Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
CAEA
Revised: 04/22/98
This unpublished work, first created in 1997 and updated thereafter, is protected under the copyright laws of the United States and of other countries throughout the world. Use, disassembly, reproduction, distribution, etc., without the express written consent of United Technologies Corporation is prohibited. Copyright United Technologies Corporation 1997. All rights reserved. Information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and improper use or disclosure may results in civil and penal sanctions.
Revised: 04/22/98
Overview
D What is FEA? D Advantages of FEA? D Disadvantages of FEA? D Nodal degrees of freedom.
Table of Contents
3 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
D Fundamental equations for structural analysis. D Fundamental equations for thermal analysis. D System assembly/decomposition. D Element shape functions. D Linear rectangle shape functions. D Quadratic rectangle shape functions. D Incompatible linear rectangle. D Linear and quadratic triangle shape functions. D Pelement shape functions. D Isoparametric elements. D Numerical integration. D Fundamental characteristics of finite element solutions. D Natural boundary conditions.
Table of Contents
4 Revised: 04/22/98
Table of Contents
5 Revised: 04/22/98
Preprocessing
D General considerations. D How to begin. D Element selection. D Plane stress/plane strain. D Shell elements. D Axisymmetric vs. 3D slice. D Connecting 2D to 3D axisymmetric models. D Why does everyone hate Tets? D Mixing element types (general case) D Stress singularities D Applying loads and other boundary conditions. D Symmetry types. D Constraining rigid body motion. D What is rigid body motion? D Thermal equivalent to rigid body motion. D Typical error messages for rigid body motion. D Minimum constraints to inhibit rigid body motion. D Finding problems in complex models.
Table of Contents
6 Revised: 04/22/98
Preprocessing (Continued)
D Coupling/constraint equations. D Contact elements vs. coupling equations. D Stress stiffening and spin softening. D Stress stiffening. D Spin softening. D Saint Venants principle. D Common modeling problems/errors. D Preloaded joints. D Interference fits. D 3D problems modeled as 2D. D Orthotropic materials. D Composite materials. D Element types for composite analysis. D 2D shell. D 3D solid D Axisymmetric elements. D Software available for composites analysis.
Table of Contents
7 Revised: 04/22/98
Preprocessing (Continued)
D Dynamics modeling D Dynamics mesh density considerations. D Dynamic analysis type vs. software suitability table. D Element shape checking D Conditioning D Model review checklist
Table of Contents
8 Revised: 04/22/98
Postprocessing
D General considerations. D Stepbystep postprocessing. D LCF and Fracture analysis considerations.
Table of Contents
9 Revised: 04/22/98
Table of Contents
10 Revised: 04/22/98
Table of Contents
11 Revised: 04/22/98
Table of Contents
12 Revised: 04/22/98
Table of Contents
13 Revised: 04/22/98
OVERVIEW
Overview
14 Revised: 04/22/98
WHAT IS FEA?
FEA (finite element analysis), or the FEM (finite element method), was primarily developed by engineers using physical reasoning and can trace much of its origin to matrix methods of structural analysis. The finite element method is a computer-aided mathematical technique that is used to obtain an approximate numerical solution to the fundamental differential and/or integral equations that predict the response of physical systems to external effects.
Overview
15 Revised: 04/22/98
Overview
16 Revised: 04/22/98
Overview
17 Revised: 04/22/98
Advantages of FEA
The primary advantages of a finite element approach are outlined below:
D Complex geometry is easily accommodated. D Complex, nonlinear material properties can be employed. D Arbitrary boundary conditions can be applied. D Commercial computer codes can handle general classes of problems, rather than requiring different programs for plane, axisymmetric, 3-D, etc.
Overview
19 Revised: 04/22/98
Disadvantages of FEA
A number of disadvantages are associated with this technique:
D Solution is numerical rather than analytic. D Significant computing resources are required. D Large amount of input data needed for analysis. D Large amount of output information to be digested. D Small modeling errors can cause large changes in the solution.
Overview
20 Revised: 04/22/98
Overview
21 Revised: 04/22/98
Rotational DOF allow outofplane bending but do not define the physical location. i.e. This is not the true angle of rotation.
Elements
An element represents an approximation to the structural or thermal field in a volumetric region in space. Elements can be graphically depicted as point, line, surface or volumetric entities but in reality each element approximates the behavior of a volumetric region. For example, an element that is graphically depicted as a straight line, may actually represent the centerline of a volume that is assumed to deform in accordance with beam theory. As in a hand calculation, the finite element code calculates the deformation of the centerline (the line element) and beam theory then predicts the deformation throughout the volume based on the kinematic assumption that plane sections remain plane.
Overview
23 Revised: 04/22/98
Elements (Cont.)
In general, every element has a minimum of four attributes in a commercial code:
D element type or library reference number D material reference number, which links the element definition to material properties D element property reference number, which typically links the element definition to other geometric data (not defined by the element nodes) such as shell thickness, beam cross-sectional area, etc. D node numbers of nodes that bound the element.
Additional attributes that define so-called element and/or material coordinate systems for the element are part of the element attributes in some codes.
Overview
24 Revised: 04/22/98
Overview
Meshing, Free and Mapped Meshes
The process of creating the finite element nodes and elements is typically called meshing. When a user meshes a particular region or part, the resulting mesh may be referred to as either a free mesh or a mapped mesh. See the next two figures for 2-D examples of each type of mesh. Free meshes are always easier to create than mapped meshes and allow the user to have more mesh control at the boundary lines at the expense of losing control of the shape and number of elements in the interior. Free meshes can be all quads in 2-D or mixtures of quads and triangles. Free meshes of volumetric regions are usually all tetrahedron elements unless a user takes a free mesh of surface elements and sweeps the surface mesh to create hexahedron elements. Mapped meshes are much more structured, typically look better and, particularly in 3-D since the mesh is all hexahedrons, employ a smaller number of elements. However, these characteristics do not ensure that a mapped mesh will produce more accurate results than a free mesh. In addition, if the simple regions(required for a mapped mesh) are not well-shaped, the resulting hexahedron elements will not be well-shaped.
March 15, 1999 FEM - BEST PRACTICES Overview - 20
Overview
Definition of a Mapped Mesh
A mapped mesh is an all quadrilateral (brick) mesh in 2-D (3-D) in which the internal element boundaries are bilinear interpolants of the boundary curves (surfaces) of the surface (volume) being meshed. To get a true mapped mesh, the following requirements must be met: surface must be bounded by 4 curves (composite curves are OK), the volume must be bounded by 5 or 6 surfaces, each of which is bounded by 4 curves number of elements on opposite lines must be equal
Overview - 21
Overview
Definition of a Free Mesh
A free, sometimes called automatic, mesh is a more unstructured mesh. An area can have an arbitrary number of boundary lines with arbitrary element sizes on each line. The user gives up control of the internal mesh shape in return for ease of use. Such meshes can be all quads or a mixture of quads and triangles in 2-D. In 3-D, a free mesh of a volume typically creates all tetrahedral elements. The volume can be bounded by an arbitrary number of areas(surfaces).
Overview - 22
Overview
Meshing
Free meshes are not unique. That is, with the same meshing specification, different programs will produce meshes that are quite different. Mapped meshes are, for the most part, unique. User controls on mesh density(fineness of mesh) generally allow several of the following options: # of elements or element size on individual lines; biasing on the line usually takes the form of a user-specified geometric progression or a spacing ratio, the size of the last element on the line to the first element on the line Element size at endpoints of lines Local and/or global specification of element sizes in regions or wherever another specification is not given.
Overview - 23
ELEMENT THEORY
Element Theory
25 Revised: 04/22/98
..
U U
.
..
[C] = damping matrix = nodal velocity vector [K] = stiffness matrix { U } = nodal displacement vector { F } = nodal force vector
This equation expresses dynamic nodal equilibrium, i.e., the inertia forces plus the damping forces plus the elastic forces at the nodes must balance the externally applied nodal forces. In this case, displacements and forces are generalized to include translations/rotations and forces/moments at the nodes.
Element Theory
26 Revised: 04/22/98
[K]{ U } + { F }
This equation represents nodal equilibrium at every node in the model in every direction. The stiffness coefficient Kij, the entry in the ith row and jth column of the [K] matrix, is the force required in the direction of DOF I to produce a unit displacement of DOF J while holding all other displacements equal to zero. This physical interpretation is the basis for developing stiffness matrices based on physical reasoning and experimental results. The overall stiffness, mass, damping matrices and force vector are calculated by assembling element contributions at common nodes.
Element Theory
27 Revised: 04/22/98
2 1 F R + K 22 + k K 12 + * k
or in matrix form,
F1 F2
K 11 K 12 + F + K K 21 22
U1 U2
+ [ K ]{ U }
where [K] is the element stiffness matrix for the spring element.
Element Theory 28 Revised: 04/22/98
* 10 [ K ] 2 + 20 * 20 10 * 20 20 K 12 K 13 U1 K 22 K 23 U2 U K 32 K 33 3 * 10 * 20 0 0 30 * 20 U
U2
U2
U3
2 20 U 3
Element Theory
29 Revised: 04/22/98
The last two equations can be solved for U2 and U3 and, then knowing U2 and U3, the reaction force at node 1 can be calculated from the first equation.
Element Theory
30 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
31 Revised: 04/22/98
where is the vector of the displacement field components, the N matrix contains the interpolation or shape functions that define the spatial variation of the displacements, and the U vector contains the element nodal displacements. In a 2-D formulation, has two components, the x- and y-components of displacement. Note that the components of are functions of position, the entries in U are simply unknown constant values of the displacement components at each node of the element.
Linear triangle
Y X 1 2
u x + a ) bx ) cy u x + x + b x
Element Theory
32 Revised: 04/22/98
{ } + [ B ]{ U }
where the coefficients of [B] are, in most cases, a function of position(x,y,z) and are obtained by differentiating the coefficients of [N]. Hence the strains are not constant throughout the element unless the [B] matrix is composed entirely of constant terms.
Element Theory
33 Revised: 04/22/98
{s } + [ D ]{ }
where is the column vector of stress components, i.e., normal and shear stresses. The [D] matrix coefficients are combinations of material constants such as Youngs modulus, Poissons ratio and shear modulus; isotropic or nonisotropic material laws can be easily modeled.
Element Theory
34 Revised: 04/22/98
{s } + [ D ][ B ]{ U }
By inserting the coordinates (x,y,z) of an element stress sampling point into the coefficients of [B], the stress components at that point can be computed. In most cases, strains and stresses are calculated at the nodes of the element; however, the finite element model yields a prediction of these fields at every point in the element.
Element Theory
35 Revised: 04/22/98
where the b and t vectors are body forces per unit volume and surface forces per unit surface area ,respectively and is the mass density of the material. All integrations are done over the volume of the element or the surface area over which the external traction is applied. The damping matrix in many applications is based on Rayleigh (proportional) damping and hence [C] is formed by linear combinations of [K] and [M]. The K and M matrices are symmetric which reduces computer storage requirements considerably.
Element Theory
36 Revised: 04/22/98
..
{u } + { f } i cos w it
Where:
{f } + wi + t+
eigenvector representing the mode shape of the ith natural frequency ith natural circular frequency (radians per unit time) time
[K] * w 2[M] + 0
This is an eigenvalue problem which may be solved for up to n values of w2 and n eigenvectors {F}i which satisfy the equation of motion where n is the number of degrees of freedom.
Element Theory
38 Revised: 04/22/98
where:
K Q T C T ) +
[C] + SpecificHeatMatrix
+ nodalrateofchangeoftemperaturevector
Element Theory
39 Revised: 04/22/98
where T(x,y,z) is the temperature at any point within the element or on the element boundaries and the components of the Tn vector are the element nodal temperatures. Differentiating to obtain the thermal gradients, in terms of the nodal temperatures, yields
{g } +
T, x T, y T, z
+ [B]{T n}
where the coefficients of [B] are, in most cases, a function of position (x,y,z). A comma denotes differentiation with respect to the variable following the comma. The thermal gradients are not constant throughout the element unless the [B] matrix is composed entirely of constant terms.
