GITNUXSOFTWARE ADVICE
Manufacturing EngineeringTop 9 Best Permanent Magnet Simulation Software of 2026
Compare permanent magnet simulation software options for electromagnetics design, with key tradeoffs and fit notes for engineering teams.
How we ranked these tools
Vendors set the topic, but our editors set the inclusion criteria and the evaluation framework before research starts.
Agents extract product evidence with provenance, then collect written reviews and transcribe video reviews and podcasts.
Framework: Features 40% · Ease 30% · Value 30%
Gitnux may earn a commission through links on this page — this does not influence rankings. Editorial policy
QuickField is the best choice for engineers who need fast, repeatable magnetostatic screening for motor designs because its parameter-study templates keep variants consistent, whereas Elmer FEM is the better alternative for teams that want equation-driven control over nonlinear magnet modeling and batch runs.
Editor’s top 3 picks
Three quick recommendations before you dive into the full comparison below — each one leads on a different dimension.
QuickField
Repeatable job templates that keep parameter studies consistent across geometry and material variants.
Best for: Fits when engineers need fast, repeatable magnetostatic screening for motor designs.
Elmer FEM
Editor pickEquation-driven project configuration lets magnet physics and solver choices be customized per study, not only selected from presets.
Best for: Fits when control over nonlinear magnet modeling and reproducible batch studies matter more than guided setup.
COMSOL Multiphysics
Editor pickPhysics-controlled meshing and parametric sweep workflows stay coherent across coupled electromagnetic-thermal studies.
Best for: Fits when teams need magnet plus thermal coupling with automated parametric sweeps on shared CAD geometry.
Comparison Table
QuickField
SMBFinite element analysis software for magnetic, electric, heat transfer, and stress problems including permanent magnet systems.
Repeatable job templates that keep parameter studies consistent across geometry and material variants.
QuickField supports typical motor and magnet modeling steps like importing CAD geometry, setting boundary conditions, and running nonlinear magnetic analyses for air gap fields and flux distributions. The workflow emphasizes quick edit cycles, with persistent model definitions that reduce rework when geometry or material properties change. Result viewing and extraction are geared toward engineering iteration, not only one-off inspection of a single solve.
A key tradeoff is that QuickField’s permanent magnet feature coverage and coupling options do not reach the breadth of large multi-physics suites. It fits teams who need fast magnetostatic runs and repeatable parameter sweeps inside a smaller electromagnetic scope, especially during early torque ripple and cogging torque screening.
- +Parameterized study workflow speeds repeated motor magnet iterations
- +CAD-to-solve pipeline reduces manual rework between design variants
- +Consistent result comparison for multiple geometry and material changes
- +Focused magnetic analysis keeps setup cycles short
- –Limited multi-physics coupling depth versus larger simulation suites
- –Advanced customization depends more on built-in workflow than scripting freedom
- –Automation and external integration options lag full API-centric ecosystems
- –Complex ferromagnetic modeling setups can require more careful material prep
Motor design engineers
Early-stage magnet screening
Shorter iteration loop
Product development teams
Variant management for motor BOM changes
Less study rework
Show 2 more scenarios
Analysis leads in engineering groups
Parameter sweep on magnet shaping
More confident tradeoffs
Compare field maps and derived metrics across controlled sweep runs.
Research engineers
Tool-assisted magnet geometry refinement
Faster geometry convergence
Iterate on model changes with tight solve-display feedback for field inspection.
Best for: Fits when engineers need fast, repeatable magnetostatic screening for motor designs.
Elmer FEM
open-sourceElmer FEM is an open-source multiphysics solver with finite element capabilities for electromagnetic field problems.
Equation-driven project configuration lets magnet physics and solver choices be customized per study, not only selected from presets.
Elmer FEM targets magnet and machine analysts who need control over the solver setup and material laws rather than fixed magnet workflows. The project file approach captures boundary conditions, material parameters, solver selection, and mesh controls in a way that can be reused across runs. Nonlinear material modeling supports permanent magnet behavior via user-defined constitutive relationships, which helps when modeling recoil behavior or custom magnet demagnetization curves.
A key tradeoff is that achieving stable nonlinear convergence often requires manual tuning of solver settings and mesh refinement strategy. Elmer FEM fits situations where a team can invest in configuration discipline and wants reproducible studies for variants such as air gap field maps or flux linkage comparisons. The tool is less aligned with highly GUI-driven workflows that prioritize quick result generation over explicit solver control.
- +User-extensible physics setup via project equations and solver controls
- +Repeatable batch runs enable parametric studies across geometry and materials
- +Nonlinear magnet behavior modeling supports custom magnet constitutive inputs
- +Open workflow supports on-prem execution with direct file-based projects
- –Nonlinear magnet runs often need manual convergence tuning
- –GUI-driven setup is limited compared with commercial FEM environments
- –Advanced multiphysics setups require careful configuration work
- –Large 3D problems can demand time-intensive mesh refinement
Magnet R&D engineers
Nonlinear air-gap field verification across variants
Consistent variant-to-variant comparisons
University research groups
Custom magnet material behavior studies
Tailored material law testing
Show 2 more scenarios
Controls and drives teams
Torque ripple inputs from flux linkage maps
Reusable inputs for drive models
Use postprocessing outputs to build flux linkage or field-derived signals for downstream analysis.
Small engineering teams
On-prem parametric sweeps
Repeatable sweep results
Execute repeated project runs with controlled geometry and material parameter changes for design screening.
Best for: Fits when control over nonlinear magnet modeling and reproducible batch studies matter more than guided setup.
COMSOL Multiphysics
enterpriseFinite element simulation platform with dedicated electromagnetics tools for permanent magnet modeling and coupled multiphysics analysis.
Physics-controlled meshing and parametric sweep workflows stay coherent across coupled electromagnetic-thermal studies.
COMSOL Multiphysics pairs a magnetics solver with multi-physics coupling so permanent magnet studies can include electromagnetic-thermal interactions and shared geometry across disciplines. Its nonlinear material modeling supports custom magnet and ferromagnetic behavior needed for B-H curve and recoil-related effects.
COMSOL also supports parameterized sweeps and scriptable workflows for repeating rotor, magnet, and air-gap design variants. Built-in CAD import and physics-controlled meshing reduce the manual glue work common in magnet-only FEM pipelines.
- +Strong multi-physics coupling between magnetics and thermal domains
- +Nonlinear material models support realistic magnet and ferromagnetic behavior
- +Parametric sweeps and scripting support automated design-space runs
- +Geometry, meshing, and solver settings stay consistent across coupled physics
- –Setup time increases for tightly coupled multi-physics configurations
- –Large 3D magnet models can push mesh and memory requirements high
Researchers and simulation engineers
Coupled custom magnet model variants
Repeatable experimental design testing
Photonics and electromagnetics researchers
Resonant electromagnetic modeling with coupling
Coupled device performance predictions
Show 2 more scenarios
CFD and thermal engineers
Conjugate heat transfer around magnets
Temperatures and heat-transfer behavior
Simulate transient temperature behavior and heat-transfer effects alongside electromagnetic analysis for magnet systems.
Chemical and process engineers
Heat and transport in equipment
Hotspot and transient insights
Model spatial transport, mixing, and heat transfer with kinetics in equipment geometries alongside coupled physics needs.
Best for: Fits when teams need magnet plus thermal coupling with automated parametric sweeps on shared CAD geometry.
JMAG-Designer
vertical specialistElectromagnetic simulation software focused on electric machines, including permanent magnet motor and generator design.
End-to-end permanent magnet machine modeling workflow that keeps magnet material behavior, field solving, and torque-focused outputs in one project structure.
JMAG-Designer runs magnetostatic and transient electromagnetic simulations for permanent magnet machines and magnet systems with a workflow focused on device geometry, material nonlinearities, and field extraction for design iteration. The package supports magnet-specific material entry with hysteresis-related curves and computes flux, forces, torque-related quantities, and related derived metrics for design tradeoffs.
- +Strong permanent-magnet material modeling with curve-driven magnetic behavior
- +Built-in machine-oriented workflow for recurring geometry and design revisions
- +Field and performance postprocessing tailored to motor and magnet metrics
- +Supports electromagnetic-thermal co-simulation for temperature-sensitive results
- –Automation depth via API is limited compared with general-purpose solver stacks
- –Mesh refinement control can require manual attention for tight air-gap gradients
- –Complex custom physics often depends on specific JMAG module workflows
- –Interoperability with external CAD and external solver toolchains can add friction
BLDC and permanent-magnet motor teams
Compare variants for torque and flux
Validated torque and back-EMF
Magnetics and motor verification engineers
Check nonlinear demagnetization and transients
Evidence across operating scenarios
Show 2 more scenarios
Simulation validation and engineering teams
Run revision-to-measurement correlation loops
More repeatable correlation checks
Reuse project structures and parameter sweeps to compare revisions and relate simulation outcomes to measured behavior.
Power electronics engineers
Analyze power devices with multiphysics
Electromagnetic and coupled results
Model electromagnetic behavior and coupled device effects in power electronics assemblies using project-based workflows.
