Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing most liked content since 04/01/13 in all areas

  1. 4 likes
  2. 3 likes
    Hi, Deleting those files usually helps, Or you can write a .bat files like below: "C:/Program Files/Altair/2017.3/hm/bin/win64/hmopengl.exe" -nouserprofiledialog -uOptiStruct Search HyperMesh Startup Options in Altair Connect or in Help doc for more info.
  3. 3 likes
    Hi Vipin You can use "by block" option in *createmark. Here is sample code. set blockname [::hwat::utils::GetUniqueName block "Dummy"]; *createsimpleblock $blockname 11 -100000 -100000 0.5 100000 100000 100000; *createmark surfs 1 "by block name" $blockname; *numbersmark surfaces 1 1; *createmark blocks 1 "by name only" $blockname; *deletemark blocks 1; Thanks, Imoto
  4. 3 likes
    work with only 1/4 Split surface of 2nd by 1st Make 2D mesh on 1st solid (yellow) => Make 3D tet mesh for 1st solid On interface, make 2D mesh on 2nd solid => Equivalence of nodes. Make the rest of 2D mesh of 2nd solid & equivalent of nodes: Finally fill 3D tet for 2nd solid and get the final result: Here's HM model: peca.hm HTH,
  5. 3 likes
    Yes surface is not a named hypermesh entity. If you tagged the surf in catia. Maybe the tag will be imported into hm as metadata. Try searching it by: set md [hm_metadata findall] puts [join [lsearch -all -inline -glob $md "surfs $surfID *"] \n]
  6. 3 likes
  7. 3 likes
  8. 2 likes
    Thank you very mush!I use it to check a solid.It shows Intersections found.But how can i see the intersection facets?
  9. 2 likes
    please Try this: variable list1 proc framework args \ { *createmarkpanel comps 1 "Please select the components "; hm_framework registerproc getorderedcomps graphics_selection_changed; *clearmark comps 1; } proc getorderedcomps args \ { variable list1; lappend list1 [noIntersect;]; } proc noIntersect args \ { variable list1; foreach item [hm_getmark comps 1] \ { if {$item in $list1} \ { continue; } else {set comp $item}; } return $comp } framework puts $list1
  10. 2 likes
    Hi Manjunath, You can do it via: modelHandle AddResult $resultfileloc
  11. 2 likes
    Okay, it kind of got solved. For everyone who has thr same issue. The System or the Mateial orientation dialog does NOT work for this. (2017.2) However you can create a coordinate system und put it into the property as CORDM. Select "USER" and choose the coordinate system. The materila will orient itself around the X-axis.
  12. 2 likes
    Hi Set w .wDemo Destroy $w Toplevel $w Wm transient $w . For {set i 1} {$i<5} {incr i} { Frame $w.f$i Label $w.f$i.lbl -text "Input $i =" Entry $w.f$i.ent Pack $w.f$i.lbl -side left -anchor w Pack $w.f$i.ent -side right -anchor e Pack $w.f$i -side top -anchor nw -fill x } Button $w.b -text Proceed Pack $w.b -side top -anchor e
  13. 2 likes
    Hi Use *entityhighlighting 0 hm_blockredraw 1
  14. 2 likes
    Hi, In your code, destroy .window11 will close the window. Not sure how to close it as soon as you enter a value.
