All Things ANSYS 057: Simulation for Additive Manufacturing in ANSYS 2020 R1

 

Published on: February 24th, 2020
With: Eric Miller & Doug Oatis
Description:  

In this episode your host and Co-Founder of PADT, Eric Miller is joined by Lead Mechanical Engineer Doug Oatis for a discussion on the latest advancements in simulation for additive manufacturing and topology optimization in ANSYS 2020 R1.

If you would like to learn more about what this release is capable of, check out our webinar on the topic here:

https://www.brighttalk.com/webcast/15747/384528

If you have any questions, comments, or would like to suggest a topic for the next episode, shoot us an email at podcast@padtinc.com we would love to hear from you!

Listen:
Subscribe:

@ANSYS #ANSYS

ANSYS Mechanical: Mesh Time Metric Display

The things you find out from poking around the Enhancement Request list…

Did you know that you can get ANSYS Mechanical to report the amount of time that the meshing takes? I didn’t until I stumbled across this little gem on the request to show mesh time metrics.

This option is already available for many releases now. Users can turn performance diagnostics by setting to Tools -> Options -> Miscellaneous -> “Report Performance Diagnostics in Messages” to Yes inside Mechanical.

So, of course, I tried it out.

This was in version 2020R1, but it says that the option has been there since R19.0.  Now they just need to add it to the Statistics section of the Mesh Details so that we can use it as an output parameter.

Additive Manufacturing & Topology Optimization in ANSYS 2020 R1 – Webinar

ANSYS offers a complete simulation workflow for additive manufacturing (AM) that allows you to transition your R&D efforts for metal additive manufacturing into a successful manufacturing operation. This best-in-class solution for additive manufacturing enables simulation at every step in your AM process. It will help you optimize material configurations and machine and parts setup before you begin to print. As a result, you’ll greatly reduce — and potentially eliminate — the physical process of trial-and- error testing.

ANSYS additive solutions continue to evolve at a rapid pace. A variety of new enhancements and features come as part of ANSYS 2020 R1, including the ability to work with EOS printers, using the inherent strain approach in ANSYS Workbench Additive, and new materials in ANSYS Additive Print and Science.

Join PADT’s Lead Mechanical Engineer Doug Oatis for an exploration of the ANSYS tools that help to optimize additive manufacturing, and what new capabilities are available for them when upgrading to ANSYS 2020 R1. This presentation includes updates regarding:

  • Inherent strain method in workbench Additive
  • Additive Wizard update
  • And much more

Register Here

If this is your first time registering for one of our Bright Talk webinars, simply click the link and fill out the attached form. We promise that the information you provide will only be shared with those promoting the event (PADT).

You will only have to do this once! For all future webinars, you can simply click the link, add the reminder to your calendar and you’re good to go!

GrabCAD Print Software: Part One, an Introduction

Where are you on your New Year’s resolutions? They often include words such as “simplify,” “organize” and “streamline.” They can be timely reminders to rethink how you do things in both your personal and professional lives, so why not rethink the software you use in 3D Printing?

Preparing a CAD solid model or an STL file to print on a 3D printer requires using set-up software that is typically unique to each printer’s manufacturer. For Flashforge equipment, you use FlashPrint, for Makerbot systems you use MakerBot Print, for Formlabs printers you use PreForm, and so on.

GrabCAD Print software for setting up STL or CAD files to print on Stratasys 3D printers (main screen).
GrabCAD Print software for setting up STL or CAD files to print on Stratasys 3D printers (main screen). Image courtesy PADT.

For printers from industrial 3D printing company Stratasys, the go-to software is GrabCAD Print (along with GrabCAD Print Mobile), developed for setting up both fused deposition modeling (FDM) and PolyJet technologies in new and efficient ways. Often just called GrabCAD, this versatile software package lets you organize and control prints assigned to one of more than 30 printer models, so the steps you learn for one printer transfer directly over to working with other models.

If you’ve previously used Stratasys Catalyst (on Dimension and uPrint printers), you’ll find similarities with GrabCAD, as well as some enhanced functionality. If you’re accustomed to the fine details of Stratasys Insight, you’ll see that GrabCAD provides similar capabilities in a streamlined interface, plus powerful new features made possible only by the direct import of native CAD files.  Additionally, you can access Insight within GrabCAD, combining the best of both traditional and next-generation possibilities.

Simple by Default, Powerful by Choice

GrabCAD lets users select simplified default settings throughout, with more sophisticated options available at every turn. Here are the general steps for print-file preparation, done on your desktop, laptop or mobile device:

1 – Add Models: Click-and-drag files or open them from File Explorer. All standard CAD formats are supported, including SolidWorks, Autodesk, Siemens and PTC, as well as STL. You can also bring in assemblies of parts and multi-body models, choosing whether to print them assembled or not. (Later we’ll also talk about what you can do with a CAD file that you can’t do with an STL.)

2 – Select Printer: Choose from a drop-down menu to find whatever printer(s) is networked to your computer. You can also experiment using templates for printers you don’t yet own, in order to compare build volumes and print times.

3 – Orient/Rotate/Scale Model: Icons along the right panel guide you through placing your model or models on the build platform, letting you rotate them around each axis, choose a face to orient as desired, and scale the part up or down. You can also right-click to copy and paste multiple models, then edit each one separately, move them around, and delete them as desired.

4 – Tray Settings: This icon leads to the menu with choices such as available materials, slice height options, build style (normal or draft), and more; always targeted to the selected printer. These choices apply to all the parts on the tray or build sheet.

5 – Model Settings: Here’s where you choose infill style, infill density (via slider bar), infill angle, and body thickness (also known as shell thickness) per part. Each part can have different choices.

6 – Support Settings: These all have defaults, so you don’t even have to consider them if you don’t have special needs (but it’s where, for example, you would change the self-supporting angle).

7 – Show Slice Preview: Clicking this icon slices the model and gives you the choice to view layers/tool paths individually, watch a video animation, or even set a Z-height pause if you plan on changing filament color or adding embedded hardware.

8 – Print: You’re ready to hit the Print button, sending the prepared file to the printer’s queue.

Scheduling Your Print, and Tracking Print Progress

A clock-like icon on the left-side GrabCAD panel (the second one down, or third if you’ve activated Advanced FDM features) switches the view to the Scheduler. In this mode, you can see a day/time tracking bar for every printer on the network. All prints are queued in the order sent, and the visuals make it easy to see when one will finish and another start (assuming human intervention for machine set-up and part removal, of course).

Scheduling panel in GrabCAD Print, showing status of files printing on multiple 3D printers.
Scheduling panel in GrabCAD Print, showing status of files printing on multiple 3D printers. Image courtesy PADT.

If you click on the bar representing a part being built, a new panel slides in from the right with detailed information about material type, support type, start time, expected finish time and total material used (cubic inches or grams). For printers with an on-board camera, you can even get an updated snapshot of the part as it’s building in the chamber.

Below the Scheduler icon is the History button. This is a great tool for creating weekly, monthly or yearly reports of printer run-time and material consumption, again for each printer on the network. Within a given build, you’ll even see the files names of the individual parts within that job.

Separately, if you’re not operating the software offline (an option that some companies require), you can enable GrabCAD Print Reports. This function generates detailed graphs and summaries covering printer utilization and overall material use across multiple printers and time periods – very powerful information for groups that need to track efficiencies and expenditures.

And That’s Just the Beginning

Once you decide to experiment with these settings, you begin to see the power of GrabCAD Print for FDM systems. We haven’t even touched on the automated repairs for STL files, PolyJet’s possibilities for colors, transparency and blended materials, or the options for setting up a CAD model so that sub-sections print with different properties.

For example, you’ll see how planning ahead allows you to bring in a multi-body CAD model and have GrabCAD identify and reinforce some areas at full density, while changing the infill pattern, layout, and density in other regions. GrabCAD recognizes actual CAD bodies and faces, letting you make build-modifications that previously would have required layer-by-layer slice editing, or couldn’t have been done at all.

Stay tuned for our next blog post, GrabCAD Print Software, Part Two: Simplify Set-ups, Save Time, and Do Cool Stuff You Hadn’t Even Considered, and reach out to us to learn more about downloading and using GrabCAD Print.

