Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
ISRN: BTH-AMT-EX--2007/D-10--SE
0.1
Strain
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Time(Seconds)
Harikishan Mandalapu
Sandeep Karanamsetty
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Blekinge Institute of Technology
Karlskrona, Sweden
2007
Supervisor:
Harikishan Mandalapu
Sandeep Karanamsetty
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Blekinge Institute of Technology
Karlskrona, Sweden
2007
Thesis submitted for completion of Master of Science in Mechanical
Engineering with emphasis on Structural Mechanics at the Department of
Mechanical Engineering, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona,
Sweden.
Abstract:
The present report is about the parameter analysis of creep models of
Nanocomposites (Isotactic polypropylene and CaCo3).The parametric
analysis of the nanocomposites under creep was carried out, and the
parameters related to creep model are determined by comparing to the
experimental results. The influence of these parameters on the creep was
studied. Using commercially available software ABAQUS, Finite
Element Calculations were done for elastic and creep conditions. The
results obtained from theoretical analysis were verified with the
Experimental Results. Also Abaqus results are compared with the
Experimental results. Experimental results were obtained from the
experiments conducted by the Department of Chemistry, Huazhong
University of Science and Technology, China and by Department of
Advanced Materials and Technology, College of Engineering, Peking
University, Beijing, China.
Keywords:
Creep strain, PP/CaCO3, Nanocomposites, FEM.
Acknowledgements
This thesis work is carried out at the Department of Mechanical
Engineering, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden, under
the supervision of Dr.Sharon Kao-Walter.
We consider it is our duty to acknowledge the people without whose
assistance this work could not have been undertaken at all. We record our
deep sense of gratitude to Dr.Sharon Kao-Walter, Department of
Mechanical Engineering, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden, for her
invaluable guidance and kind cooperation extended by her throughout the
course of this work.
Our thanks go to the almighty God for giving us the opportunity to be able
to complete this project.
We wish to express our sincere appreciation to Tech. Etienne Mfoumou for
his help regarding ABAQUS analysis.
We also thank all our faculty members and our classmates for their
encouragement, discussion, comments and many innovative ideas in
carrying out this work.
Finally, we would like to dedicate this work to our parents in India for their
moral support and inspiration.
Contents
1 Notations
2 Background
3 Introduction to creep
3.1 Primary Creep
3.2 Secondary Creep
3.3 Tertiary Creep
3.4 Creep under variable loading
8
11
12
12
12
4 Experimental Work
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Tensile test for creep measurement
4.3 Experimental Results and parameter Analysis Work
4.4 Curve fitting with three methods
4.4.1 Method 1
4.4.2 Method 2
4.4.3 Method 3
4.5 Discussion and conclusion of parameter analysis
14
14
14
16
20
20
27
31
38
5 ABAQUS Model
39
45
45
49
8 References
50
Appendices
Appendix A
52
52
54
54
57
58
60
61
1 Notations
E
Youngs Modulus
[Mpa]
Stress
[Mpa]
Strain
Creep Strain
& c
Strain rate
Poissons ratio
Constitutive matrix
Time
Material Constant
Material Constant
Material Constant
[Seconds]
[Cal/(mol)(K)]
Abbreviations
PP
Isotactic polypropylene
PN
poly-oxyethylene
HDPE
CaCo3
Calcium Carbonate
LVDT
2 Background
Nanocomposites refer to materials consisting of at least two phases with
one dispersed in another that is called matrix and forms a three-dimensional
network. Nanocomposites have been studied extensively mainly for
improved physical properties.
Isotactic polypropylene (PP) is used as a most common plastic for the
manufacturing of automotive parts, home appliances, for construction
process, etc [3].But this PP is notch sensitive and brittle under severe
conditions of deformation, such as at low temperatures or high impact rates,
which makes limited its wider range of usage for the manufacturing
processes. Blending PP with rigid inorganic particles such as CaCO3 is the
best way to improve the stiffness and toughness of the PP.Dispersion
quality of CaCO3 particles played a crucial role in toughening efficiency.
The nanocomposites composed of isotactic PP and CaCo3 nanoparticles
were fabricated by melt extrusion [3]. A nonionic modifier, polyoxyethylene (PN), was added to the PP/CaCo3 mixture by dry mixing
before melt extrusion. The dispersion of CaCo3 particles was greatly
improved by this PN modifier [2]. Isotactic polypropylene (PP) and
calcium carbonate CaCo3 nanocomposites mixture have various
applications in automotive, construction and in other fields due to their high
impact strengths and toughness. Different kinds of nanocomposites were
tested to study the creep mechanism of components. An experimental setup
was made and tensile creep tests were carried out on the specimen with
different composite compositions each time.
The aim of our thesis is to analyze the better creep model by studying the
parameters. The material parameters are determined by comparing to a
creep model from the experimental data and are verified along with the
values estimated from theoretical formula. The analysis is done considering
three methods with a defined creep model. We try to match the
experimental results for the creep behavior with the results obtained from
the theoretical formula. ABAQUS and Matlab were used to perform the
necessary finite element analysis and mathematical calculations. An
overview of creep behavior is observed from the results.
3 Introduction to Creep
Creep takes place in Engineering materials and structures manifested by the
accumulation of plastic deformation over prolonged time periods under
steady or variable loading conditions [11].
At elevated temperatures and at constant stress or load many materials
continue to deform at slow rate. This behavior is also called as creep. In
other words high temperature progressive deformation of a material at
constant stress is also called as creep.
Creep deformation does not happen suddenly. Creep is the term used to
describe the tendency of a material to move or to deform permanently to
relieve stresses.
There are different stages of creep. Creep can be subdivided into three
categories primary, steady state creep and tertiary.
The following figure1 illustrates the different stages of creep in a simple
way,
0 = 0 / E (T ) + p ( 0 , T ),
(3.1)
Where E (T ) the modulus of Elasticity. The creep strain in Fig2 is can then
be expressed according to
c = (t ) 0t k
(3.2)
10
The creep behavior exists in two of the above listed categories, namely in
the theories of viscoelasticity and viscoplasticity.
c = f ( , t )
(3.3)
Several mathematical forms exist to represent the function f ( , t ); one of
these is the Norton-Baily creep law:
c = A n t m ,
(3.4)
&c = Am nt m 1.
(3.5)
Inserting the time t from (3.4) into (3.5), we arrive at the relation
1
( m 1)
&c = mA m m c
(3.6)
11
c = A n t m
(3.7)
& c = Am n t m 1
(3.8)
12
(3.9)
m 1 / m
or
& c = A1 / m m( ) n / m ( c ) ( m 1) / m
(3.10)
Equation (3.10) expresses the creep rate & c as a function of the stress
and the current creep strain c .Experiments indicate that the strainhardening formulation is to be favored over time-hardening formulation.
However, nothing the large scatter in creep data, the use of the simple law
of time hardening becomes justifiable in deriving analytical solutions.
Evidently, and strain hardening offers no difficulty in seeking numerical
solutions. Both formulations as given above are applicable only for
situations where no stress reversals occur, a situation where modified rules
have to be used .Also both formulations do not account well for the
important phenomenon of creep recovery due to unloading or variable
cyclic loading.
13
4 Experimental Work
4.1 Introduction
The nanocomposites composed of isotactic PP and CaCo3 nanoparticles [2]
are used to reinforce thermoplastic polymers which have wide applications
in many areas. The addition of these nanocomposites to the polymers
increases their toughness and stiffness. The major drawback of these
polymers is creep which occurs at stresses below the yield stress of the
polymer materials. Nanocomposites with combination of surface modifiers
such as poly-oxyethylene (PN) are good for obtaining uniform dispersion in
the polymer matrix and have better mechanical behavior [3] than the
original polymer matrix materials.
The present work is to analyze the creep behavior of these composites with
different PN content.
Specimen
50mm
LVDT
Control box
CPU
Weight
Carrier
14
Specimen
PP
CaCo3
PN
Code
(Wt %)
(Wt %)
(Wt
%)
Youngs
Modulus
(Gpa)
Poissons
ratio
Material
Constant
PP
100
0
0
1.21
0.34
10.28
PPC-0.75 84.25
15
0.75
1.55
0.36
8.71
PPC-1.5
83.5
15
1.5
1.25
0.34
11.76
PPC-2.25 82.75
15
2.25
1.31
0.32
12.20
Table1: Combinations of composites taken for experiments
The densities of PP and CaCO3 are 0.96 gm/cm3 and 2.55 gm/cm3
respectively.
The device used to carry out the tensile creep test [2] consists of a LVDT
with precession of 0.02mm, control box, computer, weights and carrier.
The tests were done at four different stresses 12.33MPa, 17.33MPa,
20.67MPa, 24MPa respectively. The tests were carried out in the laboratory
at a controlled temperature of 220C with variation of 20 C. The slight
change in the temperatures is negligible on the tensile properties of the
material. The dimensions of the specimen tested were 50x30x10mm 3 .
Generally, the whole creep process is divided in two three phases like
primary, secondary steady state and teritiary.Though the creep rate is rather
high in the primary stage than in the secondary steady stage, the creep
strain is not important compared to the total deformation because the rate
slows down continuously and the duration is limited.
In this work, we are only interested in the second stage which occupies
longer duration and the creep rate remains constant. So, the steady stage
influences the dimensional stability of the structure. In the tertiary stage
there is increase in the creep rate which causes final failure in short time.
So, the present work concentrates on the first two stages of creep to study
the effect of creep deformation and creep rate of the steady stage. The
tensile test is carried for duration of four hours for loads 12.33MPa,
17.33MPa, and 20.67MPa respectively. But for load 24MPa the failure
occurred within one hour.
15
0.018
Strain
0.016
0.014
0.012
0.01
0.008
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Time(S)
Figure 4: Strain versus time under 12.33MPa [2]
16
16000
0.03
Strain
0.025
PP
PPC0.75
PPC1.5
PPC2.25
0.02
0.015
0.01
5000
10000
15000
Time(S)
Figure 5: Strain versus time under 17.33MPa [2]
Strain Vs Time under 20.67Mpa Experimental
0.1
0.09
PP0
PPC-0.75
PPC-1.75
PPC-2.25
0.08
Strain
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Time(S)
17
16000
0.12
Strain
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
Time
Figure7: Strain versus time under 24MPa [2]
The creep rate is calculated from the values obtained from the experimental
data.
We have,
Total strain = elastic strain + creep strain
(4.1)
The creep rate is defined by the formula,
& c = Am n t m 1
(4.2)
Now the creep rate for different composites is plotted for the various
stresses. They are shown in the fig.8, 9 below. Also Logarithmic creep vs.
the logarithmic stress values are also plotted for the verification purpose.
18
-5
x 10
PP
PPC0.75
PPC1.5
PPC2.25
2.5
Strain rate
1.5
0.5
0
12
14
16
18
Stress(Mpa)
20
22
24
PP
PPC0.75
-5
PPC1.5
Log(Creep-rate)
PPC2.25
-5.5
-6
-6.5
-7
1
1.05
1.1
1.15
1.2
Log(Stress)
1.25
1.3
1.35
1.4
19
20
From fig.14 it can be found that there is a huge deviation in the results
between experimental and theoretical when we use Average A value. One
of the possible reasons could be the error in the calculation of A value
from the experimental data. Now we tried to approach the A values by
applying suitable numerical methods. The new values are substituted once
again. The calculations are performed by Matlab. The value of A is
obtained by iterative calculations. The results from theoretical formula are
verified with the experimental results. Results are plotted in Matlab as
shown below,
The results are tabulated as shown below:
n
m
Average
A
PP
10.28
1
3.338 10 19
PPC-0.75
8.71
1
19.746 10 18
PPC-1.5
11.76
1
6.993 10 21
21
PPC-2.25
12.20
1
30.72 10 22
4.362 10 22
-5
For PP
x 10
Approached
Experimental
Average
Creep-strain-rate
10
15
20
25
Stress
2.5
For PPC0.75
x 10
Approached
Experimental
Average
Creep-strain-rate
1.5
0.5
10
15
20
Stress
22
25
-4
For PPC1.5
x 10
1.2
Approached
Experimental
Average
Creep-strain-rate
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
10
15
20
25
Stress
1.2
x 10
Creep-strain-rate
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
10
15
20
Stress
23
25
From the results above it can be understood that the parameter m = 1 does
not give desired experimental results, and we proceed to method 2.
