CAE Benchmark for structural simulation tools at BSH

Transcription

1 CAE Benchmark for structural simulation tools at BSH Presentation date: Presenter Name: Room name: 25 th October a.m. Doris Gschwendtner Cannes Doris.Gschwendtner@bshg.com Tel.: Address: BSH Hausgeräte GmbH Werner-von-Siemens-Str Traunreut

2 Content General About BSH About the benchmark Benchmark General information Test cases Main criteria Summary Results of the benchmark & Outlook

3 Content General About BSH About the benchmark Benchmark General information Test cases Main criteria Summary Results of the benchmark & Outlook

4 About BSH BSH at a glance Robert Bosch GmbH 1967 Founded as a joint venture between Siemens AG and Robert Bosch GmbH 100% factories in Germany, China, France, Greece, India, Peru, Poland, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, USA Employees of which R&D specialists Revenue bn. Euros Worldwide No. 2 in market Europe No. 1 in market BSH Hausgeräte GmbH Founded in 1967

5 About BSH Product Portfolio

6 About BSH Our Brands BSH Home Appliances Group is a Trademark Licensee of Siemens AG for the brand Siemens and of Robert Bosch GmbH for the brand Bosch.

7 About BSH Siemens and BSΗ Siemens statement NX is able to solve a major amount of BSH s simulation tasks. Strategic partnership between Siemens and BSH since January 2016 Strategy of Siemens enhancing CAE portfolio (LMS, cdadapco)

8 About BSH CAE Simulation at BSH System 6% Fluid Dynamics 30% ~ 150 users worldwide (Europe + China) Molding 28% Crash 2% Fluid Dynamics Structural Crash Molding System ~ 45 structural mechanic users Siemens tools are used in some sites Structural 34%

9 Simulation at Siemens BSH NX CAE / NX Flow LMS CD-Adapco Teamcenter Simcenter 1D/3D Teamcenter

10 Simulation at Siemens Coming from I-DEAS Purchasing Nastran (NX Nastran) 2012: acquisition of LMS January: Acquisition of CD-adapco March July: BSH Structural Benchmark based on NX x / 2016-current tool at BSH July: introduction of Simcenter 11 October: introduction of dedicated CAE support at Siemens October: PLM Europe Simcenter 12

11 Content General About BSH About the benchmark Benchmark General information Test cases Main criteria Summary Results of the benchmark & Outlook

12 General Topics About the Benchmark Only structural mechanics Not a complete benchmark Good impression and overview

13 General Topics Goals of the Benchmark Outlook Find out differences in the software Evaluation of total costs of ownership Prove / disprove the Siemens statement

14 Content General About BSH About the benchmark Benchmark General information Test cases Main criteria Summary Results of the benchmark & Outlook

15 Test Cases Overview Four low to medium complex models to compare pre-/ postprocessor and solver Models were calculated by Dr. Binde Ingenieure and BSH engineers The Models Single part (material modeling): tensile test Small assembly (contacts): silicon sealing Medium assembly: door panel glass package Thermal + mechanical coupling: cavity base

16 Test Case 1 Tensile Test Description Material: plastic Load: forced displacement of 2mm in z- direction Result: plot force over displacement and compare with test Challenge Material modeling Receive the same results as in the tests

17 Test Case 1 Tensile Test Result BSH Siemens

18 Test Case 2 Silicon Sealing Description Silicon sealing is bent by 90 between to metal sheets. Result: compare deformation (direction and magnitude) Challenges Hyperelastic material Contact situation

19 Test Case 2 Silicon Sealing Result BSH Siemens

20 Test Case 3 Door Panel Glass Package Description The mounting process of the oven glass package should be modelled with the help of the FEM to analyze the press-stress condition. Challenges All initial penetration of the 3D-CAD-parts should be eliminated Τo generate the pre-stress condition, the two pre-stress springs between the inner and the intermediate glass panel, which are pushing the glasses against the retainer, should be strutted between the panels. Gravity

21 Test Case 3 Door Panel Result BSH Total Deformation Siemens

22 Test Case 4 Cavity Base Description Bottom Sheet of a cavity Thermally loaded by a heating element All three heat transfer mechanisms Second step: deformation of the sheet metal part is simulated due to thermal expansion. Challenges Coupling of thermal and structural analysis by using all three heat transfer mechanism (conduction, convection, radiation)

23 Test Case 4 Cavity Base Result BSH Total deformation Siemens

24 Content General About BSH About the benchmark Benchmark General information Test cases Main criteria Summary Results of the benchmark & Outlook

