Stress analysis of quadcopter part

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around performing a stress analysis on a part designed in Solidworks, specifically focusing on the validity of assumptions made for hand calculations and the subsequent ANSYS simulation. Participants explore various methods for analyzing stresses, including finite element analysis (FEA) and moment diagrams, while addressing concerns about stress concentrations and material failure.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • A participant expresses the need for a basis from hand calculations to validate the ANSYS simulation results.
  • Another participant mentions performing a force and moment balance, noting discrepancies between expected and FEA results.
  • Concerns are raised about potential failure at cross-section transitions due to stress concentrations, suggesting the addition of fillets to sharp corners.
  • Participants discuss the relationship between shear stress and flexural stress in different sections of the part, with conflicting views on which section experiences more stress.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of considering section constants (Area and I value) for accurate stress analysis.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of statically indeterminate problems and the potential reliance on SolidWorks for stress analysis.
  • Participants suggest that explaining critical load cases and how constraints are applied is essential for validating the analysis.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing opinions on the adequacy of hand calculations versus FEA results, the significance of stress concentrations, and the approach to analyzing the part's stresses. No consensus is reached on the best method for analysis or the implications of the findings.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in their analyses, such as the need for moment reactions at fixed supports and the complexity of the part leading to statically indeterminate conditions. There are also mentions of varying assumptions regarding material properties and load cases.

Who May Find This Useful

Students and professionals in civil engineering, mechanical engineering, and related fields interested in stress analysis methodologies and the application of FEA in design validation may find this discussion relevant.

sciencerocks
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hi Everyone,

I am a student studying civil engineering and want to do a stress analysis on a part I have made in Solidworks (CAD software). However, it is somewhat complex for handcalculation purposes, so I have simplified it down. I want to run a full ansys simulation on the part, however I need a basis from the handcalculation to determine if the ansys analysis is credible or not. If anyone can give me some input onto if my assumptions are right that would be great.

I initially tried to use a plane stress approach 2d analysis, however this assumes the whole cross section is fixed. It is only fixed at the spots indicated. Attached is the part geometry with support and loads.

The fixed support holes I am concerned that the material will fail there, and at the beginning of the square cross section due to the bending moment.

I can't thank you enough for the help.
 

Attachments

  • QUADCOPTER PART.JPG
    QUADCOPTER PART.JPG
    18.8 KB · Views: 807
Engineering news on Phys.org
some work

Hey guys,

I did a force and moment balance and did a quick FEA in cad. I was expecting the max stress to be within regions B-C because this would have the highest bending moments. However, FEA shows otherwise. Anyone know why?

Thank you,

Sciencerocks
 
here are the pictures

Please put in your input guys. I am very curious.

Thank you
 

Attachments

  • FEA OF PART.JPG
    FEA OF PART.JPG
    58.7 KB · Views: 725
  • STRESS ANALYSIS.JPG
    STRESS ANALYSIS.JPG
    11.8 KB · Views: 707
Usually a part like that will fail at a cross section transition ie the rectangular meeting the round due to stress concentrations. You might want to put a fillet where you have now a sharp corner.

BC might have more shear stress, but especially CD will have more flex.

Your dimensioning is off - there is no way to determine AE or CD.
 
256bits said:
BC might have more shear stress, but especially CD will have more flex.

How will CD have more flex if the moments are not nearly as large as the one between B-C, more specifically at C.
 
Just takes your moment around C for example. They both are equal or you would have an unbalanced forrce.
30 BC = 6 CE
Isn't CE longer than BC. so E would show more displacement relative to C than B would relative to C.
 
Hey sciencerocks

It depends what you're trying to calculate. What is it that you want to know? If it's the max stress in the part then SolidWorks will be able to tell you that more easily and accurately than by hand calc. Since the lower section is an extruded circular plate with a varying I value, your section constants (Area and I value) are important if you want to go into much detail. Determining (qualitatively) how it will fail and then calculating the most critical load case may be sufficient. I'm assuming this is a metallic part?

So your process should be:

Find loads

1. Sum of horiz and vertical loads, each = 0
Take moments about any point. Since its not "simply supported", make sure you don't make the common error of underestimating the reaction at the end fixture if you're taking moments about the lower fixture.

2. Find a data sheet with Ftu (ultimate tensile strength) and Fty (yield tensile strength) For the material you are using. e.g 2024-T4 Al alloy has a Ftu of circa 74ksi and Fty of circa 62ksi. A conservative assumption can be made to average these two values for your "allowable tensile stress".

3. Your margin of safety, MS = allowable stress/applied stress - 1

4. Your loads may give you a large MS if its a metallic part. If composite, then you will have to go into slightly more detail due to its isotropic material properties.

5. Just remember to keep it simple.

Let me know how you get on.
 
Hi Jericho,

I do appreciate your help and realized my mistake. I just wanted to make a moment diagram to see how the loads would vary throughout the length of the beam. I did take sum of moments around the fixed supports to find the force reactions, however, i did not include moment reactions at the fixed supports. When moment reactions are taken into account, sadly this becomes a statically indeterminate problem. Should I just rely on the solidworks?

Thank you,

sciencerocks
 
Hey,

You absolutely could purely use SolidWorks, you'll just have to explain the most critical load case and how it determined where you applied the constraints/loads to the model. (Sometimes it's obvious, sometimes not so, but you still need to show you addressed each point.)

(When determining the maximum stress location, keep I value in mind and especially any sudden changes in section constants like I value and Area, as local changes in these values sometimes suggest that a region of local high stress is in the vicinity. You could say something along those lines, in fact, when you explain critical load cases.)

This is generally standard practice to perform a stress analysis on a part like this, it just requires you address the way the loads are applied and then how you made conservative assumptions on the criticality of the load case.

Let me know how you get on.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
14K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K