The Difference Between Static and Dynamic Analysis - Enterfea

START HERE!
LOG IN ENGLISH 
CONSULTING COURSES PORTFOLIO BLOG CONTACT
Test your FEA skills! only 3 min.
The difference between

static and dynamic MOST
analysis POPULAR
When I was doing my rst civil engineering design I hardly
thought about dynamics. Static analysis was “all there 
was” for me. And to some degree, it might have been even
Test your FEA
skills!
justi ed back then. Now, when I understand a bit more, I Quiz (2-3 min.)
would like to take you on a trip! We will learn about the

differences between statics and dynamics! All about
Buckling
The main difference between static and dynamic analysis Analysis
posted on August 20th,
is TIME! If the load is applied so slowly, that inertia
2019
effects won’t play a role, all you need is static analysis.

Dynamic analysis handles impacts and other “fast”
FEA by Hand
happening situations, but also vibrations (which happen posted on March 9th,
in time). 2019

But of course, there is implicit and explicit, and all the How Accurate is
exciting stuff! So let’s get rolling! FEA?
posted on February 3rd,
2019
Starting slow 
Linear vs
Nonlinear FEA!
(deeeespaaaacito!) posted on February 20th,
2019
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will
assume that you are happy with it.
Ok
Stay
newsletter
updated!
Get all new posts
directly to your inbox.
Your name
Your e-mail
This part will be short (and slow!) because it’s about static
I agree to receive
analysis.
marketing materials. Read
The basic idea is, that the load you have applied to your more…
structure just is there. Furthermore, it could have already

Sign Up
been there those precious seconds after the Big Bang! In
short, it doesn’t matter how this load “got there”, but it’s
there now and it won’t change later. If you want a slightly
more scienti c description, this more or less means that
the load is applied extremely slowly! So slow in fact, that
the speed of the load application can be omitted!
SEARCH
Search... 
Static analysis in a nutshell:
It doesn’t matter how you apply the load. Solver

assumes that this is happening extremely
CATEGORIES
slowly. This means that the way you apply the
load has no impact on structural behavior.
FEA: Basics
The load is not changing in time – it is just
there… and that’s that! FEA: Intermediate
FEA: Advanced
Structural response to the static load CAN differ
in time (you know, things like creep, relaxation, FEA Design Tips
etc.). Engineers usually view such analysis as
Benchmarks
more specialistic, and not “simple static”. Still,
structural response changing in time is an FEA Topics:
option in static design.
• Linear Analysis
We use cookiesThe
to ensure thatload
fact the we give you changing
is not the best experience
doesn’t on our website. If you continue to use this site we will
mean • Nonlinear Analysis
that the structural response is linear! All sorts of
Ok is high • Meshing
fun things can happen! If the load
enough it can cause buckling, yield and all sort • Boundary
of other cool things. This, however, doesn’t Conditions
change the fact that the analysis is “static” in
• Post Processing
nature!
• Contact
• Linear Buckling
Without a doubt, the static design is really popular. In fact,
in Poland when someone will do calculations of a Case Studies
structure they would say that they are going to do “static
Structural Design
design” or simply “statics”. I know the same is true in
Topics:
several other countries as well.
• Structural Steel
This is mostly because static is much easier to calculate
• Stability
then dynamic, and require less sophisticated software to
do so! This also means that people will prefer doing • Connections
statics. Which in turn leads to something pretty interesting
Basic Engineering
and that is…
Concepts
Art of Engineering
Static load equivalent Q&A
RFEM
FEMAP
Events
Free FEA
essentials
course!
You see, “back in the day” it was almost impossible to
First Name
calculate impact, etc. Simply put software was to “weak”
to do so. I assume you could do such things at
Universities, etc. But in a typical structural o ce, it was out Email
of reach – at least in civil engineering.

I agree to receive
But of course, this doesn’t mean that impacts didn’t marketing materials. More
happen!
We use cookiesThere were
to ensure thatstone
we givecrushers, things
you the best were on
experience thrown
our website. If you continue
Start to use thisFEA
learning sitetoday!
we will
out of trucks on structures (inassume
gravel that
plants and
you are similar
happy with it.
Ok
facilities) and myriads of other things (including even a car
hitting the building you are designing).
But how people handled those if they couldn’t perform the

dynamic analysis?
… well, they increased the static load!
Static load equivalent
In essence if something will impact our structure you

may not have to calculate the actual impact. I know it
would be super cool to do such things! But often you
don’t have the software, and more importantly, the
time to do such analysis.
This is where static equivalent of dynamic load comes

in play.
The idea is simple: just increade the load with the

“dynamic factor”! Then you can treat it as static load
in your analysis.
I saw various “dynamic factors” in my career, starting

from a humble 1.5 and going up to around 10. If I
would have to give the most popular value it would
de nitely be 4.0. However, 2,0 would be close behind
it.
Of course, the value of “dynamic factors” depends on

the industry and what you are trying to do. Often
times, those were estimated and then “passed along”
for decades. The origins of many of the values are
long forgotten. But it doesn’t mean that this approach
doesn’t work! Far from it! I think that most civil
engineering structures with impact loads were
designed this way!
This
We use approach
cookies is so
to ensure thatpopular, thatthe
we give you many manufacturers
best experience on our of
website. If you continue to use this site we will
assume this
various technical equipment supply that you are happy with
information in it.
their datasheet! For instance, you get the machine
Ok drawing
(to know how to connect it to the structure, etc). Usually,
this drawing contains machine weight (the real one) and
the “static weight” you should use in design. If the
machine can cause horizontal loads, the manufacturer
should provide those as “static equivalent” as well. Cool
huh!
You will also get a frequency of the machine, along with all
of the above. And this nicely leads us to another part of
this article!
Dynamic or not dynamic –

vibrations!
This is where things start to be a bit more interesting. I

think it’s obvious that “vibrations” are a dynamic thing. But,
you most likely won’t need all the fancy stuff to analyze
vibrations! This is the realm of “linear dynamics”.
In essence, you can use modal analysis to predict vibration

modes of your structure (as long as the structure itself
behaves in a linear way). And what is interesting is, that
loads in this analysis don’t change in time. In fact, the
solver will “change” the loads you select into the mass of
your model. It will simply ignore the rest of the loads! So
there is no “load changing in time” component yet!
You may think about modal assume
analysisthatasyouabout Linear
are happy with it.
Buckling Analysis (LBA) of dynamics! It’s there,
Ok it does
help, but it’s not the pinnacle of human achievement in the
eld!
Modal analysis
Modal analysis allows you to predict natural

frequencies of your linear model. This way, you can
check if you may have vibration problems. Of course,
you don’t want the applied load frequency to be close
to the one you’ve got for your structure in modal
analysis. If that is the case, it’s better to be careful,
since your structure can enter resonance, and this
hurts!
Resonance is of course dangerous. It’s the situation where

the amplitude of vibrations increases A LOT! I don’t want
to say that it increases to “in nity” because of the
damping. But still, it increases enough to destroy your
structure if the source of vibrations isn’t shut off quickly
enough!
Storytime!
When I was a student I was in a building during resonance

once. And nothing really bad happened, so I live to tell the
tale. In Wrocław, the civil engineering department is a 10
story building, and they were making a parking space
behind it. Since they needed to compact sand they used
those small “hoppers”. You know the small machines that
Ok
basically “jump” up and down to compact the ground
below them. It so happened that the frequency of the
hopper “jumps” they used matched almost perfectly to the
natural frequency of our building. So naturally, after some
time the building started to shake!
I was in the lecture on the 1st oor so it wasn’t so bad. But

people from the 10th run down in panic on the stairs (they
were afraid to use elevators). Luckily someone realized
what was going on! They run to the guys doing the parking
space and ask them to take a break… and things
stabilized!
But I also helped in the design of repairs of the steel

structure that entered resonance! This time the source
was some technology thing, and before they shut it down,
many of the welds and bolts cracked. Luckily the crew was
wise enough to run off and shut down the machine by
killing the electricity from afar!
So yea… you may want to pay attention to natural

vibrations, and modal analysis will help you here. Sadly, it’s
pretty costly to change the natural frequencies of the
structure once it is built! So it’s better to pay attention!
Share this post

with your
Friends!
 Facebook Share
 LinkedIn Share
High-end shaking!
Ok
Of course, modal analysis isn’t all you can do. It’s more or
less the beginning I would say. Just as LBA in buckling, the
modal analysis doesn’t paint a “full picture”.
In fact, you can do a forced response analysis, that would

be an equivalent of nonlinear buckling (jut to drag the LBA
analogy a bit more). This would be a type of more
advanced analysis, and I won’t have anything against
calling it “dynamics”!
In essence, you de ne the loads/accelerations that are

applied to the structure. Those loads/accelerations
change in time of course! Many programs have some
“historical earthquakes” already implemented there. But
you can let your imagination run wild as well (i.e. to t your
load to a certain machine, etc.). Then you run the analysis
and see how your structure will react to such loading
changing in time.
Forced response advantages:
Of course, forced response analysis is more di cult

and time-consuming to perform. So it has to have
some advantages because no one would use it
otherwise! This is the main one:
Forced response allows you to see, how your

