Stuck? 
support@mecway.com
support@mecway.com
Mecway
FEA
Victor
About
- Username
- Victor
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,759
- Last Active
- Roles
- Administrator
Comments
-
It meshes OK if you set Maximum element size to 10 mm. This seems to be necessary with thin-walled parts sometimes.
-
I had a look at section 4.5.1/2/3 and it seems to really depend on the the element formulation being no better or worse than what they expect. Perhaps this is why only approved software is allowed? I was going to suggest refining the mesh to create …
-
Not sure if this would help, but are you aware of OUTPUT=2D on *NODE FILE or *EL FILE? It causes shells remain as 2D elements in the solution and CCX averages the stresses from the 3D nodes into 2D, which loses information like bending stress but sh…
-
Thanks John. Fantastic idea.
-
No, sorry. The file format is defined by the code that generates it which is not organized to make generating a complete definition easy.
-
@cashan Those are indeed limitations. I looked into beam offset once but somehow didn't implement it. Perhaps it was too difficult. Just one other suggestion - there is shell offset which you might be able to use instead of all the stiffeners have …
-
Regarding beam elements. Mecway isn't much better than LISA in that area. Though it allows L-section beams, they have the limitation of no bending-twisting coupling, which I think may be the same as LISA. The tools for manually building plate meshe…
-
Yes, it's a regression when the solution has more elements than the model, sorry. * In v13, additional elements would end up in some arbitrary component and fewer elements would cause a crash. * In v14, both additional and fewer elements cause …
-
Not automatically. But I guess you know that you can do each time step one by one? Whichever time step is currently shown in the solution is where the temperatures are taken from.
-
Mecway doesn't output values at integration points, but CCX does with the .dat file (*EL PRINT). I suppose another way would be to interpolate the node values back to the Gauss points using element shape functions. Though I don't know anything abo…
-
Not with the solution formula since it treats the fields as continuous and evaluated at the nodes so element volume wouldn't really make sense. However, the Python API gives access to individual element volumes as well as the integral tool, all fie…
-
Heaviside being greater than 1 (or less than 0) inside quadratic elements at transitions between compression and tension is a consequence of the quadratic elements representing the step function with a quadratic one. The mean and integral tools also…
-
Is m also a constant? If so, you could make a new field variable for the integrand using Solution -> New formula then use the integral tool (Solution -> Volume integral) to integrate that over volume. That way , you don't need to know individu…
-
Since Poisson effect is happening, I'd expect greater stress and plastic strain in tension due to the reduced cross-section area. The curve describes both tension and compression symmetrically since it uses von Mises equivalent stress and a similar…
-
Oh, I understand now. It's only undergoing tension (or compression) with no load reversal so the two hardening models should be equivalent in that region. I don't understand the theory here so I'm not sure if Poisson's ratio is supposed to remain c…
-
@disla, can you be more specific about what's not right? I'm not sure what the different cases in the screenshots are showing or what's wrong with those graphs.
-
Hello Manuel 1) It can be linear. Even if the displacement is large, linear is still OK just to see if its doing rigid body motion. 2) You can use a separate displacement constraint to constrain each translational DOF and a separate node rotation …
-
Sent it! I wish I'd waited though because I'd love Eastbourne - fanciest neighborhood in my city. Not sure what a Bexhill is but it sounds old
-
@DaveStupple. Oh, that's not right. Do you mind sending me the .unv file to try to find the problem and fix it for the next release?
-
@disla. I see. Two hydrostatic pressures with different gravities is more conservative than one hydrostatic pressure using the summed gravity. I guess this might be a problem best solved by a (not yet existing) feature to sum solution values across …
-
@disla, that's interesting regarding multiple gravities. Perhaps it doesn't make physical sense to sum accelerations? Do you think that might cause some sort of impossible/incorrect/ambiguous situation? The multiple gravity loads are internally sum…
-
It's possible that you might be able to just drop in nglib.dll and all its dependencies to the ngmesh or ngmesh6 folder in Mecway. However, I've made some small modifications to Netgen to make it compatible with Mecway so it might not work properly.…
-
You could use nonlinear static analysis for this. If you know the points of contact with the ground, you could put displacement constraints there and a non-zero displacement at the lifting point. If you don't know them, use contact. If you just wan…
-
I don't think so, sorry. You could get thickness using the API but then it's not available for putting into a field variable. 3 material properties are available for formulas - density, E, and specific heat, so if you're not using those for what th…
-
I find it solves with CCX_PARDISO.exe 2.17 dated "niedz., 26 lip 2020 19:57:20" but not with the default CCX.exe 2.17 included with Mecway dated "Wed Jun 16 14:14:29 2021". It may be too big.
-
You shouldn't have any unconstrained degrees of freedom in static analysis. So no pendulums or chains. Either use dynamic response for that or nonlinear static and lower it into equilibrium position in a quasi-static manner such as by constraining i…
-
Element properties -> Truss is set so they're not really beams. However, CCX beams do have a bunch of problems. From the Mecway manual: "The CCX solver (2.17) has some bugs with beam elements. Non-zero displacement constraints on beams can caus…
-
Especially thanks to @prop_design for nagging me about this bug when I wasn't believing it existed :P
-
Hello @mathiasf. I've put my compression-only structure into your model. Adding Flexible joint on beam to both ends makes the whole little assembly behave like a single compression-only truss element. The spacing between the two middle nodes would …
-
There's no technical reason why it couldn't be there. You can arrange beams to connect to the opposite ends of the tension-only member though it's a bit fiddly. Here's an example that also uses an artificial beam with extreme section properties to…
