optimum column/beam position

hello guys

i'm doing an experiment with GH and karamba to find the optimal of 3 column/beam position in a simple rectangle plan, the thing is it's getting wired results from the analysis of deformation like the follow pics, which the second seems more reasonable but still having a worse result compare to the first which have a rather wired positions..,which i'm using "mesh-load" from the square plan.

also with the 'mesh-load' component should i feed the inputs of 'mesh' and 'pos' with separate branches for let's say different levels, or should i flatten those inputs? cuz i tried with separate branches but the 'assemble' is not working accordingly!

and last question, as i use '-1' for the load case of gravity the deformation value didn't really change with or without gravity, is this a mistake i have with wrong definition of GH or any other reason?

i'll be glad to hear any response! thanks

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Rex T on November 4, 2011 at 10:46am

sorry for the missing GH definition!

Attachments:

column-beam position.gh, 18 KB

Permalink Reply by Robert Vier on November 6, 2011 at 9:01pm

Hey,

seems like you haven't defined more than the 6 beams - so 'mesh load' does not more than distributing the uniform load from the rectangle to the three nodes of the triangle.

you have to take the edge-lines of a rather fine mesh of the rectangle, and then either incorporate the nodes of your triangle somehow to those mesh edges+vertices (proximity?) or snap to the closest one of the vertices.

best

robert

Permalink Reply by Rex T on November 7, 2011 at 3:12pm

hello Robert

thanks so much for the reply!

i was thinking what you've mentioned about "incorporate the nodes of your triangle somehow to those mesh edges+vertices"

is it something like the tutorial file of Karamba named "BracingWalls" like the attched one? if so i suppose i could use the same connection as in the file with my rectangular mesh and triangular column/beam support?

i'd be glad to hear any discussion! thanks!

Attachments: