Long time DM / Mechanical user.  Ansys is pushing SpaceClaim hard.  I've gone through the Ansys Learning Hub's SpaceClaim Introduction course and I wasn't impressed. SCDM seems directed at a different audience than DM.  Wondering what others' experience is.

What do you gain by switching CAD import and processing from DM to SCDM?

What do you lose by switching CAD import and processing from DM to SCDM?

CAD is Creo Parametric (3D solid parts and assemblies).

Most simulations are Static Structural.  90% 3D / 10% 2D. Occasionally Modal, Harmonic Response, Random Vibration, Eigenvalue Buckling, etc.

Occasionally, I'll use DX to perform DOE, Response Surface analysis, etc. with inputs as different CAD model dimensions.

DM is common for

• Imprint faces and edges (e.g. contacts and boundary conditions)
• De-featuring / Re-featuring (e.g. depending on source file fidelity and FEA model simplification)
• Extracting 2D faces from 3D solid (e.g. axisymmetric)
• Point Loads / Hard points (e.g. vertices and nodes at exactly "this" location).
• Creo coordinate system and datum point import
• Beam modeling (e.g. bolted joint analysis using beam elements with Mechanical "bolt load" boundary condition).
• Creo CAD dimensions / parameters
• Named Selection processing (e.g. collecting Creo features on a Creo layer and being able to reference the resulting edges / faces / bodies as a Mechanical Named Selection or Mechanical APDL Component).
• Refreshing CAD changes in Mechanical or pushing CAD changes from Workbench / DX.

-- Andrew

Andrew Kelly, P.E.
Principal Engineer
Honeywell | Sensing & IoT
2080 Arlingate Lane
Columbus, OH 43228
Office:  614.850.7818
Toll Free:  800.848.6564
Fax:  614.850.1111

andrew.kelly@honeywell.commailto:andrew.kelly@honeywell.com
measurementsensors.honeywell.com
Twitter: @honeywell

This email and any accompanying attachments are intended for the addressee(s) only and may be confidential.  If received in error, please keep contents confidential, notify the sender, and delete this email (and any copies and attachments).

Andrew,
I may be in the minority, but in some ways I view SCDM as a modeling paradigm that is closer to what the MAPDL geometry paradigm was way back when.  Just, with way, way, way better robustness and speed.  And a way, way, way better user experience.  SCDM just treats geometry as geometry.  Its like a low-level, stateless BRep editor.  It doesn't layer on top the feature modeling paradigm.
Having said that, it is quite the paradigm shift from a feature based modeler.  My biggest complaint originally was the lack of sketching dimensions, but they've added those in.  When it comes to most of the items in your list, I find I can do them faster in SCDM than in DM.  In terms of what you lose, one thing I still struggle with is figuring out how to build truly parametric geometry from the ground up.  Feature based modeling is a little easier for me to wrap my head around making parametric stuff work.  But, cleaning up CAD, its just way faster.  It also has tons of keyboard shortcuts of which I only know a handful.  (Like your 2D faces from 3D.  Click select the faces, Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V, done)  Watching someone who is versed in all the shortcuts is like watching a VIM or Emacs expert do crazy things to a text file you didn't think were possible.
Matt
www.padtinc.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Kelly, Andrew via Xansys xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 2:35 PM
To: xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Cc: Kelly, Andrew Andrew.Kelly@Honeywell.com
Subject: [Xansys] [WB] Preserving SCDM Edits across source CAD refreshes

Long time DM / Mechanical user.  Ansys is pushing SpaceClaim hard.  I've gone through the Ansys Learning Hub's SpaceClaim Introduction course and I wasn't impressed. SCDM seems directed at a different audience than DM.  Wondering what others' experience is.

What do you gain by switching CAD import and processing from DM to SCDM?

What do you lose by switching CAD import and processing from DM to SCDM?

CAD is Creo Parametric (3D solid parts and assemblies).

Most simulations are Static Structural.  90% 3D / 10% 2D. Occasionally Modal, Harmonic Response, Random Vibration, Eigenvalue Buckling, etc.

Occasionally, I'll use DX to perform DOE, Response Surface analysis, etc. with inputs as different CAD model dimensions.

