2
Demonstration Problems
Main Index
Corporate
MSC.Software Corporation
2 MacArthur Place
Santa Ana, CA 92707
Telephone: (800) 3452078
FAX: (714) 7844056
Europe
MSC.Software GmbH
Am Moosfeld 13
81829 Munich
GERMANY
Telephone: (49) (89) 43 19 87 0
Fax: (49) (89) 43 61 71 6
Asia Pacific
MSC.Software Japan Ltd.
Shinjuku First West 8F
237 Nishi Shinjuku
1Chome, ShinjukuKu
Tokyo 1600023, JAPAN
Telephone: (81) (3)69111200
Fax: (81) (3)69111201
Worldwide Web
www.mscsoftware.com
User Documentation: Copyright 2012 MSC.Software Corporation. Printed in U.S.A. All Rights Reserved.
This document, and the software described in it, are furnished under license and may be used or copied only in accordance with the
terms of such license. Any reproduction or distribution of this document, in whole or in part, without the prior written authorization of
MSC.Software Corporation is strictly prohibited.
MSC.Software Corporation reserves the right to make changes in specifications and other information contained in this document
without prior notice. The concepts, methods, and examples presented in this document are for illustrative and educational purposes
only and are not intended to be exhaustive or to apply to any particular engineering problem or design. THIS DOCUMENT IS
PROVIDED ON AN ASIS BASIS AND ALL EXPRESS AND IMPLIED CONDITIONS, REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES,
INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, ARE
DISCLAIMED, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT SUCH DISCLAIMERS ARE HELD TO BE LEGALLY INVALID.
MSC.Software logo, MSC, MSC., MSC/, MD Nastran, MSC Nastran, ADAMS, Dytran, MARC, Mentat, and Patran are trademarks or
registered trademarks of MSC.Software Corporation or its subsidiaries in the United States and/or other countries.
NASTRAN is a registered trademark of NASA. MSC.Nastran is an enhanced proprietary version developed and maintained by
MSC.Software Corporation. Python is a trademark of the Python Software Foundation. LSDYNA is a trademark of Livermore Software
Technology Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
This software may contain certain thirdparty software that is protected by copyright and licensed from MSC.Software suppliers.
METIS is copyrighted by the regents of the University of Minnesota.
NTMPICH is developed by Lehrstuhl fr Betriebssysteme der RWTH Aachen. Copyright 19922004 Lehrstuhl fr Betriebssysteme
der RWTH Aachen.
PCGLSS 6.0 is licensed from Computational Applications and System Integration Inc.
Use, duplication, or disclosure by the U.S. Government is subject to restrictions as set forth in FAR 12.212 (Commercial Computer
Software) and DFARS 227.7202 (Commercial Computer Software and Commercial Computer Software Documentation),
as applicable.
Revision 0 5/24/2012
NA*V2012.2*Z*Z:Z*MNDPM
Main Index
Contents
MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
Contents
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19
70
80
95
10
11
12
Main Index
13
164
14
174
15
Tube Flaring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
183
16
190
17
Doublesided Contact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
200
18
Demonstration of Springback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
249
19
256
20
308
21
317
22
362
23
Bolted Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
368
24
381
25
390
26
398
27
405
28
417
Main Index
Contents 5
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
Main Index
45
798
46
863
47
914
48
927
49
936
50
980
51
Creep of a Tube . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
993
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Main Index
Contents 7
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
Main Index
77
78
Main Index
Preface
Preface
Main Index
Introduction
10
Overview of SimXpert
15
15
Technical Support
Internet Resources
16
17
11
10
Introduction
This demonstration problems manual, written for those with a working knowledge of Nastran, highlights the steps
necessary to use the advanced features of the MSC Nastran 2012, including contact, elasticplastic creep, elastomeric
material nonlinearities, heat transfer, and adaptive mesh refinement. The subsequent application examples focus on
how to include these advanced features by making relatively modest changes to existing MSC Nastran bulk data files
using either a text editor or using a pre and postprocessing program like SimXpert exemplified in the video showcase
below. Click the thumbnails (Figure P1) to open streaming videos, or read on and youll find these videos at the end
of the indicated chapters.
39
56
6
23
3
25
5
16
72
60
6
64
44
28
45
61
46
18
18
10
A
10
49
core
42
4
2
53
4
1
t
F
23
27
25
200
x
z=0
Figure P1
Main Index
MSC Nastran Another World  Click Thumbnails for Streaming How To Videos
Every application example has a working input file(s) available to simulate the results found in each chapter, and upon
clicking its name, it will be downloaded into your browser to use. Once an understanding of how to invoke a new
feature has been reached, you are encouraged to experiment by changing some of the input parameters and rerunning
the application. Furthermore, as confidence grows, these models can serve as stepping stones to more complex
simulations that can help you better understand and improve your simulations.
Cross Reference of Solution Sequence, Element Types, Materials, Loads/BC, Contact, and
Load Control
Contact
Load
Control
Point Load
yes
NLPARM
Pressure
yes
NLPARM
Moving
Rigid Body
yes
NLPARM
400
3D
Isotropic Elastic
Point Load
yes
NLPARM
400
3D
Isotropic Elastic
Gravity,
Pressure
yes
NLPARM
400
Composite  Orthotropic
Elastic
Point Load
no
NLPARM
400
3D shell
Composite  Orthotropic
Elastic
Pressure
no
NLPARM
400
3D shell
Composite  Orthotropic
Elastic
Pressure
no
NLPARM
700
Metal
Centripetal,
Impact
yes
TSTEPNL
10
400
3D
Pressure,
Bolt Loading
yes
NLPARM
11
400
3D shell
Elasticplastic
yes
NLPARM
12
400
3D
Isotropic Elastic
no
NLPARM
13
400
axisymmetric
Mooney, Ogden
yes
NLSTEP
14
103 &
700
3D shell
Isotropic Elastic
no
TSTEPNL
15
400
axisymmetric
Elasticplastic
yes
NLPARM
Ch.
Sol
Element Type(s)
400
plane strain
Isotropic Elastic
400
axisymmetric &
3D
Isotropic Elastic
400
Main Index
Material
Loads/BC
Pressure
Point Load
12
Table P1
Cross Reference of Solution Sequence, Element Types, Materials, Loads/BC, Contact, and
Load Control (continued)
Contact
Load
Control
yes
NLPARM
Elasticplastic
yes
NLPARM
plane strain
Elasticplastic
yes
NLPARM
400
3D
Elasticplastic
Moving
Rigid Body
yes
NLPARM
20
400
plane strain
VCCT
yes
NLSTEP
21
700
3D
Airbag
yes
TSTEPNL
22
700
3D
Side Airbag
yes
TSTEPNL
23
400
3D
Isotropic Elastic
Bold Load,
Pressure,
Thermal
yes
NLPARM
24
400
3D
Isotropic Elastic
Point Load
yes
NLPARM
25
103
3D
Isotropic Elastic
Glued
Contact
yes
NLPARM
26
400
3D
Isotropic Elastic
Interference
Fit
yes
NLPARM
27
400
3D
Isotropic Elastic
Snap Fit
yes
NLPARM
28
400
3D
Isotropic Elastic/gasket
Bolt Loads,
Pressure
yes
NLSTEP
29
200
3D
Isotropic Elastic
Point Load
no
30
700
3D
Isotropic Elastic
Rollers
yes
TSTEPNL
31
700
3D
Impact
yes
TSTEPNL
32
700
3D
Elasticplastic, rigid
Impact
yes
TSTEPNL
33
101
Beam
Composites
Point Load
no
34
200
Isotropic Elastic
Point Load
no
35
200
3D
Isotropic Elastic
Point Load
no
36
200
3D
Isotropic Elastic
Point Load
no
37
101
plane stress
Isotropic Elastic
Edge Load
no
38
400
3D
Isotropic Elastic
Distributed
Load
yes
Ch.
Sol
Element Type(s)
16
400
3D shell
Elasticplastic
17
400
plane strain
18
400
19
Main Index
Material
Loads/BC
Moving
Rigid Body
NLPARM
Table P1
Cross Reference of Solution Sequence, Element Types, Materials, Loads/BC, Contact, and
Load Control (continued)
Contact
Load
Control
Distributed
Load
yes
NLPARM
Elasticplastic
Impact
FSI
TSTEPNL
3D
Elasticplastic
Explosion
FSI
TSTEPNL
700
Elasticplastic
Explosion
FSI
TSTEPNL
43
700
3D
Elasticplastic
Explosion
FSI
TSTEPNL
44
400HT
3D membrane
Isotropic
Radiation
no
NLSTEP
45
400HT
3D
Isotropic
Thermal
Loads
no
TSTEPNL,
NLSTEP
46
400HT
3D
Isotropic
Thermal
no
NLSTEP
47
400
3D beams
Elasticplastic
Beam To
Beam
yes
TSTEPNL
48
400
3D
Shape Memory
Prescribed
Displacemen
t
49
400
3D shells
Isotropic Elastic
Prescribed
Displacemen
t
yes
NLPARM
50
400
Isotropic Elastic
Point Load
no
NLPARM
51
400
Axisymmetric
Pressure
no
NLSTEP
52
400
3D
Elasticplastic
Pressure
yes
NLSTEP
53
700
3D
Elasticplastic
Blade Out
yes
TSTEPNL
54
700
3D shell
Elasticplastic, hydrodynamic
Impact
yes
TSTEPNL
55
700
3D shell
Anisotropic Elasticplastic,
rigid
Moving
Rigid Body
yes
TSTEPNL
56
700
Mooney
Hydroplanin
g
FSI
TSTEPNL
Ch.
Sol
Element Type(s)
Material
39
400
3D
40
700
3D
41
700
42
Loads/BC
NLPARM
57
400 2D
HT&RC
Isotropic
Convection
no
NLSTEP
58
400RC
3D
Isotropic
Convection
no
NLSTEP
59
400
3D shell
Isotropic
Point Load
no
NLSTEP
60
400
3D
Isotropic
OpenFSI
no
TSTEPNL
Main Index
14
Table P1
Cross Reference of Solution Sequence, Element Types, Materials, Loads/BC, Contact, and
Load Control (continued)
Contact
Load
Control
Convection
yes
NLSTEP
Isotropic Elastic
Gravity,
Pressure
no
Elasticplastic
Pressure
no
NLSTEP
400
3D
Elasticplastic
Moving
Rigid Body
yes
NLSTEP
65
400RC
3D
Isotropic
Convection,
Advection
no
NLSTEP
66
400RC
3D
Isotropic, Honeycomb
Radiation
no
NLSTEP
67
400RC
3D
Isotropic
Prescribed
Temperature
s
yes
NLSTEP
68
400RC
3D
Isotropic
Radiation,
Distributed
Flux
no
NLSTEP
69
700
3D
Isotropic
FSI
TSTEPNL
70
400RC
2D
Temp. dependent
Convection
no
NLSTEP
71
700
3D shell
Orthotropic, Progressive
Failure
Impact
yes
TSTEPNL
72
400
3D
Isotropic Elastic
Bolt Load
yes
NLSTEP
73
400
Axisymmetric
Elasticplastic
Moving
Rigid Body
yes
NLSTEP
74
700
3D Euler, 2D Shell
MultiMat Fluids,
Elastic/Plastic
Undewater
Explosion
FSI
Coupiing
TSTEPNL
77
700
3D Euler, 2D Shell
MultiMat Fluids,
Elastic/Plastic
Prescribed
motion
FSI
Coupling
TSTEPNL
Ch.
Sol
Element Type(s)
61
400
3D
Isotropic
62
400
Axisymmetric
63
400
64
Main Index
Material
Loads/BC
Overview of SimXpert
SimXpert is an integral component of the enterprise simulation environment. It incorporates direct integration with
SimManager and SimDesigner. SimXpert is a multidisciplinary simulation environment for the analyst including
workspaces between which one common model can be shared. The workspaces provide different tools appropriate to
the discipline:
Structures linear and nonlinear, static and dynamic Finite Element Analysis (FEA) using MSC Nastran
Thermal linear FEA using MSC Nastran
Motion multibody dynamics of rigid and flexible bodies using the Adams C++ solver
Crash nonlinear explicit dynamic FEA using LSDyna
MSC Explicit  nonlinear explicit dynamic FEA using MSC Nastran
Template Builder  Captures Simulation Procedures Consisting Of SimXpert Commands And Macros
Process Builder  Creating Enterprise Processes (SimProcess)
All solvers are included. Workspaces also filter the simulation model. Only the parts of the model that have relevance
to a workspace are visible.
The simulation process allows knowledge capture and reuse through the use of templates.The template builder allows
you to: define a sequence of tasks and subtasks, draganddrop existing scripts in a visual editing environment, and
publish the finished template to SimManager for reuse across an organization.
To learn more about SimXpert, see Appendix A: Getting Started in SimXpert.
Main Index
16
Users Guides
Getting Started
Linear Static Analysis
Dynamic Analysis
MSC Demonstration Problems
Thermal Analysis
Superelement
Design Sensitivity and Optimization
Implicit Nonlinear (SOL 600)
Explicit Nonlinear (SOL 700)
Aeroelastic Analysis
User Defined Services
EFEA Users Guide
EFEA Tutorial
EBEA Users Guide
Technical Support
For help with installing or using an MSC.Software product, contact your local technical support services. Our
technical support provides the following services:
If you have concerns about an analysis, we suggest that you contact us at an early stage.
You can reach technical support services on the web, by telephone, or email:
Web
Main Index
United States
Telephone: (800) 7327284
Fax: (714)
Frimley, Camberley
Surrey, United Kingdom
Phone: (44) (1276) 60 19 00
Fax: (44) (1276) 69 11 11
Munich, Germany
Phone: (49) (89) 43 19 87 0
Fax: (49) (89) 43 61 71 6
Tokyo, Japan
Phone: (81) (3) 3505 02 66
Fax: (81) (3) 3505 09 14
Rome, Italy
Phone: (390) (6) 5 91 64 50
Fax: (390) (6) 5 91 25 05
Paris, France
Phone: (33) (1) 69 36 69 36
Fax: (33) (1) 69 36 45 17
Moscow, Russia
Phone: (7) (095) 236 6177
Fax: (7) (095) 236 9762
Send a detailed description of the problem to the Email address below that
corresponds to the product you are using. You should receive an acknowledgement
that your message was received, followed by an Email from one of our Technical
Support Engineers.
Patran Support
mscpatran.support@mscsoftware.com
mscnastran.support@mscsoftware.com
Dytran Support
mscdytran.support@mscsoftware.com
mscfatigue.support@mscsoftware.com
Marc Support
mscmarc.support@mscsoftware.com
msctraining.support@mscsoftware.com
Internet Resources
MSC.Software (http://www.mscsoftware.com/)
MSC.Software corporate site with information on the latest events, products and services for the CAD/CAE/CAM
marketplace.
Main Index
18
Training
The MSC Institute of Technology is the world's largest global supplier of CAD/CAM/CAE/PDM training products
and services for the product design, analysis and manufacturing market. We offer over 100 courses through a global
network of education centers. The Institute is uniquely positioned to optimize your investment in design and
simulation software tools.
Our industry experienced expert staff is available to customize our course offerings to meet your unique training
requirements. For the most effective training, the Institute also offers many of our courses at our customer's facilities.
MSC offers training at:
2 MacArthur Place
Santa Ana, CA 92707
Phone: (800) 7327211
Fax: (714) 7844028
MSC maintains stateoftheart classroom facilities at training centers throughout the world. All of our courses
emphasize handson computer laboratory work to facilitate skills development.
We specialize in customized training based on our evaluation of your design and simulation processes, which yields
courses that are geared to your business.
In addition to traditional instructorled classes, we also offer video and DVD courses, interactive multimedia training,
webbased training, and a specialized instructor's program.
Main Index
Main Index
Summary
20
Introduction
Solution Requirements
Analytical Solution
FEM Solutions
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
21
21
21
22
26
69
29
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry
Material properties
E cylinder = 210kN mm 2
E block = 70kN mm 2
Quasistatic analysis
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element type
Contact properties
FE results
and
= 0.1
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Distance (mm)
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 21
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
Introduction
A steel cylinder is pressed into an aluminum block. It is assumed that the material behavior for both materials is linear
elastic. The cylinder is loaded by a point load with magnitude F = 35kN in the vertical direction. A 2D approximation
(plane strain) of this problem is assumed to be representative for the solution. An analytical solution for the frictionless
case is known  (Ref: NAFEMS, 2006, Advanced Finite Element Contact Benchmarks, Benchmark 1 2D Cylinder
Roller Contact).
Solution Requirements
There are two solutions: one using a friction coefficient of 0.1 between the cylinder and block and one frictionless.
Length of contact zone
Normal pressure distribution as function of distance (xcoordinate) along the contact surface
Tangential stress distribution as function of distance along the contact surface
These solutions demonstrate:
More elements near the contact zone
Which surface is treated as master (contacting) and slave (contacting)
The analysis results are presented with linear and parabolic elements.
Analytical Solution
An analytical solution for this contact problem can be obtained from the Hertzian contact formulae (Hertz, H., ber
die Berhrung fester elasticher Krper. J. Reine Angew. Mathm. 92, 156171, 1881) for two cylinders (line contact).
The maximum contact pressure is given by:
p max =
F n E*
2BR*
where F n is the applied normal force, E* the combined elasticity modulus, B the length of the cylinder and R* the
combined radius.
The contact width 2a is given by:
a =
8F n R*
BE*
Using the normalized coordinate = x a with x the Cartesian xcoordinate, the pressure distribution is given by:
p = p max 1 2
The combined elasticity modulus is determined from the modulus of elasticity and Poissons ratio of the cylinder and
block E cylinder , E block , cylinder , and blo ck , as follows:
2E cylinder E block
E* = 2
2
E block 1 cylinder
+ E cylinder 1 block
Main Index
The combined radius of curvature is evaluated from the radius of curvature of the cylinder and block R cylind er and
R block , as follows:
R cylinder R block
R* = R cylinder + R block
For the target solution, the block is approximated with an infinitely large radius. The combined radius is then evaluated
as:
R* =
lim
R block
R cylinder R block
= R cylinder
R cylinder + R block
Using the numerical parameters for the problems the following results are obtained:
a = 6.21mm
p max = 3585.37N mm 2
Note that half the contact length is equal to 6.21 mm which corresponds to approximately 7.1 degrees of the ring.
Hence, it is clear that, in order to simulate this problem correctly, a very fine mesh near the contact zone is needed.
FEM Solutions
A numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastrans solution sequence 400 (SOL 400) for the element mesh
shown in Figure 11 using plane strain linear elements. The elements in the entire cylinder and entire block have been
selected as contact bodies. Contact body IDs 5 and 6 are identified as a set of elements of the block and cylinder
respectively as:
BCBODY
BSURF
...
5
5
2D
1
DEFORM
2
5
3
0
4
.1
5
6
6
2D
1242
DEFORM
1243
6
1244
0
1245
.1
1246
1247
1248
and
BCBODY
BSURF
...
Furthermore, the BCTABLE entries shown below identify that these bodies can touch each other:
BCTABLE
BCTABLE
0
SLAVE
6
0
MASTERS 5
1
SLAVE
6
0
MASTERS 5
0.
0
1
0.
0
.1
0.
0.
0.
0
1
0.
0
.1
0.
0.
Thus, any deformable contact body is simply a collection of mutually exclusive elements and their associated nodes.
The order of these bodies is important and is discussed later. For the simulations with friction, a bilinear Coulomb
model is used (FTYPE = 6). The slave or contacting nodes are contained in the elements in the cylinder, whereas the
master nodes or nodes or contacted segments are contained in the elements in the block.
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 23
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
Steel Cylinder
Contact Body ID 6
Element IDs 1242 to 2641
Contact Body ID 5
Element IDs 1 to 1241
Aluminium Block
Y
Z
Figure 11
Nonlinear plane strain elements are chosen by the PSHLN2 entry referring to the PLPLANE option as shown below.
PLPLANE 1
PSHLN2 1
+
C4
1
1
PLSTRN
1
L
+
+
Herein referred to as plane strain quad4 elements (PLSTRN QUAD4) or (PLSTRN QUAD8) for the linear and parabolic
elements respectively listed in Table 11. All elements are 1 mm thick in the outofplane direction.
Table 11
linear
PLSTRN QUAD4
parabolic
PLSTRN QUAD8
The material properties are isotropic and elastic with Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio defined as:
$ Material Record : steel
MAT1
1
210000.
$ Material Record : aluminum
MAT1
2
70000.
.3
.3
PFNT
Here the PFNT option is selected to update the stiffness matrix during every iteration using the full NewtonRaphson
iteration strategy; the default convergence tolerance values (0.01) will be used. The convergence method and
tolerances may be specified explicitly as shown here since they will be discussed later.
Main Index
Table 12
NLPARM
+pb1
1.00E2
1.00E2
PFNT
10
UP
YES
+pb1
The obtained lengths of the contact zones are listed in Table 13. The exact length of the contact zone cannot be
determined due to the discrete character of contact detection algorithms (nodes are detected to be in contact with an
element edge for 2D, element face for 3D). It is clear, however, that the numerical solution is in good agreement with
the analytical one.
Table 13
aavg
(mm)
amax
(mm)
Error
(%)
Pmax
(N/mm2)
Error
(%)
linear
5.99
6.33
6.67
2.6
3285
8.38
parabolic
5.88
6.08
6.28
1.5
3583
0.05
The deformed structure plot (magnification factor 1.0) is shown in Figure 12. A plot of the Hertzian contact solution
for the pressure along the contact surface is obtained with linear and parabolic elements as shown in Figure 13 and
Figure 14.
amax
amin
Contacting Nodes
Contacted Nodes
Figure 12
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 25
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Distance (mm)
Figure 13
5000
Comparison of Analytical and Numerical Solutions for Linear Elements without Friction
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Distance (mm)
Figure 14
Comparison of Analytical and Numerical Solutions for Parabolic Elements without Friction
The contact pressure plotted for the contacting nodes shows, even with this mesh density, an oscillating type of
behavior. This is reduced for the parabolic elements. Generating the same plots along the contacted nodes produces a
smoother curve.
Numerical solutions have also been obtained with a friction coefficient of 0.1 (bilinear Coulomb). The contact normal
and tangential stress along the contacting nodes are shown in Figure 15.
All stresses show an oscillating type of behavior. This can be improved by refining the mesh in the contact zone.
Main Index
5000
Pressure Linear
Pressure Parabolic
4000
Tangential Linear
Tangential Parabolic
3000
2000
1000
0
Distance (mm)
Figure 15
Modeling Tips
About Convergence
Although the nonlinearity of the forcedisplacement relation in this problem is quite mild, looking more closely at the
convergence of this problem will be useful for subsequent problems in this manual, and worthy of mention here as a
matter of introduction. Table 14 controls the number of iterations in the NewtonRaphson process illustrated below
in Figure 16.
Table 14
Convergence Output
Error Factors
Load Step
No. Inc
IRT
Disp
Load
Work
1.00E+00
9.78E01
9.78E01
3.70E+00
8.83E01
4.57E+00
2.80E+00
6.83E01
3.98E+00
1.43E+00
3.81E01
2.26E+00
4.96E01
7.28E02
8.84E01
3.72E04
1.51E02
9.98E04
6.00E05
2.69E05
8.69E05
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 27
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
Load Fy (N)
60000
NewtonRaphson Path
Fy , v
50000
Point C
40000
30000
Point D
20000
Point B
10000
Displacement v (mm)
Point A
0.0
Figure 16
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
At the beginning of the analysis (Point A in Figure 16), the tangent modulus (slope of loaddisplacement curve) is
used to project to the applied load to Point B, which does not satisfy the convergence criteria. Then equilibrium is reestablished at Point C, and a new slope is computed. The NewtonRaphson iterative procedure continues until the
convergence tolerances are satisfied, Point D. The convergence criteria are based upon displacement, load or work
either individually or in some combination. The NewtonRaphson iterative scheme is recommended for all SOL 400
analyses because the degree of nonlinearity is typically significant. For the parameters in Table 13, the output
(Table 14) shows the following convergence characteristics. The percent sign helps to locate the line in the output
file. In this case, the criteria used is both the displacement, U, and load, P  specified through the UP keyword for the
convergence type on the NLPARM command  with a value of 0.01 for each. This means that both relative displacement
and load measures (error factors) must be below 0.01 for convergence to be permitted. This can be seen in Figure 17.
In this case, there is no checking on the work, even though it has a low tolerance.
1
Log(work)
Log(disp)
1
2
Log(epsp = epsu)
Log(load)
3
4
5
Log(epsw)
Figure 17
Main Index
the body with the most nodes as the contacting body. Run nug_01aw.dat to see the differences as shown in
Figure 18.
nug01aw.dat
Steel Cylinder
Contacted Nodes
Contacting Nodes
Aluminium Block
Figure 18
Main Index
nug01am.dat
Steel Cylinder
Contacting Nodes
Contacted Nodes
Aluminium Block
CHAPTER 1 29
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
c
d
Main Index
a
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 31
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
( p
a
b
c
c
Main Index
a
b
c
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 33
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
a
b
Main Index
a
b
c
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 35
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
Main Index
Stitch Surfaces
Finally, all of the surfaces that comprise the part/block, are stitched together. Stitching surfaces creates congruent
surfaces with aligned normals within a stitch tolerance. Unconnected or free edges are displayed in red whereas shared
edges are displayed in green as shown below.
a. Geometry
b. Stitch
c. 4 bodies; click OK
1
2
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 37
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
c. cylinder, OK
Main Index
Create an Arc
The cylindrical surface is generated by an arc and a line. The arc is defined below.
a. Geometry
b. Arc
c. DirRadius 0,250,0;0,250,1
d. Arc.1, 40,0,180 VERTEX(indicated); click OK
a
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 39
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
a
b
Main Index
Break Line and Arc into Two Curves for Two Surfaces
Before generating a surface from these two curves, each curve (line and arc) is broken into two equal pieces
respectively. This allows for generating two surfaces that ultimately generate different meshes.
a. Geometry
b. Edit Curve
c. Split
d. Parametric, 2 Curves; click OK
a
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 41
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
a
b
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 43
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
Create Mesh
With the curves of this surface seeded, a quadrilateral dominate mesh is created by using the surface mesher.
a. Meshing
b. Surface
c. Pick Surface, Mesh type and Method (indicated)
d. Element Size 1
e. Quad Dominant
f. OK
yp
a
b
c
d
Main Index
Create Mesh
The top cylindrical surface is meshed with a quadrilateral dominate mesh and the cylindrical part meshing is complete.
a. Meshing
b. Surface
c. Pick Surface
d. Element Size 2.5
e. Quad Dominant
f. OK
a
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 45
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
Create Mesh
The block part consists of four surfaces that are now to be meshed with the smallest rectangular surface being mesh
with uniform elements with the indicated size using a quadrilateral dominate mapped mesher.
a. Meshing
b. Surface
c. Pick Surface
d. Element Size 1.5
e. Quad Dominant
f. OK
a
b
Main Index
a
b
c
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 47
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
Create Mesh
Finally, the lower rectangular surface of the block is meshed using the mapped mesher with uniform element sizes.
a. Meshing
b. Surface
c. Pick Surface
d. Element Size 5
e. Quad Dominant
f. OK
g. Pick Surface
h. Element Size 5
i. Quad Dominant
j. OK
a
b
Main Index
b
c
d
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 49
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
d. Al, (properties), OK
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 51
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
b. Deformable Body
c. Select cylinder, OK
a
b
Main Index
a
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 53
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
c. BCTABLE_INIT
Main Index
Define Constraints
The horizontal component of displacement for all nodes on the symmetry plane is fixed to be zero by selecting the
associated curves.
a. Loads and Boundary Conditions (LBC)
b. General
c. Symmetry (Tx = 0 only)
d. 5 Curves; click OK
y(
y)
d. 5 Curves, OK
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 55
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
Define Constraints
The horizontal and vertical displacement components of all nodes on the bottom of the block are fixed by selecting
the associated curve.
a. Loads and Boundary Conditions (LBC)
b. General
c. Bottom (Tx, Ty = 0 only)
d. 1 Curve; click OK
c. Bottom (Tx, Ty
0 only)
d. 1 Curve, OK
Main Index
d. 17500, (direction), OK
c
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 57
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
a
b
c
d
Main Index
c
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 59
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
Main Index
c
a
f
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 61
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
b
c
d
a
Main Index
Request Output
In order to visualize results, nodal and elemental output requests are made.
a. Output Request
b. Nodal Output Requests
c. Create Constraint Force output Request; click OK
d. Elemental Output
e. Create Nonlinear Stress Output,; click OK
d
a
b
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 63
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
Run Analysis
The preprocessing is now complete and the job is submitted. Upon successful completion of the job, the results are
attached and visualized.
a. Right click job, cylinder_roller_contact, under Simulations
b. Run.
Main Index
Results
The results are attached.
a. Attach Results
b. Select *_xdb file
a
b Select *.xdb file
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 65
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
b. Fringe
c. Cauchy Stress
d. Y Component
e. Update
c
d
Main Index
b. Chart
c. Stress, Y Comp., Nodes
d. Advanced Picking Tool
e. From Curve
f. Select Curve
g. X Global
h. Add Curves
b
a
d
c
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 67
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 1 69
2D Cylindrical Roller Contact
Input File(s)
Snippets from the first four Nastran input files listed below are used to illustrate the simulation throughout various
sections of this chapter except the section, Pre and Postprocess with SimXpert. This later section illustrates the
simulation using the SimXpert workspace environment, instead of the Nastran input file(s). While both illustrations
ultimately lead to the same solution, viewing the simulation from these two different viewpoints facilitates a better
understanding of how to perform the simulation.
For example, nug_01am.dat, uses contact body IDs 5 and 6 as the set of elements for the block and cylinder,
respectively; whereas the input file, ch01.bdf, (derived from the SimXpert workspaces database, ch01.SimXpert)
uses contact body IDs 1 and 2 as the set of elements for the block and cylinder, respectively. It is important to
understand that while the contact bodies in these two input files are different (they use different IDs with a different
set of elements), they yield the same solution since the loads, boundary conditions, and material properties are
the same.
File
Description
nug_01am.dat
nug_01aw.dat
nug_01bm.dat
nug_01cm.dat
nug_01dm.dat
ch01.SimXpert
SimXpert Model
ch01_SimXpert.proc
ch01.bdf
Main Index
Main Index
Summary
71
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solutions
Results
Input File(s)
Video
72
72
72
75
79
79
78
CHAPTER 2 71
3D Punch (Rounded Edges) Contact
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry
Axisymmetric/3D contact
Analytical deformable body contact
Friction along deformabledeformable contact plane
Comparison of linear and parabolic elements
Material properties
Analysis type
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
A uniform pressure (distributed load) is applied to the punch in the axial direction,
P = 100N mm 2
Element type
Axisymmetric
4node linear elements
8node parabolic elements
Contact properties
FE results
3D continuum
8node linear elements
0.005
Radius (mm)
0.000
20
40
60
80
100
Friction
0.005
0.010
No Friction
0.015
0.020
Main Index
NAFEMS
Friction
No Friction
Introduction
An axisymmetric steel punch is compressed on an aluminium cylinder. It is assumed that the material behavior is linear
elastic. The punch is loaded by a uniform pressure with magnitude P = 100N mm 2 in the axial direction. The effect of
friction is studied along the contact zone. Axisymmetric 2D solutions are used to serve as a target solution for a 3D
analysis. For the 3D solutions, one quarter of the assembly is modeled, using symmetry conditions. (Ref: NAFEMS,
2006, Advanced Finite Element Contact Benchmarks, Benchmark 2, 3D Punch (Rounded Edges) Contact)
Requested Solutions
Both 2D (axisymmetric) and 3D solutions are requested. Two solutions, one frictionless and the other using a friction
coefficient of 0.1 between the punch and foundation, are requested. The displacement, force, and stress fields in the
contact zone (contacting surface of the punch and contacted surface of the foundation) are of interest and are obtained
with both linear and parabolic elements in the axisymmetric case and with linear elements in the 3D case. The SOL
400 elements specified through suitable extensions to the PLPLANE or PSOLID entries are demonstrated. In the 3D
case, solutions obtained with these elements are also compared to those obtained using existing HEX elements.
The solutions presented include:
Radial displacement of top contact surface of punch as function of coordinate.
Contact force, friction force, and contact pressure distributions as a function of coordinate.
FEM Solutions
Numerical solutions have been obtained with MSC Nastrans solution sequence 400 for multiple 2D axisymmetric
and 3D cases. The axisymmetric cases include linear and parabolic elements, with and without friction. The 3D case
includes linear elements with and without friction.
The contact, material, geometry, convergence, and other parameters are explained below  primarily with respect to
the axisymmetric linear element case and are representative for both 2D and 3D cases.
Contact Parameters
The element mesh using axisymmetric linear elements is shown in Figure 21 and is further described as follows: Two
contact bodies, one identified as the punch and the other identified as the foundation, are used. Pressure is applied at
the top of the punch in the axial direction. The bottom of the punch, in turn, compresses the foundation. Typical
element length along the punch and foundation is 4 mm and 3.5 mm, respectively. Contact body ID 4 is used to identify
the punch and body ID 5 is used to identify the foundation.
BCBODY
4
BSURF
4
........
2D
1
DEFORM
2
4
3
0
4
.1
5
BCBODY
5
BSURF
5
..........
2D
229
DEFORM
230
5
231
0
232
.1
233
Main Index
1
6
234
235
CHAPTER 2 73
3D Punch (Rounded Edges) Contact
BCBODY with ID 4 is identified as a twodimensional deformable body with BSURF ID 4 and friction coefficient of
0.1. Furthermore, 1 on the 8th field indicates that BCBODY 4 is described as an analytical body, wherein the discrete
facets associated with the element edges are internally enhanced by using cubic splines. Since the punch has rounded
edges in the contact zone, using an enhanced spline representation of the punch yields better accuracy. The minus sign
indicates that the nodal locations defining the spline discontinuities are automatically determined. Note that since the
foundation is a rectangular shape with sharp angles, using the spline option with this body is not necessary since it
would only increase the computational cost without an associated improvement in accuracy.
Figure 21
The BCTABLE bulk data entries shown below identify the touching conditions between the bodies:
BCTABLE
BCTABLE
0
SLAVE
4
0
MASTERS 5
1
SLAVE
4
0
MASTERS 5
0.
0
1
0.
0
.1
0.
0.
0.
0
1
0.
0
.1
0.
0.
BCTABLE with ID 0 is used to define the touching conditions at the start of the analysis. It should be noted that this is
a required option that is required in SOL 400 for contact analysis. It is flagged in the case control section through the
optional BCONTACT = 0 option. Note that BCTABLE 0 and other contact cards with ID 0 (e.g., BCPARA 0) would be
applied at the start of the analysis even without the BCONTACT = 0 option. For later increments in the analysis,
Main Index
BCONTACT = 1 in the case control section indicates that BCTABLE with ID 1 is to be used to define the touching
conditions between the punch and the foundation.
The BCPARA bulk data entry shown below for the frictional linear axisymmetric case defines the general contact
parameters to be used in the analysis:
BCPARA
0
FTYPE
NBODIES 2
BIAS
MAXENT 84
9.0E01 ISPLIT
MAXNOD
84
RVCNST
1.0E04
Note that ID 0 on the BCPARA option indicates that the parameters specified herein are applied right at the start of the
analysis and are maintained through the analysis unless some of these parameters are redefined through the BCTABLE
option. Important entries under BCPARA option include FTYPE  the friction type, RVCNST  the slipthreshold value
and the BIAS  the distance tolerance bias. As per general recommendation, BIAS is set to 0.9 (note that the default
value of BIAS is 0.9). For the frictional case, FTYPE is set to 6 (bilinear Coulomb model) and RVCNST is set to 1e4
(this is a nondefault value that is used in this particular problem  the need for a nondefault value is discussed in more
detail later). Note that when other parameters on the BCPARA option like ERROR (distance tolerance), FNTOL
(separation force) are not specified, left as blank or specified as 0, program calculated defaults are used. It should also
be noted that while the BCPARA parameters generally apply to all the bodies throughout the analysis, some of the
parameters like ERROR, BIAS, FNTOL can be redefined via the BCTABLE option for specific body combinations and
for specific times through the analysis.
Material/Geometry Parameters
The two material properties used herein for the punch and foundation are isotropic and elastic with Youngs modulus
and Poissons ratio defined as
$ Material Record : steel
MAT1
1
210000.
$ Material Record : aluminum
MAT1
2
70000.
.3
.3
For the 2D case, axisymmetric elements are chosen via the CQUADX option pointing to a PLPLANE entry which in
turn, points to an auxiliary PSHLN2 entry as shown below.
PLPLANE 1
PSHLN2 1
+
C4
+
C8
1
1
1
AXSOLID L
AXSOLID Q
+
+
where the C4 entries indicate that linear 4noded full integration axisymmetric solid elements are to be used and the
C8 entries indicate that parabolic 8noded full integration axisymmetric solid elements are to be used. Note that the
PSHLN2 entry enables SOL 400 to access a robust 2D element library featuring linear and parabolic plane stress,
plane strain or axisymmetric elements. Multiple element topologies (4noded, 6noded, 8noded) can be defined as
plane stress, plane strain, or axisymmetric through the PSHLN2 options. These elements which can be used for
isotropic/orthotropic/ anisotropic elastic/elastoplastic applications augment previous SOL 400 hyperelastic element
technology that could be used in conjunction with the PLPLANE and MATHP options.
For the 3D case, hex elements are chosen via the CHEXA option pointing to a PSOLID entry. For elastic or small strain
applications, the user has two choices: Use existing 3D solid elements with just the PSOLID option or use 3D solid
element technology accessed by the PSOLID entry pointing to an auxiliary PSLDN1 entry. For large strain elastoplastic applications, the user should always use the 3D solid elements; i.e., the primary usage of the 3D solid
Main Index
CHAPTER 2 75
3D Punch (Rounded Edges) Contact
elements is for large strain elastoplasticity for which the PSLDN1 + NLMOPTS,LRGSTRN,1 bulk data entry is
recommended. However, as in the current example, these elements can also be used for elastic applications when used
in conjunction with PSLDN1 and with NLMOPTS,ASSM,ASSUMED entry.
Convergence Parameters
The nonlinear procedure used is defined through the NLPARM entry:
NLPARM
10
PFNT
25
UP
YES
where 10 indicates the total number of increments; PFNT represents Full NewtonRaphson Technique, wherein the
stiffness is reformed at every iteration; KSTEP = 0 in conjunction with PFNT indicates that the program
automatically determines whether the stiffness needs to be reformed after the previous load increment is completed
and the next load increment is commenced. The maximum number of allowed recycles is 25 for every increment and
if this were to be exceeded, the load step would be cutback and the increment repeated. UP indicates that convergence
will be checked using both displacements (U) and residual criteria (P). YES indicates that intermediate output will be
produced after every increment (note that this has been turned to NO for the 3D case due to voluminous output). The
second line of NLPARM is omitted here, which implies that default convergence tolerances of 0.01 will be used for U
and P. It should be noted that the PFNT iterative method used conducts checking over incremental displacements and
is generally more stringent than for the FNT iterative method which convergence is checked over weighted total
displacements.
Results
The radial displacements obtained for the frictionless and frictional cases for the linear axisymmetric element case are
compared in Figure 22. The results match very well with the corresponding NAFEMS results (Benchmark 2 of
NAFEMS 2006).
It is noteworthy to study the effect of the slip threshold value, RVCNST, on the friction results. The radial
displacements for two different values of RVCNST are compared in Figure 23. It is seen that RVCNST has a significant
influence on the radial displacements. It should be noted that the default value of RVCNST is calculated as 0.0025 times
the average edge length of all elements that can participate in contact. For the linear axisymmetric problem, the default
RVCNST is of the order of 0.015. Relative radial displacements which are smaller than this value imply a transition
Main Index
zone and the frictional force linearly increases from 0 to the peak value within this zone. In order to capture the
frictional force and the relative sliding more accurately, a smaller value of RVCNST (= 1e4) is required in this
problem. In general, for friction problems, a good check to be made from the f06 file or by postprocessing is whether
the friction force is of the order of F n , where is the friction coefficient and F n is the nodal contact normal force.
Radial Displacement (mm)
0.005
Radius (mm)
0.000
20
40
60
80
100
Friction
0.005
0.010
No Friction
0.015
NAFEMS
0.020
Figure 22
Friction
No Friction
Radial Displacement as Function of the Radial Coordinate (friction coefficient =0.0 and 0.1)
Obtained with Linear Axisymmetric Elements
0.005
Distance (mm)
0.000
20
40
60
80
100
= 0.1 RVCNST=1e4
0.005
0.010
= 0.1
RVCNST=default
0.015
No Friction
0.020
Figure 23
The contact normal force and friction force along the punch for the linear axisymmetric element is plotted in
Figure 24. It is instructive to check that equilibrium is wellmaintained (the sum of the contact forces transmitted via
the punch should be equal to the total force being applied to the punch). It can be shown that the sum of all contact
forces at the punchfoundation interface is within .03% of the total force applied on the punch
2
=PR punch
= 10050 2 = 7.85e5N . Also, the friction forces are about 0.1 times the contact normal forces.
Main Index
CHAPTER 2 77
3D Punch (Rounded Edges) Contact
The contact pressure is plotted for the contacting nodes for both the linear and parabolic axisymmetric elements of the
punch in Figure 25. The parabolic solution shows a rather oscillating type of behavior. Also, as may be expected, the
parabolic solution shows a more localized stress peak. These trends are consistent with the NAFEMS benchmark 2
results. The oscillatory behavior can be improved by refining the mesh in the contact zone (and the surrounding part
assuring connection with the remaining part of the structures).
Force (N)
350000
300000
250000
Contact Normal
Force
200000
150000
Contact Friction
Force
100000
50000
0
Distance (mm)
10
Figure 24
20
30
40
50
60
Contact Normal Force and Friction Force at Punch as a Function of Radial Coordinate Along
PunchFoundation Contact Interface
Linear Elements
500
400
300
200
100
0
Distance (mm)
Figure 25
10
20
30
40
50
60
Variation of Contact Normal Stress Along Radial Coordinate of Punch for Linear and
Parabolic Axisymmetric Elements
The displacement contours in the punch for the 3D frictional case are shown in Figure 26. The lefthand side shows
the solution for the 3D solid elements identified through the PSOLID + PSLDN1 options. The righthand side shows
Main Index
the solution for the existing 3D solid elements identified through the PSOLID options only. As seen, the solutions are
very close to each other.
Figure 26
Main Index
CHAPTER 2 79
3D Punch (Rounded Edges) Contact
For the axisymmetric case, the pressure load is applied through PLOADX1. It should be noted that the pressure
value to be specified on the PLOADX1 option is not the force per unit area 100N mm 2 but the pressure over a
circular ring of angle 2 Accordingly, on the LOAD bulk data entry, the pressure load is scaled by a value of
2
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_02am.dat
nug_02bm.dat
nug_02cm.dat
nug_02dm.dat
nug_02em.dat
3D Linear Elements Without Friction  PSLDN1 used along with PSOLID to flag nonlinear
HEX elements
nug_02en.dat
3D Linear Elements Without Friction  existing HEX element technology flagged through
PSOLID
3D Linear Elements With Friction  PSLDN1 used along with PSOLID to flag nonlinear
HEX elements
nug_02fm.dat
3D Linear Elements With Friction  existing HEX element technology flagged through
nug_02fn.dat
PSOLID
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 18 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
0.005
Radius (mm)
0.000
20
40
60
80
100
Friction
0.005
0.010
No Friction
0.015
0.020
Figure 27
Main Index
NAFEMS
Friction
No Friction
Main Index
Summary
Introduction
Solution Requirements
FEM Solutions
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
94
81
82
83
93
94
82
CHAPTER 3 81
3D Sheet Metal Forming
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry
Material properties
Original
Position
Punch
Sheet
Final
Position
W
R2
R3
Die
Hollomon hardening:
= K n
K = 550.4N mm 2
n = 0.223
Analysis type
Quasistatic analysis
Elastic plastic material (isotropic hardening)
Geometric nonlinearity
Nonlinear boundary conditions
Displacement boundary
conditions
Element type
2D Plane strain  4node linear elements; 3D Shell  4node shell elements
Contact properties
FE results
300
SOL 400
Marc
250
200
150
Experimental
100
50
0
10
15
20
25
30
Main Index
Introduction
This benchmark problem is an approximation of the Numisheet 2002 Benchmark B problem. Simulations are carried
out using MSC Nastran solution sequence 400 to find the angles before and after spring back. Experimental results are
available for this benchmark, but it is noted that the sheet is slightly anisotropic. The text setup and reference details
of these experimental results are given in Figure 31. The current problem uses an isotropic elasticplastic hardening
behavior.
SOURCE
FREE BENDING BENCHMARK TESTING OF 6111T4 ALUMINUM ALLOY SAMPLE
John C. Brem*, Frederic Barlat**, Joseph M. Fridy** Alcoa Technical Center, Pennsylvania,
Numisheet 2002 Conference, Korea
Figure 31
Solution Requirements
Two solutions: one using friction coefficient 0.1342 (bilinear Coulomb friction model) between the sheet and both
tools, and one frictionless solution are requested for:
Forming angle (the angle at the end of the punch stroke)
Angle after release (the angle after tool removal)
Punch force  punch displacement diagram
Figure 32 shows the definition of angle . The solutions, obtained with shell elements and plane strain elements,
include the following:
Main Index
CHAPTER 3 83
3D Sheet Metal Forming
Unit: mm
A
20
20
B
C
20
y
x
Figure 32
FEM Solutions
FEM solutions have been obtained with MSC Nastrans solution sequence 400 for the 2D plane strain and 3D shell
representations of the present sheet metal forming problem. The details of finite element models, contact simulations,
material, load, boundary conditions, and solution procedure of both the 2D plane strain and 3D shell approaches are
discussed.
Main Index
1
1
PLSTRN
1
L
30.0
Figure 33
Table 31
Position
Number of Elements
50
0 x 27mm
27 x 40.2mm
100
40.2 x 60mm
20
The finite element model used for the 3D shell approach is presented in Figure 33. Also, in this case, only half of the
plate has been modeled with appropriate symmetry conditions at the middle of the plate. The sheet is modeled using
1020 thick shell elements with 6 elements across the width and 170 elements along the length (as in Table 32). MSC
Nastrans thick shell elements with material ID 1 are selected using the following PSHELL and PSHLN1 entries. The
thickness 1 mm for the sheet is specified in PSHELL option.
PSHELL
PSHLN1
+
1
1
C4
Figure 34
Main Index
1
1
DCT
1.
1
L
1
NO
CHAPTER 3 85
3D Sheet Metal Forming
Table 32
Position
0 x 40mm
Number of Elements
160
40 x 60mm
10
Contact Models
In defining the contact model for the 2D plane strain case, the sheet is modeled as a deformable body and the punch
and die are modeled as rigid bodies. Elements comprising the sheet are used to generate a deformable contact body
with ID 4 using the following BCBODY and BSURF entries. Contact body ID 5 is used to define the load controlled
rigid body with a control node ID 1 for the punch and contact body ID 6 is used to define the position controlled rigid
body for the die. The geometry profiles of these rigid bodies are defined using 2D NURB curves that describe the true
surface geometry and most accurately represent the punch and die geometry. The friction factor of 0.1342 is defined
for all these contact bodies.
BCBODY
BSURF
...
BCBODY
...
BCBODY
...
4
4
2D
1
5
2D
0
0.
RIGID
1
NURBS2D 3
6
2D
0
0.
RIGID
0
NURBS2D 2
DEFORM
2
RIGID
0.
3
RIGID
0.
2
4
3
0.
CBODY2
50
0.
CBODY3
50
0
4
.1342
5
0
0.
.1342
0.
1
0.
1
0.
0
0.
.1342
0.
1
0.
1
0.
The contact bodies for the 3D shell models are also defined in similar way with the punch and die surfaces defined
using 3D NURB surfaces. The following BCBODY entries are used to define contact bodies for 3D shell model. The
control node ID 1198 is used in this case to define the load controlled rigid body for the punch.
BCBODY
BSURF
...
BCBODY
...
BCBODY
...
1
1
3D
1
2
0
RIGID
NURBS
3D
0.
1198
19
3
0
RIGID
NURBS
3D
0.
7
DEFORM
2
RIGID
0.
4
RIGID
0.
13
1
3
0.
CBODY2
4
0.
CBODY3
4
0
4
.1342
5
0
1.
.1342
0.
1
0.
1198
0.
50
50
14
.1342
0.
1
0.
1
0.
50
50
4
0
1.
4
The following BCPARA bulk data entry defines the general contact parameters to be used in the analysis. The ID 0 on
the BCPARA option indicates that the parameters specified herein are applied right at the start of the analysis and are
maintained through the analysis unless some of these parameters are redefined through the BCTABLE option.
Important entries under BCPARA option include: FTYPE the friction type and the BIAS  the distance tolerance bias.
For all the models, the bias factor, BIAS, is set to 0.99. The bilinear Coulomb friction model is activated by setting
FTYPE to 6. For the models without friction, FTYPE is set as 0.
BCPARA
Main Index
0
BIAS
.99
FTYPE
The following BCTABLE entries identify how the contact bodies can touch each other. The BCTABLE with ID 0 is used
to define the touching conditions at the start of the analysis. This is a mandatory option required in SOL 400 for contact
analysis and is flagged in the case control section through the optional BCONTACT = 0 option. Similar BCTABLE
options with ID 1, 2 and 3 are used to define the touching conditions for later steps in the analysis, and it is flagged
using the option BCONTACT = n (where n is the step number 1, 2 or 3) in the case control section. Two contact pairs
are defined in the BCTABLE option: one between the sheet and punch and one between the sheet and die. Both the 2D plane strain and 3D shell models have similar BCTABLE entries.
BCTABLE
0
SLAVE
4
0
FBSH
MASTERS 5
SLAVE
4
0
FBSH
MASTERS 6
0.
0
1.+20
2
0.
0
.99
0.
0
1.+20
0.
0
.99
.1342
0.
0.
0.
.1342
0.
Material
The isotropic elastic and elastic plastic material properties of the sheet are defined using the following MAT1, MATEP,
and TABLES1 options. The Hollomon hardening behavior, = K n with K = 550.4N mm 2 ,and n = 0.223 is
represented in the form of stressstrain data defined in TABLES1 option.
MAT1
MATEP
TABLES1
1
1
1
0.
.08
.4
.8
1.2
70500.
Table
2
194.
313.378
448.681
523.682
573.239
.02
.1
.5
.9
1.3
.342
1
1.
230.043
329.365
471.573
537.619
583.564
.04
.2
.6
1.
1.4
Isotrop Addmean
268.496
384.423
491.14
550.399
593.287
.06
.3
.7
1.1
ENDT
293.904
420.802
508.317
562.224
The following NLMOPTS entry enables large strain formulation using additive plasticity with mean normal return.
