Ansys Workbench- Max Principal Stress Error

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around an issue encountered in Ansys Workbench regarding the calculation of maximum principal stress in a finite element analysis of a casting body subjected to a load. Participants explore potential reasons for the observed results, particularly why the maximum principal stress appears below the surface element, while von Mises stress yields expected results. The conversation includes considerations of mesh quality, element types, and stress interpretation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the maximum principal stress value is reported one element below the surface, raising questions about mesh discontinuity or other factors.
  • Another participant suggests that the issue may be related to mesh density and recommends refining the mesh in critical areas.
  • A participant mentions having conducted a mesh convergence study and refined the surface mesh, yet the results remain unchanged.
  • Concerns are raised about the interpretation of maximum principal stress, particularly in cases where the surface experiences compression, potentially leading to confusion in results.
  • One participant highlights that calculated stresses can be discontinuous across element boundaries, affecting graphical output and interpretation.
  • Another participant inquires about the absolute and relative differences in stress values observed in the analysis.
  • A participant provides specific stress values, indicating a significant variation within a single element and referencing ultimate tensile strength for context.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the cause of the observed maximum principal stress results, with some attributing it to mesh issues while others suggest it may be related to how stresses are interpreted in the context of the analysis. No consensus is reached on the underlying cause of the discrepancy.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention limitations related to mesh density and the interpretation of stress outputs, indicating that the results may depend on the specific modeling approach and post-processing techniques used.

nik786
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I did simple problem, in which assembly is subjected to single load & it is fixed at other end. I used Higher Order Tet element (& tried with Hexdominent Method also) for the casting body.

The vonmises stress shows the true results but when i was looking for the Max Principal stress, it was showing max value one element below the surface element. I wondered how it is possible that max principal stress value is below the surface.

Is it related to some mesh discontinuity or something else.?

Can anybody help me out...!

Thnx,
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
You're going to have to post some pictures for us to understand what your geometry looks like. Without that, all I can guess is mesh discontinuity...
 
Pls check the attached file for the model. The image shows the cross sectional result for the Max Principal Stress. (Mesh- HexDominent)
 

Attachments

  • 1.PNG
    1.PNG
    36.2 KB · Views: 1,358
The error you're referring to is definitely due to the mesh density (or lack thereof). If you want a better look in a complex geometry location, you'll need to refine the mesh in that area.

Have you done a mesh convergence study?
 
Yeah i did that... n also refined that surface because i knw the max value will come on to that area. The transistion between the elements were good. I also used aggressive meshing for shape checking. But the results are same...

Is it possible that due to results extrapolated n averages at the node, sometimes the stresses within the body may dominates the surface stresses...?
 
You have to be a bit careful interpreting "max principal stress". For example if the structure is in compression at the surface, you could get the situation where the "max" principal stress is zero, but you were probably more interested in the minimum (negative, compressive) principal stress.

I have seen software that plots the "worst principal stress" (i.e. the one with the biggest absolute value), but that can have discontinuities where it jumps from positive to negative, which can also be confusing.

For most types of finite element, the calculated stresses are discontinuous across the element boundaries, and the graphics output usually includes some sort of smooth interpolation. Some post processing software tries to do this in a mathematically consistent way, other programs go more for the "never mind the quality, just look at the pretty pictures" approach.

I don't use Ansys so I can't comment on your specfic output. I suggest you look at the physical stress components (in the global X Y and Z directions), or a function like von Mises stress that is a mathematically "smooth" function of the stress field, to see if the issue is really with the model or just with the post processing.
 
How big is the difference actually, in absolute & relative terms?

nik786 said:
Hi all,

I did simple problem, in which assembly is subjected to single load & it is fixed at other end. I used Higher Order Tet element (& tried with Hexdominent Method also) for the casting body.

The vonmises stress shows the true results but when i was looking for the Max Principal stress, it was showing max value one element below the surface element. I wondered how it is possible that max principal stress value is below the surface.

Is it related to some mesh discontinuity or something else.?

Can anybody help me out...!

Thnx,
 
Actually that surface is subjecting tensile stresses n body is casting. so i have to luk for the max principal stress.

@PerennialII: At the surface the value is 57000 & the max is 64000... so the variation is of 7000 within the single element. Also The ultimate tensile strength is 65000...
 
nik786 said:
Yeah i did that...

And what were the results of your mesh convergence study? It looks to me like the mesh is not fine enough to get detailed information out of the corner you're looking at...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
12K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
16K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
12K