I agree 100% with @bwalker145's comments. Without more background info, it is difficult to say if results shown are a reasonable simulation of real-life. I always check if the Inspect Panel > Reaction Forces are expected. These (of course) should be equal in magnitude, and opposite in direction to the applied loads for static equilibrium. Once you're convinced the Load Case & study setup is accurately capturing / abstracting the real operating conditions, and still witness unexpected result anomalies, you may have to further tweak the mesh or the Simulation Model itself.
The highest stresses that occur at edges shown in the screenshot are likely artificial stress concentrations. These can manifest at geometry with a Fixed constraint applied, and unfortunately an effect inherent in the FEM solution.
Other manifestations of artificial stress concentrations can exacerbate as the mesh density is increased. These mainly occur at sharp inside / re-entrant corners, that in real-life are not as perfectly sharp as the computer model has represented. Stress is pressure, which is force per unit area. If the area is made smaller and smaller (via changing the settings to generate a smaller and smaller mesh element) the area approaches zero, and stress goes to infinity (this is kind of an analogy). Usually these can be safely be ignored, or a tiny blend / fillet added to the Simulation Model to smooth out the effect.
Another gotcha of 'this isn't real-life results' may occur if there isn't a sufficiently dense mesh in the place(s) of interest in the model. e.g. you need 3 layers thickness of solid elements to accurately simulate shear throughout the thickness of plate type bodies in bending. Fusion Simulation uses solid tetrahedral mesh elements exclusively, which are well suited for chunky bodies. However, thinner bodies are better suited using Shell elements instead. These element nodes have not only translational DOFs that solid tets employ, but add rotational DOFs (such as a DKT - Discrete Kirchoff Triangle shell element that Autodesk Inventor Stress Analysis, and Autodesk Inventor Nastran products offer). Using the correct element types in a 'mixed model' will capture the physics more accurately, and with far less elements needed (better results in less time). In your case, the bracket appears thick enough that solid elements should be fine IMO.
Hope this helps! Please let us know if you have additional questions, comments or suggestions.
Best regards,
Hugh Henderson
QA Engineer (Fusion Simulation)
