nastrmsc
New member
- Sep 4, 2018
- 8
Hi,
I'm using the sol 200 for a structural optimization but I have problem with the stress responses.
I've used four type of DRESP1:
1) DRESP1 198 S198 STRESS PSHELL 9 198
2)DRESP1 1198 S198 STRESS PSHELL 17 198
3)DRESP1 6 S6 STRESS PBARL 7 6
4)DRESP1 6 S6 STRESS PBARL 7 6
for more than two property.
Linked to these responses I have DCONSTR like this:
DCONSTR 4000 198 233.
where 233 MPa is the upper bound for von mises stress.
I found inconsistencies between the stress responses that appear at the end of the file f06(the list of active responses) and the stresses related to the last analysis, the one with the optimized configuration .
In fact if I check one element in the stress responses list(figure3) and after in the static analysis(figure 4), I find a different value of stress. Can you tall me why?
I don't hunderstand why the optimization finishes with hard convergence (figure 1)but I've still elements that violate the constraints.
Thanks.
Best regards
I'm using the sol 200 for a structural optimization but I have problem with the stress responses.
I've used four type of DRESP1:
1) DRESP1 198 S198 STRESS PSHELL 9 198
2)DRESP1 1198 S198 STRESS PSHELL 17 198
3)DRESP1 6 S6 STRESS PBARL 7 6
4)DRESP1 6 S6 STRESS PBARL 7 6
for more than two property.
Linked to these responses I have DCONSTR like this:
DCONSTR 4000 198 233.
where 233 MPa is the upper bound for von mises stress.
I found inconsistencies between the stress responses that appear at the end of the file f06(the list of active responses) and the stresses related to the last analysis, the one with the optimized configuration .
In fact if I check one element in the stress responses list(figure3) and after in the static analysis(figure 4), I find a different value of stress. Can you tall me why?
I don't hunderstand why the optimization finishes with hard convergence (figure 1)but I've still elements that violate the constraints.
Thanks.
Best regards


