Basic FEA Test .

Answer True OR False to the following :

1. The finer the FE mesh on a model, the better the results.

2. A finer mesh gives better accuracy.
3. Geometry should be represented with as much detail as possible.
4. Solids give the best results because they accurately model the geometry.
5. Better (more-expensive) FEA software gives better results than less-expensive
packages.
6. Automeshing is better than manual meshing.
7. An automatic-mesh generator reduces meshing to a pushbutton operation.
8. The high accuracy of FEA results comes from the high processing accuracy
of the computer.
9. When your FEA software reports no error, the solution will be correct.
10. You do not really need an error estimation. FEA is always accurate
enough.
11. You should always make a fine mesh so you do not have to worry about
error.
12. Higher-order elements give more accurate results.
13. Tetrahedral solids are too stiff and should be avoided.
14. Make a coarse mesh first to find stress concentrations, then refine it as
needed.
15. When FEA results correlate well with strain-gage readings, for example,
FEA results are OK.
16. Always make the finest model possible. Disk space should be your limit.
17. All major FEA codes have been extensively tested so users need not run
benchmark models.
18. Analysts may ignore degenerated elements as long as they are far away
from stress concentrations.
19. If you want to know only deflections and do not care about stresses, then
you can make a coarse model.

1
20. Modal analysis can use a coarser mesh than stress analysis.
21. Finite-element models offer a deceiving level of detail.
22. Model geometry is the most readily controlled of all data, loads less so,
while boundary conditions are the most difficult to control.
23. The most severe modeling errors are most often made assigning boundary
conditions.
24. Test data always contain errors and may be inconsistent with FEA as-
sumptions.
25. Incompetent analysis gives, at best, unreliable results. At worst, it is
positively misleading. Bad FEA lets users misplace trust in the design.
26. FEA is often excessive technology. It’s similar to using a hammer where
only a fly swatter is needed.
27. P-elements are slower than h-elements.

The following are the answers .

1. Usually true, if ”better results” means more ”accurate results” in terms

of convergence error. However, this does not imply that we should al-
ways build fine meshes. Finer meshes are also more expensive, so a happy
medium would combine acceptable accuracy with acceptable cost.

2. True, when ”better results” means lower-convergence error. The finer the
mesh, the lower the convergence error. Convergence error is calculated
by refining the mesh and comparing results from two consecutive refine-
ments. Almost any local or global measure can be used as convergence
criterion. These include displacement of a particular node, maximal Von
Mises stress, global strain energy, energy norm, or what have you.

3. False. Only structurally significant (or thermally significant in the case of

thermal analysis) details should be modeled in the FEA model. Small and
structurally insignificant details such as chamfers and draft angles unnec-
essarily complicate models and waste analyst’s time. Geometry coming
from CAD usually includes a lot of details that should be deleted from
the finite-element model.
Understanding how the part will behave under load helps distinguish be-
tween significant and insignificant details. Some details such as sharp
corners result in high stress concentrations. In short, CAD works with
realistic geometry, FEA works with FEA specific geometry. Only on rare
occasions are those two geometries identical.

2
4. False. Solids give a representation of model geometry only in a visual sense
by making impressive images. Solid elements do not guarantee the best
or even good results. Quite often, particular geometry does not lend itself
to modeling with solid finite elements. An example would be a casting
with thin walls. Properly modeling the wall with solid elements requires
several layers of elements across the wall thickness. Doing so would result
in huge models that are expensive or impossible to solve. Before using
expensive solid elements, always consider more efficient shell elements.
CAD to FEA interfaces provide solid-model geometry which can only be
meshed with solid elements, unless it is reworked, such as creating mid-
plane surfaces and meshing them with shells. It is unfortunate that CAD-
FEA interfaces encourage the use of solids in cases where solids should
not be used. Automeshers working on thin or solid geometry may place
only one element across a wall thickness producing a terrible model when
using h-elements. A one-element-thick wall will not model bending and
will report greatly underestimated stress. Errors on the order of 500
5. False, of course. More expensive software may be easier to use and may
produce more impressive plots. Good (correct results) depends on the
user’s skills. A top-of-the-line package may produce terribly wrong re-
sults, and vice versa.

6. True and false at the same time. Automeshing is certainly a time saver
because it works much faster than mapped or truly manual meshing. How-
ever, automeshing most likely produces tetrahedral elements which are less
efficient. Presently, few automeshers build brick elements. See answer 7
for more details.

7. False, for goodness sake. Automeshers know nothing about stress anal-
ysis. All they can do is fill up a geometric volume with elements. It is
the user’s responsibility to assure that the mesh is refined where stress
concentrations are expected, that there are enough elements across mem-
bers in bending, and so on. For more difficult geometry, automeshers tend
to produce terribly distorted elements and place them with no regard for
laws of mechanics, such as one tetrahedral element across the wall in bend-
ing. Automeshers tend to work more reliably with p-elements, which can
take more distortion and accurately model bending with only one element
across.

