Uploaded by Talha Ahmed

IEL Report 2 (1) (1)

Ontario Tech University
Faculty of Energy Systems and Nuclear Science
Integrated Engineering Lab (ENGR 3750U)
Laboratory 2 - Finite Element Analysis
Course Instructor: Sharman Perera
Lab Instructor: Brandon Barclay
CRN: 74829
Date: 2022/02/01
Prepared by:
Group: 4
Name: Ryan Brown
Signature: RMB
Student ID: 100760288
Name: Mathew Maltese
Signature: MM
Student ID: 100742297
Reviewed by:
Name: Justin Maher
Signature: JM
Student ID: 100670433
Approved by:
Name: Talha Ahmed
Student ID: 100748215
Signature: TA
Table of Contents
Contribution Table
The objective of this laboratory exercise was to experiment with Siemens NX
Computer-aided Design (CAD) modeling software’s simulation features. Specifically, Finite
Element Method (FEM) and Finite Element Analysis (FEA) features. Each feature allows
analysis on the designed object to be performed, displaying the effects various parameters
experience when subjected to multiple conditions [1]. Depending on the condition simulated, the
part designed will undergo various changes to both shape and parameter. Deformation is an
example of a design change when subjected to a load applied, morphing the design’s parameters.
The simulation aids in revealing any flaws or defects present within the model and contains
safety issues needing corrections. The Siemens NX CAD software offers a numerical
methodology of analyzing complex systems through its FEM and FEA feature [1]. The FEM
feature is a numerical (computational) feature capable of generating geometric solutions
regarding the model design. The FEA is another feature allowing computable solutions in
generating visual scenarios pertaining to the solution model [1].
For the purpose of this laboratory, a .dat laboratory file was provided labeled “IEL Lab 2
- FEMWing” to generate the model solution set for evaluation. The model was a wing found in
various turbine selections, and it was opened to commence FEM and FEA usage. The wing,
through use of simulation, was subjected to a load of 10 N [1].
In this laboratory experiment Finite Element Analysis was done on a previously created
airfoil. This was done by launching the previously created part named “IEL Lab 2 - FEMWing''
in NX-12. Next, under the application tool bar the pre/post tool bar the new FEM and simulation
option was selected. Next, the FEM and Simulation Window settings opened where the ‘ok’
option was selected then the create solution option was selected. Then the ‘ok’ option once more
to complete the menu. The materials were assigned to the airfoil by selecting more on the
properties tab and selecting ‘assign materials’. The ABS isotropic material was selected. After
the material was assigned the 3D mesh was created. This was done by selecting the 3D mesh
option under the mesh section. Then on the 3D mesh window the type was changed to until
target. Then the source face was assigned to the initial spline while the target face was assigned
to the smaller end face. Next, the source element size was changed to 2 mm. Next ‘ok’ was
selected and the 3D mesh was created. Then the constraints for the Finite Element Analysis
needed to be created. The constraints were created by selecting the activate simulation button at
the top left of the screen. Then the fixed constraint option was selected from the constraint type
drop-down menu. In the fixed contarin menu the base-face option was selected and applied.
Next, a load needed to be added to the part. This was done by selection force under the load type
menu. The top face of the wing was selected and a force of 10 N was applied to the wing in the
positive YC direction. Next, in the solution section the submit option was switched to solve.
After nastran computed the solution the deformation of the airfoil was displayed by clicking the
structural option in the post processing navigator. Under the results section the contour plot was
selected. The post view was then edited to display both the deformation and the undeformed
Once the FEM was set up and the FEA was completed, the results were viewed in Post
View. The results of this FEA for the given airfoil wing are shown in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: Post View results of the FEA for the given airfoil wing with 10 N upward (+YC) force.
Colour gradient indicates magnitude of displacement due to applied force distorting the airfoil
shape. Colourless model included with the results for comparison. Physical distortion
exaggerated in Post View.
From the results in Figure 1, the maximum displacement occurs at the airfoil tip with a
magnitude of 1.917 mm. The minimum displacement is 0.000 mm at the fixed end of the airfoil.
As the force applied was 10 N in the upwards (+YC direction with respect to the FEM
coordinates) and the larger end face of the airfoil wing was defined as a fixed constraint in the
FEM, these results are consistent with the model parameters.
The distorted shape of the Post View model is exaggerated for clarity of magnitude of
relative displacement, as the maximum displacement is only 1.917 mm compared to the airfoil
wing length of 200 mm. From the shape of the displacement in Figure 1, the displacement is
either a linear trend that begins some distance past the fixed end of the airfoil wing or is
nonlinear with respect to the distance from the fixed end.
