Class Code/Title: Engineering Analysis 3

Student Number:
Date:

Title: Modeling and Finite Element Analysis (Static

Structural) of an Aluminium Alloy Shaft on ANSYS
Workbench
Contents
Nomenclature...............................................................................................................1
1.0 Introduction.........................................................................................................2
2.0 Analysis...............................................................................................................2
2.1 Material Properties..........................................................................................2
2.2 Geometry.........................................................................................................3
2.3 Mesh................................................................................................................3
2.4 Boundary Conditions.......................................................................................4
3.0 Results................................................................................................................6
3.1 Maximum Principal Stress...............................................................................6
3.2 Deformation.....................................................................................................6
3.3 Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress........................................................................7
4.0 Verification..........................................................................................................8
5.0 Discussion..........................................................................................................9
6.0 Conclusion..........................................................................................................9
7.0 References.......................................................................................................10

Student No.
Nomenclature

Symbol Description Units

P Pressure Pa
L Length mm
D Outer Diameter mm
d Inner Diameter mm
σ Stress Pa
r Radius mm
F Force N
ε Strain Dimensionless
k Factor of Roark’s Formulas Dimensionless

Student No. 1
1.0 Introduction
Ideally, stress analysis calculations presume that the components under
consideration are smooth, have a uniform section and no irregularities. But in general
practice, nearly all engineering components have some unavoidable changes and
deformations in their shape and/or sections. Some of the common examples include
shoulders on shafts, oil holes, key ways and screw threads. Any discontinuity in their
cross-section changes the stress distribution in the vicinity of the discontinuity, so
that the basic stress analysis equations no longer apply. Such discontinuities cause
local increase of stress referred to as 'stress concentration'. [ CITATION Sus16 \l
1033 ] So that it can be said that stress concentrations arise from any abrupt
change in the geometry of a specimen under loading. As a result, the stress
distribution is not uniform throughout the cross-section. The maximum stress, σmax,
normally occurs at these discontinuities. This maximum local stress is many times
greater than the nominal stress, σ nom, of the member. Thus, the discontinuities cause
areas of stress concentration within the component, and are often called "stress
raisers". The shaft is assumed to deform and become internally stressed due to the
loading conditions, as the laws of linear elasticity apply here. But the deformation of
solid body and displacements of the material particles are assumed to be much
smaller than any relevant dimension of the body; so that its geometry and the
constitutive properties of the material (such as density and stiffness) at each point of
space can be assumed to be unchanged by the deformation.
The objective of this project was to perform a finite element static structural analysis
on a circular aluminium alloy hollow shaft with a transverse hole on both sides, by
fixing the shaft from one end and applying an axial pressure on the other end.
SolidWorks was used to make the CAD geometry of the hollow shaft and ANSYS
Workbench 2019 R3 was used to perform engineering analysis and calculate the
following parameters:
 Maximum Principal Stress
 Total Deformation of Shaft
 Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress
Moreover, the Roark’s formula of stress was used to calculate the theoretical value of
stress for the hollow shaft.

2.0 Analysis
2.1 Material Properties
Aluminium alloy was selected as the material of the shaft under consideration. The
following table shows the properties of Aluminium Alloy.
Table 1: Properties of Aluminium Alloy

Sr. # Property Value

1. Density 2770 kg/m^3
2. Young’s Modulus 71 GPa
3. Poisson’s Ratio 0.33
4. Bulk Modulus 69.6 GPa

Student No. 2
5. Shear Modulus 26.7 GPa
6. Tensile Yield Strength 280 MPa
7. Tensile Ultimate Strength 310 MPa
2.2 Geometry
The CAD model of shaft was made in SolidWorks. The outer diameter of the shaft
was 40 mm, while the inner diameter of the shaft was 32 mm and the length of the
shaft was 100 mm. Furthermore, two transverse holes in the middle of the shaft with
a diameter of 16 mm each were also cut.

Figure 1: 3D Model of the Shaft

Figure 2: 2D Drawing of the Shaft

Student No. 3
 2.3 Mesh
Meshing is an important step in any engineering analysis. The accuracy of results is
directly proportional to the quality of mesh. The mesh of the circular shaft was
created using ANSYS Workbench 2019 R3. The automatic generation of mesh by
ANSYS Workbench resulted in 5281 nodes and 2527 elements. The element type
was specified as ‘Tetrahedrons’. Figure 3 shows the mesh of the shaft. Figure 4
shows the element quality of the mesh.
Table 2: Mesh Parameters

Sr. # Mesh Metric Value

1. Nodes 5281
2. Elements 2527
3. Element Type Tetrahedrons

Figure 3: Mesh of the 3D Shaft

Figure 4: Element Quality

2.4 Boundary Conditions

One side of the shaft was made rigid and attached to a fixed support while a
pressure of 50 MPa was applied to the other end axially to understand the behaviour
of the shaft when subjected to tension. To add a fixed support, following procedure
was followed:
 Select the surface which is to be referenced as fixed support, as shown by
green area in figure 5.

Student No. 4
  Right click on the solution which is being performed. (In this case, it is Static
Structural)
 Go to Insert.
 Click on Fixed Support.
The selected area would now act as a fixed support.

Figure 5: The Fixed Support of the Shaft

Similarly, to apply a pressure of 50 MPa to the free end, following procedure was
followed:
 Select the surface on which the pressure is to be applied, as shown by green
area in figure 6.
 Right click on the solution which is being performed. (In this case, it is Static
Structural)
 Go to Insert.
 Click on Pressure.
 Enter the value 50 MPa.
 To change the direction, just add a minus (-) sign before the value.

