Chapter

3
Creating and Importing Geometry

Suggested Reading Assignments:

Mechanical APDL Modeling and Meshing Guide: Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 9

CHAPTER OUTLINE

3.1 Considerations for Model Geometry

3.2 Creating Model Geometry
3.3 Boolean Operations
3.4 Deleting Solid Model Geometry
3.5 Importing Solid Model Geometry*
3.6 Coordinate Systems
3.7 The Working Plane
3.8 Solid Model Viewing

In this chapter, you will learn how to create solid model geometry using the ANSYS native
solid modeler, how to import geometry from other solid modeling software packages, and how
to skip the solid modeling process altogether and directly generate the finite element mesh. You
will also learn how to view, manipulate, and interact with solid models in ANSYS.

3.1. Considerations for Model Geometry

Before you can begin to create your model geometry, there are a number of decisions that must
be made, including whether to create a solid model or generate the nodes and elements directly,
whether to create the solid model in ANSYS or import it from another program, how many
dimensions to include in the model, and which geometric details to include in the model.

3.1.1. Choosing Direct Generation or Solid Modeling

Usually, the first step in a finite element analysis is to create a solid model that represents the
system geometry. The solid model is then meshed to create the finite element entities (nodes
and elements) necessary to create and solve the partial differential equations in the model. But a
solid model is not required. Nodes and elements can be defined directly in ANSYS. This pro-
cess is called direct generation.

ANSYS Mechanical APDL for Finite Element Analysis.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-812981-4.00003-4 47 Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
48 ANSYS Mechanical APDL for Finite Element Analysis

In the early days of finite element analysis, direct generation was the only option for creating the
model geometry. Today, direct generation is used to create small models and models that use spe-
cialty elements. These models often run faster than models with solid model geometry and take up
less memory since the solid modeling and meshing operations are not performed. In addition, direct
generation gives you complete control over the numbering and locations of the individual nodes in
the model. However, direct generation is usually impractical for large and complicated models. It
is also not recommended for novice FE analysts since it requires you to assume responsibility for
the nodal spacing, which determines the mesh quality and thus the accuracy of the solution.

3.1.2. Choosing Whether to Create or Import Solid Model Geometry

If you choose to build a solid model, you must decide if you will create it using the ANSYS
native solid modeler or if you will build it in another program and import it into ANSYS. The
ANSYS native solid modeler was developed specifically for ANSYS. It gives you maximum
control over the geometry and allows complete parameterization of the model. This permits a
more robust and convenient selection of geometric entities inside the model, and can improve
your ability to mesh, apply boundary conditions, and postprocess the model. When combined
with APDL, the ANSYS native solid modeler can also allow you to do things that would be
impossible in most commercial solid modeling packages. We build most of our Mechanical
APDL models using the ANSYS native solid modeler because of these advantages. However,
the ANSYS native solid modeler was developed decades before the modeling packages that are
available today. It is now old technology and no significant improvement is expected in the near
future. In addition, it may not be the best choice if you already have a solid model that you
want to use or if you are very attached to your current CAD/CAE package.

3.1.3. Choosing the Dimensionality of the Model

The next decision to make when planning the geometry for your analysis is whether to build the
model in three dimensions (3D) or if a one-dimensional (1D) or two-dimensional (2D) model
will suffice. Lower order models have simpler solid model geometry and fewer degrees of free-
dom after meshing, so they generally require less time to solve. However, lower order models
often require more complex boundary conditions and element definitions, which can increase
the cost of building and postprocessing the model. For example, nodal forces need to be calcu-
lated and applied per unit depth for analyses using plane stress or plane strain, and per radian
for axisymmetric analyses. The expected behavior of the system (plane stress, plane strain, plane
stress with thickness, generalized plane strain, etc.) may need to be specified using element key
options. And, postprocessing may require the creation and use of element tables. Finally, lower
order modeling is only possible if an appropriate element is available for use.

Lower order models were very common in the early days of finite element analysis when com-
puting power was limited. As a result, many lower order and lumped elements were created to
facilitate their use. Although computing and finite element technologies have come a long way
since the 1970s, model size is still a consideration. Your ANSYS license may limit the maxi-
mum number of nodes and elements that you can include in a model. Even if you can create a
very large model, your ability to solve it is limited by the amount of memory available on your
computer. And, if you can solve it, your computer’s processing power will limit how quickly
you can find the solution. Unless you have access to a high-performance computing cluster or
can take advantage of expandable cloud-based computation resources with ANSYSs Enterprise
Cloudt, you should consider using lower order elements when possible.

3.1.3.1. Characteristics of 1D, 2D, and 3D Models

One-dimensional models are meshed with simple lumped elements where the required behavior
is included via the assumptions of the problem or has been incorporated into the element itself.