Element Theory
40 Revised: 04/22/98
{ f } + [D]{ g }
where f is the column vector of thermal flux components. The [D] matrix coefficients are simply the thermal conductivities for the material, again both isotropic or nonisotropic properties are easily included. The flux at any point inside the element, or on its boundary, can be calculated from
{ f } + [D][B]{T n}
By inserting the coordinates (x,y,z) of an element flux sampling point into the coefficients of [B], the flux components at that point can be computed.
Element Theory
41 Revised: 04/22/98
c[N] [N]dV [K] + [B] [D][B]dV ) [N] [N]hdA ) c[N] V [B]dV {Q} + [N] [N]qdV ) [N] t dA ) [N] hT dA
[C] +
T T T T T f T T f T b
where c is the specific heat, q is the internal heat generation per unit volume, h is the film coefficient on a convective boundary, Tb is the bulk fluid temperature adjacent to the convective boundary, tf is the heat flux on the boundary where an external flux is specified, the Vf vector is the conducting mediums fluid velocity vector (which in most cases is zero) and is the mass density of the material. All integrations are done over the volume of the element or the surface area over which the external convective or flux boundary conditions are specified. Note that convection boundary conditions affect the conductivity matrix as well as the heat flow vector. In addition, if the Vf vector is nonzero and hence mass transport of heat terms are included, the K matrix is nonsymmetric.
Element Theory
42 Revised: 04/22/98
Structural Displacements Strains Stresses BC Forces BC Pressure Elastic Foundation Temperature Distribution
Thermal Temperatures Thermal Gradients Flux Heat Flow Heat Flux Convection Internal heat generation per volume
Element Theory
43 Revised: 04/22/98
System Assembly/Decomposition
The overall system equations are always formed by assembling element contributions. However, the system DOF can be nodal-based or element-based. In a nodal-based system, any node in the model is assumed to be a point where equilibrium equations are to be formed and solved and hence a node that has no attached elements will produce a singular set of equations. An element-based scheme, on the other hand, only constructs equilibrium equations for nodes that are connected to elements and hence unconnected nodes play no role in the analysis.
Element Theory
44 Revised: 04/22/98
Assembly Method Element based Nodal based Element based Element based
Element Theory
45 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
46 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
47 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
48 Revised: 04/22/98
Patch Test
The patch test is used to evaluate incompatible (nonconforming) elements. In this test, a patch of elements with at least one element completely contained within the interior boundary of the model is subjected to a constant strain condition. If the element strains actually represent the constant strain conditions, the patch test is passed.
Element Theory
72 Revised: 04/22/98
where Ni is the shape or interpolation function for node number I and can be written in terms of the x and y coordinates of the nodes as
N1 N2 N3 N4 + + + + (w * X)(h * Y)4wh (w ) X)(h * Y)4wh (w ) X)(h ) Y)4wh (w * X)(h ) Y)4wh
Note the field includes a complete linear polynomial plus the mixed quadratic term.
Element Theory 49 Revised: 04/22/98
x + u x y + v y g xy + u ) v y x
Note that since the assumed displacement field for u and v are the same as that of T, this element can model exactly a strain field that includes an x-strain that varies linearly with y, a y-strain that varies linearly with x, and a shear strain field that has a linear variation with respect to x and y. If this element is used to model any strain with a more complex variation, and virtually every practical problem has a more complex variation, the solution will be approximate.
Element Theory
50 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
51 Revised: 04/22/98
1 Figure 2:
The quadratic element includes all the polynomial terms as the linear element but includes the additional terms,
X2, Y2, X2Y, XY2
Note all quadratic terms and two mixed cubic terms are included. For structural problems, this element can model exactly strain fields where the x-strain includes all linear terms, the mixed quadratic term and a quadratic variation in y.
Element Theory
52 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
53 Revised: 04/22/98
where i, j and k are the three nodes of the triangle. The shape functions (Ni, Nj, Nk) can be expressed in terms of the coordinates of the three nodes by writing three simultaneous equations, when X=Xi and Y=Yi, T=Ti, etc. A typical shape function, Ni, is given by the equation,
Ni +
a i ) b iX ) c iY
2D
where
a i + X jY k * X kY j bi + Yj * Yk ci + Xk * Xj D + areaofthetriangle
Note that the shape function for node I always has a value of one when evaluated at node I and has a value of zero at all other nodes. Note that this assumed variation can only model (exactly) a constant gradient in each direction, i.e., in structural analysis, the strain and stress predictions are constant throughout this element, the [B] is composed of all constant terms. This type of element should rarely be used in structural analysis since the assumed field is of such a low order that the element will be very stiff and stresses will always be discontinuous at interelement boundaries.
Element Theory 54 Revised: 04/22/98
Note that this field contains higher order terms than the linear rectangle and is complete to the same order as the quadratic rectangle. The rate of convergence of the solution, as the mesh is refined, depends on the order of the highest complete polynomial in the element and hence the quadratic triangle will converge at the same rate as the quadratic rectangle.
Linear triangle
Y X 1 Figure 3: 2
Quadratic triangle
6 Y X 1 4 2 5
Element Theory
55 Revised: 04/22/98
These elements are also hierarchical elements; the stiffness matrices of a lower order element can be used to minimize the computations required for the higher order elements.
Element Theory
56 Revised: 04/22/98
Many users do not consider the implications of setting the escalation and convergence criteria. If the escalation criterion is set too loose, element polynomials will be fixed at too low an order and considerable error is locked into the solution and the solution can converge to the wrong value. If the convergence criterion is too loose, the model will appear to be converged when, in reality, the solution is far from convergence. Default escalation and convergence criteria are usually too loose for accurate gradient results such as local strains and stresses.
Element Theory
57 Revised: 04/22/98
Isoparametric Elements
Isoparametric formulations were introduced by Irons [8] in 1966 and make it possible to have nonrectangular quadrilaterals, curved element edges, and singularity elements for fracture mechanics. In an isoparametric formulation, element nodes define not only the displacement at any point in terms of the nodal displacement values but also the coordinates of any point in terms of the nodal coordinates, i.e.,
{ d } + [N]{ U } {c } + [N]C N
where the c vector defines the global Cartesian coordinates (X,Y,Z) of a point in the element and CN is a vector of the X,Y, and Z coordinates of the nodes of the element. The elements are called isoparametric since the same shape functions are used to interpolate both coordinates and the displacement field. Since the shape is being mapped by the same function as the displacements, elements with two nodes/side will have straight sides, quadratic or higher order elements can have curved boundaries. The degree of the boundary curve can be of the same order, or lower, as that of the assumed displacement field on that boundary.
Element Theory
58 Revised: 04/22/98
h+*1 2
N X Y + N Y
i i
h+*1 X, u
i i
Figure 4:
where Xi and Yi are the global coordinates of the four nodes of the element and the shape functions are the same as those of the linear rectangle with the substitution of the appropriate dimensions and new coordinate variables. The linear isoparametric shape functions are shown at the right.
Element Theory
N1 N2 N3 N4
+ + + +
59 Revised: 04/22/98
N U + N V
i i
where u and v are functions of X and Y, and Ui and Vi are the X and Y components of the global Cartesian displacement vector at node I. To calculate the strain-displacement matrix ([B]), the chain rule of partial differentiation must be employed since the derivatives of u and v with respect to X and Y are needed and the shape functions are in terms of and . For example, differentiating with respect to the natural coordinate and adopting the convention that a comma denotes differentiation with respect to the variable following the comma, yields,
u, c + u, XX, c ) u, YY, c
Element Theory
60 Revised: 04/22/98
where [J] is called the Jacobian matrix. The coefficients of [J] are obtained by differentiating the expressions for X and Y as functions of and , which yields
N , c X Y, c + N , cY X, h + N , hX Y, h + N , hY
X, c +
i i i i
+ J 11 + J 12 + J 21 + J 22
i i i
Since the shape functions [N] are in terms of the natural coordinates, the differentiation can be performed and the [J] coefficients will be functions of and and the known, constant, X and Y coordinates of the four nodes of the element. For example,
N 1, c + * (1 * h) 4
Element Theory
61 Revised: 04/22/98
x 1 { } + y + 0 g xy 0
u, x 0 0 0 u, y 0 0 1 v, x v, y 1 1 0
JI 11 u, x JI 21 u, y + v, x 0 v, y 0
JI 12 0 0 u, c 0 JI 22 0 u, h v, c 0 JI 11 JI 12 v, h 0 JI 21 JI 22
u, c N1, c N 1, h u, h + v, c 0 v, h 0
0 N 2, 0 0 N 2, h 0 N 1, c 0 N 2, c N 1, h 0 N 2, h
Element Theory
where t= thickness of the element and J is the determinant of the Jacobian matrix. J is the scaling factor between a differential area in the - system and the global Cartesian system, that is,
dXdY + Jdcdh + J 11J 22 * J 21J 12dcdh
In most instances, J is a function of position (,) and hence varies throughout the element. In the simple case of a rectangular or parallelogram element, J=(area of element)/4. J, the determinant of the Jacobian matrix, plays a crucial role in determining whether the isoparametric mapping is acceptable or the element is too distorted. J must be positive at every point in the element and on its boundary for the mapping to be acceptable, i.e., every point in the parent element ( square) maps onto one point in the real element. For linear isoparametric elements, J will be positive if every interior angle is <180_. Angles that are close to 180_ will produce ill-conditioned elements and hence should be avoided.
Element Theory
63 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
64 Revised: 04/22/98
Numerical Integration
The calculation of element matrices and load vectors requires efficient numerical integration of polynomials and ratios of polynomial functions. In most commercial codes, Gauss quadrature [11] is employed. In Gauss, or Gauss-Legendre, quadrature, an integral is evaluated by summing the terms of a finite series as shown below,
I+
f(b)db + W f
n 1 *1
i i
where Wi are the so-called weighting coefficients and fi is the value of function f evaluated at a corresponding sampling point (ai) in the interval. Using Gaussian quadrature, one can exactly integrate a polynomial of order (2n-1) by employing n sampling points or integration points, sometimes called Gauss points. The accuracy of the quadrature is said to be O(h2n ). Therefore, using a 2-point rule for instance, one can exactly integrate a polynomial of order three or lower. If the integrand is not a polynomial but rather the ratio of two polynomials, then the integration will not be exact but will become more accurate as higher sampling rules are employed.
Element Theory
65 Revised: 04/22/98
0.0
0.6
Element Theory
66 Revised: 04/22/98
f(c, h)dcdh + W W fc , h
n n *1 *1 i+1 i+1 i j i j
Typical sampling points for two-point and three-point rules are shown in the figure below. The extension to 3-D elements is clear and involves a triple sum rather than a double sum.
3 c+ 3 4 2 h+ c 1 3 3 h+* 3 3 3 c + 0.6 h + 0.6 3 2 1 6 5 4 9 8 c
3 c+* 3
c + * 0.6
7 h + * 0.6 (b)
(a)
Element Theory
67 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
68 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
69 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
70 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
71 Revised: 04/22/98
Stress Extrapolation
In many commercial codes, element strains and stresses are calculated at the integration or Gauss points since it can be shown [12] that these locations are the most accurate places within the element to sample the strain/stress response. In general, the optimal stress or heat flux sampling points in the element are the Gauss points of the corresponding (pm+1) rule. For example, a quadratic (8noded) quadrilateral would be integrated with a 2x2 rule and the stresses would be calculated at the four Gauss points within the element. In most instances, users prefer element nodal strains/stresses since node locations are readily visible points in the model while Gauss points are interior to the elements. Strains and stresses at the nodes can be obtained by extrapolating the Gauss point values. The extrapolation is normally done [13] by employing a leastsquares polynomial fit (in natural coordinates) to the Gauss point stresses, component by component, and then simply substituting the proper natural coordinates of a given node.
