Create an Advanced Post Report in NXLC.The main steps to follow for showing the critical ply ID and load case ID are: In this Tips & Trick, we will assume that you have already solved your model and obtained the ply stresses and ply strains. The critical ply ID and load case ID can be obtained for ply stresses, ply strains, failure indices, strength ratios and margins of safety. This Tips & Trick shows how you can overlay the critical ply ID and load case ID on laminate element contour plots using Advanced Post Report in NX Laminate Composites (NXLC). femap nx cae siemens marginofsafety mayahtt nastran The margin of safety metric is perhaps more interesting when analyzing an assembly made of different materials, each having different yield or ultimate strengths. With the different Femap contour tools, you can then plot the stress margin of safety (Figure 4) and visually identify the critical stress area of your part. The “+0.01” is to avoid division by zero for elements that may have no stress. It can be recovered using the function VEC(SetID VectorID EntityID). Stress is the result of the envelope result previously generated.Here it’s a query to get the tensile yield strength based on the element ID Material strength is either the yield or ultimate strength of your material.The Femap dialog looks like this (Figure 3): Then, you can use Model->Output->Calculate to compute % Margins of Safety based on the previous envelope result. SolidC1 VonMises) using the “Add Component/Corner Results” button (Figure 2) After selecting the Von Mises solid stress (60031), be sure to include the nodal results (eg. Once the NX Nastran analysis is complete and you have loaded or linked the stress results, you can generate an elemental envelope result based on the maximum nodal stress using Model->Output->Process->Envelope. This example, created in Femap 11.2, shows a solid mesh of a fan blade on which a pressure load was applied (Figure 1).
#Structural margin of safety how to
As the future direction in human health risk assessment will probably involve chemical-specific and/or default assessment factors to a larger extent, this development must be followed and discussed further.This post-processing Tip & Trick will show how to calculate the stress margins of safety of a structure under a static pressure load, and then how to plot the margins and locate the critical areas of the part. It is agreed that a MOS of at least 100 should be used as a starting point, taking into account factors such as the type, incidence, magnitude and severity of the toxicological effect/response, the duration and administration schemes in the animal experiments, dose-response relationships, sensitive subgroups within the human population, the quality of the underlying database and the quality of the exposure assessment. However, it is difficult to say what is scientifically justified, both generally and in the specific case. The commonly used uncertainty factor of 100 (based on the NOAEL from long-term animal studies) is thought to be a useful default value. As already mentioned, risk assessment must be done on a case-by-case basis using expert judgement based on the scientific information. How large should the MOS be, then, in order not to "raise concern"? The CSTEE has just started to discuss this.