Your deformation scale factor is 920. Mine with 920 is almost flat. ¿How is that possible.?
implementation of Surface spring and Compression only feature are based on theory of Beam on Elastic Foundation, the model rested on elastic spring. It’s a simplification of elastic contact analysis and some assumption or limitation apply.
When the support is at high or infinity in stiffness i.e contact with rigid plane, maybe there’s another story.
PrePoMax is good enough to displaying load and boundary symbol, legend and dimension also. So pictures is not just a picture i think.
Actually, the springs are defined by direction. If a spring is defined only in the x direction, the only elongation taken into account to compute the spring stiffness is the x displacement. This is how I understand the CaluliX documentation.
For such tests, it is good to use the Poisson ratio of 0.
Right. Legend shows you are solving the problem with different material.
You are absolutly right. I didn’t understood that correctly.
Thanks
below example added contact analysis with elastic base part and rigid ones. In my understanding, spring stiffness need to calculate based on supported bottom part. Still questionable in modeling of contact with rigid part by compression-only feature, even linear element seems capable.
elastic
rigid
It seems the beam’s edges are not deformed enough using the compression-only constraint. Did you try reducing the value of the Tensile Force?
Spring stiffness and Tensile forces in contact with rigid part case is left to default for both linear and quadratic element models
rigid
elastic
