Hello
I performed a bending simulation of a beam embedded at both ends with a force in the center.
When I compare the results with the classic RDM formulas I find the same max constraint but I have a big difference on the arrow (see attached image).
Can you explain why? is it due to a warping of the C-shaped section?
Thanks in advance
This may be related to a difference in moment of inertia between calculation and simulation.
The calculation is more approximate as to the shape of the profile
I checked, we have the same moment of inertia.
Hello
First of all, when you do a finite element calculation (which I presume you do) you will discretize your structure into reference elements. Here I think Solid did it for you, moreover there are a multitude of types of elements and the calculation will depend on the type you have chosen.
Here you have an analytical result obtained by Bernouilli's theory for the calculation of beams (no warping of flat sections in bending). So if you don't use the elements that take this theory into account (B23: Bernouilli's elements) you will never find the analytical result (which by the way is based on a lot of hypotheses that have not yet been verified). If you then want to get closer to the most accurate result possible, you will have to refine your mesh.
Dimitri
Hello
If I understand correctly, the most important arrow in the result of the solidworks simulation is due to the fact that it takes into account the warping of the section while the result of the analytical calculation does not take it into account?
In addition, how can we change the type of element in solidworks to select the B23? Unless I'm mistaken, I can only select the volume elements, beams or shells.
Kind regards
Completely according to the elements selected by Solidwork, the calculation will take into account the warping of the section.
Personally, to make structural calculations I use Abaqus, from there I have a great deal of freedom in the choice of my elements. In your case I am not sure that you can choose particular elements in your case the choice of beam will be made for 1D structures; shell for 2D structures and finally volume for 3D structures.
After that, you should know that an analytical result remains an approximate result.
Dimitri
Hello
Visually, I wonder about the coherence of the model. In concrete terms, the deformed does not correspond to what it should be. Normally, you should have something parabolic and continuous. Whereas here, you have 2 parts that remain almost straight with a discontinuity in the center.
Is your modeling in beam elements? Is the junction between your 2 volume bodies really continuous?