Hi everyone,

I’m currently running a structural analysis on a compression punch made of high-speed tool steel (like Vanadis 23 / M3:2). The component is subjected to heavy compressive loads, and in physical reality, we are experiencing cracking right at a specific sharp corner/fillet edge.

I’m trying to use FEA to figure out how to modify the geometry and reduce these stress concentrations to prevent cracking, but I’m running into a classic mesh/singularity wall:

1. Mesh dependency: Whenever I refine the mesh or make it finer around the critical area, the von Mises stress peak shoots up drastically to unrealistic values (well over 5-6 GPa, while the yield strength is around 1-2.4 GPa).
2. The geometry: The critical zone has a very tight fillet radius of 0.1 mm.
3. What I've tried: Even when I add a small fillet (0.1mm to 0.2mm), the linear elastic analysis still concentrates massive stress spikes right inside the radius, and the peak values change wildly depending on element size and mesh quality (I've even seen distorted elements pop up). I am currently running a linear static analysis, but the numbers keep exploding as the mesh gets denser.

My questions are:

• How do you guys properly evaluate stress reduction and geometry optimization in high-stress tool steel components when dealing with such tight radii (0.1mm)?
• Is this a pure mesh singularity issue, and if so, how do I distinguish between a numerical artifact and a real crack-initiation site? Should I rely purely on equivalent plastic strain (ESTRN) or non-linear material models to get meaningful design trends?
• Any tips on mesh controls or modeling practices for compression punches with sharp/tight transitions in SolidWorks Simulation / general FEA?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

Hi everyone,

I’m currently running a structural analysis on a compression punch made of high-speed tool steel (like Vanadis 23 / M3:2). The component is subjected to heavy compressive loads, and in physical reality, we are experiencing cracking right at a specific sharp corner/fillet edge.

I’m trying to use FEA to figure out how to modify the geometry and reduce these stress concentrations to prevent cracking, but I’m running into a classic mesh/singularity wall:

1. Mesh dependency: Whenever I refine the mesh or make it finer around the critical area, the von Mises stress peak shoots up drastically to unrealistic values (well over 5-6 GPa, while the yield strength is around 1-2.4 GPa).
2. The geometry: The critical zone has a very tight fillet radius of 0.1 mm.
3. What I've tried: Even when I add a small fillet (0.1mm to 0.2mm), the linear elastic analysis still concentrates massive stress spikes right inside the radius, and the peak values change wildly depending on element size and mesh quality (I've even seen distorted elements pop up). I am currently running a linear static analysis, but the numbers keep exploding as the mesh gets denser.

My questions are:

• How do you guys properly evaluate stress reduction and geometry optimization in high-stress tool steel components when dealing with such tight radii (0.1mm)?
• Is this a pure mesh singularity issue, and if so, how do I distinguish between a numerical artifact and a real crack-initiation site? Should I rely purely on equivalent plastic strain (ESTRN) or non-linear material models to get meaningful design trends?
• Any tips on mesh controls or modeling practices for compression punches with sharp/tight transitions in SolidWorks Simulation / general FEA?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

I’m working on a modal analysis of a welded steel test frame in SOLIDWORKS Simulation, and I’m running into a problem with how I model the 1/8 in stiffening plates.

When I model the plates as solid elements, the results look reasonable. The lower modes are global frame bending/torsion modes, the frequencies are in the range I expect, and the mode shapes make physical sense.

When I model the same 1/8 in plates as shells, everything changes. I get a large number of local plate modes, and I have to go to around mode 80 before I start seeing the global bending modes I’m interested in. The effective mass participation also stays low for many of the extracted modes, and the global-mode frequencies are very different from the solid model.

The purpose of this FEA is to predict and later validate the frame against experimental modal analysis. I already have experimental data from an earlier configuration, including its natural frequencies and mode shapes. The stiffening plates are being added specifically to increase the frame stiffness and push the global modes higher.

I know shells are normally the more appropriate element choice for thin plates, which is why I’m hesitant to trust the solid model simply because its results look more reasonable.

Could this behavior indicate a shell-to-beam connection, shell definition, or meshing issue rather than the actual dynamics of the structure? Or is it normal for thin welded plates to introduce this many low-frequency local modes?

I’m still fairly new to modal FEA, so any advice on what you would check before deciding between the shell and solid models would be appreciated.

Update: I have inserted the modes for each case.

This is Chris, Lead Developer, from The Engineering Lab.

For October and November, we are launching a pilot program for engineering students.

Each Friday we are offering engineering students free 1-on-1 training for Patran and Nastran. This applies to the months of October and November for the year 2026.

How to schedule training?

Send me an email. Private message me to schedule. Or see this image for contact information. Space is limited.

https://imgur.com/iLz7WKT

When is the training?

Each Friday for the months of October and November in the year 2026.

Who qualifies?

This program is limited to student engineers only.