DM is common for

• Imprint faces and edges (e.g. contacts and boundary conditions)
• De-featuring / Re-featuring (e.g. depending on source file fidelity and FEA model simplification)
• Extracting 2D faces from 3D solid (e.g. axisymmetric)
• Point Loads / Hard points (e.g. vertices and nodes at exactly "this" location).
• Creo coordinate system and datum point import
• Beam modeling (e.g. bolted joint analysis using beam elements with Mechanical "bolt load" boundary condition).
• Creo CAD dimensions / parameters
• Named Selection processing (e.g. collecting Creo features on a Creo layer and being able to reference the resulting edges / faces / bodies as a Mechanical Named Selection or Mechanical APDL Component).
• Refreshing CAD changes in Mechanical or pushing CAD changes from Workbench / DX.

-- Andrew

Andrew Kelly, P.E.
Principal Engineer
Honeywell | Sensing & IoT
2080 Arlingate Lane
Columbus, OH 43228
Office:  614.850.7818
Toll Free:  800.848.6564
Fax:  614.850.1111

andrew.kelly@honeywell.commailto:andrew.kelly@honeywell.com
measurementsensors.honeywell.com
Twitter: @honeywell

This email and any accompanying attachments are intended for the addressee(s) only and may be confidential.  If received in error, please keep contents confidential, notify the sender, and delete this email (and any copies and attachments).

Xansys mailing list -- xansys-temp@list.xansys.org To unsubscribe send an email to xansys-temp-leave@list.xansys.org If you are receiving too many emails from XANSYS please consider changing account settings to Digest mode which will send a single email per day.

Please send administrative requests such as deletion from XANSYS to xansys-mod@tynecomp.co.uk and not to the list

Andrew,

Yeah, I agree with everything that Matt has said.  Nothing will ever beat APDL when it comes to parameterizing everything and anything - it is a one stop shop (prep/post/solve all in one).  Seek out a SpaceClaim user and get an hours' worth of tips-n-tricks.

Who is the winner, in my opinion?
Software updates:  SpaceClaim
Parameters:  Mechanical then Design Modeler then SpaceClaim (SpaceClaim can make a parameter for volume!  DM can't do that).
CAD Clean Up (stitch surfaces, remove split or extra edges, etc.):  SpaceClaim
Volume Extraction/Midsurface creation/Enclosure creation:  SpaceClaim
Interference Check:  SpaceClaim
Slicing/Dicing:  SpaceClaim (doing less of this since moving more and more to tetrahedral meshes)
Sharing topology:  SpaceClaim
Measuring things, viewing surface normal:  SpaceClaim
Dealing with large assemblies:  SpaceClaim
Patterning:  SpaceClaim
Sketches with dimensions:  Design Modeler  (haven't given SpaceClaims latest update on this a fair shot yet).
Scripting:  SpaceClaim

SpaceClaim is a real time saver - seriously, spend some time, keep an open mind and try it out.

Regards,
Irene Slater
Corning Incorporated

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Sutton matt.sutton@padtinc.com
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 4:22 PM
To: XANSYS Mailing List Home xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Cc: Kelly, Andrew Andrew.Kelly@Honeywell.com
Subject: [EXTERNAL]--[Xansys] Re: [WB] Preserving SCDM Edits across source CAD refreshes

Andrew,
I may be in the minority, but in some ways I view SCDM as a modeling paradigm that is closer to what the MAPDL geometry paradigm was way back when.  Just, with way, way, way better robustness and speed.  And a way, way, way better user experience.  SCDM just treats geometry as geometry.  Its like a low-level, stateless BRep editor.  It doesn't layer on top the feature modeling paradigm.
Having said that, it is quite the paradigm shift from a feature based modeler.  My biggest complaint originally was the lack of sketching dimensions, but they've added those in.  When it comes to most of the items in your list, I find I can do them faster in SCDM than in DM.  In terms of what you lose, one thing I still struggle with is figuring out how to build truly parametric geometry from the ground up.  Feature based modeling is a little easier for me to wrap my head around making parametric stuff work.  But, cleaning up CAD, its just way faster.  It also has tons of keyboard shortcuts of which I only know a handful.  (Like your 2D faces from 3D.  Click select the faces, Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V, done)  Watching someone who is versed in all the shortcuts is like watching a VIM or Emacs expert do crazy things to a text file you didn't think were possible.
Matt
www.padtinc.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Kelly, Andrew via Xansys xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 2:35 PM
To: xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Cc: Kelly, Andrew Andrew.Kelly@Honeywell.com
Subject: [Xansys] [WB] Preserving SCDM Edits across source CAD refreshes

Long time DM / Mechanical user.  Ansys is pushing SpaceClaim hard.  I've gone through the Ansys Learning Hub's SpaceClaim Introduction course and I wasn't impressed. SCDM seems directed at a different audience than DM.  Wondering what others' experience is.

What do you gain by switching CAD import and processing from DM to SCDM?

What do you lose by switching CAD import and processing from DM to SCDM?

CAD is Creo Parametric (3D solid parts and assemblies).

Most simulations are Static Structural.  90% 3D / 10% 2D. Occasionally Modal, Harmonic Response, Random Vibration, Eigenvalue Buckling, etc.

Occasionally, I'll use DX to perform DOE, Response Surface analysis, etc. with inputs as different CAD model dimensions.

DM is common for

• Imprint faces and edges (e.g. contacts and boundary conditions)
• De-featuring / Re-featuring (e.g. depending on source file fidelity and FEA model simplification)
• Extracting 2D faces from 3D solid (e.g. axisymmetric)
• Point Loads / Hard points (e.g. vertices and nodes at exactly "this" location).
• Creo coordinate system and datum point import
• Beam modeling (e.g. bolted joint analysis using beam elements with Mechanical "bolt load" boundary condition).
• Creo CAD dimensions / parameters
• Named Selection processing (e.g. collecting Creo features on a Creo layer and being able to reference the resulting edges / faces / bodies as a Mechanical Named Selection or Mechanical APDL Component).
• Refreshing CAD changes in Mechanical or pushing CAD changes from Workbench / DX.

-- Andrew

Andrew Kelly, P.E.
Principal Engineer
Honeywell | Sensing & IoT
2080 Arlingate Lane
Columbus, OH 43228
Office:  614.850.7818
Toll Free:  800.848.6564
Fax:  614.850.1111

andrew.kelly@honeywell.commailto:andrew.kelly@honeywell.com
measurementsensors.honeywell.com
Twitter: @honeywell

This email and any accompanying attachments are intended for the addressee(s) only and may be confidential.  If received in error, please keep contents confidential, notify the sender, and delete this email (and any copies and attachments).

Xansys mailing list -- xansys-temp@list.xansys.org To unsubscribe send an email to xansys-temp-leave@list.xansys.org If you are receiving too many emails from XANSYS please consider changing account settings to Digest mode which will send a single email per day.

Please send administrative requests such as deletion from XANSYS to xansys-mod@tynecomp.co.uk and not to the list _______________________________________________
Xansys mailing list -- xansys-temp@list.xansys.org To unsubscribe send an email to xansys-temp-leave@list.xansys.org If you are receiving too many emails from XANSYS please consider changing account settings to Digest mode which will send a single email per day.

Please send administrative requests such as deletion from XANSYS to xansys-mod@tynecomp.co.uk and not to the list

Andrew, Matt

I might add that I like having a history tree that you can make changes to later on in another session if required and be able to regen the model. SCDM does not have that feature yet, at least not at 2020R2. I don’t plan on switching to 2021R2 for at least a year if at all. I just don’t have time to troubleshoot Ansys new releases.

Best,
Tom Caltabellotta
Senior Mechanical Engineer
LGS LABS, CACI inc.

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 23, 2021, at 4:23 PM, Matt Sutton matt.sutton@padtinc.com wrote:

Andrew,
I may be in the minority, but in some ways I view SCDM as a modeling paradigm that is closer to what the MAPDL geometry paradigm was way back when.  Just, with way, way, way better robustness and speed.  And a way, way, way better user experience.  SCDM just treats geometry as geometry.  Its like a low-level, stateless BRep editor.  It doesn't layer on top the feature modeling paradigm.
Having said that, it is quite the paradigm shift from a feature based modeler.  My biggest complaint originally was the lack of sketching dimensions, but they've added those in.  When it comes to most of the items in your list, I find I can do them faster in SCDM than in DM.  In terms of what you lose, one thing I still struggle with is figuring out how to build truly parametric geometry from the ground up.  Feature based modeling is a little easier for me to wrap my head around making parametric stuff work.  But, cleaning up CAD, its just way faster.  It also has tons of keyboard shortcuts of which I only know a handful.  (Like your 2D faces from 3D.  Click select the faces, Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V, done)  Watching someone who is versed in all the shortcuts is like watching a VIM or Emacs expert do crazy things to a text file you didn't think were possible.
Matt
www.padtinc.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Kelly, Andrew via Xansys xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 2:35 PM
To: xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Cc: Kelly, Andrew Andrew.Kelly@Honeywell.com
Subject: [Xansys] [WB] Preserving SCDM Edits across source CAD refreshes

Long time DM / Mechanical user.  Ansys is pushing SpaceClaim hard.  I've gone through the Ansys Learning Hub's SpaceClaim Introduction course and I wasn't impressed. SCDM seems directed at a different audience than DM.  Wondering what others' experience is.

What do you gain by switching CAD import and processing from DM to SCDM?

What do you lose by switching CAD import and processing from DM to SCDM?

CAD is Creo Parametric (3D solid parts and assemblies).

Most simulations are Static Structural.  90% 3D / 10% 2D. Occasionally Modal, Harmonic Response, Random Vibration, Eigenvalue Buckling, etc.

Occasionally, I'll use DX to perform DOE, Response Surface analysis, etc. with inputs as different CAD model dimensions.

DM is common for

• Imprint faces and edges (e.g. contacts and boundary conditions)
• De-featuring / Re-featuring (e.g. depending on source file fidelity and FEA model simplification)
• Extracting 2D faces from 3D solid (e.g. axisymmetric)
• Point Loads / Hard points (e.g. vertices and nodes at exactly "this" location).
• Creo coordinate system and datum point import
• Beam modeling (e.g. bolted joint analysis using beam elements with Mechanical "bolt load" boundary condition).
• Creo CAD dimensions / parameters
• Named Selection processing (e.g. collecting Creo features on a Creo layer and being able to reference the resulting edges / faces / bodies as a Mechanical Named Selection or Mechanical APDL Component).
• Refreshing CAD changes in Mechanical or pushing CAD changes from Workbench / DX.

-- Andrew

Andrew Kelly, P.E.
Principal Engineer
Honeywell | Sensing & IoT
2080 Arlingate Lane
Columbus, OH 43228
Office:  614.850.7818
Toll Free:  800.848.6564
Fax:  614.850.1111

andrew.kelly@honeywell.commailto:andrew.kelly@honeywell.com
measurementsensors.honeywell.com
Twitter: @honeywell

This email and any accompanying attachments are intended for the addressee(s) only and may be confidential.  If received in error, please keep contents confidential, notify the sender, and delete this email (and any copies and attachments).

Xansys mailing list -- xansys-temp@list.xansys.org To unsubscribe send an email to xansys-temp-leave@list.xansys.org If you are receiving too many emails from XANSYS please consider changing account settings to Digest mode which will send a single email per day.

Please send administrative requests such as deletion from XANSYS to xansys-mod@tynecomp.co.uk and not to the list

Xansys mailing list -- xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
To unsubscribe send an email to xansys-temp-leave@list.xansys.org
If you are receiving too many emails from XANSYS please consider changing account settings to Digest mode which will send a single email per day.

Please send administrative requests such as deletion from XANSYS to xansys-mod@tynecomp.co.uk and not to the list

I can only add a timely anecdote to this conversation. Today I'm running an analysis wherein I need to include the interference fit between a hyperplastic material and glass. When I need to tweak the diameter of the glass component, I open SCDM from the taskbar (It's always open), hit "P" for Pull. Click on the inner radial face. Type in the new radius. Hit enter. Go back to Mechanical, hit refresh, and solve. 30 seconds maybe?

Simplistic example? Perhaps, but the time saved is not insignificant.

Regards,
Matthew Pausley
Principal Device Development Engineer
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals

-----Original Message-----
From: Slater, Irene M SlaterIM@corning.com
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 4:40 PM
To: XANSYS Mailing List Home xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Cc: Kelly, Andrew Andrew.Kelly@Honeywell.com
Subject: <External> [Xansys] Re: [EXTERNAL]--Re: [WB] Preserving SCDM Edits across source CAD refreshes

EXTERNAL MESSAGE

Andrew,

Yeah, I agree with everything that Matt has said.  Nothing will ever beat APDL when it comes to parameterizing everything and anything - it is a one stop shop (prep/post/solve all in one).  Seek out a SpaceClaim user and get an hours' worth of tips-n-tricks.

