Analysis of different loading conditions on a plate

having hole in the centre

Muhammad Ali Khan
MSME(21-23)
DME,PIEAS,Islamabad

Abstract— The objective of the writing is to understand the

different loading conditions on a plate having dimensions
100X100 mm2 and thickness 20mm with a hole in the centre
having diameter of 10mm. The selected material is Al 6061T.
The different loading conditions are point load, distributed and
distributed triangular load. The methodology is benchmarked
in this regard and the results are verified. Also, the mesh type
and mesh metrics are determined. Mesh independence study is
considered. The stress distribution and the worst loading
condition are found out. The results are compared with
existing theoretical models available for all loading conditions.

Keywords—loading conditions, stress distribution, verify

I. INTRODUCTION
Stress analysis is a fundamental aspect of engineering
that involves evaluating the distribution of internal forces
and deformations within a structure under applied loads.
When it comes to analyzing a plate with a hole in the
center, the stress concentration around the hole becomes a
critical factor. This type of analysis is commonly
encountered in various engineering applications, such as
in mechanical, civil, and aerospace engineering.
The presence of a hole in a plate can lead to localized Figure 1 Hole in a plate and loading conditions
stress concentrations due to the redistribution of stresses
around the opening. These stress concentrations can
significantly affect the structural integrity and
performance of the plate, potentially leading to failure or III. METHODOLOGY
deformation. Therefore, it is essential to perform stress
analysis to understand the behavior of the plate and In current methodology, the static structure stress analysis
determine its strength and stability. By performing a stress begins with an assumption of 2D plane stress model.
analysis of a plate with a hole in the center, engineers can Mesh is generated with a suitable element type and size.
gain valuable insights into its structural behavior, identify Boundary conditions are applied. Models are duplicated
potential failure points, and make informed design and different loading conditions are applied for each
decisions to ensure its safe and efficient operation. duplicated model. Solver is used to evaluate the results of
the required parameters. Mesh independence is required to
get better results through parameterization. Worst loading
II. PROBLEM STATEMENT conditions are searched through optimization. Different
A plate shown in figure has dimensions of 100X100 loading conditions are compared with one another and
mm2 and has thickness of 20 mm. A hole with a diameter theoretical results.
of 10 mm is present at the center of the geometry. The
following loading conditions applied on the plate for
Material Al-6061T are (a) point load of 10000 kgf (b) IV. 2D MODEL
uniformly distributed load of 10000 kgf (c) triangular Using design modular, a simple rectangle of 100X100
varying load of 10000 kgf (with max value at edge) (d) mm2 is made in xy plane with a hole in the centre having
triangular varying load of 10000 kgf (with max value at diameter of 10mm. Surface from sketches option is used
center). The key points that are asked for the stress to generate the required model in 2D. Loading points are
analysis are to benchmark the methodology, validate/ made in each duplicated model as per requirement.
verify the results, determine the mesh type and mesh
metrics, show the mesh independence study, determine
the stress distribution and determine the worst loading
condition and compare the results with existing theoretical
models of available.
 Figure 4 Quadrilateral mesh with default element size

VI. LOADING CONDITIONS

Figure 2 Two-dimensional model
A. Point Loads
Plane stress 2D behavior is assumed for the model since Two loading points are drawn in the geometry at the
thickness of 20 mm is quite less as compared to middle of the upper and lower edges of the surface body
dimensions in the other directions. Aluminum alloy respectively. 98066.5 N (10000 kgf) loads are applied at
having properties of 6061T category is assigned as a these points normal to the the edges.
material. Weak spring is on since no support conditions
are given because theoretical resultant load on the plate is
zero. Due to numerical limitations, rigid body motion
occurs and solver will not be able to evaluate the solution.

Figure 5 Point load conditions

1) Mesh Independence Study

When parameterizing the maximum principal stress for
highest value with respect to mesh element size, it is
found that after decreasing element size lower than 1mm
has no significant effect on stress value. Therefore, 1mm
element size is chosen and stress distribution is again
plotted.

Figure 3 Plane stress assumption and material

selection

V. MESH
The quadrilateral mesh is initially selected with default
element size of 12.451 mm. 207 number of nodes and 187
number of elements are generated in the surface.

Figure 6 Point load mesh independence

 Figure 10 Maximum principal stress
Figure 6 Mesh with 1mm element size
4) Worst loading conditions
Tensile yield strength of Al 6061T is 280 MPa. We need
2) Mesh matrics to find the load at 280MPa stress which comes out to be
Skewness: Maximum skewness is 0.48 and average 4922 N.
skewness is 0.033.
Aspect Ratio: Maximum value is 2.108 and average
value is 1.0315.

