Posts Tagged ‘Simulation’

Parameters and Design Studies

Wednesday, May 15th, 2013

In my opinion, one of the most underutilized tools in SolidWorks Simulation is the Design Study.  Design studies allow you to easily set up a number of ‘what if’ scenarios and run them all with the click of a button.  Sure, it might take a couple extra minutes to set up a few parameters, but the extra setup time will pay off handsomely later.

Let’s take a look at the effects of varying mesh size for a stress concentration.  The first step is to create and run a Simulation Study to verify the model setup and boundary conditions.  Second, set up a parameter for the global element size.  Third, create a design study, using that parameter as a variable.  Finally, add a constraint; in this case we’ll use the maximum stress from the Simulation study we previously created.  When these steps are complete, run the design study and all of the scenarios with the click of a button!

Setting up a Parameter can be done in (at least) two ways.  From the Evaluation tab of your Command Manager, you can left-click the down arrow on the Design Study icon and choose ‘Parameters’.  Alternately, from your Simulation feature tree, you can right-click on “Parameters” and choose ‘Edit/Define…’. The keys to creating a Parameter are to provide a name, choose the appropriate category, then link that parameter to the item you want to vary in the design study.  In this example, I want to link the Parameter to ‘Global Element’ size, so I’ll click on the Mesh icon from my Simulation study feature tree.

2013-0515 a  Parameters

The next step is to insert a Design Study into your model.  Use the down-arrows to add the Element Size variable to the Design Study.  In the second column, I chose to use discrete values for element size.  These can be typed in using a comma to separate values.  In the Constraints section, use the pull-down menu to add a Simulation Data Sensor to the model, specifically to monitor the maximum stress.  Be sure to choose the Simulation study you want the sensor to reference for data.  Then un-check the ‘Optimization’ box and click ‘Run’.

2013-0515 a  Parameters

When the Design Study is finished running all of the scenarios, you will have a plot for each constraint utilized.  In the picture below, the stress plot from one of the scenarios is shown.  I’ve also added a ‘Local Trend Graph‘ to show the stress concentration model does, indeed, show a diverging solution with regards to stress.

2013-0515 c  Output

I could have arrived at the same information in a couple of ways not utilizing a Design Study.  The most common method I encounter is a user creating ten Simulation studies, then manually meshing each with a different Global Element size.  That is, quite simply, a waste of time!  The extra few minutes spent creating Parameters and properly defining a Design Study can be done much faster than creating several individual studies.  I’m certain with a little investigation you can find plenty of uses for this powerful tool.  Now go make your products better with SolidWorks Simulation!

What Can’t You Design In SolidWorks? #2

Tuesday, April 2nd, 2013

RC Hovercraft #2 – SolidWorks

To review, I had 4 main design criteria for the Remote Control Hover Craft.

  • Utilize the SolidWorks and SolidWorks Simulation Suite of software to develop and optimize the hovercraft design.
  • The RC Hovercraft’s main components will be 3D Printed using the Stratasys UPrint.
  • Easy to Assemble. I want to make the assembly as easy and as straight forward as possible with concise instructions.
  • For purchases components, use low cost, off the shelf components including the electric motors, electronic speed control (ESC), batteries, and propellers.

I proceeded forward with the design of the Hovercraft using SolidWorks 3D mechanical design software.  SolidWorks allowed me to quickly develop and execute a first pass design, utilizing Multi-Body Parts, In context Assembly Modeling, Sketch Pictures, Fastening Features, Interference Detection, and several other standard options.  All of this came together in an initial design that meets the above criteria.

The design started with the Top Plate part that houses the downward facing fan assembly and gives the craft its overall dimensional size.  I kept the craft under the 8″ by 8″ tray size of the Stratasys UPrint 3D Printer.  The part consists of multi-bodies; one for the plate and the other for the fan housing.  These bodies have minimal tolerance so they are a snug fit when pressed together for final assembly.  This design criteria is so that if the propeller needs to be serviced later total dis-assembly of the craft does not have to take place. Simply pull the fan unit upward out of the top plate.

