Stats

State Verified Answer
Replies 7
Subscribers 1
Views 2
Members are here 0

Static equilibrium analysis problem.

I am trying an H-arm Camber link suspension type, but I get an error like this "Static equilibrium analysis has not been successful". I checked the constraints with other templates but I couldn't find mistake I had done. Can someone please help me to sort it out this problem.

Attached Files (4)

Rear_subsystem.sub.zip

trail_1_parallel_travel.msg

_H_arm_suspension.tpl.zip

Rear.asy.zip

0 Jesper Slattengren over 5 years ago

If you run a dynamic suspension analysis (dynamics are less tricky to get through than statics), you will see that your strut is not properly attached. Not at all at the bottom and something wacky at the top.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 Jesper Slattengren over 5 years ago
The wacky thing was that your top mount joint was active only in kinematic mode so it was deactivated by default.

To summarize:

Create a joint between lower strut at H-arm. Spherical is ok if you change the cylindrical joint between lower and upper strut to a translational.

Change the hooke joint at the top of the strut to be always active.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Reject Answer

Cancel
0 SamsonAkash over 5 years ago

Thanks JSlat, I tried what you mentioned above and I got the result but I got some warning like this "Residual imbalance is less than 0.00000E+00" and

acar/svsl

*** Warning:

the left side rotation is equal to zero.

therefore, the side view swing arm length will equal zero.

acar/svsl

*** Warning:

the right side rotation is equal to zero.

therefore, the side view swing arm length will equal zero.

I don't know what is the problem. Can you please help me in this warning.

Attached Files (1)

opposite_wheel_travel_1.zip
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 Jesper Slattengren over 5 years ago

The second warning you can ignore (it was actually discussed here only a week ago). But it is because there is no flexibility in your suspension, so ADAMS can't calculate compliance terms. You could switch to using geometric method instead of compliance method, but better is to add some bushings that represent the stiffness of your real joints (so very stiff, but not ideal rigid).
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 SamsonAkash over 5 years ago

Ohh Ok, then i will try giving bushing in joints but i used geometric method in the above template, but i like to ignore those warning and i think this would not affect my full vehicle assembly. But i will try using bushing in my joints and try other analysis. Thanks JSlat for taking your time for me.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel

Cadence Guidelines

Community Guidelines

The Cadence Design Communities support Cadence users and technologists interacting to exchange ideas, news, technical information, and best practices to solve problems and get the most from Cadence technology. The community is open to everyone, and to provide the most value, we require participants to follow our Community Guidelines that facilitate a quality exchange of ideas and information. By accessing, contributing, using or downloading any materials from the site, you agree to be bound by the full Community Guidelines.