Best for: Fits when teams need a magnet-first motor modeling workflow with nonlinear materials and practical multiphysics coupling.
FEMM
SMBFree finite element package for 2D magnetics, electrostatics, heat flow, and current flow with common permanent magnet use cases.
Integrated FEMM scripting ties geometry edits, solving, and result extraction into repeatable automation runs.
FEMM provides a dedicated magnetostatic solver with nonlinear B-H curve handling and standard block-based materials, which makes it practical for magnet performance checks and motor topology studies. The toolchain includes geometry editing, boundary condition setup, and mesh generation inside the same environment. Post-processing targets magnet field quantities and force outputs used for design iteration. This focus keeps projects smaller in scope than general-purpose commercial solvers that prioritize coupled physics and advanced CAD integration.
- +Focused magnetostatic solver with nonlinear B-H material support
- +Built-in scripting enables repeatable parametric studies
- +2D workflow supports quick geometry edits and force post-processing
- +Open-source distribution supports on-premise model inspection
- –2D-centric workflow limits fidelity for 3D effects like end-turn leakage
- –Transient and multi-physics coupling coverage is narrower than commercial suites
Motor design engineers
Quick pole and air-gap trade studies
Shorter iteration cycles
Magnet material analysts
Nonlinear B-H fit verification
Faster material sensitivity checks
Show 1 more scenario
Research teams
Custom automation for batch runs
Repeatable study datasets
Run parametric sweeps and extract force or flux metrics via script control.
Best for: Fits when 2D magnetostatic trade studies need repeatable automation without multi-physics overhead.
EMWorks
SMBEMWorks adds electromagnetic finite element simulation for permanent magnets and electric machines inside CAD workflows.
Magnet-first workflow centered on B-H curve-driven magnetostatic runs for machine-level flux linkage and force outputs.
EMWorks performs permanent magnet simulations with a focus on magnet-specific geometry workflows and nonlinear material inputs for magnetostatic and derived performance outputs. The tool supports modeling inputs such as B-H curves and magnet properties, then computes magnetic field quantities used to estimate forces, flux linkage, and torque-related metrics for machine layouts.
- +Magnet-centric modeling workflow reduces setup time versus generic FEM-only tools
- +Nonlinear magnet material inputs support realistic B-H behavior
- +Parametric reruns support quick compare-and-iterate loops for magnet geometry
- +Outputs target machine-level metrics like forces and flux linkage
- –Limited automation depth and API surface compared with full simulation suites
- –Multi-physics coupling options are narrower than general-purpose FEM environments
- –Advanced meshing control and solver customization are less granular for edge cases
- –Model portability can require rework when translating between different tool chains
Permanent magnet and actuator designers
Air-gap and demagnetization stability studies
Compare magnetic stability
Multiphysics and electromechanical engineering teams
Temperature rise and motion coupling
Assess operation-driven thermal effects
Show 2 more scenarios
Design engineers and simulation analysts
Parametric sweeps across design inputs
Evidence across multiple variants
Run repeatable sweeps over geometry, material properties, and operating conditions to compare extracted performance metrics.
EMC and electromagnetic compatibility engineers
Stray-field and excitation interference checks
Identify interference risks early
Examine field behavior and electromagnetic interaction around electrical and electronic designs before physical testing.
Best for: Fits when teams need fast magnet-focused iterations and acceptable nonlinear material realism.
GetDP
open-source FEMOpen-source finite element solver supporting magnetostatic and time-domain electromagnetic problems.
User-defined equation-driven physics lets magnet problem definitions go beyond prebuilt magnetic features.
GetDP is an open-source finite element solver focused on user-defined physics and custom analysis workflows for magnet problems. It uses a domain-specific equation language so users can define magnetostatic and time-dependent formulations, including nonlinear material behavior, without relying on a fixed magnetic toolkit.
- +Equation language enables custom permanent-magnet formulations and constraints
- +Scriptable project inputs support parameter sweeps for geometry and materials
- +Open-source solver model fits reproducibility and on-prem verification
- +Boundary condition and material nonlinearity control for magnet problems
- –Magnet-specific tooling is thinner than commercial Maxwell or Flux workflows
- –Custom formulations increase setup time versus wizard-driven FEM tools
- –Large magnet assemblies can demand careful meshing discipline
- –Mixed workflows need tighter integration planning for multi-physics stacks
Permanent magnet design engineers
Custom magnetostatics with nonlinear materials
Custom physics magnet simulations
Simulation analysts and researchers
Air-gap flux and force post-processing
Decision-ready magnet metrics
Show 1 more scenario
Systems engineers running batch studies
Repeatable parameter sweep automation
Repeatable multi-variant runs
Create repeatable project definitions and run automated multi-variant studies for permanent magnet design questions.
