Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
I agree with this poster. Autodesk, by not including this linear static method of modeling revolute joints, you are limiting and thereby dooming your users to using (integrated) NX Nastran nonlinear contact solution which wastes far too much time for what should be a commodity, linear static analysis. It is well known in FEA circles that NX Nastran's contact solver (your only current method of modeling revolute joints) is extraordinarily slow compared to your competition, so by not including the Ansys-like linear joint formulation, your FE software quickly becomes useless when more than one component is involved. I do not see Fusion generating much excitement in many development groups because of this limitation.
If you were able to provide an elegant solution for basic bolted joint analysis (and yes, it's just basic), then there is no reason for you to keep linearized joint formulations away from the Fusion 360 user base. Thank you for reading.