Element Theory
73 Revised: 04/22/98
ANSYS
HYPERMESH MENTAT
PATRAN
Element Theory
Quadratic
Linear
Quadratic
Linear
Element Theory
75 Revised: 04/22/98
If proper numerical integration rules are employed, structural solutions will, for the most part, exhibit the following additional characteristics:
D Displacements are generally underestimated, i..e, the model is too stiff. However, at any given point, in any given direction, the displacement may or may not be underestimated. As the model is refined, the structure becomes more flexible. D Strains and stresses are generally underestimated, as the model is refined strain and stress predictions will increase. Strains/stresses do not, in general, converge monotonically as the mesh is refined. D If the model is loaded by tractions and/or temperatures, computed strain energy values will increase monotonically as the model is refined by increasing the polynomial order (for a fixed mesh) or by introducing more elements (for a fixed polynomial order) using reducible meshes. A sequence of reducible meshes is achieved by always creating new elements within the boundary lines of the current elements. D If the model is loaded by imposed displacements, the computed strain energy will decrease monotonically as the mesh is refined as described above. D If the model is loaded by imposed displacements and tractions or temperatures, strain energy values do not, in general, converge monotonically as the mesh is refined.
Element Theory
76 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
77 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
78 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
79 Revised: 04/22/98
X I Z
Element Theory
80 Revised: 04/22/98
Beam/bar Element
Beam elements are usually defined by either two or three nodes. The first two define the centerline location and orientation; the third node may be used to define the orientation of the principal axes of the crosssection. In general, axial displacements and torsional rotations are assumed to vary linearly along the axis; normal (transverse) displacements are assumed to vary in a cubic manner. Since beam theory forms the basis of such element, the parts length to thickness ratio should be five or higher (10 or higher if the beam element does not include shear deformation). Most commercial codes have more than one beam element type. Consider the following options/characteristics during the element library review:
Element Theory
81 Revised: 04/22/98
FEA BEST PRACTICES D D D D D D D D symmetric or unsymmetric crosssection centerline coincident or offset relative to nodes shear center effects shear deformation effects tapered or constant crosssection shear relief due to taper straight or curved beam material properties: D elastic D plastic D creep D stress output: D locations, ends only or along span, sampling points in the crosssection D types of stresses D direct D bending D shear due to torsion D shear to vertical shear load
Element Theory
82 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
83 Revised: 04/22/98
2D elements that are axisymmetric, or have an axisymmetric option, are available in most codes. Such elements are normally formulated on either a per unit radian or per revolution basis. Users must be aware of the basis in order to correctly apply/interpret the following:
D mixing axisysmmetric and nonaxisymmetric elements D applying nodal forces D Interpreting element nodal and reaction forces D
Mixtures of axisymmetric and 2-D plane or 3-D solid elements can be very cost-effective models. Generally speaking, the part/system must be axisymmetric in geometry, loading and material properties; some codes allow nonaxisymmetric loading via a Fourier series approach in the circumferential direction. Axisymmetric elements subjected to nonaxisymmetric loads are sometimes called harmonic elements and are limited to a linear analysis since superposition will be employed in summing the terms of the series.
Element Theory
84 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Selection
Whenever justifiable, simplifying assumptions are introduced to reduce the modeling effort and computational cost.If the part geometry and loading are appropriate, simple elements such as spring, truss and beam elements can be very effective. Continuum elements provide the means to model more complex geometries and stress fields.
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
The decision on whether to use a plane stress versus a plane strain formulation should, in general, be based on the physical dimensions of the part. However, for a given geometry, a plane strain model will be stiffer than the corresponding plane stress model and will appear to have a larger Poissons ratio in the x-y plane. While 2-D plane strain/stress elements can be used to model 2-D bending and 3-D solid elements can be used to model 3-D bending, two or more elements are normally needed in the beam height or shell thickness direction.
Preprocessing
Some codes require axisymmetric elements to be defined in the x-y plane while other codes require the geometry to lie in the x-z plane. If the x-y plane is employed, each node has two DOF, the x- and y-translations. However, the stress state is 3-D, in-plane stresses give the radial, axial and in-plane shear stresses; the out-of-plane stress, the z-stress, is the hoop stress. Axisymmetric elements provide the best of both worlds, the user builds a 2-D model, the computational cost of the solution is similar to that of a 2-D model, and yet accurate 3-D stresses are obtained.
Preprocessing
Axisymmetric and 2-D or 3-D solid elements can be employed in the same model. The user must, however, take care that the mixture of elements makes sense from a physical viewpoint. Some codes formulate elements on a per unit radian basis while other formulations are based on the full toroidal circumference. If 2-D plane and 3-D solids are mixed, thicknesses and material properties must be adjusted to ensure that the entire model is consistent in terms of both stiffness and mass (if inertia effects are to be included in the analysis).
Preprocessing
Shell Elements
Typical four and eightnoded shell elements are shown below. Note that shell elements may be arbitrarily oriented in space and subjected to both inplane and outofplane loading. The X and Y axes are in the plane of the shell neutral surface and Z is perpendicular to the plane. In general, the inplane, middle surface displacement field assumption is the same, or similar to, the corresponding 2D solid element. The outofplane (normal) displacement is typically cubic. Most FEA codes have a number of shell elements in the library. Consider the following options/characteristics during the element library review (remember the results will never be better than shell theory predictions):
D use straightsided or curvedsided elements D definition of element and material coordinate systems D direction of positive pressure loading D stress stiffening/spin softening D small deflection, large deflection, large strain D thin shell or thick shell (needs to include shear deformation) D homogeneous or composite shell? If composite, does shell behave as a laminated shell or sandwich structure? D if composite, how are ply thicknesses (including drop off), material orientations, material properties defined? D coincident or offset with respect to the nodes D elastic, plastic, and/or creep D stress/strain sampling locations, inplane and through the thickness D stress/strain output coordinate system, element or material
Element Theory 85 Revised: 04/22/98
Typical applications of shell elements include thin panels, castings, and molding. Blades are sometimes modeled with shells if the platform/airfoil attachment region is not an area of interest.
Element Theory
86 Revised: 04/22/98
Shell Elements
Beam and shell elements have the assumptions of beam or shell theory embedded in the element formulation and hence only one element is needed in the beam height or shell thickness direction. A structure can normally be approximated as plate- or shell-like if the length/thickness or radius/thickness ratio is 5 or larger (10 or larger if shear effects are not included in the formulation). Shell elements are based on shell theory and hence can never provide an answer better than classical shell theory. Shell formulations are normally based on either the standard Kirchhoff assumptions, i.e., plane sections remain plane and normal to the middle surface, or Mindlin assumptions, i.e., plane sections remain plane but not necessarily normal to the middle surface which implies that the transverse shear strain is constant through the shell thickness. The membrane (middle or neutral surface) behavior of shell elements is the same or similar to that of the corresponding plane stress/strain elements. The out-of-plane (normal to the middle surface) displacement field is similar to that of a beam element, a cubic, or higher, order polynomial. Linear shell elements, i.e., two nodes per element edge, typically have a linear in-plane, middle surface displacement field but a cubic, or higher order, normal displacement field. The shell mesh describes the middle surface of the shell and the finite element solution represents the deformation of the middle surface. Shell theory completely describes the deformation and stress state throughout the shell once the middle surface displacement field is known.
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Brick Elements
Hexahedron elements, typically called bricks, may be linear (8noded), quadratic (20noded), and, less frequently, cubic (32noded). Most brick elements have only translations as DOF at each node; however, some codes have bricks with translations and rotations as DOF. This simplifies mixed models of bricks and shells and provides a higher order displacement field. Consider the following options/characteristics during the element library review:
D use straightsided or curvedsided elements D definition of element and material coordinate systems D stress stiffening/spin softening D small deflection, large deflection, large strain
Element Theory
87 Revised: 04/22/98
n n
n n n
Tetrahedron Elements
Tetrahedron elements, typically called tets, are normally linear (4noded) or quadratic (10noded). Cubic and higherorder elements can easily be developed but are not commonly used, except in a pelement context. Standard linear tets, which have three translations as DOF at each node, are very stiff and should be avoided. Quadratic tets provide good accuracy and quadratic stress convergence as the mesh is refined. Mixtures of bricks and tets are incompatible, i.e., such models inherently contain cracks and hence should be avoided. Properly arranged, one can maintain compatibility with a mixture of bricks, pyramids, and tetrahedron elements. Some codes have linear tets with six DOF per node, three translations and three angular rotations. This element (24 total DOF) has an accuracy considerably better than that of a standard linear tet (12 total DOF) but slightly poorer than that of a quadratic tet (30 total DOF). The rotations also simplify the connections between shells and tets.
Element Theory
89 Revised: 04/22/98
Over the last few years, tet models have become much more commonplace. The changes that drive the use of tets are given below:
D Time allocated for modeling/analysis has been greatly reduced. D Fast, reliable tet meshers have been developed, brick meshing is still restricted to relatively simple shapes. D Increases in CPU speeds, memory, and disk space have made tet models that were infeasible 2-3 years ago, routine today.
Preprocessing
While some users cite unfavorable results of tets in comparison to brick models, most of these comparisons are subject to question since brick elements with 90 degree corners are typically employed in the comparisons. Virtually all practical finite element models contain a large percentage of elements whose corner angles deviate significantly from 90 degrees. Brick elements, under shear and torsion loading, lose a large percentage of their accuracy as their shape changes from rectangular to trapezoidal. A simple comparison of distorted bricks versus tets [15] shows that as a brick corner angles deviates from 90 degrees to 45 degrees, the trapezoidal bricks produce results (under shear and torsion loading) that are only 10-50% of the accuracy of 90 degree bricks. See Appendix A for more details.
Preprocessing
Gap Elements
For decades, nonlinear FEA codes have allowed users to model contact (places where parts may touch or lose touch during load application) by the use of gap elements. Contact always requires a nonlinear analysis and hence is an iterative solution; the iterations cease when some type of convergence criteria is met. Gap elements are pointpoint contact elements, i.e., the solution is monitoring whether the distance between two nodes is increasing or decreasing. If the two gap nodes remain separated or the distance increases, no load is transmitted at the interface. If the gap closes or an interference condition exists, a compressive load will be transmitted at the two nodes. Gap elements are very effective for many problems but suffer from a number of drawbacks such as:
D requires the mesh on both parts to match, node for node, in the contact zone D may require nontrivial effort to define the node pairs that are used by the gap elements D cannot model large relative motion in the contact zone D does not allow the direction of the compressive force to realign due to large deflection
Most gap elements require the user to define a gap stiffness. If the gap element closes, the element behaves like a linear spring; a compressive load is transmitted. Since the gap stiffness is finite, penetration (overlap) will occur. The gap stiffness must be large to minimize penetration; excessive values of contact stiffness may cause convergence difficulties. If parts having stiffnesses K1 and K2 in the gap direction are in contact, the gap stiffness can be estimated by the equation:
K gap + 1 100 1 K )K
1
Element Theory
90 Revised: 04/22/98
where f is typically in the range 10100, E=Youngs modulus, h = characteristic contact length (e.g, h = thickness of 2D part or radius in an axisymmetric model). After the analysis is completed, the displacement in the contact region should be reviewed (at true scale) to ensure that the penetration is acceptable. If the gap is closed and hence a compressive load exists at the interface, the gap element may allow friction to be modeled as well. Most friction models are dry, sliding friction models; the friction force is less than or equal to the coefficient of friction times the normal force. Friction is a nonconservative loading and hence the model should be loaded in the sequence the parts will see in service.
Element Theory
91 Revised: 04/22/98
If one or more parts could undergo rigid body motion if the gap elements open, then support those parts with soft springs to ensure stability. A good rule of thumb in modeling with gap elements, the model should be defined such that the model would still be stable if the gap elements were deleted. This ensures that the solution will never fail due to rigid body motion. If the only source of nonlinearity is gap (contact) elements, substructuring (superelements) should be considered. If superelements are employed, the equilibrium iterations will run much faster since only the DOF of the gap elements must be computed each iteration. For ANSYS users, a macro is available to do this automatically. Please contact Joe Metrisin (87965967) for details.