NLMOPTS,LRGS,1
Main Index
CHAPTER 3 87
3D Sheet Metal Forming
Vertical Displacement
0
28.5
28.5
0
The following data in the case control section of the input file defines the load and boundary conditions at the four
different steps of the analysis. The bulk data entries SPCD, SPCR and SPC1 are used to define the loads in these steps.
The SPCD data presented here shows the application of the imposed downward displacement of 28.5 in vertical
direction in steps 1 and 2 at node 1 for the 2D plane strain model. A similar imposed displacement is applied at node
1198 for the 3D shell model. The SPCR data presented here shows the application of the imposed upward relative
displacement of 10.0 in vertical direction in step 3 and its fixation in step 4 at node 927 for the 2D plane strain model.
A similar imposed relative displacement is applied at node 1167 for the 3D shell model.
SUBCASE 1
STEP 1
NLSTEP =
BCONTACT
SPC = 2
LOAD = 1
STEP 2
NLSTEP =
BCONTACT
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
STEP 3
NLSTEP =
BCONTACT
SPC = 3
LOAD = 3
1
= 1
2
= 2
3
= 3
28.5
3
28.5
9
18.5
10.
Solution Procedure
The present analysis of metal forming and gradual spring back is carried out in four different steps on both the 2D
plane strain and 3D shell models. In each of these models, the analysis has been carried out for the cases with and
without friction using SOL 400 in MSC Nastran. The first step analyses the metal forming process, the second step is
used to achieve a more accurate solution before the spring back analysis starts in steps 3 and 4.
In the first step, the metal forming operation is simulated by applying a vertical downward displacement of punch. The
nonlinear procedure is defined through the following NLSTEP entry with ID 1. Here 100 indicates the total number
Main Index
of increments; PFNT represents Pure Full NewtonRaphson Technique wherein the stiffness is reformed at every
iteration; 500 is the maximum number of allowed recycles for every increment. UP indicates that convergence will
be checked on displacement (U) and residuals (P). The 0.01 defined in the fourth line of NLSTEP indicates the
convergence tolerances of 0.01 for displacement and residual checking. The negative sign of displacement tolerance
indicates that iteration on displacements will be checked against the incremental displacement quantity instead of total
displacement.
The second step is considered to be a dummy one in which the load applied in the first step is maintained with very
fine convergence tolerances on displacement and residual. This step is used to ensure that the model reaches the good
equilibrium condition at the end of step 2 and before starting step 3 involving the more complex spring back operation.
It can be seen from the NLSTEP ID 3 that this spring back operation is done over 200 increments with a convergence
check only on displacement.
NLSTEP
1
1.
GENERAL 500
FIXED
100
MECH
UP
0
NLSTEP 2
1.
GENERAL 500
FIXED
10
MECH
UP
0
NLSTEP 3
1.
GENERAL 500
FIXED
200
MECH
U
0
1
1
0.01
0
10
0.01
1
10
1
0.0001 0.0001
0
1
1
0.01
0
PFNT
1
PFNT
1
10
PFNT
1
To restrict rigid body movement during the springback step3, a spring with very small stiffness (1e5) is added at the
free end using the following CELAS1 and PELAS cards.
CELAS1
PELAS
851
2
2
1.E5
927
Results
The characteristic deformed stages from the 2D plane strain analysis without friction and with friction during the
forming step are shown in Figure 35. The deformed shapes during the release in various stages are shown in
Figure 36.
Main Index
CHAPTER 3 89
3D Sheet Metal Forming
Figure 35
Main Index
Figure 36
In the analysis without friction, contact is initially present between the sheet and the lower section of the punch. Near
the end of the deformation, the sheet separates at the lower section of the punch and gets in contact with the lower
section of the die. As soon as this contact is detected, the sheet is further bent into the final shape and the required force
in the force displacement history curve increases (Figure 35). In the analysis with friction, the deformation behavior
is different. The tangential forces due to friction result in a stretching of the sheet causing contact between the punch
and the sheet to be present during the complete forming history.
The characteristic load displacement curves for the analysis from SOL 400 without friction and with friction are shown
in Figure 37. The differences in the shape of the curves are caused by the different contact conditions at the end of
the forming stage.
Main Index
CHAPTER 3 91
3D Sheet Metal Forming
350
300
No Friction
250
200
150
With Friction
100
50
0
10
50
15
20
25
30
Figure 37
Observe that the unloading stage is analyzed in two steps. In the first unloading step the punch and the strip are moved
simultaneously in upward direction. This releases the strip from the die, while it remains in contact with the punch. In
the second unloading step the strip is fixed in vertical direction while the punch is moved further upward to its original
position. This gradually releases the strip from the punch and allows it to spring back to its final configuration. Note
that the fixation of the strip is such that there are no reaction forces after it has lost contact with both the die and the
punch. This, of course, is a requirement in order to capture the proper spring back behavior. The fixation primarily
serves to suppress rigid body motions of the model during the unloading stage.
The characteristic values of the angles at the end of the forming stage and after removal of the tool are listed in
Table 34.
Table 34
Characteristic Angles during Forming and Release Process (2D Plane Strain Model)
Friction Coefficient
Forming Angle
20.42
46.24
0.1348
20.35
54.56
A comparison of the results obtained with Marc and SOL 400 of MSC Nastran is shown in Figure 38 (no friction)
and Figure 39 (friction). In the last figure, a comparison is also made with the experimental result. The results from
SOL 400 are found to be on the higher side, particularly towards the end of forming. The results exhibit more
oscillations in the load displacement curve and this is caused by the use of hard contact approach in Marc and SOL
400. It should be noted that no experimental data points are reported for the unloading.
Main Index
300
250
No Friction Marc
200
150
100
50
0
10
15
20
25
30
Figure 38
Load Displacement Curves from Marc and SOL 400 (without friction)
2D Plane Strain With Friction
300
SOL 400
Marc
250
200
150
Experimental
100
50
0
10
15
20
25
30
Figure 39
Load Displacement Curves from Marc and SOL 400 (with friction)
The results of analyses from 3D shell models have been compared with the plane strain analysis for both the cases
with and without friction. The load displacement curves for these two models are shown in Figure 310 (no friction)
and Figure 311 (friction=0.1348).
2D & 3D No Friction
Punch Force (N)
300
3D
250
200
150
2D
100
50
0
10
15
20
25
30
Figure 310
Main Index
CHAPTER 3 93
3D Sheet Metal Forming
300
250
200
150
3D
100
2D
50
0
10
15
20
25
30
Figure 311
The resulting values of the characteristic angles are listed in Table 35 (no friction) and Table 36 (with friction). For
the case with friction, the results are compared with experimental predictions from Numisheet 2002. The predictions
of SOL 400 from both 2D plane strain case and 3D shell models are found to match well with the experiment.
Table 35
Comparison of Angles for Plane Strain and Shell Approach (no friction)
Forming Angle
Plane strain
20.42
46.24
Shell
20.38
46.67
Table 36
Comparison of Angles for Plane Strain and Shell Approach (Friction 0.1348)
Forming Angle
Plane strain
20.35
54.56
Shell
20.45
54.07
19.6 to 21.0
53.4 to 55.8
Numisheet
Modeling Tips
One of the complicating characteristics in this benchmark problem is a very local contact between the plate and the
curved shoulders of the die. In fact, the contact is almost a point (2D) or line (3D) contact with a large amount of
sliding. Contact is only verified between the nodes of the plate and the rigid dies. Hence, in the discrete steps of the
displacement history, points can be identified where no contact is detected; especially, if large elements are used near
the shoulder of the die.
The following are some guidelines and tips for modeling this benchmark:
A fine mesh has to be used to describe the contact of the nodes of the sheet with the die properly
A smooth representation of the die has to be chosen, either in an analytical form or by a piecewise linear curve
using a high number of segments
Main Index
The unloading behavior is characterized by removal of the tools and at the same time adding boundary
conditions preventing the possibility of rigid body movement.
The unloading behavior should preferably be done in a number of steps. Note that in these steps low values of
the normal and, consequently, the friction forces are present which makes it difficult to obtain a converged
solution
Numerical damping is often recommended to stabilize the solution, but it can be shown that this greatly
influences the accuracy of the solution.
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_03a.dat
MSC Nastran SOL 400 input for 2D plane strain model (without friction)
nug_03b.dat
MSC Nastran SOL 400 input for 2D plane strain model (with friction)
nug_03c.dat
MSC Nastran SOL 400 input for 3D shell model (without friction)
nug_03d.dat
MSC Nastran SOL 400 input for 3D shell model (with friction)
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 25 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
Original
Position
Punch
Sheet
Final
Position
W
R2
R3
Figure 312
Main Index
Die
Main Index
Summary
Introduction
Required Solution
FEM Solutions
Input File(s)
Video
102
96
97
97
97
102
102
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry
R1
F
F
Material properties
Analysis type
Quasistatic analysis
Linear elastic material
Geometric nonlinearity
Displacement boundary
conditions and
applied loads
Element type
Contact properties
FE results
0.7
0.6
Strip_x
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
Main Index
Angle (degrees)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
CHAPTER 4 97
3D Loaded Pin with Friction
Introduction
This application example evaluates the performance of contact algorithms at curved boundaries between deformable
bodies. A cylindrical pin is located in the cylindrical hole of a strip. The diameters of the hole and the pin are identical.
Two equal point forces are applied to the center of the end surfaces of the pin. It is assumed that the tangential contact
forces can be described with a Coulomb friction model using friction coefficient 0.1. Due to the symmetry condition,
a quarter of the assembly is sufficient for the finite element analysis.
Required Solution
The displacement components and contact normal and tangential forces are of interest. In addition, the relative
tangential slips along the contact surfaces of the two bodies as functions of angle (see Figure 41) are also worth
investigating. One analysis is conducted with MSC.Nastran SOL 400 with standard HEX elements and compared with
available advanced HEX elements. In the current version of MSC Nastran SOL 400, the advanced HEX elements are
defined by a PSOLID entry pointing to an auxiliary PSLDN1 entry.
Figure 41
FEM Solutions
Numerical solutions have been obtained with MSC Nastran solution sequence 400 for the 3D case. First, the advanced
3D elements are used to conduct the analysis with contact and friction. In comparison, the same analysis is also
conducted with the standard 3D solid elements.
The contact, material/geometry, solution/convergence schemes and other parameters are explained below.
Contact Parameters
The element mesh using the 3D solid element is shown in Figure 42. The contact body named as cbody1 (shown
in pink) represents the pin. The contact body named as cbody2 defines the strip. A point load (black arrow) is applied
at the center point of top end of the pin. It should be noted that the symmetry has been taken into consideration.
Main Index
Figure 42
In the input data file, the contact bodies are defined as below:
BCBODY
BSURF
.
BCBODY
BSURF
.
1
1
3D
1
DEFORM
2
1
3
0
4
.1
5
2
2
3D
2296
DEFORM
2297
2
2298
0
2299
.1
2300
6
1
2301
7
2302
The BCBODY with ID 1 defines the pin as a threedimensional deformable body. The BCBODY with ID 2 defines the
sheet also as a threedimensional deformable body. Furthermore, BCBODY 2 is described as an analytical body by set
value of 1 at the 8th field.
The BCTABLE bulk data entries shown below define the touch conditions between the bodies:
BCTABLE
BCTABLE
0
SLAVE
1
1
FBSH
MASTERS 2
1
SLAVE
1
1
FBSH
MASTERS 2
0.
1
1.+20
1
0.
0
.99
.1
0.
1
1.+20
1
0.
0
.99
.1
0.
0.
0.
0.
As shown above, BCTABLE with ID 0 is used to define the contact touching conditions at the start of the analysis. Zero
(0) identifies the case number. The BCTABLE entry is mandatory for the contact analysis with SOL 400. Also, the
options (BCONTACT with ID 0 and BCPARA with ID 0) are all applied at the start of the analysis. For the loading
analysis defined as load case 1 under the case control section, the contact touching conditions are redefined by options
of BCTABLE, BCPARA, and BCONTACT with ID 1. In this example, the BCPARA is only defined once because the
parameters specified herein are applied through the analysis from the beginning unless some of these parameters are
redefined by BCTABLE entry with ID 1. It should be mentioned is that the BIAS parameter is defined as 0.99 (the
default value is 0.9).
Main Index
CHAPTER 4 99
3D Loaded Pin with Friction
BCPARA
0
BIAS
.99
FTYPE
Material/Geometry Parameters
The both bodies in this analysis are defined as isotropic elastic materials. The Youngs modulus and Poisson ratio are
defined as:
MAT1
MAT1
1
2
210000.
70000.
.3
.3
1.
1.
As shown above, the material IDs are given as 1 and 2 for the pin and the sheet, respectively.
The element type is defined by the PSOLID and PSLDN1 bulk data options as shown below where (C8 SOLI L)
defines the 3D continuum solid element with linear integration scheme.
PSOLID
1
PSLDN1
1
+
C8
+
C20 SOLI
Main Index
1
1
SOLI
0
L
+
+
Results
Numerical solutions have been done with current versions of MSC Nastran SOL 400 and Marc. As seen in Figure 43,
a relatively coarse mesh is used for the strip and a fine mesh is used for the pin. The nodes on the pin surface are defined
as slave nodes and the surfaces of the strip are specified as master contact surface in this analysis. In order to describe
the contact body more accurately, the contact surface of the strip is defined analytically. Therefore, a smoother surface
(Coons Patch) is used during the analysis for the strip.
Figure 43
The resulting contact normal nodal forces are shown in Figure 44. The peak value in the contact normal force is found
to be around 1933 N. The peak contact tangential force is found to be around 193 N, which equals to F n . That is
consistent with the coefficient of friction applied during the analysis.
Figure 44
The displacement in x and y directions along the circular edge of the pin (slave or contacting surface) are shown as
function of the angle in Figure 45 and Figure 46, respectively.
Main Index
CHAPTER 4 101
3D Loaded Pin with Friction
Displacement X (mm)
0.8
Pin_x
0.7
0.6
Strip_x
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
Angle (degrees)
0
60
Figure 45
120
180
240
300
360
Displacement (x) along the Circular Edge of the Pin and the Strip
Displacement Y (mm)
0.10
0.08
Strip_y
0.06
0.04
Pin_y
0.02
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
Angle (degrees)
0
60
Figure 46
120
180
240
300
360
The Displacement (y) along the Circular Edge of the Pin and the Strip
For the comparison, another solution is obtained by using the existing solid element available in SOL 400. This
element type is defined by PSOLID option only. The results are almost identical. Figure 47 compares of the
displacement contours obtained by MSC Nastran SOL 400 with the advanced 3D solid elements and the standard 3D solid elements (without PSLDN1 option). It shows that both results are extremely close.
(a)
Figure 47
Main Index
(b)
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_04am.dat
nug_04an.dat
nug_04bm.dat
nug_04bn.dat
nug_04cm.dat
nug_04cn.dat
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 18 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
L1
R2
H
R1
F
F
Figure 48
Main Index
Main Index
Summary
Introduction
Analytical Solution
FEM Solutions
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
109
104
105
105
105
108
108
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry
1.0
4.0
A
gy
px
1.2
1.3
0.7
6.0
1.0
X
Z
Material properties
E up = 2.06 10 Pa , up = 0.3 , up = 1 kg m
11
E low = 2.06 10
Quasistatic analysis
Boundary conditions
All displacement components of the nodes in the lower face of the lower wedge are
fixed; u z = 0 m of two nodes on the upper wedge with contact between upper and lower
wedge
Applied loads
Element type
3D solid with 4 node linear and 10node parabolic tetrahedral elements
Contact properties
FE results
0.0012
0.0010
Quadratic Elements
0.0008
0.0006
Linear Elements
0.0004
0.0002
0.0000
0.0002
0.0004
0.0006
Main Index
% of load
50
100
150
200
CHAPTER 5 105
Bilinear Friction Model: Sliding Wedge
Introduction
This problem verifies and validates the behavior of the bilinear friction model. A more detailed description of the
bilinear friction model can be found in the Release Notes for MSC Nastran. The fundamental control parameter of this
friction model is the socalled relative sliding displacement below which (elastic) sticking is simulated. This parameter
can be userdefined by specifying RVCNST on the BCPARA option. Otherwise, MSC Nastran determines the default
value as a function of the average edge length of the elements in the contact bodies.
This example was originally proposed by NAFEMS as a 2D large sliding contact and friction example. Here, we use
a modified version of the problem: namely 3D instead of 2D and an alternating load instead of a linearly increasing
load.
A large displacement is expected in this solution but the strains will be pretty small. Assuming the motion as rigid
body, it can be predicted analytically as shown in the NAFEMS documentation (NAFEMS Benchmark Tests for Finite
Element Modeling of Contact, Gapping and Sliding, 2001).
First, a gravity load is applied to the whole model. Then, a positive pressure p x is applied as such that point A will
have displacement u x = 1 m . The next step, a negative pressure is applied as such that point A will have displacement
u x = 1 m . The last step is again an application of positive pressure p x . The applied pressure p x will be determined
analytically.
The analysis results are presented with linear and parabolic elements.
Analytical Solution
Assuming a rigid body motion and neglecting the loss of energy due to friction, the relation among the total force on
the upper wedge in the x and ydirection ( F x and F y ), the friction coefficient ( ), the wedge angle ( , the total spring
stiffness ( K ) and the positive displacement ( u x ) of the upper wedge is:
F x 1 tan + F y + tan
K = u x 1 tan
With tan = 0.1 , = 0.3 , F x = 1500 N , F y = 3058 N (based on g y = 764.5 N ) and u x = 1 m , the total spring stiffness
( K ) is 239 N/m . Thus, the applied p x that correlates with is 1250 Pa . This load is applied during the second step.
Alternatively, with the given value of K , tan , and F y , F x = 832.8 N results in a displacement of the upper wedge
( u x = 1 m ). p x that correlates with this F y is F x = 693.375 N . This pressure is applied in the third step. The fourth
step is again the introduction of p x = 1250 Pa .
FEM Solutions
A numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastrans SOL 400 for the element mesh shown in Figure 51. The
colored regions of the wedges have been identified as contact bodies. Contact body IDs 1 and 2 are identified as a set
of elements of upper and lower wedge, respectively as:
Main Index
BCBODY
BSURF
...
1
1
3D
42
DEFORM
107
1
118
0
132
.3
194
236
239
2
2
3D
1
DEFORM
2
2
3
0
4
.3
5
and
BCBODY
BSURF
...
Figure 51
Furthermore, the BCTABLE entries shown below identify that these bodies can touch each other.
BCTABLE
0
SLAVE
1
0
MASTERS 2
1
SLAVE
1
0
MASTERS 2
BCTABLE
0.
0
1
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
1
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
Thus, any deformable contact body is simply a collection of mutually exclusive elements and their associated nodes.
To activate contact with Coulomb friction, FTYPE must be set to 6 in BCPARA option (the only supported Coulomb
friction model). The contact separation option is based on relative stresses. It is done by setting IBSEP = 4.
BCPARA
0
FTYPE
IBSEP
1
2
1
2
The two material properties are isotropic and elastic with Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio defined as
MAT1
MAT1
Main Index
1
2
2.06+07
2.06E+11
.3
.3
1.
1.
CHAPTER 5 107
Bilinear Friction Model: Sliding Wedge
LRGDSIP 1
1
1
2
25
FNT
FNT
UV
UV
Here the FNT option is selected to update the stiffness matrix during every recycle using the NewtonRaphson iteration
strategy and the default convergence tolerance for displacement (relative to the incremental displacement) will be
used.
The simulation is eventually controlled by the case control section which consists of four STEPS.
STEP 1
LABEL
...
STEP 2
LABEL
...
STEP 3
LABEL
...
STEP 4
LABLE
...
= Gravity Load
= Px is 1250
= Px is 694
= Px is again 1250
The deformed structure plot (magnification factor 1.0) is shown in Figure 52. After the second step, as seen in
Figure 52, the upper wedge moves in the xdirection one meter as predicted analytically.
deformed
undeformed
ux =
Figure 52
1.0
The displacement plot of point A, for linear and parabolic elements, is shown in Figure 53. It is clearly seen that the
upper wedge moves alternately from u x = 1 m to u x = 1 m and then back to u x = 1 m as expected using the analytical
solution. The result of the linear element is nearly the same as that of the parabolic elements. As clearly seen from this
figure, during (linear) sticking contact, the displacement of the upper wedge varies linearly.
Main Index
xdisplacement (m)
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.2
% of load
50
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
xdisplacement (m)
0.0012
0.0010
Quadratic Elements
0.0008
0.0006
Linear Elements
0.0004
0.0002
0.0000
% of load
50
100
150
200
0.0002
0.0004
0.0006
Figure 53
Displacement Plot for Point A (Representing the Displacement of the Upper Wedge)
Modeling Tips
It is very important to have accurate coordinates for those points that are located on the both sides of the contact
interfaces. Failure in representing accurate smooth surfaces may lead to unexpected contact behavior. That is why the
coordinate of the grid points both for models with linear and parabolic elements are expressed in the extended format
of MSC Nastran.
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_05a.dat
Linear Elements
nug_05b.dat
Quadratic Elements
Main Index
CHAPTER 5 109
Bilinear Friction Model: Sliding Wedge
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts about 47 minutes and explains how the steps
are performed.
1.0
4.0
A
gy
px
1.2
1.3
0.7
6.0
1.0
X
Z
Figure 54
Main Index
Main Index
Summary
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solution
112
Modeling Tips
114
Input File(s)
Video
115
111
112
114
112
CHAPTER 6 111
Laminated Strip under Threepoint Bending
Summary
Title
Geometry
0.1
0.1
0.1
0o
90o
0o
0.4
90
0.1
0.1
0.1
0
90oo
0
y
10
x
10
15
15
10
10 N/mm
1
x
12 = 0.4
E 1 = 100GPa
all dimensions in mm
G 12 = 3GPa
E 2 = 5GPa
G 13 = 2GPa
E 3 = 5GPa
G 23 = 2GPa
Analysis type
Quasistatic analysis
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element type
2D shell
3D solid composite
FE results
Main Index
Material properties
Quantity
Units
NAFEMS
CQUAD4
linear
CQUAD4
PSHLN1
CHEXA
PCOMPLS
ASTN
CHEXA
PCOMPLSL
11 at E
MPa
684
683
683
685
664
13 at D
MPa
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.2
u z at E
mm
1.06
1.06
1.06
1.06
1.02
Introduction
This problem demonstrates the ability to model composite laminated material both using shell and solid elements. A
laminated strip is subjected to a threepoint bending test, due to symmetry only a quarter of the structure needs to be
modeled. Stresses and displacements are computed and compared to a reference solution.
Requested Solutions
The stresses and displacements of a composite laminated strip under threepoint bending configuration are calculated
in MSC Nastran. This test is recommended by the National Agency for Finite Element Methods and Standards (U.K.):
Test R0031/1 from NAFEMS publication R0031, Composites Benchmarks, February 1995.
FEM Solution
A numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastrans solution sequence 400 for the configuration shown in
Figure 61. The composite strip comprises seven lamina, with lamina thicknesses and orientation as shown in the
figure. Only one quarter of the structure is modeled using symmetry conditions along the mid span and center of the
longitudinal direction. Each lamina is modeled as one layer is the composite. For the model using shell elements, this
is done using the PCOMP entry
PCOMP
1
1
1
1
1
1
.00001
.1
.4
.1
.00001
0.
90.
90.
90.
0.
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
0.
.09999
.1
.1
.09999
1
1
1
1
0o fiber direction
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
YES
YES
YES
YES
0.1
0.1
0.1
0o
90o
0
0.4
90
0.1
0.1
0.1
0o
90o
0o
y
10
x
10
15
15
10
10 N/mm
E
C
1
x
Figure 61
Main Index
all dimensions in mm
CHAPTER 6 113
Laminated Strip under Threepoint Bending
For the model using composite brick elements, this is done using the PCOMPLS entry. Please note that the layer
orientation is defined relative to the coordinate system defined in the CORDM field of this entry.
PCOMPLS
1
C8
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
1
SLCOMP
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
L
.00001
.09999
.1
.1
.4
.1
.1
.09999
.00001
0.
0.
90.
0.
90.
0.
90.
0.
0.
For the model using solid shell elements this is done using the PCOMPLS entry
PCOMPLS
1
C8
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
1
SLCOMP
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
ASTN
.00001
.09999
.1
.1
.4
.1
.1
.09999
.00001
0.
0.
90.
0.
90.
0.
90.
0.
0.
Note that in these models two very thin extra layers are added, they have the same properties as the layer they are
connected to. These two layers are added to calculate the stress mentioned in the reference table (Table 61) at the
correct position.
Table 61
Quantity
Units
NAFEMS
11 at E
MPa
684
683
13 at D
MPa
4.1
u z at E
mm
1.06
ASTN
L
683
685
664
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.2
1.06
1.06
1.06
1.02
12 = 0.4
G 12 = 3GPa
E 2 = 5GPa
23 = 0.3
G 13 = 2GPa
E 3 = 5GPa
31 = 0.02
G 23 = 2GPa
Main Index
100000. 5000.
.4
3000.
3000.
2000.
1.4
And for the model using the solid composite elements this is defined as
MATORT
1
3000.
1
100000. 5000.
2000.
2000.
5000.
.4
.3 .02 1.4
Two types of shell elements are analyzed. The default CQUAD4 and the CQUAD4 suitable for large deformations.
The latter is activated using the PSHLN1 entry
PSHLN1
+
1
C4
DCT
NO
For analysis of shelllike structure with composite material, the TSHEAR option on the NLMOPTS entry has to be given
to obtain a parabolic transverse shear distribution across the thickness of the element.
NLMOPTS TSHEAR
TSHEAR
A line pressure of 10N mm is applied, this pressure is translated to point loads on the finite element mesh.
Table 61 compares the results of the different models with the reference solution, the data is taken from the f06 file.
The stress at E is linearly interpolated from the centroid of the first two elements close to the symmetric line.
Modeling Tips
When modeling composite structures that support large deformation and nonlinear material behavior (activated with
the PSHLN1 or PCOMPLS entry) it is recommended to set the TSHEAR parameter on the NLMOPTS entry. This will
result in a more parabolic shear distribution through the thickness, and in the output of interlaminar stresses. When
using CHEXA elements for analysis of shelllike structure under bending deformation, it is recommended to use solid
shell elements instead of linear composite brick elements.
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_06n.dat
Linear Elements
nug_06m.dat
nug_06c.dat
nug_06d.dat
Main Index
CHAPTER 6 115
Laminated Strip under Threepoint Bending
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 30 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
0o fiber direction
0.1
0.1
0.1
0o
90oo
0
0.4
90o
0.1
0.1
0.1
0
90oo
0
y
10
x
10
15
15
10
10 N/mm
D
E
1
x
Figure 62
Main Index
all dimensions in mm
Main Index
Summary
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solution
Input File(s)
Video
120
117
118
118
119
118
CHAPTER 7 117
Wrapped Thick Cylinder under Pressure and Thermal Loading
Summary
Title
Geometry
27
23
25
200
all dimensions in mm
z=0
Material properties
Inner Cylinder
= 0.3
E = 210GPa
= 2.0 10
Outer Cylinder
E 1 = 130GPa
12 = 0.25
G 12 = 10GPa
11 = 3.0 10 6 C
E 2 = 5GPa
13 = 0.25
G 13 = 10GPa
E 3 = 5GPa
23 = 0
G 23 = 5GPa
22 = 2.0 10 5 C
33 = 2.0 10 5 C
Analysis type
Quasistatic analysis
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element type
2D shell
FE results
Units
NAFEMS
linear
PSHLN1
at r = 24 mm
MPa
1483
1414
1414
at r = 26 mm
MPa
822
875
875
at r = 24 mm
MPa
1309
1236
1236
at r = 26 mm
MPa
994
1053
1053
STEP 1
STEP 2
Main Index
ria
ate
ic m
rop tion
t
o
a
or th orient
Introduction
This problem demonstrates the ability to model pressure and thermal loading for composite laminated material. A
thick cylinder is loaded with both pressure and a temperature increase. Stresses are calculated and compared to a
reference solution.
Requested Solutions
The Hoop stress at the inner and outer cylinders is calculated under pressure loading and under both pressure loading
and thermal loading in MSC Nastran. This test is recommended by the National Agency for Finite Element Methods
and Standards (U.K.): Test R0031/2 from NAFEMS publication R0031, Composites Benchmarks, February 1995
FEM Solution
A numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastrans SOL 400 for the configuration shown in Figure 71. The
cylinder consists of two layers with layer thickness and orientation as shown in Figure 71. The axial displacement is
set to zero at z = 0 . Only one eighth of the model is analyzed with the appropriate symmetry boundary conditions.
The two layers are modeled using the PCOMP entry, where the thickness of both layers is 2 mm
PCOMP
1
1
2.
0.
YES
0.
2.
0.
0.
YES
al
teri
ma
c
i
p
otro ation
or th orient
27
y
z
23
25
200
x
all dimensions in mm
z=0
Figure 71
Each lamina is modeled as one layer in the composite. The inner cylinder (layer 1) is isotropic and the outer cylinder
(layer 2) is orthotropic. The material properties for the inner cylinder are
E = 210GPA , = 0.3 , = 2.0 10 5 C
Main Index
CHAPTER 7 119
Wrapped Thick Cylinder under Pressure and Thermal Loading
12 = 0.25
G 12 = 10GPa
11 = 3.0 10 6 C
E 2 = 5GPa
13 = 0.25
G 13 = 10GPa
E 3 = 5GPa
23 = 0
G 23 = 5GPa
22 = 2.0 10 5 C
33 = 2.0 10 5 C
and are entered using the MAT1 and MAT8 entry, respectively.
Two types of shell elements are analyzed: the CQUAD4 default and the CQUAD4 suitable for large deformations. The
latter is activated using the PSHLN1 entry.
PSHLN1
+
1
C4
DCT
NO
The analysis is performed in two analyses steps. In the first step, a uniform pressure of 200MPa is applied on the
inside of the cylinder. In the second step, both this pressure and a temperature rise of 130C is applied.
Table 71 compares the Hoop stress in the inner and outer cylinders for the two examples for the two analyses steps
with the reference solution at r = 24mm and r = 26mm . The NAFEMS Hoop stress at r = 23mm and
r = 25mm are averaged to compare at r = 24mm for the inner cylinder and similar for r = 26mm for the outer
cylinder.
Table 71
CQUAD4
CQUAD4
Units
NAFEMS
Linear
PSHLN1
at r = 24 mm
MPa
1483
1414
1414
at r = 26 mm
MPa
822
875
875
at r = 24 mm
MPa
1309
1236
1236
at r = 26 mm
MPa
994
1053
1053
STEP 1
STEP 2
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_07n.dat
Linear Elements
nug_07m.dat
Main Index
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 18 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
ria
ate
ic m
rop tion
t
o
a
or th orient
27
y
z
23
25
200
x
all dimensions in mm
z=0
Figure 72
Main Index
Main Index
Summary
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solution
123
Modeling Tips
125
Input File(s)
Video
126
122
123
126
123
Summary
Title
Geometry
z
face sheet
0.028
uniform normal
pressure
core
C
10
0.750
E
0.028
face sheet
10
y
simply supported
on all four edges
Material properties
Face sheets
6
G 12 = 10Psi
4
E 2 = 10Psi 13 = 0 G 13 = 3 10 Psi
4
Analysis type
Quasistatic analysis
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Pressure of 100Psi applied to the top face (most positive in the zaxis)
Element type
FE results
Main Index
CQUAD4
Linear
CQUAD4
CHEXA
u z at C
in
0.123
0.123
PSHLN1
0.122
PCOMPLS
0.122
11 at C
kpsi
34.45
34.029
34.212
33.932
22 at C
kpsi
13.93
13.294
13.167
13.406
12 at E
kpsi
5.07
5.040
5.006
5.020
CHAPTER 8 123
Threelayer Sandwich Shell under Normal Pressure Loading
Introduction
This problem demonstrates the ability to model pressure loading of a square composite three layer sandwich flat shell.
Stresses and displacements are calculated and compared to a reference solution.
Requested Solutions
Stresses and displacements are calculated at the surface of the composite three layer sandwich flat shell in MSC
Nastran. This test is recommended by the National Agency for Finite Element Methods and Standards (NAFEMS):
Test R0031/3 from NAFEMS publication R0031, Composites Benchmarks, February 1995.
FEM Solution
A numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastrans SOL 400 for the configuration shown in Figure 81. The
plate consists of three layers, a core layer and two face sheets covering this layer. Thicknesses of the layers are shown
in Figure 81. Only one quarter of the part is analyzed with the appropriate symmetry boundary conditions, and the
two edges on the boundary of the plate are fixed. The three layers are modeled using the PCOMP entry, where the
thickness of both layers is 0.028 in.
PCOMP
1
1
1
.028
.028
0.
0.
YES
YES
0.
.75
0.
0.
YES
z
face sheet
0.028
uniform normal
pressure
core
C
10
0.750
E
0.028
A
10
y
simply supported
on all four edges
face sheet
Figure 81
Each lamina is modeled as one layer in the composite. The materials for the face sheets and core have the following
orthotropic properties:
Main Index
Face sheets
6
G 12 = 10Psi
4
E 2 = 10Psi 13 = 0 G 13 = 3 10 Psi
4
1
C4
DCT
NO
For modelling with solid shell elements, the standard CHEXA elements are used to define the element connectivity.
To activate the solid shell elements, PCOMPLS entry has to be used for assigning the property of the CHEXA.
PCOMPLS 1
C8
1
SLCOMP ASTN
.028 0.
.75
.028 0.
0.
For shelllike structure with composite materials, the TSHEAR option on the NLMOPTS entry has to be given to obtain
a parabolic shear distribution for composite layers in shells. This is particularly important for this structure because
the inner core resists deformation in shear.
NLMOPTS TSHEAR
TSHEAR
Main Index
CHAPTER 8 125
Threelayer Sandwich Shell under Normal Pressure Loading
Table 81
Quantity
Units
CQUAD4
CQUAD4
CHEXA
NAFEMS
Linear
PSHLN1
PCOMPLS
u z at C
in
0.123
0.123
0.122
0.122
11 at C
kpsi
34.45
34.029
34.212
33.932
22 at C
kpsi
13.93
13.294
13.167
13.5406
12 at E
kpsi
5.07
5.040
5.006
5.020
Figure 82
Modeling Tips
When modeling composite structures using shell elements that support large deformation and nonlinear material
behavior (activated with the PSHLN1 entry), it is recommended to set the TSHEAR parameter on the NLMOPTS entry.
This will result in a more parabolic shear distribution through the thickness, and in the output of interlaminar stresses.
Main Index
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_08n.dat
Linear Elements
nug_08m.dat
nug_08d.dat
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 18 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
Figure 83
Main Index
Main Index
Summary
128
Introduction
Requested Solutions
Model Details
129
FEM Solution
130
Results
Modeling Tip
Input File(s)
129
133
134
135
129
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
Units: inches
2
44.2
D = 1.8
t = 0.2
D = 27.2
0.0266 < t < 0.0403
6.24
D = 2.36
Material properties
Boundary conditions
Prestress analysis:
One end of blade is fully fixed.
1/3 and 1/2 span of rotor are fixed to x and y translational and rotational directions
Impact analysis:
One end of blade is fixed to x, y and z translational directions.
1/3 and 1/2 points of rotor are fixed to x and y translational directions
Details are explained in FEM solutions section.
Applied loads
Prestress analysis:
Fan: 8000 rpm using RFORCE option (rotational static force)
Impact analysis:
Fan: 8000 rpm using TIC3 option (rotational initial speed) and SPCD2 option
(enforced motion)
Bird: Initial velocity of 7692 inch/s (437 m.p.h.) using TIC option.
Details are explained in FEM solutions section.
Element type
FE results
Prestress analysis:
Plot of final stage of implicit run nastin  ASCII result file
for initial state values are included.
Impact analysis:
Plot of each stage (t = 1.52 ms shown here)
Main Index
t = 1.52 ms
CHAPTER 9 129
Bird Strike on Prestressed Rotating Fan Blades
Introduction
Aerospace companies have performed bird strike test simulation to predict the impactresistance properties of the
aircraft structure. This is an example of a bird (made by solid elements) impacting against rotating fan blades using a
sequential implicitexplicit technique. First, using the implicit solver, the initial condition (stress and displacement) on
the blades and rotor was calculated followed by transient loading of bird impact, which was simulated using the
explicit solver.
Requested Solutions
A numerical analysis was performed to demonstrate the prestressed fan blade out method. The rotational inertia
effects were taken into account in implicit analysis and the resulting stress, strain and displacements were computed.
Next, the results were added to the explicit analysis as initial condition.
Model Details
Materials
Fan: Piecewise linear plastic material (MATD024)
= 4.14e4 lbf/inch3s2/inch, = 0.35, E = 1.60E+7 psi
y (yield stress) = 138000 psi, ET (Tangent modulus) = 100000 psi
Plastic strain failure limit = 0.2
Bird: Elasticplastic hydrodynamic material (MATD010)
= 9E5 lbf/inch3s2/inch, G (Shear modulus) = 145 psi
y (yield stress) = 2.9 psi, ET (Tangent modulus) = 0.145 psi
Linear polynomial equation of state (EOSPOL
P = a + a 2 + a 3 + b + b + b 2 + b 3 E
1
2
3
0
1
2
3
0
= 1
0
= overall material density
0 = reference density
E = specific internal energy pur unit mass
a1 = a2 = b1 = b2 = b3 = 0
a = 4.25x10 6 psi
1
Main Index
FEM Solution
Boundary Condition and Applied Load
Prestress Analysis (Implicit)
The rotational velocity of blades and rotor is 8000 rpm which is applied using RFORCE option (rotational static force)
in the prestress run. The end of the rotor is fully fixed. In addition, the bearings located at 1/3 and 1/2 of distance from
the front of rotor are fixed in x, y translational as well as x, y rotational directions using SPC1 option. The applied
loading and boundary conditions of prestress analysis are shown in Figure 91(a).
RFORCE 1
TABLED1 321
0.
SPC1
1
SPC1
1
SPC1
1
299999
133.3330.0
1.
.001
1.
123456 300425 THRU
1245
400058
1245
400115
0.0
1.
ENDT
300443
TIC
1
1000001 3
7692.
...
SPCD2
1
GRID
1
7
80
1.
TABLED1
80
+
+
0.0
837.758
1.
837.758
ENDT
$ Displacement Constraints of Load Set : Disp1
SPC1
1
3
21
THRU
31
...
...
$ Initial angular velocity for rotor +fan blade
TIC3
1 299999
1.
837.758
1
THRU
6384 300000
THRU 300018 300020 THRU
Main Index
CHAPTER 9 131
Bird Strike on Prestressed Rotating Fan Blades
8000 rp
rrpm
m
Fu
Fully
ully fixed
f xed
fi
Fixed (x,y direction)
(x,y rotation)
8000 rrp
rpm
pm
(iniitiall speed)
(initial
437 mph
(b) Impact model (explicit)
Figure 91
Main Index
1.5
ADAPT
10
ADAPT
10
The file rotor.dytr.nastin contains an entry called ISTRSSH. This entry specifies the prestress condition of the
shell element as defined below (see the MSC Nastran Quick Reference Guide for more details). These result values of
the prestress run are to be carried over to the impact run. When other elements types other than shells are used,
ISTRSBE, ISTRSTS, and ISTRSSO entries must be included in the nastin file.
ISTRSSH*
*
*
*
...
2275
0.000E+00
7.084E+03
6.916E+03
3.908E+01
7.371E+03
1.150E+02
5*
*
1.480E+02*
0.000E+00*
In this analysis, adaptive contact is defined between the bird and the fan blades. The BCBODY and BCPROP entries
are used to define a symmetric (MS, SM) contact bodies.
BCTABLE 1
SLAVE
+
+
Main Index
8001
0
0.1
0.
0
2
0.
0
0.1
YES
0.
CHAPTER 9 133
Bird Strike on Prestressed Rotating Fan Blades
+
+
+
BCBODY
BCPROP
...
MASTERS 1001
SLAVE
1001
0
0.1
MASTERS 8001
1001
3D
1001
1
0.
0
0.
0
0.1
DEFORM
2
1001
3
0
4
0.
YES
Results
Prestress Run
The results of all increments are essentially the same which indicates that the implicit calculations are stable. The
results of the last increment were written to the file prestres_rotor.dytr.nastin.
Figure 92
Main Index
Impact run
The prestress result variables have been initialized at the begin of the analysis (Time = 0)
Figure 93
t = 0 ms
t = 1.00 ms
t = 1.52 ms
t = 2.00 ms
t = 3.00 ms
t = 4.00 ms
Modeling Tip
The default values for shell integration points in implicit and explicit analyses are different. There are three integration
points for implicit analysis and two integration points for explicit analysis. Therefore, the shell element type for the
implicit analysis has to be modified to be consistent with that of explicit simulation.
PSHELL1 1
Main Index
BLT
GAUSS
CHAPTER 9 135
Bird Strike on Prestressed Rotating Fan Blades
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_9a.dat
Impact analysis
nug_9b.dat
Prestress model
nug_9c.dat
nug_9d.dat
Main Index
10
Main Index
Engine Gasket
Summary
Introduction
Requested Solutions
Model Details
138
FEM Solution
139
Modeling Tip
Input File(s)
Video
145
137
138
144
145
138
CHAPTER 10 137
Engine Gasket
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
gasket ring
gasket body
Cylinder diameter: 24 mm . Engine block width, breadth and height: 93.1 mm , 70 mm and
15 mm . Cylinder head thickness: 3 mm . Bolt diameter: 8 mm . Bolt head diameter:
14 mm . Gasket ring thickness: 1 mm ; gasket body thickness: 0.9091 mm
Material properties
Linear elastic material for the engine block, cylinder head and bolts,
5
Isotropic inplane
behavior of the gasket: E body = 120 MPa , E ring = 100 MPa , body = ring = 0 . Transverse
shear moduli of the gasket: G body = 40 MPa , G ring = 35 MPa . Outofplane elasticplastic
behavior of the gasket defined by loading and unloading curves.
E engine = E head = E bolt = 2.1 10 MPa engine = head = bolt = 0.3
Analysis type
Quasistatic analysis
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element type
Contact properties
FE results
Main Index
Introduction
A gasket is assembled between an engine block and a cylinder head. The loading of the assembled structure consists
of pretensioning the bolts connecting the cylinder head and the engine block. Striking features in this analysis are the
MPCs used to load the bolts, the geometry and material description of the gasket, and the use of the contact algorithm
to establish contact constraints between the grids of the gasket and the cylinder head and the engine block and between
the grids of the bolts and the cylinder head.
Requested Solutions
A numerical analysis will be performed to find the forces in the bolts and the response of the gasket in terms of gasket
closure versus gasket pressure.
Model Details
The gasket actually consists of two parts: the socalled gasket ring and the gasket body. These parts have different
material properties and thicknesses. Assigning different material properties is straightforward, but modeling different
thicknesses would require different finite element meshes for the ring and the body. Since this is inefficient from a
modeling perspective, it is allowed to include both parts in one connected set of finite elements and to define the
thickness difference as an initial gap. In the numerical analysis, this implies that as long as the thickness reduction of
gasket element integration points is smaller than the initial gap, there will be no stress in the thickness direction. In
Figure 101, a detailed view of the actual versus the modeled gasket geometry is shown.
initial gap
magnitude
Figure 101
The material behavior of a gasket is generally rather complex to characterize using conventional material models.
Instead, a special gasket material model is adopted, which decouples the inplane and thickness behavior. The
inplane behavior is assumed to be linear and defined by Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio. The behavior in
thickness direction is nonlinear and defined by experimentally determined loading and unloading curves, where the
gasket pressure is measured as a function of the gasket closure. This gasket closure is given by the change in distance
between the top and the bottom face of the gasket. The loading and unloading curves for the gasket ring and the gasket
body are shown in Figure 102.
Main Index
CHAPTER 10 139
Engine Gasket
Figure 102
Material Behavior in Thickness Direction for the Gasket Body and Ring
In order to apply pretensioning on the bolts, they are piece wise modeled by two parts, one upper and one lower part,
obtained by a fictitious cut. The grids of the lower and the upper part of this cross section are connected using MPCs
to a socalled control grid. Calling the displacement of a grid in the lower part u lower , the displacement of a grid in the
upper part u up per and the displacement of the control grid u control , then the MPC reads:
u control = u lower u upper
By assigning all the grids in the lower and upper part of the section of a bolt to the same control grid, one can easily
define the shortening of a bolt by prescribing u control . As a result, the total bolt force is found as the reaction force on
the control grid.
FEM Solution
The numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastrans SOL 400 for the element mesh shown in Figure 103
using 3D 8node hexahedral and 6node pentahedral elements. Based on symmetry, only half of the structure is
modeled.
Figure 103
Main Index
In total, four deformable contact bodies are used. The first deformable body consists of all elements of the gasket
including the gasket body and ring. The cylinder head defines the second deformable body. The third deformable body
contains the elements of the engine block. Finally, the fourth deformable body consists of the upper and lower parts
of the bolts. The deformable contact bodies are identified as 3D bodies referring to the BSURF IDs 1, 2, 3 and 4:
BCBODY
BSURF
...
...
BCBODY
BSURF
...
...
BCBODY
BSURF
...
...
BCBODY
BSURF
...
...
1
1
292
3D
285
293
DEFORM
286
294
1
287
295
288
296
289
297
290
298
291
299
2
2
8
3D
1
9
DEFORM
2
10
2
3
11
4
12
5
13
6
14
7
15
3
3
677
3D
670
678
DEFORM
671
679
3
672
680
673
681
674
682
675
683
676
684
4
4
974
3D
967
975
DEFORM
968
976
4
969
977
970
978
971
979
972
980
973
981
In addition to the BCBODY option to define the deformable contact bodies, the BCTABLE option will be used to
indicate:
which grids are to be treated as slave grids and which as master grids in the multipoint constraints for
deformabledeformable contact;
glued contact between the gasket and the cylinder head;
glued contact between the gasket and the engine block;
glued contact between the bolts and the cylinder head.
Compared to the cylinder head and the engine block, the gasket has the finest mesh and is also relatively soft. In
general, it is recommended to use the grids of the contact body with the finest mesh as the slave grids in the MPCs
used to solve the contact problem. If the mesh density in the contact area is comparable, then the grids of the softest
body should be chosen as the slave grids. In the current simulation, grids of the gasket and the bolts are selected as
slave grids, which is done using the BCTABLE option. This option is also used to activate glued contact conditions, so
that both relative normal and tangential displacements in the contact areas are prohibited:
BCTABLE
Main Index
1
SLAVE
1
1
MASTERS 2
SLAVE
1
1
MASTERS 3
SLAVE
4
1
MASTERS 2
0.
2
3
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
CHAPTER 10 141
Engine Gasket
Besides indicating the slave nodes and glued conditions, the first SLAVE MASTER combination also activates the
extended tangential contact tolerance. The reason to use this is motivated by the coarse mesh of the cylinder head (see
Figure 104) compared to the gasket. By activating the extended tangential contact tolerance, all grids at the top of the
gasket are found to be in contact with the cylinder head.
Figure 104
In order to activate the full nonlinear formulation of the 3D isotropic elements (cylinder head, engine block and bolts),
the nonlinear property extension of the PSOLID entry is used:
PSOLID
PSLDN1
+
MAT1
3
3
C8
5
5
0
5
1
SOLI
L
210000.
+
.3
1.
1.55
Where the isotropic material definition is straightforward, the gasket behavior needs more attention. Here, the MATG
entry is used. For the gasket body, the definition is:
PSOLID
PSLDN1
+
MAT1
MATG
1
1
C8
2
1
35.
TABLES1 1
0.
.108
TABLES1 2
.1
.16
2
1
SLCOMP
120.
2
0
1
L
60.
0
NO
1
+
1.
2
5.5
.090909
52.
72.
0.
33.28
.027
.135
2.08
52.
.054
.175
8.32
56.
.081
ENDT
18.72
0.
35.84
.1225
.1675
5.04
45.36
.1375
.175
14.
56.
.1525
ENDT
27.44
The PSLDN1 entry refers to the PSOLID with ID number 1 and activates the solid continuum composite element
formulation via the SLCOMP option. The material ID number 2 of the MATG entry refers to MAT1 ID number 2 to
define the inplane (membrane) behavior of the gasket material. The loading curve is defined by the table with ID
number 1, while the unloading curve is defined by the table with ID number 2. In general, up to ten unloading curves
can be referred to, but in this example only one unloading curve is used. The onset of irreversible behavior of the gasket
material is defined by a yield pressure of 52 MPa (see also Figure 102). As soon as the corresponding gasket closure
Main Index
has been exceeded, the unloading behavior will be interpolated between the loading and the unloading curve. The
tensile modulus (in case the gasket would be loaded in tension) is set to 72 MPa and the transverse shear modulus to
35 MPa. The initial thickness difference between the gasket ring and gasket body is reflected by the initial gap of
0.090909 mm.
The control grids for the bolt pretensioning, 4083 and 4095, are defined by:
GRID
4083
36.04921.31545 20.515 5
GRID
4095
CORD2R 5
22
4083
22
4083
22
4083
4084
1
4085
1
4086
1
1
1.
1
1.
1
1.
1.
3924
1.
1.
3930
1.
1.
3936
1.
22
4095
22
4095
22
4095
4104
3
4105
3
4106
3
3
1.
3
1.
3
1.
1.
1966
1.
1.
1972
1.
1.
1978
1.
Alternatively, the BOLT option can be used. Although the kinematic constraints involved are the same, the BOLT option
has the following advantages:
the input format is more concise;
the option is easier to use in a contact analysis.
When the MPC entries are used, the user defined MPC's may easily be conflicting with MPC's introduced by the
contact algorithm, thus causing the contact constraints to be skipped. On the other hand, when the elements at both
sides of the cross section are included in the same contact body, then the BOLT option causes the contact algorithm to
treat this cross section in a special way, Consequently, grid points at the boundary of the cross section can touch
another contact body, while grid points touching the body with the cross section can slide along this body, even when
the cross section has to be passed.
Using the same control grids as mentioned above, the input of the BOLT entries is:
BOLT
1
TOP
BOTTOM
BOLT
2
TOP
BOTTOM
Main Index
4083
3924
3966
4084
4091
4095
1918
1960
4096
4103
3930
3972
4085
4092
3936
3978
4086
4093
3942
3984
4087
4094
3948
3954
3960
4088
4089
4090
1924
1966
4097
4104
1930
1972
4098
4105
1936
1978
4099
4106
1942
1948
1954
4100
4101
4102
CHAPTER 10 143
Engine Gasket
4083
.175
SPCD
4095
.175
10
FNT
10
25
UPW
YES
Here the FNT option is selected to update the stiffness matrix during every recycle using the full NewtonRaphson
iteration strategy. Convergence checking is performed based on displacements, forces, and work. For all criteria, the
default error tolerance is used. In order to avoid bisections, the field MAXDIV is set to 10.
Figure 105 shows a plot of the displacement magnitudes in the structure corresponding to the maximum pretensioning of the bolts. The expected symmetry in the solution is clearly present.
Figure 105
The values of the bolt force as a function of the bolt shortening are depicted in Figure 106 and clearly show a
nonlinear response. The bolt force is found as the reaction force on grid 4083.
Main Index
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
Bolt Shortening (mm)
0
0.00
0.05
Figure 106
0.10
0.15
0.20
Finally, Figure 107 displays the gasket pressure as a function of the gasket closure, both for the gasket ring and the
gasket body. As explained before, the gasket body has an initial gap which explains that the gasket pressure remains
zero until this gap is closed. The fact that the gasket pressure seems to already be nonzero for a gasket closer smaller
than the initial gap value (0.090909 mm) is due to the finite number of steps (10). Neither the gasket ring nor the gasket
body is loaded yet beyond the yield stress.
Figure 107
Modeling Tip
Contact Body Definition
Since the mesh of the engine block and the lower part of the bolts is a continuous mesh, the automated contact
algorithm will not be able to find a unique boundary description at the interface of the engine block and the bolts. This
is reflected by messages like:
warning: node
Main Index
3 only.
CHAPTER 10 145
Engine Gasket
Although, in the current example, this will not affect the results (there will be no contact detection between the engine
block and the bolts), it is generally not recommended. Instead, one should either make sure that the lower part of the
bolts are separated from the engine block or include only the upper part of the bolts in the contact body definition.
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_10.dat
nug_10_bolt.dat
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 47 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
Figure 108
Main Index
Chapter 11: Elasticplastic Collapse of a Cylindrical Pipe under External Rigid Body Loading
11
Main Index
Elasticplastic Collapse of a
Cylindrical Pipe under External
Rigid Body Loading
Summary
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solutions
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
154
147
148
148
153
154
148
CHAPTER 11 147
Elasticplastic Collapse of a Cylindrical Pipe under External Rigid Body Loading
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry
Pipe Length
Move Down
V = 2 in
R=4
Rigid
Body 2
Pipe
Rigid
Body 1
Move Up
V = 2 in
R=3
Material properties
Analysis type
Quasistatic analysis using elastic perfectly plastic material, geometric nonlinearity, and
nonlinear boundary conditions
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Both rigid bodies are moving towards the pipe in ydirection with a velocity of 2 in/sec.
for duration of 1 second.
Element type
FE results
100000
80000
60000
Force Y Top
40000
Force Y Bottom
20000
0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Main Index
Introduction
A model of a cylindrical pipe is subjected to crushing as rigid bodies above and below the pipe move inward towards
each other. The model is created using 2D nonlinear thick shell elements to model the pipe and rigid surfaces above
and below the pipe. The problem attempts to quantify whether the movement of the external structures cause the
plastic collapse of the pipe. Initial contact with the external structures is expected to cause elastic deformation of the
steel pipe. Additional incremental movement potentially subjects the structure to stresses beyond the proportional limit
of the material. The yield stress defines the onset of plastic strains that may initiate the collapse of the structure walls.
This exercise illustrates several SOL 400 capabilities including large displacement analysis, contact analysis between
rigid and deformable bodies, and large strain plasticity modeled with an elasticperfectly plastic model.
Requested Solutions
The large displacement elasticplastic contact analysis is carried out using MSC Nastran SOL 400 for this rigid to
deformable problem. The application of the nonlinear thick shell element is demonstrated by using the nonlinear
extension PSHLN1 option for the regular PSHELL option. The following results from SOL 400 model are compared
with the results obtained from the Marc model.
Contour plot for ydisplacement
Contour plot for total equivalent plastic strain
FEM Solutions
A numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastrans SOL 400 for a 3D representation of the deformable pipe
structure and two semicircular sections of rigid pipes sections. The details of finite element model, contact simulation,
material, load, boundary conditions, and solution procedure are discussed in this chapter.
Main Index
1
1
C4
1
1
DCT
.4
1
L
1
NO
CHAPTER 11 149
Elasticplastic Collapse of a Cylindrical Pipe under External Rigid Body Loading
Figure 111
In defining the contact model, the primary pipe section is modeled as a deformable body and the two external pipe
structures are modeled as rigid bodies. Elements comprising the deformable pipe structure are used to generate a
deformable contact body with ID 4 using the following BCBODY and BSURF entries. Contact body IDs 5 and 6 are
used to define the velocity controlled rigid bodies for the two semicircular sections of rigid pipes. The geometry
profiles of the rigid surfaces are defined using 3D NURB surfaces that describe the true surface geometry and most
accurately represent the curved surfaces.
BCBODY
BSURF
...
BCBODY
...
BCBODY
4
4
5
0
RIGID
NURBS
6
0
RIGID
NURBS
...
3D
1
DEFORM
2
3D
0.
RIGID
0.
13
2.
3D
0.
13
0.
10
8.1
RIGID
0.
10
7.1
4
3
0
4
0
0.
0.
CONTACT_TOP
4
4
5.5
2.
0
0.
0.
CONTACT_BOTTOM
4
4
5.5
0.
5
0.
50
8.1
0.
50
7.1
6
1
2.
7
0
0.
50
0
4.66667
1
2.
0
0.
50
8
4.66667
Furthermore, the following BCTABLE entries identify how these bodies can touch each other. BCTABLE with ID 0 is
used to define the touching conditions at the start of the analysis. This is a mandatory option required in SOL 400 for
contact analysis and is flagged in the case control section through the optional BCONTACT = 0 option. The BCTABLE
with ID 1 is used to define the touching conditions for later increments in the analysis, and it is flagged using
BCONTACT = 1 in the case control section.
BCTABLE
Main Index
0
SLAVE
4
0
MASTERS 5
SLAVE
4
0
MASTERS 6
0.
0
2
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
BCTABLE
1
SLAVE
4
0
MASTERS 5
SLAVE
4
0
MASTERS 6
0.
0
2
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Material
The isotropic elastic and elasticperfectly plastic material properties of the deformable body are defined using the
following MAT1 and MATEP options.
MAT1
MATEP
1
1
3.+7
Perfect36000.
.3
Isotrop Addmean
The following NLMOPTS entry enables large strain formulation using additive plasticity with mean normal return.
NLMOPTS,LRGS,1
2
1
1
1
1
1
123456
123456
0
1
343
1.16
THRU
THRU
1.
18
360
0.
0.
Solution Procedure
The nonlinear procedure used is defined through the following NLPARM entry:
NLPARM
100
PFNT
500
UPV
NO
where 100 indicates the total number of increments; PFNT represents Pure Full NewtonRaphson Technique wherein
the stiffness is reformed at every iteration; KSTEP = 0 in conjunction with PFNT indicates that the program
automatically determines if the stiffness needs to be reformed after the previous load increment is completed and the
next load increment is commenced. 500 is the maximum number of allowed recycles for every increment and if this
were to be exceeded, the load step would be cutback and the increment repeated. UPV indicates that convergence will
be checked on displacements (U) and residuals (P) and V stands for vector component which will do a maximum
component check. NO indicates that intermediate output will not be produced after every increment. The second line
of NLPARM is omitted here which implies that default convergence tolerances of 0.01 will be used for U and P
checking.
Main Index
CHAPTER 11 151
Elasticplastic Collapse of a Cylindrical Pipe under External Rigid Body Loading
Results
The contour of displacement in ydirection and total equivalent plastic strain in the pipe section from SOL 400
simulations are shown in Figure 112 and Figure 113, respectively. Similar plots from the Marc simulations are
shown in Figure 114 and Figure 115, respectively. It is clear from these figures that the predictions from the SOL
400 matches closely with the prediction from Marc.
Figure 112
Figure 113
Main Index
Figure 114
Figure 115
Main Index
CHAPTER 11 153
Elasticplastic Collapse of a Cylindrical Pipe under External Rigid Body Loading
Modeling Tips
PSHLN1 entry in conjunction with regular PSHELL entry allows the users to make use of the thick shell
element which is capable of handling large strain elastoplastic applications problems. Users should also make
use of the NLMOPTS,LRGS,1 option to flag the large strain behavior of these element.
Adding the parameter,
PARAM,CDBMSG05,5
after the BEGIN BULK option will output a num11m.t19 file that has the contact information available for
postprocessing in either Mentat or Patran. With this information, you can plot the normal contact force on the
rigid bodies (Die Forces) versus the Die Displacement as shown in Figure 116. The step shaped response is
due to the local collapsing of the curvature of the pipe elements. Using more elements would require smaller
step sizes.
Die Load [Lbf ]
100000
80000
60000
Force Y Top
40000
Force Y Bottom
20000
0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Figure 116
It is possible to make use of load controlled rigid body in place of the velocity controlled rigid body for this
problem. In such case, you should apply necessary displacement boundary condition at the control node of
rigid bodies to simulate its movement in ydirection.
Main Index
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_11m.dat
ch11.SimXpert
ch11.bdf
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 18 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
Figure 117
Main Index
12
Main Index
Thermal/Pressure
Loaded Cylinders
Summary
156
Introduction
Required Solutions
FEM Solutions
Results
Input File(s)
157
157
157
160
163
163
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry and
description
0.09
Material properties
Displacement Boundary
conditions and applied
loads
Symmetric displacement constraint over the horizontal plane with one end of the
cylinders are fixed in the zdirection. Step 1: Thermal loading 50oF temperature change.
Step 2: Internal pressure loading; internal cylinder.
Element type
Contact properties
FE results
Main Index
CHAPTER 12 157
Thermal/Pressure Loaded Cylinders
Introduction
This application example evaluates the performance of an adaptive load stepping scheme in the applications of MSC.
Nastran SOL 400 for the FE analysis. Due to the symmetry condition, half of the assembly is sufficient for the finite
element analysis. This example involves thermal load, contact, material, and geometrical nonlinearity under pressure
loading. The geometry and material descriptions are given in the above summary table. There are two load steps. The
first step is to apply the thermal load by specifying the temperature changes at each node of the two eccentric cylinders.
With the thermal loading along with the given boundary conditions, the stress and strain are generated due to uneven
thermal expansion of the two cylinders. In the second loading step, a pressure is applied at the inside of the inner
cylindrical surface. Due to this pressure, the smaller cylinder expands in diameter and eventually fills the gap between
the two cylinders when the outer surface of the small cylinder progressively touches the inner surface of the outside
cylinder.
Due to the strong nonlinearity, adaptive time stepping scheme is used. By the adaptive time stepping scheme, the step
size of each increment is adjusted at the end of step that just converged.
Required Solutions
SOL 400 is used for the FE analysis of this problem. The advanced HEX element defined by PSOLID entry pointing
to an auxiliary PSLDN1 entry is used. For the first loading step, the thermal strains and stresses of the two cylinders
are of the interests. For the second load step, the deformation and contact between two cylinders under pressure
loading are investigated. Due to the nonlinearity introduced by nonlinear material properties and contact, convergence
speed varies with the nonlinear deformation and changes of contact condition. In order to achieve fast and stable
analysis, the time step size is automatically adjusted according to the convergence condition. In the current version of
MSC Nastran SOL 400, this is done by adding the NLAUTO option into the input data file. For comparison purposes,
one analysis with Marc with the solid element of the same formulation as the element in SOL 400 and auto step scheme
is also conducted.
FEM Solutions
The element, contact, material/geometry, solution algorithm, and convergence schemes parameters are explained in
this chapter.
Main Index
1
1
C8
1
1
SOLI
0
L
Figure 121
Contact Parameters
As shown in Figure 121, the contact body named as cbody1 (shown in pink) represents the inner cylinder. The
contact body named as cbody2 defines the outside cylinder. The black arrows represent the pressure applied on the
inner surface of the small cylinder (cbody1). It should be noted that only half of the whole assembly is modeled due
to the symmetry condition.
In the input data file, the contact bodies are defined deformable contact bodies as below:
BCBODY 1
BSURF
1813
BCBODY 2
BSURF
3D
3D
1013
DEFORM 1
1814
1815 1816
DEFORM 2
1014
0
1817
1818
1819
1017
1018
1019
1015 1016
The BCTABLE bulk data entries shown below define the touch conditions between the bodies:
BCTABLE
BCTABLE
BCTABLE
0
SLAVE
1
0
FBSH
MASTERS 2
1
SLAVE
1
0
FBSH
MASTERS 2
2
SLAVE
1
0
FBSH
MASTERS 2
0.
0
1.+20
1
0.
0
0.
0.
0
1.+20
1
0.
0
0.
0.
0
1.+20
1
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
As shown above, BCTABLE with ID 0 is used to define the touch conditions at the start of the analysis. 0 identifies the
case number. This BCTABLE is mandatory for the contact analysis with SOL 400. Also, the options BCONTACT with
Main Index
CHAPTER 12 159
Thermal/Pressure Loaded Cylinders
ID 0 and BCPARA with ID 0 are all applied at the start of the analysis. For each load step, the touch condition can be
defined by BCTABLE, BCPARA, and BCONTACT option.
Material/Geometry Parameters
Both bodies in this analysis are isotropic in terms of thermal and mechanical properties. Body one represents the inner
cylinder, which is also elastoplastic. The Youngs modulus, Poisson ratio, and thermal expansion coefficient are
defined by MAT1 bulk data option. The plasticity properties are defined by MATEP with TABLES1 option. Here,
TABLES1 is associated with MATEP to defined the strain hardening rule of the material with ID 1.
MATEP
MAT1
TABLES1
1
1
1
0.
.00615
Table
2.2+7
2
9900.
20000.
3.94
.05
1
.3
1.
Isotrop Addmean
1.855
12500.
25000.
9.54
.1
15200.
28000.
.00295
ENDT
17500.
Body two represents the outside cylinder. As shown below, this body has a temperature dependent Youngs modulus
(see TABLEM1).
MAT1
MATT1
TABLEM1
2
2
2
0.
2.2+7
2
2.2+7
50.
.3
1.
1.855
1.76+7
100.
1.54+7
ENDT
The thermal expansion coefficient of the two cylinder are the same which is 0.0000185 1/oF.
Main Index
accuracy. Too large numbers may cause significant change of time step size between increments, which may cause the
solution to converge slowly or even diverging. If this happens, SOL 400 cuts the time step size back. As one of the
consequences, the analysis may need even longer computation time. To avoid this, it is recommended to set a
reasonably small value for the maximum ratio of incremental step size change between incremental steps (the 6th field
of the first line of the NLAUTO option). This parameter is set as 10 with desired number of iteration as 5 for load step
1. For the second load step, with consideration of the fact that contact and large deformation may occur, this parameter
is set as 1.2 with desired number of iterations as 7. This is particularly important in order to avoid penetration and also
to control the time step size with good balance of efficiency and accuracy.
SUBCASE 1
STEP 1
TITLE=This is a default subcase.
ANALYSIS = NLSTATICS
NLPARM = 1
BCONTACT = 1
SPC = 2
LOAD = 3
TEMPERATURE(LOAD) = 4
DISPLACEMENT(SORT1,REAL)=ALL
SPCFORCES(SORT1,REAL)=ALL
STRESS(SORT1,REAL,VONMISES,BILIN)=ALL
BOUTPUT (PRINT)=ALL
STEP 2
TITLE=This is a default subcase.
ANALYSIS = NLSTATICS
NLPARM = 2
BCONTACT = 2
SPC = 2
LOAD = 6
TEMPERATURE(LOAD) = 8
DISPLACEMENT(SORT1,REAL)=ALL
SPCFORCES(SORT1,REAL)=ALL
STRESS(SORT1,REAL,VONMISES,BILIN)=ALL
$ Direct Text Input for this Subcase
BEGIN BULK
NLMOPTS LRGS
1
PARAM
LGDISP 1
NLPARM
1
20
PFNT
1
0.01 0.01
0
NLAUTO
1
0.05
1.0
0.1
10.
5
1
0
0
10
$
NLAUTO
2
0.05
1.0
0.1
1.2
7
1
0
0
10
NLPARM
2
20
PFNT
1
0.01 0.01
25
UP
0
1.0e5 0.2
0
0
999999
0.0
1.0e5
0
25
999999
0.0
NO
0.2
0
UP
NO
Results
Load Step One
The initial temperature of the whole assembly is set as zero (0). In the first load step, a temperature load is applied to
the inner cylinder and part of the outside cylinder (see Figure 122  yellow color). Due to the thermal expansion
caused by the temperature load and the corresponding changes of the material properties, thermal strain and stress are
generated. Figure 123 shows the distribution of major principal stress and the equivalent stress at the end of this load
step. It is seen that the distribution of stress is uneven through the wall thickness of the outside cylinder. However, the
stress in the inner cylinder is quite uniformly distributed (see Figure 123(b)). This is because the inner cylinder has a
Main Index
CHAPTER 12 161
Thermal/Pressure Loaded Cylinders
uniform temperature load with minimum displacement boundary constraints. Therefore, it has nearly stressfree
thermal expansion. With the adaptive loading step scheme, the analysis of this loading sequence is completed in eight
incremental steps.
Figure 122
Temperature Loading
Figure 123
Distributions
Main Index
the inner cylinder. The lower level of stress is mainly because of the softening of material due to increased
temperature.
(a)
(b)
Figure 124
Figure 125
In addition to the analysis with MSC Nastran SOL 400, Marc is also used to conduct the analysis with the same type
of element and material and boundary condition definition. The results are quite close as shown in Figure 126(a) and
Figure 126(b). The analysis by Marc takes 16 incremental steps for the first load step and another 27 incremental steps
for the pressure loading step.
Main Index
CHAPTER 12 163
Thermal/Pressure Loaded Cylinders
Figure 126
(b) MSC.Marc
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_12bm.dat
mdug_12b3d.dat
Main Index
13
Main Index
Summary
165
Introduction
Solution Requirements
FEM Solution
Results
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
166
167
170
173
172
172
166
CHAPTER 13 165
Ball Joint Rubber Boot
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry
r = 0.017557 m
r=0m
Clamp 2
Knuckle
CL
Original Shape of Boot
Deformed Shape of Boot
Stud
Clamp 1
Housing
Material properties
Shear Modulus, G = 2.0 MPa  using time dependent and independent Mooney and
Ogden elastomeric material models
Boundary conditions
Housing moves to seat clamp 1; stud and knuckle move to seat clamp 2.
Element types
FE results
Verify the equivalence of the two elastomeric models and underscore the importance of
time effects of material properties in elastomers. Verify the deformed shape with actual
installation.
CL
Main Index
Introduction
In the design of ball joints for automotive applications, the major design concern is to prevent sealing boots from
leaking. Because most ball joint failures occur as a result of corrosion, contamination or dirt ingress, causing excessive
wear. Figure 131 shows some typical ball joint failure modes. In practice the stud of a ball joint is subjected to axial,
oscillatory and rotational loads. Currently, most designs of sealing boots are based on design engineer's experience,
experimental tests, and/or much more simplified FEA models. In this example, we will install the boot using a 2D
axisymmetric FEA model whereby the boot is fitted onto the housing under the large clamp, and then the stud and
knuckle moved to fit the boot onto the shaft. The deformed profile of the boot is then compared to the actual boot.
Contamination in the
grease
Contamination at the
parting line.
Figure 131
Solution Requirements
MSC Nastran is used to model the assembly process of the boot onto the housing and stud. Since the stiffness of the
housing, ball stud, knuckle and clamping rings is much higher than the rubber sealing boot, they are modeled with
rigid bodies. The simulation is performed as three different cases as explained below:
Cases A and B: The rubbersealing boot material is modeled using MooneyRivlin (Case A) and Ogden (Case B)
material models and equivalent performance of both is studied.
Case C:
Main Index
Viscoelastic Relaxation follows the installation with Mooney as the material mode. A time
dependence of hyperelastic properties is taken into account where the viscoelasticity is represented
as linear perturbations over hyperelastic material capable of representing large strains. The
viscoelastic relaxation will drop the strain energy density by about 50% in a two hour time period.
CHAPTER 13 167
Ball Joint Rubber Boot
FEM Solution
The numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastran's solution sequence 400. The details of finite element
models, contact simulations, material, load, boundary conditions, and solution procedure are discussed next.
Contact Models
The model has six contact bodies. The rubber boot is the deformable contact body while the housing, ball stud,
knuckle, ring small and ring large are represented as the rigid contact bodies. Each of the contact bodies is defined
through the BCBODY bulk data entry. Each rigid body is defined to contact the deformable rubber boot, and hence, six
contact pairs are defined through BCTABLE. In each contact pair, the contacting rigid body is defined as MASTER and
the deformable rubber boot is defined as SLAVE. The contact tolerance is zero and the bias factor is globally defined
for all contact pairs as 0.95. For simplicity, no friction has been included in the analysis. The BCPARA bulk data entry
is used to define the global bias factor.
Figure 132
Main Index
Material
Cases A and B:
The experimental data is fitted with a one term Mooney (commonly known as neoHookean) model. To demonstrate
the equivalence and accuracy of the implemented elastomer models in sol 400, both Mooney (Case A) and Ogden
(Case B) models have been used for the rubber boot. The models are made equivalent by ensuring that the bulk
modulus is the same for both models and taking care of the following:
1 = 2C10 and 1 = 2 and 2 = 2C01 and 2 = 2
It is important to note that this equivalence relation holds only one way i.e. any neoHookean or Mooney model can
be represented by the Ogden model in general but not viceversa. The bulk data entry used to define the material
properties in Case A is MATHE for both Mooney and Ogden models. The properties of Mooney and Ogden materials
have been input as follows:
MATHE
MATHE
1
1.
0.
0.
1
2.
0.
Mooney
0.
0.
0.
Ogden
2.
2.
1.
1.
0.
0.
0.
Case C:
In this case, along with the Mooney properties of Case A, a MATVE bulk data file entry is used to define the viscoelastic
properties. Here, Wdi (multiplier or scale factor for deviatoric behavior in Prony series) and Tdi (time constant for
deviatoric behavior in Prony series) need to be entered in the MATVE entry. They have been included in the input file
as follows:
MATHE
1
Mooney
0.
1.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
MATVE,1,Mooney,,,0.111188,0.205057,,
,0.130683,1.71947,0.0967089,23.7532,0.0822848,273.121,0.0965449,3107.79
Main Index
CHAPTER 13 169
Ball Joint Rubber Boot
Case C:
All the control node displacements are applied together in the first load step (as explained in the above case) which is
followed by a step of viscoelastic relaxation.
Solution Procedure
The assembly process for the different cases has been done as follows:
Cases A and B:
In the first step, the housing is brought into place with the ball stud and knuckle held unassembled. A fixed
time stepping procedure using NLSTEP with 50 increments is used to assemble the knuckle. UPV residual
checking is used with KSTEP = 1 and the solution algorithm utilizes the full NewtonRaphson (PFNT) with
convergence check using the infinity norm (as opposed to the L2 norm):
NLSTEP
1
1.0
general 25
fixed
50
mech
UPV
1
0
.01
10
.01
NLSTEP
2
1.0
general 25
1
10
fixed
50
0
mech
UPV
.01
.01
In the second step, both the stud and the knuckle are brought into position with the housing held in place.
Again, a fixed time stepping procedure using NLSTEP with 50 increments is used to assemble the Knuckle.
UPV convergence checking is used with KSTEP = 1.
Large displacement (PARAM, LGDISP, 2)
Large Strain analysis with updated Lagrangian approach with multiplicative decomposition of deformation
gradient (NLMOPTS,LRGS,2)
Case C:
In this case, all three housing, knuckle, and stud are brought into place in the first load step. Here, the entire analysis
is done in real time. The first load step is of 2 seconds.Again, a fixed time stepping is used with 100 increments with
each increment representing a real time of 0.02 seconds. Again the convergence technique is PFNT and UPV
convergence checking is used with KSTEP = 1. The NLSTEP entry is as follows
NLSTEP
1
2.0
general 25
fixed
100
mech
UPV
1
0
.01
10
.01
In the second load step, there are no additional loads or boundary conditions applied and the system is held in place
through the contact conditions. The assembled system thus relaxes for the next 7200 seconds. This is easily
accomplished with the adaptive time stepping scheme activated using the NLSTEP entry. The ADAPT field is employed
Main Index
in the NLSTEP entry to achieve this. While options like PV convergence test method and PFNT technique with
KSTEP=1 and convergence tolerance of 0.100 are specified in the MECH option of the NLSTEP entry, the ADAPT
option is used which specifies the following:
Initial time step (=1.0e3)
Minimum time step as a fraction of total load step time (=1.0E5)
Maximum time step as a fraction of total load step time (=.10)
Desired number of iterations (=10)
Factor for increasing the time steps (=1.20)
Output flag (=1)
Maximum number of increments in the current load case (=999999)
Flag for damping (=0)
Damping coefficient (=.100E03)
The NLSTEP entry is as follows:
NLSTEP
2
72000.0
GENERAL
25
0
ADAPT
1.0E03 1.0E5 .10
0 .100E03
MECH
PV
0.00
.100
10
0
0.00
10 1.20
0
1
PFNT
.100
1
1
999999
1.2
Results
The installation of the boot onto the housing and stud is shown in Figure 133. The deformed shape is overlaid onto
the actual deformed boot geometry to validate the modeling techniques.
CL
Undeformed
Deformed
R
Figure 133
Main Index
CHAPTER 13 171
Ball Joint Rubber Boot
As expected, the knuckle force is identical for both the models as shown in Figure 134. In addition, the results agree
with Marc's results which have been taken as reference. Figure 135 shows the fall of the knuckle force due to the
subsequent relaxation associated with the viscoelastic effects. The fall is quite dramatic and consistent with the
material data. Also, it can be noticed that the SOL 400 solution is very close to the Marc reference results.
Axial Force (N)
80
70
60
50
40
30
Mooney (MD Sol 400)
20
Mooney (Marc)
10
0
0.000
0.002
Figure 134
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.010
Axial Displacement (m)
70
60
Mooney (Marc)
50
40
30
Relax
20
10
Time (sec)
0
Figure 135
Main Index
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
Modeling Tips
Use of NLMOPTS,LRGS,2 and PARAM,LGDISP,2 must be included in the analysis. The KSTEP field in the NLSTEP
entry should be set to 1,especially for these kind of problems. Finally, for an efficient solution using the adaptive time
stepping scheme, the ADAPT option is used in the NLSTEP entry.
It must be noticed that additional laboratory tests (and corresponding curve fitting to get the Prony coefficients) would
need to be carried out to get the time dependence of the material properties. The need for the addition of time
dependent effects in an analysis requires judgment. In analyses involving both rolling resistance (important for
designing for fuel efficiency) or standing waves (tire blowout) in tires, viscous effects are important,; however, a
simple static loading to capture loaddeflection curves does not require modeling of any time dependent effects. This
can save time and money to do the additional tests.
In general, adaptive load stepping is recommended to provide robust automatic control of the applied load even in the
presence of strong nonlinearities. In this case, however, the large amount of contact throughout loadcase one together
with the timedependent aspects of loadcase two made fixed stepping the better option.
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_13a.dat
Mooney model
nug_13b.dat
Ogden model
nug_13c.dat
Main Index
CHAPTER 13 173
Ball Joint Rubber Boot
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 30 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
r = 0.017557 m
r=0m
Clamp 2
Knuckle
CL
Original Shape of Boot
Deformed Shape of Boot
Stud
Clamp 1
Housing
Figure 136
Main Index
14
Main Index
Summary
175
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solution
Results
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
176
177
179
181
182
176
176
CHAPTER 14 175
Time NVH Analysis Chassis Example
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
Units: mm
G
W1= 993
W1
W2
W2= 1,182
A
L1= 1,518
F
L2= 865
L3= 927
L1
L4
L3
L2
L4= 361
Size of rectangular hollow beam: 53x111 to 53x191 depending on locations.
Thickness of shell: 3.5
Material properties
E = 2.10x10 5 N mm
Analysis type
Boundary conditions
Free
Applied loads
Element type
FE results
1.00E01
1.00E02
901581
901641
1.00E03
Amplitude
901697
901865
902061
902097
1.00E04
902580
902595
902609
902797
1.00E05
902996
903063
1.00E06
0.00E+00
2.00E+01
4.00E+01
6.00E+01
8.00E+01
1.00E+02
1.20E+02
1.40E+02
1.60E+02
Frequency (Hz)
K
J
H
G
C
B
A
Main Index
Introduction
This is an example of a virtual dynamic test. A chassis of a car was modeled and a vertical impulse loading was applied
at one of front corner points. Time histories were obtained at select chassis locations and they were translated to
frequency domain by applying Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) to extract mode shapes and frequencies for 12 sampling
points.
Requested Solutions
Acceleration time histories are obtained at 12 points and they are translated to a frequency domain. Dynamic properties
such as modal natural frequencies and mode shapes are then computed. The results are then compared with those of
Nastran SOL 103 for validation purposes.
SOL 700
Yes
Final dynamic properties
Is acceptable?
No
Add PARAM, S700NVH1
, TIMNAT and TIMSML cards
Figure 141
Main Index
CHAPTER 14 177
Time NVH Analysis Chassis Example
FEM Solution
There are two models. The first model is the initial run to determine the rough dynamic properties of the structure and
second model is a rerun of the first job to find the accurate and final results using the previous time history results.
3
1
10.
10.
902517
.01
0.
0.
0.
ENDT
0.
0.
.001
0.
1.
1.
.002
0.
The acceleration time histories at 12 points on the chassis are computed (see Figure 142) to obtain the modal
responses.
Load (ton)
0.010
H
G
0.005
C
B
A
Time (ms)
0.000
Figure 142
10
Applied Impulse Loading and Nodes Selected for Getting the Acceleration Responses
Primary Job
The end time in transient run is defined by using 100 time steps at 0.4e4 sec. for each increment. The end time is the
product of these two entries. Notice here, the time increment is only for the first step. The actual number of time
increments and the exact value of the time steps are determined by MSC Nastran solver during the analysis. The time
step is a function of the smallest element dimension during the simulation.
TSTEPNL
100
.01
ADAPT
10
TIMNVH,
+, 0, 3,
Main Index
1,
1,
,
0.015,
,
0,
3,
1.0,
13,
1000.,
.0030,+
3,
0.0005,
2,+
The range of natural frequencies to obtain is from 1.0 Hz to 1000 Hz and translational degrees of freedom for zdirection is only considered (3). The sampling rate is 0.0005 seconds. The peaking criterion is two, which means that
a peak is selected if the amplitude of the number of increasing and decreasing points around a peak is equal or greater
than 2.
Acceleration is selected for the response (0) and translational eigenvectors are only requested as ASCII format (3).
Eigenvalues are normalized by 1.0 (1) and 0.015 is selected as CLOSE value which means if there are two modes which
distance is smaller than 0.015 Hz, it is assumed to be the same mode. ACII file format of natural frequencies and
eigenvalues are asked (0) and translational time histories of zdirection are requested (3). Frequencyamplitude data
of zdirection are requested (13) and a peak whose amplitude is less than 0.0030 times the maximum amplitude is
ignored (.0030)
+, 901581, 901641, 901697, 901865, 902061, 902097, , ,+
+, 902580, 902595, 902609, 902797, 902996, 903063
The grid points 901581, 901641, 901697, 901865, 902061, 902097, 902580, 902595, 902609, 902797, 902996 and
903063 are selected to obtain time history responses for Time NVH analysis.
TIMNVH,1, , , 1.0,
+, 0, 3, 1, 0.015,
+, 901581, 901641,
+, 902580, 902595,
Rerunning Job
To find the accurate modal properties, a rerun is required using the previous time history data. Only three entries are
different from the initial job;
PARAM, S700NVH,
TIMNVH and
TIMNAT
The value of PARAM, S700NVH is assigned to 1 for using the previous time history binary data (binout0000). In
TIMNVH entry, the PEAK option (in the first line) is changed from 2 to 2, which will require defining the TIMNAT entry.
TIMNAT is used to specify the natural frequencies selected from amplitudefrequency plot from the initial run. The
natural frequencies close to 35, 43, 49, 101, and 108 Hzs are obtained as the natural frequencies.
PARAM,S700NVH1,1
TIMNVH,1, , , 1.0, 1000., 3,.0005, 2,+
+, 0, 3, 1, 0.015, 0, 3, 13, .0030,+
+, 901581, 901641, 901697, 901865, 902061, 902097, , ,+
+, 902580, 902595, 902609, 902797, 902996, 903063
TIMNAT,1,35.,43.,49.,101.,108.
Main Index
CHAPTER 14 179
Time NVH Analysis Chassis Example
Results
There are three result files from Time Domain NVH analysis.
mode.out: Results for the natural frequencies and eigenvalues.
amplfreq 009018653.txt: amplitudefrequency output of degree of freedom =3 at grid point 901865.
timehist 009018653.txt: time history output of degree of freedom =3 at grid point 901865.
From the amplfreq*** files, the frequencyamplitude plots are shown in Figure 143. Using the plot, the modal
frequencies are specified in TIMNAT option to refine the dynamic property results.
1.00E01
6
1 2
1.00E02
901581
901641
1.00E03
Amplitude
901697
901865
902061
902097
1.00E04
902580
902595
902609
902797
1.00E05
902996
903063
1.00E06
0.00E+00
2.00E+01
4.00E+01
6.00E+01
8.00E+01
1.00E+02
1.20E+02
1.40E+02
1.60E+02
Frequency (Hz)
K
J
H
G
C
B
A
Figure 143
Main Index
36.017
35.000
43.952
43.000
67.428

84.722

101.969
101.001
Mode #
111.016
108.001
Figure 144
52.506
49.000
Comparison of Mode Shapes and Frequencies for SOL 103 and SOL 700
The small peaks for modes 4 and 5 are barely observable in Figure 143 and arise because of the selection of the type
of impulse loading. These lateral modes exhibit a low participation when the impulse loading is vertical. For a certain
set of impulse loads, certain modes may not be excited and the FFT only picks up the excited modes that significantly
participate in the transient response.
Main Index
Mode
SOL103
SOL 700
Diff(%)
Comparison
36.0170
35.0002
2.82%
43.9523
43.0002
2.17%
52.5065
49.0003
6.68%
67.4281
Small peak
84.7220
Small peak
101.9688
101.0005
0.95%
111.0159
108.0005
2.72%
CHAPTER 14 181
Time NVH Analysis Chassis Example
Results show that even though the vertical mode shapes of modes 2 and 3 are similar, their amplitude and lateral modes
are quite different. The results are compared in Figure 145.
Sample Output
The final response from the FFT steps for the 12 sampling points are contained in a file called modes.out which
contains the eigenvalues (frequencies) and eigenvectors (mode shapes) in the form:
02'(6
(,*9
st
1 mode {
Sample
Grid IDS
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
} Frequency
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
Modeling Tips
To get more accurate data, options of TIMNVH and TSTEPNL entry could be changed. For example, increasing the end
time (defined as 1 second in this analysis) can result in higher resolution (the frequency increment in the frequencyamplitude plot). The resolution is determined as:
1
1
 =  = 1 Hz
sample end time  sample start time
1 sec 0 sec
Main Index
To increase the maximum frequency in the frequencyamplitude plots, the sampling rate which is defined as 0.015
seconds in this example decreases. The maximum frequency of this example is computed as:
1
1
 =  = 133.33 Hz
1
1
 sampling rate
 0.015 sec
2
2
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_14a.dat
nug_14b.dat
nug_14c.dat
Main Index
15
Main Index
Tube Flaring
Summary
184
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solutions
Input File(s)
185
185
189
185
Summary
Title
Features
Deformabledeformable contact
Large elasticplastic deformation
Geometry
Axisymmetric
x=r
CL
x=r
CL
Material properties
Tube: Youngs modulus = 3.0e7 psi, initial yield stress = 3.6e4 psi, yield
stress at 0.1 equivalent plastic strain = 1.8e5 psi, Poissons ratio = 0.3
Tool: Youngs modulus = 4.0e7 psi, Poissons ratio = 0.3, no yielding
Analysis type
Quasistatic analysis
Boundary conditions
The left end of the tube is prevented from moving in the axial direction but
is free to move in the radial direction.
Applied loads
An edge load is applied to the right end of the tool (the end with a larger
diameter) to push the tool into the steel tube, then released
Element type
Contact properties
Friction between the tool and the tube is ignored in the analysis
FE results
0.4
0.3
0.2
x=r
0.1
CL
Time (s)
0.0
0.0
Main Index
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
CHAPTER 15 185
Tube Flaring
Introduction
A coneshaped flaring tool is pushed into a cylindrical tube to permanently increase the diameter of the tube end. The
goal of the analysis is to determine whether the final shape of the tube, after the entire process, meets the objective.
The nonlinear nature of the problem, along with the irreversible characteristics, makes it impossible to know in
advance the load required to drive the tool into the tube. As a result, multiple runs through the analysis cycle may be
necessary to achieve the final objective of the analysis.
This problem demonstrates the use of MSC Nastran SOL 400 to analyze a contact problem involving deformabledeformable contact and large elasticplastic deformations.
Requested Solutions
The requested solutions include the curve of the tube diameter at the right end as a function of loads and the deformed
shape of the tube and the tool along with the distributions of von Mises stresses and plastic strains.
FEM Solutions
A numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastrans SOL 400 for the element mesh (shown in Figure 151)
using axisymmetric elements.
x=r
y
Figure 151
There are two contact bodies. One is the tube and one is the tool. The two contact bodies with ID 3 and 4 are identified
as selected elements of the tube and the tools respectively as:
BCBODY
BSURF
...
3
3
115
2D
109
116
DEFORM
110
117
4
4
32
2D
25
33
DEFORM
26
34
4
27
35
111
118
112
119
113
120
114
and
BCBODY
BSURF
...
Main Index
0
28
36
29
37
30
38
31
39
Furthermore, the BCTABLE entries shown below identify that these bodies can touch each other.
BCTABLE
BCTABLE
0
SLAVE
3
0
fbsh
MASTERS 3
SLAVE
4
0
fbsh
MASTERS 3
1
SLAVE
3
0
fbsh
MASTERS 3
SLAVE
4
0
fbsh
MASTERS 3
0.05
0
0.05
0
0.05
0
0.05
0
2
100.
0
0.8
100.
0
0.8
2
100.
0
0.8
100.
0
0.8
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Axisymmetric elements are defined with CQUADX along with PLPLANE and PSHLN2 entries:
PLPLANE
PSHLN2
+
+
+
+
+
$ Pset:
CQUADX
CQUADX
1
1
1
1
C3
AXSOLID
C4
AXSOLID
C5
IPS
C6
AXSOLID
C8
AXSOLID
"pshell.1" will
109
1
110
1
1
L
L
L
Q
Q
be imported as: "plplane.1"
10
144
145
1
144
146
147
145
+
+
+
+
+
The Youngs modulus and Poissons ratios for the tube and the tool are defined as:
MAT1*
*
MAT1*
*
1
1.
2
1.
3.+7
1.15385+7
.3
4.+7
1.53846+7
.3
The yield stresses along with the hardening are defined respectively as:
MATEP
1
Table 36000.
TABLES1,1,2,,,,,,,+,
+,0.,36000.,0.1,180000.,ENDT,
Isotrop Addmean
The NLPARM entry is used to define the nonlinear analysis iteration strategy. There are two load steps: loading and
unloading. One hundred (100) uniform time increments are used to solve each load steps. The stiffness matrix will be
updated at each iteration (full NewtonRaphson iteration strategy).
NLPARM
100
PFNT
25
YES
NLPARM
100
PFNT
25
YES
Main Index
CHAPTER 15 187
Tube Flaring
The tube diameter at the right end of the tube gradually increases during the analysis as the load increases and reaches
the maximum of 0.4316 inches. The final tube radial displacement after unloading is settled at 0.4093 inches. See
Figure 152 for the curve of tube diameter as a function of time (load). The entire analysis procedure can be repeated
with various load levels to achieve the desired final tube diameter. The curve is not smooth at the loading path because
of the discrete finite elements. It can be improved by refining the finite element meshes.
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
x=r
0.1
CL
Time (s)
0.0
0.0
Figure 152
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
The deformed mesh and the distribution of von Mises stress at the time the applied load reaches maximum are shown
in Figure 153. It can be observed that the stresses are concentrated in two areas: the tip of deflection where the tube
made contact with the tool and in the area where the tube is deformed.
Main Index
x=r
Figure 153
The deformed shape of the tube and the tool along with the distribution of plastic strains at the end of the analysis are
shown in Figure 154.
x=r
Figure 154
Main Index
Deformed Mesh and Distribution of Equivalent Plastic Strains at the End of Analysis
CHAPTER 15 189
Tube Flaring
Input File(s)
File
nug_15.dat
Main Index
Description
Tube flaring input file.
16
Main Index
Summary
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solutions
Input File(s)
Video
199
191
192
192
192
199
198
CHAPTER 16 191
Cup Forming Simulation
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry
Material properties
Analysis type
Displacement boundary
conditions
Element type
3D shell
4noded reduced integration elements
Contact Data
FE results
1. History plots of contact body forces for punch, die, and holder
2. Plot of equivalent plastic strains and equivalent stresses in the workpiece
3. Distribution of contact normal and friction forces on workpiece
Force (N)
25000
20000
15000
Die Force
10000
5000
0
0.0
5000
Holder Force
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
10000
15000
20000
Main Index
1.0
Time (s)
Punch Force
Introduction
A cylindrical cup drawing test is simulated with a circular punch and blank. The test is simulated for a 1 mm thick
aluminium sheet modeled by onepoint shell elements and using an isotropic elastoplastic material with workhardening. Only a quarter section of the cup is analyzed. A schematic view of the cup drawing process is shown in
Figure 161. The simulation demonstrates various capabilities available in MSC Nastran SOL 400 to simulate large
strain processes including robust and efficient shell elements, large strain material and geometric nonlinearity, and
automated contact algorithms that can handle large amounts of sliding and friction.
R2
DIE
R4
t0
R0
R3
R1
HOLDER
PUNCH
Figure 161
Requested Solutions
The contact forces on the rigid tools, workpiece, and the stress/plastic strain contours in the workpiece are of interest.
The availability of the largestrain shell elements in SOL 400 (by using suitable PSHLN1 extensions to the PSHELL
entry) are demonstrated. Analytical rigid tools that capture curved geometries accurately are modeled and friction
between the workpiece and these rigid tools is simulated. The solutions presented include:
History plot of the contact forces acting on the rigid punch, die, and holder
Contact normal forces and friction forces acting on the workpiece
Plastic strain and equivalent stress contours in the workpiece
FEM Solutions
The contact, material/geometry, convergence and other parameters used for the cup drawing simulated herein are as
follows.
Contact Parameters
The contact bodies are shown in Figure 162. The first body is the deformable workpiece; the second, third and fourth
bodies are the rigid punch, rigid die, and rigid holder, respectively. The gap between the holder and die is 1 mm. All
Main Index
CHAPTER 16 193
Cup Forming Simulation
the rigid bodies are defined with analytical surfaces using the NURBS option. Friction coefficient is taken as 0.05 for
all surfaces.
BCBODY
BSURF
BCBODY
BCBODY
BCBODY
7
7
1
0
RIGID
2
0
RIGID
3
0
RIGID
3D
19
DEFORM
20
7
21
3D
0.
RIGID
0.
27
0.
PUNCH
3D
0.
RIGID
0.
27
0.
DIE
3D
0.
RIGID
0.
0.
HOLDER
0
22
23
24
25
0
0.
0.
1
0.
0
40.
0
0.
0.
1
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0.
1
0.
0
0.
BCBODY with user ID 7 is identified as a threedimensional deformable body with associated BSURF ID 7. BCBODY
with ID 1 is identified as the rigid punch. It is specified as a velocity controlled body and is moved with a Z velocity
of +40 mm per unit time (identified in red on the BCBODY definition above). BCBODY with ID 2 is identified as the
die and BCBODY with ID 3 is identified as the holder. These are specified as zero velocity bodies and are held
stationary through the analysis.
Figure 162
The BCTABLE bulk data entries shown below identify the touching conditions between the bodies:
BCTABLE
Main Index
1
SLAVE
7
0
FBSH
MASTERS 2
SLAVE
7
0
FBSH
0.0
0
0.0
0
3
50.
0
0.95
50.
0
0.95
0.05
0.
0.05
0.
MASTERS 3
SLAVE
7
0
FBSH
MASTERS 1
0.0
0
50.
0
0.95
0.05
0.
BCTABLE with ID 1 is used in conjunction with the BCONTACT = 1 case control option to define the touching
conditions between the bodies in the forming step. Three sets of contact parameters are defined in the above table: the
first set for the workpieceholder, the second set for the workpiece die, and the third set for the workpiece punch. The
contact parameters for all sets are identical in this problem though they can be varied for each set if needed. The
friction coefficient is defined as 0.05, the bias factor as 0.95, and the separation force as 50 N. The definition of a nondefault separation force bears more explanation  during the sheet forming process, especially at the early stages, nodes
tend to chatter (contact, separate, back into contact, etc.). Using the default separation force (maximum residual force
in the solution) allows a significant amount of chattering and leads to increased iterations and smaller steps. Specifying
a larger separation force reduces this chattering and reduces the number of iterations for the solution. It should be noted
that care should be taken in specifying the nondefault separation force; it should not be so large that it prevents
physical phenomena like earing, etc.
The BCPARA bulk data entry defines the general contact parameters to be used in the analysis:
BCPARA
0
FTYPE
NLGLUE
6
1
BIAS
FNTOL
9.5E01
5.E1
Note that ID 0 on the BCPARA option indicates that the parameters specified herein are applied right at the start of the
analysis and are maintained through the analysis unless some of these parameters are redefined through the BCTABLE
option. Important entries under BCPARA option include FTYPE = 6 (bilinear Coulomb friction), BIAS = 0.95
(distance tolerance bias), FNTOL = 50 (separation force). A program calculated default (1/4 of the shell thickness)
is used for the distance tolerance (ERROR) is not defined on the BCPARA option.
Material/Geometry Parameters
An isotropic elastoplastic material with workhardening is used for the workpiece. MAT1 is used to define the elastic
properties and MATEP in conjunction with TABLES1 is used to define the initial yield stress and workhardening
properties:
MAT1
70000.
.3
MATEP
Table
1.
Isotrop Addmean
327.244
It should be observed that a 2 is used in the third field of the TABLES1 option to indicate that the data corresponds to
stress vs. plastic strain (as opposed to stress vs. total strain). Only the first line of the workhardening data is indicated
here. The plastic strains are specified up to 1.0 in the actual table. The following should be noted: For the large strain
problem being simulated herein, TABLES1 data is interpreted by the program as Cauchy stress versus true plastic
strain. Also, if the actual plastic strains in the analysis exceed the maximum value in the table, the workhardening
slope calculated using the last two values of plastic strain is used for extrapolating.
Main Index
CHAPTER 16 195
Cup Forming Simulation
Reduced integration shell elements are used herein. They are identified by the PSHELL option in conjunction with the
PSHLN1 option.
$ Elements and Element Properties for region : shell
PSHELL
1
1
1.
1
1
PSHLN1,1,1
,c4,dct,lrih
where the MAT1 primary material is pointed to by MID1/MID2/MID3 entries of the PSHELL option, a shell thickness
of 1.0 is specified on the PSHELL option, the C4 field DCT of the PSHLN1 option indicates that thick 4 noded shell
elements are to be used and LRIH of the PSHLN1 option indicates that reduced integration elements are to be used.
These elements have three global displacements and three rotations as the nodal degrees of freedom. Bilinear
interpolation is used for the coordinates, displacements, and rotations. MITC4 shell geometry with the ANS (assumed
natural strain) method in conjunction with a physical stabilization scheme in used in the formulation of the reduced
integration element. These elements with a onepoint quadrature scheme are able to undergo large rotations without
any artificial correction for warping. The large strain formulation for the element is flagged through the
PARAM,LGDISP,1 in conjunction with the NLMOPTS,LRGSTRN,1 bulk data entries. The former option indicates that
a large displacement analysis with follower force effects is to be conducted. The latter option indicates that additional
large strain parameters are to be flagged for the shell elements. Note that for large strain elastoplastic applications
using elements pointed by the PSHLN1, PSLDN1, PSHLN2 entries, NLMOPTS,LRGSTRN,1 is a mandatory option.
As is customary for all Nastran shell elements, a material coordinate system is defined herein for each of the shell
elements. This orientation is defined through the THETA/MCID option on the CQUAD4 option:
CQUAD4
CQUAD4
19
20
1
1
40
41
22
23
3
22
4
40
0
0
In the current example, the basic coordinate system (ID 0 indicated in red on the CQUAD4 options above) is projected
onto the plane of the element. The resulting axes define the XYZ orientation of the material coordinate system in the
elemental plane.
Convergence Parameters
The nonlinear procedure used is defined through the NLPARM entry:
NLPARM
100
PFNT
30
NO
where 100 indicates the total number of increments; PFNT represents Full NewtonRaphson Technique wherein the
stiffness is reformed at every iteration; KSTEP = 0 in conjunction with PFNT indicates that the program
automatically determines if the stiffness needs to be reformed after the previous load increment is completed and the
next load increment is commenced. 30 is the maximum number of allowed recycles for every increment and. if this
were to be exceeded, the load step would be cutback and the increment repeated. U indicates that convergence will
be checked on displacements (U). NO indicates that no intermediate output will be produced after every increment. The
second line of NLPARM is omitted here, which implies that default convergence tolerances of 0.01 will be used for U
checking. It should be noted that, by default, the PFNT checking used herein conducts displacement checking over
incremental displacements and is generally more stringent than FNT checking which conducts displacement checking
over weighted total displacements.
Main Index
Note that P checking (checking on residuals) has not been conducted in this example. The normal P check in SOL 400
compares the weighted residuals with the weighted external loads and checks that the tolerance (default = 0.01) is
satisfied. In this problem, external loads are absent since the punch imposes displacement boundary conditions on the
workpiece. Under these circumstances, SOL 400 normally checks residuals in the current iteration versus residuals in
previous iterations. However, due to frequent separations, residuals and displacements oscillate significantly and the
check of current weighted residuals versus previous weighted residuals causes a large number of unnecessary recycles.
Due to these reasons, displacement checking alone is conducted in this problem.
Results
The history plot of the rigid tool contact forces in the Z direction are presented in Figure 163. Two trends are
noteworthy: The contact forces are in equilibrium; i.e., the contact force exerted by the punch on the workpiece is in
equilibrium with the contact forces transferred by the workpiece to the holder and die. Note also that as the punch
pushes the blank upwards (+Z direction), the predominant tendency is for the sheet to contact the die. However,
portions of the sheet separate from the die and make intermittent contact with the holder.
In order to verify the accuracy of the SOL 400 solution, the total punch force obtained from SOL 400 is compared with
the corresponding solution obtained from MSC.Marc in Figure 164. It is seen that the history of the forces match quite
well and are within about 2% of each other.
