Stress Concentration Factor Convergence Study of a Flat Plate with an Elliptical Hole Under Elastic Loading Conditions

by Dwight Snowberger A Project Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of MASTER of ENGINEERING in MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Approved: _________________________________________ Ernesto Gutierrez-Miravete, Project Adviser

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Hartford, Connecticut December 2008

CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................. 3 LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... 4 ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... 6 1. Introduction.................................................................................................................. 7 2. Objectives .................................................................................................................... 8 3. Methodology................................................................................................................ 9 3.1 Schematics.....9 3.2 Stress Concentration Factor Equations for an Elliptical Hole .10 3.3 Boundary Conditions...11 3.4 Elements..11 3.5 FEA Model..12 4. Results........................................................................................................................ 14 5. Discussion.................................................................................................................. 18 6. Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 21 7. References.................................................................................................................. 22 8. Appendix A................................................................................................................ 23 9. Appendix B................................................................................................................ 26 10. Appendix C................................................................................................................ 32

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Stress Concentration Factors for Various Ellipse radii Table 2a Plane42 Element Type FEA Model Results/Data Table 2b Plane82 Element Type FEA Model Results/Data

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Flat Plate with an Elliptical Hole Figure 2. FEA model Boundary Conditions Figure 3. 4-noded Quad Element, (Reference 2) Figure 4. 8-noded Quad Element, (Reference 2) Figure 5. FEA Model Size Control Labels Figure 6 Magnified view of the stress distribution near the tip of the ellipse. (a/b = 1.25, b = 0.8, Plane 42 element type shown) Figure 7 Ellipse Short Radius, b vs Length of Element at the Right of Ellipse needed to obtain an accuracy of +/- 1% from the calculated stress concentration factor Figure 8 Ellipse Short Radius, b vs. # of Elements to the Right of the Ellipse needed to obtain an accuracy of +/- 1% from the calculated stress concentration factor Figure 9 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.1 Figure 10 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.2 Figure 11 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.3 Figure 12 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.4 Figure 13 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.5 Figure 14 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.6 Figure 15 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.7 Figure 16 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.8 Figure 17 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.9 Figure 18 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 1.0 Figure 19 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.1 Figure 20 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.2 Figure 21 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.3 Figure 22 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.4 Figure 23 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.5 Figure 24 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.6 Figure 25 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.7 Figure 26 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.8 Figure 27 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.9 Figure 28 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 1.0 4

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I would like to thank my wife Amanda, and my son Steven for all of their support and sacrifice throughout my graduate education experience.

ABSTRACT
A flat plate with an elliptical hole made of steel (E=30e6psi) with dimensions of 10x20 inches with an elliptical hole of 1 for its long radius and a short radius that varied in length from 1 to 0.1 in 0.1 increments, was loaded with a 1000psi pressure load in a quartered FEA model created in ANSYS. A comparison was made between the equation for a flat plate with a circular hole and an elliptical hole equation with the ellipse being a circle from Reference 1. The results were found to be the same, with a stress concentration of 2.54 using the elliptical hole equation and 2.50 for the circular hole equation. This showed that just the elliptical hole equation could be used to calculate the stress concentration for all cases including when the ellipse was a circle. Two different finite elements (Plane42 and Plane82 from the ANSYS element library) were used on the model. These elements were used to show that increasing the order of the element is one way to improve an FEA model. This was shown by measuring the length of the element at the tip of the ellipse. The Plane42 (4-noded quad) element had the shorter element length with 0.0095 while the Plane82 (8-noded quad) had a length of 0.0147. Since the Plane82 element had a longer length than the Plane42 on the same model it meant that the Plane82 element was better at determining the stress concentration factor that is within +/- 1% of the stress concentration as calculated from the closed form solution. Finally, it was also possible to produce a more accurate FEA model by increasing the number of elements in a mesh. To show this, the number of elements used to mesh the model were recorded and compared for each ellipse size. The Plane42 model ranged from using 7 elements at the ellipse tip for the case of the ellipse being a circle to needing 46 elements and an element scaling factor of 32 when the ellipse had a short radius of 0.1. The Plane 82 model needed 4 elements with no scaling factor for the circular hole case to using 38 elements with a scaling factor of 23 when the short radius was 0.1. All of the values for the number of elements and element scaling factors were recorded for each model only when the model produced a stress concentration that was within +/- 1% of the stress concentration as calculated from the closed form solution.

1. Introduction
Changes in geometry such as a circular hole or an elliptical hole cause increases in the amount of stress created at these discontinuities. This stress increase is more commonly known as the stress concentration factor. This factor is a ratio between the maximum stress produced at the discontinuity divided by the nominal stress far away from the hole. These factors have been well-studied and documented, with closed form solutions for more common geometries available in such texts as Reference 1. For an elliptical hole in a flat plate, the stress concentration will be different depending on the narrowness of the ellipse.

FEA programs such as ANSYS can be used to approximate the stress concentration factor as calculated using a closed form equation for a given geometry. The accuracy of the model can be increased by two ways. One is by increasing the mesh density around the discontinuity in order to better capture the increase in stress. The other method is to increase the order of the element, such as using an 8-noded quad element vs. a 4-noded quad element.

2. Objectives
The objective of this project will be to study the effect an elliptical hole has on the stress distribution of a flat plate as the sharpness of the ellipse increases from a circle to a narrow crack. It will be shown that as the ellipse sharpness increases, more elements will be needed to accurately capture the stress concentration factor to be within 1% of the calculated value from Reference (1) for the specific geometry of a flat plate that is 10x20 inches and a 2-inch long diameter elliptical hole. Two element types will be compared, which are the 4-noded quad (ANSYS Plane42) and the 8-noded quad (ANSYS Plane82). Finally, the equations for a flat plate with a circular hole and an elliptical hole will be compared for the case when the elliptical hole is a circle in order to show that the results are similar enough that the elliptical equations can be used for the case when the ellipse becomes a circle.

3. Methodology
3.1 Schematics This report will focus on the specific geometry of an elliptical hole in a flat plate in Figure 1.

1000psi

20

b a

1000psi

D = 10
b = short radius a = long radius D = width of the flat plate Figure 1 Flat Plate with an Elliptical Hole.

The plates material will be ordinary steel with a Youngs Modulus of 30e6 psi and the model will use a pressure load of 1000psi (nominal stress of the model). One important point to note, this report is a study of the stress concentration factor under elastic loading conditions. The materials modulus does not have any effect on the outcome of the results, as long as the stress does not exceed the materials yield point (36,000 psi for steel), the maximum stress will always be 1000psi multiplied by the stress concentration factor.

3.2 Stress Concentration Factor Equations for an Elliptical Hole Equation (1) (Reference 1) is the stress concentration factor for an elliptical hole in a flat plate. Equation (1) is only valid if the a/b ratio is between 0.5 and 10. For this project the ratio of a/b varies from 1 to 10.

(1)

where: a = the long radius of ellipse (1) b = the short radius of ellipse (will be varied from 1 to 0.1 in 0.1 increments) D = width of the flat plate (10 inches) K = stress concentration factor for an elliptical hole in a flat plate. The special case of where b = a for a circular hole, the elliptical hole equation (1) yields a stress concentration of 2.54. For the same plate, using the equation for a circular hole from Reference (1), the stress concentration is 2.50. This is only a 1.6% difference. Therefore, the elliptical hole stress concentration equation (1) will be used for both the circular and elliptical hole cases.

10

3.3 Boundary Conditions for FEA model Figure 2 shows the boundary conditions for the FEA model. The flat plate from Figure 1, was modeled as a quarter plate with the left vertical edge constrained in the x direction and the bottom edge being constrained in the y direction. The right vertical edge of the model will be a free edge and the top edge will be where the pressure load of 1000psi is applied. Load Applied on Edge 1000psi

Edge constrained, dx = 0

Free Edge

y
Edge constrained, dy = 0 Ellipse Figure 2 FEA model Boundary Conditions 3.4 Elements There will be two element types used in this report. The first element is a 4-noded quad element. In ANSYS the name of the element type is Plane42 shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. 4-noded Quad Element, (Reference 2) 11

The second element to be used is an 8-noded quad element, called the Plane82 in ANSYS, shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4. 8-noded Quad Element, (Reference 2) 3.5 FEA Model The 2-D FEA model in ANSYS (see Appendix A for log file code) was created to accurately determine the stress concentration within 1% of the closed form solution of equation (1) for an elliptical hole in a flat plate. In order to do this it was necessary to set up manual controls for ANSYS to mesh the model and easily capture how many elements were used at the point of highest stress, which is at the ellipse tip, to calculate the stress concentration factor to be within 1% of the closed form solution calculated by equation (1). Figure 5 is a schematic of the FEA models size control limits, which can be changed by the user to either increase or decrease the mesh density at the hole and around the whole model. These labels are referred to in the FEA model code of Appendix A. Top of Plate Each highlighted edge of the model will have its own size controls.

Left Side of Ellipse

Right Side of Flat Plate

Ellipse

Right Side of Ellipse Tip

Figure 5. FEA Model Size Control Labels 12

Additional manual mesh control of the FEA model is achieved by use of the LESIZE command in ANSYS. Below is a sample line from the FEA model text file. LESIZE,_Y1, , ,10, 3, , , ,1 This command will generate 10 elements on the line that it is assigned to, and the 3 will size those elements based on a scaling factor where the first element will be 3 times smaller than the last node in the line. This means that the elements will become gradually larger the farther away they are from the hole. The scaling factor command allows the user to optimize the number of elements used in a model, since the farther away an element is from the elliptical hole, the less its stress is going to change. Because the greatest stresses will be produced on the right side of the ellipse tip, smaller elements will be needed than at the top of the plate where larger elements can be used.

13

4. Results
Table 1 shows the stress concentration factor for each of the 10 ellipses used. The first column is the a/b ratio, which is the ratio between the long and short radius of the ellipse (as seen in Figure 1), the 4 constants C1-C4 needed in equation (1), and the stress concentration factor using equation (1). The last two columns of Table 1 are the stress concentration factor tolerance, which will be used to determine if the FEA model from ANSYS (Appendix A) has an adequate mesh density. This tolerance was chosen as +/1% from the calculated stress concentration (K) in equation (1).

a/b

C1

C2

C3

C4

K+1% 17.20 9.02 6.31 4.96 4.16 3.62 3.24 2.96 2.74 2.56

K-1% 16.86 8.84 6.19 4.87 4.08 3.55 3.18 2.90 2.68 2.51

10.00 1.00 0.10 21.00 -25.25 32.17 -25.92 17.03 5.00 3.33 2.50 2.00 1.67 1.43 1.25 1.11 1.00 1.00 0.20 11.00 -12.81 14.50 -10.69 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.40 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.60 1.00 0.70 1.00 0.80 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 7.67 6.00 5.00 4.33 3.86 3.50 3.22 3.00 -8.67 -6.59 -5.35 -4.52 -3.92 -3.48 -3.13 -2.86 9.14 6.66 5.28 4.42 3.85 3.44 3.15 2.93 -6.14 -4.07 -2.93 -2.24 -1.78 -1.47 -1.24 -1.08 8.93 6.25 4.92 4.12 3.59 3.21 2.93 2.71 2.54

Table 1 Stress Concentration Factors for Various Ellipse radii

Table 2a and 2b show the results of the FEA models for the Plane 42 and the Plane 82 elements. This data was recorded for each model only when the maximum stress produced at the ellipse tip divided by the nominal stress (1000psi) resulted in a stress concentration factor that was within the +/- 1% tolerance from the stress concentration calculated by equation (1).

14

15

This is an explanation of Table 2a and 2bs columns, and Figure 5 gives a graphical representation for the naming/location of the edges of the model. b = short radius of the ellipse (inch), Kroarks = Stress concentration factor calculated using equation (1). K+1% and K-1% is the stress concentration factor, Kroarks +/- 1% in order to establish a tolerance which will determine if the model has been meshed properly Gnom = Nominal stress in the plate far away from the hole. This will be the 1000psi pressure load. (psi), Gmax = Maximum stress created at the ellipse tip which is where the highest stresses are produced. (psi), Kmodel = Stress concentration factor obtained from the FEA model in ANSYS, which is calculated by dividing Gmax/Gnom. Right = Number of elements that were on the bottom edge of the model, which was to the right of the ellipse tip. Scale = Scaling factor used in the LESIZE command, which scaled the elements, Left = Number of elements that were used to generate the mesh on the left vertical edge of the model. This is also the side that was constrained to not move in the x-direction. Right Side = Number of elements that were applied to the right vertical edge of the model. This was the unconstrained, free edge of the model. Top = Number of elements that were applied to the top of model, which was the edge that the 1000psi pressure load was applied. Element Length on Right of Ellipse = Length of the element that is on the Right Side edge of the model at the tip of the ellipse. Figure 6 shows the length dimension of the element that was recorded for this column. Top Each edge of the model will have its own size controls.

Left

Right Side

Ellipse

Right

Figure 5. FEA Model Size Controls Labels, re-shown from page 12

16

y x

Ellipse Length of element

Figure 6 Magnified view of the stress distribution at the tip of the ellipse. (a/b = 1.25, b = 0.8, Plane 42 element type shown)

17

5. Discussion
The first objective of this report is to show that the classical solution for a circular hole in a flat plate is the same as using the closed form solution for an elliptical hole in a flat plate with a short radius of b = a = 1 which is a circular hole. The results of the closed form equation (Reference 1) for a flat plate with a circular hole produced a stress concentration of 2.50 and the elliptical hole equation (Reference 1) had a stress concentration of 2.54. These results are within 1.6% of each other, which meant just the elliptical equations were used to calculate the stress concentration factor for all cases including when the ellipse become a circle. The second objective was to show that it is possible to improve the results of an FEA model by increasing the order of the elements used in the model. Based on the results gathered from the FEA models from Tables 2a and 2b, the following figure was created.
Length of Element at the Right of Ellipse vs Ellipse Short Radius
1.1 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Plane82 Plane42

Length of Ellement to Right of Ellipse (inch)

b, Ellipse Short Radius (inch)

Figure 7 Ellipse Short Radius, b vs Length of Element at the Right of Ellipse needed to obtain an accuracy of +/- 1% from the calculated stress concentration factor

18

Figure 7 shows that as the elliptical hole became narrower a more refined mesh density was required. More importantly it shows that the Plane42 element type required the most amount of refinement, because the element to the right of the ellipse tip (as shown in Figure 6) needed to be smaller in order to capture the stress concentration that was within +/- 1% of the actual stress concentration as calculated from closed form solutions. In Figure 7, it can be seen that the Plane42 element type always used a smaller length of element compared to the Plane82 element. The Plane42 element had a length of 0.0095 vs. the Plane82s length of 0.0147 when the ellipse had a short radius of 0.1. The third objective of this report was to show that an FEA model could increase in accuracy by increasing the number of elements used in a model. Figure 8 shows that as the ellipse became narrower, more elements were needed at the ellipse tip in order to obtain a stress concentration factor that was within +/- 1% of the actual stress concentration as calculated from closed form solutions. The figure also shows the Plane82

element was more efficient at meshing the model since it required less elements in order to capture the stress concentration factor within the specified tolerance of +/1%.
Ellipse Short Radius, b vs. # of Elements to the Right of the Ellipse
50

# of Elements to the Right of the Ellipse

Plane82 45 Plane42 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

b, Ellipse Short Radius (inch)

Figure 8 Ellipse Short Radius, b vs. # of Elements to the Right of the Ellipse needed to obtain an accuracy of +/- 1% from the calculated stress concentration factor 19

Finally, this report shows the mesh density needed to calculate the stress concentration factor within 1% of the closed form solution. The values needed to generate a mesh density that falls within 1% of the closed form solution for the stress concentration factor are shown in Tables 2a and 2b. These values are for the specific geometry of an elliptical hole in a flat plate with an a/b ratio varying from 1 to 10, a width of 10 and subjected to a pressure load of 1000psi, as can be seen in Figure 1, shown below for convenience.

1000psi

20

b a

1000psi

D = 10
Figure 1 Flat Plate with an Elliptical Hole.

20

6. Conclusion
Discontinuities in a geometry such as an elliptical hole create an increase in the stress distribution known as the stress concentration factor. It was shown that the results for the stress concentration calculated using the elliptical hole equations when the ellipse became a circle were the same. Because of this, the elliptical hole equation was used for all cases including the circular hole case. It was also shown that the accuracy of an FEA model can be increased by two methods. The first method was to increase the order of the element used in the model. It was shown that the 4-noded quad element (Plane42) needed smaller elements and more of them in order to capture the stress concentration factor to be within +/- 1% of the closed form solution for the stress concentration factor for this specific geometry, as compared to the 8-noded quad element (Plane82). The second method was to increase the number of elements in the model. This was done by showing that as the ellipse became narrower, more elements were needed in order to obtain the stress concentration factor within 1% of the closed form solution to equation (1) for this specific geometry.

21

7. References
1 2 Young, Warren; Budynas, Richard, Roarks Formulas for Stress and Strain ANSYS Help Menu, ANSYS INC., Release 10.0A1 UP20060105

22

8. Appendix A
This appendix contains the FEA code used to create all of the ANSYS models for this project.
/CLEAR,START /PREP7 ! ET,1,PLANE82 ! /REPLOT,RESIZE ! MPTEMP,,,,,,,, MPTEMP,1,0 MPDATA,EX,1,,30e6 MPDATA,PRXY,1,,.3 /REPLOT,RESIZE CYL4,0,0,1 FLST,2,1,5,ORDE,1 FITEM,2,1 ! ! ------------------ Ellipse Size --------------! ARSCALE,P51X, , ,1,.1,1, ,0,1 ! RECTNG,0,5,0,10, FLST,2,1,5,ORDE,1 FITEM,2,2 FLST,3,1,5,ORDE,1 FITEM,3,1 ASBA,P51X,P51X,SEPO,DELETE,DELETE ! FLST,5,1,4,ORDE,1 FITEM,5,10 CM,_Y,LINE LSEL, , , ,P51X CM,_Y1,LINE CMSEL,,_Y ! !--------- Right Side Ellipse (Horizontal) ----------! LESIZE,_Y1, , ,38, 23, , , ,1 ! FLST,5,1,4,ORDE,1 FITEM,5,9 CM,_Y,LINE LSEL, , , ,P51X CM,_Y1,LINE CMSEL,,_Y ! !------------ Ellipse -----------! LESIZE,_Y1, , ,32,12 , , , ,1 ! FLST,5,1,4,ORDE,1 FITEM,5,13 CM,_Y,LINE

23

LSEL, , , ,P51X CM,_Y1,LINE CMSEL,,_Y ! !---------------- Left Side of Ellipse (Vertical) ----------! LESIZE,_Y1, , ,38, 2, , , ,1 ! FLST,5,1,4,ORDE,1 FITEM,5,11 CM,_Y,LINE LSEL, , , ,P51X CM,_Y1,LINE CMSEL,,_Y ! !------------- Right Side of Flat Plate ------------! LESIZE,_Y1, , ,22, 1, , , ,1 ! FLST,5,1,4,ORDE,1 FITEM,5,12 CM,_Y,LINE LSEL, , , ,P51X CM,_Y1,LINE CMSEL,,_Y ! !--------------- Top Side of Flat Plate ------------------! LESIZE,_Y1, , ,11,1 , , , ,1 ! MSHKEY,0 CM,_Y,AREA ASEL, , , , 3 CM,_Y1,AREA CHKMSH,'AREA' CMSEL,S,_Y ! AMESH,_Y1 ! CMDELE,_Y CMDELE,_Y1 CMDELE,_Y2 ! FINISH /SOL FLST,2,1,4,ORDE,1 FITEM,2,13 ! /GO DL,P51X, ,UX,0 FLST,2,1,4,ORDE,1 FITEM,2,10 ! /GO DL,P51X, ,UY,0 FLST,2,1,4,ORDE,1 FITEM,2,12 /GO

24

! ! ---------- Pressure Load (-1000psi) ----------! SFL,P51X,PRES,-1000, /STATUS,SOLU SOLVE FINISH /POST1 ! /DSCALE,ALL,OFF /EFACET,1 PLNSOL, S,EQV, 1,1.0 !

25

9. Appendix B
This appendix shows plots of the final FEA models for the Plane42 element type.

Figure 9 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.1

26

Figure 10 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.2

Figure 11 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.3

27

Figure 12 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.4

Figure 13 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.5

28

Figure 14 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.6

Figure 15 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.7

29

Figure 16 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.8

Figure 17 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.9

30

Figure 18 Plane 42 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 1.0

31

10.Appendix C
This appendix shows plots of the final FEA models for the Plane82 element type.

Figure 19 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.1

32

Figure 20 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.2

Figure 21 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.3

33

Figure 22 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.4

Figure 23 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.5

34

Figure 24 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.6

Figure 25 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.7

35

Figure 26 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.8

Figure 27 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 0.9

36

Figure 28 Plane 82 FEA model results with a short radius of b = 1.0

37