Combination method for Load groups

[Poja]

@MarcoPelle

Ehi @Poja

It is a WIP and it might contains some bug (especially for custom load group combinations)

However, I think you can use the following methodology to keep working in a full parametric environment

The basic idea is:

• create a .struxml file which will be a sort of template for you model
• read the file and create a model with ReadFromFile
• AddElements to the model will then add your parametric bridge geometry

As LoadGroup are referencing some existing LoadCase, I think that you need to assign the existing load case to your loads using the one from Model.Deconstruct

I will try this now

@MarcoPelle

You should use the following .gha tool to have the Load relationship bug fixed

FemDesign_24.0.0_WIP.zip (1.2 MB)

Thanks, which bug does it fix? I still have this issue for permanent loads not being able to be alternative. Is the WIP intended for this, or some other bug? Maybe I did not install it correctly…

[MarcoPelle]

For anything related to LoadGroup which does not currently work, you currently have to use the “readfromfile” methodology that I have show above.

The LoadGroup component that you currently have will be rewritten in the next month.

Basically, no load group components in your grasshopper script. You will get those from the Model.ReadFromFile as they are inside the .struxml file that you will load

[Poja]

I have not managed to run your suggestion fully yet, but I understand it well. But I am excited to look into the struxml-file for the first time, very interesting how this works !!!

So basically, the GH-components generate text in the struxml-file at the end of the day?

So, the reason I think your suggestion will not help me fully is that changing my structure will also change the number and names of load-cases as well as the position and number of loads. A new template would have to be saved each time.

However, I wounder about these GUID values… what are these? Do they need to be in those formats or can I choose whatever unique value I want? I’m thinking if it would be possible to create these custom load case realationships by just adding them into the struxml-file via a python-component i GH? That would be beautiful

[MarcoPelle]

@Poja

So, the reason I think your suggestion will not help me fully is that changing my structure will also change the number and names of load-cases as well as the position and number of loads. A new template would have to be saved each time.

My suggestion should actually help as the geometry is detach from the LoadGroup.

However, as the load that you will apply to your model are linked to load cases, and the load cases are linked to the load group, you need to use the load cases from the template file.

@Poja

However, I wounder about these GUID values… what are these? Do they need to be in those formats or can I choose whatever unique value I want? I’m thinking if it would be possible to create these custom load case realationships by just adding them into the struxml-file via a python-component i GH? That would be beautiful

The custom relationship can be created in the template file.

I have solved temporarily an issue related to the LoadGroupDefinition in the following .dll

Have a look at the attached example. It should be self-explanatory for you

LoadGroup_example.zip (61.2 KB)

FemDesign_24_0_0.WIP_2.zip (1.2 MB)

[Poja]

Thanks Marco!

In my GH-script, changin the length of the bridge changes the number of load cases.

I also managed to find a quite good (temporary) work-around during this week-end which allows me to solve my current issues without having to define custom relationships!

[MarcoPelle]

Hej @Poja , @Bohman

Can you give some comment on the workflow?

is it helpful to have also a “number” in the data input?

[Bohman]

Very happy to see this being added!!
Regarding the workflow: It will be very time consuming to produce all those “combination-rules-rows”, and keep track of them. Especially when dealing with many loadgroups, it might get a bit messy. But I don´t have any better solution atm so I would still prefer this over nothing.
The most important part for me would be to first add the option of adding predefined combinations (the button “Add combinations” in the GUI). In this way I can override the national annex (EKS for me working with bridges in Sweden)

[MarcoPelle]

gotcha!

I will open a ticket for our developers. Unfortunately, .struxml does not have access to the functionality and it will need some low level code.

However, you can expect to have all the other settings ready to be use!

[Poja]

Agree with @Bohman ,

I would prefer an easy way to choose from the existing combination rules so I can pick 6.10a&6.10b instead of EKS. Of course, customization is also necessary!

Much more importantly is the subgroups!

Edit: Do you plan to implement a “Deconstruct” component for load group combination?
That would be essential if one needs to change something from the existing combionations. In my case, If I would want to exclude a load group from getting combined with another group.

I would make an easy component for the user, to just check which loads should not occur simultaneously!

[MarcoPelle]

@Poja @Bohman

I have just realised an updated version of LoadGroup. Unfortunately, we haven’t had time to implement the subGroup but they might follow in the next milestone.

[Poja]

@MarcoPelle

realised an updated version of LoadGroup. Unfortunately, we haven’t had time to implement the subGroup but they might follow in the

Great, thanks! I will have a look at it soon!

[Poja]

Hi @MarcoPelle !

Have we gotten any sub-group functionality yet?

[anLor]

Hi Poja!

Unfortunately, subgroups have not been added to the API yet. It is still on the to-do list.