Force (N)
25000
20000
15000
Die Force
10000
5000
0
0.0
5000
Holder Force
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Time (s)
10000
15000
Punch Force
20000
Figure 163
Main Index
History Plot of Contact Tool Forces in Z Direction during Cup Drawing Process
CHAPTER 16 197
Cup Forming Simulation
30000
25000
SOL 400
20000
Marc
15000
10000
5000
Time (s)
0
0.0
0.2
Figure 164
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Comparison of Total Punch Force vs. Time for MSC.MARC and SOL 400
The equivalent plastic strain contours at the outermost fiber of the workpiece and the corresponding equivalent stress
contours at the end of the cup forming process are plotted in Figure 165. It is noted that maximum plastic strains are
of the order of 45% and the peak values occur along the die radius. The portion of the workpiece held between the die
and the holder is the most highly stressed. Also, the circumferential variation of the quantities is negligible, thereby
confirming the axisymmetric nature of the problem being simulated.
Figure 165
Equivalent Plastic Strains and Equivalent Stresses in Workpiece at End of Cup Forming
Process
The contact normal force and friction force from the center to the outer edge of the workpiece along a radial line of
nodes is plotted in Figure 166. It can be noted that the peak contact normal forces occur at the punch radius and the
next peak is at the die radius. Friction force are of the order of F n , where is the friction coefficient = 0.05.
30000
25000
SOL 400
20000
Marc
15000
10000
5000
Time (s)
0
0.0
0.2
Figure 166
Main Index
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Contact Normal Force and Friction Force as a function of Radial Coordinate for Workpiece
F06 Output
A number of case control options (DISPLACEMENTS, SPCFORCES, STRESS, NLSTRESS, BOUTPUT) are used (see
nug_16is.dat). This, in conjunction with the YES or NO option for INTOUT on the NLPARM entry, allows
extensive output of relevant quantities in the F06 file:
Contact normal forces, normal stresses and frictional forces at the contact nodes of the Workpiece are
produced via the BOUTPUT option. BOUTPUT = ALL produces output for all contact nodes. BOUTPUT
= N where N is a set number would restrict output to only those contact nodes that belong to set N.
BOUTPUT = NONE suppresses all contact related output in the F06 file.
For the nonlinear output format (requested by NLSTRES), average values of the stress components, strain
components, equivalent stress, and equivalent plastic strain are produced for the top and bottom fibers. For
each layer, the integration point values are averaged over the number of integration points and presented in
the F06 file. For the onepoint elements used herein, the average is the same as the gauss point value. It
should be noted that for the largestrain elastoplastic problem simulated herein using the
NLMOPTS,LRGSTRN,1 option, the output stresses are the Cauchy stresses and the output strains are the
logarithmic strains.
Main Index
CHAPTER 16 199
Cup Forming Simulation
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_16is.dat
3D Shell Elements  PSHLN1 used along with PSHELL to flag nonlinear
reduced integration elements. Isotropic elastoplastic material properties
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 27 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
Figure 167
Main Index
17
Main Index
Doublesided Contact
Summary
201
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solutions
Results
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
202
202
202
206
206
248
210
CHAPTER 17 201
Doublesided Contact
Summary
Title
Contact features
Deformabledeformable contact with bilinear friction, large strain plasticity, and work
hardening
Geometry
Five at
1.0 each
1.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.5
Material properties
Elasticplastic material with isotropic strain hardening. The stressstrain curve is defined
in the materials section. The material properties are:
6
Analysis type
Boundary conditions
Nodes on lefthand side are constrained in xdirection and nodes on bottom side are
constrained in ydirection
Applied loads
Nodes on the top side are given the imposed displacement of 0.6 inch in ydirection
Element type
FE results
Deformed shapes at several steps, contours of von Mises stress, and total equivalent
plastic strain
Main Index
Introduction
This problem demonstrates MSC Nastrans ability to perform multibody contact analysis, incorporating automated
doublesided contact with friction between the contact surfaces for linear plane strain elements. For these types of
contact problems, it is not necessary to assign either body as a master or slave.
Requested Solutions
The large displacement elasticplastic contact analysis is carried out using MSC Nastran for a deformabletodeformable contact problem with friction. The application of the nonlinear plane strain element is demonstrated by
using the nonlinear extension PSHLN2 option along with the PLPLANE option. The following results from the MSC
Nastran model are compared with the results obtained from the Marc model.
Deformed shapes at steps 10, 20 and 30
Contour plot for equivalent plastic strain
FEM Solutions
A numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastrans SOL 400 for a 2D representation of the contact
simulation between two deformable bodies. The details of finite element model, contact simulation, material, load,
boundary conditions, and solution procedure are discussed below.
Main Index
1
1
PLSTRN
1
L
CHAPTER 17 203
Doublesided Contact
Figure 171
In defining the contact model, the elements comprising the deformable bodies are used to generate a deformable
contact bodies with ID 1 and 2 using the following BCBODY and BSURF entries. The friction factor of 0.07 is defined
for both these contact bodies.
BCBODY
BSURF
...
BCBODY
BSURF
...
1
1
2D
61
DEFORM
62
1
63
0
64
.07
65
66
67
2
2
2D
1
DEFORM
2
2
3
0
4
.07
5
Furthermore, the following BCTABLE entries identify how these bodies can touch each other. BCTABLE with ID 0 is
used to define the touching conditions at the start of the analysis. This is a mandatory option required in SOL 400 for
contact analysis and is flagged in the case control section through the optional BCONTACT = 0 option. The BCTABLE
with ID 1 is used to define the touching conditions for later increments in the analysis and is flagged using
BCONTACT = 1 in the case control section. The 0 defined for the first field (ISEARCH) of third data line of BCTABLE
indicates that doublesided contact will be used for this contact pair. With this double contact option, SOL 400 will
consider another contact pair for the analysis with body 1 as master and body 2 as slave in addition to the contact pair
defined in the BCTABLE option.
BCTABLE
BCTABLE
Main Index
0
SLAVE
1
0
FBSH
MASTERS 2
1
SLAVE
1
0
FBSH
MASTERS 2
0.
0
1.+20
1
0.
0
0.9
0.
0
1.+20
1
0.
0
0.9
.07
0.
0.
.07
0.
0.
The BCPARA bulk data entry shown defines the general contact parameters to be used in the analysis.
BCPARA
0
FTYPE
BIAS
0.9
The ID 0 on the BCPARA option indicates that the parameters specified herein are applied right at the start of the
analysis and are maintained through the analysis unless some of these parameters are redefined through the BCTABLE
option. Important entries under BCPARA option include FTYPE the friction type and the BIAS  the distance
tolerance bias. As a general recommendation, BIAS is set to 0.9 (note that the default value of BIAS is 0.9). For the
frictional case, FTYPE is set to 6 (bilinear Coulomb model).
Material
The isotropic elastic and elasticplastic material properties of the deformable bodies are defined using the following
MAT1 and MATEP options. The stressstrain curve for this material is defined in TABLES1 which is referred in MATEP
option. Figure 172 shows the stressstrain diagram defined in TABLES1.
MAT1
1
3.175+7
.268
MATEP
1
TABLE
1
TABLES1 1
2
*
0.000000000e+0 8.073000000e+4
...
*
*
7.000000000e2
ENDT
200000
1.595880000e+5
7.44
5.136
1.000000000e5
8.096400000e+4
2.200000000e1
1.753830000e+5
Stress (Psi)
150000
100000
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
The following NLMOPTS entry enables large strain formulation using additive plasticity with mean normal return.
NLMOPTS,LRGS,1
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 205
Doublesided Contact
Figure 173
Solution Procedure
The nonlinear procedure used is defined through the following NLPARM entry:
NLPARM
Main Index
30
0.01
PFNT
25
YES
where 30 indicates the total number of increments; PFNT represents Pure Full NewtonRaphson Technique wherein
the stiffness is reformed at every iteration; KSTEP = 0 in conjunction with PFNT indicates that the program
automatically determines if the stiffness needs to be reformed after the previous load increment is completed and the
next load increment is commenced. 25 is the maximum number of allowed recycles for every increment. P indicates
that convergence will be checked on residuals (P). YES indicates that intermediate output will be produced after every
increment. The 0.01 defined in the second line of NLPARM indicates the convergence tolerances of 0.01 for
residual checking.
Results
The deformed shape at steps 10, 20, and 30 observed from both Marc and SOL 400 models are compared in
Figure 174. The equivalent plastic strain contours observed at step 30 from Marc and SOL 400 runs are presented in
Figure 175 and Figure 176. It is clearly observed from these pictures that, the predictions from SOL 400 matches
closely with the predictions from Marc.
Modeling Tips
PSHLN2 entry in conjunction with regular PLPLANE entry allows the users to make use of the plane strain
elements using regular Nastran elements CQUAD4, CQUAD8, and CTRIA6. Users should make use of the
NLMOPTS,LRGS,1 option to flag the large strain behavior of these elements.
The value of 0 for ISEARCH parameter in BCTABLE defines the double sided contact for this problem.
Assigning the value of 1 for ISEARCH parameter will define single sided contact for this problem, and this
will not work properly in this case. The nug_17w.dat input file shows this wrong way of contact definition
for this problem and Figure 177 shows how SOL 400 works in such situations.
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 207
Doublesided Contact
Marc  Step 10
Marc  Step 20
Marc  Step 30
Figure 174
Main Index
Figure 175
Figure 176
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 209
Doublesided Contact
Figure 177
Main Index
b
d
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 211
Doublesided Contact
a
b
c
e
Main Index
b
c
d
e
f
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 213
Doublesided Contact
a
a
Main Index
a
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 215
Doublesided Contact
Main Index
d
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 217
Doublesided Contact
Main Index
a
b
c
d
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 219
Doublesided Contact
b
c
d
e
f
Main Index
a
b
d
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 221
Doublesided Contact
b
c
Main Index
b
c
e
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 223
Doublesided Contact
b
c
d
e
b
f
Main Index
b
c
d
e
b
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 225
Doublesided Contact
b
c
d
e
f
g
Main Index
a
b
c
d
f
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 227
Doublesided Contact
a
b
c
d
f
g
Main Index
a
b
c
e
d
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 229
Doublesided Contact
a
b
c
d
e
f
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 231
Doublesided Contact
Main Index
a
b
c
f
g
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 233
Doublesided Contact
d
e
Main Index
a
b
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 235
Doublesided Contact
b
d
Main Index
a
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 237
Doublesided Contact
a
b
Main Index
a
b
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 239
Doublesided Contact
a
c
b
e
f
g
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 241
Doublesided Contact
e
a
Main Index
f
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 243
Doublesided Contact
d
c
a
Main Index
a
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 245
Doublesided Contact
d
c
f
e
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 17 247
Doublesided Contact
e
c
Main Index
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_17.dat
nug_17w.dat
ch17.dat
ch17.SimXpert
Main Index
18
Main Index
Demonstration of Springback
Summary
Introduction
Reference Solution
FEM Solutions
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
255
250
251
251
254
254
251
Summary
Title
Contact features
Rigiddeformable contact, velocity driven rigid cylinder, load controlled rigid cylinder,
and release of a contact bodies
Geometry
Material properties
Quasistatic analysis
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element type
Contact properties
FE results
Contour of equivalent stress at the end of forming, equivalent stress after the springback;
displacement history of point A.
XDisplacement (in) Point A
0.20
forming
springback
0.15
0.10
MD Nastran Sol400
MSC.Marc
0.05
% of Load
0.00
Main Index
50
100
150
200
CHAPTER 18 251
Demonstration of Springback
Introduction
Significant permanent deformation and large strains occur during the forming step by moving a cylindrical rigid body
into the metal structure. The metal structure springs back upon removal of the cylindrical rigid body using the contact
table definition.
Reference Solution
MSC.Marc 2005r3 will be used to create a reference solution.
FEM Solutions
The finite element model is shown in Figure 181. There are two contact bodies: one deformable and one rigid body.
BCBODY
BSURF
...
BCBODY
...
1
1
2D
1
DEFORM
2
4
0
RIGID
NURBS2D
.85875
2D
0.
0
7
.51775
RIGID
0.
72
4
1
3
0.
CYL
50
.85875
0
4
1
1.
0.1125
1
0.
0
0.
.95525
The deformable contact body is simply a collection of mutually exclusive elements and their associated nodes. The
rigid cylindrical body is defined using 2D NURBS line.
Furthermore, the BCTABLE entries shown below identify that these bodies can touch each other. Since the master body
is a rigid one, this actually means that the deformable body is the slave one.
BCTABLE
BCTABLE
0
SLAVE
1
0
MASTERS 4
1
SLAVE
1
0
MASTERS 4
0.
0
1
0.
0
.2
0.
0.
0.
0
1
0.
0
.2
0.
0.
During the springback analysis, the contact forces on the deformable body due to the contact with the rigid body are
removed immediately. It is done using BCMOVE option. To prevent the two bodies cylinder reclaims contact, a new
BCTABLE has to be defined that does not include the cylinder.
BCMOVE
BCTABLE
2
4
2
RELEASE 0
1
The geometric nonlinear analysis is requested using the following LGDISP parameter. The large strain option is also
set in this model
PARAM
NLMOPTS
Main Index
LGDSIP
LRGSTR
1
1
To activate the friction behavior, the user should use the BCPARA option as follows:
BCPARA
0
FTYPE
Figure 181
Plane strain elements for large strain elasticplastic analyses are chosen by the PSHLN2 entry referring to the
PLPLANE entry on the CQUAD4 option as shown below.
PLPLANE 1
PSHLN2 1
1
1
The material property is isotropic and elasticplastic with hardening. The Youngs modulus, Poissons ratio, and
plasticity parameters are defined as follows:
MAT1
MATEP
TABLES1
*
1
1
1
0.
1.06+7
TABLE
2
.33
1
42900.
ISOTROP ADDMEAN
0.001733
43110.2
The nonlinear procedure used during the forming and springback are set using the following options:
NLPARM
NLPARM
1
2
30
1
PFNT
PFNT
U
U
Here the PFNT option is selected to update the stiffness matrix during every recycle using the NewtonRaphson
iteration strategy, and the default displacement convergence tolerances will be used.
The simulation process is controlled by the case control section. The first step is the forming process and the second
one is the springback analysis:
BCONTACT=0
SPC = 2
STEP 1
TITLE=Forming Step
NLPARM = 1
BCONTACT = 1
LOAD = 1
Main Index
CHAPTER 18 253
Demonstration of Springback
STEP 2
TITLE=Springback Step
NLPARM = 2
BCONTACT = 2
BCONTACT=0 is meant to bring both bodies just in contact. Since there is no explicit external load applied in this
analysis, a dummy LOAD is introduced in the case control parameters.
The deformed structure plot (magnification factor 1.0) is shown in Figure 182 along with the von Misses stress
contour. The maximum stresses are located at the expected location.
UNDEFORMED
DEFORMED
Figure 182
Deformed Configuration with von Misses Stress Contour at the End of the Forming Step
The deformation after the springback analysis is shown in Figure 183. There is significant permanent deformation
during the forming process as obviously seen from this figure. The von Misses stresses of the residual stresses are also
plotted.
UNDEFORMED
DEFORMED
Figure 183
Main Index
Deformed Configuration with von Misses Stress Contour After the Springback
The displacement of point A is plotted versus time (percentage of load) in Figure 184 illustrating the elastic
springback upon unloading the structure. This behavior is compared with a reference plot obtained with MSC.Marc
2005r3. The result of MSC Nastran matches the referenced one very nicely.
XDisplacement (in) Point A
0.20
forming
springback
0.15
0.10
MD Nastran Sol400
MSC.Marc
0.05
% of Load
0.00
50
Figure 184
100
150
200
Modeling Tips
Force control applied via a control node associated with the rigid cylinder may be used instead of displacement (or
equivalently velocity) control. Using this technique, the release of the load requires less difficulty with the contact
table (please see nug_18b.dat). In terms of CPU time, removing the rigid body from contact table is more efficient
since there is no need to do contact manipulation (please see nug_18c.dat).
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_18a.dat
nug_18b.dat
nug_18c.dat
Main Index
CHAPTER 18 255
Demonstration of Springback
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 18 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
UNDEFORMED
DEFORMED
Figure 185
Main Index
19
Main Index
Summary
257
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solution
Input File(s)
258
258
258
307
262
CHAPTER 19 257
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry
Material properties
E block = 17.5Mpsi
block = 0.3
Body_1
Body_2
Body_3
yield = 35kpsi
Elasticplastic material
Analysis type
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element type
3D solid
FE results
Main Index
Introduction
This problem demonstrates the ability to perform metal forming analyses. A rigid cylinder is pressed into an elasticplastic material and, in the second loading stage, it is rolled. Large plastic deformation is anticipated in this analysis.
Requested Solutions
To model this large plastic deformation, additive plasticity with mean normal return is used. This is activated in MSC
Nastran using the NLMOPTS bulk data entry, nonlinear material options, and then choosing LRGSTRN,1. Together
with this option, nonlinear property extensions for the PSOLID entry should be used. This can be done by activating
the PSLDN1 bulk data entry and selecting the required properties.
FEM Solution
A numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastrans SOL 400 for the element mesh (Figure 191) using solid
elements (contact body ID 1). The dimensions of the workpiece are 20 x 10 x 12 inches. The radius of the cylinder is
10 inches, the width 18 inches, and the cylinder is placed on top of the workpiece at its center. The cylinder (contact
body ID 2) is modeled as a rigid using NURBS to define the surface. The plane which supports the workpiece is also
defined as a rigid (contact body ID 3).
BCBODY
BSURF
...
1
1 1
3D
DEFORM
3
and
BCBODY
...
2
226
RIGID
3D
0.
227
3
0
RIGID
3D
0.
RIGID
0.
0.
BODY_2
0
1.
.1
0.
1
0.
227
0.
0
1.
.1
0.
1
0.
0
0.
and
BCBODY
...
RIGID
0.
0.
BODY_3
Thus, a deformable contact body is simply a collection of mutually exclusive elements and their associated nodes.
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 259
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Figure 191
Furthermore, the BCTABLE entries shown below identify that these bodies can touch each other.
BCTABLE
BCTABLE
BCTABLE
0
SLAVE
1
0
MASTERS 1
SLAVE
2
0
MASTERS 1
SLAVE
3
0
MASTERS 1
1
SLAVE
1
0
MASTERS 1
SLAVE
2
0
MASTERS 1
SLAVE
3
0
MASTERS 1
2
SLAVE
1
0
MASTERS 1
SLAVE
2
0
MASTERS 1
SLAVE
3
0
MASTERS 1
0.
0
3
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0
3
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0
3
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0.
.1
0.
.1
0.
0.
.1
0.
.1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
Solid elements suitable for large deformation analyses are chosen by the PSLDN1 entry referring to the PSOLID entry
on the CHEXA option as shown below.
PSOLID
PSLDN1
+
Main Index
1
1
C8
1
1
SOLI
0
1
The material property for all the elements is elasticplastic, with Youngs modulus, Poissons ratio, and initial yield
stress defined as
MATEP
MAT1
1
1
Perfect35000.
1.75+7
Isotrop Addmean
.3
The rigid cylinder (contact body 2) is load controlled. This means that two nodes define the motion of the rigid. One
node defines the translational degrees of freedom and one node defines the rotational degrees of freedom. The motion
of the cylinder is first in the zdirection, and, after this, it rolls around its yaxis in the xdirection. This motion is
prescribed by defining two analyses steps. Node 227 is for the translational motion, and node 226 for the rotational
motion. Note that in step 2, the cylinder rotates both around the yaxis and moves in the xdirection, making a rolling
movement.
SPCD
SPCD
SPCD
SPCD
1
2
2
2
227
227
227
226
3
3
1
2
6.25
6.25
5.
.5
1
0.01
2
0.01
25
0.01
25
0.01
0.01
0.01
PFNT
10
PFNT
10
200
UP
YES
200
UP
YES
Here PFNT is selected to update the stiffness matrix every recycle using the full NewtonRaphson iteration procedure.
Convergence checking is on displacements and forces. Note that MAXITER is set to 200 and MAXDIV is set to 10 to
avoid that bisections occur, since too many bisections may increase the overall solution time.
Two stages of the deformation are shown in Figure 192 and Figure 193. Figure 192 shows the deformation after the
first step where the cylinder has moved in the zdirection. Figure 193 shows the deformation after the second step
when the cylinder also has rolled in the xdirection.
Figure 192
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 261
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Figure 193
A comparison with MSC.Marc is made. Figure 194 shows a superposition of the deformed mesh of Nastran (black)
and the deformed mesh of Marc (purple).
Figure 194
Main Index
Comparison of Deformed Structure Plot Of MSC Nastran (black) and Marc (purple) after the
Second Load Step.
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 263
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Create Parts
a. Assemble tab
b. Parts, select Create Part
c. For Name, type Solid_Block
d. Click Apply
e For Name, type Rigid_Body1
f. Click Apply
g. For Name, type Rigid_Body2
h. Click OK
i. Right click Solid_Block; select Set Current
a
b
Main Index
Create Surface
a. Geometry tab
b. Surface, select Filler
c. For Method, select Points
d. For Points, enter 0,0,0;20,0,0;20,10,0;0,10,0 (Hit the Enter key on the keyboard)
e Click Apply
f. Click Cancel
a
b
c
d
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 265
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Create Mesh
a. Meshing tab
b. Automesh, select Surface
c. For Surface to mesh, select the surface
d. For Size, enter 2.5
e Click Apply
f. Click Cancel
a
b
d
c
Main Index
c
c
d
e
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 267
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Delete Quads
a. Hide 3D elements
b. Edit, select Delete
c. Pick window, select Elements
d. Select the quads displayed with a window (draw a box around graphic)
e Pick window, click Done
f. In Delete? window, click Yes
g. Pick window click Exit
h. Show 3D elements
a
h
d
c
Main Index
Create Surface
a. Right click Rigid_Body1; select Set Current
b. Geometry tab
c. Curve: select From Points
d. Create, select Polyline
e. Method, select 2 Points
f. For Points, enter 30,30,0;50,30,0 (Hit the Enter key on the keyboard)
g. Click Apply
h. Click Cancel
b
c
d
e
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 269
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Create Circle
a. Geometry tab: Surface: select Normal
b. Width, enter 80 (Hit the Enter key on the keyboard)
c. Check Reverse direction
d. Select the curve
e. Click Apply
f. Click Cancel
b
d
c
Main Index
Create Surface
a. Right click Rigid_Body2; select Set Current
b. Geometry tab: Curve: select Arc
c. Method, select DirectionRadius
d. Radius: enter 10 (Hit the Enter key on the keyboard)
e. Select Axis Y
f. Check Create Circle
g. Enter Center Point: 10,14,22 (Hit the Enter key on the keyboard)
h. Enter Start Point: 0,0,0 (Hit the Enter key on the keyboard)
i. Click Apply
j. Click Cancel
To rotate your graphic to match the one shown below, click on the Rotate Icon, put the cursor
on the graphic, hold the left mouse button, and rotate the graphic for different views.
b
c
d
e
f
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 271
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Create Cylinder
a. Geometry tab: Multi: select Sweep
b. Along, select Axis
c. Select Axis Y
d. Length Of Sweep, enter 18 (Hit the Enter key on the keyboard)
e. Entities: select the curve
f. Check Delete Entities to Sweep
g. Check Reverse Direction
h. Click Apply
i. Click Cancel
b
c
d
f
g
i
h
e
Main Index
a
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 273
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Create Material
a. Materials and Properties tab
b. Material, select Isotropic
c. Name: enter Mat_1
d. Young Modulus: enter 1.75e7
e. Poissons Ratio, enter 0.3
f. Click Advanced and Add Constitutive Model
g. Click Elasto Plastic
h. Select Perfectly Plastic
i. Initial Yield Stress, enter 35000
j. Click Apply
k. Click Cancel
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Main Index
Create Properties
a. Materials and Properties tab
b. 3D Properties, select Solid
c. Entities: select Solid_Block
d. Material: select Mat_1
e. Click Advanced
f. Select Non Linear
g. Corner elements keyword: HEXA, select C8
h. Element structural behaviour: HEXA, select SOLID
i. Integration scheme: HEXA, select L
j. Click Apply
k. Click Cancel
a
b
d
c
g
h
i
j
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 275
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
a
b
c
d
Main Index
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 277
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
g
h
i
Main Index
a
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 279
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Create Constraints
a. LBCs tab
b. Constraints, click Pin
c. Name: enter spc1
d. Uncheck Ty and Tz
e. Entities: activate pick nodes
f. On the left edge of the block, select 25 nodes with a window
g. Click Apply
h. Click Cancel
a
b
c
e
d
e
Main Index
a
b
c
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 281
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
a
b
c
d
Main Index
a
b
d
e
d
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 283
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
a
b
d
f
e
g
e
Main Index
a
b
f
e
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 285
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Analysis Setup
a. Model Browser, right click FileSet
b. Select Create new Nastran job
c. Solution Type: select SOL400
d. Solver Input File: select NewJob.bdf
e. Uncheck Create Default Layout
f. Click OK
a
b
c
d
e
Main Index
a
e
h
i
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 287
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
c
f
g
d
Main Index
f
h
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 289
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
b
a
c
d
Main Index
g
f
h
i
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 291
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
b
c
a
d
Main Index
b
e
c
d
f
g
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 293
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
b
e
c
f
d
Main Index
a
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 295
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
c
d
Main Index
b
c
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 297
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
For Step2, repeat the Step1 procedure for Requesting Output Parameters.
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 299
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Postprocessing
a. File: Attach Results
b. File Path: select MASTER
c. Attach Options: Results
d. Click OK
b
c
d
Main Index
Postprocessing (continued)
a. Results tab
b. Click Deformation
c. Plot Data tab
d. For Plot Type, select Fringe
e. Result cases, select Step1
f. Result type, select Displacements, Translational
g. Derivation, select Magnitude
h. Click Update
a
b
d
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 301
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Postprocessing (continued)
Main Index
Postprocessing (continued)
a. For Plot Type, select Deformation
b. Result cases, select Step 1
c. Result types, select Displacements,Translational
d. Click Update
c
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 303
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Postprocessing (continued)
Main Index
Postprocessing (continued)
a. Results tab
b. Click Deformation
c. Plot Data tab
d. For Plot Type, select Fringe
e. Result cases, select Step2
f. Result type, select Displacements, Translational
g. Derivation, select Magnitude
h. Click Update
i. Model Browser, uncheck Deform 01
a
b
d
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 305
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Postprocessing (continued)
Main Index
Postprocessing (continued)
a. For Plot Type, select Deformation
b. Result cases, select Step 2
c. Result type, select Displacements,Translational
d. Click Update
Main Index
CHAPTER 19 307
3D Indentation and Rolling without Friction
Postprocessing (continued)
Input File(s)
File
nug_19.dat
Main Index
Description
Linear Elements using PSLDN1 Entry
20
Main Index
Summary
Introduction
Requested Solution
FEM Solutions
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
316
309
310
312
314
316
312
CHAPTER 20 309
Composite Fracture and Delamination
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
6
R = 0.5
1.1
0.078
0.6
0.9
0.9
0.6
Initial Crack
Material properties
Analysis type
Quasistatic analysis
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element type
VCCT properties
FE results
Reaction force
200
150
100
50
Main Index
0.05
0.1
Vertical displacement
0.15
0.2
Introduction
This example models a honeycomb (core) structure with a face sheet between which exists an initial delamination. A
hole is drilled in the core part, where a prescribed displacement is applied to the face sheet in order to study the effect
of delamination of the face from the core.
A plane strain assumption has been used and, for simplicity, the same isotropic material is used for the two parts.
The delamination is modeled in two ways:
With glued contact and crack growth using the VCCT option.
With interface elements using a cohesive zone model.
Figure 201 illustrates the VCCT model. The face sheet is glued to the core. The center part of the face sheet is omitted
from the contact body and thus defines the initial cracks. The grid IDs defining the crack tips are shown in Figure 202.
Figure 201
The model using interface elements is shown in Figure 203. Here, we do not use contact; instead, there are interface
elements between the core and the face which share the grids from the existing meshes. The interface elements have
zero thickness, but they are shown with finite thickness in Figure 203 (the face part has been moved downwards for
better illustration).
For the VCCT model, a crack growth resistance is specified. The energy release rate is calculated for each crack at
each load level. When this energy release rate is larger than the crack growth resistance, the crack will grow. The
growth is accomplished by releasing the glued contact at the crack tip. The next grid along the interface is
automatically identified and a new calculation of the energy release rate is performed, and the check for growth
repeated. This continues at constant load until either the crack reaches a free boundary or the energy release rate is
below the crack growth resistance.
Main Index
CHAPTER 20 311
Composite Fracture and Delamination
grid 2381
grid 1136
Figure 202
Figure 203
Delamination Model with Bottom Part moved Downwards to Show the Location of the
Delamination Elements
Main Index
With the interface elements and the cohesive material model, the growth of the delamination occurs by increased
damage in the interface elements. Damage could occur at any point along the interface, but in this case, the largest
stresses occur where the initial delamination ends, so the largest damage will happen here. When the interface elements
have sustained full damage at all integration points, they no longer contribute to the stiffness of the structure.
Requested Solution
Requested results are the forcedisplacement curve of the point where the prescribed displacement is applied and the
amount of growth of the initial delamination.
FEM Solutions
MSC Nastrans SOL 400 has been used in the analysis.
The VCCT option is specified in the bulk data as:
VCCT
VCCT
2381
1
1136
1
4.409
0
2
4.409
0
The grid IDs 2381 and 1136 are located as shown in Figure 202
Plane strain elements are chosen by the PLPLANE entry on the CQUAD4 option as shown below.
PLPLANE 1
PSHLN2 1
+
C4
1
1
PLSTRN
1
L
+
+
The delamination elements are defined with the CIFQUAD entry, and the corresponding cohesive property and material
are defined as:
MCOHE
+
PCOHE
4.409
2
.500E02
2
2
where the exponential option is used for the cohesive material model.
The nonlinear iterative control is specified as:
NLSTEP
+
+
+
2
GENERAL 30
FIXED
100
MECH
PV
1.
1
0
0.01
PFNT
+
+
+
Fixed time stepping procedure with total time of 1 is used. Maximum 30 iterations are allowed for each increment.
Total 100 numbers of increments are used for fixed time stepping. Output for every single increment is written to the
result file. For convergence criterion load equilibrium error with vector component method (PV) is used. Convergence
tolerance of 0.01 is used. Pure Full NewtonRaphson Method is used (PFNT) as an iteration method.
Main Index
CHAPTER 20 313
Composite Fracture and Delamination
The deformed shape at the final load for the two cases is shown in Figure 204. It can be seen that the amount of growth
of the delamination is the same for the two models. The cohesive zone variant shows the stretched interface
elements. They are, at this point, fully damaged and do not contribute to the structural stiffness.
Figure 205 shows a plot of the reaction force versus the prescribed displacement. Here, we clearly see the difference
between the two approaches. For VCCT, the interface is rigid until crack growth occurs. The jumps in the reaction
force indicate when a new node is released. With a finer mesh, the curve would be smoother. The cohesive zone model
shows a different behavior. The initial stiffness is lower as a result of the properties of the cohesive material. Here the
interface layer is relatively soft, and the growth of the delamination is smooth. By adjusting the properties of the
cohesive material one can adjust the initial stiffness of the interface layer. Thus, the VCCT approach models the
interface as rigid while the interface element approach models an elastic interface with initially zero thickness.
The values used for the crack growth resistance and the cohesive energy are the same in the two model. This makes
sense since these quantities are related both correspond to the energy needed to break the connection.
a) VCCT
b) Cohesive Zone
Figure 204
Main Index
250
Cohesive zone
VCCT
Reaction force
200
150
100
50
Figure 205
0.05
0.1
Vertical displacement
0.15
0.2
Modeling Tips
Both models could be done with higherorder elements for increased accuracy. When glued contact is released in the
VCCT model, the midside grid is released whenever a corner grid is released. Hence, although this would give an
increased general accuracy of the solution, it would not improve the jagged nature of the forcedisplacement curve.
Some notes on mesh design. In the VCCT model, the meshes on both sides of the glued interface have matching nodes.
One of the two grids at the crack tip is identified in the VCCT input. It does not matter which one of the two that is
used. It is allowed to use nonmatching meshes for VCCT based crack growth. Figure 206 shows an example. Here,
the bottom part is glued to the top part (the bottom part is the touching side and the top part the touched side). In this
case, it is important that the grid of the touching part is chosen for the VCCT input. This is the grid that would be
released in case of crack growth. The touching part should be the part with a finer mesh density.
The current interface element model does not use contact. The interface elements and the other elements share nodes.
In order to allow a model with independent meshes, one can also use glued contact here. See Figure 207 for an
example. The interface elements are shown with finite thickness for clarity. The top part of the interface elements are
glued to the top part of the model and the bottom part of the interface elements to the bottom part. This way, all three
parts can be modeled independently. Similar to the VCCT example above, the touching body (in this case the interface
elements) should have a finer mesh density.
Main Index
CHAPTER 20 315
Composite Fracture and Delamination
Figure 207
Example of Mesh for Cohesive Zone Model with Nonmatching Mesh Densities
Main Index
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_20v.dat
nug_20d.dat
nug_20d.bdf
nug_20d_start.SimXpert
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts about 47 minutes and explains how the steps
are performed.
6
R = 0.5
1.1
0.078
0.6
0.9
0.9
Initial Crack
Figure 208
Main Index
0.6
21
Main Index
Summary
318
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solution
Results
Input File(s)
Animation
319
319
319
322
361
361
323
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
Material properties
Car frame:
Rigid
Airbag:
Fabric (MATD034)
Density = 8.76E07
Ea = 0.3; Eb = 0.2
nab= 0.2; Gab = 0.04
CSE = 1; EL = 0.06; PRL = 0.35
LRATIO = 0.1; DAMP = 0.4
Rigid
R gas inflator = 353.78; CP gas inflator = 1191
The Inflator Mass Flow Rate and the Temperature of the gas as a
function of time are defined by tables.
Dummy:
Hybrid 3  50 (LSTC.H3.022908_Beta_Rigid.50th
Seatbelt:
Analysis type
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element type
FE results
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 319
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
Introduction
Automotive companies perform crash simulations including airbags and dummies to predict the forces that would be
exerted on the passenger. For people of average size, the airbag can be simulated using a uniform gas bag method
where a predetermined pressure profile is applied inside the airbag surface. In some crash scenarios, such as OutofPosition (OOP), the passenger is already leaning forward at the time of airbag deployment, in which case the flow is
not uniform and the pressure method is not accurate. Instead, Full Gas Dynamic approach (CFD method) is used to
accurately simulate the gas jet, and its pressure distribution inside the bag. This crash example is based on the full gas
dynamic approach where an occupant dummy impacts the airbag.
Requested Solutions
A numerical analysis will be performed to predict the behavior of an airbag and an occupant dummy during crash
simulation.
FEM Solution
The units of this model are mm, kg, msec, KN, GPa, K, and J.TSTEPNL describes the number of time steps (20) and
time increment (2 msec) of the simulation. End time is the product of the two entries. Notice here that the time
increment is only for the first step, and in this analysis, it is overruled by the addition of an initial time step parameter:
PARAM, DYINISTEP, 1.E7.
The actual number of time increments and the exact value of the time steps are determined by SOL 700 during the
analysis. The time step is a function of the smallest element dimension during the simulation.
TSTEPNL 1 20
2.
AIRBAG instructs SOL 700 to create an airbag using either the full gas dynamic (CFD) method or using a uniform gas
bag method. Here, the CFD method will be used. Inflow of gas into the airbag is defined by the entries following the
INFLATOR key word.
AIRBAG
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
3
CFD
7
ON
1
1.2E9
NONE
INITIAL0.000101 294.34
INFLATOR
9
1
353.78
1191.
GAS
2
0.0 0.02897CONSTANT
GAS
4
0.0 0.0235CONSTANT
20.
20.
286.98
2
1004.
1004.
1191.
MATD034 represents SOL 700 Material #34. It is used to model fabric material.
Main Index
20.
1.
For the airbag and the Seatbelt the following fabric materials are used respectively:
MATD034
0.2
+
1.
+
0.0
+
0.0
+
0.0
MATD034
+
+
+
8.76E7
0.3
0.2
0.04
0.35
3.
0.06
0.0
0.0
0.0
292
1.E6
0.1
0.4
0.0
0.0
1.
0.0
0.0
2.9
0.0
2.9
0.0
The ends of the Seatbelt are modeled with Seatbelt elements (CBELT), Seatbelt property (PBELTD), and Seatbelt
material (MATDB01). The loading and unloading curves (force vs. strain) are defined in the following tables:
MATDB01
TABLED1
+
0.1
+
ENDT
TABLED1
+
ENDT
293
61
4.2
1.E6
0.0
0.5
62
61
0.0
0.45
6.7
7.6
0.0
62
0.05
0.0
3.
1.7
1.00
8.2
1.00
8.2
The dummy is modeled by using many element types and joints: CPENTA, CHEXA, RBJOINT, RBJSTIFF, CBAR,
CBEAM, HGSUPPR, CSPR, PSPRMAT, MAT1, MATRIG, and several of MATD0**.
EOSGAM defines the ideal gas inside the airbag.
EOSGAM
1.4 286.98
Bulk Data Entries that Define Contact Relations and Contact Bodies
BCTABLE defines MasterSlave as well as self contact.
BCTABLE
1
+
SLAVE 1
+
+
+
+
+
+
MASTERS
+
SLAVE
5
+
+
0.3
+
+
Main Index
0.5
2
1
0.5
0.3
SS2WAY
2
+
YES+
CHAPTER 21 321
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
+
+
+
..
MASTERS
1.
20.
1.
YES+
BCBODY is a bulk data entry that defines a flexible or rigid contact body in 2D or 3D. It could be specified with a
BSURF, BCBOX, BCPROP, or BCMATL entry.
BCBODY
BCBODY
..
1
5
3D
3D
DEFORM
DEFORM
2
13
respectively.
BCPROP
..
BSURF
..
6
2527
1
THRU
THRU
10922
2516
Using the BCTABLE and several BCBODY, BCSEG, and BCSURF entries, the following contacts are defined as:
Contact
Number
Slave
Master
Airbag
Airbag
Pelvis
Neck ring
Neck
Ribs
Torso
Ribs
Breast
Airbag
Seatbelt
Lower body
Chair
Feet  hands
Frame
Airbag
Frame
10
Boundary conditions are specified for the car frame, and chair. Because the car frame is rigid, enforced motion entry
(SPCD2) is used.
$ Constraint for Frame chair floor
SPCD2
6
RIGID
MR289
SPCD2
6
RIGID
MR289
SPCD2
6
RIGID
MR289
SPCD2
6
RIGID
MR289
Main Index
1
2
3
5
0
0
0
0
555
555
555
555
1.
1.
1.
1.
SPCD2
SPCD2
TABLED1 555
+
0.
6
6
RIGID
RIGID
0.
MR289
MR289
1000.
6
7
0.
0
0
ENDT
Results
Figure 211
Main Index
555
555
1.
1.
CHAPTER 21 323
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
Main Index
a
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 325
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
Specify Input/Output
a. Tools: Options
b. Select Input/Output
c. Click Nastran Structures
d. Unselect Reduce Parts
e. Click Apply
f. Click GUI Options
g. Click Solver Card
h. Click OK
b
c
g
f
Main Index
c
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 327
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
d
a
f
g
Main Index
a
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 329
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
a
b
Main Index
a
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 331
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
a
c
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 333
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
Dummy Positioning
a. Safety: Positioner Panel
b. Select Parts by clicking Torso
c. Dummy Positioning: select Dummy HPoint
d. For H Point Location, change X to 560; change Y to 279.90; change Z to 55
e. For Rotation, change Y to 10; change Z to 180
b
d
Main Index
a
b
c
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 335
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
b
c
Main Index
a
b
b
f
c
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 337
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
a
f
h
c
d
g
e
Main Index
a
b
c
e
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 339
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
d
e
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 341
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
a
e
c
g
i
k
j
k
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 343
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
Main Index
b Pelvis
c Axes
e Ring Neck
d Ribs
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 345
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
b Torso
a Ribs Shoulder
c
d Breast
c Plate Neck
e
e Dummy
Main Index
f Seatbelt
b Lower Body
a Chair
c
d Hands Feet
c Frame
e
e Body
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 347
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
Modify BCTABLE
a. Right click: BCTABLE_1; select Properties
b. # NGROUP = 10
c. Click # NGROUP
Group 0 : Airbag  Airbag (Imported) (not shown)
Group 1 : Pelvis  Leg Bones
d. Double click +c19 IDSLAV,1
e. Click and select Deform2_2; click OK
f. Click +c19 FRIC,1, enter 0.3
g. Click +c25 METHOD,1, select SS2WAY
h. Click +c27 SOFT,1, select 2
i. Click +c29 SFS,1, enter 1; click +c29 SFM,1, enter 1;
click +c29 AUTO,1, select Yes
j. Double click +c36 IDMA,1
k. Click and select Deform3_3; click OK
Continue with Groups 2 through 9 (see the following page)
l. Click Modify
Main Index
h
i
j
l
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 349
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
Main Index
GROUP
IDSLAVE
FRIC
Method
SOFT
SFS
SFM
AUTO
IDMA
airbag
0.3
ss2way
yes
Pelvis
bones
0.3
ss2way
yes
Ring plate
neck
0.45
ss2way
yes
Ribs torso
0.3
ss2way
yes
Ribs
breast
0.3
ss2way
yes
Airbag
dummy
0.3
ss2way
yes
10
seatbelt
dummy
11
0.3
blanks
yes
16
Dummy
chair
13
0.3
ss2way
yes
12
Dummy
frame
15
0.3
ss2way
yes
14
Airbag
Frame
0.3
ss2way
yes
14
c
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 351
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
a
b
d
f
e
l
g
Main Index
b
d
e
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 353
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
Main Index
c
a
b
d
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 355
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
Main Index
50002
2470
79267
80457
0.0
b
a
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 357
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
a
b
c
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 359
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
c
i
Updated (Deformed)
h
Original
f
g
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 21 361
Occupant Safety and Airbag Deployment
Input File(s)
File
Description
Chapter21.dat
Body_Final.bdf
Frame model
eulerbagconstant_new_spiral_simx.bdf
Airbag model
LSTC.H3.022908_Beta_RigidFE.50th.dat
Dummy model
Animation
Click on the link below to play the animation.
Figure 212
Main Index
22
Main Index
Multicompartment Side
Curtain Airbag Deployment
Summary
363
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solution
Results
Input File(s)
364
364
366
367
364
364
CHAPTER 22 363
Multicompartment Side Curtain Airbag Deployment
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
Fix
Compartment
Inflator
=
gth
Len
2m
0.75
Material properties
Analysis type
Boundary conditions
Fixed at brackets
Applied loads
Element type
Airbag:
2D triangular shell element
Airbag gas: 3D solid element (automatically generated)
FE results
60 m
t = 0.3
Heigh
Main Index
Introduction
.The purpose of this example is to demonstrate the simulation of a multicompartment airbag; a capability is introduced
in MSC Nastran SOL 700 (SOL 700). AIRBAG, GRIA, and EOSGAM are added in Bulk Data entries to support the
capability.
Requested Solutions
The airbag has five compartments. These compartments are folded, and each compartment is connected to the gas
supply bag through a large hole. An inflator is modeled next to the gas supply bag. The gas jet is initiated from the
inflator and running into the gas supply bag. Fixed boundary conditions are applied to the brackets attached to the gas
supply bag. The simulation time is 0.04 seconds.
SOL 700
Deformation (AIRBAG)
FEM Solution
The units of this model are kg for weight, meter for length, second for time, and Kelvin for temperature.
TSTEPNL describes the number of Time Steps (100) and Time Increment (0.0004 seconds) of the simulation. End time
is the product of the two entries. Notice here, the Time Increment is only for the first step. The actual number of Time
Increments and the exact value of the Time Steps are determined by SOL 700 during the analysis. The step size of the
output files is determined by the Time Increment as well.
TSTEPNL
Main Index
100
.0004
ADAPT
10
CHAPTER 22 365
Multicompartment Side Curtain Airbag Deployment
One inflator and five compartment AIRBAG entries are defined. An AIRBAG entry instructs SOL 700 to create an
airbag using either the CFD method (full gas dynamics) or using a uniform gasbag method. Here, the full gas dynamic
method is used for all airbag definitions. Inflow of gas into the airbag is defined by the entries following the INFLATOR
key word. Outflow is defined by adding LARGHOLE to the inflator which is connected to the five different compartment
airbag. Details of an AIRBAG entry are described below:
Airbag 1 is the definition of the inflator airbag.
The CFD option defines CFD related data. Gamma law equation of state is defined referring the EOSGAM 3 field.
AIRBAG
+
1
CFD
25
3
1.527
0.009
0.009
0.009
+
+
Using the INITIAL option, initial conditions of gas property inside an airbag are defined. Initial pressure is 101,325
N/m2, initial temperature is 293 K, initial gamma gas constant is 1.4 and initial R gas constant is 294 Nm2/s2/K.
+
1.4
294.
The INFLATOR option is used to define gas property from an inflator. Mass flow rate is defined referring a table data
(TABLED1). Temperature of inflowing gas is 350 K, a scale factor of available inflow area is 0.7, the gamma gas
constant of the inflator gas is 1.557, and the R gas constant of the inflator gas is 243 Nm2/s2/K.
+
+
INFLATOR1001
1.557
1
243.
350.
0.7
+
+
The LARGEHOLE option defines the compartment location where gas flows into. In the example below, the first field,
LARGHOLE 301 indicates that gas flows through surface 301 into the compartment with ID 2. A scale factor of inflow
area is 1.0, meaning that 100% of the gas flows in. Five LARGEHOLEs definitions are used to model the gas flow inside
the five airbag compartments.
+
+
+
+
+
LARGHOLE301
LARGHOLE302
LARGHOLE303
LARGHOLE304
LARGHOLE305
2
3
4
5
6
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
+
+
+
+
AIRBAG
+
+
2
35
CFD
3
INITIAL 101325. 293.
1.527
1.4
0.011
294.
0.011
0.011
+
+
EOSGAM defines the ideal gas inside the airbag. This entry is used for each airbag definition. The gamma law gas
equation of state is defined by EOSGAM. The pressure p is defined as:
= 1 e
where is a constant, e is specific internal energy per unit mass, is overall material density. A constant of 1.517
and R gas constant of 226.4 m2/s2/K are used in this model.
Main Index
EOSGAM
1.517
226.4
The GRIA entry defines the final unstretched configuration of a deployed bag. All IDs of GRIA entries must be the
same as the IDs of GRID entries.
GRIA
...
.0009375.626128 .230000
Summary of Materials
Inflator airbag: fabric material (MATD034):
density=
783 kg/m3
Ea
Eb
783 kg/m3
(Poissons ratio) = .3
= 1.527 kg/m3
Results
There are two types of results files: ARC and d3plot. The ARC file is the original MSC.Dytran binary result file and
includes the results for the Euler elements (fluid). d3plot is the native LSDYNA result file format.
Main Index
CHAPTER 22 367
Multicompartment Side Curtain Airbag Deployment
t=0
t=2
t=4
t=6
t=8
t = 10
t = 20
t = 30
Airbag
Deformed Shape
Time (ms)
t = 40
Figure 221
Euler
Adaptive Mesh
Input File(s)
File
nug_22.dat
Main Index
Description
MSC Nastran input file for multicompartment airbag FSI example
23
Main Index
Bolted Plates
Summary
Introduction
Solution Requirements
FEM Solutions
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
380
369
370
372
379
379
370
CHAPTER 23 369
Bolted Plates
Summary
Title
Contact features
Deformabledeformable contact
No friction
Geometry
Material properties
Units: mm
Large plate 60x20x6
Small plate 20x20x2
Bolt hole radius = 5
Bolt shaft radius = 4
Bolt head radius = 6
Bolt head thickness = 2
Nut thickness = 2
Nut outer radius = 6
Y
Z
X
X
1
Y
4
, Linear
elastic material
Analysis type
Quasistatic analysis
Boundary conditions
Small plate is supported at one side. Normal contact conditions applied between the two
plates and between the large plate and the bolt, glued contact between the small plate and
the nut. Rigid rotation and translation of the plates is suppressed
Applied loads
Element type
FE results
Main Index
Introduction
A small and a large steel plate are bolted together. Initially, the smaller plate is in full contact on one side with the
larger plate. The opposite side of the smaller plate is supported. Furthermore, the bolt head is touching the larger plate
and the nut is glued to the smaller plate. It is assumed that the material behavior for both the plates and the bolt is linear
elastic.
In the first load step, the bolt is fastened by applying a pretension force ( F = 200N ) to the bolt in the basic Zdirection.
In three subsequent load steps, the bolt is locked (that is, further shortening of the bolt is suppressed) and the plates
are subjected to cyclic loads. Two types of loads will be presented: a mechanical load that consists of a uniform
pressure equal to P = 0.125MPa applied to the larger plate and a thermal load in which temperature of the plates is
increased by T = 50C .
Solution Requirements
Two solutions, one involving a uniform pressure equal to P = 0.125MPa applied to the larger plate and one involving
a temperature increase by T = 50C of the two plates, are:
Bolt shortening during fastening in the first load step
Bolt forces during the loading cycle
Bolt stresses
These solutions demonstrate:
Bolt modelling
That the bolt force is largely unaffected by the applied pressure to the larger plate
That the bolt force increases with increasing temperature of the plates, due to thermal expansion
The analysis results are presented with linear elements.
Bolt Modeling
In various engineering applications, it is necessary to define a prestress in, for example, bolts or rivets before applying
any other structural loading. A convenient way do this is via multipoint constraints. The idea is to split the element
mesh of the bolt across the shaft in two disjoint parts, such that duplicate grid points appear at the cut, and to connect
the duplicate nodes again by multipoint constraints (see Figure 231). The constraints are chosen such that an overlap
or a gap can be created between the two parts in a controllable way. If the motion of the parts is somehow constrained
in the direction in which the gap or overlap is created, then an overlap (a shortening of the bolt) will introduce a
tensile (pre)stress in each of the parts and a gap (an enlongation of the bolt) will result in a compressive stress.
The multipoint constraints have one slave and two master grid points. The slaves are the grid points at the cut from
the bottom part of the bolt (see Figure 231). The first master grids are the corresponding grid points from the top part
of the bolt on the other side of the cut. The second master in the constraints is a unique third grid point, called the
control grid point of the bolt. This is often a free grid point (that is, not part of the element mesh) and is shared by all
multipoint constraints on the cut.
Main Index
CHAPTER 23 371
Bolted Plates
top part
top part
mesh split
top grids
(first master)
MPCs
control grid
(second master)
bottom grids
(slave)
bottom part
undeformed
Figure 231
F1,bot
Fcontrol
F2,bot
u1,bot
u2,bot
ucontrol
(overlap) ucontrol
u1,top
u2,top
F1,top
F2,top
bottom part
deformed
Prestressing a Structure by Creating an Overlap Between the Top and the Bottom Part
Using MultiPoint Constraints.
