Scan-and-Solve for Rhino

Simulate Early, Simulate Often... In Rhino

# Bicycle disc brake

This is a  disc brake I developed in 2009, painfully calculated with other software with many mesh problems and finally tested in several down-hill races here in Italy.
It took me about 12 revisions of the geometry to reach this final design because it's a typical model-test-adjust task where the form must be optimized in order to be as light as possible without collapsing under known possibile load conditions.

I believe it's a perfect task for Scan-and-Solve and I was able to verify my results in a couple of minutes!

The material used for the final test is an AISI430F Steel (I modified manually the materials.db file).

The 6 inner faces of the bolt holes are used as restraints.

The load is a single Vector force (0,-700,0)N applied to the inner face of a profiled hole.

Resolution is set to 50000 elements.

This conditions are a good setup for this kind of simulation and can be used confidently in place of a dynamic analisys involving friction based on a complex mechanical model.

The initial force of 700N is used because I was asked to study a real life disc that collapsed during a race, and after some reverse engineering that was the max force it was able to handle.

This particular design, under the same conditions, collapses with 2100N, that's a security factor of 3 to 1.

On the upper left is the disc that collapsed during a race.

On the right there're two well known commercial discs, also analyzed in order to collect more data on the typical collapse conditions.

Below is the first preproduction model.

I would like to encourage all the Scan and Solve team, this is a GREAT beta and I'll keep looking for every update.

Suggestions:

- when in View mode, it would be very usefull to know the min and max values of the Von Mises Danger Level, maybe with some spots in the geometry

-  a list with the maximal (+ and -) values reached in N/mm2 (or N/m2) related to the graph would also be fantastic

EDIT: in the very first week all the suggestions were implemented, the team in SnS is doing and excellent job!

Best regards

Cristian Luca

Views: 202

### Replies to This Discussion

Very nice work!
Thank you for exhibiting this.

I wonder if we need to start a new sub-forum to collect and organize suggestions and proposed development directions?
~Michael
It seems natural to me, the more we use the plugin the more we suggest :)
I just created a new category for forums called "Wish list" -- specifically to propose and discuss new features. Please suggest!

Thank you for this great post! I hope that you tested at several different resolutions -- you should always do this anyway, just to see that the computed results are consistent and make sense. This may seem counter-intuitive, but very coarse resolution is not usually the best choice: not only you may be loosing on accuracy, but you also make the "scan" step work harder.
It would be fantastic for beginners or user with scarse engineering background to have a default resolution, set on the basis of user inputs and choices of restrains and type/entity of loads. Would it be an impossible dream? You guys seem to be able to turn dreams into reality already. Thanks.
Armido
I agree! This would be great!
Thanks!

Philip
No, it is not impossible, and I think that you should add a post to the wish list -- where it is less likely to be lost. But we are threading dangerous waters here. First of all, any such suggestion would be based only on rough estimates and heuristics; secondly, by the very nature of the problem, all solutions are only approximations; and thirdly, solving at different resolutions is usually required to gain any assurances that the solution is converged. This is not a comment on Scan&Solve -- this is a comment on any numerical solution. But all of this could be improved and much can be automated -- at some cost (time) to the user. ... tell us and post what you are solving! we really want to know!