas nicely:
https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/specia ... I/XFEM.pdf
Are your thoughts in line with the presentation or do you have some other ideas?
The complexity of the implementation is not insignificant. The are many details to consider. I guess 2D is significantly easier than 3D? The way how a levelset cuts through 3D elements would result to some challenges in the subdivision etc.
-Peter
Re: XFEM Method for crack propagation
Hi Prof. Råback,raback wrote: ↑04 Dec 2022, 21:10 Hi Jenwel
I don't think the old thread is relevant. However, the idea is still good.
This seems to recap some of the ideas nicely:
https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/specia ... I/XFEM.pdf
Are your thoughts in line with the presentation or do you have some other ideas?
The complexity of the implementation is not insignificant. The are many details to consider. I guess 2D is significantly easier than 3D? The way how a levelset cuts through 3D elements would result to some challenges in the subdivision etc.
-Peter
Yeah, indeed, the 2D problem is much easier.
Thank you for the slides, the level set method is classical and useful. We can try it and follow the method in the slides.
BR
Jenwel