How do MSC Nastran, nx Nastran, and NE Nastran compare? 2

[semni]

I have come to the conclusion that Nastran is the best FEA solution for my company's needs. Please tell me what you know about the strengths and weaknesses of MSC Nastran versus nx Nastran versus NE Nastran. Some of my areas of interest are:

- Capabilities / Features
- User interface / Ease of use
- Robustness (software bugs)
- Quality of documentation
- Quality of technical support
- Price

In addition, which pre/post processor is the best choice for each one (Patran, FEMAP, or something else).

 

[pjhype]

semni,

Now that you have decided that Nastran is the FE code that you want to use, you should contact the sales reps for these codes and get demonstrations. You might also ask if they have "evaluation versions" of the codes so that you could try using them yourself. I don't know about NX or NE Nastran, but if you go with MSC Nastran 4W, the recommended pre/post processor is FEMAP.

pj

 

[rocketsci]

NX/Nastran from EDS(makers of Unigraphics) is the 2001 Version of MSC/Nastran. The FTC ruled that MSC had to provide this version to EDS and must remain compatable for 3 yrs. EDS is leasing the NX/Nastran product at about a 25% cost savings over the MSC version.

NE/Nastran: I have done a short demo of this product which used FEMAP as its pre and post processor. Its very compatable with MSC and sould be with NX Nastran as far as most cards go. I only evaluated this product for dynamic analysis. The results were very close to the MSC results and some from modal testing also.

I hope this helps.


Don Harris (rocketsci)

 

[hombre]

In my opinion, MSC/NASTRAN with PATRAN is the best package. I have used MSC/NASTRAN with FEMAP and have evaluated NE/NASTRAN with FEMAP for my previous employers.

While NE/NASTRAN is a very strong package, it does not have all of the advanced capabilities that MSC has due to its relative newness (ie, DMAP alters, ASETS, smaller element library). Give NE/NASTRAN a few more years, and they will catch up due to their responsiveness. MSC is now almost too large to respond to the smaller companies.

PATRAN is the better pre/post processor because I found it to be the most integrated with the features found in NASTRAN. Again, this is probably due to the fact that it has been around longer.



Hope this helps.

Hombre

 

[mcoggs]

my experience with NE/Nastran which uses FEMAP as a pre & post has been excellent from a capabilty stand point. data files are transferred seamlessly with our customer who uses MSC. tech support is very detailed repsonsive.
what has not been mentioned is price and it beats both MSC and NX by 100%.

 

[jwh2]

Hi,

I have been using NE Nastran ever since
CSA Nastran sold out to MSC. The latest
version of NE has a very fast solver and
works well with Femap. The annual fee for
NE Nastran and Femap is about $1800 for
statics and modal analysis capabilty.

Thanks
jwh

Warren Hoskins
warren_hoskins@att.net

 

[glenn11897]

been in the industry for 2 yrs now and all i can say is that 'right now,' MSC.Nastran & MSC.Patran is a good combo. Although its more expensive than NE, you get the advantage of having the leaders in the Nastran side of FEMs. Documentation is great, they have a support website that can get you started with the software and more... good luck...

 

[trainguy]

NE Nastran all the way.

Amazing tech support - i.e. "Send us your model and we'll run it here" support. Look and feel of Msc.

tg

 

[ThiloT]

I cannot directly compare NX vs. NE Nastran, but I can compare the experiences with both companies a bit:
EDS is treating FEMAP like an unwanted stepchild, rather slow development, bugfixes take commonly until the next release (~once a year), official support only if you purchase directly from EDS etc. Typical big company overhead. It still is a decent Pre/Post, but IMHO it falls behind year after year. I cannot comment on how that translates over to NX/Nastran, but as this is not EDS' core business I would be at least a bit cautious.

As stated above by others, there is not much you can possibliy improve about customer support and responsiveness with Noran engineering and NE/Nastran. Haven't seen a better company in this matter and industry. The solver is on par with MSC or NX IMHO - but this view depends on your individual needs (DMAP, special elements etc.)

 

[labosonic]

Considering your problem, I want to had a question : do you need nastran only analyze or also to share models with others.
In the first solution, each code will be OK and as a pre/post i'll say you FEMAP is quite simple.
In the second option, you ll have to buy a MSC solution (MSC-Nastran or NX-Nastran) with the pre/post you want.

It is true that NX Nastran is MSC Nastran V2001 obtained by EDS courtesy of an antitrust judgement.
So NX Nastran = MSC NAstran 2001 but EDS is not an expert in the code just like MSC so you have to judge if the assistance they will offer you will be efficient comparing to the cost saving.
Knowing the problems involded by giving MSC Nastran latest version, MSC decided during 2003 to report the version of a potential MSC Nastran 2003 to make a huge MSC Nastran 2004 release (out since 1 month).
This version is very different from 2001 so take care if you have to share with people that have MSC Nastran 2004.
There is a new non-linear solver based on MSC Marc (sol 600) and they have changed the element formulation of CQUAD4 element (one of the most commonly used)

 

[brad]

Labosonic--
A few clarifications:
I wouldn't say that Nastran 2004 is "very different" from 2001; MSC has introduced new features, but there is no significant difference on existing features (and many would argue that the new features are not "mission-critical".

Additionally, the CQUAD4 has not been reformulated; rather the CQUADR has been reformulated and MSC is recommending that this be used as the new shell default. CQUAD4 itself is essentially unchanged.

Brad

 

[labosonic]

Soory for my lack of information, brad. I'ld rather stop talkin' about nastran because i'm not working with it no more ...

