Finite element analysis for the lectotype of the large electronic truck scale structure


ACTA IMEKO | www.imeko.org December 2020 | Volume 9 | Number 5 | 58 

ACTA IMEKO 
ISSN: 2221-870X 
December 2020, Volume 9, Number 5, 58 - 62 

 
 

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS FOR THE LECTOTYPE OF THE LARGE 

ELECTRONIC TRUCK SCALE STRUCTURE 
 

Wei Tieping1, Zhou Xingyang2, Yang Xiaoxiang3, Yao Jinhui4 

 
1 School of Mechanical and Automotive Engineering, Fujian University of Technology, Fuzhou, China, 

tpwei@fjut.edu.cn  
2 School of Mechanical and Automotive Engineering, Fujian University of Technology, Fuzhou, China, 

1224122843@qq.com  
3 School of Mechanical Engineering and Automation, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou, China, yangxx@fzu.edu.cn  

4 Fujian Province Institute of Metrology, Fuzhou, China, yaojinhui2000@126.com  

 

Abstract: The stiffness of truck scales is the 

main influence factor on its measurement accuracy. 

Three kinds of SCS-100T large electronic truck 

scales are different in size arrangement of U-beam. 

Based on the finite element method, the models of 

the truck scales were established. The stiffness and 

strength of the scales were compared on account of 

the analysis results. The results show that U-beam 

arrangement of the low at both ends but high in the 

middle structure for the truck scale not only can 

save material but also meet the requirement of 

stiffness. Simulation analysis provides the 

theoretical basis for the structural design of truck 

scales. 

Keywords: electronic truck scale; U-beam; 

stiffness; finite element analysis 

1. INTRODUCTION 

At present, the structures of the electronic truck 

scale mainly include three kinds, including i-section 

steel, channel-section steel and U-section steel. The 

study found that U-section steel layout structure of 

the electronic truck scale was considered to be the 

most compressive capacity and the highest material 

utilization rate [1, 2]. Traditionally, the truck scale 

structure is usually simplified into a simply 

supporting beam in order to analyse the stiffness of 

the truck scale structure [3-5]. However, there is a 

large error in this simplification method. Therefore, 

to make the calculation results more consistent with 

the actual model, many studies have been carried 

out by establishing a complete three-dimensional 

finite element model of the scale. 

The truck scale structure of U-beam structure 

was optimised, and the optimised mass ratio was 

reduced by 6.7 % [6]. The truck scale body structure 

of section steel was replaced with cold-bending 

groove made of steel plate, which finally made 

lighter weight, less consumables and its strength and 

stiffness requirements in mechanical properties can 

be achieved [7]. In addition, the strength index 

should be used as an important checking index when 

the SCS series truck scales was overloaded by 

simulation analysis [8]. Also, the deformation of 

single scales in SCS series 120 t truck scales was 

studied under different loading modes with the 

finite element method [9]. However, the size of u-

shaped beam arrangement has a great influence on 

the stiffness of the scale body, which has not been 

seen in the literature. 

In this paper, the scale body of SCS-100T U-

beam structure is taken as the research object, and 

the three U-beam size arrangement modes are 

simulated and calculated to explore the influence of 

size arrangement mode on the stiffness. 

Furthermore, the optimal arrangement mode is 

determined to provide theoretical basis for the 

transformation of truck scale without weight 

verification [10, 11]. 

2. FINITE ELEMENT MODEL OF SCALE 
STRUCTURE 

2.1. Model Simplification and Mesh Generation 
The SCS-100T U-beam truck scale body 

structure produced by a company was taken as the 

research object, as shown in Figure 1. Generally, a 

truck scale mainly consists of the load bearing 

device (scale platform), the weighing display 

instrument, the weighing sensor, connecting parts, 

the limit device and junction boxes. First, when the 

weighing object or the truck is placed on the scale, 

its gravity is transferred to the weighing sensors 

through the scale under the action of gravity, which 

leads to the deformation of the elastomer of the 

weighing sensor. Then, the strain gauge bridge 

attached to the elastomer is out of balance and it will 

output an electrical signal that is proportional to the 

http://www.imeko.org/
mailto:tpwei@fjut.edu.cn
mailto:1224122843@qq.com
mailto:yangxx@fzu.edu.cn
mailto:yaojinhui2000@126.com


ACTA IMEKO | www.imeko.org December 2020 | Volume 9 | Number 5 | 59 

weight value. After that, the electrical signal is 

amplified by a linear amplifier and conversed to 

digital signal with A/D conversion. Finally, the 

weight signal is processed by the microprocessor of 

the meter and the weight data is displayed directly. 

 
Figure 1: Schematic diagram of the truck scale structure 

The layout of three different U-beam size is 

shown in Figure 2. Figure 2(a) shows that the scale 

body is designed with equal height layout and the 

height of the beam is h. Figure 2(b) shows that the 

scale body is designed with the layout of high 

intermediate and low at two ends. Figure 2(c) shows 

that the scale body is designed with the layout of 

low intermediate and high at two ends. 

