(Snipped commentary that is 100% off-topic and also fails completely to address what I actually communicated).The real techno-babble is what you are mentioning here. They [NIST] can't even get ...
Tony, you did not understand what I posted. Or you ignored it.
I was not discussing the right and wrong of NIST's inputs and outputs.
I merely explained, to those who still have not understood (there are active posters here who evidently have not understood! And Leroy Hulsey evidently has not understood!) NIST's modelling approach, and the connections between subsequent but different models. Perhaps you have understood NIST's modelling approach and can help me help those fellow posters who have not? That would be great. However, I have a hunch that you haven't understood NIST's modelling approach yourself, as becomes evident whenever you post something from Chapter 8 when the discussion is actually about content from Chapter 10, 11 or 12.
As I have shown earlier, Hulsey for example erroneously misrepresents inputs for the Chapter 11 ANSYS model and, additionally, conflates them erroneously with inputs for the Chapter 12 LS-DYNA model. If you have understood this, I think you would be eager to inform Hulsey personally of his mistakes (have you? If not, why not?). They can be found on slides 19 to 24.