PADT Inc. is a globally recognized provider of Numerical Simulation, Product Development and 3D Printing products and services. For more information on Stratasys printers and materials, contact us at info@padtinc.com.

All Things ANSYS 056: A Unique Perspective on a Unique Solution – PADT Sales Talks ANSYS Applications

 

Published on: February 10th, 2020
With: Eric Miller, Bob Calvin, Dan Christensen, Brian Benbow, Heather Dean, Ian Scott & Will Kruspe
Description:  

In this episode your host and Co-Founder of PADT, Eric Miller is joined by Bob Calvin, Dan Christensen, Brian Benbow, Heather Dean, Ian Scott, and Will Kruspe from PADT’s ANSYS sales team to discuss the benefits they see in ANSYS as a solution for their unique customer bases, as well as for manufacturers and engineers as a whole. With a combination of technical know-how and knowledge of positioning within different industries, the PADT sales team shares a unique perspective on the value of the various tools that make up the ANSYS suite and how users can best take advantage of them in order to help them succeed.

If you have any questions, comments, or would like to suggest a topic for the next episode, shoot us an email at podcast@padtinc.com we would love to hear from you!

Listen:
Subscribe:

@ANSYS #ANSYS

Introducing the Stratasys J826 – Full-color, multi-material printing for the enterprise design world

Taking risks attempting to capture design intent at the end of the process requires a lot of post-processing (coloring, assemblies, a mix of technologies, etc.) – when its too time consuming, expensive and late to make changes or correct errors. Stratasys PolyJet 3D printing technology is developed to elevate designs by realizing ideas more quickly and more accurately.

By putting realistic models in a designer’s hands earlier in the process, companies can promote better decisions and a superior final product. Now, with the Stratasys J8 Series, the same is true for prototypes. This tried and tested technology simplifies the entire design process, streamlining workflows so you can spend more time on what matters –creating, refining, and designing the best product possible.

PADT is excited to introduce the new Stratasys J826 3D printer 

Based on J850 technology, the J826 supplies the same end-to-end solution for the design process and ultra-realistic simulation at a lower price point.
Better communicate design intent and drive more confident results with prototypes that realistically portray an array of design alternatives.

The Stratasys J826 3D Printer is able to deliver realism, shorter time to market, and streamlined application thanks to a variety of unique attributes that set it apart from most other Polyjet printers:

  • High Quality – The J826 can accurately print smaller features at a layer thickness of 14µm to 27µm. As part of the J8 series of printers it is also capable of printing in ultra-realistic Pantone validated colors.
  • Speed & Productivity – Three printing speed modes (high speed, high quality & high mix) allows the J826 to always operate at the most efficient speed for each print. It can also avoid unnecessary down-time associate with material changeovers thanks to it’s built-in material cabinet and workstation.
  • Easy to Use – A smooth workflow with the J826 comes from simple integration with the CAD format of your choice, as well as a removable tray for easy clean up, and automated support creation and removal.

Are you ready to learn how the new Stratasys J826 provides the same quality and accuracy as other J8 series printers at a lower cost?

Provide the requested information via the form linked below and one of PADT’s additive experts will reach out to share more on what makes this new offering so exciting for the enterprise design world.

Start a Conversation

All Things ANSYS 055: Introducing ANSYS 2020

 

Published on: February 3rd, 2020
With: Eric Miller, Josh Stout, Sina Gohds, Ted Harris & Tom Chadwick
Description:  

In this episode your host and Co-Founder of PADT, Eric Miller is joined by Josh Stout, Sina Gohds, Ted Harris, and Tom Chadwick from the simulation support team to discuss their thoughts on ANSYS 2020 R1, and what specific capabilities they are excited about exploring after attending the annual ANSYS sales kickoff in Florida.

This new release covers updates for the entirety of the ANSYS suite of tools, so there is a lot to talk about.

If you have any questions, comments, or would like to suggest a topic for the next episode, shoot us an email at podcast@padtinc.com we would love to hear from you!

Listen:
Subscribe:

@ANSYS #ANSYS

Fluent Updates in ANSYS 2020 R1 – Webinar

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) can be challenging for a multitude of reasons, but not with ANSYS Fluent. Anyone can get great CFD simulation results with ANSYS solutions. Fluent software contains the broad, physical modeling capabilities needed to model flow, turbulence, heat transfer and reactions for industrial applications. These range from air flow over an aircraft wing to combustion in a furnace, from bubble columns to oil platforms, from blood flow to semiconductor manufacturing and from clean room design to wastewater treatment plants.

Fluent spans an expansive range, including special models, with capabilities to model in-cylinder combustion, aero-acoustics, turbomachinery and multiphase systems. The latest innovations and updates simplify and speed setup and meshing while adding even more accurate physical models. The outcome: great results, without compromise.

Join PADT’s Senior CFD & FEA Application Engineer, Sina Ghods, for a look at what’s new and improved in this latest version of ANSYS Fluent, including:

  • User Interface/Graphics
  • Meshing Workflows
  • Multi-phase Robustness
  • Solver Enhancements
  • And much more

Register Here

If this is your first time registering for one of our Bright Talk webinars, simply click the link and fill out the attached form. We promise that the information you provide will only be shared with those promoting the event (PADT).

You will only have to do this once! For all future webinars, you can simply click the link, add the reminder to your calendar and you’re good to go!

Mechanical Updates in ANSYS 2020 R1 – Webinar

With ANSYS structural analysis software, users are able to solve more complex engineering problems, faster and more efficiently than ever before. Customization and automation of structural solutions is much easier to optimize thanks to new and innovative finite element analysis (FEA) tools available in this product suite.

Once again, ANSYS is able to cement their role as industry leaders when it comes to usability, productivity, and reliability; adding innovative functionality to an already groundbreaking product offering. ANSYS Mechanical continues to be used throughout the industry, and for good reason as it enables engineers to optimize their product design and reduce the costs of physical testing.

Join PADT’s Senior Mechanical Engineer & Lead Trainer Joe Woodward, for an in-depth look at what’s new in the latest version of ANSYS Mechanical, including updates regarding:

  • External Modeling
  • Graphics
  • Composites
  • Linear Dynamics
  • And much more

Register Here

If this is your first time registering for one of our Bright Talk webinars, simply click the link and fill out the attached form. We promise that the information you provide will only be shared with those promoting the event (PADT).

You will only have to do this once! For all future webinars, you can simply click the link, add the reminder to your calendar and you’re good to go!

Reduce EMI with Good Signal Integrity Habits

Recently the ‘Signal Integrity Journal’ posted their ‘Top 10 Articles’ of 2019. All of the articles included were incredible, however, one stood out to me from the rest – ‘Seven Habits of Successful 2-Layer Board Designers’ by Dr. Eric Bogatin (https://www.signalintegrityjournal.com/blogs/12-fundamentals/post/1207-seven-habits-of-successful-2-layer-board-designers). In this work, Dr. Bogatin and his students were developing a 2-Layer printed circuit board (PCB), while trying to minimize signal and power Integrity issues as much as possible. As a result, they developed a board and described seven ‘golden habits’ for this board development. These are fantastic habits that I’m confident we can all agree with. In particular, there was one habit at which I wanted to take a deeper look:

“…Habit 4: When you need to route a cross-under on the bottom layer, make it short. When you can’t make it short, add a return strap over it..”

Generally speaking, this habit suggests to be very careful with the routing of signal traces over the gap on the ground plane. From the signal integrity point of view, Dr. Bogatin explained it perfectly – “..The signal traces routed above this gap will see a gap in the return path and generate cross talk to other signals also crossing the gap..”. On one hand, crosstalk won’t be a problem if there are no other nets around, so the layout might work just fine in that case. However, crosstalk is not the only risk. Fundamentally, crosstalk is an EMI problem. So, I wanted to explore what happens when this habit is ignored and there are no nearby nets to worry about.

To investigate, I created a simple 2-Layer board with the signal trace, connected to 5V voltage source, going over an air gap. Then I observed the near field and far field results using ANSYS SIwave solution. Here is what I found.

Near and Far Field Analysis

Typically, near and far fields are characterized by solved E and H fields around the model. This feature in ANSYS SIwave gives the engineer the ability to simulate both E and H fields for near field analysis, and E field for Far Field analysis.