8. False. First of all, who said that FEA is highly accurate? It certainly
can be when properly used. Most FEA programs use double precision
arithmetic for lower numerical error. In most cases, so-called computer
accuracy or more precisely the round-off error is small when compared
with other errors like convergence error and modeling error.

3
 9. False. No error means only that the model is correct from the solver’s
point of view. Solvers happily run the most horrendous models as long as
they do not run into numerical problems.

10. False. A single run provides results with unknown error. The error may be
low but it is unknown. Without previous experience with similar models,
analysts must run several mesh refinements to calculate convergence error
and estimate solution error.

11. False. Even when using a fine mesh, analysts still do not know the error.
In fact, building a fine mesh that provides an estimated solution error of,
e.g., 0.1
12. True in terms of convergence error, Higher-order elements in place of lower
order elements are practically equivalent to mesh refinement. When com-
paring two otherwise identical models - one with first-order elements and
the other one with second-order elements - the later will provide more ac-
curate results in terms of convergence error, Second-order-element models
also converge faster so fewer mesh refinements are necessary for error anal-
ysis.

13. Generally true, Many tetrahedral elements or test do not benefit from
certain enhancements in element definition that make hexahedral (brick)
elements behave like higher-order elements. Test usually require more el-
ements to properly model bending.
However, the foregoing does not mean tet elements produce wrong results
when using enough of them. Using any kind of element requires under-
standing the basics of its formulation. Analysts need to know what the
element can and cannot do, such as whether or not it models constant or
linear (or quadratic) stress distribution within its volume, supports nodal
rotations, or which elements can be combined in one mesh.

14. True in most cases. However, a first ”rough” mesh still needs sufficient
density to detect stress concentrations. When the element size is larger
than the size of a hot spot, the stress concentration will not show up and
analysts will know they should have refined the mesh in that particular
location.

15. False. Strain gages may be placed in a spot that is modeled correctly in
the finite-element model. However, correlation in one or more locations
does not guarantee that everything is fine with the model. However, the
opposite statement is true: when FEA does not correlate with experiment,
then something is definitely wrong, either with the model, the experiment,

4
 or both.

16. False. The best mesh is the most coarse one that still provides acceptable
accuracy. The ”finest possible” mesh is simply a waste of time when there
is no use for higher accuracy. Also, even the finest possible mesh gives no
indication of error.

17. Generally true, if you use a reputable software and your analysis involves
typical cases. Still, benchmark tests are recommended to get the feel of
the program, particularly when applying it to unusual models or to unfa-
miliar conditions.

18. False. Degenerated elements tend to be too stiff and they affect the global
model stiffness. In other words, they ”pollute” the model. The pollution
may propagate to the area of interest and render erroneous results.

19. True. In most cases nodal displacements converge faster than, for exam-
ple, stresses. Still, using a coarse mesh for deflection analysis should be
justified by the results of convergence analysis.

20. True. Modal analysis provides natural frequencies and modes of vibration
which are of a global nature as opposed to local measures such as stress
concentrations.

21. True. Results come in 10-digit numbers. Every conceivable bit of informa-
tion on displacements and stresses can be obtained along with impressive
animated plots and graphs. It’s too easy to forget that all these results
often rest on crude assumptions like material properties, loads, supports,
modeling simplifications, and finite-element discretization error.

22. True. Geometry is the most intuitive input and can be assessed by eye.
Loads are relatively easy to relate because they are expressed in numbers.
Boundary conditions, or supports in the case of structural analysis, are the
most vague, and perhaps because of that, users often neglect the proper
definition of boundary conditions. Most people simply model them either
as perfectly rigid or as hinged supports, while the truth may be somewhere
in between.

23. True. Read statement 22.

5
24. True. Loads, for instance, may not be the same. Finite-element models
may also ignore their own weight, residual stresses, and surface-finish fac-
tors.

25. True. In the hands of an unskilled but enthusiastic user the FEA can be
an expensive toy. Depending on the importance of the analysis it may
also be an outright dangerous tool.

26. True. Some people say they use FEA for everything for better results.
These poor folks are wasting their money. Other methods such as long-
hand calculations, engineering tables, math packages such as TK Solver,
or testing are often less expensive, faster, and more reliable.

27. False. H-element software produces data of interest. But after a single
run there is no convergence error analysis, P-element software produces
data of interest in an iterative process and provides results complete with
convergence error analysis. A single run of h-element software may take
shorter than the iterative solution performed by p-element software. How-
ever, the proper basis for comparison of speed between h and p-version
software is to compute data of interest and verify that the associated er-
ror is small. This basis for comparison shows that p-elements are actually
faster. P-element software automatically generates a convergence error
analysis. H-elements require that users perform several mesh refinements
which may be time consuming.