Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'trajectory'.



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 2 results

  1. Hello I am using RADIOSS to simulate a crash test which I have previously done. The trajectory of the impactor before impact is complex and requires several linkages and mechanisms to set up. The area of interest is the post-impact behaviour (stress/strain) on the target component, as well as the trajectory of the impactor. When I run the impactor by itself, to see the launch trajectory, I get a reasonable run time of about an hour. When I run the impactor with a simplified initial velocity + the target with all the contact and failure cards defined, I get a reasonable run of about 3 hours. When I run the full model: impactor with the initial trajectory + the target with all the contact and failure cards defined, I get a run around 12 hours to reach the impact, and another 12-24 hours to get results from post impact trajectory. I believe this is partly due the finer mesh required for the target model. I was hoping there is a way I can split the analysis in two, using the results from a the first as an initial condition for the second. Consider the following scenario: Model A: Simple model with only what is required to set off the trajectory of the impactor. The target is not modeled. Run from T=0 to T=T_impact. The run is stopped at the moment where the impact would have occurred. Model B: The target, with finer mesh and contact and fail definition is introduced, and the analysis is "RESTART" picking up from where Model A left off. In other words the target (with finer mesh) only appears just before impact onwards. This should theoretically cut down the majority of the analysis time. Is there a way to set up a RESTART file with introduction of new elements / properties / fail cards, and linking it to a "Stopped" run? I hope the diagrams attached illustrates what I'd like to do. Please let me know if there is a way to do this. Thank you. Best Regards, MN
  2. Submitted by Joe on Fri, 02/15/2013 - 21:37 Hi, I've written some custom blocks in VisSim and they work great. I can simulate and generate code and it shows off our trajectory generation in a motion servo loop really well. My only problem now is that I would like to enter expressions that use variable names from the VisSim diagram in my parameter setup dialog box instead of just numeric constants. Can I do that? If so, how?
×
×
  • Create New...