First and foremost, we can see, as expected, that both near and far Field have resonances at the same frequencies. Additionally, we can observe from Figure 1 that both E and H fields for near field have the largest radiation spikes at 786.3 MHz and 2.349GHz resonant frequencies.

Figure 1. Plotted E and H fields for both Near and Far Field solutions

If we plot E and H fields for Near Field, we can see at which physical locations we have the maximum radiation.

Figure 2. Plotted E and H fields for Near field simulations

As expected, we see the maximum radiation occurring over the air gap, where there is no return path for the current. Since we know that current is directly related to electromagnetic fields, we can also compute AC current to better understand the flow of the current over the air gap.

Compute AC Currents (PSI)

This feature has a very simple setup interface. The user only needs to make sure that the excitation sources are read correctly and that the frequency range is properly indicated. A few minutes after setting up the simulation, we get frequency dependent results for current. We can review the current flow at any simulated frequency point or view the current flow dynamically by animating the plot.

Figure 3. Computed AC currents

As seen in Figure 3, we observe the current being transferred from the energy source, along the transmission line to the open end of the trace. On the ground layer, we see the return current directed back to the source. However at the location of the air gap there is no metal for the return current to flow, therefore, we can see the unwanted concentration of energy along the plane edges. This energy may cause electromagnetic radiation and potential problems with emission.

If we have a very complicated multi-layer board design, it won’t be easy to simulate current flow on near and far fields for the whole board. It is possible, but the engineer will have to have either extra computing time or extra computing power. To address this issue, SIwave has a feature called EMI Scanner, which helps identify problematic areas on the board without running full simulations.

EMI Scanner

ANSYS EMI Scanner, which is based on geometric rule checks, identifies design issues that might result in electromagnetic interference problems during operation. So, I ran the EMI Scanner to quickly identify areas on the board which may create unwanted EMI effects. It is recommended for engineers, after finding all potentially problematic areas on the board using EMI Scanner, to run more detailed analyses on those areas using other SIwave features or HFSS.

Currently the EMI Scanner contains 17 rules, which are categorized as ‘Signal Reference’, ‘Wiring/Crosstalk’, ‘Decoupling’ and ‘Placement’. For this project, I focused on the ‘Signal Reference’ rules group, to find violations for ‘Net Crossing Split’ and ‘Net Near Edge of Reference’. I will discuss other EMI Scanner rules in more detail in a future blog (so be sure to check back for updates).

Figure 4. Selected rules in EMI Scanner (left) and predicted violations in the project (right)

As expected, the EMI Scanner properly identified 3 violations as highlighted in Figure 4. You can either review or export the report, or we can analyze violations with iQ-Harmony. With this feature, besides generating a user-friendly report with graphical explanations, we are also able to run ‘What-if’ scenarios to see possible results of the geometrical optimization.

Figure 5. Generated report in iQ-Harmony with ‘What-If’ scenario

Based on these results of quick EMI Scanner, the engineer would need to either redesign the board right away or to run more analysis using a more accurate approach.

Conclusion

In this blog, we were able to successfully run simulations using ANSYS SIwave solution to understand the effect of not following Dr.Bogatin’s advice on routing the signal trace over the gap on a 2-Layer board. We also were able to use 4 different features in SIwave, each of which delivered the correct, expected results.

Overall, it is not easy to think about all possible SI/PI/EMI issues while developing a complex board. In these modern times, engineers don’t need to manufacture a physical board to evaluate EMI problems. A lot of developmental steps can now be performed during simulations, and ANSYS SIwave tool in conjunction with HFSS Solver can help to deliver the right design on the first try.

If you would like more information or have any questions please reach out to us at info@padtinc.com.

All Thing ANSYS 054: Talking CFD – Discussion on the Current State of Computational Fluid Dynamics with Robin Knowles

 

Published on: January 13th, 2020
With: Eric Miller & Robin Knowles
Description:  

In this episode we are excited to share an interview done with host and Co-Founder of PADT, Eric Miller and host of the Talking CFD podcast Robin Knowles, regarding the history of PADT’s use of simulation technology as a whole, and the current state of all things CFD.

If you would like to hear more of Robin’s interviews with various other CFD based companies both small and large, you can listen at https://www.cfdengine.com/podcast/.

If you have any questions, comments, or would like to suggest a topic for the next episode, shoot us an email at podcast@padtinc.com we would love to hear from you!

Listen:
Subscribe:

@ANSYS #ANSYS

Defining Antenna Array Excitations with Nested-If Statements in HFSS

HFSS offers various methods to define array excitations. For a large array, you may take advantage of an option “Load from File” to load the magnitude and phase of each port. However, in many situations you may have specific cases of array excitation. For example, changing amplitude tapering or the phase variations that happens due to frequency change. In this blog we will look at using the “Edit Sources” method to change the magnitude and phase of each excitation. There are cases that might not be easily automated using a parametric sweep. If the array is relatively small and there are not many individual cases to examine you may set up the cases using “array parameters” and “nested-if”.

In the following example, I used nested-if statements to parameterize the excitations of the pre-built example “planar_flare_dipole_array”, which can be found by choosing File->Open Examples->HFSS->Antennas (Fig. 1) so you can follow along. The file was then saved as “planar_flare_dipole_array_if”. Then one project was copied to create two examples (Phase Variations, Amplitude Variations).

Fig. 1. Planar_flare_dipole_array with 5 antenna elements (HFSS pre-built example).

Phase Variation for Selected Frequencies

In this example, I assumed there were three different frequencies that each had a set of coefficients for the phase shift. Therefore, three array parameters were created. Each array parameter has 5 elements, because the array has 5 excitations:

A1: [0, 0, 0, 0, 0]

A2: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4]

A3: [0, 2, 4, 6, 8]

Then 5 coefficients were created using a nested_if statement. “Freq” is one of built-in HFSS variables that refers to frequency. The simulation was setup for a discrete sweep of 3 frequencies (1.8, 1.9 and 2.0 GHz) (Fig. 2). The coefficients were defined as (Fig. 3):

E1: if(Freq==1.8GHz,A1[0],if(Freq==1.9GHz,A2[0],if(Freq==2.0GHz,A3[0],0)))

E2: if(Freq==1.8GHz,A1[1],if(Freq==1.9GHz,A2[1],if(Freq==2.0GHz,A3[1],0)))

E3: if(Freq==1.8GHz,A1[2],if(Freq==1.9GHz,A2[2],if(Freq==2.0GHz,A3[2],0)))

E4: if(Freq==1.8GHz,A1[3],if(Freq==1.9GHz,A2[3],if(Freq==2.0GHz,A3[3],0)))

E5: if(Freq==1.8GHz,A1[4],if(Freq==1.9GHz,A2[4],if(Freq==2.0GHz,A3[4],0)))

Please note that the last case is the default, so if frequency is none of the three frequencies that were given in the nested-if, the default phase coefficient is chosen (“0” in this case).

Fig. 2. Analysis Setup.

Fig. 3. Parameters definition for phase varaitioin case.

By selecting the menu item HFSS ->Fields->Edit Sources, I defined E1-E5 as coefficients for the phase shift. Note that phase_shift is a variable defined to control the phase, and E1-E5 are meant to be coefficients (Fig. 4):

Fig. 4. Edit sources using the defined variables.

The radiation pattern can now be plotted at each frequency for the phase shifts that were defined (A1 for 1.8 GHz, A2 for 1.9 GHz and A3 for 2.0 GHz) (Figs 5-6):

 Fig. 5. Settings for radiation pattern plots.

Fig. 6. Radiation patten for phi=90 degrees and different frequencies, the variation of phase shifts shows how the main beam has shifted for each frequency.

Amplitude Variation for Selected Cases

In the second example I created three cases that were controlled using the variable “CN”. CN is simply the case number with no units.

The variable definition was similar to the first case. I defined 3 array parameters and 5 coefficients. This time the coefficients were used for the Magnitude. The variable in the nested-if was CN. That means 3 cases and a default case were created. The default coefficient here was chosen as “1” (Figs. 7-8).

