An overview of methods for

modelling bolts in ANSYS V15

Dragana Jandric
ANSYS Inc
Technical Support Engineer
1

2014
PresentedMay
at28,the
2014 ANSYS Regional Conference Chicago May 23, 2014

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

Outline

Introduction

Bolt Modeling
- Bolt Modeling Method 1 3D bolt representation
- Bolt Modeling Method 2 3D bolt representation
- Bolt Modeling Method 3 bolt thread contact
- Bolt Modeling Method 4 bolt thread contact
- Bolt Modeling Method 5 screw joint
- Bolt Modeling Method 6 line body representation
- Bolt Modeling Method 7 line body representation
- Bolt Modeling Method 8 beam connection

Result Comparison
Summary

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Introduction

Bolted connections are common to many industries

Basic requirements of a bolted connections are:

Bolt should transfer the load realistically across the connecting
elements
Bolt must have adequate strength
Joint must remain intact
Connection must have adequate fatigue and fraction life

Bolted analysis is no different than any other FEA calculation

This presentation shows different approaches of modeling
bolted connection using full 3D models to beam models

It also explores examples and best practices and explains

enhancements in ANSYS v15

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Bolt modeling
To demonstrate different ways to model bolts, a simple eight bolt
flange is taken. In the following slides following aspects will be
considered:
Geometry

Meshing
Contact

Pre-tension loading
Post processing
6

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Bolt modeling
Bolt can be modeled as:
- Solid body
- Line body
- Beam connection
Solid Body
+ Most accurate
+ All contact details available
+ Easy post-processing
- Geometry preparation
- Mesh refinement
- High computational time

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Line Body
+ Easy to set up
+ Low computational time
+ Some post-processing tools
- Creating line bodies
- No contact detail
- No stress detail in flange
Beam Connection
+ Easy to set up
+ Low computational time
+ No geometry required
- No stress detail in flange
- No contact detail
- APDL post-processing

Model and analysis considerations

Approach to modelling the bolts usually involve making engineering decisions about the
following:

Prepare geometry
Bolt and flange

Mesh
Minimum DOF for best representation
Consider contact areas for load transfer/stress
Hex / tet

Three step analysis:

Step 1: preload by load or adjustment
Step 2: fix the pretension, release any temporary restraining boundary conditions
Step 3: Apply in-service loads

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Overview of model
Eight sectors, each has a different method of
modelling the bolt

Upper / lower flanges are multi-body,

sweep-able parts

All contacts are asymmetric & bonded

Analysis settings:
Upper / lower flanges fixed at pipe OD
2 step (load/lock ), linear analysis
500N pre-load to all bolts

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Bolt model 1:
Key features of this approach:

No/very little geometry preparation

Full thread on bolt and nut
Good geometric representation of stiffness of
bolt/nut will be captured if mesh is dense enough

Contact areas give accurate representation of bolt

head and nut contact area to flange

Most cases will produce a tetrahedral mesh, check

element quality

10

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Bolt model 2:
Key features of this approach:

Some geometry preparation, threads removed on

bolt and nut

Care should be taken not to alter bolt shank stiffness

as this will affect bolt deflection and load transfer in
the system during pre-tension and in-service loading

Contact areas give accurate representation of bolt

head and nut contact area to flange

Load between bolt and nut is transferred via bonded

contact.

Most cases will produce a tetrahedral mesh, check

element quality
11

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Bolt model 3:
Key features of this approach:

Geometry same as bolt model 2

New V15 bolt thread contact applied
(recommended 4 elements span 1 thread width)

Contact sizing option to increase number of

elements in thread area

Contact results show helical load transfer at

threads

12

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Bolt model 4:
Key features of this approach:

Significant amount of geometry preparation on

13

bolt and nut

De-feature, respecting size of contact area
under bolt head/nut and bolt shank diameter
Decompose to sweep-able bodies
Multi-body back together
Prepare 1 fastener and use pattern to replace
others
Can take quite a few mesh controls to get a
good quality mesh
Bodies are modified to mesh them with hex
mesh.
New V15 bolt thread contact applied
(recommended 4 elements span 1 thread
width)
2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Bolt model 5:
Key features of this approach:

Geometry and mesh same as bolt 4

Bolt thread contact replaced with a cylindrical
joint

APDL commands to redefine joint as a screw

joint

keyo,_jid,1,17
sectype,_jid,joint,screw,_wbjoint
pi=acos(-1)
secjoin,,12
pas=1
secjoin,pitch,(pas/2/pi)
14

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Bolt model 6:
Key features of this approach:

Geometry preparation
Bolt/nut geometry replaced with a line body

Line body meshed as beam elements, model

size significantly reduced

Contact, end of bolt to cylindrical edge of bolt

hole, MPC couple U-Rot inside pinball, note:
for edge contacts WB automatically extends
spider out 1 element for load transfer

15

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Bolt model 7:
Key features of this approach:

Geometry preparation
Bolt/nut geometry replaced with a line body
Upper/lower flanges have been split and
mutli-bodied back together to give a contact
area to attach the beam ends to

Line body meshed as beam elements, model

size significantly reduced

Contact, end of bolt to flange cylindrical face,

MPC couple U-Rot inside pinball

16

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Bolt model 8:
Key features of this approach:

No bolt/nut geometry
Use Body-Body > Beam
Single beam188 element between
mobile/reference geometry
Scope to edge or surface of bolt holes on
flanges
Radius of beam = bolt shank diameter

Recommend use of named selections (flange

edge/surface geometry) and object generator
to copy a master body-body beam

This method cannot use a bolt pre-tension

load directly, need to apply load via APDL
inistate commands
17

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Overview of workflow

Module B is the original 8 bolt flange, this can be duplicated to investigate bolt
modelling further, i.e. frictional contact, mesh sizing, etc.