Top Plate

Top Plate

Exploded View Front

Exploded View Front

Exploded View Back

Exploded View Back

 

The chassis continues with a bottom plate and separating ribs.  The chassis is hollow as the air needs to fill this cavity before exiting out of the skirt.  The skirt is intended to be a bicycle inner tube cut to size with holes cut around the inner bottom portion allowing the air to escape.  The skirt will be held on by two fastening plates and standard hobby store machine screws.

Section View

Section View

The back cowling snaps into place with a Snap Hook.  The Fastening Feature command was used to create this geometry.  The Snap Hook will allow for ease of assembly, and the cowl contains a cross bar with built in motor mount sized for a 9V-11V brushed can motor. The Cowling and Top Plate will make up the mounting location for the dual rudder system.  The system is driven by  an S75 Nano servo available at most local hobby shops.

Cowl

Cowl

 

 

The canopy will cover all of the electronics including the Receiver, two Electronic Speed Controls (ESC), And two Li-Poly 300MAH 11.1V Batteries.  One ESC and battery per motor.  I originally set out utilizing the Sketch Picture and Surfacing to create the canopy structure. This worked out well, however at this time I did not have the electronics in the full assembly.  When trying to accommodate the electronics under the first variation of the canopy I visibly had interference. Luckily utilizing in-context editing and having a well planned design intent, the changes to the canopy allowed for an easy and quick change.

Sketch Picture

Sketch Picture

Interference Original Canopy

Interference Original Canopy

Receiver & ESCs

Receiver & ESCs

 

Batteries, Receiver, and ESCs

Batteries, Receiver, and ESCs

Canopy Design Change

Canopy Design Change

 

 

There is still much to do with the modeling aspect, but for now I have a good working start to the project and a starting point to investigate the flow and stress characteristics of the design.  The next step is to utilize Flow Simulation to verify the lift ability of the motor and propeller combination  for the lift fan and the rear facing fan assembly.

Top

Top

Front

Front

Back

Back

Side

Side

 

 

 

 

 

What Can’t You Design In SolidWorks?

Monday, February 25th, 2013

RC Hovercraft #1

For this blog series I wanted to design something from scratch.  Not necessarily a new idea but something fun and cool.  My intention is to design a Remote Control Hovercraft from the ground up.

I want to give you a brief description and history of a Hovercraft:

A hovercraft or air-cushion vehicle is a vehicle capable of travelling over variable surfaces, such as land and water.  The hovercraft operates by forcing a high pressure of air between the bottom of the craft and the surface below.  This high pressure of air lifts the vehicle upward essentially “hovering” above the ground on a cushion of air. The first practical design for hovercraft derived from several coinciding inventions in the 1950s to 1960s. They are now used throughout the world as specialized vehicles for transport and other applications.

500px-Hovercraft_-_scheme.svg

  1. Propulsion Propellers
  2.  Air
  3. Lifting Fan
  4. Flexible skirt

YouTube Preview Image

I have specific goals in mind that I want to meet in the design and build of this project.

 

Goals of the Hovercraft Design:

  • Utilize the SolidWorks and SolidWorks Simulation Suite of software to develop and optimize the hover craft design.
  • The RC Hovercraft’s main components will be 3D Printed using the Stratasys UPrint.
  • Easy to Assemble. I want to make the assembly as easy and as straight forward as possible with concise instructions.
  • For purchased components, use low cost, off the shelf components including the electric motors, electronic speed control (ESC), batteries, and propellers.

I am starting from just an idea, and a sketch. We will see where the design leads.

Hover Craft2

When To Use A Bearing Load

Friday, January 25th, 2013

The use of a bearing load is brought up frequently during training and technical support discussions. I want to elaborate on this topic with a simple example, illustrating when to use and when it is not necessary to use the bearing load.
Let’s step back a minute and talk about what a bearing load is. According to the SolidWorks Help file:

 

Bearing Loads


Bearing loads develop between contacting cylindrical faces or edges of shells.
In most cases, the contacting faces or edges have the same radius. The bearing forces generate a non-uniform pressure at the interface of contact. You can select between a sinusoidal variation and a parabolic variation in the appropriate half-space, as shown in the figure.

