Reply to “Comment on ‘Flow of wet granular materials: A numerical study' ”

Reply to “Comment on ‘Flow of wet granular materials: A numerical study' ” In 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. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Physical Review E American Physical Society (APS)

Reply to “Comment on ‘Flow of wet granular materials: A numerical study' ”

Preview Only

Reply to “Comment on ‘Flow of wet granular materials: A numerical study' ”

Abstract

In 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.
Loading next page...
 
/lp/aps_physical/reply-to-comment-on-flow-of-wet-granular-materials-a-numerical-study-313zAM5ttQ
Publisher
The American Physical Society
Copyright
Copyright © ©2017 American Physical Society
ISSN
1539-3755
eISSN
550-2376
D.O.I.
10.1103/PhysRevE.96.016902
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

In 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.

Journal

Physical Review EAmerican Physical Society (APS)

Published: Jul 28, 2017

There are no references for this article.

Sorry, we don’t have permission to share this article on DeepDyve,
but here are related articles that you can start reading right now:

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Unlimited reading

Read as many articles as you need. Full articles with original layout, charts and figures. Read online, from anywhere.

Stay up to date

Keep up with your field with Personalized Recommendations and Follow Journals to get automatic updates.

Organize your research

It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

Monthly Plan

  • Read unlimited articles
  • Personalized recommendations
  • No expiration
  • Print 20 pages per month
  • 20% off on PDF purchases
  • Organize your research
  • Get updates on your journals and topic searches

$49/month

Start Free Trial

14-day Free Trial

Best Deal — 39% off

Annual Plan

  • All the features of the Professional Plan, but for 39% off!
  • Billed annually
  • No expiration
  • For the normal price of 10 articles elsewhere, you get one full year of unlimited access to articles.

$588

$360/year

billed annually
Start Free Trial

14-day Free Trial