Atom topic feed | site map | contact | login | Protection des données personnelles | Powered by FluxBB | réalisation artaban
You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
L'objectif est de simuler l'enroulement d'un ressort spiral en 2d. Pour cela, on impose aux noeuds du centre des ddls de déplacement (circulaire), et on encastre l'autre extrémité. On se place en élasticité non linéaire + grands déplacements + déformation plane. La solution converge mais le résultat n'est pas satisfaisant : les spires se touchent (voir pbAster.png)
Visiblement, je n'applique pas les bonnes conditions de calculs. Un conseil serait le bienvenu, merci d'avance.
Last edited by Chris60 (2020-10-21 11:55:52)
Offline
Bonjour,
le calcul est plus réaliste si vous introduisez un DEFI_CONTACT entre les bords.
Sorry for the bad french,
Mario.
Offline
Merci Mario pour ce conseil.
Mais normalement, les spires ne devraient pas se toucher. Le ressort devrait s'enrouler sur lui même.
Offline
Hi,
well, I'm not sure about that. The center of rotation is not in the center of the spring, whatever the 'center' is. If I estimate the center of mass of the spring without the holding thingy, there is for sure an offset between rotation center and center of mass. And also, the distances of the windings are different on either side,
Mario.
Last edited by mf (2020-10-16 21:59:59)
Offline
refer modified files upload and study further
Offline
.comm
Offline
thank you for your replies.
- the origin of the referential is corresponding to the internal circle center
- It's not necessary to define the displacement condition on the whole border of the spring, only on the internal circle (close to its center)
I think the issue is about the model definition, and/or missing key word in STAT_NON_LINE, ...
Offline
any other solver you hv done, share image of result.
Offline
You can see the capture.png which shows the results after a 180 ° rotation (producted by Elmer solver)
Offline
Hi,
ok, I see. At first, I must say there is nothing obviously wrong with your calculation. It seems that your geometry is very sensitive to the choice of parameters in STAT_NON_LINE, so we are seeing some kind of numerical effect here. Your choice of 2nd order elements is obviously correct. Here is what I changed:
1.) increased the number of timesteps to 400. Anything lower, and there are timesteps where the spiral 'blows up'. I haven't seen anything like it before. It is very sensitive.
2.) In NEWTON I changed PREDICTION to ELASTIQUE. MATRICE = ELASTIQUE didn't work--> enormous RESI_GLOB_RELA--> ERROR.
3.) Set RESI_GLOB_RELA to 1E-6, although this is probably not important.
With these settings you'll get a similar result compared to Elmer (never used it, can't say anything about it). But I can't say which one of the results is 'better' per se,
Mario.
Last edited by mf (2020-10-19 16:40:11)
Offline
I made a small mistake in my last post, A was still at 0.62. For 180° it should be equal to 1.
Then the result is similar to the result calculated by Elmer, although it needs 1000 timesteps here,
Mario.
Offline
Thank you for your advice and the sharing files.
I've reloaded my study with your Stat_non_line parameters, the results are ok.
As an attchment file, the displacement results provided by Aster and Elmer
Offline
Hi,
so it is solved? Could you please mark it as [SOLVED] (edit post title in first message)?
Thanks,
Mario.
Offline
Pages: 1