See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/330841329

MECHANICS OF SOLIDS AND STRUCTURES

Article · February 2019

CITATION READS

1 2,159

2 authors, including:

Ziad Al Sarraf
University of Mosul
31 PUBLICATIONS   56 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Effect of Vibration Amplitude and Welding Force on Weld Strength of Ultrasonic Metal Welding View project

Flat Plate with a Hole Analysis by Abaqus View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ziad Al Sarraf on 03 February 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 MECHANICS OF SOLIDS AND STRUCTURES
BY DR. ZIAD SH. AL SARRAF
FLAT PLATE WITH A HOLE ANALYSIS

INTRODUCTION

Stress analysis will be performed on a finite flat plate with a hole in the middle under uni-
axial tension. The bottom edge is fixed with the top pulled. The plate will be analyzed using
finite element analysis modelled into the Abaqus program. The following steps will be taken
to complete the process:

1) By inspecting the .dat file, determine the stresses on the plate along the line y = 0.
Compare the principal stresses SP1 and SP2 with the stress components S11 and S22 along the y
= 0 axis and note the values of S12.
2) Graph of the Abaqus derived values of S11 along the line y = 0, versus the distance from
the edge of the hole plotted. Engineering judgement used to ensure results are reliable. Graphs
re drawn for improvement, if necessary
3) Graph of the Abaqus derived values of S22 along the line y = 0, versus the distance from
the edge of the hole. Engineering judgement used to ensure results are reliable. Improved
graph drawn if necessary, with results used to calculate Stress Concentration Factor (S.C.F) at
the edge of the hole.
4) Literature searched on analytic value for the S.C.F. for a plate with a hole, in this case it
will not be 3 as the plate in not of infinite width. Value obtained compared with that of
improved graph from part (4) above.
5) Suggest ways of improving the analysis.

The following diagram shows the full part to be analyzed. As this shape contains two lines of
symmetry, only a quarter model of this part, shown highlighted in the diagram, need be
modelled with relevant boundary conditions applied. The plate is very thin, and will therefore
be in plane stress. As can be seen in the diagram below, the force used will be (F/2) for the
quarter model when put into the finite element analysis.

Plate Dimensions
Plate thickness: 1.9mm
Applied Force F: 2.4KN
F F/2 Young’s Modulus: 107 GPa

Figure 1 – Flat thin plate with hole

1
 MECHANICS OF SOLIDS AND STRUCTURES
BY DR. ZIAD SH. AL SARRAF
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

Defining the 2 direction as that in which the forces shown are applied, the boundary
conditions regarding the quarter plate model seen on the right will be as follows:

2 u2 = 0 and θ12 = 0 on all nodes on the 1-axis

u1 = 0 and θ12 = 0 on all nodes on the 2-axis

1
A mesh is constructed for use with the finite element modelling process, diagrams of which
are shown below for the un-deformed and deformed sections. The mesh is constructed to have
a higher density of elements towards the hole, the reason being that this is a high area of
interest for the calculation, thereby generating as high an accuracy as possible for the stress.

Figure 2 – Mesh formation for Quarter Plate Figure 3 – Deformed Quarter Plate model

Computing this model into the Abaqus program, values from the .dat file are obtained for the
direct and principal stresses S11, S22, S12, SP1 and SP2 . The values for S11 and S22 are plotted
against the distance from the edge of the hole to the edge of the plate.

Node Distance - S11 (N/m2) S22 (N/m2) S12 (N/m2) SP1 (N/m2) SP2 (N/m2)
undeformed(from
hole) /m
101 0 6.5852x105 3.7038x106 6.5043x104 6.5713x105 3.7052x106
102 0.05 2.4811x105 1.8123x106 1.0439x105 2.4118x105 1.8193x106
103 0.10 3.0723x105 1.5681x106 8.2591x104 3.0184x105 1.5735x106
104 0.15 2.1603x105 1.4578x106 6.2199x104 2.1293x105 1.4609x106
105 0.20 1.3967x105 1.3998x106 4.9236x104 1.3775x105 1.4017x106
106 0.25 8.3767x104 1.3608x106 4.2048x104 8.2384x104 1.3622x106
107 0.30 4.3260x104 1.3262x106 3.9038x104 4.2074x104 1.3274x106
108 0.35 1.7048x104 1.2867x106 3.8750x04 1.5866x104 1.2879x106
109 0.4 -3378 1.2276x106 3.9279x104 -4630 1.2289x106
Table 1 – Table showing values of normal and principal stresses for plate with hole

2
 MECHANICS OF SOLIDS AND STRUCTURES
BY DR. ZIAD SH. AL SARRAF
The values seen in the above table for the principal stresses SP1 and SP2 should be
approximately the same as those for S11 and S22, which they are, indicating that they are
correct. As the principal and normal stresses are close, the shear stresses should therefore be
zero, which they are not as shown in the above table. This is due to the Abaqus Finite element
program calculating the stresses at Gauss points and extrapolated to the axis of symmetry,
showing this discrepancy.

Graphs drawn for the values of S11 and S22 plotted against the distance from the edge of the
hole can be viewed in Appendices A and B respectively. The maximum value for S22 should
be 2 or 3 times the size of the average or nominal stress in the cross section. The negative
values shown for S11 and SP1 are due to Poisson’s Ratio effects when the plate is stretched.
Analyzing the values seen in the above table and graphs drawn, it can be seen that values for
S11 at nodes 101 and 109 are not zero. This is incorrect as nodes 101 and 109, the edge of the
hole and edge of the plate respectively, are free surfaces and must therefore have values of
zero for stress. This has been corrected and taken into account in the graph for S11, which now
shows a line of best fit originating the origin. This “improved graph” can be seen in
Appendix C.

Considering the values for S22, it also shows that at nodes 101 and 109, the values are not
zero; again this is incorrect as the edge of the hole and the plate are free surfaces. The
“improved Graph” for S22 is now drawn, and can be viewed in Appendix D. For this graph
however, it shows a line drawn from the origin to the maximum stress value shown in the
table above to indicate that S22 reaches zero at node 101. At node 109, a line is drawn from
the x-axis to the curve; again to indicate that the value of the S22 stress at node 109 reaches
zero, the graph otherwise shows the same basic distribution as the unimproved S22 graph.

These discrepancies in the values for the normal stresses S11 and S22 go back to the use of
Gauss points in the computation of the analysis, which will then extrapolate to the nodes on
the axis of symmetry.

STRESS CONCENTRATION FACTOR

The stress concentration Factor (KT) is the relationship between the maximum stress σmax in
the discontinuity area to the nominal or average stress σn, which in the case of this flat thin
plate will produce an equation as follows:

 MAX S 22 F F
KT   n   Eq. 1
n n A w  d t

The value σmax will be obtained from the maximum value of the stress value from the
“improved” S22 graph in Appendix D. Although, as stated earlier, this maximum stress value
should be zero at this particular node 101, it is also the maximum stress value that must be
used. Regarding the equation for the nominal stress, (w) is the width of the plate, (d) is the
diameter of the hole and (t) is the thickness of the plate.

The Stress concentration factor will thus be calculated from values obtained in the finite
element method and an analytic solution will be made available for this specific configuration
i.e. a flat plate with a hole. A graph exists for this configuration, with the relevant value
shown highlighted with an arrow is shown below. The diameter of the hole is 0.2m while the

3
 MECHANICS OF SOLIDS AND STRUCTURES
BY DR. ZIAD SH. AL SARRAF
width of the plate comes to be 1m. Therefore, the calculation for the value (d/w) is calculated
to be 0.2, as shown in the graph.

Graph 1 – Stress Concentration Factor for Flat thin plate with hole

The graph has been defined to show the factor for the values used in this report, which
indicate that the value for this from is 2.5. Another calculation for determine the (S.C.F.) can
be done using the following calculation:

2 3
 2r   2r   2r 
K T  3  3.13   3.66   1.53 
D D D
2 3
 2 x 0 .1   2 x 0 .1   2 x 0 .1 
 K T  3  3.13   3.66   1.53 
 1   1   1 
2 3
 0 .2   0 .2   0 .2 
K T  3  3.13   3.66   1.53 
 1   1   1 

In this calculation, the element (r) is the radius of the hole, while the Element (D) is the width
of the plate, as before. The (S.C.F.) value from this method is calculated to be KT = 2.50816.
This therefore confirms the accuracy of the analytical method.

The stress concentration factor will now be calculated for the Finite Element Analysis
conducted earlier as follows.

F 2400
n    1.58MPa
w  d t 1  0.20.0019
Then

4
 MECHANICS OF SOLIDS AND STRUCTURES
BY DR. ZIAD SH. AL SARRAF
 max S 22 MAX 3.7 x10 6
KT     2.35
n n 1.58 x10 6

Although this value is similar to that obtained from the analytical value, they are not identical.
The reason for this difference, as with the calculation of the stresses earlier, is due to the value
of the maximum stress calculated using Gauss points then extrapolated to the nodes.

Now that there is a more accurate value of the stress concentration factor (KT), this can now
be used to re calculate the maximum stress value for S22, and incorporating this new value
into a new “improved graph”. This is done as follows:

 max  max
K T  2.5 KT    2.5   max  S 22 MAX  3.95 x10 6 N / m 2
n 1.58 x10 6

This value is now incorporated into a new “improved graph” for S22 against the distance
from the edge of the hole, which shows that the Abaqus Finite Element analysis has
underestimated the value for S22 at the node 101. A new graph is now drawn and can be
viewed in Appendix E. This new “improved Graph also shows the distribution from node
102 to node 101 being less steep as the Finite Element method again underestimates the stress
at this position and should not be as steep as the preceding S22 graph.

CONCLUSION

There are several ways to improve the above analysis to enable it to perform and present more
accurate results. In this analysis, a four noded linearly interpolated CPS4 quad model was
used in the analysis. This model is not seen as a good model to use for this analysis, as it has
not accurately modelled the curved circular hole boundary section in the quarter plate model.
Linearly interpolated quad models would not generate good accuracy for a curved boundary
as it only considers elements that have straight edges. Curved boundaries must therefore be
presented as piecewise quadratic, not piecewise linear as is done here, an 8-noded quad can
then be used to model this.

A finer mesh with a denser population of elements towards the hole can also be made to the
model in Figure 2 above, therefore increasing the accuracy of the analysis further. The mesh
elements around the hole are also shown to be inaccurate as their shapes do not satisfactorily
conform to that of their parent shapes below the nodes from 909-509, the shape of the
elements should be as close to the shape of a square as possible to be accurate. The finite
element analysis will be less accurate the further the physical element deviates from the
parent shape. The angles seen between the elements are not right angles and become more
distorted the closer the elements are to the hole as seen in Figure 3. A finer mesh with more
elements can rectify this issue along with the use of the eight noded quadratic interpolation
model mentioned earlier.

A finer mesh however, would increase the computation time for the analysis, especially if the
model was complex. The increase in computation time however, is offset by the improved
accuracy, especially as in this case, curved boundaries are modelled.

5
View publication stats

MECHANICS OF SOLIDS AND STRUCTURES

BY DR. ZIAD SH. AL SARRAF
REFERENCES

[1] Dr. R. Thomson, Mechanics of Solids and Structures 4 Lecture Notes –

[2] Joseph Shigley, Charles Mischke and Richard Budynas, Mechanical Engineering Design

[3] Raymond J. Roark, Warren C. Young, Richard G. Budynas, Roark’s Formulas for Stress
and Strain

[4] PCE Engenharia Ltda [Online]

http://www.pce.com.br/kti.htm