Differences in calculations between ANSYS and ANSYS WORKBENCH
Thread Content
I need to use FEA software for my work, and I’m not sure how much the results from ANSYS and ANSYS WORKBENCH will differ I find the classic interface to be more difficult to learn; WORKBENCH is easier to get started with, but I’m still unsure about the results. Could someone who is familiar with both share their insights on the results?
In terms of the results alone, there is no difference, as the same solver is used. I think what you should be worried about isn’t the software itself, but rather the simplifications you make to the model and their impact on operating the software.
What was said upstairs is correct, but there is still a difference between ANSYS and WORKBENCH. Generally, in ANSYS one can choose to divide the grid manually, while in WORKBENCH the division can only be done automatically. Personally, I think WORKBENCH might be easier for beginners to get started with.
The grid division in WORKBENCH is not entirely free; it selects the element type automatically based on the analysis type defined earlier. The classic ANSYS interface also incorporates this feature in version 12.0, with an additional option provided for this purpose. The default algorithms used by BENCH and the classic ANSYS interface are different – BENCH uses the PCG algorithm by default, while the classic interface uses the elimination method. As a result, there may be differences in the output, but they are not significant. If the differences are substantial, it indicates that there is an issue with BENCH’s calculations.
I’m taking an *introductory course; came in to see how everyone is learning
AWB’s meshing functionality is very powerful! For the common structures of pressure vessels, a reasonable sclicing approach can generally be used to generate hexahedral meshes