×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

(OP)
Hi,

We have to do some static tests on 3D parts and correlates the obtained results with those obtained by our Finite Element Models. The question naturally arose, how do we know where are the best locations for strain gages installation?

I believe that due to the limitation in strain gages installation, we cannot put them in sharp corners. So, in order to find out the best locations, I checked the hot spots due to the FEM Maximum and Minimum principal 3D stress distributions for each test load condition. I believe that presence of a single or multiple load path at FEM spot suggests using strain gages with linear or rosette pattern, respectively.

I know that correlation between test and FEA is not an easy task. For example, following items may have impact on this job:

o Residual internal stress from manufacturing;
o Difference between real material properties and test alloy;
o Loading the part beyond the elastic limit at any location on the part;
o Complex imperfect 3D geometry;
o Strain gages not calibrated perfectly;
o Insufficient mesh density;

I would like to know about your experience with the Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA.  How do you decide about the best location (and type) of strain gages on your 3D part?

Thanks,
A.A.Y.

 

RE: Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

generally keep them well away from "spurious" stress gradients.

correct the s/g output for everything under the sun (obtain accurate material properties from coupon tests of the same batch of material, etc)

be really happy if you're anywhere near 10% different from the FEM

what you may want to do, if the results are completely different, is to strain aguage the interface of the detail part (ie, get the loads coming into/out of the part).

finally, good luck (you'll need lots !)

RE: Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

Your strain gage manufacturer should be able to help with selection based on materials, temperatures, loading conditions etc.  As far as location that's predominately up to engineering judgment.  Stay away from areas with large strain gradient because it will be location sensitive.  Avoid difficult areas to place them.  Remember the strain gage is basically reporting the average strain under the gage section.  Determine what % correlation you are aiming for before testing.  In some industries 10% is great in others 1% is unacceptable.  If you don't get buy in early people will always say well the model has errors.  Good luck.

Rob Stupplebeen   

RE: Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

(OP)
rstupplebeen, it is a good point, I understood that I should avoid large strain gradient, but not necessary large strain region as long as they are less than elastic limit.

rb1957, I am not quite sure if you are referring to the large strain gradient by using spurious stress gradient or you are pointing to another issue. I am agreeing with you, I need to have good luck to get acceptable level of correlation between test and FEM results. I believe that 10% is an optimistic number. I will be happy even with 25%.

A.A.Y.
 

RE: Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

feadude,

I´ve done a lot of this. It´s easier than you think. With metal components, well chosen and accurately positioned gauges you should have no problem with getting well under 10%

I think the previous posts have covered all of the salient points, making me wonder what more to add............

It´s this - make sure that the boundary conditions in your model REALLY match reality. Check the hardware setup and fit. On complex jigs, make sure that the test hardware stiffness assumptions match your model assumptions and if necessary even model the test hardware.

Have fun!

Gwolf

RE: Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

Sorry, Feajob, not dude, Feadude is another poster I think.

RE: Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

Good on you for correlating your model. Even if the results are awful at first you will learn a lot. Have you done a modal correlation first?


 

Cheers

Greg Locock

SIG:Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

Addressing some of your concerns:

1) Residual stress won't show up on the gage.  Attach the gage when the part is not loaded.  The part may have a residual stress at that point but the gage will be at zero strain.

2)  Gages can be calibrated fairly accurately, certainly within a percent or two.  It will be one of the smaller errors overall.

RE: Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

I have done some strain gage testing for model validation. However my results have not been as good as those reported by some members above. 1% agreement for any model appears to be very optimistic. Usually getting mesh convergence within 1% is not easy.

Most of my models have bolted joints. There is alwyas some uncertainty in loads. Also quite a few models are assemblies. If I get results near 20% I consider them good.

High strains usually occur near areas of high strain gradients. Therefore significant diffrence in results would occur due to placement error at these locations. Strain gage calibration error would be negligible in comparision.

The sources of error could be as follows:
1. Uncertainty in material properties
2. Uncertainty in load
3. Discretization error which can be established by mesh convergence
4. Uncertainty in geometry
5. Uncertainty in boundary conditions
6. Uncertainties in test conditions

Difference between analysis results and test results is subject to all of above. To get good agreement significant effort in reducing all of the above uncertainties is required. I think it would be difficult to get an agreement of 10% based on a single test.

Gurmeet

RE: Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

I know a lot of test engineers that think that it is important to put the strain gauge near a failure point, whereas for FEA correlation your biggest problems are more likely to be in estimating the loads, and boundary conditions, so a high strain point is not automatically the most valuable location.

Cheers

Greg Locock

SIG:Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

I do this type of comparison all the time and I have found the results to be with in 5% and sometimes with in 1%. I think the trick is not so much in the FEA but in the strain gaging. Make sure your placement is very PRECISE in terms of location and direction of the grid.
HTH

RE: Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

(OP)
BobM3, this is a good point about residual stress.

gurmeet2003, you have described very well source of errors. As I mentioned previously, I think that 10% is a fair agreement. If you don't mind, could you share more details about your experience? What was the percentage of agreement for your structure? What kind of structure are you dealing with?

GregLocock, You are right, our main purpose is to validate the load paths and correlate essentially our stick model (3D Beam Model) with real assembly. However, we will try to validate our 3D detailed FEM Models (meshed with tet 10 elements) at the same time.

joesm519, It's good to find that your test results are with in 1% to 5%. I am wondering if you can share more details with us. Could you please give us more detail about the type of structure you are testing?

FYI, I am dealing with a 3D Assembly Aeronautic structures.

Thanks,
A.A.Y.

RE: Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

residual stress will not show in your real world model, but also not in you computer model (unless you model is as a load case). As long as no plastic deformation occurs, disturbing the correlation between calculated elastic stress and real world behavior, you will ok.

RE: Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

feajob,
The parts I design, analyze and calibrate are wind tunnel force tranducers. The analysis is done on a part while the calibration is done with a assembly. The transducers have multiple load paths and have forces and moments applied in multiple directions. The material is typically steel or aluminum. We also strain gage composite panels which we don't calibrate.
HTH

RE: Strain Gage Analysis versus FEA

FEAjob,

Usually models I deal with are complex shaped casting assemblies including 20-30 bolts (recip compressor parts). Bolt preloads are important. The strain gage locations are on the inside and not easily accessible. Gaskets are also involved.

Gurmeet

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources