I have a confusing question.
When I try to calculate bending moment stress thru "Beam and column calcultor it shows an error that is Wk and Jk is missing. Ok that is fine. If we put values for both we will get the answer. Because I have come to know thru inv discussion that many material in the CC do not have these values.
Now my question is when we insert a part for example from content centre (CC) and do FEA analysis on this part. It shows some values like deflection, stress etc etc. How is that possible? one side it is not doing in the beam calculatio but other side in FEA it is doing that.
It means we are not going to rely upon these results in the FEA. It is the same CC, same inventor, how should be trust the result in FEA.
Anyone Please advise.
When you say "FEA analysis" are you by chance referring to Frame Analysis? (and not stress analysis)
I believe the Beam and column calculators (in Design Accelerator) and Frame Analysis both use beam equations to find the displacements, stresses, etc.
Inventor's Stress Analysis doesn't use the classic theoretical beam equations, even for content center parts. SA uses the FEM, which takes into account only material properties such as Young's Modulus, Poisson's ratio, etc. As such, we don't need profile section property information like torsonal section modulus or the polar moment of inertia.
Structural shapes that originate from the default CC library include all necessary section properties and these can be recognized by Design Accelerator and Frame Analysis. However, for custom structural shapes these may be considered missing, or not used in Frame Analysis.
To get around the possibility of missing section properties during authoring, Frame Analysis uses Beam Properties values that are calculated from the profile sketch's region properties "on the fly". Torsional Section modulus (Wz) is the calculated value that may be missing only for the non-circular hollow profile class of structural shapes. I believe this equation is not redily available through the Robot Strutural Analysis tools that FA uses, or by Inventor's region properties calculator.
If say Wz (beam's torsonal section modulus) is missing, this just means that Frame Analysis won't calculate the torsional stress, but other results that do not rely on this property are still valid (e.g. bending stress). If there is no torsional load on the member, it is fine to ignore. If a torsional stress is likely, we can manually add (or override) this property in the Beam Properties dialog by choosing the Customize checkbox.
In summary, since FEA (Stress Analysis) doesn't use section properties, I think you can trust the FEA (Stress Analysis) results for beams and structural shapes since it uses the FEM and not classic beam equations that rely on section properites. You can trust Frame Analysis results since it uses profile properties calculated "on the fly" and will not show a result it cannot calculate due to a missing property.
Hope this helps.
Best regards, -Hugh
[Edit" added 'material']
I asked this question because when I do stress analysis on a channel taken from CC. all the time the result is varying. I have done " converagence etc but there comes a big difference whenever i run or re-run the stress analysis command.
whenevr I apply fix constrain on the holes ( two holes on each side) and apply a total load 9000N) uniform load).
and run the stress analysis. everytime i run it it comes out with different value.
Please find the attached copy of the part and do this on ur system. Please let em know if u r facing or not the same problem
I do not see a simulation in the part you attached?
No Stress analysis done in this one.
it is just an example.
The same channel I was testing last week at home and facing problems.
I ma in the office now.
What Safety Factor are you getting on these tests?
small relative displacement?
As JD mentioned, can you show the setup and results are you getting from Design Accelerator? If the setups are not close enough, we will get different results (of course).
By fixing the holes in space it doesn't take into account the compliance of the rest of the structure. The beam will kind of stretch in addition to bending.
The fixed constraints will create a stress riser around the holes, much like fixing the end of a cantilevered beam. If you are using h-refinement / convergence the stress result won't converge...is this what you're seeing by "...every time i run it it comes out with different value."?
Attached are the results I generate using R2011_SP2.
Best regards, -Hugh
Are you still here?
I thought you might want to take this discussion further - setting up a more realistic test.
I can also check with Autodesk Simulation (Algor), Creo and SolidWorks.
Sorry I cudn't get bacj to you all. I was away from the office for few days. I am trying to do some more test and will get back to you on that FEA as soon as can.
Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register