| Newsgroups |
gmane.comp.mathematics.abaqus.user |
| Message-ID |
<[email protected]> |
Dear Dave,
I am implementing a custom viscoelastic material using the UMAT subroutine in Abaqus/Standard. My question is that since I am using a UMAT does the Step type i.e., *VISCO vs *DYNAMIC IMPLICIT really cause an effect. If so, can you explain how; a pointer to some good resource will also do. I know that the *VISCO step wouldn't consider inertial effects. Apart from that is there any difference in the solution technique?
Thank You
Feby Abraham
Research Student
IIT Madras, Chennai
IN - 600036
---In [email protected], <ddlindeman1@...> wrote :
Are you running a quasi-static analysis (*VISCO) or a dynamic analysis (*DYNAMIC)? What is the source of the time-dependency (for example, are you using a viscoelastic material)? Dave Lindeman Lead Research Specialist SEMS Research Laboratory 3M Center 235-3G-08 St. Paul, MN 55144 651-733-6383 From: [email protected] mailto:[email protected] [mailto:[email protected] mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 8:10 PM To: [email protected] mailto:[email protected] Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Abaqus] Load controlled Quasi-Static analysis in ABAQUS/Standard using dynamic implicit Hi!, I am running a quasi-static analysis on a slender beam based on load control. I ran analyses with 1, 1.5, 2, and 10 secs. When the load rate is very less, that is 10 secs step time, the load displacement curve close to ultimate point is unacceptable. But, the load-displacement curve for all step times before ultimate point are all similar. Is there any particular load rate limit for Quasi-static analysis in Dynamic Implicit. Thank you. Best regards, Thananjayan