What is Ansys Forming?

Ansys Forming is an end-to-end tool for sheet metal manufacturing process simulation; it has truly redefined how sheetmetal forming is being done using our trusted LS-DYNA solver. It has a newly developed graphical user interface that allows engineers to easily, accurately and efficiently setup the simulation, solve the job and analyze the results. The advantage of our Ansys Forming software is that most of the parameters are already predefined and user is interactively guided through a streamlined step by step process. Ansys Forming only needs the knowledge of the sheetmetal forming process. In a nutshell, Ansys Forming is a one stop shop for all metal stamping needs and it offers an optimal performance delivering a good balance between speed and accuracy.

In Ansys Forming “Deep drawing” is the process we are trying to simulate. The forming process is typically performed on a press and the parts are formed between 2 dies as shown above. This is a time intensive process and the procedure requires machinery and specialized tools. Through Ansys Forming we are able to simulate gravity loading simulation, conduct formability analysis, account for springback prediction and compensation, conduct press and roller hemming, perform clamping simulation, account for hydroforming, etc. as shown on the graphic below. In Forming simulation, the desired shape is extracted through plastic deformation w/o undergoing any advanced machining processes such as milling. With Ansys Forming we can optimize the process before the actual tool is manufactured. It reduces the cost to manufacture the tools and reduces the time to market for OEM’s. It guarantees the manufacturability of the parts and ensures parts come out right the first time.

What are some common applications of Ansys Forming?

Most of the applications for Ansys Forming are found in the following industries ranging from Automotive OEMS, suppliers manufacturing fenders, doors, hoods and various parts and accessories of the automobile to Aerospace manufacturing various parts of the entire aircraft including wings, fuselage, etc. from Consumer appliances such as refrigerators and washing machines to food and packaging industry manufacturing cookware, canned products, etc. the application is quite widespread.

Join us on July 30, 2024, at 9:00 AM for our exclusive webinar and discover how Ansys Forming can revolutionize your sheet metal manufacturing process!

If you use Ansys Mechanical for simulation, you probably use its contact modeling features. And if you use contacts in Mechanical, you’ll be more efficient if you use the Contact Tool to validate your setup and generate useful results. This tool gives you fast insight into how your contacts are behaving, even before the analysis has started. Whether you have just set up your contacts and want to know if they are working correctly, or you are troubleshooting an analysis that failed to solve, or you want detailed results for a contact region, the Contact Tool is the way to go.

How Can You Save Time by Running the Ansys Mechanical Contact Tool Before Structural Analysis?

When simulating a structural assembly, it is often most efficient to run the Contact Tool before running the analysis itself. The Contact Tool runs in a fraction of the time required for the full structural analysis, and it warns you about any contact regions that are not working correctly. All you need to do is add a Contact Tool under the Connections branch and generate initial contact results. Then you’ll see a table that looks like this:

The color of these rows is based on the Status column and the type of contact region. Here’s how to interpret the different row colors:

• White (Closed) contact regions are closed and working normally.
• Gray (Inactive) regions are duplicate contacts created by the solver when using default contact behaviors. You can ignore these.
• Red (Far Open) regions are linear contacts (Bonded or No Separation) that are not working correctly. You should check each of these contact regions and make changes to them if you want them to be included in the analysis.
• Yellow (Near Open or Far Open) regions are nonlinear contacts (Frictional, Frictionless, or Rough) that are initially open. This may be acceptable but you should be aware that these regions will not hold the model together as long as they remain open.
• Orange (Closed) regions are working correctly but there may be a large gap or initial penetration. It is recommended to check these regions carefully if they were generated automatically, since they may be connecting two parts that are not connected in real life.

If you see any contacts that you are concerned about, you can right-click on any of these rows to go to the corresponding region in the tree and make changes to the contact settings. It is much easier to identify and fix these problems now than to wait for the analysis to solve then try to figure out why the results don’t seem right.

It is also possible to make plots of contact status, gap, or penetration. Make use of these plots if you want to quickly visualize what areas are in contact or how large the gaps in the contact regions are.

How Can You Use the Ansys Mechanical Contact Tool to Troubleshoot Problems After Solving a Model?

Sometimes an analysis solves partially but does not complete, or it solves all the way and the results do not look correct. Either way, you can use a solution Contact Tool to figure out whether the solution problems are related to contact behavior. Hopefully you’ve verified that the initial contact status is realistic (see preceding section). You can also add a Contact Tool under the Solution branch and use it to observe how the contact status changes during the simulation.

This tool is mainly useful for troubleshooting if the model has nonlinear contacts (Frictional, Frictionless, Rough). Make a note of what time in the simulation convergence difficulties started to happen or other unwanted behavior started to occur, and see if there are any changes in contact status around that time. For instance, if two parts start in contact and then separate, that may be a source of instability in the model. Similarly, if two parts are initially separate and the simulation runs into problems after they collide, then this contact region is probably the source of the convergence difficulty.

Plots of contact status are color-coded so you can visualize which regions are closed (orange and dark orange) and which are open (blue or yellow depending on gap size). These statuses also have corresponding integer values for the purposes of graphs and probes:

• 0: Far Open
• 1: Near Open
• 2: Closed (Sliding)
• 3: Closed (Sticking) 

Using this knowledge, the graph below shows that the contact is sticking (3) at time = 1s, then suddenly switches to Far Open (0) at 1.2s. If a sudden status change like this occurs, you should verify that the model behaves correctly after the change.

How Can You Use the Ansys Mechanical Contact Tool for Postprocessing Results?

Even once you’ve validated the setup for the model and run the analysis successfully, the Contact Tool still has more to offer. You may be able to use deformation plots to view the general behavior of parts in contact, but sometimes more detailed information is needed. For instance, in sealing applications it is very important to ensure there are no gaps in the seal during operating conditions. The status plot below shows that the yellow region (open contact) is probably too large to guarantee an adequate seal.

Other results, such as contact pressure or penetration, are also available. If these quantities are relevant to the performance of your design, then be sure to make use of these results.

Explore our library of Ansys Mechanical resources, including tutorials, case studies, and best practices. Start exploring now!

In an increasingly competitive landscape, companies invest heavily in reducing costs and time to market. Traditional techniques of modeling, testing, and prototyping are no longer viable. Using computer-aided engineering (CAE), companies can mimic physical drop tests and impact tests at a fraction of the cost, saving millions of dollars. With Ansys LS-DYNA, companies can simulate material failure, component deformation, and energy absorption related to various test standards and specs.When was the last time you had the harrowing experience of dropping your expensive smartphone on the road while loading your groceries into your car, ending up with a cracked screen? Or perhaps you damaged your smartwatch by hitting it against a doorknob? Consumer electronics are highly susceptible to damage from accidents and shipping mishaps, leading to costly replacements and customer dissatisfaction. Companies are constantly exploring innovative ways to improve product design for better sustainability and durability against impacts and drops.

The Widespread Application of Drop and Impact Testing

The application of drop testing extends beyond consumer electronics. It includes:

• Automotive Industry: Vehicle front-end collision with a concrete barrier.
• Aviation Industry: Bird strikes on the leading edge of an aircraft.
• Transportation Sector: Packages dropped during transit.
• Military Applications: Impact of kinetic energy projectiles like bullets piercing armor plates.

Using our Ansys LS-DYNA explicit simulation capabilities, users are able to simulate drop tests and impact tests much more comprehensively and efficiently.

What are the Advantages of Running Computer Aided Simulation?

In the ever increasing cutthroat competitive landscape companies are heavily invested in ways to reduce cost and time to market and the traditional technique of modeling, testing and prototyping is not a viable option anymore. Using computer-aided engineering (CAE) companies are able to mimic these physical drop tests and impact tests which are otherwise very expensive and time consuming at a fraction of the cost which can save companies millions of dollars. Using our Ansys LS-DYNA tool, companies are able to simulate drop tests to simulate material failure, component deformation, energy absorption related to various test standards and specs. With our tool creating a virtual prototype is fast and easy and facilitates easy design iteration process that yields fast and reliable results and the ROI on the software investment is more than justified when comparing this to expensive physical tests.

Drop Test and Impact Test Simulations with Ansys LS-DYNA

Cell Phone Drop Test

This simulation involves dropping a generic mobile phone from a height to impact with the ground.

The mesh count was well under 30k elements and CFL timestep was plotted to ensure we could use small amount of mass scaling to expedite the solve if needed as shown below.

The animation below shows the result from the cell impacting the ground.

The animation above reveals the battery pack separating from the lower housing due to frictional sliding which attributes to the negative contact energy as observed on the plot below for energy summary.

In addition to stresses and deformation on the various objects we can also gather useful information on contact force transmitted between the device and ground as shown below.

Bird strike on the leading edge of an aircraft 

Bird strikes are fairly common occurrence that can happen when the aircraft is flying at low altitudes especially in situations of take off and landing. The bird strikes can be quite catastrophic if the bird strikes the windshield of an aircraft or gets sucked into the engine or as in this case hits the leading edge of the airfoil of the aircraft that can cause structural damage.

The aviation industry is heavily focused on not only ensuring that such occurrences do not occur but in the circumstances, they do occur that the structural integrity of the aircraft is not compromised.

In this example the airfoil which is the structural part (“Lagrangian” body) is comprised of a Multibody part comprising of an outer skin and four interior stiffeners inside. The airfoil material is defined as “Aluminum” and is modeled in Ansys LS-DYNA using the Johnson Cook strength material model. The bird is idealized as an “ellipsoid” shape and simulated using Smooth Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) in LS-DYNA. The material assigned to the bird is “water” which includes an equation of state and tensile pressure failure set to 0 Pa to easily allow the body of the bird to disintegrate on impact. The graphic below explains the various aspects of the geometry and material setup.

Provided below is a closeup view of the finite element mesh. The mesh reveals the airfoil which is the “Lagrangian” part and the bird is defined as “SPH” part viewed as particle mesh.

The bird is designed to impact the aircraft approaching at approximately 900 km/hr to mimic the speed of the aircraft at time of impact. Provided below are snapshots of the plastic strain and deformation showing extensive damage to the airfoil structure post impact.

Provided below is an animation of the bird strike simulation.

Maritime collision

The rapid increase in maritime traffic makes risk of collision higher in areas of high traffic places. The consequences of ship collision can be quite catastrophic which can be detrimental to not only the environment but also put the ships crew under risk and hence a huge amount of emphasis is put into consideration in the design stage of the ship.

The graphic below shows the collision between a tanker and ferry and this impact simulation was solved using Ansys LS-DYNA.

The tanker and ferry were defined as “Lagrangian” parts; Johnson Cook material model was used to define the elastic-plastic behavior and the plastic strain failure was used to simulate failure. The graphics below show the finite element mesh for the simplified model taken into consideration and material law used.

The initial velocity of 3 m/s was applied to the cruise ship and contact was defined as single surface contact to ensure self-impact.

Provided below are graphics of the plastic deformation showing significant damage on the hull of the fuel tanker.

The animation below captures the simulation of the collision between the tanker and ferry.

The applications above demonstrate the power behind virtual prototyping to simulate any sort of drop test or impact test and Ansys LS-DYNA is able to calibrate test results very closely.

Explore the Full Potential of Ansys LS-DYNA

The applications above demonstrate the power of virtual prototyping to simulate various drop and impact tests. Ansys LS-DYNA can calibrate test results very closely, offering significant advantages over traditional testing methods.

Don’t Miss Our Webinar on Advanced Simulation Techniques! Register now!

Multiphysics simulations help predict how everyday designs will behave in the real world before engineers actually build them. One key example is conjugate heat transfer, which models how heat moves between a solid object and the fluid (liquid or gas) around it. For instance, if you were designing an engine or electronics enclosure, you would need to capture both the conductive heat flow through the solid objects as well as the convective heat transfer to the surrounding air or coolant, which is highly dependent on the fluid dynamic solution. By simulating the different physics together, engineers can optimize designs for better performance, efficiency, and safety from the very start.

In the past, Multiphysics simulations involved a complex coupling of different tools and solvers, which required specialized expertise and significant computational resources. In today’s world of accelerated design, tools like Ansys Discovery Simulation give engineers a competitive advantage by making relatively complex physics more accessible than ever before. Check out this video to see Discovery Simulation in action.

How do GPU solvers help engineers tackle Multiphysics problems?

In my previous blog, “Why is GPU Computing Good for Simulation Driven Design?” we discussed how Discovery Simulation’s lightning fast GPU solvers unlock the key to simulation driven design: real time results generated at the speed of the design changes. But it’s not enough to just have a fast simulation software. Engineers also need tools that can actually capture the physics of the problems they are working on, and to have confidence that the results are accurate.

Engineers need fast AND ACCURATE  results

Let’s take a look at how Discovery enables fast and accurate results in a real-world example. And since we’re talking about world class GPU solvers, what better example case than a GPU cooling channel?

Starting from a conceptual model of the flow path above, Discovery’s intuitive interface allows users to quickly assign materials and physics. The software autogenerates the appropriate fluid-solid interface behaviors along the flow path and heat sink. Easy Peasy. Throw in a flow inlet, heat generation from the GPU, and a quick exterior convection, and less than 3 minutes later, we’re ready to solve. Oh wait. The model already solved. So on to post processing!

Now if you’ve never done CFD analysis before, you’re probably a bit skeptical that Discovery can give meaningful results with hardly any effort up to this point. And if you HAVE done CFD analysis before, you’re probably REALLY Skeptical. As you should be. 

