Solidthinking inspire surface with zero thickness

#Solidthinking inspire surface with zero thickness manual#
#Solidthinking inspire surface with zero thickness software#

You say, in order to check your words, I just need to 'take a plane element'.

You have given an example from ANSYS (BTW, I use ANSYS as well) and it is clear in that case what thickness is and what is done with the load (simply an average value over the thickness is given - that's ok). I understood your answer completely, and I agree with it when it is dealt with planes or shells. This is why I asked: what is the meaning of 'thickness' in this case? This is why I emphasized this word.

So, it is clear what thickness is, and I refer to them as 2D bodies, since the formulation is mainly 2D (of course there are also 3D formulations for those bodies, but this is not the issue here).Р”В«ut when I said '3D models (solids)', I meant a 3D body on which you can not make such a distinction any more! So, there is no dimension of the body which you can denote as 'thickness' (e.g. However, planes and shells have one dimension significantly smaller than other two and this one we call thickness. You are right when you say that all bodies are actually 3D bodies, hence shells and plates as well. If I understand you correctly, this is what you refer to all the time - planes, shells. They are used in formulations of shells and planes. Well, as I have said it, I am familiar with plane strain and plain stress formulations. Then apply a load 10 times as high for a plane stress with thickness element (thickness = 10) and see whether you get the same result.Р”Р„lso, it helps to keep in mind that all bodies in solid mechanics are 3D whatever assumptions you might make.Р”Р‡inally, a google search on your question leads me to a post pn OSdir which says essentially what I thought was going on.

To check that this is indeed the case, all you have to do is take a plane element, apply a small load to it, and compute the displacements. If you define a thickness of 0.1, the applied force is assumed to be the total force and the actual force used in the analysis is f/0.1 (according to the manual). There is no equivalent thing for plane strain in ANSYS - only a generalized plane strain option.

#Solidthinking inspire surface with zero thickness manual#

You should take your question there and also look at the user manual for the particular definition that Abaqus uses.Р”Р„s I said in my previous reply, in ANSYS, the default value of 1 for the thickness indicates that the nodal forces are specified in units of force per unit length (for plane stress).

#Solidthinking inspire surface with zero thickness software#

However, people who do have access to the software post regularly on the Abaqus Yahoo Group or at. Since Abaqus is an expensive piece of software, many of us on iMechanica do not have access to it. I'm sorry that I wasn't able to answer your question to your satisfaction. Indeed, that's what I was trying to address in my answer (see for instance the figure at the end of my reply). ' Please, pay attantion to the word 'thickness' at the end'. I guess I'd knew that, if I knew the meaning of 'plane stress/strain thickness'?Р”Р„nyway, thanks for your answer, at least you gave some answer. I am also asking myself, what would it mean if I would define 0.1, or 10 instead of 1. In different tutorials you can only read to accept the default value of 1, without any further explanation what it means. Hence, what is the meaning in that case? What ever it is, it is related to 3D models, and the answers should take that aspect into account. One ('plane stress/strain thickness') is required when the section forР”Р€D models (solids) is defined. Those formulations also require to define the thickness (e.g. Both the plane strain and plane stress formulations are used in 2D formulations - planes, shells, where 3D field is reduced to a 2D field. Please, pay attantion to the word 'thickness' at the end. But, as you can see above, we have the sintagm 'plane stress/strain thickness', which is not the same one, only somewhat similar. I am very well familiar with terms plane stress and plane strain. I already knew the information contained in your answer but I think this is not was I was looking for.