New Page 1

PRODUCT	FatigueWizard > Benchmarks

Overview
Features

Tutorial

Benchmarks

Brochure

Software Benchmarks

As a potential customer, you need to know that the FatigueWizard produces the "right answers".

To confirm this, a series of benchmarks were performed against other well respected fatigue codes.

One of the more simple benchmarks can be seen here.

The tables below show direct comparisons between four fatigue codes (latest versions as of June 2002). The results from an identical Linear Stress Analysis were fed into the respective codes and the number of cycles to failure recorded.

The test case FE model can be seen below.

The results of a Linear Static Stress analysis can be seen below.

The following loadcurve was applied to the above model in all fatigue codes

The table below shows the number of cycles to failure for various mean stress correction methods. All analyses were performed using the most modern strain based methods

	Ncode	Falancs	I-Deas Durability	FatigueWizard
None	173500	147910	171462	161963
Morrow	92590	81283	89654	86694
Smith Watson Topper	61588	42657	58976	54311

The table below shows the results of all codes normalized to the FatigueWizard.

	Ncode	Falancs	I-Deas Durability	FatigueWizard
None	0.93	1.10	0.94	1
Morrow	0.94	1.07	0.97	1
Smith Watson Topper	0.88	1.27	0.92	1

It is clear that all codes give, essentially, the same answer to the question posed. There are obviously differences, but they are probably due to the way each code handles the material data in building strain-life curves.

Note that all codes were run on HP Unix machines costing at least $15000, EXCEPT the FatigueWizard results which were obtained on a 1GHz PC running W2000 and costing around $1000.

In summary, the FatigueWizard produces the same answers as it's competitors and does this very quickly on inexpensive hardware.

For further information see the tutorial provided.