Dear all, As one usually reads from literature (or commercial software documentation), usually, a shell element would need >= 2 Gaussian quadrature points through the thickness to capture its bending behavior. For example, in the LS-DYNA documentation <https://www.dynasupport.com/tutorial/ls-dyna-users-guide/elements> or mentioned in this paper <http://web.mit.edu/kjb/www/Principal_Publications/Performance_of_the_MITC3+_and_MITC4+_shell_elements_in_widely_used_benchmark_problems.pdf> .
I noted that the QUADSHELL4 and QUADSHELL8 elements have only the 4 quadrature point at the zeta=0 plane. I was thinking about manually adding one more layer for numerical integration, but just wonder that - would it make sense to build that in QUADSHELL4 or QUADSHELL8 default qrule? Or would you think it would be cleaner to manually add one more loop? PS: The existing MITC4 shell example (actually Q4Gamma24 element) seems to be using only one layer of quadrature points across the thickness, and the results does not match ABAQUS well with thicker shells. I am still trying to understand whether it is because of some small-strain assumptions during implementation of the Q4Gamma24 theory, or whether it is because of the 1-layer integration points through the thickness. I'll report back when I have an idea! PPS: Reading a French textbook with Google Translate is really challenging... :) Best, Shawn -- Yuxiang "Shawn" Wang, PhD yw...@virginia.edu +1 (434) 284-0836 _______________________________________________ Libmesh-users mailing list Libmesh-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-users
