# Support for beam elements **URL:** \ **Category:** Feature Requests\ **Created:** [October 2, 2023, 4:37pm UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/support-for-beam-elements/1142 "2023-10-02T16:37:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![lucas\_bueno](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/prepomax.discourse.group/lucas_bueno/32/1168_2.png) [@lucas\_bueno](https://prepomax.discourse.group/u/lucas_bueno)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2023, 4:37pm UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/support-for-beam-elements/1142/1 "2023-10-02T16:37:23Z")
Hello everyone. I want to ask for the support of beam elements in the PrePoMax software. Even though CalculiX has some bugs regarding 1D elements (with many being corrected in the last release), it is pretty helpful to have them for slender structures modeling alongside shells. I work on a daily basis with beams and I would appreciate a lot if they could be implemented in this amazing software. Best regards, Lucas ---
**Author:** ![FEAnalyst](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/prepomax.discourse.group/feanalyst/32/688_2.png) [@FEAnalyst](https://prepomax.discourse.group/u/FEAnalyst)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2023, 4:57pm UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/support-for-beam-elements/1142/2 "2023-10-02T16:57:19Z")
They are surely planned to be added in the future. For now, you can use them in the FreeCAD FEM workbench. More about beams in PrePoMax: [UNV import to support line element (beam)](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/unv-import-to-support-line-element-beam/62) ---
**Author:** ![synt](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/prepomax.discourse.group/synt/32/4658_2.png) [@synt](https://prepomax.discourse.group/u/synt)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2023, 9:19pm UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/support-for-beam-elements/1142/3 "2023-10-02T21:19:42Z")
indeed, beam element in CalculiX only have several shapes but advanced (contact and nonlinearity material/geometry, static & dynamics, stability) and one general section is limited in capabilities (linear static only). Possible beam element shape and type to be implemented in PrePoMax are: - rectangle - circle - pipe - box - user (general) - composed (experimental) the last type is composed have [problems](https://calculix.discourse.group/t/b32-beam-elements/1398/19?u=xyont) in section force output, but working normally in previous versions. it has disadvantages in over stiffening the model, but can be acceptable in case of slender (long) beam. Also, stiffness modification based on modulus of elasticity can be adjusted by reduction to comply. > [@FEAnalyst](#): > > More about beams in PrePoMax probably, meshing of 1D element is better to do internally in PrePoMax, so a selection and grouping based on shape is easier to manage. ---
**Author:** ![lucas\_bueno](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/prepomax.discourse.group/lucas_bueno/32/1168_2.png) [@lucas\_bueno](https://prepomax.discourse.group/u/lucas_bueno)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2023, 12:41am UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/support-for-beam-elements/1142/4 "2023-10-03T00:41:18Z")
Do you know if this problem described in the thread you’ve posted still occurs in CCX 2.21? I would like to investigate this a little more when I have time. ---
**Author:** ![synt](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/prepomax.discourse.group/synt/32/4658_2.png) [@synt](https://prepomax.discourse.group/u/synt)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2023, 3:39am UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/support-for-beam-elements/1142/5 "2023-10-03T03:39:30Z")
i’m seek previous version of CalculiX which known to be working, and lost. but i’ts not a problem in 3D stress output. to know work around of composed beam, it can be found on official test files named `beamcom.inp` i copied below, ```auto ** ** Structure: cantilever beam. ** Test objective: B32 elements, composite beam. ** *NODE, NSET=Nall 1, -1.49012e-08, 0.00000e+00, 0.00000e+00 2, 1.00000e+00, 0.00000e+00, 0.00000e+00 3, 5.00000e-01, 0.00000e+00, 0.00000e+00 4, 2.00000e+00, 0.00000e+00, 0.00000e+00 5, 1.50000e+00, 0.00000e+00, 0.00000e+00 *ELEMENT, TYPE=B32R, ELSET=Eall 1, 1, 3, 2 2, 2, 5, 4 3, 1, 3, 2 4, 2, 5, 4 *BOUNDARY 1,1,6 *MATERIAL,NAME=EL1 *ELASTIC 210000.,.3 *MATERIAL,NAME=EL2 *ELASTIC 110000.,.3 *ELSET,ELSET=SET1 1,2 *ELSET,ELSET=SET2 3,4 *BEAM SECTION,ELSET=SET1,MATERIAL=EL1,SECTION=RECT,OFFSET2=-.5 0.05, 0.08 0.d0,1.d0,0.d0 *BEAM SECTION,ELSET=SET2,MATERIAL=EL2,SECTION=RECT,OFFSET2=.5 0.05, 0.08 0.d0,1.d0,0.d0 *STEP,NLGEOM *STATIC *CLOAD 4,1,0.1 *NODE FILE,NSET=Nall U *EL FILE,ELSET=Eall S *END STEP ``` i changed request output to be section forces, still shown some problems in summation at end nodes of beam element (1,2,4) but not at mid-nodes (3,5) . ![2023-10-03 10_59_35-CalculiX GraphiX](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/prepomax/original/2X/2/2ac8216b01b5a276d78ea74ce43b5d6c602cedad.png) ---
**Author:** ![FEAnalyst](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/prepomax.discourse.group/feanalyst/32/688_2.png) [@FEAnalyst](https://prepomax.discourse.group/u/FEAnalyst)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2023, 6:50am UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/support-for-beam-elements/1142/6 "2023-10-03T06:50:30Z")
> [@synt](#): > > i’m seek previous version of CalculiX which known to be working, and lost Do you mean 2.20? It’s still available here: [http://www.dhondt.de/calculix\_2.20\_4win.zip](http://www.dhondt.de/calculix_2.20_4win.zip) You can download older versions by just changing the number in the link. It’s best to report any issues here: [GitHub · Where software is built](https://github.com/Dhondtguido/CalculiX/issues) Fortunately, several nasty bugs, including some related to beams, were fixed in 2.21. ---
**Author:** ![synt](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/prepomax.discourse.group/synt/32/4658_2.png) [@synt](https://prepomax.discourse.group/u/synt)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2023, 8:44am UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/support-for-beam-elements/1142/7 "2023-10-03T08:44:21Z")
not really sure exactly versions known works, i made many tests in year of 2016. So, the version is about 2.10 and before. indeed, i’m thinking to submit issue but probably a report test case and shown a version’s known working can be valuable info to developer. \*\*edited maybe i’m not remembered properly, still questioning. Currently, i do test in versions 2.8p2 and 2.90 but still shown not working properly at section force output of composed beams. ![2023-10-03 19_10_15-C__Windows_system32_cmd.exe](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/prepomax/original/2X/b/b026ebc55e5d43497cb0621e37e8f3615d13a010.png) ![2023-10-03 19_09_22-C__Windows_system32_cmd.exe](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/prepomax/original/2X/5/556a7db12abf1ae7545ae4ac4294d99858f20a70.png) ---
**Author:** ![jonathanb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8e8cbc/32.png) [@jonathanb](https://prepomax.discourse.group/u/jonathanb)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2025, 4:47am UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/support-for-beam-elements/1142/8 "2025-06-08T04:47:10Z")
Just want to bump this thread as support for beams natively in PrePoMax would be really beneficial to me (and I’m sure many others) ---
**Author:** ![Krzysztof](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Krzysztof](https://prepomax.discourse.group/u/Krzysztof)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2025, 8:16pm UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/support-for-beam-elements/1142/9 "2025-09-11T20:16:59Z")
I’m also interested in adding 1D elements. This would be very helpful to create simplified bot connections. ---
**Author:** ![synt](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/prepomax.discourse.group/synt/32/4658_2.png) [@synt](https://prepomax.discourse.group/u/synt)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2026, 4:43pm UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/support-for-beam-elements/1142/10 "2026-08-14T16:43:23Z")
i seen there some interesting done for [patch](https://calculix.discourse.group/t/user-element-1d-beam-custom-implementation/4079)of beam element (classical) in CalculiX is available. I hope this feature in GUI still on the list of future development, thank you.