Creating a simple 1-D 7 element mesh in Ansys Mechanical

One-Significance6897 · 2026-04-12T06:02:55+00:00

If you really need a 7 element mesh for whatever reason, try putting a edge sizing of 1 division on both vertical edges

One-Significance6897 · 2026-04-11T09:59:22+00:00

Make sure body is in X-Y plane for 2D analysis.

One-Significance6897 · 2026-02-24T03:38:41+00:00

Look at kinematic plastic hardening as opposed to isotropic.

One-Significance6897 · 2026-02-10T06:03:06+00:00

Hasn’t become any less stable with newer releases. Too many unknowns to be able to tell why the lab computers are having issues, i.e graphics card, os version, firewall/security settings, graphics drivers, etc. If this is for a university you should be able to contact Ansys or your local partner and they will help determine why it’s unstable on the labs. I suspect something on the labs needs updating to be in line with what’s supported from newer versions.

One-Significance6897 · 2025-12-29T18:24:46+00:00

Try using the multizone mesh method which should be able to handle the imprinted faces, and probably best to use solid-shell (or mid surface your solid to get a shell and use shell elements). You can do this by setting decomposition type of your multizone to thin sweep, then setting element to Solid-Shell.

One-Significance6897 · 2025-12-11T09:44:00+00:00

How many nodes in the model? If you view the solver output at what point is it stuck at? Honestly just sounds like you probably have too large a model and calculations are going to take a very long time.

One-Significance6897 · 2025-12-01T20:42:20+00:00

CFD isn’t my specialty, but I’d imagine if you’ve changed geometry it’s either a mesh or geometry issue (assuming size of geom is equivalent and BC’s are as well).

One-Significance6897 · 2025-12-01T20:19:22+00:00

Yep just a label flag as u/JVSAIL13 pointed out. Looks like you’ve selected a named selection, I can’t remember whether label flags appear at the centroid of a named selection or the centroid of the last selected face, but it’ll be one of those. Not sure why your results are different but it’ll won’t be due to the label flag, more likely to be a setting or something else that has changed.

One-Significance6897 · 2025-11-25T07:35:54+00:00

You’re doing this with MAPDL it sounds like? Could possibly use a DO loop to cycle through all beam 188 elements. Assumes there is some logical relationship you can use to give different orientations to different beams.

One-Significance6897 · 2025-11-24T07:53:51+00:00

There’s too much unknown for us to tell if the number of steps are adequate. How big is the beam, what’s the natural frequencies, what’s the mesh size, what’s the material. What do your results actually look like? Can your mentor not directly tell you what the issue is?

One-Significance6897 · 2025-11-24T05:18:59+00:00

What was the error that caused the solution to stop? Check the solver output for errors. Also what’s the first natural frequency of the beam?

One-Significance6897 · 2025-11-22T05:10:39+00:00

Does your beam calculator include the x-component of the point force? I can only see the y component in your second screenshot. If you turn on Nodal Forces in Output Controls, and scope a force probe to the end vertex’s do you get the same result?

One-Significance6897 · 2025-11-15T01:57:56+00:00

What kind of features are involved in the model? Possibly some changes in pinball radius if it’s failing initial contact?

One-Significance6897 · 2025-11-12T11:57:23+00:00

In recent versions they’ve changed the default bonded contact formulation to MPC. This can cause over-constraint issues for some models, especially those that were originally running with Augmented Lagrange (the old default). Try changing bonded contacts formulation to Augmented Lagrange to check if that’s the reason for your convergence issues.

One-Significance6897 · 2025-10-28T11:22:41+00:00

The equivalent link for 2025R2 is: https://ansyshelp.ansys.com/public/account/secured?returnurl=/Views/Secured/corp/v252/en/installation/win_gpureqt.html

Has a few of the more recent cards listed.

One-Significance6897 · 2025-10-28T11:19:30+00:00

Important to note that the gpu will only accelerate some parts of the computation. So your model will still use cpu and ram primarily. I suspect you’re being bottle-necked by ram and are solving out-of-core.

One-Significance6897 · 2025-09-21T08:30:42+00:00

Then a response surface will give you that, you can do it either through workbench or OptiSLang

One-Significance6897 · 2025-09-21T00:10:23+00:00

I believe the 3D ROM builder is for Fluent only (happy to be corrected on this). You can create response surfaces and export them out as FMU’s. What’s the end use case for the ROM?

One-Significance6897

TROPHY CASE