A1: [1, 1.5, 2, 1.5, 1]

A2: [1, 1, 1, 1, 1]

A3: [2, 1, 0, 1, 2]

E1: if(CN==1,A1[0],if(CN==2,A2[0],if(CN==3,A3[0],1)))*1W

E2: if(CN==1,A1[1],if(CN==2,A2[1],if(CN==3,A3[1],1)))*1W

E3: if(CN==1,A1[2],if(CN==2,A2[2],if(CN==3,A3[2],1)))*1W

E4: if(CN==1,A1[3],if(CN==2,A2[3],if(CN==3,A3[3],1)))*1W

E5: if(CN==1,A1[4],if(CN==2,A2[4],if(CN==3,A3[4],1)))*1W

Fig. 7. Parameters definition for amplitude varaitioin case.

Fig. 8. Exciation setting for amplitude variation case.

Notice that CN in the parametric definition has the value of “1”. To create the solution for all three cases I used a parametric sweep definition by selecting the menu item Optimetrics->Add->Parametric. In the Add/Edit Sweep I chose the variable “CN”, Start: 1, Stop:3, Step:1. Also, in the Options tab I chose to “Save Fields and Mesh” and “Copy geometrically equivalent meshes”, and “Solve with copied meshes only”. This selection helps not to redo the adaptive meshing as the geometry is not changed (Fig. 9). In plotting the patterns I could now choose the parameter CN and the results of plotting for CN=1, 2, and 3 is shown in Fig. 10. You can see how the tapering of amplitude has affected the side lobe level.

Fig. 9. Parameters definition for amplitude varaitioin case.

 Fig. 10. Radiation patten for phi=90 degrees and different cases of amplitude tapering, the variation of amplitude tapering has caused chagne in the beamwidth and side lobe levels.

Drawback

The drawback of this method is that array parameters are not post-processing variables. This means changing them will create the need to re-run the simulations. Therefore, it is needed that all the possible cases to be defined before running the simulation.

If you would like more information or have any questions please reach out to us at info@padtinc.com.

Getting Bulk Properties for Repeated Structures in ANSYS Mechanical with Material Designer

Using Material Designer To Perform Homogenization Studies

Editor’s Note:

3D Printing and other advanced manufacturing methods are driving the increased use of lattice-type structures in structural designs. This is great for reducing mass and increasing the stiffness of components but can be a real pain for those of us doing simulation. Modeling all of those tiny features across a part is difficult to mesh and takes forever to solve.

PADT has been doing a bit of R&D in this area recently, including a recent PHASE II NASA STTR with ASU and KSU. We see a lot of potential in combining generative design and 3D Printing to drive better structures. The key to this effort is efficient and accurate simulation.

The good news is that we do not have to model every unit cell. Instead, we can do some simulation on a single representative chunk and use the ANSYS Material Designer feature to create an approximate material property that we can use to represent the lattice volume as a homogeneous material.

In the post below, PADT’s Alex Grishin explains it all with theory, examples, and a clear step-by-step process that you can use for your lattice filled geometry.

PADT-ANSYS-Lattice-Material_Homogenization

All Things ANSYS 053: 2019 Wrap-up & Predictions for ANSYS in the New Year

 

Published on: December 20th, 2019
With: Eric Miller, Tom Chadwick, Ted Harris, Sina Ghods & Ahmed Fayad
Description:  

In this episode your host and Co-Founder of PADT, Eric Miller is joined by PADT’s Simulation Support Team, including Tom Chadwick, Ted Harris, Sina Ghods, and Ahmed Fayad for a round-table discussion of their favorite ANSYS features released in 2019, along with predictions on what has yet to come.

If you have any questions, comments, or would like to suggest a topic for the next episode, shoot us an email at podcast@padtinc.com we would love to hear from you!

Listen:
Subscribe:

@ANSYS #ANSYS

Books on Additive Manufacturing Make the Perfect Holiday Gift, of Course

It took a while for books about Additive Manufacturing to catch up with the industry; now there are at least several dozen from which to choose.
It took a while for books about Additive Manufacturing to catch up with the industry; now there are at least several dozen from which to choose.

Much as we all love and use websites, YouTube videos and blog posts (you’re reading this one, right?), there are still times when there’s nothing like a book, even if you read it on your phone or dedicated device. Books provide data, perspective and pointers to other resources, in a convenient, all-in-one format. You can dive deeply into a subject or get a fascinating overview of topics you may never have known were connected.

