News: has a Community Board and Customer Support System. Submit a ticket at

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
I'm facing a problem during Hyperfea optimization process combined with FEA constraints implementation related to the spars of a wingbox . More in detail, although max displacement target value (Tmax=945 mm) is achieved after 5 iterations (943.19 mm)the following iterations don't seem to converge to above mentioned value instead continue to reduce max displacement value by increasing membrane stiffness and mass of affected components (spars caps). In attachment you can find some pictures which i hope will help you to better understand the problem.

thank you

Miscellaneous Software Topics / Re: 90Grid - Grid stiffened Panel Family
« Last post by James on October 12, 2017, 12:56:34 PM »

The help file is out of date. The 90 grid has been removed from the interface.

To change the stiffener direction, you should rotate the material vectors so they are pointed in the assumed stiffener direction. You can do this in the FEM viewer. See:
Hit the nail on the head.

Thank you - I switched the flag to No and the anlysis took 00:01:10.  Back to a similar time frame to the previous model.

Thanks again
Miscellaneous Software Topics / 90Grid - Grid stiffened Panel Family
« Last post by martinjb on October 12, 2017, 07:56:17 AM »
Dear Hypersizer,

I have just been looking at different concepts for the Grid Stiffened Panel Family and I was looking to try and understand if the stiffeners would be better aligned in the 0 or 90 deg direction.  In the concept selection tab it only allows me to choose a 0Grid.  Has the 90 Grid been removed from the family?

Looking at the help file Software Forms/Sizing Form/Dimensions Tab/Panel and Beam Families/Grid Stiffened Panel Family it shows the options that can be selected on the 90Grid.

Is the helpfile out of date or has my installtion not completed fully?

Also the S0 has no ticks in the table.  Is this an omission or does the S0 column need to be in the helpfile?

Miscellaneous Software Topics / Re: Analysis time increased with 7.3.37 installation
« Last post by James on October 12, 2017, 07:09:10 AM »
Hi Martin, I believe this has to do with the exhaustive search flag in the backdoor data options.

Open the backdoor data form > Buckling Coefficients tab > Panel buckling energy solution exhaustive search

Set flag = No.

This flag prompts HyperSizer to try more m and n half modes for the energy buckling solution. This will slow the software significantly. It is only necessary for the buckling analysis of curved panels with long aspect ratios (> 15/1).

HyperSizer Stress Reports / Re: OrthoGrid Within Excel Stress Report
« Last post by James on October 12, 2017, 07:00:43 AM »
Thanks Martin. We'll get this fixed.
HyperSizer Stress Reports / OrthoGrid Within Excel Stress Report
« Last post by martinjb on October 12, 2017, 05:43:28 AM »
Dear Hypersizer,

When creating stress reports in Excel the Orthogrid worksheet has a picture of the orthogrid dimensions that fills the whole screen. Could this be reduced in size as the worksheet is unusable in the present condition? 

The worksheet also has a frozen pane, so if you try and scroll to the orthogrid data you have to un freeze the pane, resize the picture, scroll down to the data and then delete all the extra rows that have been created owing to the picture being so large.

It is not a bug or an error, but an inconvenience when we are doing quick studies looking at orthogrid data in different stress reports, as it has to be completed on each report and then saved.

Miscellaneous Software Topics / Analysis time increased with 7.3.37 installation
« Last post by martinjb on October 05, 2017, 09:43:37 AM »
Dear Hypersizer,

I have recently installed 7.3.37 onto my machine to try and take advantage of the Assembly Projects capability. When I tried to run an assembly it seemed to take a significant amount of time to complete the analysis based on previous performance.  Having investigated 7.3.37 on two different machines I get similar analysis times. 

Details of the analysis are as follows -
1 Project
1 Assembly
31 components
7 effective laminates
9 steps 

When I run the analysis it takes 00:30:00+ to complete this one assembly.

My colleague is still running 7.2.22 and we tried running the analysis on his box and it completed in 00:00:50 and gave the same mass results.

Are there any settings that I need to change in the backdoor settings that have changed or is there something that I have missed in the installation of 7.3.37?  Or is there something that I could have done wrong in creating the database that would significantly increase the time to analyse a model?

The previous iteration of the FEM which had 40+ assemblies, 1500+ components, took approximately 30 mins to run through the whole model. The model has been broken up from a large single model to a model that has been multiple include files.  The results of both models have been checked and the same FEA answers have been achieved.

Sorry I will not be able to share the .hdb.

FEM Coupling (HyperFEA) / Re: Importing temperatures from Ansys
« Last post by James on September 28, 2017, 07:42:07 AM »
For ANSYS thermal loads are not supported.


For other solvers, HyperSizer supports element forces.

You could assign reference temperatures to the load sets in HyperSizer. This will define the temperature at which the material properties are extracted for margin assessment.

I hope this is helpful.

FEM Coupling (HyperFEA) / Importing temperatures from Ansys
« Last post by Heini on September 28, 2017, 04:24:12 AM »
Is it possible to import temperatures from Ansys? The temperatures are applied as nodal body force loads (APDL: BF) in a static analysis in Ansys.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10