Gaikwad, et al, International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies E-ISSN2249–8974

Research Paper
FREE FREE RUN ANALYSIS FOR 2D MESHING
Vikrant C. Gaikwad1, Dr. Suresh M. Sawant2

Address for Correspondence

1
Research Scholar, 2Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, RIT Sakharale 415414, Sangli,
Maharashtra, India
ABSTRACT
Finite Element Method reduces the degrees of freedom from infinite to finite with the help of meshing. Meshing is the most
important step in finite element analysis. In meshing, mesh quality and mesh connectivity are important consideration for
further analysis. In Free-Free run analysis six rigid modes indicate al1 the parts in the assembly are properly connected to
each other. The mesh quality may have considerably on the analysis in terms of the quality of the solution and the time
required for it. In process, meshing is done with HYPERMESH software and solution is acquired using NASTRAN solver.
KEYWORDS: Finite element analysis (FEA), Meshing.
1. INTRODUCTION meshes, while preserving the underlying geometry.
Meshing of the domain into finite elements is the first Following steps in hypermesh is given below.
step in the finite element method. This is equivalent 3.2.1 Geometry Cleanup
to replacing the domain having an infinite number of Generally CAD data is provided in igs format.
degrees of freedom by a system having finite number Geometry cleanup is an integral part of meshing
of degrees of freedom. The shape, size, number and activity. Before starting the meshing, geometry
configuration of elements have to be chosen carefully should be carefully checked.
so that the original body or domain is simulated as Before starting any mesh geometry, it is a good to
closely as possible without increasing the look over the part and develop a strategy for how you
computational effort needed for the solution. are going to go about meshing the part.
Meshing is (at least optionally) a highly automated 1. Spend sufficient time in studying the geometry
process, mesh quality, its connectivity (i.e. 2. Time estimation
compatibility). 3. Geometry check
HyperMesh enables to receive high quality meshes 4. Symmetry check
with maximum accuracy in the shortest time possible. 5. Selection of type of elements
A complete set of geometry editing tools helps to 6. Type of meshing
efficiently prepare CAD models for the meshing 7. Joint modeling
process. Meshing algorithms for shell and solid 3.2.2 Decide the Element Type
elements provide full level of control, or can be used Element type selection is based on Geometry size and
in automatic mode. HyperMesh offers the biggest shape, Type of analysis, Time allotted for project,
variety of solid meshing capabilities in the market, Hardware configuration. The geometry can be
including domain specific methods such as Noise categorized as 0-D, 1-D, 2-D, or 3-D based on the
Vibration and Harshness (NVH), Fatigue, crash and dominant dimensions and then accordingly that type
Optimization. of element is selected.
2. FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS (FEA) 3.2.2.1 Types of Elements
The finite element method is used in a wide variety There are different types of elements for
of disciplines and engineering applications. In the discretization. Fig.1. shows the different types of
beginning, the use of these techniques was customary elements used for meshing.
only in the aerospace and nuclear fields. • 0 D Element: Scalar element
Subsequently, the use has spread to a variety of • 1D Element: Rod, Bar, Beam
products, physical situations, and manufacturing • 2D Element: Shell, Membrane, Plane
processes. Some of the interesting features of FEA stress, Plane strain
are structural analysis, Noise Vibration and • 3D Element: Solid
Harshness (NVH), Fatigue, crash and Optimization.
In order to obtain better design in FEA, following
procedure is given below.
2.1 Initial design and geometry generation
Initial design of the model is a planning decision and
the geometry is generated depending on these initial
design considerations, using modelling tools.
3.2 Mesh Generation
Basic theme of FEA is to make calculations at only
limited (Finite) number of points & interpolate the
results for entire domain (surface or volume). Any Fig.1. Different types of elements
continuous object has infinite degrees of freedom & Once the geometry is in an appropriate state, a mesh
it's just not possible to solve the problem in this will be created to approximate the geometry. Either a
format. Finite Element Method reduces degrees of beam mesh (1-D), shell mesh (2-D) or a solid mesh
freedom from Infinite to Finite with the help of (3-D) will be created. This meshing step is crucial to
discretization i.e., meshing (nodes & elements). the finite element analysis as the quality of the mesh
HYPERMESH is a powerful tool that lets designers directly reflects on the quality of the results
and analysts of component create high-quality generated. At the same time the number of elements
Int. J. Adv. Engg. Res. Studies / II/ IV/July-Sept., 2013/34-36
 Gaikwad, et al, International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies E-ISSN2249–8974

(number of nodes) affects the computation time. That 3.2.4.5 Tria Angle
is the reason why in certain cases a 2D and 1D mesh The Angle between two sides of a tri element should
is preferred over 3D mesh. be 600 as much as possible. Typical required values
3.2.3 Meshing the Geometry are to have all tria angles between 200 to 1200. Some
Once the geometry is in an appropriate state, a mesh time smaller angles are require to model geometry
will be created to approximate the geometry. Either a with small angle.
shell mesh (2-D) or a solid mesh (3-D) will be
created. This meshing step is crucial to the finite
element analysis as the quality of the mesh directly
reflects on the quality of the results generated.
3.2.4 Quality parameter for meshing Fig.6. Tria angle
Acceptance criteria of model quality are considered 3.2.4.6 Jacobian
when meets the body mesh model Quality check list It is measure of close the shape of element is to ideal
concerning the various mesh quality parameters like shape. Jacobian is really the best measure of finite
skew, aspect ratio, Jacobian etc. are the measures of element mesh quality. Typically less than 5% of
how far a given element deviates from ideal shape. element in a mesh should have Jacobian less than 0.7
Some of the qualities checks are based on angles (like within the minimum value of 0.5.
skew, included angles) while others on side ratios &
area (like aspect, stretch).
Some of the terms used when checking element
quality include:
3.2.4.1 Warpage Fig.7. Jacobian
It is a measure of how to close a QUAD element is to In process, two dimensional 2-D meshing have used.
being planer. A perfect planer element will have the It is used when two of the dimensions are very large
warpage of zero. Warpage of up to five degrees is in comparison to the third one. 2-D meshing is
generally acceptable. carried out on a mid surface of the part. By creating
2-D elements, the software knows 2 out of the 3
required dimensions. The third dimension, thickness,
has to provide as an additional input data.
Mathematically, the element thickness specified by
the user is assigned half on the element top and half
Fig.2. Warpage on the bottom side. Hence, in order to represent the
3.2.4.2 Skew geometry appropriately, it is necessary to extract the
The angles between the lines join opposite midsides. mid surface and then mesh on the mid surface. [1]
It Measure the angle created as square is turned into For meshing, Element type selection is based on
parallelogram or rhombus. Typical required values Geometry size and shape, type of analysis, time
are to have less than 450 or 600. allotted for project and hardware configuration. In
this process we have used 2D meshing used with
shell element.
The assumptions for FEA,
1. Weight of the radiator with coolant
2. Weight of the fan

Fig.3. Skew
3.2.4.3 Aspect Ratio
It is the ratio of max length side of element to min
length side of an element. This should be reduced as
much as possible. Fig.8. 2D meshing of engine cooling system model
2D meshing of engine cooling system model gives
total number of elements are generated is 54368 in
number. Total no. Of elements are categorised as
below:
Trias-CTRIA3 : 3560
Fig.4. Aspect ratio Quad-CQUAD4 : 50808
3.2.4.4 Quad Angle Rigid-RBE2 : 11
The angle between two sides of a quad element Mass-CONM2 : 2
should be 900 as much as possible. Typical required 3.2.5 Material and Property Information
values are to have all angles between 450 and 1350. After meshing is completed, material (e.g. Young’s
Modulus) and property information (e.g. thickness
values) are assigned to the elements.
In Model basically Expansion tank, Radiator tank,
shroud all parts are made up of plastic and radiator is
Fig.5. Quad angle made up of aluminium.

Int. J. Adv. Engg. Res. Studies / II/ IV/July-Sept., 2013/34-36

 Gaikwad, et al, International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies E-ISSN2249–8974
Table 1 - Material of Component Table 3- Frequencies for various mode shapes

2.3 Pre-Processing
Pre-processing involves creating the FE model and
applying the necessary loads and boundary
conditions.
In Free-Free run analysis has used with No
constraints and No force as a boundary condition.
2.4 Processing (Solver) 4. CONCLUSION
The FEM model (consisting of nodes, elements, In this research work following software like
material properties, loads and constraints) is then Hypermesh for meshing, Nastran as a solver and
exported from within the pre-processor Hypermesh. Hyperview for visualized result are used. Free-Free
The exported FEM model, typically called solver run analysis, is carried out for checking the mesh
input deck, is an ASCII file based on the specific continuity of the model and it is found that it is valid
syntax of the NASTRAN solver. In process, after for the further analysis.
applying the boundary condition in the pre-processor ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
the model is solved in the NASTRAN-Solver. I wish to thank Behr India limited, Pune-410501, and
2.5. Post-Processing Maharashtra, India for giving me an opportunity to
Post-processing provides an in depth view of data work in this field. The guidance, cooperation,
with visualization of various loading conditions. practical’s approach & inspiration given by company
The model which is solved shows results in especially by Mr. K. Parmeshwar (Engine Cooling
Hyperview software. Head), Mr. S Prakash (Manager), and Mr. Abasaheb
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Gaikwad (Manager at Tata Motor’s Limited, Pune)
Element quality and Free free run analysis results are provided me the much needed impetus to hard work.
discussed below. REFERENCES
1. Nitin S Gokhale, Sanjay Deshpande, Sanjeeve V.
3.1 Element Quality Check Badekar, Anand N. Thithe, “Practical Finite Element
The mesh quality may have considerably on the Analysis”, 1st Edition, ISBN978-81-906195-0-9.
computational analysis in terms of the quality of the 2. Users Reference Manual for the Hypermesh.
solution and the time required for it. 3. Users Reference Manual for the MYSTRAN
(NASTRAN) General Purpose Finite Element
Acceptance criteria of model quality are considered Structural Analys is Computer Program (Nov 2011).
acceptable when it meets the Quality check list with
various mesh quality parameters such as aspect
ratio, warpage, percentage of trias in the mesh and
the most important parameter, the Jacobian or
distortion of the mesh from an ideal shape.
Table 2- Two dimensional (2D) Quality report

From the above table 2 of different mesh quality

report shows that how much percentage of failed
elements. The above mesh parameters which have
been generated for 2D mesh are within acceptable
range of failure [1].
3.2 Check the free-free run analysis for assembly
Method used to check the connectivity of the mesh is
the free-free run method. With this method we can
checking of the connectivity of the meshing is valid
or not.
So, according to table 3 first Six Mode shapes have a
negative or zero frequency and after that the mode
shapes have a positive value, which satisfies the
condition for the Free-Free run analysis [1].
Int. J. Adv. Engg. Res. Studies / II/ IV/July-Sept., 2013/34-36