Cquad4 vs Cquadr's

[cyt4]

I have been trying to reason why one should choose one element over the other(pros vs cons). It seems to me that CQUAD4 in Nastran is an half-assed attempt to have a proper shell element as you have to specify the 6th degree of rotation artificially with the K6rot term,whereas Cquadr seems like a more complete element formulation, being less sensitive to mesh sizes and quality.
It seems to me that most of the aerospace companies are choosing one over the other without actually thinking the repercussions of one element over the other in the global/local models.Any insights on why you might choose CQUADs over reduced integration elements?

 

[rb1957]

hadn't heard of CQUADR before. is it MSC NASTRAN ? NEI NASTRAN ??

CQUAD4s (with their, yes, flaky R6 issue) have been the default since before ... well forever.

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

 

[cyt4]

I think all of the Nastrans include those reduced integration elements(Nx,nei,Msc).