25 Main Criteria Software Costs Integrated Tool Chain Raising Efficiency

26 Criterion 1 Software Costs Very high license costs for CAE software Specialized Software Costs per user are significant higher than in CAD and number of user much lower Existing contract with Siemens Strategic partnership Good cooperation

27 Criterion 2 Integrated Tool Chain Improvements in work/implemented with Simcenter! One environment for several analysis / tasks (e.g. CAD, Problems with CAD and CAE users working on one part with different + NX - NX CAM, CAE) versions newer version wins Standard CAD tool in BSH Problems with TC- Integration due to Update cycle major updates: >1x yearly in CAE every 2 years in CAD

28 Criterion 2 Integrated Tool Chain Improvements in work/implemented with Simcenter! One environment for several analysis / tasks (e.g. CAD, Problems with CAD and CAE users working on one part with different + NX - NX CAM, CAE) versions newer version wins Summary Standard CAD tool in BSH Problems with TC- Integration due to Update cycle major updates: >1x yearly in CAE every 2 years in CAD Siemens BSH

29 Criterion 3 Raising Efficiency License Hardware Man Power Efficiency

30 Criterion 3 Raising Efficiency Criteria to consider Handling (user interface, usability) Performance (calculating speed) Speed in general (effort to set up a model, loading times ) Quality of results Preprocessing Solver Postprocessing Geometry Meshing Boundary Conditions Material Speed Convergence Speed Functionality S U P P O R T

31 Criterion 3 Raising Efficiency Support Software User support Technical assistance and consulting Extensions (macros) Trainings Hardware Cluster setup Remote solutions (e.g. Citrix connection) Worldwide and in local language Know-How Special trainings Special assistance Deep applicational and technical knowledge in all areas covered by the software

32 Criterion 3 Raising Efficiency Differences in Workflow Video demonstration about how to set up the tensile test. NX BSH

33 Based on NX10 (2015)

34 Criterion 3 Raising Efficiency Differences in Workflow Video demonstration about how to set up the tensile test. NX BSH

35 Based on Ansys 17.2 (2016)

36 Criterion 3 Raising Efficiency Preprocessing Geometry preparation Meshing Setup Summary Siemens BSH

37 Criterion 3 Raising Efficiency Solver Functionality Speed Usability Summary Siemens BSH

38 Criterion 3 Raising Efficiency Postprocessing Function range Automation Summary Siemens BSH

39 Content General About BSH About the benchmark Benchmark General information Test cases Main criteria Summary Results of the benchmark & Outlook

40 Results Statement of Siemens Outlook Find out differences in the software Evaluation of total costs of ownership Prove / disprove the Siemens statement

41 Results Statement of Siemens 01/2016 NX is able to solve a major amount of our simulation tasks. Effort to set up the simulation is higher than in our tool More complicated workflow Some key features missing / not well implemented NX may be too complex for design engineers Support at Siemens is improving, positive development NX BSH

42 Results Statement of Siemens Now NX is able to solve a major amount of our simulation tasks. Required features and improvements for workflow are considered. Some features are already implemented in newer versions than currently used in BSH. NX Siemens is very interested in improvements and makes constant effort to improve the tool chain for simulation BSH

43 Results Differences Outlook Find out differences in the software Evaluation of total costs of ownership Prove / disprove the Siemens statement

44 Results Differences Conclusion Integrated Tool Chain Preprocessing Solver Postprocessing Support (Status 07/2016) Siemens BSH

45 Results Differences Conclusion Integrated Tool Chain Preprocessing Solver Postprocessing Support (Status 10/2017) Siemens BSH

46 Results Total costs of ownership (TCO) Outlook Find out differences in the software Evaluation of total costs of ownership Prove / disprove the Siemens statement

47 Results Total costs of ownership (TCO) Siemens - NEW BSH - currently Basic Costs Licenses Support IT Costs Hardware Licenses Data Storage

48 Results Total costs of ownership (TCO) Siemens - NEW BSH - currently Human Resources Retraining Man Power NX CAE Rollout IT

49 Results Total costs of ownership (TCO) Siemens - NEW BSH - currently O V E R A L L C O S T S

50 Results Outlook Outlook Find out differences in the software Evaluation of total costs of ownership Prove / disprove the Siemens statement

51 Results Outlook Next steps at BSH and Siemens Results were discussed with Siemens and main points were addressed Siemens was highly interested in the results and is open minded and cooperative Close cooperation for further improvement, lots of pro-active activities from Siemens First progress in many areas, some features are already implemented in newer versions

52 Results Outlook Together we Track the improvement Push the development Review the progress

53 Thank you very much for your attention! October 2017