I tried to benchmark the results of rectangular beams against other codes (SubDyn, SAMCEF, HOTINT) and I observed the same issues as commented above. Somehow, the Timoshenko beam formulation needs a significant number of nodes to have the proper behavior. Is someone else observing this behavior? Is this due to an incorrect use or implementation of the builder = fea.ChBuilderBeamTaperedTimoshenko()?
Attached to you can find the comparison between codes. And here the definition of the test case: https://github.com/OpenFAST/openfast/pull/2646#issuecomment-2688827936 Thanks for the support. Roger On Friday, January 9, 2026 at 1:15:09 PM UTC-7 Roger Bergua wrote: > Hi all, > > I have been trying to model a cantilever beam in pyChrono. > > When using Euler-Bernoulli beams, everything seems to work as expected. > However, I get large displacements (~1.83 m instead of ~0.89 m) when using > the Timoshenko beams. For reference, I have added the response from a third > code (SubDyn). See the attached image: > *Wrong_Timoshenko_beams_behavior.jpg* > > Interestingly, if the discreization is increased very significaly, the > expected results are obtained. See the attached image: > *Fine_discretization_Timoshenko.jpg* > > I'm not sure what is the issue. But it does not look consistent. > > Attached you can also find the pyChrono input file used in *.txt format. > > Thanks in advance for the support! > > Roger > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ProjectChrono" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/projectchrono/ec17dae3-bb6d-45f0-8130-ae216f61894cn%40googlegroups.com.