18

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Bolt Pretension
How to apply bolt pretension

Insert Bolt Pretension load

Select geometry to apply load to
Solid body > select body or face
Line body > select edge

Define load
Load / lock / magnitude etc

19

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Bolt Pretension
How to apply bolt pretension to a
body-body beam

Identify beams for loading purposes:

beam_bolt_id = _bid

Initial stress to beam188 element is

applied using command snippet

bolt_rad = 2.5 ! bolt shank radius mm

bolt_load = 500 ! bolt pretension load N
bolt_area = (22/7)*(bolt_rad*bolt_rad)
bolt_stress = 1.5*bolt_load/bolt_area
esel,s,ename,,188
esel,r,real,,beam_bolt_id
nsle
/solu
inistate,set,csys,-2
inistate,set,dtyp,stre
inistate,define,,,,,bolt_stress
alls

21

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

! select all beam elements in model

! select bolts defined as beams only
! select nodes on beam bolt element
! enter solution to define bolt load
! select element coordinate system
! set to initial stress definition
! define bolt stress
! reselect all entities

Bolt Pretension
A word on meshing ensure there is at least 2 elements (hex, tet, beam) along the
shank of the bolt

Why because ANSYS bolt-pretension load splits the bolt shank and connects the
resulting faces (solid) / vertices( beam) to a pilot node, the load is then applied via the
pilot nodes

22

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Results comparison
Flange deflection - consistent regardless of how bolt has been modelled

23

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Results comparison
Stress in flange - some differences between line and area
contacts, biggest difference is with beam connector where spider
extends out 1 element depth
Bolt head

24

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Nut

Results comparison
Stress in bolt shank:
Solid body bolts > scope stress to bolt body
Results fairly consistent regardless of method used to model bolt
Line body bolts > Post process using Beam Tool or User Result > Beamdirect
Body-body beam connector > APDL commands to post process

25

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Results comparison
Stress in bolt shank:
Line body bolts > Post process using Beam Tool or User Result > Beamdirect
25.5 MPa vs Solid 25.4 to 26.7 MPa

26

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Results comparison
Stress in bolt shank:

Body-body beam connector > APDL commands to post process

Axial bolt force = 498.9 N
Bolt shank stress = 25.4 MPa
Bolt shank stress comparison
Beam connector 25.4 MPa
Line body 25.5 MPa
Solid 25.4 to 26.7 Mpa

27

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

set,last
esel,s,type,,beam_bolt_id
!Length unit for the following data is MM
/FOC, 1, 62.9820904842815 ,-13.5452039539814
,171.46091721952
/VIEW, 1, -623.383469365249 ,773.613482745931
,113.645190993093
/ANG, 1, 5.37623044565048
/DIST, 1, 136.558237213941
ETABLE,ax1,smisc,1
ETABLE,ax2,smisc,14
/title, Axial Force Diagram
/SHOW,png
PLLS,ax1,ax2
! Direct Stress Axial
ETABLE,sdir1,smisc,31
ETABLE,sdir2,smisc,36
/title,Direct Stress Axial
/SHOW,png
PLLS,sdir1,sdir2

Results comparison
EQV [MPa]

28

Beam Axial
Stress [MPa]

Deformation [mm]

Bolt 1

26.265

0.0071

Bolt 2

26.744

0.00459

Bolt 3

26.736

0.00459

Bolt 4

26.171

0.00402

Bolt 5

26.390

0.00669

Bolt 6

25.485

Bolt 7

25.485

Bolt 8

25.428

Nut

47

0.0876

Flange

47

0.0876

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Bolt Thread Modeling Enhancements in v15

Analyze Bolt Threads without physically modeling
the threads
Threads defined as a Contact geometry correction
Accuracy closer to true thread modeling than
bonded MPC method, and much faster

True Thread Simulation

29

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Bolt Section Method

Elements

True Thread Model

Wall
Time
115 hrs

Bolt Section Method

12.75 hrs

69K

11.65 hrs

69K

MPC Method MPC Method

1.1 M

Bolt Thread Modeling Enhancements in v15

Build conventional surface to surface asymmetric
contact between cylindrical faces.
Define thread parameters in contact details window
Mean Pitch diameter
Thread Pitch distance
Thread angle
Starting/ending orientation points (Program
Controlled defaults to top and bottom of scoped
cylindrical bolt body center).

In MAPDL, use SECTYPE and SECDATA commands

30

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Bolt Thread Modeling Enhancements in v15

With sufficient mesh refinement, stress profiles match very closely

31

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

Summary
Beam Connector
+

Easy to setup

Easy to setup

No geometry required for bolt

Low computation time

Low computation time

Good simplification of bolt/flange

stiffness

Solid body

Most accurate/realistic
representation of joint

Stresses available for all parts

depending on how modelled

All contact details available,

depending on how modelled

Post-processing tools available

Good simplification of
bolt/flange stiffness
Some post-processing
tools available

No contact detail between fastener

and flange

Requires line bodies in

model

Some geometry preparation liklely

to be required

No stress detail in flange

No contact detail between

fastener and flange

Mesh controls will be required

Need to know correct initial stress

to achieve required pretension

Large model / high computational

time

32

Line body

APDL post-processing

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014

No stress detail in flange

Summary

This presentation showed different methods how to model bolt

pretension. Traditionally bolts are one of the difficult
connection to model mainly because of difficulties in including a
preload produced by installation torque of tightening the bolt

Modeling and representation of threads in the analysis adds

complexity

There are other scenarios that could be included in the finite

element model of a bolted connection. Submodeling can often
be used to develop more detailed bolt modeling

33

2011 ANSYS, Inc.

May 28, 2014