Eng-Tips is the largest forum for Engineering Professionals on the Internet.

Members share and learn making Eng-Tips Forums the best source of engineering information on the Internet!

Register Log in
  • Congratulations JStephen on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Search results for query: *

  1. IcarusAero223

    Mesh singularity on non-manifold geometry

    The model with lugs was just a quick way to see if the singularity will move away from the root when I pull spar webs outward, and since I knew how the structure behaved under the given load conditions I wasn't too much bothered with the meshing. Boundary conditions on lugs were fixed RP's that...
  2. IcarusAero223

    Mesh singularity on non-manifold geometry

    Thanks for the suggestion FEA way. As the wing is supposed to be optimized later in regards to ply thicknesses and orientations, using any solid elements might not be the most ideal solution. Could the problem be in the mesh connectivity? I did check for free edges and it seems OK at the...
  3. IcarusAero223

    Mesh singularity on non-manifold geometry

    Hello everyone! I'm modelling a composite wing and am exhibiting a mesh singularity at the spar web/cap connection. Solutions I've tried: Modelling softer boundary conditions through springs Reducing the stiffness of the spar webs Pulling out spar web surfaces and modelling BC's through...
  4. IcarusAero223

    Unable to mesh layer by layer in surface geometry

    Only after making this post I realized the shared curves and relevant surfaces need to be in the same layer. I'm new to Femap so the whole idea of Groups vs Layers is still new to me. Coming from Abaqus, I figured Groups are Display Groups (for postprocessing) and Layers are more like Sets. I...
  5. IcarusAero223

    Unable to mesh layer by layer in surface geometry

    Hi all, I would appreciate any advice for this little problem I'm having. [bigears] I'm modelling composite wing thats modelled with surfaces in SW and exported as parasolid into Femap (Photos included). I organized the model into layers: 1. Skin and 2. Internal (spars and ribs). But when I go...
  6. IcarusAero223

    XFEM in Abaqus/Standard for 3D CFRP layup - nodal level set value error

    With ANGLEMAX = 15 upper part of the crack connected nicely, while the lower part (even though its symmetrical layup) hasn't and that caused the original error. As the explanation of this parameter in the manual is a bit vague I'm not sure how the angle defined is measured.
  7. IcarusAero223

    XFEM in Abaqus/Standard for 3D CFRP layup - nodal level set value error

    Thank you very much. I checked the documentation and NPOLY and INISMOOTH parameters aren't available for LaRC05 so I'm just going to try ANGLEMAX which does look promising.
  8. IcarusAero223

    XFEM in Abaqus/Standard for 3D CFRP layup - nodal level set value error

    It's a 2022 version.
  9. IcarusAero223

    XFEM in Abaqus/Standard for 3D CFRP layup - nodal level set value error

    I don't have access so that would be greatly appreciated.
  10. IcarusAero223

    XFEM in Abaqus/Standard for 3D CFRP layup - nodal level set value error

    Hi everyone! Any advice is greatly appreciated! [bigears] I'm trying to model a composite test coupon damage combining LaRC05 criterion and XFEM. To get my job converge after first element experienced some damage (STATUSXFEM between 0 and 1, usually at 0.4) I had to define damping factor of...
  11. IcarusAero223

    3D composite coupon convergence issue

    Thanks for your answer. I'm validating LaRC05 criteria so I'm unfortunately stuck on Abaqus/Standard. Most definitely convergence issue comes from contact between 12 layers in my model and I'll have to check if the interlaminar properties affect the results in any way. I'm inspecting...
  12. IcarusAero223

    3D composite coupon convergence issue

    I'm doing an Abaqus/Standard model verification for a 3D composite coupon using C3D8R elements and LaRC05 failure criteria (Load-displacement curve). Interlaminar properties are defined using cohesive interaction property and General contact interaction type. When running my simulation the...
  13. IcarusAero223

    Stiffness defined by engineering constants is not physically reasonable?

    I calculated equivalent elastic properties of a honeycomb core using analytical Ashby & Gibson approach. Material was defined using "Engineering Constants" submenu in elastic material properties section (with analitically calculated values). After that I defined material orientation using local...

Part and Inventory Search

Back
Top