PSI - Issue 58

J.R. Steengaard et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 58 (2024) 61–67

63

J.R. Steengaard et al. / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2024) 000–000

3

Bracket

Actuator

Cutterbar

Bracket

Steel table

Wire potentiometers Strain gauges

Fig. 2. Experimental setup for quasi-static experiment performed on a cutterbar.

dŽƉ

ϯ

Ϯ

ϭ

hŶŝĚŝƌĞĐƚŝŽŶĂů ƐƚƌĂŝŶ ŐĂƵŐĞ ZŽƐĞƚƚĞ ƐƚƌĂŝŶ ŐĂƵŐĞ ^ƚƌĂŝŶ ĚŝƌĞĐƚŝŽŶ tŝƌĞ ƉŽƚĞŶƚŝŽŵĞƚĞƌ

&ƌŽŶƚ

ϰ

ϱ

ϲ

ϮϰͲϮϱͲϮϲ

ϭϬͲϭϭͲϭϮ

ŽƚƚŽŵ

ϭϳ

ϭϲ

Ϯϭ

ϭϯ

Ϯϯ

ϭϱ

ϭϰ

ϵ

ϴ

EƵŵďĞƌƐ ŝŶĚŝĐĂƚĞ ĐŚĂŶŶĞů

Ϯϴ

Ϯϳ

ϭϴͲϭϵͲϮϬ

ĂĐŬ

ϳ

ϮϮ

Fig. 3. Placement and numbering of strain gauges and wire potentiometers shown on a schematic of the cutterbar. The locations of the three analyzed welds are shown on the bottom view. Red is the back weld, orange is the bottom weld, and purple is the front weld.

measurements in Fig. 4b, the cutterbar does not seem to return to its original position after removing the load. This is most likely caused by slack in the setup, as the strain readings do not indicate any yielding. The experimental results shown in Fig. 4 are normalized.

3. Finite element analysis

The FE model is based on the computer-aided design (CAD) assembly of the experimental setup. The model is developed in ANSYS Mechanical and can be seen in Fig. 5. The di ff erent parts of the model are denoted according to Fig. 5, which will be used as reference in the remainder of the paper. Only half of the geometry is modelled due to symmetry. The symmetry plane is through the middle of the brackets and parallel to the cutterbar beam, see Fig. 2.