{"id":393564,"date":"2024-11-11T11:46:51","date_gmt":"2024-11-11T11:46:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/innovationspace.ansys.com\/forum\/forums\/reply\/393564\/"},"modified":"2024-11-11T11:46:51","modified_gmt":"2024-11-11T11:46:51","slug":"393564","status":"publish","type":"reply","link":"https:\/\/innovationspace.ansys.com\/forum\/forums\/reply\/393564\/","title":{"rendered":"Reply To: compression test of scaffold or lattice structure"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>&lt;p&gt;Hey,&lt;\/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The total area subtracted by the hole area makes more sense. I have seen papers which have used cross sectional area which cuts through the holes. Also there are many literature available which compare FEA results to experimental stress-strain curves. Check them out and make the best decision.&lt;\/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;For your 2nd question using the 2 plates does seem like the best scenaria. You can make those 2 plates rigid to avoid increase in the simulation time.&lt;br&gt;You can definitely use remote displacement directly as well. I don&#8217;t expect too much difference between the two. If you are unsure you can try them both and see if there are considerable differences.&lt;\/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Regards,&lt;br&gt;Mohan Urs&lt;\/p&gt;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","class_list":["post-393564","reply","type-reply","status-publish","hentry"],"aioseo_notices":[],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/innovationspace.ansys.com\/forum\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/replies\/393564","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/innovationspace.ansys.com\/forum\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/replies"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/innovationspace.ansys.com\/forum\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/reply"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/innovationspace.ansys.com\/forum\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/replies\/393564\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/innovationspace.ansys.com\/forum\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=393564"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}