Analysis of a Pinned Beam Supported by a Tie-Rod on

Opposite End
The William States Lee College of Engineering, University of North
Carolina at Charlotte
Prepared by: Carson Downs
UNC Charlotte, Department of Mechanical Engineering, MEGR 3225;
Introduction to Finite Element Analysis

Problem Statement:
In this project a square beam supported by a pin and bracket at the left end and a tie-rod at the
right end was looked at. The beam was subjected to a uniformly distributed load, , along its top
surface. The pin, square beam, tie-rod, and clevis joint are made of steel with a Youngs
Modulus of 200 GPa. The brackets that support the pin and tie-rod were assumed to be rigid.

Figure 1 Assembly of Analyzed Pinned Beam

The beam has dimensions of 250cm x 10cm x 10cm with a maximum allowable stress of 100
MPa. The tie rod has dimensions of 125cm x 20cm x 6cm with a maximum allowable stress of
100 MPa. The pin on the left end has a cross-sectional area of 2.5cm2 and a maximum allowable
shear stress of 40 MPa. The pins that attach the clevis joint and tie-rod have cross-sectional area
of 10cm2 with a maximum allowable shear stress of 40 MPa. The tie-rod attaches to the beam
15cm from the end.
The purpose of the analysis was to find the maximum distributed load, , which would not cause
the pins, tie-rod, and square beam to exceed their maximum allowable stress.
The analysis for this project was done using Abaqus/CAE 6.11-3 and methods from solid
mechanics.

Problem Simplification:
The problem was simplified by applying several tie-constraints. The purpose of the tie constraint
is to tie two separate surfaces so that there is no relative motion between them. The constraints
were used to save computation time. There were a total of six constraints which can be seen in
Appendix A.
The two brackets were assumed rigid to further simplify the problem. To do this, an extremely
high Youngs Modulus was chosen to ensure relatively minimal deflection. The upper bracket
and lower bracket were also said to have no displacement or rotation in the x-y-z directions.

Another simplification that could be made is to cut the assembly in half along the length of the
beam. When using a very fine mesh this simplification would greatly reduce computation time.

Finite Element Models:

For this project quadratics tetrahedral elements were chosen for meshing. Figure 2 shows the
meshed assembly with a finer mesh around the points of contact for better analysis.

Figure 3 Meshed Assembly using Quadratic Tetrahedral Elements

Number of Elements: 27829
Analysis Type: Static, General
Total Number of Nodes: 48066
The stress/displacement elements used in this model were 10-node quadratic tetrahedron
(C3D10) which have 1, 2, or 3 active degrees of freedom. Figure 4 comes from the Abaqus
handbook version 6.7 and shows the nodal placements (integration points) on the element.

Figure 4 10-Node Quadratic Tetrahedron Element

Results Analysis:
Using Solid Mechanics Methods:
Each of the three pins, the beam, and the tie-rod were analyzed for stress and deflection using
methods from solid mechanics. Calculations for the stresses and deflections can be seen in
Appendix B.

Figure 5 Two-Dimensional Model used for Solids Analysis

Maximum Values of :
Allowable Stress

Maximum

Deflection (using 80
kPa)

Left Ended Pin

40 MPa

40 kPa

N/A

Right Ended Pin

40 MPa

160 kPa

N/A

Square Beam

100 MPa

5.3 MPa

130 mm

Tie-Rod

100 MPa

9.6 MPa

62.5 m

Table 1 Maximum Distributed Load and Deflection using Solid Mechanics

Using Abaqus/CAE 6.11-3:

Results from Abaqus show a maximum Mises stress of 3968 N/cm2 or 39.68 MPa on the left pin
using a distributed load of 1.2 N/cm2 or 12 kPa. Figure 6 shows a bottom up view of the stress
experienced by the left pin and bracket.

Figure 6 Stress Concentration on Pin and Bracket

The maximum displacement in the assembly occurs in the square beam. Figure 7 shows the
displacement plot of the assembly.

Figure 7 Displacement Plot of Assembly

A maximum displacement of 0.238 mm occurs in the center of the beam. The tie-rod displaces
evenly with a value of 7.80 m.

Analysis of Results:
The results obtained using solid mechanics and those obtained using Abaqus differed
significantly. The allowable distributed load calculated using solids was much higher than the
simulation results. Solids gave a maximum distributed load of 40 kN/m2 while the simulation
showed the load could only be 12 kN/m2. The lower allowable load that was found in the
simulation could have been caused by the stress concentration between the pin and bracket not
allowing for a higher load.
Deflection values differed as well. The beam deflection value obtained from Abaqus was 0.238
mm while solids mechanics techniques gave a deflection of 130 mm, three orders of magnitude
difference. The deflection in the tie-rod were the closest results with Abaqus giving a deflection
of 7.80 m while solids gave 62.5m.
Both methods agreed on where the failure would occur. The weak spot on the assembly was the
left pin and bracket. This makes sense as this pin had the smallest diameter of all three pins and
the smallest contact region to dissipate the stress.
Using a finer mesh in Abaqus would likely yield the most accurate results as it can more
accurately and easily account for stress concentrations. If this part were to plastically deform it
would make it a much more complex problem as it would have changing areas over which the
stress is applied.

References
Dassault Systemes. Abaqus Analysis Users Manual Version 6.7
www.egr.msu.edu/software/abaqus/Documentation/docs/v6.7/books/usb/default.htm?star
tat=pt06ch21s01abo21.html

Appendix A

Appendix B