Menu

Discussion Forum

New Discussion
Filtrer

Note: This discussion is about an older version of the COMSOL Multiphysics® software. The information provided may be out of date.

Discussion Closed This discussion was created more than 6 months ago and has been closed. To start a new discussion with a link back to this one, click here.

Couple 2D shell and 1D beam

Posted 2 août 2011, 03:11 UTC−4 Geometry, Modeling Tools & Definitions, Parameters, Variables, & Functions, Structural Mechanics Version 4.2 4 Replies

Hee Jun Shin
Send Private Message Flag post as spam

Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam

Hi

Hi. I'm curious to know how to couple 1D beam and 2D shell. I want to link these on a point which located in a same position geometrically. I heard that if points from shell and beam is located in a same point these are connected automatically. However, as you see from attached JPG file, beam and shell are not copuled and worked separately. Then, I used 'union', but it doesn't work either. So my question is the how to couple 1D beam and 2D shell.

..........................................._________________
1D beam ---------------- o |........2D shell...............|
...........................................------------------------------
.......................................^ point location


Thanks a lot.

Hee Jun Shin

Attachments:

4 Replies Last Post 6 nov. 2011, 07:36 UTC−5
Nagi Elabbasi Facebook Reality Labs
Send Private Message Flag post as spam

Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam

Posted: 1 decade ago 2 août 2011, 22:23 UTC−4
Check out the response to a similar discussion involving beams and trusses: www.comsol.asia/community/forums/general/thread/20197/

Nagi Elabbasi
Veryst Engineering
Check out the response to a similar discussion involving beams and trusses: http://www.comsol.asia/community/forums/general/thread/20197/ Nagi Elabbasi Veryst Engineering
Hee Jun Shin
Send Private Message Flag post as spam

Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam

Posted: 1 decade ago 3 août 2011, 00:00 UTC−4
Dear Nagi Elabbasi

Appreciate for the answer. I checked the link, then I solve the problem with the answer.
I have another one. How about cantilever beam case like the picture attached?
Actually, I need a help of this case. Previous one is about simply supported beam, but this case is cantilever beam.
I changed u2 to u. It works in simply supported beam case, but it doesn't work in cantilever beam.
Do i have to apply some ohter things like union or definitions?

Best regards,
Hee Jun Shin
Dear Nagi Elabbasi Appreciate for the answer. I checked the link, then I solve the problem with the answer. I have another one. How about cantilever beam case like the picture attached? Actually, I need a help of this case. Previous one is about simply supported beam, but this case is cantilever beam. I changed u2 to u. It works in simply supported beam case, but it doesn't work in cantilever beam. Do i have to apply some ohter things like union or definitions? Best regards, Hee Jun Shin

Attachments:

Nagi Elabbasi Facebook Reality Labs
Send Private Message Flag post as spam

Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam

Posted: 1 decade ago 4 août 2011, 00:08 UTC−4
That is not as easy as displacements since beams use the rotation vector (thx,thy,thz) as dependent variables and shells use the normal displacement field (arx,ary,arz) according to the manuals. One way to work around this is to prescribe the beam rotations at the interface point to be a function of the shell’s normal displacement field at the same point (through a Model Coupling operator). I have not tried that before though, and it should only work in linear analysis.

Nagi Elabbasi
Veryst Engineering
That is not as easy as displacements since beams use the rotation vector (thx,thy,thz) as dependent variables and shells use the normal displacement field (arx,ary,arz) according to the manuals. One way to work around this is to prescribe the beam rotations at the interface point to be a function of the shell’s normal displacement field at the same point (through a Model Coupling operator). I have not tried that before though, and it should only work in linear analysis. Nagi Elabbasi Veryst Engineering
Shen Cheng
Send Private Message Flag post as spam

Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam

Posted: 1 decade ago 6 nov. 2011, 07:36 UTC−5
I have a question that whether modal analysis belong to the linear analysis, so then I can use this method of coupling. Thanks very much.
I have a question that whether modal analysis belong to the linear analysis, so then I can use this method of coupling. Thanks very much.

Note that while COMSOL employees may participate in the discussion forum, COMSOL® software users who are on-subscription should submit their questions via the Support Center for a more comprehensive response from the Technical Support team.

Suggested Content