Ansys or Abaqus

[6DOF]

We're considering purchasing one of these packages, Ansys Structural or
Abaqus Standard. I've used Ansys Workbench 10 a little, but have
not used Abaqus. Has anyone used both of these packages?
Would you please comment on which one might by better and why?



We would be using it for nonlinear (material and contact) evaluations mostly.



Thanks!

 

[acook]

Hey 6DOF,

Your nick really fits well in this forum.

I have used both (ANSYS since version 8 and Abaqus 6.x.x). Like you, I have done more with ANSYS though. Between the two, I think they are very similar as far as usability (although, sometimes both UIs can get a little funny on you).

There are differences and way to many to be listed here. Personally, I would perfer ANSYS ans thats becuase I have worked my fanny off understanding it (and it can be bear to understand sometimes, just like Pro/Engineer). This is not a really good reason to choose one or the other. You will do fine with nonlinear analysis on both packages as they are both extremely pwerful.

Here is a couple links you may find useful (in other forums). You may or may not have seen these already. Some are pretty good and the first talks about price which is very important.:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=141914&page=1

[url]http://groups.google.com/group/sci.engr.mech/browse_thread/t hread/17b9f875e449c2a8/cf857631c1b67b32?lnk=st&q=ABAQUS+ vs.+ANSYS&rnum=3#cf857631c1b67b32 [/url]

The link above is a little old (pulled from USENET). Note that alot of changes have occured in both packages since this thread was started. I read through it and it still makes SOME valid points as far as I can tell.

I also like ANSYS because it integrates very nicley with Pro/Engineer, I don't know if ABAQUS has these same features as ABAQUS was recently aquired by Dassault Systems (makers of CATIA and ENOVIA).


Hope this helps.

 

[6DOF]

Thanks Adam. Your post was very helpful.



Here's what I found out:



Both packages are similar in capabilities. It seems that
Abaqus/CAE is generously improving its capabilities and functionality
with each release whereas Ansys is primarily focused on transferring
the functionality of core Ansys in to Workbench. However, most
people stated that Workbench is fairly well packed with capabilities
and they like the interface. Most people felt that Abaqus offered
much better support. Ansys' support is through there VAR's
whereas Abaqus' support is direct. Both packages offer direct
ProE plugins (no geometry transfer) which will handle parts and
assemblies. Both packages offer 64-bit software at no extra
charge. Ansys supports multiple processors at no extra charge,
but Abaqus only supports running on a single processor unless you
purchase an add-on which will allow you to take advantage of multiple
processor on one or more machinces (distributed computing).



Most references stated that Ansys would cost less than Abaqus.
However, I found the opposite to be true. Abaqus' business model
is geared towards a yearly lease of the software. However, they
do offer an outright purchase. We currently have a flavor of
Nastran and Ansys is willing to give us a 35% discount if we 'trade' it
in. They said that we wouldn't actually have to give them the
software and we could still use it (good thing because we do like it a
lot). They just use this as a marketing tool. Including
this discount, Ansys/Mechanical would still cost $1500.00 more than an
outright purchase of Abaqus/Standard with Abaqus CAE. Both
packages include their respective ProE plugin. Ansys yearly
maintenance would cost about $40 more per year (a wash).



HTH anyone else that is considering one of these packages. In
general it seems you can't go wrong with either one. Price and
support seem to be the driving factors of a purchase.

 

[acook]

Hey 6DOF,

This is very interested concerning the price. I know for a fact, that a while back (circa 1992) we were quoted a price for ABAQUS and ANSYS and for the packages in each that we require (basic structural, mostly thermal, and some electromechanical), ANSYS was ALOT cheaper. In addition, back then, a selling point for ANSYS was its straight foward GUI system (which still needs some improvement in my opinion).

I am sort of surpirsed the difference in price is that much and ANSYS is MORE expensive. This may be due to the fact that ABAQUS was aquired by Dassault Systems but it also may be just the way things go. Both packages are extremely powerful and I alsways liked the support we got for ANSYS (Belcan ANSYS).

Hope this helps.

 

[6DOF]

Exactly, in 2000, when we purchased Nastran, we also evaluated Ansys
and looked at Abaqus. Abaqus wanted $22,000 per year for the
lease and $55,000 to buy outright. So we only evaluated Ansys and
Nastran. Ansys was $28,500 at that time and has gone up
since. Abaqus is now under $20,000 excluding maintenance and the
ProE plugin. It's now under $10,000 for a yearly lease. I
asked our local Abaqus rep. why the price dropped so much. He
said that they're trying to compete with Ansys. I suppose a
little competition is good for us, the users, in the end.

 

[karunnt]

Hello,

I am thinking of buying either ANSYS or ABAQUS.

Can anyone tell me what the current prices are for these packages. I am a ME but have been out of the loop for a while and would just like an estimate not an exact price.

Thanks.

 

[mechg]

Have you considered Mechanica? At about $10000 to purchase, it's considerably cheaper than either Ansys WB or Abaqus CAE, uses native ProE geometry and the UI is familiar to any ProE user. The functionality is very similar to Ansys WB (I can't comment on Abaqus - I haven't used it for a few years).

Regards,

Rod

 

[6DOF]

Yes, we've owned Mechanica for many years and prefer to use it when applicable. I used to be a PTC certified trainer for Mech (through WF3). Mechanica is an excellent package, but it has limited capabilities as compared with Abaqus. Specifically, at the time I was looking to purchase a high-end FEA code, Mech could not handle nonlinear materials which we need on almost all of our projects.
Abaqus has been a solid package for us and we're very pleased with the product and capabilities.