Workbench Technology Showcase Example Problems

Workbench Technology Showcase: Example
Problems
ANSYS, Inc. Release 2022 R1

Southpointe January 2022
2600 Ansys Drive
Canonsburg, PA 15317 ANSYS, Inc. and
ansysinfo@ansys.com ANSYS Europe,
Ltd. are UL
http://www.ansys.com registered ISO
(T) 724-746-3304 9001: 2015
(F) 724-514-9494 companies.
Copyright and Trademark Information
© 2022 ANSYS, Inc. Unauthorized use, distribution or duplication is prohibited.
ANSYS, Ansys Workbench, AUTODYN, CFX, FLUENT and any and all ANSYS, Inc. brand, product, service and feature
names, logos and slogans are registered trademarks or trademarks of ANSYS, Inc. or its subsidiaries located in the
United States or other countries. ICEM CFD is a trademark used by ANSYS, Inc. under license. CFX is a trademark
of Sony Corporation in Japan. All other brand, product, service and feature names or trademarks are the property
of their respective owners. FLEXlm and FLEXnet are trademarks of Flexera Software LLC.
Disclaimer Notice
THIS ANSYS SOFTWARE PRODUCT AND PROGRAM DOCUMENTATION INCLUDE TRADE SECRETS AND ARE CONFID-
ENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY PRODUCTS OF ANSYS, INC., ITS SUBSIDIARIES, OR LICENSORS. The software products
and documentation are furnished by ANSYS, Inc., its subsidiaries, or affiliates under a software license agreement
that contains provisions concerning non-disclosure, copying, length and nature of use, compliance with exporting
laws, warranties, disclaimers, limitations of liability, and remedies, and other provisions. The software products
and documentation may be used, disclosed, transferred, or copied only in accordance with the terms and conditions
of that software license agreement.
ANSYS, Inc. and ANSYS Europe, Ltd. are UL registered ISO 9001: 2015 companies.
U.S. Government Rights
For U.S. Government users, except as specifically granted by the ANSYS, Inc. software license agreement, the use,
duplication, or disclosure by the United States Government is subject to restrictions stated in the ANSYS, Inc.
software license agreement and FAR 12.212 (for non-DOD licenses).
Third-Party Software
See the legal information in the product help files for the complete Legal Notice for ANSYS proprietary software
and third-party software. If you are unable to access the Legal Notice, contact ANSYS, Inc.
Published in the U.S.A.

Table of Contents
What You Need to Know .......................................................................................................................... xxvii
1. Brake-Squeal Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Problem Description and Geometry .................................................................................................. 2
1.3. Modeling and Meshing ..................................................................................................................... 3
1.3.1. Understanding the Advantages of Contact Element Technology ............................................... 3
1.3.2. Modeling Contact Pairs ............................................................................................................ 4
1.3.3. Generating Internal Sliding Motion ........................................................................................... 6
1.3.4. Meshing the Brake Disc-Pad Model ........................................................................................... 7
1.4. Material Properties ........................................................................................................................... 8
1.5. Boundary Conditions and Loading .................................................................................................... 8
1.6. Analysis and Solution Controls .......................................................................................................... 9
1.6.1. Linear Non-prestressed Modal Analysis ..................................................................................... 9
1.6.2. Full Nonlinear Perturbed Modal Analysis ................................................................................. 10
1.7. Results and Discussion .................................................................................................................... 12
1.7.1. Determining the Modal Behavior of Individual Components ................................................... 14
1.8. Recommendations .......................................................................................................................... 15
1.9. References ...................................................................................................................................... 15
1.10. Workbench Input Files and Project Files ......................................................................................... 16
2. (reserved) .............................................................................................................................................. 17
3. (reserved) .............................................................................................................................................. 19
4. Ring-Gear Forging Simulation with Rezoning ...................................................................................... 21
4.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 21
4.2. Problem Description ....................................................................................................................... 22
4.3. Geometry ....................................................................................................................................... 22
4.4. Modeling and Meshing ................................................................................................................... 24
4.5. Material Properties .......................................................................................................................... 27
4.6. Boundary Conditions and Loading .................................................................................................. 27
4.7. Nonlinear Adaptive Region ............................................................................................................. 28
4.7.1. Analysis Settings for Nonlinear Adaptivity Remeshing Controls ............................................... 28
4.10. References .................................................................................................................................... 31
5. Delamination of a Stiffened Composite Panel Under a Compressive Load .......................................... 33
5.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 34
5.3. Geometry and Modeling ................................................................................................................. 34
5.6. Analysis and Solution Controls ........................................................................................................ 41
5.9. Workbench Input Files and Project Files ........................................................................................... 43
6. Thermal-Stress Analysis of a Cooled Turbine Blade .............................................................................. 45
6.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 45
6.3. Modeling ........................................................................................................................................ 47
Release 2022 R1 - © ANSYS, Inc. All rights reserved. - Contains proprietary and confidential information
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. iii
Workbench Technology Showcase: Example Problems

6.9. References ...................................................................................................................................... 60
7. Nonlinear Transient Analysis of a Camshaft Assembly ......................................................................... 61
7.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 62
7.1.1. Differences Between General Axisymmetric and Harmonic Axisymmetric Elements ................. 62
7.3. Geometry ....................................................................................................................................... 63
7.3.1. Create Local Coordinates Systems for Remote Points ............................................................... 63
7.3.2. Create Remote Points for Joint and Spring .............................................................................. 65
7.4. Modeling ........................................................................................................................................ 67
7.4.1. Contact between various bodies ............................................................................................. 67
7.4.2. Create Body-Ground Revolute Joints using Remote Points ..................................................... 69
7.4.3. Use General Axisymmetric Symmetry to Create a Solid from a Surface Body ............................ 72
7.5. Meshing ......................................................................................................................................... 72
7.8. Analysis Settings for Transient Structural with General Axisymmetric Symmetry ............................... 75
7.9.1. Results Comparison: General Axisymmetric Model and Full 3-D Model ..................................... 78
7.10. Recommendations ........................................................................................................................ 78
8. Nuclear Piping System Under Seismic Loading .................................................................................... 81
8.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 81
8.3. Modeling ........................................................................................................................................ 83
8.3.1. Global Nuclear Piping System Model ...................................................................................... 83
8.3.2. Local Elbow Model Meshed with ELBOW290 Elements ............................................................ 83
8.3.3. Local Elbow Model Meshed with SHELL281 Elements .............................................................. 85
8.5.1. Global Nuclear Piping System Model ...................................................................................... 87
8.5.2. Local Elbow Model Meshed with ELBOW290 Elements ............................................................ 87
8.5.3. Local Elbow Model Meshed with SHELL281 Elements .............................................................. 88
8.6.1. Modal Analysis of the Global Piping System Model .................................................................. 88
8.6.2. Nonlinear Static Analyses of the Local Elbow Models ............................................................... 88
8.7.1. Global Piping System: Modal Analysis Results .......................................................................... 89
8.7.2. Local Elbow Models: Nonlinear Static Analysis Results ............................................................. 89
8.9. References ...................................................................................................................................... 94
9. (reserved) .............................................................................................................................................. 95
10. (reserved) ............................................................................................................................................ 97
11. (reserved) ............................................................................................................................................ 99
12. Dynamic Simulation of a Nuclear Piping System Using RSA Methods ............................................. 101
12.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 102
iv of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
12.2. Problem Description ................................................................................................................... 102

12.3. Geometry ................................................................................................................................... 103
12.4. Modeling and Meshing ............................................................................................................... 104
12.4.1. BM3 Piping System ............................................................................................................. 105
12.4.2. Elastic Support Modeling .................................................................................................... 106
12.5. Material Properties ...................................................................................................................... 109
12.6. Load and Boundary Conditions ................................................................................................... 109
12.7. Analysis and Solution Controls .................................................................................................... 111
12.7.1. Response-Spectrum Analysis Summary ............................................................................... 111
12.7.2. Full-Transient Analysis Summary ......................................................................................... 112
12.8. Results and Discussion ................................................................................................................ 113
12.8.1. Results Comparison of the Time-History and Response-Spectrum Analyses .......................... 113
12.8.1.1. RSAs B and C .............................................................................................................. 114
12.8.1.2. RSA D ........................................................................................................................ 115
12.8.1.3. RSAs E and F .............................................................................................................. 116
12.8.1.4. RSA G ........................................................................................................................ 118
12.8.1.5. RSA H ........................................................................................................................ 119
12.9. Recommendations ...................................................................................................................... 120
12.10. Bibliography ............................................................................................................................. 121
12.11. Input / Workbench Project Files ................................................................................................. 121
13. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 123
14. Rotordynamics of a Shaft Assembly Based on a Representative Model of Nelson-Vaugh Rotor ..... 125
14.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 126
14.3. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 128
14.3.1. 3-D Modeling of Flexible Rotor Component ........................................................................ 128
14.3.2. Axisymmetric Modeling of the Flexible Rotor Component from 3-D Geometry ..................... 128
14.3.2.1. General Axisymmetric Meshing .................................................................................. 130
14.3.3. Disk and Bearing Modeling ................................................................................................. 132
14.3.3.1. Disk Modeling ........................................................................................................... 132
14.3.3.2. Modeling Bearings .................................................................................................... 134
14.5. Boundary Conditions and Loading .............................................................................................. 137
14.6.1. Modal Analysis ................................................................................................................... 140
14.6.1.1. Modal Analysis without Gyroscopic Effects ................................................................. 140
14.6.1.2. Modal Analysis with Gyroscopic Effects ...................................................................... 140
14.6.2. Campbell Diagram Analysis ................................................................................................ 141
14.6.3. Unbalance Response Analysis ............................................................................................. 141
14.7.1. Performance Benefits of the 2-D Axisymmetric Model ......................................................... 151
14.9. References .................................................................................................................................. 153
14.10. Workbench Input Files and Project Files ..................................................................................... 153
15. Calibrating and Validating a Hyperelastic Constitutive Model ........................................................ 155
15.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 155
15.3.1. Calibration Experiments ..................................................................................................... 156
15.3.2. Validation Experiment ........................................................................................................ 157
15.3.3. Material Properties ............................................................................................................. 158
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. v

15.9. References .................................................................................................................................. 167
16. Evaluation of Mixed-Mode Stress Intensity Factors and T-stress for 3-D Surface Flaws .................. 169
16.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 170
16.2.1. Rectangular Block with a Semicircular Surface Flaw ............................................................. 170
16.2.2. X-Joint Pipe with Warped Surface Flaw ................................................................................ 171
16.4. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 172
16.4.1. System Setup on Project Schematic in Workbench .............................................................. 173
16.4.2. Fully Define Systems in the Mechanical Application ............................................................. 173
16.4.3. Crack Modeling .................................................................................................................. 174
16.5. Meshing ..................................................................................................................................... 177
16.6. Loads and Boundary Conditions .................................................................................................. 177
16.7. Analysis Settings ......................................................................................................................... 178
16.8. Results ........................................................................................................................................ 178
16.10. References ................................................................................................................................ 184
17. Impact of a Metal Bar on a Rigid Wall ................................................................................................ 187
17.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 187
17.3. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 188
17.3.1. Impact Scenarios ................................................................................................................ 189
17.6.1. Solution Options for Capturing Simulation Results .............................................................. 191
17.6.1.1. Rigid Impact .............................................................................................................. 191
17.6.1.2. Elastic Impact ............................................................................................................ 191
17.6.1.3. Elastoplastic Impact ................................................................................................... 192
17.7.1. Rigid Impact Results ........................................................................................................... 193
17.7.2. Elastic Impact Results ......................................................................................................... 193
17.7.3. Elastoplastic Impact Results ................................................................................................ 193
17.9. References .................................................................................................................................. 194
18. Viscoelastic Analysis of an All-Ceramic Fixed Partial Denture (FPD) ................................................ 197
18.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 198
18.3.1. Denture Modeling .............................................................................................................. 200
18.3.2. Contact Modeling ............................................................................................................... 202
vi of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.

18.4.1. Transient Thermal Analysis Material Properties .................................................................... 203
18.4.2. Static Structural Analysis Material Properties ....................................................................... 204
18.5.1. Thermal Analysis BC and Loading ........................................................................................ 205
18.5.2. Structural Analysis BC and Loading ..................................................................................... 206
18.9. References .................................................................................................................................. 217
19. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 219
20. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 221
21. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 223
22. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 225
23. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 227
24. Hydrostatic Fluid Analysis of an Inflating and Rolling Tire ............................................................... 229
24.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 230
24.3. Geometry ................................................................................................................................... 231
24.3.1. Create Remote Point for Point Mass and Remote Displacement Application ......................... 233
24.3.2. Create Point Mass ............................................................................................................... 234
24.3.3. Create Element Orientation on Shell Bodies Used for Reinforcement .................................... 235
24.4.1. Contact Between Different Bodies ...................................................................................... 240
24.4.2. Mesh .................................................................................................................................. 242
24.4.3. Command Snippet to Create HSFLD242 Elements ............................................................... 250
24.6. Analysis Settings for Step Controls ............................................................................................... 253
24.8. Results ........................................................................................................................................ 259
24.8.1. Time-History Response ....................................................................................................... 260
24.8.2. Tire Deformation Simulation ............................................................................................... 265
25. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 269
26. Nonlinear Analysis of a Rubber Boot Seal ......................................................................................... 271
26.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 271
26.3. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 273
26.3.1. Model the Rubber Boot Seal ............................................................................................... 273
26.3.2. Model the Contact Pairs ...................................................................................................... 276
26.3.2.1. Rigid-flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Shaft and Rubber Boot ................................ 276
26.3.2.2. Self Contact Pairs at Inner and Outer Surfaces of Rubber Boot ..................................... 277
26.9. Workbench Input Files and Project Files ....................................................................................... 290
27. Hot-Rolling Structural Steel Analysis with Nonlinear Mesh Adaptivity ........................................... 291
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. vii
27.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 291

27.1.1. Description of the Hot-Rolling Process ................................................................................ 292
27.1.2. Hot-Rolling Process Simulation ........................................................................................... 292
27.3. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 294
27.3.1. Model the Symmetry Regions ............................................................................................. 295
27.3.2. Model the Block ................................................................................................................. 296
27.3.3. Model the Rollers ............................................................................................................... 297
27.3.4.1. Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Top Roller and Block ................................... 298
27.3.4.2. Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Side Roller and Block .................................. 300
27.5.1. First Remote Displacement ................................................................................................. 303
27.5.2. Second Remote Displacement ............................................................................................ 304
27.5.3. Displacement ..................................................................................................................... 306
27.5.4. Nonlinear Adaptive Region ................................................................................................. 306
28. Friction Stir Welding (FSW) Simulation ............................................................................................. 315
28.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 316
28.3. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 317
28.3.1. Workpiece and Tool Modeling ............................................................................................. 317
28.3.2.1. Contact Pair Between the Plates ................................................................................. 318
28.3.2.2. Contact Pair Between Tool and Workpiece .................................................................. 320
28.5.1. Thermal Boundary Conditions ............................................................................................ 323
28.5.2. Mechanical Boundary Conditions ....................................................................................... 324
28.5.3. Loading .............................................................................................................................. 325
28.7.1. Deformation and Stresses ................................................................................................... 329
28.7.2. Temperature Results .......................................................................................................... 331
28.7.3. Welding Results .................................................................................................................. 333
28.9. References .................................................................................................................................. 334
29. Rocket Nozzle Extension Simulation: Operation .............................................................................. 335
29.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 336
29.3. Modeling Overview ..................................................................................................................... 337
29.3.1. Use of Ansys Composite PrepPost to Model Composite Layers ............................................. 337
29.3.2. Geometry and Mesh ........................................................................................................... 339
29.3.3. Contact Modeling Between Reinforcing Ring and Nozzle ..................................................... 342
29.3.4. Cyclic Symmetry Modeling ................................................................................................. 342
29.4. Setting up the ACP (Pre) System .................................................................................................. 343
viii of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
29.4.1. Insert ACP (Pre) and define a custom material in Workbench ............................................... 344
29.4.2. Specify Modeling Details in Mechanical .............................................................................. 345
29.4.3. Specify Composite Layers in ACP ........................................................................................ 349
29.4.4.Transfer Modeling and Composite Specifications to Downstream Thermal and Structural
Analyses in Workbench ................................................................................................................. 352
29.4.5. View the Transferred Composite Layers in Mechanical ......................................................... 352
29.6.1. Boundary Conditions for the Thermal Analysis .................................................................... 353
29.6.2. Boundary Conditions and Loads for the Structural Analysis .................................................. 355
30. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 361
31. Fitting Parameters for a Chaboche Kinematic Hardening Model ..................................................... 363
31.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 364
31.3. Geometry ................................................................................................................................... 364
31.4. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 366
31.4.1. Chaboche Nonlinear Kinematic Hardening Model ............................................................... 366
31.4.2. Determining Material Parameters ....................................................................................... 367
31.6. Material Properties: Chaboche Kinematic Hardening Material Model ............................................ 371
31.6.1. Input Uniaxial Plastic Strain Test Data into Workbench ......................................................... 372
31.6.2. Chaboche Material Curve-Fitting Process ............................................................................ 374
31.6.3. Use the Calculated Material Constants in the Analysis .......................................................... 378
31.9. Results ........................................................................................................................................ 380
31.10. References ................................................................................................................................ 382
32. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 383
33. Analysis of a Piezoelectric Flextensional Transducer in Water ......................................................... 385
33.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 386
33.3.1. 2D Transducer Model .......................................................................................................... 388
33.3.2. 3D Transducer Model .......................................................................................................... 390
33.5.1. Structural Boundary Conditions .......................................................................................... 393
33.5.2. Acoustic Boundary Conditions and Flags ............................................................................. 393
33.5.3. Piezoelectric Boundary Conditions ...................................................................................... 395
33.9. References .................................................................................................................................. 401
33.10. Input Files ................................................................................................................................. 401
34. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 403
35. Elastoplastic Creep Analysis of Lead-Free Solder Bumps ................................................................. 405
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. ix
35.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 405

35.3. Geometry ................................................................................................................................... 408
35.4. Meshing ..................................................................................................................................... 409
35.6.1. Thermal Analysis ................................................................................................................ 412
35.6.2. Structural Analysis .............................................................................................................. 413
35.7. Results ........................................................................................................................................ 414
35.9. References .................................................................................................................................. 417
36. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 419
37. Bolt Thread ........................................................................................................................................ 421
37.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 421
37.3. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 423
37.3.1. Bolt Thread Correction method ........................................................................................... 423
37.3.1.1. Connections .............................................................................................................. 424
37.3.1.2. Meshing .................................................................................................................... 425
37.3.1.3. Analysis Settings ........................................................................................................ 425
37.3.1.4. Boundary Conditions and Loading ............................................................................. 425
37.3.2. MPC Method ..................................................................................................................... 426
37.3.3. True Thread Simulation: ...................................................................................................... 426
37.5. Results ........................................................................................................................................ 428
37.5.1. Comparison of Computation Time ...................................................................................... 433
38. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 435
39. Wire Bonding Ultrasonic Transducer ................................................................................................. 437
39.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 437
39.4. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 440
39.5.1. Structural Boundary Condition ........................................................................................... 442
39.5.2. Piezoelectric Boundary Conditions ...................................................................................... 443
39.6.1. Prestressed Modal Analysis with Linear Perturbation Method .............................................. 443
39.6.2. Prestressed Full Harmonic Response Analysis ...................................................................... 444
39.7.1. Results from Prestressed Modal Analysis with Linear Perturbation Method .......................... 444
39.7.2. Results from Prestressed Full Harmonic Response Analysis .................................................. 446
39.9. References .................................................................................................................................. 447
40. Shape Memory Alloy (SMA) with Thermal Effect .............................................................................. 449
40.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 449
40.2. SMA Thermal Effect Simulations .................................................................................................. 450
40.2.1. Simulation of a Spinal Spacer Implant ................................................................................. 450
x of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
40.2.1.1. Problem Description .................................................................................................. 451

40.2.1.2. Modeling ................................................................................................................... 451
40.2.1.3. Material Properties .................................................................................................... 452
40.2.1.5. Analysis and Solution Controls ................................................................................... 453
40.2.1.6. Results and Discussion ............................................................................................... 454
40.2.2. Simulation of a Spring Actuator .......................................................................................... 456
40.2.2.1. Problem Description .................................................................................................. 456
40.2.2.2. Modeling ................................................................................................................... 457
40.2.2.3. Material Properties .................................................................................................... 458
40.4. References .................................................................................................................................. 463
41. Acoustic Analysis of a Viscothermal Resonator ................................................................................ 465
41.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 466
41.3. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 468
41.9. References .................................................................................................................................. 474
42. Wire Crimping Modeled with General Contact ................................................................................. 475
42.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 476
42.3. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 477
42.3.1. Model the Grip and Wire ..................................................................................................... 477
42.3.2. Model the Rigid Punch and Base Support ............................................................................ 477
42.3.3. Model the Contact Using the General Contact Method ........................................................ 479
43. Contact Surface Wear Simulation ..................................................................................................... 491
43.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 491
43.3. Material Properties ..................................................................................................................... 492
43.4.1. Modeling Wear ................................................................................................................... 495
43.4.2. Improving Mesh Quality During the Solution ...................................................................... 496
43.7. Results ........................................................................................................................................ 499
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. xi

44. C*-integral Evaluation for 3-D Surface Flaws .................................................................................... 505
44.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 506
44.4. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 509
44.4.1. System Setup on Project Schematic in Workbench .............................................................. 509
44.4.2. Fully Define Systems in the Mechanical Application ............................................................. 510
44.4.3. Crack Modeling .................................................................................................................. 510
44.4.3.1. Rectangular Block with a Semicircular Surface Flaw .................................................... 511
44.4.3.2. X-Joint Pipe with Warped Surface Flaw ....................................................................... 512
44.5. Meshing ..................................................................................................................................... 513
44.6. Loads and Boundary Conditions .................................................................................................. 513
44.8. Results ........................................................................................................................................ 515
44.10. References ................................................................................................................................ 522
44.11. Input Files ................................................................................................................................. 522
45. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 523
46. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 525
47. Electromigration in a Solder Ball ...................................................................................................... 527
47.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 528
47.7. Results ........................................................................................................................................ 538
47.9. References .................................................................................................................................. 546
48. Active and Passive Lateral Earth Pressure Analysis .......................................................................... 547
48.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 547
48.3. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 549
48.6.1. Defining the Initial Stress State ........................................................................................... 553
48.8. Bibliography ............................................................................................................................... 556
49. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 559
50. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 561
51. Multi-Filar Coil Inside a Tube Modeled with Beam-to-Beam Contact ............................................... 563
51.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 564
xii of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.

51.3.1. Model the Five-Filar Coil ..................................................................................................... 565
51.3.2. Model the Tube .................................................................................................................. 566
51.3.3.1. Contact Between the Coil and the Tube ..................................................................... 567
51.3.3.2. Self Contact Between Coil Filars ................................................................................. 569
52. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 577
53. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 579
54. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 581
55. Inverse-Solving Analysis of a Rotor Fan Blade with Disk .................................................................. 583
55.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 583
55.3. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 586
56. Threaded Connection Analysis ......................................................................................................... 597
56.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 597
56.3. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 599
56.5.1. Boundary Conditions and Loadings for the 2-D Axisymmetric Analysis ................................ 604
56.5.2. Loadings on the 3-D Extruded Model ................................................................................. 607
56.6.1. Step 1: Perform a 2-D Axisymmetric Analysis with Pressure and End-Cap Loading ................ 607
56.6.2. Step 2: Extrude the 2-D Model to 3-D .................................................................................. 607
56.6.3. Step 3: Solve the 3-D Model with Bending Load ................................................................... 609
57. (reserved) .......................................................................................................................................... 617
58. Suction Pile Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 619
58.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 619
58.3. Modeling .................................................................................................................................... 621
58.5. Three Sequential Analyses ........................................................................................................... 622
58.5.1. Analysis I. Nonlinear Static Analysis with Nominal Geometry ................................................ 623
58.5.1.1. Boundary Conditions ................................................................................................. 623
58.5.1.2. Loading ..................................................................................................................... 623
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. xiii
58.5.1.2.1. Load Step 1: Gravitational Acceleration on the Soil + Initial Stress State ............... 624
58.5.1.2.2. Load Step 2: Gravitational Acceleration on the Suction Pile ................................. 627
58.5.1.2.3. Load Step 3: Interaction Forces (Upper Structure) on the Suction-Pile Top ........... 627
58.5.1.2.4. Load Step 4: Suction Pressure and Supplementary Friction Forces ...................... 629
58.5.2. Analysis II. Linear Buckling Analysis with Nominal Geometry ................................................ 635
58.5.2.2. Loading ..................................................................................................................... 635
58.5.3. Analysis III. Nonlinear Static Analysis with Modified Geometry ............................................. 637
58.5.3.2. Loading ..................................................................................................................... 637
58.7. Bibliography ............................................................................................................................... 641
59. Thermal-Structural Analysis of a Printed Circuit Board .................................................................... 643
59.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 644
59.3. Geometry ................................................................................................................................... 645
59.6.1. Steady-State Thermal Analysis ............................................................................................ 649
59.6.2. Static Structural Analysis ..................................................................................................... 650
59.7.1. Steady-State Thermal Analysis Settings ............................................................................... 651
59.7.2. Static Structural Analysis Settings ....................................................................................... 652
59.8. Results ........................................................................................................................................ 653
xiv of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
List of Figures
1.1. Brake Disc-Pad Assembly ........................................................................................................................ 3
1.2. Contact Target Pairs for Bonded Contact .................................................................................................. 4
1.3. Contact Target Pairs for Frictional Contact ............................................................................................... 5
1.4. Frictional (left) and Bonded (right) Contact Pair Definition ....................................................................... 6
1.5. Faces Highlight the Scoping for Mapped Face Meshing for Discs .............................................................. 7
1.6. Faces Highlight the Scoping for Mapped Face Meshing for Hub Components ........................................... 7
1.7. Final Mesh for the Disc Brake Assembly ................................................................................................... 8
1.8. Boundary Conditions (Displacement Constraints and Pressure Loading) .................................................. 9
1.9. Mode Shape at Mode 21 ....................................................................................................................... 12
1.10. Mode Shape at Mode 22 ..................................................................................................................... 13
4.1. Geometry ............................................................................................................................................. 23
4.2. Frictionless Contact between Billet and Lower Die ................................................................................. 25
4.3. Frictionless Contact between Billet and Upper Die ................................................................................. 26
4.4. Meshed Billet Body ............................................................................................................................... 27
4.5. Nonlinear Adaptive Region - Billet Body ................................................................................................ 28
4.6. Equivalent Strain Distribution and Deformed Shape at the Final Stage ................................................... 29
4.7. Von Mises Stress Distribution at the Final Stage ..................................................................................... 30
5.1. Stiffened Panel ...................................................................................................................................... 34
5.2. Workflow .............................................................................................................................................. 35
5.3. Symmetry Section ................................................................................................................................ 35
5.4. Meshed Geometry ................................................................................................................................ 36
5.5. Two Contact Pair Definitions (Initial Crack and CZM Area) ....................................................................... 36
5.6. Boundary Conditions ............................................................................................................................ 40
5.7. Constraint Equations ............................................................................................................................. 40
5.8. Time History Plot of Strain and Stabilization Energies ............................................................................. 41
5.9. Global Deformed Shape (Last Substep) .................................................................................................. 42
5.10. Equivalent Stress (Last Substep) .......................................................................................................... 42
5.11. Contact Status at Final Substep ........................................................................................................... 43
5.12. Contact Status for the Initial Bonded Contact Region ........................................................................... 43
6.1.Turbine Blade Cooling Passages (Cross-Sectional Image in Yellow) .......................................................... 46
6.2. Turbine Blade Cooling Passages ............................................................................................................ 47
6.3. 3-D Model of Cooled Turbine Blade ....................................................................................................... 48
6.4. Mesh Settings Used .............................................................................................................................. 49
6.5. Sweep Mesh Method Settings ............................................................................................................... 50
6.6. Edge Sizing setting for line bodies ......................................................................................................... 50
6.7. Meshed model of cooled turbine blade ................................................................................................. 51
6.8. Material properties for the steel blade ................................................................................................... 52
6.9. Material properties for the fluid ............................................................................................................. 52
6.10. Convection Fluid Flow Settings for First Hole ....................................................................................... 53
6.11. Exterior Surface Temperature of the Solid ............................................................................................ 54
6.12. First Hole Inflow Temperatures ............................................................................................................ 55
6.13. First Hole Mass Flow Rate .................................................................................................................... 55
6.14. Solid Region Temperature Distribution ................................................................................................ 56
6.15. Fluid Temperatures ............................................................................................................................. 56
6.16. Solid Surface Temperatures ................................................................................................................. 57
6.17. Fluid Temperature Along Path of Hole Number 1 ................................................................................. 57
6.18. Solid Temperature Along Path of Hole Number 1 ................................................................................. 58
6.19. Von Mises Stresses for Solid Region ..................................................................................................... 58
6.20. Von Mises Stress Along Path of Hole Number 1 .................................................................................... 59
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. xv
7.1. Full 3-D Geometry of a Camshaft Assembly ........................................................................................... 62

8.1. Large-Scale Nuclear Piping System ........................................................................................................ 82
8.2. Entire Nuclear Piping System Line Diagram ........................................................................................... 83
8.3. Elbow Model Line Diagram ................................................................................................................... 84
8.4. Elbow Model Meshed with ELBOW290 Elements ................................................................................... 84
8.5. Midsurface Geometry of Elbow (SHELL281 Model) ................................................................................. 85
8.6. Elbow Model Meshed with SHELL281 Elements ..................................................................................... 85
8.7. Boundary Conditions of Entire Nuclear Piping System ............................................................................ 87
8.8. USUM Plot Comparison: Local ELBOW290 and SHELL281 Models ........................................................... 90
8.9. Ansys Workbench Mechanical - Native Total Deformation: Local ELBOW290 and SHELL281 Models ......... 91
8.10. Von Mises Stress Comparison: Local ELBOW290 and SHELL281 Models ................................................. 92
8.11. Von Mises Strain Comparison: Local ELBOW290 and SHELL281 Models ................................................. 93
12.1. Full Model of the BM3 Nuclear Piping System .................................................................................... 103
12.2. Geometry ......................................................................................................................................... 104
12.3. Pipe and Elbow Elements Used to Model Straight and Curved Parts .................................................... 105
12.4. Pipe Idealization ............................................................................................................................... 105
12.5. Connections Used to Create Elastic Supports ..................................................................................... 106
12.6. Spring Information for Connection Worksheet ................................................................................... 107
12.7. Edge Sizing Details for Straight Pipe Section ...................................................................................... 107
12.8. Meshed Model .................................................................................................................................. 108
12.9. Input-Acceleration Response Spectra (1% X Direction) ....................................................................... 110
12.10. Input-Acceleration Time History (X Direction) ................................................................................... 111
14.1. 3-D Geometry of Nelson-Vaugh Rotor ................................................................................................ 127
14.2. 2-D Axisymmetric Geometry of Nelson-Vaugh Rotor .......................................................................... 127
14.3. 3-D Model Meshed with SOLID187 Elements ..................................................................................... 128
14.4. 3-D Geometry ................................................................................................................................... 129
14.5. 2-D Axisymmetric Geometry Extracted from 3-D Geometry ................................................................ 129
14.6. Flexible Rotor Component Modeled with General Axisymmetric ........................................................ 131
14.7. Flexible Rotor Component Mesh ........................................................................................................ 132
14.8. Boundary Conditions (3-D Solid Model) ............................................................................................. 137
14.9. Campbell Diagram - General Axisymmetric Model ............................................................................. 144
14.10. Campbell Diagram - 3-D Solid Model ............................................................................................... 145
14.11. Unbalance Response at the Node Located Near the Rigid Disk ......................................................... 146
14.12. Unbalance Response at the Node Located Near the Bearing ............................................................. 148
15.1. Hyperelastic Test Suite: Test Specimens ............................................................................................. 156
15.2. Hyperelastic Test Suite: Experimental Data ........................................................................................ 157
15.3. Tension-Torsion Test Specimen .......................................................................................................... 157
15.4. Tension-Torsion Experimental Data ................................................................................................... 158
15.5. Curve fitting using Mooney-Rivlin 5 parameter model ........................................................................ 159
15.6. Tension-Torsion Test Specimen Mesh ................................................................................................. 159
15.7. Remote Points Scoped to Clamp Regions ........................................................................................... 160
15.8. Comparison of Tension-Torsion Experiment to the Five-Parameter Mooney-Rivlin Model .................... 167
16.1. Rectangular Block Geometry with Semicircular Surface Flaw .............................................................. 171
16.2. Semi-circular Surface Crack Dimensions ............................................................................................. 171
16.3. X-Joint Pipe Full Model with Warped Surface Flaw at Welded Joint ..................................................... 172
16.4. Semi-elliptical Surface Crack Dimensions ........................................................................................... 172
16.5. Project Schematic ............................................................................................................................. 173
16.6. Details - Geometry and Solid Body .................................................................................................... 174
16.7. Details and Preview - Semi-Elliptical Crack ......................................................................................... 175
16.8. Generated Crack Mesh for Semi-Elliptical Crack .................................................................................. 176
16.9. Details and preview - Pre-Meshed Crack ............................................................................................ 177
xvi of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
16.10. Loads and Boundary Conditions ...................................................................................................... 178

16.11. Total Deformation - Rectangular Block ............................................................................................. 179
16.12. Equivalent Stress - Rectangular Block ............................................................................................... 179
16.13. Comparing Normalized SIF (K1) Results with those Reported in the Literature - Rectangular Block .... 180
16.14. Normalized T-Stress - Rectangular Block ........................................................................................... 181
16.15. Total Deformation - X-Joint Pipe ...................................................................................................... 182
16.16. Equivalent Stress - X-Joint Pipe ........................................................................................................ 182
16.17. Normalized SIFs (KX) results comparison - X-Joint Pipe ..................................................................... 183
16.18. Normalized T-Stress - X-Joint Pipe .................................................................................................... 184
17.1. Geometry and FE Model of a Metal Bar Impacting a Rigid Wall ........................................................... 188
18.1. FPD Viscoelastic (Glass) Veneer Geometry .......................................................................................... 199
18.2. FPD Ceramic Core Geometry (Inside the Veneer) ................................................................................ 199
18.3. FPD Veneer (A) and Core (B) Mesh (SOLID291) .................................................................................... 201
18.4. Contact Between Veneer and Core (CONTA174 and TARGE170) .......................................................... 202
18.5. Workflow for Temperature Results Transfer to Structural ..................................................................... 202
18.6. Contact Details ................................................................................................................................. 203
18.7. Details of Transient Thermal Analysis Settings .................................................................................... 208
18.8. Details of Structural Analysis Settings ................................................................................................ 208
18.9. Temperature Distribution in Veneer (A) and Core (B) at 60 Seconds ..................................................... 209
18.10. Temperature Distribution in Veneer and Core at 300 Seconds ........................................................... 210
18.11. Temperature Distribution in Veneer (A) and Core (B) at 600 Seconds ................................................. 211
18.12. Von Mises Stress in Veneer (A) and Core (B) at 60 Seconds ................................................................ 212
18.13. Von Mises Stress in Veneer (A) and Core (B) at 300 Seconds ............................................................... 213
18.14. Von Mises Stress in Veneer and Core at 600 Seconds ......................................................................... 214
18.15. Reference Results: Residual Principal Stress Distribution in Veneer and Core ...................................... 216
24.1. 3-D Model of an Inflated Tire and a Road Surface ............................................................................... 230
24.2. Beta Options ..................................................................................................................................... 232
24.3. Geometry ......................................................................................................................................... 233
24.4. Create Remote Point with Rigid Behavior ........................................................................................... 234
24.5. Create Point Mass .............................................................................................................................. 235
24.6. Two Element Orientations ................................................................................................................. 236
24.7. Reinforcement on Belt Shell Bodies ................................................................................................... 238
24.8. Reinforcement on Sidewall Shell Bodies ............................................................................................. 239
24.9. Reinforcement Elements ................................................................................................................... 240
24.10. Frictional Contact Between the Road and Tire .................................................................................. 241
24.11. Bonded Contact Between the Tire and the Tire Rim .......................................................................... 242
24.12. MultiZone Back_Tire_Body .............................................................................................................. 243
24.13. MultiZone Front_Tire_Body ............................................................................................................. 244
24.14. Edge Sizing .................................................................................................................................... 245
24.15. Face Meshing .................................................................................................................................. 247
24.16. Face Meshing2 ................................................................................................................................ 248
24.17. Mesh .............................................................................................................................................. 249
24.18. Element Orientations ...................................................................................................................... 250
24.19. Hydrostatic Fluid Element with Positive Volume ............................................................................... 252
24.20. Hydrostatic Fluid Element with Negative Volume ............................................................................. 252
24.21. Acceleration Load ........................................................................................................................... 255
24.22. Remote Displacement to Restrict Movement ................................................................................... 256
24.23. Remote Displacement to Move Tire in Contact with Road ................................................................. 258
24.24. Total Deformation ........................................................................................................................... 260
24.25. Fluid Pressure Variation ................................................................................................................... 262
24.26. Fluid Volume Variation ..................................................................................................................... 263
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. xvii
24.27. Fluid Density Variation ..................................................................................................................... 264

24.28. Fluid Mass Variation ......................................................................................................................... 265
24.29. Tire Deformation (All Load Steps) ..................................................................................................... 266
26.1. Setting Surface-Projection-Based Contact .......................................................................................... 272
26.2. 3-D Model of Rubber Boot Seal and Rigid Shaft .................................................................................. 273
26.3. Linear Order Used for Mesh Elements ................................................................................................ 274
26.4. Face Sizing Used for Mesh Elements .................................................................................................. 274
26.5. Mapped Face Meshing for Rigid Shaft ................................................................................................ 275
26.6. Meshed Model of the Assembly ......................................................................................................... 275
26.7. Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair Between the Rigid Shaft and the Rubber Boot ........................................... 276
26.8. Details of Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Shaft and Rubber Boot ....................................... 277
26.9. Self Contact Pairs at Inner and Outer Surfaces of the Rubber Boot ...................................................... 278
26.10. Detailed Settings for Self Contact Pairs on Inner and Outer Surfaces of Rubber Boot ......................... 279
26.11. Constants for Neo-Hookean Model .................................................................................................. 280
26.12. Frictionless support at symmetry plane faces to restrict the out-of-plane translations ....................... 280
26.13. Frictionless support at bottom faces to restrict the axial translation .................................................. 281
26.14. Frictionless support at bottom cylindrical faces to restrict the radial translation ................................ 281
26.15. Rigid Remote Point Scoped to Top Face of Shaft ............................................................................... 282
26.16. Rigid Remote Point Scoped to Bottom Face of Shaft ......................................................................... 282
26.17. Remote Displacement (Displacements and Rotations) Applied in Different Load Steps ..................... 283
26.18. Step Controls Used .......................................................................................................................... 284
26.19. Set Large Deflection On and Stabilization Off ................................................................................... 284
26.20. Comparison of Cumulative Iterations for Different Contact Detection Methods ................................. 285
26.21. Total Displacement at Maximum Shaft Angle ................................................................................... 286
26.22. Von Mises Stress at the Maximum Shaft Angle .................................................................................. 286
26.23.Total Strain at First Contact between Outer Plaits of Rubber Boot ...................................................... 287
26.24. Total Strain at Second Contact between Inner Plaits of Rubber Boot ................................................. 288
26.25.Total Strain at Third Contact between Inner Plaits of Rubber Boot and Shaft ...................................... 289
27.1. Hot-Rolling Model ............................................................................................................................. 293
27.2. Symmetric Hot-Rolling Model ............................................................................................................ 294
27.3. Meshed Model with Dimensions ....................................................................................................... 295
27.4. Hot-Rolling Quarter Model Geometry ................................................................................................ 296
27.5. Symmetry Region 1 ........................................................................................................................... 296
27.6. Symmetry Region 2 ........................................................................................................................... 296
27.7. Mesh Settings for the Block ............................................................................................................... 297
27.8. Geometry Details of Rollers ............................................................................................................... 297
27.9. Mesh Settings for Rollers ................................................................................................................... 298
27.10. Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Top Roller and Block ........................................................ 299
27.11. Details of Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Top Roller and Block ......................................... 299
27.12. Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Side Roller and Block ....................................................... 300
27.13. Details of Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Side Roller and Block ........................................ 301
27.14. Material properties for Block body ................................................................................................... 302
27.15. First Coordinate System ................................................................................................................... 303
27.16. First Remote Displacement .............................................................................................................. 304
27.17. Second Coordinate System .............................................................................................................. 305
27.18. Second Remote Displacement ......................................................................................................... 306
27.19. Displacement .................................................................................................................................. 306
27.20. Nonlinear Adaptive Region .............................................................................................................. 307
27.21. Analysis settings for Load Step 1 ...................................................................................................... 308
27.22. Analysis settings for Load Step 2 ...................................................................................................... 309
27.23. Force Convergence Plot ................................................................................................................... 310
xviii of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
27.24. : Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress Plot .................................................................................................. 310

27.25. Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress at first re-mesh point .......................................................................... 311
27.26. Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress after Load Step 1 ................................................................................ 311
27.27. Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress at 1.6848s .......................................................................................... 311
27.28. Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress after Load Step 2 ................................................................................ 312
27.29. Animation of Total Deformation ....................................................................................................... 312
27.30. Equivalent Plastic Strain .................................................................................................................. 313
27.31. Equivalent Plastic Strain Plot ............................................................................................................ 313
28.1. 3-D Model of Workpiece and Tool ...................................................................................................... 317
28.2. 3-D Meshed Model of Workpiece and Tool ......................................................................................... 318
28.3. Contact Pair Between Plates .............................................................................................................. 319
28.4. Contact Pair Between Tool and Workpiece ......................................................................................... 320
28.5. Plastic Work Fraction (Taylor-Quinney Coefficient) ............................................................................. 322
28.6. Thermal Boundary Conditions ........................................................................................................... 323
28.7. Mechanical Boundary Conditions and loading ................................................................................... 324
28.8. Load Steps ........................................................................................................................................ 325
28.9. Coupled Field Analysis Settings: Physics Region ................................................................................. 326
28.10. Analysis Settings for First Load Step ................................................................................................. 326
28.11. Analysis Settings for Second Load Step ............................................................................................ 327
28.12. Analysis Settings for Third Load Step ................................................................................................ 327
28.13. Deflection at Workpiece After Load Step 1 ....................................................................................... 329
28.14. von Mises Stress After Load Step 1 ................................................................................................... 329
28.15. Temperature After Load Step 1 ........................................................................................................ 330
28.16. Frictional Stress After Load Step 1 .................................................................................................... 330
28.17. Frictional Stress After Load Step 2 .................................................................................................... 331
28.20. Maximum Temperature (on Workpiece Beneath the Tool) Variation with Time ................................... 332
28.21. Contact Status at Interface with Bonding Temperature 1000 °C ........................................................ 333
29.1. Project Schematic in Workbench ....................................................................................................... 337
29.2. Details of ACP (Pre) in Mechanical (A) and Workbench (B) ................................................................... 338
29.3. Nozzle Extension Geometry ............................................................................................................... 339
29.4. Nozzle Extension 1° Base Sector Geometry (a), Detail View of Reinforcing Ring (b) .............................. 340
29.5. Name Selections ............................................................................................................................... 341
29.6. Mesh (a) and Layer Solid Representation of the Mesh (b) .................................................................... 341
29.7. Bonded Contact Between Edges of Ring and Nozzle .......................................................................... 342
29.8. Cyclic Symmetry Boundary Condition ................................................................................................ 343
29.9. Named Selections NS_HIGHBOUNDARY (A) and NS_LOWBOUNDARY (B) ............................................ 343
29.10. Project Schematic in Workbench ..................................................................................................... 352
29.11. Plies Defining Composite Material Imported into Mechanical ........................................................... 352
29.12. Constant Temperature Specified at Clamped End ............................................................................. 354
29.13. Three Convection Boundary Conditions .......................................................................................... 354
29.14. Fixed Support ................................................................................................................................. 355
29.15. Temperature Imported from Thermal Analysis ................................................................................. 355
29.16. Settings for the Thermal Analysis .................................................................................................... 356
29.17. Settings for the Structural Analysis .................................................................................................. 356
29.18. Temperature Results ........................................................................................................................ 357
29.19. Deformation ................................................................................................................................... 357
29.20. Equivalent Stresses in Layer 1, 2, 3 and 4 ........................................................................................... 358
31.1. Plate with Notch (A), Model Leveraging Symmetry (B) ........................................................................ 365
31.2. Simulated Geometry ......................................................................................................................... 365
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. xix
31.3. Stable Hysteresis Strain-Controlled Data ............................................................................................ 368

31.4. Plot Comparing Curve-Fitting Tool Results ......................................................................................... 370
31.5. Meshed Model .................................................................................................................................. 371
31.6. Include Uniaxial Plastic Strain Test Data in the Properties Window of Structural Steel in Workbench .... 372
31.7. Paste Tabular Data in Uniaxial Plastic Strain Test Data in Workbench ............................................... 373
31.8. Uniaxial Plastic Strain Test Data Chart with Data from Excel File ......................................................... 374
31.9. Include the Chaboche Kinematic Hardening Property ........................................................................ 375
31.10. Chaboche Kinematic Hardening Property Included with Defaults ..................................................... 376
31.11. Resulting Curve Fit for Chaboche Kinematic Hardening Model without Defining Initial Seed Values ... 377
31.12. Specify Initial Seed Values for Material Constants and Yield Stress to Improve Curve Fit Accuracy ...... 377
31.13. Improved Curve Fit After Specifying Seed Values .............................................................................. 378
31.14. Copy Calculated Values to Property ................................................................................................. 378
31.15. Calculated Material Constants Copied to the Properties of Stainless Steel Window ............................ 379
31.16. Equivalent Plastic Strain .................................................................................................................. 381
31.17. Accumulated Equivalent Plastic Strain ............................................................................................. 381
33.1. Class IV Flextensional Underwater Acoustic Transducer Shell .............................................................. 386
33.2. Flextensional Transducer Surrounded by Water .................................................................................. 387
33.3. Alternating Polarity of Piezoelectric Stacks ......................................................................................... 387
33.4. Physics Region with Piezoeletric Coupling ......................................................................................... 388
33.5. Physics Region with Structural Physics Only (2D Case) ........................................................................ 388
33.6. Physics Region with Acoustic Physics Only (3D Case) .......................................................................... 388
33.7. 2D Transducer Model Mesh ............................................................................................................... 390
33.8. 3D Transducer Model Mesh ............................................................................................................... 391
33.9. Piezoelectric Stress Matrix ................................................................................................................ 392
33.10. Symmetry Boundary Conditions ...................................................................................................... 393
33.11. Z Constraints for 3D Model .............................................................................................................. 393
33.12. Acoustic Boundary Conditions for 2D Model .................................................................................... 394
33.13. Acoustic Boundary Conditions for 3D Model .................................................................................... 395
33.14. Applied Voltages ............................................................................................................................. 396
33.15. SPL Plot of Quarter-Symmetry 2D Transducer Model ........................................................................ 397
33.16. SPL Plot of Quarter-Symmetry 3D Transducer Model ........................................................................ 397
33.17. SPL Plot Along an Arc 1 m from Center ............................................................................................. 398
33.18. 2D SPL Plot ..................................................................................................................................... 399
33.19. 3D SPL Plot ..................................................................................................................................... 400
35.1. Creep Stages ..................................................................................................................................... 406
35.2. Distribution of Solder Bumps in Full Flip Chip Model and Size of Solder Bump .................................... 407
35.3. 1/8 Symmetry of Flip Chip Pack ......................................................................................................... 408
35.4. Flowchart in Project Schematic of Workbench .................................................................................... 408
35.5. Geometry View in Mechanical ........................................................................................................... 409
35.6. Meshed Model .................................................................................................................................. 409
35.7. Contact Target Pairs .......................................................................................................................... 410
35.8. Creep Experimental Data [4-6] at Different Temperatures Used for Curve-Fitting Procedure ................ 411
35.9. Initial Temperature ............................................................................................................................ 413
35.10. Temperature Cycle History ............................................................................................................... 413
35.11. Imported Body Temperature ............................................................................................................ 414
35.12. Temperature Distribution in Flip Chip at 3150 Seconds and 3750 Seconds ........................................ 414
35.13. USUM Results from Creep Curve Fitting Constants and Reference Constants at the End of 14th Load
Step (3750 Seconds) ................................................................................................................................. 415
35.14. Node Used for Plotting Post Process Results ..................................................................................... 416
35.15. Von Mises Creep Strain at Node Number 4112 .................................................................................. 416
37.1. 2-D Axisymmetric Meshed Models for the True Thread, Bolt Section, and MPC Method ........................ 423
xx of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
37.2. Additional Settings for Bolt Thread Correction ................................................................................... 425

37.3. Bolt Pretention Load Applied ............................................................................................................. 426
37.4. Detailed Geometry Used for the True Thread Simulation Method ....................................................... 427
37.5. UY Displacement in the 2-D Axisymmetric Model for all Three Methods .............................................. 429
37.6. Equivalent Stress in the 2-D Axisymmetric Model for all Three Methods .............................................. 430
37.7. Linearized Stress in the Bolt Shank Along a Path at y = 280 for all Three Methods. ............................... 431
39.1. Ultrasonic Transducer Model ............................................................................................................. 438
39.2. Approximate Location for Positioning the Holder ............................................................................... 438
39.3. Meshed Ultrasonic Transducer Model ................................................................................................ 440
39.4. Physics Regions Setup ....................................................................................................................... 441
39.5. Polarization with Alternating Z-Orientation ........................................................................................ 442
39.6. Top and Bottom Plate Connection ..................................................................................................... 442
39.7. Structural and Piezoelectric Boundary Conditions .............................................................................. 443
39.8. ......................................................................................................................................................... 444
39.9. First Longitudinal Mode of Interest (14) at 26.8 kHz ............................................................................ 445
39.10. Second Longitudinal Mode of Interest (25) at 58.9 kHz ..................................................................... 445
39.11. Third Longitudinal Mode of Interest (32) at 87.4 kHz ......................................................................... 446
39.12. Impedance Frequency Response ..................................................................................................... 446
39.13. Tip Deflection Frequency Response ................................................................................................. 447
40.1. Spinal Spacer Implant ....................................................................................................................... 450
40.2. Loading and Recovery of a Spinal Spacer Implant .............................................................................. 451
40.3. Simulated model ¼ of Spinal Spacer .................................................................................................. 452
40.4. Displacement .................................................................................................................................... 453
40.5. Thermal Load .................................................................................................................................... 453
40.6. Displacements of Central Node A of the Spinal Spacer ....................................................................... 454
40.7. Spinal Spacer Deformation and Stress, t = 2 seconds .......................................................................... 454
40.10. Motion of a Vertical Helical Spring ................................................................................................... 457
40.11. Finite Element Models of a Spring Actuator ...................................................................................... 458
40.12. Applied Force Steps ........................................................................................................................ 459
40.13. Applied Temperature Steps ............................................................................................................. 459
40.14. Details of Analysis Settings .............................................................................................................. 460
40.15. Spring Actuator Deformation at Step 1 ............................................................................................ 461
40.18. Displacement History: Bottom of a Spring Actuator with Temperature .............................................. 462
41.1. Geometry of the Resonator Model ..................................................................................................... 466
41.2. Resonator Composed of Tubes with Variable Diameters and Lengths .................................................. 467
41.3. Mesh Controls: Body Sizing, Sweep Method, and Face Sizing ............................................................... 468
41.4. Mesh Controls: Inflation and MultiZone .............................................................................................. 469
41.5. Surface Velocity on Exterior Face ....................................................................................................... 470
41.6. LRF Model for Tubes with Radius = 3.4 mm ........................................................................................ 471
41.7. Thermo-Viscous BLI Boundary Details ................................................................................................ 471
41.8. Full Harmonic Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 472
41.9. Absorption Coefficient using LRF Model ............................................................................................ 473
41.10. Absorption Coefficient Using BLI model ........................................................................................... 473
42.1. 3-D Crimp Joint Model ...................................................................................................................... 476
42.2. 3-D Meshed Model of Grip with Seven Stranded Wires ...................................................................... 477
42.3. Rigid Punch and Rigid Base ............................................................................................................... 478
42.4. Frictional Contact Between Rigid Punch and Grip .............................................................................. 480
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. xxi
42.5. Frictional Contact Between Grip and Rigid Base ................................................................................. 481
42.6. Remote Displacement Applied To Rigid Base ..................................................................................... 483
42.7. Remote Displacement Applied to Wire .............................................................................................. 484
42.8. Remote displacement applied to punch ............................................................................................ 484
42.9. UY Time Varying Remote Displacement ............................................................................................. 485
42.10. Analysis Settings ............................................................................................................................. 486
42.11. Displacement at 2.5E-4 Seconds ...................................................................................................... 487
42.12. Equivalent Plastic Strain in Wires and Grip at 2.5E-4 Seconds ............................................................ 487
42.13. Displacement at 3.35E-4 Seconds .................................................................................................... 488
42.14. Equivalent Plastic Strain in Wires and Grip at 3.35E-4 Seconds .......................................................... 488
42.15. Cross-Sectional View of Grip and Wires at 3.35E-4 seconds ............................................................... 489
42.16. Deformed Wires at 3.35E-4 seconds ................................................................................................. 489
43.1. 2D Axisymmetric Model of a Hemispherical Ring Rotating on a flat Ring ............................................. 492
43.2. Advanced Geometry Options ............................................................................................................ 493
43.3. Geometry Details .............................................................................................................................. 493
43.4. Contact Region Details ...................................................................................................................... 494
43.5. 2D Axisymmetric Meshed Model ....................................................................................................... 494
43.6. Commands Used for the Archard Wear Model .................................................................................... 495
43.7. Commands Used for Nonlinear Mesh Adaptivity ................................................................................ 497
43.8. Remote Displacement Details ............................................................................................................ 498
43.9. Remote Force Details ........................................................................................................................ 498
43.11. Contact Pressure versus Time .......................................................................................................... 500
43.12. Contact Pressure Before and After Wear ........................................................................................... 500
43.13. Normal Stress in Y Direction Before Wear ......................................................................................... 501
43.14. Normal Stress in Y Direction After Wear ............................................................................................ 501
43.15. Mesh After Wear .............................................................................................................................. 502
44.1. Rectangular Block Geometry with Semicircular Surface Flaw .............................................................. 506
44.2. Semicircular Surface Crack Dimensions .............................................................................................. 507
44.3. X-Joint Pipe Full Model with Warped Surface Flaw at Welded Joint ..................................................... 507
44.4. Semi-elliptical Surface Crack Dimensions ........................................................................................... 508
44.5. Creep Properties Specified to Structural Steel Material ....................................................................... 509
44.7. Details and Preview: Semi-Elliptical Crack ........................................................................................... 511
44.8. Generated Crack Mesh for Semi-Elliptical Crack .................................................................................. 512
44.9. Pre-Meshed Crack ............................................................................................................................. 512
44.10. Detailed View of Pre-Meshed Crack .................................................................................................. 513
44.11. Loads and Boundary Conditions ...................................................................................................... 514
44.13. Equivalent Elastic Strain and Equivalent Creep Strain - Rectangular Block ......................................... 516
44.14. Equivalent (von Mises) Stress - Rectangular Block ............................................................................. 516
44.15. C* - Integral along the Crack Front - Rectangular Block ..................................................................... 517
44.16. Equivalent Elastic Strain: X-Joint Pipe ............................................................................................... 518
44.17. Equivalent Creep Strain: X-Joint Pipe ................................................................................................ 519
44.18. Equivalent (von Mises) Stress: X-Joint Pipe ....................................................................................... 520
44.19. C* Integral Values Along the Crack Front - X-Joint Pipe ..................................................................... 521
48.1. Soil Geometry and Active/Passive Movement of Left Retaining Wall ................................................... 548
48.2. Mesh Details ..................................................................................................................................... 549
48.3. CAD geometry .................................................................................................................................. 549
48.4. Horizontal-to-Vertical Stress Ratios Along the Retaining Wall .............................................................. 554
xxii of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
48.5. Horizontal Displacement for Active Pressure Load Step (Negative Displacement of Retaining Wall in x-
Direction) ................................................................................................................................................. 554
48.6. Equivalent Plastic Strains for Active Pressure Load Step ...................................................................... 555
48.7. Horizontal Displacement for Passive Pressure Load Step (Positive Displacement of Retaining Wall in x-
Direction) ................................................................................................................................................. 555
48.8. Equivalent Plastic Strains for Passive Pressure Load Step ..................................................................... 556
51.1. 3-D Models of a Five-Filar Metal Coil Inside a Polymer Tube ................................................................ 565
51.2. Meshed Coil ...................................................................................................................................... 565
51.3. Mesh Settings for Coil - Solid Elements (Case1) .................................................................................. 566
51.4. Mesh Settings for Coil - Beam Elements (Case 2 and Case 3) ............................................................... 566
51.5. Meshed Tube .................................................................................................................................... 567
51.6. Mesh Settings for Tube - Solid Elements (Case1 and Case 2) ................................................................ 567
51.7. Mesh Settings for Tube - Pipe Elements (Case3) .................................................................................. 567
51.8. Contact Pairs for Contact Between Coil and Tube ............................................................................... 568
51.9. Contact Settings for Contact Between Coil and Tube .......................................................................... 568
51.10. Self Contact Definition Between Coil Filars ....................................................................................... 569
51.11. Contact Settings for Self Contact Between Filars ............................................................................... 569
51.12. Remote Point Settings and Remote Displacement Constraints at Selected Nodes - Case 1 ................. 571
51.15. Analysis Settings for All Three Cases ................................................................................................. 574
51.16. Total Deformation Plots for all Three Cases ....................................................................................... 575
51.17. von Mises Stress .............................................................................................................................. 575
55.1. Hot-to-Cold Geometry Work Flow ..................................................................................................... 584
55.2. Import .cdb File Using External Model ............................................................................................. 587
55.3. Update Project After Specifying .cdb File Location ........................................................................... 588
55.4. Poisson's Ratio as a Function of Temperature for NASA Rotor 67 Fan Blade and Disk ............................ 589
55.5. Summary of Analysis Settings ........................................................................................................... 592
55.6. Deformation after Inverse Solve (A) and Forward Solve (B). Hot geometry is also plotted as wire-
frame. ....................................................................................................................................................... 593
55.7. Equivalent Stress Results of Inverse Solve (A) and Forward Solve (B) .................................................... 594
55.8. Equivalent Total Strain Results of Inverse Solve (A) and Forward Solve (B) ............................................ 594
55.9. Thermal Strain Results of Inverse Solve (A) and Forward Solve (B) ....................................................... 595
56.1. Threaded-Connection Model ............................................................................................................. 598
56.2. 2-D Axisymmetric Mesh of the Threaded Connection ......................................................................... 600
56.3. Meshing at Threads ........................................................................................................................... 601
56.4. Flexible-to-Flexible Contact Pair Details ............................................................................................. 602
56.5. Material properties used for threaded-connection model ................................................................... 604
56.6. Analysis Time Step Controls ............................................................................................................... 605
56.7. End cap load applied on the top end of model and fixed support at bottom edges ............................ 605
56.8. Apply Internal Node Pressure ............................................................................................................ 606
56.9. Internal Pressure and End-Cap Loading Cycles ................................................................................... 606
56.10. Equivalent Stress After 2-D Axisymmetric Analysis ............................................................................ 610
56.11. Total Mechanical Equivalent Strain After 2-D Axisymmetric Analysis ................................................. 611
56.12. Equivalent Stress After MAP2DTO3D .............................................................................................. 612
56.13. Total Mechanical Equivalent Strain After MAP2DTO3D .................................................................... 612
56.14. Equivalent Stress After Restart Analysis with Bending Load .............................................................. 613
56.15. Total Mechanical Equivalent Strain After Restart Analysis with Bending Load .................................... 614
56.16. Bending Stress on the Threads After 3-D Analysis ............................................................................. 614
56.17. Contact Pressure at the Threaded Connection After MAP2DTO3D ................................................... 615
56.18. Contact Pressure at the Threaded Connection ................................................................................. 615
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. xxiii
58.1. Problem Geometry ............................................................................................................................ 621

58.2. Flow Diagram of Three Sequential Analyses ....................................................................................... 622
58.3. Boundary Conditions - Nonlinear Static Analysis with Nominal Geometry ........................................... 623
58.4. Vertical Stress Distribution in the Soil ................................................................................................. 626
58.5. Total Displacements in the Soil .......................................................................................................... 627
58.6. Remote Force on Suction-Pile Top ..................................................................................................... 628
58.7. Remote Moment on Suction-Pile Top ................................................................................................. 629
58.8. Suction Pressure Applied to Suction-Pile Cap ..................................................................................... 630
58.9. Suction Pressure Applied to Suction-Pile Skirt .................................................................................... 631
58.10. Frictional Forces Between Suction-Pile Skirt and Soil ........................................................................ 632
58.12. Total Displacements – Entire Model ................................................................................................. 633
58.13. Total Displacements – Soil ............................................................................................................... 633
58.14. Equivalent Plastic Strains - Soil (A), Cross Section View (B) ................................................................. 634
58.15. Equivalent von Mises Stress – Suction Pile ........................................................................................ 634
58.16. Equivalent Plastic Strain – Suction Pile ............................................................................................. 635
58.17. Analysis Settings for Buckling Analysis ............................................................................................. 636
58.18. Total Deformation, First Buckling Mode ........................................................................................... 636
58.19. Total Deformation in the Soil, First Buckling Mode ............................................................................ 637
58.20. Workbench Project Schematic ........................................................................................................ 638
58.21. Total Deformation, Second Static Analysis on Modified Geometry ..................................................... 639
58.22. Deformation in the Soil, Second Static Analysis on Modified Geometry ............................................. 639
58.23. Equivalent Plastic Strains - Soil (A), Cross Section View (B), Second Static Analysis on Modified Geo-
metry ....................................................................................................................................................... 640
59.1. PCB with Close-up Views ................................................................................................................... 645
59.3. Geometry -Top View and Zoomed-In Side View .................................................................................. 647
59.4. Line and Shell Bodies Modeled as Reinforcement ............................................................................... 648
59.5. Mesh Details ..................................................................................................................................... 648
59.6. Details for Applying Thermal Load and Boundary Conditions ............................................................. 650
59.7. Structural Analysis Boundary Conditions ........................................................................................... 651
59.8.Temperature Profile in Area Where Heat Generation Load is Applied ................................................... 653
59.9. Deformation in Area Where Heat Generation Load is Applied ............................................................. 654
59.10. Equivalent Thermal Strain ................................................................................................................ 655
xxiv of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
List of Tables
1.1. Solution Output .................................................................................................................................... 13
1.2. Guidelines for selecting optimal analysis method to use for a Brake Squeal problem .............................. 15
1.3. Guidelines for Selecting the Optimal Eigensolver (MODOPT) for Obtaining the Brake Squeal solution .... 15
16.1. Material Properties ............................................................................................................................ 172
24.1. Edge Sizing Specifications ................................................................................................................. 244
24.2. Rename Named Selections Imported from SpaceClaim .................................................................... 250
24.3. Material Properties of the Tire ............................................................................................................ 252
24.4. Reinforcing Material Properties ......................................................................................................... 253
24.5. Air Properties .................................................................................................................................... 253
26.1. Simulation Statistics for Different Contact Detection Methods ............................................................ 285
28.1. Workpiece Material Properties ........................................................................................................... 321
28.2. Material Properties of the PCBN Tool .................................................................................................. 323
28.3. Load Steps ........................................................................................................................................ 325
31.1. Load and Boundary Conditions ......................................................................................................... 379
35.1. Implicit Creep Models ....................................................................................................................... 406
35.2. Generalized Garofalo Creep Constants Calculated from Curve Fitting and at Constant Temperature .... 411
35.3. Flip Chip Material Properties .............................................................................................................. 412
35.4. Temperature-Dependent Properties .................................................................................................. 412
37.1. Material Properties of Bolt ................................................................................................................. 428
37.2. Material Properties of Cover Plate and Base Plate ............................................................................... 428
39.1. Structural Material Properties (taken from Yan [1]) .............................................................................. 439
39.2. Piezoelectric Material Properties (taken from Berlincourt [3]) .............................................................. 439
41.1. Tube Numbers, Radii, and Lengths ..................................................................................................... 467
41.2. Properties ......................................................................................................................................... 469
42.1. Material Properties ............................................................................................................................ 481
42.2. Material Properties of Grip ................................................................................................................. 482
42.3. Material Properties of Wire ................................................................................................................ 482
44.1. Material Properties and Creep Constants ........................................................................................... 508
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. xxv
xxvi of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
What You Need to Know
The example problems presented in this document are provided to encourage you to take advantage
of the extraordinarily broad simulation capabilities of Ansys Mechanical and Ansys Workbench. The real-
world problems showcase the power of Ansys Mechanical to simulate and accurately solve interdiscip-
linary problems from a variety of industries and engineering fields.
The problems are more substantive and complex than examples found in the standard documentation
set. The documentation examines the underlying physics of each problem and the considerations ne-
cessary to simulate these problems with numerical models. Approximation issues, accuracy considerations,
and recommended practices are discussed. Examining these example problems is an effective way to
learn powerful features that you can customize to create unique, accurate simulations that help you
design optimal solutions to your own problems.
How Problems Are Presented

