I have calculated a total time to get results of about 8 min. (Of course, starting from a different mesh, the final result, in terms of mesh, is different with respect to the one I posted in the first report.) I've made a new analysis by meshing the CAD model with some local control of the mesh only on the two vertical holes and around the ring slot (see SW_initial_mesh.jpg) and then running a h-adaptative analysis getting the final mesh you can see in figure SW_final_mesh.jpg. starting from the final mesh SW had generated at the end of the first analysis! Thus it was so fast! Sorry for the mistake. I made the first analysis some weeks ago and I just re-run the analysis before preparing the report, but. 3) A multi-resolution is welcome to better adapt basis functions to small geometrical features.Ĥ) Run time can be strongly speed-up on Rhino V5 64 bit version.Ībout question (1) I reviewed my SW model and I realized there's a mistake in the run time I reported. 2) SnS should allow to save more analyses carried out on the same model. 1) After running an analysis, if I modify the model (just moving a face, for example) and a lunch again SnS on that solid, the software show me previous results and doesn't alert me about variations in the model. While testing SnS I faced out with the following issues. Consider, moreover, that SW and Comsol got the same maximum x-displacement, and displacements are usually considered the more reliable results in contrast with stresses. On the other hand, SW simulation is supposed to give the more accurate solution as the mesh improvements are made automatically through the h-adaptative method, not adopted in Comsol. While run time are similar for SW Simulation (about 1 min + 30 sec for meshing) and Comsol (about 2 min + 10 min for meshing), about 6 min where needed for SnS on a notebook (Centrino 2 DUO T9600, 8GB Ram, Win7 64 bit, Rhino V4).įrom the comparison one can see the very good agreement between SnS and Comsol results ( benchmark_grid), whereas some significant differences arise with SW Simulation. In SnS the maximum resolution was set and the element size of the basis functions is much bigger than the average mesh size set in the other software. In Comsol some issues were found to mesh the model and a tuning manual set-up of mesh parameters was necessary to mesh small patches. In SW Simulation a h-adaptative mesh analysis was performed as previous results were depending strongly from the mesh adopted in the more stressed areas. Moreover, both inner planar faces of the coupler are constrained in z direction (to simulate the presence of the mate coupler). The coupler is fixed in all directions on the ring slot, and pulled along x-axis on both coaxial cylindrical holes with 20kN (applied on half cylinder). The study is related to a vehicle coupler ( 3D model) with many small features and fillets. I made a benchmark study among Scan&Solve and two simulation software I usually use: SolidWorks Simulation (2010, 64 bit) and Comsol Multiphysics (3.5a, 64bit).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |