ASSIGNMENT Various numerical methods available for analyzing a process Metal forming(me-8104)

SUBMITTED TO: PROF. cetu iit barnala

SUBMITTED BY : tony

1. Application of variational calculus The calculus of variations can be applied to metalworking in several ways, including the upper-bound type of analysis. Two important methods will be considered briefly; the weighted residuals approach and a matrix integral function. 1.1 The general method of weighted residuals This mathematical technique has been available for a long time, but has found fairly extensive applications in engineering only during the past decade. It offers an approximate method of solution for changes in distributed systems. First, a reasonable guess is made on the basis of previous experience and knowledge of related problems, guess is made on the basis of previous experience and knowledge of related problems, and this is then progressively improved until an acceptable accuracy is obtained.

The input is a system of differential or integral/differential equations with associated constitutive relationships and boundary conditions. Given also a set of initial conditions, a trial solution is assumed. This may, for example, specify a functional dependence upon positional co-ordinates but include undetermined functions of time. The latter can then be determined by requiring the trial solution to satisfy the original differential equations to some specified approximation. Suppose that a differential equation for displacement u as a function of co-ordinates x and time t is given as:N(u)-ut = 0 for t > 0 and x in a 3-dimensional volume V with boundary S N(u) contains only spatial derivatives of u. For the initial boundary conditions: u(x,0) = u0 x in the continuum V u(x,t) = fs(x,t) on the surface S A trial solution is assumed, satisfying the boundary conditions but not necessarily the differential equations. This can take the form:u* (x.t) = us(x,t) + Ci(t) ui(x,t) i=1 to N

where the approximate discrete functions ui are prescribed and satisfy the boundary conditions on the surface us=fs , ui = 0 These equations can be written in the form of residuals, which are of course zero if the solution is exact. R(u*) = N( u*) - u*t R0( u*) = u0X- us(x,0)- Ci(0) ui(x,0) i=1 to N

The difference between these residuals is a measure of the extent to which u* satisfies the differential equations and the initial conditions respectively. A Weighting function wj is prescribed so that the integral of the residuals over the whole volume is zero, or as small a value as is acceptable. If u* is exact, the solutions are valid regardless of the weighting functions, but this would be a special case. The weighting functions may be chosen in various ways, by reduction to ordinary differential equations , by the method of moments, by the principle of least squares, by collocation wj =(xj x), or by a unified method due to Crandall. 1.1.1 Weighted-residuals method in plasticity

This method has been shown to provide another powerful technique for solving metalworking problems. Suppose that an unknown continuous function is to be found that satisfies the differential equations D1[f(x)] = f1 (x) in the continuum V D2[f(x)] = f2 (x) at the boundary S Where D1 and D2 are differential operators and f1 and f2 are given functions of the position co-ordinates.

Now a function f*(x) is postulated in terms of discrete values of the co-ordinates. It must satisfy both continuity and stress equations for the deforming body. f*(x) = Aii(x) Then the error, or residual, will be E(x) = AiD1 [i(x)]- f(x) Which depends on the form of the function and the choice of parameters Ai . The next step is to choose these values so that the error is reduced to a desired minimum. This can be done, in principle, by selecting weighting factors wi such that, as nearly as possible V wi(x) E(x) dV = 0 The most convenient way of doing this is to use the method of least squares, namely V E2(x)dV = minimum Since the variable parameters are Ai, this is equivalent to /Ai V E2(x) dV = 0 Or V /Ai [E(x)] . E(x) dV = 0 From which it can be seen that wi(x) = /Ai . [E(x)] 1.1.2
r

Application of weighted residuals to axisymmetric extrusion

u/r + u/r + v/

r/r + rz/ + r- /r = 0 z/ + rz/r + rz /r = 0 There are two unknowns in the strain-rate equation, so a scalar flow function can be chosen, such that u = /r / v = - /r /r

satisfying equations. The four unknown stresses require two independent functions and to be specified satisfying the two equations. These may be chosen as r = /r 2/ = /r z = /r 2/r2
2

