|
|
Quiz 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
100 |
|
|
|
|
Average |
105.1 |
|
|
|
|
Codename |
Total |
Problem 1 Score |
Submission of FCE Additional 10 Points |
Comments |
|
Anaheim , California |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Atlanta , Georgia |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Buffalo , New York |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Cincinnati , Ohio |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Cleveland , Ohio |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Columbus , Ohio |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Dallas , Texas |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Fort Wayne , Indiana |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Fremont , California |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Fresno , California |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Indianapolis, Indiana |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Kansas , Missouri |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Louisville , Kentucky |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Mesa , Arizona |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Omaha , Nebraska |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Pittsburgh , Pennsylvania |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Raleigh , North Carolina |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Sacramento , California |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Santa Ana , California |
100 |
110 |
10 |
|
|
Seattle , Washington |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
St. Paul , Minnesota |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
St. Petersburg , Florida |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Tampa , Florida |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Washington , DC |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Wichita , Kansas |
110 |
100 |
10 |
|
|
Arlington , Texas |
108 |
98 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained |
|
Austin , Texas |
108 |
98 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained |
|
Baltimore , Maryland |
108 |
98 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained |
|
Denver , Colorado |
108 |
98 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained |
|
Hialeah , Florida |
108 |
98 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained |
|
Honolulu CDP, Hawaii |
108 |
98 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained |
|
Jacksonville , Florida |
108 |
98 |
10 |
Rotational motions of ram weren't constrained |
|
Jersey , New Jersey |
108 |
98 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained |
|
Las Vegas , Nevada |
108 |
98 |
10 |
Incorrect number of nodes selected at the top face of ram.
Creates slightly wrong result |
|
Long Beach , California |
108 |
98 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained |
|
Minneapolis , Minnesota |
108 |
98 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained |
|
New Orleans , Louisiana |
108 |
98 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained |
|
Norfolk , Virginia |
108 |
98 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained |
|
Toledo , Ohio |
108 |
98 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained |
|
Anchorage , Alaska |
107 |
97 |
10 |
Wrong displacement graph |
|
Milwaukee , Wisconsin |
107 |
97 |
10 |
Rotational motions of ram weren't constrained. Von mises contour
plot shows displacement values |
|
Phoenix , Arizona |
107 |
97 |
10 |
Rotational motions of ram weren't constrained. Von mises contour
plot shows displacement values |
|
San Antonio , Texas |
107 |
97 |
10 |
Wrong displacement graph |
|
Baton Rouge , Louisiana |
106 |
96 |
10 |
Rotational motions of ram weren't constrained, Simulation gives
wrong result |
|
El Paso , Texas |
106 |
96 |
10 |
Adaptive stiffness is unchecked. Rotational Motions of ram
werent constrained |
|
Laredo , Texas |
106 |
96 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained, von mises contour
plot shows 44th step |
|
Lincoln , Nebraska |
106 |
96 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained, von mises contour
plot shows 44th step |
|
Memphis , Tennessee |
106 |
96 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained,adaptive stiffness
wasn’t used. |
|
Riverside , California |
106 |
96 |
10 |
Multiplier at 1.1 sec wasn't defined |
|
San Francisco , California |
106 |
96 |
10 |
Rotational motions of ram weren't constrained, Simulation gives
wrong result |
|
Stockton , California |
106 |
96 |
10 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained. Displacement graph
doesn’t show the displacement of ram |
|
Virginia Beach , Virginia |
103 |
93 |
10 |
No displacement graph, simulation gives very wrong result. |
|
Boston , Massachusetts |
100 |
100 |
0 |
|
|
Corpus Christi , Texas |
100 |
90 |
10 |
Total number of steps should have been 44. Not 40. Wrong
displacement graph. Von mises contour plot shows 36th step. |
|
Glendale , Arizona |
100 |
90 |
10 |
Total Number of steps should have been 44. Mistake corresponds
to wrong von mises stress contour plot for and displacement
graph |
|
Oakland , California |
100 |
90 |
10 |
Total Number of steps should have been 44. Mistake corresponds
to wrong von mises stress contour plot for and displacement
graph |
|
Plano , Texas |
100 |
90 |
10 |
No displacement graph, multiplier at 1.1 defined 1. it should
have been 0, simulation gives very wrong result |
|
Portland , Oregon |
100 |
100 |
0 |
|
|
St. Louis , Missouri |
100 |
100 |
0 |
|
|
Los Angeles , California |
98 |
98 |
0 |
Rotational motions of ram weren't constrained. |
|
Tucson , Arizona |
98 |
98 |
0 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained |
|
Charlotte , North Carolina |
93 |
93 |
0 |
Rotational Motions of ram werent constrained. Displacement graph
is missing. |
|
Tacoma , Washington |
0 |
0 |
0 |
No Submission |
|
|
 |
|