XANSYS Message: 34751 [Go back to message list]
[bookmark on del.icio.us]
No rating yet
Rate item:

Subject: Re: Regarding substructuring
Author: Riccardo Testi
Date: 2002-03-11 05:01:00

Speaking about substructuring, I have a sort of philosophical question
related to contact analysis: where does the border lie between a "do a
superelement and then contact" and "do the contact only" strategies? When I
have a huge model to be put in contact with something else, the question is
"Will all the time I'll spend generating a superelement compensate the time
I save during the subsequent contact analysis?"

Thank you very much

Riccardo Testi
R&D and Operations 2 wheels/Engine Design
Piaggio & C. spa
v.le R. Piaggio, 25 - Pontedera (PI) - ITALY

At 22.53 08/03/02 +0000, you wrote:
>I am giving total workspace as 1650 and db size 32.
>I have very high end machine 2 GB ram 136 GB harddisk.

>Thanks

>Regards

>Somesh

>At 10:06 AM 08/03/2002 -0500, you wrote:
> >Page file - what sort of -m and -db are you starting Ansys with?

> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Somesh J. Ghunakikar [mailto:someshjg@i...]
> >Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 3:16 PM
> >To: xansys
> >Subject: RE: [xansys] Regarding substructuring

> >Again we have a confusion. I have a big volume having 90000 elements.
> >I have selected only boundary nodes those are around 3000. I have around
> >9000master dof's. But the system is creating a huge page file and its not
> >solving in the gereration pass.

> >Thanks

> >Regards

> >Somesh

> >At 09:04 AM 3/7/02 -0500, you wrote:
> >> I don't understand "the frontal solver can solve only 50000 DOFs" -
> >>there
> >>is no such limit. Perhaps you mean what the solver can only handle 50000
> >>master DOFs? If so, this sounds like an extremely large number. Is it
> >>possible
> >>that you have set all DOFs to be masters rather than just some boundary or
> >>loading nodes?
> >>John Swanson
> >>Swanson Analysis Services, Inc.

> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Somesh J. Ghunakikar [SMTP:someshjg@i...]
> >>> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 9:11 PM
> >>> To: xansys
> >>> Subject: RE: [xansys] Regarding substructuring

> >>> I have a single volume meshed with 50000 elements, I can not solve in
> >>> generation pass, its coming out by giving watson error. Since the frontal
> >>> solver can solve only 50000 DOF's. The problem is I can not divide the
> >>> volume also.
> >>> Again in the use pass, while solving its taking only frontal solver. But
> >I
> >>> need atleast sparse. I need an iterative solver in the use pass. How I
> >can
> >>> do it.

> >>> Thanks

> >>> Regards

> >>> Somesh

> >>> IEL, Hyd.
> >>> India

> >>> At 08:01 AM 07/03/2002 -0500, you wrote:
> >>> > A slightly longer answer is that substructure generation is a partial
> >>> >factoring of the set
> >>> >of equations, down to the set of Master DOFS. The other solvers in
> >>> ANSYS,
> >>> >both iterative
> >>> >and direct, do not have this capability, which leaves you with the
> >>> frontal
> >>> >solver.
> >>> > Direct solvers might be modified to have this capability (Sparse,
> >for
> >>> >example), but I have
> >>> >not seen any research on how this might be done with an iterative
> >solver.
> >>> >John Swanson
> >>> >Swanson Analysis Services, Inc.

> >>> >> -----Original Message-----
> >>> >> From: Bohlen, Dan (GEAE) [SMTP:dan.bohlen@a...]
> >>> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 11:33 AM
> >>> >> To: 'xansys '
> >>> >> Subject: RE: [xansys] Regarding substructuring

> >>> >> I believe the short answer is: you can't.

> >>> >> -----Original Message-----
> >>> >> From: Somesh J. Ghunakikar [mailto:someshjg@i...]
> >>> >> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 6:14 PM
> >>> >> To: xansys
> >>> >> Subject: [xansys] Regarding substructuring

> >>> >> Dear Users
> >>> >> In substructuring , the generation pass has only frontal solver? How
> >>> we
> >>> >> can change the solver instead of frontal in generation pass.

> >>> >> Thanks

> >>> >> Regards

> >>> >> Somesh

> >>> >> IEL Hyd. India


Posts possibly associated with message #34751AuthorDateScore
34548Regarding substructuringSomesh J. Ghunakikar2002/03/05 
34565Regarding substructuringSomesh J. Ghunakikar2002/03/05 
34616Re: Regarding substructuringDan Bohlen2002/03/06 
34655Re: Regarding substructuringJohn Swanson2002/03/07 
34656Re: Regarding substructuringSomesh J. Ghunakikar2002/03/07 
34658Re: Regarding substructuringJohn Swanson2002/03/07 
34714Re: Regarding substructuringSomesh J. Ghunakikar2002/03/08 
34717Re: Regarding substructuringSomesh J. Ghunakikar2002/03/08 
34718Re: Regarding substructuringDan Bohlen2002/03/08 
34719Re: Regarding substructuringHerbert Liu2002/03/08 
34720Re: Regarding substructuringSomesh J. Ghunakikar2002/03/08 
34721Re: Regarding substructuringDan Bohlen2002/03/08 
34722Re: Regarding substructuringDan Militaru2002/03/08 
34724Re: Regarding substructuringSomesh J. Ghunakikar2002/03/08 
34751Re: Regarding substructuringRiccardo Testi2002/03/11 
34769Re: Regarding substructuringChristopher Wright1970/01/01