5 Replies Latest reply on May 8, 2007 12:29 PM by Vince Adams

    Structural analysis

    Ranga Narasimhan
      Hi,

      I have a prob with weldment analysis. i did following steps

      1) For a simple cantilever prob using weldment profile for my (custom) beam, the cosmos gave me right values for one study.
      2) Then i went to feature manager and changed the orientation of my beam to 90 deg and updated in cosmos using "update all components"
      3) But still the solution was same as previous one.It seems the member orientation change is not taken into account

      But when i deleted the old study and ran a new study (with 90 deg orientation), cosmos gave me right results .

      Is there anything i have to do after i change orientation to tell cosmos that i have changed my orientation of weldement profile
        • Structural analysis
          Vince Adams
          Two things could have happened...
          (1) if you defined your load with a face on the beam, that face rotated 90 deg with the section so the system may not have really changed, thus giving you the same response magnitudes...
          (2) Even though you updated components, COSMOS didn't register that as a geometry change so it didn't flag a re-mesh. Thus, you solved the previous model.

          You need to check your load references, Update Components, & remesh to see the impact of the orientation change.

          Vince
            • Structural analysis
              Ranga Narasimhan

              Vince Adams wrote:

               

              (1) if you defined your load with a face on the beam, that face rotated 90 deg with the section so the system may not have really changed, thus giving you the same response magnitudes...

              i know this would been your target (i tried all) . i created a INDEPENDENT axis and set that axis as reference for my load. still problem persisted !

               


              (2) Even though you updated components, COSMOS didn't register that as a geometry change so it didn't flag a re-mesh. Thus, you solved the previous model.

              Yep.. this could be the case. But still isn't it the responsibility of cosmos to check all stuff when i say "update all components"?

                • Structural analysis
                  Vince Adams
                  The behavior in a beam model is consistent with other model types. When you make a change to a solid body and choose "Update All Components", it just makes sure the mesher is aware of the current geometry state. You still have to re-mesh the part. Since the beam mesh is an abstraction (more so than a solid tet mesh), it is not as obvious that re-meshing is required.

                  I think a change we could make to improve consistency is to flag the mesh as being "out of date" as we do in solid models. I'll file an SPR on that today.

                  Vince