Home Forums NextFEM Designer support forum OOFEM – time is too long to solve a problems

This topic contains 4 replies, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  parhyang 1 year, 5 months ago.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1010

    parhyang
    Participant

    hi,

    i try running a test case with medium number of nodes, is this normal when OOFEM took a long time to solve?

    plate element with 1827 nodes solved in ~23 minutes

    thank you,

    • This topic was modified 1 year, 5 months ago by  parhyang.
    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #1013

    Admin NextFEM
    Keymaster

    Dear parhyang,
    with version 1.09, only the slow solver is present. Please be patient for the 1.10 which should be published at the end of this week. You’ll find a option for usign the fast DSS solver.
    regards

    #1014

    parhyang
    Participant

    Thank you Admin for considering solver times, i believe it’s only a second when solved with CCX. afaik, most opensource FEA solver are well known beat faster compare to commercial solver.

    #1015

    parhyang
    Participant

    i look back, seem my previous model are wrong. when i try to merging coincided nodes there contains about 400 nodes but why the solver works?

    i reproduce the problem, and taking compare OOFEM with CalculiX but still shown large discrepancy in computational times 1,16sec (P6200) vs 149.0sec (i5)

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 5 months ago by  parhyang.
    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #1026

    parhyang
    Participant

    thank you for implementation DSS and Spooles in solver options, cut about half in real time consumed.

    exiting in user time consumed when solved a plate problems with ~2000 nodes, it’s only required 17sec to solve with DSS compared to 477sec with standard solver.

    but why not as in real time consumed?

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 5 months ago by  parhyang.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.