# Is CalculiX right for me? Metalforming, Explicit Analysis, Cohesive shear based friction

**URL:** <https://calculix.discourse.group/t/is-calculix-right-for-me-metalforming-explicit-analysis-cohesive-shear-based-friction/2349>\
**Category:** Uncategorized\
**Created:** [July 20, 2024, 6:27pm UTC](https://calculix.discourse.group/t/is-calculix-right-for-me-metalforming-explicit-analysis-cohesive-shear-based-friction/2349 "2024-07-20T18:27:01Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 5\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Eph00n](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5fc32e/32.png) [@Eph00n](https://calculix.discourse.group/u/Eph00n)\
**Post date:** [July 20, 2024, 6:27pm UTC](https://calculix.discourse.group/t/is-calculix-right-for-me-metalforming-explicit-analysis-cohesive-shear-based-friction/2349/1 "2024-07-20T18:27:01Z")

</div>

Hello Together,  
I hope you can give me some guidance if CalculiX is the right choice for me:

I am currently working on a research project for a metal forming problem.  
Up until now I used LS-Dyna to simulate the deformation but I would like to switch to an open-source solution.

The current setup consists of an explicit analysis with a solid body tool that moves into the workpiece (rigid body movement). The workpiece uses a Johnson-Cook material model. The contacts are still a work in progress, but I will probably have to use a cohesive shear-based friction definition.

As I havent found much on shear-based friction in the docs, I would like to know if this is implemented in CalculiX or if it is possible to implement it through user-defined contacts if there are any.

Am I right in assuming that the general setup (save the contacts) should be transferrable to CalculiX?

Thanks a lot in advance!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Calc\_em](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/43a26b/32.png) [@Calc\_em](https://calculix.discourse.group/u/Calc_em)\
**Post date:** [July 20, 2024, 6:42pm UTC](https://calculix.discourse.group/t/is-calculix-right-for-me-metalforming-explicit-analysis-cohesive-shear-based-friction/2349/2 "2024-07-20T18:42:39Z")

</div>

> [@Eph00n](#):
>
> explicit analysis

CalculiX is not good for explicit dynamics. I’d rather have a look at OpenRadioss which is a very powerful code meant specifically for this.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![xyont](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/calculix.discourse.group/xyont/32/3553_2.png) [@xyont](https://calculix.discourse.group/u/xyont)\
**Post date:** [July 20, 2024, 8:41pm UTC](https://calculix.discourse.group/t/is-calculix-right-for-me-metalforming-explicit-analysis-cohesive-shear-based-friction/2349/3 "2024-07-20T20:41:14Z")

</div>

metal forming and LS-Dyna users may the reason to chose OpenRadioss since it have the same capabilities, input file also can be directly submitted.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Eph00n](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5fc32e/32.png) [@Eph00n](https://calculix.discourse.group/u/Eph00n)\
**Post date:** [July 21, 2024, 8:52am UTC](https://calculix.discourse.group/t/is-calculix-right-for-me-metalforming-explicit-analysis-cohesive-shear-based-friction/2349/4 "2024-07-21T08:52:22Z")

</div>

Alright I will take a look at OpenRadioss, thank you very much!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![xyont](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/calculix.discourse.group/xyont/32/3553_2.png) [@xyont](https://calculix.discourse.group/u/xyont)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2024, 11:02am UTC](https://calculix.discourse.group/t/is-calculix-right-for-me-metalforming-explicit-analysis-cohesive-shear-based-friction/2349/5 "2024-09-01T11:02:01Z")

</div>

updated info, latest CGX version is capable to export in LS Dyna format, but i’m not tried yet personally.

 ![2024-09-01 17_56_05-cgx_2.22.pdf - Adobe Reader](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/calculix/original/2X/a/aa9d22330afde0303d8107b90f2ebcab3c4a4cfe.png)