Fishing Rod NonLienar Analysis
Fishing Rod NonLienar Analysis
Fishing Rod NonLienar Analysis
tM
Computers & S~rucrures Vol. 21, No. l/2, pp. 265-271, 1985
B 1985 Pergamon Press Ltd.
Printed in the U.S.A.
H. OHNISHIand A. MATSUZAKI
Torayca Apphcation Research Laboratory, Toray Industries, Inc., Sonoyama, Otsu 520, Japan
Abstract-The purpose of this paper is to present the analysis and design considerations of a graphite
fishing rod. A large displacement and small strain analysis was performed and good agreement was
obtained with experimental data. In addition, the following was found: The bending strain distribution
of the fishing rod varies with the load level and the point which shows the maximum bending strain
travels from the tip to butt area with increasing load. The fracture of the fishing rod occurs at the load
when the bending strain reaches the smaller of the material failure strain and the critical buckling
strain. By the computer aided design method proposed here, analytical predictions of the fracture load
and the fracture location were calculated, and good correlation was obtained with experimental data.
PIECE No.
14 ' 6 5 4 3 2 1
I I I I I I 1
A 12-
izi
- lo-
zl
I- 8-
5 6-
;;
4-
2-
I
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
LENGTH (ml
Fig. I. Dimensions of a graphite fishing rod.
PIECE No.
7 6
6
b ----
4t
2I------ Lr
1 I I I I I I
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
LENGTH b)
Fig. 2. Finite element model of a graphite fishing rod (ET = 0.98 GPa, CL7 = 0.392 GPa. VU = 0.3).
The large deformation analysis of a graphite fishing rod 267
2.5 2.5
2
N
2.0
1.5
2.0
1.5
r P = o.lkg
1.0 1.0
0.5 0.5
---- EX!'ERIME
0 C
7i5--3+, m
-0.5
(a) (b)
Fig. 3. Load-deflection curve: (a) butt angle Q = 73”; (b) a = 88”; (c) a = 0” (1 kg = 9.8 NJ.
268 H. OHNISHI and A. MATWLAKI
PIECE No.
I 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
I I I I I I
MEASURED P(kg)
--o-- 0.1
- 0.5
-Q-- 0.9
--c- 1.3
-0.6 L
Fig. 4. Load-strain diagram (butt angle = 73”)
equilibrium iterations, but using a sufficiently large used in the numerical analysis, are shown in Fig,
number of load stepsl2f. It was found that a dis- 2. The longitudinal modulus EL was determined by
placement solution. practically accurate enough the three point bending testing of each piece. The
and cost effective, was obtained with a fairly coarse initial deflection caused by the self weight of the
f’inite element model using the above procedure. fishing rod and the lead lines for strain measurement
was not taken into account in the analysis as the
3.1 Finite element modeling corresponding level of deflection was small.
The nonhnear FEM code used in this analysis
was ADINA[3J. A large displacement and small
strain analysis was performed using the total La- The convergence behaviour of the deflection so-
grangian formulation, without equilibrium itera- lution was investigated with various numbers of
tions but reformation of stiffness in each load step. load steps, and it was found that a practically ac-
The eight-node orthotropic plane stress element curate enough solution was obtained with 900 load
was used to model the orthotropic tapered pipe. steps to the tip load of 1.5 kg (14.7 N). This required
The model of the fishing rod is shown in Fig. 2; 200 set of CPU time on a IBM3083 computer.
note that the circular pipe cross sections were mod- Figure 3(a) shows the deflection curves of the
eled by rectangular cross sections, with equivalent numerical and measured results of the fishing rod,
bending rigidity. In this modeling, cross sectional with butt angle LY= 73”. and shows good agreement
areas are not equal to those of pipe sections, but between the numerical calculations and the exper-
this effect is negligible as the axial stresses are imental data.
small. The stiffened ends of the pipe joint sections
were not taken into account in this model, because 3.4 Bending strain
the lengths of the joint sections are small compared Bending strains of the fishing rod were calcu-
to those of each piece. The height h, which is dis- lated from the bending moment which was obtained
continuous at the joint sections, was made contin- from the deflection curve of the finite element anal-
uous by taking mean values at each joint. ysis. According to curved beam theory, the bending
The elastic moduli of each piece, which were moment M and strain E are given by the following
The large deformation analysis of a graphite fishing rod 269
PIECE No.
7 6 5 4 3 i 1
0.6- P (kg)
0.1
h
dP 0.5
V
0.9
2 0.4-
1.3
=;
0.2 -
0.6 -
h
dp
Y
5 0.4-
a
a
0.2 -
\
.J I
0.0 2.5 3.
(b) LENGTH (ml
PIECE No.
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
I I I I I I 1
I
I----
----
I I
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
(cl LENGTH (ml
Fig. 5. Load-strain diagram: (a) butt angle a = 73”; (b) Q = 88”; (c) (Y = 0”.
270 H. OHNISHI and A. MA~SUZAKI
PIECE No.
7 6 5 4 2 1
1.0' I I / 1 I I 1
I I I I I 1
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
LENGTH (m)
Fig. 7. Bending strains of a graphite fishing rod
The large deformation analysis of a graphite fishing rod 271
and ltLe = 0.3), the material failure strains, and the rod vary with load level and the point which
maximum strain envelopes at the load of 1.3 kg shows the maximum bending strain travels
(12.74 N). It can be seen from this figure that the from the tip to the butt area with increasing
bending buckling strain curve is close to the max- load.
imum strain envelope of the 73” butt angle at the (4) The fracture of the fishing rod occurs at the
No. 6 piece, and it coincides with the results of load when the bending strain reaches the
actual collapse. That is, the strength of this fishing smaller of the material failure strain and the
rod is determined by the bending buckling strength, critical buckling strain.
because the bending buckling strains of Nos. 6 and (5) By the computer aided design method pro-
7 pieces are 0.6 - 0.7%, which is smaller than the posed here, analytical predictions of the frac-
material failure strains of approximately 1%. This ture load and the fracture location of the graph-
shows the poor stability performance of this type ite fishing rod were calculated, and good
of laminate with low transverse stiffness. Placing correlation was obtained with experimental
the 90” graphite layers at the top surface of the pipe data.
increases the transverse flexural rigidity, and hence
the critical bending strain is increased, but this at Acknowledgments-The authors are grateful to DAIWA
the expense of the axial stiffness. SEIKO INC. for supplying the graphite fishing rod and
information, and also to many individuals of the Torayca
Application Research Laboratory for their contribution to
5. CONCLUSIONS this article.