Who is the winner, in my opinion?
Software updates:  SpaceClaim
Parameters:  Mechanical then Design Modeler then SpaceClaim (SpaceClaim can make a parameter for volume!  DM can't do that).
CAD Clean Up (stitch surfaces, remove split or extra edges, etc.):  SpaceClaim Volume Extraction/Midsurface creation/Enclosure creation:  SpaceClaim Interference Check:  SpaceClaim
Slicing/Dicing:  SpaceClaim (doing less of this since moving more and more to tetrahedral meshes) Sharing topology:  SpaceClaim Measuring things, viewing surface normal:  SpaceClaim Dealing with large assemblies:  SpaceClaim
Patterning:  SpaceClaim
Sketches with dimensions:  Design Modeler  (haven't given SpaceClaims latest update on this a fair shot yet).
Scripting:  SpaceClaim

SpaceClaim is a real time saver - seriously, spend some time, keep an open mind and try it out.

Regards,
Irene Slater
Corning Incorporated

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Sutton matt.sutton@padtinc.com
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 4:22 PM
To: XANSYS Mailing List Home xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Cc: Kelly, Andrew Andrew.Kelly@Honeywell.com
Subject: [EXTERNAL]--[Xansys] Re: [WB] Preserving SCDM Edits across source CAD refreshes

Andrew,
I may be in the minority, but in some ways I view SCDM as a modeling paradigm that is closer to what the MAPDL geometry paradigm was way back when.  Just, with way, way, way better robustness and speed.  And a way, way, way better user experience.  SCDM just treats geometry as geometry.  Its like a low-level, stateless BRep editor.  It doesn't layer on top the feature modeling paradigm.
Having said that, it is quite the paradigm shift from a feature based modeler.  My biggest complaint originally was the lack of sketching dimensions, but they've added those in.  When it comes to most of the items in your list, I find I can do them faster in SCDM than in DM.  In terms of what you lose, one thing I still struggle with is figuring out how to build truly parametric geometry from the ground up.  Feature based modeling is a little easier for me to wrap my head around making parametric stuff work.  But, cleaning up CAD, its just way faster.  It also has tons of keyboard shortcuts of which I only know a handful.  (Like your 2D faces from 3D.  Click select the faces, Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V, done)  Watching someone who is versed in all the shortcuts is like watching a VIM or Emacs expert do crazy things to a text file you didn't think were possible.
Matt
https://urldefense.com/v3/http://www.padtinc.com;!!ODpDvJZr5w!SoXTMGMHM9c2z8HPPpmqjQw_vIbABybfdgSEl0VwEDqiflnJIYAAqZ4o5OT5fCrw567YGO4$

-----Original Message-----
From: Kelly, Andrew via Xansys xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 2:35 PM
To: xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Cc: Kelly, Andrew Andrew.Kelly@Honeywell.com
Subject: [Xansys] [WB] Preserving SCDM Edits across source CAD refreshes

Long time DM / Mechanical user.  Ansys is pushing SpaceClaim hard.  I've gone through the Ansys Learning Hub's SpaceClaim Introduction course and I wasn't impressed. SCDM seems directed at a different audience than DM.  Wondering what others' experience is.

What do you gain by switching CAD import and processing from DM to SCDM?

What do you lose by switching CAD import and processing from DM to SCDM?

CAD is Creo Parametric (3D solid parts and assemblies).

Most simulations are Static Structural.  90% 3D / 10% 2D. Occasionally Modal, Harmonic Response, Random Vibration, Eigenvalue Buckling, etc.

Occasionally, I'll use DX to perform DOE, Response Surface analysis, etc. with inputs as different CAD model dimensions.

DM is common for

• Imprint faces and edges (e.g. contacts and boundary conditions)
• De-featuring / Re-featuring (e.g. depending on source file fidelity and FEA model simplification)
• Extracting 2D faces from 3D solid (e.g. axisymmetric)
• Point Loads / Hard points (e.g. vertices and nodes at exactly "this" location).
• Creo coordinate system and datum point import
• Beam modeling (e.g. bolted joint analysis using beam elements with Mechanical "bolt load" boundary condition).
• Creo CAD dimensions / parameters
• Named Selection processing (e.g. collecting Creo features on a Creo layer and being able to reference the resulting edges / faces / bodies as a Mechanical Named Selection or Mechanical APDL Component).
• Refreshing CAD changes in Mechanical or pushing CAD changes from Workbench / DX.

-- Andrew

Andrew Kelly, P.E.
Principal Engineer
Honeywell | Sensing & IoT
2080 Arlingate Lane
Columbus, OH 43228
Office:  614.850.7818
Toll Free:  800.848.6564
Fax:  614.850.1111

andrew.kelly@honeywell.commailto:andrew.kelly@honeywell.com
measurementsensors.honeywell.com
Twitter: @honeywell

This email and any accompanying attachments are intended for the addressee(s) only and may be confidential.  If received in error, please keep contents confidential, notify the sender, and delete this email (and any copies and attachments).

Xansys mailing list -- xansys-temp@list.xansys.org To unsubscribe send an email to xansys-temp-leave@list.xansys.org If you are receiving too many emails from XANSYS please consider changing account settings to Digest mode which will send a single email per day.

Please send administrative requests such as deletion from XANSYS to xansys-mod@tynecomp.co.uk and not to the list _______________________________________________
Xansys mailing list -- xansys-temp@list.xansys.org To unsubscribe send an email to xansys-temp-leave@list.xansys.org If you are receiving too many emails from XANSYS please consider changing account settings to Digest mode which will send a single email per day.

Please send administrative requests such as deletion from XANSYS to xansys-mod@tynecomp.co.uk and not to the list _______________________________________________
Xansys mailing list -- xansys-temp@list.xansys.org To unsubscribe send an email to xansys-temp-leave@list.xansys.org If you are receiving too many emails from XANSYS please consider changing account settings to Digest mode which will send a single email per day.

Please send administrative requests such as deletion from XANSYS to xansys-mod@tynecomp.co.uk and not to the list

Dear Mr. Kelly,
I haven't felt the need yet to switch from DM to SCDM. The main reason is DM's refreshing feature; I must often deal with many variants of the same CAD model (Creo, btw), and having the possibility to refresh the imported geometry while preserving most of the modifications done in DM is really handy.
I saw that Ansys Inc. has included a sort of journal-saving feature in SCDM, to record all the activities and execute them again. That should replicate DM's refreshing feature.
I have always had the impression that SCDM was (and still is) aimed at users with little familiarity with the CAD tools used to generate the geometries their FEM models are based upon. If you can manipulate your geometry both in DM and in the CAD tool, I still see non reason to switch to SCDM.

Best regards
Riccardo Testi

Development and Strategies
2 Wheeler Engines Technical Centre
Piaggio & C. S.p.A
Viale Rinaldo Piaggio, 25
56025 Pontedera (Pisa) - ITALY
Phone:  +39 0587 272850
Fax:        +39 0587 272010
Mobile: +39 339 7241918
E-mail:    riccardo.testi@piaggio.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Kelly, Andrew via Xansys xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Sent: lunedì 23 agosto 2021 21:35
To: xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Cc: Kelly, Andrew Andrew.Kelly@Honeywell.com
Subject: [Xansys] [WB] Preserving SCDM Edits across source CAD refreshes

CAUTION:This email originated from outside the Piaggio Group. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Long time DM / Mechanical user.  Ansys is pushing SpaceClaim hard.  I've gone through the Ansys Learning Hub's SpaceClaim Introduction course and I wasn't impressed. SCDM seems directed at a different audience than DM.  Wondering what others' experience is.

What do you gain by switching CAD import and processing from DM to SCDM?

What do you lose by switching CAD import and processing from DM to SCDM?

CAD is Creo Parametric (3D solid parts and assemblies).

Most simulations are Static Structural.  90% 3D / 10% 2D. Occasionally Modal, Harmonic Response, Random Vibration, Eigenvalue Buckling, etc.

Occasionally, I'll use DX to perform DOE, Response Surface analysis, etc. with inputs as different CAD model dimensions.

DM is common for

• Imprint faces and edges (e.g. contacts and boundary conditions)
• De-featuring / Re-featuring (e.g. depending on source file fidelity and FEA model simplification)
• Extracting 2D faces from 3D solid (e.g. axisymmetric)
• Point Loads / Hard points (e.g. vertices and nodes at exactly "this" location).
• Creo coordinate system and datum point import
• Beam modeling (e.g. bolted joint analysis using beam elements with Mechanical "bolt load" boundary condition).
• Creo CAD dimensions / parameters
• Named Selection processing (e.g. collecting Creo features on a Creo layer and being able to reference the resulting edges / faces / bodies as a Mechanical Named Selection or Mechanical APDL Component).
• Refreshing CAD changes in Mechanical or pushing CAD changes from Workbench / DX.

