se st3 fem nx nastran

[Moskiz]

I noticed that after simulations with the fem nx nastran interceded of the st3 in the directory ......scratch\simulationdump\ the program never deletes the old temporary files, say that I can manually delete those with obsolete dates? It is normal that you do not automatically delete them when the simulation was closed and saved if you do not erase that directory, you have a giga monster and a space giga... every simulation creates me on average 1 gb of temporary files.

However, it remains a very useful and direct application, which does not force to export/import to other fems (clearly always if we are satisfied with the limited functions of the package).

 

[Tequila]

I never noticed this thing the times I used the solid edge femap... Try to feel your assistance what she tells you about it and then let us know.
Hi.

 

[gerod]

I think it's always been a problem if that of temporary files, even without fem.

However, it remains a very useful and direct application, which does not force to export/import to other fems (clearly always if we are satisfied with the limited functions of the package).

Why do you say that?
I have both vn4d (not updated) and ansys ds (updated) and I have always communicated with the se. just buy the communication form.
I used femap on my classic (v 20) and I must say that it is not even to compare to ansys. for me we are on another planet (for small things it is okay)
Hi.

 

[Be_on_edge]

I think it's always been a problem if that of temporary files, even without fem.

Why do you say that?
I have both vn4d (not updated) and ansys ds (updated) and I have always communicated with the se. just buy the communication form.
I used femap on my classic (v 20) and I must say that it is not even to compare to ansys. for me we are on another planet (for small things it is okay)
Hi.

the simulation module of st (from 2 ?) is much more powerful than that of v20.
not at ansys level but it includes a good part of the needs.

Hi.

 

[gerod]

I'm still at st2, but I never used it if not for tests since my customers all stopped at 20.
I can not give judgments on the new fem also because, given the investment, use ansys!

 

[Tequila]

I'm still at st2, but I never used it if not for tests since my customers all stopped at 20.
I can not give judgments on the new fem also because, given the investment, use ansys!

I don't know what license package you have of yourself, but from st2 onwards to have simulation you need to have the premium license because if you have the classic you only want the femap express like previous versions

 

[Moskiz]

femapexpress is ridiculous.. does not deserve comments , instead the module nx nastran of if to exsre a bundle has a good quality/price ratio and meets my needs in an egregio.
then for those who need to push themselves beyond of course can count on solutions clearly more powerful but also much more expensive.
where I previously worked I had to export to parasolid from if on cosmos was not so immediate the application of the modification to the regenation of the mesh.
Now, the fact of having everything integrated with simple clear commands and well made to impose the fem, I speed up my work (e.g. very convenient to make mesh on the simplified part and in the same file continue the development of the complete model).

 

[Gioan]

I put myself in the discussion about st2's (premium license) simulation. Does anyone use it with carpentry structures (e.g. electro-welded bases of machines)? if you find yourself?

 

[Moskiz]

I put myself in the discussion about st2's (premium license) simulation. Does anyone use it with carpentry structures (e.g. electro-welded bases of machines)? if you find yourself?

If the simulation of st2 is the same as st3, I answer yes, I use it and I find it very well.

 

[Gioan]

thank you for the answer moskiz,
you should be the same between st2 and st3.
I have the premium license but I haven't used it yet.
My question arises from the fact that I was told (by a professional I think prepared) that simulation does not allow to properly manage t links between the plates (for example, simplifying, in a tubular structure with inside the ribs you can not properly manage the contact between the ribs and the tubular structure).
Are there any restrictions in this regard?