Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Finite Element Method PDF
Finite Element Method PDF
Finit
Finitee
Element
Analysis
in Structures
Zahit Mecitoğlu
2
Finite
Element
Analysis
in Structures
Zahit Mecitoğlu
İstanbul Technical University
Faculty of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Maslak, Istanbul
January 2008
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Finite element analysis is introduced in this chapter. The advantages of the method
over the other analysis methods are explained. The application steps of the method and
software usage are discussed. The cautions which must be taken care about are denoted.
Finite Element Analysis (FEA) is a method for numerical solution of field problems.
A field problem may be determination of the temperature distribution in a turbine blade,
or calculation of the distribution of displacements and stresses on a helicopter rotor
blade. A field problem is formulated by differential equations or by an integral
expression. Either description may be used to formulate finite elements.
Why the Finite Element Method (FEM) is necessary to solve the engineering
problems? Analytical solutions to the engineering problems are possible only if the
geometry, loading and boundary conditions of the problem are simple. Otherwise it is
necessary to use an approximate numerical solution such as FEM.
The finite element method is originally developed to study the stresses in complex
aircraft structures. Then, it is applied to other fields of continuum mechanics, such as
heat transfer, fluid mechanics, acoustics, electromagnetics, geomechanics,
biomechanics. However, this book is devoted solely to the topic of finite elements for
the analysis of structures.
FEA is used in industries, such as aerospace, automotive, biomedical, bridges and
buildings, electronics and appliances, heavy equipment and machinery, micro
electromechanical systems (MEMS), and sporting goods.
In the FEA the structure is modeled by the assemblage of small pieces of structure,
Fig. 1.1. These pieces with simple geometry are called finite elements. The word
“finite” distinguishes these pieces from infinitesimal elements used in calculus. In the
finite element analysis (FEA), the variation of the field variable on the element is
approximated by the simple functions, such as polynomials. The actual variation on the
element is almost certainly more complicated, so FEA provides an approximate
solution. However, the solution can be improved by using more elements to represent
the structure.
Elements are connected at points called nodes. The value of field variable and
perhaps also its first derivatives are defined as unknowns at the nodes. The assemblage
of elements is called a finite element structure, and the particular arrangement of
elements is called a mesh. FEM changes the governing differential equations or integral
expressions into a set of linear algebraic equations to solve the nodal unknowns.
Recognation of need
Definition of problem
Determination of
design constraints
Analysis Experiment
Evaluation
loads without failure. There are two ways to ensure design constraints: Analysis and
experiment.
Experimental way is based on the trial-and-error approach and for the large
structures with expensive components the cost for a trial-and-error experiment approach
is severe. Furthermore, test of some systems can be dangerous. Therefore it is desirable
to develop a theory that will adequately predict failure analyze the particular design
using this theory. The advantage of this method is that the engineer can predict failure
of his design without having to actually construct and test it.
A diagram for the solution process of engineering problems is shown in Figure 1.3.
An analysis is applied to a model problem rather than to an actual physical problem.
Even laboratory experiments use models unless the actual physical structure is tested.
The shortcomings of the both methods are the approximations during the modeling and
solution/measurement phases.
In the structural design, analysis and experiment should both be viewed as
dispensable in the design process. In practice, at first the analyses are used to improve
the design. Thus the number of experiments is decreased and the stupidly accidents
during the experiments are prevented.
Before the analysis step, the structural designer has to predetermine the geometric shape
and material makeup of the structure, and applied loads such as mechanical loads, input
heat, etc. A model for analysis can be devised after the physical nature of the problem
has been understood.
In modeling the superfluous details are excluded but all essential features are
included. Analyst makes some assumptions related to the geometry, loads, materials,
deformations, stress field and so on. Thus the resulting model is desired to be simple but
to be capable of describing the actual problem with sufficient accuracy. A geometric
model becomes a mathematical model when its behavior is described, or approximated, by
differential equations or integral expressions.
! !
mathematical method of
aproximations
model solution
aproximations
engineering results
problem
!
! Experimental measurements
aproximations
model
aproximations
Example 1.1 Consider a beam with length L as shown in Fig. 1.4. The modulus of
elasticity of beam is E, and the moment of inertia is I. When a vertical distributed load P
is applied, the beam deforms by w from the original horizontal line. Mathematical
model of the beam in differential equation form is
P
L EI
d 4w
EI =P (1.1)
dx 4
d 2w d 3w
= = 0 at x = L
dx 2 dx3
2
EI
L
⎛ d 2w ⎞ L
Π=
2 ∫ ⎜ dx 2 ⎟
⎜ ⎟ dx − ∫ Pwdx (1.2)
0⎝ ⎠ 0
Here Π is the mechanical potential energy of the beam with deflection w under applied
distributed force P. A solution of this problem statement can be obtained by minimizing
the potential energy.
Solution:
(i) Analytical Solution: Application of the integration method to Eq. (1.1) as an
analytical solution method..
d 3w 1
3
= Px + C1
dx EI
d 2w 1
2
= Px 2 + C1 x + C2
dx 2 EI
dw 1
= Px3 + C1 x 2 + C2 x + C3
dx 6 EI
1
w= Px 4 + C1x3 + C2 x 2 + C3 x + C4
24 EI
The integration constants are obtained by applying the B.C.’s and the exact solution is
found as follows
Px 2 2
w=−
24 EI
(
x − 4 Lx + 6 L2 )
(ii) Approximate Solution: Application of the Ritz method to Eq. (1.2) as a
approximate solution method. A trial function can be chosen as
w( x) = x 2 (a1 + a2 x + a3 x 2 + L)
If we take only two terms, and substitute the approximate solution into the potential
energy expression Eq. (1.2) we obtain
L L
Π=
EI
2
2
( 2
)
∫ ( 2a1 + 6a2 x ) dx − ∫ P a1x + a2 x dx
3
0 0
8
The potential energy is minimized by equating to zero its first derivatives with respect
to unknown constants. After performing the integrations, the following equations are
obtained.
∂Π PL2
= 0 ⇒ 2a1 + 3La2 =
∂a1 6 EI
∂Π PL2
= 0 ⇒ a1 + 2 La2 =
∂a2 24 EI
5PL2 PL2
a1 = a2 = −
24 EI 12 EIL
w( x) = −
PL
24 EI
(
5 x 2 L − 2 x3 )
(iii) Numerical Solution: Application of the FEA as a numerical solution method. We
discretize the beam with two beam elements, Fig. 1.5. The unknown nodal parameters
are the deflections and the slopes.
After the application of the FE procedure we reduce the problem to the following
linear algebraic equation system.
w1 w2 2
1 P w3
θ1 θ3
1 θ2 2 3
L/2 L/2
L
⎡ 24 0 −12 3L ⎤ ⎧ w ⎫
2 ⎧ 12 ⎫
⎢ 2⎥⎪ ⎪
8 EI ⎢ 0 2 L −3L 2 L ⎥ ⎪θ 2 ⎪ PL ⎪⎪ 0 ⎪⎪
2 1
⎢ ⎥⎨ ⎬= ⎨ ⎬
L3 ⎢ −12 −3L 12 −3L ⎥ ⎪ w3 ⎪ 24 ⎪ 6 ⎪
⎢ 3L 1 L2 −3L L2 ⎥ ⎪⎩ θ3 ⎪⎭ ⎪⎩− L ⎪⎭
⎣ 2 ⎦
⎧ w2 ⎫ ⎧−0.044271L ⎫
⎪θ ⎪ 3 ⎪ −0.14583 ⎪
⎪ 2 ⎪ PL ⎪ ⎪
⎨ ⎬= ⎨ ⎬
⎪ w3 ⎪ EI ⎪ −0.125 L ⎪
⎪⎩ θ3 ⎪⎭ ⎪⎩ −1.666667 ⎪⎭
The numerical values at the middle span of the beam and the free beam are given at the
Table 1.1
Table 1.1 The numerical values obtained from the different solution techniques.
Versatility: FEA is applicable to any field problem, such as heat transfer, stress
analysis, magnetic fields, and so on.
There is no geometric restriction: It can be applied the body or region with any
shape.
Boundary conditions and loading are not restricted (boundary conditions and
loads may be applied to any portion of the body)
Material properties may be change from one element to another (even within an
element) and the material anisotropy is allowed.
Different elements (behavior and mathematical descriptions) can be combined in
a single FE model.
An FE structure closely resembles the actual body or region to be analyzed.
The approximation is easily improved by grading the mesh (mesh refinement).
In industry FEA is mostly used in the analysis and optimization phase to reduce the
amount of prototype testing and to simulate designs that are not suitable for prototype
testing. Computer simulation allows multiple “what-if” scenarios to be tested quickly
and effectively. The example for the second reason is surgical implants, such as an
artificial knee. On the other hand, the other reasons for preference of the FEM are cost
savings, time savings, reducing time to market, creating more reliable and better-quality
designs.
Checking results
It is important to understand the physics or nature of the problem and classify it. The
first step in solving a problem is to identify it. Therefore an engineer has to identify the
problem asking the following questions.
What are the more important physical phenomena involved?
Is the problem time-independent or time dependent? (static or dynamic?)
Is nonlinearity involved? (Is iterative solution necessary or not?)
What results are sought from analysis?
What accuracy is required?
From answers it is decided that the necessary information to carry out an analysis, how
the problem is modeled, and what method of solution is adopted.
Some problems are interdisciplinary nature. There are some couplings between the
fields. If the fields interacts each other, it is called direct or mutual coupling. If one field
influences the other, it is called indirect or sequential coupling. An example of direct
coupling is flutter of an aircraft panel. The pressure produced by airflow on the panel
deflects the panel and the deflection modifies the airflow and pressure. Therefore
structural displacement and air motion fields cannot be considered separately.
Cautions:
Without this step a proper model cannot be devised.
At present, software does not automatically decide what solution procedure must
apply to the problem.
You must decide to do a nonlinear analysis if stresses are high enough to produce
yielding. You must decide to perform a buckling analysis if the thin sections carry
compressive load.
FEA is applied to the mathematical model. FEA is simulation, not reality. Even very
accurate FEA may not match with physical reality if the mathematical model is
inappropriate or inadequate.
Thus, we may ignore geometric irregularities, regard some loads as concentrated, say
that some supports are fixed and idealize material as homogeneous, isotropic, and
linearly elastic.
What theory or mathematical formulation describes behavior? Depending on the
dimensions, loading, and boundary conditions of this idealization we may decide that
behavior is described by beam theory, plate-bending theory, equations of plane
elasticity, or some other analysis theory
Modeling decisions are influenced by what information is sought, what accuracy is
required, the anticipated expense of FEA, and its capabilities and limitations. Initial
modeling decisions are provisional. It is likely that results of the first FEA will suggest
refinements, in geometry, in applicable theory, and so on.
Before going from a mathematical model to FEA, at least one preliminary solution
should be obtained. We may use whatever means are conveniently available – simple
analytical calculations, handbook formulas, trusted previous solutions, or experiment.
Evaluation of the preliminary analysis results may require a better mathematical model.
1.3.4 Discretization
There are three stages which describe the use of any existing finite element program:
Preprocessing, solution and postprocessing. Before entering the program’s preprocessor,
the user should have planned the model and gathered necessary data [5].
Preprocessing: Input data describes geometry, material properties, loads, and boundary
conditions, Fig. 1.7. Software can automatically prepare much of the FE mesh, but must
be given direction as to the type of element and mesh density desired, Fig.1.8. Review
the data for correctness before proceeding. The completion of the preprocessing stage
results in creation of an input data file for the analysis processor.
Solution: This processor reads from the input data file each element definition.
Software automatically generates matrices that describe the behavior of each element,
and combines these matrices into a large matrix equation that represents the FE
structure, applies enough displacement boundary conditions to prevent rigid body
motion, solves this equation to determine values of field quantities at nodes and
performs additional calculations for nonlinear or time-dependent behavior. Element and
node values of strains and stresses are computed for each solution. The processor then
produces an output listing file with data files for postprocessing.
Postprocessing: This processor takes the results files and allows the user to create
graphic displays of the structural deformation and stress components. The node
displacements are usually very small for most engineering structures so they are
exaggerated to provide visible deformed shapes of structures, Fig. 1.9. Sometimes the
animation of structural behavior will be useful to acquire a good understanding.
15
Hardware error 7
Software error 13
User error 30
Other causes 2
User error was usually associated with poor modeling, and with poor understanding of
software limitations and input data formats.
References:
[1] R., Szilard, Theory and Analysis of Plates, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs,
NJ, 1974.
[2] R.D. Cook, D.S. Malkus, M.E. Plesha and R.J. Witt, “ Concepts and Applications
of Finite Element Analysis,” John Wiley and sons, Inc., USA, 2002.
[3] W. Weaver, Jr. and P. R. Johnston, “Finite Elements for Structural Analysis,”
Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1984.
[4] T.J.R. Hughes, “The Finite Element Method – Linear Static and Dynamic Finite
Element Analysis,” Prentice-Hall, Inc., NJ, 1987.
[5] C.E. Knight, Jr., “The Finite Element Method in Mechanical Design,” PSW-KENT
Publishing Co., Boston,1993.
[6] “Computer Misuse – Are We Dealing with a Time Bomb? Who is to Blame and
What are We Doing About It? A Panel Discussion,” in Forensic Engineering,
Proceedings of the First Congress, K.L. Rens (ed.), American Society of Civil
Engineers, Reston, VA, 1997, pp. 285-336.