Skip to main content

Blog posts

The Fundamental Physical Bases of the WR Approach (and, Consequently, of FEM) in General

Submitted by Ajit R. Jadhav on
FEM
physics
Weighted Residual
WR
physical bases

It has been quite some time (more than 1.5 years) that I had touched upon the topic of the physical bases of FEM in general, and of the general weighted residual (WR) approach in particular, at iMechanica (see here).

The position I then took was that there is no known physical basis at all for the WR approach---despite its loving portrayals in mathematical terms, or its popularity.

Composite Beams

Submitted by Vishal on

I am working on FE Modelling of Composite hollow rectangular section beam in Ansys. When I select beam 188 element, there is no need of inputting real constants. Where do i put the initial values in pre-processing????Pls do help me,,I am new to applying Composite material in Ansys.....pls...

Why do we often use Jaumann rate instead of Truesdell rate?

Submitted by Rong Tian on
opinion

In the attachment, we show that Truesdell rate can by simplified to Green-Naghdi rate by assuming F .=. R and can be further simplified to Jaumann rate by assuming W .=. R(.)R(T), where .=. means approximately equal

In a stretch dominant deformation, the three rates give different stress rate. This is usually explained by that we need a different tangential modulus for different objective rate. However, it is hard to understand why we need to change "material" modulus when we use a different "mathematical" form of objective rate as they are all supposed to be equivalent.

Subscribe to Drupal blog posts