Stuck? 
support@mecway.com
support@mecway.com
Mecway
FEA
prop_design
About
- Username
- prop_design
- Joined
- Visits
- 14,263
- Last Active
- Roles
- Member
Comments
-
here are some models with spring steel. it has a 1GPa yield strength. the first model has no fillets. the second model adds 1mm fillets. i also broke the surfaces on the second model, to make places to apply BCs. i may have a model size conversion p…
-
hi, i did the same thing as the previous poster. I brought your dxf file into Rhino 5 and made a surface. Then exported the surface as a step file. Netgen doesn't seem to allow the import of dxf files. I hid some of your lines, to make the surface.…
-
the new center of mass feature is very useful. i like the lines marking the location. here is an example, where the new feature helps explain the deformation results.
-
Congrats. That looks like a lot of work. I can't wait to try it out.
-
interesting results @cmmcnamara. that's really fast for a laptop. interesting not much difference from 4 to 10 cores.
-
@JohnM that fits my vague recollection of ansys plots, when multicore was first coming out. they did comparisons of speedup versus cores. it's nice to have something updated for what we are using.
-
@antte although it takes a little work, it's worth it to install the ccx pardiso version and the intel mkl. you get a huge speed up. it also allows you to solve larger files. at least that's my experience with it. there is another thread on the to…
-
it took 9 min 37 sec on one core ccx pardiso solver v2.16 intel mkl 2019 update five amd a9-9400 laptop apu runs at about 2.9-3.2 GHz for this case (boosts so not a constant number) RAM 8GB DDR4 2400 MT/s HDD 5,400 rpm in the past i tested using t…
-
hi tk1537, yeah i was turned off by flexpde scripting as well. when comsol made a gui and started specializing that was much more attractive. however, i tried the demo once and couldn't even use it. the gui didn't fit well on a small laptop screen.…
-
have you tried flexpde. it might be better for what you want. certainly comsol as well. the python scripting isn't out yet. victor was saying that it would be in version 13 which might be out at the end of this month.
-
that's a really cool simulation sergio
-
Well that didn't take long. Nvidia just announced they added FEM to the PhysX library: https://www.techradar.com/news/nvidia-reveals-physx-50-but-amds-explosive-femfx-demos-already-stole-its-physics-thunder
-
Since the step file wasn't uploaded, I didn't have many meshing options with your model. I took some measurements inside mecway to try and figure out the dims of your model. It looks like it was a dia of 1000mm and a height of 1000mm. So I made a ne…
-
I updated the shell model so that it matches the solid model. Previously, it was just some random geometry I created. It's still random geometry, but they match up now. It looks like you need to fix the base to match the solid model better. The bc w…
-
Also, the formula for radial displacement came from the Mecway sample files folder
-
the coriolis loads in a static analysis, the mass, inertia matrix, and cg location all look interesting to me. those are things i have been wanting. the ability to simulate an aircraft pitching and yawing at the same time, while the fans are spinnin…
-
i increased the mesh density another x2 and the buckling load factor is about 5.1. so it's closer to the theoretical. that load factor seems to correspond to the load limit for the ccx nonlinear solver. once you increase the load past that, it won't…
-
hi, perhaps this helps in your evaluation. ccx nonlinear was able to solve up to the buckling load factor of 5.7. a value of 6 wouldn't solve though. the stress plot is with a cut-plane, so you can see the high stress on the inside of the tube.
-
thanks for the clarification victor. after i read your post i searched for a better form of the equation and it's clear now. i didn't understand the BC setup but left it alone. so i'm glad you clarified that as well. one thing i don't understand, th…
-
hi, by composites i meant orthotropic shell elements. something like carbon/epoxy. i hadn't looked at your model when i wrote that. for your original model using ccx linear i get 51.85 MPa. With the refined mesh using ccx nonlinear i get 55.48 MPa …
-
to disla's point. if you select all your elements you can go to mesh refine x2. i did that twice in a row and ran the model. it does look better. you have to update your saved node selections. but that's easy to do. the saved face selection seems to…
-
i've never did a buckling analysis. but i noticed your material doesn't have density defined. for modal analysis, density is important. not sure if this is an issue in your case or not. also, the shell offset option is in element properties. so if y…
-
that's normal for ccx. it expands the shells into solid elements. Make sure to set the element orientation, if using composites. For ccx, use the following cards, if using composites: *EL FILE,GLOBAL=NO S Also, for ccx composites, add 'don't gene…
-
Below are the updated paths for setting the user environment variables. It's not clear whether you will have to reboot or not. Two out of three times, I did not have to reboot after adding the environment variables. Each time was a different version…
-
I updated to 2019 Update 4 of Intel Parallel Studio and MKL. For some reason I did have to reboot to get the system variables to work this time. Before I didn't. For update for the paths are now as follows: C:\Program Files (x86)\IntelSWTools\compi…
-
i'm confused. it runs for me, using mecway. i didn't watch your video though. so not sure what you are doing exactly. it is very fast and allows for larger models to be run on the same hardware. have you looked at this thread; http://mecway.com/foru…
-
I use an AMD laptop APU with the internal and CCX solver and have no issues. I also switched to the CCX Intel Pardiso version awhile ago and it works fine too. I've used AMD netbook and laptop APUs for years. C, E, and now A series. They all worked …
-
thanks hedgepeth, glad they were helpful
-
I would use the ccx shell elements. they will expand to a solid. it's a weird formulation. but it seems to work pretty good. start by importing a surface mesh of your model. the choice of which surface can take trial and error. typically you use the…
-
yes it's pretty much the same. you gain speed, add some features, but lose some features too. for the most part, you can always use it. rarely do I use the internal solver now
