topic Re: Static Simulation of a wave Spring takes too much time to solve ? in Fusion Support Forum

Static Simulation of a wave Spring takes too much time to solve ?

GermanWings — Mon, 20 Oct 2025 19:04:26 GMT

Hello,

I am referring to Wave Spring (click on it to see , Smalley CM08 L1 Wave Spring) , I downloaded the model from Smalley set the material correctly to Carbon , Steel , ran a pre check everything looks good , and simulation never solves ?.

It does not fails but it also does not solve , I tried changing the mesh settings but was afraid if the results would be affected therefore kept default just enabled "Curved Elements **" in the Advanced Settings following a Forum Post , I am looking for a reaction force of 13 Newtons as advertised by the seller on their webpage.

I am attaching the f3d file just in case anyone wants to check it.

Thanks,

Bhavar

Re: Static Simulation of a wave Spring takes too much time to solve ?

TheCADWhisperer — Mon, 20 Oct 2025 19:19:39 GMT

@GermanWings

See Banner at top of screen.

Also, you do not need the two additional bodies (base and top) to run analysis on the spring - that only adds complexity to the analysis.

Are you attempting to follow a tutorial on this analysis?

Re: Static Simulation of a wave Spring takes too much time to solve ?

GermanWings — Tue, 21 Oct 2025 11:12:58 GMT

Hello,

I noticed the banner , the banner's now gone , still my simulation is stuck at 5% , The 2 Bodies are necessary , without them the simulation will not work properly , I believe...

Re: Static Simulation of a wave Spring takes too much time to solve ?

TheCADWhisperer — Tue, 21 Oct 2025 18:16:46 GMT

@GermanWings

You are testing the Spring.

I don't understand why you need the base and the top bodies in the analysis.

Fixed constraint on the bottom face of the spring.

Load on the opposite end face of the spring. (prescribed displacement in your case)

Unfortunately I don't have any cloud credits to test, but my concerns besides the extra bodies:

1. A prescribed displacement of 1mm night be excessive displacement for geometry only 1.7mm load face to constrained face. (In fact, there doesn't appear to be physical space for 1mm displacement.)

In any case, Linear Static Stress is limited to "relatively" minor displacements.

2. Linear Static Stress is intended for rigid bodies, not "springy" material.

3. Linear Static Stress analysis only valid within the linear elastic deformation range.

If you were going to continue with this analysis, I would first eliminate the two extra block bodies from the analysis.

I would place a force load rather than the prescribed displacement and gradually increase the load observing the Safety Factor (really a misnomer - just an indication of when the analysis goes beyond the valid linear elastic deformation range). Certainly, can't deform beyond 0.253+0.467 and my guess is SF will be less than 1 before that displacement is reached.