Element Theory 92 Revised: 04/22/98
When using such elements, the node pattern on adjacent parts need not be aligned (have one to one correspondence). However, in modeling circular interference fits, considerable error can be introduced if the nodes do not align or the mesh is not extremely fine. The error stems from the contactor node making contact on the facetted approximation, target surface. The inscribed circle to the facetted approximation defines the effective radius which can introduce a very large error in the interference fit.
Element Theory 93 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
94 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
95 Revised: 04/22/98
Element Theory
96 Revised: 04/22/98
1 Z
Preprocessing
General Considerations
When modeling a new class of problems, an engineer should consider the following:
D If possible, avoid analyzing problems that your education, training, experience and other sources of information will not provide an approximate solution for comparison purposes or the ability to discern whether the solution is right or wrong. Most virgin finite element models are incorrect, i.e., need modifications. D Before starting on a model, carefully review how the model results will be used and if the finite element model will provide meaningful information. The worst scenario is to build and analyze an expensive model that is of no practical value. D Start with simple models. Consider the following hierarchy in complexity: D point (lumped mass) and line (spar, beam) elements D 2-D solid (plane and/or axisymmetric) elements D shell elements D 3-D solid elements D Use simple, degenerate models rather than large complex models to experiment with boundary conditions and/or analysis. Experimenting with large models to resolve boundary conditions is computationally, and lead-time, expensive.
Preprocessing
98 Revised: 04/22/98
How To Begin:
D Review current System Level Procedures (SLPs). These procedures document the latest recommended analysis procedures and requirements for each particular component. Netscape links to these documents can be found in the P&W Intranet under: http://pw3fl.com/strudyn/strudocs.html D Write a brief outline that describes the following: D objective of the analysis D parts to be included in the analysis D technical assumptions to be employed in the analysis, some of the work described later may be needed to complete this portion of the outline D estimate of man-time and elapsed time required to build, analyze, and postprocess the model D estimate of computer resources needed, e.g., CPU time, disk space, RAM D nature, quantity, and presentation form for analysis results
Preprocessing
99 Revised: 04/22/98
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Guidelines for Mesh Design
Geometric Considerations 1. Shape of finite element model should closely approximate the shape of the structure. Geometry
FE Model Approximation
2.
March15, 1999
Preprocessing, Part 1 - 8
Preprocessing
Guidelines for Mesh Design
Geometric Considerations (continued) 3. Do not extend elements across discontinuities such as thickness changes and folds.
Geometry FE Model
March15, 1999
Preprocessing, Part 1 - 9
Preprocessing
Guidelines for Mesh Design (continued)
Geometric Considerations (continued) 4. If physical model is symmetric, use a symmetric mesh pattern. Reflective Symmetry
Symmetric Mesh
Asymmetric Mesh
March15, 1999
Preprocessing, Part 1 - 10
Preprocessing
Guidelines for Mesh Design (continued)
Stress Fields Guide Mesh Design 5. Use a uniform mesh pattern where possible.
6.
Biased
Unbiased
7.
Good stress results require a finer model than good displacement results.
March15, 1999
Preprocessing, Part 1 - 11
Preprocessing
Guidelines for Mesh Design (continued)
Stress Fields Guide Mesh Design (continued) 8. A priori assessment of the stress picture is an essential step for the layout of a mesh pattern. Dense mesh around notch
9.
Where applied loads or stresses change rapidly use smaller elements or higher order elements. High Stress in notch
10. Outside high stress regions use smooth transition from small to large elements.
March15, 1999
Preprocessing, Part 1 - 12
Preprocessing
Guidelines for Mesh Design (continued)
Element Usage 11. Represent curved surfaces with curved elements or more of the simpler flat elements.
13. Avoid high aspect ratio of the element sides. 1:1 Ideal 1:2.5 Acceptable 1:9 Excessive
March15, 1999
Preprocessing, Part 1 - 13
Preprocessing
Guidelines for Mesh Design (continued)
Element Usage (continued) 14. Avoid elements with very obtuse or acute angles. Obtuse 15. Midside nodes of higher order elements should be placed accurately at middle of side (+/- 10%).
Acute
March15, 1999
Preprocessing, Part 1 - 14
Preprocessing
Guidelines for Mesh Design (continued)
Element Usage (continued) 17. In modeling curved surfaces observe limits on the subtended angle: 5-15 for flat elements, 20-30 for curved elements.
March15, 1999
Preprocessing, Part 1 - 15
Preprocessing
Guidelines for Mesh Design (continued)
18. Rotational degree of freedom about normal to shell surface may need restraining in some cases.
March15, 1999
Preprocessing, Part 1 - 16
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
The use of constraint equations is limited to small deflection problems and requires considerable user effort in a complex model. The process of embedding elements requires considerable effort and the local solution results are quite sensitive to the depth of embedment. The overlay method is relatively simple to apply and is applicable to both small and large deflection problems. In most instances, the overlay method is the preferred approach and good results are obtained by making the bending inertia of the beams/shells large to enforce plane sections remain plane; the in-plane stiffness should be small to allow Poissons effect to occur in the thickness direction. Remember to set the density of the overlay elements to zero to avoid incorrect mass effects.
Preprocessing 115 Revised: 04/22/98
Coupling/Constraint Equations
Coupling/constraint equations allow a user to specify relationships between the primary nodal unknowns, displacements in structural problems, temperatures in a thermal analysis. Some codes call such equations, multipoint constraint equations. Coupling equations are a very simple form of constraint equation. A typical coupling equation might enforce the condition that the x-displacement at nodes 1 and 6 are the same.
U x1 + U x6
A typical example of coupling might be to model sliding at the blade/disk interface. If friction is neglected, no separation is allowed at the interface, and the node pattern on both parts align at the interface, the sliding interface can be modeled as follows. The nodal coordinate system for the disk and blade nodes can be rotated to be tangent and normal to the interface and the nodes are coupled in the normal direction. This allows frictionless sliding at the interface but does not allow penetration or separation in the normal direction. Constraint equations are more general in that the user can write equations that express an arbitrary linear relationship among the nodal unknowns. Constraint equations are used for a variety of applications, such as:
D connecting dissimilar meshes (mesh pattern does not align) D modeling interference fits D inducing preloads in bolted joints D connecting dissimilar elements that connect to a common node, by dissimilar we mean elements that do not have the same degrees of freedom, e.g., connecting shell elements with brick elements D modeling rigid regions
Preprocessing 142 Revised: 04/22/98
Coupling/Constraint Equations
A typical example of using a constraint equation, connecting a 2-D beam element to 2-D solid elements, is shown below Employing the assumption of beam theory, plane sections 62 y,Uy remain plane and normal to the middle surface, a constraint equation connecting the angular rotation at node 12 to the x,Ux translations at nodes 11 and 13 can be written as(assuming Z is normal to the paper and Y is parallel to the vertical edge),
ROTZ 12 +
UY 11 * UY 13
D 11*13
13
12
11
19
The denominator is the horizontal distance (X-distance) between nodes 11 and 13. This constraint equation is only valid for small values of angular rotation since we have employed the assumption that the angle and the tangent to the angle are the same.
22
25
18
21
24
Coupling/constraint equations act like elements in that they increase the connectivity of the finite element model and therefore increase the bandwidth or wavefront of the system equations. The use of such equations will, in general, increase the computational effort required to solve the problem.
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Shell element nodes tied to solid tet mesh with constraint equations (Ux, Uy, Uz DOF).
Preprocessing
Thermal Strain
Mean a Tn2
Mean a Tn1
To Tn1 Tn2
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
a + T
When deformation is unrestrained, T is temperature above a reference temperature (Tref) at which the thermal expansion is assumed to be zero. If the expansion coefficient is constant (not temperature dependent) then,
T + a T * T ref
T
T +
adT + a(T)T * T
T ref
ref
where
a( T ) +
1 T * T ref
adT
T ref
Where a , which is temperature dependent, is an effective expansion coefficient, sometimes called the mean coefficient of thermal expansion. ANSYS and NASTRAN use this mean definition rather than the socalled instantaneous definition. Note that the use of the mean coefficient assumes that Tref is the definition temperature about which data is supplied and is also the reference temperature at which zero thermal strains exist in your structure. If these temperatures are not the same, then a modified equation must be used for the mean coefficient.
Preprocessing 118 Revised: 04/22/98
Consider:
a
To T
instdT
Eq: T1
r th r + a ( T ) T * T ref +
a
T ref
instdT
Eq: T2
Equations T1 and T2 represent the thermal strain at a temperature T for two different starting points, To and Tref. Now let To be the temperature about which the data has been generated (definition temperature), and Tref be the temperature at which all strains are zero (reference temperature). ) what is needed as program input. Thus ao(T ) is the supplied data, and a r(Tis
Preprocessing
a
To
instdT
a
To
instdT )
a
T ref
instdT
Eq: T3
also,
a
To
T ref
instdT
+ a o T ref T ref * T o
Eq: T4
or,
a
To
T ref
instdT
+ a r(T o) T ref * T o a r( T ) +
Eq: T5
a o( T ) )
The above equation is used to convert alpha from a measured temperature (To) to a different thermal strain free temperature (Tref). This adjustment can be performed automatically in ANSYS using the MPAMOD command.
Preprocessing 120 Revised: 04/22/98
Stress Singularities
Stress singularities (infinite stresses) do not occur in practice; stress singularities predicted by finite element models are caused by modeling errors or by finite element solutions attempting to match elasticity solutions that are singular. Typical sources of such singularities include:
D fine mesh surrounding a point force D sharp corners (reentrant) that do not have finite fillets or allow for local yielding D cracks in the finite element model caused by errors in mesh generation D poorly located midside nodes on higher-order elements D severe distortion of elements
Real structures do not possess such singularities and hence finite element models must be constructed in such a manner that these singularities will not be calculated.
Preprocessing
[ K ]{ U } + { F }
allow the use of applied nodal forces and moments. Distributed loadings causes by pressures, inertia loads, temperature distributions, etc. are usually introduced into these equations by a consistent nodal load vector approach,
{F } +
where the b and t vectors are body forces per unit volume and surface forces per unit surface area ,respectively. Note that the equivalent or consistent nodal load vector depends on the shape or interpolation functions used in the element formulation. While linear elements (two nodes/side) have consistent load vectors that can also be derived by simple statics, quadratic and higher order elements have consistent load vectors that are statically equivalent but whose load distribution is not intuitive.
Preprocessing
L Q P Q
P+1 3
(a)
(b)
(c)
P + 1 , Q + 1 3 12
(d)
P and Q are consistently derived fractions of the total force on a quadratic element. In each case the force is uniformly distributed and directed upward, and the side nodes are located at the midsides.
(a) (b) (c) (d) Body force on a rectangular plane element. Traction on the top edge of a plane element. Traction on the rectangular top surface of a solid element. Traction on the triangular face of a quadratic element.
Note that in case (b), the use of two linear elements on the top edge would have produced nodal loads of , , and of the total load rather than the 1/6, 2/3, and 1/6 distribution. The 3-D load distribution is even more disturbing, a pressure load on the face produces some nodal loads that are in the opposite direction.
Preprocessing 123 Revised: 04/22/98
4K
Preprocessing
Symmetry Types
Whenever possible, finite element modeling should exploit known conditions of symmetry or antisymmetry. When investigating symmetry, the user must consider whether the model exhibits symmetry in the following:
D shape D material properties D load and support conditions
Perhaps the most common type of symmetry is reflective or mirror symmetry, i.e., the model has a plane of symmetry. The loading can be symmetric, antisymmetric, or exhibit no regularity with respect to the plane of geometric and material symmetry.
P P P P
Symmetric Loading
Antisymmetric Loading
Preprocessing
Symmetry
Antisymmetry
D Zero translation perpendicular to the D Zero translation in the plane of plane of symmetry. symmetry D All rotation vectors (nonzero) are D All rotation vectors (nonzero) lie in perpendicular to the plane of the plane of symmetry symmetry Some finite element preprocessors can apply symmetry or antisymmetry boundary conditions automatically, others require the user to explicitly define the appropriate nodal displacement boundary conditions. Note, in a general case, such conditions require two changes to the finite element model: D If the plane of symmetry does not align with the nodal coordinate system, the nodal systems must be rotated so that translations and rotational displacements have components parallel and normal to the plane of symmetry. D The appropriate translations and rotations must be restrained, see figure above, for all nodes that lie in the plane of symmetry.
Preprocessing 126 Revised: 04/22/98
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Some commercial codes can impose cyclic symmetry automatically, other codes require the user to explicitly rotate the nodal coordinate systems and couple the appropriate node pairs on the left and right faces.
Preprocessing 130 Revised: 04/22/98
MX
9% error
Symmetry constraints
Cyclic Symmetry
Preprocessing
MX
Symmetry Constraints:
Symmetry constraints (enforced displacements) force cut boundaries to remain planar. This may or may not be a valid assumption. A clue to the validity is that matching nodes on the left and right cut boundaries should have equal stresses. In this example, note that the stress distribution on the left and right faces do not correspond. This is an invalid solution. Symmetry constraints are easier to define and cheaper to run than cyclic symmetry constraints.
MN
Y X Z
Preprocessing
MX
Y X Z
Preprocessing
Unsymmetric loading or unsymmeteric material properties may cause unsymmetric response. Holeinplate model is loaded symmetrically. Orthotropic material properties are oriented 30degrees offaxis. In this case, a 1/4 or 1/2 symmetry model of the holeinplate would be invalid. Gas Turbine examples are DS or SC turbine blades and vanes, various composite structures.
MX
MN
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
In some instances, the solution will run but the results contain displacements that are very large in one or more directions. All of the above indicate a poorly posed problem, there is no unique solution.
Preprocessing
Note these are the minimum number but one cannot simply apply any constraints of that number and obtain a correct solution.
Preprocessing
2-D Spar
(UX,UY)
2-D Beam
(UX,UY,ROTZ)
3-D Solid
(UX,UY,UZ)
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
An additional constraint must be added (bringing the total number of constraints to six) to eliminate all possible rigid body motions:
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
This approach allows a linear solution to the interface. However, separation cannot be modeled, interface forces cannot change direction during deformation, and frictional effects are neglected. Therefore, coupling produces the least expensive (computationally) solution but not necessarily an accurate solution. Whenever coupling equations are used, the element forces should be reviewed (during postprocessing) to ensure that all forces induced via coupling are compressive and have directions, in the deformed shape, that are physically reasonable. Remember that coupling equations are simply degenerate constraint equations and hence should not be used in regions undergoing large rotations. The use of contact elements to model an interface is always a more accurate approach; this approach will produce the same results as the use of coupling, if all assumptions associated with coupling are satisfied. Contact elements allow friction and separation (or additional contact) to be included in the analysis. However, such analyses are always nonlinear, may have convergence difficulties, and can be computationally expensive.
Preprocessing 146 Revised: 04/22/98
Stress Stiffening
Stress stiffening, sometimes called geometric stiffening, incremental stiffening or differential stiffening, is the stiffening or softening of a structure due to its stress state. This effect couples in-plane and transverse displacement, i.e., creates an increase or decrease in transverse stiffness due to membrane stress. Tensile membrane stresses increase the transverse stiffness while compressive stresses lower the stiffness. This effect is normally significant in a thin flexible structure, whose bending stiffness is small compared to its axial stiffness. Typical examples of stress stiffening are the increase in the bending frequencies of a turbine blade due to rotational speed, change in frequency of a guitar string as the string tension is increased, change in stiffness of a beer can as it is pressurized, etc. Stress stiffening is a second order geometric nonlinearity; this effect should automatically be included when a user activates a large deflection structural analysis. In some codes, the user can turn on large deflection and stress stiffening; turning on stress stiffening, in addition to large deflection, is normally used to help the convergence characteristics rather than change the analysis results. In other words, the analysis result is unchanged by including stress stiffening in addition to large deflection. The stress stiffening matrix is added to the regular stiffness matrix; in a static analysis the equilibrium equations become,
([ K ] ) [K s]){ U } + { F }
If membrane stresses become compressive then terms in the stress stiffness matrix may cancel the positive terms in the regular stiffness matrix. The combined matrix, or total, stiffness matrix may be nonpositive-definite which indicates the onset of buckling. In fact, a linear or eigenvalue buckling problem is solved by simply determining the scalar multiplier(s) of the stress stiffness matrix that will make the total matrix singular.
Preprocessing 147 Revised: 04/22/98
Spin Softening
While stress stiffening effects increase the stiffness of a rotating part, spin or centrifugal softening reduces the stiffness. However, the combined effect is still a stiffened structure compared to a nonrotating configuration. Spin softening is an attempt to introduce large deflection effects into a small deflection solution. Consider the simple spring-mass system shown below,
Ws
K
r u
Equilibrium requires that the spring force balance the centrifugal force and hence in a small deflection analysis, KU + w s 2Mr where S is the angular velocity, r is the radial rest position of the mass and u is the radial displacement of the mass from the rest position. To include large deflection effects, the centrifugal force is calculated in the deformed geometry, and hence the equilibrium equation becomes, Rearranging terms, yields, K * w s 2M u + w s 2Mr
KU + w s 2M(r ) u)
The term in parentheses is the reduced stiffness matrix that accounts for spin softening effects. The formulation can be extended to three dimensions and results in a modification to the main diagonal coefficients of each element matrice in each translational direction [16]. In a 3-D problem, spin softening only affects the stiffness in the plane of rotation; the stiffness in the direction normal to the plane of rotation is not affected.
Preprocessing 148 Revised: 04/22/98
Spin Softening
The effect of stress stiffening and spin softening on the fundamental natural frequency of a simple rotating blade [17] is shown.
Fundamental Natural Frequency (Herts) A = No Stress Stiffening, No Spin Softening B = Stress Stiffening, No Spin Softening C = NoStress Stiffening, Spin Softening D = Stress Stiffening, Spin Softening
AngularVelocityofRotation(w s)(RadiansSec)
Effects of Spin Softening and Stress stiffening on Fan Blade Natural Frequencies
Preprocessing
Saint-Venants Principle/Submodeling
In 1855, B. de Saint-Venant proposed a principle that can be stated as follows[18]: If some distribution of forces/moments acting on a portion of the surface of a body is replaced by a different distribution of forces/moments acting on the same portion of the body, then the effects on the parts sufficiently removed from the region of application are essentially the same, provided the two distributions are statically equivalent. In most cases, the effect of local distributions on a structure are assumed to be negligible at 5-6 times the greatest linear dimension of the area over which the distribution is applied. However, it is possible that local effects can be felt throughout the structure if the structure has thin walls [19]. Saint-Venants principle forms the basis for a two-step approach to analysis sometimes called submodeling, rebreak, or the cut boundary displacement method. This approach is outlined below: D build a coarse model that is sufficient to resolve the displacement field and the basic stress field but may not be fine enough to resolve the local stress field around stress risers. D perform an analysis of the coarse model and review the results D decide which region(s) need a finer mesh to resolve the stress field D build a new model of the region(s) with a much finer mesh; the boundaries of the new model should be sufficiently removed (>6 times critical dimension of the riser) from the area of interest D impose displacement boundary conditions, on the boundary nodes where we have cut through material, consistent with the coarse model D impose any other loads that the elements in that region(s) would feel, e.g., pressures, inertia loads, temperature distributions, etc. D analyze using the new local submodel D review the stress distribution on the cut boundaries and compare to the distribution in the coarse model, if the stiffness of the submodel is similar to the stiffness of the region in the coarse model, the stresses should also be very similar and hence we can have confidence in these local results.
Preprocessing 150 Revised: 04/22/98
COARSE MODEL
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Preloaded Joints
Bolts are frequently employed to preload joints. In most instances, a preloaded joint requires the modeler to consider a number of factors, such as: D How will preload be introduced? D Drop temperature of the bolt D Drop temperature of spar connecting two halves of bolt or initial strain in spar D Constraint equations D Initial interference of contact elements between bolt/nut heads and flanges D How will bolt be modeled? D Simple spar or beam D Simple 2-D/3-D solid elements, no detail D Complex 2-D/3-D model of bolt D Bolt/flange interaction model D Bolt-flange connected via coupling equations D Contact elements, with or without friction D bolt head-flange D bolt body-flange hole D Flange-Flange interaction D Coupling equations D Contact elements D Contact element type D Point-point (gap element) D Surface-surface (general contact)
Preprocessing 154 Revised: 04/22/98
Most methods of preloading the joint rely on inducing a strain() in the bolt such that E*A* equals the preload, where E=Youngs modulus and A= cross-sectional area of the bolt. The flexibility of the clamped components must be recognized when the strain is computed, as the components compress, the bolt load will relax. In most cases, an initial run is made with an approximate strain, the resulting bolt load is reviewed, and the initial strain is scaled to produce the proper preload.
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Interference Fits
Interference fits can be simulated by a variety of approaches, some more accurate than others. For instance, in modeling the interference between a disk and a shaft, one might employ one of the following techniques:
D Assume shaft contraction will be small and simply impose a uniform radial displacement, at the disk bore, equal to the radial interference. D Impose a unit uniform pressure on the exterior of the shaft and bore of the disk. After the analysis, scale the pressure such that the radial expansion of the disk plus the radial contraction of the disk equals the radial interference. D Couple the disk and shaft nodes in the radial direction and impose a temperature rise on the shaft such that it should expand an amount equal to the radial interference. D Let the disk and shaft share a common set of nodes at the interface, set the coefficients of thermal expansion to zero except in the radial direction, and subject the shaft to the temperature rise described above; assumes interface stays locked radially and axially. D Write constraint equations between the disk and shaft nodes at the common interface. The radial expansion of the disk plus the radial contraction of the shaft must equal the radial interference. D Use gap or contact elements between the disk and shaft and impose an initial interference in the model via temperatures or gap input data or by modeling the parts at their true dimensions.
Clearly, all of these approaches, except the last, are based on maintaining contact over the entire interface. Some assume a uniform pressure distribution and most neglect friction at the interface. The last approach is the most general and accurate approach in that nonuniform pressure distributions, separation, and friction can be included in the model; however, it requires a nonlinear analysis.
Preprocessing 157 Revised: 04/22/98
Preprocessing
Orthotropic Materials
Orthotropic materials require special care to ensure the proper stiffness is computed and the strain and stress output is clearly understood. A few considerations are listed below:
D Orthotropic material properties must be defined with respect to some coordinate system since the material properties are directionally-dependent. How is this material coordinate defined in your FEA code? D Orthotropic material properties are typically specified in one of two formats, row-normalized form or column-normalized form. Which form does your FEA code expect?
Preprocessing
Composite Materials
Composite materials require special methods to handle the unique material properties. Simple composite structures can be handled with conventional elements using an orthotropic assumption, however more complex layered composites require the use of special elements. The first step is to determine the behavior you wish to model and the type of materials you have. These decisions will influence whether you choose 2D, layered shell, or 3D solid elements. Several questions should be answered before you begin:
D If the structure is a layered composite, will the structure be modeled using a layered shell element (assumes plane stress), a layered 3-D solid element or regular 3D solid elements. D For layered shell elements, does composite behave like a thin laminated structure where all layers carry bending, or does it behave like a sandwich structure where outer layers carry bending and center layer carries the shear? D For a layered structure, how are the ply thicknesses, material properties, and material orientation angles defined and checked? D Shell elements should be defined in such a way that shell normals and ply numbering are consistent for adjacent elements. D What type of output is required for the composite elements? D Strain/stress sampling locations ? D Strain/stress measures, failure criteria? D Strain/stress directions?
Preprocessing
Composite Materials
Preprocessing
Disadvantages:
D Lots of printout to sort through D No interlaminar tensile stress prediction. D Interlaminar shear stress is an approximation.
2D Plane Stress
Advantages:
D D D D Predicts interlaminar tensile and interlaminar shear stresses. Easy to set up and quick to run. Useful in parametric analysis. Contour plotting for data reduction.
Disadvantages:
D Limited to structures that dont vary through thickness.
Preprocessing
Disadvantages:
D Computer intensive solution. D Cost (modelling time and computer).
Axisymmetric Elements.
Advantages:
D D D D Used to analyze bodiesofrevolution. Interlaminar stress recovery. Easy to set up and quick to run. Contour plotting for data reduction.
Disadvantages:
D Will not handle nonaxisymmetric loads.
Preprocessing
Inhouse code for preprocessing. Commercially available pre, and post processor for ANSYS and NASTRAN. Commercial FEA program for linear and nonlinear analysis. Commercial FEA program for linear and nonlinear analysis. Commercial FEA program for linear and nonlinear analysis.
164 Revised: 04/22/98
Preprocessing
The next five figures illustrate the percent error in frequency and mode shape versus mesh density for beam, shell, and solid elements. Note that considerably coarser meshes can be used if frequencies, rather than accurate mode shapes are the quantities of interest.
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Low Frequency Structural Dynamics High Frequency Structural Dynamics Shock Wave Propagation Impact/Penetration Random Vibration Rigid Body Dynamics/Kinematics Stability (Flutter) Rotor Dynamics Fluid/Structural Coupling
Preprocessing
Elements with midside nodes are generally less sensitive to distortion than the corresponding linear elements. A p-element is the extreme example of a higher order element that is relatively insensitive to distortion.
Preprocessing 173 Revised: 04/22/98
Preprocessing
Conditioning
Most FEA codes try to alert the user if the model is ill-conditioned; the equilibrium equations are ill-conditioned if small changes in the stiffness matrix or load vector cause large changes in the displacement solution. The cause of ill-conditioning may be physical, such as the development of a yield hinge or the onset of buckling. However, in most cases, when ill-conditioning is raised as an issue, a user is discussing large changes in the solution caused by the use of finite precision arithmetic in the computer. Computer manipulation errors include truncation error and roundoff error; however, truncation error, storing only the leading n bits of a stiffness coefficient, is more significant. The digits that were dropped because of truncation may be critical to obtaining an accurate solution. Consider the simple spring model shown at the right [20]:
k2 u2 2 1 u1 P k1
K1 * K 1
* K1 U 1 P + K 1 ) K 2 U 2 0
K 1 ) K2 * K 1U2 + P
This equation gives the exact solution, K2 U2 =P. However, when the computer calculates the entries in the stiffness matrix, K1 and K2 are only stored to a certain number of significant figures and if the stiffnesses differ by many orders of magnitude the results may be very inaccurate. If K1=1.000000 and K2=4.444444E-6 and the computer carried seven digits, the subtraction , (K1+K2)-K1, yields 1.000004 1.000000 =0.4E-6, only one significant figure representing the stiffness K2 remains. If only six significant figures are employed, the subtraction would yield 1.000000 1.000000 = 0.000000, and hence the equation solver should find the matrix is singular and hence has no unique solution. Note this error is caused by the high stiffness spring being supported by the low stiffness spring. If K2 >> K1, no ill-conditioning occurs.
Preprocessing 175 Revised: 04/22/98
Conditioning (Cont.)
Typical sources of ill-conditioning include:
D stiff regions supported by very flexible regions; this is the most common source of ill-conditioning D thin-walled shell structures; ill-conditioning stems from the membrane stiffness being much larger than the bending stiffness D using a Poissons ratio very close to 0.5 D using a low-order Gauss rule D modeling a rigid region with very stiff elements; use constraint equations and make the region totally rigid
Various measures of conditioning can be calculated but no single test appears to be completely reliable.
Preprocessing
Conditioning Measures
Some codes, during element formulation, report the minimum and maximum values, and corresponding element numbers, of the main diagonal coefficients of the element stiffness matrices. A large ratio of max to min indicates the model is composed of very flexible and very stiff elements and hence may be ill-conditioned. Ratios of 108 or larger may produce problems; a review of the elements reporting the min and max values is in order. Other tests are usually based on examining the main diagonal coefficients of the overall, i.e., assembled, stiffness matrix. Checks may include: D Ratio of largest main diagonal to smallest main diagonal coefficient, sometimes called the pivot ratio; large ratios (1013) may be an indication of ill-conditioning. This test may be overly pessimistic; note in the previous example if K2>>K1 the software would still give a warning message even though the system is not poorly conditioned. D Diagonal decay test [20]. As equations are eliminated during the Gauss elimination process, the subtractions reduce the magnitudes of diagonal coefficients in equations that have yet to be processed. We see this in the simple spring example where K22 reduces from K1+K2 to K2. The software stores the original value of each Kii and divides it by its reduced value just before the reduced value is used as a pivot in eliminating the ith equation. If the ratio is 10n, and if the computer stores numbers using p significant figures, then only p-n accurate digits remain. Most codes perform element formulations, assembly, and decomposition using double precision arithmetic. Ratios of 107 or higher may produce warning or error messages. In NASTRAN, this ratio is called the conditioning number. Be aware that a number of measures are called by similar names. Another measure, the so-called condition number [9] or spectral condition number, represents the ratio of the largest to the smallest eigenvalues of the scaled [K]. This measure, which is expensive to calculate, can be used to calculate the worst-case estimate of the loss of significant figures. Processing the equations in a different order (resequencing) can sometimes reduce the truncation error; in general the equations should be processed (eliminated) starting from the more flexible region and proceeding toward the stiffer region.
Preprocessing 177 Revised: 04/22/98
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Preprocessing
Postprocessing
Postprocessing
General Considerations
Many FEA users consider postprocessing to be the process of creating the pretty pictures. While graphics is a key tool in postprocessing, postprocessing has the following objectives:
D Verify that the model was subjected to the proper loading environment, D Verify that the model behaves kinematically as expected, i.e., no hinges, cracks, rigid body motion, etc. D Verify that the general distribution of displacement and strain/stress is as expected or can be physically and/or mathematically justified. D Examine the goodness of the FEA predictions. Evaluate the mesh density (discretization error). D Determine critical regions for displacement and strain/stress results and associated magnitudes and directions. D Compare the results to allowable values and/or calculate the life of the part/system. D Determine the features (parameters) of the design that appear to cause nonuniform stress and displacement results. D Determine which features (parameters) are more significant in determining the functional response of the part/system, i.e., perform a design sensitivity study. D Determine the loads that are transmitted to other components or systems.
Postprocessing
Step-By-Step Postprocessing
D review the printed output/error files D check for warning/error messages D check total mass/center of mass of model D for nonlinear models, review convergence history D review the reactions, sum the reactions to determine the net force and moments, compare to the applied loadings D draw freebody diagrams of each part D review coupling/constraint equations for validity, e.g., if coupling was used to simulate contact, all coupling forces must be compressive D review the displacement field D plot the distorted shape, review the displacement scaling factor, animate the deformed shape. D review the maximum displacement component in each translation and rotation direction; compare the maximum values to the part/system dimensions to decide whether the analysis should be considered as small or large deflection. D does the distorted shape coincide with expectations, in both magnitude and direction?
Postprocessing
Postprocessing
Program U553 SURCK Infomat Creep curves Ansys, Nastran, Marc, W140
In general, stresses from a plastic analysis should not be use in any P&W life system. U553 and SURCK use linear elastic stresses and perform their own plastic shakedown. Using stresses from a plastic analysis in our life system will result in anticonservative results.
Postprocessing
References
1. M.J. Turner, R.W. Clough, H.C. Martin, L.J. Topp, Stiffness and Deflection Analysis of Complex Structures, Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences, Vol.23, No. 9, 1956, pp.805823. 2. R.W. Clough, The Finite Element Method In Plane Stress Analysis, Proc. 2nd ASCE Conf. Electronic Computation, Pittsburgh, PA, Sept. 1960, pp. 345378. 3. H. Kardestuncer, Finite Element Handbook, Chapter 4, McGrawHill,New York, 1987. 4. H. Kardestuncer, Finite Element Handbook, Chapter 5, McGrawHill, New York, 1987. 5. O.C. Zienkiewicz, The Finite Element Method, 3rd edition, McGrawHill, New York, 1977. 6. G.P. Bazeley, Y.K. Cheung, B.M. Irons, and O.C. Zienkiewicz, Triangular Elements in Bending Conforming and Nonconforming Solutions, Proc. Conf. Matrix Methods in Structural Mechanics, Air Force Institute of Technology, WrightPatterson Air Force Base, Ohio, 1965. 7. B. Szabo and I. Babuska, Finite Element Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1991. 8. B.M. Irons, Engineering Applications of Numerical Integration in Stiffness Methods, AIAAJ, Vol. 4, No. 11, 1966, pp. 20352037. 9. R. D. Cook, Concepts and Applications of Finite Element Analysis, 2nd edition, John Wiley, New York, 1981. 10. D. S. Burnett, Finite Element Analysis, Addison Wesley, Reading, MA, 1987. 11. A. H. Stroud and D. Secrest, Gaussian Quadrature Formulas, PrenticeHall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.,1966. 12. J. Barlow, Optimal Stress Locations in Finite Element Models, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, Vol. 10, No. 2, 1976, pp. 243251. 13. E. Hinton, F.C. Scott and R.E. Ricketts, Local Least Stress Smoothing for Parabolic Isoparametric Elements, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, Vol.9, 1975, pp.235238.
References 189 Revised: 04/22/98
References (Cont.)
14. A. Saada, Elasticity Theory and Applications, Pergamon Press, New York, 1974. 15. P. Kohnke, ANSYS Verification Manual, 1996. 16. W. Carnegie, Vibrations of Rotating Cantilever Blading, Journal of Mechanical Engineering Sciences, Vol. 1, No. 3, 1959. 17. ANSYS Users Manual, Volume IV, Theory for Revision 5.2, August, 1995, pg. 331. 18. I. Sokolnikoff, Mathematical Theory of Elasticity, McGrawHill, New York, 1956. 19. N. J. Hoff, Journal of Aeronautical Sciences, Vol. 12, 1945, pg. 445. 20. R. D. Cook, Finite Element Modeling For Stress Analysis, John Wiley, New York, 1995, pg. 127. 21. Warren Young, Roarks Formulas for Stress and Strain, Sixth Edition, McGrawHill, New York, 1989. 22. R. Peterson, Stress Concentration Factors, John Wiley, New York, 1974. 23. W. Pilkey and P. Chang, Modern Formulas for Statics and Dynamics, McGrawHill, New York, 1978.
References
All of these problems have closedform theoretical solutions, or a very accurate numerical solution, which are used to gauge the accuracy of the finite element results for the mesh variations. The designations used in the tables are:
4noded, linear, isoparametric quadrilateral with extra shape functions (incompatible modes) QUAD-4* standard 4noded, linear, isoparametric quadrilateral TRI-3 standard 3noded, constant strain triangle QUAD-8 standard 8noded, quadratic, isoparametric quadrilateral TRI-6 standard 6noded, quadratic isoparametric triangle QUAD-4
The mesh input consists of the type of element (quadrilaterals or triangles in two dimensions, bricks, wedges or tetrahedrons in three dimensions), the displacement function (linear for elements with no midside node, quadratic for elements with midside nodes), number of elements along each length, and the biasing of element spacing along each length. Triangles are formed by dividing quadrilateral areas along the diagonals so that four triangles replace one quadrilateral. It should be noted that the 4node linear quadrilateral with extra displacement functions (incompatible modes), QUAD4, should provide improved results, particularly in bending.
where:
p L d thickness
= = = =
A onequarter symmetry model of the plate is analyzed, using quadrilateral and triangular elements with both linear and quadratic displacement functions. Mesh density is varied, and the biasing of element spacing toward the hole is also evaluated. The theoretical maximum normal stress in the xdirection (SMX) at the top of the hole is approximately 3085 psi. The following table summarizes the mesh study results.
# HOLE ELEMENTS
6 6 6 6 12 12 12 12 12 12 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 12 12 12 6 6 12 6 6 12 24 8
# RADIAL ELEMENTS
10 10 10 24 10 10 10 24 24 24 10 10 10 24 10 10 10 24 10 10 10 10 10 20 10 10 20 40 15
SPACING RATIO
5 10 15 5 5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15 5 5 10 15 5 5 10 15 5 10 15 5 10 15 15 VARIABLE
# OF ELEMENTS
60 60 60 144 120 120 120 288 288 288 60 60 60 144 328 338 328 548 420 410 396 60 60 240 328 338 600 1124 120
SMX/SMX THEORY
0.931 0.954 0.959 0.963 0.955 0.980 0.986 0.992 0.994 0.994 0.958 0.979 0.982 0.988 0.719 0.937 0.899 0.922 0.848 0.943 0.943 0.965 0.996 1.001 0.916 1.015 1.005 1.003 1.000
* EXTRA DISPLACEMENT FUNCTIONS SUPPRESSED **SPACING RATIO IS THE RATIO OF THE SIZE OF THE LAST RADIAL ELEMENT TO THE SIZE OF RADIAL ELEMENTS ADJACENT TO THE HOLE.
Appendix A Mesh Density / Element Type Comparisons 194 Revised: 04/22/98
A review of the results of this mesh study illustrates several conclusions and trends:
1. The pelement solution provides the most accurate solution with the least amount of elements (not necessarily the lowest computational cost). 2. Quadratic displacement functions provide greater accuracy than linear displacement functions, assuming the same number of elements in the mesh. 3. Quadrilateral elements provide greater accuracy than triangular elements, assuming the same number of elements in the mesh. 4. Biasing the mesh toward the hole significantly increases accuracy. The linear triangles (TRI3) require large biasing ratios (ratio of largest/smallest element side length along a line) to produce reasonable results. Approximately 612 linear elements are needed to span an arc of 90 degrees unless very large biasing ratios are used.
5. The effect of the extra displacement functions in the linear quadrilateral elements has little effect on this type of loading.
The contour plot below represents the normal stress in the xdirection distribution near the hole for the 8noded quadrilateral mesh with 6 elements along the hole, 10 elements along the radial direction, and a bias spacing ratio of 10.
Appendix A Mesh Density / Element Type Comparisons 195 Revised: 04/22/98
L
where: h L M E depth = = = = = = 1.0 inch 10.0 inches 2000 inlb 30 x 106 psi 0.3 0.2 inch
The maximum bending stress occurs along the top and bottom surface of the beam, and is given by the following expression:
s x + Mh + 60.0KSI 2I
The maximum deflection at the end opposite from the fixed end is equal to the following expression:
u y + ML + 0.20inch 2EI
2
The results from this study are summarized in the table below.
Element Type
QUAD4 QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* TRI3 TRI3 TRI3 TRI3 TRI3 TRI3 QUAD8 TRI6
# Length ele- # Height ele- Length Spac- Height Spacments ments ing Ratio ing Ratio
2 2 4 8 12 12 12 16 16 16 24 24 2 4 12 12 16 16 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 4 4 2 8 8 2 4 1 2 4 4 8 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.2** 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 5 1 1
# Of elements
2 2 8 16 24 48 48 32 128 128 48 96 2 32 192 192 512 512 2 8
Ux / Uy Theory
1.005 0.095 0.165 0.345 0.435 0.440 0.440 0.480 0.490 0.405 0.575 0.585 0.065 0.125 0.715 0.715 0.820 0.820 1.000 1.000
*EXTRA DISPLACEMENT FUNCTIONS SUPPRESSED **VARYING LENGTH SPACING CAUSES UNEVEN BENDING ALONG BEAM LENGTH
A contour plot of the bending stress for the 6noded triangular mesh containing eight elements is shown above.
Appendix A Mesh Density / Element Type Comparisons 198 Revised: 04/22/98
The maximum shear stress occurs along the centerline of the beam, and has a value given in the following expression:
t xy + PH + 1.5ksi 8I The displacement at the end where the shear load is applied, at the center of the beam, is as follows:
3 2 u y + PL ) Ph L + 0.135inch 3EI 8GI 2
The following table contains the results from the mesh study in which quadrilateral and triangular elements were used, with both linear and quadratic displacement functions, and with various mesh biasing in the height direction of the beam. A pelement model was also analyzed. The search for the maximum shear stress in the model is limited to regions away from the ends of the beam, where inaccurate results in the numerical solution can occur near the nodes where boundary conditions are applied.
Element Type
QUAD4 QUAD4 QUAD4 QUAD4 QUAD4 QUAD4 QUAD4 QUAD4 QUAD4 QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* TRI3 TRI3 TRI3 TRI3 TRI3
# Of elements
2 8 32 32 24 48 96 32 64 2 24 48 96 96 96 32 64 48 96 240 8 384 256 384 960
Ux / Uy Theory
0.933 0.978 0.993 0.993 0.993 0.993 0.993 0.993 0.993 0.096 0.770 0.785 0.785 0.785 0.785 0.844 0.859 0.911 0.926 0.956 0.067 0.711 0.815 0.904 0.933
A contour plot of the shear stress for the mesh of 8node quadrilaterals with 12 by 8 element spacing is shown above.
The mesh density study considered brick, wedge and tetrahedral element shapes, using both linear and quadratic displacement functions. A coarse mesh and a fine mesh were used for each element type. The maximum shear stress was obtained away from the ends of the beam to eliminate edge effects. The results are presented in the table below.
Element Type
LINEAR BRICK LINEAR BRICK QUAD BRICK QUAD BRICK LINEAR WEDGE LINEAR WEDGE QUAD WEDGE QUAD WEDGE LINEAR TET LINEAR TET QUAD TET QUAD TET
# of elements
32 256 32 256 128 1024 128 1024 475 3904 475 3904
SMxy/SMxy Theory
0.632 0.917 1.111 1.017 0.640 0.853 1.049 1.008 0.454 0.720 0.905 1.034
A contour plot containing the shear stress contour for the quadratic brick mesh with 8 elements along the length, and 2 elements along the height and width is shown in the figure above.
# of elements
2 8 32 96 2 96 8 384 2 8 96 8 384
Element Type
QUAD4 QUAD4 QUAD4 QUAD4 QUAD4* QUAD4* TRI3 TRI3 QUAD8 QUAD8 QUAD8 TRI6 TRI6
# of elements
2 8 32 96 2 96 8 384 2 8 96 8 384
The same geometry and loading as before for the 10 inch long beam were used. The target values are 0.135 inch for maximum displacement, 1.50 ksi for maximum shear stress, and 60 ksi for maximum bending stress. The table below contains the results of this study.
Element Type
QUAD4 QUAD4 QUAD4 QUAD4 QUAD4 QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD4* QUAD8 QUAD8 QUAD8 QUAD8 QUAD8 TRI6 TRI6 TRI6 TRI6 TRI6
# Length elements # Length elements # Height Uy/Uy on top on bottom elements Theory
12 11 10 9 8 12 11 10 9 8 12 11 10 9 8 12 11 10 9 8 12 13 14 15 16 12 13 14 15 16 12 13 14 15 16 12 13 14 15 16 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 0.993 0.993 0.985 0.985 0.985 0.785 0.630 0.481 0.393 0.341 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
SMxy/SMxy Theory
0.980 1.073 1.087 1.327 1.513 0.500 0.627 0.853 1.073 1.393 1.007 1.033 1.040 1.027 1.073 1.093 1.080 1.100 1.100 1.167
SMx/SMx Theory
0.965 0.965 0.915 0.907 0.900 0.767 0.610 0.555 0.545 0.543 1.012 1.010 1.007 1.005 1.002 1.007 1.007 1.007 1.007 1.007
The contour plot shown above contains the shear stress for the case of the 4noded quadrilateral with extra displacement functions for the distorted mesh with 8 elements on top and 16 elements on bottom.
Introduction
This example illustrates the typical decision making process employed to analyze the turbine rotor assembly shown in the cross section below.
Drafting part
Drafting part
Extremely small features cause meshing problems and are usually not needed in the analysis.
Assumptions: Mating flange geometry and bolts are not modelled. Structure is assumed to be axisymmetric. Holes are simulated as plane stress. Bolt inertia simulated with radial forces. Bolt preload ignored. Flange face assumed to remain planer (vertical). Effects: Low confidence in stress/deflection results in flange, bolt holes, arm, and flangetodisk fillets. Stress/deflection results in main disk are PROBABLY uneffected by these assumptions. This is where experience and engineering judgement are required. Considerations: When in doubt, include extra features. Consider who will review your results. You may have confidence in the assumptions, but you may have difficulty convincing a reviewer or customer.
Appendix B Example of Rotor Assembly Analysis 215 Revised: 04/22/98
Below, assumptions were made to model the blade and disk attachment features. These are 3D features that cannot be accurately represented in a 2D model. They must be accounted for at least for their effect on the disk and coverplates. In this case, the axial and radial stiffnesses of the dead rim features must be modelled to represent the coverplate interfaces, and the inertial and gas loading. What effect will these assumptions have on the analysis?
Assumptions: Blade not modeled. Blade pull simulated with forces. Disk structure assumed to be axisymmetric Disk dead rim modeled as plane stress. Part interfaces modeled with contact elements or coupled DOF (MPCs). Friction? Min or max tolerances and fits. Effects: Stress/deflection results in dead rim and live rim area have low confidence. Part interfaces status (contact or loose) is assumed prior to analysis if coupled DOF are used. If contact elements are used, what about frictional effects? Considerations: When in doubt, include extra features. 3D model necessary for blade/disk attachment areas.
Model Verification:
The following methods can be employed to verify the model prior to analyzing the actual engine conditions.
5. Elevated isothermal load case to verify constraints. Free thermal expansion should not generate any stresses in a model properly constrained against rigid body motion under most circumstances. This rotor assembly model may be an exception. If the coverplates are of a different material than the disk and have a different coefficient of thermal expansion, they will respond differently than the disk under a thermal load and hence may generate stress. Also, if there is an interference fit between the disk and coverplates, the assembly condition will generate stresses by themselves. 6. Apply unit loads to verify load path, or apply various load types individually. For parts or assemblies with complex loading conditions it can be difficult to determine if the loads and BCs are applied correctly. It is often times prudent to run several load cases applying each type of load individually and evaluating their isolated effect. For example, running individual load cases for RPM, pressure, temperature, and assembly loads may isolate a problem otherwise masked during a combined load analysis. This procedure can also provide valuable insight into which conditions most affect the design. 7. Review program calculated section properties. Both ANSYS and NASTRAN will calculate and print section properties (mass, center of gravity, moments of inertia, etc.) for the model. This information can be used to verify model position, overall dimensions, etc. with known values. 8. Always review the solution printout for errors and warnings. Just because the program created an output file does not mean the analysis is correct. The printout contains valuable information such as the matrix coefficients (ANSYS) and epsilon (NASTRAN) which estimate the conditioning of the matrix. For nonlinear analyses, the iteration summary, convergence values, load step information, etc. MUST be reviewed to verify the solution. 9. Plot/review the deformed shape. Does the magnitude of the displacement seem reasonable? Verify with a hand calculation (RnT), etc.
Appendix B Example of Rotor Assembly Analysis 220 Revised: 04/22/98
FEA BEST PRACTICES 10. Plot/review stresses. Are stress contours smooth? Are there any singularities (location of infinite stress). Do the stresses match hand calculations (P/A)? 11. Review the reaction loads. Do the applied loads match the reaction loads? Generate a Freebody diagram. 12. Verify the mesh density. Plot the strain energy norm (ANSYS) or review element nodal variation in critical areas. Are stress or temperature gradients across elements in key areas too high? 13. Review coupling (CPs or MPCs) for validity. For example, if the coverplate/disk interfaces were modelled with constraint equations instead of gaps, are they in compression or tension. If interfaces are in tension, the solution is invalid. Consider using contact elements.
P2 P7
Sum reaction forces at constrained nodes. Do reaction forces balance the applied force and pressure loads?
P6 P3
P5
P4
Introduction
This example illustrates a structural analysis of the Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) High Pressure Fuel Turbopump (HPFTP) 1st and 2nd stage Blade Outer Gas Seals (BOGS). This is a detailed structural analysis report that is to be submitted to the customer who, in this case, is the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). Some portions of this document not related to the FEA analysis were deleted for brevity. It is intended that the reader use this as an example of good documentation techniques which are as important as good analysis techniques. Remember, that your documentation is the final product and reflects on the quality of your analysis.
FEA BEST PRACTICES D Note in this section a discussion of how engine wear patterns on the demo parts are consistent with model results. Comparing your analytical results to hardware experience is the ultimate method of model verification. D Whenever possible, compare your results to strain gage data, wear patterns, LCF crack initiation, etc.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to acknowledge Mr. W. David Day for contributing the BOGS analysis report which is the basis of this appendix. This analysis and report sets a standard of excellence which others are encouraged to aspire to.
Workshop List
1. 2D Beam - Effects of Element Order 2. Mesh Density Study 3. Properties of [K] 4. Element Type Selection Exercise - Blade/Vane Geometry 5. Shell Modeling 6. Stress and Strain at an Interface 7. Typical Stress Singularities 8. Thermal Stress 9. Loads in Quadratic Elements 10. Symmetry/Antisymmetry 11.Constraint Equations 12.Stress Stiffening/Spin Softening 13.Element Selection/Boundary Conditions
Workshops. - 1
Workshop #1
Workshops. - 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
March 15, 1999
Case # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Element Shape Tri Quad Tri Quad Tri Quad Tri Quad Tri Quad Tri Quad
Element Order Linear Linear Linear Linear Quadratic Quadratic Linear Linear Linear Linear Quadratic Quadratic
Extra Shape Functions Active Active Suppressed Suppressed N/A N/A Active Active Suppressed Suppressed N/A N/A
# of height elements 3 3 3 3 3 3 6 6 6 6 6 6
Workshops. - 6
Workshop #2
Workshops. - 7
Workshops. - 8
The maximum stress from the theoretical solution is approximately -3085 psi at the top edge of the hole. Using various element types, element spacing and element biasing toward the hole, the maximum stress at the edge of the hole can be predicted and compared to the theoretical result. Tasks: (1) Using a mesh with 6 elements along the hole length and 10 elements along the edge of the plate, vary the element biasing along the edge using values of 1, 5, 10, 15 and 20. The edge biasing represents the length of the largest element to the smallest element at the ends of the edge. For instance, edge biasing of 10 will result in a mesh that contains elements at the hole that are 10 times smaller than at the edges of the plate. Repeat the analysis using four types of elements (linear rectangles, linear triangles, quadratic rectangles, quadratic triangles). Fill in the table below with the maximum normal stress in the x-direction (a toolbar button X_STRESS will automatically create this stress contour) for all element types, as shown :
Workshops. - 10
10
15
20
March 15, 1999 FEM - BEST PRACTICES Workshops. - 11
Tasks (continued)
(2) Using quadratic rectangles and a edge bias value of 1 (even spacing), determine the number of elements along the hole and edge of the plate needed to obtain a maximum stress value that is close ti the theoretical value. (Hint: Try 10 elements along th hole and 20 along the edge, then 15 and 30, then 20 and 40, etc.)
Workshops. - 12
Workshop #3
Properties of [K]
Workshops. - 13
Properties of [K]
Properties of [K] Each diagonal coefficient(Kii) is positive. For any structure, no diagonal coefficient is negative, or zero, unless the structure is unstable. If the structure is not supported, [K] does not resist rigid-body motion. Therefore, if {u} is a displacement vector associated with rigid-body motion,
{F } = [K ]{u} = {0}
Each column of [K] is a set of nodal forces and/or moments that is in equilibrium under a unit displacement corresponding to that column. For any linear structure, the matrix [K] is symmetric, I.e. Kij=Kji. For the truss shown below, the axial stiffness of each member is:
k i = Ai Ei / Li
March 15, 1999 FEM - BEST PRACTICES Workshops. - 14
Properties of [K]
(continued)
Workshops. - 15
Properties of [K]
(continued)
The overall system stiffness matrix can be expressed in terms of the axial stiffness of each member and the overall system equations are:
k3 0 k3 0 0 0
0 0 0 k1 0 k1
Workshops. - 16
Properties of [K]
(continued)
Write rigid-body motion vectors for the following cases and show that each produces an {F} vector that has all zero forces. (a)translation in the direction of bar 1 (b)translation in the direction of bar 2 (c)rotation through a small angle about node 2
Workshops. - 17
Workshop #4
Workshops. - 18
Y Z
Cross - Section
Workshops. - 19
Cases :
1. Tip fully constrained - section anywhere, uniform pressure
3. Tip free - away from tip, uniform pressure - temperature gradient through the cross-section
Workshops. - 20
Workshop #5
Shell Modeling
Workshops. - 21
Workshop #6
Workshops. - 23
Some stress and strain components are continuous across an interface, and some are not. It is important to recognize which measures are not continuous, so that the analyst does not average these values at nodes along the interface (as would occur in a nodal contour plot). Consider the two-dimensional problem below and determine for each stress ( x, y and xy) and strain ( x, y and xy) component whether it is continuous or discontinuous across the interface. What arguments can be used to support your selections?
Y X
Workshops. - 24
Workshop #7
Workshops. - 25
1000 psi
C D D E F G
H
Y Z X
I
Fixed Y displacement
Workshops. - 26
Workshop #8
Thermal Stress
Workshops. - 27
Thermal Stress
(continued)
Temperatures have two influences on a structural analysis: most material properties are temperature-dependent temperature distributions induce thermal loads in the structure In thermal stress analysis, stresses are calculated from the equation,
{ } = [D]({ } { T })
where are the total strains calculated from the displaceme nts
The thermal loads caused by the temperature distribution are calculated from the equation,
Thermal Stress
(continued)
Question #1 Assume we have an axisymmetric part that is not restrained from expansion or contraction: if the temperature distribution varies linearly only in the axial direction, would the stresses be zero or nonzero? if the temperature distribution varies linearly only in the radial direction, would the stresses be zero or nonzero?
Workshops. - 29
Thermal Stress
Consider the 3-node, linear, triangular element shown below. For this element, the [B] matrix will be constant. The origin of the model is at the centroid of the element. Assume the temperature distribution is:
T = C1 X + C 2Y
For a 2-D model, the stress calculation reduces to,
1 x E 1 y = 2 (1 ) 0 0 xy
0 T 0 [B ]{U } T (1 ) 0 2
Workshops. - 30
Thermal Stress
Question 2 If we plug into the equation for calculating the nodal loads due to temperature, all nodal loads are zero and hence all displacements(U) are zero. Plug into the equation for calculating stress and write the equation for the stress in the x-direction: does the stress distribution seem reasonable? evaluate the stress at the centroid, does it seem reasonable? y,v
x,u
Workshops. - 31
Workshop #9
Workshops. - 32
{F } = [N ]T {t }dA
where {F} are the equivalent nodal forces, [N] is the shape or interpolation function matrix, {t} is the vector of surface tractions (pressure loadings in most cases) and we are integrating over the area where the traction (pressure) is applied. In many cases, the vector {t} has only one nonzero component and many of the entries in [N] are zero. For instance, in the case of the quadratic element shown on the next page, if the distributed load(q) is in the y-direction and is applied on the surface y=b, the only nonzero nodal forces will be in the y-direction at nodes 3,4 and 7.
Workshops. - 33
2 2 2 X / L X / L N @ y = b F 4 y L / 2 4 L /2 2 2 {F } = F 7 y = N 7 @ y = bqTdX = 1 (4 X / L ) qTdX F 3 y L / 2 N @ y = b L / 2 2 2 3 2 X / L + X / L
where q is the pressure in the y-direction, T= thickness (in-out of paper). Note that for any shape function, NI, the shape function is 1 at node I, is zero on any edge other than edges where node is located, is zero at any other node, and is nondimensional.
Workshops. - 34
Calculate the equivalent nodal forces for a concentrated 10 lb. Load acting at X=L/4, Y=b in the Y-direction. Hint: q is in general a function of X; for a concentrated load of q=0 except at the point of load application. At the point of load application, qTdx=load magnitude. Additional hint, no integration is needed!
Workshops. - 35
Workshop #10
Symmetry/Antisymmetry
Workshops. - 36
Symmetry/Antisymmetry Workshop
The frame shown below is to be analyzed under three different loading conditions: equal vertical ( Fy ) loads at nodes 22 and 24 equal but opposite vertical loads at nodes 22 and 24 a moment about the Z-axis at node 23
Each member has a cross-sectional area A and an inertia I. Assume we are only going to model the left half of the structure. State the displacement boundary conditions, loads, and section properties to be used in the analysis.
Workshops. - 37
Symmetry/Antisymmetry Workshop
(continued)
The plate shown below is subjected to two symmetrically-placed, convection BCs as shown. The film coefficient is the same at both locations but the bulk temperature at one location is 100 and at the other it is -100. Can we get an accurate solution by modeling only a portion of the plate? If so, show the portion and state all BCs.
20" x 1" plate with h=1 and tbulk = 100, tbulk = -100
Workshops. - 38
Symmetry/Antisymmetry Workshop
(continued)
For cases A, B and C, decide on the smallest portion of the model that can be analyzed and state the boundary conditions required on the boundaries of the model. The tangential displacement is restrained along the entire inner bore. Case A: Radial Loads
Workshops. - 39
Symmetry/Antisymmetry Workshop
(continued)
Workshops. - 40
Symmetry/Antisymmetry Workshop
(continued)
Workshops. - 41
Symmetry/Antisymmetry Workshop
(continued)
For the shell structure(all boundaries clamped) shown below, determine the smallest portion that can be analyzed, sketch the region and specify all loadings/boundary conditions.
Workshops. - 42
Workshop #11
Constraint Equations
Workshops. - 43
Constraint Equations
Constraint Equations Many finite element users employ constraint equations to connect dissimilar meshes. Some finite element codes can write the constraint equations automatically and some require the users to write the equations manually.
Workshops. - 44
Constraint Equations
(continued)
The constraint equations relate the displacements at the nodes of the finer mesh(A,E,D,C) to the displacements of the nodes of the coarser mesh(A,B,C). For instance, the displacement at node E would be written as a linear combination of the displacements of nodes A and B. If node E is 75% of the distance from node A to node B, the constraint equation in a typical direction would be written as
U E = 0.25U A + 0.75U B
Consider the mesh in the figure above. Would writing such constraint equations produce a Co continuous displacement field, i.e., no holes or cracks at the interface? Imagine that we fix all nodes except B,D, and E, fix nodes B,D, and E in the vertical direction and then move node B horizontally, draw a typical deformed shape plot.
Workshops. - 45
Workshop #12
Workshops. - 46
Workshops. - 47
The known solutions for the first and fifth natural frequencies are: First natural frequency: 436.23 Hz Fifth natural frequency: 3605.43 Hz The effect of including stress stiffening and spin softening will be assessed. Tasks: Run a series of analyses using the following inputs for mesh density, stress stiffening, and spin softening. Record the results for the natural frequencies and compare them to the known values. Note: This model can be accessed via the MODAL toolbar button.
Workshops. - 48
Input quantities:
Case Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 # of Height Elements 5 5 5 10 10 10 # of Width Elements 3 3 3 6 6 6 Spin Softening NO NO YES NO NO YES PreStress Stiffening NO YES YES NO YES YES
Workshops. - 49
# of Height Elements 5 5 5 10 10 10
# of Width Elements 3 3 3 6 6 6
First Mode
Fifth Mode
Workshops. - 50
Workshop #13
Workshops. - 51
Workshops. - 52
Model This Part and Show the Displacement Boundary Conditions If Three Different Types Are Employed.
Workshops. - 53