Looking at a cross section temperature slice of the heat sink, we see that the result is way off! See I KNEW it was too good to be true (pro tip: keep reading to see how the new local refinement features in Discovery address this).

What we’re seeing is a fidelity issue that is common for thin featured geometry. Discovery Explore mode uses a voxel base approach to quickly mesh practically ANY geometry nearly instantaneously. This is great for users who don’t want to spend hours and hours cleaning up geometry or messing with mesh settings. The downside is if features are very small compared to the discretization size, you can end up with solutions that fail to capture the physics important to the problem (in this case, flow/heat dissipation on the thin fins).

Discovery’s user-friendly fidelity slider allows for some improvement, though ultimately the size of your graphics card will dictate how small of a feature that can be captured using the voxel approach. The run of the mill Quadro P3200 card on my laptop is probably due for an upgrade, but it still gets me close to capturing the fins.

Discovery allows easy visualization of voxel resolution, and I can see that even at the highest fidelity, these fins are simply too thin to capture on my machine. Now before you go buy a bigger graphics card, let’s discuss a few of the new fidelity controls that we believe are game changers for the future of Discovery Simulation.

How Can I Improve my Mesh Accuracy with Local Fidelity?

Discovery’s local fidelity option lets you control where to spend your GPU resources to make sure you’re capturing the smallest features in your model. Quickly box selecting the fin geometry and applying a local fidelity yields much better resolution, and I can now visualize the generated mesh.

Another quick solve and I can see that my model is now fully capturing the thin fin geometry.

How do know the results are accurate?

Generating a pretty picture is one thing, but engineers need to know that their simulation data is accurate in order to have confidence in their design decisions. Let’s investigate one more tool within Discovery to see how this plays out.

Discovery Refine Mode

Jumping from super quick explore mode to the more accurate refine mode is a simple toggle in Discovery. In this mode I have more advanced physics options that enable me to specify and preview Polyhedra mesh.

How does Discovery compare to well established CFD solvers such as ANSYS Fluent?

In the absence of test data, we can compare the solver accuracy of Discovery to industry leading codes such as ANSYS Fluent to have confidence that our solution is accurate. Taking a close look at the mesh, we see that we’re able to capture similar levels of boundary layer resolution in each case.

Not surprisingly, the heat profiles generated are nearly identical. This is perhaps especially unsurprising since Discovery is actually using the same exact GPU solver as Ansys Fluent under the hood.

So without leaving the Discovery environment, we were able to generate a result that was within about 2% of the total temperature rise within the first few minutes of effort, and nearly spot on after just a few more clicks. Now that’s the power of Discovery.

Let’s Connect!

Are you still unconvinced that you can have fast and accurate results? Let’s talk! Visit our DRD webpage to get in touch, or join these 2 free webinars to learn more.

Part 1 Webinar: Leveraging Real-Time GPU Solvers for Simulation Driven Designs 

Part 2 Webinar: Empowering Design Engineers with Faster and More Accurate GPU Physics Solvers 

How does Ansys licensing work with GPU solvers and cards?

Ansys continues to develop GPU solvers as GPU based computing continues to reach maturity and shows promise as a more efficient and economical way to access powerful high-performance computing. DRD’s benchmarks show significant promise in using GPUs for computational fluid dynamics (CFD) using Fluent’s new native GPU solver and for discrete element modeling (DEM) using Ansys Rocky.

When investigating the use of GPUs to solve your complex and large problems it is important to understand the licensing implications. In this article we will discuss licensing for both Fluent and Rocky when using GPUs.

Fluent requires a CFD Enterprise license to enable the Native GPU Solver. Included in the license is the ability to use up to 40 streaming multiprocessors (SMs) on a GPU with the ability to solve on a card with a greater number of SMs by checking out HPC Workgroup or HPC Pack licenses. The table below shows the required number of HPC Workgroup tasks or HPC Packs required for a given SM count. In some sense the licensing scheme is similar to the CPU solver where HPC licensing is required to solve on more than 4 cores. Similarly, a core is a subset of the compute elements on a CPU die just like an SM is a subset of the repeating compute units on a GPU. It is important to note that an SM is not equivalent to a CUDA core. SMs contain multiple CUDA cores. This article explains how to determine the number of SMs on a given card below. It is also important to know that you must use all of the SMs on a given GPU. You cannot utilize only a portion of the SMs.

Rocky allows the use of GPUs right out of the gate with up to 112 SMs. Rocky does use it’s own HPC licensing that enables an additional 112 SMs per Rocky HPC 8 License as shown in the table below.

How Many Streaming Multiprocessors (SMs) Are on my GPU Card?

