CAE and simulation
Run a structural analysis
Evaluate displacement, stress, and reactions with a documented model and verification checks.
Use Adam to set up a structural study, inspect an existing one, or compare design revisions. Name the solver if you have a requirement; otherwise ask Adam to check an available formulation appropriate to the problem.
Choose the right physical model
A small-displacement linear study can answer some stiffness questions. Contact separation, snap fits, large deformation, impact, or material yielding may require different physics. A modal shape shows a vibration mode with arbitrary normalization; its plotted amplitude is not an operating displacement prediction.
Provide geometry and units, sourced material properties, physical attachment, loads, and the quantity you need. Distinguish an applied force from a prescribed displacement: the latter can be used to calculate the reaction needed to impose that motion.
Start with a controlled example
For an illustrative study, model a rectangular cantilever 120 mm long, 20 mm wide, and 4 mm thick. Use an ideal linear elastic material with E = 70 GPa and Poisson ratio 0.33. Fix the end at x = 0 and distribute a total 10 N load downward over the opposite end face, bending through the 4 mm thickness. Check small-deflection assumptions. Report tip displacement and support reaction, compare displacement with a beam estimate, and examine mesh sensitivity. Label the idealized fixture and material assumptions.
This is a numerical learning example, not a qualification of a real bracket or joint.
Compare with the beam estimate
For the idealized end load above, the elementary bending estimate is deflection = F L³ / (3 E I), with I = width × thickness³ / 12. In consistent N and mm units, E = 70,000 N/mm² and I = 106.67 mm⁴.
| Quantity | Reference value |
|---|---|
| Tip deflection magnitude | Approximately 0.771 mm |
| Vertical support reaction magnitude | 10 N |
| Support bending moment magnitude | 1,200 N·mm |
These are beam-theory reference values. A three-dimensional finite-element model can differ because of its formulation and end constraints. Ask Adam to explain the difference and mesh sensitivity. A factor-of-1,000 discrepancy is a reason to check units before changing the physics.
Inspect setup and results
Verify the physical inputs
Read back material assignments, units, load direction and total, support locations, and contact assumptions.
Run and preserve evidence
Keep the input deck or native study, mesh, solver version, logs, and achieved load or time step.
Check numerical behavior
Review termination, finite results, equilibrium where available, and refinement of the requested response.
Interpret the engineering result
Compare against the supplied requirement and explain the effect of assumptions, singularities, or missing checks.
Compare a design change
Compare revisions A and B under the same documented load case. Rebuild geometry selections and remesh each revision. Report mass, displacement at [location], and stress using the same component and averaging convention. Keep material and support assumptions fixed. Include solver completion, reaction balance where available, and mesh sensitivity before recommending a revision.
A stress peak at an idealized constraint may not be a meaningful failure criterion. A factor of safety needs the appropriate material limit and failure mode; displacement alone does not establish strength.
For native studies, see Native CAE setup. For deliverables, see Results and comparison.