Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'design'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Altair Support Forum
    • Welcome to Altair Support Forum
    • Installation and Licensing
    • Modeling & Visualisation
    • Solvers & Optimization
    • Multi Body Simulation
    • Conceptual design and Industrial design
    • Model-Based Development
    • Manufacturing Simulation
    • CAE Process Automation
  • Academic Partner Alliance Forum
    • APA - Composites
    • APA - CFD & Thermal
    • APA - Vehicle Dynamics
    • APA - Manufacturing
    • APA - Crash and Safety
    • APA - Noise, Vibration and Harshness
    • APA - System Level Design
    • APA - Structural and Fatigue
    • APA - Marine
    • APA - Optical Design
  • Japanユーザーフォーラム
    • ユーザーフォーラムへようこそ
    • Altair製品の意外な活用例
    • インストールとライセンス
    • モデリング(プリプロセッシング)
    • シミュレーション技術(ソルバー)
    • データ可視化(ポストプロセッシング)
    • モデルベース開発
    • コンセプト設計と工業デザイン
    • 製造シミュレーション
    • CAE プロセスの自動化
    • 学生向け無償版
    • エンタープライズソリューション

Categories

There are no results to display.


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Interests


Organization

Found 14 results

  1. ESAComp is software for analysis and design of composites. Its scope ranges from conceptual and preliminary design of layered composite structures to analyses of details. ESAComp is a stand-alone software tool, but thanks to its ability to interface with widely used finite element software packages, ESAComp fits seamlessly into the design process. The comprehensive material database of ESAComp forms the basis for design studies. ESAComp has a vast set of analysis capabilities for solid/sandwich laminates and for micromechanical analyses. It further includes analysis tools for structural elements: flat and curved panels, stiffened panels, beams and columns, bonded and mechanical joints. ESAComp is developed and supported by Componeering Inc., Finland. www.esacomp.com or check out our Altair Partner page http://www.altairhyperworks.com/partner/ESAComp ESAComp-Intro.pdf
  2. Join us on either April 5th/6th/11th 2017 Presenters: Harri Katajisto & André Mönicke, Componeering Inc. To get an overview to the new capabilities of ESAComp 4.6, sign-up here to join our free webinars: http://www.esacomp.com/webinars/live Python scripting for batch runs and for creating user extensions Enhanced panel analysis with shell modelled stiffeners Structural analysis of thick-walled pressure vessels with solid FE modelling from winding patterns imported from ComposicaD filament winding simulation For HyperWorks users, an integrated solution for pre- and post-processing of composite structures, allowing ply-by-ply investigation of failure modes using advanced failure criteria The webinar takes appr. 45 minutes including a Questions & Answers session at the end.
  3. The 4th European Altair Academic User Day on June 26th (during the European Altair Technology Conference, June 26th - 28th in Frankenthal Germany) provides students, teachers, professors and researchers across Europe to network and share their experiences with Altair’s CAE solutions. Join us to hear how ESAComp assists schools and universities offering composite engineering courses, both in the class room and for post-grad research. Register here -> http://www.altairatc.com/EventPage.aspx?event_id=89&name=Academic+Day+2017 ESAComp-EDU-06-2014.pdf
  4. For thick-walled composite pressure vessels, solid modelling has been added to ESAComp's existing shell analysis module for thin-walled CPVs. The videos in this playlist form a tutorial that describes the modelling approach and workflow in detail. Check-out "Solid CPV Modelling with ESAComp & ComposicaD" now available here -> http://www.altair.com/ResourceLibrary.aspx?translation_id=7541
  5. Hello, I'm searching for an easy way to implement the following constraint for a group of design variables in an optimization study within the Hyperstudy interface. Let's assume we have the variables A, B, and C wich should be varied within the following ranges: A: Lower Bound: 0, Upper Bound: 1, Initial Value: 0.33 B: Lower Bound: 0, Upper Bound: 1, Initial Value: 0.33 C: Lower Bound: 0, Upper Bound: 1, Initial Value: 0.33 Whereas the general constraint A+B+C<=1 musn't be violated. My approach using the function "Link Variables" did not lead to an appropriate result. I would like to avoid a redefinition of the parameters within the solver input file (i.e. by A = A/(A+B+C), in consideration of the explicit assignment between the parameters defined by Hyperstudy and the "real" parameters used within the solver. Does anybody know of an convenient way to implement the constraints as described? Thank you for your efforts in advance. Cheers, Felix
  6. The 4th European Altair Academic User Day on June 26th (during the European Altair Technology Conference, June 26th - 28th in Frankenthal Germany) provides students, teachers, professors and researchers across Europe to network and share their experiences with Altair’s CAE solutions. Join us to hear how ESAComp assists schools and universities offering composite engineering courses, both in the class room and for post-grad research. Register here -> http://www.altairatc.com/EventPage.aspx?event_id=89&name=Academic+Day+2017 ESAComp-EDU-06-2014.pdf