structure reacts to various frequencies at once.
We use Modal
cookies toanalysis tells
ensure that youyouwhat
we give the bestare the “clean”
experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will
frequencies your assumewill
structure that you are happyinwith it.
vibrate
(eigenmodes). And what if in reality, youOkwill have
more than one frequency present? You also learn how
your model reacts to vibrations that have different
frequencies than eigenmodes. The fact that frequency
of the vibration doesn’t “hit” the eigenmode doesn’t
mean that you can simply ignore it…
There is a trick here. If you have a load, that changes 20

times in 2 seconds… you could actually calculate 20
different linear static analyses (for each different load).
The “animation” between those 20 static analysis
outcomes may look as if you really did forced response
analysis. I’ve seen people who claimed such a thing…
This is of course not what this is about! In “real” forced

response analysis your structure will vibrate even after the
load ends. Since you usually de ne just a few seconds of
the load, it’s simple to check! Just see what is happening 3
seconds after the load ends. And it’s shouldn’t be
“nothing”, unless you have some seriously crazy damping!
You are expecting that the structure will still vibrate
because of the load you applied before.
Dynamic or not dynamic –

fatigue!
So cookies
We use we explored vibrations
to ensure so far,
that we give you tackling the idea of
the best experience on loads
our website. If you continue to use this site we will
assume
changing in time in force response that you are happy with it.
analysis.
Ok
Another interesting phenomenon that you can meet in your
designs is fatigue! Here, the situation is literally opposite
to the one I in modal analysis! The load changes in time,
but we will do static analysis to handle it (in most cases at
least)!
I’m mentioning it brie y here since I don’t think most

people would classify fatigue as “dynamic”. Although
fatigue is often associated with vibrations. But since I
used “load changing in time” as my dynamic de nition it’s
only fair to mention it here!
The idea is, that repeating load cycles can cause

cumulative damage to the material. So it’s not only about
the stress that is higher than yield. Rather, that 130MPa of
stress in S235 steel changing from tension to
compression may cause failure over time as well!
The thing is, that usually, load cycles are “static in nature”
and they don’t happen very fast. This means that there will
be no “inertia effects” in your analysis. And in such a case,
it’s “murky” to classify fatigue as a dynamic problem.
Simply put you will solve static cases to see the maximal
and minimal stress in any given place. Afterward, you
perform the fatigue checks “outside of FEA” (with scripts
or even hand calculations). Those static cases usually will
be linear, unless low-cycle fatigue will be considered. In
such a case, you have to include yielding you our analysis.
Of course, it can happen, that the cycles are “dynamic” in

nature with vibrations. That would be a nice mix of forced
response and fatigue case in such a situation!
Time for dummies…
Ok
De nitely, we are getting closer and closer to the analysis
of the actual dynamics. But before we start…
…there is one thing I should mention, and that is “dummy

time”. You see some solvers (like Adina used in SOL 601
of NX Nastran) want you to de ne time… even in static
analysis! It is seemingly stupid, but this is only a way of
introducing the “load factor” into the analysis.
While it may look like your load “depends” on time it’s not
the case! Time (in such a case “dummy time”) is only used
as a “counter” or load multiplier if you prefer.
The idea is simple: de ne how the load changes in the

“dummy time”. Usually, you want a linear dependence. You
know if dummy time is “0” then the Load is “0”. Of course,
you also de ne maximal dummy time “X” when the load
has “full value”. Just be aware that in the case of dummy
time “X” means… some measure of dummy time. It is not
in seconds (nor any other time unit). Dummy time is just a
measure of how much load is applied. In essence when
dummy time is equal to “X/2” then 50% of the load is
applied.
The best way to think about dummy time is as a load

multiplier. In fact, there is only one difference. The load
multiplier for the load you applied is 1.0. This means that
the load multiplier of 0.5 always means that 50% of the
applied load. With dummy time it’s not the case! You can
actually say, that maximal load is applied when the dummy
time is equal to whatever you like. Of course, it is still wise
to use 1… just to avoid mistakes. But technically you can
use a dummy time of 2346 to represent the “full value” of
the load you applied. In such a case, at dummy time
Ok
2346/2=1173 you will get 50% of the load.
Whenever you play like this with dummy time never forget
that the solver uses it to iterate the solution. So when you
change the dummy time at max load from 1 to let’s say
100 that is not all! It would be wise to adjust “dummy time
stepping” as well:
Using dummy time
Let’s assume we have a load of 1000kN. We want to

apply it in 100 equal steps of 10kN each.
Firstly the “simple case”. Let’s say that when the full
load is applied (1000kN) we have the dummy time =
1.0. In such a case, each step should be 1/100=0.01
units of dummy time to get our 10kN per step.
However, we may want to have the max dummy time =

300 units when the load is 1000kN. In that case, each
increment of the analysis should be 300/100=3 units
of dummy time. In essence, we still get 10kN in each
step.
It is easy to forget changing the “dummy time

stepping” in our analysis! This is why it’s best to stick
with dummy time = 1.0 for the full load. Just to avoid
weird mistakes!
Dummy time has its uses, even though they are not as
“grand” as you may think. I consider it a “perk” of certain
solvers. Some use it, some don’t but in the end, all work
the same. It just a matter of understanding how your
solver increments loads. There is only one “bene t” you
get from dummy time. You don’t have to toy with “steps” in
your analysis when you use it. Let’s imagine you want to
do such a multi-step analysis:
Step 1: apply 100% of the load

Step 2: decrease of 50% of the load
Step 3: increase the load to 75%
Step 4: Decrease load to 0…
Ok
Normally you will have to set up “steps” in your analysis.
Effectively there would be 4 analyses one after another, as
described above. But with “dummy time” you can make a
single analysis step. All you have to do is to say that the
dependence between time and load is:
Of course, you must say that the analysis should be from

Time “0” to Time “1”… and that is it. You don’t have to learn
how to make steps or how to restart analysis with other
loads. Perhaps this is a bit easier this way. That is one of
the differences between SOL106 and SOL 601 in NX
Nastran by the way.
Of course, it’s not all sunshine and rainbows. Dummy time

can be “irritating” to understand. Especially if your solver
needs it for nonlinear static and you don’t know about it. It
took me some time to gure it out for the rst time! And
even now I forget to set “dummy time” on occasion when I
do SOL 601 analysis in my NX Nastran.
There is one important thing to remember! The fact that

you de ned “time dependence” for your loads doesn’t
mean automatically that you are making a dynamic
analysis! There is a chance this is a static analysis with a
“dummy time”. It is always worth checking that in your
solvers manual. Sadly, in many cases “dummy time” is
described
We use asensure
cookies to “time”that
in your software.
we give It isexperience
you the best super easyonto
ourget
website. If you continue to use this site we will
confused! assume that you are happy with it.
Ok
If you are unsure if you are using “dummy” or “real”
time test it!
Set a time at max load to 0.0001 and do analysis. If

you have a static analysis with “dummy time” it will
work just ne. If you are really making a dynamic
analysis applying load in 0.0001s will cause some
funky effects! Most likely you will see impact waves in
your model and stuff. It is actually quite possible that
your dynamic analysis won’t converge with this setting
without some “ ghting” for it. Just remember, that if
you want to apply a load in 100 steps, each of those
steps should be 0.0001/100=0.000001 units of time!
It’s easy to forget to change the incrementation
settings in the solver!
The “True” Dynamic Analysis
Finally, we got to the heart of this. I guess that if you would

like to “oppose” static analysis with dynamic one – this is
it! Sure, along the way we have discussed some interesting
topics on vibrations, etc. Some of those analyses can
easily be called “dynamic”. But the “real” dynamic analysis
starts here!
The difference between static and dynamic analysis is

simple. As I wrote at the beginning, static analysis means,
that the load “is just there” and does not change in time
(which means it was applied really slowly!). Dynamic
analysis is precisely on the opposing side of the scale.
Here, we wonder how the load is applied and how fast it
Ok
happened. We take into account inertia effects and all the
jazz.
If you never met the term “inertia effects” it is simply this:
On the left, you see a nonlinear static analysis. Rotation is

applied to the handle… and the entire thing just rotates.
Nothing fancy really. This is what would happen if you
would apply the rotation to the handle very slowly. This is
the static domain, the load is applied so slowly, that you
can basically ignore inertia effects!
On the right – the same thing… but with a twist! This time I
applied the rotation “fast”, which called for dynamic
analysis. I actually had to set how fast the 90der rotation
will happen (in seconds) during load de nition. Notice, that
at the beginning handle moves before the tip realizes that
there is a movement to be made. Then the tip tries to
“catch up” and stuff begins to shake!
Note how the rod vibrates, even after the rotation is done!
Inertia effects!
The faster you rotate the shing rod, the bigger the
vibrations you get at the end. This “additional”
movement is caused by inertia.
This is why you can ignore “slow-motion” and treat it

as static in your models! The speed is so low, that
We use there are

cookies basically
to ensure thatno
weinertia
give youeffects.
the bestThere will be
experience no website. If you continue to use this site we will
on our
vibration at all after the load is done.
assume Most
that you loadswith it.
are happy
happen in this “slow” domain. Ok
But in “high speeds” inertia effects take place, and you
have to use dynamic analysis instead. Otherwise, you
may be missing important aspects of your model
response!
It’s not simple to say how fast is “too fast” for static. If
in doubt, it is better to use dynamic analysis “just in
case”. But if I would have to make a limit, I would say
that if the load is applied in minutes, it would be a
good ground to consider static analysis. Anything
faster calls for dynamics.
Of course, dynamic analysis allows for a lot of other cool

things. For instance, you can analyze an impact:
Notice how nicely all things come together here. Firstly, it’s
plainly obvious that I didn’t use “static load equivalent”. It
would be a possibility of course! Instead of the ball, I
would model a load on the impact area. The dynamic
factor would be an issue for sure! I don’t think I ever heard
about the values for such a case… and this is why I’ve
made the dynamic analysis instead! I simply didn’t have to
guess the dynamic factor, I could analyze what would
really happen at the impact!
Notice that after the ball bounced you can see the shell
vibrating
We use cookies slightly
to ensure due togive
that we impact.
you the This is a really
best experience nice
on our website. If you continue to use this site we will
example of inertia effects! Of assume
curse, that
youyou
canareset some
happy with it.
“crazy” dumping into the dynamic problem. InOk
such a case,
the vibrations will be very small. Usually, however, you
expect some “shaking” in the dynamic analysis even after
the load disappears.
The vibrations above are not the same as in the case of

modal or forced response analysis. There, you have a
constant source of the vibrations. You know, something
like rotating machinery, etc. Modal analysis (and forced
response) requires a constant “existence” of the vibration
source. Without the source, vibrations die out due to
dumping. Here, vibrations are just a “side effect” of
dynamic load. They are caused by the effects of inertia,
and of course without the “constant source” they die out
eventually.
The great battle of dynamic

solvers!
The shing rod and shell impact examples were done in an

implicit solver. This is usually how a “typical” dynamic
solver is called. But most likely you have heard about
explicit solvers as well. Those would t to solve the above
task as well.
But of course, there must be a difference between implicit

and explicit solvers. Otherwise, no one would bother to
implement
We use cookies toboth types!
ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will
Ok
In essence, the difference is in the “speed” of the
phenomenon you wish to analyze. If things are happening
in time longer than let’s say 1s (maybe even 0.1s) implicit
solver is great. If things happen faster (100ms or less)
most likely it will be better to use explicit solver.
In theory, both will work just ne for all problems. It’s just
that implicit solvers will compute much faster when the
analysis time is long, while explicit solvers excel at quick
solutions of problems with really short periods of “analysis
time”.
The implicit vs explicit battle is fascinating, and without a

doubt requires a post of its own. You can read much more
about it in this post! Here, I just wanted to mark that there
are 2 possibilities for solving dynamic problems in FEA.
Summary
I hope that you nd this useful. While there is a lot of

content here, let’s try to wrap this up a bit. The goal is to
make it easier to digest and remember for later.
Dynamic analysis involves time! Whenever the

speed of things is of essence or loads change in
time, dynamic analysis is your tool! But this means,
that if things are happening really slowly… you can
simply
We use cookies use static
to ensure analysis
that we give youinstead!
the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will
… but there is a problem with the above
Ok
de nition! It’s obvious that “impact analysis”
requires a dynamic approach. But, there are some
other effects where loads change in time. Those
include:
Vibrations! They are caused by loads that are

changing in time in a constant manner. And
since they are changing in time, they t into
the de nition. There are two approaches to
this. You can do the modal analysis to see the
natural frequencies of your structure. But you
can also perform a forced response. This will
show you how your model will react to the
given excitation. Both are fun, but without
doubt, a forced response in a more advanced
approach.
Fatigue! This is where it gets really “murky”! In

fatigue loads are time-dependent as well… but
you usually solve those as static problems
anyway. This is because changes in the loads
may happen really slowly over long periods of
time. Of curse, fatigue can also happen when
the loads change quickly (in vibrations). It’s
just something associated with time in
analysis, so I decided to mention it here.
Not everything dynamic needs to be solved that

way! Often times, you will just increase the impact
loads with a “dynamic factor” and then analyzed
them in a static way. This way, you don’t have to run
“fancy” analysis all the time. There is always an
important question, however! Who should say what
is the value of such a “dynamic factor” and who is
responsible for that value?
Even when you have “time” set up in your analysis

this may not mean you are doing dynamic
analysis! Sometimes nonlinear solvers (like Adina)
may require you to set “dummy time” simply to
iterate nonlinear static problems. This is just the
solver set up, and such time has no physical
meaning. Also, the effects ofthat
assume inertia
you arewon’t be it.
happy with
considered in such an analysis, which
Ok may be
important in your task! Read your solver manual to
make sure, but you can also do a simple test. Set the
time to be 0.000001 and then 1000 in a second
analysis. Then iterate your solution in both. If the
outcomes are the same, most likely this is a “dummy
time”!
2 avors of dynamic analysis! You can solve the

