AutoFEM and other CAE systems comparison
( AutoFEM vs Ansys & SolidWorks Simulation )
We are often asked, "Does AutoFEM provide an acceptable precision of calculations? Is there any comparison AutoFEM and other famous finite element software systems?"
Below you can find a comparison of our tutorial examples, solved, besides AutoFEM, in two other well known finite element systems: ANSYS Workbench and SolidWorks Simulation (CosmosWorks).
Linear Static Strength Analysis
The result "Displacements" in AutoFEM Analysis:
The result "Displacements" in SolidWorks Simulation:
The result "Displacements" in Ansys Workbench:
Comparison:
|
Ansys |
CosmosWorks | ||
Max Displacements, mm | 0,06497 | 0.06424 | 0.06406 | |
Number of tetrahedra | 9,924 | 10,797 | 10,601 |
Conclusion:
We can see, the maximal displacements are very close in spite of the difference between finite element meshes.
The result "Stresses von Mises" in AutoFEM Analysis:
The result "Stresses von Mises" in SolidWorks Simulation:
The result "Stresses von Mises" in Ansys Workbench:
Comparison:
|
Ansys |
CosmosWorks | ||
Max Stresses, MPa | 67,96 | 81,336 | 99,387 |
|
Number of tetrahedra | 1,281 | 840 | 1,105 |
Conclusion:
We can see fairly large disturbance in stress estimations between all FEA systems because of the finite element mesh coarseness.
Frequency Analysis (determining resonance frequencies)
First mode, AutoFEM Analysis:
First mode, Ansys WorkBench:
First mode, SolidWorks Simulation:
Fifth mode, AutoFEM Analysis:
Fifth mode, Ansys WorkBench:
Fifth mode, SolidWorks Simulation:
Comparison:
|
Ansys |
CosmosWorks | ||
First frequency, Hz |
441.92 |
440.13 |
438.84 | |
Fifth frequency, Hz | 2,853,14 | 2,843.6 | 2,840.3 | |
Number of tetrahedra | 1,281 | 870 |
1,105 |
Conclusion:
We can see that frequencies and shapes of modes are very close in all systems.
Buckling Analysis (critical load factor)
First buckling mode, AutoFEM Analysis:
First buckling mode, Ansys WorkBench:
First buckling mode, SolidWorks Simulation:
Third buckling mode, AutoFEM Analysis:
Third buckling mode, Ansys WorkBench:
Third buckling mode, SolidWorks Simulation:
Comparison:
|
Ansys |
CosmosWorks | ||
First Load Factor |
8.676 |
8.5485 |
8.4937 | |
Third Load Factor | 16.002 | 15.931 | 15.861 | |
Number of tetrahedra | 3,209 | 2.871 |
3,103 |
Conclusion:
We can see that all critical-load factors and buckling shapes are very close in all systems.
Thermal Analysis
Temperature field, AutoFEM Analysis:
Temperature field, Ansys WorkBench:
Temperature field, SolidWorks Simulation:
Thermal Flux, AutoFEM Analysis:
Thermal Flux, Ansys WorkBench:
Thermal Flux, SolidWorks Simulation
:
Comparison:
|
Ansys |
CosmosWorks | ||
Maximum Temperature, C |
38.9824 |
39.088 |
38.996 | |
Maximum Heat Flux, W/m2 |
14,960 | 19,969 | 15,770 | |
Number of tetrahedra | 8,710 | 20.776 |
3,103 |
Conclusion: Temperatures and thermal (heat) fluxes are close in all systems.