Units for RADIOSS? [SOLVED]

Altair Forum User
Altair Forum User
Altair Employee
edited October 2020 in Community Q&A

I believe that HyperMesh is unitless, but is this the same for RADIOSS as well?

If we just keep the same unit for everything then we can simulate in SI or British system, right?

Tagged:

Answers

  • gopal_rathore
    gopal_rathore Altair Community Member
    edited June 2016

    Hi,

    Please find the attached image for the unit system.

    <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>unit system.JPG

  • Altair Forum User
    Altair Forum User
    Altair Employee
    edited June 2016

    There is no specific unit system for RADIOSS. The user has to maintain the consistency in the inputs provided.

    The standard unit consistency maintained is shown in the image above

  • Altair Forum User
    Altair Forum User
    Altair Employee
    edited June 2016

    George, I understand that RADIOSS is unitless.

    We can use the British or any other system of units, just that we have to be consistent with it.

    It is not compulsory to stick with SI system.

    Correct me if I am wrong.

  • Altair Forum User
    Altair Forum User
    Altair Employee
    edited June 2016

    It is not compulsory to stick with SI system.

     

    Hi Bongirs,

     

    Not necessarily. I think in HyperCrash you can add a unit system. Can you please check?

  • Altair Forum User
    Altair Forum User
    Altair Employee
    edited June 2016

    Prakash, I meant that I am using HyperMesh with RADIOSS. So there is no compulsion of using the SI system as the documentation suggests. I see that we have to select the unit system for HyperCrash. But for HyperMesh there is no such compulsion. Correct me if I am wrong.

  • pohan
    pohan Altair Community Member
    edited June 2017

    Hello everybody.

    I find that in the Help of Radioss (see the picture below)

    Is this an error?

    Thanks

     

    <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>error.jpg

  • Altair Forum User
    Altair Forum User
    Altair Employee
    edited June 2017

    Hi,

    Good catch and thank you for notifying us about this printing error.

    Please read it as 2.06e+8.