Simulation with Rigid Solid

APereira · 2021-09-30 11:18:15

Hi,

I'm wondering if it's possible to simulation a Rigid Solid without meshing it. For example, it I want to simulation a crimping process, I want to mesh my crimping part but I can use Rigid Solids or Rigid Surfaces for jaws. How can I modelise this in SalomeMeca ?

Thanks you

sameer21101970 · 2021-10-01 08:07:16

attach all files

APereira · 2021-10-01 11:31:15

Hi,

which files ? I do not have any example files. I was juste wondering how to simulate some parts without meshing them. I previously used Marc-Mentat were it was allowedt to use geometric body.

regards
Adrien

miib · 2021-10-02 10:57:20

APereira wrote:

Hi,
which files ? I do not have any example files. I was juste wondering how to simulate some parts without meshing them. I previously used Marc-Mentat were it was allowedt to use geometric body.
regards
Adrien

Ciao bello.
Senza Mesh come definisci il dominio di calcolo ???

engineering3d.it/mesh-elementi-finiti.html (copy and paste in your browser's bar)

youtube.com/watch?v=0aBx-yXfi_8 (copy and paste in your browser's bar)

youtube.com/watch?v=lmwZrp2zYNw (copy and paste in your browser's bar)

youtube.com/watch?v=HBtLe7hrZqA (copy and paste in your browser's bar)

Last edited by miib (2021-10-02 18:30:03)

mf · 2021-10-02 18:17:10

Hello,

I am not sure what you mean, but if you want to avoid a lot of modeling work, then you could do the following. You design and mesh your component to be crimped, like you would have to anyway. But you could represent your crimping tool with a partition of your tool on your component (a partition is a line representation of your tool on your component, you can define groups accordingly). The caveat is: you'll also have to design the tool or at least part of it. So it may not be a lot less work (although simulating contact can be very difficult).
Additionally, if you apply displacements it would appear like a rigid tool penetrating your component.

However, of course your model would be more realistic with contact and realistic stiffnesses etc. (what Maurizio does in his videos is the right way to do this, with contact maybe also with friction)

See the simple example attached (SM2020 on Ubuntu 20.04), one corner is a partition with a sphere (this surface is displaced later). Opposite surfaces are fixed. The corner segment named FORCE appears to be perfectly rigid. This is the only way of 'modeling' a rigid tool without actually meshing it I can imagine :-),

Mario.

EDIT: obviously, your 'tool' is only represented by a surface on the component. Thus, it is assumed, your tool matches the component perfectly. In reality, this is usually not the case.

Last edited by mf (2021-10-03 10:19:13)

Attachments:
FORUM_34.zip, Size: 874.85 KiB, Downloads: 167

miib · 2021-10-03 10:00:55

APereira wrote:

Hi,
I'm wondering if it's possible to simulation a Rigid Solid without meshing it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bijection,_injection_and_surjection

Excluding complex domains :

which function generates real values starting from the empty set ???

Last edited by miib (2021-10-03 10:03:34)

APereira · 2021-10-04 09:35:34

Hello,

First of all, thanks you both for your answer.
I used Marc-Mentat before, and in Marc-Mentat you are able to model some parts with mathematical objects (Splines, Surfaces, Solids, ...). It allows you to simulate things like crimping for example without meshing jaws. In fact, when you only want to see deformed shape and you do not care about stess or strain in jaws, the calcul will consider them with an infinite stiffness. But contact, displacement and force are still available. I guess, it just "update" boundaries conditions of your crimped part with mathematical equation from your rigid part. And I wanted to know if there is a way to do so in SM. I'll try the partition things, it could be interesting.

Adrien

miib · 2021-10-04 19:15:34

maybe also marc mentat creates ever meshes (see attached)

yes is possible to create with SM , line, point, border (ever meshed) :-)

Attachments:
marc mentat.png, Size: 145.16 KiB, Downloads: 145

APereira · 2021-10-05 08:32:00

Hi,

Maybe I'm not clear enough but here is an explanation of what is able in Marc-Mentat and what I want to try in SM.
It's a Youtube Video, the time code is 19:15. "https : //www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjf1knumHoE&ab_channel=MSCSoftware"

miib · 2021-10-05 18:59:19

please repost the link of the url

APereira · 2021-10-06 08:38:12

Here is the link, take care I put space before and after the dot (youtu.be) : https://youtu . be/pjf1knumHoE?t=1159

miib · 2021-10-06 19:20:31

APereira wrote:

Here is the link, take care I put space before and after the dot (youtu.be) : https://youtu . be/pjf1knumHoE?t=1159

try again , the url is corrupted.............

or if you want,
you can do a zipped file where into there is a sequence of screen shot related to the video which you desire show to me.

Last edited by miib (2021-10-06 19:22:28)

mf · 2021-10-07 08:25:09

Hello,

open any YT-Video and insert the pjf1knumHoE?t after the watch?v=,

Mario.

APereira · 2021-10-07 08:49:47

Hello,

The link work for me, no corruption , I've just tried it.
Otherwise you can search on youtube for : "Webinar- Speed Up Your Contact Analysis Process with MSC Nastran". The first video is the right one, posted the 28 february 2018 and with 5.2k views. And the time code is 19 min 18 s.

miib · 2021-10-07 19:06:50

hi!

finally founded :-)

for my actual know how in code aster you can't do the same BUT you can go very near to MSC example using right BC. :-)

Attachments:
founded.png, Size: 567.2 KiB, Downloads: 121

APereira · 2021-10-08 08:47:19

Hi,

I was using this a lot espacially when I wanted to restrain my displacement only on Z- for example and allow it on Z+. Is there an easy way to do so in Code_Aster ?

mf · 2021-10-08 09:22:28

Hello,

my answer to this would be 'no' to 'easy way'. You would have to displace nodes on your part according to how your other geometry looks like:

N1: DX=-1.345
N2: DX=-2.5
N3: DX=-4.5
...
...

But I can imagine how it is done in the other software. Also, you would have to check node distances by yourself.
This would involve some major programming in CA on your side, I suppose.

I guess, it is easier to model the tool(s) and do this the old fashioned way with contact. Also with the benefit of having a realistic elastic modulus.

Mario.

Last edited by mf (2021-10-08 09:24:45)

#1 2021-09-30 11:18:15

Simulation with Rigid Solid

#2 2021-10-01 08:07:16

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

#3 2021-10-01 11:31:15

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

#4 2021-10-02 10:57:20

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

#5 2021-10-02 18:17:10

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

#6 2021-10-03 10:00:55

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

#7 2021-10-04 09:35:34

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

#8 2021-10-04 19:15:34

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

#9 2021-10-05 08:32:00

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

#10 2021-10-05 18:59:19

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

#11 2021-10-06 08:38:12

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

#12 2021-10-06 19:20:31

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

#13 2021-10-07 08:25:09

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

#14 2021-10-07 08:49:47

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

#15 2021-10-07 19:06:50

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

#16 2021-10-08 08:47:19

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

#17 2021-10-08 09:22:28

Re: Simulation with Rigid Solid

Board footer