LIGGGHTS® - User Forum

Hello,

Can anyone please show how to set liquidsource and liquidflux with washino/capillary/viscous, i looked everywhere but i found nothing.

any ideas ?

Regards.

I am using a If command (if "${b} <= ${bod1}" then "variable bod1 equal v_b") and getting an error (Compute used in variable between runs is not current. Use the update_on_run_end option for computes to avoid this.) I am trying to define update on run. when i try to do that they say illegal variable command. how and where to define update on run in variable defined in if command. I have defined variable like this (variable bod1 equal 1e-5) (variable b equal c_kash[1] ) (compute kash all property/atom z ). Can you please help me editing these commands to get rid of an error.

Hello everyone!! I am a new to liggghts and have installed and successfully running my simulation. The only issue is that liggghts uses 1 by 1 by 1 mpi grid set up even though I give command mpirun -np 8 .................
I am using Ubuntu 18.04 on a 12 logical core system. Someone please help.

Hello all,

I am running a shear test simulation and I would like to see some force chains. I use the command
" compute fc all pair/gran/local id pos force"
but because of that my simulation results change.

Hello

I m working on a research project and i want to dump f_surfaceLiquidContent[0] but it seems like it s giving me wrong values, im attaching my script and the results with you, so can someone please gives a help

Hi all,

i have a cylindrical shear cell geometry. In order to lower the computational cost i want to use periodic boundaries. I know that i can not unfortunately use "pie slices" (sorry if thats not the correct term) only boxes. The geometry has the be able to rotate also to simulate shearing.
Is there a way to simulate half of the shear cell with a cartesic periodic boundary approach? How can set this up? Are there any other possibilities to reduce computational time i can think of?

Thanks a lot this forums helps tremendously.
Kind regards

I want to ask about using different contact models for superquadric particles. I can see only the following contact models are available in the "style_contact_model.whitelist" file for superquadric particles:

GRAN_MODEL(HOOKE, TANGENTIAL_HISTORY, COHESION_OFF, ROLLING_OFF, SURFACE_SUPERQUADRIC)
GRAN_MODEL(HOOKE, TANGENTIAL_NO_HISTORY, COHESION_OFF, ROLLING_OFF, SURFACE_SUPERQUADRIC)
GRAN_MODEL(HOOKE, TANGENTIAL_NO_HISTORY, COHESION_OFF, ROLLING_CDT, SURFACE_SUPERQUADRIC)
GRAN_MODEL(HOOKE, TANGENTIAL_NO_HISTORY, COHESION_SJKR, ROLLING_OFF, SURFACE_SUPERQUADRIC)

I read in restrictions for atom_style command document (https://www.cfdem.com/media/DEM/docu/atom_style.html?highlight=superquad...) that superquadric style is not available yet for public version?

Is that true or the document is not updated?

Hello everyone, I am doing a simulation of wear in a mining truck hopper ... this study consists of 3 cases with 4 different sizes of spheres, (case 1: 180, 220, 280, 340; case 2: 340, 400, 440, 500; case 3: 500, 540, 600, 660 [mm]).
In case 3 I receive the error in the title, I understand that I should increase the value of the "neigh_modidy" command but I don't understand what value I should choose. It would be very helpful if you could advise me which value to choose.
Finally I say goodbye to everyone. Greetings to all.
attached input script

Hello everyone,

i used normal spheres until recently and the simulations went fine.
Now i have to study the effect of different particle shapes in my Simulation so i set up my Simulation for multispheres. Now when i run my simulation the Particles after quite some time in the run are doing crazy things like suddenly "exploding" and worst of all clipping through the container where they are supposed to get shuffled around.

So basically the stuff you see when the time step is too large to catch the particle interaction correctly.