Each problem description provides information about the nature and physical characteristics of the
problem, specific modeling techniques, material properties, boundary conditions and loading, analysis
details and solution controls.
A comprehensive results and discussion section carefully examines analysis results and illustrates why
specific strategies and methods were chosen.
Each problem concludes with valuable hints and recommendations for performing a similar type of
analysis. In many cases, references are provided for additional background information. Using these
examples as templates, you can tailor them to specify and set up customized simulations to address
your needs.
Your Results May Vary Slightly

The results shown for each problem may differ slightly from those that you obtain, depending upon
the computer hardware and operating system platforms used.
Use of Ansys Mechanical Assumed

The problem descriptions here are solved using the Mechanical Application. To see these examples
solved using Mechanical APDL see Technology Showcase: Example Problems.
Obtaining the Input Files

Every example problem has a Workbench Project Archive file available for download so that you can
examine and explore hands-on the demonstrated features and options within Ansys Mechanical and
Ansys Workbench. Most examples also have one or more input files that can be used to compare different
modeling strategies. Links for the downloads can be found in the Workbench Input Files and Project
Files section at the end of each example problem or in the summary table below.
Downloads are .zip files containing the relevant files for that particular problem. After downloading
a .zip file, extract the contents to a convenient location on your computer.
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. xxvii
Workbench Project Archive (.wbpz) files can be very large and may take a long time to download.
Input files are contained in a single .zip file for each example. The contents of the .zip files vary from
problem to problem (they may include complex geometry CAD files, mesh files, database files, etc.) and
originate from different modeling and simulation software products (SpaceClaim, DesignModeler, and
Mechanical APDL, etc.). For procedures describing how to open various input files, see Attach Geo-
metry/Mesh in the Mechanical User's Guide.
Problem Summary
The following example problems are described in this Showcase:
td-1 Brake-Squeal Analysis (p. 1) Solves a brake squeal problem. Three

analysis methods are highlighted: linear
Download non-prestressed modal, partial nonlinear
.wbpz file (505 prestressed modal, and full nonlinear
MB) prestressed modal. The problem
demonstrates sliding frictional contact and
No input files uses complex eigensolvers to predict
available unstable modes.
td-4 Ring-Gear Forging Demonstrates the efficiency and usefulness

Simulation with of rezoning in a 2-D simulation of
Download Rezoning (p. 21) metal-forming processes. Rezoning
.wbpz file (36 facilitates the convergence of a nonlinear
MB) finite element simulation in which excessive
element distortion occurs.
Download
input files
td-5 Delamination of a Stiffened Uses solid-shell element technology to

Composite Panel Under a model a layered-composite structure. The
Download Compressive Load (p. 33) problem simulates interface delamination
.wbpz file (12 through the debonding capability of contact
GB) elements.
Download
input files
xxviii of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
td-6 Thermal Stress Analysis of a Shows how to easily set up and perform a
Cooled Turbine Blade (p. 45) thermal-stress analysis of a cooled turbine
Download blade. The problem uses surface-effect
.wbpz file (26 capabilities to simulate convection loading
MB) on solid regions, and one-dimensional
fluid-flow capabilities to obtain a highly
Download accurate thermal solution for convection
input files loading.
td-7 Nonlinear Transient Analysis Shows how to easily set up and perform an
of a Camshaft analysis involving both axisymmetric and
Download Assembly (p. 61) nonaxisymmetric components. The problem
.wbpz file (3.9 demonstrates how modeling with general
GB) axisymmetric element technology can
reduce computational resources significantly
Download while maintaining the same degree of
input files accuracy as a simulation using a full 3-D
model.
td-8 Nuclear Piping System Demonstrates the advantages of elbow

Under Seismic element technology over traditional shell
Download Loading (p. 81) and pipe element technology for modeling
.wbpz file (1.5 pipe bends in a typical nuclear piping
MB) system.
Download
input files
td-12 Dynamic Simulation of a Accounts for the missing-mass effect and

Nuclear Piping System Using rigid-response effects in a spectrum analysis,
Download RSA Methods (p. 101) and demonstrates how including those
.wbpz file (1.9 effects improves results accuracy (as
GB) compared to full-transient analysis results).
Uses a piping system model from an actual
Download nuclear power plant.
input files
td-14 Rotordynamics of a Shaft A rotordynamic analysis of a rotating

Assembly Based structure. A 2-D axisymmetric geometry is
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. xxix
Download Representative Model of extracted from a 3-D solid model of the

.wbpz file (323 Nelson-Vaugh Rotor (p. 125) rotating structure. Modal, Campbell diagram,
MB) and unbalance response analyses are
performed for the 2-D and 3-D models.
Download Results for the 2-D axisymmetric model are
input files compared to the full 3-D solid model results.
td-15 Calibrating and Validating a Uses hyperelastic curve-fitting to select

Hyperelastic Constitutive constitutive model parameters to fit
Download Model (p. 155) experimental data. Several issues influencing
.wbpz file (207 the accuracy of the curve fit are discussed.
MB) Validation of the resulting constitutive
model is demonstrated by comparison with
Download a tension-torsion experiment.
input files
td-16 Evaluation of Mixed-Mode Demonstrates the linear elastic fracture

Stress Intensity Factors and mechanics of 3-D structures. The problem
Download T-stress for 3-D Surface shows how fracture mechanics can be used
.wbpz file (94 Flaws (p. 169) to evaluate mixed-mode stress-intensity
MB) factors, J-integrals, and T-stresses. Analyses
of a simple semicircular surface flaw in a
Download rectangular block and a warped flaw along
input files a tubular joint are discussed.
td-17 Impact of a Metal Bar on a An impact simulation using a model of a

Rigid Wall (p. 187) 3-D metal bar hitting a rigid wall. The
Download problem shows the advantages of using
.wbpz file (3.4 impact constraints for modeling contact in
MB) a nonlinear transient dynamic analysis.
Several combinations of available
No input files time-integration methods and contact
available algorithms are also investigated, using
different material models to show how
various choices affect the performance and
accuracy of the finite-element solution of
impact problems.
xxx of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
td-18 Viscoelastic Analysis of an Demonstrates the fictive-temperature model
All-Ceramic Fixed Partial using the Tool-Narayanaswamy (TN) shift
Download Denture (FPD) (p. 197) function to study residual stresses in an
.wbpz file (1.2 all-ceramic fixed partial denture (FPD). A
GB) coupled-field solution process, including
transient thermal and nonlinear structural
Download analyses, is used.
input files
td-24 Hydrostatic Fluid Analysis of Models a fluid (air) that is fully enclosed
an Inflating and Rolling within a solid container (tire). Shows how
Download Tire (p. 229) loading and deformation on the container
.wbpz file (323 affects the contained fluid pressure, volume,
MB) density and mass.
Download
input files
td-26 Nonlinear Analysis of a A nonlinear analysis of a rubber boot seal

Rubber Boot Seal (p. 271) that includes geometric nonlinearities (large
Download strain and large deformation), nonlinear
.wbpz file (1.3 material behavior (incompressible
MB) hyperelastic material model), and changing
status nonlinearities (contact). The analysis
Download demonstrates the advantages of the
input files surface-projection-based contact contact
method.
td-27 Hot-Rolling Structural Steel A 3-D large-deformation problem

Analysis with Nonlinear demonstrating the use of Nonlinear Mesh
Download Mesh Adaptivity (p. 291) Adaptivity to automatically repair a severely
.wbpz file (4.5 distorted mesh during simulation and
GB) achieve solution convergence. The example
also uses contact technology.
Download
input files
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. xxxi
td-28 Friction Stir Welding (FSW) Simulates the friction stir welding (FSW)
Simulation (p. 315) process. Several characteristics of FSW are
Download presented, including plastic deformation,
.wbpz file (691 tool-workpiece surface interaction, and heat
MB) generation due to friction and plastic
deformation. Thermal and mechanical
Download behaviors are mutually dependent and
input files coupled together during the FSW process.
A nonlinear direct coupled-field analysis is
performed.
td-29 Rocket Nozzle Extension Simulates the thermal stresses induced

Simulation: during the operation of a rocket nozzle. Hot
Download Operation (p. 335) gases flow through the nozzle, subjecting
.wbpz file (6.7 the inside and outside of the nozzle body
MB) to convection heat loading. Solid thermal
and structural elements accurately simulate
Download the multiphysics of the problem.
input files
td-31 Fitting Parameters for a Determines material parameters for a

Chaboche Kinematic third-order Chaboche kinematic hardening
Download Hardening Model (p. 363) model using the curve-fitting tool.
.wbpz file (47.9
MB) A method is presented to estimate the
initial parameters and obtain a
Download least-squares best fit to the data. The
input files fitted parameters are validated by
conducting uniaxial simulations using
a single element and comparing the
results with the experimental data.
td-33 Analysis of a Piezoelectric Couples structural, piezoelectric, and

Flextensional Transducer in acoustic elements to analyze the
Download Water (p. 385) acoustic response of a flextensional
.wbpz file (21.8 transducer to voltage excitation. The
MB) problem highlights fluid-structure
interaction (FSI), piezoelectric materials,
Download infinite acoustic elements, the Robin
input files boundary condition, and far-field
postprocessing.
xxxii of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
td-35 Elastoplastic Creep Analysis A thermomechanical analysis of lead-free
of Lead-Free Solder solder bumps subjected to cyclic thermal
Download Bumps (p. 405) loading. The problem shows how to obtain
.wbpz file (2.2 implicit creep material constants using
GB) experimental data, uses creep and plasticity
material models to simulate viscoplastic
Download behavior, and determines accumulated
input files creep strain due to thermal loading.
td-37 Bolt Thread A comparison of three modeling techniques

Simulation (p. 421) for bolt threading: true threading
Download simulation, the bolt section method, and
.wbpz file (868 the multi-point constraint (MPC) method.
MB) The comparison shows that the bolt section
method offers accurate results while
Download requiring significantly less computational
input files time.
td-39 Wire Bonding Ultrasonic Simulates electrical excitation of an

Transducer (p. 437) ultrasonic transducer used for wire bonding
Download applications. Includes piezoelectric material
.wbpz file (1.6 definition, and prestressed modal and
GB) harmonic-response analyses.
Download
input files
td-40
Download
.wbpz file (434
MB)
Download
input files
td-41 Acoustic Analysis of a Uses acoustic elements and viscothermal

Viscothermal losses comparing the boundary layer
Download Resonator (p. 465) impedance (BLI) model and the low reduced
.wbpz file (429 frequency (LRF) model to analyze the noise
MB) reduction of sound-absorbing trim panels
with quarter-wave resonators.
No input files
available
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. xxxiii
td-42 Wire Crimping Modeled with Demonstrates the ease of contact modeling
General Contact (p. 475) using the general contact method. The
Download method offers automated contact creation
.wbpz file (1.5 and requires minimal user input. It is
GB) especially useful when the model has a
large number of contacting surfaces and
Download the geometry makes it difficult to determine
input files contact pairs.
td-43 Contact Surface Wear Demonstrates how to model contact surface

Simulation (p. 491) wear using the Archard wear model. The
Download wear model calculates how much, and in
.wbpz file (206 what direction, a contact node is to be
MB) moved to simulate wear based on the
contact results. Nonlinear mesh adaptivity
Download based on a wear criterion is used to improve
input files the mesh during the wear process.
td-44 C*-integral Evaluation for Evaluates the C*-integral for cracks in

3-D Surface Flaws (p. 505) structural components. Analyses of a simple
Download semicircular surface flaw in a rectangular
.wbpz file (872 block and a warped flaw along a tubular
MB) joint are presented.
Download
input files
td-47 Electromigration in a Solder A transient electromigration analysis of a

Ball (p. 527) solder ball. The coupled-field solution
Download calculates the deviation in atomic
.wbpz file (296 concentration from an initial unit value due
MB) to the combined effects of diffusion,
electromigration, stress migration, and
Download thermomigration.
input files
xxxiv of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
td-48 Active and Passive Lateral Simulates soil behavior under active and
Earth Pressure passive earth-pressure loadings. Shows how
Download Analysis (p. 547) the nonlinear plastic behavior of soil can be
.wbpz file (4.34 modeled with a Mohr-Coulomb material.
MB)
Download
input files
td-51 Multi-Filar Coil Inside a Tube Three methods for modeling a multi-filar
Modeled with coil inside of a tube. Each model uses a
Download Beam-to-Beam different contact scenario: surface-to-surface,
.wbpz file (2.56 Contact (p. 563) beam-to-surface, or beam-to-beam. A
GB) comparison shows that the beam model
using beam-to-beam contact offers the best
Download advantage in terms of simplified modeling
input files and reduced computation time.
td-55 Inverse-Solving Analysis of A simulation of a rotor fan blade with disk

a Rotor Fan Blade with using a nonlinear static analysis with inverse
Download Disk (p. 583) solving to obtain the cold geometry from
.wbpz file (57.7 the hot geometry in a single solution.
MB)
Download
input files
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. xxxv
td-56 Threaded Connection A threaded-pipe connection analysis

Analysis (p. 597) demonstrating the capabilities and
Download advantages of a 2-D to 3-D analysis. The
.wbpz file (5.5 analysis requires extending a 2-D model
GB) solution to a corresponding extruded 3-D
body so that the solution can continue
No input files based on the 3-D model.
available
td-58 Suction Pile Analysis (p. 619) Simulates the interaction between a soil
environment and a steel suction-pile
Download structure. The nonlinear plastic behavior of
.wbpz file soil is modeled using a Mohr-Coulomb
(111MB) material. The problem examines the
influence of imperfections on the structural
Download response.
input files
td-59 Thermal-Structural Analysis Uses mesh-independent reinforcements in

of a Printed Circuit a thermal-structural analysis of a printed
Download Board (p. 643) circuit board (PCB). The model includes both
.wbpz file (648 discrete and smeared reinforcing. The
MB) problem solution involves a thermal analysis
followed by a downstream structural
Download analysis.
input files
xxxvi of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
Chapter 1: Brake-Squeal Analysis
This example analysis shows how to solve a brake-squeal problem using the Ansys Mechanical Applic-
ation. To see this example solved using Ansys Mechanical APDL see Brake Squeal Analysis in the Tech-
nology Showcase: Example Problems.
Two analysis methods are highlighted: linear non-prestressed modal (p. 9) and full nonlinear perturbed
modal (p. 10). The problem demonstrates sliding frictional contact and uses complex eigensolvers to
predict unstable modes.
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Modal Analysis, Nonlinear Pre-Stressed Modal Analysis
Element Type(s) 3-D Solid
Solver Type(s) Ansys Mechanical
The following topics are available:

1.1. Introduction
1.2. Problem Description and Geometry
1.3. Modeling and Meshing
1.4. Material Properties
1.5. Boundary Conditions and Loading
1.6. Analysis and Solution Controls
1.7. Results and Discussion
1.8. Recommendations
1.9. References
1.10. Workbench Input Files and Project Files
1.1. Introduction
Eliminating brake noise is a classic challenge in the automotive industry. Brake discs develop large and
sustained friction-induced oscillations, simply referred to as brake squeal.
Two common theories describe brake-squeal phenomena:
• Stick-Slip Theory -- The self-excited vibration of a brake system that occurs when the static coefficient
of friction is greater than the sliding friction coefficient. Variable friction forces introduce energy into
the system, which is not properly dissipated during the squealing event, resulting in large vibrations.
of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. 1
Brake-Squeal Analysis
• Mode-Coupling Theory -- When two similar characteristic modes couple with each other, instability is
introduced to the braking system. This instability is caused primarily by improperly selected geometric
parameters.
Both theories attribute brake squeal to variable friction forces at the disc-pad interface.
Brake noise is generally categorized as follows:
• Low-frequency noise -- An example of a low-frequency noise is the "groaning" noise which occurs in
the frequency range between 100 and 1000 Hz. Any noise having a frequency above 1000 Hz is
considered a squeal.
• Low-frequency squeal -- A result of mode coupling occurring between the out-of-plane modes of the
rotor and the bending modes of the brake pad.
• High-frequency squeal -- A result of mode coupling occurring between the in-plane modes of the
rotor.
Low- and high-frequency squealing can be determined via complex eigensolvers. The presence of unstable
modes suggests that the geometry parameters and material properties of the braking system should
be modified.
For more information, see Brake-Squeal (Prestressed Modal) Analysis in the Structural Analysis Guide.
1.2. Problem Description and Geometry

The following model is a simple brake disc-pad assembly. The disc has a thickness of 10 mm and the
brake pads have a thickness of 15 mm. The inner diameter of the disc is 250 mm and outer diameter
is of 350 mm. A pre-stressed modal analysis is performed on this model using various methods to de-
termine the unstable modes.
2 of ANSYS, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates.
Modeling and Meshing
Figure 1.1: Brake Disc-Pad Assembly

The following modeling topics are available:
1.3.1. Understanding the Advantages of Contact Element Technology
1.3.2. Modeling Contact Pairs
1.3.3. Generating Internal Sliding Motion
1.3.4. Meshing the Brake Disc-Pad Model
1.3.1. Understanding the Advantages of Contact Element Technology

Brake-squeal problems typically require manual calculations of the unsymmetric terms arising from
sources such as frictional sliding, and then inputting the unsymmetric terms using special elements
(such as MATRIX27). It is a tedious process requiring a matched mesh at the disc-pad interface along
with assumptions related to the amount of area in contact and sliding.
3-D contact elements (CONTA17x) offer a more efficient alternative by modeling surface-to-surface
contact at the pad-disc interface. With contact surface-to-surface contact elements, a matched mesh
is unnecessary at the contact-target surface, and there is no need to calculate the unsymmetric terms.
Contact surface-to-surface elements offer many controls for defining contact pairs, such as the type
of contact surface, algorithm, contact stiffness, and gap/initial penetration effect.
1.3.2. Modeling Contact Pairs

Frictional surface-to-surface contact pairs with a 0.3 coefficient of friction are used to define contact
between the brake pads and disc to simulate frictional sliding contact occurring at the pad-disc inter-
face. Bonded surface-to-surface contact pairs are used to define the contact for other components
which will be always in contact throughout the braking operation.
The bonded contact definition is provided between faces of following part pairs/combinations. The
contact and target bodies are indicated in Figure 1.2: Contact Target Pairs for Bonded Contact (p. 4)
as C and T, respectively. This illustration is a guide. Contacts are not defined between bodies, but
between faces corresponding to those bodies.
Figure 1.2: Contact Target Pairs for Bonded Contact
Similarly, the contact and target pairs for the frictional contact are shown below.
Figure 1.3: Contact Target Pairs for Frictional Contact
The augmented Lagrange algorithm is used for the frictional contact pairs, as the pressure and fric-
tional stresses are augmented during equilibrium iterations in such a way that the penetration is re-
duced gradually. The augmented Lagrange algorithm also requires fewer computational resources
than the standard Lagrange multiplier algorithm, which normally requires additional iterations to
ensure that the contact compatibility is satisfied exactly. The augmented Lagrange is well suited for
modeling general frictional contact, such as the contact between the brake pad and disc defined in
this example.
An internal multipoint constraint (MPC) contact algorithm is used for bonded contact because it ties
contact and target surface together efficiently for solid-solid assembly. The MPC algorithm builds
equations internally based on the contact kinematics and does not require the degrees of freedom
of the contact surface nodes, reducing the wave front size of the equation solver. A contact detection
point is made on the Gauss point for frictional contact pairs, and on the nodal point (normal-to-target
surface) for MPC bonded contact pairs.
Figure 1.4: Frictional (left) and Bonded (right) Contact Pair Definition
1.3.3. Generating Internal Sliding Motion

The CMROTATE command defines constant rotational velocities on the contact/target nodes to
generate internal sliding motion. The specified rotational velocity is used only to determine the sliding
direction and has no effect on the final solution. The element component used should include only
the contact or the target elements that are on the brake disc/rotor. In this example, the target elements
are defined on the disc surface and the contact elements are defined on the pad surface. The target
elements attached to the disc surface are grouped to form a component named E_ROTOR which is
then later specified on the CMROTATE command to generate a sliding frictional force.
The CMROTATE command must be inserted as a command snippet as there are no native features
that currently support this command in Workbench. For the full non-linear perturbed modal analysis
method, it is inserted under the Static Structural Analysis, and for the linear non-prestressed modal
analysis method, under the Modal Analysis.
1.3.4. Meshing the Brake Disc-Pad Model

Brake discs, pads and all other associated components are meshed with 20-node structural solid
SOLID186 elements with uniform reduced-integration element technology. The face mesh and edge
sizing tools are used to obtain a refined mesh at the pad-disc interface and improve solution accuracy.
For problems with a large unsymmetric coefficient, a finer mesh should be used at the pad-disc inter-
face to accurately predict the unstable modes. The brake disc-pad assembly is meshed with a total
of 60351 nodes and 11473 elements. Mapped face meshing is used to control the mesh on the disc-
pad faces. Number of divisions for edge sizing are kept at 8 for the pads and the bodies between the
discs.
Figure 1.5: Faces Highlight the Scoping for Mapped Face Meshing for Discs
Figure 1.6: Faces Highlight the Scoping for Mapped Face Meshing for Hub Components
Figure 1.7: Final Mesh for the Disc Brake Assembly

Linear elastic isotropic materials are assigned to all the components of the braking system.
Material Properties
Young's Modulus (Nm-2) 200e3 MPa
Poisson's Ratio 0.3
Density 7800 Kg/m3

The inner diameter of the cylinder hub and bolt holes is constrained in all directions. Small pressure
loading is applied on both ends of the pad to establish contact with the brake disc and to include pre-
stress effects. Pressure is nominally ramped to 1 Pa over two load steps. The displacement on the brake
pad surfaces where the pressure loading is applied is constrained in all directions except axial (along
the Z-axis).
Analysis and Solution Controls
Figure 1.8: Boundary Conditions (Displacement Constraints and Pressure Loading)

The analysis settings and solution controls differ depending upon the method used to solve a brake-
squeal problem. This section describes two possible methods:
1.6.1. Linear Non-prestressed Modal Analysis
1.6.2. Full Nonlinear Perturbed Modal Analysis
1.6.1. Linear Non-prestressed Modal Analysis

A linear non-prestressed modal analysis is effective when the stress-stiffening effects are not critical.
This method requires less run time than the other method since Newton-Raphson iterations are not
required. The contact-stiffness matrix is based on the initial contact status.
Following is the process for solving a brake-squeal problem using this method:
• From the Toolbox, drag a Modal analysis system to the Project Schematic in workbench. Import
the Brake assembly geometry, and set up the model as shown before.
• Set the Solver Type to Unsymmetric in the Analysis Settings of Modal analysis. Perform a complex
modal analysis using the QRDAMP or UNSYM eigensolver.
When using the QRDAMP solver, you can reuse the symmetric eigensolution from the previous
load steps (QRDOPT), effective when performing a friction- sensitive/parametric analysis, as it saves
time by not recalculating the real symmetric modes after the first solve operation.
• Insert the following command snippet under Modal Analysis to generate sliding frictional force
(CMROTATE).
/SOLU ! ENTER SOLUTION
ESEL,S,ENAME,,170 ! Chose Target elements on Disc 1
ESEL,R,CENT,Z,0
CM,SEL_A,ELEM ! Make a component of Target elements
ALLSEL
ESEL,S,ENAME,,170 ! Chose Target elements on Disc 2
ESEL,R,CENT,Z,0.035
CM,SEL_B,ELEM ! Make a component of Target elements
ALLSEL
CMSEL,S,SEL_A
CMSEL,A,SEL_B ! Make a component to apply cmrotate
CM,EROT,ELEM
ALLSEL
CMROTATE,EROT,,,2
ALLSEL
For this analysis, the UNSYM solver is selected to solve the problem. (Guidelines for selecting the
eigensolver for brake-squeal problems appear in Recommendations (p. 15).)
• Ensure that the Small Sliding effects are switched to the ‘OFF’ state under the Frictional contact
behavior. This is true only for this method.
The frequencies obtained from the modal solution have real and imaginary parts due the presence
of an unsymmetric stiffness matrix. The imaginary frequency reflects the damped frequency, and the
real frequency indicates whether the mode is stable or not. A real eigenfrequency with a positive
value indicates an unstable mode.
1.6.2. Full Nonlinear Perturbed Modal Analysis

A full nonlinear perturbed modal analysis is the most accurate method for modeling the brake-squeal
problem. This method uses Newton-Raphson iterations for static solutions.
Following is the process for solving a brake-squeal problem using this method:
• From the Toolbox, drag a Static Structural analysis system to the Project Schematic in workbench.
Import the Brake assembly geometry, and set up the model as shown before.
• In the Analysis Settings, set the number of steps to 2.
• Perform a nonlinear, large-deflection static analysis (NLGEOM,ON) by setting the Large Deflection
option to On in the analysis settings under Static Structural System.
• Use the unsymmetric Newton-Raphson method (NROPT,UNSYM) by setting the Newton-Raphson

option to Unsymmetric in the Nonlinear Controls.
• Restart Controls: specify the Restart Points needed for the linear perturbation analysis
(RESCONTROL) by setting the Generate Restart Points option to Manual and then setting the
writing of substep files to a Specified Recurrence Rate of 1.
• Generate sliding contact (CMROTATE) to form an unsymmetric stiffness matrix. Insert the following
code into a command snippet. This command snippet is to be executed in the first step to create
the component EROT to be used in the second step.
ESEL,S,ENAME,,170 ! Chose contact elements on Disc 1
ESEL,R,CENT,Z,0
CM,SEL_A,ELEM ! Make a component of contact elements
ALLSEL
ESEL,S,ENAME,,170 ! Chose contact elements on Disc 2
ESEL,R,CENT,Z,0.035
CM,SEL_B,ELEM ! Make a component of contact elements
ALLSEL
CMSEL,S,SEL_A
CMSEL,A,SEL_B ! Make a component to apply cmrotate
CM,EROT,ELEM
ALLSEL
Insert another command snippet and set the execution step to the second step. Insert the following
commands into the second command snippet.
CMROTATE,EROT,,,20
ALLSEL
• After obtaining the second static solution, postprocess the contact results.
• Evaluate the contact status to determine whether the elements are sliding and the sliding distance,
if any. This can be done by inserting a Contact Tool and a Status and Sliding Distance result
object within the contact tool.
• To conduct a pre-stressed Modal analysis, insert a Modal analysis system in the Project Schematic.
• See that the pre-stressed environment is automatically set to the Static Structural System that it is.
Also verify whether the Contact Status is set to Use True Status.
• In the Analysis Settings, set the Solver type to Unsymmetric and the number of modes to expand
to 30.

The unstable mode predictions for the brake disc-pad assembly using both methods were very close
due to the relatively small prestress load. The linear non-prestressed modal solution (p. 9) predicted
unstable modes at 6474 Hz, while the full nonlinear perturbed model predicted unstable modes at 6458
Hz.
The mode shape plots for the unstable modes suggest that the bending mode of the pads and disc
have similar characteristics. These bending modes couple due to friction, and produce a squealing noise.
Figure 1.9: Mode Shape at Mode 21
Results and Discussion
Figure 1.10: Mode Shape at Mode 22
Table 1.1: Solution Output
Linear non-prestressed modal Full nonlinear perturbed modal

Mode Imaginary Real Imaginary Real
1 775.91 0 775.32 0
2 863.54 0 863.18 0
3 1097.2 0 1096.7 0
4 1311.6 0 1309.6 0
5 1328.8 0 1326.1 0
6 1601 0 1600 0
7 1616.2 0 1615 0
8 1910.5 0 1910.5 0
9 2070.7 0 2069.7 0
10 2081.3 0 2080.2 0
11 2676.8 0 2671.2 0
Linear non-prestressed modal Full nonlinear perturbed modal

12 2724.1 0 2718.1 0
13 3374 0 3371.9 0
14 4141.6 0 4140.9 0
15 4145.2 0 4144.8 0
16 4434.1 0 4422.4 0
17 4486.7 0 4477 0
18 4668.6 0 4665 0
19 4767.6 0 4765.2 0
20 5241.6 0 5240.9 0
21 6474.5 -21.583 6458.2 -21.788
22 6474.5 21.583 6458.2 21.788
23 6763.4 0 6762.8 0
24 6765.6 0 6765.2 0
25 6920.7 0 6916.8 0
26 6929.3 0 6929.1 0
27 7069.9 0 7057.1 0
28 7243.9 0 7239.8 0
29 8498.8 0 8478.5 0
30 8624.2 0 8592.2 0
1.7.1. Determining the Modal Behavior of Individual Components

It is important to determine the modal behavior of individual components (disc and pads) when
predicting brake-squeal noise. A modal analysis performed on the free pad and free disc model gives
insight into potential coupling modes. The natural frequency and mode shapes of brake pads and
disc can also be used to define the type of squeal noise that may occur in a braking system. Bending
modes of pads and disc are more significant than twisting modes because they eventually couple to
produce squeal noise.
An examination of the results obtained from the modal analysis of a free disc and pad shows that
the second bending mode of the pad and ninth bending mode of the disc can couple to create dy-
namic instability in the system. These pad and disc bending modes can couple to produce an inter-
mediate lock, resulting in a squeal noise at a frequency close to 6470 Hz.
References
Table 1.2: Guidelines for selecting optimal analysis method to use for a Brake Squeal problem
Analysis Benefits Costs

Method
Linear Fast run time Accuracy
non-prestressed
modal No convergence issues Does not include pre-stress
effects
Good method for performing
parametric studies
Partial nonlinear No convergence issues Accuracy
perturbed
modal Includes pre-stress effects
Full nonlinear Accurate Longer run time
perturbed
modal Includes pre-stress effects Convergence issues
Table 1.3: Guidelines for Selecting the Optimal Eigensolver (MODOPT) for Obtaining the Brake
Squeal solution
Eigensolver Benefits Costs

QRDAMP Fast run time Accuracy, as it approximates the
unsymmetric stiffness matrix
An excellent solver for
performing parametric studies Not recommended when the
number of elements
contributing to unsymmetric
stiffness matrix exceeds 10
percent of the total number of
elements in the model
UNSYM Accuracy, as it uses the full Long run time when many modes
unsymmetric stiffness matrix to are extracted
solve the problem
For further information, see Brake-Squeal (Prestressed Modal) Analysis in the Structural Analysis Guide.
1.9. References
The following references are cited in this example problem:
Triches, M. Jr., Gerges, S. N. Y., & Jordon, R. (2004). Reduction of squeal noise from disc brake systems
using constrained layer damping. Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering.
26, 340-343.
Allgaier, R., Gaul, L., Keiper, W., & Willner, K. (1999). Mode lock-in and friction modeling. Computational
Methods in Contact Mechanics. 4, 35-47.
Schroth, R., Hoffmann, N., Swift, R. (2004, January). Mechanism of brake squeal from theory to experi-
mentally measured mode coupling. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Modal Analysis Conference
(IMAC XXII).

Explore various aspects of this example problem in the Mechanical Application by downloading input
files and the Workbench Project Archive (.wbpz) file with the following links:
• No input files available
• Workbench Project Archive (.wbpz) (505 MB): Download
Project Archives are large files and may take a long time to download.
See Workbench Project Archive File for general details on these files.
Chapter 2: (reserved)
This chapter is reserved for future use.
Chapter 4: Ring-Gear Forging Simulation with
Rezoning
The ring-gear forging example is simulated using the Ansys Mechanical Application. To see this example
solved with Ansys Mechanical APDL see Ring-Gear Forging Simulation with Rezoning in the Technology
Showcase: Example Problems.
This example problem demonstrates the efficiency and usefulness of rezoning in a simulation of metal-
forming processes. Rezoning facilitates the convergence of a nonlinear finite element simulation in
which excessive element distortion occurs.
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Static Structural Analysis using Nonlinear Adaptive Region
Element Type(s) 2-D Solid (axisymmetric)

4.1. Introduction
4.2. Problem Description
4.3. Geometry
4.7. Nonlinear Adaptive Region
4.10. References
4.1. Introduction
Finite element analysis plays a significant role in designing and analyzing complex metal-forming pro-
cesses that improve product quality. Successful simulation of these processes is often complicated due
to the nonlinear nature of the problems involved. Causes for nonlinearity in such problems include
large-deformation analysis, material plasticity, and the contact needed between the work piece and the
dies.
Ring-Gear Forging Simulation with Rezoning
Rezoning is a powerful tool for overcoming problems that can arise due to mesh distortion, including
reduced simulation accuracy and convergence difficulties. This technology can automatically repair a
distorted mesh during the simulation to capture local deformations in more detail and improve solution
convergence and accuracy. Rezoning is not intended for cases where the material or structure becomes
unstable or where the mesh deformation has become too severe to repair. Rezoning is implemented
through the Nonlinear Adaptive Region feature in the Ansys Mechanical Application.
If necessary, several regions can be repaired at the same time (horizontal rezoning), and multiple
rezoning operations are allowed on a region at different times during the analysis (vertical rezoning).

The forging process is simulated using a 2-D axisymmetric model meshed with a 2-D four-node struc-
tural solid element (PLANE182). The model represents an elastoplastic cylindrical block (the work piece)
sitting in a rigid surface (static die).
The block is deformed by another rigid surface (moving die) that moves at an infinitesimal speed, such
that the final shape of the work piece becomes a ring gear with complete die fill.
The initial analysis diverges due to excessive mesh distortion when 96 percent of the total loading (TIME
= 0.96) is reached.
The initial rezoning is applied using Nonlinear Adaptive Region technology, and the entire work piece
is remeshed. The analysis continues with the new mesh and converges to completion, but the mesh is
severely distorted.
The results of effective plastic strains and total strains can be compared with results of a similar problem
[1].
4.3. Geometry
Insert a Static Structural analysis and attach input geometry. The Upper and Lower Die have their
Stiffness Behavior set to Rigid with Plane Stress 2D Behavior. The billet (work piece) has Flexible
Stiffness Behavior with Axisymmetric 2D Behavior
Geometry
Figure 4.1: Geometry

The cylindrical block is modeled using plane elements (PLANE182) with axisymmetric behavior (element
key option KEYOPT(3) = 1). Options for full integration with the B-bar method (KEYOPT(1) = 0) and
mixed u-P formulation (KEYOPT(6) = 1) are also specified.
Note:
Since it is not possible to add B-bar method (KEYOPT(1) = 0) and mixed u-P formulation
(KEYOPT(6) = 1) on a surface body in Workbench, these controls must be implemented
via the following command snippet on the Billet body. For information on adding
command snippets in Mechanical, see Commands (APDL).
keyopt,matid,1,0 ! Use full integration with B-bar method (default)

keyopt,matid,6,1 ! Use mixed u-P formulation
Frictionless contact is created between Billet and Dies to use Augmented Lagrange formulation with
Update Stiffness at Each Iteration.
Figure 4.2: Frictionless Contact between Billet and Lower Die
Figure 4.3: Frictionless Contact between Billet and Upper Die
Mapped Face meshing is applied on the Billet Body to create lower order Quadrilateral elements using
Edge Sizing to get 9 X 44 elements along length and height, respectively.
The B-bar method and the mixed u-P formulation prevent the volumetric locking that can be triggered
by large plastic deformation.
Boundary Conditions and Loading
Figure 4.4: Meshed Billet Body

The Billet material properties are listed in the table below.
AISI8620 alloy Material Properties

Modulus of Elasticity = 200e3 MPa
Poisson’s Ratio = 0.3

Nonlinear Isotropic Hardening Power Law
Initial Yield Stress = 385.4 MPa
Exponent = 0.134

The top rigid surface is displaced downwards by 138 mm in one load step. The downward displacement
compresses the cylindrical block (work piece), and the material flows to fill up the space between the
dies.
Boundary Conditions Load

Left edge of Billet is Y Displacement of 138 mm is applied on Top edges of Upper
fixed in X direction Die.
Bottom edges of Lower Displacement in X direction and rotation is restricted.

Die fixed to avoid
displacement as well as
Rotation
4.7. Nonlinear Adaptive Region

Nonlinear Adaptive Region is applied on the Billet body using Mesh Criterion with Maximum Corner
Angle of 160 degree and Specified Recurrence Rate 1 for the Entire Load Step as illustrated below.
This setting monitors the corner angles in all of the elements on the billet body at the end of each
converged substep and triggers remeshing when the angle exceeds 160 degrees.
Figure 4.5: Nonlinear Adaptive Region - Billet Body
4.7.1. Analysis Settings for Nonlinear Adaptivity Remeshing Controls

The Analysis is solved using Step Controls with Initial Substeps = 20, Minimum Substeps = 10 and
Maximum Substeps = 2000, Large Deflection set to on, Stabilization Nonlinear Control set to off,
and the Nonlinear Adaptivity Remeshing Controls as listed below.
Here the remeshed region will retain the sizing gradient of the original mesh with additional sizing
compensation based on the element size change due to deformation during solution. The boundary
angle threshold is set at 10 degrees and 10 layers of elements are used from the distorted element
to create the new mesh.
Nonlinear Adaptivity Remeshing Controls
Remeshing Gradient Perfect Shape Gradient

Boundary Angle 10 degree
Quality Improvement (NSL) 10
Quality Improvement (GSR) 1
Quality Improvement (RT) 0.05

At the conclusion of the ring-gear forging simulation, the cylindrical block (work piece) completely fills
the die gap. The die gap becomes very narrow as deformation progresses and rezoning becomes ne-
cessary, as there are not enough elements and nodes in the free surface to completely fill this gap as
the work piece material flows.
Equivalent Plastic Strain and Equivalent (von Mises) Stress results at the final stage (complete die fill)
are plotted in the figures below.
Note:
The results obtained may differ than those reported in the figures below since the
Nonlinear Adaptive Region may create a different mesh than the one shown below. The
aim of this tech demo is to explain the use of advanced technology in Ansys Mechanical.
Figure 4.6: Equivalent Strain Distribution and Deformed Shape at the Final Stage
Figure 4.7: Von Mises Stress Distribution at the Final Stage
To perform a similar ring-gear forging simulation using rezoning, consider the following hints and re-
commendations:
• Rezoning has limitations .
Use rezoning only in problems experiencing mesh distortion as a result of large deformation.
• Select the substep to initiate rezoning carefully.
Determine the optimal substep after carefully examining the element solution, the deformed mesh,
and the convergence pattern.
The best substep to rezone is the one where the mesh is distorted (though not too severely distorted)
and the time increment is not close to (or at) its minimum.
• Use an earlier substep or a better mesh if necessary.
If any of the following situations are encountered, initiate rezoning at an earlier substep or improve
the quality of the new mesh:
-- Remeshing errors
-- Error, failure, or convergence difficulty during remapping
-- Convergence failure in the restarted analysis
-- New mesh shape characteristics are bad due to distortion.
• More than one region can be remeshed at the same time.
• Mesh size affects mapping.
Workbench Input Files and Project Files
If the new mesh size is drastically different from that of the old mesh, convergence issues may occur
during mapping. It may be necessary to resize the new mesh to more closely match the old one.
• Specify more substeps if needed.
A larger maximum number of substeps may need to be specified to handle convergence difficulties
during mapping and in the restarted analysis.
4.10. References
The following reference was used in this example problem:
1. Kwak, D. Y., Cheon, J. S., & Im, Y. T. (2002).Remeshing for Metal Forming Simulations - Part I: Two-
Dimensional Quadrilateral Remeshing. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering.
53,11, 2463-2500.

• Input files: Download
Chapter 5: Delamination of a Stiffened Composite
Panel Under a Compressive Load
This example problem demonstrates the use of solid-shell element technology to model a layered-
composite structure. The example is simulated using the Ansys Mechanical Application. To see this ex-
ample solved with Ansys Mechanical APDL see Delamination of a Stiffened Composite Panel Under a
Compressive Load in the Technology Showcase: Example Problems.
The problem simulates interface delamination through the debonding capability of contact elements.
The following features and capabilities are highlighted:
• Use of the solid shell element technology to model layered composites
• Bonded contact with a cohesive zone model to simulate delamination (also known as debonding)
• Shell section definitions
• Use of constraint equations to model periodic symmetry
• Nonlinear stabilization
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Static Structural Analysis
Element Type(s) 3-D Solid Shell

5.1. Introduction
5.3. Geometry and Modeling
Delamination of a Stiffened Composite Panel Under a Compressive Load
5.1. Introduction
Stiffened composite panels are ideal for aircraft fuselage construction because of their excellent durab-
ility and optimal strength-to-mass ratios. The program provides a variety of element types for modeling
layered composite structures. In this example, the eight-node solid-shell element SOLSH190 is chosen
for its general applicability to layered structures and its continuum element connectivity that greatly
simplifies the modeling process.
The unique properties of the SOLSH190 element used in this example greatly simplify the modeling of
contact between thin parts. For example, when using SOLSH190 instead of shells, you do not have to
worry about the section offset, contact surface orientation, or thickness change in large deflection.
The stiffened panel may undergo various local and global failure modes when subjected to a service
load. This example focuses primarily on the global buckling of the panel and the progressive failure of
the bonding material between different structural components. To simulate this highly nonlinear and
unstable phenomenon, the nonlinear stabilization method and bonded contact with a cohesive zone
model are used.

The stiffened panel consists of three components: the skin, the stringer web, and the stringer flange.
The construction of stiffeners (stringer web and flange) repeats at a fixed interval, as shown in the figure
below. All three components are made of layered composite materials. An in-plane compressive load
is gradually applied, causing the panel to buckle and the bond between the skin and the flange to be
damaged. The debonding is initialized at an artificial imperfection and allowed to propagate as the load
increases.
Figure 5.1: Stiffened Panel
5.3. Geometry and Modeling

To create solid shell composite bodies, two different ACP systems are used. Shell bodies are first created
in Ansys DesignModeler, then imported into Mechanical to generate the required named selections
and mesh. Layers, stackups, oriented element sets, modelling plies, and solid composites are defined
within ACP. They are then imported into Mechanical.
Geometry and Modeling
Figure 5.2: Workflow
Due to the symmetry of the problem, it is possible to model only one representative section of the
whole panel. The representative section shown below contains a 600 mm x 160 mm portion of the
panel skin and one stiffener assembly.
Figure 5.3: Symmetry Section
The section is meshed with SOLSH190 elements, as shown below. Note that the elements on the skin
and the flange do not need to match when the interfaces are modeled with contact elements.
Figure 5.4: Meshed Geometry
A secure bond is assumed between the web and the flange. This perfect bonding is simulated using
common nodes for both components.
The interfaces between the skin and the flange are meshed with CONTA174 and TARGE170 elements.
Two distinct contact pairs are established, as shown in Figure 5.5: Two Contact Pair Definitions (Initial
Crack and CZM Area) (p. 36). Since debonding is permitted in the entire interfacing area between the
skin and flange, KEYOPT(12) = 6 is set for the CONTA174 elements to allow only an initially bonded
contact, and a cohesive zone material (CZM) is assigned to these elements for modeling any subsequent
debonding. An area of artificial imperfection is introduced in the skin-flange interface. In this area, the
bonding material is completely missing and the standard contact behavior (KEYOPT(12) = 0) is assigned
to the CONTA174 elements.
Figure 5.5: Two Contact Pair Definitions (Initial Crack and CZM Area)
Material Properties
Composite Materials
The properties of the two orthotropic materials used in this problem are summarized in the tables below.
They are assumed to be linear elastic and temperature independent. These materials are used to define
the layers of the composite materials that make up the skin, stringer flange, and stringer web (refer to
the shell section definitions (p. 38) later in this section).
Linear Elastic Material Number 1

Young's Modulus in X direction (MPa) 130000
Young's Modulus in Y direction (MPa) 8000
Young's Modulus in Z direction (MPa) 8000
Poisson's Ratio (PRXY, PRYZ, PRXZ) 0.3
Shear Modulus GXY (MPa) 5000
Shear Modulus GYZ (MPa) 2500
Shear Modulus GXZ (MPa) 5000
Linear Elastic Material Number 2

Young's Modulus in X direction (MPa) 68918
Young's Modulus in Y direction (MPa) 68918
Young's Modulus in Z direction (MPa) 4000
Poisson's Ratio (PRXY, PRYZ, PRXZ) 0.31
Shear Modulus GXY (MPa) 4000
Shear Modulus GYZ (MPa) 3250
Shear Modulus GXZ (MPa) 3250
Cohesive Zone Model

The properties of the bilinear cohesive zone material model with the CBDE option are summarized in
the table below. The TB and TBDATA commands are used to define this material model. See Cohesive
Zone Material for Contact Elements in the Material Reference for details on the definition of cohesive
zone models.
Cohesive Zone Model Properties

Maximum normal contact stress (σmax) 61
Critical fracture energy for normal separation (Gcn) 0.075
Maximum equivalent tangential contact stress (τmax) 68
Critical fracture energy for tangential slip (Gct) 0.6
Artificial damping coefficient (η) 5.e-4
Flag for tangential slip under compressive normal contact stress (β) 1
Shell Section Definitions

Shell sections are used for defining the layup of the composite materials. See the SECTYPE and SECDATA
commands for details on how to define the material, thickness, material orientation, and the number
of integration points of each layer. The following tables summarize the section properties for the skin,
the flange, and the web.
Section Properties for Skin

Layer Thickness Material Orientation Angle from Integration Points
local x direction
0.14 1 45 3
0.14 1 -45 3
0.14 1 45 3
0.14 1 -45 3
0.14 1 45 3
0.14 1 -45 3
0.14 1 0 3
0.14 1 0 3
0.14 1 -45 3
0.14 1 45 3
0.14 1 -45 3
0.14 1 45 3
0.14 1 -45 3
0.14 1 45 3
Section Properties for Stringer Flange

local x direction
0.36 2 45 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.36 2 45 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.36 2 45 3
Section Properties for Stringer Web

Local x Direction
0.36 2 45 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
Section Properties for Stringer Web

Local x Direction
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.36 2 45 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.36 2 45 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.36 2 45 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.36 2 45 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.125 1 0 3
0.36 2 45 3

One end of the panel is completely constrained, as shown in the figure below. The other end is assumed
rigid and allowed only uniform displacement in the longitudinal (global X) direction. To simulate these
conditions, a pilot node is created and the CP command is used to couple the X displacement of the
pilot node and the X displacement of all other nodes at this end.
Figure 5.6: Boundary Conditions
The periodic symmetry requires that any node on one cut boundary of the representative model moves
in the same way as the corresponding node at the other cut boundary. The coupling condition (CP) is
shown in the figure below. APDL scripting is adopted for locating coupled nodal pairs. (See Workbench
Input Files and Project Files (p. 43) for more details.)
Figure 5.7: Constraint Equations
An in-plane compressive force of 76666 N in the negative X direction is applied at the pilot node to
induce buckling and debonding.

A static analysis is performed. Large deflection effects are included (NLGEOM). To achieve a converged
solution with this unstable problem, a constant stabilization energy dissipation ratio equal to 0.1 is in-
cluded (STABILIZE).

A converged solution is obtained with the help of the nonlinear stabilization technique.
The energy dissipation ratio is carefully chosen to avoid excessive artificial stabilization energy. As shown
in Figure 5.8: Time History Plot of Strain and Stabilization Energies (p. 41), the level of stabilization energy
(STEN) is low compared to the total strain energy (SENE) throughout the simulation. Therefore, the
validity of the simulation results can be guaranteed. The figure also shows that the solution becomes
increasingly unstable toward the end of simulation. If you encounter a convergence difficulty, you can
increase the energy dissipation ratio to an adequate level; however, validation of the new energy dis-
sipation ratio is required.
Figure 5.8: Time History Plot of Strain and Stabilization Energies
The buckling of the stiffener and the separation of the skin-flange connection are clearly indicated by
the final deformed shape, shown below.
Figure 5.9: Global Deformed Shape (Last Substep)
This highly nonlinear deformation leads to complex overall stress distributions and a number of signi-
ficant stress concentrations, as shown below.
Figure 5.10: Equivalent Stress (Last Substep)
The following two figures show the final contact status on the skin and the flange. As expected, debond-
ing of the skin-flange interface starts at the edges of the imperfection and propagates further into the
bonded areas as the load increases.
Figure 5.11: Contact Status at Final Substep
Figure 5.12: Contact Status for the Initial Bonded Contact Region
Figure 5.12: Contact Status for the Initial Bonded Contact Region (p. 43) shows that the initial sticking
status of the large skin-flange interface areas has changed to open or near-contact status at the final
converged stage. The structure may undergo catastrophic failure and fail to withstand any further load
as debonding progresses. In this case, a transient simulation would be more suitable.
To perform a similar analysis, keep the following recommendations in mind:
• Consider the SOLSH190 element for modeling general layered composite structures, especially where
contact, variable thickness, 3-D constitutive relations, and/or thin to thick part transitions are present.
• Choose the proper technology (bonded contact or cohesive zone elements) for simulating interface
debonding. In this example, contact with a cohesive zone model simulates the interface debonding.
Another option is available for debonding analysis via interface elements (INTER205 in this case). See
Crack-Initiation and -Growth Simulation, Interface Delamination, and Fatigue Crack Growth in the
Fracture Analysis Guide; for more information about both methods.
• To ensure a reliable solution, avoid an excessive energy dissipation ratio or mass damping factor in
nonlinear stabilization.

• Workbench Project Archive (.wbpz) (12 GB): Download
Chapter 6: Thermal-Stress Analysis of a Cooled
Turbine Blade
This example problem shows how to easily set up and perform a thermal-stress analysis of a cooled
turbine blade using Ansys Workbench Mechanical. To see this example solved with Ansys Mechanical
APDL see Thermal-Stress Analysis of a Cooled Turbine Blade in the Technology Showcase: Example
Problems.
• Use of surface-effect capabilities to simulate convection loading on solid regions.
• Use of one-dimensional fluid flow capabilities to obtain a highly accurate thermal solution for convec-
tion loading.
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Steady-State Thermal analysis, Static Structural analysis
Element Type(s) Solid region: 3-D 8 node Thermal Solid (SOLID278),
Fluid region: 2 node Coupled Thermal-Fluid Pipe (FLUID116)


6.1. Introduction
6.3. Modeling
6.9. References
6.1. Introduction
It is common practice in the turbine industry to cool turbine blades with a fluid flowing through cooling
holes. As a result of temperature gradients in the blade, thermal stresses are induced, which can lead
to failure of the blades.
Thermal-Stress Analysis of a Cooled Turbine Blade
In a typical thermal-stress analysis, temperatures are calculated and then applied as load conditions for
the stress analysis. While it is possible to solve for the temperature by modeling conjugate heat transfer
in a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) code, it requires significant computational resources. A reduced-
order model for CFD, assuming a one-dimensional flow through the holes, can provide an inexpensive
solution without significant loss in accuracy. As mass flow rates through the cooling holes are known,
empirical relationships for the film coefficients can be used to model heat transfer from the blade to
the fluid.
A simplified blade model from a NASA report (p. 60) is used to demonstrate the procedure. Figure 6.1: Tur-
bine Blade Cooling Passages (Cross-Sectional Image in Yellow) (p. 46) illustrates the cooling passages
in a typical blade. The arrows shows the path of the coolant as it cools the exterior and interior surfaces.
Figure 6.1: Turbine Blade Cooling Passages (Cross-Sectional Image in Yellow)
The modeling approach described in this example problem presumes that the coolant flows through
different paths that do not interact with each other and are confined to the interior of the blade.
For further information, see the following resources:
• Thermal Analysis Guide.
• SURF152 and FLUID116 documentation in the Element Reference.
• SURF152 - 3-D Thermal Surface Effect and FLUID116 - Coupled Thermal-Fluid Pipe in the Mech-
anical APDL Theory Reference.

As shown in the following figures, the turbine blade has 10 cooling passages. It is assumed that the
external surface is fixed at a constant temperature. The adiabatic surfaces are assumed to be fixed for
the stress analysis. The fluid flows through the holes at different rates and cooling occurs primarily via
convection. The convection coefficients, inflow temperatures, and mass flow rates are all specified. If
the film coefficients are high, the solid loses more heat to the fluid and, accordingly, the fluid temper-
ature rise is higher. If the fluid mass flow rate is higher, the fluid temperature rise is not as high.
Modeling
Figure 6.2: Turbine Blade Cooling Passages
6.3. Modeling
The line bodies model type is set to Thermal Fluid and the fluid discretization method is set to Up-
wind/Linear. A fluid cross sectional area of 31.1709 mm2, 7.5473 mm2, and 3.0789 mm2 is used for the
line bodies with cross sectional radii of 3.15 mm, 1.55 mm ,and 0.99 mm respectively.
3D FLUID116 element is used to model 10 fluid bodies which can conduct heat and transmit fluid
between its two primary nodes. See the element description for FLUID116 for further details.
The solid region is meshed with SOLID278 elements. Lower order elements are used. The model and
mesh settings used are reported in the figures below.
Figure 6.3: 3-D Model of Cooled Turbine Blade
Modeling
Figure 6.4: Mesh Settings Used
The settings used for the sweep mesh method for the solid mesh are shown in the figure below.
Figure 6.5: Sweep Mesh Method Settings
Edge Sizing with 24 divisions and hard behavior is used to mesh fluid bodies.
Figure 6.6: Edge Sizing setting for line bodies
Material Properties
Figure 6.7: Meshed model of cooled turbine blade

The unit system for this example problem is shown in the table below.
Unit Metric (m, kg, N, s, V,

System A)
Angle Radians
Temperature Kelvin
Material properties for the steel blade in MKS units are as follows:
Blade Material Properties

Thermal Conductivity 43 W m^-1 C^-1
Young's Modulus 2.00E+11 Pa
Poisson's Ratio 0.3
Coefficient of Thermal
1.08E-5 C^-1
Expansion
Figure 6.8: Material properties for the steel blade
Fluid properties in MKS units are as follows:
Fluid Material Properties

Thermal Conductivity 1.00E-16
Specific Heat 2.26E+3
The convection coefficients, inflow temperatures, and mass flow rates are specified. The heat transfer
from the blade to the coolant is proportional to the film coefficient, and the temperature rise in the
fluid is inversely proportional to the mass flow rate.
Figure 6.9: Material properties for the fluid
The convection film coefficients in W/(m2K) are as follows:
Hole Film
Number Coefficient
1 2.9543e5
2 2.9629e5
3 3.0076e5
4 3.1416e5
5 3.1495e5
6 3.0199e5
Hole Film
Number Coefficient
7 3.0247e5
8 4.4343e5
9 2.8527e5
10 8.9586e5
Convection fluid flow settings used for first hole are shown in the figure below.
Figure 6.10: Convection Fluid Flow Settings for First Hole

The exterior surface temperature of the solid is maintained at 568° K and applied to four faces.
Figure 6.11: Exterior Surface Temperature of the Solid
The inflow temperatures and mass flow rates are as follows:
Inflow
Hole Mass Flow Rate
Temperature
Number (kg/sec)
(°K)
1 348.83 0.228E-01
2 349.32 0.239E-01
3 339.49 0.228E-01
4 342.30 0.243E-01
5 333.99 0.239E-01
6 364.95 0.242E-01
7 343.37 0.232E-01
8 365.41 0.799E-02
9 408.78 0.499E-02
10 453.18 0.253E-02
Figure 6.12: First Hole Inflow Temperatures
Figure 6.13: First Hole Mass Flow Rate
A Fixed Support boundary condition is scoped to the two faces at inlet and outlet sections.

Linked steady-state thermal and static structural analyses are solved using default analysis settings.

The following figure shows the temperature distribution in the solid region. As expected, the blade is
cooler near the holes.
Figure 6.14: Solid Region Temperature Distribution
The following two figures show the fluid and solid surface temperatures, respectively. The fluid temper-
ature rises from inlet to outlet. The solid surface temperature shows a similar trend.
Figure 6.15: Fluid Temperatures
Figure 6.16: Solid Surface Temperatures
The following two XY plots show the fluid and solid temperatures, respectively, along the fluid path of
hole number 1.
Figure 6.17: Fluid Temperature Along Path of Hole Number 1
Figure 6.18: Solid Temperature Along Path of Hole Number 1
The next figure shows the von Mises stresses for the solid region. Maximum stresses occur inside hole
number 10.
Figure 6.19: Von Mises Stresses for Solid Region
The following XY plot shows the stress variation in hole 1.
Figure 6.20: Von Mises Stress Along Path of Hole Number 1
Summary of Results
The following table summarizes results of the simulation.
Result Type Result Value

Solid Region Temperature - max. 568 K
Solid Region Temperature - min. 338.29 K
Fluid bodies Temperature - max. 562.32 K
Fluid bodies Temperature - min. 333.99 K
Solid Surface Temperature - max. 562.62 K
Solid Surface Temperature - min. 338.29 K
Fluid Temperature along path of hole 1 - max. 385.28 K
Fluid Temperature along path of hole 1 - min. 348.83 K
Solid Temperature along path of hole 1 - max. 391.51 K
Solid Temperature along path of hole 1 - min. 357.21 K
Von mises stresses for solid region – max. 2.7959e+9 Pa
Von mises stresses for solid along path of hole 1 - max. 7.1469e+8 Pa
When performing a similar type of analysis, consider the following hints and recommendations:
• The Line Body object defined as a Thermal Fluid model can be used to calculate the thermal fluid
heat transfer between fluid and solid bodies. The ease of using this feature was shown here by sim-
ulating the convective heat transfer through the cooling passages of the turbine blade. A wide range
of cross-sections are supported, see Line Bodies in the Mechanical User's Guide for more details.
• When a solid region with a convective passage is included in an analysis, lower-order elements for
the solid region should be used when modeling the passage with a Line Body. Using higher-order
surface-effect elements can sometimes lead to an unrealistic temperature distribution.
6.9. References
This example problem was based on the following reports:
Hylton, L.D., Mihelc, M. S., Turner, E. R., Nealy, D. A., & York, R. E. (May, 1983). Analytical and Experimental
Evaluation of the Heat Transfer Distribution Over the Surfaces of Turbine Vanes. NASA CR 168015
Turner, E. R., Wilson, M. D., Hylton, L. D., & Kaufman, R. M. (July, 1985). Analytical and Experimental
Evaluation of Surface Heat Transfer Distributions with Leading Edge Showerhead Film Cooling. NASA
CR 174827
Hylton, L. D., Nirmalan, V., Sultanian, B. K., & Kaufman, R. M. (November, 1988). The Effects of Leading
Edge and Downstream Film Cooling on Turbine Vane Heat Transfer. NASA CR 182133.

Chapter 7: Nonlinear Transient Analysis of a Camshaft
Assembly
This example analysis shows how to solve a brake-squeal problem using the Ansys Mechanical Applic-
ation. To see this example solved using Ansys Mechanical APDL see Nonlinear Transient Analysis of a
Camshaft Assembly in the Technology Showcase: Example Problems .
This example problem demonstrates the ease with which you can set up and perform an analysis in-
volving both axisymmetric and nonaxisymmetric components. The problem shows how modeling with
general axisymmetric element technology can reduce computational resources significantly while
maintaining the same degree of accuracy as a simulation using a full 3-D model.
• Use of general axisymmetric element technology and 3-D element technology in a model consisting
of both axisymmetric and nonaxisymmetric parts.
• Generating axisymmetric elements in an assembly having more than one axisymmetric part with
multiple axes of symmetry and subjected to nonaxisymmetric loading.
• Use of contact element technology to couple general axisymmetric elements with standard 3-D ele-
ments.
• Use of joint element technology for applying loading.
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Transient Structural Analysis
Element Type(s) 3-D Solid Using Shell Body in General Axisymmetric Symmetry

7.1. Introduction
7.3. Geometry
7.4. Modeling
7.5. Meshing
7.8. Analysis Settings for Transient Structural with General Axisymmetric Symmetry
Nonlinear Transient Analysis of a Camshaft Assembly
7.1. Introduction
Axisymmetric modeling greatly reduces modeling and analysis time when compared to equivalent 3-D
modeling. In some cases, however, certain components of the model may be nonaxisymmetric, or the
geometry may be axisymmetric but loading is nonaxisymmetric.
7.1.1. Differences Between General Axisymmetric and Harmonic Axisymmet-

ric Elements
General axisymmetric elements offer much more utility than standard harmonic axisymmetric elements.
For example, the elements:
• Introduce the Fourier series into interpolation functions to describe the change of displacements
in the circumferential (θ) direction. (The elements can therefore apply to any analysis type, including
geometric nonlinear analyses, and can support any load and deformation mode.)
• Can have any axis as the axisymmetric axis.
• Do not require the input of peak loads and multiple load steps for each Fourier term. (Loads can
therefore be applied anywhere in 3-D space and only one solve operation is required to obtain the
solution.)
With General Axisymmetric Elements, it is necessary only to define base elements (quadrilaterals or
triangles) on a master plane. (See General Axisymmetric Element Terminology.) The program generates
a 3-D mesh (based on a 2-D mesh) on the master plane, after which boundary conditions and loading
can be applied at nodes in 3-D space.

The following model is a camshaft assembly, consisting of four cams connected to a shaft:
Figure 7.1: Full 3-D Geometry of a Camshaft Assembly
Geometry
One of the cams is in contact with a valve. As the shaft rotates, the motion of the valve is controlled
by the cam, which pushes the valve according to the cam profile. A transient analysis of the assembly
is performed by rotating the shaft for one full rotation.
Note:
Both the valve and the cam shaft (excluding the cams) have axisymmetric cross-sections and
can be modeled using General Axisymmetric Elements.
7.3. Geometry
Insert a Transient Structural analysis and attach input geometry for 2D axisymmetric analysis using
the General Axisymmetric feature. Cam Shaft and Valve Stem are surface bodies used for creating
solid bodies using General Axisymmetric Symmetry.
Note:
To setup and solve a Transient Structural analysis using General Axisymmetric you
must enable Beta Options.
7.3.1. Create Local Coordinates Systems for Remote Points

Create a first local coordinate system named GenAxValve at Vertex1 by aligning the local Y axis with
Global Z axis as illustrated below. This coordinate system will be used to setup the general axisym-
metric elements in the valve body.
Specify the second local coordinate system named GenAxShaft at Vertex2 by aligning the local X axis
with Global Y axis and the local Y axis with the Global X axis (see below). This coordinate system will
be used to setup the general axisymmetric elements in the cam shaft body.
Create a third local coordinate system named ShaftEnd1 at Vertex3 by aligning the local Z axis with
the Global X axis as shown below. This along with the fourth coordinate system is used to set the
joint motion of the cam.
Geometry
Create a fourth local coordinate system with name ShaftEnd2 at Vertex2 by aligning the local Z axis
with the Global X axis as illustrated below.
7.3.2. Create Remote Points for Joint and Spring

Create the first Remote Point named ShaftEnd1 located on ShaftEnd1_Edge using location (0,0,0) of
local coordinate system ShaftEnd1 and Rigid Stiffness Behavior as illustrated below.
Create the second Remote Point named ShaftEnd2 located on ShaftEnd1_Edge using location (0,0,0)
of local coordinate system ShaftEnd2 and Rigid Stiffness Behavior as illustrated below.
Create the third Remote Point named ValveSpringEnd located on ValveSpringEdge (2.4936e-3,-
0.11441,-0.07989) of the global coordinate system and Rigid Stiffness Behavior as illustrated below.
Modeling
Specify the fourth Free Standing Remote Point named SpringFixedEnd located at (2.4936e-3,-
0.11441,0.0508) of the global coordinate system with Rigid Stiffness Behavior as illustrated below.
7.4. Modeling
7.4.1. Contact between various bodies

Delete Children under Contacts folder and set Auto Detection Face/Face to No to create Manual
Contacts. Contacts that are created between various bodies to simulate the problem are described
here.
Create a Frictionless Asymmetric contact between Ball face and Cam 4 outer faces using Augmented
Lagrange Formulation with Pinball Radius 1.5e-2m as illustrated below. Note: Program Controlled
formulation corresponds to Augmented Lagrange.
Create four Bonded contacts between the edge of the Cam Shaft (Surface Body) in contact with the
inner face of each Cam with MPC Contact Formulation using a Pinball Radius 1.5 e-2 m.
Create a Bonded contact between the edge of the Valve (Surface Body) and the face of the Valve
Ball in contact with MPC Contact Formulation using a Pinball Radius 5e-3 m.
Modeling
7.4.2. Create Body-Ground Revolute Joints using Remote Points

Create the first Revolute Joint using ShaftEnd1 Remote Point for Mobile scoping as indicated below.
Change the Reference Coordinate System under the Joint relocating it to the vertex on the same
edge, which corresponds to the axis of the cam shaft, and align the Z axis with the axis of the cam
shaft as shown below.
Create the second Revolute Joint using ShaftEnd2 Remote Point for Mobile scoping as indicated
below.
Change the Reference Coordinate System under this Joint, relocating it to the vertex on same edge,
which corresponds to the axis of the cam shaft and align the Z axis with the axis of cam shaft.
Modeling
Create a Longitudinal Spring specifying SpringFixedEnd Free Standing Remote Point as Reference
and ValveSpringEnd Remote Point as Mobile with stiffness = 1e5 N/m and Preload = 1000 N .
7.4.3. Use General Axisymmetric Symmetry to Create a Solid from a Surface

Body
Specify a General Axisymmetric object scoped to body ValveStem_ShellBody using Cordinate System
GenAxValve with 3 Nodal Planes as indicated below.
Note:
Assigning the valve stem as a General Axisymmetric body makes the existing Remote
Point definition scoped to the valve stem body under-defined, and you must set Be-
havior to Rigid.
Specify a second General Axisymmetric object scoped to bodies in CamShaft_ShellBody using

Cordinate System GenAxShaft with 3 Nodal Planes as shown below.
7.5. Meshing
The 2-D valve and 2-D shaft are modeled with general axisymmetric SOLID272 elements. Because the
valve and shaft should not have high localized deformation in the circumferential direction (θ), the
number of Nodal Planes (Fourier nodes) is set to 3. The number of Nodal Planes controls number of
Fourier nodes in the circumferential direction.
Meshing
The remaining parts of the assembly such as the valve ball and cams are modeled with standard 3-D
elements.
Set Global Element Size 0.00508 m. To create the mesh, insert a MultiZone Method with Mapped
Mesh Type Hexa for CamBodies as illustrated below (For general information on mesh methods and
sizing, see Interactions Between Mesh Methods and Mesh Controls).
Insert Face Sizing on ValveBallFace with Element Size = 2e-3 m and Behavior = Soft.
Insert Face Sizing on StemFace with Element Size = 2e-3 m and Behavior = Hard.
Use the Generate Mesh option to create the mesh. Ensure that the General Axisymmetric objects
have three mesh planes spaced at 120 degrees around the general axisymmetric axis for each body.
Note that the mesh may differ from the one pictured below, depending on Mesh development.

