CQUAD4 in bending test

[O_Stodieck]

If you then change it to isotropic, does it work? What I am trying to determine is if the issue is related to orthotropy in general. It seems that might be the case.

I think the best thing to do would be create the simplest deck that demonstrates the issue. For example, I would not use any load scaling factors and I would use round numbers for the material properties, etc. Also, it will be easier if you don't use up all the entire space in the field (better separation of the numbers that includes spaces). This will be possible if you use whole numbers and it will be easier to read the deck for those that don't have column editors or less familiar with this format. Its still at a point where we have a better idea what is going, but I would encourage you to make the deck as simple, basic, and readable as possible to expedite resolution.

Yes - an 'isotropic' MAT8 property works. 

I simplified the model and am attaching 3 versions, which are identical except for the MAT8 properties, which should outline the problem as clearly as we can get it right now. (Note, due to rounding and less elements, the model is not longer the same in geometry and properties as in previous posts). 

The _ref model has E1 = 1.3E11 , E2 = 9.0E9
The _soft model has E1 = 9.0E9 , E2 = 9.0E9
The _stiff model has E1 = 1.3E11, E2 = 1.3E11

The table below compares the analytical beam deflection at the tip to the Mystran prediction. 
There is a good match for the _soft and _stiff models. 
The _ref model is 87% out and matches neither of the isotropic models (in theory it should match the _soft model).