Hello everyone, I am modeling a honeycomb core that's been experimentally tested in shear in accordance with the ASTM C273 standards. In order to reduce computational time, I removed the loading plates and replaced them with boundary conditions, consisting of a rigid region connected with a master node. This approach makes the structure much stiffer than the actual core tested in the experiments, thus I want to introduce some spring stiffness ( maybe ) to reduce the stiffness of the rigid region better representing the in-between situation of the experiment. Is there a way to overcome this? I use ANSYS APDL for my simulation. Thank you all for your time and help. Antonis Student at the University of Athens

> On Dec 19, 2022, at 10:59 AM, AntonisΤ <useratsi98@gmail.com> wrote: > > in accordance with the ASTM C273 standards. In order to reduce > computational time, I removed the loading plates and replaced them with > boundary conditions, consisting of a rigid region connected with a This is a really bad artifice, for many reasons but chiefly because you'll waste a lot of time convincing yourself that the associated error is negligible. Probably it won't be. Model it properly. If your computer can't handle it, make another problem or use another computer. Christopher Wright P.E. (ret'd) |"They couldn't hit an elephant at chrisw@skypoint.com | this distance" (last words of Gen. http://www.skypoint.com/members/chrisw/ | John Sedgwick, Spotsylvania (1864)

Hello Antonis, You can decompose the honeycomb using CMS reduction. You can see an example here using the command snippet for reference https://www.ansystips.com/2017/05/component-mode-synthesiscms.html?m=1 Just make sure to conservatively mesh and set master dofs at connection points. More points you have the bigger your CMS substructure will be. Thanks, Nelson On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 9:00 AM AntonisΤ <useratsi98@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I am modeling a honeycomb core that's been experimentally tested in shear > in accordance with the ASTM C273 standards. In order to reduce > computational time, I removed the loading plates and replaced them with > boundary conditions, consisting of a rigid region connected with a master > node. This approach makes the structure much stiffer than the actual core > tested in the experiments, thus I want to introduce some spring stiffness ( > maybe ) to reduce the stiffness of the rigid region better representing the > in-between situation of the experiment. > > Is there a way to overcome this? > I use ANSYS APDL for my simulation. > > Thank you all for your time and help. > Antonis > > Student at the University of Athens > _______________________________________________ > 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 >

Hi Antonis, I agree with Chris, adding springs is pretty much "cheating" as it is impossible to know the stiffness of the springs apriori. Perhaps try "symmetry" to half the model size. Secondly, the plates may be further approximated with shell elements. I heard it is possible to offset the interface to the thickness of the plate but have not looked into it myself. Shell elements may be too much an approximation for what you're after. My guess is the swivel joint may throw you off. Note, also, the load axis that is not parallel to the plates in this picture (in pink line): https://www.universalgripco.com/astm-c273?lightbox=cwlo In short, be extra careful in your experiment. This is a very challenging problem. Good luck, Sze Kwan (Jason) Cheah Graduate Student University of Minnesota - Twin Cities On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 7:17 PM Nelson Ho <nelsonho567@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello Antonis, > > You can decompose the honeycomb using CMS reduction. You can see an example > here using the command snippet for reference > > https://www.ansystips.com/2017/05/component-mode-synthesiscms.html?m=1 > > > Just make sure to conservatively mesh and set master dofs at connection > points. More points you have the bigger your CMS substructure will be. > > Thanks, > Nelson > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 9:00 AM AntonisΤ <useratsi98@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > > > I am modeling a honeycomb core that's been experimentally tested in shear > > in accordance with the ASTM C273 standards. In order to reduce > > computational time, I removed the loading plates and replaced them with > > boundary conditions, consisting of a rigid region connected with a master > > node. This approach makes the structure much stiffer than the actual core > > tested in the experiments, thus I want to introduce some spring > stiffness ( > > maybe ) to reduce the stiffness of the rigid region better representing > the > > in-between situation of the experiment. > > > > Is there a way to overcome this? > > I use ANSYS APDL for my simulation. > > > > Thank you all for your time and help. > > Antonis > > > > Student at the University of Athens > > _______________________________________________ > > 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

Oops just realized I mistyped in the email. CMS reduction of connecting plate (not the honeycomb) if you want to go down that route of generating super elements. But if the geometry is simple I agree shelling or coarse mesh will give you a better answer. Thanks, Nelson On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 11:37 AM Sze Kwan Cheah via Xansys < xansys-temp@list.xansys.org> wrote: > Hi Antonis, > > I agree with Chris, adding springs is pretty much "cheating" as it is > impossible to know the stiffness of the springs apriori. > > Perhaps try "symmetry" to half the model size. Secondly, the plates may be > further approximated with shell elements. I heard it is possible to offset > the interface to the thickness of the plate but have not looked into it > myself. Shell elements may be too much an approximation for what you're > after. > > My guess is the swivel joint may throw you off. Note, also, the load axis > that is not parallel to the plates in this picture (in pink line): > https://www.universalgripco.com/astm-c273?lightbox=cwlo > > In short, be extra careful in your experiment. This is a very challenging > problem. > > > Good luck, > Sze Kwan (Jason) Cheah > Graduate Student > University of Minnesota - Twin Cities > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 7:17 PM Nelson Ho <nelsonho567@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello Antonis, > > > > You can decompose the honeycomb using CMS reduction. You can see an > example > > here using the command snippet for reference > > > > https://www.ansystips.com/2017/05/component-mode-synthesiscms.html?m=1 > > > > > > Just make sure to conservatively mesh and set master dofs at connection > > points. More points you have the bigger your CMS substructure will be. > > > > Thanks, > > Nelson > > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 9:00 AM AntonisΤ <useratsi98@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > > > I am modeling a honeycomb core that's been experimentally tested in > shear > > > in accordance with the ASTM C273 standards. In order to reduce > > > computational time, I removed the loading plates and replaced them with > > > boundary conditions, consisting of a rigid region connected with a > master > > > node. This approach makes the structure much stiffer than the actual > core > > > tested in the experiments, thus I want to introduce some spring > > stiffness ( > > > maybe ) to reduce the stiffness of the rigid region better representing > > the > > > in-between situation of the experiment. > > > > > > Is there a way to overcome this? > > > I use ANSYS APDL for my simulation. > > > > > > Thank you all for your time and help. > > > Antonis > > > > > > Student at the University of Athens > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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

Hello, Sze, what do you mean by offset the interface? I am using only shell elements for the whole model. Can you provide me with papers/documentation that I can look into ? Thanks a lot, Antonis Στις Τρί 20 Δεκ 2022 στις 10:01 μ.μ., ο/η Nelson Ho <nelsonho567@gmail.com> έγραψε: > Oops just realized I mistyped in the email. CMS reduction of connecting > plate (not the honeycomb) if you want to go down that route of generating > super elements. > But if the geometry is simple I agree shelling or coarse mesh will give you > a better answer. > > > Thanks, > Nelson > > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 11:37 AM Sze Kwan Cheah via Xansys < > xansys-temp@list.xansys.org> wrote: > > > Hi Antonis, > > > > I agree with Chris, adding springs is pretty much "cheating" as it is > > impossible to know the stiffness of the springs apriori. > > > > Perhaps try "symmetry" to half the model size. Secondly, the plates may > be > > further approximated with shell elements. I heard it is possible to > offset > > the interface to the thickness of the plate but have not looked into it > > myself. Shell elements may be too much an approximation for what you're > > after. > > > > My guess is the swivel joint may throw you off. Note, also, the load axis > > that is not parallel to the plates in this picture (in pink line): > > https://www.universalgripco.com/astm-c273?lightbox=cwlo > > > > In short, be extra careful in your experiment. This is a very challenging > > problem. > > > > > > Good luck, > > Sze Kwan (Jason) Cheah > > Graduate Student > > University of Minnesota - Twin Cities > > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 7:17 PM Nelson Ho <nelsonho567@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hello Antonis, > > > > > > You can decompose the honeycomb using CMS reduction. You can see an > > example > > > here using the command snippet for reference > > > > > > https://www.ansystips.com/2017/05/component-mode-synthesiscms.html?m=1 > > > > > > > > > Just make sure to conservatively mesh and set master dofs at connection > > > points. More points you have the bigger your CMS substructure will be. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Nelson > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 9:00 AM AntonisΤ <useratsi98@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > > > > > I am modeling a honeycomb core that's been experimentally tested in > > shear > > > > in accordance with the ASTM C273 standards. In order to reduce > > > > computational time, I removed the loading plates and replaced them > with > > > > boundary conditions, consisting of a rigid region connected with a > > master > > > > node. This approach makes the structure much stiffer than the actual > > core > > > > tested in the experiments, thus I want to introduce some spring > > > stiffness ( > > > > maybe ) to reduce the stiffness of the rigid region better > representing > > > the > > > > in-between situation of the experiment. > > > > > > > > Is there a way to overcome this? > > > > I use ANSYS APDL for my simulation. > > > > > > > > Thank you all for your time and help. > > > > Antonis > > > > > > > > Student at the University of Athens > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > 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 > _______________________________________________ > 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

Antonis, To clarify, I was suggesting the possibility of offsetting the nodes of the loading plates so that you could use shell elements instead of solid elements for the loading plate to reduce the size of the model. Sounds like you're already doing that. From the help manual: https://www.mm.bme.hu/~gyebro/files/ans_help_v182/ans_cmd/Hlp_C_SECOFFSET.html#SECOFFSET.shells I'm not sure if it is able to account for loading offset, or is purely a graphical aid. Others who have tried it could chime in. Thanks, Sze Kwan (Jason) Cheah Graduate Student University of Minnesota - Twin Cities On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 4:32 PM AntonisΤ <useratsi98@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Sze, what do you mean by offset the interface? I am using only shell > elements for the whole model. > > Can you provide me with papers/documentation that I can look into ? > > Thanks a lot, > Antonis > > Στις Τρί 20 Δεκ 2022 στις 10:01 μ.μ., ο/η Nelson Ho <nelsonho567@gmail.com > > > έγραψε: > > > Oops just realized I mistyped in the email. CMS reduction of connecting > > plate (not the honeycomb) if you want to go down that route of generating > > super elements. > > But if the geometry is simple I agree shelling or coarse mesh will give > you > > a better answer. > > > > > > Thanks, > > Nelson > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 11:37 AM Sze Kwan Cheah via Xansys < > > xansys-temp@list.xansys.org> wrote: > > > > > Hi Antonis, > > > > > > I agree with Chris, adding springs is pretty much "cheating" as it is > > > impossible to know the stiffness of the springs apriori. > > > > > > Perhaps try "symmetry" to half the model size. Secondly, the plates may > > be > > > further approximated with shell elements. I heard it is possible to > > offset > > > the interface to the thickness of the plate but have not looked into it > > > myself. Shell elements may be too much an approximation for what you're > > > after. > > > > > > My guess is the swivel joint may throw you off. Note, also, the load > axis > > > that is not parallel to the plates in this picture (in pink line): > > > https://www.universalgripco.com/astm-c273?lightbox=cwlo > > > > > > In short, be extra careful in your experiment. This is a very > challenging > > > problem. > > > > > > > > > Good luck, > > > Sze Kwan (Jason) Cheah > > > Graduate Student > > > University of Minnesota - Twin Cities > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 7:17 PM Nelson Ho <nelsonho567@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > Hello Antonis, > > > > > > > > You can decompose the honeycomb using CMS reduction. You can see an > > > example > > > > here using the command snippet for reference > > > > > > > > > https://www.ansystips.com/2017/05/component-mode-synthesiscms.html?m=1 > > > > > > > > > > > > Just make sure to conservatively mesh and set master dofs at > connection > > > > points. More points you have the bigger your CMS substructure will > be. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Nelson > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 9:00 AM AntonisΤ <useratsi98@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > > > > > > > I am modeling a honeycomb core that's been experimentally tested in > > > shear > > > > > in accordance with the ASTM C273 standards. In order to reduce > > > > > computational time, I removed the loading plates and replaced them > > with > > > > > boundary conditions, consisting of a rigid region connected with a > > > master > > > > > node. This approach makes the structure much stiffer than the > actual > > > core > > > > > tested in the experiments, thus I want to introduce some spring > > > > stiffness ( > > > > > maybe ) to reduce the stiffness of the rigid region better > > representing > > > > the > > > > > in-between situation of the experiment. > > > > > > > > > > Is there a way to overcome this? > > > > > I use ANSYS APDL for my simulation. > > > > > > > > > > Thank you all for your time and help. > > > > > Antonis > > > > > > > > > > Student at the University of Athens > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 see you were only referring to the elements, not something I could change in the modeling process. Thanks a lot again. Στις Τετ 21 Δεκ 2022 στις 1:03 π.μ., ο/η Sze Kwan Cheah via Xansys < xansys-temp@list.xansys.org> έγραψε: > Antonis, > > To clarify, I was suggesting the possibility of offsetting the nodes of the > loading plates so that you could use shell elements instead of solid > elements for the loading plate to reduce the size of the model. Sounds like > you're already doing that. > > From the help manual: > > https://www.mm.bme.hu/~gyebro/files/ans_help_v182/ans_cmd/Hlp_C_SECOFFSET.html#SECOFFSET.shells > > I'm not sure if it is able to account for loading offset, or is purely a > graphical aid. Others who have tried it could chime in. > > > Thanks, > Sze Kwan (Jason) Cheah > Graduate Student > University of Minnesota - Twin Cities > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 4:32 PM AntonisΤ <useratsi98@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > Sze, what do you mean by offset the interface? I am using only shell > > elements for the whole model. > > > > Can you provide me with papers/documentation that I can look into ? > > > > Thanks a lot, > > Antonis > > > > Στις Τρί 20 Δεκ 2022 στις 10:01 μ.μ., ο/η Nelson Ho < > nelsonho567@gmail.com > > > > > έγραψε: > > > > > Oops just realized I mistyped in the email. CMS reduction of connecting > > > plate (not the honeycomb) if you want to go down that route of > generating > > > super elements. > > > But if the geometry is simple I agree shelling or coarse mesh will give > > you > > > a better answer. > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Nelson > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 11:37 AM Sze Kwan Cheah via Xansys < > > > xansys-temp@list.xansys.org> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Antonis, > > > > > > > > I agree with Chris, adding springs is pretty much "cheating" as it is > > > > impossible to know the stiffness of the springs apriori. > > > > > > > > Perhaps try "symmetry" to half the model size. Secondly, the plates > may > > > be > > > > further approximated with shell elements. I heard it is possible to > > > offset > > > > the interface to the thickness of the plate but have not looked into > it > > > > myself. Shell elements may be too much an approximation for what > you're > > > > after. > > > > > > > > My guess is the swivel joint may throw you off. Note, also, the load > > axis > > > > that is not parallel to the plates in this picture (in pink line): > > > > https://www.universalgripco.com/astm-c273?lightbox=cwlo > > > > > > > > In short, be extra careful in your experiment. This is a very > > challenging > > > > problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > Good luck, > > > > Sze Kwan (Jason) Cheah > > > > Graduate Student > > > > University of Minnesota - Twin Cities > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 7:17 PM Nelson Ho <nelsonho567@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello Antonis, > > > > > > > > > > You can decompose the honeycomb using CMS reduction. You can see an > > > > example > > > > > here using the command snippet for reference > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.ansystips.com/2017/05/component-mode-synthesiscms.html?m=1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just make sure to conservatively mesh and set master dofs at > > connection > > > > > points. More points you have the bigger your CMS substructure will > > be. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Nelson > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 9:00 AM AntonisΤ <useratsi98@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > > > > > > > > > I am modeling a honeycomb core that's been experimentally tested > in > > > > shear > > > > > > in accordance with the ASTM C273 standards. In order to reduce > > > > > > computational time, I removed the loading plates and replaced > them > > > with > > > > > > boundary conditions, consisting of a rigid region connected with > a > > > > master > > > > > > node. This approach makes the structure much stiffer than the > > actual > > > > core > > > > > > tested in the experiments, thus I want to introduce some spring > > > > > stiffness ( > > > > > > maybe ) to reduce the stiffness of the rigid region better > > > representing > > > > > the > > > > > > in-between situation of the experiment. > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there a way to overcome this? > > > > > > I use ANSYS APDL for my simulation. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you all for your time and help. > > > > > > Antonis > > > > > > > > > > > > Student at the University of Athens > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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

Hello All, Looking any suggestion in element import in APDL. Here is the details of it. I am running two analysis, one with Structural and other with thermal. I am modifying elements in Structural model (Some geometry) (SOLID185) and then importing it to the Thermal model (SOLID70), somehow, I can see nodes are created however, I could not see element created. Please do let me if its not clear. Thanks and Regards Bhavesh V. R & D Engineer EGA, UAE PS. I am changing ET type to SOLID 70 (On elements which require to import in thermal analysis) before Ewrite command in Structural analysis. Bhaveshkumar Rameshchandra Varia Engineer I - R&D Technology Development & Transfer Midstream T +971 2 509 444 <BR>D +97148221034 <BR>M +971543924196 Emirates Global Aluminium PO Box 109111, Abu Dhabi United Arab Emirates www.ega.ae ________________________________ This is an e-mail from Emirates Global Aluminium PJSC. Its contents are confidential to the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. It may not be disclosed to or used by anyone other than its intended recipient, nor may it be copied in any way. If received in error please e-mail a reply to the sender and delete it from your system. Although this e-mail has been scanned for viruses, Emirates Global Aluminium cannot ultimately accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan attachments (if any).

Hello, See ETCHG command in ur APDL help, ANSYS with automatically change the element type based on the analysis you are performing. Thanks Anjum -----Original Message----- From: Bhaveshkumar Rameshchandra Varia via Xansys <xansys-temp@list.xansys.org> Sent: 09 January 2023 13:54 To: XANSYS Mailing List Home <xansys-temp@list.xansys.org> Cc: Bhaveshkumar Rameshchandra Varia <bhavaria@ega.ae> Subject: [Xansys] Importing Element File ***This mail has been sent by an external source*** Hello All, Looking any suggestion in element import in APDL. Here is the details of it. I am running two analysis, one with Structural and other with thermal. I am modifying elements in Structural model (Some geometry) (SOLID185) and then importing it to the Thermal model (SOLID70), somehow, I can see nodes are created however, I could not see element created. Please do let me if its not clear. Thanks and Regards Bhavesh V. R & D Engineer EGA, UAE PS. I am changing ET type to SOLID 70 (On elements which require to import in thermal analysis) before Ewrite command in Structural analysis. Bhaveshkumar Rameshchandra Varia Engineer I - R&D Technology Development & Transfer Midstream T +971 2 509 444 <BR>D +97148221034 <BR>M +971543924196 Emirates Global Aluminium PO Box 109111, Abu Dhabi United Arab Emirates www.ega.ae ________________________________ This is an e-mail from Emirates Global Aluminium PJSC. Its contents are confidential to the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. It may not be disclosed to or used by anyone other than its intended recipient, nor may it be copied in any way. If received in error please e-mail a reply to the sender and delete it from your system. Although this e-mail has been scanned for viruses, Emirates Global Aluminium cannot ultimately accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan attachments (if any). _______________________________________________ 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 This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message.