Matching shells to their force values

Hello,

I am conducting studies of masonry walls, and I appreciate very much one of latest Karamba improvements that lets you know section force values in shells.

However, I'd like to put it grafically, so I need to match the list of first and second in-plane principal force to their position in the mesh.

I don't know how to do it, because I tried extracting the faces from the mesh separately but I don't think they match the values from the Shell Forces component.

Any suggestion?

Ramon

Attachments:

Mesh forces and shells.jpg, 368 KB

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Karamba3D on February 27, 2014 at 12:42pm

Hello Ramon,

in Karamba 1.0.5 there is the 'Principal Force Directions on Shells'-component: Along with the principal force directions it gives you the position of the corresponding element centers. The order of results is the same as that of the 'Shell Forces'-component.

Best,

Clemens

Permalink Reply by Ramon Casas on March 3, 2014 at 4:53am

Ok, many thanks for your response, it works perfectly.

Yet, here comes my next question... is there any way to obtain stresses in shells in a numerical way, correlated to their position, like with forces?

Thanks again,

Ramon

Permalink Reply by Ramon Casas on March 3, 2014 at 8:27am

Oh, I guess it can be done with the Principal Stress Directions On Shells Component. Am I right?

Permalink Reply by Karamba3D on March 3, 2014 at 11:27am

Yes, the length of the vectors corresponds to the absolute stress value. It is not possible however to get the sign of the stresses - for this one would need a numeric output. Best, C.

Permalink Reply by Ramon Casas on March 6, 2014 at 2:17am

Ok, now I can visualize the vectors over the mesh, I detect something that makes me doubts about the result.

Ples correct me if I am wrong: the fact that this mesh is triangulated causes that contiguous triangles, that formed part of one rectangle in the mesh, now get opposite forces. Maybe because they are in an asymmetric disposition, and equilibrium should be achieved.

Is there a way to overcome it? Could Karamba process calculations without a triangular partition of the mesh? Or, otherwise, should I pre-process the mesh in some way to get more favourable triangles?

Ramon