From part to FEM analysis with AI.
AI2CAE · 2:31 · Video in German, without audio · AImation / Holger Peschke
This video series documents our journey into AI-assisted engineering: individual visuals or values may still contain errors and are being reviewed and improved step by step.
How the LLM controls the CAE workflow
A 1,500 N load acts on the shaft hub. The large language model controls the analysis workflow in the connected CAE system: setting up supports and loads, solving three meshes and comparing the results with a hand calculation.
- Represent locating and floating bearings, material and load case
- Compare mesh refinements r/5, r/10 and r/20
- Evaluate and document bearing reactions, deformation and notch stresses
The LLM coordinates the modelling, calculation and evaluation steps. The CAE system solves the numerical model; engineering review assesses the assumptions and results.
This is a linear-elastic, static demonstration analysis. Idealised supports, local stresses and mesh convergence require engineering assessment. Fatigue, actual bearing contacts and part approval are not established.
AI2CAE · Chapter 05
The model is built. Now comes the calculation.
A 1,500 N load acts on the shaft hub. The LLM coordinates the analysis through a tool interface; the CAE system performs the numerical calculation. The demonstration follows the result through to a documented comparison with a hand calculation.
Set up the model
Define the material, load and locating and floating bearing constraints. Check the assumptions before solving.
Refine the mesh
Compare r/5, r/10 and r/20. Observe how deformation and local stresses change.
Cross-check the results
Compare reactions and bending moments with equilibrium. Assess differences in deformation and notch stresses.
Document the assessment
Record results, assumptions and unresolved checks in the report. Engineering approval remains a separate step.
| Quantity | Hand calculation | FEM |
|---|---|---|
| Locating bearing reaction, magnitude | 3,464 N | 3,463.7 N |
| Floating bearing reaction, magnitude | 4,964 N | 4,963.6 N |
| Deflection at the hub end | 0.22–0.23 mm | 0.251 mm |
| Slope at the floating bearing | 1.9 arcmin | 2.5 arcmin |
| F1 relief: local tensile stress / σ₁ | 230–245 MPa | 268.2 MPa |
Where the methods agree
The bearing reactions closely match equilibrium. The bending moments also agree in the supplied comparison. This checks the global load balance; it does not establish every material or support assumption.
Where engineering judgment matters
At relief F1, the FE principal stress exceeds the estimate based on nominal bending stress and a stress concentration factor. Deflection and bearing slope differ as well. The supplied assessment discusses support idealisation, notch geometry and proximity to the bearing as possible influences.
Scope: linear-elastic static analysis. A strength ratio for this load case does not establish fatigue life or general suitability for service. Load assumptions, bearing representation and convergence must be checked for the actual application before part approval.