Figure 7 Skewness Figure 11 Maximum principal stress vs Point load

B. Uniformly Distributed Load

Pressure of 49.033 MPa is applied in 3D model at the
upper and lower surface of the plate such that tensile loads
of 10000 kgf are obtained.
1) Mesh Independence Study
When parameterizing the maximum principal stress for
highest value with respect to mesh element size, it is
found that after decreasing element size lower than 1mm
Figure 8 Aspect ratio has no significant effect on stress value. Therefore, 1mm
element size is chosen and stress distribution is again
3) Stress Distribution
plotted.
Maximum equivalent stress is 4846 MPa and maximum
principal stress is 5579 MPa.

Figure 10 Equivalent stress Figure 12 Uniformly distributed load mesh

independence
 2) Mesh matrics
Skewness: Maximum skewness is 0.48 and average
skewness is 0.033.
Aspect Ratio: Maximum value is 2.108 and average
value is 1.0315.

Figure 17 Worst loading conditions

Figure 13 Skewness C. Triangular Varying Load with MaximumValue at the

Edge
Triangular varying pressure equal to 10000 kgf is applied
on both the the plates such that maximum pressure is
obtained at 100 mm from x-direction.

Figure 14 Aspect ratio

3) Stress Distribution
Maximum equivalent stress is 146.4 MPa and maximum
principal stress is 157.51 MPa.

Figure 17 Triangular loading conditions

1) Mesh Independence Study

When parameterizing the maximum principal stress for

highest value with respect to mesh element size, it is
Figure 15 Equivalent stress found that after decreasing element size lower than 1mm
has no significant effect on stress value. Therefore, 1mm
element size is chosen and stress distribution is again
plotted.

Figure 16 Maximum principal stress

4) Worst loading conditions Figure 18 Triangular loading mesh independence

Tensile yield strength of Al 6061T is 280 MPa. We need
to find the load at 280MPa stress which comes out to be
87.15 MPa.
 2) Mesh matrics
Skewness: Maximum skewness is 0.48 and average
skewness is 0.033.
Aspect Ratio: Maximum value is 2.108 and average
value is 1.0315.

Figure 23 Worst loading conditions

Figure 19 Skewness D. Triangular Varying Load with MaximumValue at the

Centre
Triangular varying pressure equal to 10000 kgf is applied
on both the the plates such that maximum pressure is
obtained at 50 mm from x-direction.

Figure 20 Aspect ratio

3) Stress Distribution
Maximum equivalent stress is 153.04 MPa and maximum
principal stress is 164.84 MPa. Maximum tensile stresses
are foud near the hole and at 100 mm in x direction.

Figure 24 Triangular loading conditions

1) Mesh Independence Study

When parameterizing the maximum principal stress for

highest value with respect to mesh element size, it is
Figure 21 Equivalent stress found that after decreasing element size lower than 1mm
has no significant effect on stress value. Therefore, 1mm
element size is chosen and stress distribution is again
plotted.

Figure 22 Maximum principal stress

4) Worst loading conditions

Tensile yield strength of Al 6061T is 280 MPa. We need Figure 18 Triangular loading mesh independence
to find the load at 280MPa stress which comes out to be
174.3 MPa.
 2) Mesh matrics
Skewness: Maximum skewness is 0.48 and average
skewness is 0.033.
Aspect Ratio: Maximum value is 2.108 and average
value is 1.0315.

Figure 23 Worst loading condition

Figure 19 Skewness
VII. RESULTS VERIFICATION

A. Point Loads
Computational results are compared with the theoretical
results as shown in the graph:

Figure 20 Aspect ratio

3) Stress Distribution
Maximum equivalent stress is 213.23 MPa and maximum
principal stress is 230.77 MPa. Maximum tensile stresses
are foud near the hole and at 100 mm in x direction.

Figure 24 Point loads results

B. Uniformly distributed loads

Computational results are compared with the theoretical
results as shown in the graph:

Figure 21 Equivalent stress

Figure 25 Uniformly distributed loads results

C. Triangular Varying Load with MaximumValue at the

Figure 22 Maximum principal stress Edge

Computational results are compared with the theoretical

4) Worst loading conditions results as shown in the graph:
Tensile yield strength of Al 6061T is 280 MPa. We need
to find the load at 280MPa stress which comes out to be
174.3 MPa.
Figure 26 Triangular varying loads with max value at
edge results

D. Triangular Varying Load with MaximumValue at the

Centre
Computational results are compared with the theoretical
results as shown in the graph:

Figure 27 Triangular varying loads with max value at

centre results

VIII. CONCLUSION
• Worst loading condition in case of point load
reaches early as compared to distributed loads.
• Worst loading condition in uniformly distributed
loads reaches at higher values as compared to
triangular varying loads.
• Worst loading condition in triangular varying
loads with max value at centre reaches early as
compared to that of max. value at the edge. It is
because the concentrated loads at centre have
more influence on the hole.
• Computational results are underestimated as
compared to theoretical results. The difference is
due to numerical errors.