Stuck? 
support@mecway.com
support@mecway.com
Mecway
FEA
Sergio
About
- Username
- Sergio
- Joined
- Visits
- 9,294
- Last Active
- Roles
- Member
Comments
-
Have someone worked with CFD using CCX?
-
Well, there are a lot of steps to get the mesh 1) Be carefull while modeling, keep radius constant and realistics, better to model as surface and then add the thikness to check that also the mesh could be extruded 2) In CAD add extra face divisions…
-
Hi, just to revive this thread, attached is an example of the secuency of modeling (with OnShape) and meshing (using Salome) with quads and then extruded to get hexas of a bracket made in steel sheet, very similar to the one of @JohnM . It takes a l…
-
This is a very usefull plastic material database, it has properties and stress/strain curves for lot of comercial polymers, and even at different temperatures. https://www.campusplastics.com/
-
@tk1537 , if I understood well, following the option 4) what you would get is CCX with out of core capacity. The CCX executable available from CalculiX site works inside of core (put all the stiffnes matrix in RAM only), so if your problem is too b…
-
Licences :-(
-
Is there a reason why is not readily available an out of core MKL version of CCX?
-
Is increddible, but I have exactly the opposite experience on your points, I do 90% of my meshes using Netgen, even feel more comfortable with the standalone version of it than Gmsh. And again, I found very usefull Salome, mostly for creating struct…
-
Can you share the geomety? Normally what I do is split the faces in the CAD program available, then export the cad to Salome were I mesh with quads, the extude to create the hexas. Another way would be creating the elements in Mecway directly, but c…
-
For that kind of part I would suggest to use hexa elements, and have at least 2 second order element in thikness.
-
@rwhirley , you can postprocess the results and do the simmetry using Paraview.
-
Congrat, I'm testing mostly the improvements in display performance for big models, and looks very well. One thing, while I was solving a problem, have tried to test the center of mass tool, it open the window but as it doesn't have defined densit…
-
I have a DELL workstation at work with Xeon and Nvidia Quadro, I don't see the benefits today (in fact since years) compared with standard good hardware, but, it's a enterprise decition. In the past there was huge difference between performance of w…
-
Have tried with an old Lenovo T420 laptop: SOLVER: CCX Pardiso 2.16 using 4 cores CPU: Intel Core i5 2520M @ 2.50GHz RAM: 8.00GB Doble-Canal DDR3 @ 664MHz HD: Hitachi HTS723225A7A364 Run Time: 9 min 45 seconds (!!!) Looks like the 1:43 mark is ve…
-
Solver: CCX Pardiso 2.16 using 18 cores CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5—2697 v4 © 2.306Hz 2.30 GHz Memory: 32.0GB Unknown @ 1197MHz Run time: 1 min 46 seconds I was doing some CAD stuff whit Solidedge and Teamcenter while solving.
-
Yes, as I said before in the post, was meshed with Salome. Normally I mesh one face of the perfil (or half/quarter in case of having simmetry), then import in a empty Mecway file, do the mirrowing if is needed and apply material and save in the Mecw…
-
No, I can't. Sorry
-
In the past had used a pendulum test as a way to determine the rebound properties of rubber, others ask you for a drop test as you perform, but inside a plastic tube to avoid wind effect. But for more accurate damping measurements we use dynamic tes…
-
Have checked and not, it doesn't go up higher than initial height. Plotting the position of one node is not accurate as the ball start to rotate after a few rebounds. Atacched is the model that I have run in CCX (using Scite to launch the solver) an…
-
I did some comparations between Abaqus and CCX using exactly the same cards, and the results were different after the impact. CCX bounds more than Abaqus, didn't find a way to change this behavieur even using different damping options on CCX.
-
I´m waiting the Hextreme integration too, looks interesting, but in my opinion for a good hexa still we will need to do the work by hands. I saw several of this automatic tools, and for complex geometries they create too much elements, or fail to re…
-
CCX 5.0?????? Or Gmsh 5.0?
-
The trick is avoid the straight line in the partitions/divisions of the orange surface. The curved partitions must start about the half of the radius
-
Dave, can you share your geometry? Maybe with a different partition scheme could lead to a better discretization. Regards
-
Be aware that in your last model there is no simmetry bc defined. Also the artificial Y displacement restriction (and the frictionless support) could be hidding the issue that the lifting points are not equidistant to the center of gravity of the tu…
-
Hi, can you share the model?
-
I was checking the model, and even considering the thikness of tubes and slings, still there is too much separation, I would start with solid elements, and the sling coincident with te tube in the contact areas.
-
I would model with solid elements and using a quarter of geometry as it's simmetric. Probably would fix the ends of the sling and use gravity as load.
-
These are the results with a simple plastic material. I will do a new run but lifting the stripper more than now to see if then the blank has different behavieur
-
Looks like that with a smaller increment (0.001) it works. It's taking a little time (more than one hour with 18 cores) but has passed the point where it fails before
