Eigenvalue Buckling and Post-buckling

Analysis in ANSYS Mechanical

ANSYS Mechanical, ANSYS Workbench, Buckling, Eigenvalue

As often happens, I learned something new from one of my latest tech support
cases. I’ll start with the basics and then get to what I learned. The question in this
case was, “Can I use the mode shape as a starting position for an Eigenvalue
Buckling?” My first thought was, “Sure, why not,” with the idea being that the load
factor would be lower if the geometry was already perturbed in that shape. Boy
was I wrong.

Let’s start with the basic procedure for Eigenvalue buckling and a post-buckling
analysis in ANSYS. You start with a Static Structural analysis, in this case, a
simple thin column, fixed at the bottom with a 10 lbf downward force on top. Then
you drag an Eigenvalue Buckling system for the toolbox, and place it on the
Solution cell of the Static Structural system. After setting the number of buckling
modes to search for, ANSYS calculates the Load Multiplier for each mode. If you
applied the real load in the Static Structural system, then the Load Multiplier is
the factor of safety with that load. If you put a dummy load, like 10lbf, then the
total load that will cause buckling is F*Load Factor (l).

For post-buckling analysis, ANSYS 17.0 or later lets you take the mode shape
from a linear Eigenvalue Buckling analysis and feed it to another Static Structural
analysis Model cell as the initial geometry. We use to have to do this with the
UPCOORD command in MAPDL. Now you just drag the Solution cell of the
Eigenvalue Buckling analysis on to the Model cell of a stand-alone Static
Structural system. Also connect the Engineering Data cells.

The key is to look at the Properties window of the Solution cell of the buckling
analysis. In the above picture, that is cell B6. (Right-click and hit Properties if
needed.) This lets you choose the mode shape and the scaling factor for the new
shape going into the structural analysis. Generally it will be Mode 1.
You can then apply the same BCs in the second structural analysis, but make the
force be the buckling load of F*Load Factor (l), where F is your load applied in the
buckling analysis. Make sure that Large Deflection is turned on in the second
structural analysis. This will give you the deflection caused by the load just as
buckling sets in. Increasing the load after that will cause the post-buckling
deflections.
In this case, F is 10 lb, and load factor for the first mode (l) is 23.871, so the load
at load step 1 is 238.71 lb, and load step 2 is 300 lb. You can see how there is
very little deflection, even of the perturbed shape, up to the buckling load at load
step 1. After that, the deflection takes off.

So what did I learn from this? Well there were two things.

First, doing another Eigen Value Buckling analysis with the perturbed shape, if
perturbed in buckling mode shape 1, returns the same answers. Even though the
shape is perturbed, as the post-buckling structural analysis shows, nothing really
happens until you get to that first buckling load, which is already for mode 1. If the
model is perturbed just slightly, then you have guaranteed that it will buckle to
one side versus the other, but it will still buckle at the same load, and shape, for
mode 1. If you increase the scale factor of the perturbed shape, then eventually
the buckling analysis starts to get higher results, because the buckling shape is
now finding a different mode than the original.

The second thing that I learned, or that I should have remembered from my
structures and dynamics classes, a few <cough>23<cough> years ago, was that
buckling mode shapes are different than dynamic mode shapes from a modal
analysis with the same boundary conditions. As shown in this GIF, the Modal
mode shape is a bit flatter than the buckling mode shape.
After making sure that my perturbed distances were the same, the scale factor on
the modal analysis was quite a bit smaller, 2.97e-7 compared to .0001 for the
Eigenvalue scale factor. With the top of the column perturbed the same amount,
the results of the three Eigenvalue Buckling systems are compiled below.
So, now you know that there is no need to do a second Eigenvalue buckling, and
hopefully I have at least shown you that it is much easier to do your post-buckling
analysis in ANSYS Workbench than it used to be. Now I just have to get back to
writing that procrastination article. Have a great day!

Share this: