06.2 / CDS Training Manual

Exercises
learn by completing a study.

One curriculum shared with Workbench. Choose an exercise, follow its tasks, check the expected behavior, and keep validation data of your results. The User Guide explains the controls; the Theory Manual explains the mathematics.

06.1 · Manuals, previews and downloads →

Exercise curriculum

Shared CDS database

CREATEDesign a starting point DISCOVERExplore the live laminate SIMULATELaunch Workbench

Search exercisesApplicationModelGeometryResource type

DifficultyEstimated walkthrough

About difficulty levels and time estimates

Instructional ratings describe setup and interpretation effort, not solver accuracy or license access. Existing catalog stages remain separate. Estimates include setup, comparisons and interpretation; they are not solver runtimes and will vary with experience.

Foundation — a single basic material or micromechanics relationship.
Developing — orientation, short-fiber comparisons or an introductory laminate setup.
Intermediate — a structural response, transport history or process study.
Advanced — coupled fields, nonlinear response or optimization with more interpretation.
Integrated — a multi-field study combining thermal, moisture and mechanical effects.

The numbered ring fills as difficulty increases. The clock fill indicates walkthrough duration on a two-hour scale; the adjacent number gives the estimate in minutes. These initial ratings are assigned from the model scope and curriculum stage and can be refined by instructors.

Group / sort by 140 of 140 resources

Exercises

Click to preview · double-click or Enter to open in Workbench.

Exercise · 40 min

03.54 · UV cure: equal-energy one-sided versus two-sided exposure

Level 4
AdvancedEst. 40 min

03 · Advanced & coupled studies · coupled-lab-uv-two-sided

Physical process schematic · Open full-size schematic ↗

Conceptual setup, not a solved result. Use the existing live process view in Workbench to inspect this exercise’s linked equipment, boundary settings and results.

Exercise workflow · Open full-size map ↗Hide unused blocks

All blocks keep the CREATE / DISCOVER / SIMULATE positions, with Equipment below Geometry; unused records remain disconnected. This changes the view only, not the exercise records.

∑ Used models & submodels

Only models assigned to records used by this exercise are listed here. The full-layout option preserves the supplied starter records; no Workbench records are changed.

Halpin–Tsai · Hypothetical UV composite · effective optical model · UV cure residual-stress screening

One compatible homogenization model per Micro recipe. Separate recipes compare models; their predictions are not blended.

∑ Theory & assumptions

CLT · Linear static with failure indices · Plate — Nx Static Validation · UV cure residual-stress screening

Shared laminate stiffness drives this membrane/CLT path. Failure criteria are independent comparisons, not blended models. Fatigue is a separate assessment.

∑ Theory & assumptions

1D transient heat transfer · UV exposure thermal load · UV cure residual-stress screening

Needs linked laminate properties and a compatible process schedule. A linked cycle is not a solved temperature history.

∑ Theory & assumptions

Maximum stress · Plate — Nx Static Validation · UV cure residual-stress screening

Primary ply criterion for Plate — Nx Static Validation · UV cure residual-stress screening. Envelope comparisons are independent; criteria are not blended.

∑ Theory & assumptions

Data travelling between blocks

Micro → Laminates
Predicted ply stiffness, strength, density and expansion properties.

Materials → Micro
Constituent stiffness, strength, density and thermal / moisture properties.

Mechanical → Simulation
SIMULATION selects this case and its analysis model; the case owns its applicable cycle and input references.

Laminates → Mechanical
Ply angles and thicknesses, stiffness, mass and ply properties.

Geometry → Mechanical
Part shape and dimensions, thickness or section definition, and model-specific geometric inputs. Each selected case consumes only the dimensions its model supports.

Thermal → Simulation
SIMULATION selects this case and its analysis model; the case owns its applicable cycle and input references.

Laminates → Thermal
Ply angles and thicknesses, stiffness, mass and ply properties.

Equipment → Thermal
Linked lasers, IR/UV lamps, heaters, coolers and molds: dimensions, radiant power or prescribed temperature / heat flux, contact conductance, body and surface materials. Each boundary keeps its own placement, side and exposure.

Models → Micro
Applied model assignment: Halpin–Tsai. Model parameters and formulation are used by Micro.

Models → Mechanical
Applied model assignment: CLT · Linear static with failure indices. Model parameters and formulation are used by Mechanical.; Maximum stress

Models → Thermal
Applied model assignment: 1D transient heat transfer. Model parameters and formulation are used by Thermal.

What this exercise will help you understand

UV exposure, local conversion, heating and stress describe different parts of the same illustrative study. This exercise helps you distinguish incident exposure from the state reached through the thickness, and identify how illumination, geometry and the chosen material laws affect that state.

Application: UV cure residual-stress screening
Baseline models: Halpin–Tsai · CLT · Linear static with failure indices · 1D transient heat transfer · Maximum stress
Geometry: Infinite plate

Open in Workbench ↗Database downloads in user portal →

Reference validation · 2026-09-20

Not benchmark validated

No matched quantitative reference comparison completed for the full exercise.

Recorded baseline only—not a certification of the current database, edited inputs, or every output. Analytical agreement is not experimental material or failure validation.

Source validation, comparisons and tested inputs

Execution: Completed (not validation)

A coupled, damage, transport or local-field comparison needs matched constitutive data, boundary conditions and field/mesh convergence. Execution alone is insufficient.

Tested inputs

Input SHA-256: 6c40936ce87e27ff80cc71e6670966804cb77afd8e99558bfa1890dd7a8b9016
Solver source SHA-256: 21b57ba5585334998ad98a0b2bac916764c93739a20e81f92e8e37cd50006f4a

Hypothetical UV-compatible composite; effective optics, kinetics, shrinkage and modulus require calibration. Carbon/epoxy source data do not prove UV transparency or compatibility. CLT includes thermal and post-gel chemical-shrinkage stress; distinguish peak stress from the cooled residual state. No fixtures, tool contact, oxygen transport, radical dark cure or viscoelastic relaxation. Not manufacturing validation.

Download source-validation results (JSON) · Full 138-exercise study

Preparing a meaningful comparison

Inspect wavelength, optical inputs, exposure schedule and the hypothetical material calibration before running. Make the requested intensity, sidedness, duration or thickness comparison without changing the remaining inputs. When comparing equal incident doses, retain the full time history instead of assuming that dose alone determines the response.

Open the exercise in Workbench and confirm the selected simulation before editing its records. The map above helps you follow the input connections; it is a preview of the setup, not a solved result. Review the connected input summary and any validation notices, and preserve shared reference records by making an independent copy when you need a separate variation.

Working through the exercise

Step 1
Run the 500 W/m² upper plus 500 W/m² lower exposure for the same duration as the one-sided reference.
Step 2
Compare against 1000 W/m² upper and zero lower illumination. Keep transmission, thickness and wavelength unchanged.
Step 3
Compare core conversion, face-to-face cure gradient and cure-stress profiles, including the final cooled state.
Step 4
Refine the thickness mesh and halve the UV time step before interpreting small stress differences.

Understanding your results

Read the intensity and conversion profiles together with temperature and any enabled stress components. Compare final stresses at comparable cooled states, and inspect the gel and modulus evolution used by the model. Refine the stated time and thickness controls before interpreting small differences; the current model’s dark-cure limitation must remain part of the conclusion.

Use the following checkpoints to test your explanation against the exercise’s intended comparison. Record the relevant result beside each checkpoint, and discuss any discrepancy in terms of inputs, model assumptions or numerical settings rather than simply marking the run complete.

Total incident intensity is 1000 W/m² in both configurations; absorbed energy may differ.
Two-sided exposure changes the depth distribution, not just total dose.

Writing your conclusion

Bring the baseline and comparison together in a short engineering explanation. Describe what you changed, which quantities changed in response, and why that behaviour is consistent with—or raises a question about—the selected formulation. Include a labelled plot or table with units and the corresponding input state so that another reader can follow your reasoning.

Save the study and retain the solver notices and the checks you performed. State the limitations that matter to this particular result, including illustrative data or missing calibration. A completed exercise demonstrates the comparison you have carried out; claim benchmark validation only where the source-validation panel explicitly supports it.

User Guide · operating the Workbench → · ∑ Theory Manual · equations and assumptions →

Model limits

Hypothetical UV-compatible composite; effective optics, kinetics, shrinkage and modulus require calibration. Carbon/epoxy source data do not prove UV transparency or compatibility. CLT includes thermal and post-gel chemical-shrinkage stress; distinguish peak stress from the cooled residual state. No fixtures, tool contact, oxygen transport, radical dark cure or viscoelastic relaxation. Not manufacturing validation.

Reference material

How the shared curriculum works

Read the reference
Select an exercise from the shared CDS database
Trace inputs in Simulation
Run and inspect fields
Compare checkpoints and record limits

SIMULATION selects the Thermal, Moisture, Mechanical and EM cases to run, with None available in each slot. Geometry owns shared specimen dimensions; Laminate owns plies and thickness. Equipment, directly below Geometry, owns reusable laser, IR/UV lamp, heater, cooler and mold specifications. Cases link that hardware to its placement and exposure; a boundary temperature alone does not imply a hardware model. Each case owns one analysis model, its applied conditions and its applicable cycle; there is no separate Process block. Surrounding blocks manage available records. Run updates results; completed does not mean validated or passed.

All 140 exercises, examples and case studies select connected records from one shared default database. Opening an exercise does not add duplicate materials. Changes to shared records affect studies using them; duplicate a record for an independent variation. Downloads provide self-contained subsets of that database and require sign-in and an active CDS license. Exercise links open the matching guide; they do not run a solver or replace your database. Historical files remain in a separate portal archive.

Catalogue revision 2026-09-20. Source-data case studies require the setup and calibration described in their guides.

138 exercises, examples and case studies → · Your CDS library: overview, manuals and database downloads →

Choose the run in the SIMULATION block

SIMULATION is the control point for the run. Select a Thermal case, Moisture case, Mechanical case and EM case, or None in any slot. Each selected case shows its analysis model, laminate and applicable geometry.

Step-by-step instructions · 4 steps

Keep candidate records in the surrounding blocks. Adding a candidate does not select it for execution.
Select the required cases in SIMULATION and review their inputs before Run. At least one case is required.
Use the same laminate for a supported combined run. Run standalone studies separately with the other selectors set to None.
Run executes the selected combination. A connection or Used marker is not confirmation of a successful solve.

Review every downstream geometry dependency

A geometry record can be shared by several cases and simulations. Editing its dimensions or type affects all linked consumers, including studies that are not currently open. Unrelated records are unchanged.

Step-by-step instructions · 4 steps

After editing geometry, open Solver messages and expand Review affected cases and simulations. Select a linked name to inspect that record.
Check the selected model, load basis, dimensions and boundary conditions. Loads are not automatically replaced when the geometry changes.
Resolve incompatible geometry and model combinations before running. An I-section does not turn a plate theory into a beam theory.
Rerun affected simulations before relying on previous results. Inputs changed warnings indicate that stored results no longer match their connected inputs.

Exerciseslearn by completing a study.

Choose the run in the SIMULATION block

Review every downstream geometry dependency

Exercises
learn by completing a study.