Stuck? 
support@mecway.com
support@mecway.com
Mecway
FEA
Victor
About
- Username
- Victor
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,659
- Last Active
- Roles
- Administrator
Comments
-
It's a strange one that I can't solve, sorry. Gmsh (option in Meshing parameters) works OK though. Here's a solid mesh I got. If you don't want to install Gmsh, another way is to export as an stl file and mesh it in Mecway with Mesh tools -> Aut…
-
Not sure if/when I'd add it sorry. Here's a document written by Anthony Falzone which contains the maths. I don't understand it but it seems to work perfectly*. The key equation is: α = -2 Ω ω where Ω and ω are two angular velocities about two pe…
-
Those temperatures don't sound right. Won't they have a artificial thermal contraction in all the non-brazed regions, followed by an even worse one in all the non-weld regions? I think if you use a 0°C reference temperature, you can set the brazed …
-
Sometimes a single large complex surface can cause problems. Maybe the conical(?) surface with the holes is like that. If you can split it into several, that might help. You can try turning on Tools -> Labs -> Smooth geometry preview (slower)…
-
Angular acceleration is just not implemented, sorry. There's no major reason other than that not many people have asked for it. The reason centrifugal force and linear acceleration are available in Quasi-static analysis is because they're putting t…
-
It doesn't currently have either of those features, sorry. You can generate a model with your own software writing an XML .liml file and running Mecway with the command line parameters to solve it. It can also output solution data to a .csv file (So…
-
Changing x to radial can be done simply by changing the direction vector from (1,0,0) to the radial direction (x,0,z). Also, just for convenience, it's not necessary to include so many data points in the table since it gets linearly interpolated any…
-
I think all those steps up to before the welding are doable through the UI. The only risk I see is if the flange has to push the ring through a large strain with a corner-to-surface contact, it might fail. A few people have had trouble with that sit…
-
This is a type of problem that has come up a few times and there's sometimes no good way to do it with Mecway/CCX because of the key point you said about stress being lost after solving. You can get around that by running one big quasi-static solve …
-
1. The edge of a quadratic element is always a parabola or a straight line. To make multiple elements fit that curve, you could use the curve generator or start with a single non-straight element and refine it multiple times which preserves the quad…
-
This seems to be a bug or at least a missing feature that lacks an error message. Loads aren't allowed on the 1D faces of line3 elements with CCX. It looks like force is the only load that meets those conditions. Thanks for pointing it out because I…
-
I used an old example that doesn't quite match your case, sorry. Just change the (-y,x,0) to (x,y,0) in the first displacement constraint in the example to change it to radial. To contract it instead of expanding it, use negative coordinates or a ne…
-
Writing *TRANSFORM directly, you have to be careful about other constraints on the same nodes that it might conflict with. A safer way and simpler way is to specify the displacements as formulas. Radial displacement would have the direction vector …
-
1. Select the fixed elements and right click one then Add elements to new named selection. 2. Solve. 3. Solution -> Sum external forces on the element selection: a) Choose an external force component b) Select only the element selection for the…
-
The stress in that corner may well be high but not as high as at the fixed support so it isn't visible without scaling the contour plot range. Don't forget to refine the mesh since there's likely to be high error near these regions too. I don't thi…
-
Just a follow up after investigating. I think Mecway is behaving correctly here and the problem is caused by the shape of the tri6 element at the axis of symmetry. Its surface normal is not quite parallel to the axis of symmetry so the frictionless …
-
I'd say bonded contact for the pins is non-conservative since it distributes the force around the entire hole instead of concentrating it on one side. You could replace the lower pin with compression only support, or replace bonded contact with cont…
-
That delay before solving turns out to be the solver itself running completely, so it shouldn't be any slower than doing one configuration at a time. The problem is that it locks up the UI and doesn't report progress, so maybe OK if it's unattended …
-
Thanks for reporting that delay and different solution. It must be a bug. I'm still investigating but avoid using Solve all configurations for now. I notice the material's 100 MPa Young's modulus is in the circumferential direction (V) rather than …
-
Poisson's ratio failing is a concern - maybe something else is wrong and that just reveals the problem. Could you attach the file? I'd be skeptical of any results from linear analysis since the displacements when it's collapsed will be much larger …
-
Hello amasha. This is probably not a good forum for such a non-FEA question. I recommend you try eng-tips.com which has a whole sub-forum for ASME codes.
-
Sorry for all the frustrations. Here's a 1 quadrant model that solves with hydrostatic pressure and non-linear. You can use them together for small displacements, it's just that the pressures aren't follower loads which is an issue for large displac…
-
The CCX manual says it has an explicit option (*DYNAMIC,EXPLICIT) but I haven't been able to get it to solve properly.
-
Here you go. Initial velocity (*INITIAL CONDITIONS) doesn't seem to work for shells - only solids from what I can tell. So I used a force to accelerate the object then released the force before impact so it would have a predictable initial velocity.
-
Though it looks similar, this new displacement is about double what it was before. The maximum is now 1.3e-8 m compared to 6.7e-9 m without the midside nodes included. That's because without temperatures on the midside nodes, half the nodes of each …
-
The change is that version 8 and earlier calculated thermal stress using a single average temperature over the whole element but version 9 interpolates the temperature at each integration point which is more accurate. That means non-uniform temperat…
-
Yes, it can do that. You need to make these settings for plastic material options to be enabled: Analysis type: Nonlinear Static 3D or Nonlinear Dynamic Response 3D Solver: CCX
-
Thanks for the suggestions. a) Somebody has asked for this before but it's become low priority. For now, you might find it a little easier to click it and press F2 instead of using the menu. b) Again, yes, especially surfaces, but I haven't done i…
-
This appears to be the "gradient error estimator" (see CCX manual). If it's this, then it's an estimate of the error in the maximum principal stress and is obtained using a heuristic based on the difference between values at the integration points i…
-
That's even more mysterious. It almost sounds like two issues that might be somehow interacting. Would you mind doing these things to help isolate it a bit? 1) Clear all Mecway's settings: 1a) Make a backup of it from %localappdata%/mecway_limit…