Best for: Fits when teams need reproducible, custom magnet FEA formulations and automated study runs.
Faraday
SMB2D and 3D electromagnetic field solver for magnets and coils.
Parametric generation linked to magnet-motor study reuse to standardize results across variations.
Faraday from integratedsoft.com focuses on permanent magnet simulation workflows that stay integrated from geometry inputs to solver runs and result checks. It supports parametric modeling so magnet and motor variations can be regenerated without rebuilding the whole study setup.
- +Parametric study workflow reduces rebuild time for magnet and motor variants
- +Focused permanent magnet workflow streamlines setup compared with general EM suites
- +Scriptable automation supports repeatable solver runs across project variants
- +Consistent result handling helps teams compare flux and torque outputs
- –Advanced multi-physics coupling depth trails full multiphysics authoring tools
- –Complex material hysteresis workflows need careful configuration discipline
- –Solver control granularity is less extensive than commercial FEM suites
- –Large model scaling can hit throughput limits without workflow tuning
Motor design teams
Regenerate magnet and motor variations
Faster variant generation
Simulation standardization teams
Standardize model-to-result checks
Consistent simulation results
Show 2 more scenarios
Magnet-focused engineering groups
Nonlinear permanent magnet calculations
Reliable magnet simulation runs
Run magnet-centric workflows that emphasize nonlinear magnetic behavior and repeatable calculation runs.
Design iteration teams
Iterate with parametric updates
More repeatable design iteration
Keep geometry inputs tied to solver runs so that magnet system updates produce repeatable results.
Best for: Fits when engineering teams need repeatable permanent magnet simulations with parametric automation.
MOOSE Magnetic
API-firstOpen simulation framework with magnetics capabilities for custom multiphysics modeling that can include permanent magnet problems.
MOOSE-style extensibility lets custom coupled physics blocks run with the same input-driven workflow.
MOOSE Magnetic targets magnetostatic and electromagnetics workflows inside the MOOSE multiphysics environment, which is a concrete fit for teams already using MOOSE for coupled physics. It supports nonlinear ferromagnetic material behavior through configurable material models and lets users assemble custom physics blocks for geometry, boundary conditions, and solver controls.
- +Reuses the MOOSE architecture for custom physics block composition
- +Config-driven parametric sweeps through batchable case inputs
- +Nonlinear ferromagnetic material behavior is integrated into the solve setup
- +Supports extensibility for electromagnetics coupling work beyond magnetostatics
- –Model setup can require more developer-style work than GUI-driven solvers
- –Meshing and solver-tuning often need manual mesh and convergence discipline
- –Workflow defaults are less guided for permanent magnet tutorials than commercial FEM tools
- –Higher complexity raises run-management overhead for large sweep grids
Teams already using MOOSE
Magnetostatic field workflows in MOOSE
Nonlinear magnet field calculations
Simulation engineers building custom blocks
Assemble physics blocks for magnets
Reproducible case setup
Show 2 more scenarios
Permanent magnet study leads
Scriptable parameter runs and reproducibility
Repeatable magnet studies
Run scriptable parametric cases for permanent magnet studies while keeping inputs as versionable artifacts.
Coupled-physics expansion teams
Extend magnet workflows with extra physics
Expandable coupled workflows
Start with magnet field calculation workflows and expand into additional coupling when required.
Best for: Fits when engineering teams need MOOSE-compatible magnet solves with automation and custom physics extension.
Conclusion
After evaluating 9 permanent magnet simulation software, QuickField stands out as our overall top pick — it scored highest across our combined criteria of features, ease of use, and value, which is why it sits at #1 in the rankings above.
Use the comparison table and detailed reviews above to validate the fit against your own requirements before committing to a tool.
Frequently Asked Questions About Permanent Magnet Simulation Software
How do Elmer FEM, GetDP, and COMSOL Multiphysics differ in how magnet physics is defined?
When is a transient electromagnetic solve required in JMAG-Designer versus a magnetostatic-only workflow in FEMM?
Which toolset best supports parametric sweep automation for motor and magnet variants without manual rebuilds?
What breaks if mesh generation and physics settings are not kept consistent across coupled studies in COMSOL Multiphysics?
How do MOOSE Magnetic and Elmer FEM handle extensibility when teams add custom physics blocks?
Which integration approach is more suitable for orchestration through files and solver coupling: EMWorks or COMSOL Multiphysics?
How do scripting workflows in FEMM versus QuickField affect repeatability of geometry and results across iterations?
What security and access-control issues tend to appear when magnet simulation teams scale across multiple users in COMSOL Multiphysics versus local open-source stacks like FEMM and Elmer FEM?
How does Faraday’s parametric generation compare with JMAG-Designer’s reusable machine templates for preserving model intent during redesigns?
Where do Elmer FEM and GetDP fall short compared with magnet-specific workflows like EMWorks for magnet material realism and output focus?
Tools reviewed
Primary sources checked during evaluation.
Referenced in the comparison table and product reviews above.
How to Choose the Right Permanent Magnet Simulation Software
What separates permanent magnet simulation software for us is how faithfully it models magnet materials and boundary conditions, then how well it repeats the same results across runs. Focus on criteria like Solver accuracy, Material library completeness, and Output diagnostics to avoid tools that look fine but fail on real magnet geometries.
Solver accuracy controls
Why it matters
Solver accuracy controls decide whether predicted fields and forces track the same solution when you change run settings. For permanent magnet work, small numerical differences can shift force, flux, and gap predictions.
How to check
Run the same provided example twice using tighter and looser accuracy or refinement settings, if available. Compare the key outputs the demo shows (e.g., field/force plots) and note whether the results converge or drift.
Permanent magnet material library
Why it matters
A complete material library matters because permanent magnet results depend on having the right magnet grade data in the format the solver expects. Missing or oversimplified material inputs lead to incorrect field levels and forces.
How to check
Check whether the demo includes common magnet grade definitions and whether you can import your own magnet data. Ask to see what happens when you switch magnet grade and compare the resulting field or force changes.
Geometry and meshing workflow
Why it matters
Geometry and meshing workflow affects whether users can model complex magnet shapes without constant manual fixes. In this category, bad meshing choices can create artifacts that look physical.
How to check
Try loading a sample geometry with multiple parts (magnets plus surrounding iron or air regions) and watch the meshing steps the tool uses. Ask for a simple before/after plot that shows how the mesh changes and how outputs respond.
Nonlinear magnet and ferromagnet handling
Why it matters
Nonlinear material handling matters when the magnetic circuit pushes materials outside a linear approximation. The gap field and forces can be sensitive to this, especially when iron saturates.
How to check
In the demo, switch between a linear and a nonlinear material option (if offered) and compare the resulting field/force outputs. Ask for an example where saturation is present and see whether the outputs change in a defensible way.
Outputs for field and force
Why it matters
Outputs for field and force decide whether you can validate against measurement or earlier designs. Permanent magnet users usually need both spatial field maps and derived mechanical quantities.
How to check
Export or inspect outputs such as field maps and computed forces/torques for an example. Confirm you can generate the outputs your team typically compares (plots, numeric reports, and probe values).
Output diagnostics and repeatability
Why it matters
Output diagnostics and repeatability tell us whether the solver actually reached a stable solution. When results must be trusted across iterations, you need clear convergence and error indicators.
How to check
Run the same case with identical settings twice and compare the reported convergence or stopping criteria. If diagnostics exist, check the logs for iteration behavior and whether the tool flags questionable runs.
Red flags
- Results shift a lot when you only tighten solver accuracy settings.
- Material grade data is missing or cannot be replaced with your own data.
- The tool shows maps but provides unclear diagnostics for whether the solution converged.
Fit by situation
- If you compare designs against measurements, prioritize Output diagnostics and repeatability.
- If your magnet grades are specialized, prioritize Permanent magnet material library.
- If you model multi-part assemblies with tight clearances, prioritize Geometry and meshing workflow.
Funding and competing interests
This study was co-funded by several of the vendors assessed in it. No single vendor funded it. Funders could propose the market studied.
They had no role in selecting vendors, setting or weighting criteria, analysing data or drawing conclusions, and they received the same factual-accuracy check as every other vendor assessed.
Market definition, inclusion rules and criteria weights were fixed by an editor before research began and did not change afterwards. Editorial process →
- Aerospace Aviation SpaceTop 10 Best Magnet Simulation Software of 2026
- Manufacturing EngineeringTop 10 Best Electromechanical Simulation Software of 2026
- Science ResearchTop 10 Best Magnetic Field Simulation Software of 2026
- Science ResearchTop 10 Best 3D Simulation Services of 2026
- Manufacturing EngineeringTop 10 Best Mechanical 3D Modeling Services of 2026
Keep exploring
Comparing two specific tools?
Software Alternatives
See head-to-head software comparisons with feature breakdowns, pricing, and our recommendation for each use case.
Explore software alternatives→In this category
Manufacturing Engineering alternatives
See side-by-side comparisons of manufacturing engineering tools and pick the right one for your stack.
Compare manufacturing engineering tools→