All parts of Cam Shaft assembly have the same material properties listed in the table below.
AISI8620 alloy Material Properties

Young's Modulus (Pa) 2.00E + 11
Poisson's Ratio 0.3
-3
Density (Kgm ) 7850
Analysis Settings for Transient Structural with General Axisymmetric Symmetry

The Joint Load is applied to rotate the shaft by 360 degree in 1 s. The cams attached to the shaft also
rotate with the shaft. The cam in contact with the valve ball (via the surface-to-surface contact pair)
pushes the valve along its axial direction. The valve moves along its axial direction, and, due to the
spring force, it returns to its original position when the rotating cam stops pushing it. All valve nodes
are constrained to move only along the valve axis. A local coordinate system is defined at the valve
with the local Y axis aligned along the valve axis, and movement is allowed only in the Y direction of
that local coordinate system. The following table and figure summarize the applied loads and boundary
conditions.

Nodal Orientation is scoped to ConstraintNodes Joint Load is scoped to Joint 2 and applies a rotation
to align with GenAxValve. 0 to 360 degrees in 0 to 1 s.
Nodal Displacement scoped to ConstraintNodes

is applied to prevent movement in the X and Z
direction and allow movement only in the Y
direction (along valve axis).
Remote Displacement is applied to restrict movement
in all directions for Free Standing Remote Point
SpringFixedEnd.
7.8. Analysis Settings for Transient Structural with General Axisymmetric

Symmetry
The analysis is solved using Step Controls with Initial Substeps = 300, Minimum Substeps = 100 and
Maximum Substeps = 1000, setting the Large Deflection property to On and the App. Based Settings
option to Low Speed Dynamics.

To verify the accuracy and efficiency of the general axisymmetric element model, a transient analysis
was performed on the full 3-D model of the crankshaft assembly. Both the general axisymmetric model
and the full 3-D model simulations were run on the same computer with identical solution settings.
The following table shows the deformation plots (USUM) of the camshaft assembly at various time steps
during one full rotation (θ = 360 degrees) of the shaft. For comparison, results obtained from the full
3-D model are also plotted with those from the general axisymmetric model.
Deformation plots: General Axisymmetric Model Compared to Full 3-D Model

θ (degree) General Axisymmetric Model Full 3-D Model
36
180
270
360
The plots show that the valve always remains in touch with the cam throughout the analysis.
The following figures show the maximum and minimum principal stress plots of the valve and shaft at
the end of the analysis. For comparison, results obtained from the full 3-D model are also plotted with
those from the general axisymmetric model.
Minimum Principle Stress Plots from the Axisymmetric and Full 3-D Model
General Axisymmetric Model Full 3-D Model
Maximum Principle Stress Plots from the Axisymmetric and Full 3-D Model
General Axisymmetric Model Full 3-D Model
The shaft and valve are subjected to nonaxisymmetric deformation. The results show that General
Axisymmetric Elements are capable of modeling nonlinear general 3-D deformation. The problem also
demonstrates how General Axisymmetric Elements can have any axis as the axisymmetric axis.
7.9.1. Results Comparison: General Axisymmetric Model and Full 3-D Model
In the full 3-D model, the number of degrees of freedom (DOFs) is approximately 300,000. In the
general axisymmetric model, the number of DOFs is only 18,000. The smaller number of DOFs in the
general axisymmetric model is possible due to the combination of axisymmetric and 3-D modeling.
The following table lists parameters to compare the computational efficiency of the general axisym-
metric model with the full 3-D model.
FEA Model Details General Axisymmetric Full 3-D Model [b]

Model [a]
Number of elements in FEA model 4496 18513
Number of elements in valve 282 11054
component
Number of elements in shaft 300 5400
component
Number of elements in valve ball 3104 1164
component
Number of elements in cams 810 895
Simulation time 26 m 4 s 1 h 54 m
Simulation time for the general axisymmetric model is
observed to be approximately 75 percent less than that of
the full 3-D model.
[a] In the general axisymmetric model, the valve and shaft components are meshed with
general axisymmetric SOLID272 elements. The remaining components consist of standard
3-D elements.
[b] In the full 3-D model, all components are meshed with 3-D elements.
The analyses show that using General Axisymmetric Elements can reduce computational time sig-
nificantly with no loss of accuracy.
Note:
The above data could change with different solution settings, and to a lesser extend based
on the mesh settings, contact settings, and analysis settings.
To perform a similar type of analysis, keep the following hints in mind:
• Choose an appropriate number of Fourier nodes in the circumferential direction to ensure better
accuracy and to minimize computational cost.
– The KEYOPT (2) is controlled by Nodal Planes details view option in General Axisymmetric
Symmetry which controls the number of Fourier nodes in the circumferential direction for the
general axisymmetric elements (SOLID272 and SOLID273).
– If any part of your model which uses general axisymmetric elements does not have high localized
deformation in the circumferential direction, the number of Nodal Planes (Fourier nodes) can be
set as low as 3.
– In the case of high localized deformation in the circumferential direction, the number of Nodal
Planes (Fourier nodes) can be set as high as 12, according to your requirements.
• Use a node-to-surface contact pair to connect general axisymmetric elements to standard 3-D elements.
– Always create target surfaces on standard 3-D elements.

• Workbench Project Archive (.wbpz) (3.9 GB): Download
Chapter 8: Nuclear Piping System Under Seismic
Loading
This example problem demonstrates the advantages of elbow element technology over traditional shell
and pipe element technology for modeling pipe bends in a typical nuclear piping system using the
Ansys Mechanical Application. The example is simulated using Ansys Workbench Mechanical. To see
this example solved with Ansys Mechanical APDL see Nuclear Piping System Under Seismic Loading in
the Technology Showcase: Example Problems.
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Modal Analysis and Nonlinear Static Structural Analysis
Element Type(s) 1-D Beam Element, Elbow Element and 3-D Shell Element

8.1. Introduction
8.3. Modeling
8.9. References
8.1. Introduction
Nuclear piping systems under seismic loading are typically analyzed in two stages:
1. A transient analysis is performed with a simplified model of the entire piping system to obtain the
global response of the system.
2. Using the global response as the imposed boundary condition, nonlinear static analyses are performed
separately on critical parts to investigate local stress and strain responses over time. The critical
parts are typically modeled with refined 3-D elements.
This conventional global-local analysis method requires the conversion of results between the global
and local models and is usually time-consuming and computationally expensive.
Nuclear Piping System Under Seismic Loading
Compared to the straight-pipe segments, curved-pipe bends (elbows) have much greater flexibility and
can therefore develop more significant deformation and stresses. Ansys, Inc. elbow element technology
offers a simple 1-D geometry (similar to a standard pipe element) and excellent accuracy (matching
that of a 3-D shell element). The elbow can be used directly in both global and local simulation to avoid
any cumbersome global-to-local model and boundary-condition conversion.

The problem involves a large-scale nuclear piping system consisting of straight pipes, nine elbows, and
a tee:
Figure 8.1: Large-Scale Nuclear Piping System
Not shown in the figure is a 1000 kg mass representing a valve.
The system is supported by nozzles, an anchor, three two-directional supports, a horizontal support, a
vertical support and a spring hanger (Nie et al. (2008) (p. 94)). The following analyses are performed
on the piping system to study both global and local responses of the system when subjected to seismic
loading:
• Modal analysis of the entire piping system
• Nonlinear static analysis of one of the critical elbows of the piping system using elbow element
technology
• Nonlinear static analysis of one of the critical elbows of the piping system using shell element tech-
nology
Modeling
8.3. Modeling
Three models are prepared for this problem:
8.3.1. Global Nuclear Piping System Model
8.3.2. Local Elbow Model Meshed with ELBOW290 Elements
8.3.3. Local Elbow Model Meshed with SHELL281 Elements

The entire piping system is examined in this model. Initially, a line diagram of the piping system is
created:
Figure 8.2: Entire Nuclear Piping System Line Diagram
The model type is set to Pipe for line bodies, and Pipe Idealization under Analysis Environment is
used to model elbow elements.
Note:
Ansys Workbench Mechanical supports pipes with eight cells around the circumference
and general section deformation (the default value for ELBOW290 element with KEY-
OPT(2) = 2).

The local nonlinear analysis is focused on the elbow between locations labeled A and B in Figure 8.2: En-
tire Nuclear Piping System Line Diagram (p. 83).
Following is the line diagram of this elbow model:
Figure 8.3: Elbow Model Line Diagram
The model has branches that are 645.2 mm long and an elbow with a radius of 304.8 mm (for a total
centerline length of 950 mm). The diameter of the pipe is 219.2 mm and the wall thickness is 10.38
mm. Pipe Idealization is used to model elbow elements.
Time-varying-displacement boundary conditions, extracted from a transient analysis of the entire

piping system model under seismic loading, are applied at one end of the model. A nonlinear static
analysis using the Chaboche material model is performed on this elbow model to obtain the stress
and strain response over time.
Figure 8.4: Elbow Model Meshed with ELBOW290 Elements
Modeling

An equivalent local 3-D model of the same elbow using SHELL281 elements is used to generate a
reference solution. The 3-D surface representation of the elbow and the refined SHELL281 mesh are
shown respectively in the following figures:
Figure 8.5: Midsurface Geometry of Elbow (SHELL281 Model)
Figure 8.6: Elbow Model Meshed with SHELL281 Elements
Material properties and loadings considered in this model are identical to those of the local ELBOW290
model. A conversion of boundary conditions from the global line mesh to the local 3-D shell mesh
is necessary, however. Time varying displacement boundary conditions are applied to the pilot node
at one end of the model. The pilot nodes are coupled with edge nodes at both ends via contact ele-
ments as shown in Figure 8.6: Elbow Model Meshed with SHELL281 Elements (p. 85).

A multilinear kinematic hardening material model is used in the analysis of the entire nuclear piping
system (for both modal and transient analyses).
Material properties for the entire system are listed below.
Nuclear Piping System Material Properties

Young's Modulus (MPa) 1.89E+05
Poisson's Ratio 0.3
Multilinear Kinematic Hardening Material Model
Strain Stress (MPa)
0.00146 275.942
0.02184 280.14
0.02701 312.55
0.05 379.34
A Chaboche nonlinear kinematic hardening material model is used in the nonlinear static analysis of
the elbow model (for both the ELBOW290 and SHELL281 models).
Material properties for the elbow model are listed below.
Elbow Model Material Properties

Young's Modulus (MPa) 2.03E+05
Poisson's Ratio 0.3
Chaboche Nonlinear Kinematic Hardening Material Model
Yield Stress (σy) 275.92 MPa
Material Constant for First Kinematic Model (c1) 65191.29 MPa
Material Constant for First Kinematic Model (γ1) 1044.83
Material Constant for Second Kinematic Model 14909.91 MPa
(c2)
Material Constant for Second Kinematic Model 177.06
(γ2)
Material Constant for Third Kinematic Model 1653.9 MPa
(c3)
Material Constant for Third Kinematic Model 2.2
(γ3)
The mass density of the pipe material for all models is 12388 kg / m3.

Boundary conditions for the three models follow:


To simulate various types of supports in the system, the following boundary conditions and equivalent
loading are applied:
• To simulate the nozzles and anchor supports, the nodes at all three ends of the system are com-
pletely constrained.
• To simulate the three two-directional supports, three nodes are constrained in either the Y and Z
directions or the X an Z directions.
• To simulate a horizontal support and a vertical support, two nodes are constrained respectively in
the X and Z directions.
• A spring hanger support is replaced by an equivalent concentrated force.
• A 1000 kg mass representing a valve is simulated by a MASS21 element.
• Internal pressure and gravity load are applied in the model.
Figure 8.7: Boundary Conditions of Entire Nuclear Piping System

One end of this model is fixed in all degree of freedoms and time varying displacements, representing
the seismic loading condition, are applied at the other end of the elbow model, as shown in Fig-
ure 8.4: Elbow Model Meshed with ELBOW290 Elements (p. 84). Internal pressure and gravity loads
are identical to those applied in the global model (p. 87).

Boundary conditions for this model are identical to those applied on the local elbow model meshed
with ELBOW290 elements. In this model, however, the method for applying displacement-time-history
data is different.
Pilot nodes are created on both ends of the model at the center of the cross-sections. The pilot nodes
are coupled with the edge nodes of the cross-sections via contact pairs. One pilot node is fixed in all
degrees of freedoms and time-varying-displacement data are applied at the other pilot node, as
shown in Figure 8.6: Elbow Model Meshed with SHELL281 Elements (p. 85).

This example problem involves the following analyses:
8.6.1. Modal Analysis of the Global Piping System Model
8.6.2. Nonlinear Static Analyses of the Local Elbow Models
8.6.1. Modal Analysis of the Global Piping System Model

A prestressed modal analysis is conducted on the global model.
Initially, a large-deflection (NLGEOM) static analysis is performed, followed by the prestressed modal
analysis. The Block Lanczos solver (MODOPT) extracts the first fundamental mode.
To examine the effect of the prestressed analysis, a modal analysis without prestress effects is performed
on the same mode.
8.6.2. Nonlinear Static Analyses of the Local Elbow Models

A nonlinear static analysis is performed on both of the local elbow models (ELBOW290 and SHELL281)
.
A constant time increment of 5 ms is specified to obtain the stress and strain response over a period
of 20 seconds.
Large-deflection effects are included.
Results are stored in the .RST file for all substeps.

This section examines the results of both the modal analysis of the global piping system and the non-
linear static analysis of the local elbows:
8.7.1. Global Piping System: Modal Analysis Results
8.7.2. Local Elbow Models: Nonlinear Static Analysis Results
8.7.1. Global Piping System: Modal Analysis Results

The table below compares the calculated fundamental natural frequency of entire piping system with
the expected experimental result (Nie et al. (2008) (p. 94)). The close agreement between the simulation
and the expected results validates the methods used in this analysis.
Fundamental Frequency of Entire Nuclear Piping System

Modal Analysis Results Measured Value in
With Prestress Effects Without Prestress Effects Experiment
6.3064 Hz 6.2216 Hz 5.9 - 6.3 Hz
Note:
Ansys Workbench Mechanical does not support power graphics and Von Mises Stress/Strain
results for line bodies. Command snippets are used to evaluate USUM,Von Mises Stress
and Strain (see below). For information on adding command snippets in Mechanical, see
Commands (APDL).
/post1
/eshape,1
/graphics,power
!Settings for reverse video plot
/rgb,index,100,100,100,0
/rgb,index,80,80,80,13
/rgb,index,60,60,60,14
/rgb,index,0,0,0,15
jpgprf,,,1
/show,png
/view,1,-0.292,-.2178,0.931
/angle,1,57.875
set,last
! USUM plot of local elbow model with ELBOW290 elements

plnsol,u,sum
*GET,my_U_HAX,PLNS,O,MAX
esel,s,cent,x,8.7,9.0
esel,r,cent,y,4.2,4.5
! Von Mises stress plot of local elbow model with ELBOW290 element
plnsol,s,eqv
*GET,my_EQUIVAIENT_STRESS_MAX,PLNS,O,MAX
! Von Mises strain plot of local elbow model with ELBOW290 elements
plnsol,epto,eqv
4GET,my_EQUIVALENT_STRAIN_MAX,PLNS,O,MAX
allsel, all
8.7.2. Local Elbow Models: Nonlinear Static Analysis Results

This section compares the results and computational efficiency of the of the two local models (EL-
BOW290 and SHELL281) used to simulate the elbow depicted in Figure 8.3: Elbow Model Line Dia-
gram (p. 84).
The final deformed shape of the local ELBOW290 model matches closely with that of the local SHELL281
model, as shown in the following figures.
Figure 8.8: USUM Plot Comparison: Local ELBOW290 and SHELL281 Models
Figure 8.9: Ansys Workbench Mechanical - Native Total Deformation: Local ELBOW290 and
SHELL281 Models
Von Mises stress and total mechanical strain for both models are shown in the following figures.
Again, the close agreement between the stress and strain results from the two models is apparent.
Figure 8.10: Von Mises Stress Comparison: Local ELBOW290 and SHELL281 Models
Figure 8.11: Von Mises Strain Comparison: Local ELBOW290 and SHELL281 Models
The following table lists parameters that compare the computational efficiency of the of the local
ELBOW290 and SHELL281 models used to simulate the elbow depicted in Figure 8.3: Elbow Model
Line Diagram (p. 84).
ELBOW290 Local Elbow SHELL281 Local Elbow Model

Model
Number of elements in the FEA 100 3024
model
Solution time 30 m 35 s 3 h 36 m
ELBOW290 Local Elbow SHELL281 Local Elbow Model

Model
Disk usage 1.8 GB 13.12 GB
The solution time and disk space usage are approximately 86 percent less for the ELBOW290 model
compared to the SHELL281 model.
To perform a similar type of analysis, consider the following hints and recommendations:
• To minimize computational costs, use pipe elements, applicable only for line bodies, to model straight-
pipe segments.
If a straight-pipe segment may be subjected to large cross-sectional deformation, Pipe

Idealization (ELBOW290) is a better choice.
• Because Pipe Idealization that uses ELBOW290 elements is based on shell theory, its applicability is
limited to pipes with thin to moderately thick walls.
8.9. References
The following references are used in this example problem:
Nie, J., Degrassi, G., Hofmayer, C. & Ali, S. (2008). Nonlinear Seismic Correlation Analysis of the
JNES/NUPEC Large-Scale Piping System Tests ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Division Conference.
PVP2008 Proceedings.

• Workbench Project Archive (.wbpz) (1.5 MB): Download
Chapter 12: Dynamic Simulation of a Nuclear Piping
System Using RSA Methods
This example problem is a dynamic simulation of a piping network used in a nuclear power generation
system. The problem demonstrates the analysis methods available to account for the effect of higher
frequency modes of a structure in a response-spectrum analysis (RSA). This example problem is solved
using the Ansys Mechanical Application. To see this example solved using Ansys Mechanical APDL see
Dynamic Simulation of a Nuclear Piping System Using RSA Methods in the Technology Showcase: Example
Problems.
For verification, RSA results are compared to the full-transient analysis results performed on the same
model. In an industrial application, a full-transient analysis is computationally intensive and often im-
practical for analyzing a nuclear piping network.
• Use of the missing-mass response to include the responses of the higher modes in the RSA.
• Use of rigid responses (Gupta or Lindley-Yow method) to more accurately combine the modal responses
(consisting of both periodic and rigid-response components).
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Response Spectrum and Transient Structural Analysis
Element Type(s) Beam, Elbow, and Spring

12.1. Introduction
12.3. Geometry
12.6. Load and Boundary Conditions
12.10. Bibliography
12.11. Input / Workbench Project Files
Dynamic Simulation of a Nuclear Piping System Using RSA Methods
12.1. Introduction
The response-spectrum analysis (RSA) is a widely used method for studying seismic responses of structures
such as nuclear power plants, boilers, and pressure vessels. Current practice is to calculate only the re-
sponses of modes that have a frequency within the frequency range of the input spectrum.
In some cases, however, the responses of higher modes may not be negligible. The missing-mass
method is a convenient, computationally efficient, and accurate method used to account for:
• The contribution of all modes with frequencies above fZPA, at which the response spectrum re-
turns to the Zero Period Acceleration (ZPA).
• The contribution to support reactions of mass apportioned to system-support points.
Terms used in this example problem:
Zero Period Acceleration (ZPA) - The acceleration value (peak) at zero period (or infinite
frequency) of an input spectrum. It corresponds to the response of a rigid system.
ZPA frequency (fZPA) - The minimum frequency beyond which the input spectrum curves
for various damping ratios converge towards the same ZPA acceleration.
For frequencies occurring in the amplified region of the response spectrum (f < fZPA), the mode re-
sponses generally have both in-phase (periodic) and out-of phase (rigid-response) components [1].
To separate and combine the response components, the methods proposed by Gupta and Lindley-Yow
are applied and the results are compared [2]. The in-phase modal response components and the missing-
mass contributions are combined algebraically to produce the total in-phase response component. For
the combination of the out-of-phase modal response components, either the Square Root of the Sum
of the Squares (SRSS) method or the Der Kiureghian CQC method is applied.
For more information, see the following resources (in the Mechanical APDL Theory Reference):
• Missing-Mass Response
• Rigid Responses
• Combination of Modes

The problem uses the BM3 piping system model from an actual nuclear power plant found in the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission's report [1, 3]. The model consists of three anchors, three piping sub-
system branches, and elastic supports, as illustrated in the following figure.
Geometry
Figure 12.1: Full Model of the BM3 Nuclear Piping System
To measure the influence of each effect and compare the response-component combination methods,
seven single-point response spectrum (SPRS) analyses are performed.
The results of a full-transient (direct time-integration) analysis are used as a baseline.
12.3. Geometry
Insert a Modal Analysis and attach the input geometry. The geometry of the BM3 Nuclear Piping System
consists of line bodies as seen in Figure 12.2: Geometry (p. 104). Set the unit system to BIN (lb-in-sec)
and Radians. Select Pipe as the Model Type in for all line bodies.

12.4.1. BM3 Piping System
12.4.2. Elastic Support Modeling
12.4.1. BM3 Piping System

The straight and curved parts of the BM3 model are meshed with pipe (PIPE289) and elbow (ELBOW290)
elements, respectively, as indicated in the following figure.
Figure 12.3: Pipe and Elbow Elements Used to Model Straight and Curved Parts
To create elbow elements for curved bodies, insert a Pipe Idealization and scope to Named Selection
= Curved_Edges with the Extend option set to No (do not extend to adjacent elements) as shown
in Figure 12.4: Pipe Idealization (p. 105).
Note:
You must have already set Model Type to Pipe for all line bodies to enable the Named
Selection scoping method option in the Details of Pipe Idealization.
Figure 12.4: Pipe Idealization
12.4.2. Elastic Support Modeling

Each elastic support of the piping system is modeled as a spring element (COMBIN14). Anchors have
three elastic supports aligned in the X, Y, and Z directions that are modeled with both longitudinal
and torsional springs. Figure 12.5: Connections Used to Create Elastic Supports (p. 106) and Fig-
ure 12.6: Spring Information for Connection Worksheet (p. 107) illustrate the springs and list their
properties that are used to the model elastic supports and anchors of the piping system.
Note:
To insert a spring with torsional stiffness, you must enable Beta Options. One-dimensional
longitudinal and torsional springs are defined to create Elastic Supports.
Figure 12.5: Connections Used to Create Elastic Supports
Spring Information for the Connection Worksheet shown below lists the details related to Spring
Stiffness used for Body to Ground Longitudinal and Torsional (Beta) springs to create Elastic
Supports. You can use existing Named Selections available on the Mobile side and spring length =
50 (in) to generate the elastic supports.
Figure 12.6: Spring Information for Connection Worksheet
The anchors are modeled with longitudinal springs at three ends (N1, N31, and N38) with stiffness =
1e11 lbf/in and torsional springs with stiffness = 1e20 lbf-in/rad in all three directions. All other spring
stiffness details are given in Figure 12.6: Spring Information for Connection Worksheet (p. 107).
To capture the curvature of a bend more accurately, it is divided into four elements while the straight
pipe sections are meshed to create a single element by applying Edge Sizing with Hard Behavior.
Figure 12.7: Edge Sizing Details for Straight Pipe Section
Figure 12.8: Meshed Model
Create a worksheet based Named Selection named FarSupport1_Y_Node to select the node at the
location shown below. This is required to evaluate the acceleration result at the specified location.
Load and Boundary Conditions

Pipe material properties for different branches are as shown in the table below. You can use Material
Assignment with the Named Selections scoping method to define the material properties of the
bodies named Branch1, Branch2, and Branch3.
Pipe Material Properties

Branch 1: Density (slinch in-3) 1.043e-03
-3
Branch 2: Density (slinch in ) 1.107e-03
-3
Branch 3: Density (slinch in ) 1.253e-03
Young's Modulus (psi) 2.9e+07
Poisson's Ratio 0.3

Fixed support conditions are applied at the grounded node of each spring.
The input spectrum is a one-percent acceleration response spectrum (RS), represented here (applied
load in the Response Spectrum Analysis):
Figure 12.9: Input-Acceleration Response Spectra (1% X Direction)
Note:
You must set the unit system to MKS to import the acceleration RS data from the .xml file
provided. (Use the link provided in Input / Workbench Project Files (p. 121) to download input
files for this example.) Once imported, you can change the unit system to make sure that
the Acceleration plot shown here matches with the graph in the Mechanical Application.
The input-acceleration response is applied in the X direction. It exhibits a sharp, highly amplified peak
at the fundamental frequency of the structure/soil system. Its characteristics are fZPA ≈ 16.50 Hz and
ZPA = 0.54 g.
Generally, piping systems experience this type of seismic input instead of ground motion associated
with broad-banded response spectra. For this study, the unbroadened spectrum is used to provide a
direct comparison to the time history analysis results.
Following is the input-acceleration time history (applied load in the Transient Structural analysis) along
the X direction.
Figure 12.10: Input-Acceleration Time History (X Direction)
The ground motion is consistent with the input-acceleration response spectrum shown in Figure 12.9: In-
put-Acceleration Response Spectra (1% X Direction) (p. 110).
For the full-transient and response-spectrum analyses performed using all three-directional inputs, the
same input is considered for both horizontal (X and Z) directions. The input in the vertical Y direction
is considered to be 2/3 of the horizontal input.

The following analysis and solution-control topics are available:
12.7.1. Response-Spectrum Analysis Summary
12.7.2. Full-Transient Analysis Summary
12.7.1. Response-Spectrum Analysis Summary

The acceleration RS is applied in different directions using the loading data in the .xml input
file (p. 121) td12_RS_ACC.xml and the corresponding Scale Factors listed in the table below.
Following is a summary of the seven response-spectrum analyses (RSAs) and their solution controls:
• The input spectra unit is g. To transform it into SI units, set Scale Factor = 386.4 and 257.6 in
RS Acceleration (see details in the following table).
• The rigid-response effect initial frequency (Rigid Response Effect Freq Begin) is 2.80 Hz, and
the final frequency is 6 Hz or 11.90 Hz (Rigid Response Effect Freq End).
For more information on these options, see Response Spectrum Options and RS Base Excitation.
Case Input Spectra Mode Missing Mass Effect Rigid Response Effect
Direction Combination
Method Gupta or Lindley
method[a]
B X SRSS No No
C CQC
Scale Factor =
D 386.4 Missing Mass Effect
E = Yes Rigid Response Effect = Yes
ZPA = 0.54 in/s2 Lindley ZPA = 0.54 in/s2

F Rigid Response Effect = Yes
Gupta with Begin Freq =

2.8 Hz and End Freq = 11.9
Hz
G Rigid Response Effect = Yes
Gupta with Begin Freq =

2.8 Hz and End Freq = 6 Hz
H X,Y,Z Rigid Response Effect = Yes
Scale Factor (X, Lindley ZPA = 0.54 in/s2 in

Z) = 386.4 all three directions
Scale Factor (Y)
= 257.6
[a] When Rigid Response Effect is set to Yes, you choose either the Gupta or Lindley-Yow
method to calculate the rigid responses.
Fourteen modes exist below fZPA. All 14 modes are used in all seven spectrum analyses. To accomplish
this, the modal analysis is solved with the Max Modes to Find option set to 14.
12.7.2. Full-Transient Analysis Summary

In the transient analysis, you must specify the damping coefficients α (proportional to the mass) and
β (proportional to the stiffness) to reproduce the input spectrum's one-percent constant modal
damping.
The equation ξi = α/2ωi + βωi/2 is used for the damping coefficients, where ωi is the natural circular
frequency of mode i.
The coefficients are determined by specifying the target modal damping at the fundamental frequency
(2.91 Hz) and at an intermediate frequency between this frequency and fZPA. A frequency of 14.32
Hz is chosen to achieve the best fit over the 2.91 Hz to 16.50 Hz range of interest.
The values obtained are α = 0.304 (ALPHAD) and β = 1.85e-4 (BETAD). Small variations of these
coefficients have a negligible effect on the results.
Automatic time stepping ensures that the time step is small enough to accurately calculate the
higher mode responses. The duration of the analysis is 14.99 seconds with Initial Time Step = 5e-3
s, Minimum Time Step = 5e-4 s, Maximum Time Step = 5e-3 s, and Large Deflection set Off.
Three transient structural analyses are solved. Input acceleration is applied in different directions in
each analysis. The input acceleration data are contained in the following .xml input files (p. 121):
• for the horizontal (X,Z) directions: td12_TRANS_ACC_X.xml
• for the vertical Y direction: td12_TRANS_ACC_Y.xml.
The acceleration load is applied by setting the Defined By property to Vector and selecting the
proper direction.
When performing the time history analysis with three-directional input motions, the individual re-
sponses for each input motion (X, Y, and Z directions) are combined using the SRSS method.

The following table lists the natural frequencies of the 14 significant modes (below fZPA):
Mode Frequency (Hz)

1 2.91
2 4.44
3 4.86
4 5.02
5 6.95
6 7.58
7 7.82
8 10.94
9 11.65
10 11.78
11 12.80
12 14.32
13 15.17
14 15.79
12.8.1. Results Comparison of the Time-History and Response-Spectrum

Analyses
The reactions at the supports obtained in the spectrum analyses B through H are given in the following
topics:
12.8.1.1. RSAs B and C
12.8.1.2. RSA D
12.8.1.3. RSAs E and F

12.8.1.4. RSA G
12.8.1.5. RSA H
The ratio of the RSA results to the transient results is reported in separate columns. The mean and
standard deviation of these ratios are evaluated at the bottom of each table.
This form of representation facilitates easy recognition of over-prediction and under-prediction by

the RSA method. A ratio of 1.0 indicates exact agreement, a ratio of > 1.0 indicates RSA over-prediction,
and a ratio of < 1.0 indicates RSA under-prediction.
The absolute acceleration solutions are also compared for the X-direction and 3-direction (X, Y, Z)
input motions.
12.8.1.1. RSAs B and C

The accuracy of the RSA results using SRSS or CQC combination method is assessed. The modes
are closely spaced, as seen in the following table.
Mode Frequency Coupled Modes Coupling

Number (Hz) Mode Frequency Coefficient
Number (Hz)
3 4.86 4 5.02 0.278
6 7.59 7 7.82 0.301
9 11.66 10 11.78 0.779
12 14.32 13 15.18 0.105
Because of the closely spaced modes, the CQC results are closer to the reference (full transient
analysis results). The mean and standard deviation values of spectrum results using CQC are 1.59
and 1.13, respectively.
S. No. Reaction Reference B Spectrum Ratio (B / C Spectrum Ratio (C /

(lbf) or Full-Transient (SRSS) Reference) (CQC) Reference)
(lbf-in)
1 FX1 49.85 31.15 0.62 31.26 0.63
2 FY1 4.41 15.54 3.52 12.87 2.92
3 FZ1 5.99 48.95 8.17 25.25 4.22
4 MX1 182.31 1512.39 8.30 774.82 4.25
5 MY1 845.77 1216.77 1.44 933.45 1.10
6 MZ1 818.01 1118.32 1.37 1114.03 1.36
7 FX4 111.2 45.23 0.41 45.05 0.41
8 FZ4 34.77 82.18 2.36 56.06 1.61
9 FY74 10.97 28.31 2.58 16.92 1.54
10 FY11 11.49 18.37 1.60 16.52 1.44
11 FZ11 67.99 43.56 0.64 42.89 0.63
12 FX15 643.98 367.91 0.57 387.89 0.60

13 FY17 28.06 44.69 1.59 46.24 1.65
14 FZ17 64.43 52.85 0.82 54.68 0.85
15 FY36 60.23 161.83 2.69 168.04 2.79
16 FZ36 55.45 81.73 1.47 82.21 1.48
17 FX38 749.37 116.73 0.16 135.57 0.18
18 FY38 39.95 52.35 1.31 54.12 1.35
19 FZ38 38.47 39.03 1.01 44.4 1.15
20 MX38 778.08 2525.35 3.25 2587.18 3.33
21 MY38 2657.65 2527.5 0.95 2883.9 1.09
22 MZ38 2810.52 3642.74 1.30 3753.21 1.34
23 FX23 259.54 176.7 0.68 193.15 0.74
24 FY23 42.14 144.41 3.43 150.49 3.57
25 FX31 60.03 9.58 0.16 11.2 0.19
26 FY31 13.34 22.26 1.67 24.87 1.86
27 FZ31 14.92 32.8 2.20 33.54 2.25
28 MX31 969.5 2147.64 2.22 2237.86 2.31
29 MY31 545.46 210.37 0.39 236.18 0.43
30 MZ31 2232.76 630.75 0.28 729.03 0.33
Mean of 30 components 1.9 - 1.59
Standard deviation of 30 components 1.94 - 1.13
12.8.1.2. RSA D
To improve accuracy, the missing-mass response is included in the analysis, and results are reported
in the following table. The standard deviation decreases to 1.07. The mean value of 1.72 still shows
over-prediction in the results.
S. No. Reaction (lbf) or Reference D Spectrum Ratio (D /

(lbf-in) Full-Transient (CQC) Reference)
1 FX1 49.85 42.82 0.86
2 FY1 4.41 15.62 3.54
3 FZ1 5.99 25.38 4.24
4 MX1 182.31 777.28 4.26
5 MY1 845.77 938.56 1.11
6 MZ1 818.01 1124.04 1.37
7 FX4 111.2 75.26 0.68
8 FZ4 34.77 56.58 1.63
9 FY74 10.97 16.93 1.54
10 FY11 11.49 16.52 1.44
11 FZ11 67.99 43.99 0.65

12 FX15 643.98 388.62 0.60
13 FY17 28.06 46.24 1.65
14 FZ17 64.43 55.11 0.86
15 FY36 60.23 168.04 2.79
16 FZ36 55.45 86 1.55
17 FX38 749.37 583.09 0.78
18 FY38 39.95 54.12 1.35
19 FZ38 38.47 50.22 1.31
20 MX38 778.08 2587.21 3.33
21 MY38 2657.65 3132.23 1.18
22 MZ38 2810.52 3753.38 1.34
23 FX23 259.54 242.68 0.94
24 FY23 42.14 150.55 3.57
25 FX31 60.03 53.25 0.89
26 FY31 13.34 27.84 2.09
27 FZ31 14.92 33.97 2.28
28 MX31 969.5 2248.28 2.32
29 MY31 545.46 390.32 0.72
30 MZ31 2232.76 1821.45 0.82
Mean of 30 components 1.72
Standard deviation of 30 components 1.07
12.8.1.3. RSAs E and F

In RSA E and F, both missing-mass and rigid-response effects are taken into account in the analyses,
and the results are repoted in the following table. The mean and standard deviation values using
the Gupta method are equal to 1.11 and 0.16, respectively. Using the Lindley-Yow method, the
mean and standard deviation values are 1.19 and 0.24, respectively.
S. No. Reaction Reference E Spectrum Ratio (E / F Spectrum Ratio (F /

(lbf) or Full-Transient (Lindley) Reference) (Gupta) Reference)
(lbf-in)
1 FX1 49.85 52.23 1.05 53.41 1.07
2 FY1 4.41 6.08 1.38 3.75 0.85
3 FZ1 5.99 10.35 1.73 6.02 1.01
4 MX1 182.31 321.55 1.76 191.42 1.05
5 MY1 845.77 902.49 1.07 874.99 1.03
6 MZ1 818.01 981.96 1.20 984.69 1.20
7 FX4 111.2 105.27 0.95 102.74 0.92
8 FZ4 34.77 43.28 1.24 42.67 1.23
9 FY74 10.97 11.37 1.04 10.46 0.95

10 FY11 11.49 13.54 1.18 13.45 1.17
11 FZ11 67.99 51.34 0.76 49.55 0.73
12 FX15 643.98 562.4 0.87 546.91 0.85
13 FY17 28.06 35.11 1.25 36.05 1.28
14 FZ17 64.43 52.64 0.82 56.2 0.87
15 FY36 60.23 86.16 1.43 72.87 1.21
16 FZ36 55.45 66.56 1.20 68.12 1.23
17 FX38 749.37 751.12 1.00 768.06 1.02
18 FY38 39.95 45.97 1.15 45.73 1.14
19 FZ38 38.47 43.23 1.12 45.94 1.19
20 MX38 778.08 1186.55 1.52 912.8 1.17
21 MY38 2657.65 3007.02 1.13 3207.11 1.21
22 MZ38 2810.52 3234.79 1.15 3227.96 1.15
23 FX23 259.54 323.33 1.25 344.57 1.33
24 FY23 42.14 67.05 1.59 48.85 1.16
25 FX31 60.03 60.53 1.01 62.18 1.04
26 FY31 13.34 17.07 1.28 16.8 1.26
27 FZ31 14.92 20.46 1.37 20.73 1.39
28 MX31 969.5 1314.77 1.36 1378.2 1.42
29 MY31 545.46 511.62 0.94 551.62 1.01
30 MZ31 2232.76 2193.74 0.98 2313.17 1.04
Mean of 30 components 1.19 - 1.11
Standard deviation of 30 components 0.24 - 0.16
For the Gupta method, Rigid Response Effect Freq Begin f1 = 2.80 Hz and Rigid Response Effect
Freq End f2 = 11.90 Hz.
The absolute acceleration values at support (NearSupport) and far from support (FarSupport) are
compared in the following table:
Location Acceleration Reference F (Includes % F (Includes %

Result Full Rigid Response Error Rigid Error
Direction Transient effect as well Response
analysis, as Missing effect only),
in/s2 Mass effect), in/s2
in/s2
NearSupport_X X 207.54 209.35 0.87 10.58 94.90
FarSupport1_Y_Node X 310.21 277.10 10.67 284.82 8.18
FarSupport2_Z X 226.27 227.16 0.39 233.45 3.17
The results show clearly that the absolute acceleration value near the support shows close compar-
ison with the full-transient solution after the addition of the missing-mass effect.
12.8.1.4. RSA G
With the Gupta method, there is a limitation lying in the semi-empirical basis of the definition of
the rigid-response coefficient αi, as a function of fi [2, 3]. The choice of key parameter f2 (RI-
GRESP,,,,VAL2), which defines the frequency above which modal responses are combined algebra-
ically, has a significant effect on the predicted response.
To show the effect of the f2 value, two different values of f2 are chosen: 6.0 Hz [2, Appendix H (p. 121)]
and 11.90 Hz [4]. Both frequencies are within a range where the input acceleration is almost constant
and the acceleration value is very close to the ZPA. A value of f1 = 2.80 Hz is maintained for both
analyses.
For f2 = 6.0 Hz (Case G), the mean and standard deviation values are 0.91 and 0.18, respectively,
implying under-prediction of the reaction forces. Conversely, for f2 = 11.90 Hz (Case F), the mean
and standard deviation values are 1.11 and 0.16, respectively, implying over-prediction of reaction
forces.
S. No. Reaction (lbf) or Reference G Spectrum Ratio (G /

(lbf-in) Full-Transient (CQC) Reference)
1 FX1 49.85 51.16 1.03
2 FY1 4.41 3.13 0.71
3 FZ1 5.99 4.06 0.68
4 MX1 182.31 136.62 0.75
5 MY1 845.77 904.59 1.07
6 MZ1 818.01 885.95 1.08
7 FX4 111.2 111.51 1.00
8 FZ4 34.77 35 1.01
9 FY74 10.97 9.22 0.84
10 FY11 11.49 9.46 0.82
11 FZ11 67.99 62.13 0.91
12 FX15 643.98 641.2 1.00
13 FY17 28.06 26.33 0.94
14 FZ17 64.43 46.43 0.72
15 FY36 60.23 44.87 0.74
16 FZ36 55.45 56.3 1.02
17 FX38 749.37 757.25 1.01
18 FY38 39.95 42.33 1.06
19 FZ38 38.47 42.24 1.10
20 MX38 778.08 399.92 0.51
21 MY38 2657.65 2935.21 1.10
22 MZ38 2810.52 2994.2 1.07
23 FX23 259.54 302.5 1.17
24 FY23 42.14 16.35 0.39
25 FX31 60.03 60.12 1.00

26 FY31 13.34 13.52 1.01
27 FZ31 14.92 13.16 0.88
28 MX31 969.5 784.86 0.81
29 MY31 545.46 497.43 0.91
30 MZ31 2232.76 2149.85 0.96
For the Gupta Method, f1 = 2.80 Hz and f2 = 6.00 Hz.
12.8.1.5. RSA H
This analysis considers the inputs in the X, Y and Z directions. The mean and standard deviation
values obtained are 1.00 and 0.10, respectively, implying that the correlation between the spectrum-
analysis and transient-analysis results is better than for single-directional input. The better spectrum-
analysis correlation is a result of the reactions having directions orthogonal to the input, which are
not significantly improved by including the missing-mass and rigid-response effect; however, these
reactions should remain smaller than the primary reactions.
S. No. Reaction (lbf) or Reference H Spectrum Ratio (H /

(lbf-in) Full-Transient (Lindley) Reference)
1 FX1 54.83 56.5 1.03
2 FY1 98.61 98.71 1.00
3 FZ1 37.91 45.27 1.19
4 MX1 723.42 847.79 1.17
5 MY1 1098.86 1208.36 1.10
6 MZ1 1891.2 2013.91 1.06
7 FX4 129.24 117.55 0.91
8 FZ4 318.78 246.92 0.77
9 FY74 120.19 117.49 0.98
10 FY11 226.04 217.29 0.96
11 FZ11 288.05 230.04 0.80
12 FX15 664.35 603.6 0.91
13 FY17 91.52 94.42 1.03
14 FZ17 146.66 153.32 1.05
15 FY36 374.49 348.75 0.93
16 FZ36 830.34 830.94 1.00
17 FX38 750.13 752.06 1.00
18 FY38 181.68 191.63 1.05
19 FZ38 260.41 261.41 1.00
20 MX38 3365.05 3169.84 0.94
21 MY38 11092.74 11183.88 1.01

22 MZ38 7664.78 8443.56 1.10
23 FX23 273.8 336.37 1.23
24 FY23 264.46 233.96 0.88
25 FX31 61.15 61.69 1.01
26 FY31 90.01 92.92 1.03
27 FZ31 138.54 140.44 1.01
28 MX31 9020.89 9044.73 1.00
29 MY31 745.7 714.34 0.96
30 MZ31 2624.24 2583.86 0.98
The absolute acceleration values at support (NearSupport) and far from support (FarSupport) are
compared in the table below.
Location Acceleration Reference H (Includes % H (Includes %

Result Full Rigid Response Error Rigid Error
Direction Transient effect as well Response
analysis, as Missing effect only),
in/s2 Mass effect), in/s2
in/s2
NearSupport_X X 206.26 208.70 1.18 11.33 94.50
FarSupport1_Y_Node Y 518.55 484.84 6.50 496.17 4.32
FarSupport2_Z Z 203.95 208.77 2.36 24.77 87.80
The results clearly show that the absolute acceleration value near the support shows close compar-
ison with the full-transient solution after the addition of the missing-mass effect.
When performing a spectrum analysis that takes into account missing-mass and rigid-response effects,
consider the following hints and recommendations:
• Define the ZPA frequency value (fZPA) corresponding to the input spectrum. (This value is the begin-
ning of the frequency range for which the acceleration remains constant and equal to the ZPA.)
• Request all solutions below fZPA in the modal analysis.
• Include all modes having a frequency below fZPA in the spectrum analysis.
• Choose a CQC mode combination to correctly combine modes with closely spaced frequencies (if
any).
• Always include the missing-mass effect in the first simulation to verify its significance. (The missing-
mass response is the result of a static analysis of the structure, so its computational cost is small.)
Input / Workbench Project Files
• Include the rigid-response effect. The Lindley-Yow method is easier to use, as only the ZPA value
must be input.
12.10. Bibliography
The following reference works are cited in this example problem:
1. Morante, R., Y. Wang. (December, 1999). "Reevaluation of Regulatory Guidance on Modal Response
Combination Methods for Seismic Response Spectrum Analysis." NUREG/CR-6645, BNL-NUREG-52576.
2. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (July, 2006). Combining Modal Responses and Spatial Compon-
ents in Seismic Response Analysis, Revision 2.Regulatory Guide 1.92.
3. Belzer P. et al. (October, 1990). Alternate Modal Combination Methods in Response Spectrum Ana-
lysis. NUREG/CR-5627, BNL.
4. Gupta, A.K. (1993). Response Spectrum Method in Seismic Analysis and Design of Structures. CRC.

Chapter 14: Rotordynamics of a Shaft Assembly Based
on a Representative Model of Nelson-Vaugh Rotor
Rotordynamics plays a crucial role in identifying critical speeds, and to ultimately design rotating
structures that tolerate extremely high vibrations. This example illustrates the application of Rotordy-
namics Analysis procedures using the Nelson-Vaugh rotor model (p. 153). The example is simulated using
the Ansys Mechanical Application. To see this example solved with Ansys Mechanical APDL see Rotor-
dynamics of a Shaft Assembly Based on a Representative Model of Nelson-Vaugh Rotor in the Technology
A 2-D axisymmetric representation of the 3-D solid model is used to perform a Rotordynamics Analysis.
The results of the 2-D axisymmetric model analyses are compared to the full 3-D solid model results.
This problem demonstrates the following concepts and techniques:
• General axisymmetric meshing of a 3-D geometry
• Disc and bearing modeling
• Gyroscopic effects in rotating structures and modal analysis
• Campbell diagram analysis
• Determination of critical speeds
• Unbalance response analysis
• Performance benefits of 2-D axisymmetric models
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Modal Analysis and Harmonic Analysis
Element Type(s) Solid and General Axisymmetric Element

14.1. Introduction
14.3. Modeling
Rotordynamics of a Shaft Assembly Based on a Representative Model of Nelson-
Vaugh Rotor

14.9. References
14.1. Introduction
Rotating machines such as steam or gas turbines, turbo-generators, internal combustion engines, motors,
and disk drives can develop inertia effects that can be analyzed to improve the design and decrease
the possibility of failure. Current trends in rotating equipment design focus on increased speeds, which
increase operational problems caused by vibration. At higher rotational speeds, the inertia effects of
rotating parts must be consistently represented to accurately predict rotor behavior.
Inertia effects in rotating structures are usually caused by gyroscopic moment introduced by the precise
motions of the vibrating rotor as it spins. As spin velocity increases, the gyroscopic moment acting on
the rotor becomes critical. Not accounting for inertia effects at the design level can lead to bearing and
support structure damage. It is also important to consider bearing stiffness, support structure flexibility,
and damping characteristics to understand the stability of a vibrating rotor.
In the sections that follow, modeling details and analysis procedures for a rotating structure are detailed.
Generally, a 3-D model directly available from the CAD can be used for the analysis. However, 3-D
models result in a large number of nodes and elements models. This example demonstrates how to
extract a plane 2-D model from the 3-D model, which can be analyzed using far fewer nodes and ele-
ments. The ease of use, accuracy, and performance of 2-D and 3-D model analyses are compared.
For more information about rotordynamics, refer to the Rotordynamic Analysis Guide and Rotating
Structure Analysis in the Advanced Analysis Guide.

The model for the problem is a 3-D geometry model of a Nelson-Vaugh rotor, as shown in the figure
below. The model consists of a flexible rotor with one rigid disk supported by two orthotropic bearings.
The modeling details of the original model can be found in Nelson and McVaugh (1976) (p. 153).
Problem Description
Figure 14.1: 3-D Geometry of Nelson-Vaugh Rotor
Modal, Campbell diagram, and unbalance response analyses are performed on the 2-D axisymmetric
model represented in the figure below. The effect of gyroscopic moment on the rotating structure dy-
namics is observed in each analysis.
Figure 14.2: 2-D Axisymmetric Geometry of Nelson-Vaugh Rotor
To validate the accuracy of the results obtained with the 2-D axisymmetric model, the same analyses
were performed with the corresponding 3-D solid model. The results are then used as a benchmark for
the 2-D axisymmetric model results.
Vaugh Rotor
14.3. Modeling
The following modeling topics are discussed in this section:
14.3.1. 3-D Modeling of Flexible Rotor Component
14.3.2. Axisymmetric Modeling of the Flexible Rotor Component from 3-D Geometry
14.3.3. Disk and Bearing Modeling
14.3.1. 3-D Modeling of Flexible Rotor Component

The 3-D model is meshed using Tetrahedrons method with patch conforming algorithm, as shown
in the figure below. It gives SOLID187 elements for structural analysis.
Figure 14.3: 3-D Model Meshed with SOLID187 Elements
14.3.2. Axisymmetric Modeling of the Flexible Rotor Component from 3-D

Geometry
The following process uses the Ansys Workbench product to extract the 2-D axisymmetric geometry
from the 3-D geometry:
1. Freeze the highlighted portion of the model shown below.
Modeling
Figure 14.4: 3-D Geometry
2. Use the Slice by Plane operation on the unfrozen portion of the model as shown below.
Figure 14.5: 2-D Axisymmetric Geometry Extracted from 3-D Geometry
Vaugh Rotor
14.3.2.1. General Axisymmetric Meshing

The extracted 2-D Axisymmetric geometry is meshed with General Axisymmetric settings shown
below.
Note:
General Axisymmetric is a beta feature for modal and harmonic analysis in Workbench
Mechanical, and you must enable Beta Options to use it.
Modeling
Figure 14.6: Flexible Rotor Component Modeled with General Axisymmetric
Vaugh Rotor
Figure 14.7: Flexible Rotor Component Mesh
14.3.3. Disk and Bearing Modeling

14.3.3.1. Disk Modeling
14.3.3.2. Modeling Bearings
14.3.3.1. Disk Modeling

The rigid disk is modeled as a concentrated mass using the Point Mass object through remote at-
tachment as shown below.
Modeling
Vaugh Rotor
14.3.3.2. Modeling Bearings

Bearings are used to support the rotor in the lateral direction. Two identical undamped and linear
orthotropic bearings were modeled using the Bearing object configured as a body to body bearing
between a standalone remote point and a remote point attached to the center of the cross section
of the rotor at each bearing location, as shown in the figures below.
Modeling
Vaugh Rotor

Unit System Metric (mm, tonne, N)

Angle Degrees
Rotational Velocity rad/s
Material properties of the 3-D/2-D Model of a Nelson Rotor are shown in the table below.
Density 7.85e-009 tonne/mm3

Young's Modulus 2.0e+005 MPa
Poisson's Ratio 0.3
The properties of the point mass (rigid disk) are shown in the table below.
Mass (X, Y and Z 1.401e-3 tonne

directions)
Polar Inertia 2.0 tonne mm2
Diametral Inertia 13.6 tonne mm2
The stiffness properties of the two identical orthotropic bearings are shown in the table below.
K11 = K22 3.503e+004 N/mm

K12 = K21 -8.756e+003 N/mm

Fixed support conditions using remote displacements are applied to the standalone remote points of
the bearing elements, as shown in the figure below. Translational and rotational DOFs about the axis
of rotation at the bearing locations are constrained.
Figure 14.8: Boundary Conditions (3-D Solid Model)
3-D Solid Model
Vaugh Rotor
2-D Axisymmetric Model
The effect of the unbalanced mass on the disk is represented by forces acting in the two directions
perpendicular to the spinning axis. The forces are applied on a node located on the axis of rotation at
the same location as the point mass. The unbalance force F is computed as
F = Ω2mr
where:
Ω = rotational velocity
m = unbalance mass
r = distance between the mass unbalance and the spin axis
A Rotating Force object is added under harmonic environment to perform an unbalance response
analysis, and rotating force is calculated from unbalance mass of 3.8e-003 tonne and radius of 0.5 mm.

This section discusses the following topics:
14.6.1. Modal Analysis
14.6.2. Campbell Diagram Analysis
14.6.3. Unbalance Response Analysis
Vaugh Rotor
For more details, see Rotordynamics Controls.
14.6.1. Modal Analysis

Modal analyses of the 2-D axisymmetric model with and without gyroscopic effects included are dis-
cussed in this section .
14.6.1.1. Modal Analysis without Gyroscopic Effects

The Modal analysis without gyroscopic effects is performed using the default program controlled
(Block Lanczos (LANB)) solver, extracting twelve modes.
14.6.1.2. Modal Analysis with Gyroscopic Effects

The rotational velocity is specified using the Rotational Velocity object. The gyroscopic effects of
the rotating structure are included by setting the CORIOLIS Effect property to On.
The modal analysis with gyroscopic effects is performed on the model using the complex Reduced
Damped solver.
14.6.2. Campbell Diagram Analysis

Before performing a Campbell diagram analysis, a modal analysis must be performed with multiple
load steps corresponding to different angular velocities with the Campbell Diagram property set On
under Rotordynamics Controls (see below). A Campbell diagram chart result shows the evolution
of the natural frequencies with respect to the rotational speed.
14.6.3. Unbalance Response Analysis

A harmonic analysis of the 2-D axisymmetric model is performed within a speed range of 0 to 100,000
rpm (a frequency range of 0 to 1666.67 Hz) using 200 substeps. The first seven modes in this frequency
range are excited.
In this analysis, the unbalance is considered as loading. (see Boundary Conditions and Loading (p. 137)
for more details).
A structural damping coefficient of 2 percent is considered (DMPSTR).
The frequency of excitation is specified as synchronous with the rotational velocity (SYNCHRO). The
rotational velocity (CMOMEGA) determines only the rotational velocity direction vector of the rotating
component. The spin of the rotor is automatically calculated (HARFRQ).
Vaugh Rotor
Natural frequencies
The natural frequencies of the 2-D axisymmetric model without rotation are evaluated and compared
with the results of 3-D solid model in the following table.
Mode 2-D Axisymmetric Model (Hz) 3-D Solid Model (Hz) Error
# (%)
1 189.79 189.29 0.26
2 209.05 208.17 0.42
3 640.22 639.65 0.09
4 654.35 658.89 0.69
5 733.45 736.09 0.36
6 806.83 810.8 0.49
7 991.47 991.73 0.03
8 1786.2 1782.5 0.21
9 1786.8 1785.2 0.09
10 2016.5 2004.9 0.58
11 2092.4 2019.3 0.63
12 3288.2 3287.8 0.01
The natural frequencies of the 2-D axisymmetric model in rotation (50,000 rpm) also show good
agreement with the 3-D solid model results, as shown in the following table.
Mode General Axisymmetric Model (Hz) 3-D Solid Model (Hz) Error
# (%)
1 169.15 168.46 0.41
2 232.6 231.96 0.28
3 628.19 628.81 0.10
4 652.17 655.6 0.52
5 752.35 754.96 0.35
6 808.36 812.18 0.47
7 991.47 991.73 0.03
8 1768.7 1766 0.15
9 1804.6 1802 0.14
10 1930.9 1917.7 0.69
11 2192.3 2181.3 0.5
12 3288.2 3287.8 0.01
Campbell Diagram Analysis

The following figures show the Campbell Diagram for the General Axisymmetric model and the 3-D
solid model.
Vaugh Rotor
Figure 14.9: Campbell Diagram - General Axisymmetric Model
Figure 14.10: Campbell Diagram - 3-D Solid Model
With the help of the Campbell diagram analysis, we can identify the forward (FW) and backward (BW)
whirls, as well as possible unstable frequencies (though none are present in this example). In the table
below, the whirls and natural frequencies of the 2-D axisymmetric model at maximum rotational speed
(100,000rpm) are compared with the 3-D solid model results.
Frequency (Hz)
Whirl 100000 RPM
Mode # 2-D Axisymmetric 3-D Solid Model 2-D Axisymmetric 3-D Solid Model
Model Model
1 BW BW 145.09 144.35
2 FW FW 264.72 264.25
3 BW BW 604.74 606.26
4 BW BW 650.52 653.21
5 FW FW 796.8 799.83
6 FW FW 816.49 819.9
7 UNDETERMINED BW 991.47 991.73
8 BW BW 1751.5 1748.8
Vaugh Rotor
Frequency (Hz)
Whirl 100000 RPM
Mode # 2-D Axisymmetric 3-D Solid Model 2-D Axisymmetric 3-D Solid Model
Model Model
9 FW FW 1823.3 1820.6
The Campbell diagram analysis helps to determine the critical speeds of the rotating structure. Critical
speeds are compared in the table below. For a synchronous excitation, the critical speeds correspond
to the intersection points between the frequency curves and the 1.0 slope line. The critical speeds of
the 2-D axisymmetric and 3-D solid models show strong agreement.
Critical Speeds (RPM)

Mode 2-D Axisymmetric Model 3-D Solid Error
# Model (%)
1 11112 11081 0.28
2 12908 12857 0.40
3 37883 37900 0.04
4 39177 39401 0.57
5 45066 45224 0.35
6 48544 48783 0.49
7 59488 59504 0.03
8 0 0 -
9 0 0 -
Unbalance Response
The results of the unbalance response analysis are shown in the following figure. The logarithmic plots
show the variation of the displacement (Y and Z) amplitudes of two selected nodes with respect to the
frequency of excitation. The first node is located near the rigid disk. The second node is located near
the bearing location.
The critical frequencies appear where the amplitudes are largest, and correspond to the critical speeds.
Figure 14.11: Unbalance Response at the Node Located Near the Rigid Disk
Frequency Response (UY)
Frequency Response (UZ)
Vaugh Rotor
Figure 14.12: Unbalance Response at the Node Located Near the Bearing
Frequency Response (UY)
Frequency Response (UZ)
Vaugh Rotor
Total displacement amplitudes are plotted using the real and imaginary values of the X, Y and Z direc-
tional displacement frequency response in the following figure. The critical frequencies appear where
the amplitudes are largest and correspond to the critical speeds.
14.7.1. Performance Benefits of the 2-D Axisymmetric Model

Elapsed time, memory used, and result file size of the general axisymmetric model are shown in the
following table.
Vaugh Rotor
General Axisymmetric Model

Elements Nodes MAPDL MAPDL MAPDL Result
Elapsed Time Memory Used File Size (MB)
(MB)
Campbell
Diagram 2241 7760 16 s 377 20.313
Analysis
Unbalance
Response 184 s 494 204.13
Analysis
Elapsed time, memory used, and result file size of the 3-D model are shown in the following table.
3-D Solid Model

Elements Nodes MAPDL MAPDL MAPDL Result
Elapsed Time Memory Used File Size (MB)
(MB)
Campbell
Diagram 9058 15115 26 s 585 57.5
Analysis
Unbalance
Response 197 s 1592 501.56
Analysis
• In the CAD geometry, identify the axisymmetric and non-axisymmetric parts. A non axisymmetric
part should be considered as follow:
– If inertia is negligible, create a non-rotating component based on this part. The gyroscopic effect
will not be taken into account.
– If inertia is not negligible, delete the part and create an equivalent axisymmetric geometry so that
its gyroscopic effects are included. The simplest way to do this is to add a point mass on the rota-
tional velocity axis. The point mass characteristics are based on the part mass and inertias. The two
rotary inertias perpendicular to the rotational velocity axis must be equal to guarantee the
axisymmetry.
• For 3-D and 2-D axisymmetric modeling, the geometry is sliced at rigid disks and bearing locations
so that those components are easily created and connected to remote points attached to the interfaces.
• When meshing a 2-D axisymmetric model using SOLID272 or SOLID273, choose an appropriate
number of Fourier nodes in the circumferential direction to ensure good accuracy and minimize the
computational cost. For typical rotordynamics problems in linear dynamics, three Fourier nodes are
sufficient.
• When performing a Campbell diagram of a structure, always check the eigenfrequencies at zero rota-
tional velocity first. If the supports (bearings or boundary conditions) are symmetric, bending frequen-
cies should appear in pairs. If that is not the case in a 3-D model, try refining the mesh.
• To perform the unbalance response analysis of 3-D and 2-D axisymmetric models, the unbalance re-
sponse is introduced using complex forces defined at a node on the rotational velocity axis. The un-
balance response may be defined using a point mass away from the rotational velocity axis only in
the case of a nonlinear transient analysis.
14.9. References
Nelson, H.D. & McVaugh, J. M. (May, 1976). The dynamics of rotor-bearing systems using finite elements.
ASME Journal of Engineering for Industry.
Beley, A., Rajakumar, C., & Thieffry, P. (2009). Computational methods for rotordynamics simulation.
NAFEMS World Congress.

Chapter 15: Calibrating and Validating a Hyperelastic
Constitutive Model
This example problem demonstrates the curve-fitting capabilities used to select an appropriate hyper-
elastic constitutive model in the Ansys Mechanical Application (see also Experimental Data in the Ma-
terial Reference). To see this example solved using Ansys Mechanical APDL see Calibrating and Validating
a Hyperelastic Constitutive Model in the Technology Showcase: Example Problems.
Several issues that influence the accuracy of the curve fit are discussed. Validation of the resulting
constitutive model is demonstrated by comparison with a tension-torsion experiment.
Overview
Element Type(s) 3-D SOLID (SOLID186)

15.1. Introduction
15.9. References
15.1. Introduction
Several hyperelastic constitutive models can be used to model the large deformation behavior of
elastic materials. However, it is sometimes difficult to select an appropriate hyperelastic model and the
parameters to adequately match the behavior of the material. The curve-fitting process fits the hypere-
lastic constitutive model parameters to a set of experimental data using a least-squares minimization.
Curve-fitting is relatively simple, but certain conditions can affect the accuracy of the resulting constitutive
model. The constitutive model should therefore be compared with experimental data to ensure that it
adequately reproduces the material behavior over the actual range of deformation.
Calibrating and Validating a Hyperelastic Constitutive Model

An appropriate hyperelastic model capable of modeling the behavior of vulcanized natural rubber ma-
terial up to 100 percent engineering strain in a variety of deformation modes is sought.
Hypothetical experimental uxiaxial, biaxial and planar tension test data are generated using the Ogden
hyperelastic material model. To demonstrate the curve-fitting behavior, this data is used to determine
the parameters of a three-, five- and nine-parameter Mooney-Rivlin hyperelastic material model.
The best fit model is then used in a tension-torsion analysis and the results compared with experimental
data.
15.3.1. Calibration Experiments

Experimental data was obtained via a simulation of a hyperelastic test suite with an Ogden hypere-
lastic material. The test suite specimens are shown here, with the dark areas indicating locations of
the clamps:
Figure 15.1: Hyperelastic Test Suite: Test Specimens
The engineering-stress vs. engineering-strain results are as follows:
Material Properties
Figure 15.2: Hyperelastic Test Suite: Experimental Data
The uniaxial specimen is similar to ASTM D412-C (ASTM Standard D412, 2006).
The crosshead is displaced by 396 mm, giving a measured engineering strain in the gage section of
662 percent and a calculated engineering stress of 58.1 MPa.
The equibiaxial specimen is disc-shaped, with 16 equally spaced tabs about the circumference. The
tabs are stretched 127.3 mm, resulting in a measured engineering strain in the gage section of 336
percent and a calculated engineering stress of 22.1 MPa.
For the planar specimen, the crosshead is displaced by 191.6 mm, giving a calculated engineering
strain of 639 percent and a calculated engineering stress of 54.7 MPa.
15.3.2. Validation Experiment

A simulated tension-torsion experiment was performed on a thin strip. The specimen is similar to that
specified in ASTM D1043 (ASTM Standard D1043, 2006) and is shown here:
Figure 15.3: Tension-Torsion Test Specimen
The experiment consists of clamping each end of the specimen into the test apparatus, then
stretching the specimen by 50 percent of its original gage length and twisting one end of the specimen
for four complete revolutions. Following is the resulting moment-vs.-rotation data:
Figure 15.4: Tension-Torsion Experimental Data
15.3.3. Material Properties

The Uniaxial, Biaxial, and Shear experimental test data given in the file is a set of engineering-strain
vs. engineering-stress input. The five-parameter Mooney-Rivlin model model, fit to the experimental
data up to 100 percent strain, is selected as an adequate representation of the material response.
Figure 15.5: Curve fitting using Mooney-Rivlin 5 parameter model

The mesh consists of 1377 SOLID186 elements using the default formulation (a mixed-displacement
pressure formulation with reduced integration).
Figure 15.6: Tension-Torsion Test Specimen Mesh
Note:
Note: To turn on reduced integration, go to geometry details and set Element Control to
Manual. The Brick Integration Scheme will appear under the part file details of the geometry,
set this to Reduced as shown below.
The Remote Points are created with Behavior set to Rigid as shown in the figure below. This ensures
that the cross-sections of the holes remain circular after loading.
Figure 15.7: Remote Points Scoped to Clamp Regions

The simulation is carried out in three load steps. The attachment of the test specimen to the test appar-
atus is simulated by boundary conditions applied to the specimen in the region of the clamps, as de-
scribed here:
• The back-left clamp region is fully restrained as shown below.
• The back-right clamp region is attached to a rigid-contact surface and fixed in place.
• The front-left clamp region is attached to a rigid-contact surface and displaced in the z direction to
simulate a clamping displacement equal to 25 percent of the specimen thickness. The same is true
for the front-right clamp region.
• The stretching to 50 percent engineering strain is simulated by displacing the rigid-contact surfaces
attached to the right clamp regions while holding left clamp regions fixed as shown in the image
below.
• The torsion of the specimen is simulated by holding the left clamp region in place and twisting the
keypoints attached to the right contact surfaces about the longitudinal axis as shown in below image.

