Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
In my FEA class we run the same problems through Inventor, SolidWorks, Creo and Algor (Autodesk Analysis) and get the same results in all. Some of them we run check against hand calculations from formulas found the Machinery's Handbook. Perhaps I need better examples for my class. Post your examples.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Autodesk Inventor 2019 Certified Professional Autodesk AutoCAD 2013 Certified Professional Certified SolidWorks Professional
I admitt that simple calcs are pretty mach accurate but once you run some difficult stractural model with more forces involved it's an utter rubbish.
Just one example; we run stress analisys on arch sheave that had 20 rollers bolted from each side with M24 bolts so 40 off M24 grade 8.8 botls in total. Now shear force for one M24 bolt is about 13.4 KN. The load spread over all 20 rollers is 2.5 tone (not even worth of calculating right?) but inventor analisys would fail on bolt connections! I am pretty comftable that the first thing going off would be the frame of the sheave rather tha bolts......
FEA is only as good as the data entered.. Crap in..crap out.
These programs are based on the proper mathmatical equations and should be as close as you can get with the proper input...loads/constraints/material properties,etc...
1 missing or improper constraint or whatever and its all out the window..
You are maybe right. That's why I am saying that simple stuff is good but hard stuff must accurately examined for constrains that's one of the thinks Autodesk should work on.... to make it much simpler and easier to use because it very time consuming. One error will cost you hours of time to investigate.
That's why you get paid the big $bucks$. Maybe by the time we retire robust, real-time FEA for the casual user will be old hat.
read Bill Vaghn Cohen's - The Engineering Method. (no - it is not about FEA, more about how we really work)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Autodesk Inventor 2019 Certified Professional Autodesk AutoCAD 2013 Certified Professional Certified SolidWorks Professional
![Autodesk Design & Make Report](https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/1350519iCB55845EBFC43016/image-size/large?v=v2&px=999" "Autodesk Design & Make Report")