The aim of this test case is to validate the following functions:
The simulation results of SimScale were compared to the numerical results presented in [NAFEMS]. In addition to the meshes described in [NAFEMS], the meshes used in (A) and (B) were set up using an automatically created tetrahedral mesh and a refined hexahedral mesh was used in (G).
Import validation project into workspace
| A | B | C | D | A’ | B’ | C’ | D’ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| x [m] | 0 | 0 | 3.25 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3.25 | 2 |
| y [m] | 1 | 2.75 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2.75 | 0 | 0 |
| z [m] | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
The point B’’ is located in the middle of edge BB’. The same applies to point C’’ and edge CC’.
(x3.25)2+(y2.75)2=1(1)
(x2)2+y2=1(2)
The gradient of edge BC is defined via equation (1)
and for the edge AD via equation (2)
.
Tool Type : Code_Aster
Analysis Type : Static (linear elastic)
Mesh and Element types :
| Case | Mesh type | Number of nodes | Element type |
|---|---|---|---|
| (A) | quadratic tetrahedral | 26761 | 3D isoparametric |
| (B) | quadratic tetrahedral | 174707 | 3D isoparametric |
| (C) | linear hexahedral | 36 | 3D isoparametric |
| (D) | quadratic hexahedral | 111 | 3D isoparametric |
| (E) | linear hexahedral | 105 | 3D isoparametric |
| (F) | quadratic hexahedral | 349 | 3D isoparametric |
| (G) | quadratic hexahedral | 52941 | 3D isoparametric |
Material:
= 0.3
Constraints:
Loads:
Comparison of the stress σYY
at point D obtained with SimScale and the results presented in [NAFEMS].
| Case | [NAFEMS] | SimScale | Error (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| (A) | 5.38 | 5.44473 | 1.20% |
| (B) | 5.38 | 5.39614 | 0.30% |
| (C) | 5.38 | 3.98345 | -25.96% |
| (D) | 5.38 | 5.47091 | 1.69% |
| (E) | 5.38 | 5.10811 | -5.05% |
| (F) | 5.38 | 5.71058 | 6.14% |
| (G) | 5.38 | 5.38599 | 0.11% |
| [NAFEMS] | (1, 2, 3, 4) (1987)”The Standard NAFEMS Benchmarks”, The international association for the engineering analysis community |
