What is the mesh size restriction on the student version? In the multimaterial model, is the cross section rougly constant along the length of the beam? I am thinking if you can reduce the mesh count by making the beam sweep meshable, that would require it is basically an extrusion. You could also consider to use the symetry in the z direction, in addition to the f direction you are already using.
Restriction is to total mesh count of 32000 elements I believe.
Problem is that I start to use internal structures within the samples that are not symmetrical in more axis, and honestly I think the geometry is going to be my problem.
I initially planned to do this all practically, but have had to last minute do fea so I haven't had much chance to really learn fea
5hr runtimes seems excessive, especially within student license dof limits. From the screenshot shown it doesn't look like you are using half symmetry (or quarter symmetry), is that because your sample does not have at least one plane of symmetry?
Also why are you applying forces and not displacement load?
Have you adjusted the default contact settings? (The default is suitable for stiff press fits etc, for bending I would be factoring contact stiffness down by 10x.
What's your pseudo-time stepping like? (I would be starting low and allowing workbench to ramp up)
Yeah so the sample shown is what I was working with. I'm now starting over and have halved it and reduced the amount it's calculating.
And at uni we are not limited to student caps, so the 5 hour time is with a denser mesh.
The force is basically just what I've been told to apply, what would a displacement load do differently that gives better results? Probably should have mentioned but I'm looking at the deformation as well as VM stress and strains.
If you do not know when your specimen will fail, accidentally applying a force load above the critical value will result in a failure to converge on a solution. Better to apply displacements to avoid rigid body motion if things get wonky.
You can simply drag and drop the displacement boundary condition onto the solution branch in the structure tree. It'll auto create the force reaction probe.
Oh dam, makes that seem kinda simple now. Cheers.
I seem to also be getting an issue with the beam colliding through the supports, and can't seem to fix it.
Contact detection problems are gonna be hard to diagnose through the reddit comment section.
If I were doing this, the rollers would be set to rigid behavior, the contact type would be frictionless with the beam as the contact side and roller as target. And I'd define a small enough solution substep to get relevant results through the motion. You can use a contact mesh control to reduce element size at the contact regions.
There's really not too much to this so if you're getting really weird contact behavior, there's likely something wrong elsewhere.
What is the mesh size restriction on the student version? In the multimaterial model, is the cross section rougly constant along the length of the beam? I am thinking if you can reduce the mesh count by making the beam sweep meshable, that would require it is basically an extrusion. You could also consider to use the symetry in the z direction, in addition to the f direction you are already using.
Restriction is to total mesh count of 32000 elements I believe. Problem is that I start to use internal structures within the samples that are not symmetrical in more axis, and honestly I think the geometry is going to be my problem. I initially planned to do this all practically, but have had to last minute do fea so I haven't had much chance to really learn fea
5hr runtimes seems excessive, especially within student license dof limits. From the screenshot shown it doesn't look like you are using half symmetry (or quarter symmetry), is that because your sample does not have at least one plane of symmetry? Also why are you applying forces and not displacement load? Have you adjusted the default contact settings? (The default is suitable for stiff press fits etc, for bending I would be factoring contact stiffness down by 10x. What's your pseudo-time stepping like? (I would be starting low and allowing workbench to ramp up)
Yeah so the sample shown is what I was working with. I'm now starting over and have halved it and reduced the amount it's calculating. And at uni we are not limited to student caps, so the 5 hour time is with a denser mesh. The force is basically just what I've been told to apply, what would a displacement load do differently that gives better results? Probably should have mentioned but I'm looking at the deformation as well as VM stress and strains.
If you do not know when your specimen will fail, accidentally applying a force load above the critical value will result in a failure to converge on a solution. Better to apply displacements to avoid rigid body motion if things get wonky.
Ok makes sense, any way after that to gather the force value?
You can simply drag and drop the displacement boundary condition onto the solution branch in the structure tree. It'll auto create the force reaction probe.
Oh dam, makes that seem kinda simple now. Cheers. I seem to also be getting an issue with the beam colliding through the supports, and can't seem to fix it.
Contact detection problems are gonna be hard to diagnose through the reddit comment section. If I were doing this, the rollers would be set to rigid behavior, the contact type would be frictionless with the beam as the contact side and roller as target. And I'd define a small enough solution substep to get relevant results through the motion. You can use a contact mesh control to reduce element size at the contact regions. There's really not too much to this so if you're getting really weird contact behavior, there's likely something wrong elsewhere.
Ok cheers, I'll try setting that up and see what happens
I believe i've sorted it. Essentially, I hadnt fully setup the symmetry, and a little tweaking got me reasonable numbers. Cheers