<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title><![CDATA[Cervenka Consulting Forums — Wrongly reported reactions]]></title>
		<link>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?id=1809</link>
		<atom:link href="https://forums.cervenka.cz:80/extern.php?action=feed&amp;tid=1809&amp;type=rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<description><![CDATA[The most recent posts in Wrongly reported reactions.]]></description>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2015 09:43:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>PunBB</generator>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Wrongly reported reactions]]></title>
			<link>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=3361#p3361</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Thanks a lot for your reply. Actually I found out that I can include an isolated node inside a macroelement and apply loading, provided that meshing crosses this extra node. </p><p>However, the above can&#039;t be done if you want to apply loading or restraints on a line contained in the middle of a macroelement, without losing the ability to mesh with bricks. The only solution in that case is to split the macroelement in two distinct ones. </p><p>I will send you some models that yield different reactions when loading is applied on differ points between macroelements</p><p>Thanks a lot again</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (vpapanik)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2015 09:43:36 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=3361#p3361</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Wrongly reported reactions]]></title>
			<link>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=3360#p3360</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Hello, it is generally NOT recommended to do this - what is your reason for dividing the loaded element into multiple volumes/macroelements? </p><p>The typical problematic results are (were?) that you get 0 in your monitor because the load gets effectively applied to an-/some other of the 2 (or more) identical joints. If you suspect your reaction gets split between/among the identical joints, please send us your model such that we can check it and/or recommend a solution.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (dpryl)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2015 09:21:56 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=3360#p3360</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Wrongly reported reactions]]></title>
			<link>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=3358#p3358</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Hello ! Just a quick note to make sure if I correctly understood paragraph 2.1.18 of the troubleshooting manual.</p><p>I am applying a prescribed displacement on a joint that belongs to 2 adjacent macroelements (ATENA 3D Engineering v.5.1.2d.11514) and I am monitoring the reaction force on the same macroelement where that displacement is applied.</p><p>Is it possible that a fraction of the total reaction is lost to the adjacent macroelement ? I have the impression that I should put monitors to both macroelements in order to sum up the correct reaction value. Is that true ?</p><p>I am asking because I am not sure about the word &#039;region&#039; in the troubleshooting manual (instead of &#039;macroelement&#039;). Moreover it says that this issue is fixed already in a very old version (1.2.2).</p><p>Thanks a very lot in advance.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (vpapanik)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2015 18:53:40 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=3358#p3358</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