“real” dynamic problems with implicit and explicit
algorithms. You need to do this when things are
happening “fast” in your analysis. Such analysis also
includes the effects of inertia. Both implicit and
explicit approaches are ne, and not a single one of
them is “better”. But I should say that the explicit
solver is a part of fewer FEA packages. Since not
every FEA package even has one, the explicit solver
is seen as a “more advanced” thing.
I really hope that you’ve enjoyed the post. I would love you
to share your opinion (or questions) in the comments
below!
Want to learn more about

FEA?!
You are in the right place! Check my FREE online FEA
course, where I teach you about the most valuable lessons
I learned during my FEA career!
10 FEA
lessons I wish
I knew a
decade ago!
assume
Join the thatdon’t
course, you are happy with it.
learn
the hard way!Ok
First Name
Email
I agree to receive
marketing materials. Read
more
Begin your FEA

journey today!
Liked the article? Share it  


with friends!
18 Comments
Yaniv Ben-David October 25, 2019 at 8:19 pm - Reply
Great article Łukasz! As usual…
It is worth mentioning that a dynamic analysis

can be further divided into two sub-classes:
1. The tested item is stationary and exposed to
loads varying in time (in this case if they change
slowly enough the whole thing may be solved
statically, as you mentioned).
2. The tested item is actually free to travel in
space. The solver has to balance the loads with
the inertial forces. In this case – you have to be
extremely cautious before using a static
structural analysis instead of dynamic.
Regarding the fatigue – I would greatly

appreciate if you have the time to write a post
about fatigue analysis based on random
vibrations. i.e, de ning a PSD of the
accelerations an itemassume
would that
be subjected to,
you are happy with it.
and using the statistical stress results in order
Ok
to run a fatigue analysis. The part of ascribing a
single speci c frequency to a stress resulted
from a random vibration test is really
mysterious to me.
Łukasz Skotny October 26, 2019 at 7:19 am - Reply
Hey Yaniv!
That is a really good division that you

proposed! Thank you for that.
As for fatigue, I don’t think I’m quali ed

enough yet to post about such things. I
tent to operate within the eld I feel strong
about, and while I did fatigue analysis
before, it was not connected to vibrations,
so I never really had to go deep on the
subject. But you know how this is – life is
rich. I will have to learn this one day to
solve one problem or another – then I will
be to write a post like this 🙂
All the best

Ł
Mohammed Sohail Bakshi October 26, 2019 at 11:46 am -

Reply
Wonderfully chalked-out. Awsome!

Interesting point is in dynamic analysis, the
study of effect of set of frequencies just around
the eigen values of the structure. Exact
credibility of a structure could be framed (with
linear studies, atleast).
Thanks a lot, Sir Lukasz Skotny.
Hey Mohammed!
I’m really glad that you like the post!
To your comment, I’m only not sure if it is
Ok
possible to build an “accurate enough”
model of a big structure to analyze
frequencies in a lot of details. There are a
lot of parameters there, and personally I
always considered such calculations to be
“estimate” rather than accurate.
All the best

Ł
Darinel Mata October 29, 2019 at 2:20 pm - Reply
Sir,
Thank you very much for this another great

post! It’s very informative for Engineers like me
with limited knowledge in dynamic analysis. I
have tried one, though, using modal analysis
(Response Spectrum).
Thanks again and God bless!
Darinel Mata
Łukasz Skotny October 29, 2019 at 3:12 pm - Reply
I’m really glad that you like it Darinel!
All the best!

Ł
Yogesh Tripathi October 30, 2019 at 6:23 am - Reply
Dear Sir,
Your work is very effective. I learned so much
about FEA basics.
Thank you so much to explain fundas of FEA in
a very interesting manner.
Regards,
Yogesh Tripathi
Ok
Thank you Yogesh!
I’m really glad that you like my work!
All the best

Ł
Wesley Mascarenhas November 6, 2019 at 5:05 pm - Reply
Very instructive material. Thank you for posting

it.
Just one comment. The explicit method can
also be used to simulate quasi-static events, in
which contact and excessive element distortion
take place. A few years ago, I simulated the
swage process for conformation of terminal
hoses for offshore applications using Abaqus.
The real swage process took place very slowly,
taking about 35 seconds to be completed and,
despite the event time was so long, I had to use
the explicit algorithm to simulate it because
there was contact complexities, different kinds
of materials and very high levels of plasticity
and viscoplasticity, which led to excessive
element distortion.
Łukasz Skotny November 7, 2019 at 9:05 am -