+ /r

rz = - /r 2/r The six unknowns are in this way reduced to three functions, which are expressed as polynomials whose order is a compromise between accuracy and computing time. In extrusion, the following flow function has been suggested = 0 r2/r*2 + (r r *)2 Aij r2i+2zj+1 where r*(z) is the profile of the die. The expression must give vr=0 at r=0 and vz constant at =0. Also = 0= constant when r=r*. Suitable stress functions are = Kk=0 Ll=0 Bkl r2k+3 zl = Pp=0Qq=0 Cpq r2p+1 zq The best values of the parameters Aij, Bkl, Cpq have then to be chosen, by the least squares method. The equation for comparison is the Levy-Mises flow rule, which for the radial direction is r m = /
r

So the error Er at any point N in the deformation zone is (Er)N = (r m) /

and over the whole volume the least squares equation is applied:(Er)2 = N (Er)2N 0 Similar flow-rule equations govern the circumferential, axial and shear-strain rates, giving error functions E Ez E A total error function is this built up:ET = E i w i Where the weighting factors are found by differential with respect to Aij, Bkl, And Cpq, according to equation previously derived. The whole system of functions is very complex because each of the four functions depends on A, B and C, while r, , z and rz are functions of r,z,B and C, and r is a function of r,z and A. The procedure itself is lengthy, and if the flow rules are not linear it will require several iterations. Nevertheless , the calculation is fully numerical and complete solutions have been obtained. Detailed stress stress distributions through the deformation, zone have been plotted for extrusion and for drawing.

1.2 A Matrix Function Method

The finite element method rapidly becomes complex and requires extensive computer storage as well as calculation time. If the yield stress requires extensive computer storage as well as calculation time. If the yield stress varies with position because of strain hardening, and with direction because of anisotropy, the problem can no longer be treated as linear and the complexity multiplies, especially if large deformations are included. A variational approach can be used to reduce the computation and storage. This has some resemblance to the unit-zone upper-bound method and to the weighted residuals method. Making the usual assumptions that the material is rigid-plastic and that the elastic deformation can be ignored, the rate of performing work can be described in terms of three components as equations. The rate of working due to homogeneous deformation can be written in terms of the generalized stress and strain rate d(WH)/dt = V dV These were defined in previous equations. The rate of working due to inhomogeneous deformation is assumed to be expressible in a similar form but with a Lagranian multiplier to take account of the redundant work factor. d(WI)/dt = V (
1

2+

3)

dV

The rate of wor ing due to the surface traction T with a displacement rate u is d(WS)/dt = S T u dS Then a functional, or integral expression can be defined, in a way analogous to that of equation, giving the residuals = V dV + V (
1

2+

3)

dV - S T u dS

The true solution will reduce this to a minimum, so d/d = 0 In this solution, the velocity fields must satisfy the velocity boundary conditions on the free surface. To formulate the problem, the workpiece is divided into elements connected at their nodal points, as in other numerical methods, and the integral (functional) is approximated by a function of the discrete nodal point velocities ui and the multipliers i for each element. The Problem is thus reduced to finding a set of u and values that give a minimum value of . The analysis is still lengthy, but the method is flexible. It is possible to include variation of flow stress with strain and even to make allowance for anisotropy, but an iterative process is then necessary. One of the important deficiencies of variational methods in general is that rigid zones cannot be calculated. It is however possible to find the boundary of any region where the strain is below a set limit and to eliminate all nodal points within this region from calculation. They can then be reintroduced for the next increment of deformation if required. This matrix has been applied in detail to a cold heading problem.

FINITE ELEMENT METHOD In mathematics, the finite element method (FEM) is a numerical technique for finding approximate solutions to boundary value problems for differential equations. It uses variational methods (the calculus of variations) to minimize an error function and produce a stable solution. Analogous to the idea that connecting many tiny straight lines can approximate a larger circle, FEM encompasses all the methods for connecting many simple element equations over many small subdomains, named finite elements, to approximate a more complex equation over a larger domain. the method originated from the need to solve complex elasticity and structural analysis problems in civil and aeronautical engineering. Its development can be traced back to the work by A. Hrennikoff and R. Courant. In China, in the later 1950s and early 1960s, based on the computations of dam constructions, K. Feng proposed a systematic numerical method for solving partial differential equations. Hrennikoff's work discretizes the domain by using a lattice analogy, while Courant's approach divides the domain into finite triangular subregions to solve second orderelliptic partial differential equations (PDEs) that arise from the problem of torsion of a cylinder. Courant's contribution was evolutionary, drawing on a large body of earlier results for PDEs developed by Rayleigh, Ritz, and Galerkin. The subdivision of a whole domain into simpler parts has several advantages:

Accurate representation of complex geometry Inclusion of dissimilar material properties Easy representation of the total solution Capture of local effects. A typical work out of the method involves: (1) dividing the domain of the problem into a collection of subdomains, with each subdomain represented by a set of element equations to the original problem. (2) Systematically recombining all sets of element equations into a global system of equations for the final calculation. The global system of equations has known solution techniques, and can be calculated from the initial values of the original problem to obtain a numerical answer.

FEM mesh created by an analyst prior to finding a solution to a magnetic problem using FEM software. Colours indicate that the analyst has set material properties for each zone, in this case a conducting wire coil in orange; a ferromagnetic component (perhaps iron) in light blue; and air in grey. Although the geometry may seem simple, it would be very challenging to calculate the magnetic field for this setup without FEM software, using equations alone.

FEM solution to the problem at left, involving a cylindrically shaped magnetic shield. The ferromagnetic cylindrical part is shielding the area inside the cylinder by diverting the magnetic field created by the coil (rectangular area on the right). The color represents the amplitude of the magnetic flux density, as indicated by the scale in the inset legend, red being high amplitude. The area inside the cylinder is low amplitude (dark blue, with widely spaced lines of magnetic flux), which suggests that the shield is performing as it was designed to.

More advanced implementations (adaptive finite element methods) utilize a method to assess the quality of the results (based on error estimation theory) and modify the mesh during the solution aiming to achieve approximate solution within some bounds from the 'exact' solution of the continuum problem. Mesh adaptivity may utilize various techniques, the most popular are:

moving nodes (r-adaptivity) refining (and unrefining) elements (h-adaptivity) changing order of base functions (p-adaptivity) combinations of the above (hp-adaptivity). The matrix is usually referred to as the stiffness matrix, while the matrix is dubbed the mass matrix.

General form of the finite element method In general, the finite element method is characterized by the following process.

One chooses a grid for . In the preceding treatment, the grid consisted of triangles, but one can also use squares or curvilinear polygons.

Then, one chooses basis functions. In our discussion, we used piecewise linear basis functions, but it is also common to use piecewise polynomial basis functions.

Various types of Finite Element Methods 1. AEM The Applied Element Method, or AEM combines features of both FEM and Discrete element method, or (DEM). 2. Generalized finite element method The Generalized Finite Element Method (GFEM) uses local spaces consisting of functions, not necessarily polynomials, that reflect the available information on the unknown solution and thus ensure good local approximation. Then a partition of unity is used to bond these spaces together to form the approximating subspace. The effectiveness of GFEM has been shown when applied to problems with domains having complicated boundaries, problems with micro-scales, and problems with boundary layers.[7] 3. hp-FEM The hp-FEM combines adaptively, elements with variable size h and polynomial degree p in order to achieve exceptionally fast, exponential convergence rates.[8] 4. hpk-FEM The hpk-FEM combines adaptively, elements with variable size h, polynomial degree of the local approximations p and global differentiability of the local approximations (k-1) in order to achieve best convergence rates. 5. XFEM(Extended finite element method) 6. S-FEM( Smoothed finite element method) 7. Spectral methods( Spectral method) 8. Meshfree methods( Meshfree methods) 9. Discontinuous Galerkin methods 10. Finite element limit analysis 11. Stretched grid method 12. Comparison to the finite difference method

The finite difference method (FDM) is an alternative way of approximating solutions of PDEs. The differences between FEM and FDM are:

