Comparing Abaqus/Patran/Nastran for FEM Analysis

In summary, both Patran and Abaqus have their pros and cons, but after testing them I plan on giving a more detailed review.
  • #1
theOrange
50
2
I need to decide on whether to use Abaqus or Patran/Nastran for FEM analysis. However I am not sure what the advantages/disadvantages are of each FEM package. Also, searching on google has not come up with a list of situations where one is better compared to the other. I'm just looking for a generalized list.

I'll have a month (February) to try out both packages, and do some tutorials with each to get a feel for them.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
Abaqus is the best nonlinear FEA solver out there. For linear problems, I personally think it's about sixes. I think it all comes down to how you like the "feel" of the package and what your company is currently using.
 
  • #3
I have the possibility of using either at the company I work for. What do you mean "I personally think it's about sixes."?

Yeah I found that Abaqus is best for nonlinear, and February I'll be able to test both.
 
  • #4
Sorry about my phrase. I think the correct cliche is "six of one, half a dozen of the other". It means it's really about the same. I don't know that either program is "better" for linear problems.

Let us know what your opinion is after you've tested them!
 
  • #5
timthereaper said:
Sorry about my phrase. I think the correct cliche is "six of one, half a dozen of the other". It means it's really about the same. I don't know that either program is "better" for linear problems.

Let us know what your opinion is after you've tested them!

Oh alright got it. Sure, I'll post it later, and a short description of the project I'm working on.
 
  • #6
Just to be clear if anyone else reads this. I am not asking for the best one, I understand that is very difficult. I am just asking in what areas are each good at, so advantages/disadvantages of each FEM package (patran/nastran, and abaqus).
 
  • #7
What type of solutions are you intending to solve?
 
  • #8
CFDFEAGURU said:
What type of solutions are you intending to solve?

Well at the moment I'm just looking for a general comparison between the two. What applications is Patran better than Abaqus, and what application abaqus is better than Patran.

As for my project: I'll be deforming a CAD model of a flat plate, towards a 3d scan. The 3d scan is of the plate but then in a deformed position. Anyways, the specifics of my project aren't important right now. At the moment I would just like to know in general where both Abaqus and Patran excel. I haven't been able to find a list of pros/cons or advantages/disadvantages of either.
 
  • #9
I don't have any knowledge of Patran but I do no that for this type of non-linear behavior, Abaqus is your best software.
 
  • #10
Yep, I have read that Abaqus is stronger when concerning a non-linear problem.

For my project we aren't sure whether it is a linear or non-linear problem. I'm planning on running a test to see if it is linear/non-linear.
 
  • #11
From your description it seems that the simulation involves plastic deformation. If this is the case, I'd say the problem is non-linear.
 
  • #12
jh0 said:
From your description it seems that the simulation involves plastic deformation. If this is the case, I'd say the problem is non-linear.

No, the deformation is elastic. Therefore we don't know for sure if it is linear or non-linear.

Hopefully this week or next week I'll be able to do a test in Patran to see if it is linear/non-linear.
 
  • #13
This is not as much about the actual software; the critical issues are: (a) accurate input data preparation; (b) sensible mechanical interpretation of obtained numerical results.
Below are couple of examples devoted to the mechanical interpretation of FEA results for some simple shells:

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~comecau/quad_shell.htm

http://comecau.com/quad_shell_wtank_ir.htm [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #14
NumericalFEA said:
This is not as much about the actual software; the critical issues are: (a) accurate input data preparation; (b) sensible mechanical interpretation of obtained numerical results.
Below are couple of examples devoted to the mechanical interpretation of FEA results for some simple shells:

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~comecau/quad_shell.htm

http://comecau.com/quad_shell_wtank_ir.htm [Broken]

I feel like people are misunderstanding the original question. I am not asking which software is the best. I am asking which one has an advantage over the other for specific situations. If such a list isn't possible to make, then so be it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #15
Well, it's hard to say one program has an advantage over another without saying "this program is better than this one for this problem". Most of the errors you will encounter are model-based (read: user error) and the only "advantages" are user's preference. Numerically, I think they're all about the same although you may agree with the results of one solver over another.

