Ansys APDL Structural Analysis: Comparing Element Types for Max. Stress

AI Thread Summary
In Ansys APDL, it is not feasible to mesh and compare solid, shell, and beam elements using the same 3D model due to their differing geometric requirements. Solid elements necessitate a complete 3D geometry, while shell elements require surface geometries, and beam elements depend on line geometries. To analyze honeycomb structures, distinct geometries must be created for each element type. The solid model can be meshed, but a dense mesh is needed for accurate results, and the student version of ANSYS may limit the number of nodes available. Shell elements require a defined surface plane for each side of the honeycomb structure, which complicates their application in this context.
Damian123
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I'm doing structural analysis of honeycomb light weight structures in ansys apdl.. is it possible to mesh and compare element types such as solid, shell and beam elements with respect to max.stress with the same 3D model??
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
No it is not possible. Solid elements require 3-D geometry, shell elements require surface geometries in 3-d space (it might be possible to approximate your honeycomb with surfaces), Beam elements require lines (2-D geometry in 3-D space).

I think you're going to need different geometries for each element type.
 
Thank you for your reply mech engineer.. can u give some examples for it.. so that i can understand more clearly..
 
like pics, sites r journals.. I am totally new to ansys apdl
 
Let me b clear.. Is it possible to mesh first picture with solid elements, and second picture model with shell elements.. it's hollow inside
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.jpg
    Untitled.jpg
    37.9 KB · Views: 651
  • Honeycomb surface.JPG
    Honeycomb surface.JPG
    28.8 KB · Views: 787
The solid model in the first picture can be meshed, although it's going to take a pretty dense mesh for accurate mechanical properties. It could be the student version of ANSYS will not provide enough mesh elements for what you're hoping to achieve (I think the student vesion is limited to something like 200,000 nodes).

The second picture is not going to work, one because it isn't the correct format for shell elements, and second because its geometry is significantly different than the first model. If you really want to use shell elements, you need to define a surface plane for evey side in the honeycomb of the first picture.

Here is a link to some simple ANSYS tutorials so that you can see what you're getting yourself into: http://www.mece.uAlberta.ca/tutorials/ansys/
 
Here's a video by “driving 4 answers” who seems to me to be well versed on the details of Internal Combustion engines. The video does cover something that's a bit shrouded in 'conspiracy theory', and he touches on that, but of course for phys.org, I'm only interested in the actual science involved. He analyzes the claim of achieving 100 mpg with a 427 cubic inch V8 1970 Ford Galaxy in 1977. Only the fuel supply system was modified. I was surprised that he feels the claim could have been...
Thread 'Turbocharging carbureted petrol 2 stroke engines'
Hi everyone, online I ve seen some images about 2 stroke carbureted turbo (motorcycle derivation engine). Now.. In the past in this forum some members spoke about turbocharging 2 stroke but not in sufficient detail. The intake and the exhaust are open at the same time and there are no valves like a 4 stroke. But if you search online you can find carbureted 2stroke turbo sled or the Am6 turbo. The question is: Is really possible turbocharge a 2 stroke carburated(NOT EFI)petrol engine and...
Back
Top