other than the 3 simple examples you list, there aren't any general simple rules. have to look at the actual structural connections, and ensure that the BC's are realistic and appropriate for expected structural behavior. common mistake is to over constrain the model, by using rigid BC's or...
seems like you would be applying internal pressure loads.
can you show the actual applied loads on the entire vessel.
probably don't scale the loads, but apply that loads that are on the half that is modelled.
but the boundary conditions at the symmetric plane can be complicated. might be...
suggest you delete this post and repost in either the Finite Element Analysis forum or the OptiStruct forum (if it exists). This forum is mostly Civil Structures engineers.
VCCT and Cohesive Zone models have both been used to predict bonded joint strength. Abaqus has elements for both approaches. You will need test data to a) determine and calibrate the input properties, b) to validate the joint strength predictions.
What are your adherend and adhesive material...
Beams are not that complex.
Boundary conditions can be complex and difficult to approximate.
Stress concentration areas can be complex to model (its often best to not model these in detail, but to extract far field forces and apply classical stress concentration factors or other analytical...
Re rb’s last comment. Exactly. You have to know how to do proper structural analysis before you start using FEA. Generating millions of element results for a thousand load cases is not helpful if you don’t know what to do with the results.
You learn by doing. And making mistakes. And getting advice from peers and more experienced engineers.
You learn the most by working on real problems.
And by correlating analysis predictions to test data.
And realize that FEA is just a tool in the tool box. Like any tool it has its uses. And...
huh? what?
are you talking about beam analysis? if so you integrate the shear down the length to get the moment distribution down the length
integrating the shear stress thru the thickness of the cross section is something else.
start over with a lot more details about what you are doing. and...
there has to be something about the mesh, material properties, loads or boundary conditions that are not symmetric. show us pictures of the loads, boundary conditions, etc
why in tarnation do you want to model the fastener holes? you are not going to get a correct local stress distribution with RBE3 or RBE2 connections to the holes, nor even if you try to incorporate contact between the fastener and hole. just eliminate the holes in the model, connect with...
Do it in Excel.
Output all of the node definitions - ids and coordinates
Sort by coordinate locations.
Coincident nodes should be adjacent.
Create CBUSH cards in Excel using character strings.
Out CBUSH cards and read into Hypermesh.
If you are modelling the bolts with solid elements, well, to be frank, that is gross overkill and its not going to be accurate anyway. All it does is make for a very complicated model and will generate lot and lots of output for which you won't know what to do with. What are you going to do...
are you going to model the bolts with solid elements?
or are you modelling the bolts with bars/springs/etc?
are you going to attempt to model the fastener preload? which is quite difficult.
there have been many thousands of aerospace fastened joints analyzed with FE models with simple fastener...
If you are gapping the joint you do not have a good joint design. Either increase fastener torque, or add bolts, or something.
You can use either one or two models, just have to consider the limitations of each. Both are an approximation to reality.