Reply
Hey Wesley!
Wow, now that is an interesting example. I

can only guess how long the analysis
took! Crazy stuff. I never was in a
situation that I had to use such methods
so thank you for sharing your experience.
Do you think that convergence of implicit
or even static analysis was not possible at
all, or would it simply take more time than
waiting for the explicit solver to do its
thing?
All the best
Ł
Ok
Pradeep March 3, 2020 at 8:54 am - Reply
Really nice article to get started with Dynamic

analysis.
Thanks a lot for the article…..keep up the good
work.
Łukasz Skotny March 3, 2020 at 10:27 pm - Reply
Thank you Pradeep! I’m really glad that

you like it 🙂
Ridho Iqbal Maulana July 17, 2020 at 3:17 pm - Reply
so if the equation used by solver is differential

dynamic equation, that’s mean the inertial effect
is taking into acount automatically right?
i mean this equation (mx″+cx+kx=f(t)
Łukasz Skotny July 19, 2020 at 9:38 am - Reply
Hey!
I’m not a huge math fan in FEA, but I think

you may want to read this: https://abaqus-
docs.mit.edu/2017/English/SIMACAETHERefMap/simathe-
c-procedures.htm#simathe-c-procedures-
t-BasicFiniteElementEquations-sma-
topic1__simathe-c-procedures-eq1 I think
it may help, but I cannot be sure…
All the best!

Ł
Anubhab Mukherjee July 29, 2020 at 6:47 pm - Reply
Thank you for the post Sir. it was very

informative and useful.
We use cookies to ensure

I have that wethese
always give you the best
doubts( experiencebelow)
mentioned on our website. If you continue to use this site we will
in my mind related to assume that you are happy with it.

dynamics and statics and
nobody has yet able to satisfy me i Ok
mean i am
not 100% satis ed with their answer so i need a
help in this regard, Please. To my understanding
and knowledge.
Linear Static Analysis : the term linear refers

that the force deformation relationship is linear
and traces a straight line path and the term
connecting them is always a constant i.e ( k =
Force/ Deformation, or E = Stress/ Strain, is
always constant) and the term static refers that
the load is applied very slowly and as u said its
just there, it doesn’t change with time or in
actual term constant or very minimal change in
value over a long period of time and it is an
elastic analysis ( loading and unloading curves
are same)
Non-Linear Static : the difference with the above

reference is only in the rst part that is the
relationship is not linear ( it does not follow
straight line path)but still its static.
Linear Dynamic : the relationship is linear but

the load is applied very fast and the magnitude
varies with time. inertial forces developed in
masses are considered, so that’s why dynamic.
Non-linear Dynamic: the relationship is not

linear and the load is applied fast and the
magnitude also changes with time. inertial
effects comes into play.
Now in this regard i have heard people saying

that in case of non-linear static or non-linear
dynamic analysis materials deform beyond their
elastic limit and in elasticity comes into play. my
question is a material can deform in a non linear
way not following a straight line path but
elasticity is something whether loading and
unloading path are same or not , i mean it can
be nonlinear but still elastic. why it has always
to go into inelastic zone just because
assume the
that you are happy with it.
Ok
relationship is non linear.? it can be non-linear
elastic right?
one more doubt what is the difference between

gradually applied load and montonically applied
load? i found that gradually means that change
in the value of load occurs very slowly over a
long period of time and montonically is also like
the value of load increases/ decreases very
slowly over a large period of time. So what is
the difference in between them i am confused
and these two are always a static load right.?
One last query Sir, have you posted anything in

line with development of Response Spectrum
curve step by step from ground acceleration
data?
I am a student in Earthquake Engineering and i

am in a level of learning things right now and i
come across many doubts and confusions and i
get frustrated when i am not able to clear or
resolve it.
Thank you in advance Sir, i will be waiting for

your answer.
Łukasz Skotny July 30, 2020 at 12:33 pm - Reply
Hey Anubhab!
Wow, there is a lot of questions there, I

will try to unpack this a bit for you:
1. Read this: https://enterfea.com/how-to-

tackle-nonlinear- nite-element-analysis/
In short, you will learn there, that there are

SEVERAL things that can be nonlinear.
First is the Load/Deformation thing – it is
called “Nonlinear Geometry”. It can be
We use cookies to ensure that we give
nonlinear justyou
as the bestlaundry
in the experience on our
string, or website. If you continue to use this site we will
buckling goes into this category. This is
Ok
the “property” of your model geometry,
and how it deforms. It has nothing to do
with how material stress-strain curve
looks like, so material can be elastic or
not – it doesn’t matter, since the model
will react to load in a geometrically
nonlinear fashion. There are a lot of links
to other articles about this in the article I
linked above – you can read more there.
Then… there is material nonlinearity. It

doesn’t mean that material must yield,
permanently deform, or whatever. Every
time when the stress/strain curve is NOT
A STRAIGHT LINE means that you have
nonlinear material. Sure, this will often
mean yielding (as steel yields) but you
can just as easily can have nonlinear
elastic materials, that won’t yield, but will
still behave in a nonlinear way. Again, this
is a property of the material, and it has
nothing to do with geometrical
nonlinearity – this is something
completely different.
Sometimes folks refer to contact as a 3rd