Bearing Load Distribution

In contrast, a uniform load does not vary in strength closer to the tangency of the tube. The load is constant across the applied face.
Setup:


We will examine two models and four scenarios in this exercise. The models will be both a solid and a hollow shaft. The shaft dimensions will be 14″ long with a 2″ diameter. Additionally, the hollow shaft will have a wall thickness of 0.125″.
Both the Solid and Hollow tubes were loaded with a distributed and bearing load in order to compare and contrast the results. Both models were held fixed at either end. The load was applied to the entire length of the top half of the shaft in a vertical direction.

Loading
The Results:


Between the distributed and bearing load on the Solid model, there is no difference in stress and displacement. On the hollow tube, the bearing load shows a drastic difference in the displacement compared to the uniform load. The bearing load shows the majority of the load is being focused on the center of the tube.
Model Load Stress Displacement

Model Load Stress Displacement
Solid 2000lb Distributed 3943.6 psi 0.001066 in.
Solid 2000lb Bearing 3943.4 psi 0.001065 in
Hollow 2000lb Distributed 11,534.6 psi 0.003009 in.
Hollow 2000lb Bearing 12,084.9 psi 0.003467 in.

Significant digits are for illustration only.

The stress is 4.5% higher in the ‘hollow shaft – bearing load’ combination as compared to the ‘hollow shaft – distributed load’ example.
Load Solid Stress
Stress Above Displacement Below Solid Distributed Load
Load Solid Disp

Bearing Load Solid Stress

 

Stress Above Displacement Below Solid Bearing Load

Bearing Load Solid Disp

 

Load Hollow Stress

 

Stress Above Displacement Below Hollow Distributed Load

 

Load Hollow Disp

 

 
Bearing Load Hollow Stress

Stress Above Displacement Below Hollow Bearing Load

Bearing Load Hollow Disp
Summary:


In summary, the bearing load should be utilized when dealing with a hollow or thin walled, cylindrical geometry. Utilizing solid geometry the load differences do not affect the results. The solid geometry distributes the load throughout the solid volume and is inherently stiffer. The hollow tube, missing its internal mass, shows a difference in the displacement of the applied load. The uniform load displaced evenly from tangent edge to tangent edge where as the bearing load concentrated in the center.

A bearing load can be applied to solid and hollow cylindrical geometry however it is only necessary for hollow or thin geometry.

Submodeling in Simulation 2013

Friday, January 18th, 2013

Was it really last year that Vik wrote about Two Neat Additions  to Simulation in 2013?  How time flies!  For all its power, the addition of Submodeling studies for Simulation 2013 has seemingly gone unnoticed by our Simulation user base.

In most cases, we are usually interested in the performance of a small portion of the model, maybe a part or two of the whole design.  In order to get to that area of interest, we need to analyze a load path through other components.  What submodeling does is allow us to generate analysis results on an entire assembly, then utilize those results on our area of interest in the mechanism.  This is done by using the displacements from the assembly and transferring those as a fixture (a prescribed displacement) on the components of interest.  Let’s show how this works in Simulation.

Here is the Frame model we demonstrated Submodeling on during the SolidWorks 2013 Roll-Out sessions.  The boundary conditions have been applied to the entire model, but our real area of interest is the middle cross brace and associated components.

We conduct the analysis on the entire frame, specifically looking for the displacements results of the assembly.  The displacements at the cut boundary between the entire frame and our important component(s) is what we are interested in to begin a submodeling study.

To start the Submodeling study, right-click on the Simulation study name and select the option ‘Create Submodeling Study’.

The next step is to select components – the ones we are most interested in – from the graphics window.  Simulation will take a few moments to generate the derived configuration and transfer the displacement results at the cut boundary into the submodel study.

