Stuck? 
support@mecway.com
support@mecway.com
Mecway
FEA
Victor
About
- Username
- Victor
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,723
- Last Active
- Roles
- Administrator
Comments
-
Version 13 has a mecway.exe.config installed with it. A difference is that it now requires .Net Framework 4.5 and probably no longer works with .Net Framework 3.5 because it includes IronPython which has that dependency. A minimal version of the fi…
-
Good spotting. I wonder if there's a way to rewrite it without the singularity?
-
Right click the slider and choose Max/min... where you can type in the two limits.
-
Yes, apply them to surfaces in the Geometry view for them to be retained. When creating the loads, right click the geometry surface (or ctrl+click first for multiple surfaces), and choose Loads & Constraints -> .... To change your existing l…
-
If the surface meshes on the interfaces are the same, you can combine them in Mecway with Mesh tools -> Merge nearby nodes, but if they're not, you can't. Bonded contact may be an option if you can't get the meshes to match.
-
I see it can also export I-DEAS .unv format which Mecway can import, so you could try that.
-
You can use Solution -> New formula to do the multiplication and that creates a new solution variable containing the result. If you do need to read solution variables back in, probably the easiest way is using the Gmsh .msh format which is fairl…
-
No, sorry. Other than zero the offset for all elements then undo or open a saved copy to reinstate them.
-
I'm a bit late to the party, but I notice your first picture shows the external force is being summed on Optic_underside. Is that the side in contact with the o-ring and without the load? If so, it won't work because contact forces aren't included i…
-
No worries. In earlier versions when the sample was made, all the solution variables were included automatically, but most of them are now optional.
-
You mean heat flux? Add it through the menu Solution -> New thermal and fluid -> Heat flux.
-
No way to keep edge loads, sorry. Another possibility is to use 3D solids but with a smaller segment size, such as 1 degree so that the solving is fast. Put frictionless support on both symmetry surface to enforce the axial symmetry boundary condit…
-
You can do a Surface mesh (in Meshing parameters) then delete all the surfaces except what's in the XY plane for axisymmetry.
-
Tension-only is a nonlinear effect so it can't be used with linear buckling. However, if you know whether each one is in tension or compression then they're equivalent to ordinary spring/truss elements or nothings respectively. But that's only line…
-
Hopefully in a couple of months.
-
I agree with rwhirley. If the goal is to verify the design, then the actual stress concentrations that it has would be important. If the goal is to verify that Roark's agrees with the idealized theory it's supposed to agree with then you might have …
-
If it really is a stress singularity, then I'd be skeptical of the meaning of the stress given in Roark's since that doesn't make sense on the face of it. Could it be that Roark's just neglects the stress due to the stress concentration in the same …
-
It's connected by bonded contact in the 2nd configuration.
-
It looks like you're nearly there. Use a smaller time steps size to sample and simulate the excitation frequency properly though. I'm not quite sure what your question is. Do you want to adjust the stiffness by changing the geometry of the secondar…
-
Hello justhumm The density is very high. 150 lb.s^2/ft^4 is 4820 lb/ft^3. Mecway doesn't currently have a lb/ft^3 unit so you would need to convert to one of the available units. The displacements are excessive because there are insufficient const…
-
It seems to be working correctly as a tension-only member. Is the problem that you want to apply a balanced tension to it instead of the external force that you currently have? If you have a known tensile force that remains constant even as the fra…
-
You can't really do that with Mecway, at least not without a lot of hackery. Calculix has it though, called Steady state dynamics. So you can still use Mecway to generate most of the model and manually set up the *STEADY STATE DYNAMICS card and othe…
-
Good to hear. Yes, CCX can have trouble with very tiny elements and may be a little stricter on element quality.
-
By the way, the CCX solver can calculate effective modal mass. Change to the CCX solver and add a CCX -> custom step contents containing the line: *NODE PRINT and it generates a .dat file in the working directory (configure that in Tools -> …
-
Hello tdool Constrained DOFs are condensed out of the matrices so it looks like you have: 2488 nodes 2488 nodes * 3 DOFs per node = 7464 DOFs in total 7299 unconstrained DOFs 7476-7299 = 165 constrained DOFs (equivalent to 55 fully constrained node…
-
Just some guesses - Could it be "tested" doesn't mean "load tested"? Or that it's a different version of the standard? The site has a to link what looks like B30.20 2013 but ends up at a page for 2018.
-
@cwharpe I see your suggestion of increasing the beam stiffness addresses the underlying problem - it was already qualitatively correct but for very flexible beams! By refining the beams, you can see why the lip bends backwards and why the beams rot…
-
I don't know why it seems to be bending the opposite way there. Another way is to apply the moment load to a ring of faces around the top and it'll be distributed as equivalent forces. It doesn't work reliably with shell elements and CCX but you ca…
-
You can normally use a single bonded contact for many parts so you could perhaps select all the nodes of the ends of the cables, change to Select faces mode, then use that face selection in the bonded contact. And similar for the faces on the struct…
-
Oh. Can you confirm that it's the thermal transient analysis type, not steady state? If so, it would be great to see an example of it being missing. Radiation doesn't seem to work reliably with steady state with CCX. It might be something to do wit…