When determining how much HPC is required for a given GPU it is important to know both the target application (Fluent or Rocky) as well as the number of SMs on the card. Since you must consume all of the SMs on the card, you must have sufficient licensing to be able to invoke either solver on the card. The number of SMs on a card is rarely published, so it can seem daunting at first, but DRD has found that the website techpowerup.com readily posts the SM count. 

Search for the GPU name and “specs” in google and follow the tech powerup link:

Scrolling down to the details of the card, the SM count is listed in the “Render Config” section:

From this example, we can see that to run the Fluent native GPU solver on the RTX 4090 would require 3 HPC packs and to run Rocky on this card would require a single Rocky HPC 8 license.

DRD hopes this article helps answer questions regarding licensing of our world class GPU solvers as well as where to find published streaming multiprocessor counts for modern GPUs. Do you want to see more Ansys GPU benchmarks?  Visit our hardware page.

Why is GPU Computing Good for Simulation Driven Design?

In my previous blog post, Discovering New Possibilities with Ansys Discovery (and is SpaceClaim going away??), I discussed the geometry modeling capabilities that set Ansys Discovery apart from it’s predecessor, Ansys SpaceClaim. In today’s blog, we’ll discuss the power of CAD embedded GPU solvers in creating better designs faster and more efficiently than ever before.

What is the Difference Between Simulation Validated Design and Simulation Driven Design?

Most companies we work with are familiar with simulation validated design. This approach relies on traditional design methods for initial ideation, and utilizes simulation to verify the design will pass physical testing prior to production or physical prototyping. Without a doubt, this approach saves valuable time and resources over traditional build, test repeat cycles, but is this all simulation has to offer?

Why should you adopt simulation driven design?

Simulation driven design leverages simulation earlier in the product development life cycle, with the following key benefits:

• Cost and Time Efficiency: By identifying and resolving potential issues early in the design process, it reduces the need for physical prototypes, saving both time and money.
• Innovation and Flexibility: Enables exploration of a wider range of design alternatives and innovative solutions, fostering creativity and flexibility in the design process.
• Enhanced Product Performance: Simulation driven design allows for extensive virtual testing and optimization, leading to improved performance and reliability of the final product.

So why are so many companies still operating under a simulation validation paradigm instead of a simulation driven paradigm? I believe the answer to this question lies in the lack of engineering tools available to enable real time simulation feedback as design changes occur. Consider a design change as simple as moving a bolt hole 0.5” to the right. If the designer is required to send an updated CAD model to an analysist, have them rerun the model (if they have time), and wait a week for the results, the data they get back could very well be irrelevant by the time the simulation is complete. This creates a bottleneck that for many companies makes simulation driven design infeasible.

What is a Practical Example of Real-Time Simulation for Design Engineers?

Vent Optimization

Let’s take a look at a practical example to see how the power of real time simulation can be leveraged to guide optimizing a car’s AC system.

Geometry Prep and Simulation Setup

Since Discovery is also geometry editor, it’s super easy to extract the fluid volume and set up the appropriate physics in seconds directly from the 3D CAD.

Assign Air and throw in some inlets and outlets…

Hit solve, and within seconds… 

Not even exaggerating here, you probably could have set up and run this entire model in less time than it took you to read this blog (with minimal training, I might add).

The intuitive and lightning fast setup, meshing, and GPU solver is the real secret sauce for how Discovery gives you real time insights into potential issues as well as understanding how your design changes will impact performance. For instance, it looks like the lower vents are not distributing the flow very well (there is backflow at the feet).

so let’s throw in a vane, update the fluid volume…

And the solver automatically updates the solution in seconds. 

Discovery gives you the flexibility to track output parameters as you design, so you can explore new possibilities faster than ever before. In this case, we see the mass flows are starting to balance, and we’re ready to keep iterating.

Okay. I get it’s fast, but can I trust the results?

I want to end with a few final comments on solution accuracy, since Discovery simulation has come leaps and bounds from its initial debut a few years ago. The latest releases expose some exciting new features that allow you to locally refine your mesh for improved accuracy around small features in Discovery’s Explore mode. Within Refine mode, you can even leverage the same polyhedral meshing and GPU solver technology available in the Ansys’ Flagship CFD Fluent solver, so you no longer have to decide between fast and accurate.

Upcoming Webinars:

Ready to learn more about how Ansys Discovery’s GPU solvers can help you achieve simulation driven designs? Visit our website to learn more details on Ansys Discovery or register for our upcoming 2-part webinar series titled Leveraging Real-Time GPU Solvers for Simulation Driven Designs and Empowering Design Engineers with Faster and More Accurate GPU Physics Solvers.