NOT SUPPORTED !
Was this the case before the fasteners became beams, I haven't time to test?
Ansys it is then
↧
Plasticity and fasteners
↧
Re: Automate Analysis (FEA and CFD) in Product Development
StressCheck is the leader in Handbook FEA solutions, but they don't have CFD.
↧
↧
Re: Automate Analysis (FEA and CFD) in Product Development
Hello
It'sjustforinformationifyouhaven'tseen it already.
Kind regards.
Denis
↧
Re: Creo Simulate vs ANSYS Workbench contact analysis w. friction.
Charles,
Were the results from your Creo and ANSYS studies presented to Creo Technical Support?
↧
Re: Creo Simulate vs ANSYS Workbench contact analysis w. friction.
Mats,
If finer elements is the reason for capturing abrupt changes in nonlinear models using ANSYS, then why couldn't Creo do the same, as you can make finer elements in Creo too?
↧
↧
Re: Creo Simulate vs ANSYS Workbench contact analysis w. friction.
That would go against the philosphy of the P-element solver, where you increase element order rather than element size.
Also, there will be no guarantee that the mesher can actually find a good mesh for a smaller element size, so you might run into issues where the analysis starts running okay and then complains in the middle of the analysis that the mesher fails. An engineer with little experience in FEA would probably have trouble understanding that, and curse at the software.
It would be nice if PTC were to explain how exactly they implement contact in the P-solver. It could also help in making better models.
But one of the drawbacks of Creo Simulate w.r.t. other FEA software is its poor documentation, especially about the underlying theory, so I don't think we'll see that anytime soon.
↧
Re: Creo Simulate vs ANSYS Workbench contact analysis w. friction.
Patrick,
I know about the p-element version vs h-element, as I was just wanting to hear what Mats thinks about this since it was his post about ANSYS and the smaller elements vs Creo. I've attached a document from PTC on the contact theory used in WF4, and a lot of this is still in Creo.
↧
Re: Creo Simulate vs ANSYS Workbench contact analysis w. friction.
(Sorry, I thought the question was for me)
No, I have only presented this here. Perhaps PTC's staff reads this, I don't know.
↧
Re: Plasticity and fasteners
With rounds added, to avoid edge-surface contact, the model ran to completion. I'm out of office right now and we're having issues with our VPN so I can't access the license to review results :-(
↧
↧
Re: Creo Simulate vs ANSYS Workbench contact analysis w. friction.
Steven,
Poor background info is a criticism I have made on many occasions.
I would like more background on contact as mentioned above. My knowledge is partly reverse engineered and part remembered occasional notes from PTC when specific questions are answered. Bits of a complete story but never the whole story.
These PTC Global Services documents are not released to the general public and only found by chance or by knowing someone after which they gradually become known by the wider community.
Some earlier documents such as the one you attach were marked as PTC internal only and of course, none of us got copies ...
It is not possible to locate these documents via the PTC support pages (unless that has recently changed) and I point this out whenever possible. They should be part of the help installation.
A cynic may say it is to keep the users ignorant so as to be able to sell services. But I cannot work out if it a premeditated move to maintain the 'positioning of the software' where designers' don't need to know' or a consequence of running a lean ship, There are (were? Is Tad Doxee still around for example?) clearly very clever developers who understand the theory and have tested models etc.
The community is generally unaware of
Where Roland Jakel's and other PTC presentations can be found.
None of us are encouraged to be involved.
Perhaps this is in part a consequence of there being no effective user group any more.
Simulate is very good and getting bettering better and it's CAD integration is brilliant (PTC, please don't quote me out of context), but it will never really begin to deal with software snobbery unless we know more. Again, perhaps this deliberate.
atb
Charles
↧
Re: Creo Simulate vs ANSYS Workbench contact analysis w. friction.
Mats,
That's okay. I was wondering if Charles presented his results to PTC support, since ANSYS seemed to work better than Creo (the problem with a smaller block on top of a larger block) and working with friction.
↧
Plastic deformation
Hello
Shouldbedeformedatubesteelof600mmdiameterand1.0mmthicktomakeaflange,as shownintheattachedimage,10.0mmhighand20.0millimeterswideovertheentirecircumferenceofthetube.
Thepurposeistoknowthestrengthtoexerciseforthisdistortion.
TodothisI would like tofindanexampleofSimulate,oneseesmoreondocumentation,asthefoldingofa clip.
Kind regards.
Denis
↧
Re: Plastic deformation
Denis,
I've seen all kinds of tube fabrication in industry, but I haven't seen this type (in your image). Do you have an actual picture of the metal tube after fabrication?
↧
↧
Re: CFD Analysis
Hi Turan
how are you progressing with your CFD evaluation ?
Any news you can share with the community ?
Best regards
↧
Re: Plastic deformation
Mats,
C'est la simulation de cette déformation pour en connaître la force nécessaire pour sa réalisation.
Denis
↧
Re: Creo Simulate vs ANSYS Workbench contact analysis w. friction.
Charles,
I'm extremely interested in what PTC has to say about this, if they even come back with a response. I would love to see an explaination from their developers as to why Creo will not perform the analysis as well as ANSYS.
↧
Re: Creo Simulate vs ANSYS Workbench contact analysis w. friction.
Charles,
I went to SAXSIM, and I couldn't locate Jakel's presentations. Do you know the full URL path? Thanks.
↧
↧
Re: Creo Simulate vs ANSYS Workbench contact analysis w. friction.
Do you seriously expect an answer to that question?
It is like asking Romain Bardret why he is not performing as well as Lance Armstrong.
↧
Creo vs ANSYS - Stress Linearization Graphs to Compute Kt
This is not posted as a question, but I just wanted to show that Creo does just as good as ANSYS when plotting stress linearizations, and I like the formatted output better than ANSYS. If you're attempting to determine the Kt value with Creo, you will get good results. The Kt from the FEA was compared to hand calculations and a macro in spreadsheet. All Kt values for all of these methods came out to approximately 1.32
Creo Kt = (8794.7/6658.78) = 1.32
Message was edited by: Steven Dunker
↧
Re: Creo Simulate vs ANSYS Workbench contact analysis w. friction.
↧