Documentation
This triaxial load primary creep validation case belongs to solid mechanics. This test case aims to validate the following parameters:
The simulation results of SimScale were compared to the analytical results derived from [NAFEMS_R27]
The geometry consists of a cube with an edge length
The coordinates for the points in the cube geometry are as tabulated below:
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | |
x | 0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0 |
y | 0 | 0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 | 0.1 | 0.1 |
z | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 |
Tool Type: Code Aster
Analysis Type: Nonlinear static
Mesh and Element Types: The mesh used in cases A and B was created using the standard algorithm within SimScale. The same mesh is used in both cases – the only difference between the runs is the element technology integration. Table 2 shows more details about the cases.
Case | Mesh Type | Number of Nodes | Element Type | Element Technology |
(A) | Standard | 235 | 2nd order tetrahedral | Standard |
(B) | Standard | 235 | 2nd order tetrahedral | Reduced integration |
Find below the mesh used for cases A and B. It’s a standard mesh with second-order tetrahedral cells.
Material:
Boundary Conditions:
Advanced Automatic Time Stepping:
The following advanced automatic time stepping settings were defined under simulation control:
The equations used to solve the problem are derived in [NAFEMS_R27]
Find below a comparison between SimScale’s results and the analytical solution presented in [NAFEMS_R27]
Case | [NAFEMS_R27] | SimScale | Error (%) |
(A) | 0.133380 | 0.133107 | -0.205 |
(B) | 0.133380 | 0.133107 | -0.205 |
In Figure 3, we can see how
Last updated: November 29th, 2023
We appreciate and value your feedback.
Sign up for SimScale
and start simulating now