ANSYS Mechanical-APDL Harmonic Analysis Example …engr.bd.psu.edu/ansysug/ANSYS M-APDL...
Embed Size (px)
Transcript of ANSYS Mechanical-APDL Harmonic Analysis Example …engr.bd.psu.edu/ansysug/ANSYS M-APDL...
-
ANSYS Mechanical-APDL Harmonic Analysis Example and Comparison
to ANSYS Mechanical results
Dave JohnsonPenn State Erie
9/11/2017 1
-
Disk modal and harmonic analyses Steel disk - 75 mm radius and 3mm radius
center hole, and 0.34 mm thickness
9/11/2017
1421 SHELL 181 elements Modulus = 200,000 Mpa Poissons Ratio = 0.3 Density = 7.85E-9 tonnes/mm3
TOTAL MASS: 0.471E-04 (tonne)
Support: simply-supported, (no translation: UX = UY = UZ = 0) at the edge of the hole
2
-
Hand calc for verification and validation of modal analysis results
Reference: Marks Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers, 8th ed., p. 5-75
For a flat circular plate constrained at the center, the umbrella mode (zero nodal diameters) is predicted by:
9/11/2017
Where: E = elastic modulus (N/mm2) r = plate radius (mm) g = gravity acceleration (mm/s2) = Poissons ratio t = plate thickness (mm)
3
-
Hand calc for verification and validation of modal analysis results
*** FREQUENCIES FROM BLOCK LANCZOS ITERATION ***
MODE FREQUENCY (HERTZ)FREQUENCY RANGE REQUESTED= 0.00 500.001 31.028364525952 31.156689302753 53.417788778604 79.034945984505 79.04406402341
9/11/2017
~3.2% differenceHand calc vs. FEA
4
-
Modal Analysis Results*** FREQUENCIES FROM BLOCK LANCZOS ITERATION ***
MODE FREQUENCY (HERTZ)
FREQUENCY RANGE REQUESTED= 0.00000 500.000
1 31.02836452595
2 31.15668930275
3 53.41778877860
4 79.03494598450
5 79.04406402341
6 183.3880216411
7 183.4157944991
8 298.3216528279
9 322.7271830757
10 322.8378280898
11 336.4477549042
12 336.9226420643
13 496.8088338095
14 497.05947940599/11/2017
In the frequency range of interest, we observe 14 modes: 31 < fn < 497 Hz
5
-
Harmonic Analysis Setup Method: Mode Superposition Load (1 N) on keypoint in z-direction at edge (at
3 oclock position) use all (14) modes from 0 to 500 Hz,
solve 100 substeps 0.03 damping ratio
(minimal, structural value) perform an expansion
pass after the harmonic analysis solution
9/11/2017 6
-
Harmonic Analysis ResultsZ-deformation at
node where the harmonic load is applied Linear vs. Log ?
9/11/2017 7
Note: the Mode Superposition Solutionused 14 modes (in range 0 500 Hz), and
max. amplitude (27.59 mm) occurred @ 30 Hz
-
Harmonic Analysis Results - 2Use modes from twice the range of interest,
i.e., 0 1000 Hz (26 modes were found)
9/11/2017 8
Note: the Mode Superposition Solutionused 26 modes (in range 0 500 Hz), and
max. amplitude (27.62 mm) occured @ 30 Hz
-
Harmonic Analysis Results - 3Used the FULL Method, not Mode Superposition
9/11/2017 9
Note: the FULL Method Solution, maximumamplitude (33.07 mm) occurred @ 30 Hz
-
ANSYS Mechanical ComparisonModal linked to Harmonic (B-C) vs. Harmonic (D & E)
9/11/2017
Structural Steel properties from WB library
Same geometry, constraint, and loading
Similar mesh: 1433/1422 SHELL181 elements
TOTAL MASS = 0.47072E-04 (tonne)
[same as ANSYS Mechanical APDL model]
10
-
ANSYS Mechanical Comparison
9/11/2017
Modal linked to Harmonic (B-C) vs. Harmonic (D & E)
11
(Split to make vertex for loading)
-
ANSYS Mechanical ComparisonModal linked to Harmonic (Schematic Objects B-C)
9/11/2017 12
Compared to ANSYS Mechanical APDL Results:*** FREQUENCIES FROM BLOCK LANCZOS ITERATION ***
MODE FREQUENCY (HERTZ)
FREQUENCY RANGE REQUESTED= 0.00 500.0
1 31.02836452595
2 31.15668930275
3 53.41778877860
4 79.03494598450
5 79.04406402341
6 183.3880216411
7 183.4157944991
8 298.3216528279
9 322.7271830757
10 322.8378280898
11 336.4477549042
12 336.9226420643
13 496.8088338095
14 497.0594794059
-
ANSYS Mechanical ComparisonModal linked to Harmonic (Schematic Objects B-C)
9/11/2017 13
Note: (default) uses log scale for Amplitude,Solution used 14 modes (in range 0 500 Hz),and max. amplitude (18 mm) occurs @ 30 Hz
-
ANSYS Mechanical ComparisonHarmonic without Modal (Schematic Object D)
9/11/2017 14
Note: (default) uses log scale for Amplitude,Solution used 26 modes (in range 0 1000 Hz),and max. amplitude (26 mm) occurs @ 35 Hz
-
ANSYS Mechanical ComparisonHarmonic without Modal (Schematic Object E)
using FULL Method
9/11/2017 15
NOTE: different damping input under Analysis Settings ( = 11 and = 2e-5) see next slide, and max. amplitude (18.2 mm) occurs @ 30 Hz
-
Full Harmonic, Damping Input
For this example:
9/11/2017 16
From ANSYS Help > Mechanical APDL >Structural Analysis Guide > 1.2.1 Alpha & Beta Damping (Rayleigh Damping)
-
Comparing Results
9/11/2017 17
-
Comparing Results
9/11/2017 18
-
Comparing ResultsMaximum Response occurs at 30 or 35 Hz and
the Next Highest Response occurs at 80 Hz
9/11/2017 19
-
Conclusions/Observations Mechanical (WB) default method for Harmonic
Analysis is Mode Superposition. The ANSYS default method is Full
Mechanical (WB), Harmonic Analysis without linked Modal Analysis, uses 2x the user-requested frequency range, i.e., requested 0 500 Hz, and WB used modes from 0 1000 Hz
Mechanical (WB), default Frequency Response plot format uses a log scale for the y-axis (for the Amplitude)
9/11/2017 20
-
Conclusions/ObservationsWhy ? Does the Full Method
show higher max. values, in general ?
Is Mechanical MSUP-26 max. value at 35 Hz ?
Should we care about variations at higher frequencies where the amplitude is much less ?
9/11/2017 21
-
finish
/clear
/PREP7
ET,1,SHELL181 ! use 3D 4-node thin shell element
!*
MPTEMP,,,,,,,,
MPTEMP,1,0
MPDATA,EX,1,,200000 ! modulus in MPa
MPDATA,PRXY,1,,0.3 ! Poisson's ratio
MPTEMP,,,,,,,,
MPTEMP,1,0
MPDATA,DENS,1,,7.85e-9 ! density in tonnes/mm^3
sect,1,shell,,
secdata, 0.34,1,0.0,3 ! shell thickness 0.34 mm
secoffset,MID
seccontrol,,,, , , ,
PCIRC,75,3,0,360, ! 75 mm outer radius, 3 mm radius center hole
SMRT,6 ! Smart size for meshing
ESIZE,5,0, ! Global element size
MSHAPE,0,2D !
MSHKEY,0 ! allow "free" meshing
!*
AMESH,all ! create the mesh
FINISH
/SOLU
ANTYPE,2 ! Modal analysis
MODOPT,LANB,50 ! use (default) Block Lanczos method
EQSLV,SPAR
MXPAND,50, , ,0 ! extract & expand up to 50 modes
LUMPM,0
PSTRES,0
!*
MODOPT,LANB,50,0,500, ,OFFbv ! frequency range 0 - 500 Hz
lsel,s,,,5,8,1
DL,all, ,UX, ! constraints on edge of hole
DL,all, ,UY,
DL,all, ,UZ,
lsel,all
solve
save,disk_modal,db
finish
/POST1
set,list
finish
-
/SOLU
ANTYPE,3 ! Harmonic Analysis
!*
HROPT,MSUP, , ,0 ! Mode Superposition Method
HROUT,ON
LUMPM,0
!*
HROPT,MSUP,14,1,0 ! use (all) 14 modes from modal analysis
HROUT,ON,OFF,0
!*
FK,1,FZ,1, ! Harmonic load amplitude
HARFRQ,0,500, ! Frequency range
NSUBST,100, ! substep thru freq range
KBC,1 ! step change boundary conditions
!*
ALPHAD,0,
BETAD,0,
DMPRAT,0.03, ! 3% damping ratio
DMPSTR,0,
MDAMP,1, , , , , , ,
!*
solve
finish
save,disk_harmonic,db
/SOLU
!*
EXPASS,1 ! Harmonic Analysis Expansion Pass
NUMEXP,ALL,0,500,1 ! Frequency range
HREXP,ALL,
!*
SOLVE
/POST26 ! Time History Postprocessor
*GET,nn,KP,1,ATTR,NODE
NSOL,2,nn,U,Z,
!*
LINES,200
PRCPLX,1 ! print Amplitude/Phase vs. Real/Imaginary results
/AXLAB,Y,UZ Deformation (mm)
/title, disk harmonic analysis - w/linear y-axis (default)
plvar,2
prvar,2
/GROPT,LOGY,ON
/title, disk harmonic analysis - w/log y-axis to match WB
plvar,2
ANSYS M-APDL Harmonic Analysis Example and Comparison to WBANSYS Mechanical-APDL Harmonic Analysis Example and Comparison to ANSYS Mechanical resultsDisk modal and harmonic analysesHand calc for verification and validation of modal analysis resultsHand calc for verification and validation of modal analysis resultsModal Analysis ResultsHarmonic Analysis SetupHarmonic Analysis ResultsHarmonic Analysis Results - 2Harmonic Analysis Results - 3ANSYS Mechanical ComparisonANSYS Mechanical ComparisonANSYS Mechanical ComparisonANSYS Mechanical ComparisonANSYS Mechanical ComparisonANSYS Mechanical ComparisonFull Harmonic, Damping InputComparing ResultsComparing ResultsComparing ResultsMaximum Response occurs at 30 or 35 Hz and the Next Highest Response occurs at 80 HzConclusions/ObservationsConclusions/Observations
Disk_Input