1 minute read
International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET)
ISSN: 2321-9653; IC Value: 45.98; SJ Impact Factor: 7.538
Advertisement
Volume 11 Issue III Mar 2023- Available at www.ijraset.com
Similarly, FEA analysis has been performed and the results are tabulated in comparison with analytical results.
Table : Comparison of results:- Analytical and FE approach (ANSYS)
Lastly, FEA results and Experimental Results are tabulated together and compared.
Table Comparison of results:- Experimental& FE approach (ANSYS)
VIII. CONCLUSION
This work involves design and analysis of a conventional leaf spring under static loading conditions. The 3D model is prepared in PRO-E and then FEA analysis is performed using ANSYS-11. From the results obtained from ANSYS, many discussions have been made and stated as follow:
1) When the leaf spring is loaded with 6.154 tonnes (90556 N) of load, a variation of 0.86% in deflection is observed among the
2) Experimental & FEA value, which proves the validation of our model and analysis.
3) At the same time bending stress for FEA solution, is decreased by 10.59 % in comparison with experimental result. This may be observed because
Improper Meshing of the model in Ansys
The node selected for the application of load would not be totally correct.
4) The Ansys analysis and the output image show that the spring is safe.
5) Also, at the time of experiment we found that the material will fall under plastic stage if it is loaded above 90556N.
Thus, it is concluded that when SOLID 45 mesh element is used for FEA analysis the results are closer to the Experimental results. Also, FEA tools provides a cost effective and less time consuming solution in comparison with the experimental testing but the results may vary in the specified range.
