Assignment 3
Objective:
The Objective of the assignment is to run the given simulation with default shell formulation and compare the result with simulation of recommended shell formulation.
Input:
| Shell | Default | Recommended |
| Ishell | 0 | 24 |
| Ismstr | 0 | 2 |
| Ish3n | 0 | 2 |
| N | 5 | 5 |
| Ithick | 1 | 1 |
| Iplas | 1 | 1 |
- Simulation runtime is changed to 55ms and animation step is changed to have 0.91ms to have 60steps
Error comparision.
Simulation 1 with default value:
As we can see in above pic the Energy error is -11.2%, which above than recommended value of -5%.
Simulation 2 with Recommended value:
As we can see in above pic the Energy error is -0.1%, which is wihin recommended value of -5%.
The mass error seems to not change during change in shell formulation.
Simulation 1 Plot (Default shell formulation):
- Internal Energy, Kinetic Energy, Hourglass energy, Total Energy.
- Rigid wall Energy
Simulation 2 Plot:
- Internal Energy, Kinetic Energy, Hourglass energy, Total Energy.
- Rigid wall Energy
Conclusion:
From the comparision of graph between simulation 1 and 2 following conclusions can be made.
- Hourglass energy with recommended shell formulation is zero.
- There is no decrease in total energy with recommended shell formulation.
- The variation of Kinetic energy and Internal energy is more accurate (non linear) with recommended shell formulation.
- Normal energy result is different with recommended shell formulation than default value.