In this tutorial, we will look into simulating a 2D shell beam in Salome-Meca.
What you will learn here:
– How to Create a 2D beam model
– How to set correctly Code_Aster for simulating 2D shell
– How to post process results and get stress on the thickness
If you want to know how to simulate a 1D Beam model, watch this video tutorial:
I tried to make the analysis quick to show the most important points first, but in case you see something to improve, please do not hesitate to leave a comment!
–Cyprien
This tutorial is quite interesting. In past I often used shell modelling also for beam frames, in mechanics, but 1d modelling is in any case preferable for large frame models. I am practicing on frames, in Salome Meca is not very simple manage 1d elements: just only to see sections and their orientation is for me something still to be unerstood, even if now I ackieved a good practice in 3d and 2d modelling.
totally agree with you about that ;-) Vizualizing the section is fundamental…
https://www.code-aster.org/forum2/viewtopic.php?id=23485
https://www.code-aster.org/forum2/viewtopic.php?id=21143
These might be helpful for 1d elements but had no time to try them.
Thanks for this tutorial, very very useful. I have a doubt. When I run an analysis and then I close software, what is the correct steps to reopen the results file? I ask you this since I am not able to reopen results sometimes, and I have to restart from the beginning.
Thanks again.
Good question… sometimes Salome-Meca can be unstable, it happened to me too, especially on Windows. That’s one of the drawbacks of open-source FEA unfortunately… My advice would be to save regularly your model in a new hdf file and to keep some backup. You can also regularly export your mesh and your command file to make sure you can rebuild quickly your model in case of problem.
Thanks for your answer. The solution I’ve just found is to save a new hdf file before running analysis and then I can run analysis.
Thanks again
First of all, thanks for the videos. I should say they are, by now, my entrance to Code Aster’s world.
I have been doing your example, and now I’m trying to reproduce it.
Until minute 32.30, I have something like you (tension -SIEQ_ELNO- graphic is very ugly in Paravis, no smooth done); but when I add the CARA_ELEM in IMPR_RESU (the same as you in minute 32’30”) when I activate Paravis, in «Properties» window nothing is seen (no CHAMP, in fact, the rectangle is empty white).
The COMM file includes
B2D_resL = MECA_STATIQUE(CARA_ELEM=elemprop,CHAM_MATER=MatCam_L,
EXCIT=(_F(CHARGE=BC_Suppo), _F(CHARGE=BC_F1)),
MODELE=B2D_Mode)
B2D_CamL = CALC_CHAMP(
CONTRAINTE=(‘SIEF_ELGA’,’SIEF_ELNO’,’EFGE_ELGA’,’SIGM_ELGA’, ‘SIGM_ELNO’),
CRITERES=(‘SIEQ_ELGA’, ‘SIEQ_ELNO’),
DEFORMATION=(‘DEGE_ELGA’, ‘DEGE_ELNO’),
RESULTAT=B2D_resL)
IMPR_RESU(FORMAT=’MED’,RESU=(_F(RESULTAT=B2D_resL), _F(CARA_ELEM=elemprop, RESULTAT=B2D_CamL)), UNITE=80)
Do you know what can be happening?
Thanks in advance.
Very difficult to say… If you followed exactly what I did in the video, it should work! Maybe you are using the windows version and this feature is not working well on the windows Salome-Meca Package? Can’t say much more without looking at the model.
Hi Cyprien,
Thanks for tutorials. When i try to prepare model, I get unexpected error message. In aster study section when i push the top face in modify mesh (ORIE_PEAU_3D>Group of element), I get the below error message. Why did this happen? Thanks advanced
Note: I wrote at codeaster forum. the link is https://code-aster.org/forum2/viewtopic.php?id=24288
Traceback:
File “D:\S_m\sm-2018-w64-0-3\MODULES\ASTERSTUDY\RELEASE\ASTERSTUDY_INSTALL\lib\python2.7\site-packages\asterstudy\gui\meshview\view.py”, line 404, in undisplayMeshGroup
sobject = self.find_group_by_name(meshfile, meshname, group, grtype)
File “D:\S_m\sm-2018-w64-0-3\MODULES\ASTERSTUDY\RELEASE\ASTERSTUDY_INSTALL\lib\python2.7\site-packages\asterstudy\gui\meshview\view.py”, line 487, in find_group_by_name
typ = child.GetObject().GetType()
Thank you very much for the tutorial Cyprien, your time and effort is much appreciated
Regards,
Great tutorial Cyprien,
does it make any sense trying to generate the 3D model of a I-beam to run a full 3D simulation? Is it just an additional computational effort, compared to the approach you exposed here?
Neverthless I think that a detailed comparison of 1D vs 2D vs 3D approach can be useful for a student that is new to FEA to understand when a more sophisticated model is actually required
You can do it as an exercise Rocco, but in practice it’s an overkill. Structural software generally use only 1D elements for beams. If you want to study the details, you can make a 2D model and if you want to study more in depth model such as steel connections, then you really need to make a 3D model.