Either way, I think you have your answer. Summing up what's been said here, there are no clear advantages either way it seems except that Abaqus is better for nonlinear problems.
 
  • #16
theOrange said:
I feel like people are misunderstanding the original question. I am not asking which software is the best. I am asking which one has an advantage over the other for specific situations. If such a list isn't possible to make, then so be it.
Unless you present a very concrete list of those specific situations, your question is senseless. What kind of problems are you going to solve ? Static, dynamic ? Natural frequencies ? Buckling ? Thermal expansion/contraction ? Are your models thin-walled shells ? Or Mindlin plates ? Or perhaps they are multi-layered composite structures ? Be concrete, and you may get a concrete answer.
 
  • #17
timthereaper said:
Well, it's hard to say one program has an advantage over another without saying "this program is better than this one for this problem". Most of the errors you will encounter are model-based (read: user error) and the only "advantages" are user's preference. Numerically, I think they're all about the same although you may agree with the results of one solver over another.

Either way, I think you have your answer. Summing up what's been said here, there are no clear advantages either way it seems except that Abaqus is better for nonlinear problems.

Yep, this is basically what my conclusion is so far. Thanks for the help.

NumericalFEA said:
Unless you present a very concrete list of those specific situations, your question is senseless. What kind of problems are you going to solve ? Static, dynamic ? Natural frequencies ? Buckling ? Thermal expansion/contraction ? Are your models thin-walled shells ? Or Mindlin plates ? Or perhaps they are multi-layered composite structures ? Be concrete, and you may get a concrete answer.

That is exactly my question. In what problems does one have an advantage over the other (if it exists). For example, abaqus is a bit stronger is non-linear problems.

Maybe, for example, patran gives better results for buckling (or maybe not).
 
  • #18
I've decided to continue with Patran. I have a question about it though, is it possible to export the geometry of the deformed part?
 

1. What are the main differences between Abaqus, Patran, and Nastran for FEM analysis?

Abaqus, Patran, and Nastran are all popular software used for finite element method (FEM) analysis. The main differences between them include their user interfaces, meshing capabilities, solver algorithms, and post-processing tools. Abaqus is known for its robust nonlinear analysis capabilities, Patran is user-friendly with efficient meshing tools, and Nastran is widely used for structural analysis and optimization.

2. Which software is best for my specific FEM analysis needs?

The best software for your FEM analysis needs depends on the type of analysis you are conducting. If you require advanced nonlinear analysis, Abaqus may be the best choice. For structural analysis and optimization, Nastran is a popular option. If you are looking for user-friendly software with efficient meshing tools, Patran may be the best fit.

3. Can I use more than one software for FEM analysis?

Yes, it is possible to use more than one software for FEM analysis. In fact, many engineers and scientists use a combination of software to take advantage of each one's strengths. For example, you may use Abaqus for its nonlinear analysis capabilities and then import the results into Patran for post-processing and visualization.

4. Are there any compatibility issues between these software?

Since Abaqus, Patran, and Nastran are all widely used in the industry, they are designed to be compatible with each other. However, there may be some minor compatibility issues when importing and exporting files between different software. It is always best to test the compatibility and make adjustments as needed.

5. Is one software more expensive than the others?

The cost of these software can vary depending on the type of license and the features included. Generally, Abaqus tends to be the most expensive due to its advanced capabilities. Patran and Nastran may have different pricing options depending on the specific features and modules you need. It is best to consult with the software providers for accurate pricing information.

Similar threads

  • Programming and Computer Science
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
2
Replies
38
Views
6K
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
4
Replies
138
Views
5K
  • Mechanical Engineering
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Math Proof Training and Practice
3
Replies
86
Views
18K
  • STEM Educators and Teaching
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
11
Views
1K
Back
Top