The nonlinear analysis requires setting the Large Deflection property to On. See the analysis settings
used to simulate this problem in the figure below.

The following figure shows a contour plot of the deformation and strain energy at the end of simulation.
The plot offers a general idea of the overall deformation of the specimen.
Except for the clamp regions, the deformation shows a uniform pattern in the gage region along the
axis of twisting. Perpendicular to the axis of twisting is a large strain-energy near the outside edge of
the specimen, decreasing toward the center.
To plot moment vs θ, calculate moment reactions scoped to front right and back right clamp regions.
The summation of both moment reactions gives the results plotted below.
References
Figure 15.8: Comparison of Tension-Torsion Experiment to the Five-Parameter Mooney-Rivlin

Model
When performing a similar type of calibration and validation, consider the following recommendations:
• Obtain test data from at least two (and preferably all three) of the experiments in the hyperelastic
test suite.
• Ensure that the test data covers the range of deformation over which the constitutive model will be
used.
• If the error between the experimental data and the constitutive model is too great, try limiting the
experimental data to the range of deformation over which the constitutive model will be used.
• Use the constitutive model within the range of fitted data only.
• Use an independent experiment to validate that the constitutive model adequately matches the
material behavior.
15.9. References
The following references were consulted when creating this example problem:
1. ASTM International. (2006). ASTM Standard D1043. Standard Test Method for Stiffness Properties of
Plastics as a Function of Temperature by Means of a Torsion Test. West Conshohocken.
2. ASTM International. (2006). ASTM Standard D412. Standard Test Methods for Vulcanized Rubber and
Thermoplastic Elastomers-Tension. West Conshohocken.

Chapter 16: Evaluation of Mixed-Mode Stress
Intensity Factors and T-stress for 3-D Surface Flaws
This example problem shows how to evaluate mixed-mode stress-intensity factors and T-stresses for
cracks in structural components. Stress intensity factors are used to evaluate the state of stress in the
region around the crack front. They can be used to evaluate the propensity for the crack to grow. T-
stress represents the forces on crack faces under a mode I type loading.
Analyses of a simple semicircular surface flaw in a rectangular block and a warped flaw along a tubular
joint are discussed. This example problem is solved using the Ansys Mechanical Application. To see this
example solved using Ansys Mechanical APDL see Evaluation of Mixed-Mode Stress Intensity Factors
and T-stress for 3-D Surface Flaws in the Technology Showcase: Example Problems.
• Evaluating mode-I stress-intensity factors and T-stresses for a semicircular surface flaw in a rectangular
block using a Semi-Elliptical Crack object.
• Evaluation of mixed-mode Stress-intensity factors and T-stresses for a warped semi-ellipical surface
flaw in a tubular joint using a Pre-Meshed Crack object.
• Meshing around a crack front in 3-D structures.
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Linear Static Structural
Element Type(s) 3-D Solid (SOLID186 and SOLID187)

16.1. Introduction
16.4. Modeling
16.5. Meshing
16.6. Loads and Boundary Conditions
16.7. Analysis Settings
16.8. Results
16.10. References
Evaluation of Mixed-Mode Stress Intensity Factors and T-stress for 3-D Surface Flaws
16.1. Introduction
Fracture analysis is widely used to predict component failure caused by small preexisting cracks. Results
can be used to take precautions to prevent further crack growth or to determine the remaining life of
the structure.
To assess the fracture damage, stress intensity factors (SIFs) must be evaluated accurately. As it is difficult
to determine accurate SIFs using a closed-form analytical solution for cracks in complex structures, finite-
element analysis is used instead.
The interaction integral method is used here. This method performs the SIF calculation during the
solution phase of the analysis and stores the results for later postprocessing.

Two models with surface flaws are considered for analysis:
16.2.1. Rectangular Block with a Semicircular Surface Flaw
16.2.2. X-Joint Pipe with Warped Surface Flaw

A Semi-Elliptical Crack object is used to simulate a semicircular surface flaw in a rectangular block.
The block has a semicircular surface flaw with a 20 mm radius at the center of one longitudinal face
of the rectangular block. The crack is perpendicular to the block's longitudinal surfaces and lies in
the thickness direction as illustrated in Figure 16.1: Rectangular Block Geometry with Semicircular
Surface Flaw (p. 171). A torus is required around the crack front to control the mesh at the crack front.
The crack front and torus around the crack front are simulated with a Semi-Elliptical Crack object.
This model is fixed at one face of the block and a pressure load is applied on the opposite face. The
objective is to find SIFs (K1) and T-Stress along the crack front.
Problem Description
Figure 16.1: Rectangular Block Geometry with Semicircular Surface Flaw
Figure 16.2: Semi-circular Surface Crack Dimensions

A semi-elliptical warped surface flaw at the tubular joint is simulated with a Pre-Meshed Crack
object and an external mesh file to obtain mixed-mode SIFs (K1, K2 and K3) and T-Stress along the
crack front.
The geometry consists of two tubular members (Tube 1 and Tube 2) attached to each other by a
welded joint. The tubular members have outer diameters of 323.85 mm (D1), 219.08 mm (D2), and
thicknesses of 15.88 mm (t1) and 8.18 mm (t2), respectively. The semi-elliptical surface crack lies on
a plane parallel to the radial direction of the heavier running pipe as shown in the figure below.
Figure 16.3: X-Joint Pipe Full Model with Warped Surface Flaw at Welded Joint
The semi-elliptical surface crack at the weld toe is warped along the welded joint, and it is perpendic-
ular to the outer surface of the 323.85 mm diameter pipe in the thickness direction. Because of the
two-plane symmetry inherent to the X-joint problem, a quarter model is analyzed. The crack front
and torus around the crack front have already been specified in the external mesh file.
Figure 16.4: Semi-elliptical Surface Crack Dimensions

The material properties of default Structural Steel used in the analyses are listed below.
Table 16.1: Material Properties
Isotropic Elasticity
Young's Modulus 2.0 E5 Mpa
Poisson's Ratio 0.3
16.4. Modeling
The following topics describe the modeling decisions and setup used:
16.4.1. System Setup on Project Schematic in Workbench
16.4.2. Fully Define Systems in the Mechanical Application
16.4.3. Crack Modeling
Modeling

Figure 16.5: Project Schematic (p. 173) shows the setup in Workbench. The rectangular block is modeled
using a 3-D Static Structural system (A in the figure) with default Structural Steel material. The default
material properties of stainless steel are listed in Material Properties (p. 172). The rectangular block
geometry is provided in two equivalent input files (p. 185): one created in SpaceClaim
(Rect_Block_TD_WB_016.scdoc) that is supported on Windows only, and one created in
DesignModeler (Rect_Block_TD_WB_016.agdb) that is supported on both Windows and Linux.
The geometry is attached as described in Attach Geometry/Mesh in the Mechanical User's Guide.
The X-Joint Pipe is modeled using an External Model system to import the mesh file
(xjoint_pipe_with_warped_flaw.cdb, which is included in the downloadable input files (p. 185)).
The setup cell of the External Model system is linked to the model cell of another Static Structural
system with default Structural Steel material to setup the X-Joint Pipe analysis (B and C in Figure 16.5:
Project Schematic (p. 173)).
Figure 16.5: Project Schematic

The rest of the modeling specifications are made in the Mechanical Application. For the X-Joint Pipe
model, the Element Control property of Geometry is set to Manual to enable the Full Brick Integration
Scheme for the solid body elements (SOLID186) as shown in the Details windows below.
Figure 16.6: Details - Geometry and Solid Body
The analysis makes use of Named Selection objects to define the crack and boundary conditions
in both the rectangular block and the X-Joint Pipe models. Local coordinate systems are also used in
both models to define the crack coordinate system.
Rectangular Block Model

The figure below shows the scoping and settings of the Semi-Elliptical Crack object used for crack
modeling in the rectangular block model.
Modeling
Figure 16.7: Details and Preview - Semi-Elliptical Crack
The Semi-Elliptical Crack object generates the recommended SOLID186 elements around the crack
front as shown in the figure below. If any component in the global coordinate system is not ortho-
gonal to the crack surface, create a local coordinate system with one component normal to the crack
surface. This action is necessary to define the crack coordinate system (crack plane normal).
Figure 16.8: Generated Crack Mesh for Semi-Elliptical Crack
X-Joint Pipe Model

A Pre-Meshed Crack object with body scoping and the settings shown below is used for Crack
modeling in X-Joint Pipe model. This approach uses the external mesh, which contains a compatible
crack mesh (crack front, top-bottom faces, and SOLID186 elements around the crack front).
Loads and Boundary Conditions
Figure 16.9: Details and preview - Pre-Meshed Crack
Fracture parameter computation commands (CINT) are sent to the solver according to the settings
of the Semi-Elliptical and Pre-Meshed Crack objects and Fracture Controls specified in Analysis
Settings.
16.5. Meshing
Meshing around the crack front was described in the previous section.
The remaining area of the rectangular block is meshed with SOLID187 elements. The Patch Conforming
Tetrahedron mesh method is added with rectangular body scoping to generate the required tetrahed-
ron-based mesh for the Semi-Elliptical Crack. Local edge sizing is separately applied on the short and
long edges of rectangular body. For information on how to apply sizing, see Applying a Local Sizing
Control.

Figure 16.10: Loads and Boundary Conditions (p. 178) illustrates the loads and boundary conditions applied
to both models.

The rectangular block is fixed at one face using Fixed Support . A Nodal Pressure of -10 E3 MPa is
applied to the nodes of the opposite face.
X-Joint Model
Analysis of the X-joint model is performed with two-sided symmetry. Two-plane symmetric boundary
conditions are applied and one midside node at the horizontal plane is constrained in the opposite
direction to restrict rigid-body motion. A pressure load of -1000 MPa is applied to the top face of the
small-diameter tube.
Figure 16.10: Loads and Boundary Conditions

Set Fracture to On and SIFs and T-Stress to yes in the Fracture Controls category of Analysis Settings
details to enable SIFs and T-Stress parameter calculations.
16.8. Results
This section discusses the results for both models:
Results

The following figures show the total deformation and equivalent stress results for the rectangular
block model.
Figure 16.11: Total Deformation - Rectangular Block
Figure 16.12: Equivalent Stress - Rectangular Block
Figure 16.12: Equivalent Stress - Rectangular Block (p. 179) shows the maximum Von Mises stress oc-
curring at the crack tip.
To verify the SIF (K1) accuracy obtained via the interaction integral method, the results are compared
to analytical results of Newman and Raju [1] (p. 184) and the finite-element results of Kamaya [2] (p. 185)
(see Figure 16.13: Comparing Normalized SIF (K1) Results with those Reported in the Literature -
Rectangular Block (p. 180)). For the comparison, results are plotted as ,
where is the initial radius of the flaw and is the normal stress. Since the crack exists at the
center of the rectangular block, the values are plotted for half of the crack. The results agree closely
with those obtained in the references.
Figure 16.13: Comparing Normalized SIF (K1) Results with those Reported in the Literature -
Rectangular Block
Figure 16.14: Normalized T-Stress - Rectangular Block (p. 181) plots the Normalized T-Stress calculated
for the semicircular surface flaw, where normalized T-Stress is calculated as
.
Results
Figure 16.14: Normalized T-Stress - Rectangular Block

The following figures show the Total Deformation and Equivalent Stress results for the X-joint pipe
with the warped flaw at the welded joint.
Figure 16.15: Total Deformation - X-Joint Pipe
Figure 16.16: Equivalent Stress - X-Joint Pipe
Results
The SIFs of the mixed-mode 3-D problem with the warped crack surface were compared with those
of Rhee and Salama [4] (p. 185). Normalized SIFs (KX) is calculated using the formula below:
where T is the thickness of the pipe and KX is K1, K2, and K3. Normalized SIFs are plotted as a function
of normalized distance, which is the distance from center of the crack along the crack front divided
by half of the crack tip length.
Figure 16.17: Normalized SIFs (KX) results comparison - X-Joint Pipe
The comparison shows that the normalized SIF results agree well with the reference results, except
near the end points, as illustrated above. A finer mesh at the end-point regions can improve the results.
Figure 16.18: Normalized T-Stress - X-Joint Pipe (p. 184) plots the T-Stress result for the X-Joint Pipe
with warped flaw.
Figure 16.18: Normalized T-Stress - X-Joint Pipe
When setting up a fracture analysis for 3-D structures, consider the following hints and recommendations:
• The recommended element type for 3-D fracture models along the crack tip is the 20-node brick
element, SOLID186.
• A greater number of crack front nodes yields more accurate results.
• If any component in the global coordinate system is not orthogonal to the crack surface, create one
local coordinate system with one component normal to the crack surface. This action is necessary to
define the crack coordinate system (crack plane normal).
• For multiple cracks, use separate crack coordinate systems for each.
• The interaction integral method gives accurate results because the contour integral is evaluated at
points far away from the crack-tip. Disregard the first contour results, however, as they are less accurate
than the other results due to the nearness of the crack tip.
For more information, see Fracture Analysis in the Mechanical User's Guide.
16.10. References
1. Newman, J. C. & Raju, I. S. (1979). Analysis of surface cracks in finite plates under tension or bending
loads. NASA Technical Paper 1578 . National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
2. Kamaya, M. (2006). Stress intensity factor of surface crack with undulated front. JSME International
Journal49.4: 529-535.
3. Anderson, T.L. (2005). Fracture mechanics - Fundamentals and applications (3rd. ed.) CRC. Boca Raton.
4. Rhee H. C. & Salama, M. M. (1987). Mixed-mode stress intensity factor solutions of a warped surface
flaw by three-dimensional finite element analysis. Engineering Fracture Mechanics 28-2: 203-209.

• Workbench Project Archive (.wbpz)(94 MB): Download
Chapter 17: Impact of a Metal Bar on a Rigid Wall
This example problem is an impact simulation using a 3-D model of a metal bar hitting a rigid wall using
the Ansys Mechanical Application. To see this example solved using Ansys Mechanical APDL see Impact
of a Metal Bar on a Rigid Wall in the Technology Showcase: Example Problems. The problem shows the
advantages of using impact constraints for modeling contact in a nonlinear transient dynamic analysis.
Several combinations of time-integration methods and contact algorithms are also investigated, using
different material models to show how various choices affect the performance and accuracy of the finite-
element solution of impact problems.
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Nonlinear Transient Structural Analysis
Element Type(s) 3-D Solid Elements

17.1. Introduction
17.3. Modeling
17.9. References
17.1. Introduction
Simulating contact in a transient dynamic analysis can be challenging. The presence of inertial forces
can adversely affect convergence in contact problems. The simulated response must also be accurate
to ensure that it remains stable, and consistent with physical behavior, over a long time period.
The impact of a metal bar on a rigid wall is ideal for demonstrating various solution options, as this
problem has been extensively studied and documented (p. 194), and there are existing analytical and
numerical solutions available for comparison.
Impact of a Metal Bar on a Rigid Wall

A copper bar with a circular cross section having an initial length of 32.4 mm and a radius of 3.2 mm
impacts a rigid, frictionless wall. The bar has an initial velocity of 227 m/s along its longitudinal axis and
has one end located at a distance of 1 mm from the rigid wall at the start of the analysis, as shown in
the figure below.
Figure 17.1: Geometry and FE Model of a Metal Bar Impacting a Rigid Wall
Several transient analyses are performed, taking into account the following criteria:
• Rigid, elastic, and elastoplastic (p. 189) material behavior for the bar
• Newmark and HHT time-integration methods (with and without damping)
• Element-level time-incrementation controls and impact constraints.
For rigid and elastic material behavior, the results of displacements, velocities, strain energies (SE), and
kinetic energies (KE) are compared to the analytical solution For the elastoplastic material behavior, the
results of mushroom radius, final length, equivalent plastic strain, and von Mises stress are compared
to a reference solution.
17.3. Modeling
The bar is modeled with a 3-D coarse mesh using 3-D SOLID186 elements.
Modeling
Frictionless contact between the rigid wall and the end of the bar is modeled, with Bar on Contact
side and Wall on Target side.
The contact elements have the following settings:
17.3.1. Impact Scenarios

Three impact scenarios are examined. Each of these scenarios requires its own finite-element model
and its own output of results of interest, hence three different models are used in the WBPZ.
• Rigid Impact (p. 191)
The bar and plate both are modeled as a rigid body.
• Elastic Impact (p. 191)
The bar is modeled as a flexible body with linear elastic material properties.
• Elastoplastic Impact (p. 192)
The bar is modeled as a flexible body with elastoplastic material properties.

The material properties of the copper bar are as follows:
Linear Elastic Material Properties

Young's Modulus (GPa) E = 117
Poisson's Ratio (ν) 0.35
Plastic Material Properties
Yield Stress (MPa) σy = 400
Tangent Modulus (MPa) ET = 100
3
Density (kg / m ) ρ = 8930

The following conditions and parameters have already been set in the Workbench project archive
(.wbpz) file (p. 195) that accompanies this example problem:
• Contacts have been defined.
• Appropriate mesh controls have been set to generate the mesh
• An initial velocity of 227 m/s has been applied to the bar in the Z direction.
To finish defining the loads and constraints for this example problem, you should constrain the rigid
wall in all six directions using Remote Displacement applied to the face opposite that of impact.

Large displacement effects are included in the analysis.
For all three impact scenarios, three transient analyses are performed, using the commands listed below:
• Full method with the Newmark time-integration scheme and no damping:
• Full method with the Newmark time-integration scheme and damping:
• Full method with the HHT time-integration scheme and damping:
17.6.1. Solution Options for Capturing Simulation Results

The Analysis Settings used for each of the three impact scenarios (p. 189) are described in the following
sections:
17.6.1.1. Rigid Impact
17.6.1.2. Elastic Impact
17.6.1.3. Elastoplastic Impact
17.6.1.1. Rigid Impact

The total time (simulation time) used is slightly larger than the time needed for the bar to impact
the rigid wall. The bar moving at a velocity of 227 m/s requires about 0.4405e-5 seconds to cover
a 1 mm gap before impacting the rigid wall.
A minimum of 100 substeps ensures a smooth response. The maximum of 10000 substeps allows
the automatic time-stepping method to cut back the time increment to satisfy the impact constraints.
Because the goal in this case is to study the displacement and velocity response of the bar at some
points of interest over the total time period, the nodal displacement and velocity solution data is
written to the results file at every substep.
17.6.1.2. Elastic Impact

All analysis settings in this case are same as for the rigid case (p. 191) except for total time. The total
time in this case must take into account the time that the stress wave created from the impact
needs to travel back and forth through the elastic bar. The calculated time of impact is 4.405e-6
seconds and the release time is calculated analytically as 2.23e-5 seconds, so a total time of 2.8e-5
seconds is used for the elastic impact.
17.6.1.3. Elastoplastic Impact

The same solution settings are used as in the rigid (p. 191) and elastic (p. 191) cases, except for the
total time. Because the bar undergoes large plastic deformation and remains in contact with the
rigid wall for a longer time period, the total time is increased to 0.8e-4 seconds.

Following is an examination of the results for each of the three impact scenarios (p. 189):
17.7.1. Rigid Impact Results
17.7.2. Elastic Impact Results

17.7.3. Elastoplastic Impact Results
17.7.1. Rigid Impact Results

For rigid impact, the bar should hit the rigid wall and bounce back immediately with the same velocity.
The total energy after the impact (SE+KE) should be same as the total energy before the impact
(239.61 J).
NMK without Damping NMK with Damping HHT with Damping

Rebound 227.0 227.0 227.0
Velocity (m/s)
Total Energy 239.61 239.61 239.61
after impact
(J)
17.7.2. Elastic Impact Results

For elastic impact, the flexible bar begins to vibrate as the stress wave from impact with the rigid
wall travels through the bar. When the stress wave returns to the impact end, the bar separates from
the wall. Because the material is assumed to be elastic, the bar continues to vibrate as it moves away
from the wall. Conservation of energy and momentum requires that the total energy in the bar after
impact (SE+KE) remain equal to the total energy before impact (KE). Some of the initial kinetic energy
(KE) is converted to strain energy (SE) after impact, so the rebound velocity after impact (spatially
averaged velocity for rigid body motion) is slightly lower than the velocity before impact.

Rebound 222.67 216.46 221.10
Velocity (m/s)
Total Energy 236.31 221.80 230.30
after impact (J)
17.7.3. Elastoplastic Impact Results

For elastoplastic impact, the impact end of the bar deforms plastically upon impact. The bar stays in
contact with the wall while undergoing plastic deformation in radial and longitudinal directions. The
separation occurs when the material cannot deform (plastically) anymore and the stress wave reaches
the impact end.
Numerical simulation of an elastoplastic impact is less sensitive to the choice of time-integration

method or the amount of numerical damping, as shown in this comparison of the mushroom radius
(R), final length (L), maximum equivalent plastic strain ( ), and maximum von Mises stress ( ):

Mushroom 7.3 7.35 7.32
Radius, R (mm)
Final Length, L 24.53 21.61 21.57

(mm)
(MPa) 455.56 463.98 457.1
2.66 2.64 2.66
Mushroom Radius and Final Length are not native results in Mechanical. They have been added as
User Defined Results in the Workbench project archive file shared as input for this tech demo.
In this demonstration, we set Time Step Controls to Use Impact Constraints because it converges
to a stable solution in less time compared to other contact settings options. While other contact
settings, such as None and Predict for Impact, can be used, they require more substeps and equilib-
rium iterations to obtain the transient response.
With Time Step Controls set to None, more analysis time is required, as more substeps and equilibrium
iterations are needed. The absence of energy conservation at the contact interface forces smaller time
increments.
Setting Time Step Controls to Predict For Impact requires the most time, as even smaller time in-
crements are necessary to avoid sudden changes in the contact status.
When performing a similar type of impact simulation, consider the following recommendations for ob-
taining better accuracy and faster performance:
• Switch to the Use Impact Constraints option in contact settings to enforce energy conservation at
the contact interface. This option helps to maintain accuracy of the nonlinear transient response over
long simulation times.
• For rigid- or elastic-impact scenarios, use the HHT time-integration method with small numerical
damping (0.1) to damp out high-frequency noise.
17.9. References
The following references were consulted when creating this example problem:
1. Carpenter, N.J., Taylor, R. L, & Katona, M. G. (1991). Lagrange constraints for transient finite element
surface contact. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering. 32: 103-128.
2. Hallquist, J.O. & Benson, D. J. (1987). DYNA3D user's manual, revision 3. Report No. UCID-19592
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
3. Kamoulakos, A. (1990). A simple 'benchmark' for impact. Bench Mark. 31-35.
4. Simo, J.C. (1998). Algorithms for static and dynamic multiplicative plasticity that preserve the classical
return mapping schemes of the infinitesimal theory. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and
Engineering. 68: 1-31.
5. Wilkins, M.L. & Guinan, M. W. (1973). Impact of cylinders on a rigid boundary. Journal of Applied
Physics. 44.3: 1200-1206.

Chapter 18: Viscoelastic Analysis of an All-Ceramic
Fixed Partial Denture (FPD)
This example problem demonstrates the fictive-temperature material model using the Tool-Naray-
anaswamy (TN) shift function to examine residual stresses in an all-ceramic fixed partial denture (FPD)
Viscoelastic Analysis of an All-Ceramic Fixed Partial Denture (FPD) in the Technology Showcase: Example
Problems. A coupled-field solution process, including transient thermal and nonlinear structural analyses,
is used in the problem simulation.
The following capabilities are highlighted:
• Using the fictive temperature model for viscoelastic material.
• Running a transient thermal analysis to determine the temperature profile at various time steps.
• Applying thermal analysis results as temperature loads for structural analysis.
• Running a nonlinear structural analysis to determine residual stresses due to thermal loading.
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Transient Thermal and Static Structural Analysis

18.1. Introduction
18.9. References
Viscoelastic Analysis of an All-Ceramic Fixed Partial Denture (FPD)
18.1. Introduction
Materials are generally considered to be viscoelastic if they have an elastic and viscous behavior. The
elastic behavior is typically rate-independent and represents the recoverable deformation due to loading,
while the viscous behavior is typically rate-dependent and represents dissipative mechanisms within
the material.
A wide range of materials (such as polymers, glassy materials, soils, biological tissue, and textiles) exhibit
viscoelastic behavior. Viscoelastic materials exhibit viscous fluid behavior at high temperatures and
solid behavior at low temperatures.
For most viscoelastic materials, the effect on the material properties caused by changes in temperature
is similar to that of the effect caused by changes in the time scale. Such materials are considered to be
thermorheologically simple. A general material property called the shift function can reduce the con-
stitutive relation at a reference temperature and shifted time. The shift function can lessen the amount
of experimentation needed to determine the material parameters.
The following shift functions are available for representing thermorheologically simple materials:
• Williams-Landel-Ferry (WLF) -- Suitable for many types of polymers.
• Tool-Narayanaswamy (TN) -- Suitable for glassy materials.
• TN with fictive temperature -- Suitable for the melting and solidification process of viscoelastic
materials such as glass and stiff polymers.
The shift functions reproduce the behavior of a wide range of viscoelastic materials. For special require-
ments, user-defined shift functions can also be defined.
The fictive temperature is the temperature at which the current microstructure of glass is in an equilib-
rium state. For the TN shift function with fictive temperature model, the fictive temperature is used to
model materials containing an intrinsic equilibrium temperature that typically differs from the ambient
temperature of the material. The fictive temperature relaxes toward the ambient temperature similar
to the way that deviatoric and volumetric stiffness constants of the viscoelastic material relax toward
the long time-elastic constants.
With the shift function, the evolution of the fictive temperature for any thermal history can be calculated.
As the fictive temperature approaches the actual temperature, the viscoelastic material becomes more
relaxed. The fictive temperature model is often used to model the melting and solidification process of
viscoelastic materials such as glass and stiff polymers. This problem uses a fixed partial denture (FPD)
model to determine the residual stresses due to the solidification of a glass veneer on a ceramic core
material.
Metal-free ceramic materials are biocompatible, chemically durable, and aesthetically desirable. Such
materials are therefore ideal for FPDs. Thermal loading during the glass layer manufacturing process
causes residual stresses in FPDs. Higher residual stresses caused by thermal contraction incompatibility
between the veneer and core materials can lead to failure under occlusal loading in the oral cavity.[1]
The ability to determine residual stresses in an FPD subjected to thermal loading is useful for predicting
the life of the FPD.
Problem Description

The FPD is a combination of glass veneer and ceramic core, as shown in the following two figures, re-
spectively.
Figure 18.1: FPD Viscoelastic (Glass) Veneer Geometry
Figure 18.2: FPD Ceramic Core Geometry (Inside the Veneer)
A 3-D model of the FPD is constructed from the digitized scanning data of a reference FPD.[1] Because
the original model is unavailable, a similar geometry of a three-unit FPD used in Mechanical APDL has
been exported as a .cdb file and imported into the Mechanical Application using the Workbench Ex-
ternal Model System.
Sintering is commonly used for glass coatings. The high temperatures (~700° C) used during sintering
are reduced to room temperature (30° C) via free convection. Initially, some free thermal expansion
occurs in the core material due to the high temperature. However, this free expansion may not affect
stresses developed during free convection of the veneer and core together. For demonstration purposes,
a uniform initial temperature for both the veneer and the core is assumed, with no initial thermal ex-
pansion of the ceramic core.
The temperature distribution in the FPD is needed to determine the thermal residual stresses in the
veneer and core. A transient thermal analysis with a duration of 600 seconds is performed on the FPD.
The initial temperature is 700° C, and free convection cools the FPD to a room temperature of 30° C. A
convective heat transfer coefficient of 3.4E-5 W/mm2 °C is specified on all free surfaces, reducing sintering
temperature to the steady-state room temperature.
The temperature results are stored every 60 seconds. The results are used as input for a subsequent
nonlinear structural analysis to determine the residual stresses.

The following modeling topics available:
18.3.1. Denture Modeling
18.3.2. Contact Modeling
18.3.1. Denture Modeling

For both the veneer and core meshes, thermal element SOLID291 is used for the transient thermal
analysis, as shown below.
Figure 18.3: FPD Veneer (A) and Core (B) Mesh (SOLID291)
A 3-D surface-to-surface contact is used for creating the contact pair. The contact between veneer
and core is meshed with CONTA174 and TARGE170 elements, as shown in the following figure.
Figure 18.4: Contact Between Veneer and Core (CONTA174 and TARGE170)
The temperature profile obtained in the transient thermal analysis is used in a nonlinear structural
analysis to determine the residual stress in the veneer. The temperature results are imported as body
temperature loads in static structural analysis at different time steps.
Figure 18.5: Workflow for Temperature Results Transfer to Structural
The structural analysis requires the same mesh as that used for the thermal analysis. In this case,
SOLID291 elements are used for the thermal analysis and SOLID187 elements are used for structural
analysis .The FPD model contains 164,041 nodes. The model has 110,275 3-D 10-node tetrahedral
structural solid elements (56,811 veneer elements and 53,464 core elements), and 10,568 3-D 8-node
surface-to-surface contact elements.

Bonded surface-to-surface contact pairs define the contact between the veneer and the core. The
settings used for contact modelling in the structural analysis are shown below.
Material Properties
Figure 18.6: Contact Details
Note:
To edit imported contacts, right-click the contact to promote it and set Read Only to No
under Transfer Properties.

The veneer is represented by viscoelastic material behavior while the core is assumed to behave elast-
ically.
The following material property data is available for this problem:

18.4.1.Transient Thermal Analysis Material Properties
18.4.2. Static Structural Analysis Material Properties
18.4.1. Transient Thermal Analysis Material Properties

The following material properties are used for the transient thermal analysis.
Temperature Conductivity (W/mm Specific Heat (J/kg

Density (kg/mm3)
(°C) °C) °C)
Core
30 0.004002012 914.540
200 0.003254307 1119.296 2.514E-6
500 0.002973238 1284.875
Temperature Conductivity (W/mm Specific Heat (J/kg

Density (kg/mm3)
(°C) °C) °C)
700 0.003255384 1347.341
Veneer
30 0.010005623 742.274
200 0.006603368 947.144
2.531E-6
500 0.004560125 1105.625
700 0.004299903 1167.299
The thermal contact conductance is 4E-5 W/(mm2 °C).
18.4.2. Static Structural Analysis Material Properties

The following material properties are used for the static structural analysis.
Core
Coefficients of
Young’s Modulus
Poisson's Ratio Density (kg/mm3) Temperature (°C) Thermal
(GPa)
Expansion
30 1.019E-5
40 1.007E-5
50 9.955E-6
60 9.848E-6
100 9.499E-6
96 0.24 2.514E-6
200 9.190E-6
300 9.689E-6
400 1.099E-5
500 1.311E-5
700 1.975E-5
Veneer
Reference
Young’s Modulus
Poisson's Ratio Density (kg/mm3) Temperature Tref H/R (° K) [a]
(GPa)
(°C)
65 0.26 2.531E-6 700 46400
[a] * H/R = activation energy / ideal gas constant
Prony Series Shift Function Constants

Gi / G0 τi Fictive Temperature (°C) Weight Relaxation Time (Sec)
0.48844 1.58E-05 750 0.25 1.58E-05
0.44003 0.000163 726 0.25 0.000163
Prony Series Shift Function Constants

0.03576 0.003853 705 0.25 0.003853
0.00487 0.008050 687 0.25 0.008050
Following are the polynomial coefficients for glass and liquid thermal expansion:
= 10.7510E-6 ppm / °C
= -2.4208E-8 ppm / °C
= 5.7267E-11 ppm / °C
According to the reference results, volume relaxation for glass occurs much less rapidly than the shear
relaxation. The Prony series input for volume decay is therefore not considered in this problem.

The following boundary and loading condition data is available for this problem:
18.5.1.Thermal Analysis BC and Loading
18.5.2. Structural Analysis BC and Loading
18.5.1. Thermal Analysis BC and Loading

An initial condition of 700 °C is applied on all nodes. A convective heat-transfer coefficient of 3.4E-5
W/mm2 °C is specified on all free surfaces of the FPD, and the ambient temperature is set to 30 °C.
Set the initial temperature value to 0 °C.
For the contact pair, a thermal contact conductance of 4E-05 J/(sec-°C) is used for heat conduction
between the veneer and the core.
Note:
In Workbench, Initial Conditions can be set using the IC command as shown below.
IC,all,temp,700 !Specifies initial temperature at all nodes.
18.5.2. Structural Analysis BC and Loading

Rigid body motion is constrained with appropriate displacement constraints at the midline of the
FPD base. Vertical displacement constraints are applied to all base nodes as shown in the following
images:
The temperature is imported at 60s, 300s and 600s as shown in the imbage below. The environment
temperature is set to 700 °C.

A transient thermal analysis is performed to determine the temperature distribution, and a static
structural analysis is run to determine the residual stress.
Thermal Analysis Solution

The simulation is carried out for 600s. The nonlinear formulation is set to Full under Nonlinear Controls
. The time step details are given in the following image:
Figure 18.7: Details of Transient Thermal Analysis Settings
Structural Analysis Solution

The imported temperature loads are applied as 3 load steps at different times as seen below. Large
Deflection is set On.
Figure 18.8: Details of Structural Analysis Settings
In workbench, the default offset temperature of 273.15 can be set to zero using the TOFFST command:
TOFFST,0
Note:
The structural portion of the analysis requires 10 solve operations. The first solution (time =
1 - 60) requires more time to converge than the remaining nine. Nevertheless, it is not good
practice to increase the time increment for the first solution.

The following three figures show the distribution of temperature at different time steps in both the
FPD veneer and core, with the temperature for both reaching the steady-state room temperature at
600 seconds:
Figure 18.9: Temperature Distribution in Veneer (A) and Core (B) at 60 Seconds
Figure 18.10: Temperature Distribution in Veneer and Core at 300 Seconds
Figure 18.11: Temperature Distribution in Veneer (A) and Core (B) at 600 Seconds
The following three figures show the von Mises stress distribution at different time steps in both the
FPD veneer and core:
Figure 18.12: Von Mises Stress in Veneer (A) and Core (B) at 60 Seconds
Figure 18.13: Von Mises Stress in Veneer (A) and Core (B) at 300 Seconds
Figure 18.14: Von Mises Stress in Veneer and Core at 600 Seconds
The von Mises stresses in both veneer and core change with temperature due to natural convection
on the veneer surface. The stresses correspond to temperature loadings at 60, 300 and 600 seconds.
At high temperatures, the von Mises stresses are very high in the veneer as compared to the core.
As the veneer cools through the transition, the elastic moduli no longer relax on the time scale of the
cooling, and,due to the different thermal contraction coefficients of the veneer and core, a jump in the
stress distribution occurs at the veneer-core interface, bringing the higher von Mises stresses in the
veneer close to the core stress at room temperature.
Stresses in the inner veneer surface at the interface are not significantly different from the core outer
surface stresses due to the stabilized fictive temperature (equal to the actual temperature) at lower
temperatures.
The tension is present because the surface cools most rapidly and becomes rigid, while the inner surface
of the veneer (at interface with the core) is still at a higher temperature. When the interface becomes
rigid and cools, it forces the surface under more compression. These residual stresses can be used for
analyzing FPDs under occlusal loading in the oral cavity and subsequently to predict the life of the FPDs
[1].
The following figure shows the maximum residual principal stress distribution in the veneer and the
core from the reference results [1], which agree closely with the simulated results from this problem:
Figure 18.15: Reference Results: Residual Principal Stress Distribution in Veneer and Core
To perform a similar type of viscoelastic analysis, consider the following hints and recommendations:
• Save the thermal analysis results at required time steps so that the temperatures can be read in for
the structural analysis.
• The sum of the fictive-temperature relaxation coefficients specified in the engineering data should
be 1.0.
18.9. References
This example analysis was based on the following reference work:
1. DeHoff, P. H., Anusavice, K. J., & Gotzen, N. (2006). Viscoelastic finite element analysis of an all-
ceramic fixed partial denture. Journal of Biomechanics . 39, 40-48.

Chapter 24: Hydrostatic Fluid Analysis of an Inflating
and Rolling Tire
This example problem demonstrates how to model a fluid (air) that is fully enclosed by a solid container
(the tire). The problem shows how loading on the container, and the resulting container deformation,
affect the pressure, volume, density, and mass of the contained fluid. This problem is simulated here
Hydrostatic Fluid Analysis of an Inflating and Rolling Tire in the Technology Showcase: Example Problems.
• Modeling hydrostatic fluid elements with negative and positive volumes
• Use of a gas material model
• Reinforcing
A transient analysis of an inflated and rolling tire shows the tire deformation through various load steps.
Overview
Element Type(s) 3-D SOLID, Fluid and Shell Reinforcement

24.1. Introduction
24.3. Geometry
24.6. Analysis Settings for Step Controls
24.8. Results
Hydrostatic Fluid Analysis of an Inflating and Rolling Tire
24.1. Introduction
Hydrostatic fluid elements are well suited for calculating fluid volume and pressure for problems involving
coupled fluid-solid interaction. Modeling with a hydrostatic fluid allows one to study the changes in
fluid behavior when it is contained within a solid upon which various loads are imposed.
Such an analysis is useful in the example problem presented here, where it is possible to examine the
changing pressure, density and volume of the air inside a tire during inflation and rolling. Another ex-
ample application involves the volume and pressure changes of a fluid contained within a cylinder in
which a piston is moving.
The automobile industry strives to improve fuel economy and reduce power loss, both of which are
affected by the rolling resistance of a vehicle's tires. To do so, it is necessary to accurately predict the
changing fluid conditions within a rolling, deformed tire.

A 3-D tire model is inflated and pressed against the road surface and then rolled over a bump on the
road. The tire is modeled with hyperelastic material and reinforcing elements. The air inside the tire is
modeled with a hydrostatic fluid element, and its pressure, volume, and density are monitored as loads
are applied to the tire.
Figure 24.1: 3-D Model of an Inflated Tire and a Road Surface
The tire is inflated to 36 psi and a mass of 1 ton is added at the axle to simulate the portion of the
vehicle's mass resting on that axle.
The analysis occurs over five load steps, as follows:
1. Apply a gravity load and set the reference temperature for the air.
2. Inflate the tire.
Geometry
3. Move the tire down to seat it on the road surface.
4. Remove displacement and pressure boundary conditions.
5. Apply an acceleration boundary condition to roll the tire over a bump.
Load steps 1 through 4 are performed statically, while load step 5 is performed as a transient analysis
to study the loading effect on vertical acceleration.
24.3. Geometry
Insert a Transient Structural Analysis system in the Project Schematic in Workbench, and attach the
input geometry. Input files for this example problem can be downloaded here (p. 266).
Activate Beta options in Workbench

To use reinforcements in a transient structural analysis, you must enable beta options in Workbench:
from the Tools menu, select Options..., select Appearance in the list on the left of available options,
scroll down to Display and check Beta Options as shown below.
Figure 24.2: Beta Options
Double-click the Model cell of the transient structural analysis system to open the Mechanical Application.
In Mechanical, set the Unit System to Metric (mm, t, N, s, mV, mA) and suppress the shell body named
"Surface". Set the Stiffness Behavior property to Rigid for the object td24_tire_hsfld242\Base_Road
that models the road. Set the Thickness property of the road surface body to 0.1 mm.
Geometry
24.3.1. Create Remote Point for Point Mass and Remote Displacement Ap-
plication
Create a Remote Point with Rigid Behavior located at the center of the tire using the Named Selec-
tion scoping method set to RP1_Faces and the location coordinates shown below. Set the Pilot
Node APDL Name to "rim" so that this remote point can be used in a command snippet to apply
the acceleration over a bump in the fifth load step (see Load and Boundary Conditions (p. 259)).
Figure 24.4: Create Remote Point with Rigid Behavior
24.3.2. Create Point Mass

To transfer the weight of different vehicle components to the tire, create a 1 tonne Point Mass scoped
to the Remote Point (p. 233) already created as detailed in the following figure.
Geometry
Figure 24.5: Create Point Mass
24.3.3. Create Element Orientation on Shell Bodies Used for Reinforcement

Create two element orientations scoped to the Named Selections "Front_Shell_Body" and
"Back_Shell_Body" as shown below to align the elemental coordinate system of the shell bodies used
to create reinforcements.
Figure 24.6: Two Element Orientations
Geometry
Create Reinforcement on Belt Shell Bodies

Select the Reinforcement option for the Model Type property for the belt shell bodies (Belt 1 and
Belt 2) and set Fiber Cross Section Area = 4 mm2, Fiber Spacing = 2 mm, and Fiber Angle 90 as
shown in the following figure.
Note:
To use Reinforcement in a transient structural analysis, you must activate Beta options in
Workbench (see Activate Beta options in Workbench (p. 231)).
Figure 24.7: Reinforcement on Belt Shell Bodies
Create Reinforcement on Sidewall Shell Bodies

Select the Reinforcement option for the Model Type property for the sidewall shell bodies (Sidewall
1, Sidewall2, Sidewall 3, and Sidewall 4) and set Fiber Cross Section Area = 2 mm2, Fiber Spacing
= 2 mm, and Fiber Angle 90 as shown in the following figure.
Geometry
Figure 24.8: Reinforcement on Sidewall Shell Bodies
When the solution is initiated, the Mechanical Application temporarily defines the reinforcement
locations using MESH200 elements along with the base elements. During solution, it internally creates
the element REINF265 for surface bodies based on the intersection of corresponding MESH200 and
base elements.
Using the setup described above for reinforcements, tire reinforcing is modeled using the reinforcing
element REINF265. For more details on reinforcement modeling, see Reinforcement Specification Using
Mesh-Independent Method in the Mechanical User's Guide and Mesh-Independent Method for Defining
Reinforcing in the Structural Analysis Guide. Different material models are used to define the reinforcing
in the road contact area and the side walls (details provided in Material Properties (p. 252)). Reinforce-
ment are created for the road contact area and the side wall of the tire as shown below based on
the mesh sizing applied.
Figure 24.9: Reinforcement Elements

The tire is modeled with frictional contact between the tire and road and bonded contact between the
tire and the tire rim. The tire is meshed with linear solid elements (SOLID185). This section details the
modeling and meshing settings used in the simulation.
24.4.1. Contact Between Different Bodies

Suppress the existing Contacts folder, insert a Connection Group, and set its Auto Detection
Face/Face property to No. Then insert two Manual Contact Regions scoped to the Named Selections
available as shown in the following figures, Figure 24.10: Frictional Contact Between the Road and
Tire (p. 241) and Figure 24.11: Bonded Contact Between the Tire and the Tire Rim (p. 242). Use the right
mouse button (RMB) option Rename Based on Definition to show the proper contact name.
Note:
You must add a Commands (APDL) object with the following command:
keyopt,cid,10,2
under each contact region to update contact stiffness each iteration based on the current
mean stress of underlying elements. The actual elastic slip never exceeds the maximum
allowable limit (SLTO) during the entire solution.
For the frictional contact between the road and tire, set Detection Method to Nodal Projected
Normal From Contact instead of the default Program Controlled.
Figure 24.10: Frictional Contact Between the Road and Tire
Figure 24.11: Bonded Contact Between the Tire and the Tire Rim
24.4.2. Mesh
In the Mesh Details window, select Linear from the drop-down menu for Element Order (SOLID185)
and set the global Element Size = 16.397 mm.
Note:
You can select Quadratic for the Element Order to model the tire with SOLID186
elements.
The following mesh controls are added to create the proper mesh.
MultiZone Methods are added as shown in Figure 24.12: MultiZone Back_Tire_Body (p. 243) and Fig-
ure 24.13: MultiZone Front_Tire_Body (p. 244). Sweep Edges used in these mesh controls can be se-
lected using the RMB option Add to Current Selection on "Back_Sweep_Edges" and
"Front_Sweep_Edges" objects available under Named Selections.
Figure 24.12: MultiZone Back_Tire_Body
Figure 24.13: MultiZone Front_Tire_Body
Edge Sizing with Hard Behavior is used to control mesh sizing according to a discrete number of
divisions along the edge. The table below lists the settings used for Number of Divisions for existing
Named Selections available for edges, shown graphically in Figure 24.14: Edge Sizing (p. 245).
Table 24.1: Edge Sizing Specifications
Named Selection Number of Divisions

Base Edges 1
Edge_Sizing2 8
Edge_Sizing3 16
Edge_Sizing4 1
Edge_Sizing5 32
Edge_Sizing6 8
Edge_Sizing7 1
Figure 24.14: Edge Sizing
Add Mapped Face Meshing to create quadrilateral elements using the Named Selections available,
"Face_Meshing1" and "Face_Meshing2" as shown in the following figures.
Figure 24.15: Face Meshing
Figure 24.16: Face Meshing2
Generate the mesh using the mesh controls described above to view it on different parts.
Figure 24.17: Mesh
Generate element orientations by selecting Generate Orientations from the RMB options on Element
Orientation to view elemental coordinate systems aligned properly.
Figure 24.18: Element Orientations
24.4.3. Command Snippet to Create HSFLD242 Elements

To model the air inside of the tire with HSFLD242 hydrostatic fluid elements, APDL commands are
used. Rename Named Selections imported from SpaceClaim as shown below to match those used
in the command snippet.
Table 24.2: Rename Named Selections Imported from SpaceClaim
Imported Named Selection Renamed to

Tire_Solid_Bodies Tire
inside_positive_tire_faces INSIDE_POSITIVE_TIRE
inside_negative_rim_face INSIDE_NEGATIVE_RIM
The air inside of the tire is modeled with HSFLD242 hydrostatic fluid elements. The elements are
generated (ESURF) with a pressure node ID over the solid elements to enclose the air. Hydrostatic
fluid elements are created using the command snippet below added on the transient analysis envir-
onment. On the Transient environment, add a Commands (APDL) object and set the Step Selection
Mode property to First to execute these commands in the first step.
Note:
To use different Step Selection Modes in command snippets, set the Number of Steps
to 5 and increase the Step End Time to 1 s per step in the details of Analysis Settings
so that the total time for the analysis at the end of the fifth step is 5 s.
Command Snippet to Create HSFLD242 Elements

!================================================================================
! Commands used to create HSFLD242 elements to represent enclosed air
! What is needed:
! 1) Define Named Selection "inside_positive_tire" of all interior surface of tire
! 2) Define Named Selection "inside_negative_rim" of all interior surface of rim
!================================================================================
!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
! Define initial air density
! Note consistent units - if you solve in "mm, MPa" units, this must be
! mass density in right units (mass=tonne)
!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MY_GAS_INITIAL_DENSITY = 1.2041e-12
MY_GAS_REFERENCE_TEMP = 20
MY_GAS_OFFSET_TEMP = 274
MY_GAS_REFERENCE_PRES = 0.101325
finish
/nerr,10,99999999
/prep7
!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
! Determine highest used element type ID
! Then define HSFLD242 (hydrostatic fluid) element type with ID + 1
! Input reference temperature, initial density, reference temperature and
! temperature offset
!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*get,MY_MAX_ETYPE_ID,etyp,,num,max
et,MY_MAX_ETYPE_ID+1,242
r, MY_MAX_ETYPE_ID+1,MY_GAS_REFERENCE_PRES
tb,fluid,MY_MAX_ETYPE_ID+1,1,,gas
tbdata,1,MY_GAS_INITIAL_DENSITY
mp,reft,MY_MAX_ETYPE_ID+1,MY_GAS_REFERENCE_TEMP
toffst,MY_GAS_OFFSET_TEMP
!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
! Unselect all nodes
! Define the 'pressure node' that controls the pressure in air
! This node is defined at (0,341,0) which is an approximate center of the tire region
!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
nsel,none
n,,0,341,0
MY_NODE_PRESSURE = node(0,341,0)
!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
! Select nodes from name selection 'inside_positive_tire' and 'inside_negative_rim'
! Define the HSFLD242 element attributes as the 'active' attributes for newly-created elements
! Create elements with ESURF
!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cmsel,s,INSIDE_POSITIVE_TIRE
cmsel,a,INSIDE_NEGATIVE_RIM
esln
type,MY_MAX_ETYPE_ID+1
real,MY_MAX_ETYPE_ID+1
mat, MY_MAX_ETYPE_ID+1
secn,MY_MAX_ETYPE_ID+1
esurf,MY_NODE_PRESSURE
allsel,all
/solu
Since you cannot display HSFLD elements in the Mechanical Application, you must open the model
in Mechanical APDL to view them. The following figure shows the fluid elements generated over the
solid elements.
Figure 24.19: Hydrostatic Fluid Element with Positive Volume
Because the fluid elements are pyramid shaped with common vertices at each pressure node ID, the
fluid elements cover some undesired volumes as well. So that fluid elements exist only in the region
where air should be present, fluid elements with a negative volume are used in the undesired region,
as shown in the following figure.
Figure 24.20: Hydrostatic Fluid Element with Negative Volume

Material properties for the tire, air, and reinforcing materials are listed in the following tables.
Table 24.3: Material Properties of the Tire
Tire Rubber
Density 2.67e-9 kg/mm3
Mooney-Rivlin Hyperelastic Material Model Constants
C10 0.551584 MPa
Analysis Settings for Step Controls
C01 0.137896 MPa

D1 0 MPa-1
Assign Tire Rubber material properties defined above for Solid_Tire (Front and Back bodies). This is
important because otherwise the analysis will not converge.
Table 24.4: Reinforcing Material Properties
Reinforcing in Contact with Road Surface Reinforcing in the Side Walls

(Belt_Mat) (Sidewall_Mat)
Young's Modulus 2e5 MPa 2e4 MPa
Poisson's Ratio 0.3 0.3
Table 24.5: Air Properties
Fluid Material Properties: Air, modeled as a compressible gas, is the fluid inside the tire.
Initial Density 1.225e-12 tonne/mm3
Reference Temperature 20°C
Temperature Offset 274°C
24.6. Analysis Settings for Step Controls

The analysis is set up with five steps, each with different Substep Controls and Time Integration settings
as shown below. Stabilization Nonlinear Control is set to Program controlled for all steps.

Environment Temperature of 20°C is set on Transient Structural environment. Because this problem
is solved in five load steps, different boundary conditions (BCs) and loadings are imposed in each load
step.

Remote Displacement scoped to Base_Faces Named Acceleration with Y component = 9806.6 mm/s2 is
Selection is created to restrict movement in all applied in the first step and held constant for
directions, which represents the Road surface. remaining steps. Remote Displacement scoped to
Remote Point with Y component = -50 mm is
applied in the third step and then deactivated in
following steps.
The acceleration load is scoped to all bodies using the Y component and tabular data as seen in the
following figure.
Figure 24.21: Acceleration Load
A Remote Displacement scoped to the "Base_Faces" Named Selection is created to restrict movement
in all direction in all steps, which represents the Road surface as shown below.
Figure 24.22: Remote Displacement to Restrict Movement
To apply an initial temperature to the hydrostatic fluid elements (previously added to the model as
described in Command Snippet to Create HSFLD242 Elements (p. 250)), add another Commands (APDL)
object on the Transient environment. On this commands object, select the By Number option for the
Step Selection Mode property, set Step Number to 1, and copy and paste the commands listed below
in the commands window.
Command Snippet to Apply Initial Temperature to the HSFLD elements

!================================================================================
! Commands used to apply Initial temperature to the hsfld elements
! ARG1 = Initial temperature in Centigrade
!================================================================================
bf,1,temp,20
! Delete default result request and save all the results
outres,erase
outres,all,all
To inflate the tire in the second step, the pressure node is constrained by applying a pressure boundary
condition, hydrostatic pressure = 36 psi (0.2482128 N/mm2). The constraint is equivalent to applying a
surface load on the underlying solid surface. It must be applied using a command snippet since there
is no option available for applying hydrostatic pressure in the Mechanical Application. Add a Commands
(APDL) object on the Transient environment, select the By Number option for Step Selection Mode,
set Step Number to 2, and copy and paste the commands listed below in the commands window.
Command Snippet to Apply Hydrostatic Pressure

!================================================================================
! Commands used to apply Inflation pressure to the hsfld elements
! ARG1 = Inflation pressure in psi
! KBC,0 will ramp up the pressure
!================================================================================
kbc,0
aa = 0.2482128
d,MY_NODE_PRESSURE,hdsp,aa
outres,erase
outres,all,all
In the third step, the tire is moved down to make contact with the road surface by applying the dis-
placement boundary condition to the pilot node. To achieve this, a Remote Displacement is scoped
to the Remote Point (p. 233) with Y component = -50 mm, applied in third step and then deactivated
in further steps.
Note:
Deactivate RX, RY, and RZ in addition to the Y component in the fourth and fifth step
using the RMB option Activate/Deactivate at this step in Tabular Data. Deactivated
tabular data will be highlighted grey as seen below. This is an important step to achieve
a converged solution.
Figure 24.23: Remote Displacement to Move Tire in Contact with Road
In the fourth step, all pressure and displacement boundary conditions are removed. The Remote Dis-
placement applied in the third step has already been deactivated in steps 4 and 5. To remove the applied
pressure, add a Commands (APDL) object on the Transient environment, select the By Number option
for Step Selection Mode, set Step Number to 4, and copy and paste the commands listed below in
the commands window.
Command Snippet to Remove Pressure

!================================================================================
! Commands used to remove pressure loading condition
!================================================================================
Results
ddele,MY_NODE_PRESSURE,hdsp
outres,erase
outres,all,all
In the fifth step an acceleration boundary condition is applied to the pilot node with name "rim" specified
in the Remote Point (p. 233) previously created (see Create Remote Point for Point Mass and Remote
Displacement Application (p. 233)). To apply acceleration on the pilot node, add a Commands (APDL)
object on the Transient environment, select the By Number option for Step Selection Mode, set Step
Number to 5, and copy and paste the commands listed below in the commands window.
Command Snippet to Apply Acceleration

!================================================================================
! Apply boundary condition to roll the tire on the road surface
! ARG1 = linear acceleration in mm/sec^2
! MIDTOL command is used to set high tolerance to allow large increments
!================================================================================
kbc,1
midtol,on,1.e6
d,rim,accz,1400
outres,erase
outres,all,all
To set convergence values for hydrostatic pressure and volume, add a Commands (APDL) object on
the Transient environment, select the All option for Step Selection Mode, and copy and paste the
commands listed below in the commands window.
Command Snippet to Set Convergence Values

!================================================================================
! Set hydrostatic pressure and volume convergence for nonlinear analysis
!================================================================================
cnvtol,dvol
cnvtol,hdsp
24.8. Results
Insert a Total Deformation object in the solution environment to view the calculated deformation of
the tire after solving the model.
Figure 24.24: Total Deformation
24.8.1. Time-History Response

To examine the condition of the inside air and its effect on the axle through each load step, add the
command snippet below to get the time history plots.
/post26
!Settings for reverse video plot
esel,s,ename,,242
*get,el_min,elem,0,num,min
/rgb,index,100,100,100, 0
/rgb,index, 80, 80, 80,13
/rgb,index, 60, 60, 60,14
/rgb,index, 0, 0, 0,15
nsol,2,MY_NODE_PRESSURE,hdsp,hdsp1
esol,3,el_min,,nmisc,1,dens
esol,4,el_min,,nmisc,3,tvol
esol,5,el_min,,nmisc,4,tmas
esol,6,el_min,,nmisc,6,ovol
prvar,2,4,3,5 !print the pressure, density, volume and mass at different time
Results
/out,scratch
/show,png
plvar,2
plvar,4
plvar,3
plvar,5
!SET,NEAR,,,,1
*GET,MY_PRES,VARI,2,REAL,1
*GET,MY_DENS,VARI,3,REAL,1
*GET,MY_TVOL,VARI,4,REAL,1
*GET,MY_TMAS,VARI,5,REAL,1
!SET,NEAR,,,,2
*GET,MY_PRES2,VARI,2,REAL,2
*GET,MY_DENS2,VARI,3,REAL,2
*GET,MY_TVOL2,VARI,4,REAL,2
*GET,MY_TMAS2,VARI,5,REAL,2
!SET,NEAR,,,,3
!SET,NEAR,,,,4
!SET,NEAR,,,,5
/show,close
The following figures shows the condition of the inside air inside the tire through each load step.
Figure 24.25: Fluid Pressure Variation
Results
Figure 24.26: Fluid Volume Variation
Figure 24.27: Fluid Density Variation
Results
Figure 24.28: Fluid Mass Variation
24.8.2. Tire Deformation Simulation

The following animation shows the tire deformation through all load steps:
Figure 24.29: Tire Deformation (All Load Steps)
To perform a similar analysis of a fluid that is fully enclosed within a solid container, consider the fol-
lowing hints and recommendations:
• Introduce the fluid mass based on the volume of the fluid element.
Set KEYOPT(5) = 1 for the hydrostatic fluid. No mass is added if the volume becomes negative.
• Specify the fluid compressibility type.
Set KEYOPT(6) = 0 for the hydrostatic fluid to model compressible fluid (default), or KEYOPT(6) = 1 to
model incompressible fluid.
• Determine the pressure node location carefully.
The pressure node can be located anywhere within the fluid volume. If the fluid volume is bounded by
one or more symmetry lines or planes, however, the pressure node must be on the line or plane of
symmetry, or on the intersecting corner or line of multiple symmetry lines or planes, and it must have
symmetrical boundary conditions.

Chapter 26: Nonlinear Analysis of a Rubber Boot Seal
This example problem demonstrates the capabilities and advantages of the surface-projection-based
contact method in a highly nonlinear problem. This analysis of a rubber boot seal model includes geo-
metric, material, and changing status nonlinearities (contact). This example is simulated using the Ansys
Mechanical Application. To see this example solved with Ansys Mechanical APDL see Nonlinear Analysis
of a Rubber Boot Seal in the Technology Showcase: Example Problems.
• 3-D surface-to-surface contact element technology
• Surface-projection-based contact
• Geometric nonlinearities
• Neo-Hookean hyperelastic material
Overview
Element Type(s) Rubber boot: 3-D 8-Node Structural Solid (SOLID185)
Rigid shaft: Structural Mass (MASS21)

26.1. Introduction
26.3. Modeling
26.1. Introduction
Rubber boot seals are used in many industrial applications to protect the flexible joint between two
bodies. In the automotive industry, rubber boot seals cover constant velocity joints on the drive shaft
to protect them from the outside elements (dust, humidity, mud, etc.). These rubber boots are designed
Nonlinear Analysis of a Rubber Boot Seal
to accommodate the maximum possible swing angle of the joints and to compensate for changes in
the shaft length.
This rubber boot seal example demonstrates geometric nonlinearities (large strain and large deformation),
nonlinear material behavior (rubber), and changing status nonlinearities (contact). The objective of this
example is to show the advantages of the surface-projection-based contact method and to determine
the displacement behavior of the rubber boot seal, stress results, and location of the contact point on
the outer surface and inner surface of the boot during the shaft motion.
Surface-projection-based contact can be defined by setting KEYOPT(4) = 3 for the contact elements
using the option indicated below for the contact region.
Figure 26.1: Setting Surface-Projection-Based Contact
This option enforces contact constraints on an overlapping region of contact and target surfaces rather
than on individual contact nodes or gauss points. The contact penetration/gap is computed over the
overlapping region in an average sense.

A rubber boot seal with half symmetry is considered for this analysis. There are three contact pairs
defined. One is rigid-flexible contact between the rubber boot and cylindrical shaft, and the remaining
two are self contact pairs on the inside and outside surfaces of the boot.
Modeling
Figure 26.2: 3-D Model of Rubber Boot Seal and Rigid Shaft
The problem is solved in three load steps:
1. Initial interference between the cylinder and boot
2. Vertical displacement of the cylinder (axial compression in the rubber boot)
3. Rotation of the cylinder (bending of the rubber boot)
26.3. Modeling
Leveraging the symmetry of the structure, only half of the rubber boot is modeled. For the rubber boot,
the hyperelastic material model is used. The shaft is considered as a rigid body.
Modeling for this problem involves the following tasks:

26.3.1. Model the Rubber Boot Seal
26.3.2. Model the Contact Pairs
26.3.1. Model the Rubber Boot Seal

Lower order hexahedron elements (SOLID185) are used to mesh the rubber boot as shown in the
figure below. This model has 3387 elements.
Figure 26.3: Linear Order Used for Mesh Elements
Face Sizing of 2 mm is used for 15 faces of the rubber boot as shown in the following figure.
Figure 26.4: Face Sizing Used for Mesh Elements
Mapped face meshing is used for the rigid shaft as shown in the following figure.
Modeling
Figure 26.5: Mapped Face Meshing for Rigid Shaft
The final meshed model is shown in the figure below. It has total 2641 elements.
Figure 26.6: Meshed Model of the Assembly

Three contact pairs are defined to simulate contact occurring in the rubber boot during the shaft
movement:
• Rigid flexible contact between the rigid cylindrical shaft and the inner surface of the rubber
boot.
• Self contact at the inner surface of the rubber boot using the surface-projection-based contact
method.
• Self contact at the outer surface of the rubber boot using the surface-projection-based contact
method.
26.3.2.1. Rigid-flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Shaft and Rubber Boot
Frictional contact with a friction coefficient of 0.2 is defined between rigid shaft face and inner 30
faces of the rubber boot to be in contact.
Figure 26.7: Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair Between the Rigid Shaft and the Rubber Boot
The following contact settings are used.
• Include interference with ramped effects (KEYOPT(9) = 2).
• Set the location of the contact detection point at the gauss integration point (KEYOPT(4) = 0).
• Update contact stiffness at each iteration (KEYOPT(10) = 2).
The following figure shows details of contact settings. The location of coordinate system used for
target ending point is at the top face of shaft and has same orientation as global coordinate system.
Modeling
Figure 26.8: Details of Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Shaft and Rubber Boot
26.3.2.2. Self Contact Pairs at Inner and Outer Surfaces of Rubber Boot
Two frictional self-contacts with a friction coefficient 0.2 are defined between the 30 inner and
outer faces of rubber boot to be in self-contact.
Figure 26.9: Self Contact Pairs at Inner and Outer Surfaces of the Rubber Boot
To model a self contacting pair, both the target and contact surfaces are the same.
The following contact settings are used:
• Surface-projection-based contact detection method (KEYOPT(4) = 3)
• Update contact stiffness at each iteration (KEYOPT(10) = 2)
Material Properties
Figure 26.10: Detailed Settings for Self Contact Pairs on Inner and Outer Surfaces of Rubber
Boot

Unit System Metric (mm, kg, N, s, mV, mA)

Angle Radians
The rubber boot is made of a rubber material that exhibits an elastic response up to the large strain.
Therefore, the Neo-Hookean model, an incompressible hyperelastic material model, is used for the
rubber material with properties listed in the table and Workbench screenshot below.
Constants for Neo-Hookean Model

Initial shear modulus (μ) 1.5 MPa
Incompressibility parameter (d) 0.026 MPa-1
Figure 26.11: Constants for Neo-Hookean Model

The model is constrained at the symmetry plane by restricting the out-of-plane translations. The bottom
portion of the rubber boot is restricted in the axial and radial directions. This is done by applying Fric-
tionless Supports as shown in the following figures.
Figure 26.12: Frictionless support at symmetry plane faces to restrict the out-of-plane translations
Figure 26.13: Frictionless support at bottom faces to restrict the axial translation
Figure 26.14: Frictionless support at bottom cylindrical faces to restrict the radial translation
Remote Points are defined with Rigid Behavior and are scoped to top and bottom faces of rigid shaft
as shown in the following figures.
Figure 26.15: Rigid Remote Point Scoped to Top Face of Shaft
Figure 26.16: Rigid Remote Point Scoped to Bottom Face of Shaft
The Remote Displacement is applied in terms of displacements and rotations through different load
steps scoped to the Remote Point at the bottom face of shaft (Remote Point 2 shown in the previous
figure). The following load steps are specified:
• Load step 1: Remote Displacement is constrained in all directions.
• Load Step 2: Boot seal gets compressed when the shaft moves down. The vertical movement of the
shaft is governed by the displacement applied to the base node (pilot node) at the end of the shaft's
center axis. Downward displacement of 10 mm is applied.
• Load Step 3: Shaft is rotated by giving rotation of 0.55 radians about z-axis to the base node (pilot
node) at the end of the shaft's center axis.
The Remote Displacement is defined as shown in the figure below.
Figure 26.17: Remote Displacement (Displacements and Rotations) Applied in Different Load
Steps

A nonlinear static analysis is performed in three load steps. Large Deflection property is set On in the
analysis.
Figure 26.18: Step Controls Used
Figure 26.19: Set Large Deflection On and Stabilization Off

Figure 26.20: Comparison of Cumulative Iterations for Different Contact Detection Methods (p. 285) and
Table 26.1: Simulation Statistics for Different Contact Detection Methods (p. 285) illustrate the following
advantages of the surface-projection-based contact method by comparing it with other available contact
detection algorithms.
• Compared to other methods, the surface-projection-based contact method (KEYOPT(4) = 3) requires

the least number of cumulative iterations to solve this problem.
• Convergence of the problem is less sensitive to the normal contact stiffness factor (FKN) when using
the surface-projection-based contact method (KEYOPT(4) =3).
Figure 26.20: Comparison of Cumulative Iterations for Different Contact Detection Methods
The surface-projection-based contact method (KEYOPT(4) = 3) produces smoother contact forces than
other contact detection algorithms. It is less sensitive to the magnitude of the contact stiffness.
For smaller values of FKN (0.1 to 1.0), the variation in cumulative iterations is less for all contact detection
methods. But for the higher values of FKN (1 to 10), the variation in cumulative iterations for the surface-
projection-based method is much less compared to the other contact detection methods. FKN = 1 is
optimal for nonlinear analysis.
In general, the surface-projection-based contact method is much more expensive in computational

time. In this particular model, the total number of iterations and substeps used with this method is less
than for other contact detection algorithms. The overall performance using the surface projection
method turns out to be better. This can be observed in the table below:
Table 26.1: Simulation Statistics for Different Contact Detection Methods
KEYOPT(4) = 0; Gauss KEYOPT(4) = 1; Nodal KEYOPT(4) = 3; Surface

Point Point Projection
Substeps 30 30 30
Cumulative Iterations 224 227 220
Simulation Time (sec) 417 471 370
the following figure shows the displacement position of the boot at the maximum shaft angle.
Figure 26.21: Total Displacement at Maximum Shaft Angle
The location of the critical zones where the maximum stress occurs in the boot at maximum shaft angle
are illustrated in the following figure. Although the equivalent stress values are low, considering the
fatigue effects of the material after numerous cycles, these areas are the most likely to fail under fatigue
loads.
Figure 26.22: Von Mises Stress at the Maximum Shaft Angle
The following figures show total strain at different points of contact occurring in the rubber boot at
different shaft angels. The first instance of contact occurs between the outer plaits of the rubber boot.
After that, stretching is noticed in the first contact zone, and the second contact occurs between the
inner plaits of the rubber boot. Finally, the third contact occurs between the inner plaits of the rubber
boot and the shaft.
Figure 26.23: Total Strain at First Contact between Outer Plaits of Rubber Boot
Figure 26.24: Total Strain at Second Contact between Inner Plaits of Rubber Boot
Recommendations
Figure 26.25: Total Strain at Third Contact between Inner Plaits of Rubber Boot and Shaft
Summary of results:
Result Type Result Value

Total Deformation max. at 3 s 58.013 mm
Equivalent Stress max. at 3 s 1.1556 MPa
Equivalent Total Strain max. at first Contact between Outer Plaits of Rubber Boot 0.2102 mm/mm
(2.467 s)
Equivalent Total Strain max. at second Contact between Outer Plaits of Rubber Boot 0.26431 mm/mm
(2.8 s)
Equivalent Total Strain max. at third Contact between Outer Plaits of Rubber Boot 0.26627 mm/mm
(2.99 s)
The following are recommendations for performing this type of analysis:
• Note that the surface-projection-based method (KEYOPT(4) = 3) is not used to define contact
between the rigid shaft and the rubber boot because this method does not support rigid surfaces
defined by primitive target segments.
• For problems such as an interference fit, over-penetration is expected. These problems often
have convergence difficulties if the initial penetration is step-applied in the first load step. You
may overcome convergence difficulties by ramping the total initial penetration over the first
load step using KEYOPT(9) = 2.

Chapter 27: Hot-Rolling Structural Steel Analysis with
Nonlinear Mesh Adaptivity
This example problem uses Nonlinear Mesh Adaptivity in a 3-D large-deformation problem. In large-
deformation analyses, such as rolling, forging, and extrusion, elements are subject to excessive deform-
ation, which can eventually cause the analysis to terminate. This example is simulated using the Ansys
Mechanical Application. To see this example solved with Ansys Mechanical APDL see Hot-Rolling
Structural Steel Analysis with 3-D Rezoning in the Technology Showcase: Example Problems.
• Nonlinear Mesh Adaptivity in 3-D problems
• Use of contact technology in complex problems
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Static Structural analysis using Nonlinear Adaptive Region
Element Type(s) 3-D Solid

27.1. Introduction
27.3. Modeling
27.1. Introduction
Hot-rolling is a metal-forming process that occurs above the recrystallization temperature of the mater-
ial. Many types of hot-rolling processes exist, including structural shape rolling, where a component is
passed through rollers to achieve the desired shape and cross section.
Hot-Rolling Structural Steel Analysis with Nonlinear Mesh Adaptivity
Structural steel is the most common hot-rolled material. Common shapes for structural steel include I-
beams, H-beams, T-beams, U-beams, and channels. I-beams have an I-shaped cross-section. The hori-
zontal elements of the cross section are called flanges, and the vertical element is called the web.
In this example problem, the hot-rolling process to form the I-beam is simulated statically using Nonlinear
Mesh Adaptivity.
27.1.1. Description of the Hot-Rolling Process

The hot-rolling process consists of two primary phases, unsteady and steady. The starting and the
ending of the hot-rolling process represent the unsteady phase, while the rest of the process represents
the steady-state phase.
In the unsteady phase, the billet (rectangular bar of steel) comes into contact with the rollers and
fills the gap between the rollers before moving through the rollers. When the billet begins to move
through the rollers, the process is considered to be in a steady state until the end face of the billet
comes into contact with the rollers.
27.1.2. Hot-Rolling Process Simulation

Although a transient analysis is often used to simulate the hot-rolling process, a static analysis is
generally preferred when dynamic effects are unimportant or when a transient analysis may require
excessive resources. This example shows how both the unsteady and steady phases of the hot-rolling
process can be simulated with a static analysis.
The static analysis is performed in two load steps: the first builds up the rolling process, and hot-
rolling occurs in the second.
In the first load step, the billet moves toward rigid rollers to establish contact with the rollers and to
fill the gap between the rollers. To build up the rolling process, the billet should partially fill the gap
between rollers so that when rollers begin to rotate, they can pull the billet in via friction.
In the second load step, the rollers pull the billet in and eventually shape the rectangular billet into
an I-section block.

A rectangular block is passed through set of rollers to obtain an I-shaped beam, as shown in the following
figure:
Problem Description
Figure 27.1: Hot-Rolling Model
Two types of rollers are used:
• Top and bottom rollers
Horizontal cylindrical rollers pull the block from the top and bottom to increase the width and reduce
the depth of the block. The rollers control the width of the flange parts of the I-shape. they are
modeled using rigid target elements.
• Side rollers
Vertical cylindrical rollers with small fillets at either end. The fillets are necessary to ensure smooth
material flow. The side rollers pull the block from the sides to create the I-shaped cross section. They
control the width of the web part of the I-shape. As with the top and bottom rollers, the side rollers
are modeled using rigid target elements.
The following figure shows that the problem is symmetrical about two planes (XZ and YZ):
Figure 27.2: Symmetric Hot-Rolling Model
To reduce modeling and computational time, only one quarter of the model is analyzed.
The simulation is performed statically in two load steps with Nonlinear Adaptive Region scoped to
the block body. In the first load step, the block is moved towards the rigid rollers to build up the rolling
process. In the second load step, the block is moved further to simulate hot-rolling performed by the
rollers.
As the block passes through rollers, large deformation occurs due to the high level of friction between
the rollers and the block. Eventually, the full block passes through the rollers to achieve the I-shaped
cross section. In such large-deformation problems, however, mesh distortion is common, which can
lead to convergence difficulties and even analysis termination.
27.3. Modeling
The geometry of the model consists of three bodies: the block, the top roller, and the side roller which
are created in Design Modeler. The block is a solid body, and the rollers are of surface bodies with 0.01
m thickness. The following figure shows the dimensions of all three bodies.
Modeling
Figure 27.3: Meshed Model with Dimensions
Notice that the block has small fillets at either end of the top face. The fillets help to establish contact
with the top roller. Without them, the sharp corner of the block would cause local singularities, and the
analysis would diverge.
Leveraging the symmetry of the structure, only one-quarter of the model is included in the simulation.
A bilinear isotropic hardening material model is used for the block body. The top roller and side roller
are modeled as rigid bodies.
Modeling for this problem involves the following tasks:

27.3.1. Model the Symmetry Regions
27.3.2. Model the Block
27.3.3. Model the Rollers
27.3.1. Model the Symmetry Regions

The following figure shows the geometry used in the simulation, which is one-quarter of the full
model. Two Symmetry Regions are defined to simulate the one-quarter model geometry.
Figure 27.4: Hot-Rolling Quarter Model Geometry
The first symmetry region is scoped to the side face of the block, selecting the Global X-axis as the
symmetry normal.
Figure 27.5: Symmetry Region 1
The second symmetry region is scoped to bottom face of the block, selecting the Global Y-axis as the
symmetry normal.
Figure 27.6: Symmetry Region 2
27.3.2. Model the Block

The Stiffness Behavior of the block is set to Flexible. The Tetrahedrons Patch Conforming Method
is used to mesh the block with SOLID187 elements. The default setting of program controlled for the
Modeling
global Element Order results in quadratic elements for this model. Body Sizing of 0.1 m is used for
the Block body as shown in the following figure.
Figure 27.7: Mesh Settings for the Block
27.3.3. Model the Rollers

MASS21 elements are used to model the rollers since their Stiffness Behavior is defined as Rigid.
Figure 27.8: Geometry Details of Rollers
Body Sizing controls are used for contact target elements. Body Sizing of 0.05 m for side roller and
of 0.25 m for top roller are used as shown in the following figure.
Figure 27.9: Mesh Settings for Rollers

Two contact pairs are defined to simulate contact occurring between block and rollers during the
block movement:
27.3.4.1. Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Top Roller and Block
27.3.4.2. Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Side Roller and Block
27.3.4.1. Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Top Roller and Block
Frictional contact with a friction coefficient of 0.6 is defined between the rigid top roller face and
6 faces (all faces excluding faces used to define symmetry regions) of the block to be in contact.
The following contact settings are used as highlighted in the figures below:
• Select Top face as Target Shell Face.
• Contact Behavior is Asymmetric.
• Set Update Stiffness to Each Iteration.
Modeling
Figure 27.10: Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Top Roller and Block
Figure 27.11: Details of Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Top Roller and Block
27.3.4.2. Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Side Roller and Block
Frictional contact with a friction coefficient of 0.6 is defined between the rigid side roller faces and
3 faces (front, back and side) of the block to model their contact.
The following contact settings are used as highlighted in the following figures:
• Select Top face as Target Shell Face
• Set contact Behavior to Asymmetric.
• Set Update Stiffness to Each Iteration.
Figure 27.12: Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Side Roller and Block
Material Properties
Figure 27.13: Details of Rigid-Flexible Contact Pair between Rigid Side Roller and Block

Unit System Metric (m, kg, N, s, V, A)

Angle Radians
The top roller and side roller are made of structural steel.
The block uses structural steel with elastoplastic behavior. A bilinear isotropic hardening material
model (TB,PLASTIC,,,,BISO) is used with the following temperature-independent material properties:
Material Properties for Hot-Rolling Analysis

Young's Modulus 200 Gpa
Poisson's Ratio 0.3
Tangent Modulus 2 Gpa
Yield Stress 70 Mpa[a]
Material Properties for Hot-Rolling Analysis

Coefficient of friction[b] 0.6
[a] A hot-rolling problem uses a low-yield stress value.
[b] Between the rollers and the block during the rolling process.
To specify the block material in Engineering Data perform the following steps:
1. Right click Structural Steel material in Engineering Data and select Duplicate to create a new
material Structural Steel 2.
2. Double click Bilinear Isotropic Hardening listed under Plasticity in the Toolbox to add it to
the properties of Structural Steel 2.
3. Under Bilinear Isotropic Hardening, set Yield Strength and Tangent Modulus to the values
listed in the table above.
Figure 27.14: Material properties for Block body
After defining the Structural Steel 2 material, close the Engineering Data workspace, click Refresh
Project on the project schematic in Workbench, and assign it to the block body in the Mechanical Ap-
plication.

Two local coordinate systems are created that are used to define remote displacements.
27.5.1. First Remote Displacement

Create a coordinate system and scope it to the Named Selection "TopRoller" body with details shown
in the figure below so that the X axis is aligned with the axis of the top roller.
Figure 27.15: First Coordinate System
Create a Remote Displacement scoped to top roller face (Named Selection "Face_2") and the local
coordinate system described above in Figure 27.15: First Coordinate System (p. 303) to set top roller
rotation around its axis to Free and constrain it in all other directions.
Figure 27.16: First Remote Displacement
27.5.2. Second Remote Displacement

Create a second coordinate system and scope it to the Named Selection "SideRoller" body with details
shown in the figure below so that the Y axis is aligned with the axis of the side roller.
Figure 27.17: Second Coordinate System
Create a second Remote Displacement scoped to side roller face (Named Selection "Face_3") and the
local coordinate system described above in Figure 27.17: Second Coordinate System (p. 305) to set
side roller rotation around its axis to Free and constrain it in all other directions.
Figure 27.18: Second Remote Displacement
27.5.3. Displacement
A Displacement along global Z direction is applied to the top face of the block (Named Selection
"Face_1"). The block is displaced to 1.5 m in load step 1 and then to 6 m in load step 2 along global
Z direction.
Figure 27.19: Displacement
27.5.4. Nonlinear Adaptive Region

To enable adaptive mesh regeneration during the simulation, create a Nonlinear Adaptive Region
and scope it to the block body with the following settings:
• Set Criterion to Mesh
• Select Skewness and Jacobian Ratio Option.
• Set Skewness Value to 0.9 and Jacobian Ratio Value to 0.1.
• Set Recurrence Rate to 10 for Time Range of entire load step.
Figure 27.20: Nonlinear Adaptive Region

A nonlinear static analysis is performed in two load steps of one second each. The analysis diverges
due to excessive deformation of elements. Nonlinear Adaptivity Remeshing is used in this example
problem to automatically remesh the model to avoid divergence during solution. The Nonlinear Adaptivity
Remeshing Controls category is available under Analysis Controls because you have inserted a Nonlinear
Adaptive Region (p. 306) condition and specified its Criterion property as Mesh. The following analysis
settings are used:
• Set Auto Time Stepping on under Step Controls.
• Define Initial, Minimum and Maximum sub-steps as 2000, 20 and 100000 respectively.
• Set Weak Springs off and Large Deflection on in Solver Controls.
• In Restart Controls, set Generate Restart Points to manual for all load steps with recurrence
rate to 20 sub-steps.
• Enable Retain Files After Full Solve.
• Under Nonlinear Adaptivity Remeshing Controls, set NSL value to 2, GSR value to 1.1, and
RT value to 0.03.
Figure 27.21: Analysis settings for Load Step 1
Figure 27.22: Analysis settings for Load Step 2

The following figure shows the Force Convergence plot along with remesh points.
When the simulation experiences sudden high stress changes occur at substep 20, it automatically
remeshes the affected region to avoid divergence. After that, Nonlinear Adaptivity Remeshing occurs
according to the defined recurrence rate.
Note:
The results obtained may differ than those reported in the figures below since the
Nonlinear Adaptive Region may create a different mesh than the one shown below.
The aim of this demonstration is to explain the use of advanced technology in Ansys
Mechanical.
Figure 27.23: Force Convergence Plot
The following figure displays the Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress over time. The green, red, and blue
curves plot the maximum, minimum, and average equivalent stress values.
Figure 27.24: : Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress Plot
The first re-mesh occurred after sub step 20 (TIME = 0.1277 s) when the side roller makes contact with
block and starts pushing on the block, which causes high distortion in elements.
Figure 27.25: Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress at first re-mesh point
The Block starts to pass between the rollers after the first remesh and begins to take shape.
Figure 27.26: Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress after Load Step 1
The Block experiences the highest stress at the point of contact detachment between the block and
rollers at 1.6848 s.
Figure 27.27: Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress at 1.6848s
Figure 27.28: Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress after Load Step 2
Figure 27.29: Animation of Total Deformation
As expected, the high plastic strain region is observed at the location where the web and flange com-
ponents of the I-beam are connected.
Recommendations
Figure 27.30: Equivalent Plastic Strain
For a period of time during the rolling process (Load Step 2), there is little variation in plastic strain
over time in the high plastic strain region. This behavior occurs during the steady-state (rolling) phase
of the simulation. The following figure shows the variation of maximum, minimum, and average equi-
valent strain values over time, represented by the green, red, and blue curves respectively.
Figure 27.31: Equivalent Plastic Strain Plot
Consider the following hints and recommendations:
• Nonlinear Adaptive Region is useful for nonlinear problems that experience convergence difficulties
or accuracy issues because of elemental distortions.
• It is also useful for cases where large deformation is small but requires mesh adaptation to better
capture the physics and give a more accurate solution.
• The Nonlinear Adaptive Region condition requires the Store Results At property to be set to
All Time Points in the Output Controls category of the Analysis Settings.
• The Nonlinear Adaptive Region condition cannot be used in combination with Weak Springs
(COMBIN14 element).
• It is necessary that the contact object property Behavior be set to either Symmetric or Asym-
metric to use a Nonlinear Adaptive Region in the analysis.

Chapter 28: Friction Stir Welding (FSW) Simulation
This example problem shows how to simulate the friction stir welding (FSW) process using the Ansys
Mechanical Application. To see this example solved using Ansys Mechanical APDL see Friction Stir
Welding (FSW) Simulation in the Technology Showcase: Example Problems. Several characteristics of FSW
are presented, including tool-workpiece surface interaction, heat generation due to friction, and plastic
deformation. A nonlinear direct coupled-field analysis is performed, as thermal and mechanical behaviors
are mutually dependent and coupled together during the FSW process.
Because it is often difficult to find a full set of engineering data to simulate the FSW process, the
problem emphasizes the simulation rather than the numerical results. A simplified version of the model
created by Zhu and Chao [1 (p. 334)] illustrates the FSW simulation method.
• Direct structural-thermal analysis using coupled-field solid elements
• Plastic heat generation in coupled-field elements
• Frictional heat generation using contact elements
• Surface-projection-based contact method
• Contact elements with bonding capability
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Coupled Field Transient
Element Type(s) 3-D Solid (SOLID226 )

28.1. Introduction
28.3. Modeling
28.9. References
Friction Stir Welding (FSW) Simulation
28.1. Introduction
Friction stir welding (FSW) is a solid-state welding technique that involves the joining of metals without
filler materials. A cylindrical rotating tool plunges into a rigidly clamped workpiece and moves along
the joint to be welded. As the tool translates along the joint, heat is generated by friction between the
tool shoulder and the workpiece. Additional heat is generated by plastic deformation of the workpiece
material. The generated heat results in thermal softening of the workpiece material. The translation of
the tool causes the softened workpiece material to flow from the front to the back of the tool where
it consolidates. As cooling occurs, a solid continuous joint between the two plates is formed. No melting
occurs during the process, and the resulting temperature remains below the solidus temperature of
the metals being joined. FSW offers many advantages over conventional welding techniques, and has
been successfully applied in the aerospace, automobile, and shipbuilding industries.
Thermal and mechanical behaviors are mutually dependent during the FSW process. Because the tem-
perature field affects stress distribution, this example uses a fully thermo-mechanically coupled model.
The model consists of a coupled-field solid element with structural and thermal degrees of freedom.
The model has two rectangular steel plates and a cylindrical tool. All necessary mechanical and thermal
boundary conditions (p. 323) are applied on the model. The simulation occurs over three load steps,
representing the plunge, dwell, and traverse phases (p. 325) of the process.
The temperature rises at the contact interface due to frictional contact between the tool and workpiece.
FSW generally occurs when the temperature at the weld line region reaches 70 to 90 percent of the
melting temperature of the workpiece material [3 (p. 334)]. The temperature obtained around the weld
line region in this example falls within the range reported by Zhu and Chao [1 (p. 334)] and Prasanna
and Rao [3 (p. 334)], while the maximum resulting temperature is well below the melting temperature
of the workpiece.
The calculated frictional heat generation and plastic heat generation show that the friction between
the tool shoulder and workpiece is responsible for generating most of the heat. A bonding temperature
is specified at the contact interface of the plates to model the welding behind the tool. When the
temperature at the contact surface exceeds this bonding temperature, the contact is changed to bonded.
The Zhu and Chao Thermomechanical Model
The model used in this example is a simplified version of the thermomechanical model developed
by Zhu and Chao [1 (p. 334)] for FSW with 304L stainless steel. Zhu and Chao presented nonlinear
thermal and thermomechanical simulations using the finite element analysis code WELDSIM. They
initially formulated a heat-transfer problem using a moving heat source, and later used the transient
temperature outputs from the thermal analysis to determine residual stresses in the welded plates
via a 3-D elastoplastic thermomechanical simulation.
A direct coupled-field analysis is performed on a reduced-scale version of the Zhu and Chao model
[1 (p. 334)]. Also, rather than using a moving heat source as in the reference model, a rotating and
moving tool is used for a more realistic simulation. The tool pin is ignored. The heat generated at the
pin represents approximately two percent of the total heat and is therefore negligible. The simulation
welds two 304L stainless steel plates (workpiece) with a cylindrical shape tool, as shown in the following
figure.
Modeling
Figure 28.1: 3-D Model of Workpiece and Tool
The FSW process generally requires a tool made of a harder material than the workpiece material being
welded. In the past, FSW was used for soft workpiece materials such as aluminium. With the development
of tools made from super-abrasive materials such as polycrystalline cubic boron nitride (PCBN), FSW
has become possible with high-temperature materials such as stainless steel [4 (p. 334)]. A cylindrical
PCBN tool is modeled in this case.
The workpiece sides parallel to the weld line are constrained in all the directions to simulate the
clamping ends. The bottom side of the workpiece is constrained in the perpendicular (z) direction to
simulate support at the bottom. Heat losses are considered on all the surfaces of the model. All
boundary conditions (p. 323) are symmetric across the weld centerline.
The simulation is performed in three load steps, each representing a respective phase (plunge, dwell,
and traverse (p. 325)) of the FSW process.
28.3. Modeling
Modeling is a two-part task, as described in the following sections:
28.3.1. Workpiece and Tool Modeling
28.3.1. Workpiece and Tool Modeling

Two rectangular shaped plates (similar to those used in the reference model) are used as the workpiece.
Dimensions have been reduced to decrease the simulation time.
The plate size is 3 x 1.25 x 0.125 in (76.2 x 31.75 x 3.18 mm). The tool shoulder diameter is 0.6 in
(15.24 mm).
The plate thickness remains the same as that of the reference model, but the plate length and width
are reduced. The plate width is reduced because the regions far from the weld line are not significantly
affected by the welding process, and this example focuses primarily on the heat generation and
temperature rise in the region nearest the weld line.
The height of the tool is equal to the shoulder diameter. Both the workpiece (steel plates) and the
tool are modeled using coupled-field element SOLID226 with the structural-thermal option (KEYOPT(1)
= 11).
A hexahedral mesh with dropped midside nodes is used because the presence of midside nodes (or
quadratic interpolation functions) can lead to oscillations in the thermal solution and a nonphysical
temperature distribution. A hexahedral mesh is used instead of a tetrahedral mesh to avoid mesh-
orientation dependency. For more accurate results, a finer mesh is used in the weld-line region. The
following figure shows the 3-D meshed model.
Figure 28.2: 3-D Meshed Model of Workpiece and Tool

Contact is modeled as follows for the FSW simulation:
28.3.2.1. Contact Pair Between the Plates
28.3.2.2. Contact Pair Between Tool and Workpiece
28.3.2.1. Contact Pair Between the Plates

During the simulation, the surfaces to be joined come into contact, modeled as a standard surface-
to-surface contact pair using TARGE170 and CONTA174, as shown below.
Modeling
Figure 28.3: Contact Pair Between Plates
The surface-projection-based contact method (KEYOPT(4) = 3 for contact elements) is defined at

the contact interface. The surface-projection-based contact method is well suited to highly nonlinear
problems that include geometrical, material, and contact nonlinearities.
The problem simulates welding using the bonding capability of contact elements. To achieve con-
tinuous bonding and simulate a perfect thermal contact between the plates, a high thermal contact
conductance (TCC) of 2E06 W/m2 °C is specified. (A small TCC value yields an imperfect contact and
a temperature discontinuity across the interface.) The conductance is specified as a Real Constant
for CONTA174 elements.
The maximum temperature ranges from 70 to 90 percent of the melting temperature of the work-
piece material. Welding occurs after the temperature of the material around the contacting surfaces
exceeds the bonding temperature (approximately 70 percent of the workpiece melting temperature).
In this case, 1000 °C is taken as the bonding temperature based on the reference results. The
bonding temperature is specified using the real constant TBND for CONTA174. When the temperature
at the contact surface for closed contact exceeds the bonding temperature, the contact type changes
to bonded, and it remains bonded for the remainder of the simulation, even though the temperature
subsequently decreases below the bonding value.
Note:
Use the command snippet below to set the bonding temperature since there is no
option for setting this in the Mechanical Application. For information on adding
command snippets in Mechanical, see Commands (APDL).
28.3.2.2. Contact Pair Between Tool and Workpiece

The tool plunges into the work piece, rotates, and moves along the weld line. Because the frictional
contact between the tool and workpiece is primarily responsible for heat generation, a standard
surface-to-surface contact pair is defined between the tool and workpiece. The CONTA174 element
is used to model the contact surface on the top surface of the workpiece, and the TARGE170 element
is used for the tool, as shown in the following figure.
Figure 28.4: Contact Pair Between Tool and Workpiece
You must specify two real constants to model friction-induced heat generation: the friction heat
factor (FHTG) and the dissipation weight factor (FWGT). The friction heat factor (FHTG) is the fraction
of frictional dissipated energy converted into heat. FHTG is set to 1 to convert all frictional dissipated
energy into heat. The weight factor for the distribution of heat between the contact and target
surfaces (FWGT) is set to 0.95 so that 95 percent of the heat generated from the friction flows into
the workpiece and only five percent flows into the tool [2 (p. 334)].
Note:
Although there are no options to set FHTG and FWGT in the Mechanical Application,
they can be set using the command snippets below. For information on using command
snippets in Mechanical, see Snippets and Scripting in Mechanical.
A low TCC value (10 W/m2 °C) is specified for this contact pair because most of the heat generated
transfers to the workpiece.
Material Properties
Some additional heat is also generated by plastic deformation of the workpiece material. Because
the workpiece material softens and the value of friction coefficient drops as the temperature increases
[3 (p. 334)], a variable coefficient of friction (0.4 to 0.2) is defined using a command snippet issuing
TB,FRIC with TBTEMP and TBDATA, (see note below).
Note:
Although there is no option to set a variable coefficient of friction in the Mechanical

Application, it can be done with a command snipped, as shown below. For information
on using command snippets in Mechanical, see Snippets and Scripting in Mechanical.
Finally, set Contact Type to Frictional and Coefficient of Friction to 0 in the Details view of
Contact.

Accurate temperature calculation is critical to the FSW process because the stresses and strains developed
in the weld are temperature-dependent. Thermal properties of the 304L steel plates [1 (p. 334)][3 (p. 334)]
such as thermal conductivity, specific heat, and density are temperature-dependent. Mechanical prop-
erties of the plates such as Young's modulus and the coefficient of thermal expansion are considered
to be constant due to the limitations of data available in the literature.
It is assumed that the plastic deformation of the material uses the von Misses yield criterion, as well as
the associated flow rule and the work-hardening rule [1 (p. 334)]. Therefore, a bilinear isotropic hardening
model (TB, BISO) is selected.
The following table shows the material properties of the workpiece.
Table 28.1: Workpiece Material Properties
Material Properties of the Plates

Young’s modulus 193 GPa
Poisson’s ratio 0.3
Coefficient of thermal 18.7 µm/m °C
expansion
Bilinear Isotropic Hardening Constants (TB,BISO)
[a]
Yield stress 290 MPa
[a]
Tangent modulus 2.8 GPa
Material Properties of the Plates

Temperature-Dependent Material Properties
Temperature (°C) 0 200 400 600 800 1000
Thermal Conductivity (W/m 16 19 21 24 29 30
°C)
Specific Heat (J/Kg °C) 500 540 560 590 600 610
Density (Kg/m3) 7894 7744 7631 7518 7406 7406
[a] TBDATA defines the yield stress and tangent modulus.
The fraction of the plastic work dissipated as heat during FSW is about 80 percent [2 (p. 334)]. Therefore,
the fraction of plastic work converted to heat (Taylor-Quinney coefficient) is set to 0.8 (MP,QRATE) for
the calculation of plastic heat generation in the workpiece material.
Figure 28.5: Plastic Work Fraction (Taylor-Quinney Coefficient)
To weld a high-temperature material such as 304L stainless steel, a tool composed of hard material is
required. A cylindrical PCBN tool is used since super-abrasive materials like PCBN are suitable for such
processes [4 (p. 334)]. The material properties of the PCBN tool listed in the table below are taken from
references ([5 (p. 334)][6 (p. 334)]).
Table 28.2: Material Properties of the PCBN Tool
Young modulus 680 GPa

Thermal Conductivity 100 W/m °C
Specific Heat 750 J/Kg °C
Density 4280 Kg/m3

This section describes the thermal and mechanical boundary conditions imposed on the FSW model:
28.5.1.Thermal Boundary Conditions
28.5.2. Mechanical Boundary Conditions
28.5.3. Loading
28.5.1. Thermal Boundary Conditions

The frictional and plastic heat generated during the FSW process propagates rapidly into remote regions
of the plates. On the top and side surfaces of the workpiece, convection and radiation account for
heat loss to the ambient [1 (p. 334)]. Conduction losses also occur from the bottom surface of the
workpiece to the backing plate.
Figure 28.6: Thermal Boundary Conditions
Available data suggest that the value of the convection coefficient lies between 10 and 30 W/m2 °C
[1 (p. 334)][2 (p. 334)][3 (p. 334)] for the workpiece surfaces, except for the bottom surface. The value
of the convection coefficient is 30 W/m2°C for workpiece and tool. This coefficient affects the output
temperature. A lower coefficient increases the output temperature of the model. A high overall heat-
transfer coefficient (about 10 times the convective coefficient) of 300 W/m2 °C is assumed for the
conductive heat loss through the bottom surface of the workpiece. As a result, the bottom surface
of the workpiece is also treated as a convection surface for modeling conduction losses. Because the
percentage of heat lost due to radiation is low, radiation heat losses are ignored. An initial temperature
of 25 °C is applied on the model. Temperature boundary conditions are not imposed anywhere on
the model.
28.5.2. Mechanical Boundary Conditions

The workpiece is fixed by clamping each plate [1 (p. 334)]. The clamped portions of the plates are
constrained in all directions. To simulate support at the bottom of the plates, all bottom nodes of
the workpiece are constrained in the perpendicular direction (z direction).
Figure 28.7: Mechanical Boundary Conditions and loading
28.5.3. Loading
The FSW process consists of three primary phases:
1. Plunge -- The tool plunges slowly into the workpiece
2. Dwell -- Friction between the rotating tool and workpiece generates heat at the initial tool position
until the workpiece temperature reaches the value required for the welding.
3. Traverse (or Traveling) -- The rotating tool moves along the weld line.
During the traverse phase, the temperature at the weld line region rises, but the maximum temper-
ature values do not surpass the melting temperature of the workpiece material. As the temperature
drops, a solid continuous joint appears between the two plates.
For illustrative purposes, each phase of the FSW process is considered a separate load step. A rigid
surface constraint is already defined for applying loading on the tool.
The following table shows the details for each load step.
Table 28.3: Load Steps
Load Time Loadings on Pilot Node Boundary Condition

Step Period
(sec)
1 1 Displacement boundary UZ = -7.95E-07 m
condition
2 5.5 Rotational boundary condition ROTZ = 60 RPM
3 22.5 Displacement and rotational ROTZ = 60 RPM
boundary conditions together
on the pilot node UY = 60.96E-03 m
Figure 28.8: Load Steps
The tool plunges into the workpiece at a very shallow depth, then rotates to generate heat. The depth
and rotating speeds are the critical parameters for the weld temperatures. The parameters are determ-
ined based on the experimental data of Zhu and Chao. The tool travels from one end of the welding
line to the other at a speed of 2.7 mm/s.

A nonlinear Coupled Field Transient Analysis is performed in three load steps. FSW simulation includes
factors such as nonlinearity, contact, friction, large plastic deformation, structural-thermal coupling, and
different loadings at each load step. The solution settings applied consider all of these factors.
Figure 28.9: Coupled Field Analysis Settings: Physics Region
The first load step in the solution process converges within a few substeps, but the second and third
load steps converge only after applying the proper solution settings as shown below.
Figure 28.10: Analysis Settings for First Load Step
Figure 28.11: Analysis Settings for Second Load Step
Figure 28.12: Analysis Settings for Third Load Step
To allow for a faster solution, automatic time-stepping is activated (AUTOTS,ON). The initial time step
size (DELTIM) is set to 0.1, and the minimum time step is set to 0.001. The maximum time step is set
as 0.2 in load steps 2 and 3. A higher maximum time-step size may result in an unconverged solution.
The time step values are determined based on mesh or element size. For stability, no time-step limitation
exists for the implicit integration algorithm. Because this problem is inherently nonlinear and an accurate
solution is necessary, a disturbance must not propagate to more than one element in a time step;
therefore, an upper limit on the time step size is required. It is important to choose a time step size
that does not violate the subsequent criterion (minimum element size, maximum thermal conductivity
over the whole model, minimum density, and minimum specific heat).
Note:
Apart from above analysis settings and solver controls, the following commands must also
be issued. Defaults in the Mechanical Application differ from those in Mechanical APDL. In
the Mechanical Application, the HHT method is used by default.

The following results topics for the FSW simulation are available:
28.7.1. Deformation and Stresses
28.7.2.Temperature Results
28.7.3. Welding Results
28.7.1. Deformation and Stresses

It is important to observe the change in various quantities around the weld line during the FSW
process. The following figure shows the deflection of the workpiece due to plunging of the tool in
the first load step.
Figure 28.13: Deflection at Workpiece After Load Step 1
The deflection causes high stresses to develop on the workpiece beneath the tool, as seen below.
Figure 28.14: von Mises Stress After Load Step 1
Following load step 1, the temperature remains unchanged (25 °C), as shown in the following figure.
Figure 28.15: Temperature After Load Step 1
As the tool begins to rotate at this location, the frictional stresses develop and increase rapidly. The
following two figures show the increment in contact frictional stresses from load step 1 to load step
2:
Figure 28.16: Frictional Stress After Load Step 1
Figure 28.17: Frictional Stress After Load Step 2
All frictional dissipated energy is converted into heat during load step 2. The heat is generated at the
tool-workpiece interface. Most of the heat is transferred to the workpiece (p. 320) (FWGT is specified
to 0.95). As a result, the temperature of the workpiece increases rapidly compared to that of the tool.
28.7.2. Temperature Results

The following two figures shows the temperature rise due to heat generation in the second and third
load steps:
The maximum temperature on the workpiece occurs beneath the tool during the last two load steps.
Heat generation is due to the mechanical loads. No external heat sources are used. As the temperature
increases, the material softens and the coefficient of friction decreases. A temperature-dependent
coefficient of friction (0.4 to 0.2) helps to prevent the maximum temperature from exceeding the
material melting point.
The observed temperature rise in the model shows that heat generation during the second and third
load steps is due to friction between the tool shoulder and workpiece, as well as plastic deformation
of the workpiece material.
The melting temperature of 304L stainless steel is 1450 °C. As shown in the following figure, the
maximum temperature range at the weld line region on the workpiece beneath the tool is well below
the melting temperature of the workpiece material during the second and third load steps, but above
70 percent of the melting temperature:
Figure 28.20: Maximum Temperature (on Workpiece Beneath the Tool) Variation with Time
Recommendations
The two plates can be welded together within this temperature range.
28.7.3. Welding Results

A bonding temperature of 1000 °C is already defined for the welding simulation at the interface of
the plates. The contact status at this interface after the last load step is shown in the following figure:
Figure 28.21: Contact Status at Interface with Bonding Temperature 1000 °C
To perform a similar FSW analysis, consider the following hints and recommendations:
• FSW is a coupled-field (structural-thermal) process. The temperature field affects the stress distribution
during the entire process. Also, heat generated in structural deformation affects the temperature
field. The direct method of coupling is recommended for such processes. This method involves just
one analysis that uses a coupled-field element containing all necessary degrees of freedom. Direct
coupling is advantageous when the coupled-field interaction involves strongly-coupled physics or is
highly nonlinear.
• A nonlinear transient analysis is preferable for simulations where the objective is to study the transient
temperature and transient heat transfer.
• The dynamic effects of different physics should be controlled. In this problem, for example, the dy-
namic effects of the structural degrees of freedom are disabled as they are unimportant.
• Separating the solution process into three load steps helps you to understand the physics and solve
the problem.
• The contact between the two plates must be nearly perfect to maintain temperature continuity. For
a perfect thermal contact, specify a high thermal contact conductance (TCC) coefficient between
workpiece plates. A high coefficient results in temperature continuity across the interface.
• Because the problem is nonlinear, proper solution settings are required. Set the following analysis
controls to the appropriate values to achieve the converged solution: LNSRCH, CUTCONTROL, KBC,
NEQIT, NROPT, and AUTOTS.
• Convergence at the second and third load steps is difficult to achieve. The depth of penetration of
the tool on the workpiece (uz), rotational speed of the tool (rotz), and time-step size play crucial roles
in the convergence of the second load step. Use a very small time-step size if the rotational speed is
higher than 60 RPM.
• A symmetric mesh (about the joint line) is preferred to capture the exact outputs and their effects
on the workpiece. A hex mesh with dropped midside nodes is recommended for the workpiece as
well as the tool. This approach helps to maintain symmetry and prevent the temperature from
reaching negative values during the simulation.
• A minimum of two element layers is required in the thickness direction. A fine sweep mesh near the
weld line yields more accurate results; however, too fine a mesh increases computational time. A fine
mesh is unnecessary on the tool side. To minimize computational time, the tool can be considered
to be rigid with no temperature degrees of freedom.
28.9. References
1. Zhu, X. K. & Chao, Y. J. (2004). Numerical simulation of transient temperature and residual stresses
in friction stir welding of 304L stainless steel. Journal of Materials Processing Technology. 146(2), 263-
272.
2. Chao, Y.J., Qi, X., & Tang, W. (2003). Heat transfer in friction stir welding - Experimental and numer-
ical studies. Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering-Transactions of the ASME. 125(1), 138-
145.
3. Prasanna, P., Rao, B. S., & Rao, G. K. (2010). Finite element modeling for maximum temperature in
friction stir welding and its validation. Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 51, 925-933.
4. Sorensen, C.D. & Nelson, T. W. (2007). Friction stir welding of ferrous and nickel alloys. (Mahoney,
M. W. & Mirsha, R. S. Eds.) Friction Stir Welding and Processing. Materials Park, OH: ASM International.
111-121.
5. Ozel, T., Karpat, Y., & Srivastava, A. (2008). Hard turning with variable micro-geometry PcBN tools.
CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology. 57, 73-76.
6. Mishra, R. S. (2007). Friction Stir Welding and Processing. Ed. R. S. Mishra and M. W. Mahoney. Materials
Park, OH: ASM International.

Chapter 29: Rocket Nozzle Extension Simulation:
Operation
This example problem demonstrates how to simulate thermal stresses induced during the operation of
a rocket nozzle using the Ansys Mechanical Application. To see this example solved with Ansys Mech-
anical APDL see Rocket Nozzle Extension Simulation: Operation in the Technology Showcase: Example
Problems.
For this problem, it is assumed that the rocket has been launched and hot gases are flowing through
the nozzle, subjecting the inside and outside of the nozzle body to convection heat loading. The heat
loading leads to a significant thermal gradient through the thickness of the body that manifests as high
thermal stresses.
Solid thermal and structural elements accurately simulate the multiphysics of the problem. While a fully
coupled element could solve the problem, a loose coupling method is used instead. Because the body
material could be homogeneous or a layered composite, the simulation requires a solid element type
with both homogeneous and layered material capabilities. Ansys Composite PrepPost (ACP) is used to
define composite layers that make up the nozzle and ring geometry.
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Static Thermal Analysis, Static Structural Analysis
Element Type(s) 3-D Thermal Solid. 3-D Structural Solid

29.1. Introduction
29.3. Modeling Overview
29.4. Setting up the ACP (Pre) System
Rocket Nozzle Extension Simulation: Operation
29.1. Introduction
The shell element model gives accurate stresses in most regions. However, through-the-thickness stresses
are not as accurate, especially where the reinforcement joins with the nozzle body. Solid elements are
used for this analysis to improve the accuracy of through-the-thickness stresses. This problem demon-
strates some of the features of the solid layered thermal elements (SOLID278).
For this example, it is assumed that the material behavior is structurally and thermally orthotropic. To
represent the material symmetry planes appropriately, it is important to define material properties along
certain orthogonal directions within the elements. This underscores the need to define an element co-
ordinate system within each element.
All elements have default element coordinate systems, but these defaults may not always be convenient.
Material directions could be misaligned with respect to the element coordinate system (ESYS) and need
to be modified. You can typically accomplish this with the following steps:
1. Define the element coordinate system - Due to rapidly changing curvature, each element in this
model must have its own element coordinate system defined. As a result, the element z axis is
aligned with the thickness direction, and the element x axis is aligned with the curvature. This makes
it very convenient to define material properties along preferred directions.
2. Adjust the element connectivity - Because solid elements are being used, you must adjust the
element connectivity so that the IJKL face is aligned with the element coordinate z axis. This ensures
that the layer definition is parallel to face 1 (the IJKL face normal n) of the element and is normal
to the ESYS z axis.
Thermal stresses can be obtained using an element with temperature and displacement degrees of
freedom (DOFs) that are fully coupled (direct or strong coupling). Alternately, stresses can be obtained
using a thermal solution followed by a structural solution (load-transfer or loose coupling). For a discus-
sion of the advantages and disadvantages of these methodologies see Types of Coupled-Field Analysis
in the Coupled-Field Analysis Guide.
Since the thermal and structural solutions in this example problem do not significantly affect each
other with a high degree of nonlinear interaction, loose coupling is used. The example demonstrates
the flexibility that loose coupling offers because the two analyses can be solved independently of each
other. For instance, a material could be treated as homogeneous for a thermal solution and layered for
a structural solution. This allows you the flexibility to mix and match the solution based on problem
requirements, a level of agility that is not possible with a strongly coupled simulation.
In this example a static thermal analysis is solved using element SOLID278, and then temperatures are
transferred to a static structural analysis. For the structural solution, thermal SOLID278 is converted to
structural SOLID185. For the thermal solution, two different cases are studied, assuming the material
to be either homogeneous or layered. A similar assumption is made for the structural solution, resulting
in thermal loads from either a homogeneous or layered solution.

Since the geometry and the loads for the model have cyclic symmetry, a 1° sector of the full geometry
is modeled under the assumption that the thermal and structural solutions are axisymmetric. 3-D solid
elements with the capability to model layers are used.
Modeling Overview
A steady-state thermal analysis is performed using a homogeneous material option, followed by an

analysis using the 4-layer material option. The temperature solution from these analyses serve as thermal
loads for a static structural analysis (both homogeneous and 4-layer material option). Ansys Composite
PrepPost is used to define the composite layered material that the Nozzle and Ring are composed of
(see Use of Ansys Composite PrepPost to Model Composite Layers (p. 337)). The Workbench project
schematic below shows the workflow. A total of four structural solutions will be obtained.
Figure 29.1: Project Schematic in Workbench
To ensure an axisymmetric solution for the thermal run, the temperature is constrained to be the same
along the theta direction. Axisymmetric DOF constraints are specified to ensure an axisymmetric solution
for the structural run.
29.3. Modeling Overview

The following modeling topics are discussed in this section:
29.3.1. Use of Ansys Composite PrepPost to Model Composite Layers
29.3.2. Geometry and Mesh
29.3.3. Contact Modeling Between Reinforcing Ring and Nozzle
29.3.4. Cyclic Symmetry Modeling
29.3.1. Use of Ansys Composite PrepPost to Model Composite Layers

Ansys Composite PrepPost (ACP) is used to define composite layers that make up the nozzle and ring
geometry detailed in the figures below.
Figure 29.2: Details of ACP (Pre) in Mechanical (A) and Workbench (B)
See Setting up the ACP (Pre) System (p. 343) for a step-by-step description of setting up the model
and defining the composite layered material of the ring and nozzle using ACP.
Alternatively, you can run the ACP(Pre) Python script (ACP_Setup.py) that is available through
downloadable links: input files (p. 359). To run the script, right-click the Setup cell of the ACP (Pre)
system, choose Run ACP Script... from the drop-down menu, browse to location of the downloaded
script and click open.
Modeling Overview
29.3.2. Geometry and Mesh
Geometry
The nozzle extension consists of a main curved wall and a reinforcing ring close to the jet exhaust,
as shown below.
Figure 29.3: Nozzle Extension Geometry
Both the wall and the reinforcing ring are made of layered composite materials. The model uses a
single orthotropic material for all layers. However, the material orientation varies from layer to layer.
The material is assumed to be homogeneous for both the thermal and mechanical analysis.
The geometry model of the 1° base sector is shown in Figure 29.4: Nozzle Extension 1° Base Sector
Geometry (a), Detail View of Reinforcing Ring (b) (p. 340).
Figure 29.4: Nozzle Extension 1° Base Sector Geometry (a), Detail View of Reinforcing Ring (b)
Set the units as shown below.
Named Selections
Several Named Selections, shown in the figure below, have been defined to scope and specify various
modeling aspects, including boundary conditions, contact source and target, and symmetry constraints.
Modeling Overview
Figure 29.5: Name Selections
Mesh
The reduced 1° geometry model is meshed with SOLID278 elements. Figures (a) and (b) below respect-
ively show the mesh and the layer solid representation of the solid mesh. For more details, see Spe-
cifying the Mesh (p. 349).
Figure 29.6: Mesh (a) and Layer Solid Representation of the Mesh (b)
Using the SOLID278 element, it is possible to make the element behave like a homogeneous material
or a layered material (KEYOPT(3) = 0 or 1). Shell sections define the layers of the composite material.
Two sections are created: one for the main wall and another for the reinforcing ring. The following
table summarizes the shell section properties:
Section Number Layer Material Material Integration

Thickness Number Orientation Points
(°)
Section 1 (main 1/4 total 1 0 3
wall) thickness 90
0
90
Section 2 1/4 total 1 0 3
(reinforcing ring) thickness 90
0
90
29.3.3. Contact Modeling Between Reinforcing Ring and Nozzle

The reinforcing ring is securely bonded to the outer surface of the main extension wall. To model
this, create a Bonded contact region between the two edges of ring that touch the nozzle and face
of the nozzle inside the ring as shown below in both the thermal and structural analysis.
Figure 29.7: Bonded Contact Between Edges of Ring and Nozzle
29.3.4. Cyclic Symmetry Modeling

Constraint equations to enforce cyclic symmetry boundary conditions on either side of the 1° base
sector are imposed for both the thermal and structural analyses. This is accomplished by adding a
symmetry object applied to the geometry along the y axis in cylindrical co-ordinate system (see details
below). The lower boundary and upper boundary of the sector are scoped to defined Named Selec-
tions, and the Number of Sectors is set to 360 as shown in the following figures.
Setting up the ACP (Pre) System
Figure 29.8: Cyclic Symmetry Boundary Condition
Figure 29.9: Named Selections NS_HIGHBOUNDARY (A) and NS_LOWBOUNDARY (B)
29.4. Setting up the ACP (Pre) System

In this example problem, an ACP (Pre) component system is used to specify the layered composite
material of the ring and nozzle as well as several aspects of the model as described in this section. All
modeling, material, and composite specification data is imported to the downstream thermal and
structural analyses through connections in Workbench.
This section demonstrates the following modeling specifications:

29.4.1. Insert ACP (Pre) and define a custom material in Workbench
29.4.2. Specify Modeling Details in Mechanical
29.4.3. Specify Composite Layers in ACP
29.4.4.Transfer Modeling and Composite Specifications to Downstream Thermal and Structural Analyses in
Workbench
29.4.5. View the Transferred Composite Layers in Mechanical
29.4.1. Insert ACP (Pre) and define a custom material in Workbench

Steps to include an ACP (Pre) component system and define a custom material for the nozzle and
ring assembly are described below.
1. Insert the ACP (Pre) component system by dragging it from the Toolbox to the Project Schematic
in Workbench.
2. Open the Engineering Data tab by double-clicking the Engineering Data cell, and define a custom
material named "nozzle_mat" with following details:
3. Close Engineering Data tab and import the shared geometry.
29.4.2. Specify Modeling Details in Mechanical

Start Mechanical by double-clicking the Model cell of the ACP (Pre) system. Within Mechanical, specify
the various aspects of the model as detailed below.
1. Specify Thickness as 2 mm and assign nozzle_mat material for Ring and Nozzle in Geometry
as seen below.
2. Set the units as shown below.
3. Create a cylindrical coordinate system with following details:
4. The following figure shows the details of the Bonded contact region between the ring and
nozzle.
5. Define named selections. See the details of three named selections below: NS_AllFaces,
HighGeomEdgeSel, LowGeomEdgeSel.
6. Specify the mesh using Face Meshing scoped to the named selection NS_ALLFACES and
Match Control scoping the High and Low Boundaries to the named selections HighGeo-
mEdgeSel and LowGeomEdgeSel, respectively, as shown below. Then generate the mesh.
Close Mechanical and update the Model cell of the ACP (Pre) system in Workbench by right-clicking
it and selecting Update (see Update ACP(Pre) Model in the figure below). When Model has finished
updating, you will see a green check. Then open Ansys Composite PrepPost by right-clicking the
Setup cell of the ACP (Pre) system and choosing Edit... (see Edit Setup in ACP in the figure below).
29.4.3. Specify Composite Layers in ACP

Within Ansys Composite PrepPost, follow the steps listed below to generate composite layers:
1. Create "Fabric.1" with the specified properties shown in the following figure. From the tree, right-
click Fabrics, select Create Fabric … from the drop-down menu, assign the Fabric Properties
shown in the figure, and click Apply then OK.
2. Create "Stackup.1" with the specified properties shown in the following figure. From the tree,
right-click Stackups, select Create Stackup … from the drop-down menu, assign the Stackup
Properties shown in the figure, and click Apply then OK.
3. Create "OrientedSelectionSet.1" and "OrientedSelectionSet.2" as shown in the following figure.

For each, right-click Oriented Selection Sets, select Create Oriented Selection Set … from the
drop-down menu, assign the Oriented Selection Set Properties shown in the figure, and click
Apply then OK.
4. Create "ModelingPly.1" and "ModelingPly.2" as shown in the following figure. First create "Model-
ingGroup.1" by right-clicking Modeling Groups, selecting Create Modeling Group… from the
drop-down menu, and clicking OK. Then for each ply, right-click ModelingGroup.1, select Create
Ply... from the drop-down menu, assign the Ply Properties shown in the figure, and click Apply
then OK.
5. Create solid models, "Nozzle" and "Ring", as shown in the following figure. For each ply, right-click
Solid Models, select Create Solid Model... from the drop-down menu, assign the Solid Model
Properties shown in the figure, and click Apply then OK.
6. Close ACP and update the Setup cell of the ACP (Pre) system in Workbench (right-click Setup and
choose Update from the drop-down menu). This completes the setup of ACP for generating
composite layers.
29.4.4. Transfer Modeling and Composite Specifications to Downstream

Thermal and Structural Analyses in Workbench
Set up the rest of the analysis by dragging a Steady-State Thermal system followed by a Static
Structural system from the Toolbox to the Project Schematic in Workbench with the connections and
data transfer shown below.
Figure 29.10: Project Schematic in Workbench
29.4.5. View the Transferred Composite Layers in Mechanical

Start Mechanical from the thermal or structural analysis by double clicking their Setup cell and verify
that the plies defining the composite material of the ring and nozzle are properly transferred as Im-
ported Plies in Mechanical as shown below.
Figure 29.11: Plies Defining Composite Material Imported into Mechanical

The properties of the single orthotropic material used in the rocket nozzle extension model are as follows:
Orthotropic Material Properties

Young's Modulus in x direction (MPa) 100000
Young's Modulus in y direction (MPa) 5000
Young's Modulus in z direction (MPa) 5000
Poisson’s Ratio PRXY 0.40
Poisson’s Ratio PRYZ 0.30
Poisson’s Ratio PRXZ 0.30
Shear Moduli GXY 3000
Shear Moduli GYZ 2000
Shear Moduli GXZ 2000
Secant coefficient of thermal expansion ALPX 1.6E-05
Secant coefficient of thermal expansion ALPY 1.6E-05
Secant coefficient of thermal expansion ALPZ 6.3E-05
The material is assumed to be linear elastic and temperature-independent. The material has different
thermal expansion coefficients in the in-plane (X and Y) and through-the-thickness (Z) directions.

As previously described, the following constraints are applied to both the thermal and structural analyses:
• Constraint equations to bind the reinforcing ring to the nozzle body. (p. 342)
• Constraint equations to enforce cyclic symmetry boundary conditions on either side of the 1°
base sector. (p. 342)
Additional boundary conditions and loads applied to the simulation are described below.
29.6.1. Boundary Conditions for the Thermal Analysis

For the thermal model, two types of boundary conditions are used:
• Constant temperature specified at the clamped end as illustrated in Figure 29.12: Constant
Temperature Specified at Clamped End (p. 354)
• Three different film convection boundary conditions for different regions of the model as illus-
trated in Figure 29.13: Three Convection Boundary Conditions (p. 354)
A more realistic thermal model may have film coefficients that were derived from empirical correlations.
Constant values are used here for simplicity. As an alternative, it is possible to specify heat flux
boundary conditions instead of convection boundary conditions it is known a priori.
Figure 29.12: Constant Temperature Specified at Clamped End
Figure 29.13: Three Convection Boundary Conditions
29.6.2. Boundary Conditions and Loads for the Structural Analysis

For the structural model, a fixed support is applied as shown below.
Figure 29.14: Fixed Support
In addition, thermal loads are transferred to the structural model from the thermal model. This accom-
plishes loose coupling, as described in the introduction (see Figure 29.1: Project Schematic in Work-
bench (p. 337)) and shown in the screen shot below from the Mechanical Application.
Figure 29.15: Temperature Imported from Thermal Analysis
For the structural analysis, other mechanical loads could be active that have been ignored, such as
pressure and shearing stresses due to gaseous flows. A more realistic simulation would account for
all possible loads that could be major contributors to stress.

A linear static analysis is performed for the thermal model using the homogeneous and layered options.
The initial temperature is specified as 22 °C and the analysis settings are shown below.
Figure 29.16: Settings for the Thermal Analysis
This is followed by a linear static analysis for the structural model using the homogeneous and layered
options (4 different analyses). Temperatures are transferred from the thermal analysis to the structural
analysis via the Imported Load object. Details of the analysis settings and imported temperature from
the thermal analysis are shown below.
Figure 29.17: Settings for the Structural Analysis

Thermal results such as Temperature and Heat Flux can be evaluated for the setup described earlier
and for each layer as seen in the following figures.
Figure 29.18: Temperature Results
Structural results such as Deformation and Equivalent Stress can be evaluated for the above setup and
for each layer as seen in the following figures.
Figure 29.19: Deformation
Figure 29.20: Equivalent Stresses in Layer 1, 2, 3 and 4
Figure 29.20: Equivalent Stresses in Layer 1, 2, 3 and 4 (p. 358) shows that the location of peak stress
noticeably shifts in the different layers. This underscores the need to study each layer carefully and refrain
from drawing immediate conclusions about other layers. For example, peak stresses in layer 4 shift to
the bonded region, which could not have been predicted from the layer 1 solution alone.
• Consider refining the mesh near bonded regions of the mesh, as well as near high curvature regions.
This recommendation is based on the observed peak stress regions of all the layers.
• By default, all layer information is written to the results file. For large meshes it would be wise to
select the proper KEYOPT(8) setting to minimize storage requirements with the layered option for
SOLID279 or SOLID186 elements. The downside of reducing the file size is that it will not be possible
to postprocess the individual layers. You will need to decide what is appropriate for your analysis.
• For complex material fibers, it is convenient to align the element coordinate system axis with the
fiber direction.

Chapter 31: Fitting Parameters for a Chaboche
Kinematic Hardening Model
This example problem demonstrates how to determine material parameters for a Chaboche kinematic
hardening model using the curve-fitting tool. This example is simulated using the Ansys Mechanical
Application. To see this example solved with Ansys Mechanical APDL see Fitting Parameters for a
Chaboche Kinematic Hardening Model in the Technology Showcase: Example Problems.
A method is presented to estimate the initial parameters and obtain a least-squares best fit to the data.
• Material curve fitting
• Chaboche nonlinear kinematic hardening model
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Static Structural analysis using nonlinear kinematic hardening
material model
Element Type(s) 2-D Plane (PLANE182)

31.1. Introduction
31.3. Geometry
31.4. Modeling
31.6. Material Properties: Chaboche Kinematic Hardening Material Model
31.9. Results
31.10. References
Fitting Parameters for a Chaboche Kinematic Hardening Model
31.1. Introduction
The Chaboche model is a nonlinear kinematic hardening model commonly used to model the plastic
deformation of metals. One of the phenomena associated with kinematic hardening is called ratcheting.
Ratcheting is the progressive accumulation of plastic strain during cyclic loading.
Ratcheting is observed in high pressure piping systems, like those in nuclear power plants that are
subject to seismic loading. A primary concern for ratcheting is that the accumulated plastic strain could
lead to catastrophic failure even though the loading amplitude from individual cycles is not expected
to cause failure.