Student No. 5
 Figure 6: Pressure Applied on the Shaft

The objective of the project was to determine the maximum stress in a hollow shaft.
For this purpose, the shaft was fixed at one end and a pressure of 50 MPa was
applied to the other end axially to subject the shaft to tension and calculate the
required parameters. Another way to perform this experiment is to apply pressure on
both ends in opposite directions. In this way, the shaft will also be in tension which
will create stress.

3.0 Results
3.1 Maximum Principal Stress
The principle stresses generated in the shaft were not found to be uniform, but rather
different from one point to another on the whole geometry, as it is shown in figure 7.
The minimum value of the principle stress which was generated in the component
was 5.05 MPa, which occurred near the surface of the transverse hole and parallel to
the axis of the shaft. Furthermore, the highest value of principal stress in the shaft
was calculated to be 205.95 MPa, which also occurred near the surface of the
transverse hole and perpendicular to the axis of the shaft.

Student No. 6
 Figure 7: Principal Stresses Generated in the Shaft

3.2 Deformation
It was observed that the deformation occurred most at the end where the pressure
was applied and decreased gradually towards the fixed support. As shown in figure
8, maximum deformation occurred at the pressure end with a value of 0.086 mm and
it can also be seen in the figure that at the fixed end, there was no deformation.

Figure 8: Total Deformation of the Shaft

3.3 Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress

Equivalent stress or von-Mises stress was also observed to be non-uniform
throughout the cross-section of the shaft. Maximum value of equivalent stress was
located on surface of transverse holes perpendicular to the axis of the shaft, which
was 202.5 MPa and the minimum value of equivalent stress was also observed on

Student No. 7
the transverse holes in but parallel to the axis of the shaft, which was found to be
5.33 MPa, as it is shown in figure 9.

Figure 9: Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress

4.0 Verification
The formula (Roark’s formula for Stress and Strain) shown in figure 10 will now be
used to verify the results. [ CITATION War01 \l 1033 ]

Figure 10: Roark's Formula

As the shaft is hollow, therefore,

d≠0
and,
d/D = 32 / 40 = 0.8 ≤ 0.9
2r/D = (2 * 8) / 40 = 0.4 ≤ 0.45
Now, other parameters will be calculated.

Student No. 8
Cross-sectional area of shaft (A) = (π / 4) D2 (D = D0 - Di)
A = 452.2 * 10^-6 m
The value of Pressure (P) = 50 MPa
P=F/A == F = P * A
F = 50 * 10^6 * 452.2 * 10^-6
F = 22.62 kN
1. K1 = 3.000
2. K2 = 2.773 + 1.529 (d/D) – 4.379 (d/D)2 = 2.773 + 1.529(0.8) – 4.379(0.8)2
K2 = 1.19364
3. K3 = -0.421 – 13.782(d/D) + 22.781(d/D)2 = -0.421 – 13.782(0.8) +22.781(0.8)2
K3 = 3.93324
4. K4 = 16.841 + 16.678(d/D) –40.007(d/D)2 = 16.841 + 16.678(0.8) -40.007(0.8) 2
K4 = 4.57892
Solving for k,
k = K1 + K2 (2r/D) + K3 (2r/D)2 + K4 (2r/D)3
k = 3.000 + 1.19364(0.4) + 3.93324(0.4)2 + 4.57892(0.4)3
k = 4.39 ~ 4.4
Now, put all the values in Roark’s formula,

σmax = k * 4F / [π (D2 – d2)]

= (4.4 * 4 * 22.62 * 10^3) / [(π (0.042 – 0.0322)]

σmax = 220 MPa

5.0 Discussion
The theoretical maximum stress, was calculated using Roark’s formula of stress and
found to be 220 MPa, while the maximum stress calculated using finite element
method on ANSYS gave the value of 205.95 MPa. It can be noticed that there’s a
significant difference between the values obtained by both methods. The difference
between these values could have been caused due to a number of factors. One
factor might be that the mesh generated is coarse. As it is said earlier, the accuracy
of results in the FEA methods is directly proportional to the quality of mesh and
number of elements. It should be noted here that the main purpose of using an
engineering software to perform a simulation is because, it disintegrates the
component under consideration into small elements, so that the underlying complex
differential equations which are too difficult and complicated to solve are converted
into algebraic equations which are rather easy to solve. Therefore, to get more
accurate results, one should use fine meshing methods like increasing inflation of
mesh, decrease the growth rate and specify smaller sizes to generate more
Student No. 9
elements. Moreover, more mesh elements can also be generated in the region where
discontinuity is high. The higher the quality of mesh, the more accurate the results
will be. Furthermore, the maximum deformation occurred on the pressure end of the
shaft was found to be 0.086 mm, which is so minor that it had no effect on properties
of the component, which satisfies the assumption of small deformation theory in
elastic region of the stress-strain analysis.

6.0 Conclusion
Static structural finite element analysis was performed on a hollow shaft with
transverse holes on both sides using ANSYS Workbench. The maximum stress with
a value of 205.95 MPa occurred near the transverse holes. The assumption was that
in ideal conditions with a uniform body, stress is distributed uniformly throughout the
surface of component. On the hand, if the body is non-uniform, just like in this case a
hollow shaft with transverse holes on it, the stress is not uniformly distributed
throughout the component body. The stress generated in the areas of discontinuity is
more than the rest of the body, so it can be said that these are stress raisers
because they have more stress concentration.

References
7.0S. Ghukua and K. N. Sahab, "An experimental study on stress concentration
[1] around a hole under combined bending and stretching stress field," Procedia
Technology, vol. 23, pp. 20-27, 2016.
[2] W. C. Young and R. G. Budynas, in Roark's Formulas for Stress and Strain,
Boston, McGraw-Hill, 2001.

Student No. 10