Discussion Closed This discussion was created more than 6 months ago and has been closed. To start a new discussion with a link back to this one, click here.
Modelling Civil Engineering elements for a bigger project
Posted 2010年6月30日 GMT-4 10:47 2 Replies
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Hello Everyone.
I am a graduate student at Rutgers University, NJ. I have a bridge design that i need to analize for self load, traffic load and earthquake load. Hence the most obivious choice was to use Comsol.
The design of the bridge has a lot of custom plate girders that are not standard. hence I have to model these first in order to use them while modelling the entire bridge. Is there a way I can do this with comsol? in the sense design the elements seperately and then combine them to form a bridge model?
Thanks!!
Afaque
I am a graduate student at Rutgers University, NJ. I have a bridge design that i need to analize for self load, traffic load and earthquake load. Hence the most obivious choice was to use Comsol.
The design of the bridge has a lot of custom plate girders that are not standard. hence I have to model these first in order to use them while modelling the entire bridge. Is there a way I can do this with comsol? in the sense design the elements seperately and then combine them to form a bridge model?
Thanks!!
Afaque
2 Replies Last Post 2010年7月1日 GMT-4 12:42
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
1 decade ago
Hi
you have an interesting point there, I have too been looking for the best way to subdivide a complex problem into smaller chuncks and "just link" them together (something à la "super-elements" of another well established FEM tool).
Unfortunately I have not succeeded, yet. The simplest is to define several geometries and physics, or just the latter, but then you must carefully link them by hand and this becomes tedious when you have many (>3 for me) similar physics.
In some similarity, you need to have a "super-"assembly mode with "super-"identity pairs between the interface nodes readily made up for you but only between similar physics, not "within" one physics.
Try to ask support ...
Good luck
Ivar
you have an interesting point there, I have too been looking for the best way to subdivide a complex problem into smaller chuncks and "just link" them together (something à la "super-elements" of another well established FEM tool).
Unfortunately I have not succeeded, yet. The simplest is to define several geometries and physics, or just the latter, but then you must carefully link them by hand and this becomes tedious when you have many (>3 for me) similar physics.
In some similarity, you need to have a "super-"assembly mode with "super-"identity pairs between the interface nodes readily made up for you but only between similar physics, not "within" one physics.
Try to ask support ...
Good luck
Ivar
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
1 decade ago
Thank you for your reply.
I am trying to model all the elements into the same project and then carefully place it at the required nodes. This is not really too tough if an appropriate scale for the x and y axes is choosen.
I have another question. The bridge deck is made of reinforced concrete. How do you suggest I model the deck as it has smaller reinforcement bars embedded in the deck? The total lenght of the bridge is 500ft. Thats a lot of reinforcement. I wonder how professionals actually model such huge structures for their projects.
Afaque
I am trying to model all the elements into the same project and then carefully place it at the required nodes. This is not really too tough if an appropriate scale for the x and y axes is choosen.
I have another question. The bridge deck is made of reinforced concrete. How do you suggest I model the deck as it has smaller reinforcement bars embedded in the deck? The total lenght of the bridge is 500ft. Thats a lot of reinforcement. I wonder how professionals actually model such huge structures for their projects.
Afaque