Felix Radisch

Administrators
  • Content count

    44
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Felix Radisch last won the day on July 14 2016

Felix Radisch had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

2 Followers

About Felix Radisch

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Cologne, Germany

Recent Profile Visitors

1470 profile views
  1. Hi all, Below you will find the Inspire 2017.2 offline help. Regards Felix Inspire_2017.2_English.pdf Inspire_2017.2_German.pdf
  2. Hi Prasad, Glad you made it to the sT Forum! Feel free to share details on your project - including pictures or the model itself. There is a much higher chance to get help by other users, if you provide more information. BR Felix
  3. Hello Mr. Threepwood, Please be aware of using the "fit" function inside the "optimization explorer" or using "PolyNURBS" to redesign, before you are trying to export any results. The optimization approaches, provided by Inspire are no geometrical parts but a visualisation. This visualisation could be saved as STL once you "fitted" it or when you put effort into redesign with "PolyNURBS". Hope this helps! Regards Felix
  4. Hi 6nwuy, This is an excellent question - there are many users out there, which are confused the first time. Running an optimization means, that your result can but don't has to be the optimal solution for your design. There is a very high chance your design approach is is extremly close to your requested optimum - but especially the "minimize mass" objective design approaches are depending a lot on the "minimum thickness constraint". In your case, you just have to reduce the "minimum tickness" inside the "run optimization" window: If you are targeting a goal which can't be achieved by using a minimal thickness you appled, you will get no result - or a result which is overdimensioned (higher SF). As an advanced or expert user: You should also consider a difference between the two types of "accuracy", you can choose from in the "run analysis" and "run optimization" window. Due to self-stiffening effects of the FE-Mesh used in the "Faster", but highly recommended mode, your optimization results will be a little bit stiffer than they would be in reality (up to ~5%). Instead of using the "More accurate" mode (which would cause your PC to melt, and force you to spend like 1000% more time on the optimization), you just should tweak your goals a little bit. When you once redesigned your final approach, based on the optimization result - you go and check the performance in the "More accurate" mode. Please, let us know if this helps! Kind Regards Felix
  5. Hi Inspired user, this is a pretty nice project! - Welcome! The easiest way here is to create a "Midsurface" of your partition. As a result, you can choose all surfaces easily to apply pressure and the computation time will be much shorter, once you've started the simulations. You find the "midsurface" inside the "geometry tab". Finally, you'll just have to left-click on the red highlighted tube you created by using the partition tool. Let us know, if this helps! Best Regards Felix
  6. Hi Marcel, You can try to put 4 controle nodes on another to repair your model (bridge and surface spit). Be carefull with slicing a model within one surface only - it may not allows you to delete a polycube later! Only Polycubes (smallest part of a PolyNURBS) wich consists of 8 nodes can be deleted easily. Please find your model attached. Regards Felix BrakeSystem_repaired.stmod
  7. You are welcome! Glad to hear that - you can always check contacts within the Structure tab -> Contact -> in your case it should be highlighted in blue. That "floating" is just a visual gap. Regards Felix
  8. Hi Sander, Welcome to the official sT Forum! You are facing some perfomance issues, caused by extremly thin volumes, you should create a 2D representation of. Therefore, please use the "Midsurface" tool on the thin parts of your assembly. You will mention no visible thickness (2D) representation, if this process is successfull. As a result, your Simulation will be extremly fast. Hope this helps! Regards Felix
  9. David, I'll send you a PM. Regards Felix
  10. Hi David, Everytime a simulation is done - an analysis or optimization - the results are saved inside the *.stmod. As a result the overall filesize is increasing. If you have to keep the filesize low, just delete runs you do not need anymore directly from the Shape Explorer or the Model Browser by right-clicking -> delete. Hope this helps! Regards Felix
  11. Hi Boost, glad you found your way here! Your model seems to be constraint correctly - to get better results, you may reduce the "min. Thickness" constraint in optimization explorer, and run a "max. Stiffness" optimization first. These results can be analysed to get the factor of safefy you can achieve with a specific mass and "min. Thickness". The factor or safety from your reanalysis (based on your optimization result) now can be taken into account for the "min. Mass" optimization - which may provides you with nicer design approaches. Feel free to share your file with us if you would like to get a more detailed answer. Hope this helps! Regards Felix BTW.: There are some nice tutorials and online trainings availible also: http://www.solidthinking.com/SupportTutorials.aspx?category=Support&item=Tutorials
  12. Hi Mouse-T, I guess Jaideep already discussed this question with you in pm - but to allow our other users to gain Inspire experience I'd like to answer also public: Any topology optimization with Inspire take respect to the internal stresses, caused by external forces. If you have two loadcases with exactly mirrored resulting forces, there will be no difference for the optimization as both loadcases will cause exactly the same optimal design approach. Loadcases are equal weighted. In case you have to expect nonlinear behaviour (part/assembly behave different on tension and compression), you may have to check your final design for buckling and activate the option "sliding with seperation" during analysis. If there is a dramatic difference in the model/system behaviour, you could activate this option for optimization too. Regards Felix
  13. Hi Gilbert, thanks for joining our forum and that interesting question! Technically, you can't run a topology optimization to reduce/controle buckling, as this is a highly nonlinear behaviour combined with the mathematics in the background of Inspire. If you really have to optimize this nonlinear faliure somehow, you may have a look into Altair Hyperworks (much more powerfull but also complex) and reduce your model into a 2D representation. Hope this help! Best Regards Felix
  14. Hi Novio, please share a detailed license and issue description with our support: support@solidthinking.com Thanks! Felix
  15. Please use the Inspire online help for detailed Information: http://www.solidthinking.com/help//Inspire/2017/win/en_us/index.html?welcome.htm Felix