{"id":161523,"date":"2021-08-23T08:55:06","date_gmt":"2021-08-23T08:55:06","guid":{"rendered":"\/forum\/forums\/topic\/difference-between-beam188-and-beam189\/"},"modified":"2021-08-24T03:42:45","modified_gmt":"2021-08-24T03:42:45","slug":"difference-between-beam188-and-beam189","status":"closed","type":"topic","link":"https:\/\/innovationspace.ansys.com\/forum\/forums\/topic\/difference-between-beam188-and-beam189\/","title":{"rendered":"Difference between BEAM188 and BEAM189"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

Hello Everyone,<\/p>\n

For a simple cantilevered I-section beam with transverse force at its end, there were some differences identified between BEAM188 and BEAM189 elements when meshing with a single element for each beam.<\/p>\n

When I keep element order to “Program controlled”, BEAM188 elements are applied automatically, and deflection result matches analytical calculations and everything is fine. However, when I apply BEAM188 elements with APDL commands under geometry (et,matid,beam188), the deflection values deviate by about 15%.. I was wondering what is the difference between BEAM188 elements applied with APDL commands and BEAM188 (same elements type) that Ansys applies automatically?<\/p>\n

Applying BEAM189 either by APDL or by changing element order to quadratic is also fine and delivered matching results. Increasing elements count also removes the deviation, but we want to employ the single element practice.<\/p>\n

I am using Workbench 18.1. Thank you<\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","class_list":["post-161523","topic","type-topic","status-closed","hentry","topic-tag-ansys-mechanical-apdl","topic-tag-beam","topic-tag-beam188","topic-tag-element-type","topic-tag-workbench"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t