This is absolutely incredible thank you! I had no clue calculix could do explicit stuff, I'll have to see to what extent it can do explicit material nonlinearity too.
There are some limitations regarding explicit dynamics in CalculiX (like the one mentioned in the video - with rigid bodies applied to 2D elements) but give it a try. Plasticity should work and there’s even a special Johnson-Cook plasticity model for this type of analysis.
Thank you for this amazing tutorial. I ran the simulation for different output frequency values varying from 2 to 100. The results seems to be heavily dependent of this value. I got very different results as the output frequency gets smaller, especially at output freq = 5 (I ran it twice incase I might have done something wrong. Got the same results). I was expecting the results should converge at an Fx-min value as the output frequency gets smaller, or not affect the Fx-min so much, but the results showed opposite. I was wondering why this might be the case. Here is the list of my results for Fx-min (since the force is in negative direction): Output Freq Fx_min 2 -604.0706 5 -12315.29 10 -2503.218 20 -4102.933 40 -5686.742 50 -5979.504 80 -6204.691 100 -6220.212
Well, I'm not very surprised to be honest. CalculiX still shows weird and inconsistent behavior in some cases, especially the explicit dynamics procedure is still underveloped and prone to issues. It was really hard to find a working example for this tutorial. Fortunately, there were (and should be also made in the future) some improvements in this regard. Anyway, that's one of the reasons why I always include analytical calculations in my tutorials.
WoW! I have seen several improvements on V2.0 Thanks for Prof. Matej and team efforts 😘😘😘. Let me try and give some feedback.
This is absolutely incredible thank you!
I had no clue calculix could do explicit stuff, I'll have to see to what extent it can do explicit material nonlinearity too.
There are some limitations regarding explicit dynamics in CalculiX (like the one mentioned in the video - with rigid bodies applied to 2D elements) but give it a try. Plasticity should work and there’s even a special Johnson-Cook plasticity model for this type of analysis.
Thank you for this amazing tutorial. I ran the simulation for different output frequency values varying from 2 to 100. The results seems to be heavily dependent of this value. I got very different results as the output frequency gets smaller, especially at output freq = 5 (I ran it twice incase I might have done something wrong. Got the same results). I was expecting the results should converge at an Fx-min value as the output frequency gets smaller, or not affect the Fx-min so much, but the results showed opposite. I was wondering why this might be the case. Here is the list of my results for Fx-min (since the force is in negative direction):
Output Freq Fx_min
2 -604.0706
5 -12315.29
10 -2503.218
20 -4102.933
40 -5686.742
50 -5979.504
80 -6204.691
100 -6220.212
Well, I'm not very surprised to be honest. CalculiX still shows weird and inconsistent behavior in some cases, especially the explicit dynamics procedure is still underveloped and prone to issues. It was really hard to find a working example for this tutorial. Fortunately, there were (and should be also made in the future) some improvements in this regard. Anyway, that's one of the reasons why I always include analytical calculations in my tutorials.
Actually, an output frequency of 50 might be better here (leading to more accurate results while keeping short calculation time).