Difference between revisions of "Talk:Composite analysis"

From CAELinuxWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:
  
 
Is this information in other wiki?
 
Is this information in other wiki?
 +
 +
-----
  
 
Well maybe you should kick it off with an example and others can tune in with improvements
 
Well maybe you should kick it off with an example and others can tune in with improvements
  
 
/C
 
/C
 +
 +
-----
 +
 +
Element size seems reasonable, if the results appears strange later on, it's just a matter of using code_aster to convert it to quadratic elements - but I'm no expert.
 +
 +
Well as you say; units matter, but I would prefer [m] in this case for some reason :)
 +
 +
/C
 +
 +
-----
 +
 +
Thanks. It's nice to hear a voice with comments.
 +
 +
----
 +
 +
Hi, I suggest that you use quadratic/second order FE elements for your analysis, they usually give you the best accuracy.
 +
 +
If the shell in thin (span to thickness ration > 30) and relativelly flat Kirchoff plate element formulation should work fine (no transverse shear deformation) => elements called DKT in Code-Aster.
 +
 +
If the shell is thicker (span / thickness ration between 15 and 30) but curvature is negligible, the First order Shear Deformation Theory (FSDT) is recommended as it allows for transverse shear deformability => it is the DST FE formulation in Code-Aster (use ~0.8333 as shear correction factor for a better accuracy).
 +
 +
If the shell is thick and significantly curved, a real 3D shell formulation is required; in Code-Aster, these elements are called Coque3D.
 +
 +
To see an "old" example of a composite shell analysis, you can have a look at this archive: http://www.caelinux.com/downloads/examples/modal.tar.gz
 +
 +
Joël Cugnoni

Latest revision as of 14:12, 31 March 2009

130 visitors and 0 contributions

Do you think that this is a good idea (comosite analysis wiki)?

Is this information in other wiki?


Well maybe you should kick it off with an example and others can tune in with improvements

/C


Element size seems reasonable, if the results appears strange later on, it's just a matter of using code_aster to convert it to quadratic elements - but I'm no expert.

Well as you say; units matter, but I would prefer [m] in this case for some reason :)

/C


Thanks. It's nice to hear a voice with comments.


Hi, I suggest that you use quadratic/second order FE elements for your analysis, they usually give you the best accuracy.

If the shell in thin (span to thickness ration > 30) and relativelly flat Kirchoff plate element formulation should work fine (no transverse shear deformation) => elements called DKT in Code-Aster.

If the shell is thicker (span / thickness ration between 15 and 30) but curvature is negligible, the First order Shear Deformation Theory (FSDT) is recommended as it allows for transverse shear deformability => it is the DST FE formulation in Code-Aster (use ~0.8333 as shear correction factor for a better accuracy).

If the shell is thick and significantly curved, a real 3D shell formulation is required; in Code-Aster, these elements are called Coque3D.

To see an "old" example of a composite shell analysis, you can have a look at this archive: http://www.caelinux.com/downloads/examples/modal.tar.gz

Joël Cugnoni