OpenSees

because it is an open source software, there is an active forum for the people to discuss their issues, and on top of them it is growing everyday. Moreover, since it is a research based software, you can find verification of their elements in papers out there. It has a number of nonlinear hysteresis models as well as some bearing elements specially designed for analyzing seismic isolated buildings. OpenSees elements cover a wide range of isolation systems from various friction based to rubber bearings.

Dear all, it seems to me that the question, though interesting, would rather be stated in a more specific manner, specially regarding the notions of the words "best" and "structures". Many thanks for your kind attention, and have nice hours ahead.

Besides an elegant answer from Dr. Claudio Pedrazzi

I also think that there is no “absolute” answer to this question.

As another example, depends on the complexity of the problem and how big is the problem (number of nodes required) you can get “exact” same result with “Lisa” FEA software (https://www.lisafea.com/) as you get with well known commercial software like ANSYS and ABAQUS at substantially lower cost (just wanted to give a little bit credit to canadian hard work engineers!!!).

Also, scripting capabilities is another key factor for a lot of researchers these days for choosing the right FEA software.

Therefore, I think that there are a lot of parameters (like mentioned in above and above answers) that are required to be defined before answering this question.

My two cents!!

for any implicit analysis and for research or training of students purposes, no doubts it is : http://www-cast3m.cea.fr/

if you need to do explicit analysis ( or mixed physics) then just use the modules to write your own software or refer to various thesis that are online

you have all sources so it is easy to adapt to any situation

for industrial problems , when geometry is not too complex ( to some extent and it is easy to make an interface with external CAD etc.) and need is to find pareto limits using combinatoric parametric optimization, just adapt the modules to specialize it and run in parallel various chunk of the design experience table ( you can even run in various VM or even in clusters if intelligently made)

if geometry is defined in another software with complex interfaces and behavior is highly non linear then you may write a dedicated interface

for Research it is free to be used, and all sources are available so it can be compiled on any device and used, it is more an vocabulary and grammar ( it is written by mathematicians..so...) rather than a code.

for commercial licence, well just ask CEA, sources were available well before the notion of open source existed ( i think first version was 1983.. castem and then castem2000 at that time :) ) , so please ask directly the discussion forum

I did my thesis using castem ( first version), and when i was researcher at ecole polytechnique (some 30 years ago), many thesis were already done using castem/castem2000 and CEA was ok for using it for industrial cases, at that time we just asked them the authorization each time

I think Abaqus or Ansys are the best ones

Hi to every body

As I know

It is dependent on your purpose. There are many FEM software that in my opinion is noncomparable.

due to your analysis, answer of this question are variable. for example for Fluid analysis almost recommend the fluent who exist in Ansys software.

For some case study also recommend Abaqus.

For some reason some body recommend Hyperworks or Msc-Nastran.

But it is important in my opinion that you know how to work with one of them. The names doesn't important.

C'est vrai le type de problèmes étudiés influent énormément sur le choix de Software (code) mais ici on parle de structures et pour cela je pense que l'Abaqus et Ansys sont les mieux adaptés.

It is true the type of problems studied have a great influence on the choice of Software (code) but here we talk about structures and for that I think that the Abaqus and Ansys are the best adapted.

For this question a perfect answar is not posgsible. The word "best" is always coupled to any specific problem. For linear & nonlinear problems, steady state or transient, you can gain excellent results using ADINA for structures, also in combination with thermal and fluid mechanics. An additional advantage is also that all the theory behind the ADINA software is well published in addition to the program manuals.

Hi

I'd like to share my personal opinion too. I agree with all the others that the question is very general because indeed the "best" software is not only the one capable to do the things you want and of course produce reasonable results but also the one you feel more comfortable with (in terms of user-friendliness, required programming skills, appearance etc.). For example, I have found ABAQUS very good in managing non linearities and also pretty stable but on the other side I found the GUI to be quite old-fashioned and and a little messy because of all options and features that have been added through the time but have not been re-shuffled to keep a good user friendliness level. Also it requires some manual work for coupling structural mechanics with different physics (if this is needed). On the other side, I found for example COMSOL very user friendly and very useful in managing multi physics problems, despite having less options than ABAQUS in terms of element types and material models. For sure there are plenty of commercial and open source codes which can do a good job but whatever you will use don't forget that any FEA code alone has no value without a proper validation with experimental data or analytical models comparison.

Hope this helps.

Good luck with your FEA analyses!

Hi

I think ANSYS program good for linear and nonlinear finite element analysis

Thanks

Hi Naderpour,

Software is just tool which we use, the most important thing is the knowledge of FEA theory .use of software depends on the purpose what type of analysis you want to perform there are some software like Hypermesh ,MSc .Nastran and Patran ,Abaqus ,LS DYNA .ANSYS ,COSMOS which most of company and researcher use. If you are new to FE world and want to know what the weakest area of a link or beam then COSMOS is basic one. .If you want to deal with complex geometry then I suggest you to use MSc Nastran and Patran because you can perform various analysis like static, dynamic and thermal analysis across the linear and nonlinear domains and also do fatigue analysis.now a days Abaqus is popular due to the quick development of GUI and simplicity in use.

