Stuck? 
support@mecway.com
support@mecway.com
Mecway
FEA
Victor
About
- Username
- Victor
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,650
- Last Active
- Roles
- Administrator
Comments
-
It seems easy in simple cases like this. Is yours different, maybe a curved edge shared by multiple shells?
-
Thanks Sture. I've added a few of these to Github issues https://github.com/victorkemp/Mecway/issues I'm a bit hesitant on failure criteria, in part, because you should be able to do write them as formulas in the solution. You can already have mor…
-
Could you be a bit more specific? Is the issue how to convert the layup schedule to material properties and element orientations, how to input that into Mecway, or more about meshing? Are there any compound curves? That can make it difficult, othe…
-
I think CCX is OK with rotational DOF constraints on composites but you have to align them with the shell edge tangents. The Symmetry constraint in Mecway does this. Internal solver composite buckling is probably wrong.
-
Yes, a rule of thumb for requiring nonlinear analysis is deflection to thickness ratio greater than 1/2. Consider an extreme case of a catenary. A chain has zero bending stiffness so it can't support any load at all without updating the stiffness t…
-
No problem. Version 29 will allow you to set modes and times in a table before solving.
-
OK, that makes sense. I tried with slightly misaligned transform and it went wrong. This sounds like a solid solution for moments on the ends of beams but it's going to be more limited for constraints in case you really need the transform to be diff…
-
Yes, you'll have to define *MEMBRANE and disable *SHELL like you did. I wasn't sure you'd used custom element type, that's all. It looks like you have membrane working fine. I'm not sure what the bug was or if it's still present.
-
There have been bugs with membrane elements in CCX so be careful. That's why it's not enabled in the GUI. You can use CCX -> custom element type to change quad8 to M3D8 so you don't have to rewrite all the element definitions.
-
Wow, that might be the silver bullet! Incredible discovery! It looks like you might have tried other orientations of the transform. Did you find it has to be this specific one? von Mises isn't really wrong, it just looks that way because it's unif…
-
A Y direction force or displacement on the Y=0 edge is not symmetric so you can't use symmetry there. You would have to model at least one more segment. Contact will have problems with constraints on the same nodes. I usually suggest high-stiffness…
-
I'm sorry, there's a mistake in the tutorial. To correct it, add displacement, stress, etc. to the solution before solving. What's happening is there's only a Temperature solution variable so that's all it generates. If there's nothing (like at th…
-
I agree with Disla that laminate would avoid this problem. Several approaches are: * Laminate material * Common nodes with shell offset on the skin elements * Shells connected by bonded contact * Solids Laminate has risks with sandwich m…
-
Excuse me, I didn't notice the word triple before. Yes, the middle one should be the master. The problem here is the constraints on the corner are also on contact slave nodes which it can't do. I would probably extrude a thin strip of high stiffnes…
-
Yes, that's fine if the meshes are the same or similar. Just when there are big differences in element size, some nodes can get missed if they're the wrong way around.
-
Shared nodes are usually easiest and most accurate if you have the meshes for that. But you can also use contact with the bonded option in either solver. The Constraint equations option works the same in both solvers because it's exported to CCX as …
-
You can position the element nodes with a sum of half-thickness separation and use bonded contact with the Constraint equations option. The master surface should have a coarser mesh so that all master nodes belong to a face that has a slave node at…
-
I guess I should make Mecway strip non-ASCII characters from the name. Somehow not many people seem to have complained about that.
-
Those colors seem to be controlled by Windows but I don't know how to change it. For me, the selected one is white, not grey like yours. Perhaps confirm this by looking at the Properties dialog for a file in Windows and see if it has the same low co…
-
It's not intended to be used this way so I might not change it. I imagine a solution would be to have the model open then import a .frd file and it would prompt if you want to use the components/orientations/named selections/etc. from the model. But…
-
Hard to know what's wrong. Here are the files I tried it on and it works. I made the shape of the model different in .liml file and .frd solution to make it clear that it didn't really solve it.
-
Here's how you can make it import the solution from test.frd. After setting it up like in the picture, have the input model in the modeler with the components/etc. and saved as test.liml then click Solve and it'll import a copy of test.frd as the so…
-
Yea, like Sergio said, Mecway stores that information internally when you click solve and puts it back together with the solution afterwards. It doesn't read any group information from the .frd file, which won't always be the same as components in M…
-
It might be relevant that this strip of low stress is also where the lowest numbered nodes are.
-
It appears to be reading it correctly according to the value at one node. EDIT: I just noticed there are multiple values for each node, as you can see in the listing below. That must be the problem.
-
It's hard to tell because the forum might have removed spaces from your post but the .frd file is fixed format and each number has to be in the correct column. If that doesn't help, could you attach the .frd file or email it to me?
-
Oh, that's worse than not supported, it's broken. Thanks for letting me know. I'll try to fix the crashing but don't think I'll be able to add support for it because it seems to be too different from newer versions since the list of installed Alibre…
-
I haven't made any effort to support older versions and don't know if it's trivial or very difficult. I guess you tried it and it didn't work? Any error message?
-
The formula in the solution only uses values from the same time step it puts the result in so it can't do the difference between time steps, sorry. However, you should be able to export the Table to Excel and use that to calculate all nodes and all…
-
How did you sum the displacements of two modes? If you created a new solution variable for that, then it won't be used for the deformed view by default but you can set it in Solution -> Deformed view settings. If you modified the existing displ…