We have the total strain given by
d c
t = o + A( ) n t
= o +
dt
(4.4)
S train
0.016
0.015
0.014
0.013
0.012
0.011
0.01
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Time(Seconds)
12000
14000
24
16000
0.03
Experimental
Theoritical
Strain
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Time(Seconds)
12000
14000
16000
0.026
0.024
Strain
0.022
0.02
0.018
0.016
0.014
0.012
0.01
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Time(Seconds)
12000
14000
16000
25
0.03
Experimental
Theoritical
Strain
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Time(Seconds)
12000
14000
16000
Experimental
Theoritical
0.03
Strain
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Time(Seconds)
12000
14000
16000
26
From the fig.14 to 18 above we can see the strain vs. time is linear which is
not correct according to the experimental results. This may be due to the
assumptions made, and also the creep model we assumed in our case may
not be appropriate. So we proceed to method 2.
4.4.2 Method 2
In this method we assume that the creep stain rate & c defined by the
creep strain rate expressed as a function of the stress and time t
(i.e.) & c = Am n t m 1 .The parameter m remaining constant during the
creep stage, with varying A
Since the secondary creep rate has much significance in the design fields,
we consider secondary creep here. From the Norton-Bialys creep laws:
c = A n t m
(4.5)
Now equation (4) expresses the creep rate as a function of stress and
current time t,
i.e., & c = f ( , t ) has been replaced by considering & c = f ( , c ) .The
derivation of such functions is as follows.
The time derivative gives
& c = Am n t m 1
(4.6)
27
PP
10.28
0.82
n
m
Average
A
3.2193 10 19
Approached
A
1.033 10 18
PPC-0.75
8.71
0.82
2.0577 10 17
8.9016 10 17
PPC-1.5
11.76
0.82
PPC-2.25
12.20
0.82
5.0453 10 20
30.0123 10 22
2.563 10 20
3.052 10 21
x 10
1.8
1.6
Creep-strain-rate
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
10
15
Stress(Mpa)
20
25
28
Strain
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Time(Seconds)
12000
14000
16000
0.026
0.024
Strain
0.022
0.02
0.018
0.016
0.014
0.012
0.01
5000
10000
15000
Time(Seconds)
29
Strain
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
5000
10000
15000
Time(Seconds)
Strain
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Time(Seconds)
12000
14000
16000
30
= o + c = o + A( ) n t m
(4.7)
12.33(Mpa)
17.33(Mpa)
20.67(Mpa)
24(Mpa)
PP
23.45
22.36
20.44
15.34
PPC0.75
27.45
24.90
22.96
13.89
PPC1.5
27.10
26.70
26.97
14.67
PPC2.25
25.70
25.50
26.34
15.56
& c = Am n t m 1
(4.8)
We try for different time t, for example 2000, 4000 sec respectively at
different stresses. And by performing necessary calculations we get the
values of the parameters can be obtained. Now we plot the curves for time
vs. strain using the obtained parameters, and they are verified with the
experimental values.
31
The values of A and m for each material at different stress values are
shown in the table below,
Material
Stress(Mpa)
PP
PPC0.75
12.33
3.883 10 16
0.52
6.97 10 14
0.35
17.33
2.58 10 17
0.52
1.38 10 14
0.31
20.67
2.79 10 17
0.41
7.35 10 15
0.27
24
4.30 10 18
0.57
3.54 10 16
0.60
Material
Stress(Mpa)
PPC1.5
PPC2.25
12.33
5.83 10 17
0.30
3.51 10 17
0.27
17.33
6.77 10 18
0.22
1.93 10 18
0.23
20.67
2.05 10 19
0.43
1.876
0.60
21
0.81
24
6.70 10
10
20
1.261
10
0.90
21
32
-5
x 10
1.8
1.6
Creep-strain-rate
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
10
15
Stress(Mpa)
20
25
= o + c = o + A( ) n t m
(4.9)
The results were drawn in the same figures together with the Experimental
results, as shown from Fig.25 to 28 for the different materials.
33
Strain
0.03
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Time(Seconds)
12000
14000
16000
Experimental
Theoritical
Strain
0.022
0.02
0.018
0.016
0.014
0.012
0.01
5000
10000
15000
Time(Seconds)
34
Experimental
Theoritical
0.03
Strain
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
5000
10000
15000
Time(Seconds)
0.035
Strain
0.03
Experimental
Theoritical
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Time(Seconds)
12000
14000
16000
35
From the calculations it is evident that there exists one set of A and m
values for each material at different stresses. This is clear from the plots
above.
Plots between A and stress values and also between m and stress values are
as shown
A Vs.Sigma
22
10
*PP
vPPC0.75
.PPC1.5
+PPC2.25
21
10
20
10
19
10
18
10
17
10
16
10
15
10
14
10
12
14
16
18
Stress(Mpa)
20
22
36
24
m Vs.Sigma
1
* PP
v PPC0.75
. PPC1.5
+ PPC2.25
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
12
14
16
18
Stress(Mpa)
20
22
24
12.33(Mpa)
17.33(Mpa)
20.67(Mpa)
24(Mpa)
PP
6.06
6.79
6.80
2.79
PPC0.75
2.58
2.90
2.96
1.89
PPC1.5
7.10
6.70
6.97
2.67
PPC2.25
8.76
7.66
6.77
2.56
37
38
5 ABAQUS Model
The creep model is described in different way in the ABAQUS. We now
try to estimate the values of and for the model. The ABAQUS
model is described as
(5.1)
(5.2)
Where
The values of
in the table.
and
Material
Stress(Mpa)
12.33
PP
PP0.75
20.12 10 17
-0.48
2.44 10 14
-0.65
17.33
1.406 10 17
-0.48
4.218 10 15
-0.69
20.67
1.14 10 17
-0.59
1.98 10 15
-0.73
24
2.45 10 18
-0.43
2.12 10 16
-0.40
39
Material
Stress(Mpa)
12.33
PPC1.5
PPC2.25
1.74 10 17
-0.70
9.53 10 18
-0.73
17.33
1.50 10 18
-0.78
4.439 10 19
-0.77
20.67
8.81 10 20
-0.57
1.126 10 20
-0.40
24
5.44 10 21
-0.19
1.13 10 21
-0.10
Also results from the ABAQUS model are calculated using these and
values, and plotted along with the experimental results for the
selected materials at different stresses.
By applying the parameters from Table.7 and Table.8 in ABAQUS creep
calculation, the strain and strain rate were obtained for different materials.
The results were shown in fig.31 to 38 together with the experimental
curves. The good agreement can be observed from the figures. The
procedure to run the ABAQUS and same results were described in
Appendix A.
40
Strain
0.018
0.016
0.014
0.012
0.01
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
Time(Seconds)
Figure31: Strain Vs time for PP under 12.33Mpa
PP under 17.33Mpa
0.04
Experimental
ABAQUS
0.035
Strain
0.03
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Time(Seconds)
41
16000
0.014
0.013
Strain
0.012
0.011
0.01
0.009
0.008
0.007
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
Time(Seconds)
Strain
0.022
0.02
0.018
0.016
0.014
0.012
0.01
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
Time(Seconds)
Figure34: Strain Vs time for PPC0.75 under 17.33Mpa
42
0.017
0.016
0.014
0.013
0.012
0.011
0.01
0.009
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
Time(Seconds)
0.1
0.08
Strain
Strain
0.015
0.06
0.04
0.02
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Time(Seconds)
Figure36: Strain Vs time for PPC1.5 under 24Mpa
43
3000
0.02
Strain
0.018
0.016
0.014
0.012
0.01
0.008
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
Time(Seconds)
Figure37: Strain Vs time for PPC2.25 under 12.33Mpa
0.12
Strain
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
500
1000
1500
2000
Time(Seconds)
Figure38: Strain Vs time for PPC2.25 under 24Mpa
44
2500
45
The creep formation in the material can be seen for different step times in
the following figures,
From the figure39 the propagation of the creep at step time 125seconds can
be observed. Since the object is constrained at one end the values of the
creep strain vary according to the coloured regions.
46
From the fig.40 the propagation of creep at step time 960 seconds can be
observed. The center region has the maximum creep strain and the region
tends to expand with the increase in step time.
47
From the Fig.39 to 41 the propagation of creep for step time 2500 seconds
can be observed. From the Fig.39 we can notice the creep phenomena with
the dark region formed in the center. Also from the Fig.39 to 41 we can
conclude that the increase in step time results in the increase in the creep
strain up to a certain time period.
48
The results obtained from the analysis were not agreeing the experimental
results for certain loads in the first two cases for strain values. The possible
reason could be the assumptions made during the evaluation step. Our
assumption for the material constant m = 1 in our case may not be
appropriate, because the possible range of m values are from 0 to 1.The
approached values of A gave better results than the approximated A
values. There exist a unique A and m values for each material at
different stress conditions. This is evident from the case 3. Still, better
results can be achieved by employing better approximation methods. Creep
Analysis is carried out in Abaqus.The results are satisfactory.
From the ABAQUS results the creep strain CE22 is shown in the figures.
The propagation of creep is properly described in the results. We can
observe the creep phenomena with the varying step time.
Better results can be achieved by employing advanced approximation
techniques, and by considering more creep models.
Hopefully, research can be carried out on these outlined setbacks for
rectifying the same.
49
8 References
1. Computational Engineering Textbook by Goran Broman,
2. Reference to Creep behavior of polypropylene/CaCo3 nanocomposites
with nonionic modifier by Jinlong Ahang,Shu-Lin Bai,Centre for
Advanced Composite Materials, Department of Advanced Materials
and technology, College of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing
100871,China
3. Cao, Guozhong. Nanostructures and Nanomaterials.
Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Company, Incorporated, 2004.
4. Engineering Solid Mechanics (Fundamentals and Applications) by
Abdel- Rahman Ragab, Salah Eldin Bayoumi.
3. Papalambros, P. Y., (2000), Extending the Optimization Paradigm in
Engineering Design, Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Michigan, USA.
4. McKay, M. D., Beckman, R. J. and Conover, W.J., (1979), A
Comparison of Three Methods for Selecting Values of Input Variables
in the Analysis of Output from a Computer Code, Technometrics, Vol.
21, No. 2, May 1979.
5. TheodorBalderes,"Finite elementmethod,inAccessScienceby McGrawHill.
6. http://websok.libris.kb.se/websearch/search?SEARCH_ONR=1013367
9
7. Introduction to Finite Elements in Engineering by Tirupathi
R.Chandrupatla and Ashok D.Belegundu.
8. Introduction to the Finite Element Method by Niels Ottosen and Hans
Petersson
9. Creep Mechanics by J.Betten 2nd Edition
10. Materialsengineer.com/CA-Creep-Stress-Rupture.htm
Copyright 1999 Metallurgical Consultants
50
51
Appendix A
A1 Finite Element Method
All the physical phenomena encountered in engineering mechanics [7] are
modeled by differential equations, and it is very complicated to solve these
equations by normal analytical methods. The finite element method is the
one approach by which differential equations can be solved in an
approximate manner as shown in Fig.42.
Model
Physical
Phenomenon
Approximation
Differential
Equation
Finite
Element
Equations
52
elements, these elements are then patched together, using some specific
rules, to form the entire region, which eventually enables us to obtain an
approximate solution for the behavior of the entire body. The finite element
(FE) method can be applied to obtain approximate solutions for arbitrary
differential equations.
As the FE method is a numerical means of solving general differential
equations, it can be applied to various physical phenomena.Inorder to
emphasize this aspect, we shall be concerned here with FE formulation of
such diverse problems as heat conduction, torsion of elastic shafts,
diffusion, ground water flow, and the elastic behavior of one-, two- and
three-dimensional bodies, including beam and plate analysis.
As previously mentioned, it is a characteristic feature of the FE method that
the region,ie.,the body, is divided into smaller parts,i.e.the elements, for
which a rather simple approximation is adopted. This approximation is
usually a polynomial. The approximation over each element means that an
approximation is adopted for how the variable changes over the element.
This approximation is, infact, some kind of interpolation over the element,
where it is assumed that the variable is known at certain points in the
element. These points are called nodal points and they are often located at
the boundary of each element. The precise manner in which the variable
changes between its values at the nodal points is expressed by the specific
approximation, which may be linear, quadratic, cubic, etc.
The Finite Element Method is a numerical approach which results in the
establishment of systems of equations often involving thousands of
unknowns.
FEM is the numerical analysis technique for obtaining approximate
solutions to many types of engineering problems. The need for numerical
methods arises from the fact that for most engineering problems analytical
solutions does not exist. While the governing equations and boundary
conditions can usually be written for these problems, and difficulties
introduced by either irregular geometry or other discontinuities render the
problems intractable analytically.
To obtain a solution, the engineer must make simplifying assumptions
reducing the problem to one that can be solved, or a numerical procedure
must be used. In an analytic solution, the unknown quantity is given by a
53
A2.1 Pre-Processing
In the Pre-Processing part the model of the specimen is created for the
analysis.
There are different steps in this process, they are as follows
Part
54
Property
In this module it has been defined the properties of the material like poisons
ratio, Youngs Modulus, etc;
The properties of the materials used are shown in the following table [2]
Specimen
Youngs Modulus
Code
PP
PPC-0.75
PPC-1.5
PPC-2.25
(Gpa)
1.21
1.55
1.25
1.31
Poissons ratio
Material Constant
0.34
0.36
0.34
0.32
10.28
8.71
11.76
12.20
Also this is the module where it has been defined the material behaviors
like elastic and creep with the required properties and data.
55
Assembly
In this module an independent mesh on instance for the analysis has been
created.
Step
In this module the analysis procedure was defined and the visco procedure
has been taken and the step time was taken as from 4000 to 16000 Seconds
depending on the stresses applied.
Load
In this module the boundary conditions and the load conditions required for
our analysis has been considered. The beam was fixed at one end and the
load has been applied at the other end as shown in the figure below.
56
Mesh
In this module the finite element mesh for the element for the analysis has
been generated. Global seeds have been assigned for the instance. And
meshing was done for the region. The meshed element used for the analysis
is as shown in the following figure.
A2.2 Simulation
Job
In this module the job has been created and submitted for analysis.
57
A2.3 Post-Processing
Visualization
58
Figure47: Tensors and Vectors for the Model PPC2.25 under 24Mpa
59
60
61
18,
19,
20,
21,
15.,
15.,
15.,
15.,
-5.,
-10.,
-15.,
-20.,
...so on
213,
-15.,
10.,
214,
-15.,
5.,
215,
-15.,
0.,
216,
-15.,
-5.,
217,
-15.,
-10.,
218,
-15.,
-15.,
219,
-15.,
-20.,
220,
-15.,
-25.,
221,
-15.,
25.,
222,
-15.,
20.,
223,
-15.,
15.,
224,
-15.,
10.,
225,
-15.,
5.,
226,
-15.,
0.,
227,
-15.,
-5.,
228,
-15.,
-10.,
229,
-15.,
-15.,
230,
-15.,
-20.,
231,
-15.,
-25.,
*Element, type=C3D8I
1, 34, 35, 46, 45, 1, 2,
2, 35, 36, 47, 46, 2, 3,
3, 36, 37, 48, 47, 3, 4,
4, 37, 38, 49, 48, 4, 5,
5, 38, 39, 50, 49, 5, 6,
6, 39, 40
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
13,
14,
15,
16,
17,
12
13
14
15
16
.............so on.....
108, 206, 207, 218, 217, 173, 174, 185, 184
109, 207, 208, 219, 218, 174, 175, 186, 185
110, 208, 209, 220, 219, 175, 176, 187, 186
111, 210, 211, 222, 221, 177, 178, 189, 188
112, 211, 212, 223, 222, 178, 179, 190, 189
113, 212, 213, 224, 223, 179, 180, 191, 190
62
63
*Boundary
_PickedSet4, 1, 1
_PickedSet4, 2, 2
_PickedSet4, 3, 3
** ---------------------------------------------------------------**
** STEP: CREEP
**
*Step, name=CREEP, nlgeom=YES
CREEPTEST
*Visco, cetol=0.01
1600., 16000., 0.16, 16000.
**
** LOADS
**
** Name: Load-1 Type: Pressure
*Dsload
_PickedSurf5, P, -12.33
**
** OUTPUT REQUESTS
**
*Restart, write, frequency=0
**
** FIELD OUTPUT: F-Output-1
**
*Output, field, variable=PRESELECT
**
** HISTORY OUTPUT: H-Output-1
**
*Output, history, variable=PRESELECT
*End Step
64
Telephone:
Fax:
E-mail:
+46 455-38 55 10
+46 455-38 55 07
ansel.berghuvud@bth.se