  15. 2 likes
  16. 2 likes
    Hi @etrud011, you can record the command using F10 panel and use it accordingly, for example *createmark elements 1 "displayed" *createmark elements 2 *elementtestjacobian elements 1 0.7 2 2 0 " 2D Jacobian " *deletemark elems 2
  17. 2 likes
    1. The idea is to use the 2D mesh to impose a mesh pattern on hexa mesh. If you want a specific mesh pattern in the through-thickness direction you can also 2D mesh the sides and use nodes or elements as guides (elems to drag/match, along geom). Note that imposing mesh patterns in 2 directions requires well thought out meshing plan as it needs to be 2 directionally mappable. Maybe you will find videos on solid map helpful . 2. surf geom in the case of provided screenshot can be set to none, because it is already defined by elems to drag. Select the surface opposite to the 2D mesh as dest geom. Please hit the like button on useful tips
  18. 2 likes
    When you use hm_pushpanel to invoke panel "automesh" to help user to adjust mesh, hm_pushpanel will return soon and not wait for user finish his work. => do not use hm_pushpanel, you need to pack all remained script into hm_setpanelproc example: eval *createmark surfs 1 $::FlangeSurfs set Holes [p_GetHoles surfs 1] hm_entityrecorder surfs on p_SplitHoles $Holes hm_entityrecorder surfs off eval lappend ::FlangeSurfs [hm_entityrecorder surfs ids] hm_setpanelproc { hm_setcollector automesh [hm_getcolnumber automesh 1] surfs hm_initpanel { eval *createmark surfs 1 $::FlangeSurfs hm_activateitem [hm_getitemnumber automesh mesh] } hm_callpanel automesh eval *createmark elems 1 {"by surface"} $::FlangeSurfs p_SolidMap elems 1 }
  19. 2 likes
    Hi, I did a sample for you to get started. Please find the attachment. Regards, llyle mypopup.tcl
  20. 2 likes
    Hi, If you get max vonmisses value from contour plot, please set an averaging method
  21. 2 likes
    Hi Vipin try using hm_getplanepanel
  22. 2 likes
    Hi Matthieu, Here is a macro for splitting 1D elements in 2 in one shot . I hope it will solve your problem and time *createmarkpanel elements 1 "select beams to split" #set elem_list [hm_getmark elements 1] set num [hm_marklength elements 1] hm_commandfilestate 0 hm_blockerrormessages 1 hm_blockmessages 1 *entityhighlighting 0 hwbrowsermanager view flush false eval *createarray $num [string repeat "2 " $num] *elementmarksplitwith1D 1 1 $num *entityhighlighting 1 hm_commandfilestate 1 hm_blockerrormessages 0 hm_blockmessages 0 hwbrowsermanager view flush true
  23. 2 likes
  24. 2 likes
  25. 2 likes
    Hi, For a fixture design, it depends on the operating frequency range on which the system is tested. You can for keeping the natural frequency around 1.5- 2 times of the operating frequency. If you are going for a component or system level design, understand the range of frequencies to which it is subjected to. For understanding local frequency effect, try running the frequency response analysis.
  26. 2 likes
  27. 2 likes
    Hi there perhaps, hm_getconfigtypeincol will help you
  28. 2 likes
    CBUSH is a generalized spring-damper structural element with can take up to 6 stiffness values.If there are more than one stiffness we need to assign a local coordinate system id. What exactly you want to capture with zero length Bush element?I have attached some documents from user guide for your reference. CBUSH.pdf PBUSH.pdf
  29. 1 like
    Hi, While explicit analysis, I could get one A000 File per 10 minutes once used 4 core , however, I could get one A000 file per 14 minutes once used totally 8 core (+4 logical processors) . How much I increase the logical core numbers, getting A000 animation files speed is getting slower. Another computer we used have totally 72 core ( 36 of 72 are logical processor) has same situation when we include the logical processor in radioss as -nt .. Dou you have any suggestion to speed up our explicit analysis when we would like to use logical processor in PC ? , Thanks in advance.
  30. 1 like
    Hi JIAYU SUN This is because the GeForce series of Nvidia is not officially recommended by HyperWorks. However, this warninig message only appear once. You can proceed further and you may experience some graphical issues in the future. HyperWorks_2017_Hardware_Recommendations_and_Certifications.pdf
  31. 1 like
    Hi John1989 The reference direction for the ports are different. This causes the 180 degree phase shift. You can change it for the MoM port as shown. For the FEM port, it cannot be set, and is assigned automatically internally.
  32. 1 like
    Hi Use panel Tools>scale to scale all comps up to 1000x But remember that you don't need it, just understand result values
  33. 1 like
    You should to switch the SPC to ASET card The rigids element needs to be switched to rbe2 CONROD_Altair_Dis_ABAQUS.fem
  34. 1 like
    Hi albertolazzeri, By looking at these images, i think you don't need inner sphere and those extended cylinders. What ever you have meshed, only those components are enough. and i also see that you have not assigned properties to the components. Make sure you assign proper properties to the components and then run the optimization. Thank you
  35. 1 like
    Hi Pablo I Check this video and forum post too, that may help you clearing the free edges and equivalence nodes.
  36. 1 like
    Hi @dilaawaiz, I think UserManual.pdf chapter 2.22 Sources would be a good starting point.
