Finite element method and applied element method

AI Thread Summary
The discussion highlights the advantages and disadvantages of the Applied Element Method (AEM) and the Finite Element Method (FEM) for analyzing a truss system. AEM is beneficial for predicting structural behavior beyond elastic limits, while FEM is suitable for analyzing structures within elastic limits and is widely used in engineering applications. The consensus leans towards FEM as the preferred method due to its established reliability and extensive software support, despite some claims about AEM's capabilities. The choice of method ultimately depends on the project's specific analytical requirements and the desired depth of analysis. For conventional truss structures, FEM is recommended as the more reliable and recognized approach.

Which method


  • Total voters
    4
Fady Alphons
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
What are the advantages and disadvantages of both AEM and FEM and which on is easier.
I am doing a project and I should use one of these two methods to solve for a truss system.
P.S. computer programming shall be used.

In the end which method is better for this case?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
It depends on how far you want the analysis of the truss system to extend.

AEM is used to predict what happens after a structure is loaded beyond elastic limits and is proceeding to failure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_element_method

FEM is generally used to analyze a structure where the stresses are not assumed to be greater than the elastic limit of the material. If some FEM results are obtained which happen to show stress is greater than the elastic limit of the material, then the designer can either do a more detailed investigation (perhaps using AEM) or simply add material to the structure to bring the stresses down to acceptable levels.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
If you are doing a small displacement linear analysis of the truss, there is no obvious reason NOT to use FEM, and no reason to write your own software (except to teach yourself about FEM).

Looking at the references and links in the wikipedia page, I see all the referenced papers have the inventor of the method as one of the authors. The two links to software products using AEM make a lot of unsubstantiated claims about the limitation of FEM which I don't necessarily agree with, and one of the products seems to have been developed on the back of a US Dept of Homeland Security initiative, to give indemnity to developers of new technologies that might have relevance to 9-11 type events in case the technology doesn't actually work.

Sorry, but if I was going to design a conventional truss structure, I would rather use an old method that has demonstrably worked OK for at least 50 years already, rather than new one where the DHS will give me my money back if the structure fails!
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
No doubt about it: use FEM. There is no conceptual difference between AEM and FEM. I would even say AEM is FEM, but formulated by those who never heard about cohesive elements. They are basically the same thing, but if you are looking for a job after graduation, you better say you know about FEM and not AEM!
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
FEM can do anything you want to do.

Car crash test simulations are done with high-fidelity FEM (8-noded "solid" elements) using such tools as ABAQUS, ANSYS, LS-DYNA.

Structural engineers model the beams and columns of high rise buildings (or perhaps more relevant for you: the bars of a bridge truss) using FEM ("beam" elements), with software such as ETABS, RISA, STAAD.

"Shell" elements are also commonly used, and that can be done using any of the aforementioned software. Additionally, any of the aforementioned software can simulate steel plasticity (damage). The high-fidelity software even have very good built-in capabilities for simulating things like anisotropy (wood, carbon-fiber), viscoelasticity (rubber), fracture (concrete damage), and just about anything else you can imagine.

I have not heard of "AEM" until this thread.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Thread 'I need a concave mirror with a focal length length of 150 feet'
I need to cut down a 3 year old dead tree from top down so tree causes no damage with small pieces falling. I need a mirror with a focal length of 150 ft. 12" diameter to 36" diameter will work good but I can't think of any easy way to build it. Nothing like this for sale on Ebay. I have a 30" Fresnel lens that I use to burn stumps it works great. Tree service wants $2000.
Hi all, i have some questions about the tesla turbine: is a tesla turbine more efficient than a steam engine or a stirling engine ? about the discs of the tesla turbine warping because of the high speed rotations; does running the engine on a lower speed solve that or will the discs warp anyway after time ? what is the difference in efficiency between the tesla turbine running at high speed and running it at a lower speed ( as fast as possible but low enough to not warp de discs) and: i...
Back
Top