  7. Throughout JEC World show, come and see ESAComp in action with our engineers. With the launch of ESAComp 4.6, we'll show you the new capabilities, including Python scripting; enhanced panel analysis with shell modelled stiffeners... ESAComp now provides structural analysis of thick-walled pressure vessels from winding patterns imported from Composicad filament winding simulation. For HyperWorks users, ESAComp provides fully integrated solution for pre- and post-processing of composite structures, allowing ply-by-ply investigation of failure modes using advanced failure criteria. We're an active member of Altair Partner Alliance, find us together with Altair Engineering in Hall 5A on Stand N68
  8. Hello, I would like to do some lattice optimization in Hypermesh. However, I need to know if it is possible to have a different mesh size for the lattice sections compared to the solid sections. The way I understand lattice optimization in Altair is that the element size you mesh with originally will determine the average length of the lattice struts. For example; I tetra mesh my model with a size of 2, the lattice beams have an average length of 2. However, I would like to have a mesh size of 0.5 with lattice elements of length 2 (or vice versa). My game plan is to run a minimize compliance with volume fraction on my model with a penalization of 1.8 (low porosity). Then use the results of the compliance optimization to split my part into sections for a given element density threshold. I should end up with solids for the lattice elements and solids for the non-lattice elements. The lattice solid sections will then be filled with lattice beam elements from another lattice topology optimization. I want to remesh each solid individually for different lattice strut sizes and types. Contact surfaces will then be used to connect the solids together and then run the Lattice optimization. The end goal is to use mesh refinement on the non lattice sections to check the validity of my model as well as experiment with different lattice sizes. Any advice is greatly appreciated. -Eric
  9. Hello all, I am new to topology optimization and I need your help to create the design and non-design spaces. What is the best way to do this? Should I create 2 different bodies in the part in Catia V5 in order to get 2 different components in Hypermesh, and then connect and mesh them? In this case, how could I connect the 2 components? Or should I create only one main body and define the non design space within Hypermesh? (But the design of the part is not simple. I fear this might be difficult) Feel free to contact me if I'm not clear enough Thank you very much Best regards Florian
  10. Hi Everybody, after performing an optimization straight to the ply stacking optimization, this last step of optimization ended without a feasible or an infeasible design. The output-file its attached, so you can see for yourself. Surprising to me is, that the ply stacking order is being shuffled, thus the output file doesn't name it a feasible design. Besides the simulation was performed on the same model, only the starting plythicknesses of the laminate where change in order to make sure, I am optimizing a global optimum. I hope you guys can help me. Kind regards for your help in advance. Dean nb016_V1_increased_laminate_2.out
  11. Composite structures all have joints, so their design and analysis is paramount to determining their overall performance. Therefore, ESAComp has comprehensive capabilities for both bonded and mechanical joints which are very efficient in the preliminary design of various joint configurations. Read more -> http://innovationintelligence.com/dont-come-unstuck-designing-structural-adhesive-bonds/ www.esacomp.com
  12. Hello, I've built a composite I beam and optimatized the thickness plys only, but, I would like to get the best height for the beam web. At the moment i'm doing this manually, comparing the results of the composite optimization for differents heights, but for each height, at this moment, i have to build all the laminate again, from zero. How can i automatized this process? or at least do it in a smart way. It's possible to do a shape optimization for composites to get the best web height without it buckling or failure? more info about the simulation: In the optimization process, for the free size stage: obj :min compliance constrains: vfrac 0.3 for the size stage: obj: min mass constrains: -buckling modes 1, 2 and 3 λ >1 -max displacement of the node on the center of the beam < 12mm -Tsai Hill failure criteria < 1 The files are attached Thanks: Lucas Pereira cat_A_optimization_freesize.hm cat_A_optimization_size.hm
  13. Hello Currently I have a problem in the topology optimization of a bearing bracket. It has two components: non design and design component. The topology optimization is feasible, but there is no connection between the non design and design part. In the two pictures you can see, that the design part around the four holes only exists by the most minimal density. For the moment there is a contact 'TIE' between the non design and design components. Do you know how to connect the two parts, to get a topology optimization which connects them? I thank you in advance for your help!
  14. The 4th European Altair Academic User Day on June 26th (during the European Altair Technology Conference, June 26th - 28th in Frankenthal Germany) provides students, teachers, professors and researchers across Europe to network and share their experiences with Altair’s CAE solutions. Join us to hear how ESAComp assists schools and universities offering composite engineering courses, both in the class room and for post-grad research. Register here -> http://www.altairatc.com/EventPage.aspx?event_id=89&name=Academic+Day+2017 ESAComp-EDU-06-2014.pdf
×
×
  • Create New...