Dear All,
I work in NVH team of the German Automotive OEM.
We would like to correlated Nastran Frequency Response Results with Abaqus Frequency Response Results.
We are calcaulting FRF up to 200 HZ.
loading is at right shock tower mount and tunnel. In both the cases, responses are taken at couple of points, including loading point.
The Abaqus results prretty good compared to Nastran, except at load application point.
Can some one help with this, is there was load applied is different in Nastran or Abaqus.
As my model size is huge, it is taking close to 10 hours to complete and results chekc etc 5 hours. So alomt 15 to 20 hours we are spending one iteration. So it would be great if some one help how we can improve the FRF results at loading point.
Regards
SriniNVH
I work in NVH team of the German Automotive OEM.
We would like to correlated Nastran Frequency Response Results with Abaqus Frequency Response Results.
We are calcaulting FRF up to 200 HZ.
loading is at right shock tower mount and tunnel. In both the cases, responses are taken at couple of points, including loading point.
The Abaqus results prretty good compared to Nastran, except at load application point.
Can some one help with this, is there was load applied is different in Nastran or Abaqus.
As my model size is huge, it is taking close to 10 hours to complete and results chekc etc 5 hours. So alomt 15 to 20 hours we are spending one iteration. So it would be great if some one help how we can improve the FRF results at loading point.
Regards
SriniNVH
