Reliability Analysis of Cantilever Beam based on Hybrid Stochastic Finite Element Method

doi:10.23940/ijpe.18.12.p14.30433053

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to improve the reliability of cantilevered low-pressure die casting machines, the reliability of the cantilever beam, which is a key component of low pressure cantilever casting machines, is analyzed based on the ANSYS/PDS module and combined with a hybrid stochastic finite element method in this paper. The hybrid stochastic finite element method combines the Monte Carlo method and response surface method to analyze the finite element of cantilever beam. The results show that the width of the cantilever beam and the length of the free end are the design variables that influence the cantilever beam, and they can be used to further optimize the structure size.

Key words: reliability sensitivity, structural reliability, cantilever beam, PDS module, stochastic finite element method

Junxi Bi, Jinjin Chen, Hongzhong Huang, Yan Zhou, and Liqin Wang. Reliability Analysis of Cantilever Beam based on Hybrid Stochastic Finite Element Method [J]. Int J Performability Eng, 2018, 14(12): 3043-3053.

Add to citation manager EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

Figures/Tables 18

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Table 1

Figure 10

Table 2

Figure 11

Figure 12

Table 3

Figure 13

Figure 14

Figure 15

References 22

[1]	L. Q. Li , “Handbook of Certified Reliability Engineer, ” China Renmin University Press, Beijing, 2012
[2]	C. Li, Z. L. Sun, X. Han , “Virtual Experiment/Analysis based on Stochastic FEM on Bearing Reliability,” Journal of Northeastern University (Natural Science),Vol. 3, No. 5, pp. 724-727, May 2009
[3]	S. Lv, Z. Niu, Q. Cui, Z. He, G. Wang , “Reliability Improvement Through Designed Experiments with Random Effects,” Computers & Industrial Engineering,Vol. 112, pp. 231-237, October 2017 doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2017.07.027
[4]	Y. Man , “Study on Fatigue Strength of Jack-Up Drilling Platform’s Cantilever Beam, ” Jiangsu University of Science and Technology, 2017
[5]	S. Q. Qu , “Stochastic Finite Element Method based on Physical Response Bases, ” Harbin Engineering University, 2013
[6]	B. W. Song, J. Liu, J. Y. Zhao, C. S. Sui , “Comparison of SOLIDWORKS and ANSYS Finite Element Analysis of Cantilever Beam Model,” Modern Manufacturing Technology and Equipment (online since March 15, 2018)(DOI 10.16107/j.cnki.mmte.2018.0127)
[7]	K. Tuo , “Analysis of Static and Dynamic Reliability of Mechanical Parts based on Stochastic Finite Element Method, ” Chongqing Jiaotong University, 2015
[8]	L.C. Zhou and T. T. Kong, “Failure Analysis of Composite Curved Beam under Bending Load,” Journal of Mechanical Strength(online since April 15, 2018) (DOI 10.16579/j.issn.1001.9669.2018.02.041)
[9]	P. H. Liu , “Reliability based Design Optimization and Software Development of Heavy Duty Gantry Machine Centre Beam, ” University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, 2016
[10]	Q. G. Hu, T. Liu, F. Qin, K. Tuo , “Connecting Rod Dynamic Reliability Analysis based on Stochastic Finite Element Method,” Machinery Design & Manufacture(online since November 8, 2016) (DOI 10.19356/j.cnki.1001-3997.2016.11.028)
[11]	H. Z. Huang, Z. Liu, J. H. Mi, Y. F. Li , “Reliability Modeling and Analysis of Heavy-Duty CNC Machine Tool Spindle under Hybrid Uncertainty,” Scientia Sinica(Physica, Mechanica&Astronomica), Vol. 48, No. 1, pp. 014603, 2018 doi: 10.1360/SSPMA2016-00522
[12]	H. Z. Huang, J. Qu, M. J. Zuo , “Genetic-algorithm-based Optimal Apportionment of Reliability and Redundancy Under Multiple Objectives,” IIE Transactions, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 287-298, 2009 doi: 10.1080/07408170802322994
[13]	G. X. Chen , “Reliability Sensitivity Analysis of Underground Silo based on Monte-Carlo Stochastic Finite Element Method,” Journal of Henan University of Technology (Natural Science Edition), Vol. 38, No. 4, pp. 86-95, August 2017
[14]	Z. Yang, H. Z. Li, J. Y. Li , “The Reliability Simulation Analysis of Cantilever Beam based on ANSYS Software,” Journal of Jilin Institute of Chemical Technology(online since May 15, 2017) (DOI 10.16039/j.cnki.cn22-1249.2017.05.008)
[15]	J. H. Niu , “The Reliability Analysis of Large Gantry Machine Beam Structure, ” Shaanxi University of Technology, 2016
[16]	A. Beskos, A. Jasra, K. Law, R. Tempone, Y. Zhou , “Multilevel Sequential Monte Carlo Samplers,” Stochastic Processes and their Applications, Vol. 127, No. 5, pp. 1417-1440, May 2017 doi: 10.1016/j.spa.2016.08.004
[17]	Y. J. Sun , “Structure/Mechanism Reliability Study,” Aeronautical Science & Technology,No. 5, pp. 25-27, October 2010
[18]	Y. Yu , “Structural Reliability Analysis and Software Development based on Probabilistic Finite Element Numerical Simulation, ” Central South University, 2011
[19]	L. J.M. Aslett, T. Nagapetyan, and S. J. Vollmer , “Multilevel Monte Carlo for Reliability Theory,” Reliability Engineering & System Safety,Vol. 165, pp. 188-196, September 2017 doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2017.03.003
[20]	Z. C. Yun , “Response Characteristics of Cantilever Beam Excited by Foundation Noise, ” Tianjin University of Technology, 2017
[21]	S. Goswami, S. Ghosh, S. Chakraborty , “Reliability Analysis of Structures by Iterative Improved Response Surface Method,” Structural Safety, Vol. 60, pp. 56-66, May 2016 doi: 10.1016/j.strusafe.2016.02.002
[22]	T. Fetz and M. Oberguggenberger , “Imprecise Random Variables, Random Sets, and Monte Carlo Simulation,” International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, Vol. 78, pp. 252-264, November 2016 doi: 10.1016/j.ijar.2016.06.012

Parameter types	Symbol	Mean	Standard deviation
Input parameters	${{D}_{1}}$	230mm	0.100
	${{D}_{2}}$	380mm	0.992
	${{D}_{3}}$	170mm	1.014
	${{H}_{1}}$	500mm	0.689
	${{H}_{2}}$	320mm	0.837
	${{H}_{3}}$	130mm	1.004
	${{H}_{4}}$	700mm	0.787
	E	206GPa	6.18GPa
	$\rho $	$7.85\text{g/}{{\text{m}}^{\text{2}}}$	$0.13\text{g/}{{\text{m}}^{\text{2}}}$
	${{\sigma }_{x}}$	345MPa	55.62MPa
	${{N}_{1}}$	3600kN	1524.73N
Output parameters	VMS	——	——
Output parameters	g(x)	——	——

Parameter	${{\sigma }_{x}}$	$E$	${{H}_{1}}$	${{H}_{4}}$
Sensitivity	0.7985	0.4031	0.2879	0.5746
Proportion/%	36.7	21.6	15.8	25.9