Thanks Patrick and well reminded.
I have used the output tab in the past but usually use the load function. I have never really understood why we still have this in the output tab since load steps came along; their capability overlaps. I know full results can be selectively switched off using the output tab method and that when using functions each load can have a different function. Using load functions always calculates full results at each time step.
I'll experiment with the output tab.
Hello All (not just Laurent)
I thought I'd do this as I am asked regularly about this and hope it helps generally.
Let me know if I have made any mistakes and I will fix
The deformation units are definitely those of strain : mm/mm or inch/inch etc
Laurent's full stress strain curve:
Yes, in Creo 2 only the plastic part of the curve is entered.
So Laurent's Creo 2.0 table should be
x-axis is only for plastic strain, note the tensile yield is picked out from your data on the right side of the graph. You don't have to enter 17.1; it's done for you.
Stresses and strains should be TRUE and not ENGINEERING. Generally this is not a problem up to 5% (elastic+plastic=total) strain
It is best to ensure that there is an elastic 'core' such that the loads are supported by elastic and plastic parts.
Stresses that rise beyond the extent defined in the data will lead to failure.
Do not apply elasto-plastic materials to an entire component, create volume regions where plastic strains are expected and only apply the plastic properties to these volume region. It may be necessary to run a linear analysis first to define these regions.
Refine the meshes in these regions.
If the material volume is substantially plastic, consider using displacement control (if possible) rather than loads
NOTE. Creo 3.0 behaves differently. It is assumed by the software the first 2 rows of the table define the linear region. i.e. Laurent's full curve and not just the plastic part. Again it's TRUE and not ENGINEERING.
I heard from Product Line Management that they plan to reimplement the ability to load multiple result windows from template, by simply adding (instead of replacing) windows when opening *.rwd files. If everything works well, it should be in Creo Parametric 3.0 M080.
(BTW: This thread has been looked at with interest during the decision process - so discussions are not fruitless, even if they show no immediate result)
Thanks Gunter. Is there a SPR for this?
Hi Steven,
yes, internal SPR 4887207 got created soon after my post - not sure whether you can see it on the PTC web site.
Gunter
I would like to apply orthotropic material properties to a single part in my assembly model and have created a coordinate system for this component. When I try to edit my material to apply orthotropic or transversely isotropic properties, I cannot find a way to link these to my component coordinate system.
Is there a way of doing this?
HelloDavid,.
Ididnotfullyunderstandyourquestion,findyouthevaluesofAL2014,asforexampleontheattacheddocument.
Kind regards.
Denis
In the table above there are boxes for E1 and E2/E3. How does one know which directions these properties are for? If one wishes to have certain properties apply directionally to a local coordinate system which is different than the global coordinate system how does one do that?
I just found that you apply the orientations in the material assignment.
That is the correct answer.
As shown in down figures.
In first figure, there are three defined curves, to act as deformation reference for the part, but in the second figure, in the mechanica analysis result, the curves will not display.
So I can not compare relative position between the part and curves after deformation.
How to make the curves displayed in the result?
It appears that all export options are consolidated in a single 'File > Print' dialog (including exporting image) in Creo .
I would create beam elements on those curves,and make those beams rigid, either by using rigid links, or constraints. You can only view elements, not CAD geometry without elements, in results.
Another strategy is to export a VRML file of the deformed geometry and import that into the original CAD-file.
Yulong,
I submitted a Product Idea to add more visuals to the results window.
I am running a mechanism of essentially a gear shape. I would like to male tooth to cut out the female section as a result of the motion I have defined.
These aren't really gears but a special profile and would like to analyze what the female side should be so nothing interferes while they are rolling. Reminder that both parts are moving..
Thanks!
Steve
The document CS187881 is a bit misleading, it states: If customers have purchased active Plastic Advisor licenses on or before 17-Oct-14, they will receive the new licenses with CMA codes at no additional charge. It should read: If customers are activewith maintenance with Plastic Advisor licenses on or after 17-Oct-14, they will receive the new licenses with CMA codes at no additional charge.
Hello,
I need to find on a selected zone the value of the average stress weighted on the area.
Create a custom surface and view the results of the analysis only on that zone is not a problem, i want to obtain the average value of a characteristic based on area shown in the formula below.
where Xi is the value of the stress and Wi is the area where the i stress is located.
Thanks
Bye
I have never tried this, but I suspect it is possible to create a "motion envelope" of the new gear geometry. The "problem" in this case, is that the motion envelope is fixed relative to ground. So you will have to define the motion of your parts so that one of them, "female" is fixed to ground, and the other one has its motion defined relative to the fixed part. (*testing*). It turns out the resulting geometry (I would think), is too coarse, see below. Note that the resulting "toothed" surface is the negative of the desired gear wheel.
Motion model used:
Next attempt would be to create a "trace curve" from the "male" onto the "female" paper part. In this case you can prescribe motions to the parts as you wish. This only creates the profile of a single gear tooth profile. I guess you might need to create several trace curves to get an accurate femate tooth geometry. Material on the "inside"of the trace curve(s) should be removed. It might be necessary to generate several trace curves, for a series of datum points along the "male's" gear surface.
I've done this not using Mechanism, but by creating a surface of the 'male' tooth and then patterning it at very small increments. The increment size was limited by accuracy / regen issues so the result was a bit facetted, but we actually milled parts (face gears) from the model and they inspected OK and seemed to work fine (in a lightly-loaded actuation application though, not 'proper' power transmission).
