Stuck? 
support@mecway.com
support@mecway.com
Mecway
FEA
Andrea
About
- Username
- Andrea
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,387
- Last Active
- Roles
- Member
Comments
-
Takes into account another aspect: often is necessary to assign different properties and/or thickness to the faces. You can do it into Mecway but creating groups on Salome and meshing within Salome, you will find groups of nodes or elements inside "…
-
A short video that explains the procedure PS The second is better defined by "partially splitted"
-
For what I know creating surfaces in CAD environment you haven't intersection edges. So importing directly on Mecway the faces are treated as separated surface bodies and the mesh is incongruent. As you wrote is necessary to split the surfaces but…
-
Yes, with R-O model runs! Maybe the combination above (dynamic response+bilinear plastic + contact) must be checked on Linux OS to know if the problem is inside the solver or inside the CCX version for Windows. I remeber that I had a similar proble…
-
...I have attached the first test with linear material.
-
Try to insert plastic properties on material window! For example Bilinear isotropic hardening : Yeld strenght 355 MPa Et 1000 MPa Your model has indefinitely elastic material and with this material model I also have a solution. The problem is when …
-
Windows 7 - 10! Try to insert plastic property to the material model. I change material property on your model and I had the same problem (see attached picture)
-
Material library could be usefull too! But, how is suggested by MW Manual, for materials one can create a blank files with the definition of some materials and use this file for starting a new job. For meshing parameters is not possible because you …
-
Sometimes I have to import several STEP files. For each file I have to set the meshing parameters also if are the same. What do you think about a possibility of creating mesh criterions and to assign them for the varius components?
-
The step file is not a real circular hollow section! It has a poligonal section so you can find a problem to mesh it with solid elements. Trash this geometry and build a new one. By the way, due to the small thickness is better to model the tube wit…
-
Of course! Some software (Ansys for example) have an automatic detection of rigid body motions and puts automatically soft springs. In this case, due to the long time ofsolution, I don't know If it is convenient.
-
I solved appliyng rigid body to the pin vertical faces and locking the rotations
-
You are right! Now I will try to apply axial constraint to the pins: for the central pins is not a problem because they are on the simmetry plane (only vertical translations) but for the lateral pins, is quite diffucult because they have a translati…
-
Well...I think that the problem is related to the pressure overclosure value (too low). In the test model reducing it happens a similar problem: radial deformations of the free pin
-
Maybe you're right! But before launching the tongs model I made a test with a simple 3 links hinged where the central pin is restrained only in z direction and seems to be correct deformation shape. The link and the pins have the same dimension of t…
-
First proof shows strange behaviour of the pins: radial deformations. Only for the lower pins. Could it depends from Master/Slave inversion?
-
sorry...GPa/m instead GPa*m
-
Which means "CCX 2.13 features" under LABS options? Thanks
-
I opened it with Mecway8...OK at warning message
-
Maybe you are speacking about two different tecniques for seismic analysis. 1) Use response spectrum (acceleration Vs period) combined with modal analysis and CQC or SRSS combination) 2) Use the accelerogram (acceleration Vs time) General method is…
-
Have you received an answer from the CCX forum? During last period I didn't follow any forum
-
See this Blog about direct and iterative solver https://www.comsol.com/blogs/much-memory-needed-solve-large-comsol-models/
-
If you are performing static analysis you can try iterative solver. See precedent post. From CCX Manual: SPOOLES is also very fast, but has no out-of-core capability: the size of systems you can solve is limited by your RAM memory. With 2GB of RAM…
-
See CCX manual about spooles solver. I think that depends from your RAM. If I'm rigth you must consider the number of equations and not number of elements Regards
-
Maybe RBE: Rigid Body Element
-
By Mecway I think that is necessary to modify manually the inp file (CCX custom step contents) adding the step relative to the dynamic one. With internal solver I don't know.
-
Try to change *Contact OUTPUT with *Contact FILE. I ran the solver and Mecway opens the frd file but is very slow. With CGX the solution on the attached picture Regards
-
*ERROR in e_c3d: nonpositive jacobian determinant in element Free mesh is fast but can lead to neglect the quality. This error is often linked to a very small element volume. Refine the mesh is generally a good solution but is better to made a par…
-
Maybe depends from the CCX compiled version for Windows. I use the versions contained on CalculiX Launcher and both iterative solvers are selectable. Iterative Cholesky is generally faster than Iterative Scaling.
-
If the spooles solver requires a lot of memory try SOLVER=ITERATIVE SCALING It is slower than spooles (which is the default solver)