 

[manam]

I am guessing that 2 years from now NX version will be much better than the MSC version. Louis Komszik, Tom Kowalski et al who were at MSC and later in SAS are now working on NX version.

 

[rjw57]

I concur with ThiloT and trainguy on NE Nastran. I admit that I am very biased in this matter. I am familiar with the support from several scientific packages, i.e. Fluent, Aspen, & Mathcad. By comparison, Noran is like having a friend in the business. I have never had a company so willing to work with me both in terms of the software and even helping me when money was a little tight. I am a very small business (me) and cost is a very serious condsideration. Here is my assessment of your bulleted items.

- Capabilities / Features: NE Nastran = MSC Nastran unless you absolutely need DMAP and some of the more esoteric elements as noted by ThiloT. I don't know what you are planning on analyzing, but it sure would help to know in order to steer you in the right direction. I believe that NE Nastran will be on par with MSC very soon. I know that they are working hard to beat MSC and if you look at the 8.2 vs 8.3 version features, you will see this. As for NX Nastran, my only experience with EDS is FEMAP. If they treat NX like they are treating FEMAP, I would think it would be slow to develop. Big company = Slow responsiveness is my assessment.

- User interface / Ease of use: The NE Nastran editor is quite functional. Ask them for a copy of their latest user manual since I see that the web link pdf (

http://www.nenastran.com/NENeditormanual.pdf)

does not contain the manual. To be honest, I lack any formal training from Noran, however I am quite able to make the software work. My pre/post is FEMAP which is very tightly integrated with NE Nastran (for all intents and purposes, seamless), mature and highly functional.

- Robustness (software bugs): Perhaps someone from Noran would be willing to share bug reports with you. My only exparience with them for a very minor bug in release code was rectified within a day!

- Quality of documentation: Absolutely well documented with a very functional help system.

- Quality of technical support: IMHO, none better in terms of providing a proper solution in a very short period of time. They are truly 24/7. You also deal with the same tech instead of whomever happened to see your email at the time. This aspect of NE Nastran is truly its greatest strength which I have found over the years to be of paramount importance with any package of this nature.

- Price: NE Nastran is without a doubt your absolute best value. I am absoultely positive about this. Maintenance is also very affordably priced, but since you get so much back, it's downright cheap!

No, I am not paid to endorse NE Nastran. I just have no problem recommending them because my experience with them is so positive.

 

[hevia]

Agree with the trainguy. NE/Nastran is a great solution.

Capabilities / Features - don't know what analysis you want to do but NE is very comparable with capabilities to the others. Interface is almost the same as well.
User interface / Ease of use - they all are about the same and easy to use
Robustness (software bugs) - very little with NE in my experience (user since '98)
Quality of documentation - Good. Online documentation is great with tutorials and white papers.
Quality of technical support - Probably their defining quality. They are on it.
Price - One to one, NE will beat the others. Probably by a significant margin. Promotions excluded. Maintanence will be great with NE. Best value.

 

[ThomasH]

Hi all

I have read a few of the posts and come to the conclusion that NE/Nastran is almost as good as MSC.Nastran but much cheaper. As far as I understand NE/Nastran is a Nastran-version with FEMAP for pre/post.

So why not compare NE/Nastran with MSC.Nastran for Windows which is MSC.Nastran with FEMAP for pre/post?

As far as I can see the features are similar for NE and MSC probably because they can do most of what FEMAP supports.

The difference in price (NE/Nastrans "strongest" side) between MSC.Nastran stand-alone and MSC.Nastran for Windows is significant, Basic Analysis for N4W is $7500. I very much doubt that NE/Nastran is 5-10 times cheaper?

Any ideas or comments on this?

Thomas

Ps
I'm not trying to annoy anybody. It's just that I have read so many posts saying that NE/Nastran is good (I don't doubt that it is) and so very much cheaper than MSC.Nastran.

 

[GregLocock]

I couldn't get a non-wriggly price for NE, but it looked like about $4000, ie 40-50% of what MSCN4W costs.

I was just using FEMAP again the other day, not having used it (or any FEA) for a year or so. What an excellent program it is.



Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[ThomasH]

Thank you Greg

Now the difference in price between MSC and NE seem more resonable. I never doubted that NE were cheaper, but 6-7 times that I read in another tread seemed a bit exaggerated.

A factor 2 is a more resonable difference, not that I like it.

Regards

Thomas

 

[tomirvine]

I use NE/Nastran with FEMAP. I paid $10,000 for the total package. Maintenance and upgrades are extra.

The folks at Noran engineering, the NE/Nastran vendor, give excellent support, as has been previously mentioned.

I use NE/Nastran mainly for dynamic problems. It is my first choice for these problems.

I have a customer that occasionally gives me models with super-elements or some other modeling details beyond the scope of NE/Nastran. I run these under MSC/Nastran, which the customer provides access to.

I expect that future versions of NE/Nastran will have capabilities for super-elements, coupled-loads, and other features.

Tom Irvine

http://www.vibrationdata.com

 

[mikel526]

NE and MSC are very nearly the same. You can play them off against each other to get a better deal, perhaps. I don't know nx. FEMAP is a good little program. I have used it with external Excel VBA programs with great success.

However, for the money ANSYS is the better deal because it is better integrated, has APDL language programming, more robust solvers, etc.

However, if you are in the aircraft industry, most engineers have not used ansys and are staunch defenders of NASTRAN. It is interesting to note that Dr MacNeal left MSC to work with ANSYS....

http://www.arclen.com