From the FEM gridlines visible in Figure 1, the 200 mm length of the airfoil wing is
divided into 100 grid segments. Using the gridlines as distance from the fixed end of the airfoil
wing and the colour gradient to correlate displacement, an approximate relationship between the
displacement versus distance was plotted. The list of approximate values determined from Figure
1 are listed in Table 1 and the plot of these data points is shown in Figure 2.
Table 1: Approximate data points of airfoil wing displacement versus distance from fixed wing
end. Taken from FEM gridlines and colour gradient in Figure 1.
Figure 2: Plot of data from Table 1, with labels and trendlines. Labels correspond to the
displacement value. The two trendlines are for a linear fit and a polynomial of order 2 fit, with
equations and R2 values for each fit shown. The linear fit is coloured blue and the quadratic fit is
coloured orange.
From the plot in Figure 2, the displacement of the airfoil wing due to the 10 N applied
force seems to follow a non-linear relationship with distance from the fixed end of the airfoil
wing. A quadratic fit to the data strongly agrees with the data, though since the distances for each
magnitude of displacement was extrapolated from the FEM grid seen in Figure 1 this would only
be an approximation to the true trend determined by the FEA.
The purpose of this laboratory exercise was to understand and apply Finite Element
Method (FEM)
and Finite Element Analysis (FEA) using Siemens NX to observe the
deformation of a designed part. The designed part in this experiment was an airfoil with a fixed
base. After applying a lifting force of 10 N, the maximum displacement was 1.917 mm observed
at the airfoil tip. The FEM grid lines were set to 2 mm, giving 100 data points across the 200 mm
wing. The displacement of the part compared to its original position was analyzed at 13 data
points to provide an approximation of the mathematical relationship showing how the wing
deforms under stress. These displacement values were then paired with linear and 2nd order
polynomial trendlines. The linear trendline, y = 0.0097x - 0.2251, had an R2 value of 0.9529. The
polynomial trendline, y = 4E-05x2 + 0.0021x + 0.0275, had an R2 value of 0.9984. This indicated
that the deformation of the wing occurs non-linearly with distance away from the fixed point.
The observed relationship most closely resembles a quadratic equation rather than a linear trend.
However, the FEM grid was set to 2 mm spacing, and is therefore not truly indicative of the
trend dictated by the FEA. Smaller grid spacing and more data points would allow for a more
accurate mathematical description of the wing's deformation. Overall, the application and
understanding of FEM and FEA are important and essential in further design work in the
engineering field.
ENGR3750 Integrated Engineering Lab Lab 2: Finite Element Analysis, Rev. 2, Ontario
Tech University, Oshawa, ON, Canada, Dec. 2021, Accessed on: Feb. 01, 2022 [Online],
Contribution Table
Student Number
Ryan Brown
Justin Maher
Matthew Maltese
Talha Ahmed
Appendix A: Ryan Brown’s Laboratory Exercise Deliverables
Figure 3: Screenshot of airfoil wing with FEM mesh visible, along with part history window.
Figure 4: Screenshot of airfoil wing with applied 10 N load visible, anlong with part history
Figure 5: Screenshot of Post View of airfoil wing simulation results. Shown are the deformed
model, undeformed model, colour gradient of displacement, and part history window.
Appendix B: Mathew Maltese’s Laboratory Exercise Deliverables
Figure 6: Screenshot of airfoil wing with FEM mesh visible, along with part history window.
Figure 7: Screenshot of airfoil wing with applied 10 N load visible, anlong with part history
Figure 8: Screenshot of Post View of airfoil wing simulation results. Shown are the deformed
model, undeformed model, colour gradient of displacement, and part history window.
Appendix C: Justin Mahers’s Laboratory Exercise Deliverables
Figure 9: Screenshot of applied mesh with information box and part history.
Figure 10: Screenshot of wing with 10 N load applied, as well as part history.
Figure 11: Screenshot of deformed wing with part history. Deformation colour gradient and
original part shape are applied for clarity.
Appendix D: Talha Ahmed’s Laboratory Exercise Deliverables
Figure 12: Screenshot of FEM mesh applied with part history window.
Figure 13: FEM mesh simulation of an airfoil wing undergoing a load of 10 N applied to the top
face of the wing; it’s part history tab shared below.
Figure 14: Screenshot of airfoil wing simulation results, displaying both areas of part
deformation, an undeformed normal model and color gradient showing the greater effect of