Difference Between FEA Result and Hand Calculation in Beam Bending?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion highlights a discrepancy between hand calculations and FEA results for beam bending, with the hand calculation yielding a maximum deflection of -2.39mm, while Ansys reports a maximum deflection of 0.8mm. Key issues identified include unclear axis orientation and the readability of the hand calculation. The user discovered that a negative sign was overlooked in their analytical calculation, leading to conflicting values. This correction clarified the results and aligned them more closely with the FEA output. Accurate axis orientation and careful calculation are essential for reliable comparisons between methods.
Kajan thana
Messages
149
Reaction score
18
TL;DR Summary
Hi Guys,
I am doing some lab work on bending cantilever beam and its deflections in both directions y and z directions. For the deflection on the Z-axis, the ANSYS value is positive and the analytical value is negative. I don't know whether I am doing the calculation wrong or is there a specific reason why the direction differs? I have also made sure that the orientation of the axis is the same for both works.
1617313395321.png
This is the analytical working out. I substituted the value of 306mm ( the maximum length of the beam) to find the maximum deflection along the Z-axis. Which came out to be -2.39mm. But according to Ansys the average deflection is 0.3mm and the maximum deflection is 0.8mm.

1617313468207.png
This is the Ansys Values.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
There are at least two problems with your question.
1) You have not told us how the axes are oriented (there is no universal orientation),
2) Your hand calc is too small to be read.
Please fix these for us, and then maybe there will be help.
 
  • Like
Likes Kajan thana
I managed to find the error. Thank you.
 
Kajan thana said:
I managed to find the error. Thank you.
Can you share please?
 
berkeman said:
Can you share please?
I ignored a negative sign in my analytical calculation, this is why I had two values in the opposite direction.
 
Hi all, I have a question. So from the derivation of the Isentropic process relationship PV^gamma = constant, there is a step dW = PdV, which can only be said for quasi-equilibrium (or reversible) processes. As such I believe PV^gamma = constant (and the family of equations) should not be applicable to just adiabatic processes? Ie, it should be applicable only for adiabatic + reversible = isentropic processes? However, I've seen couple of online notes/books, and...
Thread 'How can I find the cleanout for my building drain?'
I am a long distance truck driver, but I recently completed a plumbing program with Stratford Career Institute. In the chapter of my textbook Repairing DWV Systems, the author says that if there is a clog in the building drain, one can clear out the clog by using a snake augur or maybe some other type of tool into the cleanout for the building drain. The author said that the cleanout for the building drain is usually near the stack. I live in a duplex townhouse. Just out of curiosity, I...
I have an engine that uses a dry sump oiling system. The oil collection pan has three AN fittings to use for scavenging. Two of the fittings are approximately on the same level, the third is about 1/2 to 3/4 inch higher than the other two. The system ran for years with no problem using a three stage pump (one pressure and two scavenge stages). The two scavenge stages were connected at times to any two of the three AN fittings on the tank. Recently I tried an upgrade to a four stage pump...
Back
Top