Stuck? 
support@mecway.com
support@mecway.com
Mecway
FEA
Victor
About
- Username
- Victor
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,777
- Last Active
- Roles
- Administrator
Comments
-
That sounds like it made the surface mesh (its first step) but failed to make the solid mesh from it for some reason.
-
That "h" bug should have been fixed in v17. So please update to the latest one if you haven't. Otherwise, could you send me the file to find out why it's still doing that? However, it won't help the meshing and just show a generic error message. I…
-
Choose yes and it'll show you where the problems are. It might be hard to see the selected edges, so adjust the view options as needed.
-
That's amazing. Regarding importing the mesh, do they include *ELSETs, *SURFACEs, or anything that Mecway could merge with existing components/named selections when you import?
-
@Philipps, the shell elements aren't very good when they're distorted. It might only be a local effect that you can ignore, or locally refine it if that region is important.
-
This is an important point from @prop_design "Then just converting those elements back keeps the quad4 geometry, rather than what you originally started with." The final quad8 mesh will have mostly flat elements which can make the results wrong. Qu…
-
My email is the one in the top-right corner of the page It sounds like you've already used the procedure for meshing an STL file in the normal case where it works correctly - File -> Open then Mesh tools -> Automesh 3D.
-
All I can think of is either you scaled only some of the nodes as @disla suggested or scaled them to 0 in at least on dimension. Could you post the model or email it to me?
-
I see, sorry about this inability to mesh small-scale meshes. You'll have to scale it up using Mesh tools -> Scale before meshing. You can then scale it back to the correct size afterwards.
-
If you're opening a .stl file, you can choose units when you open the file and that will scale it. If it's already in Mecway, ensure no nodes, faces or element are selected, then use Mesh tools -> Scale to scale it.
-
I don't know about that. It should just work. Could you post the .liml file?
-
I can reproduce it now. It seems to be because of the pyramid elements at the edges of the refined region. I'll investigate further but it might turn out that the solution ends up being "don't use pyramids with node-surface coupling" Mecway just e…
-
I'm not seeing that asymmetry. Could you post the model where it happens? The fact that it depends on the order of refine and extrude suggests something's wrong with the mesh. Are you sure the reference node is still at the center? If you create i…
-
Great news! Thanks for testing it.
-
@Sture @kuhl @Sergio I've made a patch with an updated version of MKL. The existing one is 10 years old so that might magically fix the problem. If you'd like to use it, download from https://mecway.com/UpdatedMKLForMecway18.zip and extract the two …
-
It should respect the units in the file but might display them converted to some other unit that you've been using. If they're not converted correctly, could you attach an example .unv file and tell me what software made it? Some software writes th…
-
Apply it to the faces on the inside of the tank instead of the outside. If they're difficult to select, you might use cutting plane (slider on right of toolbar) to expose some of them, or Edit -> Invert selection.
-
It's according to the element node numbering. Solid elements made by Extrude or Revolve have T in the extrusion direction. Other than that, I usually just guess and undo when it's wrong. I know it's a pain, sorry.
-
I'll add that to my list.
-
There isn't really a remote force or load distributing node-surface coupling like RBE3. CCX has that (*DISTRIBUTING) but it's sometimes wrong so I don't recommend it. Instead, you can apply the load to the surfaces around the edge and also apply a …
-
They use the original element shapes. The internal solver produces derived field variables (stress and strain, not displacement) as both node averaged and at element nodes, so the integral tools use the element node values in those cases. I'm not s…
-
I'm not sure if it works or not. But you also pointed out in that thread that plastic materials get 5 integration points through the thickness so it looks like some are already closer to the surface than the usual 2 for elastic materials. I agree s…
-
Cool. I wonder if you could check if other settings get saved properly? Maybe it's reading the file but not writing to it?
-
I don't know why it shows an R there and if that really means it's B31R or not, but regarding the error, you have to refine the mesh with CCX beams, then it approaches the correct value.
-
Yes, like this between and : anywhere at the same level as the other elements.
-
@harryvanlangen It sounds like Wine might not be storing or reading any of the settings which Mecway keeps in user.config that on Windows is usually in %localappdata%/Mecway_Limited. I don't know if that gives you anything to go on.
-
A workaround to get integration points closer to the surface of shells might be to use laminate material with two thing layers at the surface since each layer has its own integration points. I've heard of this but not tried it myself.
-
@disla OK
-
I wonder if it is that compatibility not enforced option. From a quick search, it looks like that causes strains to be compatible between adjacent elements at the expense of displacements, so gaps and intersections can form. That's the opposite of w…
-
I don't know what element compatibility means there or whether it would improve or worsen the frequencies. I'm leaning towards something being wrong with the Autodesk model, material properties, or dimension since there are very consistent results …