Now you can run an analysis with a very refined mesh on the important components of the design.  The real benefit of submodeling in Simulation, however, has to do with evaluating design changes.  If the cut boundary remains unchanged and the loading conditions stay the same, you can evaluate design changes to the submodel and verify the effectiveness of those changes without meshing and running the analysis on the entire assembly.

Here we see that a slot has been cut through the main portion of the cross frame that would remove a lot of mass from the component.  We can recalculate the results of the submodel study with this design change and feel comfortable that our results are valid.

So the next time you begin a study on a large assembly, resist the temptation to drag the mesh density slider all the way to fine.  Just generate results for the entire assembly with a coarse mesh, create a submodel study and then refine your mesh as you see fit.  Now go make your products better with SolidWorks Simulation!

Materials in Design Studies

Wednesday, December 26th, 2012

Since it is the Christmas season, why don’t we look at one of the great presents we were given in SolidWorks Simulation 2013!  While there were many great enhancements this year, and it is very difficult to pick a favorite new Simulation toy, here is one that I personally rank towards the top of my list.  The ability to use SolidWorks Materials in Design Studies was a great gift, also known as an enhancement, to Simulation!   Prior to this release, we had to create custom materials, linking Material Properties to Design Study Parameters.  When doing this, we could link a property, such as Young’s Modulus, to a design parameter – one at a time.

While this simplification did work, it did not provide a great match for material selection.  Many material properties change between different grades of steel and aluminum, for instance, so only choosing Young’s Modulus as a variable wasn’t sufficient.  Further, if we optimized a solution based upon a single material property, like Young’s Modulus, we would have to try and match a new material to that Young’s Modulus and then consider what affects the other material properties might have on our optimized solution.

Enter the gift of Materials in Design Studies for SolidWorks Simulation 2013!  When we enter the parameters for our Design Study, notice how Material is now included the Category pull-down selection in 2013.

This is the first step in setting up Materials to be used as a design study variable.  The setup of the variable is unchanged – just add it to your list of what you can modify in your design.  Then, as you are adding design scenarios, you have the additional pull-down within each column to modify the material definition for each scenario.

This can be used for optimizing your designs, too!  I hope that you agree this enhancement was a great gift in SolidWorks Simulation 2013!  Now go make your products better with SolidWorks Simulation!

Troubleshooting a Common Transient Thermal Study Error

Monday, October 1st, 2012

A great feature of Thermal studies with SolidWorks Simulation Professional is the ability to utilize other thermal study results as an input for transient analysis.  This allows us, for instance, to analyze the response of a heating or cooling process on our components and assemblies.  This is done by editing the properties of the study, changing the study type to Transient, checking the box for ‘Initial temperatures from thermal study’ and choosing the appropriate study as an input.  (It is easier done than written!)

The other options, when setting up a transient thermal analysis, are the total time to analyze the heating or cooling cycle and how often you want to have a result data point.  For more advanced thermal analysis, if the input thermal study is another transient analysis, you can choose which time step from the input study to begin with for the next thermal study.  This is especially beneficial when stringing together complex power, heating or cooling curves.

Here is where the troubleshooting begins.  The most common error message we encounter with transient thermal studies is “Incompatible initial temperatures”.  The wording of this error message does not provide a clear indication of what is wrong.  Fortunately, the ‘fix’ is very simple.

As Engineers, we usually tweak each and every analysis, usually by refining the mesh in one area or another, even between studies.  When using thermal studies for inputs to transient analysis, this is not a good thing!  Getting past the cryptic wording of this error message, what it really means is the meshes for each study are not identical.  So if you see this error message, the ‘fix’ is to drag-and-drop the mesh from your input study into the new study.  This guarantees that the meshes are identical, allowing your transient thermal analysis work to continue.  Now go make your products better with SolidWorks Simulation!

Should your Simulation files go into the EPDM vault?

Thursday, June 28th, 2012

SolidWorks Enterprise PDM’s integration with Simulation is pretty easy.

 

(Though as you can see from above SolidWorks hides it in the “Display” menu.)

If you click this option, when you check in a SolidWorks part or assembly that has the simulation report file still available, EPDM will offer to check in the report file along with the component.