The multipoint constraints impose the following constraint equations on the model:
u bo t u t op u control = 0 .
in which u bo t , u top and u control are the displacement degrees of freedom of a grid point from the bottom part, its
corresponding grid from the top part and the control grid point, respectively. It immediately follows from this equation
that u control is the displacement difference of the bottom and top grids and is equal to the size of the overlap or gap
between the parts. Hence, by enforcing the displacements of the control grid point, an overlap or gap of a particular
size can be created between the two parts.
It can be shown (see, for instance, MSC.Marc 2010 Volume A: Theory and User Information, Chapter 9, Section
Overclosure Tying), that if the multipoint constraints are set up as outlined above, the force on the control grid
point equals the sum of the forces on the grid points from the bottom part as well as minus the sum of the forces on
the grid points from the top part:
F control =
F bot
= F top .
Hence, the force on the control grid point is the total force on the crosssection of the bolt. By applying a (pretension)
force to that grid point, the total force on the crosssection can be prescribed. Moreover, if the shortening of the bolt
is prescribed via an enforced displacement on the control grid point, then the reaction force on that grid point is equal
to the total force on the crosssection of the bolt.
Note that both types of boundary conditions on the control grid point can be combined in a single analysis as
demonstrated in this example. In the first load step, the pretension force will be applied to the control grid point of
the bolt. This results in a certain amount of shortening of the bolt. At the end of the first load step, the amount of
shortening is recorded and is kept constant in subsequent load steps, via a single point constraint on the control grid
point.
Main Index
Grid 1903
Bolt
Large Plate
Small plate
Nut
Figure 232
Note:
Element Mesh and MultiPoint Constraints applied in Target Solution with MSC Nastran
The gap between the top and bottom parts of the bolt in the picture on the right is purely for visualization
purposes. In reality, the gap is closed although the duplicate grids remain.
There are two ways to define the multipoint constraints for bolt modeling in the bulk data: each constraint can be
defined explicitly via the MPC option or the entire set of constraints can be defined via the BOLT option. The latter has
been designed specially for bolt modeling and has several advantages over explicit MPCs:
Provides a much more concise input than explicit MPCs;
Generates all the required multipoint constraints on all displacement and rotational degrees of freedom
automatically;
Ensures continuity of the temperature field across the cut in the thermal passes of coupled analyses;
Requires no special provisions in a contact analysis (see below).
FEM Solutions
A numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastrans SOL 400 for the element mesh shown in Figure 232
using 3D solid linear elements. The bolt and the nut are assumed to be rigidly connected and are modeled as a single
physical body. To fasten the bolt, the element mesh of the bolt is split into two parts across the shaft and the 41 grid
point pairs on both sides of the cut are connected by multipoint constraints of the form discussed in the preceding
section. Grid ID 1903 acts as the control grid of the bolt.
Two versions of the input are considered. In the first version, the BOLT option is used to generate the multipoint
constraints on the cut. In the second version, the constraints are defined explicitly via the MPC option.
The BOLT option requires a bolt ID (5000), the ID of the control grid of the bolt (1903) and the grids at the cut from
the top and bottom parts of the bolt. The latter must be entered pairwise in the TOP and BOTTOM section of the option:
the ith TOP grid should correspond to the ith BOTTOM grid.
BOLT
Main Index
5000
1903
CHAPTER 23 373
Bolted Plates
TOP
1862
1869
1876
1883
1890
1897
341
425
1394
1478
1620
1759
BOTTOM
1863
1870
1877
1884
1891
1898
353
437
1406
1490
1632
1771
1864
1871
1878
1885
1892
1899
365
449
1418
1502
1644
1783
1865
1872
1879
1886
1893
1900
377
461
1430
1572
1656
1795
1866
1873
1880
1887
1894
1901
389
473
1442
1584
1668
1807
1867
1874
1881
1888
1895
1902
401
485
1454
1596
1680
1819
1862
1.0
1862
1.0
1862
1.0
1863
1.0
1863
1.0
1863
1.0
1868
1875
1882
1889
1896
413
497
1466
1608
1747
MPC
MPC
MPC
MPC
MPC
...
$
MPCADD
100
8
16
24
32
40
341
1903
341
1903
341
1903
353
1903
353
1903
353
1903
1
9
17
25
33
41
1
1
2
2
3
3
1
1
2
2
3
3
2
10
18
26
34
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
3
11
19
27
35
4
12
20
28
36
5
13
21
29
37
6
14
22
30
38
7
15
23
31
39
Contact
The main problem with the use of explicit MPCs is that in a contact analysis, the constraints may conflict with the
multipoint constraints due to contact. Special provisions have to be made in the contact setup to avoid that the slave
grids of the MPCs can come in contact with other contact bodies. Furthermore, due to the cut in the mesh, it is difficult
for grid points of other contact bodies that touch the bolt surface, to slide across the cut from the bottom part of the
bolt to the top part or vice versa. The BOLT option addresses both issues, provided that the two parts of the bolt are in
the same contact body. Conflicts with contact constraints are avoided and grid points that touch the surface of the bolt
can slide without difficulties across the cut.
For the present model, the two methods are compared. To avoid problems in the MPC version between the explicit
MPCs and the contact constraints, the radius of the bolt shaft is slightly smaller than the radius of the holes in the plates,
such that contact between the shaft and plates will not occur.
The three physical components of the model (the two plates and the bolt with the nut) have been selected as contact
bodies. The contact bodies are identified as the set of elements in the respective components:
$ contact body: bolt and nut
BCBODY
1
3D DEFORM
BSURF
1
167
168
...
$ contact body: small plate
BCBODY
2
3D DEFORM
Main Index
1
169
2
170
171
172
173
BSURF
2
139
140
...
$ contact body: large plate
BCBODY
3
3D DEFORM
BSURF
3
1
2
...
141
142
143
144
145
3
3
The two parts of the bolt are in same contact body (ID=1).
The BCTABLE entries shown below identify the admissible contact combinations, select the slave and master body for
each combination, and set associated parameters. It is important to note that:
The first contact body (bolt and nut) must be selected as the slave (or contacting) body. Since the contact
algorithm detects contact between the grid points at the surface of the slave (or contacting) body and the faces
of the elements at the surface of the master (or contacted) body, the body with the finer element mesh in the
contact region generally should be selected as the slave body and the body with the coarser mesh as the
master, as this results in more points in contact and thus a better description of the contact conditions than
with the opposite definition. The ISEARCH entry is set to 1 to force search order from the slave body to the
master.
The bolt can touch the plates and the plates can touch each other.
The IGLUE entry is set to 1 for contact between the nut and the smaller plate to activate glued contact
conditions (that is, no sliding and no separation) between these two contact bodies.
BCTABLE
BCTABLE
0
SLAVE
1
1
MASTERS 2
SLAVE
1
1
MASTERS 3
SLAVE
2
1
MASTERS 3
1
SLAVE
1
1
MASTERS 2
SLAVE
1
1
MASTERS 3
SLAVE
2
1
MASTERS 3
0.
0
3
0
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0
3
0
0.
0
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Main Index
1
1
2
2
CHAPTER 23 375
Bolted Plates
The large strain capability and assumed strain formulation (for improved bending behavior) for these elements are
activated via the NLMOPTS option.
NLMOPTS ASSM
ASSUMED
LRGSTRN 1
The two materials are isotropic and elastic with Youngs modulus, Poissons ratio and thermal expansion defined as:
$ plates
MAT1*
1
*
1.000000E+00
$ bolt and nut
MAT1*
2
2.100000E+05
1.000000E05
3.000000E01
2.100000E+04
3.000000E01
1903
200.
0.
0.
1.
At the end of the load step, the shortening of the bolt due to the applied pretension force is recorded and kept constant
in subsequent load steps by a singlepoint constraint on the displacement of the control grid in the basic Z direction:
$ boltlock
SPC1
5
1903
Throughout the analysis, the displacements of the control grid in the basic X and Y directions are suppressed by a
singlepoint constraint:
$ boltxy
SPC1
4
12
1903
In all four load steps, the full load is applied in a single increment. The nonlinear procedure used in the load steps is:
NLPARM
+
+
1
.01
0
1
.01
PFNT
50
UP
NO
Here, the PFNT option is selected to activate the pure NewtonRaphson iteration strategy. Convergence of the nonlinear iteration process is checked on both displacements and forces, using tolerances equal to 0.01.
Results
The shortening of the bolt due to the pretension force applied in the first load step is listed in Table 231. The solution
obtained with an equivalent Marc 2005 model is included for reference. This shortening is recorded at the end of the
first load step and kept fixed in the subsequent load steps. It is apparent from this table that the MPC version and the
BOLT version produce identical results.
Main Index
Table 231
MSC Nastran
(BOLT)
Marc 2005r3
0.0054
0.0054
0.0054
bolt shortening
Pressure Load
The pressure load is applied in a cyclic fashion to the large plate in the final three load steps. The plate is loaded in
load steps 2 and 4 and unloaded in load step 3. The deformed structure plot (magnification factor 500) as well as the
equivalent von Mises stress distribution at the end of the final load step are shown in Figure 233. A plot of the bolt
force in the basic Z direction is depicted in Figure 234. Note that in the first load step, the bolt load is the externally
applied pretension force; whereas in subsequent load steps, the bolt load is the reaction force on the control grid point.
Figure 233
Main Index
Deformed Structure Plot and von Mises Stress Distribution at Maximum Load Level Due to
the Pressure Load (magnification factor = 500)
CHAPTER 23 377
Bolted Plates
200
150
100
50
MSC.Marc 2005 r3
MSC Nastran
1
Load Step
Figure 234
In Figure 234, the MSC Nastran solution (blue dots) is compared with the solution obtained by MSC.Marc 2005 r3
(the solid line). The good agreement between the two solutions is apparent.
This plot demonstrates the wellknown fact that the bolt force is unaffected by the pressure applied to the plate. Due
to a slight bending of the larger plate under the pressure load, however, the bolt force is not exactly constant.
Main Index
Thermal Load
The thermal load is applied in a cyclic fashion to both plates. The plates are heated in load steps 2 and 4 and cooled
down in load step 3. The deformed structure plot (magnification factor 100) as well as the equivalent von Mises stress
distribution at the end of the final load step are shown in Figure 235. A plot of the bolt force in the basic Z direction
is shown in Figure 236. Again, the MSC Nastran solution (blue dots) is compared with the solution obtained by
MSC.Marc 2005 r3 (the solid line) and the agreement of the two solutions is apparent.
Figure 235
Deformed Structure Plot and von Mises Stress Distribution at Maximum Load Level Due to
the Thermal Load (magnification factor = 100)
n
300
250
200
150
100
50
MSC.Marc 2005 r3
MSC Nastran
1
Load Step
Figure 236
Main Index
CHAPTER 23 379
Bolted Plates
In this load case, the bolt force increases with increasing temperature due to thermal expansion of the plates. It
decreases again to the prestress force after cooling down.
Modeling Tips
Multipoint constraints provide a convenient way to fasten bolts. Either the shortening of the bolt or the total force in
the crosssection of the bolt can be controlled via enforced displacements or forces on the control grid point of the bolt.
These two types of boundary conditions can be combined in one simulation in which the bolt is first prestressed and
then loaded by other mechanical or thermal loads.
The BOLT option provides a convenient way to generate the required multipoint constraints. It can be used
conveniently in a contact analysis, provided that the two parts of the bolt are in the same contact body.
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_23p_bolt.dat
nug_23p.dat
nug_23t_bolt.dat
nug_23t.dat
Main Index
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 58 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
Units: mm
Large plate 60x20x6
Small plate 20x20x2
Bolt hole radius = 5
Bolt shaft radius = 4
Bolt head radius = 6
Bolt head thickness = 2
Nut thickness = 2
Nut outer radius = 6
Figure 237
Main Index
Y
Z
X
X
1
Y
4
24
Main Index
Summary
Introduction
Requested Solutions
Analytical Solution
FEM Solutions
Modeling Tip
Input File(s)
Video
389
382
383
383
383
384
387
389
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry
r1
y
z
Material properties
13
r2
t
x
10
Quasistatic analysis
Boundary conditions
An 180o section of the pulley is modeled, which is clamped along the inner radius using
glued contact conditions. On both ends of the belt, loadcontrolled rigid bodies are
defined and connected to the belt using glued contact conditions. The forces F and R
are external and reaction forces on the control nodes. On the loaded control node we have
u x = u y = 0 , while on the other control node u x = u y = u z = 0 .
Applied loads
Element type
Contact properties
Different coefficients of friction between belt and pulley: = 0.05 , = 0.15 and
= 0.25
FE results
Main Index
CHAPTER 24 383
Friction Between Belt and Pulley
Introduction
A belt is positioned around a pulley such that a 90o section of the pulley is contacted. One end of the belt is fixed; the
other end is loaded by a tensile force with magnitude F = 1.0 105 . It is assumed that the material behavior for both the
belt and the pulley is linear elastic. Although this problem can be solved by a 2D approximation, a full 3D model is
chosen here in order to show the characteristic behavior of 3D parabolic hexahedral elements in a contact analysis
involving friction. An analytical solution for the case with Coulomb friction is known.
Requested Solutions
Analyses will be carried out for three different values of the friction coefficient: = 0.05 , = 0.15 , and = 0.25 .
With a constant value of the applied load, the reaction force will decrease for increasing values of the friction
coefficient. This reaction force is the primary requested quantity, as this can be easily compared with an analytical
solution.
Analytical Solution
Assuming Coulomb friction between the belt and the pulley, the principle of rope friction according to the EulerEytelwein formula provides a relation between the magnitude F of the applied force, the magnitude R of the reaction
force, the angle spanned by the belt and the friction coefficient between the belt and the pulley:
F
R = 
e
With F = 1.0 105 and =  , the theoretical value of the magnitude of the reaction force R is listed in Table 241 for
2
Friction Coefficient
Reaction Force R
0.05
9.2447x104
0.15
7.9008x104
0.25
6.7523x104
Main Index
FEM Solutions
Numerical solutions have been obtained with MSC Nastrans SOL 400 for the element mesh shown in Figure 241
using 3D 20node hexahedral elements. Assuming that the deformations of the pulley are small and localized around
the contact area, only an 180o section has been modeled. In total, there are five contact bodies: two deformable and
three rigid. The rigid bodies will be used to easily apply the boundary conditions (single point constraints and forces).
load controlled
rigid body
load controlled
rigid body
Figure 241
The first deformable body consists of all elements of the belt, where the second deformable body consists of all
elements of the pulley. The body number IDs of the belt and the pulley are 1 and 2, respectively. These deformable
contact bodies are identified as 3D bodies referring to the BSURF IDs 1 and 2:
BCBODY
BSURF
BCBODY
BSURF
Main Index
1
1
8
16
24
32
40
48
56
64
72
2
2
82
90
98
106
114
122
130
3D
1
9
17
25
33
41
49
57
65
73
3D
75
83
91
99
107
115
123
131
DEFORM
2
10
18
26
34
42
50
58
66
74
DEFORM
76
84
92
100
108
116
124
132
1
3
11
19
27
35
43
51
59
67
4
12
20
28
36
44
52
60
68
5
13
21
29
37
45
53
61
69
6
14
22
30
38
46
54
62
70
7
15
23
31
39
47
55
63
71
2
77
85
93
101
109
117
125
133
78
86
94
102
110
118
126
134
79
87
95
103
111
119
127
80
88
96
104
112
120
128
81
89
97
105
113
121
129
CHAPTER 24 385
Friction Between Belt and Pulley
The first rigid body is a half cylinder described as a NURBS surface and will be used to clamp the grids on the inner
radius of the pulley. Its body ID number is 3 and it is identified as:
BCBODY
3
0
RIGID
NURBS
...
3D
0.
RIGID
0.
0
0.
1.
0.
0
1
RIGINNER
7
13
4
4
50
.176777 .176777 0.
.324015 .029538
.237263 .222631 0.
.0306021.24812
1
0.
0
0.
50
0.
0.
The second and the third rigid bodies are load controlled rigid bodies. A load controlled rigid body is associated with
a control grid, which can be used to apply forces and/or single point constraints. In the current analysis, two flat load
controlled rigid bodies are used. They will be glued to both ends of the belt and their control grids will be used to
prevent a rigid body motion in the basic zdirection, to apply the external force on the belt and to transfer the belt load
to the fixed control grid. The load controlled rigid bodies are identified as:
BCBODY
...
BCBODY
4
0
RIGID
NURBS
3D
0.
526
2
.2
.2
5
0
RIGID
NURBS
3D
0.
527
2
.55
.55
...
RIGID
0.
2
.6
.6
RIGID
0.
2
.2
.2
0.
RIGR
2
.05
.25
0.
RIGF
2
.05
.25
0
1.
0.
1
0.
50
.55
.55
50
.05
.25
0
1.
0.
1
0.
2
.6
.6
50
.2
.2
50
.05
.25
2
.2
.2
526
0.
4
527
0.
4
Note that the control grids have the IDs 526 and 527.
The BCTABLE option will be used to indicate:
which grids are to be treated as slave nodes and which as master grids in the multipoint constraints for
deformabledeformable contact;
the friction coefficient between the belt and the pulley;
glued contact between the pulley and the half cylinder;
glued contact between the load controlled rigid bodies and the belt.
The entries of the BCTABLE option are defined as:
BCTABLE
1
SLAVE
MASTERS
SLAVE
MASTERS
SLAVE
MASTERS
SLAVE
MASTERS
Main Index
1
1
2
1
0
5
1
0
4
2
0
3
0.
0
4
0.
.05
0.
0.
0.
1
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
The first SLAVE MASTERS combination indicates that the grids of deformable body 1 are treated as slave grids when
contact is established with body 2. The friction coefficient is set to 0.05.
The other SLAVE MASTERS combinations activate glued contact between the bodies with body ID numbers 1 and 5,
1 and 4, and 2 and 3, respectively.
The bilinear Coulomb friction model will be activated using the BCPARA option (FTYPE = 6); this option is also used
to indicate that the separation behavior is based on stresses (IBSEP = 4), which is necessary in a contact analysis
involving quadratic elements:
BCPARA
NBODIES 5
IBSEP
FTYPE
In order to activate the full nonlinear formulation of the 20 node hexahedral elements, the nonlinear property extension
of the PSOLID entry is used. For the materials defining the belt (material ID number 1) and the pulley (material ID
number 2), this results in:
MAT1
MAT1
PSOLID
PSLDN1
PSOLID
PSLDN1
1
2
1
1
2
2
1.+9
1.+13
1
.3
.3
1.
1.
1
1.e4
1
1.e4
1.e4
FNT
10
25
UPW
YES
Here the FNT option is selected to update the stiffness matrix during every recycle using the full NewtonRaphson
iteration strategy. Convergence checking is performed based on displacements, forces and work. The error tolerance
is set to 104 for all criteria. Note that the MAXDIV field is set to 10 to avoid that bisections occur, since too many
bisections may increase the overall solution time.
The obtained values of the reaction forces are listed in Table 242, together with the relative error compared to the
analytical solution. The numerical and analytical solutions turn out to be in good agreement.
Table 242
Friction Coefficient
Reaction Force R
Error (%)
0.05
9.2314x104
0.14
0.15
7.9476x104
0.59
0.25
6.8448x104
1.37
Main Index
CHAPTER 24 387
Friction Between Belt and Pulley
Modeling Tip
Convergence Behavior
A nonlinear analysis involving contact and friction may need several iterations to fulfil the convergence requirements.
In such inherently nonlinear analyses, it may be advantageous to increase the number of criteria needed to force a
bisection. As discussed above, this number (MAXDIV on the NLPARM option) has been set to 10 instead of the default
value 3. The tables below show the convergence behavior with the increased value (Table 243) and the default value
(Table 244). The increased value clearly reduces the overall number of NewtonRaphson iterations and thus the
analysis wall time. When looking at Table 243, iteration 9 reaches displacement, load and work errors which are
within the required tolerances. The extra iterations needed are caused by the fact that some grids of the belt which are
initially in contact with the pulley, separate because of tensile contact stresses. After separation of these grids, a new
solution with a smaller number of contact constraints has to be found.
Table 243
Load Factor
Step
Iteration
Disp. Error
Load Error
Work Error
1.000
1.00E+00
1.70E01
1.70E01
1.000
7.76E+00
3.54E01
1.58E+00
1.000
6.61E+02
2.31E+01
6.17E+02
1.000
2.12E+02
1.80E+02
1.30E+04
1.000
8.61E02
2.78E+01
7.33E+00
1.000
3.12E03
1.70E01
4.67E02
1.000
2.60E04
4.31E03
3.50E03
1.000
7.87E06
4.09E05
1.34E04
1.000
3.92E06
9.30E07
5.09E05
1.000
10
3.39E+00
1.41E02
4.30E+00
1.000
11
4.26E02
2.05E03
6.67E01
1.000
12
2.42E03
3.31E02
3.33E02
1.000
13
8.19E06
2.26E05
1.30E04
1.000
14
4.93E06
1.61E06
6.57E05
Main Index
Table 244
Load Factor
Step
Iteration
Disp. Error
Load Error
Work Error
1.0000
1.00E+00
1.70E01
1.70E01
1.0000
7.76E+00
3.54E01
1.58E+00
1.0000
6.61E+02
2.31E+01
6.17E+02
1.0000
2.12E+02
1.80E+02
1.30E+04
0.5000
1.00E+00
9.36E02
9.36E02
0.5000
8.06E+02
2.96E01
3.12E+02
0.5000
5.62E+02
3.36E+01
6.19E+02
0.5000
8.37E+01
8.70E+01
1.92E+02
0.5000
3.27E02
1.91E+00
8.84E02
0.5000
8.88E04
2.22E02
2.19E03
0.5000
1.27E04
2.24E04
2.84E04
Main Index
0.5000
2.93E06
6.83E06
8.15E06
0.5000
1.94E+00
1.02E02
2.71E01
0.5000
10
2.89E02
1.31E03
6.47E02
0.5000
11
3.25E04
7.79E03
5.95E04
0.5000
12
2.44E05
8.00E06
5.31E05
1.0000
5.60E01
2.26E01
1.27E01
1.0000
1.25E+02
2.32E+02
7.04E+03
0.7500
1.25E+02
2.32E+02
7.04E+03
0.6250
1.25E+02
2.32E+02
7.04E+03
0.5625
1.25E+02
2.32E+02
7.04E+03
0.5312
3.86E01
6.06E01
3.32E01
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
0.9688
16
4.10E03
1.92E02
6.62E03
0.9688
16
7.84E05
4.16E04
1.37E04
0.9688
16
9.70E06
4.13E06
1.67E05
1.0000
17
3.58E02
5.91E03
2.16E04
1.0000
17
4.49E+00
7.24E01
6.56E+00
1.0000
17
3.37E03
1.27E02
5.40E03
1.0000
17
6.27E05
2.93E04
1.08E04
1.0000
17
7.94E06
2.83E06
1.34E05
CHAPTER 24 389
Friction Between Belt and Pulley
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_24_1.dat
nug_24_2.dat
nug_24_3.dat
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts about 25 minutes and explains how the steps
are performed.
Figure 242
Main Index
25
Main Index
Summary
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solutions
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
397
391
392
392
397
397
392
CHAPTER 25 391
Modal Analysis with Glued Contact
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry
d2
d1
Material properties
Boundary conditions
FreeFree
Glued contact between vanes and shroud
Applied loads
None
Element type
FE results
Main Index
Introduction
The shrouded vanes shown in Figure 251, consisting of twelve vanes with a central hub and an outer shroud, uses
contact to join dissimilar meshes during a modal analysis. The hub and vanes contain higherorder tetrahedral elements
while the shroud has linear hexahedral elements. The glued contact parameters preclude separation after initial contact
and change the original coordinates of the nodes in contact to insure stress free contact between the dissimilar meshes.
Figure 251
Requested Solutions
The modal analysis assumes freefree boundary conditions and returns ten natural frequencies and their associated
mode shapes of which the lowest six correspond to rigid body motion.
FEM Solutions
An eigenvalue analysis has been performed with MSC Nastrans SOL 103 for the element mesh shown in Figure 252.
The vanes and the hub are modeled using higher order tetrahedral elements while the shroud is modeled using linear
hexahedral elements. Contact body ID 1 is identified as all the elements making the vanes and hub whereas contact
body ID 2 is identified as the elements making the shroud respectively as:
BCBODY
BSURF
...
1
1
3D
10000
DEFORM
10001
1
10002
0
10003
10004
10005
10006
2
2
3D
100000
DEFORM
100001
2
100002
0
100003
100004
100005
100006
and
BCBODY
BSURF
...
Main Index
CHAPTER 25 393
Modal Analysis with Glued Contact
Figure 252
The BCTABLE entries shown below identify that these bodies are glued to each other:
BCTABLE
BCTABLE
0
SLAVE
2
1
MASTERS 1
1
SLAVE
2
1
MASTERS 1
0.
1
1
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
1
1
0.
0
0.
0.
The BCTABLE option shows that contact body ID 2, the shroud, has been selected as the touching body, the SLAVE,
whereas contact body ID 1, the vanes, has been selected as the touched body, the MASTERS. This selection is due to
the fact the average element size for the vanes in the contact area is slightly larger than that of the shroud as shown in
Figure 253. The IGLUE parameter of the BCTABLE option activates the glue option. The JGLUE parameter is turned
off to ensure that no nodes separate once in contact. Additionally, the ICOORD parameter is turned on to modify the
coordinates of the nodes in contact to ensure stressfree initial contact.
The BCPARA entries activate the quadratic contact option and indicate that a bias factor of 0 (actually a small nonzero
number of 1 x 1016) has been selected:
BCPARA 0
NBODIES 2
MAXENT
IBSEP 2
BIAS 1.16
Main Index
13824
MAXNOD
18348
Figure 253
Relative Element Size Between the Shroud and Vanes in the Contact Area
The vanes and the shroud are both modeled using the same material. The material properties are isotropic and elastic
with Youngs modulus, Poissons ratio, and density defined as
$ Referenced Material Records
$ Material Record : inner_mat
$ Description of Material :
MAT1
1
2.1+11
$ Material Record : outer_mat
$ Description of Material :
MAT1
2
2.1+11
.3
7.85+3
.3
7.85+3
The Lanczos procedure is selected for the real eigenvalue problem using the METHOD and EIGRL entries in which ten
modes are desired:
METHOD=13
...
EIGRL,13,,,10
The obtained modes are listed in Table 251. The first six modes are rigid body modes. Mode shapes 7 to 10 are shown
in Figure 254.
Table 251
Mode
Frequency (Hz)
6.911939E04
6.290693E04
4.908829E04
4.434468E04
2.943299E04
7.051053E05
Main Index
CHAPTER 25 395
Modal Analysis with Glued Contact
Table 251
Mode
Frequency (Hz)
1.130332E+03
1.131441E+03
1.168441E+03
10
1.774218E+03
Figure 254
Main Index
To check the efficacy of gluing dissimilar messes on natural frequencies, Test 53 (Selected Benchmarks for Natural
Frequency Analysis, Abbassian, F, Dawswell, D J, and Knowles, N C, NAFEMS Ref R0015, 1987) was performed on
glued mesh below.
Title
Contact features
R
A
o
= 10
4.2 m
0.6 m
1.6 m
Gluing
Surface
Mesh
Material properties
Boundary conditions
u = 0
Element type
FE results
fref
18.583 Hz
fref
fMD =
18.666 Hz
fMD = 140.03 Hz
= 140.15 Hz
fref
358.29 Hz
fref
629.19 Hz
fMD =
362.71 Hz
fMD =
658.97 Hz
224.56 Hz
Flexural
Mode 5
Extensional
Mode 3
Flexural
Mode 4
224.16 Hz
Flexural
Mode 2
fMD =
r
Flexural
Mode 1
Main Index
fref
CHAPTER 25 397
Modal Analysis with Glued Contact
Modeling Tips
Glued contact with no separation ensures that nodes do not separate once in contact. Stressfree initial contact modifies
the coordinates of the nodes in contact to close any gaps between the two bodies. Quadratic contact allows midside
nodes to participate in the glued contact. Insuring that the dissimilar meshes join properly requires there are no
artificial stresses induced by nodes slightly off the contact surface, and the displacement field is completely continuous
across the contact surface.
This technique of gluing dissimilar meshes together facilitates faster model building by not requiring the meshes to
be contiguous across all nodes. Furthermore, as in this application example, joining different element types assists
modeling flexibility.
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_25_1.dat
nug_25_2.dat
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately two minutes and explains
how the steps are performed.
Figure 255
Main Index
26
Main Index
Summary
Introduction
Solution Requirements
Analytical Solution
FEM Solution
401
Modeling Tips
403
Input File(s)
Video
404
399
400
403
400
400
CHAPTER 26 399
Interference Fit Contact
Summary
Title
Contact features
Deformabledeformable contact
Contact interference
Geometry
a
b+h
Material properties
CL
hea d = 0.26
s eat = 0.25
Analysis type
Quasistatic analysis
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
None
Element type
Contact properties
FE results
Plots of radial and hoop stresses versus radial distance from valve center
Radius (mm)
15
0
16
17
18
19
20
21
246621
249166
246823
100
Radial Stress
Radial Stress FEA
246815
247999
247587
248815
246622
246615
200
248830
249221
300
Hoop Stress
Main Index
246821
Y, r
Stress (MPa)
246619
246816
248604
248019
400
500
248024
246820
248039
246617
Introduction
The interference fitting of a valve insert into a cylinder head recess is to be simulated. The general arrangement is
shown in Figure 261. The compressive interference between the valve insert external radius and the cylinder head
valve recess opening is 0.05 mm. Only a portion of the relatively stiff cylinder head is modeled. An approximate
analytical solution for the stress in the valve insert can be found from a deformation analysis of thickwalled cylinders
subject to symmetric external loading.
Figure 261
Solution Requirements
A single solution is sought and the average hoop and radial stresses in the valve insert are compared to a thick cylinder
solution assuming the cylinder head is rigid. Comparison plots include average hoop and radial stresses plotted along
the radial distance from the value center for the predicted and analytic solutions.
Analytical Solution
An estimate for the hoop and radial stresses in the valve insert can be obtained from the analytical solution of a twodimensional plane stress (axial stress assumed to be zero) thick walled cylinder with prescribed displacement on its
external radius. The analytical solution assumes the cylinder head is rigid and the radial displacement of the insert at
its external radius is equal to the interference fit.
The thick walled cylinder solution only varies with radius, r , where the radial displacement, u , becomes the solution
C
of d 1 d ur = 0 or u r = C 1 r + 2 . The stresses are then determined from the radial displacement as,
dr r dr
C
E
 1 + C 1 1 2 rr = 2
r
1
C
E
 1 + C 1 + 1 2 = 2
r
1
Main Index
CHAPTER 26 401
Interference Fit Contact
FEM Solution
A numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastran's SOL 400 for the element mesh (shown in Figure 262)
using higher order tetrahedron elements. The contours show the two contact bodies defined in this analysis.
Figure 262
Contact body id 1 is identified by the element property IDs 1 and 3 for the cylinder head while contact body ID 4 is
identified by the element property ID 2 for the valve insert as:
BCPROP
BCBODY
...
1
1
4
4
3D
DEFORM
DEFORM
and
BCPROP
BCBODY
...
3D
Furthermore, the BCTABLE entries shown below identify that these bodies can touch each other:
BBCTABLE
Main Index
0
SLAVE
4
1
MASTERS 1
0.3
1
1
0.
0
.0
0.
0.
BCTABLE
1
SLAVE
4
1
MASTERS 1
1
0.
0
0.
0
.15
0.050
0.
Additionally, BCTABLE ID 1 shows the coefficient of friction to be 0.15 and the interference closure to be 0.05 mm.
BCTABLE ID 1 is referenced in the BCONTACT entry of the STEP case control command:
STEP 1
BCONTACT=1
SUBTITLE=FRETTAGE
NLPARM = 1
SPC = 2
LOAD = 10
Although there are no forces applied in this problem, a dummy LOAD = n case control is required for SOL 400.
Figure 263 plots the FEA and analytical solutions for the hoop and radial stresses in the valve insert against the radius
from the valve center. An arbitrary crosssection (high noon position of Figure 261) of the valve insert along the free
surface was chosen to pick the FEA stresses. The results of the analytical and FEA solutions are in general agreement.
Radius (mm)
15
0
16
17
18
19
20
21
246621
249166
246815
247999
246823
100
Radial Stress
Radial Stress FEA
247587
248815
246622
246615
200
248830
249221
300
Hoop Stress
246821
Y, r
Stress (MPa)
Figure 263
246619
246816
248604
248019
400
500
248024
246820
248039
246617
Several factors may have contributed to the difference in results. The analytical solution assumes a perfectly shaped
insert with prescribed displacements on the outside radius. On the other hand, the portion of the cylinder head that is
modeled using FEA is a nonsymmetric deformable body, which makes the FEA results slightly nonuniform across the
circumference as shown in Figure 264. The valve insert is in contact with the cylinder head not only across the insert's
cylindrical surface but across its bottom surface as well. In addition, the shape of the crosssection of the valve seat
disc has a slant edge on its top free surface.
Main Index
CHAPTER 26 403
Interference Fit Contact
Figure 264
Modeling Tips
This application example holds the insert in position by contact and friction. Take out friction, and the insert may (or
may not) pop out  in which case, the best thing is to add some soft springs, or a very small amount of friction to hold
it in place in the axial direction. Using the parabolic tetrahedral elements allows for good contact detection of the
cylindrical surface which yields a very smooth contact condition between the two bodies.
If the interference distance is small compared to the element size, the default contact tolerances will probably be ok;
however, it is possible that the interference fit will end up larger than the contact distance tolerance and contact will
be missed (one reason for a spotty stress plot). The remedy is to specify a distance tolerance equal to the interference
fit for the contact pair in the table, as well as a bias of 0.99 in general.
Input File(s)
File
nug_26s4.dat
Main Index
Description
Parabolic Tetrahedral Elements With Friction
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 30 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
a
b+h
CL
Figure 265
Main Index
27
Main Index
Summary
406
Introduction
Modeling Details
Solution Procedure
Results
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
407
407
412
416
415
416
410
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
168 mm
X
Z
247
y
metr
Sym
Half
mm
Material properties
E = 10GPa , = 0.4
Analysis characteristics
Quasistatic analysis using: adaptive time stepping and geometric nonlinearity due to
large displacement
Boundary conditions
Sliding, frictional contact with: ends fixed for second contact body and contact between
the two deformable bodies with = 0.1
Applied loads
Prescribed displacements for the end nodes of the first contact body with two load cases:
insertion (clipping) and removal of the buckle
Element type
FE results
Fx
1000
Fx (N)
500
0.5
1.0
Time (s)
500
Frictionless
Frictional
1000
1500
Insert
Remove
2000
Fx
Main Index
1.5
Fx
CHAPTER 27 407
Large Sliding Contact Analysis of a Buckle
Introduction
This problem demonstrates the ability of MSC Nastran SOL 400 to do a frictional contact problem. An ostensibly
simple geometry poses a substantial challenge for the contact algorithm due to the large sliding involved between the
two deformable bodies. Sudden changes in the motion path pose a challenge to the ability of the contact algorithm to
correctly place the node on the contact surface while respecting the various geometric details in the problem.
Due to large bending stresses in the deformed configuration, assumed strain formulation is used with the 8node
hexahedral elements. The material is elastic and the original geometry without residual stresses is recovered upon the
complete removal of the loading.
From elementary strength of materials analysis, the tip deflection for beam bending can be written as:
= PL 3 3EI
where P is the applied load, L is the length of the beam, I is the moment of inertia and E is the Youngs modulus.
The normal stress along the beam cross section varies in the thickness direction as:
xx = M t I
where M is the moment and t is the thickness coordinate. It must be noted that the above solution only holds for small
displacements and uniform cross section.
Modeling Details
A numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastrans SOL 400 for a 3D representation of a belt buckle with
a deformabletodeformable contact between the two pieces of the buckle. The details of finite element model, contact
simulation, material, load, boundary conditions, and solution procedure are discussed below.
The case control section of the input contains the following options for nonlinear analysis:
SUBCASE 1
STEP 1
TITLE=Insertion (Clipping)
ANALYSIS = NLSTATIC
NLPARM = 1
BCONTACT = 1
SPC = 2
LOAD = 1
DISPLACEMENT(PLOT,SORT1,REAL)=ALL
SPCFORCES(PLOT,SORT1,REAL)=ALL
STRESS(PLOT,SORT1,REAL,VONMISES,BILIN)=ALL
NLSTRESS(PLOT,SORT1)=ALL
STEP 2
TITLE=Removal
ANALYSIS = NLSTATIC
NLPARM = 2
BCONTACT = 2
SPC = 6
LOAD = 2
DISPLACEMENT(PLOT,SORT1,REAL)=ALL
SPCFORCES(PLOT,SORT1,REAL)=ALL
STRESS(PLOT,SORT1,REAL,VONMISES,BILIN)=ALL
NLSTRESS(PLOT,SORT1)=ALL
Main Index
The analysis contains a single subcase with two steps. The two steps comprise of individual load sequences consisting
of insertion (clipping) and removal of the belt buckle. Each step has a definition of convergence control option via
NLPARM, contact table and parameters via BCONTACT, applied displacements (or single point constraints) via SPC
and the displacements and stress results for the .f06 (output) file. A zoomedin view of the cross section of the model
shown in Figure 271 consists of an outer piece modeled as body 2, the buckle, while the inner piece is modeled as
body 1, the insert.
Figure 271
Large displacement effects are included in the nonlinear analysis using the option:
PARAM
LGDISP
The NLMOPTS field triggers the assumed strain formulation which provides a better bending behavior of the
continuum elements. This alleviates the difficulty associated with spuriously large shear stresses induced due to
bending moment. The LGDISP field indicated the use of large displacement, large rotation kinematics of the element.
This is adequate when the analysis consists of Hookean elastic material; however, incase of large deformation
plasticity or other inelastic models, the LRGSTRN parameter should be used in the NLMOPTS option (for more details
on its usage, please refer to : Chapter 3: 3D Sheet Metal Forming of this manual).
Element Modeling
Besides the standard options to define the element connectivity and grid coordinate location, the bulk data section
contains various options which are especially important to do nonlinear analysis. The nonlinear extensions to
Main Index
CHAPTER 27 409
Large Sliding Contact Analysis of a Buckle
lowerorder solid element, CHEXA can be activated by using the PSLDN1 property option to the regular PSOLID
property option in the manner shown below:
PSOLID
PSLDN1
+
C4
1
1
1
1
SOLI
0
1
L
+
+
The PLSLDN1 option allows the element to be used in both large displacement and large strain analysis and has no
restrictions on the kinematics of deformation unlike the regular CHEXA elements with only PSOLID property entry.
The standard CHEXA elements are more suitable for large rotations but small strain analysis due to their linear
formulation in corotational system. While the difference may be small or even negligible in elastic analysis, use of
any inelastic material model would certainly require the use of these options.
Modeling Contact
The BCPARA defines the number of bodies in contact with maximum number of contact entities (e.g., patches), nodes
on the periphery of the contact surfaces and contact parameters like friction type (in this case node based, bilinear
Coulomb model), friction coefficient, bias factor, and type of contact procedure used.
BCPARA
0ERROR
0.005BIAS
0.99FTYPE
It must be mentioned that the contact procedure being used (flagged via ISPLIT flag) is iterative penetration checking
procedure and must always be used for robustness in a quasistatic analysis.
Friction has been flagged via the FTYPE field where a 6 denotes the bilinear, Coulomb model. The friction coefficient
is 0.1 and is included in contact body definition with BCBODY option or the contact tables using the BCTABLE option.
Another significant point is the use of BIAS in frictional problems. The bias factor measures the nondimensionalized
distance on both sides of the contact surface which is used to make a decision if the node is in contact or not, based on
whether the node falls within this band defined by contact zone tolerance. Ideally, it should be 1.0 or as close to it.
However, due to the possibility of excessive iterations in case of even very slight penetration, the bias is kept as zero
or, in other words, a slight penetration is accepted. While a bias of zero works well for nonfrictional problems, it can
be a detriment for frictional problems which require the bias to be set as close to one as possible in order to avoid a
fictitious tangential force on the node which can cause non convergence of the solution. Finally, the ERROR parameter
denotes the contact zone tolerance. The default value is about 1/20th of the smallest element size for a solid element.
In this case, it has been chosen to be an even smaller value of 0.005.
To identify how the contact bodies can touch each other, the BCTABLE option is used. BCTABLE with ID 0 is used to
define the touching conditions at the start of the analysis. This is a mandatory option required in SOL 400 for contact
analysis and it is flagged in the case control section through the optional BCONTACT = 0 option. The BCTABLE with
ID 1 is used to define the touching conditions for later increments in the analysis, and it is flagged using BCONTACT
= 1 in the case control section. Also, the SLAVEMASTER combination defines that the nodes for body 1 are nodes
belonging to the slave body. This, in literature, is referred by various terminologies as either contacting body nodes or
tied nodes (imagining the situation of multipoint constraints). The nodes belonging to body 2 are said to belong to the
master body which are also referred to as the contacted body nodes or the retained nodes (imagining the situation of
multipoint constraints)
BCTABLE
SLAVE
MASTERS 1
Main Index
0.
0
0.
0
.1
0
0.
BCTABLE
SLAVE
0.
0
MASTERS 1
0.
0
.1
0
0.
The definition of the contact bodies (defined as body 1 and 2 in Figure 271) consists of the bulk data entries. The
BCBODY option defines the deformable body including the body ID, dimensionality, type of body, type of contact
constraints and friction etc. while the BSURF identifies the elements forming a part of the deformable body as:
BCBODY
BSURF
2
3D
DEFORM
2
2
50000
50001
50002
50003
50007
50008
50009
50010
50011
50015
50016
50017
50018
50019
50023
50024
50025
50026
50027
(list of element forming this body)
2
50004
50012
50020
50028
50005
50013
50021
50029
50006
50014
50022
50030
Material Modeling
The isotropic, Hookean elastic material properties of the deformable body are defined using the following MAT1
option as follows:
MAT1
10000.
0.4
Isotropi
A total X displacement of 85 mm is applied to body 1. The application of the loads or displacements is such that the
total load applied at the end of the loading sequence is given in the input.
Solution Procedure
The nonlinear procedure used is defined through the following NLPARM entry:
NLPARM
NLAUTO
1
0.01
1
10
20
.01
0
FNT
1.
.1
1.2
50
UV
ALL
1.5
.5
FNT represents Full NewtonRaphson technique wherein the stiffness is reformed at every iteration; KSTEP (field
after FNT) is left blank and in conjunction with FNT, it indicates that the program will determine if the stiffness needs
Main Index
CHAPTER 27 411
Large Sliding Contact Analysis of a Buckle
to be reformed between the end of the load step and the start of next load increment. Fifty (50) is the maximum number
of allowed recycles for every increment and, if this were to be exceeded, the load step would be cutback and the
increment repeated. UV indicates that the maximum norm of vector component of the incremental displacements will
be checked for convergence. ALL indicates that intermediate output will be produced after every increment. The
second line of NLPARM indicates that a tolerance of 0.01 will be used for displacement based convergence checking.
NLAUTO defines the parameters in the adaptive load stepping scheme. The initial load step is 1% of the total load. It
must be noted that, for many problems including plasticity of complicated contact conditions in the early stages of the
analysis, this must be a very small percentage (typically 0.5%). The smallest and largest ratio between the steps is 0.1
and 1.2, respectively, while the minimum value of the step is 10 5 . Finally, the desired number of recycles is kept at
ten which is the default in SOL 400. If this number is chosen to be very small, then the step size is cut to a smaller size
for convergence to be achieved and there will be larger number of steps. If this number is very large, then the load step
will allow more iterations for convergence in the same step.
The number of increments is provided in the third field of the NLPARM option. It is also worth noting that removing
the NLAUTO option results in a constant load step procedure with a total of 20 load increments per step (thus, a total
of 40 for the analysis).
Alternately another nonlinear procedure used is defined through the following NLSTEP entry like:
NLSTEP
+
+
+
ADAPT
MECH
1.
1.00E2
0
PV
1.E5
0.0002
0.10
0.1
1.2
PFNT
999999
+
+
+
Adaptive time procedure with total time of 1 is used. Initial time step of 0.01 is used as fraction of total time. It means
the initial load step is 1% of the total load. It must be noted that, for many problems including plasticity of complicated
contact conditions in the early stages of the analysis, this must be a very small percentage (typically 0.5%). The
maximum number of recycles allowed for each increment are 10 and minimum is 1. The desired number of recycles
per increment is 4. If this number is chosen to be very small, then the step size is cut to a smaller size for convergence
to be achieved and there will be larger number of steps. If this number is very large, then the load step will allow more
iterations for convergence in the same step.The smallest and largest ratio between the steps is 0.1 and 1.2, respectively,
while the minimum value of the step is 1E5. Output is written to result file for every single increment.
Main Index
Results
Figure 272 shows the sequence of the analysis with a closeup view of the buckle. It can be seen that the clip slides
on top of the protrusion of the static frame without any penetration. It is quite remarkable that even with the large
motion as well as large sliding contact per load increment between the two deformable contact bodies, the analysis
shows a robust behavior.
A vector plot of the comparison of normal and frictional contact forces with the Marc results is presented in
Figure 273 and Figure 274, respectively. The contact forces for SOL 400 and Marc agree very well in both
magnitude and direction.
Figure 272
Main Index
CHAPTER 27 413
Large Sliding Contact Analysis of a Buckle
Figure 273
Figure 274
(b) Marc
(b) Marc
Next, the load displacement for the frictional and frictionless cases are compared in Figure 275. Only the X direction
forces are plotted versus time. It is always recommended to perform a frictionless analysis (nug_27f.dat)
whenever possible to aid in the understanding of the affect of adding friction. As expected, for the frictionless case,
the load displacement curve is symmetric about the center line (between the insertion and removal steps). Deformed
geometry is shown at various peaks of the curve and, as intuition would suggest, the peak forces correspond to the
point of maximum bending. Addition of the nonconservative friction forces destroys the symmetry and the peak
insertion force increases compared to the peak force in removal. The removal of the clip generates less pullout force
compared to the pushin force. Also, the insertion force starts reducing due to frictional forces aiding the motion as
opposed to resisting the motion as the sliding switches from the convex part to the concave part of the contact surface.
Main Index
Fx
Fx
1000
Fx (N)
500
0.5
1.0
1.5
Time (s)
500
Frictionless
Frictional
1000
1500
Insert
Remove
2000
Fx
Figure 275
Fx
Checking the finite element analysis with a hand calculation assists both in understanding the FEM as well as the
E t
physics of the simulation. Solving elementary equations mentioned earlier for the bending stress yields, = 3 2
2 L
where is the tip displacement shown in Figure 276 during the insertion of the clip.
Inc: 17
Time: 4.250e001
4.213e+002
L=8
3.368e+002
0 mm
2.524e+002
1.679e+002
= 20 mm
8.349e+001
9.664e001
2 t = 6 mm
8.542e+001
1.699e+002
2.543e+002
3.388e+002
Y
4.232e+002
lcase1
Comp 11 of Stress
Figure 276
Performing the calculation of the bending stress at the outer fibers of the thinnest section gives,
2
2
3 10x10 9 N m 20mm 6mm
N
m
3 E 2 t
N
 = 4.69 x10 8   = 469  .
=  =  2
2 10 3 mm
2
2
2 L2
80mm
m
mm
agrees closely to the corresponding bending stresses in Figure 276 of 423N mm 2 . As expected, the linear solution
presents an upperbound to the actual stresses.
Main Index
CHAPTER 27 415
Large Sliding Contact Analysis of a Buckle
Modeling Tips
The two most important aspects in the analysis comprise of the inclusion of assumed strain enhancements to the
standard element formulation and the choice of contact and time stepping scheme parameters use of adaptive load
stepping scheme, and its associated parameters. The former is important due to presence of bending stresses in the
structure which can manifest themselves as (sometimes large) spurious shear stresses. This is a purely numerical
artifact due to the standard, displacement based finite element chosen which can be ameliorated by the use of an
assumed strain enhancement to the standard element.
Among the numerical parameters affecting the convergence of the job, the two most important parameters for this kind
of analysis are the contact bias and maximum number of recycles for the adaptive stepping scheme.
In contact analysis with friction, it is important to use a high bias (preferably 0.99) for frictional problems for improved
convergent results. In many cases (although, not in this problem, nug_27b.dat), it can decrease the number of
iterations as well.
Next is the contact zone tolerance. Typically, a default value is 1/20th the smallest length of solid element. If the
contact zone is too big, then there could be a loss of accuracy due to acceptance of penetrated nodes or large amount
of recycling due to contact nodes separating. However, reducing the contact zone tolerance may not always yield the
reduction in the number of iterations. In fact, in certain problems where there are not many separations expected,
reducing to a very small number can even increase the number of iterations due to contact detection and scaling of
incremental displacements in the iterative penetration checking algorithm in contact.
It is also worth noting that the adaptive load stepping improves the speed and accuracy of the analysis quite
significantly for this problem due to its intelligent choice of time steps based on the convergence parameters. This
adequately demonstrates the strength of the adaptive stepping in tough problems where the smart algorithm adjusts the
increment size based on the kinematics of deformation, contact constraints, and convergence rates rather than the fixed
time stepping where the only alternative is to cut down the existing increment size in case of non convergence in the
specified number of recycles.
It is also noted that a very high or very low number of desired number of recycles can either invoke an excessive
number of iterations or induce cutbacks during the analysis. For example, decreasing the desired number of recycles
to may increase the number of increments. Due to a large amount of sliding and significant contact nonlinearity, a large
number of recycles, in general, are expected for most increments. Therefore, a high number of desired recycles proved
to be useful in this particular example. However, in problems with milder material and/or contact nonlinearities where
only a few iterations per increment are expected, a smaller number of desired recycles can yield faster results. This
difference can result in notable savings of the computing time for large jobs.
Flat rigid surfaces can be glued to the ends of the buckle and insert to control the insertion and extraction of the insert
in and out of the buckle. The advantage of this modeling technique is that the total insertion and extraction force
component, Fx, can be easily determined as shown in Figure 275, since all of the forces acting on rigid bodies are
resolved to a single force and moment vector acting at the position of the rigid bodies.
Finally, since the buckle has a plane of symmetry, it is cost effective to only model the half of the model say above this
plane of symmetry.
Note:
Main Index
For contact problems, artificial damping can improve the speed of convergence and stability of the
analysis as seen in nug_27c.dat.
