Problem Specification

A steel bar is mounted in a rigid wall and axially loaded at the end by a force P = 2 kN as
shown in the figure below. The bar dimensions are indicated in the figure. The bar is so thin
that there is no significant stress variation through the thickness. Neglect gravity.

The material properties are:

Young's modulus E = 200 GPa

Poisson ratio = 0.3

In this exercise, you are presented with the numerical solution to the above problem obtained
from finite-element analysis (FEA) using ANSYS software. Compare FEA results for the stress
distribution presented to you with the corresponding analytical solution. Justify agreements
and discrepancies between the two approaches (FEA vs. Analytical).

Numerical Results
Before we explore the ANSYS results, let's take a peek at the mesh.
Mesh
Click on Mesh (above Solution ) in the tree outline. This shows the mesh used to generate
the ANSYS solution. The domain is a rectangle. This domain is discretized into a number of
small "elements". Recall that ANSYS solves the BVP and calculates the displacements at the
nodes. A finer mesh is used near the left and right ends where we expect greater stress

concentration. We have checked that the solution presented

independent of the mesh.

to you is reasonably

Units
Set the units for the results display by selecting Units > Metric (mm, kg, N, s, mV, mA) . The
displacements will be reported in mm and the stresses in N/mm2 which is equivalent to MPa.

Displacement
To view the deformed structure, click on Solution > Displacement in the tree outline. The
black rectangle shows the undeformed structure. The deformed structure is colored by the
magnitude of the displacement. The displayed displacement distribution is calculated by
interpolating the nodal displacements. Red areas have deformed more and blue areas less.
You can see that the left end has not moved as specified in the problem statement. This
means this boundary condition has been applied correctly. The displacement increases from
left to right as we intuitively expect. There is also not much variation in the y-direction. So we
can conclude that the model has been constrained properly.
Note the extremely high deformation near the point load. This extremum is unrealistic and
should be ignored (there are no point loads in reality).

To view the Poisson effect (shrinking in the y direction), zoom into the top-rightright corner by
drawing a rectangle around the region with theright mouse button.

You can do this multiple times to zoom in more. You do indeed see the shrinking in the ydirection as expected but it is small for this model.

You can restore the front view of the entire model by right-clicking in the background and
choosing View > Front .

Note that you can zoom in and out using the middle mouse wheel. You can translate the
model by clicking on the Pan button and dragging the model with the left mouse button. There
are also a bunch of zoom options next to the Pan button.

sigma_x
The stresses are derived from the nodal displacements using Hooke's law. In the following
video, we look at the sigma_x distribution in the interior and at the boundaries and compare
the ANSYS values to the values expected from the analytical solution and traction boundary
conditions.
Summary of the above video investigating sigma_x:
1.

Click on probe and hover over the bar. Using the probe may tell you the stress associated with a
specific point on the bar.

2.

To view the less noticeable stress contours, click on the scale to edit. In this video, the orange (2nd
highest value) was changed to 250 and the blue (2nd lowest value) was changed to 50. The contour map
changed to display the subtle difference in sigma_x.

In the video, we saw that ANSYS's values for sigma_x matches with:

The analytical solution in the interior (away from the left and right boundaries)

Traction boundary condition for sigma_x at the right boundary

Note that sigma_x at the location of the point load is infinite. So as the mesh is refined further, sigma_x at
the point load will get larger and larger without bound.

sigma_y
Next, let's take a look at sigma_y. Click on Solution > sigma_y in the tree outline. Again,
probe values in the middle as well as at the ends. Check that:

The value away from the boundaries is close to zero as expected from the analytical solution. It is
not exactly zero because of round-off errors.

The value at the top and bottom boundaries are close to zero. This agrees with the boundary
condition at these boundaries since the traction has to be zero at these free boundaries. In other words, the
normal component of the traction acting on these surfaces is sigma_y and that has to be zero since the
traction on these free surfaces is zero.

There is significant deviation from the analytical solution at both ends. The analytical solution
breaks down at these ends because of the additional assumptions that we made. Note that there are areas
where sigma_y is negative i.e. compressive.

tau_xy
We expect tau_xy to be zero away from the ends. Near the ends, since sigma_x and sigma_y
are non-zero, we expect

Plot tau_xy, look at the range of values and use Probe to check actual values. Are the above
statements valid?

Equivalent Stress (Von Mises):

The Equivalent or Von Mises stress is used to predict yielding of the material. We can see
that the analytical solution under-predicts the maximum equivalent stress. Thus, one would
need to use a large factor of safety if using the analytical result while designing such a
structure. One would use a factor of safety with the FEA result also but it does not have to be
as large.

