######## WORK NOTES COPIED FROM INCIDENT 396691 ########
QUESTION:
When I set JS = 0 (BFx,,JS) on a body of PLANE13 elements (keyopt(1)=4 having RSVX > 0 in a transient analysis, I see a nonuniformly distributed eddy currents getting induced in the elements in POST1. Why isn't the current zero as it should be?
ANSWER:
These elements behave differently when JS is zero than when it is non-zero. When non-zero, JS will be the only active current (same as the element behavior when RSVX = 0). But when JS is zero or not defined, the "shorted conductor" behavior (due to non-zero RSVX) is restored.
When you changed JS from non zero to zero, the element behavior "toggled" back over to the shorted conductor option (a solid ring in 2D axisymmetric models).
The workaround is to use a tiny non-zero value of JS instead of setting to exactly zero. This will force the total element current density (JT) to be equal to the uniform tiny value of JS (~0) that you define.
|
######## WORK NOTES COPIED FROM INCIDENT 396691 ######## QUESTION: When I set JS = 0 (BFx,,JS) on a body of PLANE13 elements (keyopt(1)=4 having RSVX > 0 in a transient analysis, I see a nonuniformly distributed eddy currents getting induced in the elements in POST1. Why isn't the current zero as it should be? ANSWER: These elements behave differently when JS is zero than when it is non-zero. When non-zero, JS will be the only active current (same as the element behavior when RSVX = 0). But when JS is zero or not defined, the "shorted conductor" behavior (due to non-zero RSVX) is restored. When you changed JS from non zero to zero, the element behavior "toggled" back over to the shorted conductor option (a solid ring in 2D axisymmetric models). The workaround is to use a tiny non-zero value of JS instead of setting to exactly zero. This will force the total element current density (JT) to be equal to the uniform tiny value of JS (~0) that you define. |
||
|