Stats

State Not Answered
Replies 5
Subscribers 3
Views 11
Members are here 0

What has been improved from Adams 2017 to 2022, which affects Adams's results?

0 Alexis Del Rio over 4 years ago

There are plenty of documentation about the enhancement topic

What do you mean by 'affect'? what are you attempting to do?
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 Abbas Shafiee over 4 years ago

I am running two exactly similar models with exactly similar simulation settings one in Adams 2017 and one in Adams 2022. I plot the results from these two versions and visibly they are not the same. I understand it is OK if the results from two different versions are not on top of one another, but the difference is somehow I would like to understand what the main sources are causing this conspicuous difference.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 Henrik.Skovbjerg over 4 years ago

Is the model fully converged? If you tighten the error tolerance it should still give the same results.

Do this in both versions of Adams.

simcompanion.hexagon.com/.../confirmation-of-converged-solution--kb8016233
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 Abbas Shafiee over 4 years ago

Yes, the models are fully converged in both versions.

Thank you for the document.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Sign in to reply

Verify Answer

Cancel
0 MK202610123211 over 4 years ago

My favorite wording for introducing things that make models not work properly any more in new versions is more like "enworsement".

Are you by any chance using the f77 solver on 2017 and c++ in 2022 ? The latter one does require pretty different settings and I often saw deviations between results.

Easiest example.

Create a simple pendulum example (1 link, 1 revolute, gravity) and run it in A/View with 5s and 50 steps.

Check amplitide of angular movement vs time. It's decreasing though we had no damping.

Change to something like 5000 steps and everything is fine.

You could also tighten error on the 50 step solution to get there.

Using the f77 solver worked fine without any adjustments.

If tuning the parameters did not help, contact MSC for assistance. They love validation models to challenge their solver.
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.