The most likely culprit of divergence in FEMing is inadequate meshing. This can be from not choosing a small enough element size for small geometries or improper arrangements of nodes around stress concentration points.
abhio suggested Finite Element Modeling In Engineering Practice by Constantine C. Spyrakos. It does a sample calculation on pgs 9-11 for a simple two element cantilever bar.
This is a very exellent book.
I am currently working a CFD analysis for a large section of ductwork.
The project is a team effort, which comprises of teams here in the States and one in the UK.
Given our duct model, it can be loaded from the front or the back. The front has a larger area such that if its loaded from...
For measurement of Flow the easiest type of instrument to use, in my opinion would be a digital anemometer. A pitot tube could also be used.
Another approach to the problem would be to consider the rated flowrate of the fans that supply air to the car. If you know the volume of empty air...
The number figured by Prex is correct for the longitudinal joint efficiency, however, the 'circumferential efficiency' (what termoguven is asking for) is not figured by the equations given in UG-53(b)(1).
Termoguven,
The circumferential ligament efficiency chosen for your design depends on how you are doing the radiography. E = 1 if the radiographic requirements of UW-11(a)(5)(b) are met.
E = 0.85,if no radiaography is to be done, for circumferential butt joints and longitudinal butt joints...
Izamil,
The numbers I'm getting are a little different.
(4200*.01)+(36*25.4*.02)= 60.28 mm permissible.
from what you describe, you would still be under the limit. This really sounds like the purchaser doesn't have the jack to complete the purchase.
I agree with Spector, roll it and try to...
The weld you are attaching the nozzle through will have to be RT'd per UW-14. The nozzle weld will require RT testing too unless it is a Fig. UHT-18.2 type of full pen. nozzle connection.
-to prex:I didn't say he had to do the calcs, but by doing them anyway (per UG37) you wouldn't be taking the...
Yes, RT is required but will not be easy because of the size of the opening.
Well...by doing reinforcement calcs of UG-37, you are not taking the exemption of UG-36(c)(3). In other words, ug 36-C3 says that since your nozzle is small, you don't have to show the calcs done in UG-37.
Hope this...