 
(a) Equal height layout 

 

(b) High intermediate and low at two ends layout 

 

(c) Low intermediate and high at two ends layout 

Figure 2: Cross section diagrams of different U-beam 

size arrangement of the scale body 

This study mainly analyses the platform stiffness 

of different U-beam sizes. Because there is little 

significant influence of weighing sensors and 

junction box on the stiffness, it can be ignored. The 

linear elastic isotropic material Q345 is selected for 

all components in the structure. Its elastic modulus 

is 206 GPa and Poisson’s ratio is 0.28. In addition, 

ANSA software is a powerful CAE pre-processing 

software, which has good efficiency and quality in 

geometric model and finite element mesh 

processing. Compared with other similar software, 

ANSA software has no limit on the size of the model 

and can read faster. Therefore, the finite element 

mesh model of the truck scale structure was 

established with ANSA. The finite element model 

of the scale structure with U-beam of equal height 

is shown in Figure 3. Solid 185 element is used as 

the element type of model. The Solid 185 element is 

used to construct a three-dimensional solid structure. 

The element is defined by eight nodes, each of 

which has three degrees of freedom translated along 

the xyz direction. The element has super elasticity, 

stress toughening, creep, large deformation and 

large deformation capacity. The element can also 

simulate almost incompressible elastoplastic 

materials and completely incompressible super 

elastic materials using a mixed mode. In the whole 

model, the longest side length of the cell grid shall 

not exceed 15 mm, and the shortest is 5 mm and the 

numbers of elements and nodes are 377 369 and 

701 895 respectively. 

 
Figure 3: The finite element model of scale structure 

2.2. Boundary Conditions and Loading 
Conditions 

Boundary Conditions 

In actual working conditions, the structure of the 

scale body is contacted with the ground through the 

weighing sensor, and there is no other attachment 

between the weighing sensor and the ground. 

Therefore, in the finite element model, the 

connection between seven load cells and the ground 

can be simplified as constraining y-direction 

displacement of load cells’ base, while the other one 

as constraining all degrees of freedom. 

Loading Conditions 

According to the standard GB/T 7723-2008 (this 

standard is a revision of GB/T 7723-2002 Fixed 

Electronic scale, based on OIML R76 Non-

Automatic Weighing Apparatus (2006E) 

recommended by International Legal Metrological 

Organization) fixed electronic truck scale on the 

maximum relative deformation of the large 

weighing machine, the calibration must be carried 

out using the load of 40 t acting on the middle of 

each weighing platform for a scale with a maximum 

scale of 100 t. The loading area is 2.6 m wide and it 

can be considered as evenly distributed force. 

Boundary constraints and loading conditions are 

shown in Figure 4. 

http://www.imeko.org/


ACTA IMEKO | www.imeko.org December 2020 | Volume 9 | Number 5 | 60 

 
Figure 4: Schematic Diagram of Boundary and Loading 

Conditions 

3. RESULT OF SIMULATION 

The y-direction displacement distribution cloud 

diagrams of three different U-beam scales are 

shown in Figures 5(a), 5(b) and 5(c) respectively. 

As can be seen from the figures, the main force area 

of the truck scale is in the middle, and the maximum 

displacement of the three scales occurs in the centre 

of the main scale. The maximum displacements 

values in the y direction of the U-beam scales with 

equal height layout (as shown in Figure 5 (a)), the 

U-beam scales with high intermediate and low at 

two ends layout (as shown in Figure 5 (b)) and the 

U-beam scales with low intermediate and high at 

two ends layout (as shown in Figure 5 (c)) are 

7.027 mm, 7.413 mm and 8.125 mm, respectively, 

which all occur in the middle panel of the first scale 

body. 

 
(a) equal height layout 

 

(b) high intermediate and low at two ends layout 

 

(c) low intermediate and high at two ends layout 

Figure 5: The y-direction displacement cloud diagrams of 

the scale structure with different U-beam 

The stress distribution cloud diagrams of three 

different U-beam scales are shown in Figure 6, 

Figure 7 and Figure 8, respectively. It can be seen 

from the figures that the maximum Von Mises stress 

value of the three scales occurs at the joint of the 

first scale body and the second scale body. The 

maximum Von Mises stress values of the three types 

of scales are in the order from large to small as 

following: high intermediate and low at two ends 

layout, low intermediate and high at two ends layout, 

equal height layout. The maximum stress values are 

1221.6 MPa, 1188.6 MPa, and 1100.1 MPa, 

respectively. In addition, the maximum stress value 

positions occur at the joints between the first 

weighing body and the second weighing body. 

http://www.imeko.org/


ACTA IMEKO | www.imeko.org December 2020 | Volume 9 | Number 5 | 61 

 

(a) The stress cloud diagram of the whole scale structure 

 

(b) Stress clouds of the U-beam 

Figure 6: The Von Mises equivalent stress cloud diagram 

of the U-beam scale with equal height layout 

 

(a) The stress cloud diagram of the whole scale structure 

 

(b) Stress clouds of the U-beam 

Figure 7: The Von Mises equivalent stress cloud diagram 

of the U-beam scale with high intermediate and low at 

two ends layout 

 

