<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title><![CDATA[Cervenka Consulting Forums — Negative crack width]]></title>
		<link>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?id=2040</link>
		<atom:link href="https://forums.cervenka.cz:80/extern.php?action=feed&amp;tid=2040&amp;type=rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<description><![CDATA[The most recent posts in Negative crack width.]]></description>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2018 17:30:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>PunBB</generator>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Negative crack width]]></title>
			<link>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=4040#p4040</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Thanks a lot for your explanations</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (arjun.vithalkar)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2018 17:30:43 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=4040#p4040</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Negative crack width]]></title>
			<link>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=4039#p4039</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Dear arjun.vithalkar, <br />yes. For your second question, I am not sure if I understand, but the most typical setting is to make the interface thickness equal to to the smaller thickness of the 2 MEs being connected with it. </p><p>Regards.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (dpryl)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2018 11:37:40 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=4039#p4039</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Negative crack width]]></title>
			<link>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=4038#p4038</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>So, does that mean, if the thickness of interface is smaller than the adjacent macroelement (say interface th. = 100mm and macroelement th. = 400mm), it denotes that only a small percentage of the two macroelement layers are connected to each other (in this case only 25%) ?</p><p>If yes, then what should be the optimum percentage of interface thickness in relation with the adjacent macroelement thickness?</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (arjun.vithalkar)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2018 10:36:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=4038#p4038</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Negative crack width]]></title>
			<link>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=4037#p4037</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Dear arjun.vithalkar, <br />the Thickness in the 2D Interface is the same as in all other 2D material models/Macroelements, i.e., the dimension in the 3rd direction - perpendicular to the screen. </p><p>Regards.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (dpryl)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2018 08:21:34 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=4037#p4037</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Negative crack width]]></title>
			<link>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=4036#p4036</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the clarification. </p><p>I need to ask one more thing about the interface material model.</p><p>-Is the thickness (specified in the connection input of line properties), related to the thickness of interface in y-direction or into the plane of model (along z-axis) (If I&#039;m modelling in 2D ATENA and x-axis is my longitudinal axis)? </p><p>I ask this because, if I&#039;m not wrong, while defining the macroelements, the thickness refers to the width of the specimen (that is thickness into the plane of model, i.e, along z-axis), as dimensions for the macroelements are assigned separately while defining the number of joints. </p><p>Therefore, these two values of thicknesses should be always different, because interface thickness will be very less as compared to width of adjacent macroelement.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (arjun.vithalkar)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Sun, 21 Oct 2018 16:06:37 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=4036#p4036</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Negative crack width]]></title>
			<link>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=4033#p4033</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Dear arjun.vithalkar, <br />closed cracks can have negative opening, because the numerical stiffness acting against overlapping while closing can not be infinite. <br />Regards.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (dpryl)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2018 15:34:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=4033#p4033</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Negative crack width]]></title>
			<link>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=4032#p4032</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>While analyzing the crack behavior, I am getting negative crack width values for cod1 of my specimen. <br />What does this negative crack width mean ? Does it have any physical significance?</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (arjun.vithalkar)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2018 15:08:42 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=4032#p4032</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
