Hi everyone,
so I am quiet new to simulation with solidworks and I have got a problem where I doesn't really know if I did it right.
So here is my problem:
I want to simulate how a cone 1 (hard material) is pushed in a cone 2 (soft material).
1. First with a definite force to get to know how deep cone 1 will get into cone 2
2. Secondly with a definite displacment to get to know how much force is needed for this displacment of cone 1
So my first questions:
Is it at all possible to do a static simulation for this problem? (large displacment activated) Or do I need a non-linear simulation anyway.
Is it in general usefull to do a static simulation before trying to do a non-linear (in general and in this case)?
My second questions:
Are my settings for the fixtures right (in some cases I get an error with static simulation that it failed)
Cone 1: (should be pushed along the x-axis into cone 2)
- constrained in y,z-Direction trough reference geometrie = 0
- force in x-direction
- cyclic symmetrie
Cone 2: (the edge of cone 2 should be hold in x-Direction but also can be widen in y,z and the length in general should can also be widen)
- constrained in x-Direction trough reference geometrie = 0
- cyclic symmetrie
Definitions of the Simulation
My results
So this is my result of the radial displacment of the cone 2. What would you think? Is it reliable?
-But my question is. Why has the cone 1 doesn't move as I accpected into cone 2?
Hope you can give me some Tips
Vito,
I think you are on the right track. Typically, you will want to run a static analysis before running a nonlinear study. For a more accurate solution using that soft material, the nonlinear study will offer more detail and level of control throughout the duration of the study. I have attached new files for you to review along with the simulation results. A couple of things to note:
1. For contacts, It is a good idea to start the simulation when the faces are in contact with one another, that is to say, they are coincident, not penetrating. Use the mates and the move component command with the stop at collision option to help achieve this condition. The bonded contact can be suppressed or deleted to avoid issues. The no penetration contact will perform best when the two items are initially contacting. I had to make some modifications to the part refrerences to get the mates to work correctly, mainly removing the sketch relation in the Cone2 revolve sketch to Cone1... instead I added the coincident relation to the assembly origin.
2. Types of fixtures / over-fixturing. In this case, the symmetry fixture makes the most sense, it will restrict movement in the Y and Z directions, allowing the components to move in X. The cyclic symmetry fixture is best when tangential loads exists on the circular component. The only other fixture that would be needed is on the Cone2 part to stop that X movement. I used a fixed geometry fixture, but you could place a roller/slider fixture on the back of the flange. Just be careful not to over-define the analysis with fixtures, it can be just as bad as a lack of fixtures.
Below you can see the total displacement of Cone1 with the 50N load is around 9mm in the X direction...
~Ben