beam_solid_bar_slip

ssimon
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2024 7:55 am

Re: beam_solid_bar_slip

Post by ssimon » Sun Dec 15, 2024 10:48 am

Forgot one important thing: do I need to add a factor when entering seismic waves? In other words, if I enter a ground motion peak of 0.3g, it is not as long as it is consistent with the peak value displayed in the function plot in the timeseries.

STKO Team
Posts: 2924
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:45 am

Re: beam_solid_bar_slip

Post by STKO Team » Mon Dec 16, 2024 9:52 am

would you mind to recommend me a related link? Learning videos or examples on adding ground motion, adding a uniform excitation mode, and ASDAbsorbingBoundary?
https://asdea.eu/software/advanced-e-learning-courses/

I have questions, if the model built with FF and LK is the model I built correct or the deformation is too large so that I can't find out where is the erorr?
I opened the model I noticed some inconsistencies( no mass density in the soil elastic material, not sure if you computed correctly the LK coefficients, missing fixities in the FF columns). Please review carefully your model

By the way, If we use ASDAbsorbingBoundary , is it possible to analyze the soil model with FluidSolidPorousMaterial?
Currently the ASDAbsorbingBoundary work for elastic materials, but we are under beta testing for any other material. In the meantime you can use the manual approach of FF + LK

Forgot one important thing: do I need to add a factor when entering seismic waves? In other words, if I enter a ground motion peak of 0.3g, it is not as long as it is consistent with the peak value displayed in the function plot in the timeseries.
I didn't understand your question. Anyway, you have to be consistent with your unit system

ssimon
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2024 7:55 am

Re: beam_solid_bar_slip

Post by ssimon » Wed Dec 18, 2024 12:24 pm

Thank you for taking the time to reply to me! I would like to construct a three-dimensional seismic tunnel-soil model. Is it appropriate for me to only establish the FF columns on both sides? Do you have any better methods or suggestions for the model? I watched the SSI webinar and noticed that the input timeseries is in velocity form, but I am inputting the timeseries in acceleration form. What should I pay attention to regarding the calculation or input of the damping coefficient? :D

STKO Team
Posts: 2924
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:45 am

Re: beam_solid_bar_slip

Post by STKO Team » Fri Dec 20, 2024 9:10 am

Is it appropriate for me to only establish the FF columns on both sides?
Only FF are fine if you do not expect the waves to reflect towards the vertical boundaries, otherwise you can use absorbing boundaries
I watched the SSI webinar and noticed that the input timeseries is in velocity form, but I am inputting the timeseries in acceleration form
If you want absorbing boundaries at the bottom you need the velocity

ssimon
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2024 7:55 am

Re: beam_solid_bar_slip

Post by ssimon » Mon Dec 23, 2024 3:04 am

thanks for the reply, I have one more question, which is about the place where the soil and the structure are in contact with each other, in fact it is compressed and not tensioned, my model uses zeroLengthContactASDimplex, but after running it it is found that there is a relative displacement between the structure and the soil, can you teach me how to do it?Figure 1 shows the unit parameters I set
Attachments
116ec717e9c5ab6a222ea27be60a7bf.png
116ec717e9c5ab6a222ea27be60a7bf.png (22.89 KiB) Viewed 3177 times
2befed25364207543ecc0bb79703e63.png
2befed25364207543ecc0bb79703e63.png (25.69 KiB) Viewed 3177 times

STKO Team
Posts: 2924
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:45 am

Re: beam_solid_bar_slip

Post by STKO Team » Thu Jan 02, 2025 5:44 pm

You set a very soft normal stiffness (Kn = 1).
This contact element uses the penalty approach to enforce the non-penetration constraint. The penalty stiffness should be a high value (in theory infinity, but you can't numerically set an infinite number, so you can choose a stiffness penalty value that is higher than your typical stiffness)

ssimon
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2024 7:55 am

Re: beam_solid_bar_slip

Post by ssimon » Tue Jan 07, 2025 6:09 am

Thank you for your reply, but I noticed that there was still a gap , and including the stretching behavior
Attachments
5035992339ad0cba8428102e7e8abc5.png
5035992339ad0cba8428102e7e8abc5.png (140.77 KiB) Viewed 3022 times

STKO Team
Posts: 2924
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:45 am

Re: beam_solid_bar_slip

Post by STKO Team » Thu Jan 09, 2025 11:43 am

The gap opening is normal... a contact element only enforces non-penetration, while separation is allowed

Post Reply