Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
ENGINEERING
SID: 0926018
The module task is mostly hands on and develops skills in
the use of Finite element Analysis and computer
numerical control simulation along with an
understanding of their benefits and limitations.
Table of Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 2
Workbook 2............................................................................................................................................. 3
Exercise 2.1a ....................................................................................................................................... 3
Exercise 2.1b ....................................................................................................................................... 4
Table for skewness .......................................................................................................................... 7
Table for aspect ratio ...................................................................................................................... 8
Exercise 2.1c...................................................................................................................................... 11
Exercise 2.2 ....................................................................................................................................... 11
Exercise 2.3 ....................................................................................................................................... 13
Manual calculation........................................................................................................................ 15
Exercise 2.4 ....................................................................................................................................... 15
MANUAL CALCULATION ................................................................................................................ 18
Exercise 2.5 ....................................................................................................................................... 19
Element 1 ...................................................................................................................................... 20
Element 2 .......................................................................................................................................... 21
Assembling the stiffness matrix .................................................................................................... 21
PART B ................................................................................................................................................... 23
Iteration 1 ......................................................................................................................................... 24
Iteration 2 ......................................................................................................................................... 24
Observation 1 ................................................................................................................................ 28
Test result 1................................................................................................................................... 31
Test result 2................................................................................................................................... 35
Observation 3 ................................................................................................................................ 36
Introduction
Computer aided engineering as applied in industry with importance on the analysis, manufacture
and test of a simple component is carried out by the student using the workbook 1, workbook2 and
part b.
This assignment mostly involved using finite analysis and CATIA software to create models and tests
on the materials using ANSYS. The part b actually involved making a model and testing with finite
analysis to get a specific safety factor and a good mesh quality. After finite analysis the material was
made and tested with the same load in finite analysis.
Workbook 2
Exercise 2.1a
Draw the section in the following diagram and extrude it 25mm and then mesh the part with
25mm elements size. Then examine the mesh quality and comment on the results.
The result shows that the skewness has a range from 0.0634 to 0.7659. The skewness is meant to be
below one which means it has a good skewness.
The aspect ratio is within 1.23 to 9.43. This means it has a bad aspect ratio; it should be in the range
of 1-4.
The mesh quality is very poor because it has a poor aspect ratio.
Exercise 2.1b
Draw the section in the following diagram and extrude it 25mm and then mesh the part with
25mm, 20mm, 15mm, 10mm and finally 5mm element size. Then examine the mesh quality and
comment on the results (i.e. compare how the skewness changes with change in element size).
The material is steel.
Element
size
25
Deformation
Stress probe
20
15
10
(20)skewness 0.561.3E-10
The skewness of 20
element size is ok
but not great.
(5) skewness
1.3058E-10 1.3057E-10
Observation shows that the element size of 25 has an error when a load is applied. This is possibly
because the size is large. However, observation show that when the mesh method was removed
from automatic to tetrahedrons it solved without an error so the problem for size 25 is the method.
Below is the image for tetrahedrons.
Element size 25
Tetrahedrons.
Element size
25
20
15
10
5
Skewness
0.938925631
0.935291217
0.999325681
0.165285356
1.18E-02
The element size decreases as the skewness decreases this means the element quality is better.
10
Exercise 2.1c
Plot the convergence graph (i.e. a graph of stress against element size) for a part of exercise
2.1b.
stress/element size
2.00025
2.0002
2.00015
2.0001
stress/element size
2.00005
2
1.99995
0
10
20
30
Exercise 2.2
Create an FE model of a 24mm square plate 6mm thick with a 5mm diameter hole in the centre.
The plate is subject to a uniformly distributed tensile load of 2000N along one side. Determine
the maximum stress and validate the model. The material is steel.
Force
11
Deformation
12
Stress =
Exercise 2.3
Model the following cast iron bearing lug that has a shaft mounted in it that applies a force of 18kN
vertical in the hole. Determine if the lug is safe with a factor of safety of 8.
12/-
FE plots
13
Bearing load of
18000N
Equivalent stress
28.787
Total deformation
14
Manual calculation
Use a value of 220Mpa. Yield stress
Safety factor = yield stress/allowable stress
Safety factor =
Exercise 2.4
Carry out an FEA analysis on the following beam that is free to rotate about the hole in the
centre. The section of the beam is 30mm square.
15
FE plots
Force
Fixed support
Mesh
16
Force Reaction
Reaction 2
Remote
displacement
17
Deformation
MANUAL CALCULATION
I=
I=
M = wx = 850 0.15
= 127.5Nm
= 28.333 MN/m
18
Exercise 2.5
Use the matrix method to find:
a- The effective force in each truss element and the reaction forces in the support points.
b- The vertical deflection at node number 2
The node and element numbers are given. The module of electricity is assumed to be 2.1x105 MPa
and the cross sections for element are:
Element 1 and Element 3: 300 mm2
Element 2: 400 mm2
The unique coefficient K for each student will be given by the tutor. The value of K is the last two
digits of your student ID divided by 2.
Solution
SID= 0926018
K= 18/2= 9
F= [10+ (0.1x9)] =10.9KN
M= [1.2+ (0.05x9)] =2+0.45=1.65m=1650mm
19
1650mm
1650mm
10.9KN
L2= L2+ L2
L= 2.33m=2333.4
Element 1
E =2.1x105, A=300mm2, L= 1650/cos45=2333.4mm, l=cos45=0.7071, m=sin45=0.7071
]=
20
[K]= [
Element 1 and 3
Element 2
E=2.1105 A=400mm2 L=1650mm l=cos90=0 m=sin90=1
[k]=
[K]= 50909.09[
=
[
21
= 13.4996
+13.4996
=0
eq1
= -10900
eq2
Eq1-eq2
-50900.4 = 10900
From 2
22
PART B
The material used is aluminium alloy. Calculating the yield stress require the graph below.
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0
10
12
The thick and the width given are 5.9 and 5.4mm respectively.
Area = 5.9
From the graph yield force =4357.5
Stress
23
Iteration 1
The stress is too small and the safety factor is bad so a lot needs to be done to get the required
safety factor; and the load is not distributed properly.
Iteration 2
The load is distributed properly and it has a stress that is below half of 138 Mpa.
It has a good safety factor because the demanded one is should be 1.95-2.6.
24
The total deformation is too much. So making holes might help reduce it.
After making two holes I realised that the safety factor reduced with huge difference which is below
what is needed.
The stress visually seems its distributed properly but the stress is high, it should be below half of the
normal stress.
25
The result is not close to what its needed; so using one hole might help.
Observation shows that using frictionless support creates a good safety factor of about 2.3 but the
total deformation was poor so remote displacement was chosen to get a better result.
Stress concentration
26
Total deformation
0.37027
27
Skewness
1.56772624690001E
-03 0.500883430534678
Observation 1
The quality of the material is good enough because it has an aspect ratio of 1-3.137, and skewness of
0-1, and the safety factor is within what is needed so the material is ready for machining.
Images in CATIA setting for machining
Pocketing 1
Pocketing 2
28
Profile contouring
29
Test result 1
30
Test result 1
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0
10
=6.117
Force (N)
435
472.5
31
There is a lot of difference in the safety factor from finite analysis test (ANSYS) and the test result.
The result shows that there might be issues with the material or the design. After the student
collected the material from the lab, the surfaces and the holes was smoothened by him with
sandpaper to take away sharp edges, which in turn took off bits of the edges of the material and
hence could have also led to the high difference in safety factor.
Static structural is linear analysis but in real life its not always linear.
In simulation the shrink was not shown.
32
Mesh size of
2.0mm
Aspect ratio is
1.02 to 3.4857
skewness
1.5677E-03 to
0.51403
33
Safety factor is
2.0822
Stress 66.275
Deformation is
0.40311
The table above shows the results from finite analysis and the design meets the requirement.
Observation 2
Comparing the two designs the second design is the best. But looking back at the iteration on pg.23
two holes had been made but did not meet the requirement; therefore the remote displacement
had an effect and the size is not even on both sides from the middle.
SID: 0926018 BEng (Hons) Mechanical Engineering
34
Test result 2
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0
35
Safety factor
3.68
Extension(MM)
0.27
0.2775
Force (N)
444
464
Observation 3
The result is closer now comparing the finite analysis result and real result, but its not accurate. The
reason remains static structural is always linear. The aim of computer aided design (CAE) is to build
computer programs which capture a significant fraction of an engineers knowledge. CAE systems
are programed to meet a goal, not reality. This is why it is not completely accurate.
36