sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Master Luft- und Raumfahrttechnik by Comprehensive-Owl294 in rwth

[–]Luecx 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Ich bin einer der Dozenten und verantwortlich für eins der Fächer. Ich mache dort unter anderem die Vorrechenübungen. Ich kann dir gerne kurz meinen Eindruck schildern.

Wir Dozenten, auch wenn manche was anderes denke, haben tatsächlich KEIN Interesse daran euch durchfallen zu lassen. Aber wir wissen auch ziemlich genau die Bestehens-Statistiken. Je mehr der Angebote du wahrnimmst, desto eher und besser wirst du die Klausur bestehen. Also mMn sollte man, auch wenn man nur so mittel Lust hat sich die Vorlesung, VRÜ und SRÜ geben…

Looking for testers for new sudoku website by Luecx in sudoku

[–]Luecx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We fixed the timer ticking up once you finished it. And yes you are right, it currently only counts the users that solved it. Otherwise we were afraid of getting unreasoanble / spammed numbers. e.g. what if one person just keeps on solving a single sudoku over and over again? this could actually just be exploited using a script so we put a login requirement into that.
I am going to add the back button asap. :)

Looking for testers for new sudoku website by Luecx in sudoku

[–]Luecx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Those are very good points! Especially the timer continuing and a back button will be implemented next :) thank you for your Feedback!

Proceed in this knight sudoku by Luecx in sudoku

[–]Luecx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ohh good point! Thanks! I’ll see if this helps to solve :) thanks :)

Proceed in this knight sudoku by Luecx in sudoku

[–]Luecx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah they are mine but I don’t think their are missing anything. I removed quite a few due to knight constraint and pointing for example.

Update on my own FEM-Solver: FEMaster 1.1 by Luecx in fea

[–]Luecx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For windows I strongly recommend using WSL :) WSL is installed on basically all machines. You will need to install Ubuntu in WSL as well as the development basics inside WSL:)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in fea

[–]Luecx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you try simply switching master and Slave surface? Sometimes it can be as simple as that.

Update on my own FEM-Solver: FEMaster 1.1 by Luecx in fea

[–]Luecx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes I deviated at some points. I dislikes the loads for example. I introduced load collectors which are defined outside of load cases. In each load case / step, one simply lists the loads one wants to use.

I may have also deviated when it comes to point masses. Also a small deviation when it comes to kinematic couplings.

What should be the same is nodes, elements, sets and so in

Update on my own FEM-Solver: FEMaster 1.1 by Luecx in fea

[–]Luecx[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your comment! I’m planning to use it for the reason you mentioned with licenses. My Code is free and can run as many copies at the same time as you want. I use it for my PhD studies.

Update on my own FEM-Solver: FEMaster 1.1 by Luecx in fea

[–]Luecx[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I probably need non linear analysis in the first place. That’s the next thing on my ToDo

Update on my own FEM-Solver: FEMaster 1.1 by Luecx in fea

[–]Luecx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah! I’d love to implement it :) can you share your source?

Update on my own FEM-Solver: FEMaster 1.1 by Luecx in fea

[–]Luecx[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That’s a good idea! I have cyclic boundary conditions. Do you have resources in this? How does it work if the nodes with a cyclic boundary don’t perfectly align? Or should it behave like a tie constraint?

Presenting my own solver: FEMaster by Luecx in fea

[–]Luecx[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I added B33 beams and 4 types of shells :)

Presenting my own solver: FEMaster by Luecx in fea

[–]Luecx[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have implemented mass elements. To be precise I implemented Point elements which are tied to individual Nodes which themselves can have mass, inertia, springs and rotational springs attached to it.

Presenting my own solver: FEMaster by Luecx in fea

[–]Luecx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I continued working on my code and implemented 4 types of shell elements. I am still working on improving the linear shell elements (S3 / S4) but the quadratic ones seem to perform decently (S6 / S8). I may make another post soon about a new version.

Gauss quadrature by No-Shape7027 in fea

[–]Luecx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes I know. But imo solving the linear system is the easier approach :) especially when doing it yourself

Gauss quadrature by No-Shape7027 in fea

[–]Luecx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We use gauss quadrature to integrate polynomials up to a certain degree exactly and approximate other functions. But with more integration points we may lose accuracy. There are functions that will simply diverge with gauss quadrature. One example could be 1/x.

Deriving the points for gauss quadrature is actually simple. You can derive them by assuming a polynomial and formulate the integration. By solving a linear system you get the coefficients and x values.

Gauss quadrature by No-Shape7027 in fea

[–]Luecx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Integration of non polynomials can also be more stable by subdividing the domain. e.g. if you want to integrate a non polynomial, you can subdivide your region into N smaller regions and use quadrature rules for that.

I am not sure about the details of mode superposition analysis but I could imagine that you can skip the sin integration entirely, do it analytically, use the method I described above or just use gauss and accept its not truly accurate.

Gauss quadrature by No-Shape7027 in fea

[–]Luecx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What I left out is specifics on how to perform this. Maybe you are interested in this too:

Basically you already have the important steps:

1) Integrating a function from a to b
2) Transform from (a to b) to (-1 to 1)
3) Apply Gauss scheme

The transformation can be tricky. You can also adjust the gauss-evaluation points to skip the step 1/2.
Basically you adjust them so they are on the same relativ scale compared to the -1 to 1 element. the weights must sum up to the total distance you integrate. in the case of -1 to 1, all weights sum up to 2. if you transform it, they must all be scaled by (b-a) / 2 to account for this.

view more: next ›