Reply to “Comment on ‘Flow of wet granular materials: A numerical study' ”
AbstractIn his Comment on our paper [Phys. Rev. E 92, 022201 (2015)10.1103/PhysRevE.92.022201], Chareyre criticizes, as inaccurate, the simple approach we adopted to explain the strong enhancement of the quasistatic shear strength of the material caused by capillary cohesion. He also observes that a similar form of the “effective stress” approach, accounting for the capillary shear stress, which we neglected, results in a quantitatively correct prediction of this yield stress. We agree with these remarks, which we deem quite relevant and valuable. We nevertheless point out that the initial approximation, despite ∼25% errors on shear strength in the worst cases, provides a convenient estimate of the Mohr-Coulomb cohesion of the material, which is directly related to the coordination number. We argue that the effective stress assumption, despite its surprising success in the range of states explored in Khamseh et al. [Phys. Rev. E 92, 022201 (2015)10.1103/PhysRevE.92.022201], is bound to fail in strongly cohesion-dominated material states.