Finite Element Modeling Tips

Prof. Hyonny Kim, UC San Diego

2014.10.28
1
 Key Steps for Conducting
Successful Finite Element Analysis

Define Objectives
Identify Challenges
Learn Modeling Procedures
Start Simple and Build Up Complexity
Convergence and Validation

2
 Define Objectives
critical fist step is to establish clearly-defined objectives
what outputs are desired?
what specific quantities and at what location(s)?
stiffness-based (e.g., deflection, natural freq.) or stress-based?
choice of objectives affects many subsequent decisions
analysis type e.g., static, dynamic, nonlinear
what length scales are of importance
choice of element type
level of mesh refinement
material model selection
other considerations

3
 Identify Challenges

identify what main challenges must be addressed to achieve desired

objectives, for example:
exact geometry of structure and material properties (both not
always readily available)
how to conduct certain analysis procedures e.g., dynamic
impact analysis, or elastic-plastic material behavior, or material
failure with/without nodal separation
define plan on how to address these
start simple and graduate up to more complex e.g., for
postbuckling analysis, start with just a simple beam/column

4
 Learn Modeling Procedures
based on your defined objectives, various procedures in FEA need to be
learned examples could include:
dynamic analysis running as implicit vs. explicit time-dependent solution
contact between two bodies, or self-contact of crumpling thin-wall structure
nonlinear material behavior, failure, fracture, nodal separation
buckling linear eigenvalue analysis vs. non-linear postbuckling analysis
natural frequency analysis (linear eigenvalue problem)
find teaching resources for the FEA software you are using to learn these
procedures softwares website or associated usergroup sites provide
much information
replicate results of existing simple benchmark problems to validate
your analysis and to establish confidence that you can properly execute
these procedures
5
 Start Simple and Build Up Complexity
learn how to use your newly-learned modeling procedures by first
analyzing very simple problems
examples: cantilever beam, flat plate, plate with hole problems for which known
existing solutions are available in textbooks
if you can not successfully model very simple structures, how can you model your
more complex problems?
never start with fully detailed complex model results often too complex to
understand which makes troubleshooting very difficult

apply what you learned in this process to increasingly complex

configurations
example 1: if one wanted to model composite wing first model simple wing-like
cantilever beam geometry with aluminum properties and be comfortable with those
results, and then increase geometry complexity to actual wing geom. (still
aluminum), and finally change material to be laminated composite
example 2: if interested in ballistic impact/penetration of plates first learn explicit
dynamic analysis by modeling simple block-on-block impact problem (to learn
transient dynamic and contact analyses), then model ball impacting plate, then
increase complexity of geometry, and finally add in complex material
response/failure as needed.
6
 Convergence and Validation
convergence
results should only be stated as finalized when mesh is refined such that results are no
longer mesh-dependent
show via mesh convergence study by plotting key quantities of interest vs. element size
(e.g., peak displacement or stress at key location)

validation of model against some other source is essential

comparison with measured test data, or hand-calculation analyses, or even other FEA
results that have been proven to be accurate
for very complex problems often dont have test data or hand-calc models
simpler version of your problem can be modeled in both FEA and with hand-
calculation to validate your modeling procedure same procedures demonstrated
successfully at simple level can be argued to provide similarly accurate and valid
results when next applied to problem with more complex geometry and loading
compare hand-calculation results of simplified model to FE model of complex
structure (not simplified) here you are seeking to show hand-calc model and FEA
match within ~25-50% and you must also add accompanying arguments to resolve
why your FEA is higher/lower than the hand-calc predictions
basic checks on overall force equilibrium at boundaries can be performed