Module 4

SHASHIKUMAR S
Assistant Professor
Dept. of Aerospace Engineering
Faculty of Engineering & Technology
Jain (Deemed-to-be) University
Computer aided engineering analysis

Computer-aided engineering (CAE) is the use of computer software to simulate performance in order to improve product designs
or assist in the resolution of engineering problems for a wide range of industries. This includes simulation, validation and
optimization of products, processes, and manufacturing tools.

A typical CAE process comprises of preprocessing, solving, and post-processing steps.

In the preprocessing phase, engineers model the geometry (or a system representation) and the physical properties of the
design, as well as the environment in the form of applied loads or constraints.

Next, the model is solved using an appropriate mathematical formulation of the underlying physics.

In the post-processing phase, the results are presented to the engineer for review

Applications of CAE
 CAE applications support a wide range of engineering disciplines or phenomena.

 Stress and dynamics analysis on components and assemblies using finite element analysis (FEA).

 Thermal and fluid analysis using computational fluid dynamics (CFD)

 1D CAE, or mechatronic system simulation, for multi-domain mechatronics system design and control systems analysis
Benefits of CAE

The benefits of CAE include reduced product development cost and time, with improved product quality and durability

• Design decisions can be made based on their impact on performance.

• Designs can be evaluated and refined using computer simulations rather than physical prototype testing, saving money and
time.

• CAE can provide performance insights earlier in the development process, when design changes are less expensive to make.

• CAE helps engineering teams manage risk and understand the performance implications of their designs.

• Integrated CAE data and process management extends the ability to effectively leverage performance insights and improve
designs to a broader community.
Beam bending problems
Beams are slender members that are used for supporting transverse loading.

Beams with cross sections that are symmetric with respect to plane of loading are considered here.

A general horizontal beam is shown in figure a and figure b.

Figure c shows the cross section and bending stress distribution.

𝑀 1
𝜎= y
𝐼

𝜎
∈= 2
𝐸

𝑑2𝑣 𝑀
= 3
𝑑𝑥 2 𝐸𝐼

Figure c

where 𝜎 is the normal stress, 𝜖 is the normal strain, M is the bending moment at the section, v is the deflection of the centroidal
axis at x and 𝐼 is the moment of inertia of the section about the neutral axis (z-axis passing through the centroid).
Potential-Energy Approach

The strain energy in an element of length dx is

1 4
𝑑𝑢 = න 𝜎𝜖𝑑𝐴𝑑𝑥
2

1 𝑀2
= 2 ‫׬‬ 𝑦 2 𝑑𝐴 𝑑𝑥 5
2 𝐸𝐼

Noting that ‫ 𝑦 ׬‬2 dA is the moment of inertia I, we have

1 𝑀2
𝑑𝑢 = 𝑑𝑥
2 𝐸𝐼 6

When equation 3 is used, the total strain energy in the beam is given by

2
1 𝐿 𝑑2𝑣
U = න 𝐸𝐼 𝑑𝑥
2 0 𝑑𝑥 2 7
The potential energy of the beam is then given by

Where p is the distributed load per unit length, 𝑃𝑚 is the point load at point m, 𝑀𝑘 is the moment of the couple applied at point
k, 𝑣𝑚 is the deflection at point m, and 𝑣𝑘′ is the slope at point k.
FINITE ELEMENT FORMULATION

The beam is divided into elements, as shown in figure below. Each node has two degrees of freedom. Typically, the degrees of
freedom of node i are 𝑄2𝑖−1 and 𝑄2𝑖 , The degree of freedom 𝑄2𝑖−1 is transverse displacement and 𝑄2𝑖 is slope or rotation.
𝑇 9
𝑄 = 𝑄1 , 𝑄2 , 𝑄3 … … … . 𝑄10
The vector represents the global displacement vector.

Figure d: Finite element discretization

For a single element, the local degrees of freedom are represented by
𝑇
q= 𝑞1 , 𝑞2 , 𝑞3 , 𝑞4
10
′ ′ 𝑇
In figure d, q is same as 𝑣1, 𝑣1 , 𝑣2, 𝑣2

The shape functions for interpolating 𝑣 on an element are defined in terms of ξ on -1 to +1,

The shape functions for beam elements differ from those discussed earlier. Since nodal values and nodal slopes are involved, we
define Hermite shape functions, which satisfy nodal value and slope continuity requirements. Each of the shape functions is of
cubic order represented by,
𝐻𝑖 = 𝑎𝑖 + 𝑏𝑖 + 𝑐𝑖 ξ2 + 𝑑𝑖 ξ3 , 𝑖 = 1,2,3,4 11

The conditions given in the following table must be satisfied:

𝐻1 𝐻1′ 𝐻2 𝐻2′ 𝐻3 𝐻3′ 𝐻4 𝐻4′

ξ = −1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

ξ=1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

The coefficients 𝑎𝑖 , 𝑏𝑖 , 𝑐𝑖 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑑𝑖 can be easily obtained by imposing these conditions. Thus,
 1 2 1
𝐻1 = 1−ξ 2+ξ or 2 − 3ξ + ξ3 12
4 4

1 2 1 13
𝐻2 = 1−ξ ξ+1 or 1−ξ− ξ2 + ξ3
4 4

1 2 1
𝐻3 = 1+ξ 2−ξ or 2 + 3ξ − ξ3 14
4 4

1 2 1
𝐻4 = 1+ξ ξ−1 or −1 − ξ + ξ2 + ξ3 15
4 4

Hermite shape functions

The Hermite shape functions can be used to write v in the form

16

The coordinates transform by the relationship

17

Since 𝑙𝑒 = 𝑥2 − 𝑥1 is the length of the element, we have

18
𝑙𝑒
𝑑𝑥 = 𝑑ξ
2

𝑑𝑣 𝑑𝑣 𝑑𝑥
The chain rule = gives us
𝑑ξ 𝑑𝑥 𝑑ξ

𝑑𝑣 𝑙𝑒 𝑑𝑣
= 19
𝑑ξ 2 𝑑𝑥
Noting that dv/dx evaluated at nodes 1 and 2 is 𝑞2 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑞4 respectively, we have

𝑙𝑒 𝑙𝑒
𝑣(ξ) = 𝐻1 𝑞1 + 𝐻 𝑞 + 𝐻3 𝑞3 + 𝐻 𝑞 20
2 2 2 2 4 4

which may be denoted as

𝑣 = Hq 21

𝑙𝑒 𝑙𝑒 22
where 𝐻 = 𝐻1 , 𝐻2 , 𝐻3 , 𝐻4
2 2

In the total potential energy of the system, we consider the integrals as summations over the integrals over the elements. The
element strain energy is given by

2
1 𝑑2𝑣
𝑈𝑒 = 𝐸𝐼 න 𝑑𝑥 23
2 𝑑𝑥 2
From equation 19,
24
𝑑𝑣 2 𝑑𝑣 𝑑2𝑣 4 𝑑2𝑣
= 𝑎𝑛𝑑 =
𝑑𝑥 𝑙𝑒 𝑑ξ 𝑑𝑥 2 𝑙𝑒2 𝑑ξ2

Then, substituting 𝑣 = 𝐻𝑞, we obtain

2 𝑇
𝑑2𝑣 16 𝑑 2𝐻 𝑑2𝐻 25
= 𝑞𝑇 2 𝑞
𝑑𝑥 2 𝑙𝑒 𝑑ξ2 𝑑ξ2

𝑑2𝐻 3 −1 + 3ξ 𝑙𝑒 3 1 + 3ξ 𝑙𝑒 26
= ξ, ,− ξ ,
𝑑ξ2 2 2 2 2 2 2

𝑙𝑒
On substituting 𝑑𝑥 = 𝑑ξ and Eqs. 25 and 26 in Eq. 24, we get
2
 9 2 3 9 3
ξ ξ −1 + 3ξ 𝑙𝑒 − ξ2 1 + 3ξ 𝑙𝑒
4 8 4 8
−1 + 3ξ
2 3 −1 + 9ξ2 2
− ξ −1 + 3ξ 𝑙𝑒 𝑙𝑒 27
1 𝑇 8𝐸𝐼 +1 𝑙𝑒 8 16
𝑈𝑒 = 𝑞 3 න 4 𝑑ξ 𝑞
2 𝑙𝑒 −1 9 2 3
ξ − ξ −1 + 3ξ 𝑙𝑒
4 8
2
Symmetric 1 + 3ξ 2
𝑙𝑒
4
Each term in the matrix needs to be integrated. Note that

28

This results in the element strain energy given by

1 𝑇 𝑒 29
𝑈𝑒 = 𝑞 𝑘 𝑞
2
where the element stiffness matrix is

30
Load vector
The load contributions from the distributed load p in the element is first considered. We assume that the distributed load is uniform
over the element:
𝑝𝑙𝑒 1 31
න 𝑝𝑣𝑑𝑥 = න 𝐻𝑑ξ 𝑞
𝑙𝑒
2 −1

On substituting for H from Eqs. 12,13,14,15 and 22 and integrating, we obtain

𝑇
න 𝑝𝑣𝑑𝑥 = 𝑓 𝑒 𝑞 32
𝑙𝑒

where
33
The point loads 𝑃𝑚 and 𝑀𝑘 are readily taken care of by introducing the nodes at the point of application.

Introducing local-global correspondence from potential energy approach we get-

1 𝑇
𝜋= 𝑄 𝐾𝑄 − 𝑄𝐹 34
2
BOUNDARY CONSIDERATIONS

𝐾𝑄 = 𝐹 35

Shear Force and Bending Moment

We have,
36

we get the element bending moment and shear force:

𝐸𝐼
𝑀= 6ξ𝑞1 + 3ξ − 1 𝑙𝑒 𝑞2 − 6ξ𝑞3 + 3ξ + 1 𝑙𝑒 𝑞4 37
𝑙𝑒2

6𝐸𝐼
𝑉 = 2 2𝑞1 + 𝑙𝑒 𝑞2 − 2𝑞3 + 𝑙𝑒 𝑞4 38
𝑙𝑒
These bending moment and shear force values are for the loading as modeled using equivalent point loads. Denoting element
end equilibrium loads as R1 , R2 , R,. and R4, we note that

39

It is easily seen that the first term on the right is 𝑘 𝑒 𝑞. Also note that the second term needs to be added only on elements with
distributed load.
Finite Element Analysis Convergence and Mesh Independence

Numerical software packages solve problems using a series of discrete points.

Each point, or node, adds degrees of freedom (DOF) to the system. So the more DOFs in the model the better it will capture the
structural behavior.

Each DOF adds complexity and increases solve time. The engineer needs to balance the complexity of the model with solve time:

Too few DOFs and the response could be incorrect.

Too many DOFs and the model could take days to run.

So how does an engineer develop an accurate but efficient FEA model?

By assessing convergence and demonstrating mesh independence.

It doesn’t take much time for a finite element analysis to produce results. But, for results to be accurate, we
must demonstrate that results converge to a solution and are independent of mesh size.

To begin, let’s define a few key terms:

Convergence: Mesh convergence determines how many elements are required in a model to ensure that the results of an
analysis are not affected by changing the size of the mesh.

System response (stress, deformation) will converge to a repeatable solution with decreasing element size.

Mesh Independence: Following convergence, additional mesh refinement does not affect results. At this point the model and its
results are independent of the mesh.

A mesh convergence study verifies that the FEA model has converged to a solution. It also provides a justification for Mesh
Independence and additional refinement is unnecessary.
Analysis:

Convergence studies varies the sizing and configuration of the FEA mesh.

Our example is a rectangular beam so we can vary mesh parameters in three directions. We can vary by element size or number
of divisions. For our example we will use “number of divisions” with equal spacing. Our mesh will vary the number of elements
along:

Beam Width
Beam Depth
Beam Span

Process:

Using an iterative method, we increase the number of elements along each side and solve.

We record the complexity of the model vs. response.

For us, complexity is the number of elements and subsequent degree of freedom.

Our response of interest is the maximum vertical deflection.

Varying the number of elements along each edge, we can develop a table of mesh size vs deflection and solve time:
We can then plot maximum vertical deflection vs. the number of elements in the model. At a point, the response of the system
converges to a solution. Refinement of the mesh (the addition of more elements) has little to no effect on the solution.

When this occurs we have a converged solution.

Solve Time
We also can plot solve time and vertical deflection vs. the number of elements. The addition of elements increases solve time. At
a point, more elements increases solve time with no refinement in solution. Refinement past this point is an inefficient
application of FEA.

The results of an FEA model must be independent of mesh size. A convergence study ensures the FEA model captures the
systems behavior, while reducing solve time.
How to measure convergence?
How can convergence be measured? What is a quantitative measure for convergence? The first way would be to compare with
analytical solutions or experimental results.

Error of the displacements:

𝑒𝑢 = 𝑢 − 𝑢ℎ

where u is the analytical solution for the field.

Error of the strains:

𝑒𝜖 = 𝜖 − 𝜖 ℎ

where ϵ is the analytical solution for the strain field.

Error of the stresses:

𝑒𝜎 = 𝜎 − 𝜎 ℎ

where σ is the analytical solution for the stress field.

As shown in the equations above, several errors can be defined for displacement, strains and stresses. These errors could be used
for comparison and they would need to reduce with mesh refinement.

However, in a FEA mesh, the quantities are calculated at various points. So in this case, what needs to be determined is where
and at how many points should the error be calculated.
Finite Element Analysis (FEA) is a powerful tool for evaluating complex structural problems. Like all analytical software, bad
results stem from bad input.

Sometimes, with perfect inputs, you can still get the wrong answer using FEA. There are a lot of ways that your finite element
analysis can take a wrong turn. Some of the most common issues include:

•Bad Mesh
•Poorly Applied Boundary Conditions
•Bad Contacts and Connection

So how do you know if your results are correct?

The answer is validation and verification (V&V). V&V is a process used to make sure that the FEA model behaves according to the
laws of physics.
One-dimensional h/p code.

When modeling a problem using a finite element program, it is very important to check whether the solution has converged.

The word convergence is used because the output from the finite element program is converging on a single correct solution.

In order to check the convergence, more than one solution to the same problem are required. If the solution is dramatically
different from the original solution, then solution of the problem is not converged.

However, if the solution does not change much (less than a few percent difference) then solution of the problem is considered
converged.

Currently, two types method are used to demonstrate the numerical convergence of the solution :

1) h – method
2) p – method
The h- and p- versions of the finite element method are different ways of adding degrees of freedom (dof) to the model
h-method –> The h-method improves results by using a finer mesh of the same type of element. This method refers to
decreasing the characteristic length (h) of elements, dividing each existing element into two or more elements without changing
the type of elements used.

p-method –> The p-method improves results by using the same mesh but increasing the displacement field accuracy in each
element. This method refers to increasing the degree of the highest complete polynomial (p) within an element without
changing the number of elements used.

The difference between the two methods lies in how these elements are treated. The h-method uses many simple elements,
whereas the p-method uses few complex elements.

H-Method
More accurate information is obtained by increasing the number of elements. The name for the h-method is borrowed from
mathematics. The variable h is used to specify the step size in numeric integration. If a part is modeled with a very course mesh,
then the stress distribution across the part will be very inaccurate.

In order to increase the accuracy of the solution, more elements must be added. This means creating a finer mesh. As an initial
run, a course mesh is used to model the problem. A solution is obtained. To check this solution, a finer mesh is created.

The mesh must always be changed if a more accurate solution is desired. The problem is run again to obtain a second solution. If
there is a large difference between the two solutions, then the mesh must be made even finer and then solve the solution again.

This process is repeated until the solution is not changing much from run to run.
P-Method
The p in p-method stands for polynomial. Large elements and complex shape functions are used in p-method problems. In order
to increase the accuracy of the solution, the complexity of the shape function must be increased.

Increasing the polynomial order increases the complexity of the shape function. The mesh does not need to be changed when
using the p-method.

As an initial run, the solution might be solved using a first order polynomial shape function. A solution is obtained. To check the
solution the problem will be solved again using a more complicated shape function.

For the second run, the solution may be solved using a third order polynomial shape function. A second solution is obtained. The
output from the two runs is compared.

If there is a large difference between the two solutions, then the solution should be run using a third order polynomial shape
function. This process is repeated until the solution is not changing much from run to run.
Development of finite element code

MAIN VARIABLES

All programs use the variables/codes defined below:

NN ----- Number of Nodes

NE ----- Number of Elements
NM ----- Number of Different Materials
NDIM ---Number of Coordinates per Node
(e.g. NDIM = 2 for Two dimensional problems)
NEN ---- Number of Nodes per Element
(e.g. NEN = 3 for CST Elem)
NDN ----Number of Degrees of Freedom per Node
(e.g. NDN = 2 for BEAM)
ND ----- Number of Specified Displacement Degrees of Freedom(DOF)
NL ----- Number of Applied Component Loads (Along DOF directions)
NPR ---- Number of Material Properties (e.g. E, nu, alpha)
NMPC ---Number of MultiPoint Constraints
NQ ----- Total number of Degrees of Freedom= NN+NDN

Note: No Blank Lines must be present in the input file

1D STRESS ANALYSIS USING BAR ELEMENT
Consider the thin plate shown in figure. The plate has a uniform thickness t=1 in. Youngs modulus
0.2836𝑙𝑏
E=30X106 𝑝𝑠𝑖, 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 ρ = 𝑖𝑛3 . 𝐼𝑛 𝑎𝑑𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑡𝑜 𝑖𝑡𝑠 𝑠𝑒𝑙𝑓 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡, 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑖𝑠 𝑠𝑢𝑏𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑎 𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑
𝑃 = 100𝑙𝑏 𝑎𝑡 𝑖𝑡𝑠 𝑚𝑖𝑑𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡.

Figure: a Figure: b
Input File

NN NE NM NDIM NEN NDN

3 2 1 1 2 1
ND NL NMPC
1 3 0
Node# X-coordinate
1 0
2 12
3 24
Elem# N1 N2 Mat# Area TempRise
1 1 2 1 5.25 0
2 2 3 1 3.75 0
DOF# Displacement
1 0
DOF# Load
1 8.9334
2 115.314
3 6.3810
MAT# E Alpha
1 30E6 0+
Out put File
NODE NO DISPLACEMENT
1 5.8057E-10
2 9.2762E-06
3 9.9592E-06
ELEN NO STRESS
1 2.3180E+01
2 1.7016E+00
NODE NO REACTION
1 -1.3063E+02