But should you do it? Some of those report files can get pretty big.

My advice is that unless your IT guys are falling over themselves, taking turns screaming at you because their precious vault is too big. (Why do IT guys always think it is their vault?) Do it.

Assuming you ran the analysis to ensure the design is good, having a record that you did your due diligence and checked your designs can come in very handy down the road. Doubly nice is that each Simulation report file is associated with the version of the file that you ran on it. So with EPDM, you not only have a history of how that file has changed over time, you additionally have all the analysis report files related to each version.

Never underestimate the power of a good paper trail.

Flow Simulation and the 75 Dollar Question

Friday, June 22nd, 2012

Is it worth the extra 75 dollars for a long tube header versus a short tube?

Let’s start answering this by examining how an exhaust header works, and why you would want one.  Headers are one of the easiest bolt-on accessories you can use to improve an engine’s performance. The goal of headers is to make it easier for the engine to push exhaust gases out of the cylinders.

 

To further understand why the exhaust manifold has an impact on performance let’s review the  combustion cycle of a gasoline engine.

  1. The intake stroke-  Starts with the piston at the top of the cylinder.  As the piston moves downward the intake valve opens allowing the air fuel mixture to enter the cylinder.
  2. The compression stroke-  Moves the piston back up to compress this air fuel mixture, causing the ignition of the air fuel mixture to be more powerful.
  3. The combustion stroke –  When the piston reaches the top of the cylinder, the spark plug emits a spark to ignite the gasoline. The gasoline charge in the cylinder explodes, driving the piston down.
  4. The exhaust stroke- Once the piston hits the bottom of its stroke, the exhaust valve opens and the exhaust leaves the cylinder to go out the header.

During the exhaust stroke, back pressure robs the engine of power. The exhaust valves open at the beginning of the exhaust stroke, and then the piston pushes the exhaust gases out of the cylinder. The more resistance there is to the piston expelling the exhaust gases, the greater the power loss.

Once the exhaust gases exit the cylinder they end up in the exhaust manifold. In a four-cylinder engine, all cylinders utilize the same manifold. From the manifold, the exhaust gases flow into one pipe toward the catalytic converter and the ­muffler. The idea behind an exhaust header is to eliminate the manifold’s back pressure. Instead of a common manifold that all of the cylinders share, each cylinder gets its own exhaust pipe. Old hot-rodder intuition, gut feel, and experimentation lead to each pipe being the same length, and using a two into one set up. Two into one specifies that the pipe leading from two cylinders merge into one.  In the case of a four cylinder, pipes from cylinders 1 and 2 lead to one pipe, and pipes from cylinders 3 and 4 lead to one pipe.  Those two pipes then merge again into the collector. The two into one method “smoothes” the flow through the pipe causing less turbulence when the flow fields merge.  These pipes come together in a larger pipe called the collector. By making them the same length, it guarantees that each cylinder’s exhaust gases arrive in the collector spaced out equally so there is no back pressure generated by the cylinders sharing the collector. Basically Header=Power, and we all want more power.

The 75 dollar question arose from my sister.  She is considering replacing her stock exhaust manifold with an after-market header, and was wondering what was the best “bang for the buck”.  After researching the topic extensively we found that across all the after-market brands the designs seemed to be the same regarding pipe routing, materials, etc.  So the main question came down to should she buy the “short tube” or “long tube” header?

Both the “long tube” and “short tube” headers have equal length pipes from the engine block to the collector.  Both ran a two into one method.  The long tube header however claims that since it is longer by design there would be less back pressure due to a smoother flow.  The differentiator was about 75 dollars, and the fact that the “long tube” header would need the catalytic converter to be moved and remounted by a muffler shop.  The “short tube” header is a direct bolt in.

I couldn’t resist turning to Flow Simulation to solve this question.

We purchased the long and short tube headers, and removed the stock manifold to be able to accurately take measurements from them.  The models are close but not exact without a reverse engineering tool such as a scanner or arm.