COSMOS is a perfect and modular finite element system to solve linear and non-linear, static and dynamic structural problems developed by Structural Research and Analysis Corporation. (SRAC) Working with COSMOS helps in rapid completion of finite particle analysis and is quite affordable than any other softwares. Its user interface looks great.

You do have so many choices but i think ANSYS is the most suitable for structural anaysis purpose.

Dear H. Naderpour

I agreed with suggestions given above. For structural simulation I used to work either by ABAQUS or ANSYS. However, I prefer ABAQUS from ANSYS because it supports several CAD files to import into Abaqus/CAE part module easily and shortly, even from AutoCad. In addition, for the same geometry, loading, and boundary conditions plus mesh size, Abaqus take a bit smaller simulation time than ANSYS. In Abaqus all stuffs are completed on one window but when we come to ANSYS it opens separate windows(workbench, DesignModeler, and Mechanical), which still take time.

I agree with Dr. Robert kroyer

I think ANSYS (multiphysics) program . It is based on h-version of FEM.

If you wanna work mainly on Solid Mechanics, I'll recommend you utilize the ANSYS orABAQUS FEA software.

it depends on the problem to be studied

a better sofware depends to what you want to obtained. i propose matlab program for finite element analysis

a best software depend to the study, but i can recommended matlab program

I agree with Mr. Robert kroyer, and I think we should work on important matter in RG!

Dear Colleagues, following the question and coming back to the answer from Hamed Etezadi wrt to the mission of RG & R&T.

N. Naderpour, if you let us know your specific question for your structural analysis tasks then it's much easier to respond or to give assistance.

I can say if you are think in strong nonlinear, transient dynamic problem analysis you will be very happy to find adequate possibilites to adjust your solution process according to theory in ADINA. Solving such type of structural problems, you will never find a FE program which works independent from mesh modeling, material behaviour, mass & stiffness distribution description and load application. For this case I only can recommend to cooperate and discuss your physical & numerical approach and the cooresponding results which already subject matter experts.

It would be a theory that fuses natural vibration, vibrating string theory, and mass.

I think ANSYS

Hello

the question can have a open answer. depend on your purpose of analysis, complexity of model or analysis and othe factors the answer can change.

I like Ansys for several. First you can write code. Second it has multi physic s analysis. Third You can test mesh independently very easily. Fourth,You have wide range of controll on nonlinear analysis.

I recommend you Ansys Workbench with the Version over 18, that you can also use to optimize your structure if needed.

It is fast to model and analyse it.

Mathematica

ANSYS and ABAQUS

Hi H. Naderpour,

Look this article: A comparative analysis of finite element programs for their implementation in a graphic tool of insulated power cables.

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8261643

> https://twitter.com/sebastiangtz

I prefer the Abaqus calculation code

User friendly Strand 7 good all rounder for most structures includes dynamics, linear and non linear, Vibation lock on (lock in) frequencies for resonance.

SAP 2000.

SAP2000 also good program for a specific application

ANSYS

I would recommend you to use ANSYS Workbench because Workbench is the single platform where one can do simulations of CFD, Mechanical, Electromagetics on one platform and also it helps you to run the mutliphysics simulation (Combination of any of the above three physics).

I recommand you ROBOTBAT stuturel analysis, Ithink is very usefull for concrate structures.

there is a lot fem software, according to subject and important of simulation must be choose the best

Fluid: Ansys Fluent - Flow3D- Abaqus - Comsol

Solid: Ansys APDL or Ansys Workbench - Abaqus - Comsol

2 way FSI: Abaqus and Comsol easy to work

Concrete: Abaqus

Steel: Ansys

A good all rounder is MSC Nastran mechanical and structural developed for NASA. Heat Transfer and complex FEA, shells, membranes. buckling modes,

dynamics and vibration.

I agree with Dr. Dennis

Each finite element software has advantages and disadvantages and depending on the type of model

It depends on the feild of study, nature and size of the problem. Also the number of nodes you wanna get and the exactitude you looking reach in your results.

However my personnal opinion i can recommand Abaqus, Ansys workbench and LS Dyna

Answering this question, absolutely depend on your problem.

I think for modeling structural elements like beams and columns, opensees, sap & etabs can help you. But for modeling all element especially shell element, ansys and abaqus is best choice. In these softwares, you should model a part of structure not all of structure.

OpenSees is a very powerful tool for the simulation of structures.

In my opinion, abaqus is the most powerful and user-friendly research software and SAP is the easiest and most practical application in the field of finite element for the structure analysis.

Hello to all (and though I had once stated a short response), nice question However it seems to me hardly a unique response and software can be introduced as the response.

Probably, the answer depends on the user both from the point of view of the application under attention by him or her and also the friendliness of the software needed by that special user.

Provided these, I can also address four other important points: (1) the existence of facilities to enhance the analysis' speed and control the memory necessities when needed, and also post-processing facilities. The latter both for better (and with more alternatives) presentation of the results also probably as input to other software and if needed to re-run the analysis, (2) A good and complete manual with examples and theoretical explanations, (3) An extensive library of elements (4) A mechanism to use the users feedback to enhance the software.

Maybe a nicer question to be discussed is what are the features of a typical broadly accepted finite element analysis software?

I use ABAQUS and ANSYS for complex structures. For the simple ones, I choose MIDAS.

I agree with Hoan Duong Nguyen

Hi

I do agree with Denniis Miller