Scribd
Upload
73 views

Moldflow Tips

This class will demonstrate tips and tricks for using Moldflow, including API tools and using constraints to analyze warpage results. Attendees will learn how to use API tools to automate Moldflow tasks, understand different approaches for comparing warpage results using anchors and constraints, and have fun at the presenter's expense. The presentation will cover specific examples of using the API, macros, and different warpage comparison methods.

Uploaded by

Arjav Thakkar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
73 views

Moldflow Tips

This class will demonstrate tips and tricks for using Moldflow, including API tools and using constraints to analyze warpage results. Attendees will learn how to use API tools to automate Moldflow tasks, understand different approaches for comparing warpage results using anchors and constraints, and have fun at the presenter's expense. The presentation will cover specific examples of using the API, macros, and different warpage comparison methods.

Uploaded by

Arjav Thakkar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 29

Tips and Tricks for Moldflow Experts!

Tim VanAst Jay Shoemaker


Cascade Engineering Autodesk
Tim.VanAst@cascadeng.com Jay.Shoemaker@autodesk.com
Class Summary

This class will be a live demonstration of some tips and


tricks for Moldflow experts. We'll look at using some API
tools. We'll also look at the use of constraints for
warpage.
Key Learning Objectives

At the end of this class, you will be able to:


 Use API tools
 Understand Different Approaches to Comparing Warpage Results Using
Anchors/Constraints
 Have Fun at Jay’s expense
Using API Tools
API

 The Application Programming Interface


 An Object Linking and Embedding (OLE) programming interface
 Enables functionality of Synergy to be automated
 Control Synergy commands by
 Command line
 Macros (scripts)
 External programs such as Excel
 What can you do with the API?
 Only limited by your imagination
 Well almost!
Macros

 Scripts manually executed


 Don’t have input at execution
 Default location of scripts
 ..\My ASMI 2014 Projects\scripts
 Scripts can be in any folder
 Execute with Play Macro on Tools tab
 Can assign macros to a button for one
click access
Macros in Other Applications

 Scripts written in
Excel
API Help

 API Reference
 Insight help contents - Application
Programming Interface (API)
API/Script Examples

 XY Plot Creator
 Setting Intermediate Results
 Setting Result Properties
 Mesh Diagnostics as a Result
API: XY Plot Creator

 Excel file with macros make it easy to grab and


compare XY data
API: Setting Intermediate Results

 Excel spreadsheet
 Easy way to set intermediate times
 Useful for looking in greater detail at
specific events
 Gate freeze
 Packing profile transitions
 Weld line creation
API: Setting Result Properties
(aka - Jay’s Cool Tool)
 Mesh display
 Background & feature lines
 Nodal Averaging
 Scaling
 Normal
 All Deflection plots at once
 Banded & scaled plots
 One for all deflection plots
at once
 Symmetric banded & scaled for
deflection plots
 3 bands within tolerance
Scripts: Mesh Diagnostics
as a Result
 Checks a number of mesh
diagnostics and outputs them as
results
 Why would you use this?
 To double check others work
 New analysts
 Out sourced work
 Suppliers
 To compare work on similar projects
Different Approaches to Comparing
Warpage Results
Different Approaches to Comparing Warpage Results

1. Use of layers
2. Free form/Best fit
3. Anchors
4. Local coordinate system
5. Cylindrical Coordinate system
6. Constraints in warpage analysis
7. Warp then “Stress” with post warpage constraints
8. External code for post warpage constraints
Different Approaches to Comparing Warpage Results

1. Use of layers
 Easy to isolate a feature and is scaled by display
Different Approaches to Comparing Warpage Results

2. Free form/Best fit


 Best fit all (default)
 Will position part to reduce overall
warpage
 Good overall view
 Not specific to any feature
 Best fit nodes – edge, surface, etc
 Good for isolating feature of interest
 Good for cylindrical coordinate
systems
Different Approaches to Comparing Warpage Results

3. Anchors – Define the reference plane that the warpage will be


measured against
 What does 1 point do for you?
 Keeps same global coordinate system, it just defines a common zero point
 Doesn’t fully define a reference plane
 Still best fit in 3 axes, but common zero
 2 points?
 Defines an X axis – good for a single direction
 Not commonly used
 3 points?
 Fully defined reference plane (no best fit)
 Need to be careful where you pick, especially if those points warp
Different Approaches to Comparing Warpage Results

4. Local coordinate system


 Use with features that are not aligned
with the Global XYZ
 LCS can be defined by any
coordinates
 They do not need to be on the part
 Works with best fit or anchor(s)
Different Approaches to Comparing Warpage Results

5. Cylindrical Coordinate System Workflow


 Set deflection part with cylindrical coordinate system
 Set magnitude/component to Radial component
 Set reference coordinate system (center of feature)
 Anchor - if center node available
 LCS – if no center node available
 Best fit selected nodes
Different Approaches to Comparing Warpage Results

6. Constraints in warpage analysis


 Must apply before solve
 Can use to approximate attachment features
 Not exactly correct, it’s pre-warp constraints
 Considerations
 Use General Constraints
 Allows you to specify the DOF
 Must constrain enough to prevent ridged body motion
 Easy to over constrain preventing shrinkage
Different Approaches to Comparing Warpage Results

7. Warp then “Stress” with post warpage constraints


 Requirements
 Midplane model only
 Requires a Premium license, (same as Warp)
 Workflow
 Run Warp analysis, get deflection values for desired nodes
 Define deflections as displacement loads
 Subtract shrinkage
 Run Stress analysis
Different Approaches to Comparing Warpage Results

8. External code for post warpage constraints


 In external structural software, you can add assemblies,
constraints, contacts (sheet metal), etc.
 Can export internal stress, fiber orientation, etc.

 Direct export to Autodesk Simulation Mechanical


 Export ANSYS & LS-Dyna via script
 Universal export via .xml for export to other codes
Things To Consider When Choosing The Best
Approach To Measure Warpage For Your Part
 Is part in design stage?
 Is it an overall, keep warpage low request?
 Could use best fit
 Could use 1 anchor point
 Could use 3 anchor points
 Does it have critical dimensions that need to work
 Use examine command, may use LCS or Anchors to make values orthogonal
 Are you measuring to match a part measurement from a gage or
assembly?
 The 3 anchor points can be good
 Maybe constraints (pre or post warp) of attachment locations
Things To Consider When Choosing The Best
Approach To Measure Warpage For Your Part
 Are the flatness of the attachment features more important
than the total warp of the part?
 Then use path plot with points at all attachment features will give you
more useful results than standard All/XYZ plots (you’ll still most likely want
to use anchor points for consistency)

Everything beyond best fit takes more effort, but if done


correctly will give a more precise answer. But will the extra
effort help you to make a better decision?
Wish List for Fixturing Constraints Module in
Moldflow
 Available for all 3 mesh types
 Constraint would be applied post warpage
 Ability to apply constraints all on, or in order (in order
would have to run FEA for each constraint one at a
time using results from 1 for input as 2 .
st nd

 Ability to apply -Z only constraint (ie interference with


sheet metal)
 Provide options to deal with shrinkage (auto exclude
shrink, manual input, etc)
Questions?
Autodesk University Session Feedback

Session feedback is very important to Autodesk.

 Attendees can complete the session survey on their


mobile device, PC, or at a survey station.
 Each completed session survey enters you in that
day’s drawing for a free AU 2014 pass.
 You can help make AU 2014 better!

ALSO: Complete the AU Conference Survey at a survey station and receive an


AU 2013 T-Shirt.
Thank You!

Autodesk is a registered trademark of Autodesk, Inc., and/or its subsidiaries and/or affiliates in the USA and/or other countries. All other brand names, product names, or trademarks belong to their respective holders. Autodesk reserves the right to alter product and services offerings, and specifications and pricing at any time without notice, and is not responsible for typographical or graphical errors that may appear
in this document. © 2013 Autodesk, Inc. All rights reserved.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy