Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Mr.Alb last won the day on February 4

Mr.Alb had the most liked content!

About Mr.Alb

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Research and CAE simulations
  • Are you University user?

Recent Profile Visitors

374 profile views
  1. Hello Crashphys, FEM is pretty general as field. In RADIOSS solver, you can performe a cut to consider only a part of your whole system for explicit analysis. (https://altairuniversity.com/28761-radioss-sub-modeling-cut-approach/) If you work with linear problems, maybe the field of most typical optimization problems, with OPTISTRUCT you have to consider how real components contraint the item you want to optimize. Unfortunately, I don't know how you can make a binding bond... In my opinion, when you performe an optimization the real limit is the submodel you're considering rather than the constraints you've imposed. Usually accounting all part as possible is a good choice to do a meaningful optimum. For instance, are you really sure that optimizing one panel at once, globally it results in an optimum structure? Loads pattern could be very different in my opinion... Let me know
  2. It may depend on timestep. If it's too big, you could lose your slope in PLOAD. Anyway, to compare static and quasi-static i suggest you to try with less slope, because with a high one, analysis's closer to a dynamic than a static evaluation. Let me know!
  3. I suggest you to modify this title and rename it with some shorter one. In Radioss, there isn't a unit system panel, so you have to put consistent units in all your model (mesh, material, property, timestep, cards ecc). With timestep you subdivide your analysis as frames for a video, so you have to know how much resolution you need. Can you share your engine and model files?
  4. Hi Korosh, I checked your model. It seems that you have made some mistakes with elements. I fixed your model, but you can fix it yourself by updating elemet types (2D>elemt types>elems>All>update), then export your rad and import it again in hypercrash. I tried, it works. Let me know! new_0000.rad new_0001.rad
  5. I have the same problem. Is not possible to know how the algorithm works in GRSM method? There are a lot of different algorithms, for instance: Line-Search Approach Trust Region Approach Simplex Method Newton’s Method Quasi-Newton Methods Conjugate Direction Methods Levenberg–Marquardt Methods Elimination Methods Lagrangian Methods Active Set Methods Penalty and Barrier Function Methods Sequential Quadratic Programming Mixed Integer Programming NLPQLP Many Thanks
  6. ok, let's suppose for instance that my changes were about thickness on the front rails for my vehicle. Thickness varies within few millimiters (about 3mm), but when It's thin, the car folds deeply against the wall, whereas if It's thick, the car folds a little and then has a rebound. With the cut approach I have imposed the displacement to the section force so that the car's dynamic is fixed, isn't it? In this way, I cant't appreciate differences due to the thickness changes, can I? (Total mass isn't very affected from thickness changes (less than 1%), but stiffness might be) Many thanks again for your reply
  7. Hi, I have an issue with cut approach (https://altairuniversity.com/learning-library/radioss-sub-modeling-cut-approach/). I'm modeling an half of full vehicle with the cut approach above. From this sub-model, with hyperstudy I modify a little bit the geometry and study how the crash changes dynamic. I wonder how dynamics could vary among runs if the section-force imposes original displacements? Many Thanks
  8. Thank you so much, Andy. Thorough response!
  9. Good morning, I have an issue when I run a RADIOSS .rad file on my local group's cluster. At the end of the analysis, It doesn't automatically extract the .h3d file, although It does so locally on my pc. I have all animations A0*, but I'd rather It extracts h3d automatically instead of doing manually with hvtrans. I use Radioss Block 120, Many Thanks
  10. ok sorry, just solved. From Preferences>keyboard settings just fill a free gap with "hm_pushpanel {qualityindex}".
  11. Hi everyone, I wonder whether it's possible to configurate as a shortcut the 2D--> quality index. I know that from Preferences>keyboard settings I can change shortcuts, but i need the scripts and I can't find that one in my folders. I use Hypermesh 2019.1, many thanks! Regards
  12. This solved my issue. Many thanks! Was there a bug in previous versions?
  13. It's a little tricky for me, but i could try as soon as possible if there aren't any other solutions. I will keep you informed
  14. No, I'm using full version 2017.2 of hyperstudy and I've indicated Radioss.bat (2017.1) as script, but also with the same version 2017.1 (of Hyperstudy and Radioss) I encountered this problem
  15. Hi, I'm using Hyperstudy 2017.2 and Radioss as a solver. I encounter an error when I perform the evaluate step in the DOE approach. It happens that during a run (whatever) the evaluate and extract steps can't finish succesfully, but there aren't errors in the messages box and in the .out file I can read that analysis is already finished with normal termination: in spite of this, the cursor keeps turning and seems to be waiting to finish evaluation. I realized that when it happens, there isn't the .h3d file in the run folder, even if run is completed and all animation A0# are created. I realized also that by finishing the "hvtrans" process from the task manager, or (is the same) Tclsh85t application, hyperstudy concludes the evaluate step, extracts results and goes to the next run. It's a random problem, but it always happens at least once. Thank you all for helping out.
  • Create New...