For the AM-lover on your holiday shopping list, consider one of the following titles:

3D Printing: Understanding Additive Manufacturing

by Andreas Gebhardt, Julia Kessler, Laura Thurn | Dec. 2018

3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing: Principles and Applications – Fifth Edition of Rapid Prototyping

by Chee Kai Chua and Kah Fai Leong | Nov. 2016

The 3D Printing Handbook: Technologies, design and applications

by Ben Redwood , Filemon Schöffer , et al. | Nov. 2017

Additive Manufacturing (Second Edition)

by Amit Bandyopadhyay (editor) and Susmita Bose (editor) | Oct. 2019

Additive Manufacturing: Applications and Innovations (Manufacturing Design and Technology)

by Rupinder Singh and J. Paulo Davim | Aug. 2018

Additive Manufacturing Change Management: Best Practices (Continuous Improvement Series)

by David M. Dietrich, Michael Kenworthy, Elizabeth A. Cudney | Feb. 2019

Additive Manufacturing: Design, Methods, and Processes

by Steinar Westhrin Killi | Aug. 2017

Additive Manufacturing for the Aerospace Industry

by Francis H. Froes Ph.D. (editor), Rodney Boyer (editor) | Feb. 2019

Additive Manufacturing: Materials, Processes, Quantifications and Applications

by Jing Zhang and Yeon-Gil Jung | May 2018

Additive Manufacturing of Emerging Materials

by Bandar AlMangour (editor) | Aug. 2018

Additive Manufacturing of Metals: From Fundamental Technology to Rocket Nozzles, Medical Implants, and Custom Jewelry (Springer Series in Materials Science)

by John O. Milewski | July 2017

Additive Manufacturing of Metals: The Technology, Materials, Design and Production (Springer Series in Advanced Manufacturing)

by Li Yang, Keng Hsu, Brian Baughman, Donald Godfrey, Francisco Medina (Author), Mamballykalathil Menon, Soeren Wiener | May 2017

Additive Manufacturing Technologies: 3D Printing, Rapid Prototyping, and Direct Digital Manufacturing (2015 Edition)

by Ian Gibson (Author), David Rosen (Author), Brent Stucker (Author) | Nov. 2014

NOTE: this was the first book written about the field that I could find, with its first edition in 2009. (If you know of one pre-2009, I’d be interested to hear about it.) SME uses this book as the reference guide for its Certification exams for AM Fundamentals and AM Technicians.

Design for Additive Manufacturing: Tools and Optimization (Additive Manufacturing Materials and Technologies)

By Martin Leary | Nov. 2019

Design for Additive Manufacturing: Guidelines for cost effective manufacturing

by Tom Page | Jan. 2012

Design, Representations, and Processing for Additive Manufacturing (Synthesis Lectures on Visual Computing: Computer Graphics, Animation, Computational Photography, and Imaging)

by Marco Attene, Marco Livesu, et al. | June 2018

Laser-Based Additive Manufacturing of Metal Parts: Modeling, Optimization, and Control of Mechanical Properties (Advanced and Additive Manufacturing Series)

by Linkan Bian (editor), Nima Shamsaei (editor), John Usher (editor) | Aug. 2017

Laser Additive Manufacturing: Materials, Design, Technologies, and Applications (Woodhead Publishing Series in Electronic and Optical Materials Book 88)

by Milan Brandt (editor) | Sept. 2016

Laser Additive Manufacturing of High-Performance Materials

by Dongdong Gu | Apr. 2015

The Management of Additive Manufacturing: Enhancing Business Value (Springer Series in Advanced Manufacturing 2018)

by Mojtaba Khorram Niaki, Fabio Nonino | Dec. 2017

Thermo-Mechanical Modeling of Additive Manufacturing

by Michael Gouge and Pan Michaleris | Sept. 2017

Other books definitely exist that have more of a hobbyist focus. This list comes from my own research and opinions and is not intended to slight any other titles. I’d be interested in expanding the list if you know of other titles with an industrial AM slant.

Happy Holiday reading!