In order to offer our customers the highest quality technical support, many support
enhancements are scheduled to be implemented. Currently GPBEST technical support is
available to commercial customers via email to firstname.lastname@example.org
and by telephone at (716) 639-1920 USA.
|Quick response time.|
|Knowledgeable staff for all GPBEST questions.|
|Website question and answer archive.|
|GPBEST user news and update mailing list.|
|GPBEST specialized solution forums.|
Frequently Asked Questions
- "What is the difference between Finite Element Method (FEM) and
Boundary Element Method (BEM)?"
- FEM requires a volume mesh where BEM only requires a surface mesh. It is much more
difficult to incorporate gaps and contact analysis involving multiple material properties
using FEM than BEM where this type of analysis is inherently better suited. Design changes
involving small changes in the geometry are much more easily incorporated in the BEM
surface mesh also.
- "Is the skinned surface mesh from FEM analysis appropriate for BEM
- Often the skinned surface mesh from FEM analysis is too refined for an efficient BEM
analysis. BEM only requires the geometry to be captured correctly in order to model the
body accurately. One can then, with the same surface mesh, use either linear or quadratic
shape functions for analysis. As a rule of thumb: one quadratic
BEM surface element can be used for every four quadratic FEM surface elements.
- "How do I know that the boundary element solution has converged?"
- If the appropriate order shape functions have been used and the geometry has been
captured; the convergence is excellent. In other words no further mesh refinement is
required. As a subsequent measure of convergence GPBEST calculates a load balance to aid
in measuring the level of accuracy.
- "My FEM and BEM solutions are different; what does this mean?"
- Often times users observe much higher stress concentrations in a GPBEST analysis versus
a FEM analysis. After closer inspection, often a more refined FEM analysis will begin to
approach the GPBEST solution. This is a testament to the unequaled accuracy of the
boundary element method. Furthermore, many of our users have actually run experimental
testing to prove that GPBEST correctly modeled the stress concentrations.