Strain recovery coupling with beam analysis #110
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The coordinate system that the
strain_recoverymethod assumes the input loading is in is not the same as the local beam coordinate system. This update adds a keyword argumentgxbeam_order(similar to thecompliance_matrixmethod) that , if true, updates the input loading to the correct coordiante system and then outputs beam stresses and strains in the GXBeam local frame. If it isfalsenothing is changed from before. I added an additional test for this.In the future it would be good to add an example of this to the docs, as currently none of the examples couple the output of the beam analysis with strain recovery; the loads are explicitly defined.