LAMMPS WWW Site - LAMMPS Documentation - LAMMPS Mailing List Archives
Re: [lammps-users] Nanoindentation of Graphene
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lammps-users] Nanoindentation of Graphene


From: Axel Kohlmeyer <akohlmey@...24...>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 09:29:29 -0400

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 9:23 AM, Jit Sarkar <jitsarkar1993@...24...> wrote:
> Dear Axel Sir,
>
> I am extremely sorry for the inconvenience occurred from my side due to
> wrong file attachment. I will be more concern about this from next time
> onward.
>
> Please find the correct input file attached which is running smoothly and
> with the same problem which I mentioned in my very first mail.

your input does not make sense.

you are moving a group of atoms as indenter *and* apply fix indent to
the substrate. what is the point of that?
also, there is no time integration of substrate atoms, so they will
remain in place, regardless of the forces they experience, while fix
move will move atoms without considering the forces.
thus what you observe is exactly what you have told LAMMPS to do in your input.

please always remember: GI-GO.

axel.

>
> Thanks
> Best Regards,
> JIT
> ____________________________________________________
> Jit Sarkar (B.Tech)
> Junior Project Assistant & Research Scholar (MS)
> Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering
> Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur-721302, India
> Phone- +919476414445
> Email- jitsarkar1993@...24..., jit_mme@...2882...
>
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Axel Kohlmeyer <akohlmey@...24...> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Jit Sarkar <jitsarkar1993@...24...>
>> wrote:
>> > Dear Axel Sir,
>> >
>> > I am using the LAMMPS 2016 version. I did not got any error message
>> > regarding the potential. I have also used the same potential for some
>> > other
>> > simulations with graphene like tensile, bending, thermal etc. They also
>> > worked good without any error message.
>>
>> the error is not about the potential itself but your input. the fact
>> remains, that the input you posted, is incorrect (the pair_coeff line
>> is not the only error) and thus *cannot* have been used as you have
>> claimed. i have looked through the source code archive and the syntax
>> for the affected commands has remained the same for a long time.
>>
>> if you want to be taken seriously and get help from the people on this
>> mailing list, you better make certain, that the information you
>> provide is accurate and take concerns like those i was raising very
>> seriously.
>>
>> axel.
>>
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> > Best Regards,
>> > JIT
>> > ____________________________________________________
>> > Jit Sarkar (B.Tech)
>> > Junior Project Assistant & Research Scholar (MS)
>> > Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering
>> > Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur-721302, India
>> > Phone- +919476414445
>> > Email- jitsarkar1993@...24..., jit_mme@...2882...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Axel Kohlmeyer  akohlmey@...24...  http://goo.gl/1wk0
>> College of Science & Technology, Temple University, Philadelphia PA, USA
>> International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste. Italy.
>
>



-- 
Dr. Axel Kohlmeyer  akohlmey@...24...  http://goo.gl/1wk0
College of Science & Technology, Temple University, Philadelphia PA, USA
International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste. Italy.