The explicit dynamics method is ideal for modeling highly nonlinear, large-deformation, contact-dominated problems that involve impact, multibody contact, and highly nonlinear material behavior. This class will introduce the basic concepts behind Autodesk, Inc.’s, explicit dynamics technology and explain why it is so well suited for highly nonlinear problems. We will cover the differences between implicit methods and explicit methods and explain when it is appropriate to use the explicit technology. You will learn how to obtain quasistatic solutions from the explicit dynamics method, and how to construct an appropriate model for analysis. We will cover the concepts of automatic time step selection inherent in explicit dynamics and the effect of mesh size on run times. We will present numerous examples to demonstrate how to set up a simulation and obtain results.
Engineers with interest or experience in simulation of large, nonlinear, contact dominated analysis problems.
Lee Taylor is a Distinguished Research Engineer at Autodesk. Dr. Taylor is the author of numerous explicit dynamics finite element codes and has 30 years of experience in FEA development. He is the author of Autodesk's explicit dynamics software.
The purpose of this class is to present an end-to-end workflow for generative and lattice design in the Automotive and Aerospace industry, using software and technology from Autodesk, Inc. At this moment in time, Autodesk is the only technology innovator that offers this unique capability—using their advanced software technology—for design, simulation, generative design (topology, skin, and lattice optimization), build simulation, build preparation, and advanced manufacturing methods. The class will demonstrate step by step the process involved in taking a component through design, simulation, optimization, build preparation, build simulation, post-build verification, and finishing. The class will educate attendees who wish to learn about the processes and challenges involved in additive design, lost-PLA casting and manufacturing. The software being demonstrated for the workflow includes Fusion 360 and Netfabb. This class will also present some of the challenges and solutions for certification.
Success with simulation as a driver of improved product costs, warranty costs, time to market, or reliability doesn't happen by accident. The most successful companies have strong management direction to ensure that the right projects get the right resources at the right times. In this class, managers and engineering leaders will learn to differentiate between user styles and tools for upfront engineering versus failure validation and recovery. We will share examples of successful organizations, and attendees will have the opportunity to ask global industry experts about their specific circumstances. This session covers all domains of simulation including FEA, CFD, and Digital Manufacturing.
The recently acquired Autodesk Nastran general-purpose finite element analysis (FEA) solver has gained a lot of popularity, and at the center of this is the newly developed topology optimization technology now being used in Autodesk Nastran stand-alone, Fusion 360 software, and Inventor Simulation software. This class will introduce the basics of topology optimization in Autodesk Nastran and demonstrate some of the advanced features that empower designers to create better designs and modify existing ones, making them lighter and more efficient. This session features Nastran and SimStudio.
This session will introduce the student to the topic of failure and correlation. Failure analysis is the purpose of performing any simulation. However, understanding what failure is and what it looks like is more complicated and involved than just looking for red spots. How do we determine what theory to use? Or what failure is? For example, just because your design yields doesn't always mean that it failed. With test correlation, uncertainty is everywhere—as in life. Most engineers fail to understand that just testing after analyzing the design doesn’t constitute correlation. If the analysis results are interpreted to suggest the part won’t break and it doesn’t break, the analysis isn’t correlated. Consequently, if the analysis indicates a likely failure location and the part breaks at that location, the analysis isn’t correlated. We will dive into these topics and examine how you can properly predict failure and perform correlation? This session features Simulation Multiphysics and Nastran.
This discussion will feature a panel of thought leaders involved in shaping the future of development and application of Simulation software. They have been invited to share their thoughts on Simulation software 's role in the Future of Making Things.