The most attractive feature of the FEM is its ability to handle complicated geometries (and boundaries) with relative ease. While FDM in its basic form is restricted to handle rectangular shapes and simple alterations thereof, the handling of geometries in FEM is theoretically straightforward. The most attractive feature of finite differences is that it can be very easy to implement. There are several ways one could consider the FDM a special case of the FEM approach. E.g., first order FEM is identical to FDM for Poisson's equation, if the problem is discretized by a regular rectangular mesh with each rectangle divided into two triangles. There are reasons to consider the mathematical foundation of the finite element approximation more sound, for instance, because the quality of the approximation between grid points is poor in FDM. The quality of a FEM approximation is often higher than in the corresponding FDM approach, but this is extremely problem-dependent and several examples to the contrary can be provided. Generally, FEM is the method of choice in all types of analysis in structural mechanics (i.e. solving for deformation and stresses in solid bodies or dynamics of structures) while computational fluid dynamics (CFD) tends to use FDM or other methods like finite volume method (FVM). CFD problems usually require discretization of the problem into a large number of cells/gridpoints (millions and more), therefore cost of the solution favors simpler, lower order approximation within each cell. This is especially true for 'external flow' problems, like air flow around the car or airplane, or weather simulation. APPLICATIONS OF FEM : 1. Visualization of how a car deforms in an asymmetrical crash using finite element analysis. 2. A variety of specializations under the umbrella of the mechanical engineering discipline (such as aeronautical, biomechanical, and automotive industries) commonly use integrated FEM in design and development of their products. Several modern FEM packages include specific components such as thermal, electromagnetic, fluid, and structural working environments. In a structural simulation, FEM helps tremendously in producing stiffness and strength visualizations and also in minimizing weight, materials, and costs. 3. FEM allows detailed visualization of where structures bend or twist, and indicates the distribution of stresses and displacements. FEM software provides a wide range of simulation options for controlling the complexity of both modeling and analysis of a system. Similarly, the desired level of accuracy required and associated computational time requirements can be managed simultaneously to address most engineering applications. FEM allows entire designs to be constructed, refined, and optimized before the design is manufactured. 4. This powerful design tool has significantly improved both the standard of engineering designs and the methodology of the design process in many industrial applications. The introduction of FEM has substantially decreased the time to take products from concept to the production line. It is primarily through improved initial prototype designs using FEM that testing and development have been accelerated. In summary, benefits of FEM include increased accuracy, enhanced design and better insight into critical design parameters, virtual prototyping, fewer hardware prototypes, a faster and less expensive design cycle, increased productivity, and increased revenue. 5. FEA has also been proposed to use in stochastic modeling, for numerically solving probability models. See the references list.
Expressions for the displacement of the nodes of one triangular element

The element is in principle able to move and to distort, but it must maintain strain computability between adjacent elements. This is Possible if the displacement varies linearly between the nodes and strain is assumed to be constant throughout each element. The displacement of any point within the element can be specified by its two components u and v, respectively parallel to the x and y directions. Each of these is assumed to be a linear function of the co-ordinates x and y of the point (x,y):u = n1 + n2x + n3y v = n4 + n5x + n6y u and v are linear distances, n1, n2 are constants u1 = n1 + n2x1 + n3y1 v1 = n4 + n5x1 + n6y1

ui = n1 + n2xi + n3yi vi = n4 + n5xi + n6yi u= [aiui + ajuj + amum+/ 2 + *biui + bjuj + bmum+x/ 2 +*ciui + cjuj + cmum+y/ 2 v= [aivi + ajvj + amvm+/ 2 + *bivi + bjvj + bmvm+x/ 2 +*civi + cjvj + cmvm+y/ 2

Where ai= xjym ; -xmyj ; bi = yj ym ; ci = xm - xj aj = xmyi xiym , etc and = xjym + xmyi + xiyi + xiyj (xmyi + xjym + xiyj) which is actually the area of the element.

6. Evaluation of the local strain form the displacement The direction strains
x= x and y

and the shear strain + u/y

xy(=xy)

can be written in terms of the displacements:-

u/x ,

y=

v/y ,

xy=v/x

( It is easy to see that an element of length X ,if displaced u at one end, will be displaced u+u/x X at the other and so suffer a strain u/x.)
x= y=

u/x =*biui + bjuj + bmum+/ 2 v/y= *civi + cjvj + cmvm+/ 2 + u/y=* bivi + bjvj + bmvm + ciui + cjuj + cmum +/ 2

xy=v/x

[a]=[

{b} = {

n{b} = {

] [

]=[

Thus c23= a21b13 + a22b23 + a23b33 Similarly c32= a31b12 + a32b22 +a33b32 2 . 2 . 2 .
x

=[biui +0 + bjuj +0 + bmum+0] +civi+0 +cjvj+0 + cmvm] ciui + bivi + cjuj + bjvj + cmum+ bmvm]

y =[0 xy=[