Hi all
I have a structure, with welded mechanics, and extrusions except that I can't get him to mesh the whole.
I am working with version 2018 SP1.0
I tried by modifying the definition of the mesh, it doesn't change anything.
If you have any ideas, I'm interested.
Thank you for your help.
Have a nice day
If you save your assembled parts in part
I think that your mesh problems
will disappear
@+;-)
Hello
Nothing to see but don't stay in SP1, move on to SP3 which is available. (valid regardless of the version of SW)
Totally agree
With @ FUZ 3D
Never work with an SP inf to 3
@+
Hello Olivier
I don't think it comes from any version of SW (clearly I think the SPs have nothing to do with it)
Give me an hour and I'll tell you who is likely not to go.
Kind regards
Thank you for your answers. I tried to put the assembly in parts, to simplify by excluding the inside of the sleeves from the analysis, by checking the remeshing of the failed parts, nothing moves...
Good evening Olivier
The main problem comes from your fittings which are treated for a single fitting with some part in volume and others in beam.
You can't set the beam mode for this type of room. So you have to convert everything to "Volume"
If you don't know how to do it, say it :-)
Also you have tubes treated as well in beam. You should not use the beam mode (no interest) otherwise it complicates the declarations in the simulation. Indeed, mixed mode is possible , but under certain very strict conditions. The main one is to respect the fact that a room can or cannot be a beam.
The mixed mode is mostly used when you have real beams with gussets for example.
Kind regards
PS: I'll continue :-)
Good evening @Olivier and @toutes and all
As I sensed nothing to do with a 2018 SPxx problem.
The mesh works fine once everything is reconfigured correctly.
The failure to succeed was due to a succession of mistakes.
The biggest. Wanting to make a mesh of a 36mm tube with a mesh of 45.553mm.
There is a catch, because when you put the cursor on end, you always have to click on mesh parameters to check the min and max values of the individual triangle.
The others concern the use of beam mode for fittings and tubes. In the case of the fittings and totally contrary to the way beams are used (without much explanation it's too small for the diameter-to-length ratio, the fact that you have miter cutouts on the mini-tubes of the fitting and other reasons too long to explain here)
Brief!
You will find attached your fully meshed set. I had to simplify your model and the many circular repetitions and symmetries. I wanted to eliminate as much possibility of interference as possible. Another risk of network failure.
Not knowing the loads and their orientations, I didn't do the final simulation :-)
Warning : in attachments (with the suffix zz) the reference to your sketch of the beginning of the tree is no longer valid. I'll leave it to you to start from your set to make small changes so that you will get back your reference and your own design logic.
Kind regards
Thank you for the info and the file.
Here is the error message that now appears:
it's supposedly too heavy to solve...
I put the low crossbars in fixed geometry, and loaded a force of 500kgf on the high crossmember.
I'm looking at it :-)
Since we are among professionals, I make a friendly remark: Before the result! is it the right load because 5000N on a 5000MM bar will flex a lot AMHA
To everything'
It works with 500 N but I'm going to gradually increase the load because it's already flexing by 4mm
Your problems are mainly due to the settings. Nothing serious, I'll send you your file with comments so that you can better make the settings for the rest of your project.
To everything'
Here are the results
I only assigned the vertical force using one of the vertical tubes and I simplified the mesh by removing all the mesh control because there are already more than 6,000,000 degrees of freedom.
I did two simulations, one with 2000N and the other with 5000N. The second gives 412 mm of deformation I find a bit strong but good it's up to you.
AMHA this simulation only gives you an order of magnitude because there are a lot of approximations. But your request was to make the simu work and nothing else, but we can discuss it if you want
Be careful , you have to restart the study from the new files I send you because if I attach the result of the analysis to you, it exceeds 600 MB. If you don't make it, I'll put it all in an external link. The complete simu lasts more than 20 minutes with a powerful computer but without any memory problems. I'll explain to you if you want why not a memory problem.
Hello@tous
For those who don't have the 2018 version but have followed the thread, here is the result in video.
However, the middle bar has a security coeff of barely 1.5 at the weakest, which must be worth attention because of the 5000N charge (if I wasn't wrong in the value of the charge)
Kind regards
Thank you so much for the time spent
It was precisely to show the customer that the section is too small...
I'm going back to the files as soon as possible.
thank you again
Hello Olivier_8
You know if your customer wants to keep his tube (given the spring nipple assembly) there is a trick which is to add under the tube a sheet metal cleverly openworked and then bent in V. This sheet is welded tangently at the height of the middle of the tube on either side of the tube. You can also fix it with POP rivets. You can also make it in several parts (your tube is 5m) which allows you to put a thinner sheet on the edges and thicker or more worked towards the center.
I used this thing on a machine where I have weight and inertia problems. This makes you stiffen a lot without too much weight and without much manufacturing complication.
Kind regards
PS: you can close the topic if the previous answer suits you :-)