Ansys 14.5 Magnitude License Gen
Fay Vitiello
I am trying to run simulations on a model that I converted them into shells and beams (mostly because I want to have more elements under the STudent License limit), and the dimension ratio of those parts make it quite reasonable to do so. It is an assembly file drawn in SOlidworks. Everything went well when the connection between the end vertice of the beam and the face of the plate below is set as "Bonded". I want to connect them through other means but any other kinds of connections cause an error.
"A solver pivot warning or error has been detected in the UZ degree of freedom of node 24336 located in SYS-1\Beam (Extracted Profile1). This is usually a result of an ill conditioned matrix possibly due to unreasonable material properties, an under constrained model, or contact related issues. Check results carefully. You may select the offending object and/or geometry via RMB on this warning in the Messages window."
"An internal solution magnitude limit was exceeded. Please check your Environment for inappropriate load values or insufficient supports. Please see the Troubleshooting section of the Help System for more information."
Hello ianyylai, maybe try to use MPC formulation in this connection and check in Contact Tool if the connection is closed. It should solve your problems. If you want you can also turn on Weak Springs just for a single solve and after solve you will be able to check on deformation contour plot where occurs the lack of required connection. Then change options for that connection solve again with weak springs and judge if its okay. If okay solve once again, but with Weak Springs turned OFF. Then do final check if its okay.
Hi, when I set the formulation to MPC under Frictional contact, the system highlights the row of "Formulation" and shows a question mark in front of "Contacts", like what you would get in "Geometry" without defining a material. I tried and found that this is the case for Frictional, Frictionless, and Rough. It's fine for Bonded and No Seperation but those 2 are not what the contacts should be. Any thoughts on that?
OK in Home Tab you have button, named: "Show Errors". Turn it ON and click Solve. After that, try to check Message tab (in the bottom part of graphic window). Then please show errors that appears, especially that one related with a question mark.
You have a beam inside a tube. You want the sides of the tube to hold the beam from falling over. Therefore, you have to add Frictional Contact between the beam and the sides of the tube. Without contact, there is nothing preventing the beam from moving in X or Z (assuming Y is vertical) or tipping over.
Hi, as attached is thepicture of connection that makes the error "BONDED or NO SEPARATION type required for this contact configuration" appears. It is under Frictional, which I think is the problem. I read from a few articals saying Normal Langrange should be used for non-linear contacts. But when I use Normal Langrange, the error "An internal solution magnitude limit was exceeded. (Node Number 24274, Body SYS-1\Beam (Extracted Profile1), DOF UZ) Please check your Environment for inappropriate load values or insufficient supports. You may select the offending object and/or geometry via RMB on this warning in the Messages window. Please see the Troubleshooting section of the Help System for more information." returns. I am unable to use Normal Lagrange so far.
Static Structural models don't like to start when there is zero stiffness in any of the 6 directions (3 translations, 3 rotations) of one body relative to another (or ground). For example, if the diameter of the beam is 50 mm and the internal dimension of the square tube is 52 mm, then there is 1 mm of clearance on each side of the beam if it is positioned in the center of the tube. That means the beam has zero stiffness in 5 directions (since the vertex on the bottom face takes care of Uy).
The corrective action is to tilt the beam so the beam is in the -X, -Z corner of the tube at the bottom and at the +X, +Z corner of the tube at the top of the tube, and the Wind Load must be in a direction that includes positive forces in the +X and +Z direction so that it continues to push the beam into those two corners. Now the beam has stiffness in 6 directions. Rotation about Y is taken care of by the Coefficient of Friction.
If that seems like a lot of work, you can simply make the beam have the same dimension as the ID of the tube. But, you must insert a Contact Tool under the Connections folder and Generate Initial Contact Status. The contact must be Closed. If it is Near Open, it might have a tiny gap. That is still zero stiffness. Increase the beam diameter by a tiny amount until the contact becomes closed. The benefit of this approach is that the wind load can be in any direction. With a tilted beam, if the wind load was to push the beam away from the corners it was nested in, that might cause the solution to fail.
