几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量  


返回   几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量 » 三维空间:产品设计或CAX软件使用 » CAD设计 » 产品功能分析
用户名
密码
注册 帮助 会员 日历 银行 搜索 今日新帖 标记论坛为已读


回复
 
主题工具 搜索本主题 显示模式
旧 2009-09-15, 07:05 PM   #1
huangyhg
超级版主
 
huangyhg的头像
 
注册日期: 04-03
帖子: 18592
精华: 36
现金: 249466 标准币
资产: 1080358888 标准币
huangyhg 向着好的方向发展
默认 risa-3d and the pca design coefficients

risa-3d and the pca design coefficients
i am trying to compare results from the finite analysis program risa-3d to the plate coefficients in "rectangular concrete tanks" published by pca. all of the results from the risa run seems to be lower than those listed in the pca charts. does anyone have any suggestions about how to model the plate? i.e. how thick, mesh size etc.?
or has anyone else tried this exercise?
i have found that generally, finite element analyses tend to give lower results than other empirical methods. i am not familiar with the pca document you refer to but many handbooks on plate-type solutions tend to utilize approximate methods that give conservative results. also, you must be very careful in modeling with fe as they can be tricky. try using different mesh sizes (risa has a quick way of sub-dividing elements down to smaller elements). also, watch your boundary condition assumptions as this can also affect your results.
the fe results also assume a non-cracked section if you simply enter a constant thickness throughout your model. does the pca document indicate any assumptions as to cracking and loss of stiffness?
actually, the coefficients were developed using sap90. "results are provided from finite element analyses of two-dimensional plates subject to out-of-plane loads using sap90. convergence analysis was made to ensure the quality of the results." it goes on to say that the slab was assumed to act as a thin plate.
this is why i am concerned that i am not getting results closer to the coefficients listed in the pca charts.
i'm not familiar with the charts either but i gather that the pca chart coefficients were developed using sap 90. how much difference are we talking about...you are comparing two different numerical methods (fea)which use slightly different algorithms. i would not expect the results be be exact but would expect the results to be somewhat close. perhaps you should check out the element dimensions and refine your mesh.
__________________
借用达朗贝尔的名言:前进吧,你会得到信心!
[url="http://www.dimcax.com"]几何尺寸与公差标准[/url]
huangyhg离线中   回复时引用此帖
GDT自动化论坛(仅游客可见)
回复


主题工具 搜索本主题
搜索本主题:

高级搜索
显示模式

发帖规则
不可以发表新主题
不可以回复主题
不可以上传附件
不可以编辑您的帖子

vB 代码开启
[IMG]代码开启
HTML代码关闭



所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 07:08 PM.


于2004年创办,几何尺寸与公差论坛"致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T | GPS研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量"。免责声明:论坛严禁发布色情反动言论及有关违反国家法律法规内容!情节严重者提供其IP,并配合相关部门进行严厉查处,若內容有涉及侵权,请立即联系我们QQ:44671734。注:此论坛须管理员验证方可发帖。
沪ICP备06057009号-2
更多