You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Active topics Unanswered topics
Forum updated
We have recently updated our forums system, and we have cleared all spam topics and users. In case we accidentally deleted your account, please register again. If you miss a topic you have posted before, please let us know.
Post new reply
Post new reply
Compose and post your new reply
You may use: BBCode Smilies
All fields with bold label must be completed before the form is submitted.
Topic review (newest first)
Dear mqambar,
please follow ATENA Troubleshooting, 2.1.1 to send us your model etc., such that we can check.
Above all, it is not clear from your post:
1. If there is mesh compatiblity set at the internal contacts?
2. If there are no Interface (GAP) elements?
3. How large are the convergence errors (see also Troubleshooting, 2.4.2 I get the message "The execution is killed due to violation of stop iteration criteria", what does it mean? and 2.1.19 Problems reaching convergence and understanding ATENA convergence parameters)?
Regards.
My nodes are all aligned along the interface between the three macro-elements as well. I've attached a picture to show what I mean:
https://imgur.com/a/K4eoCP9
Hello,
I am trying to model a beam with a notch (or a dapped end beam) and I'm modelling it as three separate macro-elements:
One macro-element for the section above the notch, one macro-element adjacent to that macro-element, and then one macro-element beneath that one. However, when analyzing the beam then viewing the principal strains in the post-processor, the strain appears to be discontinuous between the macro-elements as opposed to flowing continuously between them. For example, right at the interface of the two macro-elements, macro-element 1 might have a strain of -0.002, but macro-element 2 might have a strain closer to 0.
The contact is set to perfect connection between the macro-elements. Is there a specific reason this is happening?
Thank you!