After the models were completed the next step became the boundary conditions.  I was able to find a good reference guide located on line from www.donaldsonexhaust.com.  Given the engine Horsepower, cubic inch displacement, and operating RPM I was able to determine Intake airflow, and exhaust gas flow in CFM.

This calculated the exhaust gas CFM to be 520.00 CFM, or 130.0 CFM per port. Please see the hand calculations below.

Yes Engineers Still Do Hand Calcs

Knowing the CFM of the exhaust leaving the cylinder allows us to compare pressure drop from the inlet to outlet across the three manifold models.  The stock exhaust will be the base line for comparison.

 

Model Set Up:

 

Inlet Condition:                130 CFM per inlet port

Outlet Condition:             Environmental Pressure

Surface Goals:                   Each Inlet Goal – Static Pressure / Mass Flow Rate

Outlet Goal – Static Pressure / Mass Flow Rate

Results:


Stock Flow Path

Stock Pressure Gradient

Short Tube Pressure Gradient

Short Tube Flow Trajectories

Long Tube Pressure Gradient

 

Summary:

 

The “short tube” header is hands down the best value.  Both after-market headers showed a drastic decrease in pressure drop over the stock manifold however, the “long tube” header only had an edge over the “short tube” pressure by 0.019 PSI.  As a bonus the “short tube is a direct bolt in, not requiring the existing catalytic converter to be moved.  As Engineers we are always worried about time and money, and are often faced with a decision regarding these two factors.  From my engineering background and proof provided by flow I recommended the “short tube” header.

Beam Elements in Simulation

Wednesday, December 21st, 2011

One of the things that we emphasize in our Simulation Training classes is simplifying the model. It’s an easy concept to understand – the simpler the model, the faster you’ll get results! For designs that use SolidWorks’ weldment functionality, Simulation will automatically make one of the most significant idealizations of a model. 3-D geometry is idealized into a 1-D finite element for the mesh, a Beam element.

Here is a simple example where two standard c-channel structural members come together at what could become a welded joint (left side). Notice how Simulation has automatically meshed the structural member with beam elements (right side)! In Simulation 2012, you now have the option to render the beam mesh on the structural member geometry – a welcomed enhancement!
2011-1216b SW Beam Mesh-w630-h630

In Simulation, the purple spheres represent the ‘joint’ where the two or more beams are connected. There are also options for each beam’s end condition –rigid connection, hinged connection, etc.
2011-1216d Beam End Conditions-w630-h630

How should you handle the automated power of Simulation with weldments? I say ‘handle with care’! Let’s assume that you have one of these c-channels as a simply supported beam – fixed at one end with a load applied at the other. The standard, cantilever beam that we all know and love from our Engineering studies! Recall that the deflection of the end of the beam is calculated by the following equation:
Deflection = (F * L^3) / (3 * E * I)
Where F is the force acting at the end of the beam, L is the length of the beam, E is Young’s Modulus for the beam material and I is the Moment of Inertia for the cross section of the beam.

This is valid, assuming the beam has a uniform cross section throughout its length. What if there are holes cut through the beam? In this scenario, the cross section of the beam is not uniform throughout the length – which is a critical assumption for the deflection of a simply supported beam. In this scenario, Simulation does not recognize the holes and still meshes the structural member with a Beam element.
2011-1216c Edit Joints-w630-h630

In my opinion, you have two options for proceeding with the analysis. The first option is to recognize that using a Bea for the structural member is not an accurate representation of the model, but proceed with the analysis to obtain a baseline result. If this particular structural member does not significantly contribute to the overall strength of the model, you may choose to proceed based on these results. The second option would be to treat the structural member as a solid body. With this method you will obtain more accurate results with your analysis, especially if the structural member contributes to the overall strength of the model.

So the next time you’re reviewing your analysis results, be sure to review the assumptions made by both you and by Simulation. Once you’ve verified that all of the assumptions are valid, or at least that you can accept them, you will be well on your way to making sound decisions based upon your Simulation results. Now go make your products better with SolidWorks Simulation!

Bear
Bear