  37. 1 like
    at first-Do you use HyperMesh? or LSprepost? your surface: just mesh it!=) like this, Anna! p.s. i don't know why, but in this area your mesh shoulbe like in my pic below... otherwise HM won't make solid mesh right. if your solver will be dyna you should know about timestep.=)
  38. 1 like
    Hi yugang You can click delete button from the tool bar, select elements by config. Then select the shell elements and click, delete
  39. 1 like
    Bind it with the joint by a rigidlink F10 check 1d>dependency
  40. 1 like
    Hi mramakri, The results along X-direction relates to r-co-ordinate, Y-direction to t-co-ordinate and Z to z Thank you
  41. 1 like
    Hi Tinh, Thanks For reply.. actually i forgot to free temp memory allocation for automesher... *ameshclearsurface This api solved issue regards, PD
  42. 1 like
    Hi, enter reference guide of hyperwork desktop >>Programming with tcl/tk commands >>tcl/tk commands >>hyperworks desktop >>hypergraph 2d >>pltlBuildPlotsCtrl Class there is an example using method "SelectDataFile" to load file for hypergraph
  43. 1 like
    Hello sangwoo.kang CADFEKO currently does not support an irregular grid (arbitrary points) near field request. It is on our feature backlog an will be available in a future release. If you want to do this in CADFEKO, you will have to create a new near field request for each point. This is not ideal, but it will get you the field values that you need. If you want to venture into EDITFEKO, the FE card does support an arbitrary points. I'll comment on this issue that you wanted to create an arbitrary point near field request in CADFEKO.
  44. 1 like
    The details below contain some information regarding coaxial lines and micrstrip lines, but also contains other meshing suggestions. A solved model is only as good as its mesh. Modelling and meshing guidelines are given in the FEKO User Manual. This how-to gives detailed (but not exhaustive) examples of how to create a good mesh, and also shows comparative results for different meshes. Background CEM techniques discretise either the fields (such as FDTD codes) or the currents (such as MoM codes). Discretisation introduces small but controllable errors in the results. To reduce the error, the mesh size can be reduced, however, this increases computational cost. This how-to will show examples of how to create an appropriate mesh given the accuracy vs computational cost consideration. In addition, comparisons are shown between "good" and "bad" meshes. Example 1: A simple strip dipole in free space The first example is an ordinary strip dipole. To show the mesh differences more clearly, the dipole length was made 1.5 free space wavelengths. Figure 1a: Geometry of a strip dipole - dimensions 1.5 x 1/30 wavelegnths We now consider three different meshes and their results. In the first case we set the triangle mesh size under the Create Mesh dialog to a Custom size of 1/10 of the free space wavelength. This results in an average size for a mesh triangle on the dipole of around 1/20 of the free space wavelength. The smaller than requested elements are due to the narrow width of the dipole - the mesher tries to create each triangle so that its edges have similar lengths. The total number of triangles are 57 triangles. Figure 1b: The strip dipole mesh using a triangle edge length of lam0/10 In the second case we use a finer mesh size on the strip dipole. Here we set the triangle edge length to 1/60 of the free space wavelength. The total number of elements are 414 triangles. Figure 1c: The strip dipole mesh with edge length = lam0/60, zoomed view In the third case the edges of the dipole are protruded perpendicular to the dipole surface with a distance of 1.25 mm or lam0/800. The total number of elements were 140. Figure 1d: Strip dipole with edge triangles Zoomed in view Zoomed out view In the latter case the perpendicular protrusion of the edges causes basis functions to be placed all along the edges of the dipole. This provides increased accuracy for modelling the width of the dipole. Fig. 1e compares the input the resistance and input reactance for the three meshes. It can be seen that the mesh with edge triangles and the lam0/60 mesh provide very similar results, but the "standard" lam0/10 mesh shows a deviation. It is clear that a very accurate answer can still be obtained for a small increase in unknowns with the edge triangles method compared to the very fine lam0/60 mesh. Figure 1e: Comparing the input resistance (left) and input reactance (right) for the different meshes Input resistance Input reactance Note that if we were mainly interested in the far fields of the dipole and not interested in modelling the impedance of the dipole accurately, then the mesh size of 1/10 of the free space wavelength would have been sufficient. Example 2: A section of coax A section of coax can be considered to be geometrically complex - the electrically small radius of curvature requires a fine mesh to accurately represent the curvature. If the mesh is inadequate, the TEM wave that is intended to be launched will not be purely TEM and the impedance of the coax could be inaccurate. Consider the section of air-filled coax in Fig. 2a. The inner radius is 3 mm and outer radius is 2.31 times larger, resulting in a 50 Ohm line. Figure 2a: Geometry of a section of air filled 50 Ohm coax We again consider three different meshes, their unknowns and results. The first mesh uses a