Hi Auke
What I had in mind in the first place when suggesting GC was being able to model how the mechanisms you're proposing alter their shape, separately from consideration of actual loads and material properties
After that, as a second step, you could either export the geometry from your first (GC) models to a structural analysis program (maybe Diana, since that's what seems to be preferred by Andrew and Eliza) or perhaps some structural analysis could be programmed into the GC model, as for example your classmate Arjan is doing ... though I think that option may be too ambitious for the time available in this course.
In any event, yes, I think GC would be good at this stage for studying movement, since such a model would allow you to drive the deformation of the structure both by displacing nodes (which is essentially what happens when the structure reacts to external loads, passively) or by changing the lengths of elements (as in an active structure.)
Andre
ps I'll post this comment also to your blog, so that you have it all in one place.
pps Axel, let us know if you have any comments on this, please.
-----Original Message-----
From: Auke Verbraaken [mailto:xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thu 25/09/2008 16:42
To: Chaszar, A.T. Subject:
RE: SUA comment: 11386-080901
Hello Andre,
Thanks for your comment. It was my aim to indeed at least model one variant for Monday. Is GC the most suitable program to model the different variants? Is it easy to exchange a GC model to a program to test the performance, or is it possible to test the performance in GC itself?
Auke Verbraaken
No comments:
Post a Comment