HI. Thanks for the detailed explanation, I will definitely try it! Since you mentioned the problem of the Direction of the stiffness problem, do you think it is the reason the solution failed when the connection was not Bonded? SInce only when Bonded, the beam would have all 6 directions of stiffness taken care of (since all 6 are fixed). And after I generate a No Separation, how do I make the beam have the same dimension as the ID of the tube?
Ansys uses Augmented Lagrange for as the Program Controlled default, so I would say that Ansys considers that the best first try for Frictional Contact. For Bonded Contact, I always want to use MPC because I can see the Connection Elements after it has solved to verify which nodes are connected.
Hi, I hope someone is still here since I found something new. When I turn on Weak Springs I seem to find where the problem is. It is a newer design of the model but the loadings and overall functions are pretty much the same. The beam seems to have ignored my bonded contact I applied onto the circular surfaces around the bolt holes (one in the middle of the horizontal plate ad one inside the beam)
When I was forced to bond the plain surfaces instead, the beam does move with the plate but then the firctional contact was ignored. I applie them between the faces of rectangular parts under the plate and the vertical square tube. The system completely ignored them and let me penetrate.
Join us for this insightful webinar to discover how HPC and cloud computing unlocks the full potential of engineering simulation. Whether you are an engineer, IT manager, researcher, or technology enthusiast, this webinar provides the knowledge and tools to enhance your simulation workflows and drive innovation in your industry.
It is fascinating to compare experimental and simulation test results for a tensile test specimen. The ability to conduct tests virtually, rather than physically, utilizing virtual simulations for testing not only increases efficiency but also leads to significant cost savings. In this crosstalk, we will address some of the challenges typically encountered in uniaxial tensile simulations.
Velocity inlet boundary conditions are used to define the flow velocity, along with all relevant scalar properties of the flow, at flow inlets. In this case, the total (or stagnation) pressure is not fixed but will rise (in response to the computed static pressure) to whatever value is necessary to provide the prescribed velocity distribution. This boundary condition is intended for incompressible flows, and its use in compressible flows will lead to a nonphysical result because it allows stagnation conditions to float to any level. You should also be careful not to place a velocity inlet too close to a solid obstruction, since this could cause the inflow stagnation properties to become highly non-uniform. In special instances, a velocity inlet may be used in ANSYS FLUENT to define the flow velocity at flow exits. (The scalar inputs are not used in such cases.) In such cases you must ensure that overall continuity is maintained in the domain. For an overview of flow boundaries, see Section 7.3.1.
Inputs at Velocity Inlet Boundaries Summary You will enter the following information for a velocity inlet boundary:
- type of reference frame
- velocity magnitude and direction or velocity components
- swirl velocity (for 2D axisymmetric problems with swirl)
- temperature (for energy calculations)
- outflow gauge pressure (for calculations with the density-based solver)
- turbulence parameters (for turbulent calculations)
- radiation parameters (for calculations using the P-1 model, the DTRM, the DO model, or the surface-to-surface model)
- chemical species mass or mole fractions (for species calculations)
- mixture fraction and variance (for non-premixed or partially premixed combustion calculations)
- progress variable (for premixed or partially premixed combustion calculations)
- discrete phase boundary conditions (for discrete phase calculations)
- multiphase boundary conditions (for general multiphase calculations)
Calculation Procedure at Velocity Inlet Boundaries ANSYS FLUENT uses your boundary condition inputs at velocity inlets to compute the mass flow into the domain through the inlet and to compute the fluxes of momentum, energy, and species through the inlet. This section describes these calculations for the case of flow entering the domain through the velocity inlet boundary and for the less common case of flow exiting the domain through the velocity inlet boundary. Treatment of Velocity Inlet Conditions at Flow Inlets When your velocity inlet boundary condition defines flow entering the physical domain of the model, ANSYS FLUENT uses both the velocity components and the scalar quantities that you defined as boundary conditions to compute the inlet mass flow rate, momentum fluxes, and fluxes of energy and chemical species. The mass flow rate entering a fluid cell adjacent to a velocity inlet boundary is computed as
(7.3-26)