mesh size of lam0/10 in the Create Mesh dialog and results in 1292 triangles. This is depicted in Fig. 2b. Figure 2b: The coax meshed with a triangle edge length of lam0/10 The second mesh shown in Fig. 2c creates a so-called ruled mesh by imprinting axial lines onto the inner and outer surfaces of the coax every 30 degrees around the surface. These lines force the mesh triangles to be longitudinally shaped. These triangles are more appropriate for the coax as the current flow is mainly along the axis of the coax and not radial. The mesh contains 1710 triangles. Figure 2c: Ruled mesh of the coax Outer conductor view Inner conductor view The third mesh is also a ruled mesh but here the lines were imprinted every 45 degrees instead of 30 degrees. This mesh contains 1854 triangles. The results are shown in Fig. 2d. It can be seen that the ratio between the reflected power vs incident power is smallest for the "30 degree" ruled mesh, despite this mesh having fewer triangles than the "45 degree" mesh. Figure 2d: Input power vs reflected power for different meshes of the coax Note that ruled meshes are automatically created for curved geometry - it is not necessary to imprint lines on the curvature - the imprinting here was just for demonstration purposes. The ruled mesh can be controlled on the Advanced tab of the Create mesh dialog. It can be enabled/disabled by checking/unchecking the box, "Allow elongated triangles". Example 3: A box with a narrow aperture The geometry consists of a box with a wire inside. The wire is fed with a voltage source and the near fields that radiate through the slot are calculated on a sphere about 3m away on the outside of the box. The model is from the article, "EMI from cavity enclosures," IEEE Trans. EMC. Feb. 2000. The geometry of the box is depicted in Fig. 3a. Figure 3a: Geometry of the box with aperture Outer view Inside view (slightly zoomed) We consider two meshes. The first mesh is where we set the triangle edge length to the usual lam0/10 resulting in 1948 triangles. In the second mesh, we set a local mesh size on the edges of the slot of 3x the width of the slot resulting in 2432 triangles. Specifically, we use the following expression for the local mesh size: min(lam0/10, 3*slot_width). This expression ensures that the slot mesh is parametric - the minimum is taken of lam0/10 and 3*slot_width. Should the frequency increase substantially, the first term in the expression will dominate. Should the slot be made narrower, the second term of the expression will dominate. Fig. 3b shows the two meshes. Figure 3b: Mesh of the box with aperture No local meshing applied With local meshing applied on the slot edges (zoomed view) Fig. 3c shows the result comparison. We see a significant shift in some of the peaks in the curves of the near fields for the two meshes. Clearly, the local mesh size is required. Figure 3c: Emitted nearfield from the box for different meshes Example 4: A section of microstrip line When designing feed networks usually the impedance of the microstrip lines need to be modelled accurately. Similar to Example 1, we will see that using edge triangles provide high accuracy without adding to the computational resources. A section of 50 Ohm microstrip line is modelled. We consider a few meshes and their performance. The first mesh uses a mesh size of min(3*h, lambda_d/10) where h is the substrate height and lambda_d is the wavelength in the substrate. The 1st expression is required to ensure that geometry is meshed such that the triangle size is of the order of the spacing between the geometry (here the line itself and the ground plane beneath). The second expression specifies a mesh size of 1/10th of the wavelength in the dielectric. This mesh results in 2 triangles across the width of the line. The second mesh uses a mesh size of min(h, lambda_d/10). This results in about 4 triangles across the width of the line. Figure 4a: Meshed microstrip line Using a mesh size of min(3*0.5, lambda_d/10) Using a mesh size of min(0.5, lambda_d/10) The third mesh uses edge triangles by means of a vertical protrusion of the microstrip edges. The fourth mesh is a slight variation of the third mesh in that the edge triangles are still used but they are in the same plane as all other triangles. Figure 4b: Meshed microstrip line continued Using edge triangles vertically protruded from the line edge Using edge triangles in the same plane Comparing the input resistance and reflection coefficient of the line it is seen that the line with 2 triangles across the width of the line gives the least accurate answer. Using a finer mesh to obtain about 4 triangles across the line provides better accuracy. However, the meshes with edge triangles are the most accurate. Figure 4c: Input resistance and reflection coefficient for the 50 Ohm microstrip line Input resistance Input reflection coefficient The reason that the input resistance is not exactly 50 Ohm is due to the feed. It represents a discontinuity in the microstrip mode. De-embedding the feed should provide more accuracy. (The same feed was used in all cases). Example 5: An F5 generic aircraft model - RCS The monostatic RCS of a generic F5 aircraft model is calculated. We compare the results for different mesh densities. The F5 model is shown in Fig. 5.1 Figure 5.1: Geometry the F5 aircraft The mesh sizes and number of elements evaluated are as follows: lam0/3.5 = 44712 triangles lam0/4.5 = 76111 triangles