Search result for:  https://www.galaxus.ch/en/sector/showdiscussion/snapchat-id-hack-visit-kunghaccom-c76eyaq4-222179

@gmc23 Here is a comparison between SMP and MPP. Do you want initial penetrations in your model? If you are trying to use MPP but are not getting appropriate prestress from initial penetrations, you could remove the initial penetrations before simulating. With that said, there are many options in LS-Dyna that could affect this output (ie *Control_contact).

@mirko094 I know you said that you checked the properties and materials, I'm assuming that this means your unit system. That would be the first thing that I would have suggested because you may just have a mismatch in your unit system and may not actually have 8 meters of displacement. Is the screen clip that you are showing from a dynamic animation or is this the shape of the blade initially? And just to be clear, you have rigidly constrained the blue end as the cantilever correct?

@negativevolume Thank you very much I have seen a tutorial of propeller with bird strike ( ) and I delete the bird to get only the propeller but it doesn't work but i will check my model again

@negativevolume Thanks for the response. I have tried these same implicit models from and Using three different machines I get the same error, so I suspect it's a version issue. I am running version R10.0, I'll see if I can possibly get an update to R10.2 < span style="color: #666;"> Attachment :  forrrtl-severe-157-Error-messages.png

Hi @nikhillonkar92, You are not alone in getting a little overwhelmed with all these options. A lot of the time, you will find that certain combinations will work best for certain scenarios. More importantly though, make sure that you are using the correct *Contact_ type to begin with. I'm just going to drop some links for you to look over. I'd be more than willing to answer specific questions regarding your model setup and any aspects of the contacts. I will probably be a little more helpful that way as well. LS-Dyna Contact overview: Similar but in powerpoint format: Webinar slides for introduction to contacts by Oasys:

I have seen needing to convert from one to another as a need for others and myself. Right now this is mainly for geometry manipulation using the PyNastran package. I have started work on a converter on github here. It is not finished but I am putting it out there in cases this is of use to anyone or anyone wants to contribute to the repo. In addition, I want to show the github repos awesome-cae and qd-cae-python that i can across in my research. I have no affiliation to these, they are just good resources for scripting.

Dear @negativevolume thank you very much. I have purchased the vedio .k file for testing my LS dyna and modelling the same. I am following the same paper(). In this paper(page 180) it is mentioned: Figure 4 shows how the total fabric sample was modeled by using rectangular cross sections of shell elements to represent the interwoven yarn comprising each of the four fabric layers. So I think Belytschko-Tsay shell is used for fabric. the above picture is two layer fabric solid elements(shrunken element mode with messing) I am confused whether bullet mess is four node tetrahedron element or nodal pressure tetrahedron or Fully Integrated Tetrahedron Element With 24 Degrees of-Freedom. Please suggest Thanks

From Quora: SimScale. It offers a wonderful cloud-based simulation environment where everything can be setup through a browser. There are several projects available in the public projects database. Any project created through the free account (with 3000 simulation hours / year) is available publicly. They also provide professional plan, if you intend to keep it private. This could be a wonderful place to start since there are no hassles of licenses etc.

@negativevolume Hi, thank you very much for your kind reply. I tried some models with elements failure in implicit solution. For the fracture toughness and Brazilian splitting modeling (a small amounts of elements failed in the center line), my model works very well. For UCS modeling, many elements would fail, the calculation becomes unstable. I followed a tutorial () and treat the UCS modeling as a quasi-static condition. Finally, I got a stable calculation in an explicit solution with loading rate increasing method.

@sonlong Like @if4ou said, a force transducer is only for designating a specific region of a contact to output results for. You must have a constraint or another type of contact defined if it looks like it is responding how you think it should. Here is LSTC's overview of all the different types of contacts. Generally, you should stick to *Contact_automatic_surface_to_surface or *Contact_automatic_single_surface if you are just trying to model a contact between parts.

contact me on geardyn.1@gmail.com, i can send you some more pdfs

Which equations are used in LS Dyna for bullet hitting the fabric. Following is the link How to find these equations. Please help. Thanks

Solver Version: Version : smp s R14 Revision: R14.1.1-8-g2ef819c24f AnLicVer: 2025 R1 (20241030+dl-67-g73b144a) Description: I've encountered an issue where hyperelastic materials develop strange initial stresses (solver: SMP single precision, double precision solver will crash the simulation immediately) when a part is switched from rigid to deformable using *DEFORMABLE_TO_RIGID_AUTOMATIC. The same setup works perfectly with elastic materials. Summary of behavior: A part with hyperelastic material is initially rigid, then automatically switched to deformable at t=10.0 Immediately after the switch, the part shows spurious stresses If I replace the hyperelastic material with an elastic material, the problem disappears The same issue occurs whether using full restart with *STRESS_INITIALIZATION to add a new hyperelastic part, or within a single continuous simulation using *DEFORMABLE_TO_RIGID_AUTOMATIC Attached test case:A minimal working example demonstrating the issue. One single element uses *DEFORMABLE_TO_RIGID_AUTOMATIC to switch from rigid to deformable at t=10.0 with hyperelastic rubber material. Simply swap the material to elastic (*MAT_ELASTIC) to see the problem disappear. Questions: Is this a known limitation/bug in R14? Any insights would be greatly appreciated. Key file to reproduce the issue is attached Attachment : deformable_to_rigid.pendulum_automatic_switch.key

Hi all, hope you're well. I am fairly new to ABAQUS and have been trying to teach myself this software. I've been attempting to model a 3-wythe brick wall using this article as supporting literature: All the values in my ABAQUS model have been taken from this software, such as Drucker-Prager, Young's Modulus, cohesion, etc. However, every time I visualise my model, only a small part of the model is affected and thus you cannot recognise any wall pattern cracks. I am trying to recreate Wall nr. 3 from Manzouri et al's lateral resistance of URM walls experiment ( and the wall crack patterns look as such: Attachment : image.png Attachment : image.png mine look as such (x6 magnified brick units, to keep myself under the 1000 node limit of the learning edition, but principal stresses/deformation should still follow the same-ish pattern): Attachment : image.png Attachment : image.png Would it be something to do with my time step/increments (i only go up to 28 increments with step time = 1)? that I am using too small of a time range or something? or any other reason? I'm not sure so any help would be greatly appreciated... I hope I do not sound silly, this software is quite confusing for a newbie.  

Hi I have modeled pipes and elbow (picture below) using *ELEMENT_BEAM_ELBOW using LSDyna. My model converged but somehow the results are not making sense. The von misses stresses are way larger than what is expected. When I check the d3plot, I found that the elbow elements are separating badly (picture below). It happens for the second elbow as well. My *ELEMENT_BEAM_ELBOW definition is as below: *ELEMENT_BEAM_ELBOW 1 1 1 4 3 (element ID PID N1 N2 N5 and the row below is midpoint N3) 2 2 1 4 8 3 6 ............................................. *INTEGRATION_BEAM 1 0 0.0 9 2 0.161925 0.159125 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 *SECTION_BEAM 1 14 1.0 -1 2 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Could anyone help me in this regard by giving me some suggestions what I am doing wrong? I did not get much help from manual and online. Thanks again.