Stuck? 
support@mecway.com
support@mecway.com
Mecway
FEA
Victor
About
- Username
- Victor
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,777
- Last Active
- Roles
- Administrator
Comments
-
@Mishal I've wondered about this sort of thing, but it gets difficult at the connections between elements when they're not colinear. CCX does this with quite complex and buggy MPCs as well as deforming the expanded elements to fit each other. It's q…
-
Hello @dculp You were quite right that the colors are being interpolated badly. I hadn't understood that there was a better way but there is and the version after next (v18) will have more sensible interpolation that includes the two extreme colors…
-
Oh, that's certainly wrong. It looks like this bug affects the other color scales too but it's most prominent with greyscale. I'll fix it for the release after next. Thanks for finding and investigating it so thoroughly.
-
Here are details on how to change the temporary folder's location: https://mecway.com/forum/discussion/comment/1455/#Comment_1455
-
I'm not sure why but @disla here shows how to build up more complex shapes using offset beams: https://mecway.com/forum/discussion/comment/6229/#Comment_6229
-
If the model is big enough, it switches to out-of-core mode which uses temporary files. They're put in a folder that Mecway creates when it starts and deletes it when it exits. It's located in %temp% and named like MecwayInstance######### where # ar…
-
The MITC shell elements are available in the current version (16) but they're not labelled as that since they're not optional and have replaced the old ones.
-
Good stuff. I'll see about getting it to read all the values. Usually these extra variables aren't available in formulas, but you can access them from a script which can also generate a new solution variable similar to what a formula does.
-
Hello JMF. Sorry for the bad surprise. If you used the CCX solver, the solution probably has more than 900 nodes because CCX expands shells to solids. Clear the solution (Solution -> Clear) and it should save OK.
-
I agree with prop_design that it's probably better to use Netgen's own application if you want to do it separately from Mecway. It takes a STEP file, or maybe STL too?? However, if you do want to use Mecway's ngmesh, then yes, it can be run standal…
-
CCX doesn't seem to output the plastic strain components. Equivalent plastic strain is defined in the manual as where ϵ^p is the plastic strain tensor. I don't know what the || || means and if that ends up the same as your formula or not.
-
Oh, I see why the old file fails in Mecway 16. Version 16 applies shell edge forces in a more accurate way that includes moments that account for the geometry change due to the curvature. It looks like CCX has trouble with these moments in this case…
-
I'm having trouble reproducing it. I'm using PreCalibrated Bushings REV1.liml which doesn't solve for me in v16 with the CCX 2.19 or 2.20 but also doesn't show that error message, even if I add another table to one of the forces. Could you please p…
-
Thanks. I guess that explains both Netgen and Gmsh which defaults to Delaunay and doesn't seem to show increase in size away from the surface after-all:
-
I wasn't able to find a setting for min. elements per edge in Gmsh which is why that option isn't available in the GUI. It can't save to the current folder but you can configure the temporary folder it creates to be somewhere more convenient by add…
-
I think those stress discontinuities are real if they're caused by differential expansion of the two materials, so they shouldn't be hidden by softening the tangential stiffness.
-
If you remove tangential stiffness, then it's not really bonded anymore, is it? It should be free to slide. That might be worth having but I think it's a different thing from bonded contact. Or are you saying the existing way is producing wrong res…
-
You want to allow the surfaces to slide against each other but not separate? I think that should be a different type of contact since it has a different physical meaning.
-
Hi @Hengre. I don't think there are any environment variables for the version of CCX that comes with Mecway. But if you downloaded a multithreaded one like with Pardiso or PastiX, there'll be something to set the number of threads. I'm not sure what…
-
@Sergio, probably not because it's too specific.
-
Yes, Mecway always uses m,kg,s for both solvers. So this can restrict the range of values that work well. I know there are issues with nanometer scale meshes.
-
@dculp, that's certainly a problem of it not respecting maximum element size properly. I never knew it behaved like that. I see Gmsh seems to also but without the size grading, it's hard to be sure. I may just rename it to work around the problem. …
-
They're not available with CCX, sorry.
-
@mathiasf, an option to extend the range to be symmetric? I should be able to. It would be independent of the color scale choice though.
-
Reaction forces are only present at the constraints and their colors are only shown on the corresponding beam end faces. You can't really refine truss elements because that creates pin-joints at all the new nodes. A way to get a finer mesh is chang…
-
I'm not sure, sorry. I just treat the max. and min. element sizes as approximate. 70% error in the worst case seems normal.
-
@afro_samurai no donate button but I appreciate the sentiment.
-
Not sure if that behavior would generalize well to other uses. But I see what you mean, that does make it a lot less convenient for projecting onto an infinite plane.
-
Oh, this is a bug. Thanks for finding it, I'll fix it in the next version. The only workaround I can find is to restart Mecway. You can predict when it's about to happen when the target selection shows "0 nodes, faces or elements" instead of "0 fac…
-
@cwharpe, did you know that you can project a set of nodes onto a plane parallel to the 3 global planes by using Mesh tools -> Node coordinates? If you leave some components blank, they're not altered. As for 3-point plane, I think it's almost a…