nonlinearity… I always had mixed feelings
about this, but I don’t like “semantic”
battles, so let’s just leave it here.
How, each of the above ALONE means

that your analysis is nonlinear (all it takes
is one of those!). So if you have a linear
material, but nonlinear geometry…
analysis is nonlinear. But if the geometry
is linear, and material is nonlinear this is a
nonlinear analysis as well!
Of course, most often all of those effects

take place in a single model (so you have
both nonlinear geometry and material and
We use cookies to ensure that weifgive
contact youyou theto
wish best experience
have on our
it here as website. If you continue to use this site we will
well)
but that means that the problem is “just
as nonlinear”… Ok
For the analysis to be linear everything
has to be linear (so both geometry and
material properties). However, there are
algorithms called “linear contact” which
make “contact” have a pretty weird place
here (this is why I don’t like the topic, but
it’s a semantic thing really).
Hope that this clears things for you.
2. I never heard someone calling load

monotonic… so I can’t comment here…
3, I never developed Response Spectrum,

so I won’t help you here
I hope that this helps you a bit in

understanding stuff. De nitely read the
post I’ve linked too, and follow the
additional links there. When you read this
all, I’m pretty sure you won’t have your
doubts about the linear/nonlinear thing
anymore!
All the best!

Ł
Sudharshan R September 22, 2020 at 3:41 pm - Reply
Absolutely amazing. Really loved the way

concepts are explained; really overwhelming to
see such an informative blog on FEM, striving to
make the whole affair so easy and digestable!
Łukasz Skotny September 23, 2020 at 10:58 am -

Reply
Thank you a lot Sudharshan!
I’m so glad that you like my work!
Allthat
We use cookies to ensure thewe
best!
give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will
Ł assume that you are happy with it.
Ok
Leave A Comment
Comment...
Name (required) Email (required) Website
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for

the next time I comment.
POST COMMENT
CONSULTING PORTFOLIO COURSES   

BLOG NEWSLETTER COOKIE POLICY
Ok

The Difference Between Static and Dynamic Analysis - Enterfea

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Difference Between Static and Dynamic Analysis - Enterfea

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

START HERE!

CONSULTING COURSES PORTFOLIO BLOG CONTACT

Test your FEA skills! only 3 min.

The difference between

structure just is there. Furthermore, it could have already

It doesn’t matter how you apply the load. Solver

Static load equivalent Q&A

of reach – at least in civil engineering.

But how people handled those if they couldn’t perform the

… well, they increased the static load!

Static load equivalent

In essence if something will impact our structure you

This is where static equivalent of dynamic load comes

The idea is simple: just increade the load with the

I saw various “dynamic factors” in my career, starting

Of course, the value of “dynamic factors” depends on

Dynamic or not dynamic –

This is where things start to be a bit more interesting. I

In essence, you can use modal analysis to predict vibration

Modal analysis allows you to predict natural

Resonance is of course dangerous. It’s the situation where

When I was a student I was in a building during resonance

I was in the lecture on the 1st oor so it wasn’t so bad. But

But I also helped in the design of repairs of the steel

So yea… you may want to pay attention to natural

Share this post

In fact, you can do a forced response analysis, that would

In essence, you de ne the loads/accelerations that are

Forced response advantages:

Of course, forced response analysis is more di cult

Forced response allows you to see, how your

There is a trick here. If you have a load, that changes 20

This is of course not what this is about! In “real” forced

Dynamic or not dynamic –

I’m mentioning it brie y here since I don’t think most

The idea is, that repeating load cycles can cause

Of course, it can happen, that the cycles are “dynamic” in

Time for dummies…

…there is one thing I should mention, and that is “dummy

The idea is simple: de ne how the load changes in the

The best way to think about dummy time is as a load

Using dummy time

Let’s assume we have a load of 1000kN. We want to

However, we may want to have the max dummy time =

It is easy to forget changing the “dummy time

Step 1: apply 100% of the load

Of course, you must say that the analysis should be from

Of course, it’s not all sunshine and rainbows. Dummy time

There is one important thing to remember! The fact that

Set a time at max load to 0.0001 and do analysis. If

The “True” Dynamic Analysis

Finally, we got to the heart of this. I guess that if you would

The difference between static and dynamic analysis is

If you never met the term “inertia effects” it is simply this:

On the left, you see a nonlinear static analysis. Rotation is

This is why you can ignore “slow-motion” and treat it

We use there are

Of course, dynamic analysis allows for a lot of other cool

The vibrations above are not the same as in the case of

The great battle of dynamic

The shing rod and shell impact examples were done in an

But of course, there must be a difference between implicit

The implicit vs explicit battle is fascinating, and without a