I would like to carry out a structural study of a composite assembly, on the attached photo you can see the half section of the assembly.
Part A is a monolithic draped on a mold, part B is a flat monolithic that will be glued to A (red lines on the drawing = glue) and finally there will be a rework of stratum C.
I know the methodology to create each composite part in Catia (in surface area, with n plies oriented as I wish).
My surfaces that I'm just draping over are shown in green on the drawing. Where I want to call on your experience is for the assembly of these 3 parts.
As my model will be entirely areal how can I assemble this rigorously in Catia? indeed the surface B will be on the edges distant from C by a value equal to the thickness created by the number of folds of B, it is on this point that it is blurry for me. (The space represented in blue by a "?")
If we were in volume, I would just have to put a contact constraint between the two surfaces that touch each other, but as I am in surface space, how can I manage this space between my two "reference" surfaces on which I draped to have a well-assembled model to then make a structural study.
Hello since I don't have your surfaces! But if it had been me, they would be modeled symmetrically with respect to an original plane, so I could use the coincidence between the median planes.
franck.ceroux Hello, thank you for your answer. I have an old catia (V5r21) and I feel like I don't have the middle surface tool, so I created them by hand by doing a "classic" offset. For more details I post a screenshot of my created surfaces (for the moment I am only in a "part" and the surfaces are simply positioned geometrically during my design)
Could you tell me more about what you call coincidence between the middle planes? More precisely in my approach, I will save each surface as an independent part (as many "part" files as there are surfaces), drape them in the composite workshop symmetrically with respect to the median surface. It's during the assembly that it's blurry for me... What tool should I use to tell the software that one surface is coincident with another since I can't choose the surface of a volume that "touches" the other?
I can't choose the surface of a volume that "touches" the other?
I don't see what will stop you from doing that when you've created every piece.
You select the first surface and if the second one is confused you hide the first piece (right click hide from the tree) and you select the second face.
Franck.Ceroux Indeed maybe I'm anticipating my problems a little when I won't have any... For me, after having draped my surface, I will always have only one surface since (once again for me) the drape is "virtual", but I imagine that by asking CATIA to represent my folds, I will have volumetric pieces and therefore indeed I could adopt a classic approach.
Anyway, I'll try before going any further and give you feedback (as well as close the post if my question is resolved).