In this example, we examine a rectangular plate with a notch at its center. Varying pressure loads are
applied to the top edge of the plate creating tensile and compressive loads that change with time.
Leveraging planar symmetry, the model to be analyzed can be reduced to just one fourth of the plate,
reducing both model size and computational efficiency. Symmetry conditions are applied to the edges
of the rectangular plate touching the notch. A 2-D plane stress analysis under varying pressure load
using 2-D four-node structural elements (PLANE182) is performed to observe the ratcheting effect on
results obtained using the Chaboche kinematic hardening material model.
To explore this example problem, you can download and run the archived project file (p. 382).
31.3. Geometry
Leveraging the symmetry of the plate with a notch at its center, the model can be reduced in size to
include only one quarter of the plate in the analysis as seen in the following figures.
Geometry
Figure 31.1: Plate with Notch (A), Model Leveraging Symmetry (B)
Figure 31.2: Simulated Geometry
31.4. Modeling
Commonly used plasticity models for ratcheting are based on the von Mises yield criterion and a kin-
ematic hardening rule. The von Mises yield criterion for kinematic hardening is:
(31.1)
where is the isotropic hardening yield stress, and is the center of the yield surface which is a
function of the stress tensor and backstress tensor :
The backstress tensor results in a shifting of the yield surface in stress space. A bias in this shift over
repeated loading causes the progressive accumulation of plastic strain (ratcheting (p. 364)).
Experimental data and the curve-fitting tool are used to determine a set of material parameters for the
Chaboche kinematic hardening model (For details, see Chaboche nonlinear kinematic hardening model).
The Chaboche Kinematic Hardening material model option in Workbench allows up to five kinematic
models for each temperature. For this problem, three models are used, as it provides sufficient variation
to calibrate the nonlinear behavior of the material and can account for ratcheting behavior.
The following related topics are available:

31.4.1. Chaboche Nonlinear Kinematic Hardening Model
31.4.2. Determining Material Parameters
31.4.1. Chaboche Nonlinear Kinematic Hardening Model

Chaboche [1, 2] proposed the decomposed kinematic hardening model, expressed as:
(31.2)
(31.3)
where:
Each of the backstress terms of the Chaboche model have the form of an Armstrong-Frederick rule,
where the parameters represent a plastic modulus and serve as the parameters for history de-
pendence. For accurate ratcheting predictions, specify at least three components [3].
For a stable hysteresis of strain-controlled cyclic loading, the solution for the backstress in the uniaxial
direction is:
Modeling
(31.4)
(31.5)
where:
The uniaxial yield stress is the sum of the initial yield stress and the backstress component in the
uniaxial direction, expressed as:
(31.6)
Using Equation 31.4 (p. 367) and Equation 31.5 (p. 367) for plastic strains at or near the strain limit ,
Equation 31.6 (p. 367) for a third-order Chaboche model becomes:
(31.7)
31.4.2. Determining Material Parameters

The model requires six material parameters: C1, γ1, C2, γ2, C3, and γ3 as well as the initial yield stress,
σ0.
The parameters must be determined so that the model closely matches the material behavior. One
method for doing so is to obtain data from stabilized strain-controlled and stress-controlled ratcheting
experiments and use that data with the curve-fitting tool to determine material parameters that
minimize the error between the data and the model predictions.
The nonlinear curve-fitting method used by the curve-fitting tool is an iterative process and often
requires initial values for each of the material parameters. The success and quality of the fit depends
on how far the initial values are from the values that give a good fit. A procedure that uses stabilized
hysteresis stress-strain data to determine a good estimate for the initial parameters is described.
Stabilized hysteresis stress-strain data is obtained by cycling a specimen under strain-controlled

loading with symmetric tension-compression amplitude. A cyclically stabilized hysteresis response is
achieved when a cycle of stress-strain response remains unchanged through subsequent cycles.
The following figure shows a typical stable strain-controlled hysteresis curve:
Figure 31.3: Stable Hysteresis Strain-Controlled Data
Three distinct regions are noted. Part 1 is the initial onset of yielding, Part 2 is the knee of the hysteresis
curve, and Part 3 is the constant modulus segment.
For fitting purposes, the individual components of backstress for the model (α1, α2, and α3) are chosen
to represent the three regions of the strain-controlled stable hysteresis loop. In each region, the cor-
responding Ci is chosen to approximately match the plastic modulus. The γi parameters are chosen
to accommodate the history dependence defined by Equation 31.4 (p. 367) and the relationship defined
by Equation 31.7 (p. 367).
Using the described heuristic method, you can estimate seed values for the initial material parameters
to obtain a good quality fit by following these guidelines:
1. σ0 is the initial yield stress of the material.
2. C1 is the slope in Part 1 of the stress-strain curve at the transition from elastic to plastic deformation.
The value of C1 is often of approximately the same order as the Young's Modulus.
3. By Equation 31.4 (p. 367), the evolution of α1 follows an inverse exponential variation and asymptotes
at a maximum value of C1 / γ1. The magnitude of γ1 determines how rapidly α1 asymptotes. γ1
should be large enough that the exponential term quickly diminishes so that α1 is approximately
constant outside of Part 1.
4. C2 determines the slope of Part 2 of the curve. Its value is often approximately an order of mag-
nitude smaller than C1.
5. Following the guidelines from step 3, γ2 is calculated using C2 so that the value of α2 asymptotes
to C2 / γ2 before part 3 of the curve.
Modeling
6. C3 often represents the linear slope of the stress-strain curve in Part 3. In such a case, γ3 is assigned
a small value (1 to 10) to model the linear evolution of α3. C3 can be calculated from the slope of
part 3 of the curve with respect to the plastic strain.
This procedure was developed from a trial-and-error method used to fit the material parameters [4]
and usually gives a set of initial parameters that allows the curve-fitting tool to obtain a good fit.
The initial yield stress of the material is generally known, and in this problem, it is fixed and does not
affect the error minimization performed by the curve-fitting tool.
γ3 is chosen as a small positive value because it does not enter into the closed-form equations
Equation 31.4 (p. 367) through Equation 31.7 (p. 367), and experience indicates that this is generally a
good choice. While the fitting procedure iterates to a value of γ3 that best fits the data, this value is
often difficult to estimate based on stabilized hysteresis strain-controlled data. While small variations
in the value of γ3 often do not significantly influence the cyclic stress strain behavior, it may strongly
affect ratcheting behavior of the material. To investigate its influence on ratcheting strain evolution,
a numerical study can be performed by varying the value of γ3 and selecting a value that gives ex-
pected ratcheting strain (See Fitting the Ratcheting Strain).
Although the procedure for estimating the initial material parameters was developed for stabilized
hysteresis strain-controlled data, it can be applied to a single cycle of stress-controlled data; however,
the quality of the resulting fit should be checked carefully.
The curve-fitting tool provides a comparison of the data used for fitting and the model's prediction.
It is good practice, however, to compare the experimental data with a simulation of the entire exper-
imental load history to validate the fitted parameters as shown in the following figure.
Figure 31.4: Plot Comparing Curve-Fitting Tool Results

The rectangular plate is modeled using 2-D plane elements (PLANE182) with plane stress behavior.
Smaller edge sizing controls are applied to the notch edges and edges that touch the notch to produce
a finer mesh locally around the notch, in the area of interest for observing ratcheting effects. The mesh
sizing controls have already been implemented in the Workbench project archive file (p. 382), producing
the meshed model shown below.
Material Properties: Chaboche Kinematic Hardening Material Model
31.6. Material Properties: Chaboche Kinematic Hardening Material

Model
The plate material properties are shown in the table below.
Steel Material Properties in (N-mm Units)

Modulus of Elasticity = 1.8133E+5 MPa
Poisson's Ratio = 0.3

Uniaxial Plastic Strain Test Data for the Chaboche Kinematic Hardening material model are given in
an excel file that you can download (See Workbench Input Files and Project Files (p. 382)).
From the drop-down Units menu in Workbench, select Metric (tonne, mm, s, °C, mA, N, mV) and
Display Values in Project Units.
This section describes how to use the Chaboche model to obtain an accurate curve fit of uniaxial plastic
strain test data in Workbench. The curve fit will then be used in the analysis of the plate with a notch
with an applied varying pressure load to observe the ratcheting effect.
31.6.1. Input Uniaxial Plastic Strain Test Data into Workbench

To transfer the uniaxial plastic strain test data from the excel file (chaboche-test-data.xlsx)
into the Chaboche Kinematic Harding material model in Workbench, follow the steps described and
illustrated in the figures below.
Double-click the Engineering Data cell to open the Engineering Data Workspace shown in the fol-
lowing figures. Select Structural Steel under materials. To include Uniaxial Plastic Strain Test Data
in the Properties window of Structural Steel, right-click Uniaxial Plastic Strain Test Data under
Chaboche Test Data in the toolbox and select Include Property from the drop-down menu options
(see screenshot below).
Figure 31.6: Include Uniaxial Plastic Strain Test Data in the Properties Window of Structural
Steel in Workbench
At this point, Uniaxial Plastic Strain Test Data is listed in the properties window, and you can add
tabular data through its Table of Properties window as illustrated in the figure below. Copy the
numerical data from the excel file (columns labeled "epply" and "sy", plastic stress and strain), and
paste these data into the Table of Properties for Uniaxial Plastic Strain Test Data by right-clicking
the empty cell beneath Plastic Strain and choosing Paste from the drop-down menu options.
Figure 31.7: Paste Tabular Data in Uniaxial Plastic Strain Test Data in Workbench
The Uniaxial Plastic Strain Test Data should now be listed in the Table, and the chart should look as
shown below.
Figure 31.8: Uniaxial Plastic Strain Test Data Chart with Data from Excel File
31.6.2. Chaboche Material Curve-Fitting Process

In this section, the Chaboche nonlinear kinematic hardening model will be used to determine mater-
ial constants to accurately fit the input experimental data.
Expand Plasticity in the Toolbox, right-click the Chaboche Kinematic Hardening Property and select
Include Property from the drop-down menu options as shown below.
Figure 31.9: Include the Chaboche Kinematic Hardening Property
This will include the Chaboche Kinematic Hardening property with defaults (Number of Kinematic
Models = 1) as shown in the following figure.
Figure 31.10: Chaboche Kinematic Hardening Property Included with Defaults
Change the Number of Kinetic Models to 3 and solve by right-clicking Curve Fitting and selecting
Solve Curve Fit from the drop-down menu options. The following figure shows the resulting curve
fit.
Figure 31.11: Resulting Curve Fit for Chaboche Kinematic Hardening Model without Defining
Initial Seed Values
This resulting curve fit with three kinematic models is somewhat accurate as seen in the Chart in
Figure 31.11: Resulting Curve Fit for Chaboche Kinematic Hardening Model without Defining Initial
Seed Values (p. 377). The accuracy can be improved by defining initial seed values as described below.
A study of the test data in Chaboche-Test-data.xlsx reveals an initial yield strength of 129.6
MPa and tangent moduli that vary between 1E+05 to 1000. To improve the curve fit accuracy, define
initial values for the material constants as shown in the following figure and fix the values for yield
strength and γ3 by checking their Fix Seed Value check box and specifying Yield Stress = 129.6 MPa
and γ3 = 1.
Figure 31.12: Specify Initial Seed Values for Material Constants and Yield Stress to Improve
Curve Fit Accuracy
As before, recalculate the curve fit by right-clicking Curve Fitting and selecting Solve Curve Fit from
the drop-down menu options. Solving the curve fit with the above seed values and constraints produces
a curve fit with improved accuracy as seen in the chart below.
Figure 31.13: Improved Curve Fit After Specifying Seed Values
31.6.3. Use the Calculated Material Constants in the Analysis

Once you have reviewed the accuracy of the coefficients, finalize the curve fitting process by including
them in the analysis. To use the calculated values as material constants in your model, right-click
Curve Fitting and select Copy Calculated Values to Property as shown below.
Figure 31.14: Copy Calculated Values to Property
Observe that these calculated values have been effectively copied in the Properties for Structural
Steel window as seen in the figure below.
Figure 31.15: Calculated Material Constants Copied to the Properties of Stainless Steel
Window
To use the calculated material constants in the analysis, click Refresh Project on the Project Tab
in Workbench and double-click Model in the static structural analysis to start Mechanical.

A spatially varying pressure load that varies with time is applied to the top edge in a single step. The
applied load and boundary conditions are summarized in the table and figure below.
Table 31.1: Load and Boundary Conditions
Load Boundary Conditions

Spatially varying Pressure load P applied in Y direction Frictionless Support is applied to left and
to top edge of plate varies with time t by the following bottom edges that touch the notch
equation:
P = 4.3e3+21e3*sin(time)

The analysis is solved using the metric (mm, t, N, s, mV, mA) unit system with Step End Time = 1800
s, Auto Time Stepping set to On, and Large Deflection set to On. Step Controls are set with an Initial
Time Step = 10 s, Minimum Time Step = 1 s and Maximum Time Step = 20 s.
31.9. Results
Right-click the Solution object, select Insert, and select the following result options: Equivalent (Von-
Mises) Stress, Normal Stress, Equivalent Plastic Strain, and Accumulated Equivalent Plastic Strain.
Plot the Equivalent (Von-Mises) Stress result and observe that the maximum calculated stress occurs at
the notch tip (vertex near notch on the horizontal bottom edge) due to stress concentration (see red
max label in Figure 31.16: Equivalent Plastic Strain (p. 381)). Plot the Normal Stress with orientation Y
Axis, Equivalent Plastic Strain and Accumulated Equivalent Plastic Strain scoped to the notch tip.
Observe in the Graph below that the maximum equivalent plastic strain increases with each cycle
(ratcheting).
Results
Figure 31.16: Equivalent Plastic Strain
The accumulated equivalent plastic strain also increases with each cycle as seen in the following figure.
Figure 31.17: Accumulated Equivalent Plastic Strain
Insert a Chart plotting the Equivalent Plastic Strain and Normal Stress result objects added previously.
Enter the settings shown below and observe that the chart shows the expected ratcheting effect for
Chaboche Kinematic Hardening material model.
31.10. References
1. Chaboche, J.L. (1989). Constitutive equations for cyclic plasticity and cyclic viscoplasticity. Interna-
tional Journal of Plasticity. 5(3), 247-302.
2. Chaboche, J.L. (1991). On some modifications of kinematic hardening to improve the description of
ratcheting effects. International Journal of Plasticity. 7, 661-678.
3. Rezaiee-Pajand, M. & Sinaie, S. (2009). On the calibration of the chaboche hardening model and a
modified hardening rule for uniaxial ratcheting prediction. International Journal of Solids and Structures.
46, 3009-3017.CRC
4. Bari, S. & Hassan, T. (2000). Anatomy of coupled constitutive models for ratcheting simulation. Inter-
national Journal of Plasticity. 16, 381-409.

Chapter 33: Analysis of a Piezoelectric Flextensional
Transducer in Water
This example problem couples structural, piezoelectric, and acoustic elements to analyze the acoustic
response of a flextensional transducer to voltage excitation using a Coupled Field Harmonic System.
This example is simulated using the Ansys Mechanical Application. To see this example solved with
Ansys Mechanical APDL see Analysis of a Piezoelectric Flextensional Transducer in Water in the Technology
Showcase: Example Problems
• Structural-acoustic coupling using fluid-structure interaction (FSI) in 2D and 3D
• Defining piezoelectric material properties in Engineering Data
• Use of infinite acoustic elements to absorb outgoing acoustic waves in 2D
• Use of the Robin boundary condition to absorb outgoing acoustic waves in 3D
• Use of an acoustic Physics Region in 3D
• Far-field postprocessing of an acoustic field in 2.5D models
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Coupled Field Harmonic
Element Type(s) 2D Analysis:
2D Structural Solid (PLANE182)
2D Coupled Field Solid (PLANE223)
2D Acoustic Fluid (FLUID29)
3D Analysis:
3D Structural Solid (SOLID185)
3D Coupled Field Solid (SOLID226)
3D Acoustic Fluid (FLUID30)

33.1. Introduction
Analysis of a Piezoelectric Flextensional Transducer in Water

33.9. References
33.10. Input Files
33.1. Introduction
Flextensional transducers usually operate in the low- or mid-frequency range and are attractive because
they can generate high-power output. A Class IV type of flextensional transducer, shown in the following
figure, contains a stack of piezoelectric ceramics in an elliptically-shaped shell that is covered with
rubber to isolate it from the surrounding water:
Figure 33.1: Class IV Flextensional Underwater Acoustic Transducer Shell
Voltage applied to the piezoelectric ceramics causes motion along the x axis (major axis), which in turn
causes amplified motion along the y axis (minor axis). This behavior produces large fluid volume dis-
placement and therefore high-power output. The Class IV flextensional transducer produces a roughly
omnidirectional radiation pattern, although reduced output occurs along the minor axis.
Transducer design can include changing material properties or dimensions to obtain the desired resonant
frequency or response amplitude (quadrupole bending mode).
To simplify modeling, the flextensional transducer is idealized as a 2D planar model and excited at 1400
Hz. Plane stress elements are used for the structural bodies and planar acoustic elements are used for
the fluid.
Results of the 2D analysis are compared to a 3D (2.5D) model. The term 2.5D describes a single layer
of extruded 3D elements used to mimic 2D planar behavior. The example also uses advanced 3D cap-
abilities, such as wave-absorption conditions and far-field postprocessing.
Because the Mechanical Application does not support some features of 2D acoustic analysis, command
snippets are used when necessary for the 2D case. The 3D (2.5D) model is easier to create since the
acoustic features used are supported in the Mechanical user interface.

The model exhibits ¼ symmetry, so one quarter of the geometry is analyzed. The idealized 2D planar
model is shown below.
Figure 33.2: Flextensional Transducer Surrounded by Water
The quarter-symmetry model has 15 piezoelectric stacks (30 in the full model). The polarization direction
is defined as the element's x axis (aligned with the global X axis), and the element coordinate system
x-axes alternate between each piezoelectric ceramic.
Figure 33.3: Alternating Polarity of Piezoelectric Stacks

The 2D and 3D transducer models are created in Ansys DesignModeler and meshed in the Ansys
Mechanical Application. The major axis length is 450 mm and the minor axis length is 210 mm.
In both the 2D and 3D models, the first Physics Region object is scoped to all piezoelectric bodies.
Structural is set to Yes and Electric is set to Charge Based.
Figure 33.4: Physics Region with Piezoeletric Coupling
In the 2D model, the second Physics Region object is structural and is scoped to all other bodies. The
fluid region is included because Mechanical does not support defining acoustic behavior for 2D fluid
bodies. The fluid region is defined later using a command snippet (see 2D Transducer Model (p. 388)).
Figure 33.5: Physics Region with Structural Physics Only (2D Case)
In the 3D model, the second Physics Region is structural and is scoped to the aluminum shell and the
rubber boot. The third Physics Region is acoustic, as shown in the figure below.
Figure 33.6: Physics Region with Acoustic Physics Only (3D Case)
33.3.1. 2D Transducer Model

For the 2D case, the ceramic stacks are modeled with PLANE223 coupled field (piezoelectric) elements
with dropped midside nodes. PLANE182 structural elements are used for the aluminum shell and
rubber boot.
Workbench does not support the PLANE223 element with dropped midside nodes. The workaround
is to define element type PLANE223 using a command snippet, and set Element Order to Linear for
the Mesh object as shown below:
The surrounding water is a circular region meshed with FLUID29 acoustic elements with a radius of
1.1 m. Workbench does not support the FLUID29 element, but you can define it using a command
snippet as shown below:
The truncated boundary defined by the 1.1 m circular arc is meshed with FLUID129 infinite acoustic
elements to absorb outgoing acoustic waves. The FLUID129 elements are also created by a command
snippet (see Figure 33.12: Acoustic Boundary Conditions for 2D Model (p. 394)).
The following figure shows the final mesh with an average element size of 10 mm:
Figure 33.7: 2D Transducer Model Mesh
33.3.2. 3D Transducer Model

For the 3D case, the ceramic stacks are modeled with SOLID226 coupled field (piezoelectric) elements
with dropped midside nodes. SOLID185 structural elements are used for the aluminum shell and
rubber boot.
A rectangular region 300 mm from the sides of the transducer represents the surrounding water,
which is modeled with FLUID30 acoustic elements. The model is extruded 10 mm in the out-of-plane
(z axis) direction to create a 2.5-D representation.
Workbench does not support the FLUID30 element, but you can define it using a command snippet
as shown below:
The following figure shows the final mesh with an average element size of 10 mm:
Material Properties
Figure 33.8: 3D Transducer Model Mesh

The material properties are defined in Engineering Data.
Following are the material properties for the aluminum shell and rubber boot:
Material
Material Property
Aluminum Rubber
2
Young's Modulus (N/m ) 68.9E9 30E6
Poisson's Ratio 0.3 0.49
3
Density (kg/m ) 2710 1100
The water density is assumed to be 1000 kg/m3, and its speed of sound is 1500 m/s.
Following are the material properties of the piezoelectric ceramic (PZT8), where the polarization direction
is along the element x axis:
Material Property Piezoelectric Ceramic Material

3
Density (kg/m ) 7600
Material Property Piezoelectric Ceramic Material

Young's Modulus X direction = 7.407E+10 Pa
Young's Modulus Y direction = 8.696E+10 Pa
Young's Modulus Z direction = 8.696E+10 Pa
Poisson's Ratio XY = 0.303
Orthotropic Elasticity Poisson's Ratio YZ = 0.356
Poisson's Ratio XZ = 0.322
Shear Modulus XY = 3.135E+10 Pa
Shear Modulus YZ = 3.289E+10 Pa
Shear Modulus XZ = 3.135E+10 Pa
Relative Permittivity X direction = 561
Dielectric Permittivity (relative) at
constant strain Relative Permittivity Y direction = 904
Relative Permittivity Z direction = 904
Piezoelectric Stress Matrix (See Figure 33.9: Piezoelectric Stress Matrix (p. 392))
Figure 33.9: Piezoelectric Stress Matrix

Following are the boundary conditions and loading applied to the piezoelectric flextensional transducer
model:
33.5.1. Structural Boundary Conditions
33.5.2. Acoustic Boundary Conditions and Flags
33.5.3. Piezoelectric Boundary Conditions
33.5.1. Structural Boundary Conditions

Because a quarter of the model is analyzed, two symmetry boundary conditions are applied along
the x and y axes as shown below:
Figure 33.10: Symmetry Boundary Conditions
The 3D model has an additional z constraint on both planes at z = 0 and 0.01 m as shown below:
Figure 33.11: Z Constraints for 3D Model
33.5.2. Acoustic Boundary Conditions and Flags

Rigid walls and symmetry planes are naturally occurring boundary conditions in an acoustic analysis.
Therefore, no acoustic boundary conditions are necessary on the two symmetry planes at x = 0 and
y = 0. In the 3D case, the planar surfaces at z = 0 and 0.01 m are rigid walls and do not require
boundary conditions.
2D Acoustic Wave-Absorption Condition

For the 2D case, the FLUID129 infinite acoustic element is used to model the wave-absorption condition.
Typically, the fluid domain can be truncated around a quarter of the wavelength away from the object
of interest. However, because Workbench does not support far-field postprocessing for 2D FLUID29
elements, the calculated results at 1 m must be included in the computational domain. FLUID129
elements are therefore positioned in a circular arc 1.1 m from the center.
To activate the vibroacoustic coupling, the FSI flag (SF,,FSI) is applied to the N_FSI named selection.
A command snippet is used to define the FLUID129 elements and the FSI boundary condition:
Figure 33.12: Acoustic Boundary Conditions for 2D Model
3D Acoustic Wave-Absorption Condition

For the 3D case, the modeled domain is Cartesian. A Robin Radiation Boundary is applied to the
outermost (+x and +y) surfaces to model the wave-absorption condition. Because far-field postpro-
cessing is supported in 3D, it is not necessary for the computational domain to extend 1 m in distance.
The Fluid-Solid Interface is scoped to the structural and acoustic physics interfaces.
Figure 33.13: Acoustic Boundary Conditions for 3D Model
Radiation Boundary Fluid-Solid Interface

Condition

Between each piezoelectric ceramic is a terminal (not modeled). Because each terminal is equipotential,
voltages of 0 V and 1 V are applied in an alternating fashion between each piezoelectric ceramic part
as shown below:
Figure 33.14: Applied Voltages
Note: Make sure the polarization axis is set properly by using the local coordinate system for each
piezoelectric ceramic part.

A coupled field harmonic analysis is performed using the full solution method with 10 solution intervals
over a frequency range of 0 Hz to 1400 Hz.

Following are plots of the sound pressure level (SPL) on the quarter-symmetry model for both the 2D
and 3D analyses.
Figure 33.15: SPL Plot of Quarter-Symmetry 2D Transducer Model
Figure 33.16: SPL Plot of Quarter-Symmetry 3D Transducer Model
Notice that while the maximum SPL is at the surface of the transducer's minor axis, the SPL near the
truncated boundary is lower along the minor axis.
For the 2D model, the following SPL plot along an arc 1 m from the center shows the direction of the
arc from the x axis towards the y axis:
Figure 33.17: SPL Plot Along an Arc 1 m from Center
The following figures show the 2D and 3D SPL plots:
Figure 33.18: 2D SPL Plot
Figure 33.19: 3D SPL Plot
The plots indicate good correlation between the 2D and 3D models.
Additional Information:
• The meshes for both cases are not identical, so some variation in the results was expected.
• The following command snippet is used to plot Figure 33.17: SPL Plot Along an Arc 1 m from Cen-
ter (p. 398):
Input Files
To perform a similar type of piezoelectric flextensional transducer analysis, consider the following hints
and recommendations:
• For both the FLUID129 infinite fluid element (2D) and the Robin boundary condition (3D), include at
least a quarter-wavelength of fluid in a given direction, where the wavelength is based on the lowest
frequency of interest.
• For linear (lower-order) fluid elements, use approximately 14-16 elements per wavelength, where the
wavelength is based on the highest frequency of interest.
33.9. References
Theory behind the analysis of a flextensional transducer can be found in this resource:
1. Kang, K. & Roh, Y. (1980). Optimization of structural variables of a flextensional transducer by the
statistical multiple regression analysis method. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. Ph.D.
Thesis. University of California, Berkeley: CA.
33.10. Input Files

Chapter 35: Elastoplastic Creep Analysis of Lead-Free
Solder Bumps
This example problem is a thermomechanical analysis of lead-free solder bumps subjected to cyclic
thermal loading using the Ansys Mechanical Application. To see this example solved using Ansys
Mechanical APDL see Elastoplastic Creep Analysis of Lead-Free Solder Bumps in the Technology Showcase:
Example Problems.
• Using creep and plasticity material models to simulate viscoplastic behavior.
• Determining accumulated creep strain due to thermal loading.
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Thermal Stress Analysis
Element Type(s) 3-D SOLID

35.1. Introduction
35.3. Geometry
35.4. Meshing
35.7. Results
35.9. References
35.1. Introduction
Creep is a rate-dependent material nonlinearity in which the material continues to deform under a
constant load. Creep occurs because of long-term exposure to a high level of stress that does not exceed
the yield strength of the material. Creep is more severe in materials subjected to heat for long periods.
The creep strain rate can be a function of stress, time, temperature, and neutron flux level.
Under constant load, the uniaxial strain-vs.-time creep behavior is illustrated in the following figure:
Elastoplastic Creep Analysis of Lead-Free Solder Bumps
Figure 35.1: Creep Stages
In the primary stage, which tends to occur over a comparatively short period, the strain rate decreases
with time. The secondary stage exhibits an associated constant strain. In the tertiary stage, the strain
rate increases rapidly until failure (rupture). Typically, the primary and secondary stages of creep are
usually of greatest importance.
In static or transient structural analysis, creep can be simulated via implicit creep models. Compared to
other creep methods, implicit creep is preferred as it is computationally faster and more accurate. The
primary and secondary stages of creep can be simulated using different implicit creep material models,
as shown in the following table:
Table 35.1: Implicit Creep Models
Creep Equation Description Type

Strain Hardening Primary
Time Hardening Primary
Generalized Exponential Primary
Generalized Graham Primary
Generalized Blackburn Primary
Modified Time Hardening Primary
Modified Strain Hardening Primary
Generalized Garofalo Secondary
Exponential Form Secondary
Norton Secondary
Combined Time Hardening Both
Rational Polynomial Both
Generalized Time Hardening Primary
User-Defined Creep Any
The creep model can be selected based on available experimental data.
Problem Description
The temperature fluctuations endured by flip chip packages can cause progressive damage in solder
joints. Damage accumulation beyond certain limits results in electrical failure. Such failures are typically
the result of thermal-expansion mismatches between the materials used [1]. The mismatches lead to a
complex deformation behavior, and are associated with irreversible, temperature- and strain-rate or
time-dependent inelastic characteristics, producing viscoplastic deformation in and around the solder
joints. Deformation behavior can be simulated via viscoplastic material models, or by a creep model
used with a plasticity material model.
In the electronics industry, a primary goal of thermomechanical analysis is to simulate the stress and
strain responses of the solder joint to better predict its service reliability. The problem presented here
is a thermomechanical analysis of flip chip packages using creep and plasticity material models.
Because the harmful health-related effects of lead has forced electronic manufacturers to reduce their
use of toxic heavy metals (including lead) in solders, thermomechanical analysis for solder joints becomes
increasingly important as reliable alternative solders to replace lead-based solders are explored [2]. This
example uses a lead-free solder 96.5Sn-3.5Ag.

The flip chip package is composed of the chip, underfill, substrate, and solder as shown in the following
figures:
Figure 35.2: Distribution of Solder Bumps in Full Flip Chip Model and Size of Solder Bump
The size of the chip is 6.95 mm × 6.95 mm ×0.6 mm. The size of the substrate is 14 mm ×14 mm × 0.65
mm. The distance between chip and substrate is 0.075 mm. The diameter of the upper pad, the diameter
of the lower pad, and the width of the solder bump are 0.12 mm, 0.144 mm, and 0.1507 mm, respectively.
Figure 35.3: 1/8 Symmetry of Flip Chip Pack
To minimize the model size and computational resources required for the thermomechanical analysis,
only 1/8 of the full model is analyzed, leveraging its symmetric geometry, loading, and boundary con-
ditions. To determine the cyclic thermal load effect on the solder joint, a generalized Garofalo creep
model is used for the secondary stage of the creep analysis.
35.3. Geometry
To explore this example problem, you can download the .cdb file (p. 417) and import it using the
Workbench External Model System. In Workbench, insert the External Model System and select the.cdb
file as the data source. Insert the Thermal-Structural linked analysis systems and link the External
Model System to the Model cell of Transient Thermal analysis system as shown in the Workbench
flowchart below.
Figure 35.4: Flowchart in Project Schematic of Workbench
Update the Model cell and run the Mechanical Application to view the geometry bodies of solder, un-
derfill, chip and substrate.
Meshing
Figure 35.5: Geometry View in Mechanical
35.4. Meshing
The mesh is also imported from the .cbd file. It is a higher order hexahedron-dominant mesh using
SOLID279 elements for the Thermal Analysis and SOLID186 elements for the Structural Analysis.
Temperature profiles at different time steps, obtained from the transient thermal analysis, are used in
the nonlinear structural analysis to predict residual creep strains in solder bumps. The analysis requires
the same mesh used for thermal analysis.
Contact and target elements CONTA174 and TARGE170, respectively, are compatible with structural
element SOLID186.
Surface-to-surface contact pairs are created between flip chip parts using CONTA174 and TARGE170
elements, as shown in the following figure.
Figure 35.7: Contact Target Pairs

The rate-dependent plasticity material behavior is used for solder bumps, while the other parts are as-
sumed to be linear elastic and temperature-independent.
The generalized Garofalo model is used to simulate creep behavior. The creep strain rate of the model
is expressed as:
(35.1)
where
is the change in equivalent creep strain with respect to time.
is the equivalent stress.

T is the temperature.
C1 through C4 are the constants.
t is the time at the end of the substep.
e is the natural logarithm base.
The following experimental data are used with the curve-fitting tool for creep materials to find the
creep model constants. For more details, see Material Properties in the Technology Showcase: Example
Problems.
Material Properties
Figure 35.8: Creep Experimental Data [4-6] at Different Temperatures Used for Curve-Fitting
Procedure
The constants from curve-fitting procedure and the reference [3] listed in the table below fit the exper-
imental data describing creep behavior even though they have different values of C4 and consequently,
C1. They calculate equal values for C2 and C3, and the remaining terms in Equation 35.1 (p. 410) are equal
for every temperature, .
Table 35.2: Generalized Garofalo Creep Constants Calculated from Curve Fitting and at Constant
Temperature
Temperature Constant Reference Curve Fitting

(K) [units] [3]
C1 [second-1] 26.00917 7.19E-11
-1
C2 [MPa ] 0.037486 3.75E-02
218
C3 [ ] 5.5 5.50E+00
C4 [Kelvin] 5802 0.00E+00
-1
C1 [second ] 17.14286 1.01E-08
-1
C2 [MPa ] 0.044852 4.49E-02
273
C3 [ ] 5.5 5.50E+00
C4 [Kelvin] 5802 0.00E+00
C1 [second-1] 14.19463 4.97E-08
298 -1
C2 [MPa ] 0.049251 4.93E-02
Temperature Constant Reference Curve Fitting

(K) [units] [3]
C3 [ ] 5.5 5.50E+00
C4 [Kelvin] 5802 0.00E+00
-1
C1 [second ] 9.568966 5.50E-07
-1
C2 [MPa ] 0.061269 6.13E-02
348
C3 [ ] 5.5 5.50E+00
C4 [Kelvin] 5802 0.00E+00
-1
C1 [second ] 6.105528 2.85E-06
-1
C2 [MPa ] 0.081046 8.10E-02
398
C3 [ ] 5.5 5.50E+00
C4 [Kelvin] 5802 0.00E+00
The following material properties [3] are used for the thermomechanical analysis of the flip chip:
Table 35.3: Flip Chip Material Properties
Properties Solder Chip Underfill Substrate

Conductivity (W/m-K) 33 110 1.6 13
Specific Heat (J/Kg-K) 226 712 674 879
3
Density (Kg/m ) 7400 2330 6080 1938
2
Young’s Modulus (MPa) E(T) = 52708 - 67.14T - 0.0587T 162000 14470 18200
MPa
Poisson’s Ratio 0.4 0.28 0.28 0.25
Coefficients of Thermal 22.36 2.3 20 19
Expansion (ppm/K)
Table 35.4: Temperature-Dependent Properties
Temperature (K) 273 323 373

Yield Stress 21 16 10
Elastic and perfectly plastic material behavior is assumed. Bilinear isotropic hardening is used to define
the solder plasticity to compare results.

Analysis of the flip chip is performed on a 1/8 section of the full model, and symmetric boundary con-
ditions are applied to the two cut planes in both the thermal and the structural analyses.
35.6.1. Thermal Analysis

An initial temperature of 298 K is applied on all nodes.
The temperature on the free surface of the chip is increased at a constant rate for 150 seconds to
398 K.
The same constant temperature is maintained in the next load step for 300 seconds, then cooled to
218 K in 300 seconds.
Figure 35.9: Initial Temperature
The following figure illustrates the ramped heating and cooling phases and the constant temperature
maintained for 300 seconds between each phase.
Figure 35.10: Temperature Cycle History
35.6.2. Structural Analysis

The temperature profile at different time steps (obtained from a transient thermal analysis) is used
in nonlinear structural analysis to predict residual creep strains in the solder. A linear variation in the
older temperature between load steps is observed. Therefore, the thermal load is applied at the end
of each load step rather than to each substep.
The following figure illustrates the imported body temperature applied in the structural analysis at
each time step.
Figure 35.11: Imported Body Temperature
Rigid body motion is constrained with displacement of all degrees of freedom at the center of a
substrate bottom node.
35.7. Results
The following figure shows the temperature distribution at the end of the 12th and 14th load steps.
Figure 35.12: Temperature Distribution in Flip Chip at 3150 Seconds and 3750 Seconds
Results
Temperature on the chip is reduced from 398 K to 218 K in the 12th load step and increased from 218
K to 398 K in the 14th load step.
The temperature distribution is nearly uniform in all load steps, due to assumed perfect thermal contact
between parts of the flip chip and a high thermal contact conductance value. These results are used in
the structural analysis as thermal loading.
The reference structural analysis [3] results using the generalized Garofalo creep model constants are
compared to the structural analysis results with creep curve-fitting constants.
Figure 35.13: USUM Results from Creep Curve Fitting Constants and Reference Constants at the
End of 14th Load Step (3750 Seconds)
All time-history results are plotted for solder element results at node 4112, positioned at the end of
farthest solder bead from the center near the chip, as shown in the following figure.
Figure 35.14: Node Used for Plotting Post Process Results
Due to unavailable thermal contact conductance and plasticity behavior used in the reference analysis,
the following assumptions apply to this problem:
• Perfect thermal contact between parts of the flip chip.
• Elastic and perfectly plastic behavior with isotropic hardening in the structural analysis.
The results based on the curve-fitting creep constants are therefore compared to another analysis using
the reference creep constants and run with the same assumptions, as shown in this figure:
Figure 35.15: Von Mises Creep Strain at Node Number 4112
Observe the increase in creep strain with cyclic load steps.
To perform a similar elastoplastic creep analysis, consider these recommendations:
• Select the creep model based on available experimental data.
• For better results, the stress/strain rate and temperature range of the application should fall within
the considered experimental data range. Using too much additional experimental data outside the
required range also leads to more complexity in finding material constants and reduces accuracy
within the desired range of strains. Engineering judgment is therefore necessary to select an experi-
mental data range for curve fitting.
• Because the curve-fitting procedure is a numerical technique for obtaining material constants without
considering the physics of the material model, material model knowledge is required to judge the
constants obtained from curve fitting in order to avoid solution inconsistency.
• Provide accurate experimental test data to obtain valid curve-fitting results.
35.9. References
1. Kornain, Z., Jalar, A., Amin, N., Rasid, R., & Foong, C. S. (2010). Comparative study of different underfill
material on flip chip ceramic ball grid array based on accelerated thermal cycling. American Journal
of Engineering and Applied Sciences. 3(1), 83-89.
2. Shangguan, D. (2005). Lead-Free Solder Interconnect Reliability. Materials Park, OH: ASM International.
3. Jong, W., Chien-Chia, C., Hsin-Chun, T., & Hsiu-Tao, C. (2005). Elastic-Plastic-Creep analysis of lead
and lead-free solder bumps in FC. Annual Technical Conference (ANTEC) of the Society of Plastics En-
gineers. 1665-1669.
4. Darveaux, R. & Reichman, C. (2007). Mechanical properties of lead-free solders. 57th Electronic Com-
ponents and Technology Conference. 695-706.
5. Clech, J. P. (January, 2015). Sn-Ag properties and creep data. Material Measurement Laboratory. ht-
tp://www.metallurgy.nist.gov/solder/clech/Sn-Ag_Bulk.htm>.
6. Lau, J. H. & Pan, S. H. (2001). Creep behaviors of flip chip on board with 96.5Sn-3.5Ag and 100In
lead-free solder joints. International Journal of Microcircuits and Electronic Packaging. 24, 11-18.

Chapter 37: Bolt Thread
This example problem demonstrates a simplified modeling technique for bolt thread simulation using
the Bolt Thread Correction method. The method delivers results with near accuracy of the true threaded
bolt model, but without the need to include thread profile details in the geometry. Thus, the bolt thread
correction method offers significant savings in simulation time. This example is simulated using the
Ansys Mechanical Application. To see this example solved with Ansys Mechanical APDL see Bolt Thread
in the Technology Showcase: Example Problems.
• 2-D bolt thread modeling using the Bolt Thread Geometry Correction option of Contact.
• Use of Bolt Pretension loading.
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Nonlinear Static Structural
Element Type(s) 2-D PLANE, Contact-Target and Pretension

37.1. Introduction
37.3. Modeling
37.5. Results
37.1. Introduction
A bolted joint is used to hold two or more parts together to form an assembly of a mechanical structure.
In order to achieve expected physical behaviors of a bolted joint structure, a detailed three-dimensional
bolt model, which fully includes the bolt pretension effect and the frictional behavior at contact interfaces,
is desirable. However, for a large, complex structure, detailed modeling of bolted joints is difficult because
of problem size restrictions and computational costs associated with analyzing the entire structure.
The bolt thread modeling technique offers simplified modeling with accuracy close to that of a true
threaded bolt model. Bolt threads can be simulated using the Bolt Thread option available for the
Contact Geometry Correction property of contacts, which assigns a bolt section (defined by the SEC-
TYPE command) to contact elements that are overlaid on a smooth cylindrical bolt surface. To approx-
Bolt Thread
imate the behavior of the bolt, calculations are performed internally based on the user-specified bolt
orientation and thread geometry data (input via specific properties for the Bolt Thread option).
The bolt thread modeling technique is useful for system level modeling where the primary bolt function
is to transfer a load. The absence of geometric details and refined mesh discretization in the thread
region also makes it a computationally inexpensive method. This technique can be applied to 3-D
models and 2-D axisymmetric models.

The two primary characteristics in a bolted joint are pretension and mating part contact. To simulate
the bolt configuration, a stud M120 bolt is modeled with a cover and a base plate. The bolt is subjected
to a pretension load of 2544690 N to simulate the actual bolt phenomenon. Three frictional contact
pairs are defined to model the following contact areas:
1. Thread region between bolt and base plate
2. Between cover plate and base plate
3. Between bolt head and cover plate.
A pressure load of 50 MPa (which is less than the equivalent pretension load) is applied to the upper
surface of the cover plate after applying pretension to the bolt. The resulting bolt shank stress (stress
in the region between the bolt head and the bolt thread) due to the pretension load and the inclusion
of frictional contact behavior are the major concerns during the bolt simulation.
The objective of this problem is to demonstrate the following:
• how to simplify the modeling of a bolted joint using the Bolt Thread option of the Contact
Geometry Correction
• the close approximation of thread behavior and shank stress by this simplified modeling approach
compared to results from the more detailed and computationally expensive true threaded bolt
model.
This problem is simulated using three methods:
1. True Thread Simulation method
This method is the most accurate. Detailed modeling of the threads accurately simulates thread
behavior, but it requires a highly refined mesh in the thread region, which makes this method
computationally expensive.
2. Bolt Thread Connection method (simplified bolt thread modeling technique)
In this method, the bolt thread is simulated using the Bolt Thread option for Contact Geometry
Correction in Contact Settings, which assigns a bolt section to the contact elements overlaid on the
smooth cylindrical bolt surface. No detailed thread geometry is required. Bolt behavior is calculated
using thread parameters that you specify in Contact (for more information see Simplified Bolt Thread
Modeling in the Contact Technology Guide). This method is computationally inexpensive.
3. MPC method (bonded behavior in thread region)
Modeling
In this method, MPC bonded behavior is defined in the thread region. No detailed thread geometry
is required. This method is very fast computationally, but thread behavior can be lost.
2-D axisymmetric models are used to compare these three methods. The 2-D model setup for all three
methods is shown in the figure below.
Figure 37.1: 2-D Axisymmetric Meshed Models for the True Thread, Bolt Section, and MPC Method
37.3. Modeling
37.3.1. Bolt Thread Correction method

A 2D Static Structural system has been created and set up to model this example problem using
the bolt thread correction method (or simplified bolt thread modeling technique). The material
properties (summarized in Material Properties (p. 428)) have been specified, and the 2D Behavior
property for all bodies has been set to Axisymmetric. You can download the file named
Bolt_Thread_2D_Simple.agdb to explore the setup hands-on using Ansys Workbench and the
Mechanical Application (See Workbench Input Files and Project Files (p. 434)).
Multiple local coordinates have been created in the Static Structural system. They are used to define
the locations of the bolt axis (the pretension elements location), the thread end point, and the path
for evaluating Linearized Equivalent Stress. For information on creating coordinate systems, see Cre-
ating Coordinate Systems. The characteristics of the local coordinate systems are as follows:
a. Bolt_Axis:
• Origin
– Origin X = 0 mm and Origin Y = 260 mm
Bolt Thread
• Principal Axis
– Axis = X and Defined By = Global Y Axis
b. Bolt_Thread_End
• Origin
c. Path_Start
• Origin
d. Path_End
• Origin
– Origin X = 51.341 mm and Origin Y = 280 mm
37.3.1.1. Connections
This 2D assembly has the following contact regions:
• Contact Region 1 – Between smooth edge (eqv threads) of bolt and base plate (Bolt thread To
BasePlate thread).
• Contact Region 2 – Between cover plate and base plate (CoverPlate To BasePlate)
• Contact Region 3 – Between the bolt head and the cover plate (Bolt head To CoverPlate)
Each of these contacts have following settings (other than defaults) :
• Definition
– Type - Frictional
– Frictional Coefficient - 0.15
– Behavior - Asymmetric
• Advanced
– Formulation - Augmented Lagrange
– Small Sliding - Off
– Detection Method - Nodal-Projected Normal From Contact
– Update Stiffness - Each Iteration
To simulate the bolt threads, the contact between the smooth edge (eqv threads) of the bolt and
the base plate (Bolt thread To BasePlate thread), has additional Bolt Thread Contact Geometry
Modeling
Correction settings to simulate the bolt thread. The following figure shows the details of the addi-
tional settings for the Bolt Thread Correction.
Figure 37.2: Additional Settings for Bolt Thread Correction
37.3.1.2. Meshing
The 2D model is meshed with 2D axisymmetric elements. Global Element Size is set to 6.5 mm.
Local mesh Refinement (Refinement = 2) is applied on the smooth edge (eqv threads) of the bolt
and the base plate to create a finer mesh for better thread simulation using the Bolt Thread Correc-
tion method. Mapped Face Meshing is also applied on all faces.
37.3.1.3. Analysis Settings

The analysis is non-linear with two load-steps. Auto Time Stepping is set On in each load-step to
reduce the solution time. Large Deflection is set On to include large-deflection effects.
37.3.1.4. Boundary Conditions and Loading

Pretension is the most important aspect of the simulation of the bolted structure. It transfers the
load in the model while sustaining only a small part of the external load on the bolt. The preload
on the bolt is caused by the tightening of the bolt to fasten the cover plate to the base plate. Pre-
tension in the bolt is modeled by Bolt Pretension load, which cuts the bolt into two segments at
the origin of the previously defined Bolt Pretension Coordinate System (y = 260 mm) and pulls
each segment toward the other. Bolt Pretension creates pretension elements to simulate pretension
in the bolt. For more information on using Bolt Pretension, see Bolt Pretension.
The bottom edge of the base plate is constrained in all directions using Fixed Support. A pressure
load is applied to the upper edge of the cover plate after preloading the bolt.
Bolt Thread
The Bolt Pretension load applied on the bolt body is 2544690 N applied in first load step, which
remains locked in during the second load-step (see details in the following figure).
Figure 37.3: Bolt Pretention Load Applied
In the second load step, a pressure load of 50 MPa (which is less than the equivalent pretension
load) is applied to the upper edge of the cover plate.
37.3.2. MPC Method

The MPC method is similar to the bolt thread correction method in all aspects except for how the
thread contact region is modeled. Here, the Multi-Point Constraint (MPC) Contact Formulation with
bonded contact type is used to simulate the thread contact region (between the smooth edge of the
bolt and the base plate).
The settings for the thread contact region (other than defaults) are as follows:
• Definition
– Type - Bonded
– Behavior - Asymmetric
– Trim Contact - Off
• Advanced
– Formulation - MPC
– Detection Method - Nodal-Normal To Target
37.3.3. True Thread Simulation:

You can download and import the Mechanical APDL common database .cdb mesh file to explore
the most detailed modeling method, the true thread simulation method (See Workbench Input Files
and Project Files (p. 434)). This method is similar to the bolt thread correction method except that
the.cdb file is used instead of the CAD model. The more detailed geometry includes actual modeled
Modeling
threads for the true thread simulation method as seen in the following figure. As a result, the bolt
thread correction used in the simpler modeling strategies is not needed here.
Figure 37.4: Detailed Geometry Used for the True Thread Simulation Method
Bolt Thread

Structural steel with the bilinear isotropic hardening model is used to model the bolt and plates.
Table 37.1: Material Properties of Bolt
Elastic Material Properties

Young's Modulus 2.00E5 MPa
Poisson's Ratio 0.3
Density 7.85E-9 tonne/mm3
Tangent modulus 2.00E4 MPa
Table 37.2: Material Properties of Cover Plate and Base Plate

Poisson's Ratio 0.3
Tangent modulus 2.00E4 MPa
37.5. Results
Directional Deformation (UY)

The pretension effects can be observed in the following figure in which two segments of the bolt are
pulling against each other.
Results
Figure 37.5: UY Displacement in the 2-D Axisymmetric Model for all Three Methods
Equivalent Stress
The von Mises stress plots below show that shank stress is similar in all three methods. User-specified
contour values (except the minimum value) are used for the purpose of comparison. Variations
are observed only in local areas near the thread region.
Bolt Thread
Figure 37.6: Equivalent Stress in the 2-D Axisymmetric Model for all Three Methods
The stress plot of the thread region for the bolt thread correction method closely matches the stress
plot for the true thread simulation, and the MPC method plot varies. The comparison between stress
plots demonstrates that accurate simulation of thread behavior and shank stress in the bolt can be
achieved by using the bolt thread correction method.
Linearized Equivalent Stress along a Path (at Y = 280 mm)
Linearized stress in the bolt shank along the path at y = 280 is similar for all three methods. The values
are 329.39 MPa for the true thread simulation, 331.26 MPa for the Bolt Thread Correction method, and
331.67 MPa for the MPC method.
Results
Figure 37.7: Linearized Stress in the Bolt Shank Along a Path at y = 280 for all Three Methods.
Bolt Thread
Results
37.5.1. Comparison of Computation Time

From the tables below it is clear that the bolt thread correction method is computationally less ex-
pensive than the true thread simulation. The MPC method is also computationally less expensive, but
the thread effect gets lost.
True Computation Elapsed Cumulative Number of

Thread Time Timeal Iterations Elements
Simulation
Method
True 116.3 121 34 13577
Thread
Simulation
Bolt Thread 19.1 22 29 2629
Correction
method
MPC 20.6 23 30 2629
method
Bolt Thread
Comparisons of results (Directional Deformation and Equivalent Stress) and computation time
demonstrate that accurate simulation of thread behavior and shank stress results in the bolt can be
achieved by the bolt thread correction method, with the added benefit of significant savings of sim-
ulation time.
The following points are important for bolt thread modeling:
• The Bolt cylindrical surface/edge should be the contact side.
• Starting Point and Ending Point of bolt thread (under Bolt Thread Correction), should be on the
bolt axis and defined in the global coordinate system.
• In order to achieve better accuracy, the mesh size in the thread region should be less than the Pitch
Distance.
• We recommend using the projection-based contact Detection Method (Nodal-Projected Normal

From Contact).
• This technique is valid only for standard, straight threads. It is not applicable for nonstandard threads
such as tapered threads or buttress threads.
• The maximum stress in the thread region may vary with mesh density. However, the overall stress
distribution remains similar in pattern.

Chapter 39: Wire Bonding Ultrasonic Transducer
This example problem couples structural, piezoelectric elements to analyze electrical excitation of an
ultrasonic transducer used for wire bonding applications. The model includes piezoelectric material
definition, and prestressed coupled field modal and harmonic response analyses. This problem is simu-
lated here using the Ansys Mechanical Application. To see this example solved using Ansys Mechanical
APDL see Wire Bonding Ultrasonic Transducer in the Technology Showcase: Example Problems.
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Coupled Field Modal/Harmonic
Element Type(s) 3-D SOLID, (SOLID226, SOLID186, SOLID187)

39.1. Introduction
39.4. Modeling
39.9. References
39.1. Introduction
Wire bonding is the most common process for creating interconnects between an integrated circuit
(IC) and its package using fine metal (such as gold or aluminum) wires [1][2]. In wedge bonding, ultra-
sonic energy, pressure, and heat are applied to form a bond; the process avoids introducing impurities
and provides flexibility in material choice. For larger diameter wires, the frequency is often around 50-
60 kHz whereas, for finer diameter wires, the frequency is much higher, up to as much as 200 kHz.
The design of the transducer includes examining the natural frequencies associated with its longitudinal
motion. Changes in geometry, for example, can influence the vibration and electrical characteristics of
the device.
Wire Bonding Ultrasonic Transducer
In piezoelectric ceramics, an applied voltage induces strain (displacement) in the material and vice-versa,
demonstrating the coupling of the electric and structural fields. Piezoelectric ceramics are very brittle
in tension, so a preload is needed to keep the ceramics in a compressive state of stress in operation.
The following figure shows the ultrasonic transducer modeled in this example.
Figure 39.1: Ultrasonic Transducer Model

Ultrasonic wire-bonding is used extensively in making electrical connections in microelectronic packaging.
The bonding tool, made of alumina, is shown at the far right. It is connected to the titanium horn by
small screws (not modeled). The horn is connected to the piezoelectric driver assembly. The driver as-
sembly consists of piezoelectric rings sandwiched between aluminum front and back plates, which are
connected together with a steel bolt that provides prestress. The transducer is mounted to the machine
via a steel holder.
The holder should be placed at the nodal point of the transducer for optimal performance. Nodal points
are the nodes with near-zero eigenvectors. The location for the holder is chosen so that it does not affect
the bending mode of the tool. A modal analysis is performed without the holder, and the first longitud-
inal mode is determined.
As shown in the following figure, a plot of the z displacement with contour range -1 to 1 provides an
idea of the appropriate location to position the holder.
Figure 39.2: Approximate Location for Positioning the Holder
Material Properties

Material properties are defined in the Engineering Data tab of Workbench.
Table 39.1: Structural Material Properties (taken from Yan [1])
Damping RatioMaterial
Material Property Alumina Aluminium Steel Titanium
2
Young’s modulus (N/m ) 3e11 7e10 2.1e11 1.1e11
Poisson’s ratio 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.32
3
Density (kg/m ) 3720 2700 7800 4430
Piezoelectric materials typically have orthotropic material properties, although isotropic materials are
assumed in this example, as they are defined in that manner in the reference.
Note:
The Piezoelectric Matrix and Anisotropic Relative Permittivity defined in Engineering

Data must be defined at constant stress and constant strain, respectively or vice-versa as
shown in the table below. Both properties defined at constant stress or constant strain is
not recommended.
Table 39.2: Piezoelectric Material Properties (taken from Berlincourt [3])
Material Property Piezoelectric Material

2
Young’s modulus (N/m ) 9.2e10
3
Density (kg/m ) 7700
Anisotropic Relative Permittivity
Piezoelectric Stress Matrix
A system damping ratio of 0.1 percent is assumed for the model, as the ultrasonic transducer has very
little damping. The material dependent damping is defined in Engineering Data for all materials.
39.4. Modeling
The 3-D model of the transducer is created in Ansys DesignModeler and meshed in Ansys Mechanical,
as shown in the following figure.
Figure 39.3: Meshed Ultrasonic Transducer Model
The physics region is scoped to piezoelectric bodies, setting its definition of structural to yes and electric
to Charge Based to activate the piezoelectric behavior. The rest of the bodies are scoped to a second
physics region, setting only the structural definition to yes as shown below.
Modeling
Figure 39.4: Physics Regions Setup
The piezoelectric elements are meshed with SOLID226, and the other parts are meshed with SOLID186
and SOLID187 elements. The total number of elements is 54,096 and the total number of nodes is
119,273.
The piezoelectric elements are orthotropic, so each of the piezoelectric rings assume z-axis polarization
with alternating z-axis orientation as shown in the image below. To define alternating z-axis orientation,
insert two coordinate systems. The opposite polarity can be defined by inverting the polarization axis
and assigning it to respective piezoelectric rings.
Although copper terminals lie between the piezoelectric rings, they are omitted here for simplicity.
Other details and features (such as small screws or wire holes) are also omitted, as they have no effect
on the overall response. The parts are connected via shared nodes along the interfaces. Although contact
elements can be used for piezoelectric analyses, they are unnecessary for such a simple geometry in
this case.
Figure 39.5: Polarization with Alternating Z-Orientation
A bolt connects the top and bottom plates of the driver, as shown in the following figure.
Figure 39.6: Top and Bottom Plate Connection
The fastener is split in half with PRETS179 pretension elements connecting the two halves together.
The amount of preload or adjustment is controlled via the pretension node.

The following boundary conditions and loads are applied to the ultrasonic transducer model:
39.5.1. Structural Boundary Condition
39.5.1. Structural Boundary Condition

The outside diameter of the holder is fixed (constrained in all structural degrees of freedom). A static
analysis is performed to calculate the prestress due to the tightening of the bolt to the driver assembly.
A preload force of 50 N is applied to the bolt face.
The static analysis is performed only to create the stress-stiffening matrix that influences the overall
stiffness matrix. Since the effect of the bolt preload to the stiffness of the driver is considered in the
linear perturbation analysis, the actual adjustment is not required in the dynamic analysis.

Between each piezoelectric ring is an electric terminal. The rings are polarized in opposite directions,
so the positive and negative terminals alternate.
Because the terminal is equipotential, all the voltage degrees of freedom for each terminal are coupled,
leaving two independent voltage degrees of freedom at the terminal locations. One voltage is specified
as ground (voltage of 0).
In the coupled field modal analysis, the positive terminal is left unconstrained. In the harmonic response
analysis, a voltage of 5V constant with respect to frequency is applied to the positive terminal.
Figure 39.7: Structural and Piezoelectric Boundary Conditions

Two additional analyses are performed for this problem:
39.6.1. Prestressed Modal Analysis with Linear Perturbation Method
39.6.2. Prestressed Full Harmonic Response Analysis
39.6.1. Prestressed Modal Analysis with Linear Perturbation Method

A static analysis with one terminal grounded and a bolt preload of 50 N is performed. A prestressed
modal analysis using the linear perturbation method and the Block Lanczos eigensolver is then ex-
ecuted, where the first 40 modes are requested.
The linear perturbation method for modal analyses is described in Applying Prestress Effects in a
Modal Analysis in the Structural Analysis Guide.
39.6.2. Prestressed Full Harmonic Response Analysis

A static analysis (p. 443) as described above is run first. A prestressed harmonic response analysis using
the full method is used to calculate the frequency response between 57 and 60 kHz with 30 substeps.
In this coupled field harmonic response analysis, the linear perturbation method is used to include
prestress effects. The applied voltage is 5V.
The linear perturbation method for full harmonic response analyses is described in Prestressed Har-
monic Analysis in the Structural Analysis Guide.

The following topics concerning the analyses results are available:
39.7.1. Results from Prestressed Modal Analysis with Linear Perturbation Method
39.7.2. Results from Prestressed Full Harmonic Response Analysis
39.7.1. Results from Prestressed Modal Analysis with Linear Perturbation

Method
Prior to solving a harmonic response analysis, it is important to understand the frequency content of
the system, and the modal analysis provides this valuable information. In the solution information,
the participation factor summary is available under solution output.
Figure 39.8:
Modes having high participation factors in the z direction are candidates for evaluation as desirable
longitudinal modes. Also examine the mode shapes to determine whether excessive transverse motions
exist, as those modes should not be excited during transducer operation. Upon examination of the
results in this case, modes 14, 25 and 32 are the modes of interest, as shown in the following three
figures.
Figure 39.9: First Longitudinal Mode of Interest (14) at 26.8 kHz
This second mode of interest is the one to be investigated in the subsequent coupled field harmonic
response analyses.
Figure 39.10: Second Longitudinal Mode of Interest (25) at 58.9 kHz
It is worth noting that if the transducer were to be used for a higher-frequency application, the third
mode of interest is at 87.4 kHz.
Figure 39.11: Third Longitudinal Mode of Interest (32) at 87.4 kHz
In all modes, the tip of the bonding tool has little motion in the x and y directions as compared to
the z direction, necessary for proper wire bonding to occur. Also, the frequencies of the second and
third modes are roughly twice and thrice that of the first mode, as expected.
39.7.2. Results from Prestressed Full Harmonic Response Analysis

For wire bonding, the transducer can operate in the 50-60 kHz range. Although the modal analysis
determined that the second longitudinal mode of interest is 58.9 kHz, it is necessary to determine
the actual amplitude and impedance values. For this, a coupled field harmonic response analysis is
performed.
Figure 39.12: Impedance Frequency Response
Figure 39.13: Tip Deflection Frequency Response
As indicated, the lateral motion (x and y) is much less than the longitudinal motion (z). The displace-
ment for this applied voltage is a little more than 0.1 micron.
To perform a similar analysis, consider the following hints and recommendations:
• For piezoelectric materials, ensure that the polarization direction (defined by the element coordinate
system) is correct.
• The IEEE standards list the coefficients based on (x, y, z, yz, xz, xy) ordering, while Mechanical APDL
input requires (x, y, z, xy, yz, xz) ordering. For more information, see Piezoelectric Matrix in the Coupled-
Field Analysis Guide.
39.9. References
1. Yan, T. H., Wang, W., Chen, X. D., Li, Q., & Xu, C. (2009). Design of a smart ultrasonic transducer for
interconnecting machine applications. Sensors. 9.6: 4986-5000.
2. Or, S.W., Chan, H. L. W., Lo, V. C., & Yuen, C. W. (1998). Performance study of an ultrasonic transducer
used for wire bonding. Electron Devices Meeting.
3. Berlincourt, D., Krueger, H. H. A., Near, R. C. Properties of morgan electro ceramic ceramics. Properties
of Piezoelectricity Ceramics. Technical Publication TP-226.

Chapter 40: Shape Memory Alloy (SMA) with Thermal
Effect
This example problem presents two shape memory alloy (SMA) simulations: a spinal spacer implant and
a spring actuator. These simulations are performed using the Ansys Mechanical Application. To see this
example solved with Ansys Mechanical APDL see Shape Memory Alloy (SMA) with Thermal Effect in the
Technology Showcase: Example Problems.
• The SMA material model using martensite and austenite (nitinol)
• SMA behavior with thermal loading
Overview
Element Type(s) 3D Solid and beam

40.1. Introduction
40.2. SMA Thermal Effect Simulations
40.4. References
40.1. Introduction
A Shape Memory Alloy (SMA) material can undergo repeated loading and unloading cycles under large
deformations and still retain elastic behavior with no residual strains (pseudoelasticity or superelasticity).
Residual strains in SMAs caused by deformation at low temperatures can be removed when heated up
(shape memory effect).
This pseudoelasticity and the shape memory effect are material characteristics that are especially useful
for aeronautical, biomedical, and structural engineering applications. Although progress has been made
with SMA material analysis and design, many challenges still exist for precisely controlling SMAs due
to highly nonlinear hysteretic transformation, material degradation, and thermomechanical fatigue. Finite
element analysis has been widely used to simulate SMA material and provides a valuable tool for
designing products using SMA materials. For information on the governing equations used to model
Shape Memory Alloy (SMA) with Thermal Effect
the nonlinear material properties of shape memory alloys, see Shape Memory Alloy (SMA) in the Mater-
ial Reference.
40.2. SMA Thermal Effect Simulations

The following examples demonstrate typical SMA-based applications with thermal loading:
40.2.1. Simulation of a Spinal Spacer Implant
40.2.2. Simulation of a Spring Actuator
The spinal vertebrae spacer is simulated via SOLID187 elements, and the spring actuator is simulated
via BEAM188 and SOLID185 elements.
40.2.1. Simulation of a Spinal Spacer Implant

Approximately 20 percent of Americans between the ages of 20 and 64 have back pain problems,[1]
most of which are associated with intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration. In some cases, a degenerated
IVD is surgically replaced with a spinal spacer inserted into the space between vertebrae, as shown
in the figure below.
Figure 40.1: Spinal Spacer Implant
Spinal spacers restore disc space height, alignment, and the spine's ability to bear weight, any or all
of which can be lost due to IVD degeneration. Finite element analysis of implant function can help
improve the design and quality of the spinal spacer.
SMA Thermal Effect Simulations
The following topics related to this example simulation are available:

40.2.1.1. Problem Description
40.2.1.2. Modeling
40.2.1.3. Material Properties
40.2.1.5. Analysis and Solution Controls
40.2.1.6. Results and Discussion

To simulate the function of a spinal spacer implant, the spacer is initially loaded at room temperature
297 K. The spacer is compressed from the top by a rigid surface to a thickness of 3.375 mm. The
compression is then removed, and the spacer undergoes elastic recovery. To remove the residual
strain, the spacer is heated to 326 K and then cooled to body temperature 311 K.
Figure 40.2: Loading and Recovery of a Spinal Spacer Implant
40.2.1.2. Modeling
A 3-D geometry of the spinal spacer is created in Unigraphics, using dimensions found in Petrini
2005.[2] The geometry is imported into Mechanical and meshed with linear tetrahedron elements.
Because the spacer is symmetrical, the model can be reduced to include only one quarter of the
spacer, as shown below.
Figure 40.3: Simulated model ¼ of Spinal Spacer

The spinal spacer analysis uses the following material properties:[2]
Spinal Spacer Material Properties

Elastic modulus for austenite phase (MPa) 70,000
Elastic modulus for martensite phase (MPa) 70,000
H (MPa) 500
R (MPa) 120
-1
B (MPa ⋅ K ) 8.3
T0 (K) 311
M 0

Symmetrical conditions are applied to the 1/4 model of the spinal spacer. A rigid surface contacts
the top of the model, and a compressing displacement is applied to that surface. After the displace-
ment is removed, a thermal load is applied to the whole model.
Figure 40.4: Displacement
Figure 40.5: Thermal Load

The nonlinear static analysis is performed with the Large Deflection property set to On in the
Analysis Settings.
After the mechanical loading is applied, thermal loading is applied over three steps (4 - 6) (p. 454)
for quicker convergence.
In step 4, the temperature is increased from 297 K to 311 K. Convergence is achieved quickly as
this temperature is below T0.
In step 5, the temperature is again increased from 311 K to 324 K. The major phase transformation
does not occur in this step, so convergence is again achieved quickly.
In step 6, the temperature is increased above 324 K, and the shape memory effect occurs, so con-
vergence is slower.

The following figure illustrates the displacement of the central point A (shown in Figure 40.3: Sim-
ulated model ¼ of Spinal Spacer (p. 452)).
Figure 40.6: Displacements of Central Node A of the Spinal Spacer
The following figures show the deformation of the spacer at each step.
Figure 40.7: Spinal Spacer Deformation and Stress, t = 2 seconds
In step 2, the displacement is 4.04 mm and the stress is 594.2 MPa. After elastic recovery, the peak
displacement decreases to 3.56 mm and the stress is 182.49 MPa. In the final step, displacement
and stress approaches zero, indicating that the spacer has returned to its original shape.
The simulation accurately depicts the spacer under load (step 2), during elastic recovery (step 3),
and at full recovery due to SMA thermal effects (step 6).
40.2.2. Simulation of a Spring Actuator

Because of their large-strain capabilities and high force-to-weight ratios, SMAs are widley used as
compact, flexible actuators in a variety of industries. For example, SMAs can be used as combination
sensor-actuators in thermal bridges for cryogenic coolers, variable-area exhaust nozzles for turboma-
chinery, and active clearance controls for blade shrouds. A prominent aircraft manufacturer has integ-
rated SMAs into their variable geometry chevrons for engine noise control.
In this problem, a vertical helical spring is simulated to repeat its two-way motion due to the shape
memory effect. The following related topics are available:
40.2.2.2. Modeling

A vertical helical spring is simulated with shape memory effect using two different models, a
BEAM188 element model and a SOLID185 element model.
The spring is loaded by a weight of 1830 N in the martensite state at a temperature of 250 K, then
heated to 400 K. At the increased temperature, the spring lifts the weight. The spring is then cooled
back to 250 K and stretches again. A repeatable, two-way motion occurs, as shown in the figure
below.
Figure 40.10: Motion of a Vertical Helical Spring
40.2.2.2. Modeling
The geometry of the spring actuator was created in DesignModeler with a wire diameter of 4 mm,
a spring external diameter of 24 mm, a pitch size of 12 mm, with two coils, and an initial length of
28 mm, as shown in the following figure. See input files (p. 463) for links to download the .agdb
files.
Figure 40.11: Finite Element Models of a Spring Actuator
The corresponding finite element model is created using BEAM188 elements. A 3-D model is gen-
erated by extruding the initial finite element model and meshing with SOLID185 elements.

The following material properties,[3] typical of nitinol, are used in the spring actuator simulation:
Material Properties for a Spring Actuator

Elastic modulus for austenite phase (MPa) 51,700
Elastic modulus for martensite phase (MPa) 51,700
H (MPa) 1000
R (MPa) 140
-1
B (MPa⋅K ) 5.6
T0 (K) 250
M 0

The top of the spring actuator is fixed, and the bottom is loaded with a weight of 1830 N. Displace-
ments are constrained in the X and Y directions. After the spring is stretched by the weight at
temperature 250 K, the temperature is raised to 400 K to lift the weight, and the is reduced back
to 250 K to lower the weight. The following figures show the applied force and temperature histories.
Figure 40.12: Applied Force Steps
Figure 40.13: Applied Temperature Steps

The nonlinear static analysis is performed with the Large Deflection property set to On and the
Newton-Raphson Option set to Unsymmetric in the Analysis Settings (see figure below).
Figure 40.14: Details of Analysis Settings

The spring actuator stretched by load W in step 1 is shown in the following figure.
Figure 40.15: Spring Actuator Deformation at Step 1
The maximum displacement is 43 mm, greater than the original length of 28 mm.
In step 2, after heating with the shape memory effect, the spring actuator recovers to a maximum
displacement of 10 mm. The deformation is in the martensite state to support the weight, as shown
below.
In step 3, after cooling to 250 K, the spring actuator stretches back to its original length:
Results from the BEAM188 and SOLID185 models are compared. The following figure shows the
displacement history of the actuator.
Figure 40.18: Displacement History: Bottom of a Spring Actuator with Temperature
The displacement history indicates that the BEAM188 and SOLID185 models have similar results.
The BEAM188 model is much more efficient, however, requiring about an hour to complete. In
comparison, the SOLID185 model requires more than eight hours to complete.
To perform similar types of analyses involving SMAs, consider the following:
• The stiffness of the material model is generally unsymmetrical, but a symmetric matrix is used in the
solution by default. If convergence difficulty occurs during the solution, specify the unsymmetric
solver option (NROPT,UNSYM).
• SMA phase transformation involves a transformation stage and the saturated transformation. Because
convergence is more difficult to achieve during the transformation stage, break the transformation
loadstep up into smaller ones and use smaller time steps.
• The superelasticity option (TBOPT = SUPE) of the material model (TB,SMA) supports only 3-D, plane
strain, and axisymmetric stress states. The memory option (TBOPT = MEFF) of the material model
supports most of the stress states including beam, shell, plane strain, axisymmetric, and 3-D stress
states. The LINK180 element is not supported for either material option.
40.4. References
1. Paremer, A., Fumer, S., Rice, D. P. (1992). Musculoskeletal Conditions in the United States, 1st ed.. Park
Ridge: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.
2. Petrini, L., Migliavacca, F., Massarotti, P., Schievano, S., Dubini, G., & Auricchio, F. (2005). Computa-
tional studies of shape memory alloy behavior in biomedical applications. Journal of Biomedical En-
gineering. 127:716-725.
3. Arghavani, J., Auricchio, F., Naghdabadi, R. (2011). A finite strain kinematic hardening constitutive
model based on Hencky strain: General framework, solution algorithm, and application to shape
memory alloys. International Journal of Plasticity. 27: 940-961.

Chapter 41: Acoustic Analysis of a Viscothermal
Resonator
This example problem uses acoustic elements and viscothermal losses (comparing a boundary layer
impedance [BLI] model and a low reduced frequency [LRF] model) to analyze the noise-reduction of
sound-absorbing trim panels with quarter-wave resonators.
Ansys Mechanical APDL see Acoustic Analysis of a Viscothermal Resonator in the Technology Showcase:
Example Problems.
The resonator has several tube sections with small dimension compared to the acoustic wavelength,
so a viscothermal acoustic formulation is needed. In this example, the following viscothermal formulations
are demonstrated:
• Boundary layer impedance (BLI) model
• Low reduced frequency (LRF) model
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Harmonic Acoustics Analysis
Element Type(s) 3-D Acoustic Elements

41.1. Introduction
41.3. Modeling
41.9. References
Acoustic Analysis of a Viscothermal Resonator
41.1. Introduction
Development of systems for minimizing noise is an ongoing process, as noise is a factor that can quickly
and adversely affect comfort. In an aircraft cabin, for example, the turbulent boundary layer surrounding
the fuselage is a primary source of noise in the mid- to high-frequency range (500-2000 Hz). To reduce
the sound pressure level in the cabin, an effective solution consists of quarter-wave resonator panels
made of an assembly of tubes of varying diameters and lengths. The absorption capability of the reson-
ator panel is the result of a combined effect of the quarter-wave phenomenon and viscothermal loss
[1].

To reduce noise in an aircraft cabin, viscothermal quarter-wave resonator panels can be positioned
within the cabin. Resonator tube lengths and diameters are optimized to maximize the sound absorption
in the frequency range of interest. The resonator model studied here is typically tested using an imped-
ance tube method. The following model replicated the impedance tube test setup with a back tube
cavity. The back tube cavity is connected to several tubes of small diameter where viscothermal effects
play an important role in the frequency response. The objective is to understand the sound absorption
characteristics of the resonator through the absorption coefficient curves as a function of excitation
frequency.
The following figure shows the geometry of the resonator model used in this simulation:
Figure 41.1: Geometry of the Resonator Model
This figure shows the resonator is composed of tubes with variable diameters and lengths, resulting in
an optimized absorption across the frequency range. The dimensions of the tubes are listed in
Table 41.1: Tube Numbers, Radii, and Lengths (p. 467).
Problem Description
Figure 41.2: Resonator Composed of Tubes with Variable Diameters and Lengths
Table 41.1: Tube Numbers, Radii, and Lengths
Tube Number Radius (mm) Length (mm)

1 3.4 43.6
2 3.4 43.6
3 3.4 45.4
4 3.4 46.8
5 3.4 48.6
6 3.3 50.5
7 3.4 40.6
8 3.4 52.1
9 3.4 54.4
10 3.4 56.7
11 3.4 59.0
12 3.4 61.7
13 3.6 64.7
14 3.5 66.9
15 3.6 69.8
16 3.6 72.9
17 3.8 76.1
18 3.8 79.8
19 5.1 36.8
Tube Number Radius (mm) Length (mm)

20 10.3 82.3
41.3. Modeling
This example is solved using Ansys Workbench, and a workbench project archive (.wbpz) is available
for download (see Input / Workbench Project Files (p. 474)). Once the geometry is imported, the model
must be meshed using special consideration for acoustic solutions. The mesh controls highlighted in
the images below have been added. The meshed model is used in this example problem to keep the
mesh and results constant since results can be mesh sensitive. The element size chosen ensures at least
six quadratic elements per wavelength for the highest frequency of interest. All bodies are grouped in
a single part for node connectivity at the body's interfaces, i.e. shared (conformal) nodes across body
interfaces resulting in perfect acoustic energy transfer across the interfaces. Note that mesh inflation is
applied to the boundaries of the absorbing tubes to capture the boundary layers.
Figure 41.3: Mesh Controls: Body Sizing, Sweep Method, and Face Sizing
Material Properties
Figure 41.4: Mesh Controls: Inflation and MultiZone
Two Harmonic Acoustics systems have been added to analyze and compare noise level reduction using
two available viscothermal acoustic models, Boundary Layer Impedance (BLI) and Low Reduced Frequency
(LRF) .
A normal velocity and a nonreflective radiation boundary are applied on the impedance tube inlet,
simulating the sound generated experimentally by a speaker.
The Low Reduced Frequency (LRF) and Boundary Layer Impedance (BLI) models are applied on the
resonator tubes in the first and second Harmonic Acoustics system, respectively, to analyze viscous and
thermal effects. For more information on these acoustic models, see Viscous-Thermal Materials in the
Acoustic Analysis Guide.

In addition to the density and speed of sound commonly needed for acoustics analysis using the
Helmholtz equation, additional fluid properties are needed for viscothermal acoustics, e.g. dynamic/bulk
viscosity and specific heat at constant pressure/volume. The properties are used in BLI and LRF methods
to modify the base Helmholtz formulation with added terms for capturing viscothermal effects. The
material properties used for all bodies in this example problem are listed below.
Table 41.2: Properties
Property Value
Density 1.22 Kg/m3

Speed of Sound 343.3 m/s
Dynamic Viscosity 1.829e-5 Pa-s
Bulk Viscosity 1.098e-5 Pa-s
Thermal Conductivity 0.02518 W/m-K
Specific Heat at Constant Pressure 975.3 J/Kg-K
Specific Heat at Constant Volume 693.8 J/Kg-K

Only acoustic boundary conditions and loads are applied, as the model uses only acoustic elements.
Structural members are ignored in this example, but their effect on the model is retained through rigid
outer boundaries of the back cavity and absorbing tubes. Note that rigid wall (Neumann boundary)
behavior is applied as default in acoustic formulations as this is a natural boundary condition in the finite
element formulation.
A normal surface velocity is applied on the exterior face. A transparent port and a radiation boundary
are also applied on the same face:
Figure 41.5: Surface Velocity on Exterior Face
Another port, required to calculate the absorption coefficient, is defined on the end faces of all the
tubes.
For the LRF model, geometric details of the thin channel are needed like the absorbing tube radii in
this example. In the first Harmonic Acoustics system, separate LRF models are applied for each radius
group with the radius specified property in the details of the LRF model object using available Named
Selections as the scoping method. (Named Selections have been previously added for groups of tubes
with similar radii.) The following image shows LRF model applied on bodies having radius 3.4 mm.
Figure 41.6: LRF Model for Tubes with Radius = 3.4 mm
In the second Harmonic Acoustics system, a single Thermo-Viscous BLI boundary is applied on all
faces (cylindrical and circular) of tubes with the settings shown in the following figure.
Figure 41.7: Thermo-Viscous BLI Boundary Details

A full harmonic analysis is performed from 1000 to 2000 Hz in 10 Hz increments as shown in the figure
below. The acoustic load is applied as a step with constant unit velocity across the frequency range.
Figure 41.8: Full Harmonic Analysis

The performance of a sound absorbing resonator is determined by the amount of sound energy that
it absorbs. A perfect resonator would have a constant absorption coefficient of 1 over the frequency
range, meaning that all noise entering the system is absorbed.
The Absorption Coefficient of both the system is plotted using the Port defined on the face (p. 470)
where the Surface Velocity was applied.
To analyze the absorption coefficient, the boundary layer impedance (BLI) and low reduced frequency
(LRF) models are compared, as shown in the following figures:
Figure 41.9: Absorption Coefficient using LRF Model
Figure 41.10: Absorption Coefficient Using BLI model
Both models give close results. The results show that (except for a lower initial absorption at 1000 Hz)
this resonator is efficient, as the absorption coefficient is close to 1 over most of the frequency range.
This example demonstrates capabilities for solving viscothermal acoustics problems, which are widely
used in the design of acoustic devices and MEMS applications including hearing aids.
To perform a similar analysis involving an acoustic viscothermal model, consider the following recom-
mendations:
• Ensure at least six elements per wave length for the highest frequency of interest by adapting the
mesh element size to the frequency range of the analysis.
• Select one of the available viscothermal models:
– The low reduced frequency (LRF) model applies to layers and tubes below the cut-off frequency.
– The boundary layer impedance (BLI) model applies to geometries that are large compared to
the viscothermal boundary layer thickness.
41.9. References
The following reference is cited in this example problem:
1. Hannink, M.H.C., Wijnant, Y.H., & de Boer, A. (2004). Optimised sound absorbing trim panels for the
reduction of aircraft cabin noise. Eleventh International Congress on Sound and Vibration. 5-8 July
2004, St. Petersburg, Russia, 1855-1862.

Chapter 42: Wire Crimping Modeled with General
Contact
This example problem demonstrates the ease of contact modeling via the general contact method. The
method offers automated contact creation and requires minimal input. It is especially useful when a
large number of contacting surfaces are involved in the model and the geometry makes it difficult to
determine contact pairs.
Ansys Mechanical APDL see Wire Crimping Modeled with General Contact in the Technology Showcase:
Example Problems.
• Automatic generation of general contact elements
• Contact-property definitions
• Rigid-flexible and flexible-flexible contact modeled by general contact, including surface-to-surface

and edge-to-surface contact configurations
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Transient Structural Analysis
Element Type(s) The grip and the seven stranded wires: 3-D 20-Node
Structural Solid SOLID186
Rigid punch and rigid base supports:3-D Target Segment

TARGE170

42.1. Introduction
42.3. Modeling
Wire Crimping Modeled with General Contact
42.1. Introduction
In this example, a multi-strand wire is joined to an electrical terminal (connector) through a mechanical
deformation process known as crimping. The U-shaped portion of the connector (the grip) is folded
around the wires by a rigid punch, forming a B-shaped crimp which provides connectivity between the
wires and the electric terminal.
Due to the complexity of this model, defining all possible contact surfaces by the pair-based contact
method would be a difficult and time-consuming task. By using the general contact method, contact
surfaces are created automatically. Only a limited number of contact surfaces require the specification
of non-default contact properties. Both flexible-flexible and rigid-flexible contact are modeled.

The following figure shows the crimp joint model. As the rigid punch moves downward, it folds the
grip around the wires. The grip rests on another fixed rigid surface (Rigid Base in the figure). The rigid
punch is moved 7.607 mm downward in the Y direction through small time steps.
Figure 42.1: 3-D Crimp Joint Model
This problem is analysed with a transient analysis run for 3.35E-4 seconds to capture the occurrence of
all possible contact (surface-to-surface and edge-to-surface) defined by general contact.
Modeling
42.3. Modeling
The 3-D crimp joint model consists of a 0.5 mm thick grip and seven stranded wires, with each wire
has a 0.725 mm diameter. The grip and wires are made of a copper alloy which is modeled by the multi-
linear isotropic hardening plasticity material model. The model also includes a rigid punch and a rigid
support.
The steps to create this model are broken down as follows:

42.3.1. Model the Grip and Wire
42.3.2. Model the Rigid Punch and Base Support
42.3.3. Model the Contact Using the General Contact Method
42.3.1. Model the Grip and Wire

The grip and the seven stranded wires are modeled with SOLID186 (3-D structural solid) elements.
Face sizing of 0.1 mm with hard behavior is assigned to three faces of grip body at location Z = 5
mm. Edge sizing of twenty-five divisions with hard behavior is assigned to ten edges of grip body
along z direction. Body sizing of 0.1 with hard behavior is assigned to all twenty-eight wire body
parts. (For information on sizing control, see Notes on Element Sizing).
Figure 42.2: 3-D Meshed Model of Grip with Seven Stranded Wires
42.3.2. Model the Rigid Punch and Base Support

A thickness of 0.1 mm is assigned to rigid punch and base support bodies and their Stiffness Beha-
vior is set to Rigid. The rigid punch and rigid base supports are modeled with TARGE170 (3-D target
segment) elements. Body sizing of 0.25 mm with hard behavior is assigned to the rigid punch and
base bodies. Edge sizing of six divisions with hard behavior is used on the top small curved face of
rigid punch. Edge sizing of twenty divisions with hard behavior is assigned to two top large curved
faces of the rigid punch. Face meshing is applied to all eight faces of the Rigid Punch and Base Support.
Figure 42.3: Rigid Punch and Rigid Base
The rigid target surfaces are taken from a pair-based contact model and converted to general contact.
To include these target surfaces in the general contact definition, a zero real constant ID and a zero
material ID are assigned via the EMODIF command with I1 = GCN. A unique section ID (SECNUM)
and a unique element type ID (TYPE) are also assigned using the EMODIF command. The same ID
number is used for the section and element type IDs. (For more details, see Geometry Correction for
Contact and Target Surfaces). The following command snippet shows the commands used to define
the rigid punch as a general contact surface since there is no option for setting this in the Mechanical
Application.
/prep7
! Defining the rigid punch as a general contact surface
allsel,all
esel,s,real,,33,36,3
edele,all,all
ESEL,S,REAL,,32 ! Select the existing rigid surface for the punch

EMODIF,ALL,SECNUM,32 ! Assign a unique section ID (same as type ID)
EMODIF,ALL,REAL,GCN ! Assign a 0 REAL ID by inputting the GCN label
EMODIF,ALL,MAT,GCN ! Assign a 0 MAT ID by inputting the GCN label
ESURF,ALL,REVE ! Reverse the normal for proper definition
! Defining the rigid base as a general contact surface
ESEL,S,REAL,,35 ! Select the existing rigid surface for the base

EMODIF,ALL,SECNUM,35 ! Assign a unique section ID (same as type ID)
EMODIF,ALL,REAL,GCN ! Assign a 0 REAL ID by inputting the GCN label
EMODIF,ALL,MAT,GCN ! Assign a 0 MAT ID by inputting the GCN label
Modeling
ALLSEL,ALL
42.3.3. Model the Contact Using the General Contact Method

After building a complete finite element model and defining rigid targets, the next step is to create
general contact surfaces using the GCGEN command. This command automatically generates 3-D
surface-to-surface elements (CONTA174) on exterior faces of the base elements and splits them into
different contact surfaces (each having a unique section ID) if the angle between the normal of adjacent
faces is greater than the specified feature angle (GCGEN with FeatureANGLE = 20). It also generates
3-D line contact elements (CONTA177) on the feature edges between split surfaces based on the
setting EdgeKEY = 1 on GCGEN.
The value twenty is used for feature angle in order to achieve the desired split of the contact surfaces
and edges between them. In this model, only the top edges of the grip are considered, and the rest
are deleted. The following command snippet shows the commands used to generate the contact
surfaces as described above since there is no option for this in the Mechanical Application.
allsel,all
gcgen,,20,1, ! Automatically generate CONTA174 elements on
! exterior faces & CONTA177 on feature edges
! Only the top edges of the grip are considered, and the rest are deleted
esel,s,real,gcn ! Select general contact elements

esel,r,ename,,177 ! Reselect the edge elements, CONTA177
esel,u,sec,,95,96 ! Unselect the top edge elements
esel,u,sec,,109,112 ! Unselect the top edge elements
edele,all,all ! Delete the selected edge elements except top
! edge elements
allsel,all
! Define the contact force-based model for CONTA177
keyopt,95,3,0
keyopt,96,3,0
keyopt,109,3,0
keyopt,110,3,0
keyopt,111,3,0
keyopt,112,3,0
In the following command snippet, the contact interactions are defined GCDEF. By default, frictionless
standard contact is assumed among all general contact surfaces. To override this default, the command
GCDEF,AUTO,ALL,ALL,100,100 defines frictional contact for all contact surfaces. Additional GCDEF
commands are used to exclude some surfaces that may cause spurious contact.
! Define interactions between general contact surfaces via the GCDEF command
gcdef,auto,all,all,100,100 ! Define auto asymmetric frictional contact

! among all surfaces defined by material ID 100
mp,mu,100,.1 ! Define friction coefficient for material ID 100
100
tb,inter,100,,,standard ! Define standard contact behavior
tbdata,1,0 ! Include penetration and gap
r,100
rmodif,100,3,1 ! Define FKN for real ID 100
! Exclude contact between some surfaces via the GCDEF command
! to avoid spurious contact
gcdef,exclude,grip_zp_face,all_face
gcdef,exclude,grip_zn_face,all_face
gcdef,exclude,grip_zp_face,all_edge
gcdef,exclude,grip_zn_face,all_edge
gcdef,exclude,gripTop_xn_face,grip_inner_face
gcdef,exclude,75,77
gcdef,exclude,gripTop_xp_face,grip_inner_face
gcdef,exclude,76,79
allsel,all
gcdef,list ! List all defined interactions between general contact

! surfaces
gcdef,table
Frictional contact with a coefficient of friction 0.2 is defined between the rigid punch and grip as
shown in the figure below.
Figure 42.4: Frictional Contact Between Rigid Punch and Grip
The coefficient of friction is set to 0.1 for the frictional contact between the grip and rigid base as
shown in the following figure.
Material Properties
Figure 42.5: Frictional Contact Between Grip and Rigid Base

Table 42.1: Material Properties
Unit System Metric (mm, kg, N, s, mV, mA)

Angle Degrees
The grip and wires are made of a copper alloy which is modeled with the multilinear isotropic hardening
(plastic) material model.
Table 42.2: Material Properties of Grip

Poisson's Ratio 0.34
Multilinear Isotropic Hardening Constants (TB,PLASTIC,,,,MISO)
Strain Value (mm-1) Stress Value (MPa)
0 411.12
0.0019 470.63
0.0537 551.94
0.1573 670.57
0.3153 730.3
20 5200
Table 42.3: Material Properties of Wire

Multilinear Isotropic Hardening Constants (TB,PLASTIC,,,,MISO)
Strain Value (mm-1) Stress Value (Mpa)
0 261.12
0.0019 320.63
0.0537 401.94
0.1573 520.57
0.3153 627.00
20 5000

Remote Displacement with Rigid Behavior is applied to restrict movement in all directions for the rigid
base of the punch assembly is constrained in all directions, as shown in the following figure.
Figure 42.6: Remote Displacement Applied To Rigid Base
One end of each wire is constrained in all translation directions (but not rotations) and the other end
of each wire is free. This is also accomplished using Remote Displacement with Rigid Behavior, as
seen in the following figure.
Figure 42.7: Remote Displacement Applied to Wire
Finally, a Remote Displacement with Rigid Behavior is used to apply a downward displacement of
7.607 mm to the punch over 3.35 E-4 seconds. The time-varying displacement shown in Figure 42.9: UY
Time Varying Remote Displacement (p. 485) is entered as tabular data. Displacements and rotations in
other directions are constrained. (See Workbench Input Files and Project Files (p. 490) to download an
excel file with the time varying downward displacement data.)
Figure 42.8: Remote displacement applied to punch
Figure 42.9: UY Time Varying Remote Displacement

This problem is simulated with a nonlinear transient analysis. Large Deflection is set On to include
large-deflection effects. Stabilization is set Off. The step controls and other analysis settings are shown
in the figure below. For more details on nonlinear analysis settings see Nonlinear Controls for Steady-
State, Static, and Transient Analyses.
Figure 42.10: Analysis Settings
Since this problem undergoes a large plastic deformation, a large plastic limit is introduced as a cutback
factor (CUTCONTROLcommand) to automatically reduce the step size when the solution encounters
convergence difficulties during the nonlinear analysis as shown in the following command snippet.
/solu
cutcontrol,plslimit, .9 ! Cutback criterion

Displacement of the rigid punch and the deformed shape of the grip and equivalent plastic strain are
shown in the results figures below at two time points: 2.5E-4 seconds and 3.35E-4 seconds.
The maximum calculated strain is at the top edge of the grip as it comes in contact with the rigid punch.
Results at 2.5E-4 Seconds

Figure 42.11: Displacement at 2.5E-4 Seconds
Figure 42.12: Equivalent Plastic Strain in Wires and Grip at 2.5E-4 Seconds
Results at 3.35E-4 Seconds

Figure 42.13: Displacement at 3.35E-4 Seconds
Figure 42.14: Equivalent Plastic Strain in Wires and Grip at 3.35E-4 Seconds
The following figures show the deformed shape of the wires at the end of the analysis (3.35E-4 seconds).
Figure 42.15: Cross-Sectional View of Grip and Wires at 3.35E-4 seconds (p. 489) shows the B-shaped
crimp at the end of the deformation. Observe that the grip is completely folded around and in contact
with the wires. Figure 42.16: Deformed Wires at 3.35E-4 seconds (p. 489) shows the final deformed shape
of the wires and their out-of-plane extrusion.
Recommendations
Figure 42.15: Cross-Sectional View of Grip and Wires at 3.35E-4 seconds
Figure 42.16: Deformed Wires at 3.35E-4 seconds
When setting up a general contact analysis, consider the following hints and recommendations:
• Consider the feature angle carefully when issuing GCGEN. Select a value that will produce the
desired contact surfaces and edges.
When using the exclude option (GCDEF,EXCL) along with node components (to identify surfaces),
use the _FACE component name extension to exclude only surface contact. Otherwise, both
surface and edge elements will be excluded by default.
• Always verify the normal direction of the rigid surface target elements.

Chapter 43: Contact Surface Wear Simulation
This example problem simulates wear at a contact surface. The wear occurs at the interface between a
hemispherical ring rotating over a flat ring. Wear characteristics demonstrated include removal of ma-
terial due to wear, changes in contact pressure and area due to wear, and a continuous decrease of the
wear rate in steady-state conditions.
Ansys Mechanical APDL see Contact Surface Wear Simulation in the Technology Showcase: Example
Problems.
• Contact surface wear
• Nonlinear mesh adaptivity based on a wear criterion
Overview
Element Type(s) 2-D Axisymmetric (PLANE182)
2-D Contact (CONTA172, TARGE169)


43.1. Introduction
43.7. Results
43.1. Introduction
Wear is the progressive loss of material from the surface of a solid body when in contact with another
body. The program approximates this loss of material by repositioning the contact nodes at the contacting
Contact Surface Wear Simulation
surface. The new node locations are determined by a wear model which calculates how much and in
what direction a contact node is to be moved to simulate wear based on the contact results.
This example shows how to use the Archard wear model. Since wear involves material removal, the
element quality of solid elements underlying the contact elements becomes progressively worse with
increasing wear. Remeshing is required to successfully simulate large amounts of wear. This example
demonstrates how nonlinear mesh adaptivity can be used to improve mesh quality when a model un-
dergoes large amounts of wear.
As an alternative to the generalized form of the Archard wear mode, you can define your own wear
model via the userwear subroutine. The userwear subroutine is not covered in this example.

A hemispherical ring of copper with radius = 30 mm rotates on a flat ring of steel with inner radius =
50 mm and outer radius = 150 mm. The hemispherical ring touches the flat ring at the center from the
axis of rotation (at 100 mm).
The hemispherical ring is subjected to a pressure load of 4000 N/mm2 and is rotating with a frequency
of 100,000 revolutions/sec. Sliding of the hemispherical ring on the flat ring causes wear in the rings.
Figure 43.1: 2D Axisymmetric Model of a Hemispherical Ring Rotating on a flat Ring

Linear elastic material behavior is assumed for both the copper ring and the steel ring.
Property Copper Steel

Young’s Modulus (GPa) 130 210
Poisson’s Ratio 0.3 0.3

The geometry of the hemispherical and flat rings was created in DesignModeler.
After attaching the geometry, open the Geometry properties from the project schematic and change
the Analysis Type to 2D under Advanced Geometry Options, as shown in the following image.
Figure 43.2: Advanced Geometry Options
In the Mechanical Application, you can change the 2D behavior to axisymmetric in the Details panel
of the Geometry object as shown in the following image.
Figure 43.3: Geometry Details
The rings are meshed with 2D axisymmetric elements (PLANE182 with KEYOPT(3) = 1). Frictionless
contact is modeled between the two rings by overlaying the surfaces with contact and target elements
(CONTA172 and TARGE169).
The contact settings for this model are shown in the following image. The model uses asymmetric
contact to simulate wear on the top hemispherical ring: contact elements are defined on the top ring
and target elements are defined on the bottom ring.
Figure 43.4: Contact Region Details
A global element size of 1 mm is used for meshing. Local mesh sizing is also defined. For the steel ring,
Number of Divisions = 70 on the horizontal edges and Number of Divisions = 35 on the vertical
edges. For the hemispherical copper ring, Number of Divisions = 60 on the curved edge and Number
of Divisions = 40 on the flat edge . The meshed model is shown below.
Figure 43.5: 2D Axisymmetric Meshed Model
43.4.1. Modeling Wear

Workbench does not have an option for modeling the Archard wear model. Therefore, a command
snippet is used to incorporate this model. For information on adding command snippets in Mechan-
ical, see Commands (APDL).
Figure 43.6: Commands Used for the Archard Wear Model
In the first part of this command input, element key options are set to control certain contact beha-
viors. KEYOPT(5) = 1 is set to close the gap with an auto contact surface offset (CNOF). KEYOPT(10)
= 2 is set to perform a contact stiffness update each iteration so that the actual elastic slip never ex-
ceeds the maximum allowable limit (SLTO) during the entire solution. (For more information on the
KEYOPTs and the real constants CNOF and SLTO, see the CONTA172 element description.)
Contact elements are defined on the surface undergoing wear. The Archard wear model is defined
by the TB,WEAR,MATID,,,ARCD command, and the wear model is associated with the contact elements
through the MATID (cid) specified on TB,WEAR.
The Archard wear model is specified by inputting constants C1 through C4 on the TBDATA command.
These constants represent the wear coefficient (K), material hardness (H), the contact pressure exponent
(m), and the sliding velocity exponent (n). (See Archard Wear Model for more information.)
The wear coefficient K can sometimes be scaled to simplify modeling. As an example, consider this
ring-on-ring problem in which the rings are rotating at constant speed. The only effect of this rota-
tion/sliding at the contact surface is to produce wear (friction is absent). The wear coefficient K can
be scaled such that the rotation is not explicitly modeled, but its effect is included in the computation
of wear. This greatly reduces the simulation time and effort.
More specifically, if a linear dependence of wear rate on the sliding velocity is assumed, the wear
coefficient K can be scaled by the sliding velocity. In this example, sliding velocity is 2πN*R, where N
= 100,000 revolutions/sec and R is the distance from the axis of rotation. Scaling K by 2πN*R results
in the wear rate being linearly dependent upon the sliding velocity without explicitly modeling the
sliding. The distance from the axis of rotation (R) is assumed to be constant for all points and is taken
as 100 mm (the distance of the center of the ring from the axis of rotation).
There are two approaches for modeling wear:
1. Wear on One Contact Surface (Asymmetric Contact)
2. Wear on Both Contact Surfaces (Symmetric Contact)
This example only considers the first approach.
Wear on One Contact Surface (Asymmetric Contact)
Asymmetric contact is used to model wear in the hemispherical copper ring only. For this case, contact
elements are defined on the copper ring while target elements are defined on the steel ring. The
Archard wear model is defined as a material associated with the contact elements. The material data
for wear is defined using TBDATA commands. The wear properties for the copper ring are as follows:
Wear Properties for the Copper Ring

Property TBDATA Constant Value
Wear Coefficient (K) C1 kcopper = 10e-13*2π*1e5*100 (scaled by sliding
velocity 2πN*R)
Hardness (H) C2 1 MPa
Pressure exponent (n) C3 1
Velocity Exponent (m) C4 0
To initiate wear after a steady state has been reached with respect to loading, TB,WEAR is used in
conjunction with TBFIELD,TIME. The problem is simulated in two load steps. In the first load step,
pressure is ramped to the desired level and wear is inactive. In the second load step, the pressure is
held constant and wear is activated.
43.4.2. Improving Mesh Quality During the Solution

Modeling wear involves repositioning contact surface nodes to simulate the material removal process.
As a result, the element quality of the solid elements underlying the contact elements can quickly
deteriorate. This examples uses the Nonlinear Mesh Adaptivity feature to alleviate this problem when
simulating large amounts of wear.
A wear-based contact criterion triggers nonlinear mesh adaptivity whenever the mesh is distorted.
The critical ratio between the amount of wear and the underlying solid element's height is user-
defined. When the criterion is reached, nonlinear mesh adaptivity is triggered.
Nonlinear mesh adaptivity requires the following steps:
• Create a component that contains the contact elements that are undergoing wear.
• Issue the NLADAPTIVE command to trigger adaptivity based on a wear criterion.
The Mechanical Application does not have an option for specifying the contact criterion for the
Nonlinear Adaptive Region feature. Therefore, to implement nonlinear mesh adaptivity in this example,
the following command snippet is used:
Figure 43.7: Commands Used for Nonlinear Mesh Adaptivity
In this case, adaptivity occurs whenever wear at any contact point exceeds 50% of the average height
of the solid element underlying the contact element. Each time the criterion is reached, the analysis
is stopped, the mesh quality is improved by morphing the mesh, history-dependent variables and
boundary conditions are mapped, and the analysis is restarted with an improved mesh. This process
is done automatically.

The bottom of the flat steel ring is fixed, as shown in the following image:
A remote point is inserted to define a rigid surface constraint between the nodes on the top surface
of the hemispherical ring and a pilot node. The pilot node is constrained in the X direction and in rotation
about the Z axis (using Remote Displacement scoped to Remote Point) as shown in the image below.
The Remote Displacement behavior is set to Rigid.
Figure 43.8: Remote Displacement Details
A remote force is applied on the remote point that is equivalent to a pressure of 4000 N/mm2. The
equivalent pressure is ramped during the first load step from 0 to 4000 N/mm2 and is kept constant at
4000 N/mm2 during the second load step. Wear is activated in the second load step. Using the below
formula, the calculated applied force is 150,796,320 N.
Fapplied = 4000 × pi × ((Uring_offset+Uring_R)2- (Uring_offset-Uring_R)2)
where:
Uring_R = 30 mm
Uring_offset = 100 mm
Figure 43.9: Remote Force Details
Results

A nonlinear static analysis is performed in two load steps. Geometric nonlinearity is included in the
analysis (Large Deflection: On), and automatic time increments are used.
The repositioning of contact nodes during wear can result in changing contact status. If the wear incre-
ment is too large, all contact elements may go from a closed status to an open status, resulting in rigid
body motion. To prevent this, a very small-time increment is used so that the wear increment is also
small and changes in contact status are minimized.
43.7. Results
The results are analyzed to study the effect of wear on the contact conditions (contact pressure and
contact area) and how wear evolves with time under steady-state loading.
For this axisymmetric contact example, the contact condition is similar to the classical Herzian contact
at the end of load step 1 (see Figure 43.11: Contact Pressure versus Time (p. 500) below). Wear in the
hemispherical ring is activated in the second load step. The figure shows the contact pressure at the
end of 300,000 rotations (3 seconds) of the hemispherical copper ring over the steel ring.
Since the amount of wear is proportional to the contact pressure, the regions with initially high contact
pressure wear more and local curvature is reduced, thereby reducing the contact pressure in those re-
gions. This also leads to an increasing area of the ring coming into contact, which increases contact
pressure in regions that had low contact pressure at the beginning of the wear analysis.
Thus, the simulation captures the physical process of wear and results in an increased contact area and
more uniform contact pressure. Maximum contact pressure goes down with wear and minimum contact
pressure goes up with wear. That is, wear makes contact pressure more uniform as shown in Fig-
ure 43.12: Contact Pressure Before and After Wear (p. 500).
Figure 43.11: Contact Pressure versus Time
Figure 43.12: Contact Pressure Before and After Wear
The stress in the loading (Y) direction is affected by wear in a similar way. The maximum stress decreases
and the minimum stress increases, while the stress gradient is reduced. This is demonstrated in the
below plots of stress before and after wear. The element distortions due to wear at the interface are
also evident (see Figure 43.15: Mesh After Wear (p. 502)).
Results
Figure 43.13: Normal Stress in Y Direction Before Wear
Figure 43.14: Normal Stress in Y Direction After Wear
Figure 43.15: Mesh After Wear
See Figure 43.5: 2D Axisymmetric Meshed Model (p. 494) to compare this mesh with the initial mesh for
this model.
Note:
The goal of this example is to introduce you to the advanced technologies in the Ansys
Mechanical Application. The results you obtain with the provided files might be different
than shown above since the Nonlinear Adaptive Region may create a different mesh than
the mesh shown in the above figure.
When performing wear simulations, consider the following recommendations:
• Use one of the following contact algorithms: augmented Lagrangian or penalty function (KEYOPT(2)
= 0 or 1). Modeling wear with the pure Lagrangian contact algorithm can result in convergence
problems and is not recommended.
• Use very small substeps so that the wear increment is small. A large wear increment can abruptly
change the contact status and cause convergence difficulties.
• In general, you should use asymmetric contact to model wear on only one side of the contact interface.
However, you can use symmetric contact if wear is desired on both sides of the interface. In this case,
define contact elements on both sides of the interface and use the option for the nodal-stress-based
wear calculation (C5 of Archard wear model = 1 on TBDATA) to achieve better results.
• Simulating a large amount of wear can result in severe mesh distortions. In such cases, use the wear-
based nonlinear adaptivity criterion to improve the mesh quality via mesh morphing.

Chapter 44: C*-integral Evaluation for 3-D Surface
Flaws
This example problem shows how to evaluate the C*-integral for cracks in structural components. C*-
integral characterizes the crack tip conditions in homogenous materials undergoing a secondary (steady-
state) creep deformation. Analyses of a simple semicircular surface flaw in a rectangular block and a
warped flaw along a tubular joint are discussed. This example problem is solved using the Ansys
Mechanical Application. To see this example solved using Ansys Mechanical APDL see C*-integral Eval-
uation for 3-D Surface Flaws in the Technology Showcase: Example Problems.
• Evaluation of mode-I C*-Integral parameter for a semicircular surface flaw in a rectangular block using
a Semi-Elliptical Crack object.
• Evaluation of mixed-mode C*-Integral parameter for a warped semi-elliptical surface flaw in a tubular
joint using a Pre-Meshed Crack object.
• Analysis Settings for secondary Creep deformation dominating in crack tip domain.
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Nonlinear Multi step Static Structural

44.1. Introduction
44.4. Modeling
44.5. Meshing
44.8. Results
44.10. References
44.11. Input Files
C*-integral Evaluation for 3-D Surface Flaws
44.1. Introduction
Structural components operating at high temperatures may fail due to the slow extension of a pre-ex-
isting crack in the structure over a period of time. For an elastic-secondary power law creeping material
model, the stress and strain singularities at the crack tip can be controlled by a time-dependent loading
parameter [1]. For long-term loading, the C*-integral parameter can be path-independent and applies
to cracks only when the body with the crack undergoes extensive steady-state creep.

Two models with surface flaws are considered for analysis:

A Semi-Elliptical Crack object is used to simulate a semicircular surface flaw in a rectangular block.
The semicircular surface flaw with a 20 mm radius is located at the center of one longitudinal face
of the rectangular block. The crack is perpendicular to the block's longitudinal faces and lies in its
thickness direction as shown in Figure 44.1: Rectangular Block Geometry with Semicircular Surface
Flaw (p. 506). A torus is required around the crack front to control the mesh at the crack front.
The crack front and torus around crack front are simulated with a Semi-Elliptical Crack object. This
model is fixed at one face of the block, and a pressure load is applied on the opposite face.
Figure 44.1: Rectangular Block Geometry with Semicircular Surface Flaw
Problem Description
Figure 44.2: Semicircular Surface Crack Dimensions

A semi-elliptical warped surface flaw at the tubular joint is simulated with a Pre-Meshed Crack
object to obtain the C*-integral along the crack front.
The geometry consists of two tubular members (Tube 1 and Tube 2) attached to each other by a
welded joint. The tubular members have outer diameters of 323.85 mm (D1), 219.08 mm (D2), and
thicknesses of 15.88 mm (t1) and 8.18 mm (t2), respectively. The semi-elliptical surface crack lies on
a plane parallel to the radial direction of the heavier running pipe as shown in the figure below.
Figure 44.3: X-Joint Pipe Full Model with Warped Surface Flaw at Welded Joint
The semi-elliptical surface crack at the weld toe is warped along the welded joint, and it is perpendic-
ular to the outer surface of the 323.85 mm diameter pipe in the thickness direction. Because of the
two-plane symmetry inherent to the X-joint problem, a quarter model is analyzed. The crack front
and torus around the crack have already been specified in the external mesh file.
Figure 44.4: Semi-elliptical Surface Crack Dimensions

The material for both models is structural steel with the Strain Hardening creep model with the
properties and creep constants listed below. Material constants are selected to ensure that steady-state
behavior dominates. For information on creep models, see Creep in the Material Reference.
Table 44.1: Material Properties and Creep Constants

Young's Modulus 2.0 E5 MPa
Poisson's Ratio 0.3
Strain Hardening Creep Constants
C1 5 E-12
C2 3
C3 0
C4 0
Modeling
Figure 44.5: Creep Properties Specified to Structural Steel Material
44.4. Modeling
The following topics describe the modeling decisions and specifications:

Figure 44.6: Project Schematic (p. 510) shows the setup in Workbench. The rectangular block is modeled
using a 3-D Static Structural analysis system (A in the figure). The rectangular block geometry is
provided in two equivalent input files (p. 522): one created in SpaceClaim
(Rect_Block_TD_WB_016.scdoc) that is supported on Windows only, and one created in
DesignModeler (Rect_Block_TD_WB_016.agdb) that is supported on both Windows and Linux.
The geometry is attached as described in Attach Geometry/Mesh in the Mechanical User's Guide
The X-joint pipe is modeled using an External Model system to import the mesh file
(xjoint_pipe_with_warped_flaw.cdb, which is included in the downloadable input files (p. 185)).
The setup cell of the External Model system is linked to the model cell of a second Static Structural
analysis system (B and C in Figure 44.6: Project Schematic (p. 510)).
The Engineering Data cells of the rectangular block model (A) and the X-joint pipe model (C) Static
Structural analysis systems are linked so that they share the same material properties, described
previously in Material Properties (p. 508).

The rest of the modeling specifications are made in the Mechanical Application. The analysis makes
use of Named Selection objects to define the crack and set boundary conditions in both the rect-
angular block and the X-joint pipe models. Local coordinate systems are also used in both models to
define the crack coordinate system.

The features and parameters used to specify crack modeling is described for both models:
44.4.3.1. Rectangular Block with a Semicircular Surface Flaw
44.4.3.2. X-Joint Pipe with Warped Surface Flaw
Modeling
44.4.3.1. Rectangular Block with a Semicircular Surface Flaw

The figure below shows the scoping and settings of the Semi-Elliptical Crack object used for
crack modeling in the rectangular block model.
Figure 44.7: Details and Preview: Semi-Elliptical Crack
The Semi-Elliptical Crack object generates the recommended SOLID186 elements around the
crack front as shown in the figure below.
Figure 44.8: Generated Crack Mesh for Semi-Elliptical Crack
44.4.3.2. X-Joint Pipe with Warped Surface Flaw

A Pre-Meshed Crack object with body scoping and the settings shown below is used for Crack
modeling in X-Joint Pipe model. This approach uses the external mesh, which already has a com-
patible crack mesh defining the crack front, top, and bottom faces meshed with SOLID186 elements
around the crack front.
Named Selection objects and local coordinate systems are used to define Crack and boundary
conditions in X-Joint Pipe model (see "CMCRACKTIOPNODES(B2)" and "CS_Crack" in the figure below).
Figure 44.9: Pre-Meshed Crack
Loads and Boundary Conditions
Figure 44.10: Detailed View of Pre-Meshed Crack
Fracture parameter computation commands (CINT) are sent to the solver according to the settings
of the Semi-Elliptical and Pre-Meshed Crack objects and Fracture Controls specified in Analysis
Settings.
44.5. Meshing
Meshing around the crack front was described in the previous section.
The remaining area of the rectangular block is meshed with SOLID187 elements. The Patch Conforming
Tetrahedron mesh method is added with rectangular body scoping to generate the required tetrahed-
ron-based mesh for the Semi-Elliptical Crack. Local edge sizing is separately applied on the short and
long edges of rectangular body. For information on how to apply sizing, see Applying a Local Sizing
Control.

Figure 44.11: Loads and Boundary Conditions (p. 514) illustrates the loads and boundary conditions applied
to both models.

The rectangular block is fixed at one face using Fixed Support. A Nodal Pressure of -200 MPa is
applied to the nodes of the opposite face.
X-Joint Model
Analysis of the X-joint model is performed with two-sided symmetry. Two-plane symmetric boundary
conditions are applied and one midside node at the horizontal plane is constrained in the opposite
direction to restrict rigid-body motion. A pressure load of -10 MPa is applied to the top face of the
small-diameter tube.
Figure 44.11: Loads and Boundary Conditions

Because C*-integral calculation is based on creep materials, a nonlinear static analysis is performed with
Large Deflection set On. The load is applied instantaneously and then held constant until steady-state
creep conditions are reached. Typically, a response of 500~2000 hours is sufficient to reach a steady-
state condition. To obtain the C*-integral value, set C*-Control to On in the Fracture Controls category
of Analysis Settings. Figure 44.12: Analysis Settings (p. 515) shows the settings for Step Controls, Creep
Controls, and Nonlinear Controls for the rectangular block and X-joint pipe analyses.
Results
44.8. Results
This section discusses the results for both models analyzed in this problem:

The following figures show the equivalent elastic strain and equivalent creep strain.
Figure 44.13: Equivalent Elastic Strain and Equivalent Creep Strain - Rectangular Block
The creep strain is approximately 96 times larger than the elastic strain in the secondary creep stage,
which dominates the entire specimen at the end of the simulation.
The maximum equivalent Stress occurs at the crack tip as seen in the following figure.
Figure 44.14: Equivalent (von Mises) Stress - Rectangular Block
Results
The following figure shows the C*-integral along the crack front for different contours. Path-independ-
ence appears after contour 2.
Figure 44.15: C* - Integral along the Crack Front - Rectangular Block

The following figures show the equivalent elastic strain, equivalent creep strain, and equivalent stress
of the X-joint pipe with the warped flaw at the welded joint.
Figure 44.16: Equivalent Elastic Strain: X-Joint Pipe
Results
Figure 44.17: Equivalent Creep Strain: X-Joint Pipe
Figure 44.18: Equivalent (von Mises) Stress: X-Joint Pipe
The creep strain is approximately 22 times larger than the elastic strain in the secondary creep stage,
which dominates the local region of specimen at the end of the simulation.
The following figure shows the C*-integral values along the crack front, which gradually becomes
path-independent after contour 2.
Recommendations
Figure 44.19: C* Integral Values Along the Crack Front - X-Joint Pipe
When setting up a C*-integral calculation, consider the following hints and recommendations:
• The recommended element type for 3-D fracture models along the crack tip is the 3-D 20-node
structural solid (brick) element SOLID186.
• A finer sweep mesh (larger value specified for Crack Front Division in Semi-Elliptical Crack) along
the crack front yields more accurate results.
• When contour results begin with the first ring of elements around crack tip nodes (Contour 1 in Fig-
ure 44.15: C* - Integral along the Crack Front - Rectangular Block (p. 517) and Figure 44.19: C* Integral
Values Along the Crack Front - X-Joint Pipe (p. 521)), the first contour result is discarded. In such cases,
experience has shown that the first contour it is less accurate than the other contours due to highly
concentrated local deformation.
• The C*-integral could be path-independent only when steady-state creep deformation dominates the
integration domain around the crack tip.
44.10. References
The following reference works are cited in this example problem or were consulted when creating it:
1. Goldman, H.L. & Hutchinson, J. W. (1975). Fully plastic crack problems: The center-cracked strip under
plane strain. International Journal of Solids and Structures. 11:575-591.
2. Riedel, H. (1981). Creep deformation at crack tips in elastic-viscoplastic solids. Journal of the Mechanics
and Physics of Solids. 29, 35-49.
3. Riedel, H., Rice, J. R. (1980). Tensile cracks in creeping solids. Fracture Mechanics: Twelfth Conference.
ASTM STP 700, 112-130.
4. Kumar, V., German, M. D., Shih, C. F. (1981). An engineering approach for elastic-plastic fracture
analysis. Report NP-1931.
5. Kanninen, M. F. & Popelar, C. H. (1985). Advanced Fracture Mechanics. New York: Oxford University
Press.
44.11. Input Files

Chapter 47: Electromigration in a Solder Ball
This example problem is a transient electromigration analysis of a solder ball. The finite element solution
calculates the deviation in atomic concentration from an initial unit value due to the combined effect
of diffusion, electromigration, stress migration, and thermomigration.
Ansys Mechanical APDL see Electromigration in a Solder Ball in the Technology Showcase: Example
Problems.
• Coupled structural-thermal-electric-diffusion solid elements
• Coupled structural-thermal-electric-diffusion contact elements
• The migration model with the atomic flux option
Because some features demonstrated in this example are not implemented in the Mechanical user in-
terface, Mechanical APDL command snippets are used in several steps of this analysis. For information
on adding command snippets, see Commands (APDL).
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Transient Coupled analysis
(Structural-Thermal-Electric-Diffusion analysis)
Element Type(s) 3D Coupled-Field
Solver Type(s) ANSYS Mechanical

47.1. Introduction
47.7. Results
47.9. References
Electromigration in a Solder Ball
47.1. Introduction
Electromigration is a process of mass transport in metal interconnects induced by high density electrical
currents. A key failure mechanism in integrated circuits is where current densities are high due to
miniaturization. The mass transport of metal atoms can result in the formation of hillocks, whiskers, and
voids, all leading to the electrical failure of the circuit.
The properties affecting electromigration are highly temperature dependent, and the four fields in-
volved—structural, electrical, thermal, and diffusion—are coupled in many ways. For example, electrically-
driven metal diffusion and thermal expansion due to Joule heating cause compression in the conductor
(backstress) which can retard and ultimately stop electromigration.
The coupled-field element used in this example employs strong (matrix) coupling, which is essential
for obtaining convergence of the four fields. By modeling the four fields simultaneously, you can con-
veniently specify all the needed material properties and coupling effects in a single analysis.

A half symmetry model of an SnAgCu (SAC) solder joint sandwiched between two copper (Cu) plates
is considered.
The distance between the conductors is 450 μm. The diameter of the solder ball is 760 μm, and its
width where it meets the conductors is 612 μm. These dimensions approximately correspond to the
ball grid array (BGA) structure.[1 (p. 546)]
The conductors are 40 μm thick, 800 μm wide (400 μm in the half symmetry model), and 1000 μm long.
Unit System
The unit system for this example is μMKS. The unit system must be set before doing the modeling and
setup.

The geometry for the solder ball and copper plates was created in DesignModeler.
In the Workbench Project Schematic, insert a Coupled Field Transient analysis system and attach the
geometry.
3D coupled-field elements (SOLID226) are used to model the solder ball and the conductors, and 3D
surface-to-surface contact elements (CONTA174) are used to model contact between the solder ball
and the copper conductors.
The following degrees of freedom (DOF) are needed for this analysis:
Concentration (CONC)
Temperature (TEMP)
Voltage (VOLT)
Displacement (UX, UY, UZ)
For the SOLID226 elements, KEYOPT(1) = 100111 activates these degrees of freedom. For the CONTA174
elements, KEYOPT(1) = 12 activates these degrees of freedom. (See the SOLID226 and CONTA174 element
descriptions for more information on element KEYOPT settings).
Because the diffusion and electric degrees of freedom are not available in the Mechanical user interface,
Mechanical APDL commands are used to activate the required structural-thermal-electric-diffusion DOF:
ET,matid,226,100111 for SOLID226

KEYOPT,cid,1,12 for CONTA174
These commands will be evident in subsequent command snippets.
Bonded contact (KEYOPT(12) = 5) is created between the solder and the conductors.
The Augmented Lagrange formulation is used along with the following contact properties:
Contact Property Contact Element Real Value

Constant
Structural stiffness FKN 1.0 times underlying element
stiffness
Thermal conductance (pW/((μm)2*°C)) TCC 1E6
Electrical conductance ECC 1E14
(pA/((μm)2*Volt))
Diffusivity coefficient ((μm)3/s) DCC 1E6
Electrical conductance and diffusivity coefficient cannot be defined through the Mechanical user interface.
Therefore, the contact properties are defined using a command snippet.
! Contact
et,cid,174,12
keyopt,cid,1,12 ! structural-thermal-electric-diffusion DOF
keyopt,cid,12,5 ! bonded contact
r,cid,,,1.0 ! default structural stiffness,
! factor on the underlying element stiffness
rmore
rmore,,1e6 ! thermal conductance, tcc, pW/(um^2*degC) (real constant 14)
rmore,1e14 ! electrical conductance, ecc, pA/(um^2*Volt) (real constant 19)
rmore ! real constant 25 to r30
rmore ! real constant 31 to r36
rmore,,,,,,1e6 ! diffusivity coefficient, dcc, um^3/s, (real constant 42)
et,tid,170
Meshing is controlled by inserting body sizing values on the solder (90 μm) and conductors (40 μm).
For information on how to apply sizing, see Applying a Local Sizing Control.

The migration model (TB,MIGR) is used to model electromigration effects. The atomic flux option is
used in this example.
Most of the material properties for copper and SAC were taken from Wang and Liang.[2 (p. 546)] Some
copper material properties, such as the pre-exponential diffusivity coefficient, the activation energy of
diffusion, and the change number, were selected from Chao et al.[3 (p. 546)]
The material properties used for the solder are shown in the table below.
SnAgCu (SAC)
Property Value MP Command Label
Young’s modulus (MPa) 26.2E3 EX
Poisson’s ratio 0.35 PRXY
Electrical resistivity (TOhm*μm @ 20.75E-14 RSVX
200°C)
Pre-exponential diffusivity ((μm)2/s) 4.1E7 DXX
Thermal conductivity (pW/(μm*K)) 57E6 KXX
Specific heat (pJ/(kg*K)) 219E12 C
Density (kg/(μm)3) 7390E-18 DENS
Coefficient of thermal expansion (1/°C) 23E-6 ALPX
Coefficient of diffusion expansion 1E-5 BETX
Material Properties
Property Value TBDATA Command

Constant
Activation energy of diffusion Ea (eV) 0.8 C1 = Ea/kB_eV
Atomic volume V2 (μm)3 2.71E-11 C2 = V2/kB
Heat of transport Q (eV) 0.0094 C3 = Q/kB_eV
Charge number Z2 -23 C4 = Z2/kB_eV
The material properties used for the conductors are shown in the table below.
Copper
Property Value MP Command Label
Young’s modulus (MPa) 127.7E3 EX
Poisson’s ratio 0.31 PRXY
Electrical resistivity (TOhm*μm @ 200°C) 2.38E-14 RSVX
Pre-exponential diffusivity ((μm)2/s) 7.8E7 DXX
Thermal conductivity (pW/(μm*K)) 393E6 KXX
Specific heat (pJ/(kg*K) 385.2E12 C
Density (kg/(μm)3) 8900E-18 DENS
Coefficient of thermal expansion (1/°C) 17.1E-6 ALPX
Coefficient of diffusion expansion 1E-5 BETX
Property Value TBDATA Command
Constant
Activation energy of diffusion Qa 210E3 C1 = Qa/R
(J/(K*mol))
Atomic volume V1 (μm)3 1.182E-11 C2 = V1/kB
Charge number Z1 -4 C4 = Z1/kB_eV
The following constants are also defined.
Constants
Boltzmann constant kB (pJ/K) 1.3806488E-11
Boltzmann constant kB_eV (eV/K) 8.6173324E-5
Universal gas constant R (J/(K*mol)) 8.31445
Reference temperature for thermal 25
strain calculation (°C)
Reference normalized concentration 1.0
for diffusion strain calculation
The properties which cannot be defined in the Mechanical user interface are defined by command
snippets as shown below. The commands define electric and diffusion material properties along with
the constants.
Conductors:
The following command snippet is used for the conductors (Solid 1 and Solid 2).
! Constants
kB=1.3806488e-23*1.e12 ! Boltzmann constant, pJ/K
kB_eV=8.6173324e-5 ! Boltzmann constant, eV/K
R=8.31445 ! Universal gas constant, J/(K*mol)
! Copper (mat 1)
et,matid,226,100111 ! structural-thermal-electric-diffusion
mp,rsvx,matid,2.38e-8*1e-6 ! electrical resistivity, TOhm*um @ 200 C
mp,dxx,matid,7.8e-5*1e12 ! pre-exponential diffusivity, (um)^2/s
Qa=210e3 ! activation energy, J/(K*mol)

V1=1.182e-29*1e18 ! atomic volume, um^3
Z1=-4 ! charge number
tb,migr,matid !! migration model for Cu plate

tbdata,1,Qa/R ! activation energy of diffusion/R
tbdata,2,V1/kB ! atomic volume/kB
tbdata,4,Z1/kB_eV ! charge number/kB_eV
mp,cref,matid,1 ! reference concentration for diffusion strain calculation

mp,betx,matid,1e-5 ! coefficient of diffusion expansion
Solder:
The following command snippet is used for the solder (Solid 3).
! Constants
kB=1.3806488e-23*1.e12 ! Boltzmann constant, pJ/K
kB_eV=8.6173324e-5 ! Boltzmann constant, eV/K
R=8.31445 ! Universal gas constant, J/(K*mol)
! Solder - SAC (mat 2)

et,matid,226,100111
mp,rsvx,matid,20.75e-8*1e-6 ! electric resistivity @ 200 degC, TOhm*um
mp,dxx,matid,4.1e-5*1e12 ! pre-exponential diffusivity, (um)^2/s
mp,cref,matid,1 ! reference normalized concentration for diffusion strain calculation

mp,betx,matid,1e-5 ! coefficient of diffusion expansion
! for back stress calculation
Ea=0.8 ! activation energy, eV
V2=2.71e-29*1e18 ! atomic volume, um^3
Q=0.0094 ! heat of transport, eV
Z2=-23 ! charge number
tb,migr,matid !! migration model for SAC solder joint
tbdata,1,Ea/kB_eV ! activation energy of diffusion/kB_eV
tbdata,2,V2/kB ! atomic volume/kB
tbdata,3,Q/kB_eV ! coefficient of thermomigration/kB_eV
tbdata,4,Z2/kB_eV ! charge number/kB_eV

Electrical, thermal, and structural boundary conditions are applied:
Structural
• The UZ displacements are constrained on the symmetry surface.
• The UY displacements are constrained at the top and bottom surfaces of the model.
• The UX displacements are constrained at the lower left end of the copper plate.
Thermal
A convection boundary condition with a film coefficient of 20 pW/(μm)2(°C) to a bulk temperature of

50°C is specified for all surfaces except the symmetry plane. An initial temperature of 50°C is specified.
Electrical
The end of one lead is grounded while a current of (2.85x1012)/2 pA (for the half model) is step-applied
to the end of the other lead. The VOLT degree of freedom is coupled to distribute the current evenly.
These boundary conditions cannot be defined in the Mechanical user interface and are therefore defined
through a command snippet using Named Selections NS_VOLT, NS_CPVOLT, and NS_CURRENT:
! Electrical
d,NS_VOLT,volt,0
CMSEL,S,NS_CPVOLT
CP,NEXT,VOLT,ALL
ALLSEL,ALL
f,NS_CURRENT,amps,1425e9 ! electric current, pA, half model
Diffusion
An initial unit normalized concentration is specified. This cannot be defined in the Mechanical user in-
terface and is therefore defined through a command snippet.
ic,all,conc,1 ! initial normalized concentration
The above command snippets for the electrical and diffusion loading are inserted under Coupled Field
Transient in the tree outline.

A transient analysis of 63.0x106 second duration is performed to simulate the two-year service life of
the electrical component. The initial time step is 3.0x106 seconds. An initial normalized concentration
of 1.0 and an initial temperature of 50°C are specified.
Geometric nonlinearity is activated (NLGEOM,ON), primarily to make hydrostatic pressure available

during postprocessing. Loads are step-applied.
Some settings are implemented through the following command snippet:

! Initial Conditions
ic,all,conc,1 ! initial normalized concentration
kbc,1 ! step apply loads
outres,all,all ! save all results
TIMINT,ON,all
tintp,,0.25251,0.50500,0.50000
47.7. Results
The results are presented in terms of the four fields: structural, thermal, electrical, and diffusion.
Because hydrostatic stress, current density, and concentration results are not available in the Mechanical
user interface, they are obtained by inserting the corresponding expressions as User Defined Results.
Results
The following expressions are inserted: NLHPRE for hydrostatic stress, JCSUM for current density sum,
and CONC for concentration. As an example, the details for NLHPRE are shown below:
Structural Result: Hydrostatic Stress
Hydrostatic stress results are in units of MPa. The gradient of hydrostatic stress produces diffusion from
high to low "pressure". The stresses are due to the constraint on the top and bottom surface of the
model and thermal strain incompatibility between the solder and the copper. A large negative hydro-
static stress occurs at the singularity produced by the sharp re-entrant corner at the edge of the
solder/copper interface.
Thermal Result: Temperature
Results
Because the model is very small and the materials have high thermal conductivity, the temperature
reaches the steady-state in a few seconds and remains constant throughout the simulation. Therefore,
the gradient of temperature does not contribute to atomic diffusion. The uniform temperature increase
does affect diffusion by producing stress gradients due to constrained thermal expansion.
Electrical Result: Current Density
Current density here is in units of mA/(μm)2. To convert to pA/(μm)2 you need to multiply by 1e9.
Note the increase in current density (current crowding) at the entrance and exit of the solder ball. This
is the location where metal depletion has been observed in solder balls.
Diffusion Result: Concentration
Results
Regions with concentration values less than 1.0 may produce voids. Concentrations greater than 1.0
could produce hillocks or protrusions of metal from the surface.
Concentration versus Time
To generate charts of concentration versus time in the Mechanical user interface, right-click Solution
and pick Insert > Chart.
In the Outline Selection, select the Concentration result and click Apply. In Output Quantities set
Concentration (Min) to Display and set Concentration (Max) to Omit.
These settings produce a chart of minimum concentration versus time:
Now duplicate the Chart result and, in Output Quantities, set Concentration (Max) to Display and
set Concentration (Min) to Omit.
Recommendations
These settings produce a chart of maximum concentration versus time:
The concentration plots show that the steady state occurs after 1 year (or around time = 1e7 sec).
• Use large time steps in a transient analysis. For example, in this problem time steps of 1x106 seconds
and larger are used. Small steps are unnecessary and may contribute to spatially varying concentration
oscillations. A steady-state (static) analysis is also possible.
• Due to very low atomic diffusivity, materials such as copper may show spatially varying concentration
oscillations. In such cases, a tetrahedral mesh of these regions may be preferred.
47.9. References
1. Liu, H., Yu, C., Li, P., & Chen, J. (2008). Current Crowding and its Effects on Electromigration and In-
terfacial Reaction in Lead-Free Solder Joints. Journal of Electronic Packaging. 130: 59-63.
2. Wang, S. & Liang, L. (2007). Solder joint reliability under electromigration and thermal-mechanical
load. Proc. IEEE Electronic Components and Technology Conference (ECTC 07). 1074-1083.
3. Chao, B.,Chae, S. H., Zhang, X., Lu, K. H., Im, J., & Ho, P. S. (2007). Investigation of diffusion and elec-
tromigration parameters for Cu-Sn intermetallic compounds in Pb-free solders using simulated an-
nealing. Acta Mater.55:2805-2814.

• Workbench Project Archive (.wbpz)(296 MB): Download
Chapter 48: Active and Passive Lateral Earth Pressure
Analysis
This example problem simulates soil behavior under active and passive earth-pressure loadings. The
problem shows how the nonlinear plastic behavior of soil can be modeled with a Mohr-Coulomb ma-
terial. This example is simulated using the Ansys Mechanical Application. To see this example solved
with Ansys Mechanical APDL see Active and Passive Lateral Earth Pressure Analysis in the Technology
• General solid element technology
• Geomechanical materials
• Initial stress states
Overview
Element Type(s) 2-D 4-Node Structural Solid (PLANE182)

48.1. Introduction
48.3. Modeling
48.8. Bibliography
48.1. Introduction
Soil-structure interaction occurs when part of an engineering structure exchanges stresses with the
surrounding ground. Typical structures for which such interaction must be considered include ground
foundations, piles, and retaining walls. By assessing the stress exerted on an engineering structure by
Active and Passive Lateral Earth Pressure Analysis
the ground, and the stress exerted on the ground by the structure, a safety evaluation based on the
results can be performed during or after construction [1].

Earth pressure is determined by the weight of the soil, soil depth, and depth of water table. The effective
stress of the soil is:
(48.1)
where is the total stress, is the effective stress, and is the pore pressure.
The horizontal stress coefficient of earth pressure is:

(48.2)
Depending on the state of the soil, three different coefficients can be defined , which are the
at rest, active, and passive pressures, respectively.
The active and passive lateral earth pressure on a horizontally displaced retaining wall is calculated.
The retained backfill consists of a sand-like soil with little cohesion.
Initially, the at rest stress state is applied by considering the gravitational acceleration of the soil. After-
wards, two stress states are generated.
A fully developed active earth-pressure state is created by moving the retaining wall away from the
soil. In this case, the lateral stress starts from a certain value and decreases until it reaches the active
earth pressure value.
A fully developed passive earth-pressure state is produced by moving the retaining wall towards the
soil. Both stress states are strongly influenced by the plastic deformation of the retained soil. In this
case, the lateral stress starts from a certain value and increases until it reaches the passive earth pressure
value.
No water table is considered in this example problem.
Figure 48.1: Soil Geometry and Active/Passive Movement of Left Retaining Wall
Material Properties
48.3. Modeling
A 2-D static structural analysis is used to simulate soil behavior under active and passive lateral earth
pressure . The mesh is created using global controls, setting Element Order to Linear with a fixed
element size of 1 m as shown in the following figure.
Figure 48.2: Mesh Details
This element formulation is based on linear quadrilateral PLANE182 elements using an enhanced strain
formulation under plane strain conditions (KEYOPT(1) = 2, KEYOPT(3) = 2).
Figure 48.3: CAD geometry
An initial at rest earth pressure is generated by applying a gravitational acceleration of on the

soil, leading to undesirable vertical deformations. To mitigate the problem, an initial stress state is applied,
resulting in a nearly deformation-free initial state for the gravitational load step. This can be obtained
by applying three zero displacement boundary conditions and gravitational acceleration load as described
in Boundary Conditions and Loading (p. 550).

Unit System Metric (m, kg, N, s, V, A)

Angle Degrees
The soil material is modeled using an ideally plastic Mohr-Coulomb material with weak dilatancy effects.
Soil Material Properties

Young's Modulus (MPa) 30

-3
Density (Kgm ) 1500
Friction angle (°) 30
Cohesion (kPa) 0.05
Angle of dilatancy (°) 5
Residual friction angle (°) 30
Residual cohesion (kPa) 0.05
The Mohr-Coulomb material can be defined using an evolving yield surface which shows hardening
behavior, or simply perfectly plastic behavior. The cohesion and friction angle are defined as constant
values listed in the table above for simplicity.

The retaining wall is assumed to be rigid. The horizontal movement can therefore be applied directly
on the soil via Dirichlet boundary conditions.
The retaining wall on both sides of the soil is assumed to be frictionless. Therefore, only a fixed hori-
zontal movement is necessary. This is accomplished using the displacement boundary conditions shown
below.
The bottom movement of the soil structure is supported via rolling boundary conditions. To accomplish
this, the X Component of Displacement is set to Free as seen below.
In the first load step, an at rest earth-pressure state is generated by applying a gravitational acceleration
of on the soil in the vertical direction.
In a following load step, an active earth-pressure state is generated by horizontally moving the soil
nodes of the left boundary away from the soil using a specified displacement of ux = -0.075 m. This
case is accomplished by applying a displacement value of -0.075 m the second load step as shown below.
Alternatively, a passive earth-pressure state is produced by horizontally moving the soil nodes of the
left boundary towards the soil using a specified maximum displacement of ux = 1 m. This case is accom-
plished by applying a displacement value of 1 m the second load step as shown below.

A nonlinear static analysis is performed setting the Newton-Raphson option to Program Controlled
in Analysis Settings.
The at rest stress state is calculated using a single substep as shown below.
The active and passive pressure-state loads are applied via 10 initial and 100 maximum substeps with
automatic time-stepping enabled.
48.6.1. Defining the Initial Stress State

Calculating the at rest stress state in the first load step results in vertical displacements:
Generally, the soil exists in an already consolidated state. Initial displacements due to at-rest loads
are therefore unnatural and should be minimized.
The vertical stress state varies linearly with the depth of the soil, expressed as:
where:
= soil density
= gravitational acceleration
= vertical height of eachelement
The coefficient of lateral earth pressure is the ratio of horizontal to vertical stress components. For a
horizontally retained non-overconsolidated soil under elastic loading conditions, it is defined (via
Poisson’s ratio ) as:
so that the horizontal stress components can be calculated as [2]:

The resulting pressure distributions on the left retaining wall are determined using the coefficient of
lateral earth pressure:
Figure 48.4: Horizontal-to-Vertical Stress Ratios Along the Retaining Wall
For elastic soils, the coefficient of lateral earth pressure for the at rest stress state, where there is only
self weight of the soil, is consistent with the relationship using Poisson’s ratio (p. 553) as:
Figure 48.5: Horizontal Displacement for Active Pressure Load Step (Negative Displacement of
Retaining Wall in x-Direction)
For this type of problem, the coefficient of lateral earth pressure for an active stress state is solely a
function of the friction angle [3] so that:
The result of the nonlinear soil structure analysis is comparable to this value. Also, in most of the
domain, consistent with theoretical assumptions. The failure mode is shearing-dominated.
Equivalent plastic strains decrease with increasing hydrostatic pressure:
Figure 48.6: Equivalent Plastic Strains for Active Pressure Load Step
Passive earth pressure is the amount of stress that a soil structure can exert on an actively loaded
structure that interacts with the soil. It is generally much higher than the at rest stress state. The following
figure shows the horizontal movement of a typical passive loading condition:
Figure 48.7: Horizontal Displacement for Passive Pressure Load Step (Positive Displacement of
Retaining Wall in x-Direction)
Using failure-state analysis [3], the coefficient of lateral earth pressure for this passive stress state is
again a function of the friction angle, so that:
For the passive stress state, therefore, the horizontal stress components are approximately 3x the ver-
tical at rest stress along the retaining wall.
Figure 48.8: Equivalent Plastic Strains for Passive Pressure Load Step
The soil undergoes plastic deformation to a depth of approximately 10 m. Due to the large hydrostatic
stress state in the bottom region, no plastic strains develop.
The results of the at-rest pressure step, the active pressure step, and the passive pressure step are
consistent with theoretical assumptions. The analysis correctly predicts the complex stress state of this
soil-structure interaction problem.
48.8. Bibliography
1. Eurocode7: Geotechnical Design - Part 1: General Rules. DIN EN 1997-1:2014-3 (E).
2. Lazebnik, G. E. & Tsinker, G. P. (1998). Lateral earth pressure at rest. Monitoring of Soil-Structure Inter-
action: Instruments for Measuring Soil Pressures. 165-183. New York: Springer.
3. Rankine, W.J.M. (1857). On the stability of loose earth. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society
of London. 147, 9-27.

Chapter 51: Multi-Filar Coil Inside a Tube Modeled
with Beam-to-Beam Contact
This example problem demonstrates three methods to model a multi-filar coil inside of a tube. Each
model uses a different contact scenario: surface-to-surface, beam-to-surface, or beam-to-beam. A com-
parison shows that the beam model using beam-to-beam contact offers the best advantage in terms
of simplified modeling and reduced computation time.
Ansys Mechanical APDL see Multi-Filar Coil Inside a Tube Modeled with Beam-to-Beam Contact in the
• Beam-to-beam and beam-to-surface contact modeled via CONTA177 elements
• Beam-to-surface contact modeled via CONTA175 elements
• Internal contact between crossing beams
Overview
Element Type(s) 3-D Solid, 3-D Beam, 3-D Pipe, 3-D Contact
Material Model(s) Linear Elastic, Neo-Hookean Hyperelastic
Solver Type(s) ANSYS Mechanical

51.1. Introduction
Multi-Filar Coil Inside a Tube Modeled with Beam-to-Beam Contact
51.1. Introduction
Multi-filar (multi-wire) coils and multi-strand cables are mainly used in medical devices and in the
automotive industry. One example is an implantable lead, which might be part of a medical device such
as a cardiac defibrillator.
Bending analyses to model cables and wire bundles are typically performed to simulate actual physical
behaviors at the coil filar or cable strand level. Using solid elements to analyze these types of structures
can be computationally expensive because of the characteristic dimensions of the tube and coil sections.
On the other hand, beam models with beam-to-beam contact offer fast and accurate solutions with
simplified modeling.

A bending analysis is performed on an implantable lead model. The structure consists of a five-filar
metal coil (linear elastic) inside a polymer tube casing (hyperelastic). The tube is 3.45 mm long with an
outer radius of 0.43 mm and an inner radius of 0.36 mm. The wire of the coil has a 0.05 mm radius with
an initial 0.0125 mm gap between the filars.
Two contact pairs are defined in each model: one self-contact pair for the coil's filar-to-filar contact, and
one contact pair between the coil and the tube. To apply the bending boundary condition, one end of
the tube and coil is fixed, and the other end is rotated about the Y axis by 1.2 radians.
Three different models are created:
1. Solid Tube and Solid Coil
2. Solid Tube and Beam Coil
3. Beam Tube and Beam Coil
Figure 51.1: 3-D Models of a Five-Filar Metal Coil Inside a Polymer Tube (p. 565) shows the schematic
model representation for the three cases. The specific element types and contact models used are as
follows:
Case Tube Coil Self Contact Tube/Coil Contact Comments

Number Element Element (between filars)
1 SOLID186 SOLID186 Surface-to-surface Surface-to-surface More accurate,
but
computationally
expensive
2 SOLID186 BEAM189 Beam-to-beam Beam-to-surface
3 PIPE289 BEAM189 Beam-to-beam Internal
beam-to-beam
Figure 51.1: 3-D Models of a Five-Filar Metal Coil Inside a Polymer Tube

Modeling of this problem involves the following steps:
51.3.1. Model the Five-Filar Coil
51.3.2. Model the Tube
The geometries are created in Design Modeler and attached to static analysis systems in the Workbench
project schematic. Three static analysis systems are created, one for each case.
51.3.1. Model the Five-Filar Coil

The coil has a radius of 0.3 mm, and the wire has a 0.05 mm radius with a 0.0125 mm initial gap
between the filars.
Case 1: Five layers of solid helical coils are created and meshed with solid elements (SOLID186). See
a) in the figure below.
Case 2 and Case 3: A line model of helical coils is created and meshed with beam elements (BEAM189).
See b) in the figure below.
Figure 51.2: Meshed Coil
The corresponding mesh settings are shown below.
Figure 51.3: Mesh Settings for Coil - Solid Elements (Case1)
Figure 51.4: Mesh Settings for Coil - Beam Elements (Case 2 and Case 3)
51.3.2. Model the Tube

The tube is 3.45 mm long with an outer radius of 0.43 mm and an inner radius of 0.36 mm.
Case 1 and Case 2: A full three-dimensional model of the tube is created and meshed with solid
elements (SOLID186). See a) in the figure below.
Case 3: A line model of the tube is created and meshed with PIPE289 elements. See b) in the figure
below.
Figure 51.5: Meshed Tube
The corresponding mesh settings are shown below.
Figure 51.6: Mesh Settings for Tube - Solid Elements (Case1 and Case 2)
Figure 51.7: Mesh Settings for Tube - Pipe Elements (Case3)

Two contact pairs are defined to simulate contact behavior in the model:
51.3.3.1. Contact Between the Coil and the Tube
51.3.3.2. Self Contact Between Coil Filars
Because some contact settings in this example are not implemented in the Mechanical user interface,
Mechanical APDL command snippets are used to define those settings. For information on adding
command snippets, see Commands (APDL).
51.3.3.1. Contact Between the Coil and the Tube

Contact between the coil and the inner tube surface is modeled differently for the three cases, as
shown in Figure 51.8: Contact Pairs for Contact Between Coil and Tube (p. 568):
Case 1: Surface-to-surface contact is used. The outer surface of the multi-filar coil is meshed with
CONTA174 contact elements, and the inner surface of the tube is meshed with TARGE170 target
elements.
Case 2: Line-to-surface contact is used. The multi-filar coil is meshed with CONTA175 contact ele-
ments, and the inner surface of the tube is meshed with TARGE170 target elements.
Case 3: Line-to-line (beam-to-beam) contact is used. The multi-filar coil is meshed with CONTA177
contact elements, and the tube is meshed with TARGE170 target elements.
The corresponding contact settings are shown in Figure 51.9: Contact Settings for Contact Between
Coil and Tube (p. 568).
Figure 51.8: Contact Pairs for Contact Between Coil and Tube
Figure 51.9: Contact Settings for Contact Between Coil and Tube
The following contact settings (for CONTA177) are inserted as a command snippet, only for Case
3:
KEYOPT,cid,3,2 ! Include all contact scenarios
KEYOPT,cid,8,0
KEYOPT,cid,11,1 ! Include thickness effect
KEYOPT,cid,6,2 ! Aggressive stiffness variation.
KEYOPT,cid,14,2
51.3.3.2. Self Contact Between Coil Filars

Self contact between the filar surfaces is modeled differently for the three cases:
Case 1: Self contact between the coil filars is modeled as surface-to-surface contact. The outer
surface of the multi-filar coil is meshed with both CONTA174 contact elements and TARGE170 target
elements. See a) in the figure below.
Case 2 and Case 3: Self contact between the coil filars is modeled as parallel line-to-line contact.
The multi-filar coil is meshed with both CONTA177 contact elements and TARGE170 target elements.
See b) in the figure below.
The corresponding contact settings are shown in Figure 51.11: Contact Settings for Self Contact
Between Filars (p. 569).
Figure 51.10: Self Contact Definition Between Coil Filars
Figure 51.11: Contact Settings for Self Contact Between Filars
The following contact settings (for CONTA177) are inserted as a command snippet for Case 2 and
Case 3:
et,cid,177
keyopt,cid,3,1 ! Define parallel beam-to-beam contact.
keyopt,cid,11,1
keyopt,cid,14,2 !Define multiple target segments interacting with each contact detection point.
keyopt,cid,6,2 !Aggressive stiffness variation.
keyopt,cid,8,0

Linear elastic material behavior is defined for the metal coil, and a Neo-Hookean model is used to
model the polymer tube.
Elastic Material Properties (Metal Coil)

Young's Modulus 193000 MPa
Constants for Neo-Hookean Model (Polymer Tube)

Initial shear modulus (μ) 0.8 MPa
Incompressibility parameter (d) 0.004 MPa-1

To apply boundary conditions, a Remote Point object is defined at each end of the tube/coil assembly.
Each remote point ties together end nodes of the tube and the coil which are grouped into a Named
Selection. (The solver uses multipoint constraint (MPC) equations to make these connections.) Then,
Remote Displacement boundary conditions are defined at the remote points: the bottom end is fixed
and the top end is rotated about the X direction by 1.2 radians.
The remote point and remote displacement settings for the three different cases are shown below. In
each figure, the detail pane on the left shows remote point settings, while the detail pane on the right
shows the corresponding remote displacement constraint on that remote point.
Case 1: At each end of the assembly, a named selection containing nodes on the tube and coil end
faces is scoped to a remote point object.
Figure 51.12: Remote Point Settings and Remote Displacement Constraints at Selected Nodes -
Case 1
Case 2: At each end of the assembly, a named selection containing nodes on the tube end face and
the coil end nodes is scoped to a remote point object.
Case 2
Case 3: At each end of the assembly, a named selection containing the tube end node and the coil
end nodes is scoped to a remote point object.
Case 3

A nonlinear bending analysis is performed for each model. Large-Deflection effects are turned on.
Auto Time Stepping is turned on.
Figure 51.15: Analysis Settings for All Three Cases
The following command snippet is added under solution controls for all three cases to set the force
tolerance to 0.5.
NEQIT,50
CNVTOL,F,,5.d-1
Note:
The notation for the exponent can be upper or lower case e or d (see Nonrestrictive Data
Input in the Command Reference).

A comparative study of all three methods shows the effectiveness of the beam-to-beam simulation
(Case 3).
Displacement
The total deformation plots are shown for the three models. The values are similar for all three.
Figure 51.16: Total Deformation Plots for all Three Cases
von Mises Stress

Von Mises stress (SEQV) is plotted for the three models. The plots show that maximum stress occurs at
a similar location in all three models, and the overall stress pattern is similar.
Figure 51.17: von Mises Stress
Computational Time
The following table compares simulation time and cumulative iterations for the three cases.
DMP run Case 1: Case 2: Case 3:
(8 processors) Solid Tube / Solid Tube / Beam Tube /

Solid Coil Beam Coil Beam Coil
Wall time (s) 17830 3353 1127
Cumulative 741 359 134
iterations
The above data shows that the beam-to-beam simulation (Case 3) is less computationally expensive
than the solid model.
Conclusion
The comparison of von Mises stress and computation time for these models illustrates that similar results
and reduced computation time can be achieved by using a simplified beam model and beam-to-beam
contact.
The following points are important for beam-to-beam contact modeling.
• Use pipe elements (PIPE289) to model polymer tube structures as line bodies. Currently, none of the
hyperelastic material models can be modeled by beam elements (BEAM188, BEAM189).
• Some contact element settings (KEYOPTs) are not available in the Mechanical user interface but can
be easily set via command snippets, as demonstrated in this example.
• When internal beam contact is involved, set KEYOPT(3) = 2 for the contact elements to capture any
internal crossing and parallel beam-to-beam contact. In this example, the crossing contact type
dominates between the coil and the tube; the parallel contact type may potentially occur during
Newton-Raphson iterations.
• Set KEYOPT(14) = 2 for the contact elements to allow each contact detection point to interact with
multiple target segments simultaneously.

Chapter 55: Inverse-Solving Analysis of a Rotor Fan
Blade with Disk
This example problem demonstrates the capabilities and advantages of using a nonlinear static analysis
with inverse solving to simulate a rotor fan blade with disk.
Ansys Mechanical APDL see Inverse-Solving Analysis of a Rotor Fan Blade with Disk in the Technology
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Nonlinear Static Structural Analysis with Inverse Solution
Element Type(s) 3D Solid elements

55.1. Introduction
55.3. Modeling
55.1. Introduction
In turbomachinery engineering, the hot-to-cold method is commonly used to design rotor blades. The
rotor blade geometry that would represent the as-manufactured shape is referred to as the cold geometry,
whereas the shape of the rotor blade in the running condition is termed the hot geometry.
The designer begins with the hot geometry of the blade and determines the final shape of the hot
geometry via design optimization. Based on the desired hot geometry, the designer then uses an iter-
ative approach to obtain the cold geometry of the blade to manufacture. The following figure illustrates
a typical work flow of the iterative approach for a simple beam model.
Inverse-Solving Analysis of a Rotor Fan Blade with Disk
Figure 55.1: Hot-to-Cold Geometry Work Flow
The steps of the iterative approach are as follows:
1. Solve the hot geometry again with the aerodynamic, centripetal, and other loads to obtain the
double-deflected hot geometry.
Problem Description
2. The displacement results from step 1 are applied to the original hot geometry in the negative
direction to obtain the first cold estimate geometry.
3. The cold estimate geometry is again subjected to the same loads.
4. The hot estimate geometry is obtained from the analysis in step 3.
5. The hot estimate geometry is compared to the original hot geometry. If the difference is accept-
ably small, the cold estimate geometry is considered to be the final cold geometry. Otherwise,
the cold-estimate geometry is updated based on the difference and the iterative process (steps
3 - 5) is continued until an acceptable comparison is obtained.
Achieving the desired accuracy via the iterative approach is resource- and time-intensive, as each iteration
is a nonlinear solution that can involve many substeps.
Inverse solving enables the calculation of the cold geometry from the hot geometry in a single solution.
Generally, inverse solving is useful in following cases:
• When the input geometry is deformed and the material properties and loads that produce the de-
formation geometry are known, but the undeformed reference geometry and stresses/strains associated
with the deformed input geometry are unknown. The problem presented here demonstrates this case.
• When the input geometry is deformed and the material properties and loads that produce the de-
formed geometry are known, but it is necessary to solve the model with additional loads. This case
is common in biomechanical simulations, for example to aid in the design of stents and implant
devices. Here the goal is to determine the stresses and strains on the deformed geometry and, more
importantly, the response to additional loads. In such cases, a nonlinear static analysis using inverse
solving is required to recover the undeformed reference geometry, followed by a standard forward-
solving analysis to apply further loading.

The NASA Rotor 67 fan bladed disk is a subsystem of a turbofan’s compressor set used in aerospace
engine applications.
The following sector model, representing a challenging industrial example for which the detailed geo-
metry and flow information is available in the public domain, consists of a disk and a fan blade with a
sector angle of 16.364 degrees.
The sector model represents the running condition or hot geometry of the blade. It is already optimized
at the running condition under loading. The primary objective of this example problem is to obtain the
cold geometry for manufacturing from the given hot geometry using inverse solving.
To verify the results of the inverse solving analysis, a loop test is performed. The cold geometry calculated
by inverse solving is used as the input geometry in a standard forward-solving analysis, and the resulting
hot geometry at the running condition under loading is compared to the sector model hot geometry
to ensure that they are nearly identical.
To highlight the inverse-solving technology, this example problem does not include a cyclic symmetry
analysis.
55.3. Modeling
The single-sector model of a NASA Rotor 67 fan bladed disk is meshed with SOLID186 elements. As the
geometry has complicated profile, a .cdb file with fairly fine mesh is imported for the analysis. You
can download both this input file (tech_demo_55.cdb) and the .wbpz file for this example problem
(see Workbench Input Files and Project Files (p. 595)).
The .cdb file is imported into the Mechanical Application using the Workbench External Model System
(see project schematic below). You must specify the location of the .cbd by opening the External
Model tab (double-click Setup in External Model) and specifying the location (click … under Location,
choose Browse... and browse to the file).
Modeling
Figure 55.2: Import .cdb File Using External Model
Once the file location is specified, close the External Model tab and click Update Project on the Project
tab to include the .cdb file in the analysis as shown below. You will see a green check in the Setup
cell of External Model indicating the file location is specified. Start Mechanical by double-clicking Setup
in the Static Structural system.
Figure 55.3: Update Project After Specifying .cdb File Location

The model uses linear elastic material with temperature-dependent material properties listed in the
table below.
Material Properties NASA Rotor 67 Fan Blade and Disk

Temperature [°C] 22 200 300 600
Young’s Modulus
2.2 x 1011 2 x 1011 1.9 x 1011 1.8 x 1011
[Pa]
Poisson’s Ratio 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.30
3
Density [kg/m ] 7840 7740 7640 7540
Coefficient of
1.2 x 10-5 1.3 x 10-5 1.4 x10-5 1.5 x 10-5
Thermal Expansion
Reference
22°C
Temperature [°C]
These material properties are imported as tabular data directly from the .cdb file. Although it is not
necessary to specify them, you can view tabular data in the Engineering Data tab of Workbench as
seen in the screen shot below. To open the Engineering Data tab and view or specify tabular data,
double-click the Engineering Data cell in the Static Structural analysis system.
Figure 55.4: Poisson's Ratio as a Function of Temperature for NASA Rotor 67 Fan Blade and Disk

Fixed-support conditions are applied on the bottom of the disk portion of the model as shown below
in the Mechanical Application.
The following loads are applied:
• Centrifugal loads caused by rotational velocity
• Thermal loads due to the difference in reference and operating temperature
• Unsteady flow pressure applied on the fan blade
A rotational velocity of 1680 rad/sec is applied along the global Z axis, as shown below.
The thermal boundary condition is imported from CDB file and applied on respective elements of fan
blade. The temperature is applied directly on elements ranging from 100°C to 400°C. The element groups
and respective temperature values can be seen in the worksheet of “Body Loads” object imported from
External Model as seen in the following screen shot.
A detailed pressure distribution on the fan blade element faces is also imported from the .cdb file via
External Model and can be observed in the Surface Loads worksheet. However, in the case of pressure,
these data cannot be directly included in the analysis since inverse analysis cannot be solved with
SURF154 elements and there is no option in Mechanical to directly apply pressure from these data. To
approximate the effect of pressure in this simulation, apply an approximate average pressure of 3000
Pa to the fan blade face as seen below.

The analysis is performed in two steps:
• Step 1 (Inverse-Solving Analysis): A nonlinear static analysis using inverse solving (INVOPT,ON) is
performed on the hot geometry of the model to obtain the cold geometry (for manufacturing) and
the stress/strain results on the hot geometry.
• Step 2 (Forward-Solving Analysis): Consider the results of this analysis as a reference demonstrating
the correctness of the inverse-solving analysis. The cold geometry obtained from Solution 1 is solved
again but with a traditional forward-solving analysis to obtain the hot geometry with stress/strain
results.
To include large-deflection effects Large Deflection is set to On in Analysis Settings. Also, set the In-
verse Option, available only for Step 1, to Yes to enable Inverse solving. The rest of the analysis settings
are the same for both steps and mostly default settings as listed below.
Figure 55.5: Summary of Analysis Settings
An inverse-solving analysis followed by a forward-solving analysis is known as a loop test, as the forward-
solving analysis should always result in the same hot geometry (input to the inverse-solving analysis).
Furthermore, simulating the running condition by applying the same loads in both analyses should
result in the same results (mechanical stress and strain and thermal strain).

To verify the results of the loop test, that is Step 1 (inverse-solving analysis) followed by Step 2 (forward-
solving analysis) is successful, the deformation at the end of Forward solution step should be nearly
zero when compared to the original sector model hot geometry. This shows that the inverse solve has
effectively calculated the correct cold geometry of the rotor fan model, and a further forward solve with
the same loads results in a return to the hot geometry in the running conditions.
The image below plots deformation at the end of inverse and forward solution. Also overlain in this
figure is the undeformed wireframe, or the original sector model hot geometry used as input for the
inverse solve. The observation that the forward solve deformation result is indistinguishable from the
wireframe hot geometry verifies the accuracy of the cold geometry calculated by the inverse solve.
Figure 55.6: Deformation after Inverse Solve (A) and Forward Solve (B). Hot geometry is also
plotted as wireframe.
The remaining figures compare the equivalent stress, strain, and thermal strain results of the inverse
and forward solve. The observation that these results are nearly equivalent further verifies the accuracy
of the inverse solve.
Figure 55.7: Equivalent Stress Results of Inverse Solve (A) and Forward Solve (B)
Figure 55.8: Equivalent Total Strain Results of Inverse Solve (A) and Forward Solve (B)
Figure 55.9: Thermal Strain Results of Inverse Solve (A) and Forward Solve (B)
When performing an inverse-solving analysis, consider the following:
• If you observe a significant difference in loop test results, try using tighter force and displacement
convergence criteria and an equal number of substeps to obtain matching results.
• When used in an Inverse analysis, you must reverse the directions of any non-zero displacement and
rotational boundary conditions (values must be equal to the negative value used in a regular forward-
solving analysis). For more information, see Applying Loads in an Inverse-Solving Analysis in the
Structural Analysis Guide.

Chapter 56: Threaded Connection Analysis
This example problem demonstrates the capabilities and advantages of a 2-D to 3-D analysis for problems
that require mapping the 2-D model solution to a corresponding extruded 3-D body so that the solution
can continue based on the 3-D model. The analysis is performed using the Ansys Mechanical Application.
To see this example solved using Ansys Mechanical APDL see Threaded Connection Analysis in the
• Extruding a 2-D model to a 3-D model (EEXTRUDE).
• Mapping solution variables from the 2-D mesh to the new 3-D mesh and rebalancing the results
(MAP2DTO3D).
• Continuing the analysis on the 3-D model via a multiframe restart.
Overview
Element Type(s) PLANE182: 2-D 4-Node Structural Solid

56.1. Introduction
56.3. Modeling
For more information, see 2-D to 3-D Analysis in the Advanced Analysis Guide.
56.1. Introduction
Threaded-pipe connectors are common in oil, gas, and offshore piping applications. They join pipelines
in environments where pipes are frequently coupled and decoupled. The connectors must withstand
Threaded Connection Analysis
demanding operating conditions, as they are typically subjected to internal-pressure, axial-pullout,

bending, and torsion loads.
It is arduous and time-consuming to begin a threaded-connection simulation with a 3-D model even
when it is possible. Axisymmetric loads are significant and can be difficult to solve with contact, and a
refined mesh is often necessary for detailed examination of a threaded connection.
Since the first few stages of loading (such as internal pressure and axial pullout) are axisymmetric in
nature, and the loads causing nonaxisymmetric deformation (such as bending) occur later, you can
conveniently use 2-D to 3-D analysis capability to perform a more convenient 2-D analysis in the early
part of the analysis with axisymmetric loads, followed by a general 3-D analysis later where nonaxisy-
metric loads are included.
A 2-D to 3-D analysis involves extruding a 2-D deformed mesh to a new 3-D mesh. The program updates
the database as necessary, generates contact elements if needed, and transfers boundary conditions,
loads, and nodal temperatures from the 2-D mesh to the extruded 3-D mesh. The program maps all
solved variables (node and element solutions) to the new 3-D mesh and rebalances solutions for the
3-D model automatically. You can then continue the analysis on the 3-D model via a multiframe restart,
applying nonaxisymmetric loading as desired.

The following figure shows the geometry of the threaded-connection model used in this example
problem:
Figure 56.1: Threaded-Connection Model
Modeling
The analysis is a three-step process:
• Step 1: Solve a 2-D axisymmetric threaded-connection model under internal pressure and end-cap
loading.
• Step 2: Convert the 2-D axisymmetric model to the full 3-D model.
• Step 3: Continue the analysis on the 3-D threaded-connection model under bending load.
The geometry and loadings in the first step are axisymmetric, so the analysis begins with a 2-D
axisymmetric model to solve for internal pressure and tensile loadings. Using a 2-D to 3-D analysis, the
2-D deformed mesh is extruded to a new 3-D mesh and solution results are mapped to the 3-D model.
The analysis then continues with the 3-D model, on which a nonaxisymmetric (bending) load is applied.
Starting the threaded-connection analysis with a 2-D axisymmetric model rather than a 3-D model:
• Requires significantly less computational time.
• Reduces the likelihood of convergence issues when solving the 2-D model with contact pairs.
56.3. Modeling
The model uses PLANE182 2-D four-node structural solid elements with axisymmetric behavior (KEYOPT(3)
= 1).
Figure 56.2: 2-D Axisymmetric Mesh of the Threaded Connection
The mapped mesh for threads at critical locations are given an adequate mesh density.
Modeling
Figure 56.3: Meshing at Threads

The 2-D axisymmetric model of the threaded connection has two contact pairs:
The flexible-to-flexible contact pair uses a low value of friction (µ= 0.05). A very small amount of initial
penetration (included in the contact analysis) exists between threads. You can change some properties
of this contact pair (such as including/excluding the initial penetration or modifying the pinball region)
during the 2-D to 3-D mapping process. On rare occasions, some experimentation may be necessary
to determine the contact parameters to resolve convergence issues if they arise during solution
mapping (MAP2DTO3D,SOLVE). The figure below shows details of contact settings used for this
contact.
Figure 56.4: Flexible-to-Flexible Contact Pair Details
The rigid-to-flexible contact pair plays no role in the 2-D axisymmetric analysis. It is required for the
3-D model, however, when applying the bending load on the extruded 3-D model via a pilot node
created for this contact pair. This is defined using the following command snippet as below since it
is not supported in Workbench Mechanical.
finish
/prep7
cmsel,s,Contact_Nodes
esln
esel,r,ename,,172
cm,Contact_Elements_New,element
allsel,all
cmsel,s,Total_Contact_Nodes
esln
esel,r,ename,,172
cm,New_Contact_Elements,element
allsel,all
Material Properties
*get,kpmax,kp,,num,max
*get,ymax,node,0,mxloc,y
nsel,s,loc,y,ymax
*get,xmax,node,0,mxloc,x
*get,xmin,node,0,mnloc,x
k,kpmax+1,xmin,ymax
k,kpmax+2,xmax,ymax
l,kpmax+1,kpmax+2
*get,etmax,etyp,,num,max
et,etmax+1,169
et,etmax+2,172
keyopt,etmax+1,2,1
keyopt,etmax+2,9,1
keyopt,etmax+2,12,5
nsel,s,loc,y,ymax
cm,tn.cnt,node
type,etmax+2
real,etmax+2
mat,etmax+2
esln
esurf
lsel,s,loc,y,ymax
lplot
type,etmax+1
lmesh,all
allsel,all
type,etmax+1
real,etmax+2
*get,nmax,node,,num,max
pilotnode=nmax+1
n,nmax+1,0,ymax
tshap,pilot
e,nmax+1
allsel,all
finish
/solu
When the 2-D axisymmetric mesh is extruded to the 3-D mesh (EEXTRUDE), the program creates
both contact pairs for the 3-D model.

The threaded-connection model uses structural steel with elastoplastic behavior. The nonlinear Chaboche
kinematic hardening material model (TB,CHABOCHE) is used with the temperature-independent mater-
ial properties shown in the figure below.
Figure 56.5: Material properties used for threaded-connection model

56.5.1. Boundary Conditions and Loadings for the 2-D Axisymmetric Analysis
56.5.2. Loadings on the 3-D Extruded Model
56.5.1. Boundary Conditions and Loadings for the 2-D Axisymmetric Analysis
The analysis is non-linear with five load-steps. Auto Time Stepping is set On in each load-step to
reduce the solution time. Analysis time step controls for the five time steps are specified as shown
in the following figure.
Figure 56.6: Analysis Time Step Controls
The end-cap load is applied on the top end of the model using Nodal Pressure, and the bottom end
is fixed in all degrees of freedom using Fixed Support as shown below.
Figure 56.7: End cap load applied on the top end of model and fixed support at bottom edges
Internal Nodal Pressure is applied as illustrated in the following figure.
Figure 56.8: Apply Internal Node Pressure
The internal pressure and end-cap loads are cycled as shown in the following plots.
Figure 56.9: Internal Pressure and End-Cap Loading Cycles
56.5.2. Loadings on the 3-D Extruded Model

After converting the 2-D model to 3-D, a bending load is applied on the 3-D model. A rigid-to-flexible
redundant contact pair was created in the 2-D model for this purpose. A bending load of 0.4 degrees
is applied on the pilot node of the contact pair in the 3-D extruded model. This is done using command
snippet as shown below as 2D to 3D extrude is not supported in Mechanical.
finish
/clear,nostart
/solu
antype,,restart,5,
allsel,all
time,6
d,pilotnode,all
d,pilotnode,rotz,-0.001745*4
nsub,50,1000,50
outres,all,all
rescontrol,,all,10
allsel,all
solve
finish

The analysis solution involves the following steps:
56.6.1. Step 1: Perform a 2-D Axisymmetric Analysis with Pressure and End-Cap Loading
56.6.2. Step 2: Extrude the 2-D Model to 3-D
56.6.3. Step 3: Solve the 3-D Model with Bending Load
56.6.1. Step 1: Perform a 2-D Axisymmetric Analysis with Pressure and End-
Cap Loading
A nonlinear static structural analysis is performed with five load-steps. Large Deflection is set On to
include large-deflection effects. The analysis involves two complete loading/unloading cycles of the
pressure and end-cap loads. In the fifth load step, the final values of the pressure and end-cap loads
are applied.
56.6.2. Step 2: Extrude the 2-D Model to 3-D

The 3-D model is extruded from the 2-D model. Since this feature is not supported in workbench
Mechanical, it is implemented with a command snippet. The main analysis steps are described below.
Step 2 Description Command Comments

2.1 Initiate the MAP2DTO3D,START,5,4 Begins the analysis by rebuilding the
2-D to 3-D 2-D analysis database at the last
analysis. converged substep (the fourth in this
case) of the fifth load step.
2.2 Extrude the EEXTRUDE,AXIS,40,,,,,,1 Revolves the 2-D deformed
3-D mesh geometry about the global Y-axis

from the with 40 elements in the hoop
2-D direction.
deformed
mesh. Important:
Ensure an adequate
number of elements in
the hoop direction to
reproduce correct
contact results during
mapping.
After extrusion, you can modify

some contact settings if necessary
to resolve convergence issues
during rebalancing.
Limited preprocessing is possible.

You can create a new contact pair,
modify material properties for later
use in the 3-D analysis, and
change KEYOPT settings. (Use
caution when changing KEYOPTs,
however, as an inappropriate
modification can lead to different
3-D model results after
rebalancing.)
2.3 Map MAP2DTO3D,FINISH Transfers boundary conditions, pressure
boundary loads, applied nodal forces, applied
conditions nodal displacements, and applied nodal
and loads. temperatures from the 2-D mesh to the
corresponding entities in the extruded
3-D model.
2.4 Map MAP2DTO3D,SOLVE Transfers nodal and element solutions
solution from the 2-D model to the 3-D model
variables. and initiates rebalancing.
Extrude from 2D to 3D is done using below commands.

finish
/clear,nostart
/solu
MAP2DTO3D,START,5,
allsel,all
00shpp,off
EEXT,axis,40,,,,,,
allsel,all
csys,5
nsel,s,loc,y,0,180
esln,,1
cm,te,element
cmsel,r,Thread_Section
cm,thread_section,element
allsel,all
cmsel,s,te
cmsel,r,Full_Model
cm,Full_Model,element
allsel,all
cmsel,s,te
cmsel,r,Thread_Part
cm,Thread_Part,element
allsel,all
csys,0
!keyopt,45,5,2
!keyopt,45,9,0
map2dto3d,finish
rmod,21,6,-0.1
map2dto3d,solve
finish
56.6.3. Step 3: Solve the 3-D Model with Bending Load

The analysis continues on the 3-D model (via a multiframe restart) with the applied bending load.
This is done using a command snippet, as 2D to 3D extrude is not supported in Mechanical.

3.1 Restart the ANTYPE,,RESTART,5,5 Performs a multiframe restart at the
analysis. last converged substep after
MAP2DTO3D,SOLVE. (In this case, it is
the fifth substep of the fifth load step.)
3.2 Apply the D,Pilotnode,ROTZ,-0.00698 Applies the bending load on the pilot
bending node of the rigid-to-flexible contact
load. pair on the top face of the 3-D model.
A bending load of 0.4 degrees is
applied on the pilot node.
3.3 Solve and SOLVE Solves the 3-D analysis and enables
review results viewing via standard output
results. commands (PLNSOL and *GET) in
POST1.

The following figures show the equivalent stress and total mechanical equivalent strain plots following
the 2-D axisymmetric analysis.
Figure 56.10: Equivalent Stress After 2-D Axisymmetric Analysis
Figure 56.11: Total Mechanical Equivalent Strain After 2-D Axisymmetric Analysis
The following figures show the equivalent stress and total equivalent strain plots on the extruded 3-D
model after mapping (MAP2DTO3D,SOLVE):
Figure 56.12: Equivalent Stress After MAP2DTO3D
Figure 56.13: Total Mechanical Equivalent Strain After MAP2DTO3D
As expected, the results closely match those of the corresponding 2-D model. Results may differ, however,
if contact settings are not equivalent in the 2-D and extruded 3-D models. In such cases, experiment
with the contact settings to obtain matching results. This includes tightening the penetration tolerances
for the contact pairs or changing the contact formulation and the detection method used.
The following figures show the equivalent stress and total mechanical equivalent strain plots on the 3-
D model after solving for the bending load via the multiframe restart analysis.
Figure 56.14: Equivalent Stress After Restart Analysis with Bending Load
Figure 56.15: Total Mechanical Equivalent Strain After Restart Analysis with Bending Load
The following figure shows the bending stress plot on threads after solving the 3-D model with bending
load.
Figure 56.16: Bending Stress on the Threads After 3-D Analysis
This figure shows the contact pressure plot on the threaded region for the 3-D model after mapping
(MAP2DTO3D,SOLVE):
Recommendations
Figure 56.17: Contact Pressure at the Threaded Connection After MAP2DTO3D
As expected, the contact pressure is uniform in the circumferential direction.
The contact pressure plot on the threaded region at the end of the analysis is shown below.
Figure 56.18: Contact Pressure at the Threaded Connection
Due to bending, the threaded connection bears most of the load on one side.
To perform a similar analysis, consider the following hints and recommendations:
• Have at least eight elements in the hoop direction per 90-degree quadrant (that is, at least 32 elements
in an unbiased mesh for the 360-degree model) to reproduce the contact results correctly during 2-
D to 3-D mapping (MAP2DTO3D).
• If contact-related convergence issues occur during 2-D to 3-D mapping, try modifying a few contact
parameters (such as penetration tolerance, pinball radius, FKN, FKT, and so on). Any such contact
parameter changes must occur before mapping nodal and element solutions from the 2-D model to
the 3-D model and rebalancing the results (MAP2DTO3D,SOLVE).
• To apply the bending load on the 3-D model, create a rigid-to-flexible redundant contact pair with
an assigned pilot node in the 2-D model. The program uses the pilot node to apply the bending load.
• Verify that the 3-D model results closely resemble those of the 2-D model. (Small differences are ex-
pected, especially for contact results.)

Chapter 58: Suction Pile Analysis
This example problem simulates the interaction between a soil environment and a steel suction-pile
structure. The nonlinear plastic behavior of soil is modeled using a Mohr-Coulomb material. The problem
examines the influence of imperfections on the structural response. This example problem is solved
Suction Pile Analysis in the Technology Showcase: Example Problems.
• General solid element technology
• Mohr-Coulomb, one of several material models used in geomechanics
• Initial stress states
• Buckling analysis (for generating structural imperfections)
• Nonlinear static analysis
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Static Analysis and Eigenvalue Analysis
Element Type(s) Solid and Shell Elements

58.1. Introduction
58.3. Modeling
58.5.Three Sequential Analyses
58.7. Bibliography
58.1. Introduction
A suction pile (also called suction caisson or suction anchor) is a steel tube connected to a pile top or
cap. The cap consists of:
Suction Pile Analysis
• Valves for controlling pressure (negative pressure to embed the pile or positive pressure to remove
it)
• Various connections depending on the intended use of the pile
During operation, the suction pile interacts with the surrounding soil.
Engineering structures using suction piles typically operate in environments where soil-structure inter-
action must be considered to realistically describe the structural behavior. Using a nominal geometry,
especially in the case of thin tube walls, can lead to overestimating the structural load-bearing capacity.
Imperfections either in the geometry or loading conditions must be considered for accurate computation
of limit loads. An efficient method for introducing geometric imperfections involves performing a
prestressed buckling analysis and generating updated geometry using the results. The adjusted geometry
can then be used in a subsequent nonlinear static analysis to obtain a more realistic simulation of the
structural behavior.

Figure 58.1: Problem Geometry (p. 621) shows the geometry of the example problem with the suction
pile skirt and cap and the inner and outer soil region. The suction pile is surrounded and partially filled
with a sand-like soil with a low level of cohesion. Loading conditions include active and passive radial
earth pressure on the outer and inner suction-pile surfaces.
A nonlinear static analysis with nominal geometry is performed using a specific loading history. Initially,
the in-situ stress state is applied, accounting for the weight of the surrounding soil, which changes as
a function of soil depth, and Poisson's ratio. The suction pile is further loaded with negative pressure,
interface forces caused by the suction pile interacting with the driving structure, and additional friction
forces between the pile skirt and the soil.
The resulting stress state is used as input for a linear buckling analysis to obtain the buckling modes
related corresponding to the load state. Geometric imperfections are created from the deformation
shape of the first buckling mode and a specified scaling factor.
After updating the geometry to account for imperfections, a subsequent nonlinear static analysis is
performed. Compared to the results of the earlier static analysis with nominal geometry, the stress-state
and deformation results are markedly different.
Modeling
Figure 58.1: Problem Geometry
58.3. Modeling
The suction-pile model uses SHELL281 quadratic shell elements. The inner and outer soil models use
SOLID186 quadratic solid elements.
Nonlinear frictional contact regions are defined between the outer soil and suction-pile skirt, and
between the inner soil and suction-pile skirt, via CONTA174 / TARGE170 contact pairs.
The constant shell thickness of the suction-pile skirt is defined as ts = 20 mm, and the effective shell
thickness of the suction-pile top as tT = 180 mm.

The soil material is modeled using an ideally plastic Mohr-Coulomb material with weak dilatancy effects.

Young's Modulus (MPa) 30
Density (Kgm-3) 1000
Friction angle (°) 40
Cohesion (kPa) 0.5
Angle of dilatancy (°) 10°
Residual friction angle (°) 40
Residual cohesion (kPa) 0.5
The structural steel material is modeled using an elastic-plastic bilinear kinematic hardening model.
Material Properties for Structural Steel

Young's Modulus (GPa) 210
Poisson's Ratio 0.3
Density (Kgm-3) 6850
Bilinear Kinematic Hardening
Yield Strength (MPa) 300
Tangent Modulus (MPa) 500
58.5. Three Sequential Analyses

The suction-pile simulation involves three sequential analyses shown in the flow diagram below. For
more details and the Workbench Project Schematic, see Figure 58.20: Workbench Project Schematic
(p. 638).
Figure 58.2: Flow Diagram of Three Sequential Analyses
The example problem is organized to discuss each of the three analyses in the suction-pile simulation.
The boundary conditions, loading, and results are described in the following sections for each analysis:
58.5.1. Analysis I. Nonlinear Static Analysis with Nominal Geometry
58.5.2. Analysis II. Linear Buckling Analysis with Nominal Geometry
58.5.3. Analysis III. Nonlinear Static Analysis with Modified Geometry
Three Sequential Analyses
58.5.1. Analysis I. Nonlinear Static Analysis with Nominal Geometry

A nonlinear static analysis with nominal geometry is performed. The analysis accounts for a specific
loading history to obtain a loading and stress state suitable for use in the subsequent buckling ana-
lysis. The following topics are discussed:
58.5.1.1. Boundary Conditions
58.5.1.2. Loading

The following figure shows the displacement boundary conditions imposed for the nonlinear static
analysis with nominal geometry. The bottom nodes of the soil and suction-pile skirt are fixed in
the vertical (global Z) direction. Displacement in the perpendicular direction (global X and Y normal
to the faces) is restricted on all four sides of the underground model. Displacement in the horizontal
direction is also restricted on top outer ring of the suction pile.
Figure 58.3: Boundary Conditions - Nonlinear Static Analysis with Nominal Geometry
58.5.1.2. Loading
Loading occurs over four steps:
Load step (LS) Time Description

Gravitational acceleration on the soil + initial stress
1 1
state (p. 624)
LS1 + additional gravitational acceleration on the suction
2 2
pile (p. 627)
3 3 LS2 + additional interaction forces (upper structure) (p. 627)
LS3 + suction pressure + supplementary friction
4 4
forces (p. 629)
58.5.1.2.1. Load Step 1: Gravitational Acceleration on the Soil + Initial Stress State
An initial in-situ earth pressure is generated by applying a gravitational acceleration of

to the soil in the vertical direction. A command Snippet is used to apply gravitational acceleration
to the individual bodies, where ELEM_SOIL is a previously defined Named Selection that includes
all geometry parts that make up the soil in the model.
CMACEL,ELEM_SOIL,,,9.81
The in-situ stress-state calculation leads to undesirable vertical deformations. To mitigate the
problem, an initial stress state is applied, resulting in a nearly deformation-free initial state for
the gravitational load step.
Typically, soil exists in an already-consolidated state. Initial displacements due to at-rest loads
are therefore unnatural and should be minimized. The vertical stress state varies linearly based
on the soil depth. is determined via the soil density the gravitational acceleration , and
the vertical height of each element:
The coefficient of lateral earth pressure is defined as the ratio of horizontal- to vertical-stress
components. For a horizontally-retained, non-overconsolidated soil under elastic loading conditions,
the coefficient is defined via Poisson’s ratio :
The horizontal stress components are then determined by:
The known stress state is applied as the initial state (INISTATE). The following command snippet
is used to define initial state in the first load step.
!---------------------------------------
! Inistate soil
CMSEL,S,elem_outer1_soil
CMSEL,A,elem_outer2_soil
CM,elem_outer_soil,ELEM
accelz=-9.81
*dim,zone,char,1,2
zone(1,1)='outer'
zone(1,2)='inner'
!Loop outer/inner zone

*do,kk,1,2
varzone=zone(1,kk)
CSYS,0
CMSEL,S,elem_%varzone%_soil
NSLE,S,CORNER
NSEL,R,LOC,Y,0
*GET,mnloc_x,NODE,0,MNLOC,X
NSEL,R,LOC,X,mnloc_x
*GET,layer_nodes,NODE,0,COUNT
layers=layer_nodes-1
*DIM,layer_%varzone%_soil,ARRAY,layers,9
!column1: item number
!column2: upper z-coordinate
!column3: lower z-coordinate
!column4: item thickness
!column5: item density
!column6: item poisson's ratio
!column7: INISTATE Cxx & Cyy
!column8: INISTATE Czz
*GET,min_elem_num,ELEM,0,NUM,MIN
*GET,min_mat_num,ELEM,min_elem_num,ATTR,MAT
*DO,ii,1,layers
layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,1)=ii
upper_node=NODE(mnloc_x,0,0)
layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,2)=NZ(upper_node)
NSEL,U,,,upper_node
lower_node=NODE(mnloc_x,0,0)
layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,3)=NZ(lower_node)
layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,4)=layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,2)-layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,3)
layer_cent=0.5*layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,4)
elem_cent_depth=layer_cent-layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,2)
*GET,layer_dens,DENS,min_mat_num,TEMP,elem_cent_depth
*GET,layer_pois,NUXY,min_mat_num,TEMP,elem_cent_depth
*if,layer_dens,eq,0,then
*GET,layer_lat_pres,KXX,min_mat_num,TEMP,elem_cent_depth
layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,9)=layer_lat_pres
*else
layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,9)=0
*endif
layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,5)=layer_dens
layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,6)=layer_pois
*ENDDO
INISTATE,SET,DTYP,STRE
*IF,kk,LT,3,THEN
upper_load=0
*ENDIF
*DO,ii,1,layers
CMSEL,S,elem_%varzone%_soil
NSLE
NSEL,R,LOC,Z,layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,3),layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,2)
ESLN,R,1
layer_weight=layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,4)*layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,5)*accelz
depth_weight=layer_weight/2+upper_load
*if,layer_weight,eq,0,then
lat_earth_pres=layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,9)
layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,7)=-lat_earth_pres
layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,8)=depth_weight
*else
k0=layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,6)/(1-layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,6))
layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,7)=k0*depth_weight
layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,8)=depth_weight
*endif
! INISTATE command Cxx, Cyy, Czz, Cxy, Cyz, Cxz

INISTATE,DEFINE,,,,,layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,7),layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,7),layer_%varzone%_soil(ii,8)
upper_load=layer_weight+upper_load
*ENDDO
*STATUS,layer_%varzone%_soil
*ENDDO
ALLSEL,ALL
INISTATE,WRITE,1,,,0,S
CMACEL,elem_soil,,,9.81
allsel,all
The following figure shows the resulting vertical-pressure distribution.
Figure 58.4: Vertical Stress Distribution in the Soil
The initial at-rest pressure state is correctly applied while the soil structure retains its initial shape.
Marginal displacements (<0.5 mm) are acceptable due to unbalanced soil pressure inside and/or
outside of the soil region and contact penetrations, and the following figure shows that the dis-
placements are well under the marginal value.
Figure 58.5: Total Displacements in the Soil
58.5.1.2.2. Load Step 2: Gravitational Acceleration on the Suction Pile
A gravitational acceleration of is applied to the suction pile using the following command
snippet, where ELEM_BUCKET is a previously defined Named Selection that includes all geometry
parts that make up the suction pile in the model.
CMACEL,ELEM_BUCKET,,,9.81
allsel,all
58.5.1.2.3. Load Step 3: Interaction Forces (Upper Structure) on the Suction-Pile Top
Forces caused by interaction with the upper structure are applied to the suction-pile top.
Forces/Moments are distributed over the top of the pile using Remote Points, as shown in the
following figures.
Figure 58.6: Remote Force on Suction-Pile Top
Figure 58.7: Remote Moment on Suction-Pile Top
58.5.1.2.4. Load Step 4: Suction Pressure and Supplementary Friction Forces

Suction pressure is applied on both the suction-pile skirt and cap. Constant pressure on the suction-
pile skirt is assumed. The following figures show the applied suction pressure.
Figure 58.8: Suction Pressure Applied to Suction-Pile Cap
Figure 58.9: Suction Pressure Applied to Suction-Pile Skirt
Assumed frictional forces are applied on the suction-pile skirt where the skirt interacts with the
soil using a Nodal Force object.
Figure 58.10: Frictional Forces Between Suction-Pile Skirt and Soil

A nonlinear static analysis is performed. The in-situ stress state (load step 1 (p. 624)) is calculated in
a single substep. Load steps 2 through 4 are calculated with automatic time-stepping enabled.

Initial-stress-state results are presented in Loading (p. 623). The following figures show the results
after load step 4 (p. 629).
Figure 58.12: Total Displacements – Entire Model
Figure 58.13: Total Displacements – Soil
Loading on the suction pile leads to plastic strains in the soil as shown in the following figure.
Plastic strains are distributed asymmetrically due to the asymmetrical loading in load step 3 (p. 627)
and load step 4 (p. 629).
Figure 58.14: Equivalent Plastic Strains - Soil (A), Cross Section View (B)
Figure 58.15: Equivalent von Mises Stress – Suction Pile
Strain on the suction pile causes plastic strains at the neck of the suction-pile cap shown in the
following figure.
Figure 58.16: Equivalent Plastic Strain – Suction Pile
58.5.2. Analysis II. Linear Buckling Analysis with Nominal Geometry

Following the nonlinear static analysis with nominal geometry (p. 623), a linear buckling analysis with
nominal geometry is performed to obtain potential stability modes related to the static loads. The
results are used as the basis for defining imperfections.
58.5.2.2. Loading

Boundary conditions (p. 623) from the prior static analysis are used.
58.5.2.2. Loading
A final load state from load step 4 (p. 629) in the prior static analysis is used as a reference load.

The linear buckling analysis is performed with the analysis settings shown below. Ten eigenmodes
are calculated and expanded.
Figure 58.17: Analysis Settings for Buckling Analysis

Ten eigenmodes were calculated during the buckling analysis. The resulting load factors range from
0.63756 to 1.1536. The following figures show the total deformation in the entire model and the
soil calculated for the first buckling mode. The first buckling mode with a scaling factor of 0.135 is
used to generate the structure imperfections for the modified geometry in the second static
structural analysis (p. 637).
Figure 58.18: Total Deformation, First Buckling Mode
Figure 58.19: Total Deformation in the Soil, First Buckling Mode
58.5.3. Analysis III. Nonlinear Static Analysis with Modified Geometry

A second nonlinear static analysis is performed using the updated geometry from the buckling ana-
lysis. To observe the influence of the added structural imperfections, the analysis uses the same
loading (p. 623) from the first static analysis (p. 632).
58.5.3.2. Loading

Boundary conditions (p. 623) from the first static analysis are used.
58.5.3.2. Loading
Loading for the second nonlinear static analysis is identical to the loading of the first static analys-
is (p. 623). At the beginning of the analysis, however, the geometry is updated to account for imper-
fections based on the results of the buckling analysis (p. 635). The Project Schematic below shows
the three analyses, their links, and the settings on the solution cell of the eigenvalue buckling
analysis system to update the geometry for the second static structural analysis with a 0.135 scaling
factor.
Figure 58.20: Workbench Project Schematic

A nonlinear static analysis is performed, similar to the first (p. 632), but with the updated geometry.

The following figures show the results after load step 4 (p. 629).
Figure 58.21: Total Deformation, Second Static Analysis on Modified Geometry
Figure 58.22: Deformation in the Soil, Second Static Analysis on Modified Geometry
Figure 58.23: Equivalent Plastic Strains - Soil (A), Cross Section View (B), Second Static Analysis
on Modified Geometry
Compared to the static analysis results using nominal geometry (p. 633), the analysis using the up-
dated geometry with imperfections shows larger displacements and deformations on the suction-
pile skirt, resulting in higher plastic strains.
The suction-pile geometry without imperfections resulted in maximum plastic strains at the neck
on the suction-pile cap. After including the imperfections, the same loading results in the critical
region having moved from the suction-pile neck to the skirt.
Accounting for potential structural imperfections leads to qualitatively and quantitatively different
results.
When performing your own suction-pile analysis, consider the following:
• For 3-D soil analysis, use the SOLID186 quadratic brick element and the SHELL281 quadratic shell
element.
• To ensure stress state and outside loading conformity, apply an initial state (INISTATE) in a single
substep.
• For the linear buckling analysis (p. 635), select a convenient mode shape and combine it with an ap-
propriate scaling factor.
58.7. Bibliography
Eurocode 7: Geotechnical Design - Part 1: General Rules, 2014. DIN EN 1997-1:2014-3 (E).
Lazebnik, G. E. & Tsinker, G. P. (1998). Lateral earth pressure at rest. 165-183. Monitoring of Soil-Structure
Interaction: Instruments for Measuring Soil Pressures. New York: Springer.

Chapter 59: Thermal-Structural Analysis of a Printed
Circuit Board
This example problem shows how to use mesh-independent reinforcements to perform a thermal-
structural analysis of a printed circuit board (PCB).
Ansys Mechanical APDL see Thermal-Structural Analysis of a Printed Circuit Board in the Technology
• Modeling using discrete and smeared reinforcing elements.
• Thermal analysis followed by a downstream structural analysis.
Overview
Analysis Type(s) Steady-State Thermal and Static Structural analysis using Imported Body
Temperature
Element Type(s) 3-D Thermal Solid, 3-D Structural Solid, Line Reinforcement, and Shell
Reinforcement

59.1. Introduction
59.3. Geometry
59.8. Results
Thermal-Structural Analysis of a Printed Circuit Board
59.1. Introduction
Printed circuit boards (PCBs) are ubiquitous in electronic devices and other relevant applications. Gen-
erally, PCBs are made of multiple layers of laminates bonded with multiple layers of resin. The layers
are embedded with conductive metallic components and metal vias passing vertically through the layers.
In finite element analysis, modeling the bodies and traces in PCBs as elements is usually done using
solid, shell, and beam elements with coupling or contacts. That method, however, is often arduous and
time-consuming due to the sheer number of embedded bodies involved in each resin layer of the PCB.
Mesh-independent reinforcing element technology offers a better alternative for modeling and meshing
PCBs by using MESH200 elements to define the topology of the embedded regions and seamlessly
creating embedded reinforcing elements. No complex contact modeling, coupling, or difficult meshing
techniques are involved.

The following figure shows the geometry and layer details of a PCB with magnified details at the two
corners circled in red:
Geometry
Figure 59.1: PCB with Close-up Views
The analysis occurs in two parts:
Step 1. Solve the thermal analysis due to thermal boundary conditions.

Step 2. Solve the downstream structural analysis due to thermal loads.
Heat generation on some embedded metal traces due to operational loading can cause temperature
gradients across the PCB. The gradients can result in PCB deformation during operation and induce
thermal stresses and strains.
59.3. Geometry
The following figure shows the schematic in Workbench.
The PCB geometry is created in SpaceClaim. The meshed geometry and material assignments for each
part/body are saved to a .mechdat file. Importing this file into Workbench creates a Mechanical
Model system.
A Steady-State Thermal system and a downstream Static Structural system are linked to share the
Engineering Data, Geometry, and Model cell data of the Mechanical Model system. The solution cell
of the Steady-State Thermal system is linked to the setup cell of the Static Structural system so that
the results of the thermal analysis are used to calculate the thermal stresses and strains.
The following figure shows the geometry displayed in the Mechanical Application.
Figure 59.3: Geometry -Top View and Zoomed-In Side View

Rectangular blocks representing resin and laminate layers are modeled as thermal solids (SOLID278
elements) in the steady-state thermal analysis and structural solids (SOLID185 elements) in the static
structural analysis.
The reinforcement line and shell bodies are modeled as discrete (REINF264 elements) and smeared
(REINF265 elements) reinforcements, respectively, using the Reinforcement Model Type.
Figure 59.4: Line and Shell Bodies Modeled as Reinforcement
Bonded contact at the interfaces of the laminate and resin bodies is modeled by six bonded contact
pairs. The contact regions were previously created and exist in the imported .mechdat file.
Mesh sizing controls are applied on the rectangular bodies (layers) to create solid elements, and on line
and shell bodies to create reinforcement elements.
Figure 59.5: Mesh Details

The layers (laminate and resin) and reinforcements have the following thermal and structural material
properties at 22°C. (These properties are defined in the Mechanical Model system).
Reinforcement (Copper) Material Properties

Density (kg/mm3) 8.9e-6
-1
Coefficient of Thermal Expansion (C ) 1.76e-5
Modulus of Elasticity (MPa) 1.2e5
Poisson’s Ratio 0.36
-1 -1
Isotropic Thermal Conductivity (W mm C ) 0.4
Laminate Material Properties

-1
Coefficient of Thermal Expansion, X-Direction (C ) 1.5e-5
-1
Coefficient of Thermal Expansion, Y-Direction (C ) 1.5e-5
-1
Coefficient of Thermal Expansion, Z-Direction (C ) 6e-5
Young’s Modulus, X-Direction 25000
Young’s Modulus, Y-Direction 25000
Young’s Modulus, Z-Direction 8000
Poisson’s Ratio (XY) 0.18
Poisson’s Ratio (YZ) 0.3
Poisson’s Ratio (XZ) 0.3
Shear Modulus (XY) 6000
Shear Modulus (YZ) 3500
Shear Modulus (YZ) 3500
-1 -1
Isotropic Thermal Conductivity (W mm C ) 0.0002
Resin Material Properties

-1
Coefficient of Thermal Expansion (C ) 6e-5
Modulus of Elasticity (MPa) 3500
Poisson’s Ratio 0.4
-1 -1
Isotropic Thermal Conductivity (W mm C ) 1e-5

The boundary conditions and loading are described for each analysis:
59.6.1. Steady-State Thermal Analysis
59.6.2. Static Structural Analysis
59.6.1. Steady-State Thermal Analysis

Internal heat generation loads are inserted and scoped to reinforced bodies representing the embedded
copper traces and vias. Convection boundary conditions are applied on the top and bottom faces of
the PCB. The applied loads and boundary conditions make use of previously defined Named Selections,
as shown in the figure:
Figure 59.6: Details for Applying Thermal Load and Boundary Conditions
59.6.2. Static Structural Analysis

To constrain the ends of the PCB, displacement boundary conditions are scoped to the geometry
using the Bottom_Faces and Top_Faces named selections. All displacement degrees of freedom are
constrained.
Figure 59.7: Structural Analysis Boundary Conditions
By default, Imported Body Temperature is scoped to all bodies. However, Imported Body Temperature
does not support reinforced bodies and is therefore initially in an undefined state. The scoping is
manually changed to use the Solid_Bodies named selection so that imported temperatures are applied
only to solid bodies.
In the solved static structural analysis, the imported load should show the same distribution as seen
in the temperature result of the steady-state thermal analysis.

The analysis settings are described for each analysis:
59.7.1. Steady-State Thermal Analysis Settings
59.7.2. Static Structural Analysis Settings
59.7.1. Steady-State Thermal Analysis Settings

The thermal analysis is solved using the Analysis Settings shown below. Settings of interest are
highlighted.
Temperature results are inserted and scoped to All Bodies (default), Line_Bodies (a named selection),
and Shell_Bodies (a named selection).
59.7.2. Static Structural Analysis Settings

The structural analysis is solved using the Analysis Settings shown below. Settings of interest are
highlighted.
Total Deformation results are inserted and scoped to All Bodies (default), Line_Bodies (a named selec-
tion), and Shell_Bodies (a named selection). A User Defined Result is inserted with expression
EPTHEQV_RST to obtain equivalent thermal strain.
Results
59.8. Results
The temperature results are of primary interest after the steady-state thermal analysis. The following
figure shows results on a portion of the shell (smeared) reinforcement where the heat generation load
is applied.
Figure 59.8: Temperature Profile in Area Where Heat Generation Load is Applied
The temperature gradients lead to the deformation and stresses in the downstream structural analysis.
The following figure shows deformation results on the same portion of the shell (smeared) reinforcement
where the heat generation load is applied.
Figure 59.9: Deformation in Area Where Heat Generation Load is Applied
The equivalent thermal strain plot (obtained via the User Defined Result) of the PCB viewed from the
positive X-axis side shows that the strains occur at the intended locations and correspond to the loading
conditions from the thermal analysis:
Recommendations
Figure 59.10: Equivalent Thermal Strain
When performing a similar analysis, consider the following hints and recommendations:
• Select sufficiently large sizes for the solid base elements to avoid an over-refined base mesh. If the
base elements are smaller than the cross-section or thickness of the embedded components, the
heat-generation loads may not be adequately distributed, causing over-estimation of thermal results
in the affected regions.


Workbench Technology Showcase Example Problems

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Workbench Technology Showcase Example Problems

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Workbench Technology Showcase: Example

ANSYS, Inc. Release 2022 R1

© 2022 ANSYS, Inc. Unauthorized use, distribution or duplication is prohibited.

U.S. Government Rights

Published in the U.S.A.

6.5. Boundary Conditions and Loading .................................................................................................. 53

12.2. Problem Description ................................................................................................................... 102

15.4. Modeling and Meshing ............................................................................................................... 159

18.4. Material Properties ...................................................................................................................... 203

27.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 291

35.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 405

40.2.1.1. Problem Description .................................................................................................. 451

43.9. Workbench Input Files and Project Files ....................................................................................... 503

51.3. Modeling and Meshing ............................................................................................................... 565

7.1. Full 3-D Geometry of a Camshaft Assembly ........................................................................................... 62

16.10. Loads and Boundary Conditions ...................................................................................................... 178

24.27. Fluid Density Variation ..................................................................................................................... 264

27.24. : Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress Plot .................................................................................................. 310

31.3. Stable Hysteresis Strain-Controlled Data ............................................................................................ 368

37.2. Additional Settings for Bolt Thread Correction ................................................................................... 425

58.1. Problem Geometry ............................................................................................................................ 621

How Problems Are Presented

Your Results May Vary Slightly

Use of Ansys Mechanical Assumed

Obtaining the Input Files

td-1 Brake-Squeal Analysis (p. 1) Solves a brake squeal problem. Three

td-4 Ring-Gear Forging Demonstrates the efficiency and usefulness

td-5 Delamination of a Stiffened Uses solid-shell element technology to

td-8 Nuclear Piping System Demonstrates the advantages of elbow

td-12 Dynamic Simulation of a Accounts for the missing-mass effect and

td-14 Rotordynamics of a Shaft A rotordynamic analysis of a rotating

Download Representative Model of extracted from a 3-D solid model of the

td-15 Calibrating and Validating a Uses hyperelastic curve-fitting to select

td-16 Evaluation of Mixed-Mode Demonstrates the linear elastic fracture

td-17 Impact of a Metal Bar on a An impact simulation using a model of a

td-26 Nonlinear Analysis of a A nonlinear analysis of a rubber boot seal

td-27 Hot-Rolling Structural Steel A 3-D large-deformation problem

td-29 Rocket Nozzle Extension Simulates the thermal stresses induced

td-31 Fitting Parameters for a Determines material parameters for a

td-33 Analysis of a Piezoelectric Couples structural, piezoelectric, and

td-37 Bolt Thread A comparison of three modeling techniques

td-39 Wire Bonding Ultrasonic Simulates electrical excitation of an

td-41 Acoustic Analysis of a Uses acoustic elements and viscothermal

td-43 Contact Surface Wear Demonstrates how to model contact surface

td-44 C*-integral Evaluation for Evaluates the C*-integral for cracks in

td-47 Electromigration in a Solder A transient electromigration analysis of a

td-55 Inverse-Solving Analysis of A simulation of a rotor fan blade with disk

td-56 Threaded Connection A threaded-pipe connection analysis

td-59 Thermal-Structural Analysis Uses mesh-independent reinforcements in

The following topics are available:

Two common theories describe brake-squeal phenomena:

Brake noise is generally categorized as follows:

1.2. Problem Description and Geometry

Figure 1.1: Brake Disc-Pad Assembly

1.3. Modeling and Meshing

1.3.1. Understanding the Advantages of Contact Element Technology

1.3.2. Modeling Contact Pairs

Figure 1.2: Contact Target Pairs for Bonded Contact

Figure 1.3: Contact Target Pairs for Frictional Contact

1.3.3. Generating Internal Sliding Motion

1.3.4. Meshing the Brake Disc-Pad Model

Figure 1.7: Final Mesh for the Disc Brake Assembly

1.4. Material Properties

1.5. Boundary Conditions and Loading

td-44 C-integral Evaluation for Evaluates the C-integral for cracks in