Transcript Project Rampway - Engineering and Technology IUPUI

Project Rampway
ME 450–Finite Element Analysis Spring 07
Aaron Emmons, Bryce Young and Eric Bush
Professor Dr. K. Nema
Monday – April 30th, 2007
Presentation Summary
Eric
•
•
•
•
Objective
Introduction
Theoretical Concepts
Model Details / Material Properties / Cost
Aaron
•
•
Loading Cases
Results and Discussion
Bryce
•
•
•
Finish Results and Discussion
Impact Statement
Present Conclusions
Objectives
• Utilize knowledge learned through Mechanical
Engineering to obtain experimental results on a realworld example
• Examine two different materials to optimize a motorcycle
ramp for structural integrity and usability
• Accomplished by structural Finite Element Analysis of
both aluminum and steel ramps through Pro/E and Pro/E
Mechanica
Introduction
Project Background / Goal
1.
To produce the groundwork for material selection and
load limits for a motorcycle loading ramp. (pickup truck)
–
–
Use Finite Element Analysis to understand performance of aluminum
and steel
Compare Weight and Cost
Previous Work
1.
Finite Element Analysis of experimental objects in ME
450
Theoretical Background
Displacement in terms of Cartesian components:
Von Mises Stress in 3 dimensions:
Theoretical Background Cont.
Factor of Safety:
Yield _ Stress _ of _ Material
 factor _ of _ safety
Maxim um_ Stress
Relation between Von Mises, Yield Strength, and factor of safety:
Model Details
• Table 1: Ramp Dimensions
Ramp Dimensions
Dimension
metric
SI
Length
2.2350m
7.33ft
Width
0.3048m
1.00ft
Top Surface
Area
0.3786m^2
4.075ft^2
Volume
0.009m^3
0.318ft^3
Model Details II
• Table 2: Material Properties
Material Properties (3)
property
Steel
Aluminum
unit
E
200
72.4
Gpa
p
7861.1
2795
kg/m^3
poison ratio
0.29
0.33
yield strength
434
414
Mpa
ultimate yield
strength
703
469
Mpa
Model Details III
• Table 3: Steel vs. Aluminum Properties
Material
Weight Weight Cost
(kg)
(lb)
($/lb)
Raw Material
Cost ($)
Aluminum
25.06
55.21
17.50
966.15
Steel
70.48
155.28
7.77
1206.51
Model Details IV
Mesh
• Automatically generated by Pro-Mechanica at 1300
elements
• Multi-pass adaptive solution
Model Loading
• Uniform Pressure Load, Central Localized Load and Offcentered Localized Load
• Ramp is fixed for zero displacement at the base as well
as the top angled flange to simulate ground and truck
bed loading conditions
Loading Conditions
• Uniform Pressure Load – used to establish initial
maximum load and force per unit area
• Central Localized Load – set at approximately 60 inches
(average wheel base of motorcycle) to simulate
motorcycle tires
• Off-Center Localized Load – real world condition of
loading motorcycle up ramp under the assumption tires
will not follow center of ramp
Results and Discussion
•
Von Mises Stress and Displacement Analysis
for Aluminum vs. Steel
1.
2.
3.
Uniform Pressure Load
Central Localized Load
Off-center Localized Load
Uniform Pressure Load
Aluminum
• Von Mises Stress Analysis (Load = 16000 N/m^2)
Uniform Pressure Load
Steel
• Von Mises Stress Analysis (Load = 17500 N/m^2)
Uniform Pressure Load
Aluminum
• Displacement (Load = 16000 N/m^2)
Uniform Pressure Load
Steel
• Displacement (Load = 17500 N/m^2)
Results of Uniform Pressure Load
Aluminum
N
Load (N/m^2)
Max
Max
Yield
Factor
Displacement (m)
Stress
Stress (MPa)
of Safety
414
1
(MPa)
5512
16000
0.03703
413
Steel
N
Load (N/m^2)
Max
Max
Yield
Factor
Displacement (m)
Stress
Stress (MPa)
of Safety
434
1
(MPa)
6029
17500
0.0148
433.5
Central Localized Load
• Von Mises Stress Analysis (Load = 4479 N)
Aluminum
Steel
Central Localized Load
• Displacement (Load = 4479 N)
Aluminum
Steel
Results of Central Localized Load
Aluminum
N
Load (N/m^2)
Max
Max
Yield
Factor
Displacement (m)
Stress
Stress (MPa)
of Safety
(MPa)
4479
13000
0.00966
129.3
414
3.2
Max
Max
Yield
Factor
Displacement (m)
Stress
Stress (MPa)
of Safety
434
3.33
Steel
N
Load (N/m^2)
(MPa)
4479
13000
0.003515
130.4
Off-Center Localized Load
• Von Mises Stress Analysis (Load = 4479 N)
Aluminum
Steel
Off-Center Localized Load
• Displacement (Load = 4479 N)
Aluminum
Steel
Off-Center Localized Load
• Bending due to off-center loading
Results of Off-Center Localized Load
Aluminum
N
Load (N/m^2)
Max
Max
Yield
Factor
Displacement (m)
Stress
Stress (MPa)
of Safety
414
2.93
(MPa)
4479
13000
0.00995
141.3
Steel
N
Load (N/m^2)
Max
Max
Yield
Factor
Displacement (m)
Stress
Stress (MPa)
of Safety
434
3.05
(MPa)
4479
13000
0.00362
142.2
Impact Statement
• This project is simulates a material selection and design
validation process that a manufacturer would use in
choosing a material and verifying the functional limits of
a design prior to production.
• An FEA analysis aids in producing a product that
performs as advertised, which allows the production a
safe and cost effective design that fulfills the needs of
consumers.
• Due to familiarity, Pro/E Mechanica was used to as the
FEA software to perform the described analysis.
Conclusions
• The highest magnitude of stress occurred at the
intersection of the angled flange
• The largest displacements occurred at the center of the
ramp.
• Cost - Aluminum cost less than steel by more than $240
• Weight – Steel out weighs aluminum by more than 100
lbs increasing the difficulties associated with normal use
and transportation
Conclusions Cont.
• Strength – For the same design, steel’s structural
properties are superior to aluminums allowing for higher
load limits and smaller displacements under the load
conditions produce by a 1000lb motorcycle.
• Consider weight, cost, and loaded performance,
aluminum proved to be the superior material for the
motorcycle ramp.
• Aluminum motorcycle ramps are widely produced,
indicating that manufacturers arrived at similar
conclusions.
References
1. http://www.realclassic.co.uk/ridesfiles/rid
es05011401.jpg
2. http://www.horizonsunlimited.com/newsle
tter/images2003/2003-04-01_MaartenTwoWheeler.jpg
3. ME450 – Lecture Notes via Oncourse
Questions???