hexagon logo
Register Sign in
  • State Not Answered
  • Replies 12 replies
  • Subscribers 7 subscribers
  • Views 158 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Anyone tested the RealTime Solver with their own models in A/Car ?

Martin Kieltsch
I had the crazy idea to use the RT Solver to speed up a set of analysis (using FTire and dtout=1e-3 s)
So I tested the MSC Demo vehicle for one typical case and found the benchmark time was 2:05 min for everything on default settings.
 
Then after a week of hazzle with updating the license file I finally tried with different settings for FIXIT and HRATIO.
After some experiments I even found 1 and 2 being some 26 s slower than the standard-settings.
RT_Test
Furthermore the RT solver did not work with my own (even simpler model). It simply would not start running the dynamics with the RT option.
(Model works just fine with GSTIFF)
 
Calling this disappointing would be a compliment from the user point of view.
At the end you guys require buying a license for making my analysis unstable and slower ?
Parents
  • 0
    Yes, I've been running 3-axle truck models with FSI.
    I got pretty good, but sort of confusing results.
    FSI
    Using PAC2002 tires with 3D enveloping. (Later found out that there was a bug in the 3D enveloping that makes it much slower, will be fixed for the final release.)
    T_out=0.01, hmax(baseline)=0.001, 15 second simulation.
    But cut the time with a factor of 3 with 3 iterations.
    3,4,5 iterations seems good. Increasing the number of iterations above that will produce diverging solutions and fail.
    Peak accelerations are not too much off. If I study absorbed power, results are very much off, because just a small change in an acceleration peak can change the absorbed power a lot.
Reply
  • 0
    Yes, I've been running 3-axle truck models with FSI.
    I got pretty good, but sort of confusing results.
    FSI
    Using PAC2002 tires with 3D enveloping. (Later found out that there was a bug in the 3D enveloping that makes it much slower, will be fixed for the final release.)
    T_out=0.01, hmax(baseline)=0.001, 15 second simulation.
    But cut the time with a factor of 3 with 3 iterations.
    3,4,5 iterations seems good. Increasing the number of iterations above that will produce diverging solutions and fail.
    Peak accelerations are not too much off. If I study absorbed power, results are very much off, because just a small change in an acceleration peak can change the absorbed power a lot.
Children
No Data
© 2025 Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries. Privacy Policy | Cloud Services Agreement