cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Community Tip - You can Bookmark boards, posts or articles that you'd like to access again easily! X

Feedback and first impressions

SoretteMichel
13-Aquamarine

Feedback and first impressions

First of all, our overall impression is really good, the level of integration with Creo is already quite advanced and the calculation speed and accuracy are really impressive.

The moment affectation and calculation is easier than in Creo Simulate as it doesn’t require any point definition or advanced definition.

When switching between simulation live and simulate, the messages about the non-supported entities are clear.

We also appreciated the fact that the load definition works based on a parameter.

 

We used it with FMX and DEX and it worked pretty well.

 

We have noticed some things that we would like to share here :

 

On the result analysis window :

  • Deformation might be named displacement as it is expressed in length unit (mm or inch)
  • SUM should be displayed as magnitude to be consistent with Simulate naming
  • Temperature unit result shows as BOC instead of °C in the scale window
  • Isosurfaces display is hard to use (how to modify the iso value ?)
  • In the html report, one table displays OCCURANCES instead of OCCURENCES

 

On the restrictions / loads - we assume it’s on the plan but we report it anyway, so here is the main missing things we found out :

  • Bearing load
  • Pin restriction
  • Surface region
  • Mechanism load (and therefore total load at point)
  • Use of custom CSYS for loads or restriction definition

 

We also faced an issue with the limit conditions display toggle : if we run the simulation, then decide to hide the restriction/loads glyphs using the toggle button, they disappear as requested. But if we modify the model, they appear again.

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions

Thank you Michel for the detailed response.  

 

I am glad to hear your first impression were positive.  We are excited about the integration of the new solution and its lightning speed and accuracy.  We  truly believe this will help designers and engineers develop better products and provide the improved quality they are seeking.

 

For the items related to the result display, we will look into those.  A few of the naming conventions are based on the terms used in Ansys Discovery Live.  The isosurface usage will be enhanced for productions by including a slider in the display options dialog to control the isosurface display. 

 

The other boundary conditions you listed are on the enhancement list and we are hopeful to include them in a future release.  I can tell you that the Mechanism load (and therefore total load at point) will be supported in the production release of Creo Simulation Live.  

 

Lastly, we will look at the issue you stated about the display of the condition glyphs when you modify the model.  This should be easily remedied.

 

Thanks again.

Mark

View solution in original post

1 REPLY 1

Thank you Michel for the detailed response.  

 

I am glad to hear your first impression were positive.  We are excited about the integration of the new solution and its lightning speed and accuracy.  We  truly believe this will help designers and engineers develop better products and provide the improved quality they are seeking.

 

For the items related to the result display, we will look into those.  A few of the naming conventions are based on the terms used in Ansys Discovery Live.  The isosurface usage will be enhanced for productions by including a slider in the display options dialog to control the isosurface display. 

 

The other boundary conditions you listed are on the enhancement list and we are hopeful to include them in a future release.  I can tell you that the Mechanism load (and therefore total load at point) will be supported in the production release of Creo Simulation Live.  

 

Lastly, we will look at the issue you stated about the display of the condition glyphs when you modify the model.  This should be easily remedied.

 

Thanks again.

Mark

Top Tags