Cable Stay Cantilever Beam Help Please

Hello,

I’m new to Prepomax and I’m really thrilled to have this software available for free!

I’m trying to do a displacement simulation for a cantilever beam with a cable stay across a post (king post?) to keep it stiffer under load.

Files Here: PrePoMax - Google Drive

New user - cant upload to this site nor add more than one image :frowning:

I found that when the top of the cable stay post and the intersecting surface of the cable are two flat angled surfaces, the sim results look as I might expect - maximum displacement is at the far free end of the beam where the load is applied.

However, I made the top of the king post and cable surface rounded, more like it would be in reality. I used the same setup (below) but now the cable seems to behave unexpectedly, lifting off the king post and the max displacement is on the cable.

Can I get some help to understand why this difference is occurring and how I should go about setting up this sim, please?

I have included the two files.

My setup is:

Fixed end face of the beam (left side in image)
Load as surface traction on the ‘free’ (right hand side) face of the beam.

Surface interaction ‘hard’.

Contact pair with hard surface interaction on the two surfaces that mate on the top of the post (master) and the bottom face of the cable (slave).

Tie on mating faces between cable and beam at each end.

The mesh is extremely coarse; you should refine it significantly. Otherwise, contact and tie constraints may not function properly, especially in curved areas. Not to mention the overstiffening of the coarsely meshed parts. In fact, it would be best to simplify and partition them a bit to use a hex mesh. Speaking about partitions, you should also have some where the cable bends to apply contact to surfaces instead of manually selecting elements, leading to irregularities. Some surface divisions would also help limit the definitions of tie constraints on the beam.

1 Like

There are many different ways to approach this type of problem. I carry out many analysis of racing boat mast with calculix with solids for the spars and generally truss for the rigging elements. I attach them with RB3 connections (node is end of truss and this is connected by the RB3 to selected surfaces on the solid.) I had a quick play with ur example -I got sensible looking results by simply increasing the load 10 fold (to 390N) using solids and ties for the cable will introduce some odd bending moments in ur ‘cable’ and in ur round top example, more loads straightens out the odd bends created in the ‘cable’. I have also attached a slightly different approach to urs with the ‘cable’ split in 2 and all the connections being ties with no contact required

AlternativeCable Stay Beam Flat Top.pmx (262.1 KB)

.

1 Like

Actually, I assumed that your goal is to model the interaction between the cable and the post in detail, hence the usage of contact. But what kind of structure are you analyzing and what level of detail do you need ? Is it a cable-stayed bridge ? Then the cables are usually modeled in a simplified way:


(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/368413920_3D_FE_modeling_of_cable-stayed_bridge_according_to_ICE_code)

This article comprehensively discusses such a simplified model: https://ijtre.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/2017050409.pdf

Unfortunately, CalculiX expands most 1D elements to solids (and doesn’t offer connectors like e.g. Abaqus does), but you could model the cables with beam, truss or spring elements and attach them using coupling constraints. However, this needs keyword edits. You will find more information on the CalculiX forum, e.g. here: Simulation of cables with tension-only materials - CalculiX (official versions are on www.calculix.de, the official GitHub repository is at https://github.com/Dhondtguido/CalculiX).

1 Like

Thank you both for the helpful replies — I really appreciate you taking the time.

To give a bit more context, the model is a 1.4 m rotating arm with a linear motion axis mounted to it. The left “fixed” end in the model will actually be connected to a motor-driven rotating hub; the other end is hanging free in space but the tip needs to have minimal displacement under the load riding on the linear axis as it moves back and forth along the arm. It’s a bit like a miniature tower crane.

I’m new to FEA. I initially modeled the “cable” as a solid steel element, assuming it would always remain in tension under load and that this wouldn’t matter — which, as I’m now learning, isn’t a safe assumption. I haven’t used truss elements before, but I’ve done a tiny bit of reading on them since your replies.

I do have a question about implementation. I’m not sure how best to get the required 1D geometry out of Fusion 360 and into PrePoMax alongside the 3D geometry. As far as I can tell, STEP export from Fusion doesn’t include sketch entities. One idea would be to extrude the sketch line into a very thin surface and then select only the edge for meshing, but I’m not sure if that’s good practice. Importing a 3D STEP file and a separate 2D DXF also feels like it could easily lead to alignment issues. Is there a tutorial video that might help me with first time usage?

I also have a question about partitioning geometry. Is this something that’s ideally done at the CAD stage (by splitting bodies or surfaces before export), or is there a straightforward way to do it inside PrePoMax if I didn’t plan far enough ahead in CAD?

Finally, to clarify one point: I’m not actually trying to model the cable sliding over the top of the post. In retrospect, tying the cable at the top of the vertical post would clearly give minimal beam deflection. That was a mistake on my part — I was only thinking about compression in the post and didn’t think about how it might lean under un-equal forces.

@fatmac — would you consider sharing a very simple spar-and-truss example that I could study, just to understand the setup and workflow?

Those research papers are a bit too advanced for me I think. However I’ll have a good read of the forum link about tension_only cables.

Thanks again for the guidance.

Oh yes, simply adding mesh refinement to my existing round top model did indeed get sensible results! However this is also a great opportunity to learn about truss’ and the other things mentioned.

Edit: One more question — possibly a very obvious one. Is there a way to hide or show geometry while a constraint (or similar) dialog is open? At the moment, if the surface I want to select is obscured by another part, I have to select a random surface, exit the dialog, hide the obstructing object, reopen the dialog, make the correct selection, then exit again and restore visibility. That feels very inefficient, so I suspect I’m missing a simpler workflow.

Actually, if you want to use 1D elements such as trusses or beams in PrePoMax, you can’t just import them as lines because they aren’t supported in GUI yet. You would have to define their elements manually with a built-in CalculiX keyword editor. You can find multiple examples on the forum, especially since beams are often used to represent bolts: Beam Element connections between Two plates (2D)

Yes, definitely in CAD software. There’s a guide about this for FreeCAD if you want to use it. PrePoMax has only very basic splitting.

Then you should definitely work on the mesh, as I described in the first reply. And keep in mind there are certain rules about contact (mainly make sure master is the coarser one and use linear contact with lower stiffness if you encounter issues).

However, in such a case, it might be best to use solids (at least for part of the cable in contact with the post).

I can look for some about contact between cable and drum. There’s a so-called capstan equation that can be used to determine the load from the tensioned cable.

The easiest way is to use View → Exploded View. Or you could create the surfaces in their container under Mesh first and then select them for analysis features.

1 Like

Thank you, lots to keep me reading!

P.S. I think you miss-read my comment about the cable sliding. I did not want to model that specifically.

And thank you for all the wonderful youtube tutorials! I need to watch more.

So how will the cable be connected to the top of the post in real life ? I assumed you may have wanted to at least check the contact pressure between the cable and the post (in fact, it should be also possible to simulate no sliding contact as well). This would justify the usage of contact. But of course, tie constraints should make it easier (although a refined mesh like I proposed may still be necessary to get good results without overstiffening unless you resort to 1D elements which will be a bit tricky with PrePoMax and CalculiX).

1 Like

Sorry for any translation errors.

A rectangular profile 80x40x3mm, 1.4m long, and a load of 39 Newtons? 1kN is approximately 100kg. You’ve applied a very small load compared to the profile used. Below is the calculation result for a 1.4m long aluminum bracket. Try calculating it analytically for the simplest scheme.

Here’s what the OP said about this structure:

To give a bit more context, the model is a 1.4 m rotating arm with a linear motion axis mounted to it. The left “fixed” end in the model will actually be connected to a motor-driven rotating hub; the other end is hanging free in space but the tip needs to have minimal displacement under the load riding on the linear axis as it moves back and forth along the arm. It’s a bit like a miniature tower crane.

It could be an initial test scenario too.

I would use something like https://structural-analyser.com/ to quickly solve such a structure. Or 1D model in FreeCAD FEM.

A similar model with a load of 1 kN, profiles 80x40x4mm (EN-AW 6060 T66) + 40x3mm (EN-AW 6060 T66) + Fi 5mm (Steel S235).

Model:

Force:

Stresses:

Deflection:

Model 2 without reinforcement, increasing displacements, lower stresses:

[mm]

[MPa]

What software are you using for that ? I guess it’s some commercial civ eng application with Polish interface. Unfortunately, it’s really hard to find truly free alternatives for such beam/frame calculations, especially for 3D structures.

Regarding the load, let’s see what the OP says.

The attached picture is a model of a 100 ft race yacht.

This is done using Calculix but u need to be able to use truss and beam elements. This is ur model with 3 mm wires and 1 KN end load

It’s Mecway, right ? Too bad FreeCAD FEM has beams/trusses, but can’t use them together with shells/solids in the same analysis yet. So basically, keyword edits are needed to add 1D elements both in PrePoMax and in FreeCAD.

Thank you again for many replies.

The arm will be used for precise positioning of a measurement instrument. There is another 1.4 m vertical arm attached that act as a lever multiplier on the main arm deflection. My goal was to minimise tip deflection to less than 1 mm, but lower is better. The load might be about 4 kg (39N) but I have not finished the full system design, so having margin is good.

At this time I only needed an approximate guide to shape my choices and I have been able to do that with your help! I think I will need to use more modelling as the design progresses, so I must keep learning more and probably ask more advice.

If you want to try it with beam elements in FreeCAD, here’s the file:

Mini crane.zip (131.3 KB)

1 Like

I used Autodesk Robot Structural Analysis, a program used in construction. The interface can be in various languages. I didn’t have time to switch to English.

I created a simple 2D bar model without local analysis at the tendon attachment points. I modeled the tendons as tension-only bars with hinges at the ends, and the column as a compression-only bar.

In advanced nonlinear analysis, you can create a cable with pre-tensioning:

  • stresses,
  • force,
  • expansion (length change),
  • pre-sag,
  • temperature.

The easiest way to achieve convergence is to use temperature. This method allows you to apply sag or tension. Then, the tension force is calculated analytically, knowing the bar length. This method can be adopted in PrePoMax.

A solid model in PrePoMax will produce more accurate results at the tendon attachment points, but it requires very precise mapping.

For verifying simple diagrams, there are free versions of programs limited to a small number of bars or finite elements, e.g., AxisVM LT (Maximum 40 line elements, 400 surface elements, and 20 load cases can be analyzed within a model) or ABC Rama3D. ABC Rama3D has greater limitations and is more difficult to create geometry.

The first estimate is the formula for the deflection of a cantilever with a concentrated force:
Umax = P* L^3 / ( 3 * E * J )
Mmax = P * L
Smax = M / Wx

:slight_smile:

I prefer free software without limitations, but it’s hard to find any in this area. Apart from Strian, which is online app, I used e.g. LinPro: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvAE1HR2Log

There’s also this nice tool for trusses: GitHub - MShawon/Truss-101: Truss analysis software using the Finite Element Method written in Python.

But not much more than that, especially for 3D frames. The same problem is with simple kinematics. Autodesk used to have ForceEffect and ForceEffect Motion apps, but of course they withdrew them like any other nice free tool they had.

Of course, but then it’s also good to add more members using the apps we discussed above.

The FreeCAD model differs from mine. Mine uses hollow profiles. The tension member is a 5mm diameter round bar.

This is the first time I see FreeCAD calculations as bars :slight_smile: