Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 01:56:01 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <1336075131.4055.1711695361301@cornell1-cos-conf1.managed.contegix.com> Subject: Exported From Confluence MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_Part_4054_1197284328.1711695361301" ------=_Part_4054_1197284328.1711695361301 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: file:///C:/exported.html
Author: Rajesh Bhaskaran, Cornell University
Problem Specificat=
ion
1. Pre-Ana=
lysis & Start-Up
2. Numerical Results
<=
a href=3D"/display/SIMULATION/Tensile+Bar++%28Results-Interpretation%29+-+V=
erification+and+Validation">3. Verification and Validation
Exercises
Comments
One can think of Verification and Validation as a formal proces= s for checking results. Each of these terms has a specific meaning which we= won't get into here. We have already done some checks on the ANSYS results= by comparing them to the hand calculations and checking that the ANSYS sol= ution agrees with the appropriate traction or displacement boundary conditi= on at each boundary. Let's next check ANSYS's displacement value at the rig= ht boundary with the value in our hand calculations.
I get a value around 0.045 mm at the right end away from the point load.=
This is about a 10% deviation from the hand calculation result of 0.05 mm =
we obtained in our
Thus, we can be reasonably confident that the ANSYS model has been set-u= p correctly. We have however not checked that we have resolved the high str= esses at the left and right ends correctly. So we cannot say anything about= when the part would fail. Further mesh refinement may be needed. We also s= hould get rid of the stress singularity at the point load (by distributing = it over a region) and at the left corners (by filleting these corners).