RelConnectsRigidCross aplicable also on Ribs (StructuralCurveMemberRib)

[sonkaste17]

Currently, RelConnectsRigidCross (Cross-link) can be applied only on two StructuralCurveMembers and not to StructuralCurveMemberRib. Input on ribs is logical usage, so it would be great to have the option to apply the RelConnectsRigidCross on the ribs too or even the combination of a rib and an ordinary member.

[sonkaste17]

@msalak-scia Can you elaborate on a proposal, please?

[MartinSalak]

I am on it

[MartinSalak]

Hello SAF community, here is a proposal for changes in RelConnectsRigidCross. Previously RelConnectsRigidCross was only applicable to beams. With this new change it can be also applied to ribs, so you can connect beam with a rib.

As we don’t have unique names across the whole SAF model (only for one object) it is not possible to assign 1D members and Ribs in one row. The proposal below adds one new row where ribs can be referenced.

It is always necessary to define exactly two members connected by rigid cross. This means two 1D members, one 1D member and one rib, or two ribs.

Changed rows:

Property	Example	Required	Definition
1D Members	B1; B2	yes, if connection between 1D member(s) and other entity is desired, otherwise no	Reference to StructuralCurveMember Exactly two members from among 1D members and Ribs must be defined; either two ribs, two 1D members, or one of each.

New rows:

Property	Example	Required	Definition
Ribs	RB1; RB2	yes, if connection between rib(s) and other entity is desired, otherwise no	Reference to StructuralCurveMemberRib Exactly two members from among 1D members and Ribs must be defined; either two ribs, two 1D members, or one of each.

[Heroog]

Is there a reason why we don't have the names unique across the whole model? Not sure why we did't do that. Seems to me logic and I suppose most users/vendors are doing it by nature. If we say name must be unique then you just have to check if the name is from CurveMember or CurveMemberRib.

[dschuermans]

Is there a reason why we don't have the names unique across the whole model? Not sure why we did't do that. Seems to me logic and I suppose most users/vendors are doing it by nature. If we say name must be unique then you just have to check if the name is from CurveMember or CurveMemberRib.

@Heroog there's been a discussion about this in detail:
#7 (reply in thread)

[Heroog]

and what was final conclusion? We didn't do anything with it?

[dschuermans]

and what was final conclusion? We didn't do anything with it?

#7 (reply in thread)

It would be a breaking changing, warranting a major version bump and we simply do not have the resources at this point to make those changes to the SDK

[MartinSalak]

Isn't that the same behavior?

You are right, thanks. I didn't notice this one.