lam0/6.8 = 170246 triangles The RCS comparison is shown in Fig. 5.2. Figure 5.2: Monostatic RCS from the side and front of the F5, swept from top to bottom RCS from the front RCS from the side It is seen that even for a very coarse mesh, the RCS result is nearly converged. It must be stressed that the above results are very dependent on the geometry. Nearfields computed close to some areas on the surfaces could be inaccurate, or the received power in an antenna attached to the aircraft could also be inaccurate. The model was solved with the MLFMM. It must be noted that in all cases the residuum for the iterative solution for the MLFMM was set to 1e-5 (the default is 3e-3). This is sometimes required when very small values are expected in the results. Here, for example, the RCS goes down to 40 dB below the maximum. Example 6: An F5 generic aircraft model - antenna coupling We use the F5 model again but this time compute the coupling between two monopole antennas. This is to further demonstrate the mesh size is dictated also by the type of problem being solved. One monopole is located on the top near the nose of the aircraft. The other monopole is located on the bottom near the tail of the aircraft. Fig. 6.1 depicts the F5 with the monopole antennas (only their ports are visible). Figure 6.1: Geometry of the F5 aircraft showing the ports of the two antennas Again we expect very low values, so we set the residuum for the MLFMM to 1e-5. To save on computation time, the maximum number of samples for the adaptive frequency sampling was set to 31. This causes some discontinuities in the interpolated results displayed. The coupling for different mesh sizes are shown in Fig. 6.2. Figure 6.2: Antenna coupling for different mesh sizes It is seen that there is a 10 to 15 dB difference between the coarsest mesh and the finest mesh. It may even be necessary to use an even smaller than lam0/8 mesh size. Notes on FDTD meshing Surface current techniques in general require that the mesh size is reduced in proportion to the frequency. Doubling the frequency requires the mesh size to be halved. Due to numerical dispersion in the FDTD, this general rule of thumb is not conservative enough. According to Davidson [1], "it is important to appreciate that phase error accumulates across a domain. The absolute phase error over a fixed length L is approximately (k^3)(h^2)L/36" where k is the phase constant and h is the voxel size. This "implies that cell size must scale with frequency as (2*pi*f)^-1.5 to keep the error constant and hence the number of cells in each dimension scales with (2*pi*f)^1.5". For example, if the frequency is doubled, the cell size must be reduced to approximately 0.35 of the cell size at the initial frequency. Final comments This how-to didn't cover all the techniques in FEKO. For example, the ray-launching solver requires that the mesh only represents the geometry accurately. Also the FEM-MoM solver uses higher order basis functions and thus requires mesh sizes of around 1/5 of the wavelength in the dielectric. There are also higher order basis functions for the MoM and physical optics (PO) with large triangles. However, this how-to shows that coarse meshes are useful to obtain fast "ball-park" results, and in some cases very good results. The mesh sizes used in the examples in this how-to should not be taken as final for any model. It is given as a starting guideline. Mesh convergence tests* should always be done before taking results as truly final. [1] David B. Davidson, "Computational Electromagnetics for RF and Microwave Engineering" Second Ed. Cambridge University Press, p 117 * Rerunning the model with 50% more mesh elements and comparing the results with that of the original mesh.
  45. 1 like
    It's NOT so simple! Take a simple case of a beam in tension. If you increase the geometrical dimension as twice (x=2*x; y=2*y; z=2*z). The section will be increased 4 time! So if you increase your load twice, the stress of new model is only the half of initial ones! Have a look at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Similitude_(model)
  46. 1 like
    hi, i did a spring modelisation between body meshed parts and i simulated a static analysis, and it gives as a warning "compliance is negative or large 4.54e+11 compliance". what should i do to fix this problem ?
  47. 1 like
    Larger displacement in your model represents there is some connectivity issue in meshing. Go to Edges Panel ( Shift + F3 ) > Find the edges > Equivalence ( Connect unconnected edges ) On a softer note, you can follow below provided instructions to avoid this issue - a Maintain same density of elements between Design & Non-design region to establish proper connectivity b. Go for Mappble Option for proper Hex Meshing.
  48. 1 like
    If you are using Solid Thinking Inspire for analysis & optimization.Then above screenshot loads shows that load acting on entire face not on single point.Connectors option allows you to use rigid elements (Rigid i.e RBE2 & Flexible i.e RBE3) for load transfer.
  49. 1 like
    Yes the relation range = 2 amplitude is valid in any case, even on random loads. The rainflow count will be the same.
  50. 1 like
    Hi, if a list is not existing, generate it: set ListConfigType {} foreach Config {tria3 quad4 tetra4 penta6 hex8} { set TypeIDs [hm_entityinfo configtypeids elems $Config] puts "$Config:\t$TypeIDs" dict set ListConfigType $Config $TypeIDs }
×
×
  • Create New...