ME 751 - Group 3 - Project 2

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack
A. Bayat, S. Schwade
ME 751 Project II
NONLINEAR ANALYSIS OF A CAR JACK

Alireza Bayat: 150% contribution Steve Schwade: 150 % contribution
Introduction
The objective of this project is to determine the load bearing capability, the failure mode and failure location of a car jack under a compressive load P. Both geometric and material nonlinearities are to be considered in the analysis.
P
Figure 1: Car jack
In order to find the load carrying capacity of the jack, an analytical (static equilibrium) study was conducted to find the members carrying the highest percentage of the external load P. Buckling theory was also used to find the critical load for each member. The maximum load for each member was then determined by requiring that the stress be less than the yield stress of the material or that the load be less than the critical buckling load for that member. In all calculations and both analytical and FE analysis are done with a half model of the car jack.
Static Analysis
Figure 2: Geometry of the structure with the required angles and lengths
In order to find the portion of the external load in each member the geometry much first be determined. Trigonometric identities were use in the triangles that are formed by the members to find the geometric properties. The detailed calculations are listed in appendix A. Given:
And the required angles and lengths are:

Table 1: Required angles and length for study
Calculated Dimensions
6 in
26.1
129.83
15.07
105.98
23.33
Analytical study
Considering equilibrium equations in individual members, loads in different members were calculated (Appendix B).
Loads vs P for DEF link

8000 7000 6000 Loads in members (lb) 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0 1000 2000 3000 P (lb) 4000 5000 6000 F HD CE
Figure 3: required unknown loads for Analytical and FE analysis
Buckling
Considering buckling in members the critical loads in individual members were calculated and the critical member DH is determined. Critical load in DH = Critical P = 2800 lbs 1880 lbs
Figure 4: Buckling model in DH member
FE Analysis
Two different approaches were studied in order to find the critical loads in the members; 1) Individual members and 2) Whole structure study.
Individual members study

Based on the calculated loads from the theoretical study three critical members (DEF, DH, and CE) were identified to be analyzed using a nonlinear finite element analysis including linear and nonlinear1 material properties.
Figure 5: Critical members in members
See Appendix C for nonlinear material properties.
Boundary Conditions
In order to study contacts in pin areas in members different models were tried. A model with 1 pin, 2pin and without pins (Fig6, 7). The models with pins consider contact which should yield a more accurate result; unfortunately it led to a non-convergent simulation in the models with nonlinear material properties.
Figure 6: DEF - with 1 pin and contact in joint D
Figure 7: DEF - with 2 pins and contacts in joint E and F
Chosen Boundary conditions for DEF, DH and CE Comparing stress results for linear solution from the different models (1pin, 2 pin and without pins) the maximum stress in the models with pins were identical to models without pins. So the results from the model with bearing loads only would be reasonable enough for study.
Figure 8: DEF - Boundary conditions with no pins and bearing loads
Figure 9: DH - Boundary conditions with no pins and bearing loads
Figure 10: CE - Boundary conditions with no pins and bearing loads Linear material-Linear FEA results for DEF
Figure 11: DEF - Von-Mises stress result
Figure 12: DEF - Deformation results 10
Linear Material-Nonlinear solution for DEF
Figure 13: DEF - Von-Mises stress results
Figure 14: DEF - Deformation results
11
Nonlinear Material FEA results
Figure 15: DEF - Nonlinear Material Von-Mises stress results
Figure 16: DEF - Nonlinear Material deformation results
12
FE analyses for links DH and CE were conducted as well, the results are shown in Table 1 for 3 cases: 1) Linear Material- Linear Solution (LM-LS) 2) Linear Material- Nonlinear Solution (LM-NLS) 3) Nonlinear Material (NLM)
Table 2: FEA results for different solutions for three critical members DEF, DH and CE2
P = 2000 lbs. Max Stress (Psi) Link LM-LS DEF DH CE 37959 29427 6300 LM-NLS 38171 29434 6300 NLM 32601 24580 5779 LM-LS 145.54 3.1427 3.3165 LM-NLS 156.47 1.459 3.3116 NLM 320.0 2.940 6.341 Max Deformation (10^-4 in)
The critical member in the jack is DEF as expected because of the moment in the link. So based on trial and error FE analyses was performed with varying loads. Failure was found to occur at a load of 1,500 pounds.
Table 3: FE analyses results for P = 3000 lbs. that failure occurred
P = 3000 lbs. Max Stress (Psi) Link LM-LS DEF 56939 LM-NLS 57429 NLM 44714 LM-LS 218.27 LM-NLS 243.8 NLM 519.34 Max Deformation (10^-4 in)
LM: Linear material properties used in simulation, NLM: Nonlinear mater properties used in nonlinear simulation, LS: Linear simulation used, NLS: Nonlinear simulation used
13
Complete Structure Analysis

In order to validate our static analysis and boundary condition assumptions a FEA of the complete structure was needed to establish the nonlinear member interactions after deformation.
Figure 17: nonlinear structure analysis Von-Mises Stress Distribution3 The simulation was conducted with nonlinear material properties, revolute joints, and frictional body connections (with =0.7). Maximum stress occurs in the member DEF which verifies the outcome of our static equilibrium analysis.
Deformation show with 0.5 times auto scale (9.3 times magnification)
14
Figure 18: DEF Isolated Von-Mises Stress Distribution4 Member DEF experiences both displacement and rotation when the entire structure is simulated which invalidates the boundary conditions that were used in the individual member study. This rotation results in a slightly higher equivalent stress distribution and maximum stress (35.3 ksi vs 32.6 for the individual member study).
Deformation show with 0.5 times auto scale (9.3 times magnification)
15
Empirical Results
For h = 6in the jack was setup under an Instron machine and compressive load was continuously applied on the jack till failure occurred (fig 19). The associated graphs for 3 tested jacks are shown in fig 20. The average maximum load the jack held was 4387 lbs.
Figure 19: Experimental setup for h = 6 in.
16
5 4.5 4 3.5 Force [kip] 3 Jack 1 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 Total Displacement [in] Jack 2 Jack 3
Figure 20: Experimental results for 3 tested jacks.
Conclusion
The static and FEA results predict a similar outcome failure due to yielding with a load of 3,000 lbs. This is further confirmed by the experimental failure test data. All three of the jacks that were tested displayed a nearly linear force vs. displacement curve from 500 to 3,000 pounds, as the load exceeded 3,000 pounds the structure began to deform plastically and it was this plastic deformation that eventually resulted in the ultimate failure. Table 4: Maximum load via different approaches [lbs] Theory Maximum carrying load 2800 FEA individual FEA Complete Experiment members model structure model 3000 3000 4387
The difference between experiments with theory can be justified as: 1. Maximum loads estimated in the theory and FEA is based on the safety factor of 1, while safety factor in the real jack is definitely higher than 1. 2. Maximum stress failure in theory and FEA is based on maximum yielding stress failure, while the maximum carrying load from the experiments are the failure in plastic region.
17
Feasibility Study
Ultimate failure was caused by out of plane buckling that the 2D simulations cannot account for. To better predict the causes of this failure, and locate areas for improvement, a complete three dimensional model would need to be simulated.
The two dimensional model identifies that a significant portion of the member DEF is under a compression stress which is further compounded by the axial force added by member CE. In order to withstand a greater load without yielding this behavior would need to be addressed.
18
Appendix
G F
Appendix A: Geometry
E BDC ( , , ACD ( ( ADH ( )( ) ( ), )( ) ,
( )( )
)(
) D
)( ) B A
( )( )
Table 5: Coordinates of the points (Xi and Yi)5 Point A B C D E F G H X (in) 0 AB*cos AC*cos AD*cos( ) XD+ DE*cos XD + DF*cos AH Y (in) 0 AB*sin AC*sin AD*sin( ) YD + DE*sin YD + DF*sin 0
Note: the height of the jack h is the y value of point F + pins to top and bottom surfaces. 19
20
21
22
Appendix B: Forces in Members

Member HD or (
(
),
P
)
G y E F
From Free body GFAH as shown , ( )

Let HY be the Y component of force H:
( )
) (
Member GF(Free body GF) , ( ) ( )

Ay
B
x H
Ax
H
Member DEF (Free body DEF as shown) ( ( , ,

E Dy
D
( , )
) ( )
( ) (
), ( ) ( ) ) ( ( ) )
E F
Fy Fx
Dx
1
C
23
Appendix C: Nonlinear Material Properties

Table 6: Nonlinear Stress & Strain
Figure 21: Nonlinear Stress - Strain Curve
24

ME 751 - Group 3 - Project 2

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

ME 751 - Group 3 - Project 2

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

NONLINEAR ANALYSIS OF A CAR JACK

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

Figure 1: Car jack

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

And the required angles and lengths are:

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

Loads vs P for DEF link

Figure 3: required unknown loads for Analytical and FE analysis

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

Figure 4: Buckling model in DH member

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

Individual members study

Figure 5: Critical members in members

See Appendix C for nonlinear material properties.

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

Figure 6: DEF - with 1 pin and contact in joint D

Figure 7: DEF - with 2 pins and contacts in joint E and F

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

Figure 8: DEF - Boundary conditions with no pins and bearing loads

Figure 9: DH - Boundary conditions with no pins and bearing loads

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

Figure 11: DEF - Von-Mises stress result

Figure 12: DEF - Deformation results 10

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

Linear Material-Nonlinear solution for DEF

Figure 13: DEF - Von-Mises stress results

Figure 14: DEF - Deformation results

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

Nonlinear Material FEA results

Figure 15: DEF - Nonlinear Material Von-Mises stress results

Figure 16: DEF - Nonlinear Material deformation results

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

Complete Structure Analysis

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

Figure 19: Experimental setup for h = 6 in.

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

Figure 20: Experimental results for 3 tested jacks.

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

Appendix B: Forces in Members

From Free body GFAH as shown , ( )

Member GF(Free body GF) , ( ) ( )

Member DEF (Free body DEF as shown) ( ( , ,

ME 751 Project: Nonlinear analysis of a car jack

Appendix C: Nonlinear Material Properties

Figure 21: Nonlinear Stress - Strain Curve

Potrebbero piacerti anche