I have been trying to do some comparison between shell and membrane analysis. When I have simple plate with quad4 elements and I try to use "CCX custom element type"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/98680/986801fbe3648c3018f30f8b6f05bb29adde2cc4" alt=""
i get the following error />
*ERROR reading *SHELL SECTION: *SHELL SECTION can only be used for shell or user elements. Element 1 is not a shell nor a user element.
*ERROR in calinput: at least one fatal error message while reading the input deck: CalculiX stops.
I have found a work around by redefining the elements and using the *MEMBRANE SECTION CARDS
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5c103/5c10319136e764addb82a9aa6350f771c5968a52" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8e014/8e0149f9fb4432dcc524022bd434020ba879212c" alt=""
. I think this them gets me what I after but it does feel like a bit of a work up. I am missing something here.? Do I need to do anything else to be sure I'm modelling membranes as close as possible?
I think the results show the trends I' am expecting but not as large a difference between shells and plates I was expecting. The online calculators I have found don't match up that well with either my shell or membrane results. Are there any reliable bench marks any one can recommend I take a look at
Comments
Having work thru many and arrived at the same answers there is one where I think there is a possible type - see attached. I think it may be a 100x50x25 mm plate -not 100x50x2.5. It would also tie in with the analytical solution I found
Be good t know if this is a typo or if I'm really doing something wrong!
If you want to test it you better compare using some Catenary example.
Thanks for pointing it out though