SKJoe
Mechanical
- Jun 6, 2005
- 78
Hi,
I need to force some part of my model to have the same rotz and another part to have the same ux deformations in nolinear analyse.
problem 1 is that one node is common to both of these coupled sets. I tried to use CP/CERIG commands. CP/CERIG worked to force ux deformation, but didnt work to force rotz deformation.
problem 2 is that CP/CERIG commands work only with small deflection theory (maybe the reason why rotz was not the same). So are the results of nolinear analyse correct with use of CP/CERIG (they worked to force ux deformation as I wanted)commands ?
problem 3: I tried to use MPC184-beam, which can be used in nolinear analyse to have the same rotz. It worked applied alone, but didnt work with CP/CERIG in the same time (in the same time I need to have the same ux as well) - convergence difficulty occured.
Is there any way to apply these boundary conditions in nolinear analyse ?. Any suggestion are welcome. Model is too complicated can not by further simplified.
Regards,
Lubo
I need to force some part of my model to have the same rotz and another part to have the same ux deformations in nolinear analyse.
problem 1 is that one node is common to both of these coupled sets. I tried to use CP/CERIG commands. CP/CERIG worked to force ux deformation, but didnt work to force rotz deformation.
problem 2 is that CP/CERIG commands work only with small deflection theory (maybe the reason why rotz was not the same). So are the results of nolinear analyse correct with use of CP/CERIG (they worked to force ux deformation as I wanted)commands ?
problem 3: I tried to use MPC184-beam, which can be used in nolinear analyse to have the same rotz. It worked applied alone, but didnt work with CP/CERIG in the same time (in the same time I need to have the same ux as well) - convergence difficulty occured.
Is there any way to apply these boundary conditions in nolinear analyse ?. Any suggestion are welcome. Model is too complicated can not by further simplified.
Regards,
Lubo