-- Andrew

Andrew Kelly, P.E.
Principal Engineer
Honeywell | Sensing & IoT
2080 Arlingate Lane
Columbus, OH 43228
Office:  614.850.7818
Toll Free:  800.848.6564
Fax:  614.850.1111

andrew.kelly@honeywell.commailto:andrew.kelly@honeywell.com
measurementsensors.honeywell.com
Twitter: @honeywell

This email and any accompanying attachments are intended for the addressee(s) only and may be confidential.  If received in error, please keep contents confidential, notify the sender, and delete this email (and any copies and attachments).

Xansys mailing list -- xansys-temp@list.xansys.org To unsubscribe send an email to xansys-temp-leave@list.xansys.org If you are receiving too many emails from XANSYS please consider changing account settings to Digest mode which will send a single email per day.

Please send administrative requests such as deletion from XANSYS to xansys-mod@tynecomp.co.uk and not to the list

PIAGGIO & C. S.p.A. - Sede legale: Viale Rinaldo Piaggio 25, 56025 Pontedera (PI) Italy - R.E.A. Pisa 134077 - Capitale Sociale Euro 207.613.944,37 i.v. - Reg. Imprese Pisa e Codice fiscale 04773200011 - Direzione e coordinamento IMMSI S.p.A

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged information.  Any disclosure, distribution or other use of this message by any subject different from the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you received this by mistake, please notify us immediately and delete this communication.

I just loaded the free student version of ANSYS to teach. I have 30-year experience in ANSYS and so I know what I am doing.
I am not able to apply load at a node and I get an error of this type.
Any ANSYS representative around?
Vinay

Dr. Vinay Dayal
Associate Professor
Aerospace Engineering
Faculty Associate
Center for Nondestructive Evaluations
1200 Howe Hall, 537 Bissell Rd
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011

[cid:3ad19572-9841-4561-b4a6-54c0986f7988]

Dr. Dayal:

Is it just an interactive issue or is the F command also not working?

Regards,
Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: Dayal, Vinay [AER E] vdayal@iastate.edu
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2021 4:29 PM
To: XANSYS Mailing List Home xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Subject: [Xansys] Problem with ANSYS student

[External Sender]

I just loaded the free student version of ANSYS to teach. I have 30-year experience in ANSYS and so I know what I am doing.
I am not able to apply load at a node and I get an error of this type.
Any ANSYS representative around?
Vinay

Dr. Vinay Dayal
Associate Professor
Aerospace Engineering
Faculty Associate
Center for Nondestructive Evaluations
1200 Howe Hall, 537 Bissell Rd
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011

[cid:3ad19572-9841-4561-b4a6-54c0986f7988]

Dr. Dayal:

I reproduced the observed behavior in 2021 R2 with a commercial license, so it does not appear to be issue with student version.  I could not reproduce it in earlier versions.  It only seems to occur when using the 2021 R2 GUI.

I will file a bug to have this behavior fixed in 2022 R1.  The only current workarounds that I can see are to either apply forces using commands and/or use an earlier version.

Regards,
Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Shaw daniel.shaw@ansys.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2021 11:01 AM
To: XANSYS Mailing List Home xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Subject: [Xansys] Re: Problem with ANSYS student

[External Sender]

Dr. Dayal:

Is it just an interactive issue or is the F command also not working?

Regards,
Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: Dayal, Vinay [AER E] vdayal@iastate.edu
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2021 4:29 PM
To: XANSYS Mailing List Home xansys-temp@list.xansys.org
Subject: [Xansys] Problem with ANSYS student

[External Sender]

I just loaded the free student version of ANSYS to teach. I have 30-year experience in ANSYS and so I know what I am doing.
I am not able to apply load at a node and I get an error of this type.
Any ANSYS representative around?
Vinay

Dr. Vinay Dayal
Associate Professor
Aerospace Engineering
Faculty Associate
Center for Nondestructive Evaluations
1200 Howe Hall, 537 Bissell Rd
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011

[cid:3ad19572-9841-4561-b4a6-54c0986f7988]

Xansys mailing list -- xansys-temp@list.xansys.org To unsubscribe send an email to xansys-temp-leave@list.xansys.org If you are receiving too many emails from XANSYS please consider changing account settings to Digest mode which will send a single email per day.

Please send administrative requests such as deletion from XANSYS to xansys-mod@tynecomp.co.uk and not to the list