(a) The stress cloud diagram of the whole scale structure 

 

(b) Stress clouds of the U-beam 

Figure 8: The Von Mises equivalent stress cloud diagram 

of the U-beam scale with low intermediate and high at 

two ends layout 

4. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 

Combining with the analysis from Figure 5 to 

Figure 8, it can be seen that: (1) the maximum stress 

value lies at the joint of the scale body’s edge, and 

the stress concentration area at the compression 

http://www.imeko.org/


ACTA IMEKO | www.imeko.org December 2020 | Volume 9 | Number 5 | 62 

point of the U-beam is very small, so it will not 

affect the strength of the scale body structure; (2) 

the y-direction displacement of the U-beam with 

high intermediate and low at two ends layout is 

larger than that of the U-beam with equal height 

layout, but the difference is very small. In addition, 

the scale body is more evenly loaded, and the 

deflection of the scale body is within the scope of 

the regulation standard. Therefore, reducing the size 

of U-beam at both ends can improve the stress state 

of the structure and achieve the purpose of saving 

material and cost; and (3) for the U-beam with low 

intermediate and high at two ends layout, because 

of reducing in the size of the two U type beam which 

is mainly loaded, the deflection of the scale 

increases. According to the regulation GB/T 7723-

2008 fixed electronic truck scale, the U-beam scale 

with low intermediate and high at two ends layout 

does not meet the stiffness requirements (the 

maximum deformation of the weighing body in use 

shall not exceed 1/600 of the length of the weighing 

platform, and the corresponding displacement shall 

not exceed 8 mm). 

5. CONCLUSION 

Based on finite element method, the influence of 

the strength and stiffness of three scales with 

different U-beam size layout was analysed in this 

paper. According to the simulation results, the 

following conclusions and recommendations can be 

obtained as following: 

(1) The structural stiffness of the three scales is 

in the order from large to small as following: equal 

height layout, high intermediate and low at two ends 

layout, low intermediate and high at two ends layout. 

(2) The middle part of the scale structure is the 

main deformation area which is under the maximum 

load. The scale structure of the U-beam with low 

intermediate and high at two ends layout is not 

reasonable and it does not meet the rigidity 

requirements. 

(3) The scale body of the U-beam with high 

intermediate and low at two ends layout not only 

needs less material and is more uniform in the stress 

distribution, but also can meet the requirements of 

strength and stiffness of the scale structure. 

6. REFERENCES 

[1] Wang Jinqi, “Bearing Structure with Welded Beam 
of U Type of Section for Electronic Weighing 

Apparatus of Trucks”, Port Operation, no. 3, pp. 

37-37, July 2004. 

[2] Jiang Binsong, “Analysis of Prestress Force of 
Yieldable U-steel Support”, China Mining 

Magazine, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 43-46, April 1998. 

[3] Guo Zhiqiagn, Wu Zhanchao, Fang Shaohui, 
“Structural Design and Analysis for U Type 

Dynamic Electronic Truck Scale”, Machinery 

Design & Manufacture, no. 8, pp. 13-15, August 

2011. 

[4] Wang Zhenrong, “Discussion on the Structure and 
Stiffness Calculation of the Electronic Truck Scale 

Platform”, Weighing Instrument, no. 1, pp. 24-26, 

February 1997. 

[5] Wang Zhenrong, “Simple Design and Calculation 
of An Electronic Truck Scale”, Weighing 

Instrument, vol 36, no. 4, pp. 6-10, July 2007. 

[6] Lin Yuli, Yang Xiaoxiang, Wei Tieping, 
“Structural Optimization of U Type SCS-100T 

Electronic Truck Scale”, Journal of Mechanical & 

Electrical Engineering, vol 31, no. 3, pp. 346-349, 

March 2014. 

[7] Qi Jjianmin, Gu Jianhua, “One Kind of 
Improvement Plan About Electronic Truck Scale 

Body Design”, Weighing Instrument, vol 35, no. 6, 

pp. 26-27, November 2006. 

[8] Liu Mei, Zhong Peisi, Sun Zaoyang, Ding Shuhui, 
“Finite Element Analysis for Modular Platform of 

SCS Series Truck Scale with Multi-Block”, Control 

& Automation, vol 20, no. 9, pp. 106-107, 

September 2004. 

[9] W. T. Shi, J. Li, J. He, “Finite element analysis for 
analog modes of SCS series truck scale with 

different loads”, Advanced Materials Research, 

vol. 201, pp. 121-125, 2011. 

[10] Wei Tieping, Yang Xiaoxiang, Yao Jinhui, Xu 
Hang, “The Influence of A Balanced Structure on 

the Rotation Effect of A Build-up System”, 

Measurement, vol. 61, pp. 162-168, February 2015.  

[11] Wei Tieping, Yang Xiaoxiang, Yao Jinhui, Xu 
Hang, “The Additional Side Force on the Force 

Transducer in the Combinatorial Load Cell”, 

Advanced Materials Research, vol. 541, pp. 1327-

1332, 2014.

 

http://www.imeko.org/