Öner E.Yaylaci M.Birinci A.20.04.20192019-04-2020.04.20192019-04-2020151225-4568https://dx.doi.org/10.12989/sem.2015.54.4.607https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12403/753This paper presents a comparative study of analytical method and finite element method (FEM) for analysis of a continuous contact problem. The problem consists of two elastic layers loaded by means of a rigid circular punch and resting on semi-infinite plane. It is assumed that all surfaces are frictionless and only compressive normal tractions can be transmitted through the contact areas. Firstly, analytical solution of the problem is obtained by using theory of elasticity and integral transform techniques. Then, finite element model of the problem is constituted using ANSYS software and the two dimensional analysis of the problem is carried out. The contact stresses under rigid circular punch, the contact areas, normal stresses along the axis of symmetry are obtained for both solutions. The results show that contact stresses and the normal stresses obtained from finite element method (FEM) provide boundary conditions of the problem as well as analytical results. Also, the contact areas obtained from finite element method are very close to results obtained from analytical method; disagree by 0.03-1.61%. Finally, it can be said that there is a good agreement between two methods. Copyright © 2015 Techno-Press, Ltd.eninfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessContact problemFinite element modelRigid punchSemi-infinite planeSingular integral equationIntegral equationsAnalytical resultsComparative studiesContact problemIntegral transform techniqueSemi-infinite planeSingular integral equationsTheory of elasticityTwo-dimensional analysisFinite element methodContact problemFinite element modelRigid punchSemi-infinite planeSingular integral equationIntegral equationsAnalytical resultsComparative studiesContact problemIntegral transform techniqueSemi-infinite planeSingular integral equationsTheory of elasticityTwo-dimensional analysisFinite element methodAnalytical solution of a contact problem and comparison with the results from FEMArticle54460762210.12989/sem.2015.54.4.6072-s2.0-84930468498Q2WOS:000356243500001Q3