Analysis did not converge

CesarDavid
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2024 2:30 pm

Analysis did not converge

Post by CesarDavid » Wed Jan 17, 2024 2:36 pm

Any help with this model convergence.
Attachments
Modelo_Loa_Tarque_Condori_V3.zip
(175.43 KiB) Downloaded 291 times

STKO Team
Posts: 3069
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:45 am

Re: Analysis did not converge

Post by STKO Team » Wed Jan 17, 2024 3:55 pm

Merge your model. All faces are separated

CesarDavid
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2024 2:30 pm

Re: Analysis did not converge

Post by CesarDavid » Wed Jan 17, 2024 4:22 pm

Thank you very much. I did, but still no convergence.
Attachments
Captura.png
Captura.png (85.86 KiB) Viewed 3532 times

kesavapraba
Posts: 468
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2020 2:25 pm

Re: Analysis did not converge

Post by kesavapraba » Thu Jan 18, 2024 7:55 am

Hi, Please note the following changes that I made to your model, and it now runs smoothly.

1] It seems that pushover load definition has some issue. Time series (ciclica) for the pushover displacement already included a comparable displacement (~28 mm), however the spPrescribed load in the condition again multiplies it with -31. You are multiplying the actual displacement by 31! So, I changed it to -1. You can see the maximum displacement as around 30 from the experimental background curve.

2] Refine the mesh to improve the accuracy

3] Analysis settings (pushover): Increase the numIncr to atleast 5000 since the cyclic loading has many loops, hence increasing numIncr can help achieving good match between the experimental and numerical prediction.
Attachments
Modelo_Loa_Tarque_Condori_V3.zip
(163.66 KiB) Downloaded 304 times
:: With best wishes ::
Prabakaran Kesavan

CesarDavid
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2024 2:30 pm

Re: Analysis did not converge

Post by CesarDavid » Thu Jan 18, 2024 1:22 pm

I really apreciate your help. Thanks

kesavapraba
Posts: 468
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2020 2:25 pm

Re: Analysis did not converge

Post by kesavapraba » Thu Jan 18, 2024 3:19 pm

You are welcome
:: With best wishes ::
Prabakaran Kesavan

Gabriele.Neri
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2024 9:14 am

Re: Analysis did not converge

Post by Gabriele.Neri » Wed Mar 13, 2024 7:25 pm

Dear stko team,
I'm trying to do a parametric analysis, but I have some issues with the convergence.
I've tried to use different system solvers (Mumps, UmfPack), I've tried to increase the numIncr, without getting any results.. Can you help me?
I attached the error, the warning and the file I'm testing on.

Concerning the parametric analysis, the steps are the following:
- I created TCL files with the Write Input File command
- I opened a command shell in the directory in which I generated the TCL files
_I launched OpenSees with the number of processors = number of parameters, that are 30 in this case
(C:\OpenSees-Solvers\openseesmp.bat main.tcl 30)

Thanks in advance
Attachments
Warning parametric analysis.png
Warning parametric analysis.png (14.91 KiB) Viewed 2752 times
Error parametric analysis.png
Error parametric analysis.png (23.8 KiB) Viewed 2752 times
file 0.4g.zip
(2.18 MiB) Downloaded 235 times

kesavapraba
Posts: 468
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2020 2:25 pm

Re: Analysis did not converge

Post by kesavapraba » Thu Mar 14, 2024 2:58 pm

Hi, the issue is with forceBeamColumn element, it is not able to find force/displacement compatibility. I checked the BeamSectionProperty, you have used hinge option with nonlinear fiber model for the middle of the beam or column elements. I suggest this is not necessary unless you go for finite plastic hinge length model at the ends of the beam-column elements. Hence, I modified it to StandardIntergration type with 5 integration points, as you see in the attached figure. Now, the analysis converges.
Attachments
TimeHistory Gabriele_rev.zip
(179.79 KiB) Downloaded 235 times
forceBeamcolumn.png
forceBeamcolumn.png (16.7 KiB) Viewed 2742 times
:: With best wishes ::
Prabakaran Kesavan

Gabriele.Neri
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2024 9:14 am

Re: Analysis did not converge

Post by Gabriele.Neri » Thu Mar 14, 2024 3:37 pm

kesavapraba wrote: ↑
Thu Mar 14, 2024 2:58 pm
Hi, the issue is with forceBeamColumn element, it is not able to find force/displacement compatibility. I checked the BeamSectionProperty, you have used hinge option with nonlinear fiber model for the middle of the beam or column elements. I suggest this is not necessary unless you go for finite plastic hinge length model at the ends of the beam-column elements. Hence, I modified it to StandardIntergration type with 5 integration points, as you see in the attached figure. Now, the analysis converges.
Hi,
Meanwhile thanks for teh support!
You are right, I set hinge option both for beam and column elements because I need to consider non linearity for the entire length of beam-column elements in the model.

Thanks in advance

kesavapraba
Posts: 468
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2020 2:25 pm

Re: Analysis did not converge

Post by kesavapraba » Fri Mar 15, 2024 11:41 am

Ok, Yes, you can do it without hinge option as I suggested in my previous post. Thank you.
:: With best wishes ::
Prabakaran Kesavan

Post Reply