Angle of twist from in-plane displacements in FEA

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the angle of twist from in-plane displacement values in finite element analysis (FEA) simulations, particularly for solid elements that do not have rotational degrees of freedom. Participants explore the feasibility of using displacement data from elliptical and other cross-sectional shapes to derive the angle of twist, while addressing potential limitations and variations in methodology.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that solid elements in FEA typically lack rotational degrees of freedom, complicating the direct measurement of angle of twist from simulations.
  • One participant suggests that in-plane displacement values can be used to calculate the angle of twist, specifically mentioning the relationship between displacement and distance from the center of the elliptical cross-section.
  • A participant provides a specific example using displacement values to calculate the angle of twist for an elliptical bar, noting a close agreement with analytical results.
  • There is a question about the applicability of the same method for different cross-sectional shapes, such as rectangular sections, with some participants indicating that symmetry is a key factor.
  • Concerns are raised regarding the use of the method for asymmetric cross-sections like C or L shapes, with a participant asking for alternative approaches in such cases.
  • Another participant suggests that the method may still yield reasonable results if the cross-section maintains its shape, encouraging further exploration through calculations and deformed geometry plots.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying opinions on the applicability of the method for different cross-sectional shapes, with some agreeing that symmetry is important while others highlight challenges with asymmetric sections. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach for calculating the angle of twist in these cases.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependency on the symmetry of cross-sections and the potential for errors due to discretization in FEA models. The discussion does not resolve how to handle asymmetric sections definitively.

FEAnalyst
Messages
348
Reaction score
149
TL;DR
How to calculate the angle of twist from in-plane displacements?
Hi,

solid elements used in FEA don't have rotational DOFs so normally it's not possible to read the angle of twist from simulation involving torsion. Some programs allow the transformation of results to cylindrical coordinate system but it's not always the case. From what I've heard, it's possible to use in-plane displacement values to determine the angle of twist. However, I'm not sure how to actually do it. Here's an example of an elliptical bar subjected to torsion:
- X displacements:
U1.PNG

- Y displacements:
U2.PNG


How can I calculate the angle of twist from these displacement values? Or maybe it's not enough and nodal coordinates are needed as well?

Thanks in advance for your help.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
The maximum and minimum numbers in the color bars are the maximum X or Y displacement at the node with the maximum displacement. This is shown in the sketch below:
Ellipse.jpg

Note that the maximum Y displacement is exactly twice the maximum X displacement, and that the X dimension is twice the Y dimension of the ellipse. Also, the magnitudes of the positive X & Y displacements are equal to the magnitudes of the negative X & Y displacements. This shows that the total displacement is a rotation about the center of the ellipse. Any one of the displacements divided by its distance from the center gives the rotation angle in radians.

All of this is helped by the discretization which puts nodes at the extreme X and Y coordinates. Larger elements with nodes away from those points would add some error due to the lack of nodes at the extreme X and Y points on the ellipse.

It's easier to see this if the displacement plots are shown with deformed geometry.
 
jrmichler said:
Any one of the displacements divided by its distance from the center gives the rotation angle in radians.
Thank you very much. Let's take the displacement of the node on the left. The magnitude is ##0.03882 \ mm## and the semi-major axis is ##100 \ mm## so the angle should be ##0.0003882 \ rad##. And the analytical value is ##0.000394 \ rad## so the results agree really well.

However, what about other types of cross-sections? Could I use the same method (nodal displacement divided by its distance from the center) for any other cross-section like rectangular for example ?
 
Last edited:
You should be able to if it has appropriate symmetry. Rectangular, hexagon, or hollow round tube should be good, while a C-channel would require more effort.
 
jrmichler said:
You should be able to if it has appropriate symmetry. Rectangular, hexagon, or hollow round tube should be good, while a C-channel would require more effort.
Right, asymmetric sections like C or L (probably also T) will be problematic here. Do you know how to calculate the angle of twist from in-plane displacements in such cases? Maybe different method should be used.
For example:
- cross-section:
section.JPG

- X displacement:
L section 1.JPG

- Y displacement:
L section 2.JPG

And the analytical result is ##0.0257936508 \ rad## in this case.
 
X displacement divided by distance from zero X displacement should be fairly close if the cross section maintains its shape. Similar for Y. Look at the deformed geometry plot, try some calculations, and find out.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
13K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
22
Views
3K