Ivar KJELBERG
                                                                                                                                                    COMSOL Multiphysics(r) fan, retired, former "Senior Expert" at CSEM SA (CH)
                                                         
                            
                         
                                                
    
        Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
     
    
 
                                                Posted:
                            
                                1 decade ago                            
                            
                                2010/11/09 1:43 GMT-5                            
                        
                        
                                                    Hi
I would say it all depends what you are after ;)
The beam model solves quickly but is perhaps less instructive/demonstrative rather than a full 3D model. For a full 3D you could probably also consider 2D axi if you have a nice cylindrical symmetry, at least to start with (it solves quicker and allows to get a quick grasp of what is needed before attacking a full 3D model, which mostly solves much solver and is thereforefar more time consuming to fully debug from scratch).
mixing beam and solids are slightly triky, because 1) you must still dedouble the materials (have separate materials for 3D and for 2D) and the beam has rotation boundary conditions tha must be correctly linked to the 3D solid, that has NO rotary DoF's, so these must be defined first, locally
--
Good luck
Ivar                                                
                                                
                            Hi
I would say it all depends what you are after ;)
The beam model solves quickly but is perhaps less instructive/demonstrative rather than a full 3D model. For a full 3D you could probably also consider 2D axi if you have a nice cylindrical symmetry, at least to start with (it solves quicker and allows to get a quick grasp of what is needed before attacking a full 3D model, which mostly solves much solver and is thereforefar more time consuming to fully debug from scratch).
mixing beam and solids are slightly triky, because 1) you must still dedouble the materials (have separate materials for 3D and for 2D) and the beam has rotation boundary conditions tha must be correctly linked to the 3D solid, that has NO rotary DoF's, so these must be defined first, locally
--
Good luck
Ivar