Diffrence b/w workbench,design space

[yehlo1972]

Hi

what is the difference b/w Ansys workbench and designspace
And also from the standard ANSYS package.

 

[jamesbewley]

Hello

Firstly standard "classic" Ansys is the original package. It is generally command based, although it does have a GUI.
Classic Ansys is generally used by proper analysts who have an appriciation of stress analysis.

Workbench is the new ansys interface. It is very point and click based and is meant to be used by design engineers or people who dont have the time or desire to learn stress analysis.
Workbench does not have all the funtionality of classic ansys although more is being added all the time.

Design space is simply a licencing option for workbench which gives the lowest possible functionality.
It is possible to have a multiphysics licence on workbench and get some of the coupled physics simulations.


Hope this helps

James


K2 Analysis limited

http://www.k2analysis.com

 

[yehlo1972]

Hi jamesbewley

Many thanks for the very clear and to the point answer.
I want to know what u meant by
"Workbench is the new ansys interface. It is very point and click based and is meant to be used by design engineers or -->people who dont have the time or desire to learn stress analysis.<---"

Why workbench is not teach, what classic ANSYS able to teach.

 

[newtofea]

ANSYS has 2 interfaces:
ANSYS Workbench and ANSYS (also referred to as "Classic")

It has several licenses with different capabilities such as:
DesignSpace
Professional
Structural etc.

When you have a DesignSpace license, you get ANSYS Workbench interface with the capabilities of DesignSpace.

When you get any other license above DesignSpace, you also get BOTH the interfaces, namely Workbench and ANSYS.

Workbench is a very user friendly and intuitive interface and has almost all the capabilities as of "standard" ANSYS. It is NOT correct to say Workbench is only DesignSpace.

Here is a demo of Workbench Interface:

http://www.ansys.com/assets/demos/scenarios.html

Here is a capabilities chart:

http://www.ansys.com/assets/brochures/capabilities-brochure.pdf

Summary:
Workbench and ANSYS are Interfaces
Based on the license level, you get the features.
You get BOTH the interfaces with all the licenses except DesignSpace.
Workbench IS NOT just DesignSpace.

Let me know if you have more questions or call your local ANSYS rep.

Regards,

Rob.

Sriram "Rob" Atchutuni
ANSYS Account Manager
STI Technologies
(

http://www.sti-tech.com)

 

[jamesbewley]

Rob

A much better description of the situation than my attempt.
Sorry if I caused confusion but I didnt mean to imply that workbench was only design space. I thought I had covered that with the following:

"Design space is simply a licencing option for workbench which gives the lowest possible functionality.
It is possible to have a multiphysics licence on workbench and get some of the coupled physics simulations."


yehlo1972


In terms of the text you questioned. Workbench is aimed more at design engineers, in that it does a lot of the work for you.
For someone who doesn't understand FEA this is a big bonus and it is the route ANSYS are keen to go down. For an FEA expert it can however be limiting and specify options which are not always 100% correct.
Classic is much more involved but requires knowledge of the whens and why's of FEA to be able to set it up correctly.
As I said Classic has greater functionality although Rob suggests that workbench has almost all of the same functionality (spoken like a true ANSYS sales rep )

If you are just starting out in FEA then I can fully recommend workbench as a user-friendly package. Just be aware of its limitations and try to (if you already haven't) get an understandingas to the basic principles of FEA.

Best Regards

James


K2 Analysis Limited

http://www.k2analysis.com

K2 Analysis Limited

http://www.k2analysis.com

 

[cbrn]

Hi,
Jamesbewley,
"For someone who doesn't understand FEA this is a big bonus and it is the route ANSYS are keen to go down. For an FEA expert it can however be limiting and specify options which are not always 100% correct."

I do believe what you're saying is extremely dangerous. If someone doesn't understand FEA at all then it's better for him and for the people's safety that he keeps his hands away from any instrument of this kind, be it user-friendly or not. Options are never 100% correct in the simulation world wrt the real one, but a good mechanical engineer must know which simplifying assumptions are correct (appropriate) or not. It's not a matter of WB vs Classical: in both programs, the choice of BCs do are correct and consistent: it's up to you to use them properly. In fact, WB has some more BCs which are nothing but internal macros to execute "Classical" commands in one pass, for example the application of a remote force which is one command in WB and a sequence of operations in Classical.
In no case at all, as far as I know, ANSYS' reps have ever claimed that WB is for "FE-newbies".

"Classic is much more involved but requires knowledge of the whens and why's of FEA to be able to set it up correctly."

Also WB, I can assure you. Your sentence can be easily reversed, in the sense that the ease-of-use of WB can be extremely treacherous for unexperienced people, who are much more in danger to do a "garbage calculation" believing that it's correct "because the program allowed it".

"As I said Classic has greater functionality although Rob suggests that workbench has almost all of the same functionality (spoken like a true ANSYS sales rep )"

That's true, because the solver is in any case the same; moreover, any APDL command typical of "Classical" can be added to Commands Snippets in WB, once you have fully understood its logic.

"If you are just starting out in FEA then I can fully recommend workbench as a user-friendly package. Just be aware of its limitations"

No, no. Be aware of YOUR limitations, if you are just starting with FEA.

"and try to (if you already haven't) get an understandings to the basic principles of FEA."

Yeah, this is perfect. BEFORE even switching on a FEA program, study, study, study and, if you have enough time for it, study even more.

Regards

 

[jamesbewley]

Hello cbrn

Totally agree with you comments. In particular this one

"in the sense that the ease-of-use of WB can be extremely treacherous for unexperienced people, who are much more in danger to do a "garbage calculation" believing that it's correct "because the program allowed it"".

I think it is fair to say that compared to classic, workbench is aimed more at the more casual user. In my opinion this is dangerous as a lesser understanding of FEA is required to get a result out. But yes I agree that this is also the case with Classic and it is up to the user to ensure they have the knowledge. Unfortunatly I think this isnt always the case.


In terms of functionality between the two, I appricate that workbench is effecitvly just away of graphical way of scripting a macro to run through the ANSYS solver however in my opinion it doesn't structure this file in the best possible way. Also operations like stress linearization are not easy to perform in workbench, if at all really.


Thanks for your comments


James


K2 Analysis Limited

http://www.k2analysis.com

 

[yehlo1972]

Hi all

thanks for ur words of advice. tht capabilities chart is great. for me i am keeping myself to the classical ANSYS then