Verification and Validation

One can think of Verification and Validation as a formal process for checking results. Each of
these terms has a specific meaning which we won't get into here. We have already done
some checks on the ANSYS results by comparing them to the hand calculations and checking
that the ANSYS solution agrees with the appropriate traction or displacement boundary
condition at each boundary. Let's next check ANSYS's displacement value at the right
boundary with the value in our hand calculations.
Check Displacement Value at the Right Boundary

Bring up the Displacement result again by clicking on that object in the tree.

I prefer to turn off the deformation in the view as per snapshot below.

Zoom into the right end using the right mouse button.

Click Probe and check the displacement values away from the point load.

I get a value around 0.045 mm at the right end away from the point load. This is about a 10%
deviation from the hand calculation result of 0.05 mm we obtained in our Pre-Analysis. This is
a reasonable agreement considering that the hand calculation ignores the high stress areas
at the left and right ends. But these high stress areas (both tensile and compressive) affect
relatively small areas of the model and so don't contribute a lot to the overall displacement.
Summary of Our Result Checks

1.
2.

3.

The stress components agree well with hand calculations away from the right and left ends.
The displacement at the right end (away from the point force) is within about 10% from the hand
calculation value.
The ANSYS solution agrees with the boundary conditions on traction as well as displacement.

Thus, we can be reasonably confident that the ANSYS model has been set-up correctly. We
have however not checked that we have resolved the high stresses at the left and right ends
correctly. So we cannot say anything about when the part would fail. Further mesh refinement
may be needed. We also should get rid of the stress singularity at the point load (by
distributing it over a region) and at the left corners (by filleting these corners).
Problem Statement: Go through the preceding Tensile Bar tutorial before attempting this
exercise. A steel plate of width, w=0.25m, of lengthL=2m, and of density 7.9x10kg/m is hung
vertically from the ceiling. A force, F=50N is applied as shown in the figure below. The
thickness is 1mm.

The plate is so thin that there is no significant stress variation through the thickness. Gravity
effects are significant.

Bending of a Curved Beam (Results-Interpretation)

Created using ANSYS 13.0

Problem Specification
A curved beam with a rectangular cross section is subjected to a moment of 300 inch-pounds.
The curved beam has an inner radius of 10 inches and outer radius of 12 inches. The beam is
.25 inches thick.

Calculate the stresses at r = 11.5 inches.

In this exercise, you are presented with the numerical solution to the above problem obtained
from finite-element analysis (FEA) using ANSYS software. Compare FEA results for the stress
distribution presented to you with the corresponding analytical solution. Justify agreements
and discrepancies between the two approaches (FEA vs. Analytical).
Note that you will be using the ANSYS solution presented to you to explore the physics of the
problem. You will be downloading the ANSYS solution prepared for you. The objective is to
help you learn important fundamentals of mechanics through the interactive, visual interface
provided by ANSYS. You will not be obtaining the FEA solution using ANSYS; there are other
tutorials to help you learn this.
Go to Step 1 - Pre-Analysis & Start-Up
Mesh
Before we dive in to the solution, let's take a look at the mesh used for the simulation. In the
outline window, click Mesh to bring up the meshed geometry in the geometry window.

Only one-half of the geometry is modeled using symmetry constraints, which reduces the
problem size. Look to the outline window under "Mesh". Notice that there are two types of
meshing entities: a "mapped face meshing" and a "face sizing". The "mapped face meshing"
is used to generate a regular mesh of quadrilaterals. The face sizing controls the size of the
element edges in the 2D "face".
Displacement
Okay! Now we can check our solution. Let's start by examining how the beam deformed
under the load. Before you start, make sure the software is working in the same units you are
by looking to the menu bar and selecting Units > US Customary (in, lbm, lbf, F, s, V, A).
Now, look at the Outline window, and select Solution > Total Deformation.

The colored section refers to the magnitude of the deformation (in inches) while the black
outline is the undeformed geometry superimposed over the deformed model. The more red a
section is, the more it has deformed while the more blue a section is, the less it has deformed.
For this geometry, the bar is bending inward and the largest deformation occurs where the
moment is applied , as one would intuitively expect.
Sigma-theta
Click Solution > Sigma-theta in the outline window. This will bring up the distribution for the
normal stress in the theta direction.

Sigma-theta, the bending stress, is a function of r only as expected from theory. It is tensile
(positive) in the top part of the beam and compressive (negative) in the bottom part. There is
a neutral axis that separates the tensile and compressive regions. The bending stress,
Sigma-theta, is zero on the neutral surface. We will use the probe to locate the region where
the bending stress changes from tensile to compressive. In order to find the neutral axis, let's
first enlarge the geometry. Do this by clicking the Box Zoom tool
then click and drag a
rectangle around the area you want to magnify. Now, click the probe tool in the menu
bar
This will allow you to hover the cursor over the geometry to see the stress at that
point. Hover the cursor over the geometry until you have a good understanding of where the
neutral axis on the beam is. To zoom out, click "Zoom to Fit"
We will now look at Sigma-theta along the symmetry line. Click Solution > Sigma-theta
along symmetry in the outline window to bring up the stress distribution at the middle of the
bar.

Look at the color bar to see the maximum and minimum stresses. The maximum theta-stress
is 1697.63 psi and the minimum theta-stress is -1916.2 psi.
Sigma-r
In the outline window, click Solution > Sigma-r. This will bring up the distribution for the
normal stress in the r-direction.

Looking at the distribution, we can see that the stress varies only as a function of r as
expected. The magnitude of Sigma-r is much lower than Sigma-theta (this is why WinklerBach theory assumes Sigma-r =0). Also, we can see that there is a stress concentration in the
area where the moment is applied. In the theory, this effect is ignored. In order to further
examine the Sigma-r, let's look at the variation along the symmetry line. Click on Solution >
Sigma-r along symmetry. This solution is the normal stress in the r-direction at the
midsection of the beam.

Looking at the color bar again, we can see that the maximum r-stress is -.110 psi, and the
minimum r-stress is -82.302 psi. At r=a and r=b, Sigma-r ~ 0 as one would expect for a free
surface.
Tau-r-theta
In the details window, click Solution > Tau-r-theta to bring up the stress distribution for shear
stress.

Hover the probe tool over points on the geometry far from the moment. You will notice that the
stress is on the order of 10e-7. For a beam in pure bending, we assume that the shear stress
is zero. However, ANSYS does not make this assumption: it calculates a value for shear
stress at every point on the beam. Therefore, it is reassuring that the shear stress is almost
negligible, which reinforces our assumption that it is zero.
Solution at r = 11.5 Inches
Now that we have a good idea about the stress distribution, we will look specifically at solving
the problem in the problem specification. First, we will look at the stress in the r-direction at r
= 11.5 inches. In the outline window, click Solution > Sigma-r at r =11.5. This will bring up
the stress in the r-direction along the path at r = 11.5 inches (from the center of curvature of
the bar).

In the window below, there is a table of the stress values along the path. To find the value of
sigma-r at r = 11.5 in, we want to look far away from the stress concentration region due to
the moment. The path is defined in a counter-clockwise direction, so looking at the last value
of the table should tell us the stress at r = 11.5 inches at the midsection of the bar. This value
of sigma-r is -57.042 psi.
Now, we will do the same for the stress in theta direction to determine sigma-theta at r = 11.5
inches. In the outline window, click Solution > Sigma-theta at r =11.5. This will bring up the
stress in the theta-direction along the path at r 11.5 inches.

Look again at the table containing the stresses along the path. Look to the bottom of the table
to find the stress in the theta-direction at the midpoint of the bar. We find that sigma-theta at
this point is 910.950 psi. Compare this to what you would expect from curved beam theory.
Finally, we will examine the shear stress at r = 11.5 in. In the outline window, click Solution >
Tau-r-theta at r =11.5.

Again, look at the bottom of the table. You will find that the shear stress is very small at this
point as we mentioned above.
Comparison.
Now that we have our results from the ANSYS simulation, let's compare them to the theory
calculations. Below is chart comparing the values found in ANSYS, and through calculations
using the Elasticity Theory, Winkler-Bach Theory, and Straight Beam Theory (Note: all stress
values are in psi)

Now, let's see how the stress distributions vary along the beam for each theory.
First, let's see how the Elastic Theory compared to the ANSYS solution (you can right-click on
the tabular data and export it in Excel or Text format to make the plots below):

From what we can see from the able graphs, the Elastic Theory matched the ANSYS solution
very well. The same can be said for the Winkler-Bach theory:

When we approximate the beam as a straight beam, the analytical solution deviates slightly
from the ANSYS solution.

Now that we have gone through a simulation for bending of a curved beam, it is time to see if
you can do the same on your own!