<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: FEA Results in Inventor Forum</title>
    <link>https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-forum/fea-results/m-p/5755023#M365848</link>
    <description>&lt;BLOCKQUOTE&gt;&lt;HR /&gt;@Anonymous wrote:&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I was trying to simulate that it would be a complete weld at that place...like a weldolet. &amp;nbsp;So the sloped area and flat area would be constrained/welded. &amp;nbsp;I'll check that, but I believe they are both currently constrained. &amp;nbsp;Are you saying that's an issue?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;HR /&gt;&lt;/BLOCKQUOTE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I'm not necessarily saying it's a problem with your design - I don't know all your specs or anything - but I'm saying that by defining those surfaces as fixed entities, the part will not perform in FEA the same way that it will in the real world. &amp;nbsp;Your support with a fixed constraint is absolute. &amp;nbsp;There is no give. &amp;nbsp;In the real world, your support piping is going to be subject to the same forces and heat expansion, etc., that the manifold is under, and it's all going to be flexing and deforming in the same way. &amp;nbsp;Your set of fixed constraints do not - cannot - simulate that.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2015 19:06:10 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>LT.Rusty</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2015-08-03T19:06:10Z</dc:date>
  </channel>
</rss>

