Challenge

Analysis on member for different Properties and infer

Aim : To do Explicit Analysis on given component and infer by changing properties

Procedure

Given rad files

Imported file using Import Solver deck

In ENG_ANIM_DT

based on given values average was take `T fre``Tf req = (Time)/(Animations )`

`55/50 =1.1`

As given change Tfreq as to obtain 50 Animation files

In ENG_RUN

Run time changed to 55ms

In Properties -> Hat-section -> Recommended Properties are changed

Before Applying Recommended Properties

After Applying Recommended Properties

Inference :

Energy Error

It is Radioss Percentage

If the error is negative, it means that some energy has been dissipated.

The normal amount of Hourglass energy is about -10% to -15%.

In case of using QEPH shell formulation (Ishell=24) or fully integrated elements, the Energy Error can be slightly positive since there is no Hourglass energy and the computation is much more accurate. An error of +1% or +2% is acceptable

The Hourglass energy is not counted in this energy balance, so that a negative energy error generally occurs (except if using Ishell=24 (QEPH) or Ishell=12 (BATOZ) shells, and fully integrated solids, for which there is no Hourglass).

If we look into above data Energy error has become -0.1 to -0.0 there has been decrease in energy errror

There is also drastic change in Cycle as cycle starts from 550 then increases where as after applying recommended changes the cycles values are periodic; Cycle time value has reduced simulation was fast after applying changes

Before Applying Recommended Properties

After Applying Recommended Properties

Inference :

Kinetic Energy is high in both the cases

Internal Energy is 0 for both the cases

In case 1

it seems like the K.E and I.E curves are going steeper where I.E looks like it'll cross with K.E but K.E becomes after certain path; we can see that if we can increase Tstop value

Whereas in Case 2

Both the curves are going steeper at 53- 55 ms they become parallel.

Before Applying Recommended Properties

After Applying Recommended Properties

Inference :

Normal Force and Frictional Force

Case 1 and Case 2

We can see that the load impact was high in both the cases

In Case 1 the Normal force and Frictional force are in a way parallel starting at 10ms with load impact on various nodes

In Case 2 the the both curves meet at 54ms and the curve is based on Impact force is varied with respect to time

Before Applying Recommended Properties

After Applying Recommended Properties

Inference :

Case1 and Case2

In both the cases the Resultant force was higher at the start

In case 1 there is increase and then with fluctuations there is again rise in Resultant force after 50ms

In Case 2 the fluctuatuion starts at 10ms then the curve goes steeper down there is decresse in Resultant force after applying Qeph 24

Before Applying Recommended Properties

After Applying Recommended Properties

Inference :

In both the cases there curve are almost similar but there is difference in Hourglass Energy

In Case 1 there is increased Hourglass Energy from starting due to which there was more unsual deformation in Von mises Stress and Displacement

In Case 2 there is reduced Hourglass Energy, controlled the H.E using Node Integration and Qeph 24 values

Before Applying Recommended Properties

After Applying Recommended Properties

Time Step

The time step at the master node of the rigid body is computed by reporting stiffness at slave nodes to the master node.

It's also based on rigid body properties

The change in mesh elements due to impact there has been delay in time step

Von mises Streses Before Applying Recommended Properties

Von mises Streses After Applying Recommended Properties

Von Mises Stress

In Contour we can visualize the both the cases of deformation due to impact

Compact to case 1 the time of impact varies in both cases

Simulation completed faster in Case 2 compared to case 1

Results

As we used qpeh hourglass energy was reduced

Q4 reduced the displacement in nodal issues

Integration points set was good to obtain accurate reults

Iterative plasticity was good to observe time steps

Your portfolio, next

Ship work like this
in your own course.

Talk to a career counsellor

Free 20-minute call. We'll map the right course to where you want to work.

By submitting you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy.

Talk to a career counsellor

Free 20-minute call. We'll map the right course to where you want to work.

By submitting you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy.