FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS (FEA)

Team Members
M V Rameshkumar R P Pandey
S M Shelar K D Dhote
A K Roy Pankaj Choudha
S S Kashikar S B Mukane
M Dhanapal Sumit Kumar
Sandeep Sharma

ARDE / ADMC/JUNE 2001 / 1

 OBJECTIVES OF THE
STUDY GROUP
•To develop knowledge base in FEA

•To identify FEA applications in ARDE

•To apply the FEA tools for armament

design
•To act as a nodal point for FEA related
areas.

ARDE / ADMC/JUNE 2001 / 2

 INTRODUCTION TO FEA

•Definition of FEA

•Historical perspective

•Mathematical approach

ARDE / ADMC/JUNE 2001 / 3

 APPLICATION AREAS OF FEA

Optimization Structural

Coupled-Field
Analysis FEA Thermal

Computational
Electromagnetic
Fluid Dynamics
(CFD)

ARDE / ADMC/JUNE 2001 / 4

ADVANTAGES OFFERED BY FEA
× Solution to engineering problem
includes complex geometry, complex
material properties and complex
boundary conditions.
× Structural integrity/stability under various
structural/thermal/coupled loads.
× Versatile (structural, thermal, soil/rock
mechanics, computational fluid
dynamics ‘CFD’ etc).
× No Physical Prototype.

ARDE / ADMC/JUNE 2001 / 5

 BASIC METHODOLOGY OF FEA

Solid
Model
(1) Preprocessing
(3) Post processing
(2) Solution
[K]{x}={F}
Def., Strain
and Stress

ARDE / ADMC/JUNE 2001 / 6

RELEVANCE IN ARMAMENT DESIGN
•Most armament problems are too complex for
analytical study.
•Multidisciplinary in nature.
•Many materials interact.
•Combination of different analysis domains.
•Experimental verification / testing is time
consuming and expensive.
EFFECTIVE FEA IS THE SOLUTION

ARDE / ADMC/JUNE 2001 / 7

 REPRESENTATIVE PROBLEMS
ALREADY SOLVED USING FEA
•Structural analysis for 40 mm FSAPDS.
•Structural analysis of shell 130 mm cargo.
•Modal analysis of vibration fixture for LCA.
• Structural analysis of mortar bomb 81 mm.
•Structural analysis for 30 mm fair weather
towed gun.

ARDE / ADMC/JUNE 2001 / 8

STRESS CONTOUR FOR TAIL UNIT

ARDE / ADMC/JUNE 2001 / 9

ILLUMINATING BOMB FOR 120 MM LRM

ARDE / ADMC/JUNE 2001 / 10

ANTITANK BOMBLET IMPACT

ARDE / ADMC/JUNE 2001 / 11

 CONCLUSION

•The user must be capable and qualified to pose a

question correctly to the software.

•The software must be mathematically robust and

accurate enough to provide a good solution

•The user must again be qualified to understand the

results and assess the performance of the system
based on these results.

ARDE / ADMC/JUNE 2001 / 12

THANK
YOU
ARDE / ADMC/JUNE 2001 / 13