Input File(s)
File
Description
mug_27.dat
nug_27.dat
nug_27a.dat
MSC Nastran input with adaptive time stepping with bias = 0.99, contact zone tolerance = 0.0
(default), desired number of recycles = 20 (default = 10)
nug_27b.dat
MSC Nastran input with adaptive time stepping bias = 0.0 (default), contact zone tolerance =
0.005, desired number of recycles = 20 (default = 10)
nug_27c.dat
MSC Nastran input with adaptive time stepping bias = 0.99, contact zone tolerance = 0.005,
desired number of recycles = 20
nug_27b.bdf
Input file similar to nug_27b.dat above with half symmetry use in the video
nug_27_star
t.SimXpert
MSC Nastran input with adaptive time stepping bias = 0.99, contact zone tolerance = 0.005,
desired number of recycles = 20
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 47 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
168 mm
X
Z
247
Figure 277
Main Index
mm
y
metr
Sym
Half
28
Main Index
Model Airplane
Engine Analysis
Summary
Introduction
Required Solution
FEM Solution
Input File(s)
Video
428
418
419
419
427
419
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry
66
Units: mm
33
82
Material properties
Linear elastic material (Steel) for the engine block, plug, and bolts:
E = 2.1 10 5 MPa , = 0.3
Outofplane pressureover closure curves are used for the gasket body and gasket ring
using loading and unloading curves.
Analysis type
Quasistatic analysis
Boundary conditions
Some nodes on the outer boundaries on the engine block are constrained in all directions
Applied loads
Element type
Contact properties
FE results
Main Index
CHAPTER 28 419
Model Airplane Engine Analysis
Introduction
The model airplane engine analysis consists of a cylinder head, a engine block, a gasket, bolts, and a plug. The gasket
is assembled between the head and the block. The problems demonstrates how the solution sequence 400 of MSC
Nastran can be used for a typical analysis for engine involving the nonlinear pressureover closure relationship of the
gasket material and bolt pretension load. Glued contact is used to establish contact between the different parts of this
engine model.
Required Solution
The nonlinear analysis involving large displacement and gasket nonlinearity is carried for the model airplane engine
to find the forces in the bolts and contact forces in the gasket. While the deformations are relatively small the Large
Displacement activates the initial stress capability which is required for proper modeling of the gasket and the bolts.
FEM Solution
MSC Nastrans nonlinear solution sequence SOL 400 is used to analyze the engine model under the bolt and pressure
loads in two steps. The details of finite element models, contact simulations, material, load, boundary conditions, and
solution procedure are discussed in the following sections.
1
1
Figure 281
Main Index
1
1
Using the following PSOLID and PSLDN1 options, the gasket body is modeled using MSC Nastrans 8node
hexahedral gasket elements. Here, the gasket material is referred to by the material ID 5.
PSOLID
PSLDN1
5
5
C8
3
3
SLCOMP
0
1
L
The gasket ring is also modeled in a similar way using the different material ID 6.
PSOLID
PSLDN1
5
5
C8
6
6
SLCOMP
0
1
L
Contact Model
For the contact definition, various parts of the model airplane engine are defined as deformable contact bodies. the
following BCBODY and BSURF entries show the contact body definition for the gasket.
BCBODY
BSURF
1
4
3D
70172
DEFORM
THRU
4
70639
The contact bodies for other parts of the model as also defined in a similar way. Figure 282 presents the details of
different contact bodies defined for the model airplane engine.
Figure 282
The following BCTABLE entries identify how the contact bodies can touch each other. The BCTABLE with ID 1 is used
to define contact conditions at the first step of the analysis. Since there is no difference in the contacts in Second Step
the same BCTABLE with ID 1 is used to define the contact conditions for second step in the analysis, and it is flagged
using the option BCONTACT = 2 in the case control section. Glued contact is used for all the six contact pairs defined
Main Index
CHAPTER 28 421
Model Airplane Engine Analysis
in the BCTABLE option. Delayed sliding is enabled for the contact pairs involving gasket by choosing the value 2 for
the field ICOORD.
BCTABLE
1
SLAVE
1
1
4
1
1
5
2
1
4
2
1
5
3
1
4
4
1
5
MASTERS
SLAVE
MASTERS
SLAVE
MASTERS
SLAVE
MASTERS
SLAVE
MASTERS
SLAVE
MASTERS
0.0
2
0.0
2
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Material
The linear isotropic elastic properties of the steel and aluminium materials are defined using the following MAT entries.
Steel properties are used for block, bolts and plug and aluminium properties are used for cylinder head.
MAT1
MAT1
1
2
210000.
70000.
.3
.3
7.866
2.76
1.5
2.45
The inplane membrane properties of gasket body (ID 3) and gasket ring (ID 4) materials are defined using the
following MAT1 entries. The nonlinear pressureover closure relation for the gasket body (ID 3) and gasket ring (ID
5) are defined using the following MATG entries.
MAT1
MAT1
MATG
3
4
5
120.
100.
3
60.
50.
0
MATG
35.
6
0.05
4
35.
0.0
9.99E7
1.99E6
1
2
3
5.E5
0.0001
52.
72.
42.
64.
Figure 283 shows the pressureover closure properties for the gasket materials. The following TABLES1 entries
(referred in the MATG entries) are used to define these nonlinear gasket properties.
$ Displacement Dependent
TABLES1
1
+
0.0
0.0
+
0.108
33.28
$ Displacement Dependent
TABLES1
2
+
0.1
0.0
+
0.16
35.84
$ Displacement Dependent
TABLES1
3
+
0.0
0.0
+
0.104
26.88
$ Displacement Dependent
TABLES1
4
+
0.12
0.0
+
0.168
30.72
Main Index
Table : body_loading
0.027
2.08
0.054
0.135
52.
0.175
Table : body_unloading
8.32
56.
0.081
ENDT
0.1225
5.04 0.1375
0.1675
45.36
0.175
Table : ring_loading
14.
56.
0.1525
ENDT
0.026
1.68
0.052
0.13
42.
0.18
Table : ring_unloading
6.72
48.
0.078
ENDT
12.
48.
0.162
ENDT
0.138
0.174
4.32
38.88
0.15
0.18
+
18.72+
+
27.44+
+
15.12+
+
23.52+
50
40
Ring
30
20
10
0
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
Figure 284
Main Index
CHAPTER 28 423
Model Airplane Engine Analysis
The following data in case control section of the input file defines the load and boundary conditions at the two different
steps of the analysis. The bulk data entries SPCD, SPC1, and PLOAD4 are used to define the boundary condition and
loads in these steps. Bolt pretension loading is simulated using BOLT.
In order to define PreStress in Bolts, Bolt modeling is carried out using BOLT entry. BOLT
consists of combination of two pairs, TOP and BOTTOM nodes set. The key idea is to split the
element mesh of the bolt across the shaft in two disjoint parts, such that duplicate grid points
appear at the cut, and to create an overlap or gap between the two parts via multipoint
constraints. If the motion of these parts is somehow constrained in the direction in which the
gap or overlap is created, then an overlap (shortening) will introduce a tensile (pre) stress
in each of the parts and a gap (elongation) will result in a compressive stress. This technique
is more elaborated in Chapter 23: Bolted Plates.
However the internal MPC equations are generated between the TOP and BOTTOM nodes to
a free node which is also called as Control node. The BOLT entry for Bolt_1 is defined as
follows:
BOLT
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
TOP
89847
BOTTOM
38083
38271
38278
38285
38292
38299
38306
22467
22463
22341
22475
22482
21641
38272
38279
38286
38293
38300
38307
22459
22461
22816
22465
21643
21640
38273
38280
38287
38294
38301
38274
38281
38288
38295
38302
38275
38282
38289
38296
38303
38276
38283
38290
38297
38304
38277+
38284+
38291+
38298+
38305+
22466
22814
22480
22472
22469
22470
22813
22458
22471
22479
22481
22478
22477
22275
22468
22817
22474
22473
21642
21644
22460+
22462+
22464+
22476+
22815+
Here 89847 indicates the BOLT ID; 38083 indicates the Control node ID; TOP indicates the set of node IDs and BOTTOM
indicates the bottom node IDs. Similarly the remaining 3 bolts are defined as follows:
BOLT
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
BOLT
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Main Index
TOP
89848
BOTTOM
TOP
89849
BOTTOM
38007
38308
38315
38322
38329
38336
38343
20192
21825
21826
20205
20193
19871
38309
38316
38323
38330
38337
38344
20191
21828
20185
19867
20190
20206
38310
38317
38324
38331
38338
38311
38318
38325
38332
38339
38312
38319
38326
38333
38340
38313
38320
38327
38334
38341
38314+
38321+
38328+
38335+
38342+
20194
20184
20196
20199
19868
21827
20186
20188
20197
20203
20202
20187
20189
20201
20198
22544
20838
20183
19870
20200
20195+
20207+
21829+
19869+
20204+
38084
38345
38352
38359
38366
38373
38380
20324
20322
20308
20327
38346
38353
38360
38367
38374
38381
20318
19721
20305
20317
38347
38354
38361
38368
38375
38348
38355
38362
38369
38376
38349
38356
38363
38370
38377
38350
38357
38364
38371
38378
38351+
38358+
38365+
38372+
38379+
20320
20311
20312
22008
20321
20325
20313
20328
20309
20304
20315
20326
20310
22009
20316
20306
20307+
21808+
20319+
20323+
+
+
BOLT
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
TOP
89850
BOTTOM
22451
20314
19722
19719
22007
19723
22006
22005
19720+
38085
38382
38389
38396
38403
38410
38417
21071
21089
21065
22539
22542
22543
38383
38390
38397
38404
38411
38418
21069
21074
21067
21070
21083
21397
38384
38391
38398
38405
38412
38385
38392
38399
38406
38413
38386
38393
38400
38407
38414
38387
38394
38401
38408
38415
38388+
38395+
38402+
38409+
38416+
21068
21066
21398
22541
21399
21080
21073
21075
21072
21081
21078
21086
21087
21395
21085
21076
21401
22540
21082
21084
21077+
21400+
21088+
21079+
21326+
The SPCD data is used for applying the imposed displacement of 0.25 mm in the vertical direction in Steps 1 and 2 at
the controlled nodes for bolts. The lateral displacements at these four control nodes are constrained.
STEP 1
$! Step name : Bolt_Preload
SPC = 30
LOAD = 31
BCONTACT = 1
ANALYSIS = NLSTAT
NLSTEP = 2
STEP 2
$! Step name : Static_Pressure
SPC = 31
LOAD = 32
BCONTACT = 1
ANALYSIS = NLSTAT
NLSTEP = 3
...
SPCD
31
38083
3
SPC1
31
3
38083
SPCD
31
38007
3
SPC1
31
3
38007
SPCD
31
38084
3
SPC1
31
3
38084
SPCD
31
38085
3
SPC1
31
3
38085
...
SPC1
9
123
987
SPC1
9
123
2453
...
PLOAD4
1
85127
16.
...
PLOAD4
2
55616
16.
...
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
THRU
2465
24238
23579
15870
15071
Solution Procedure
The nonlinear procedure for the Step 1 is defined through the following NLSTEP entry with ID 2.
NLSTEP specifies the convergence criteria, step size control between coupled loops and step/iteration control for each
physics loop in MSC Nastran SOL 400. NLSTEP entry is represented as follows:
NLSTEP
Main Index
2
GENERAL 50
FIXED
10
MECH
P
1.
1
0.01
PFNT
CHAPTER 28 425
Model Airplane Engine Analysis
Here, 1. Indicate the total Time for the Load case; GENERAL indicates the keyword for parameters used for overall
analysis; 50 indicates the maximum number of iterations per increment; FIXED indicates the fixed stepping is to be
used; 10 indicate the number of increments for fixed stepping; 1 indicates interval for output. Every increment will be
saved for output; MECH indicate the keyword for parameters for mechanical analysis; P indicates the load convergence
criteria; 0.01 indicates convergence tolerance for load; PFNT indicates the Modified Full Newton Raphson Technique
for updating stiffness matrix. The fields MAXQN, MAXLS, and MAXBIS are set to zero to disable the Quasi Newton, line
search, and bisection techniques in the iterative process.
Similar NLSTEP option with ID 3 is used for Step 2.
NLSTEP
3
1.
GENERAL 50
FIXED
10
1
MECH
P
0.01
PFNT
Segment to Segment Contact method is activated using BCPARA. Here METHOD indicates the Global Contact type;
SEGSMALL indicates the Small SegmenttoSegment Contact. If, in BCTABLE, there are multiple GLUE with different
SLAVE entries, then NLGLUE, 1 must be used.
BCPARA
0 METHOD
SEGSMALL NLGLUE
Results
The variation of the bolt forces at grid points 38007,38083,38084 and 38085 as a function of the bolt shortening is
shown in Figure 285. This clearly shows a nonlinear response. The normal contact forces in gasket are shown in
Figure 286.
Figure 285
Main Index
Figure 286
The displacement contours of the engine model in ydirection at Steps 1 and 2 are shown in Figure 287 and
Figure 288.
The pressureclosure output for the gasket element 70582 is presented here from the f06 output file at the end of Step
2. It is observed that the pressure for this gasket element exceeded the yield pressure of 52 MPa and this result in a
plastic closure of 0.12 mm.
ELEMENT ID
70582
Figure 287
Main Index
PLY ID
1
INT. PT. ID
1
2
3
4
PRESSURE
7.805712E+01
8.207688E+01
7.722001E+01
8.107123E+01
CLOSURE
1.997745E01
2.024191E01
1.992237E01
2.017574E01
PLASTIC CLOSURE
1.200000E01
1.200000E01
1.200000E01
1.200000E01
CHAPTER 28 427
Model Airplane Engine Analysis
Figure 288
Figure 289
Input File(s)
File
nug_28m.bdf
Main Index
Description
MSC Nastran SOL 400 input for model airplane engine
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 44 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
66
Units: mm
33
82
Figure 2810
Main Index
Chapter 29: Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic External Superelement
Optimization
29
Main Index
Summary
430
Introduction
Requested Solutions
Optimization Solutions
Modeling Tip
Input File(s)
431
438
439
432
433
Summary
Title
Chapter 29: Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic
External Superelement Optimization, AESO
Features
Grids
Total degrees of freedom
Degrees of freedom in residual
Elements
Subcases
Frequencies
23K
137K
7K
37K
2
3
Geometry
Material properties
Analysis type
Boundary conditions
Element type
Loads
Random inputs applied on left and right suspension, including crosscorrelation (see
Figure 292)
FE results
5.0E 0 3
S u m m ed A c celeratio
4.0E 0 3
3.0E 0 3
S UM Init
S um fina l
2.0E 0 3
1.0E 0 3
0.0 E +0 0
4
10
F req u en cy (H z )
Main Index
12
14
CHAPTER 29 431
Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic External Superelement
Introduction
The purpose of the example is to illustrate how to run an Automatic External Superelement Optimization, AESO, job
and to demonstrate significant performance gain can be achieved with AESO. Learn more about the capability, consult
MSC Nastran Design Sensitifity and Optimization Users Guide. It is assumed that the reader is experienced in
performing modal frequency analysis. The discussion of the analysis modeling is kept to minimum.
The Camaro model is provided by General Motor Corp (Figure 291). Random inputs are applied on left and right
suspension, including crosscorrelation (Figure 292). The road response optimization task is solved by varying spring
constants of the engine mount to achieve maximum ride comfort. Both a regular (or a single shot) optimization run
and an AESO run are performed. The efficiency and accuracy of the solutions are compared between two approaches.
Figure 291
Camaro Model
1.60E02
Input Spectra
1.20E02
LEFT SUSP
8.00E03
RIGHT SUSP
REAL L/R
4.00E03
IMAG L/R
0.00E+00
4
10
12
14
4.00E03
Frequency
Figure 292
Main Index
Requested Solutions
The task will be solved in three design scenarios that are described in detail in the Optimization Solution section. Each
of three cases is solved by a single run approach and the AESO run approach. Then, the results and performance data
are compared between two approaches. It has been observed that the single shot run may fail with signal = 11 message
in the log file when design cycle is greater than 1 due to some modeling issue. However, this behavior does not show
up in the AESO runs. In this document, the results from good single shot runs will be presented but the input file is
not included.
The AESO approach should demonstrate that
accurate and very efficient solution can be obtained
the reduced model allows to perform reanalyses and/or optimization tasks many times rapidly
much larger performance gain is achieved with Analysis=DFREQ
Main Index
CHAPTER 29 433
Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic External Superelement
Optimization Solutions
Case A
This design case is to minimize the sum of RMS acceleration at drivers seat and passengers seat while limiting the
PSD response at steering column by varying nine spring constants of the engine mount. Listing 1 shows the required
design model set up for Case A.
Listing 1 Design model set up for Case A
...
DESOBJ = 1020
DESSUB = 101
...
BEGIN BULK
$ design model set up
DESVAR 11
K5307 1.0
0.01
3.0
......
K5018 1.0
0.01
3.0
DESVAR 24
DVCREL1
5307
CELAS2 5307
K
11
1246.3
......
DVCREL1
5018
CELAS2 5018
K
24
1120.
FREQ1 4
6.0
0.1
60
$ LHS  Acceleration at Driver's seat
DRESP1 1033
ACC1033
RMSaccl
3
620
1033
$ RHS  Acceleration at Passenger's seat
DRESP1 2033
ACC2033
RMSaccl
3
620
$
$ sum of RMS accelerations at Driver's and Passenger's seats
DRESP2 1020 sumrms 1020
dresp1 1033
2033
DEQATN 1020 object(driver,pass) = driver + pass
$
DRESP1 9105
ACC9005
PSDACCL
620
3
MAX
DCONSTR
101
9105
2.5e3
DOPTPRM
DESMAX 20
P1
1
P2
15
conv1 5.e3
2033
9005
Each AESO job requires two separate runs: an AESO creation run and an AESO assembly run.
To activate an AESO creation run, you need to add the following user input to a regular optimization job (bold face in
Listing 2): 1) an FMS ASSIGN statement that specifies the file name for the assembly run that will be generated from
the AESO creation run and 2) a keyword on DOPTPRM entry, autose = 1 that activates an AESO creation run.
Main Index
p1
1
P2
0.8 autose
15
1
After the creation run is complete, search for the user information message 9181 in the f06 file that indicates a
successful run.
^^^
^^^ USER INFORMATION MESSAGE 9181 (FEA)
^^^ THE JOB IS TERMINATED FOR AN AUTO
EXTERNAL CREATION RUN
^^^
The input file for the assembly run (aeso9_2.dat) is automatically generated from the creation run. Its Bulk Data
section contains the residual model (or the design model) while the Control Section is the identical copy from the
original optimization job. Some special contents in an assembly run are shown in bold face in Listing 3. The FMS
ASSIGN statement references the Nastran Master database file and the DBLOCATE statement identifies the data block
that contains various boundary matrices. The INCLUDE statement includes an assembly file that include boundary
connection data. Notice that the AUTOSE = 1 request on the DOPTPRM entry added for the creation run has been
changed to AUTOSE = 0.
Listing 3 Special contents in an assembly file
nastran buffsize=
65537
nastran rseqcont=1
assign se1=
'./test9.MASTER'
dblocate datablk(EXTDB) logical=se1, CONVERT(SEID=1)
SOL 200
CEND
......
BEGIN BULK
include './test9.asm'
DOPTPRM DESMAX 5
P1
1
P2
15
0
AUTOSE
DELX
0.2
DELP
0.8
Figure 293 shows that the sum of RMS is reduced from the initial value of 0.154 to the final of 0.130 by the road
response optimization. Table 291 compares the accuracy of the results and performance in terms of Clock time
between the regular approach and the AESO approach and clearly shows that the AESO is able to obtain the same final
design but with one fifth of the time spent by a single shot run.
Main Index
CHAPTER 29 435
Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic External Superelement
5.0E 0 3
S u m m ed A c celeratio
4.0E 0 3
3.0E 0 3
S UM Init
S um final
2.0E 0 3
1.0E 0 3
0.0 E +0 0
4
10
12
14
F req u en cy (H z )
Figure 293
Table 291
Case A
Initial
OBJ
Final
OBJ
Init. Max
Const
Init. Max
Const
# Design
Cycle
Clock Time
(Minute)
0.1534
0.0639
0.1329
0.2102
37
AESO Creation
Run
AESO Assembly
Run
Main Index
5
0.1534
0.0639
0.1319
0.2102
ASEO Total
Performance
Ratio
Case B
This case minimizes the RMS acceleration at Drivers seat and maintains frequency dependent limits on PSD
acceleration at drivers seat by varying nine spring constants of the engine mount. Listing 4 shows the required design
model set up for Case B.
Listing 4 Design Model Set up for Case B
...
DESPBJ = 1033
DESSUB = 101
...
BEGIN BULK
$ design model set up
$ Desin
$
DESVAR
......
DESVAR
DVCREL1
model set up
11
K5307
1.0
0.01
3.0
24
5307
11
K5018
CELAS2
1246.3
1.0
5307
0.01
K
3.0
......
DVCREL1 5018
CELAS2 5018
K
24
1120.
$ LHS  Driver's seat to floor (Response for Objective to be minimized)
DRESP1 1033
ACC1033
RMSaccl
3
620
1033
DRESP1 1133
ACC1033
PSDACCL
620
3
1033
DCONSTR
101
1133
1133
DOPTPRM
DESMAX 20
P1
1
P2
15
conv1 5.e3
TABLED1 1133
0.0
1.0e03 6.0
1.0e3 7.0
1.7e3 8.0
1.7e3
12.0
2.0e4 endt
Notice that in Case B, the design objective now is to minimize an RMS acceleration at Driver's seat while limiting
maintaining the frequency dependent limits on the PSD acceleration at Driver seat. The rest of the analysis model is
kept the same. Therefore, the outputs from the creation run for Case A can be reused here except replacing the
objective and constraints for Case A (Listing 1) with that for Case B formulation (Listing 4).
Figure 294 shows that the RMS acceleration at Driver's seat is reduced from the initial of 0.071 to the final of 0.058.
Table 292 compares the accuracy of the results and performance dat between the regular approach and the AESO
approach. Again, AESO achieves the same final design as the single shot run. Since no creation run is required because
it can reuse the results from the Case A's creation run, the speed up by the AESO run vs. a single shot run for Case B
is a factor of 33.
Main Index
CHAPTER 29 437
Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic External Superelement
3.0E03
2.5E03
2.0E03
2033 Init
1.5E03
2033 Final
1.0E03
5.0E04
0.0E+00
4
10
12
14
Frequency (Hz)
Figure 294
Table 292
Case B
Initial
OBJ
Final
OBJ
Init. Max
Const
Final Max
Const
# Design
Cycle
Clock Time
(Minute)
0.0713
0.0586
0.2855
0.0025
14
33
AESO Creation
Run
AESO Assembly
Run
0
0.0713
0.0584
0.2855
0.0201
ASEO Total
Performance
Ratio
33
Case C
This case is exactly the same as Case A except the frequency response is solved by the Direct Frequency Analysis
Solver. Specifically, the ANALYSIS=MFREQ Case Control command in Case A is replaces by ANALYSIS=DFREQ
command in Case C.
Therefore, the same discussions presented for Case A can be directly applied here. Table 3 compares the results and
performance data between a single shot run and shows the relationship to Case C. Again, the final design from AESO
agrees well with that from a single shot run. However, the performance gain by AESO is a factor of 40.
Main Index
In fact, the assembly run could be run directly by assessing the database file and asm file and the assembly run file
generated from the creation run for Case A since these files are identical if ANALYSIS=MFREQ or ANALYSIS=DFREQ.
Therefore, the performance gain would be a factor of 244 (i.e. 244=244/1) assuming the time spent by the assembly
run for Case B is still five minutes.
Table 293
Case A
Initial
OBJ
Final
OBJ
Init. Max
Const
Init. Max
Const
# Design
Cycle
Clock Time
(Minute)
0.1535
0.1327
0.0631
0.2073
244
AESO Creation
Run
AESO Assembly
Run
5
0.1534
0.1327
0.0636
0.2062
ASEO Total
Performance
Ratio
40
Modeling Tip
This section provides some guideline or modeling tips for performing AESO tasks:
Only database option is supported in AESO. No op2 or punch option is supported.
The nondesigned part is treated as a single part component and can not be further partitioned.
The performance gain achieved by an AESO job depends on the size of the analysis model, the ratio of the
design model size vs. the analysis model size and number of boundary points shared by designed part and
nondesigned part. A general rule of thumb is that the relative ratio should be less than 10%. The smaller the
ratio, the more performance gain can be achieved.
The UIM 7824 from the creation run lists the size of your analysis model and design model (in terms of
number of the grid points). DRATIO may be adjusted for a larger or smaller residual model.
Submit the AESO creation run with SCR=NO option to store the Nastran database. An assembly run does not
require that option.
It is recommended to use Matrix domain based domain decomposition (domain solver acms(partopt=dof) for
large scale normal modes or model frequency tasks, say the total number of degrees of freedom is half million
or higher.
Main Index
CHAPTER 29 439
Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic External Superelement
ASSIGN AESO=fn is required in the creation to define a file name of the assembly file. Directly assigning
the original job name to filename should be avoided. A good practice is to add some suffix to the original file
name such as myjob_2nd.dat where myjob is the original file name.
General guidelines or limitations to the manual External Superelement analysis also apply to AESO.
Refer to the MSC Release Guide for more guidelines and limitations.
Input File(s)
Case A
File
nug_29.dat
Description
BDF for an AESO run of Road Response Optimization
Case B
File
nug_29b.dat
Description
BDF for an AESO run of Road Response Optimization.
Case C
File
nug_29c.dat
Main Index
Description
BDF for an AESO run of Road Response Optimization
30
Main Index
Summary
441
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solution
Results
Input File(s)
442
442
446
446
442
CHAPTER 30 441
Paper Feeding Example
Summary
Title
Geometry
Material properties
Analysis type
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element type
0D
1D
2D
3D
Contact properties
FE results
t = 0 sec
t = 0.1 sec
t = 0.2 sec
t = 0.3 sec
t = 0.4 sec
Main Index
Introduction
The paper feeding analysis is done to predict the paper jamming and capacity of the printer. In this example, angular
velocities are applied on five rollers to feed the paper in the printer. There are 31 contact body definitions to simulate
the paper feeding process. Total time of simulation is 0.4 seconds.
Requested Solutions
A numerical analysis will be performed to find the printer behavior. The angular velocity of each drive and pinch is
defined such that a 1500 mm/s circumferential velocity is created. The rotational velocities are applied sequentially at
center node of the drive starting from drive 1 through drive 5 by defining Tables and SPCD. Gravity is also taken into
account. To push a drive to the paper, a load is applied at the center of each driver.
FEM Solution
The printer consists of 21 parts as shown in Figure 301.
entrance
drive_1
paper
upper guide_1
upper guide_5
upper guide_4
pinch_5
pinch_4
upper guide_3
pinch_1
lower guide_1
pinch_3
lower guide_5
drive_5
lower guide_4
pinch_2
drive_2
drive_4
guide_2
drive_3
Figure 301
lower guide_3
Analysis Model
Using the BCTABLE and several CBODY and BCSUFT entries, the following 31 contacts are defined.
Contact
Number
Slave
Master
Contact
Number
Slave
Master
1 (self contact)
paper
paper
17
paper
entrance
paper
drive_1
18
paper
lower guide_1
drive_1
pinch_1
19
paper
upper guide_1
Main Index
CHAPTER 30 443
Paper Feeding Example
Contact
Number
Slave
Contact
Number
Slave
pinch_1
drive_1
20
paper
guide_2
paper
drive_2
21
paper
lower guide_3
drive_2
pinch_2
22
paper
upper guide_3
pinch_2
drive_2
23
paper
lower guide_4
paper
drive_3
24
paper
upper guide_4
drive_3
pinch_3
25
paper
lower guide_5
10
pinch_3
drive_3
26
paper
upper guide_5
11
paper
drive_4
27
paper
pinch_1
12
drive_4
pinch_4
28
paper
pinch_2
13
pinch_4
drive_4
29
paper
pinch_3
14
paper
drive_5
30
paper
pinch_4
15
drive_5
pinch_5
31
paper
pinch_5
16
pinch_5
drive_5
Master
Master
TSTEPNL describes the number of Time Steps (100) and Time Increment (0.004 sec.) of the simulation. End time is
the product of the two entries. Notice here the Time Increment is only for the first step. The actual number of Time
Increments and the exact value of the Time Steps are determined by SOL 700 during the analysis. The step size of the
output files is determined by the Time Increment as well.
TSTEPNL
100
.004
ADAPT
10
The enforced angular velocities are applied to all pinches and drivers. The nodes, located on the circumference of each
drive and pinch, are rigidly connected to the center node using RBE2 entry. Each enforced angular velocity is defined
to have the same circumferential velocity (1500 mm/sec.) at the tip of drivers and pinches using SPCD2. The angular
velocities vary depending on the diameter of drivers and pinches. The boundary conditions are applied only to pinches.
A combination of spring and damper elements, CDAMP1D and CELAS1D, connect the fixed node and the center node
of pinches. To close the gap between all the drives and the pinches, two vertical forces are applied, in opposite
directions by using a combination of FORCE and Table entries. The magnitude of the load is predefined at each drive
location. The boundary condition and enforced motion at each pinch are shown as Figure 302.
In the cases of the drive_1 and dirver_5, their diameters are 25 and 15 mm, respectively. The angular velocity of
drive_1 is applied as 120 radian/sec. (25/2120 = 1500 mm/sec.). And 225 radian/sec. is applied to driver_5.
The example below shows how to define the boundary conditions and the enforced angular velocity of pinch_1.
Main Index
RBE2
Translational force is applied
Damper
Figure 302
Spring
Node 21002 is fully fixed and connected to the center node 21001 using CELAS1D and CDAMP1D. The coefficients
of the spring and damper are 4.9 N/mm and 196 Nsec /mm, respectively. Node 21001, the center node of the pinch_1,
is fixed except in the ydirection to which a spring and a damper are connected.
PELAS
CELAS1D
PDAMP
CDAMP1D
$
SPC1
SPC1
18
21001
19
21002
8
1
4.9
18
196.
19
13456
123456
21001
21002
21001
21002
21001
21002
The circumference nodes are connected to the center node 21001 rigidly using RBE2.
RBE2
55003
1006
...
21001
1007
123456
1008
1001
1009
1002
1010
1003
1011
1004
1012
1005
1013
At the center node, angular velocity 120 is applied to negative z angular direction. And, at the same node, translational
force is applied as well.
TLOAD1
LSEQ
SPCD
FORCE
19
1
21
4
20
20
21001
21001
21
6
0
Summary of Materials
Paper  Linear elastic material:
E
(Poissons ratio) = .3
density=
Main Index
8.4e7 kg/m3
VELO
120.
9800.
1
0.
1.
0.
CHAPTER 30 445
Paper Feeding Example
density=
1.5e6 kg/m3
density=
1.5e6 kg/m3
(Poissons ratio) = .3
density=
2.7e6 kg/m3
(Poissons ratio) = .3
density=
Main Index
7.86e6 kg/m3
Results
t = 0 sec
t = 0.1 sec
t = 0.2 sec
t = 0.3 sec
t = 0.4 sec
Figure 303
Input File(s)
File
nug_30.dat
Main Index
Description
MSC Nastran input file for printer feeding
example
31
Main Index
Summary
448
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solution
Results
Input File(s)
449
449
453
453
449
Summary
Title
Geometry
Material properties
Analysis type
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element type
Contact properties
FE results
Main Index
CHAPTER 31 449
Wheel Drop Test
Introduction
This is an example of a wheel drop test as required in automotive industry to comply with government regulations. In
this test a rigid block of 540 Kg is dropped at 13 on a wheel. The drop velocity is 2052.8 mm/seconds. Several
contacts are defined to predict the interaction between wheel, tire and the rigid block.
The 13 impact test is one of the requirements mandated by JWL (Japan Light Wheel Alloy). JWL is a set of standards
defined by the Japanese Government to ensure the vehicle's safety for aluminum road wheels. Every wheel must pass
the 13 drop test to meet government regulations before it is introduced in the market. These standards are generally
accepted worldwide for most road conditions.
The main purpose of test is to predict the stability of the vehicle when the tire hits a curb. The joint or the interface
area of the spoke and the rim is an important structural area where it usually experiences high stress concentration. An
acceptable wheel design is when there are no separation of tire and wheel (air leak) and acceptable range of stress and
strain values during the droptest.
This test has become even more important due to the recent trend of a larger and wider wheel with low profile tire
combination. The reason is that there is lower air volume than the standard OE (Original Equipment) and therefore the
inner rim section is subjected to higher stress levels.
Requested Solutions
A numerical analysis will be performed to find the behavior of a wheel and tire. The rigid block drops from 15 mm
above the tire and wheel at 13 degrees. The impact velocity of the block is 2052.8 mm/seconds.
FEM Solution
The original test setup uses a 540 kg rigid block that is dropped at 230 mm height. However, in order to reduce the
analysis time, a small gap of 15 mm is used between the wheel and the block while the initial velocity of the block is
adjusted to 2052.8 mm/sec. The original test set up and analysis model are compared in Figure 311.
Four Contacts are defined between:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Main Index
230 mm
2052.8 mm/sec
15 mm
13
Figure 311
TSTEPNL describes the number of Time Steps (100) and Time Increment (4.e4 sec) of the simulation. End time is the
product of the two entries. Notice here the Time Increment is only for the first step. The actual number of Time
Increments and the exact value of the Time Steps are determined by SOL 700 during the analysis. The step size of the
output files is determined by the Time Increment as well.
TSTEPNL
100
4.4
ADAPT
10
Two different boundary conditions are applied. First, the fixed boundary condition is applied at the center of the wheel
as shown in Figure 312. Second, the impact block is restrained in translation directions except to move vertically in
the xdirection. The two boundary conditions are defined below.
SPC1
...
SPC1
...
123456
864
874
875
23
60001
THRU
60108
Figure 312
Main Index
876
882
883
CHAPTER 31 451
Wheel Drop Test
The initial velocity applied to the impact block is defined by TIC option.
TIC
60001
2052.8
...
The material of the tire is rubber composite and its definition needs special attention. The tire consists of seven shell
and seven solid properties as shown in Figure 313. Each shell property is defined by PCOMP entry that describes a
composite material laminates. The shell composite properties use orthotropic materials defined by MAT8 and the solid
properties use a rubber material model defined by MATD027. The examples are described as below.
PCOMP
...
PSOLID
...
MATD027
...
MAT8
...
310
301
.5
90.
0.
YES
250
250
250
0.
1.19
.49
4167.
301
199700.
4400.
.148
0.
0
.1938
4400.
1.19
To model the internal pressure of the tire, the PLOAD4 entry is used to apply 1 N/mm2. The pressure at the cross section
of tire is shown in Figure 313.
PLOAD4
...
Figure 313
232401 1.
200105
210101
The Hourglass Suppression Method is used to prevent hourglass behavior of the tire by using HGSUPPR entries.
HGSUPPR, 200, SOLID, 200, 1,
, ,
, 0
...
Main Index
, 0.040
Summary of Materials
Impact block  Rigid material:
E
(Poissons ratio) = .3
density=
1.152e7 tonne/mm3
density=
y
2.7e9 tonne/mm3
Main Index
CHAPTER 31 453
Wheel Drop Test
Results
The results show plastic strains only on the wheel.
Figure 314
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_31.dat
Main Index
32
Main Index
Summary
455
Introduction
Requested Solutions
FEM Solution
Results
Input File(s)
456
456
458
458
456
CHAPTER 32 455
Pickup Truck Frontal Crash
Summary
Title
Geometry
Material properties
Analysis type
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element type
FE results
Main Index
t = 90 ms
Introduction
Auto companies perform crash tests simulation to increase safety of the vehicles and comply with government
regulations such as those of FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards). This is an example of a pickup truck
frontal crash at 15 m/s (34 m.p.h.) against a rigid wall. To model the simulation, contact was defined between the truck
and the rigid wall to predict the stress and deformations of the structure.
Requested Solutions
A numerical analysis will be performed to find the behavior of a pickup truck during crash simulation.
FEM Solution
Three contacts are defined in the simulation:
1. The truck and rigid wall surface
2. The truck tires and the ground surface
3. Self contact for the truck to avoid penetration among various components
SET is an executive control entry in SOL 700 that defines a set that contains some grid points. The set will later be
referred by the CSPOT entry in the bulk entry section.
SET
..
990009
105843
105655
TSTEPNL describes the number of Time Steps (10) and Time Increment (9.e3 sec.) of the simulation. End time is the
product of the two entries. Notice here, the Time Increment is only for the first step. The actual number of Time
Increments and the exact value of the Time Steps are determined by SOL 700 during the analysis. The step size of the
output files is determined by the Time Increment as well.
TSTEPNL 20
10
9e3
To define a 3D contact region, BCPROP and PSURF are used. BCPROP and PSURF specify a contact body by
element properties and element IDs, respectively.
BCPROP
..
BSURF
..
10
11
12
10
11
105038
105039
1990624 91344
1e06
Rigid nodes which are attached to a reference node are defined by RBE2 entry.
RBE2
..
104247
123456
104272
104614
104615
Applied forces and motions in the model are gravitational force and the initial velocity on the truck.
Main Index
CHAPTER 32 457
Pickup Truck Frontal Crash
GRAV
9806.
0.
0.
1.
Initial velocity of the pickup truck is given. All nodes of the truck have an initial velocity specified by the TIC entry.
TIC defines values for the initial conditions of variables used in structural transient analysis. Both displacement and
velocity values may be specified at independent degrees of freedom.
TIC
15000.
Boundary conditions are limited to the rigid wall and ground. All nodes of the rigid wall and the ground have been
constrained in all the degree of freedom.
SPC1
123456
990803
THRU
991384
Spot weld definition is used at several points. CSPOT is used to define spotweld with several types of failure criteria.
Normal force criterion at failure (1.e+8 N) is applied to the spot weld entry. The number of a specific SET defined in
the executive control section is referred in the entry.
CSPOT
990009
990009
..
1e+08
MATD20M is used to merge MATD020 rigid bodies into one assembly for SOL 700 only.
MATD20M 181
..
180
221
182
183
RBJOINT defines a Joint between two rigid bodies. This entry supports 14 different types of rigid joint. This analysis
has two different types of rigid joint. REVOLUTE type describes the revolute joint type which allows only axial rotation
with other degrees of freedom fixed. UNIVERS type describes the universal joint type which allows all rotational
Main Index
Results
t = 0 ms
t = 25 ms
t = 50 ms
t = 75 ms
t = 90 ms
Figure 321
Deformation History
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_32a.dat
nug_32b.dat
nug_32c.dat
Main Index
33
Main Index
460
Introduction
Solution Requirements
FEM Solution
462
Modeling Tips
463
Input File(s)
Introduction
Solution Requirements
FEM Solution
Input File(s)
461
461
464
466
467
468
466
465
Y, Ye
Fy
Fz
X, Xe
Z, Ze
Element coordinate (Xe, Ye, Ze) coincides with Basic Coordinate (X,Y,Z)
Material properties
Analysis type
Boundary conditions
Cantilever configuration
Applied loads
Bending
Element type
CBEAM3
FE results
Main Index
CHAPTER 33 461
Beams: Composite Materials and Open Cross Sections
Introduction
Composite materials have found increasing applications in many applications and slender structures like rotor blades
or highaspectratio wings may be modeled in onedimension as a 1D beam provided the complex cross sectional
properties (ultimately represented as a 2D finite element mesh) can be captured properly. Here, a new way for
composite beam analysis is introduced. The Variational Asymptotic Method (VAM) computes the properties of a
beams arbitrary cross section containing composite materials. VAM, the mathematical basis of VABS, splits a general
3D nonlinear elasticity problem for a beamlike structure into a twodimensional (2D) linear crosssectional analysis
and a 1D nonlinear beam analysis. For details on VAM, refer to Yu, W., Volovoi, V., Hodges, D. and Hong, X.
Validation of the Variational Asymptotic Beam Sectional Analysis (VABS), AIAA Journal, Vol. 40, No. 10, 2002
(available at http://www.ae.gatech.edu/people/dhodges/papers/AIAAJ2002.pdf). VAMs key benefit lies in the ability
to model a beam made of composite material with only 1D elements, namely CBEAM3.
Solution Requirements
In general, the solution requires the layup of composite material and the description of this general or arbitrary cross
section. PCOMP entries are used to provide the composite layup and PBMSECT entry is utilized to describe the profile
of cross section and the link to the composite layup via PCOMP. An example is shown as follows:
$
$ Composite case
PBMSECT 32
1
OP
0.015
OUTP=101,C=101,brp=103,c(1)=[201,pt=(15,34)]
pcomp
101
0.1
5000.
hill
0.0
501
0.05
0.0
501
0.05
501
0.05
45.0
501
0.05
501
0.05
0.0
pcomp
201
5000.
tsai
0.0
501
0.05
45.0
501
0.05
501
0.05
0.0
$MAT1
501
3.6
.3
mat8,501,2.0e7,2.0e6,.35,1.0e6,1.0e6,1.0e6,0.0,+
+,0.0,0.0,0.0,2.3e5, 1.95e5, 13000., 32000., 12000.
90.0
45.0
45.0
SYM
The theta field on PCOMP is utilized to specify the angle between the Xaxis of the material coordinate and the Xaxis
of the element coordinate. A cutout of the FEM mesh at the intersect of OUTP=101 and BRP=103 illustrates the ply
layup shown in Figure 331.
Main Index
P 0
C
O 45
M 45
P
90
1
0 0
1
Figure 331
P
0 C
45 O
45 M
P
90 1
0
0
1
FEM Solution
The converted PBEAM3 for PBMSECT,32 is as follows:
*** USER INFORMATION MESSAGE 4379 (IFP9B)
THE USER SUPPLIED PBMSECT BULK DATA ENTRIES ARE REPLACED BY THE FOLLOWING PBEAM3 ENTRIES.
CONVERSION METHOD FOR PBARL/PBEAML  .
PBEAM3
32
0 4.7202E+00 8.3059E+01 2.9578E+01 1.5664E+01 3.2316E+01 0.0000E+00
1.8014E+01 4.2136E+00 1.7100E+01 2.7858E+00 3.8881E+00 3.5404E+00 4.7202E+00 2.6994E+00
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00
1.2253E+08 2.1160E+05 8.1193E+04 2.4761E+06 3.7193E+06 7.9049E+06 2.1160E+05 2.1792E+06
1.7859E+06 1.9780E+07 5,4643E+05 3.5845E+05 8.1193E+04 1.7859E+06 2.7228E+07 1.7190E+07
2.9835E+04 2.1407E+06 2.4761E+06 1.9780E+07 1.7190E+07 2.2332E+08 5.8182E+06 1.2186E+06
3.7193E+06 5.4643E+05 2.9835E+04 5.8182E+06 2.1349E+09 4.0706E+08 8.9040E+06 3.5845E+05
2.1407E+06 1.2186E+06 4.0706E+08 7.5602E+08
Note that the MID field of above PBEAM3 has value of 0 which is a flag for using the Timoshenko 6 x 6 matrix stored
from the seventh line of PBEAM3. Timoshenko 6 x 6 matrix includes cross sectional and material properties. The
crosssectional shape and the FE mesh is shown in Figure 332. The coordinate shown in the figure matches with
element coordinate.
Main Index
CHAPTER 33 463
Beams: Composite Materials and Open Cross Sections
Figure 332
Full cross sectional stress recovery can be performed with PARAM,ARBMSS,YES in bulk data and FORCE=setid in
case control. The stresses screened based on maximum failure index is shown as follows:
1
S T R E S S E S
I N
ELEMENT
ID
GRID
ID
PLY
ID
NORMAL1
302
102
1301
2
2
2
2.468E+01
1.685E+01
1.588E+01
FLAG
MARCH
6, 2007
MSC Nastran
3/ 6/07
PAGE
14
SUBCASE 1
L A Y E R E D
D I R E
NORMAL2
C O M P O S I T E
C T
S
NORMAL3
1.601E+01 2.670E+00
1.619E+01 7.230E01
1.594E+01 7.167E01
E L E M E N T S
T R E S S E S
SHEAR12
SHEAR23
( BEAM3 )
FAILURE
MAXIMUM
SHEAR13 THEORY FAIL. INDEX
TSIAWU
TSAIWU
TSAIWU
7.161E04
7.258E04
7.193E04
STRENGTH
RATIO
4.035E+02
4.470E+02
4.569E+02
Modeling Tips
CBEAM3 is considered a straight beam if PID points to PBMSECT ID. The third point is ignored during the formation
of element matrices. During data recovery, the stresses for the third point are computed based on the forces recovered
which may not be correct.
PARAM,ARBMSTYP,TIMOSHEN must be present to access VAM for composite beam.
Main Index
Input File(s)
File
Vabcore1.dat
Main Index
Description
Composite beam with MAT1.
CHAPTER 33 465
Beams: Composite Materials and Open Cross Sections
Y, Ye
Fy
0.04
X
Fz
0.5
1.0
X, Xe
Z, Ze
Element coordinate (Xe, Ye, Ze) coincides with Basic Coordinate (X,Y,Z)
Material properties
Analysis type
Boundary conditions
Cantilever configuration
Applied loads
Element type
CBEAM, CBEAM3
FE results
Z
X
Results
Main Index
Isotropic with
VAM
Composite with
MAT1 using VAM
49.987
49.974
49.977
74974
74956
75351
Introduction
In MSC Nastran, there are two formulations to compute sectional properties. Both formulations use the finite element
method. The first one is named after its third party vender, VKI, which solves a series of equations (see documentation
of PBMSECT in Quick Look Guide) to obtain sectional properties. The other formulation is Variational Asymptotic
Method (VAM), see attached for details on VAM Theory. While VKI formulation is for isotropic material only, VAM
is capable to compute beam sectional properties for isotropic and composite material.
Solution Requirements
PBMSECT bulk data entry is utilized to describe the shape of I section and PARAM,ARBMSTYP is used to control the
selection of formulation. Note that default value for PARAM,ARBMSTYP select VKI formulation to compute sectional
properties of arbitrary cross section with isotropic material. However, PARAM,ARBMSTYP,TIMISHEN must be present
in the bulk data section if PBMSECT entry with Core and/or Layer keywords exists in the file.
$ to select VAM
PARAM,ARBMSTYPE,TIMOSHEN
.
$.......2.......3.......4.......5.......6.......7.......8.......9.......10.....
$ Section profile
$
$ 1  2  3


$ 4  5  5
$
point
1
0.50
0.23
point
2
0.00
0.23
point
3
0.50
0.23
point
4
0.50
0.23
point
5
0.00
0.23
point
6
0.50
0.23
$
$.......2.......3.......4.......5.......6.......7.......8.......9.......10.....
SET1
101
1
2
5
6
SET1
201
2
3
SET1
102
5
4
$
$ Ply properties
$.......2.......3.......4.......5.......6.......7.......8.......9.......10.....
$MAT8
501
20.59e6 1.42e6 0.42
0.89e6 0.89e6 0.89e6
$MAT1
501
1.+7
.3
$
$ isotropic case using T keyword
PBMSECT 31
1
OP
+
OUTP=101,t=0.04,BRP(1)=201,BRP(3)=102
$
$ isotropic case using C and MAT1
PBMSECT 32
OP
+
OUTP=101,CORE=301,CORE(1)=[101,PT=(1,2)],CORE(2)=[202,PT=(5,6)],+
BRP(1)=201,CORE(3)=[201,PT=(2,3)],
+
BRP(3)=102,CORE(3)=[102,PT=(5,4)]
Main Index
CHAPTER 33 467
Beams: Composite Materials and Open Cross Sections
FEM Solution
The converted BEAM for PBMSECT,31 from VKI is as follows:
*** USER INFORMATION MESSAGE 4379 (IFP9A)
THE USER SUPPLIED PBEAML/PBMSECT BULK DATA ENTRIES ARE REPLACED BY THE FOLLOWING PBEAM ENTRIES.
CONVERSION METHOD FOR PBARL/PBEAML  FINITE ELEMENT METHOD.
PBEAM3
31
1 9.6800E02 4.4896E03 6.6689E03 8.0299E19 5.2448E05 0.0000E+00
2.5000E01 5.0000E01 2.5000E01 5.0000E01 2.5000E01 5.0000E01 2.5000E01 5.0000E01
1.5197E01 6.9769E01 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 3.6170E04 3.6170E04
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 4.1043E11 7.5134E10 4.1043E11 7.5134E10
Note that the MID field of above PBEAM3 has value of 0 which is a flag for using the Timoshenko 6 x 6 matrix stored
from the seventh line of PBEAM3. Timoshenko 6 x 6 matrix includes crosssectional and material properties. The
crosssectional shape and the FE mesh is shown in Figure 333.
Z
X
Figure 333
Main Index
Regular beam stresses at extreme point from different formulation is shown in following table.
Isotropic with VKI
Composite with
MAT1 using VAM
49.987
49.974
49.977
74974
74956
75351
Results
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_33a.dat
nug_33b.dat
Main Index
34
Main Index
Summary  Beam
470
Introduction
Solution Requirements
Modeling Tips
Summary  Torsion
Introduction
Solution Requirements
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
471
471
474
476
477
482
483
477
Summary  Beam
Title
Topology optimization
features
Geometry
Compliance minimization
Mass target
Checkerboard free
Minimum member size control
Mirror symmetry constraints
Units: m
12 x 2 x 0.01 Plate
P = 200.0 N
(Symmetry)
Material properties
Analysis type
Static analysis
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element type
Topology result
Material distribution
)
P = 200.0 N
Main Index
CHAPTER 34 471
Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion
Introduction
An MBB beam example (a half model shown in Figure 341) is used to demonstrate (a) basic MSC Nastran topology
optimization capabilities without manufacturing constraints, (b) minimum member size control, and (c) mirror
symmetry constraints. The structural compliance (i.e., total strain energy) is minimized with a mass target 0.5 (i.e.,
50% material savings). The loading and boundary conditions are shown in Figure 341. The structure is modeled with
4800 CQUAD4 elements.
P = 100.0 N
Figure 341
MBB Beam
Solution Requirements
This MBB beam is well accepted by academic and industry for topology optimization validation.
Design Model Description
Objective:
Minimize compliance
PSHELL
Constraints:
Main Index
Optimization Solution
Basic compliance minimization
The input data for this example related to topology optimization model is given in Listing 1. A TOPVAR =1 Bulk Data
entry is used to define a topological design region. XINIT=0.5 on the TOPVAR entry matches the mass target
constraint so that the initial design is feasible. The rest values on the TOPVAR entry are default values that are
recommended for general topology optimization applications. Type one design responses DRESP1 = 1 and 2 identify
compliance and fractional mass, respectively. DCONSTR= 1 specifies the mass target. DESOBJ=1 in Case Control
Command selects DRESP1=1 entry to be used as a design objective (minimization as default) and DESGLB selects the
design constraint DCONSTR= 1 to be applied in this topology optimization task.
Listing 1 Input File for MBB Beam
DESOBJ = 1
DESGLB = 1
SUBCASE 1
$ Subcase name : Default
SUBTITLE=Default
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
ANALYSIS = STATICS
BEGIN BULK
DCONSTR 1
2
.5
TOPVAR,
1 ,
Tshel,
Pshell, , , , ,
DRESP1
1
COMPL
COMP
DRESP1
2
FRMASS
FRMASS
Figure 342 shows the topology optimized result that is smoothed and remeshed by using Patran. This optimal design
is very clear without any checkerboard effect. It is noticed that there are some small members.
Figure 342
Main Index
CHAPTER 34 473
Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion
The input data for this example related to topology optimization with minimum member size is given in Listing 2.
The minimum member size value is defined by the TDMIN = 0.5 parameter on the DOPTPRM entry and corresponds
to the length of 10 elements.
Listing 2 Input File for MBB Beam with Minimum Member Size
DESOBJ = 1
DESGLB = 1
SUBCASE 1
$ Subcase name : Default
SUBTITLE=Default
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
ANALYSIS = STATICS
BEGIN BULK
DOPTPRM, TDMIN, 0.5
DCONSTR 1
2
.5
TOPVAR,
1 ,
Tshel,
Pshell, , , , ,
DRESP1
1
COMPL
COMP
DRESP1
2
FRMASS
FRMASS
The Figure 343shows the topology optimized result with minimum member size TDMIN=0.5. Compared the design
shown in Figure 342, this design with minimum member size is obviously much simpler and there are no tiny
members at all.
Figure 343
Main Index
Listing 3 Input File for MBB Beam with Mirror Symmetry Constraints
DESOBJ = 1
DESGLB = 1
SUBCASE 1
$ Subcase name : Default
SUBTITLE=Default
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
ANALYSIS = STATICS
BEGIN BULK
CORD1R
1
10001
GRID
10001
GRID
10002
GRID
10003
TOPVAR, 1
, Tshel,
, SYM
,
1 ,
, TDMIN, 0.15
DRESP1
1
COMPL
DRESP1
2
FRMASS
DCONSTR 1
2
10002
3.
3.
4.
Pshell,
YZ
,
COMP
FRMASS
10003
1.
0.0
1.
1.0
1.
0.0
, , , ,
1
ZX
.5
Figure 343 shows the topology optimal result with symmetric constraints and minimum member size.
Figure 344
Modeling Tips
The quality of the results of a topology optimization task is a strong function of how the problem is posed in MSC
Nastran. This section contains a number of tips:
A DRESP1=COMP is introduced to define the compliance of structures for topology optimizations. The
response is usually used as an objective to maximize structural stiffness in static analysis problems.
A DRESP1=FRMASS is introduced to define the mass fraction of topology designed elements. The
DRESP1=WEIGHT is the total weight of all structural and nonstructural mass. For topology optimization tasks,
a DRESP1=FRMASS response is recommended to define a mass reduction target in a design constraint.
Main Index
CHAPTER 34 475
Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion
The POWER field on the TOPVAR entry has a large influence on the solution of topology optimization
problems. A lower POWER often produces a solution that contains large grey areas (area with intermediate
densities 0.3 0.7). A higher value produces more distinct black and white (solid and void) designs. However,
near singularities often occur when a high POWER is selected.
A TCHECK parameter on DOPTPRM is used to turn on/off the checkerboard free algorithm. This default
normally results in a better design for general finite element mesh. However, if high order elements and/or a
coarser mesh is used, turning off the filtering algorithm may produce a better result.
The TDMIN parameter is mainly used to control the degree of simplicity in terms of manufacturing
considerations. It is common to see some members with smaller size than TDMIN at the final design since the
small members have contributions to the objective. Minimum member size is more like quality control than
quantity control. It is in general recommended that TDMIN should not be less than the length of 3 elements.
Maximum design cycle DESMAX=30 (as default) is often required to produce a reasonable result. More design
cycles may be required to achieve a clear 0/1 material distribution, particularly when manufacturability
constraints are used.
There are many solutions to a topology optimization: one global and many local minimization. It is not
unusual to see different solutions to the same problem with the same discretization by using different
optimization solvers or the same optimization solver with different starting values of design variables.
In a multiple subcase problem, a DRSPAN Case Control Command can be used to construct a weighting
function via a DRESP2 or DRESP3. For example, a static and normal mode combined problem, the objective
can be defined as
c1
0
obj = weight1  + weight2 
c 0
1
where weight1 and weight2 are two weighting factors. c 1 is the calculated compliance and 1 is the calculated
eigenvalue via DRESP1 definition. c 0 and 0 are the initial value of these responses.
To obtain a rib pattern by topology optimization, a core nondesignable shell element thickness must be
defined together with two designable above and below the core thicknesses. That is, add two designable
elements for each regular element.
If some elements are disconnected on the final topology design proposal, the mass target may be too small to
fill the design space.
Main Index
Summary  Torsion
Title
Topology optimization
features
Compliance minimization
Mass target
Checkerboard free
Minimum member size control
Mirror symmetry constraints
Geometry
P = 1000
+
P = 1000
Units: m
Length = 16 and width = 4 and height = 4
Material properties
Analysis type
Static analysis
Boundary conditions
Cantilever
Applied loads
Element type
Topology result
Material distribution
)
Main Index
CHAPTER 34 477
Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion
Introduction
A torsion beam is used here to demonstrate the extrusion and casting constraints. Figure 345 shows the FEM model
of the torsion beam. A pair of twisting forces is applied on one end while the other end is fixed. 2048 CHEXA elements
are used for this model. The objective is to minimize the structural compliance with mass target of 0.3 (i.e., 70%
material savings).
P = 1000
+
P = 1000
Units: m
Length = 16 and width = 4 and height = 4
Figure 345
Torsion Beam
Solution Requirements
This torsion beam is utilized to show MSC Nastran topology optimization extrusion and casting
constraint capabilities.
Design Model Description
Objective:
Minimize compliance
PSOLID
Constraints:
Main Index
Optimization Solution
Extrusion Constraints With One Die
If is often to see some topology optimized designs can contain cavities that are not achievable or require a high cost
manufacturing process. For example, the result from the torsion beam without manufacturing constraints is shown in
Figure 346. Clearly, this topology design proposal is not achievable by casting.
Figure 346
The extrusion constraints enforce a constant crosssection design along the given extrusion direction. The input data
related to imposing an extrusion constraint along the zaxis in the basic coordinate system (as the default option) is
given in Listing 4.
Listing 4 Input File for Torsion Beam with Extrusion
DESOBJ = 1
DESGLB = 1
SUBCASE 1
$ Subcase name : Default
SUBTITLE=Default
ANALYSIS = STATICS
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
$ Direct Text Input for this Subcase
BEGIN BULK
DRESP1
2
Frmass
FRMASS
Main Index
CHAPTER 34 479
Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion
DRESP1
DCONSTR
TOPVAR,
,
PSOLID
1
1
1
EXT
1
,
,
COMPL
COMP
2
TSOLID,
,
1
0
.3
PSOLID, .3, , , ,
Z
Figure 347 shows the topology optimized result with extrusion constraints. It is obvious that the design has a constant
crosssection along the zaxis.
Figure 347
Main Index
DESOBJ = 1
DESGLB = 1
SUBCASE 1
$ Subcase name : Default
SUBTITLE=Default
ANALYSIS = STATICS
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
$ Direct Text Input for this Subcase
BEGIN BULK
DRESP1
2
Frmass
FRMASS
DRESP1
1
COMPL
COMP
DCONSTR 1
2
.3
CORD1R
1
5
167
7
PSOLID
1
1
0
TOPVAR,
1 ,
TSOLID,
PSOLID,
,
CAST,
,
SYM,
.3, , , ,
1
1 ,
Y, , YES
1 ,
YZ
Figure 348 shows the topology optimized result with one die casting constraints. It is observed that the design
material is added by filling up in the Y direction from the bottom. In addition, the design is symmetric about the YZ
plane in the reference coordinate system CID=1.
Figure 348
Main Index
CHAPTER 34 481
Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion
DESOBJ = 1
DESGLB = 1
SUBCASE 1
$ Subcase name : Default
SUBTITLE=Default
ANALYSIS = STATICS
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
$ Direct Text Input for this Subcase
BEGIN BULK
DRESP1
2
Frmass
FRMASS
DRESP1
1
COMPL
COMP
DCONSTR 1
2
.3
CORD1R
1
5
167
7
PSOLID
1
1
0
TOPVAR,
PSOLID
1 ,
1
,
,
TSOLID,
PSOLID, ,
CAST,
1 ,
SYM ,
1 ,
1
,
Y,
YZ
1
2, YES
Figure 349 shows the topology optimized result with two die casting constraints. It is observed that the design
material grows from the splitting plane in opposite directions along the yaxis specified in the reference coordinate
system CID=1. The splitting plane is determined by optimization and in this case corresponds to the
Main Index
Figure 349
Modeling Tips
It is recommended that a base line topology optimization job (without any manufacturability constraints) be
carried out before a topology optimization solution with manufacturability constraints. Benefits are:
a. a topology optimization without restriction may result in a better design
b. the design proposal from the no restriction run may give some hints for imposing manufacturability
constraints.
Topology optimization with manufacturability constraints often needs more material to fill the design space.
Therefore, the design with manufacturability constraints usually requires a relatively bigger mass target (less
material savings) than the one without manufacturability constraints.
The casting constraints may have difficulty dealing with a design model that has one or more nonsmoothed
boundary surfaces to be designed. It is recommended to use smooth surfaces for topology designed boundary
surfaces.
Main Index
CHAPTER 34 483
Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_34a.dat
nug_34b.dat
nug_34c.dat
nug_34d.dat
Extrusion constraints
nug_34e.dat
nug_34f.dat
Main Index
35
Main Index
Summary
485
Introduction
Solution Requirements
Optimization Solution
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
486
490
490
487
487
CHAPTER 35 485
Engine Mount Topology Optimization
Summary
Title
Topology optimization
features
Geometry
Link
Thrust Strut
Material properties
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element type
Topology result
Material distribution
)
Main Index
Introduction
The main goal is to minimize the compliance of the enginefrontmountbeam (shown in Figure 351) with mass target
0.3 (material savings 70%) and displacements within a range (0.6, 0.6) at selected 5 grids. The analysis model has 14
load cases. The finite element model is shown in Figure 352. There are 62306 HEXA elements, 703 PENTA elements,
31 TETRA elements, and 5 RBE3 elements.
Link
Thrust Strut
Figure 351
FrontMountBeam
Figure 352
Main Index
FrontMountBeam FE Model
CHAPTER 35 487
Engine Mount Topology Optimization
Solution Requirements
Design Model Description
Objective:
PSOLID = 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, and 10
Constraints:
Constraints:
Optimization Solution
The input data related to the topology optimization model is given in Listing 7.
The TOPVAR entries define five topological design parts with XINIT (initial design)=0.3 that matches the mass target
so the initial design is feasible (reduce CPU time spent on optimizer).
In order for a structural response to be used either as an objective or a constraint, it first must be identified on a DRESPi
Bulk Data entry. The DRESP1 entries 200213, for example, identify the compliance. DRSPAN and SET Case Control
Commands are then used to select one compliance DRESP1 entry for each subcase that are used in DRESP2=1000
response. The equation response DRESP2=1000 with the attribute FUNC=AVG spans all subcases to calculate averaged
compliance of the structure. A DESOBJ Case Control Command selects DRESP2=1000 to be an objective.
DRESP1=500 defines a fractional mass response. This mass target is imposed by the upper bound on the DCONSTR=50
entry. As always, fractional mass constraints should be applied at the global level in a design optimization by using
DESGLB. Separate DRESP1 entries 1 5 identify displacements responses at gird points. There responses are
constrained by the bounds set using a corresponding set of DCONSTR entries.
Main Index
set 10 = 209
set 11 = 210
set 12 = 211
set 13 = 212
set 14 = 213
DESOBJ = 1000
DESGLB = 50
DESSUB = 1
$ Direct Text Input for Global Case Control Data
$ ==================================================================
$ ==================================================================
SUBCASE 1
LOAD = 1
DRSPAN = 1
SUBCASE 2
LOAD = 2
DRSPAN = 2
SUBCASE 3
LOAD = 3
DRSPAN = 3
SUBCASE 4
LOAD = 4
DRSPAN = 4
SUBCASE 5
LOAD = 5
DRSPAN = 5
SUBCASE 6
LOAD = 6
DRSPAN = 6
SUBCASE 7
LOAD = 7
DRSPAN = 7
SUBCASE 8
LOAD = 8
DRSPAN = 8
SUBCASE 9
LOAD = 9
DRSPAN = 9
SUBCASE 10
LOAD = 10
DRSPAN = 10
SUBCASE 11
LOAD = 11
DRSPAN = 11
SUBCASE 12
LOAD = 12
DRSPAN = 12
SUBCASE 13
LOAD = 13
DRSPAN = 13
SUBCASE 14
LOAD = 14
DRSPAN = 14
$ ===================================================================
Main Index
CHAPTER 35 489
Engine Mount Topology Optimization
BEGIN BULK
$ *******************************************************************
$
Written by : MSC/NASTRAN
$
Version
: 4.51
$
Translator : MSC/NASTRAN
$
From Model : D:\users\mulf\bmwroll\fmb.mod
$
Date
:
$ *******************************************************************
$
$234567812345678123456781234567812345678
$DCONSTR 1
20
6.
6.1
$23456781234567812345678123456781234567812345678123456781234567812345678
$DCONADD 1
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
$
23
24
25
50
DCONSTR 1
1
6.
6.0
DCONSTR 1
2
6.
6.0
DCONSTR 1
3
6.
6.0
DCONSTR 1
4
6.
6.0
DCONSTR 1
5
6.
6.0
DCONSTR 50
50
.3
TOPVAR,
1 ,
psolid,
Psolid, .3, , , ,
1
TOPVAR,
2 ,
psolid2,
Psolid, .3, , , ,
2
TOPVAR,
3 ,
psolid3,
Psolid, .3, , , ,
3
TOPVAR,
4 ,
psolid8,
Psolid, .3, , , ,
8
TOPVAR,
5 ,
psolid9,
Psolid, .3, , , ,
9
TOPVAR,
6 ,
psolid10,
Psolid, .3, , , , 10
$234567812345678123456781234567812345678123456781234567812345678
DRESP1 50
w
FRMASS
DRESP1
1
d
disp
123
76095
DRESP1
2
d1
disp
123
76096
DRESP1
3
d2
disp
123
76419
DRESP1
4
d3
disp
123
76420
DRESP1
5
d4
disp
123
76421
$234567812345678123456781234567812345678123456781234567812345678
DRESP1, 200,
COMP1,
COMP
DRESP1, 201,
COMP2,
COMP
DRESP1, 202,
COMP3,
COMP
DRESP1, 203,
COMP4,
COMP
DRESP1, 204,
COMP5,
COMP
DRESP1, 205,
COMP6,
COMP
DRESP1, 206,
COMP7,
COMP
DRESP1, 207,
COMP8,
COMP
DRESP1, 208,
COMP9,
COMP
DRESP1, 209,
COMP10,
COMP
DRESP1, 210,
COMP11,
COMP
DRESP1, 211,
COMP12,
COMP
DRESP1, 212,
COMP13,
COMP
DRESP1, 213,
COMP14,
COMP
$234567812345678123456781234567812345678123456781234567812345678
DRESP2
1000
COMPL
AVG
DRESP1
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
Main Index
A topology result shown in Figure 353 is obtained by MSC Nastran. The topology optimization design proposal is
smoothed by Patran.
Figure 353
Modeling Tips
If multiple mass targets (multiple DRESP1=FRMASS) are used, it is recommended each TOPVAR's initial
value XINIT matches its corresponding mass target.
Input File(s)
File
nug_35.dat
Main Index
Description
Minimize averaged compliance/displacement constraints
36
Main Index
Summary
492
Introduction
Solution Requirements
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
493
495
495
493
Summary
Title
Topology optimization
features
Geometry
Material properties
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element type
HEXA, RBE3
Topology result
Material distribution
)
Main Index
CHAPTER 36 493
Wheel Topology Optimization
Introduction
A wheel model shown in Figure 361 is used to demonstrate MSC Nastran topology optimization cyclical symmetry
capabilities. The wheel is modeled with sixsided solid elements (118156 CHEXA). The wheel outer layers and bolts
are nondesignable. One load case is considered. The structural compliance is minimized (i.e., minimize the total strain
energy of the structure) with a mass target 0.1 (i.e., remove 90% of the material). Although the load is not cyclically
symmetric about the Yaxis, the design is required to be cyclically symmetric about the Yaxis with five segments.
Figure 361
Wheel FE Model
Solution Requirements
Design Model Description
Objective:
PSOLID (blue)
Constraints:
Constraints:
Main Index
Optimization Solution
The input data for this example related to topology optimization model is given in Listing 8. The coordinate system
(CORD2R = 1) is created to be used to specify cyclical symmetric constraints. The field CS (cyclical symmetric axis)
on the SYM line is Yaxis with NCS (number of cyclical symmetric segments) = 5. It is noticed that SMETHOD=
ELEMENT is used to select CASI iterative solver. The CASI iterative solver released in MSC Nastran can provide a
major speedup in the solution of large static analyses.
Listing 8 Input File for Wheel
DESOBJ = 10
DESGLB = 1
ANALYSIS = STATICS
SMETHOD = ELEMENT
SUBCASE 1
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
BEGIN BULK
CORD2R
1
10.512 33.3312 12.9921 22.209833.3312 4.88385
28.388 33.3313 19.7297
DCONSTR 1
2
.1
TOPVAR
1
PSOLID PSOLID .1
2
SYM
1
Y
5
DRESP1
2
FRM
FRMASS
DRESP1
10
COMP
COMP
Figure 362 shows the topology optimized result that is smoothed by using Patran. It is noticed that cyclical symmetry
is obtained even though the loading is not cyclically symmetric.
Figure 362
Main Index
CHAPTER 36 495
Wheel Topology Optimization
Modeling Tips
CASI solver is limited to compliance minimization topology optimization problem only.
The cyclical symmetry constraints can also be used for rotational parts <60. In addition, the starting surface
must be XY plane for cyclical symmetric CS=X, YZ plane for CS=Y; ZX plane for CS=Z, respectively. The
cyclical symmetric segment (NCS) must also be defined in 360 for this case. For example, a 90 rotational
part has three segments, NCS must be set to NCS=12 in 360.
Input File(s)
File
nug_36.dat
Main Index
Description
Cyclical symmetry constraints
37
Main Index
Summary
497
Introduction
Modeling Details
Material Modeling
Solution Procedure
Results
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
498
499
502
507
506
507
500
501
502
501
CHAPTER 37 497
Local Adaptive Meshing
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
H = 0.4 m
d = 0.2 m
s = 0.02 m
F = 280 N
max
F
nominal
Material properties
Analysis characteristics
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Tensile axial loading acting on the shortest edge of the plate (F = 280 N)
Element type
FE results
max
nominal
Theoretical (2.157)
Numerical
2.0
Refinement Cycle
1.5
Main Index
Introduction
This problem demonstrates the ability of the mesh refinement capability to converge on the correct solution in terms
of stress distribution. A very simple structure has been considered to enable a comparison between theoretical and
numerical results.
F
Theory, based on net section, states that if the nominal stress nom = is defined as the stress acting on the net
H d s
section (defined as the section that results from the difference between the width of the plate and the diameter of the
nom
max
 , where max is the actual stress
hole), then the stress concentration factor due to the presence of the hole is k t = 
at the critical point. The stress concentration factor can be calculated from the empirical relationship shown in
Figure 371.
Kt
3.0
d
d
d
2.5
2.0
1.5
d
H
1.0
0.00
Figure 371
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
The theoretical results and input data are shown in Table 371.
Table 371
Applied
Stress
Load
Concentration
(N)
Factor
Geometrical Data (m)
Main Index
Nominal
Stress (Pa)
Maximum
Stress (Pa)
kt
nom
max
280.0
0.4
0.2
0.02
2.157
70000.0
150990.0
CHAPTER 37 499
Local Adaptive Meshing
Modeling Details
A numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastrans solution sequence 101 for a 2D representation of a freefree plate with a hole in its central region. The details of finite element model, contact simulation, material, load,
boundary conditions and solution procedure are discussed below.
Figure 372
S U M M A R Y
POINTS
=
ELEMENTS =
ELEMENTS =
964
872
12
The case control section of the input contains the typical entries for a linear static analysis. The only command that
has been added to activate the mesh refinement is HADAPT. This, in turn, specifies the use of the bulk data entries,
HADAPTL and HADACRI that control all the refinement process (see next section for details):
ECHO = NONE
HADAPT = 1
PARAM
POST
0
PARAM,INREL,2
SUBCASE 1
TITLE=First mesh
LOAD = 2
DISPLACEMENT(PLOT,SORT1,REAL)=ALL
STRESS(PLOT,SORT1,REAL,VONMISES,BILIN)=ALL
Furthermore, the INREL parameter has been included with a value of 2 to activate the automatic inertia relief
process. It is needed (automatic or manual) because the structure is in freefree conditions (unrestrained). The output
request for displacement has been considered only to check the congruency of the deformation while the stress output
is what we really need for comparison with the theoretical results.
The Bulk Data Section contains the standard options for a linear static analysis plus the specific option for mesh
refinement control.
Main Index
The HADAPTL option specifies the local adaptive mesh refinement control parameters. In particular, referring to the
specific name associated to each field in the MSC Nastran Quick Reference Guide, the process has been defined in this
way:
REPEAT = 7 (5th field): maximum number of refinement cycles executed before the process is stopped
CRITID = 1 (6th field): associated HADACRI option identifier
WHEREMET = PROP (7th field): method used to specify the mesh refinement region subjected to the adaptivity
criteria referenced in the associated HADACRI. PROP means that all the elements associated to a specific
property option are considered by the refinement process
WHEREID = 2 (8th field): Identifier of the mesh refinement region subjected to the selected adaptivity criteria.
Considering the WHEREMET value and the elements used in the finite element model, all the elements
associated to PSHELL which identifier is 2 will be involved in the refinement process
SNAPMETH =1 (9th field): Method to project, snap, or relax new grid points on midedge or midface during
the refinement process. The selected value allows the projection onto a smooth approximation of the analysis
domain boundary interpolated from the mesh boundary.
MAXLEVEL = default (2nd field in the second physical option for HADAPTL): Maximum refinement level
allowed for each individual element in the mesh. No elements will be refined to a level higher than the
specified value. The default value is equal to that one defined in the REPEAT field.
The HADACRI option specifies the mesh adaptivity criterion and the corresponding parameters. In this case, the
method based on a scalar error indicator has been chosen (TYPE = 1 in the 3rd field). According to this criterion a
scalar error indicator Ee is computed in the finite element mesh and an element e will be refined if:
2
Ee
1
N
1
2
F 1  E f
N
f =1
where N is the total number of elements in the element set to which it belongs and F 1 is the value specified in the 4th
field of this option (in the specific case F 1 = 0.9 ). Note that the elemental error indicator is computed using the grid
point stresses following the procedure utilized by the ELSDCON Case Control command.
Main Index
CHAPTER 37 501
Local Adaptive Meshing
Material Modeling
Isotropic elastic material properties of the deformable body are defined using the following MAT1 option as follows:
MAT1
6.9+10
.33
3200.
The Youngs modulus is taken to be 6.9 GPa with a Poissons ratio of 0.33. Mass density ( = 3200 Kg/mm3) has
also been specified to support the inertia relief process. Note that the results are not affected by the value included
in this field.
Main Index
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Solution Procedure
According to the HADAPTL and HADACRI control options, the refinement process starts with a preliminary calculation
(CYCLE = 0 or ANALYSIS number 1) using the initial finite element model. Then, the refinement process starts and
continues up to a number of cycles equal to REPEAT (3rd field in HADAPTL). During these cycles, each element
involved will be refined up to MAXLEVEL value (2nd field in the second physical option in HADAPTL).
As result of each refinement cycle the following files will be generated (xxxx.bdf is the generic name of the input
file and):
xxxx.n.bdf It contains the grid points, the elements and the MPC options related to the refined mesh
created at the specific refinement cycle
xxxx.n.xdb It contains the model and the results for the specific refinement cycle.
where n is the number of the generic refinement cycle.
Furthermore, the standard files xxxx.log, xxxx.f04, xxxx.f06 are generated. In the last one, it is possible to read
some information about the refinement process show in the example below:
^^^^^^GLOBAL NUMBER OF ELEMENTS:
1096
^^^AVERAGE ERROR INDICATOR:
1.766260E+03
^^^CHANGE IN AVERAGE ERROR INDICATOR: 5.402161E01 %
^^^^^^* * * E N D O F A N A L Y S I S #:
2
* * *
^^^by which it is possible to verify how it is proceeding and when the specific cycle is finished.
Results
The first result to analyze is the way in which the finite element mesh is changed during the refinement cycles. In the
figure below all the refined models are summarized. Note that the MPC relationships used to establish the congruency
between regions with different meshes are not displayed to make the images clearer.
Main Index
CHAPTER 37 503
Local Adaptive Meshing
Refinement Cycle 1
Refinement Cycle 2
Refinement Cycle 3
Refinement Cycle 4
Refinement Cycle 5
Refinement Cycle 6
Refinement Cycle 7
Figure 373
Main Index
Looking at the refined meshes obtained in the subsequent cycles, it can be seen how important it is to activate a
projection onto a smooth approximation of the analysis domain boundary from the mesh boundary (SNAPMTHD field
in HADAPTL option). In fact, it avoids the creation of kinks that create two problems:
Driving the refinement process around the geometrical singularities
Generating stress concentration in the singular regions
Displacement output has been required only to verify the correctness of the solution in terms of deformed structure.
The use of PARAM.INREL,2 enables a meaningful deformed structure in the case of freefree boundary conditions
(Figure 374). The deformation seems to be congruent with the applied loads.
Figure 374
Deformed Structure
Figure 375
The stress level in the critical point is compared with the theoretical one and the relative stress concentration factor is
calculated. The resulting data are summarized in the following table together with other general information related
to refinement effects on mesh size and error indicator.
The error percentages are calculated according to the following relationship:
Calculated value Theoretical value
Error% =  100
Theoretical value
Main Index
CHAPTER 37 505
Local Adaptive Meshing
Referring to Table 371, the theoretical values for maximum stress and stress concentration factor are:
Maximum Stress
= 150990 N/m2
Nominal Stress
= 70000 N/m2
Table 372
Results Comparison
Refinement
Cycle
Global
Number of
elements
Average
Error
Indicator
Maximum
von Mises
Stress
(N/mm2)
Stress
Concentration
Factor
Stress
Concentration
Factor Error
(%)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
880
1100
1568
2900
6476
16326
41060
98996
1756.77
1766.26
1582.74
1211.11
838.27
530.66
338.77
115461.46
130292.07
137223.50
141407.04
14579784
148861.35
150535.57
150545.23
1.649
1.861
1.960
2.020
2.083
2.127
2.151
2.151
23.53
13.71
9.12
6.35
3.44
1.41
0.30
0.29
Main Index
Stress Concentration
2.5
Kt=
max
nominal
Theoretical (2.157)
Numerical
2.0
Refinement Cycle
1.5
Figure 376
Modeling Tips
Some suggestions can be helpful to define the best refinement process:
The refinement can be limited using the field MAXLEVEL in the HADAPTL option. None of the elements in the mesh
will be refined to a level larger than MAXLEVEL. Limiting this process is necessary to avoid runaway refinement. In
this example, the default value (MAXLEVEL = REPEAT) has been used not only to test the right convergence towards
the theoretical stress but also the limited improvement introduced in the latest refinement cycles.
Kinks (e.g., sharp internal corners that lack C 1 continuity) should be avoided in order to limit their influence:
on the refinement process (if they exist, the refinement is concentrated around the geometrical singularities)
on results (avoiding kinks prevents fictitious stress singularities)
Kinks can be controlled defining SNAPMTHD = 1 in the HADAPTL option. In this example, the relaxation/projection
method has been activated for the grid points created by the procedure; to verify its positive effect, change SNAPMTHD
from 1 to 0 and see how the refinement process behaves. The refined meshes are concentrated along the geometrical
singularities (sharp corners or kinks of a polygonal hole) and the results (the maximum value always increases) will
continue to subdivide elements near the kinks.
Main Index
CHAPTER 37 507
Local Adaptive Meshing
Setting SNAPMTHD = 1 ensures the geometry of the hole is correctly represented during the refinement process. By
creating a cylindrical coordinate system at the center of the hole, all the grid points that have been generated on the
boundary are all at R = 0.1 m, exactly the radius of the circle (the error is on the fifth decimal digit). It confirms the
need to use the SNAPMTHD = 1 relaxation/projection procedure.
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_37.dat
nug_37.bdf
MSC Nastran input file for local adaptive meshing example used in video
nug37.SimXpert
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 30 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
H = 0.4 m
d = 0.2 m
s = 0.02 m
F = 280 N
max
F
nominal
Figure 377
Main Index
38
Main Index
Landing Gear
Summary
509
Introduction
Solution Requirements
FEM Solution
Results
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
510
510
517
521
520
520
510
CHAPTER 38 509
Landing Gear
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry
DRAG STRUT
UPPER CYLINDER
GAS SPRING
SIDE STRUT
AXLE
APEX SPACER
Material properties
Boundary conditions
P I N NE D C O N NE C T I O N S
Element types
FE results
Main Index
Introduction
This test case demonstrates contact analysis using MSC Nastran. Two types of contact conditions between components
are considered:
glue contact
nonglue contact
In the first one, the contact is maintained for all the analysis after it occurs. In other words, nodes in contact are not
allowed to separate whereas, in the second one, separation can change depending on the loading conditions.
Large displacement/rotation and nonlinear materials are not taken into account in this example.
Solution Requirements
The numerical analysis is performed to demonstrate the behaviors of the 3D surface contact solution into MSC
Nastran. In particular, the simultaneous presence of glue, nonglue surface contact is considered. The deformed
structure, the satisfaction of the relative motion between components, and the stresses in the contact regions are
considered as result of the analysis.
FEM Solution
FEM solutions have been obtained with MSC Nastrans solution sequence 400. The details of finite element models,
contact simulations, material, load, boundary conditions, and solution procedure are discussed.
Main Index
CHAPTER 38 511
Landing Gear
Contact Models
In defining the contact regions for the structure, the components are modeled as deformable bodies. In particular, 15
contact bodies have been defined by specific BCBODY and BCSURF entries (each couple of options has been defined
using the same identifier). Note that each of them has been defined considering all the elements belonging to the
specific components.
Table 381
BCBODY/BSU
Component Name
Elements
Drag Strut
217804  237802
159301  160572
Gas Spring
160575  161534
Inner Cylinder
200218  217803
157797  158596
277629  297917
Side Strut
237803  257846
159717  160332
158597  159300
10
Upper Cylinder
161663  200217
11
156997  157796
12
257847  277628
13
161551  161582
14
161599  161630
15
Apex Spacer
161647  161662
Each contact body has been defined in the same way so, as an example, one set of options is used to define one of them
that has been listed:
$ Deform Body Contact LBC set: lower_link_spacer
BCBODY
13
3D
DEFORM 13
0
BSURF
13
161551 161552 161553 161554
161558 161559 161560 161561 161562
161566 161567 161568 161569 161570
161574 161575 161576 161577 161578
161582
161555
161563
161571
161579
1
161556
161564
161572
161580
161557
161565
161573
161581
In the above BCBODY option, the 3D (third field) elements mentioned in the BSURF which identifier is 13 (look at
the fifth field) define the contact body number 13. Furthermore:
The fourth field defines the general behavior of the contact body. In this case, it is a deformable contact body
The null value in the sixth field means that symmetric penetration or double side contact check is considered.
The contact is verified symmetrically and both the contact surfaces are checked for penetration and, also, if
we need to define a MASTER and a SLAVE in any case.
Main Index
The empty seventh field forces a null friction coefficient. It means that no tangential forces are generated
when the contact condition occurs, unless these bodies are glued together.
The negative value in the eighth field allows activating the analytic option for a deformable body. It is used in
this case because the part of each component involved in the contact process is cylindrical and therefore is
simple to represent it analytically. In this way, the contact is represented in the best way.
After the definition of the contact bodies, each couple of bodies that could be in contact must be defined in the
BCTABLE option. In this entry, one of the contact bodies is defined as the MASTER while the other one is the SLAVE.
The contact behaviors are completely defined. An example of the option format used in this case is listed below:
BCTABLE
1
SLAVE
MASTERS
SLAVE
MASTERS
SLAVE
MASTERS
SLAVE
1
0
FBSH
2
2
0
FBSH
10
3
0
FBSH
4
3
0
FBSH
10
MASTERS
...
...
SLAVE
12
0
FBSH
MASTERS 14
SLAVE
12
0
FBSH
MASTERS 15
4.2
0
1.+20
19
0.
0
0.
4.2
0
1.+20
0.
0
0.
0.
4.2
0
1.+20
0.
0
0.
0.
4.2
0
1.+20
0.
0
0.
0.
4.2
0
1.+20
0.
0
0.
0.
4.2
0
1.+20
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
It can be checked how the nineteen contact regions (look at the fifth field of the above BCTABLE option) are defined
in the same. The only difference is in the eighth field of the option where the SLAVE option is defined. In fact, we can
see a unit or null value. If a unit value is defined, the two contact surfaces must be glued. It means that the glue option
is activated and all the degrees of freedom of the nodes are tied in case of deformabledeformable contact once the
node comes in contact. In general, if the unit value is defined, all degrees of freedom are MPCd in the deformabledeformable contact once the grids have come in contact. To turn on the general SOL 400 contact algorithm the entry:
BCPARA, 0, NLGLUE,1
is used. It should be taken into account that if, in SOL 400 on the BCTABLE, there are multiple GLUE and nonGLUE
entries associated with different SLAVE entries, then, the above option must be used. It is the case in this example.
A null value activates the standard contact conditions. It means that a SLAVE node can move only over the MASTER
contact surface when it comes in contact (except if glued). In this case, if the general load condition leads to the
separation of the contact bodies, the slave node start again to move without constraints. Note that in this entry different
Main Index
CHAPTER 38 513
Landing Gear
contact parameters (the distance below which the node is considered in contact, friction coefficient, separation force,
stress friction limit, contact tolerance bias, etc) can be defined for each contact region.
The BCTABLE entry is activated by BCONTACT option in the Case Control section. Note that in this case, a
BCONTACT = 0, defined above the subcase level activates the corresponding BCPARA,0 and BCTABLE,0 entries
defined in the Bulk Data Section. It allows to initially identify contacting bodies. Note that in SOL 400, a
BCONTACT = 0 is allowed above all subcases but is not required. Any of the contact Bulk Data entries that allow a 0
and have a 0 value ID field are automatically sensed by SOL 400 with or without a BCONTACT = 0 command. The
contact regions are summarized in the table below.
Table 382
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Main Index
MASTER Component
(BCBODY ID)
Drag Strut Pivot (2)
Upper Cylinder (10)
Inner Cylinder (4)
Upper Cylinder (10)
Lower Link Pivot (5)
Upper Cylinder (10)
Lower Link Spacer (13)
Lower Torque Link (6)
Torsion Link Apex Pivot
Lower Link Spacer (13)
Apex Spacer (15)
Side Strut Pivot (8)
Upper Cylinder (10)
Upper Torque Link (12)
Upper Link Pivot (11)
Upper Link Spacer (14)
Upper Torque Link (12)
Upper Link Spacer (14)
Apex Spacer (15)
GLUE
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES

DRAG STRUT
DRAG STRUT PIVOT
Figure 381
GAS SPRING
UPPER CYLINDER
Looking at the behaviors of the defined contact regions, it can be checked that:
The gas spring is attached in its upper end to an internal surface of the UPPER cylinder. This system can
move along their common axis according to the nonglued contact regions defined between them and the
INNER cylinder.
The torsion link apex pivot is rigidly connected to the LOWER torque link while a nonglued contact region is
defined between the first body contact and the UPPER torque link. Also, the APEX SPACER is in the same
contact condition. Considering the null friction coefficient, this modeling solution allows to avoid any
singularity maintaining the relative rotational motion between the two links.
The rigid link pivot is rigidly connected to the LOWER torque link but it is connected by nonglued contact
region with the INNER CYLINDER. It is the same modeling solution than the above one.
The two struts are rigidly connected to the UPPER cylinder.
The two torque links (UPPER and LOWER) can rotate around the axes of the two pivots that connect each of
them respectively with the UPPER and the INNER cylinders.
Main Index
CHAPTER 38 515
Landing Gear
Figure 382
Material
The isotropic elastic material properties of the steel used for all the components have been defined by the
following MAT1.
MAT1
3.+7
.3
7.34
123
108520
108521
313468
313469
313470
313471
Main Index
Brake drag
FORCE
MOMENT
1
3
314410
314410
0
0
60000.
0.
1.
.57735
0.
.57735
0.
.57735
314410
314410
0
0
0.
.57735
1.335+6 0.
.57735
1.
.57735
0.
314410
314410
0
0
140000. 0.
0.
.57735
0.
.57735
1.
.57735
4
5
Brake vertical
FORCE
MOMENT
6
7
FX
X
MY
X
Figure 383
FZ
X
Breaking Pressure in the inner part of the Upper Cylinder (Load sets from 8 to 11)
PLOAD4
PLOAD4
PLOAD4
...
PLOAD4
PLOAD4
Figure 384
Main Index
11
11
11
164669 1190.4
164864 1190.4
166091 1190.4
33161
33236
55196
7479
7156
49965
10
10
199542 1190.4
199546 1190.4
54157
105944
106392
106130
CHAPTER 38 517
Landing Gear
All these loads are combined by LOAD Bulk data entry to define the applied static load condition
LOAD
2
1.
1.
1.
5
9
1.
1.
1.
1
6
10
1.
1.
1.
3
7
11
1.
1.
4
8
Solution Procedure
In the present analysis, contact is the only nonlinearity. It means that the provided load condition generates small
displacements and only the stresses are in the linear elastic part of the stressstrain curve of the material. As
consequence, no geometrical and material nonlinearity are taken in account. Furthermore, looking at the geometries,
the contact conditions seems to be not so complicated, It simplifies the approach to be used in the analysis.
First of all no STEP is defined under the SUBCASE level.
BCONTACT = 0
SUBCASE 1
TITLE=This is a default subcase.
BCONTACT = 1
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
DISPLACEMENT(plot)=ALL
$ SPCFORCES(SORT1,REAL)=ALL
STRESS(plot)=ALL
BOUTPUT(SORT1,REAL)=ALL
NLPARM = 1
The nonlinear procedure is defined through the following NLPARM entry with ID 1.
NLPARM
FNT
PV
YES
Here:
Only one increment is considered.
FNT represents the Full NewtonRaphson Technique wherein the stiffness is reformed at every iteration.
PV indicates that convergence will be checked on vector component (V) of the residuals (P). In this V method,
convergence checking is performed on the maximum vector component of all components in the model.
YES indicates that intermediate output is produced after every increment.
Results
No results to compare are available for this test case so what has been obtained by the calculation will be checked from
a qualitative viewpoint. The maximum total displacement occurs in the bottom part of the inner cylinder, close to the
axle (where the concentrated loads are applied).
Main Index
Figure 385
To check how the contact is working it is possible to take advantage of a procedure that in MSC Nastran allows storing
all the contact results into the database. In fact it is not possible to obtain these data into XDB (PARAM,POST,0) or
OUTPUT2 (PARAM,POST,1) postprocessing files while adding the keyword:
scr = post
in the Nastran command line, all the results, including the contact ones, are stored into the database. They are retrieved
into MSC Patran selecting:
Action
Access Results
Object
Attach Entities
Method
Main Index
CHAPTER 38 519
Landing Gear
The contact status in the UPPER TORQUE LINKTORSION LINK APEX PIVOT nonglued contact
region put in evidence how the deformation of the structure determines the contact only in a limited part of
the bodies.
A good contact modeling is recognized by a congruent representation of the Contact Status output in the
MASTER and SLAVE contact bodies. In particular in case of glued contact a continuous contact status contour
should be displayed. A different representation could highlights problems in the geometries of the contact
bodies.
UPPER LINK PIVOT
 SLAVE in contact region with UPPER TORQUE LINK (GLUED)
 MASTER in contact region with UPPER CYLINDER
833(572548(/,1.
$3(;63$&(5
0$67(5LQERWKWKH*/8('FRQWDFWUHJLRQV
/2:(572548(/,1.
7256,21/,1.$3(;3,927
6/$9(LQFRQWDFWUHJLRQZLWK833(572548(/,1.
0$67(5LQFRQWDFWUHJLRQZLWK/2:(572548(/,1.*/8('
Figure 386
$3(;63$&(5
121*/8('
7256,21/,1.$3(;3,927
0$67(56/$9(
/2:(572548(/,1.
0$67(56/$9(
833(572548(/,1.
Figure 387
*/8('
A nonclear situation is displayed for the nonglued contact between UPPER TORQUE LINK and TORSION APEX
PIVOT. In fact, the contact status is differently represented in the corresponding contact regions of the two
components. Probably, the combined effects of the deformation and the different element types in the two components
determine it.
Main Index
Differently, in case of nonglued contact regions defined in the UPPER CYLINDERUPPER LINK PIVOT
connection the contact status seems to be represented correctly (see Figure 388). In fact, there is a complete
congruency between the two regions that are in contact.
833(5&</,1'(5
121*/8('
0$67(56/$9(
833(5/,1.3,927
Figure 388
Modeling Tips
Important behaviors of this example are the definition of glued and nonglued contact regions and the effects of contact
geometries to obtain good results. Contact is only verified in a qualitative viewpoint by the analysis of the Contact
Status output.
The following are some guidelines and tips for modeling this benchmark:
The geometry of a contact surface should be defined property in order to avoid problems when it touches
another surface contact.
The density of the mesh affects the results in the contact region in particular in case of contact surfaces with
nonplanar shape and in which different types of elements are used.
Use the Contact Status output to check if the contact is working properly (use scr=post in the Nastran
command line to obtain this kind of output).
Input File(s)
File
nug_38.dat
Main Index
Description
MSC Nastran SOL 400 input for the landing gear model
CHAPTER 38 521
Landing Gear
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 40 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
Figure 389
Main Index
39
Main Index
Summary
523
Introduction
Modeling Details
Results
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Reference
Video
524
524
529
531
531
531
531
CHAPTER 39 523
Brake Squeal Analysis
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry
R = 144
Back_Plate
Insulator
Model Courtesy of
Dr. Lin Jun Seng of TRW
Automotive
Pad
Rotor
Z
X
t = 20
Material properties
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element types
FE results
Main Index
Introduction
Brake squeal is the unpleasant high frequency vibrations (2000 to 10000 Hz) that occur in disk brake systems.
Application of the brakes causes an increase in line pressure which results in the caliper piston (s) to push the pads
against the spinning rotor. A valuable review paper by Kinkaid et al. (Kinkaid 2003) provide a comprehensive review
and bibliography of research on disc brake squeal. The high pitch noise or squeal occurs when a specific combination
of piston pressure, friction and damping effects cause two stable modes to merge or coalesce into a single unstable
mode.
The solution to preventing modal coalescence is to modify the design. This would include, but is not limited to,
material changes, design changes and the addition or modification of present damping components. However the
analysis of disk brake systems has been challenging due to the complexity of the structure, material properties and
loading environment.
Brake squeal analysis models require not only the typical FEM mesh of the components (pads and rotor at a minimum),
but also the representation of the contact/frictional connection between the pad and rotor. This contact/friction is
represented by an unsymmetric stiffness matrix. Previously in Nastran there were restrictions imposed by this method
that included:
The meshed contact area between the rotor and pad must be congruent
Separation is not allowed; full contact is maintained
The contact matrix is supplied as a DMIG generated outside of the normal FEM calculations
Each contact condition involving the friction coefficient and loading (magnitude and pattern) required a
unique DMIG
Typically, the generation of the DMIG entries required days to weeks of analysis time. Interested users are directed to
Section 5.3 of the Advanced Dynamic Analysis Users Guide for a description on manual generation of the
contact/friction connection DMIG entries.
The introduction of the brake squeal analysis capability in this release has eliminated all of the previous restrictions.
In addition, the user now has the capability to examine various combinations of friction values, loading, and contact
definitions in a single execution. Further, the system matrices can include, at user request, differential stiffness due to
preloading, large displacement effects and full nonlinear property definitions. No longer is the brake squeal analysis
limited to a string of single shot runs or multiple restarts. This example features the following: 3D deformabledeformable contact with friction, multiple SUBCASE/STEP analysis, user selectable complex solution domain  real
or modal space, choice of complex Lanczos or Hessenberg solver, and full user control of contact parameters.
Modeling Details
Brake squeal analysis is activated in MSC Nastran's Advanced Nonlinear solution sequence (SOL 400) with the Bulk
Data entry BSQUEAL. The BSQUEAL entry is selectable within the Case Control section at the SUBCASE level. With
the analysis chaining capability complex eigenvalues can be computed at user selected load factors.
Main Index
CHAPTER 39 525
Brake Squeal Analysis
The case control loading and modal extraction requests are shown in the listing that follows. This example
demonstrates the extraction of complex modes at specific piston load points
SUBCASE 100
$
SUBTITLE = Nonlinear static analysis
SPC = 2
METHOD = 100 $ Modal Approach
CMETHOD = 200
AUTOSPC(noprint) = YES
RESVEC = NO
$
STEP 1
LABEL = Nonlinear Static Step
NLPARM = 2
$ Ten load increments
BCONTACT = 1
BOUTPUT = NONE
$ No contact surface output
SPC = 2
LOAD = 200
$
$ STEPs for complex eigenvalue extraction
$
STEP 2
LABEL = Brake Squeal modes at 20% piston load 0.3 friction coeff
ANALYSIS=MCEIG
BSQUEAL = 900
NLIC STEP 1 LOADFAC 0.2
$
STEP 3
LABEL = Brake Squeal modes at 50% piston load 0.3 friction coeff
ANALYSIS=MCEIG
BSQUEAL = 900
NLIC STEP 1 LOADFAC 0.5
$
STEP 4
LABEL = Brake Squeal modes at 80% piston load 0.3 friction coeff
ANALYSIS=MCEIG
BSQUEAL = 900
NLIC STEP 1 LOADFAC 0.8
BEGIN BULK
...
The analysis contains a single SUBCASE with four STEPs. Step 1 performs the nonlinear loading in 10 steps. Contact
bodies are selected with the BCONTACT where the contact friction values are defined on the Bulk Data BCTABLE.
This step performs a normal nonlinear 3D contact analysis that allows separation of the contact surfaces.
Steps 2 through 4 perform a complex eigenvalue extraction at selected load points. The methods used to extract the
modes are defined above all the STEP definitions. Activation is done with the ANALYSIS=MFREQ entry which requires
a normal modes and complex modes selection which in this example is above all STEP definitions. The user has access
to all of the MSC Nastran modern modal methods: Lanczos, complex Lanczos, and Hessenberg.
Load steps selected for complex mode extraction is defined by the NLIC entry. This entry selects the loading STEP and
the load increment  LOADFAC. The allowable values for LOADFAC are determined by the INC value defined on the
Main Index
Bulk Data NLPARM entry. The BSQUEAL entry is also present to select the variables such as friction value to be used
in generating the contact stiffness matrix between the pad and rotor. As the example shows, complex modes are
extracted for a defined friction value of 0.3 at piston loads of 20, 50, and 80 percent of the maximum. This then allows,
in one execution, monitoring the complex modes for possible coalesce of two modes which signals the onset of brake
squeal.
Modeling Contact
Contact is easily defined in MSC Nastran. The Bulk Data pair BCBODY/BSURF to designate the type of contact body
(deformable) and the elements comprising the contact body. The contact algorithms locate the element faces that will
potentially participate in contact surfaces. There is no need for user effort to limit the elements listed on the BSURF
entry to aid the contact algorithms. For example, all of the elements in the rotor are selected in BCBODY/BSURF 4 of
the larger model, and there is no need to painstaking pick only those elements that might contact the pads; similarly
for the pads.
The contact bodies for this example model are shown in Figure 391. Note that the elements defining the contact body
can be groups of discontinuous elements as shown by the brake pads.
bsurf4
bsurf5
bsurf6
Figure 391
Contact Bodies
Additional contact bodies are permitted. With disk brake systems, other components would be (but not limited to) the
caliper, pistons, guide pins, and steering knuckle. The BCTABLE collects the contact bodies and assigns various
parameters related to the surface contact. In the example below, there are four contact bodies. Contact between the
pads and pistons are defined as glued contact  integer 1 in field 8. Glued contact also has the feature of eliminating
the requirement of matching mesh gridpoints between the bodies. Pad and rotor contact is defined as full nonlinear
contact with a frictional value of 0.3.
If the contact surfaces are a mixture on glued (pistons to pads) and full nonlinear contact (pads to rotor) the BCPARAM
entry is also required.
BCPARA
Main Index
nlglue
CHAPTER 39 527
Brake Squeal Analysis
This ensures that a contact body that participate in glued and full nonlinear contact will maintain the full nonlinear
contact status in all STEPs.
$ Contact bodies (see BCBODY/BSURF)  all deformable
$ BODY 4  Rotor
$ BODY 5  Outer pad
$ BODY 6  Inner pad
$
Body ID
Fric
Glued
$234567890BCTABLE 0
2
SLAVE
6
0.
0.
0.3
0.
0
0.
2
2
0
MASTERS 4
SLAVE
5
0.
0.
0.3
0.
0
0.
2
2
0
MASTERS 4
BCTABLE 1
2
SLAVE
6
0.
0.
0.3
0.
0
0.
2
2
0
MASTERS 4
SLAVE
5
0.
0.
0.3
0.
0
0.
2
2
0
MASTERS 4
BCTABLE 2
2
SLAVE
6
0.
0.
0.4
0.
0
0.
2
2
0
MASTERS 4
SLAVE
5
0.
0.
0.4
0.
0
0.
2
2
0
MASTERS 4
BCTABLE 3
2
SLAVE
6
0.
0.
0.5
0.
0
0.
2
2
0
MASTERS 4
SLAVE
5
0.
0.
0.5
0.
0
0.
2
2
0
MASTERS 4
...
$
$ Rotor deformable contact body
$
BCBODY
4
3D
DEFORM 4
0
BSURF
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
...(rest of elements omitted)
$ Outer pad deformable contact body
$
BCBODY
5
3D
DEFORM 5
0
BSURF
5
24400
24401
24402
24403
24404
24405
24406
24407
24408
24409
24410
24411
24412
24413
24414
...(rest of elements omitted)
$
$ Inner pad deformable contact body
$
BCBODY
6
3D
DEFORM 6
0
BSURF
6
20704
20705
20706
20707
20708
20709
20710
20711
20712
20713
20714
20715
20716
20717
20718
...(rest of elements omitted)
BCTABLE with ID 0 is used to define the touching conditions at the start of the analysis. This is a mandatory option
required in SOL 400 for contact analysis, and it is flagged in the case control section through the optional BCONTACT
= 0 option. The BCTABLE with ID 1 is used to define the touching conditions for later increments in the analysis, and
it is flagged using BCONTACT = 1 in the case control section. Also, the SLAVEMASTER combination defines that the
nodes for body 1 are nodes belonging to the slave body. This in literature is referred by various terminologies as either
Main Index
contacting body nodes or tied nodes (imagining the situation of multipoint constraints). The nodes belonging to body
2 are said to belong to the master body which are also referred to as the contacted body nodes or the retained nodes
(imagining the situation of multipoint constraints)
The definition of the contact bodies (defined as Rotor and Pads in Figure 391 above) as stated above use the
BCBODY/BSURF Bulk Data pair. The BCBODY options define the deformable body including the body ID,
dimensionality, type of body, type of contact constraints and friction, etc. BSURF identifies the elements forming a
part of the deformable body and includes the convenient THRU option when listing the element ID's.
OMETH
0.5
0.0
AVSTIF
1.e+5
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
AVSTIF is the average stiffness on a per unit basis between the pad and disk. This variable is under user control instead
of a hidden predefined value. This stiffness is used in forming the penalty contact stiffness between the pad and rotor.
Thus AVSTIF has a direct influence over the overall stability of the model and the values of the brake squeal modes.
The default value is 1.0E+4 however it is advised that until the user is comfortable with the calculated results, several
additional brake squeal runs be performed using alternate AVSTIF values.
Evaluation of the proper value for AVSTIF (or if the default is appropriate) can be easily accomplished with the STEP
command. As the BSQUEAL is called from the Case Control section, a series of STEPs can be defined each calling a
BSQUEAL Bulk Data entry with a unique AVSTIF.
The second line of data defines the rotational axis of the rotor; all reference from the basic rectangular coordinate
system. The first three values define the cosines of the rotation axis. The second three values represent a point on the
rotation axis. As the rotor spins about the Z direction, only the Z cosine is supplied. Any point coordinate on the Z axis
would be acceptable for the three values as the rotor straddles the Z=0.0 plane.
Figure 392
Main Index
Displacement Constraints
CHAPTER 39 529
Brake Squeal Analysis
Pressure is applied to the backside of each brake pad. This is best described in Figure 393.
Figure 393
Solution Procedure
The nonlinear procedure used is defined through the following NLPARM entry:
NLPARM
FNT
PV
YES
FNT represents Full Newton Raphson technique wherein the stiffness is reformed at every iteration. KSTEP (field after
FNT) is left blank, and in conjunction with FNT, it indicates that stiffness needs to be reformed between the end of the
load step and the start of next load increment. The maximum number of allowed recycles for every increment is left
at the default of 25. If more than 25 recycles is exceeded, the load step would be cutback and the increment repeated.
PV indicates that the maximum norm of vector component of the incremental loads will be checked for convergence.
YES indicates that intermediate output will be produced after every increment. The second line of NLPARM is not
defined indicating that default tolerances will be used for convergence checking.
The number of increments is provided in the 3rd field of the NLPARM option. The default is 10 and this ties back to
the allowable values for LOADFAC on the NLIC entry.
Results
Figure 394 shows the displacement (contours and physical shape) of the brake pads due to the pressure load at 100%
magnitude. The undeformed shape is represented by the unshaded wireframe. This information is available for each
load increment (10 as NINC was defaulted to 10.)
Main Index
Figure 394
Figure 395 is an example of the modal shape of the first unstable complex mode when is 0.3. The mode shapes are
available for every complex mode calculated at each STEP where the BSQUEAL is present.
Figure 395
The SUBCASE/STEP combination provides the user with the powerful capability to evaluate multiple combinations
of friction, load patterns, and contact properties. In Table 391 a simple comparison between two friction values has
been summarized.
Table 391
Piston Load
First Unstable
Mode Frequency
Hz
Damping
Coefficient
First Unstable
Mode Frequency
Hz
10%
1914.56
0.014863
1914.90
0.027065
20%
1914.55
0.014855
1914.89
0.027062
50%
1914.50
0.014833
1914.84
0.027052
100%
1914.42
0.014796
1914.77
0.027007
= 0.30
Main Index
Damping
coefficient
= 0.50
CHAPTER 39 531
Brake Squeal Analysis
Modeling Tips
Start with the smaller demonstration model (small_brake_squeal.dat). This model can be run locally on a PC
machine and runs fast. Data generation is reasonable even with a large number of output requests, then migrate to the
larger model.
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_39a.dat
Simple brake squeal model. Runs fast and users encouraged to evaluate analysis
procedures/selections with this model.
nug_39b.dat
This is the large brake squeal model shown in the figures. Although it runs relatively fast it can
generate vast amounts of data, particularly if the print or punch options are chosen.
Reference
Kinkaid, N. M. OReilly, O. M. Papadopoulos, P. (2003) Automotive disc brake squeal. Journal of Sound and
Vibration 267, 105166.
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately four minutes and explains
how the steps are performed.
Units: mm, kg, sec
R = 144
Back_Plate
Insulator
Pad
Rotor
Z
X
t = 20
Figure 396
Main Index
40
Main Index
Multiple Birdstrikes on
Box Structure
Summary
533
Introduction
FEM Solution
Results
Input File(s)
534
536
594
598
541
CHAPTER 40 533
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
Bird 2
Bird 1
Structure
Material properties
Material
Density
(kg/m3)
Titanium
Air
4527
1.1848
930
930
2.2e9
Mass (kg)
0.36
0.285
150
200
1.03e11
Poissons ratio
0.314
1.38e8
Gamma
Thickness (m)
1.4
0.0015
Radius (m)
0.25
Length (m)
0.25
Boundary conditions
Bird 2
2.2e9
Analysis characteristics
Bird 1
0.1
Element types
FE results
Main Index
Introduction
Bird strike on a box structure is a typical problem in aircraft industries. The box structure simulates the leading edge
of lifting surfaces, e.g. wing, vertical, and horizontal stabilizers. The box can be simplified to consist of a curve leading
edge panel and a front spar. The acceptable design criteria for bird strike are that the leading edge panel may fail but
the front spar strength may not degrade to a certain level.
In this example, two cylindrical panels are concentric. Two birds strike the upper panel. One bird strikes in horizontal
direction and the second one vertically. The second bird will perforate the first panel and impact the second one. The
birds are modeled as cylindrical slugs of jelly. The plate is constrained in such a way that the edges can only move in
radial direction.
Bird 2
Bird 1
150 m/s
200 m/s
60o
Figure 401
Initial Situations
The properties and initial conditions of the plate and birds are as follows:
Plate
Ambient B
Bird 1
Bird 2
Material
Titanium
Air
Jelly
Jelly
Density (kg/m3)
4527
1.1848
930
930
1.03e11
2.2e9
2.2e9
Poissons ratio
0.314
1.38e8
Gamma
1.4
Thickness (m)
0.0015
Radius (m)
0.25
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 535
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Plate
Length (m)
Ambient B
Bird 1
Bird 2
0.25
Mass (kg)
0.36
0.285
150
200
0.1
Solution Requirements
SOL 700 Model
Each curved plate is modeled using 33x16 BLTshells. The boundary conditions applied at the edges of the plate are
defined within a cylindrical coordinate system, where the local zaxis is aligned with the length axis of the plate. The
cylindrical system is defined using a CORD2C entry. To create a closed surface, required by COUPLING option, the
two plates are connected with dummy quad elements.
The two birds and air are modeled using Multi Material Eulerian (FV) elements, also known as MMHYDRO. The
location of the bird in the Euler domain is defined using TICEUL option.
The material for the birds and air are modeled using EOSPOL and EOSGAM, respectively.
To allow the bird perforating the first plate and impact the second one, several modeling techniques can be used. One
of them is using two Eulerian domains and two coupling surfaces. Both the Eulerian domains and the coupling surfaces
have to be logically different. Each coupling surface associates with one Eulerian domain.
In this model, the two coupling surfaces share the same physical space. By specifying that one domain is covered
outside and the other inside, the Eulerian domain represents the correct physical space. The two Eulerian domains
cannot interact with each other except through coupling surfaces. When coupling surfaces share the same shell
elements with some or all shells failing, then the material can flow from one Eulerian domain into another one. The
interaction between the Eulerian domains is activated using COUP1INT option and PARAM, FASTCOUP, INPLANE,
FAIL. The rest of the Euler domain is filled with air. Please notice that when the effect of air is neglected, then the rest
of the Eulerian domain should be filled with void. It will speed up the analysis.
The first domain is associated with a coupling surface that is ,16,'( covered. Therefore, it cannot be adaptive and is
defined using MESH,, BOX option. The second domain is adaptive and defined using MESH,, ADAPT. The ADAPT
option will let SOL 700 create and update the Eulerian domain to minimize memory allocation and consequently
reduced CPU time. The default Eulerian boundary condition is set to that only outflow is allowed using FLOWDEF
option. In this case, a bird that reaches the free face boundary will flow out of the domain. The initial velocity of the
birds is defined using TICVAL option.
The finite element model of the upper and lower plates, the Eulerian domains and the initialization of the birds are
shown in the Figure 402. The dummy quad elements used to create closed coupling surfaces are not shown in
Figure 401.
Main Index
FEM Solution
Figure 402
Euler Domains
Input File:
SOL 700 is an executive control that activates an explicit nonlinear transient analysis:
SOL 700,NLTRAN stop=1
Case control cards for problem time, loads, and initial conditions:
$ Direct Text Input for Executive Control
CEND
TITLE = Multiple BIRD STRIKE on BOX Structure
SUBCASE 1
$ Subcase name: Default
SUBTITLE=Default
TSTEPNL = 1
SPC = 1
IC = 1
TSTEPNL is a SOL 700 bulk data entry which describes the number of time steps (10) and time increment (0.0015
seconds) of the simulation. The total time is the product of the two entries. Notice here the time increment is only for
the first step. The actual number of time increments and the exact value of the time steps is determined by SOL 700
during the analysis. The time step is a function of the smallest element dimension during the simulation.
$ BULK DATA SECTION BEGIN BULK
TSTEPNL 1
10
0.0015
1
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 537
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Define the Initial, the Minimum and the Safety factor of the time step:
PARAM*, DYINISTEP, 1e7
PARAM*, DYMINSTEP, 1e8
DYPARAM, STEPFCTL, 0.9
Define coupling surface that can fail and Multi material overflow array to store material data. In a problem where more
than 10% of the elements have more than one material, the default value of )08/7,
must be increased.
DYPARAM, FASTCOUP, INPLANE, FAIL
DYPARAM, FMULTI, 0.2
Define Output results request for every 0.00015 s and time history output request for coupling surfaces:
DYPARAM, LSDYNA, BINARY, D3PLOT, .00015
DYTIMHS,, .000001,,,,,,,+
+, CPLSOUT
Euler domain 1:
Define an Euler mesh with 50x28x44 elements reference to PEULER1 (=1):
$ domain 1
$
MESH, 1, BOX,,,,,,,+
+,0.26,0.015,0.05,0.50,0.28,0.44,,,+
+, 50, 28, 44,,,, EULER, 1
Define FSI coupling surface from elements listed in the BSURF entry (covering inside):
$ COUPLING SURFACE 1
$
COUPLE , 1 , 1 , INSIDE , ON , ON , , , , +
+ , , , , , , , , , +
+ , , 1
$
BSURF , 1 , 7393 , THRU , 8448 , 13729 , THRU , 14048 , 14577 , +
+ , THRU , 15236
Define Eulerian element properties with reference to TICEUL1 (=11).
PEULER1 , 1 ,
MMHYDRO , 11
Main Index
Define Regions with shapes, material, initial values and level indicators:
$ Allocation of material to geometric regions.
$ TICEUL1 , 11 , 11
TICREG ,
1 , 11 , CYLINDER , 1 ,
3 , 1
TICREG ,
2 , 11 , CYLINDER , 2 ,
5 , 2
TICREG ,
3 , 11 , SPHERE
, 4 ,
4 ,
,
,
3
2
,
1
2
5
,
,
,
,
,
,
XVEL ,
XVEL ,
SIE ,
Define Eulerian materials for the birds and the environment (air):
$Material Bird MATDEUL , 3 , 930 , 3
EOSPOL
, 3 , 2.2e9
MATDEUL , 5 , 930 , 5
EOSPOL
, 5 , 2.2e9
$  Material Air id =4
MATDEUL , 4 , 1.1848 , 4
EOSG
, 4 , 1.4
Euler domain 2:
Define an adaptive Euler mesh reference to PEULER1 (=6):
$Domain 2$
MESH , 2 , ADAPT , 0.01 , 0.01 , 0.01 , , , , +
+ , 0.26 , 0.015 , 0.05 , , , , , , +
+ , , , , , , , EULER , 6
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 539
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Define FSI coupling surface from elements listed in the BSURF entry (covering outside):
$===Coupling Surface 2
$
COUPLE , 2 , 2 , OUTSIDE , , , , , , +
+ , , , , , , , , , +
+ , , 2
$
BSURF , 2 , 7393 , THRU , 8448 , 13729 , THRU ,
, +
14048 ,
14577
0.0
0.0
0.25
Main Index
.83333
0.0
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 541
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Bird 2
Material:
Jelly
Jelly
Density:
r = 930 kg/m3
r = 930 kg/m3
Speed of Sound:
c = 1483 m/s
c = 1483 m/s
Mass:
m2 = .360 kg
m2 = .285 kg
Velocity:
v1 = 150 m/s
v2 = 200 m/s
Figure 403
Main Index
Birdstrike
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 543
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Create Curve 1
a. Geometry: Curve
b. Polyline Spline window: Create: select Spline
c. Polyline Spline window, Entities: select Pick
d. For Entities: X,Y,Z Coordinate, enter 0.2165 0 0.125; click OK
e. For Entities: X,Y,Z Coordinate, enter 0.2165 0.25 0.125; click OK
f. Click Apply
b
d
f
d
e
e
Main Index
Create Curve 2
a. For Entities: X,Y,Z Coordinate, enter 0.2165 0 0.001; click OK
b. For Entities: X,Y,Z Coordinate, enter 0.2165 0.25 0.001; click OK
c. Click Apply
d. Click OK
b
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 545
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Create Surface1
a. Geometry: Revolve
b. Revolve Axis: Along, select Vector
c. For Locations: X,Y,Z Coordinate, enter 0 0 0; click OK (not shown)
d. For Locations: X,Y,Z Coordinate, enter 0 0 1; click OK (not shown)
e. For Locations: X,Y,Z Coordinate, enter 1 0 0; click OK
f. Click OK
g. Revolve Curves: Entities, select CURVE/1
h. For Angle Of Spin (Degrees): enter 120; click OK
Main Index
Create Surface2
a. Geometry: Revolve
b. Revolve Axis: Along, select Vector
c. For Locations: X,Y,Z Coordinate, enter 0 0 0.124; click OK (not shown)
d. For Locations: X,Y,Z Coordinate, enter 0 0 1; click OK (not shown)
e. For Locations: X,Y,Z Coordinate, enter 1 0 0; click OK
f. Revolve Curves: Entities, select CURVE/2
g. For Angle Of Spin (Degrees): enter 120; click OK
h. Observe results
e
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 547
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Create Part2
Create surfaces 3, 4, 5, and 6
a. Assemble: Create Part
b. For Title: enter PART_2
c. For ID: enter 2; click OK
d. Observe in the Model Browser tree: PART_2
e. Surface: Filler
f. For Curves: pick CURVE/3; click OK
g. For Curves: pick CURVE/7; click OK (not shown)
h. Click Apply
i. Observe results
b
c
h
f
f
i
Main Index
d
a
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 549
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
h
b
a
i
k
l
Main Index
Seed PART_1
a. Meshing: Seed
b. Type: Number of Elements, enter 20
c. Entity: Curves, pick Curve/3, Curve/4, Curve/7, and Curve/8
d. Click Apply
e. Entity: Curves, pick Clear
f. Type: Number of Elements, enter 40
g. Entity: Curves, pick Curve/5, Curve/6, Curve/9, (not shown) and Curve/10
h. Click Apply
i. Click OK
e
f
i
c
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 551
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Surface PART_1
a. Meshing: Surface
b. Element Type: Mesh Type, select Quad Dominant
c. Surface to mesh: pick Surface/1 and Surface/2
d. Element property: Add to part: PART_1
e. Click Apply
f. Click OK
c
b
Main Index
Seed PART_2
a. In the Model Browser: right chick PART_2
b. Select Set Current (not shown)
c. In the Model Browser: right chick PART_2
d. Select Show Only (not shown)
e. Under Tools: select Identify (not shown)
f. In the Pick window, select Curves and Surfaces
g. In the Pick window, select Select
h. In the Pick window, click All
i. In the Pick window, click Done
j. In the Pick window, click Exit
k. Entity: Curves, pick Clear
l. Type: Number of Elements, enter 20 (not shown)
m. Entity: Curves, pick Curve/12 (not shown), Curve/14, Curve/16, and
Curve/18; click Apply
n. Entity: Curves, pick Clear
o. Type: Number of Elements, enter 40 (not shown)
p. Entity: Curves, pick Curve/20, Curve/22, Curve/24,
and Curve/26; click Apply
q. Type: Number of Elements, enter 5
r. Entity: Curves, pick Curve/13 (not shown), Curve/17,
Curve/19, Curve/21, Curve/23, Curve/25, and Curve/23;
click Apply
s. Click OK
k
q
h
i
j
p
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 553
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Surface PART_2
a. Meshing: Seed
b. For Mesh type:, enter Tria Only
c. For Surface to mesh, pick Surface/3, Surface/4, Surface/5, and Surface/6
d. Add to part:, enter PART_2
e. Click Apply
f. Click OK
b
c
d
Main Index
d
a
e
g
f
h
i
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 555
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Shell Materials
a. Materials: MAT[024] MAT_PIECEWISE_LINEAR_PLASTICITY (not shown)
b. For Name: enter MATD024_1
c. For MID, enter 1
d. For RHO, enter 4527
e. For E, enter 1.15E11
f. For PR, enter 0.314
g. For SIGY, enter 1.38E8
h. For FAIL, enter 0.1
i. Click Create
j. Materials: MAT[020] MAT_RIGID (not shown)
k. For Name: enter MATD020_2
l. For MID, enter 2
m. For RHO, enter 7856
n. For E, enter 2.1e+011
o. For PR, enter 0.3
p. Click Create
b
c
i
k
l
Main Index
Shell Properties
a. Element Properties: 2D, select PSHELL1
b. For Name: enter PSHELL_1
c. For Card, enter PSHELL1
d. For PID, enter 1
e. For MID, double click, select Select
f. For Entity Selection, select MATD024_1; click OK
g. For T1, enter 0.0015
h. Click Create
i. Materials: MAT[020] MAT_RIGID (not shown)
j. For Name: enter PSHELL_2
k. For Card, enter PSHELL2
l. For PID, enter 2
m. For MID, double click, select Select (not shown)
n. For Entity Selection, select MATD020_2; click OK (not shown)
o. For T1, enter 0.0015
p. Click Create
b
c
a
g
j
k
l
o
p
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 557
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
b
e
c
a
f
g
Main Index
Euler Properties
a. Element Properties: EOS, select [12] EOS Ideal Gas
b. For Name: enter EOSGAM_1
c. For PID, enter 1
d. For GAMMA, enter 1.4
e. Click Create
f. Element Properties: EOS, select [01] EOS Linear Polynomial
g. For Name: enter EOSPOL_2
h. For PID, enter 2
i. For A, enter 2.2E9
j. Click Create
a
b
c
d
e
g
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 559
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Euler Materials
Air material
a. Materials: Eulerian, select Eulerian Material
b. For Name: enter MATDEUL_3
c. For MID, enter 3
d. For RHO, enter 1.1848
e. Double click EID, select Select (not shown)
f. For Entity Selection, select EOSGAM_1; click OK
g. Click Create
b
c
Main Index
Euler Materials
Bird material
a. Materials: Eulerian, select Eulerian Material
b. For Name: enter MATDEUL_4
c. For MID, enter 4
d. For RHO, enter 930
e. Double click EID, select Select (not shown)
f. For Entity Selection, select EOSPOL_2; click OK
g. Click Create
b
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 561
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Create Mesh
Creation of Mesh 1 (modeling Outside Box Euler)
a. LBCs: Eulerian, select Mesh
b. For Name: enter Mesh_1
c. For TYPE, select BOX
d. For X0, enter 0.26, for Y0, enter 0.015, for Z0, enter 0.05
e. For DX, enter 0.5, for DY, enter 0.28, for DZ, enter 0.44
f. For NX, enter 50, for NY, enter 28, for NZ, enter 44
g. For Prop, select Euler
h. Click Create
i. Observe that Mesh_1 has been added
a
b
c
d
f
h
i
Main Index
b
d
f
g
i
h
j
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 563
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Create Cylinders
Create Cylinder 1
a. LBCs: Couple, select Cylinder (not shown)
b. From the Pick Window: select XYZ
c. For X,Y,Z Coordinate, enter 0.1381 0.125 0.26; click OK
d. For X,Y,Z Coordinate, enter 0.2381 0.125 0.26; click OK
e. For ID: enter 1
f. For Name: enter Cylinder_1
g. For Radius, enter 0.035
h. Click Modify
i. Observe that Cylinder_2 has been added
c
b
d
f
g
h
Main Index
Create Cylinders
Create Cylinder 2
a. LBCs: Couple, select Cylinder (not shown)
b. From the Pick Window: select XYZ
c. For X,Y,Z Coordinate, enter 0.13 0.125 0.2252; click OK
d. For X,Y,Z Coordinate, enter 0.17 0.125 0.2944; click OK
e. For ID: enter 2
f. For Name: enter Cylinder_2
g. For Radius, enter 0.035
h. Click Modify
i.Observe that Cylinder_2 has been added
c
b
d
f
g
i
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 565
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
b
d
e
f
g
Main Index
a
b
d
f
g
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 567
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
a
b
c
e
d
f
g
Main Index
a
b
c
e
d
f
g
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 569
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
a
b
c
d
e
i
k
h
f
Main Index
j
l
a
b
c
d
e
i
k
j
l
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 571
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
a
b
c
d
e
i
k
j
l
Main Index
c
e
j
l
n
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 573
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
c
e
d
f
j
l
h
i
k
Main Index
c
e
b
d
g
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 575
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
c
d
e
g
Main Index
a
d
f
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 577
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
c
d
f
h
Main Index
c
d
f
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 579
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
b
d
c
f
h
Main Index
Parameters
Define result frequency output
a. Job Parameter: DYPARAM_BINARY_option
b. For Name: enter DYPARAM_BINARY_option_1
c. For SID: enter 1
d. For DT_D3PLOT: enter 0.00015
e. Click Create
f. Click Exit
g. Observe that DYPARAM_BINARY_option_1 has been added
a
c
b
d
g
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 581
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Parameters (Continued)
Define initial time step
a. Job Parameter: PARAM
b. For Name: enter PARAM_2
c. For SID: enter 2
d. For N: enter DYINISTEP
e. For V1: enter 5.E7
f. Click Create
g. Click Exit
h. Observe that PARAM_2 has been added
b
d
c
e
f
Main Index
Parameters (Continued)
Define parameter to activate coupling interaction
a. Job Parameter: DYPARAM
b. For Name: enter DYPARAM_1
c. For SID: enter 2
d. For F1: enter FASTCOUP
e. For F2: enter INPLANE
f. For F3: enter FAIL
g. Click Create
h. Click Exit
i. Observe that DYPARAM_1 has been added
a
b
d
c
e
f
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 583
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Main Index
b
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 585
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Simulations
Solver Control
a. In the Model Browser Tree: Simulations: NewJob: Load Cases; Solver Control:
right click Properties (not shown)
b. Select Solution 700 Parameters
c. Deactivate Large Displacement
d. Deactivate Follower Forces
e. Click Apply
f. Click Close
a
b
c
d
e
f
Main Index
Simulations (Continued)
Define End Time and Output frequency for Loadcase Control
a. In the Model Browser Tree: Simulations: NewJob: Load Cases; DefaultLoadCase: Loadcase Control
right click Properties (not shown)
b. Select Subcase Nonlinear Static Parameters
c. For Ending Time: enter 0.0015
d. For Number of Time Steps: 10
e. Click Apply
f. Click Close
c
d
e
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 587
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Simulations (Continued)
Running New Nastran Job
a. In the Model Browser Tree: right click NewJob
b. Click Run
Main Index
Postprocessing
Start SimXpert: New Project
a. File: Attach Results
b. File Path: select newjob.dytr.d3plot
c. Attach Options, select Both
d. Click Apply
e. Repeat steps a through d for newjob.dytr_Euler_FV1_0.ARC (not shown)
f. Repeat steps a through d for newjob.dytr_Euler_FV2_0.ARC
f
b
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 589
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Postprocessing (Continued)
Displacement
a. FileSet: Part: newjob
b. Select Show Only
c. Results: Deformation
d. State plot property editor: Results cases: select Time 0.0015016
e. State plot property editor: Result type: click Deformation Components
f. State plot property editor: click Deformation
g. State plot property editor: Deformed Display scaling: select True
h. Click Update
b
f
e
Main Index
Postprocessing (Continued)
Fringe Stresses
a. Results: Fringe
b. State plot property editor: Results cases: select Time 0.0015016
c. State plot property editor: Results cases: select Stress Components
d. State plot property editor: click Fringe
e. State plot property editor: Element edge display: select Element edges
f. Click Update
c
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 591
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Postprocessing (Continued)
IsoSurface Bird 1 (MESH_1)
a. StatePlot: right click Deform 01
b. Select Hide
c. StatePlot: right click Fringe 01
d. Select Hide
e. FileSet: Part: right click NEWJOB.DYTR_EULER_FV1_0.ARC
f. Select Show Only
g. Results: IsoSurface
h. State plot property editor: Result cases: select ...FV1_cycle744
i. State plot property editor: Result type: select FMAT4
j. State plot property editor: click IsoSurface
k. State plot property editor: Target entities: select All elements
l. Click Update
e
b
c
f
Main Index
Postprocessing (Continued)
IsoSurface Bird 2 (MESH_2)
a. FileSet: Part: right click NEWJOB.DYTR_EULER_FV2_0.ARC
b. Select Show Only
c. Results: IsoSurface
d. State plot property editor: Plot attribute: select IsoSurf 02
e. State plot property editor: Result cases: select ...FV1_cycle744
f. State plot property editor: Result type: select FMAT4
g. State plot property editor: click IsoSurface
h. State plot property editor: Target entities: select All elements
i. Click Update
a
c
b
g
d
f
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 593
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Postprocessing (Continued)
IsoSurfaces Deformations
Main Index
Results
In this simulation, the time history of total zforce on the coupling surface is requested as shown in Figure 404. This
force is the sum of all zforces on the nodes that belong to both the upper and the lower plate.
From Figure 404, it is obvious that there are three large impact forces occurring on the plate. The first one is when
the first bird impacts the upper plate, which is subject to a significant damage. The second one is when the second bird
impacts the upper plate. The last peak is caused by the first bird impacting the lower plate.
Snapshots of the motion of the two birds and the deformation of the plates are shown in Figure 405 at various time
steps of the simulation. Figure 405a is the initial condition. Figure 405b is at the moment when the first bird
penetrates the upper plate and second bird touches the plate.
This corresponds with the first peak in the time history plot shown in Figure 404. Figure 405c is at the moment when
the second bird penetrates the upper plate. It corresponds with the second peak of the time history plot. Figure 405d
is at the moment when the second bird has left the plate and the first bird penetrates the lower plate. This corresponds
with the third peak in the time history plot.
Figure 404
Main Index
CHAPTER 40 595
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
Figure 405
Main Index
Deformation of Plates
%2;
(8/(5
&283/,1* 685)$&(
&283/(
,16,'(
%685)
7+58
3(8/(5
3(8/(5
(26*$0
SURSHUW\
00+<'52
287
00+<'52
00+<'52
0DWHULDO %LUG
0$7'(8/
(2632/
0$7'(8/
(2632/
Main Index
21
7+58
)ORZ ERXQGDU\
)/2:'()
)/2:
21
H
H
7+58
PDWHULDO DQG HTXDWLRQ RI VWDWH GDWD
CHAPTER 40 597
Multiple Birdstrikes on Box Structure
&</,1'(5
&</,1'(5
63+(5(
&</,1'5
&</,1'5
63+(5(
,QLWLDO PDWHULDO GDWD
7,&9$/
7,&9$/
;9(/
;9(/
=9(/
/$*5$1*(
3URSHUW\
36+(//
%OW
0$7'
36+(//
36+(//
*DXVV
H
(
(
0$7'
%RXQGDU\ FRQVWUDLQ
&25' &
0DWHULDO $LU LG
0$7'(8/
_
! GHQVLW\
'RPDLQ
7,&(8/
7,&5(*
63+(5(
7,&9$/
63+(5(
6,(
&RXSOLQJ 6XUIDFH
&283/(
Main Index
2876,'(
'(16,7<
0LG
%685)
7+58
7+58
7+58
0(6+
$'$37
(8/(5
FRXSOLQJ LQWHUDFWLRQ
&283,17
(1''$7$
Input File(s)
File
nug_40.dat
Main Index
Description
MSC Nastran input file for multiple material Euler element using FSI
technique
41
Main Index
Summary
600
Introduction
Solution Requirements
FEM Solution
Results
Input File(s)
601
602
603
655
657
606
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
Copper Plate
Voids
Explosive
Material properties
Steel Plates
Explosive
Military Compound B (See EOSIG in MSC Nastran QRG)
Copper
Density = 8960 kg/m3
Shear Modulus = 0.477E11 Pa
JohnsonCook Yield Model
Minimum Pressure of Spallation = 2.5E10 Pa
Steel
Density = 7830 kg/m3
Shear Modulus = 0.818E11 Pa
Equivalent Yield Stress = 1.4E9 Pa
Minimum Pressure of Spallation = 3.8E9 Pa
Analysis characteristics
Boundary conditions
Element types
Euler: 8node solid element for explosive, void, steel, and copper
FE results
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 601
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
Introduction
Figure 411
Model
When a metal cone is explosively collapsed onto its axis, a highvelocity rod of molten metal, the jet, is ejected out of
the open end of the cone. The cone is called a liner and is typically made of copper. The jet has a mass approximately
20 percent of the cone mass, and elongates rapidly due to its high velocity gradient. This molten rod is followed by
the rest of the mass of the collapsed cone, the slug. Typical shaped charges have liner slope angles of less than 42
degrees ensuring the development of a jet; with jet velocities ranging from 3000 to 8000 m/s. A typical construction
of a shaped charge is shown in Figure 412.
Figure 412
Main Index
An example simulation of shaped charge formation is carried out to demonstrate the ability of SOL 700 to perform
such a simulation. A simplified axisymmetric model of explosives and a copper liner is created in a finite volume Euler
mesh. Explosive are detonated starting from a point on the axis of symmetry at the end of the explosives. The
simulation is carried out for 60 s after detonation of the explosives. The jet is formed and penetrates two thick plates.
See Figure 413 for the model layout.
Figure 413
Typical shaped charges are axisymmetric. However, aiming at higher velocity, 3D designs are targeted. 3D
simulation of shaped charge formation would be necessary to avoid excessive experimental work. SOL 700 has full
abilities to perform such a 3D simulation.
Solution Requirements
SOL 700 Model
The model is simplified as shown in Figure 413. The aluminum casting is replaced with a rigid body.
Detonation is assumed to start at a point on the axis at the rear end of the explosives. The liner shape is slightly
simplified as shown in the figure. The retaining ring is assumed rigid and is modeled as a wall boundary for the Euler
Mesh (BARRIER). SI units are used in this example.
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 603
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
FEM Solution
A. Euler Mesh and Liner:
A triangular prismatic Finite Volume Euler mesh is used with head angle of 5 degrees as shown in Figure 414. A very
fine mesh is used to accurately simulate the behavior of the extremely thin liner. The liner is placed in this Euler mesh.
Symmetry conditions (closed boundary, default Euler boundary condition) are imposed on the two rectangular faces
of the prism to create an axisymmetric behavior.
Figure 414
Euler Mesh
The liner material pressure density relationship is modeled with EOSPOL model. The liner is made of copper and
the constants are taken as follows:
a1
1.43E11
N/m2
a2
0.839E11
N/m2
a3
2.16E9
N/m2
b1
0.0
b2
0.0
b3
0.0
Material yield strength is modeled with a JohnsonCook yield model. The constants are taken as follows:
A
1.2E8
N/m2
1.43E9
N/m2
0.0
0.5
Main Index
1.0
1.0
Tmelt
1356.0
Troom
293.0
Cv
399.0
J/kg
8960
Kg/m3
0.477E11
N/m2
2.5E10
N/m2
It is very easy to define the shape and position of the liner by using the method of geometrical regions when creating
the initial conditions of the liner material.
&</,1'5
&</,1'5
&</,1'5
7,&9$/
'(16,7<
Main Index
(
(
(
CHAPTER 41 605
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
30,1&
The shapes and positions of the plates are defined by using the method of geometrical regions.
&</,1'5
&</,1'5
7,&9$/
'(16,7<
D. Explosive:
The explosive is modeled by ignition and growth equation of state. The explosive is placed in this Euler mesh.
(26,*
0&203% 6,
The explosive material is taken from the database that is build into SOL 700.
To initialize the whole Euler mesh, a TICEUL entry will be defined.
7,&(8/
7,&5(*
7,&5(*
7,&5(*
7,&5(*
7,&5(*
7,&5(*
6(7
7,&9$/
Main Index
(/(0
&</,1'(5
&</,1'(5
&</,1'(5
&</,1'(5
&</,1'(5
7+58
'(16,7<
6,(
a
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 607
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
b
c
Main Index
b
c
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 609
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
a
b
c
d
i
h
Main Index
a
b
c
e
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 611
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
g
b
c
e
f
Main Index
c
d
m
l
g
i
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 613
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
a
b
i
c
d
e
g
h
Main Index
a
b
c
d
e
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 615
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
a
b
d
i
c
e
j
l
h
k
Main Index
a
b
c
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 617
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
a
b
c
d
l
o
n
g
i
Main Index
m
k
a
b
c
e
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 619
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Main Index
c
e
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 621
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
a
b
c
e
f
g
Main Index
a
b
c
e
l
n
o
g
i
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 623
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
Create Cylinders
Cylinder 1 defining outer surface of the liner
a. Click: Cylinder
b. Select XYZ
c. For XYZ Input: enter 0.5391 0.56 0 2 0.4147 0; click OK
d. For Radius, enter 0.2958
e. Click Modify
f. Cylinder_1 is added
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 625
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 627
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
Main Index
b
a
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 629
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
Main Index
a
b
c
d
e
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 631
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
a
b
c
d
e
f
Main Index
a
b
c
d
e
k
l
h
f
Main Index
j
m
CHAPTER 41 633
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
a
b
c
d
e
k
l
j
m
Main Index
a
b
d
c
e
g
h
f
i
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 635
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
a
b
d
c
e
k
l
f
m
Main Index
a
b
d
c
e
k
l
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 637
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
a
b
d
c
e
k
l
f
m
Main Index
a
b
c
e
d
h
f
g
i
k
m
o
q
n
s
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 639
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
a
b
e
g
j
m
h
i
k
Main Index
e
f
d
g
c
j
h
i
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 641
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
Create Barrier
a. LBC tab: Couple: Eulerian
b. Select Barrier
c. From Pick window CREATE BARRIER, select Nodes
d. Click Node 23593
e. Select Plane YZ; click OK
f. For ID: enter 1
g. For Name: enter Barrier_1
h. Double click BCID
i. Select BCSEG_1; click OK
j. Click DIR to unselect
k. Click Modify
l. Barrier_1 is added
b
k
i
e
d
Main Index
b
d
c
e
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 643
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
b
d
c
f
g
h
Main Index
c
d
e
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 645
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
d
f
Main Index
c
e
l
m
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 647
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
a
b
Main Index
a
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 649
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
d
b
c
Main Index
b
a
f
d
g
e
i
j
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 651
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
c
b
f
e
g
Main Index
Time = 0
Time = 1.E5
Time = 2.E5
Time = 3.E5
Time = 4.E5
Time = 5.E5
Time = 6.E5
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 653
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
b
f
e
c
d
Main Index
a
g
e
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 41 655
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
Results
Figure 415 shows the initial position of the copper liner and two thick plates at 0s, snap shots of
liner collapse, jet formation and plates penetrated at 10 s, 20 s, 30 s, 40 s, 50 s and 60 s.
Figure 415
Initial Position of the Copper Liner and Two Thick Plates, Snap Shots of Liner Collapse, Jet
Formation and Plates Penetrated (Courtesy Postprocessing by CEI Ensight)
Figure 416 shows the velocity field of explosive gases, liner, and jet at 20 s. A jet velocity of about 6000 m/s is
achieved
Figure 416
Main Index
,&
767(31/
%(*,1 %8/.
767(31/
(
3$5$0 '<,1,67(3
(
3$5$0 '<0,167(3
(
'<3$5$0 9(/0$;
(
'<3$5$0 /6'<1$ %,1$5< ' 3/27
0&203% 6,
6+5(/
</'90
&233(5
0$7'(8/
(2632/
6+5(/
(
RKQVRQ &RRN
$
</'&
(
70(/7 75220
30,1&
Q
(
67((/
0$7'(8/
(2632/
6+5(/
</'90
30,1&
7,&(8/
7,&5(*
7,&5(*
7,&5(*
7,&5(*
7,&5(*
7,&5(*
Main Index
(
(
(
(
(/(0
&</,1'(5
&</,1'(5
&</,1'(5
&</,1'(5
&</,1'(5
&
(36
&Y
CHAPTER 41 657
Shaped Charge Penetrating Two Plates
3(8/(5
6(7
&</,1'5
00675(1
7+58
&</,1'5
&</,1'5
&</,1'5
&</,1'5
7,&9$/
7,&9$/
7,&9$/
'(16,7<
'(16,7<
'(16,7<
6,(
%$55,(5
(1''$7$
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_41.dat
sch_model.bdf
Main Index
42
Main Index
Summary
659
Introduction
Solution Requirements
Results
Input File(s)
Video Examples
660
665
670
670
661
CHAPTER 42 659
Mine Blast Under a Vehicle
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
Vehicle
Ground
Explosive
Material properties
Vehicle Structure
Density = 7.85E9 ton/mm3
Youngs Modulus = 2.1E5 ton/mm/s2
Poissons ratio = 0.3
Yield stress = 250. ton/mm/s2
Euler (Air)
Density = 1.29E12 ton/mm3; Gamma = 1.4
Specific Internal Energy = 1.9385E8 tonmm2/s2
Euler (Explosive  equivalent to TNT of 7kg and radius of .25 meter)
Density = 107.E12 ton/mm3; Specific Internal Energy = 3.9E12 ton/mm2/s2
Ground Rigid
Analysis characteristics
Boundary conditions
Element types
FE results
Main Index
Introduction
This is a simulation of an explosion under a vehicle. The vehicle has triggered a mine that is exploding underneath the
bottom shield. In this example, the actual explosion of the mine is not modeled. Instead, the simulation is started
moments after the mine explodes. This is called the blast wave approach. At the location of the mine, a high density
and high specific energy is assumed in the shape of a small sphere. During the simulation, this region of high density,
energy, and high pressure, expands rapidly. The blast wave interacts with the bottom shield and causes an acceleration
of parts of the flexible body. The intent of this simulation is to find the location and the value of the maximum
acceleration.
SOL 700 Model
An outline of the basic numerical model is shown in Figure 421 below. It is composed of the following main
components:
a. Vehicle Structure
b. Euler Domain 1  air outside vehicle and compressed air (explosive)
c. Euler Domain 2  air inside vehicle
d. Ground
e. Fluid Structural Coupling
Figure 421
Main Index
CHAPTER 42 661
Mine Blast Under a Vehicle
Solution Requirements
A. The Vehicle:
Vehicle structure is modeled by QUAD, TRIA shell elements and some BAR elements.
Figure 422
Vehicle Structure
7.85E9
tonne/mm3
Modulus of elasticity
210000.
tonne/mm/s2
Poison ratio
0.3
Yield stress
250.
tonne/mm/s2
Assumed that there will be no failure of the structure. In a part of the structure, there is a hole through which air and
pressure waves can freely flow. This hole will be modeled with dummy shell elements.
B. Euler Domain 1:
The first Euler domain is the air on the outside of the vehicle. The properties of air at rest are:
Density
1.29E12
Gamma
1.4
1.9385E8
Main Index
tonne/mm3
tonnemm2/s2
107E12
tonne/mm3
4.9E12
tonnemm2/s2
Main Index
CHAPTER 42 663
Mine Blast Under a Vehicle
C. Euler Domain 2:
The second Euler region represents the air inside the vehicle. Also for the second Euler region, a MESH entry is used.
The air is at rest again, so the same properties apply:
PEULER1,202,,2ndOrder,102
TICEUL1,102,12
TICREG,3,12,SPHERE,502,230,5,5.
SPHERE,502,,0.,0.,5000.,10000.
Many of the previous cards will be used to initialize the density and energy (TICVAL) and material (DMAT/EOSGAM)
in this Euler region:
TICVAL,4,,DENSITY,107E12,SIE,3.9e12
TICVAL,5,,DENSITY,1.29E12,SIE,1.938e11
MATDEUL,230,1.29e12,203,,,,,,+
+,,1.01
EOSGAM,203,1.4
D. The Ground:
The ground is modeled as rigid body using dummy QUAD elements. It is used to close the Euler boundary under the
vehicle so the blast wave will reflect on this boundary:
PSHELL,999,999,1.
MATRIG,999,,,,1.0E10,0.00,0.00,800.,+
+,1.E10,0.0,0.0,1.E10,0.0,1.E10,,,+
+,,,,,,,,,+
+,,,,1,7,7
E. Fluid Structure Interaction:
In order to make fluid structure interaction possible, a closed volume needs to be defined. The car model itself is not
closed, so a dummy boundary will be defined to close the volume. This extra surface consists of three parts:
Part 1 resides on the back,
Part 2 is the top cover, and
Part 3 is the vent on the bottom of the vehicle.
For all these parts, dummy shell elements are defined and hole definitions will be defined.
Figure 423
Main Index
+,,,,,,,,,+
+,,1
The inner Euler domain is constrained by surface 2. For this volume, the outer Euler elements will be covered:
COUPLE,2,98,OUTSIDE,ON,ON,,,,+
+,,,,,,,,,+
+,,2
As discussed before, there are holes in the coupling surface. To this end, a flow definition is required for one of the
coupling surfaces. In this example, the flow cards are referenced from the first coupling surface. The input to define
flow between the regions is:
LEAKAGE,1,11,1,PORFCPL,84,CONSTANT,1.0
BCPROP,1,900
Also, for each of the other two flow surfaces, these set of cards are repeated
$
LEAKAGE,2,11,2,PORFCPL,84,CONSTANT,1.0
BCPROP,2,910
$
LEAKAGE,3,11,3,PORFCPL,84,CONSTANT,1.0
BCPROP,3,920
$
Main Index
CHAPTER 42 665
Mine Blast Under a Vehicle
Finally, the flow definition itself prescribes that the Euler region from coupling surface 1 is interacting with the Euler
region from coupling surface 2:
PORFCPL,84,LARGE,,BOTH,2
F. Miscellaneous:
a. Because this model uses the coupling surface interface, the time step safety factor for Eulerian elements has
to be .6. However, the Lagrangian elements (the quadratic and triangular elements) determine the timestep,
and it is beneficial to use a higher time step safety factor for the Lagrangian elements:
PARAM,STEPFCTL,0.9
b. To show results every .0002 seconds the following output request was added:
DYPARAM, LSDYNA, BINARY, D3PLOT,.0002
PARAM, CPLSARC,.0002
Results
The Figure 424 below shows the location, value, and time of the maximum acceleration. The stress distribution at this
time is also in Figure 425.
Figure 424
Main Index
Acceleration Plot
Figure 425
Main Index
CHAPTER 42 667
Mine Blast Under a Vehicle
$
TICREG,1,11,SPHERE,400,230,4,20.
TICREG,2,11,SPHERE,501,230,5,1.
$
SPHERE,400,,1797.5,0.,450.,250.
SPHERE,501,,0.,0.,5000.,10000.
$
PEULER1,202,,2ndOrder,102
$
TICEUL1,102,12
$
TICREG,3,12,SPHERE,502,230,5,5.
$
SPHERE,502,,0.,0.,5000.,10000.
$
TICVAL,4,,DENSITY,107E12,SIE,3.9e12
TICVAL,5,,DENSITY,1.29E12,SIE,1.938e11
$
MATDEUL,230,1.29e12,203,,,,,,+
+,,1.01
$
EOSGAM,203,1.4
$
FLOWDEF,202,,HYDRO,,,,,,+
+,FLOW,BOTH
$
COUPLE,1,97,INSIDE,ON,ON,11,,,+
+,,,,,,,,,+
+,,1
$
$ Define flow thru the holes
$
LEAKAGE,1,11,1,PORFCPL,84,CONSTANT,1.0
BCPROP,1,900
$
LEAKAGE,2,11,2,PORFCPL,84,CONSTANT,1.0
BCPROP,2,910
$
LEAKAGE,3,11,3,PORFCPL,84,CONSTANT,1.0
BCPROP,3,920
$
PORFCPL,84,LARGE,,BOTH,2
$
COUPLE,2,98,OUTSIDE,ON,ON,,,,+
+,,,,,,,,,+
+,,2
$
BCPROP,97,60,61,62,110,135,150,900,+
+,910,920,999
$
BCPROP,98,60,61,62,110,135,150,900,+
+,910,920
$
$ ========== PROPERTY SETS ==========
Main Index
$
$
* pbar.9988 *
$
PBAR
9988
222
3600.1000000.1000000.2000000.
$
$
* pbar.9989 *
$
PBAR
9989
222 100000.
3.E+8
3.E+8
6.E+8
$
$
* pbar.9990 *
$
PBAR
9990
222
3000. 200000.2500000.3000000.
$
$
* pbar.9993 *
$
PBAR,9993,111,459.96,25066.,55282.,16543.
$
$
* pbar.9996 *
$
PBAR,9996,111,895.52,309450.,55349.,48782.
$
$
* pbar.9999 *
$
PBAR,9999,111,736.,490275.,827555.,2095137.
$
$
* pshell.30 *
$
PSHELL
30
111
3
$
$
* pshell.40 *
$
PSHELL
40
111
4
$
$
* pshell.50 *
$
PSHELL
50
111
5
$
$
* pshell.60 *
$
PSHELL
60
111
6
PSHELL
61
111
6
PSHELL
62
111
6
$
* pshell.80 *
$
PSHELL
80
111
8
$
$
* pshell.110 *
$
PSHELL
110
111
11
$
$
* pshell.120 *
$
PSHELL
120
111
12
$
Main Index
CHAPTER 42 669
Mine Blast Under a Vehicle
$
* pshell.135 *
$
PSHELL
135
111
13.5
$
$
* pshell.150 *
$
PSHELL
150
111
15
PSHELL
151
111
15
$
$
* pshell.200 *
$
PSHELL
200
111
20
$
$
* pshell.450 *
$
PSHELL
450
111
45
$
$ dummy elements for coupling surface
$ hole
PSHELL,900,901,1.
$ top cover
PSHELL,910,901,1.
$ side cover
PSHELL,920,901,1.
$
MATD009,901,1.E20
$
$ ground
PSHELL,999,999,1.
$
MATRIG,999,,,,1.0E10,0.00,0.00,800.,+
+,1.E10,0.0,0.0,1.E10,0.0,1.E10,,,+
+,,,,,,,,,+
+,,,,1,7,7
$
$
* conm2 *
$
CONM2,5000,1145,,1.5
CONM2,5001,1146,,1.7
$
$ ========= MATERIAL DEFINITIONS ==========
$
MATD024,111,7.85e09,210000.,.3,250E10
$
MAT1,222,210000.,,.3,7.85e09
$
INCLUDE model.bdf
INCLUDE ground.dat
$
ENDDATA
Main Index
Input File(s)
File
nug_42.dat
Description
MSC Nastran input file for leakage using dummy
element
Video Examples
Import and Inspect Model
To see a video example of this step, click on the link below to view a streaming video for this section; it lasts
approximately four minutes to import and inspect the model.
Figure 426
Main Index
CHAPTER 42 671
Mine Blast Under a Vehicle
Create Properties
To see a video example of this step, click on the link below to view a streaming video for this section; it lasts
approximately two minutes.
Figure 427
Main Index
Figure 428
Main Index
CHAPTER 42 673
Mine Blast Under a Vehicle
Figure 429
Main Index
Figure 4210
Main Index
CHAPTER 42 675
Mine Blast Under a Vehicle
Create Leakage
To see a video example of this step, click on the link below to view a streaming video for this section; it lasts
approximately two minutes.
Figure 4211
Main Index
Figure 4212
Main Index
CHAPTER 42 677
Mine Blast Under a Vehicle
Figure 4213
Main Index
43
Main Index
Summary
679
Introduction
Solution Requirements
Results
Input File(s)
680
680
682
740
686
CHAPTER 43 679
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
Summary
Title
Contact features
Geometry
Euler Zone 2
Euler Zone 1
Bunker
Blast
Ground
Material properties
Bunker Structure
Density = .000734 lbfs2/inch4
Youngs Modulus = 2.9E7 lbf/in2
Poissons ratio = 0.3
Yield stress = 5.E4 lbf/in2
Plastic strain at failure = 0.21
Euler (Air)
Density = 1.2E7 lbfs2/inch4
Gamma = 1.4
Specific Internal Energy = 3E+8 lbfin
Euler (Explosive  equivalent to TNT of 7kg and radius of .25 meter)
Density = 3.84E6 lbfs2/inch4
Specific Internal Energy = 3E+9 lbfin
Ground
Rigid
Analysis characteristics
Boundary conditions
Element types
FE results
Main Index
Introduction
The purpose is to demonstrate application of multiEuler domains to failing coupling surfaces. The problem simulates
a bunker, located on the ground that is open at the sides and is surrounded by air. Gas can flow freely through the sides
of the bunker. A blast wave is ignited close to the bunker and expands into the air. When by the impact of the blast
wave, the bunker surface fails gas will flow trough the bunker surface.
Solution Requirements
SOL 700 Modeling
The bunker and the ground consist of cquad4 shell elements. The elements of the bunker are Lagrangian deformable
shells and the ground is modeled as rigid, using a MATRIG. The explosive/air region is modeled by two Euler meshes.
The first domain models the inside of the bunker, and the second one models the outside of the bunker. For the
interaction between the bunker and an Euler domain, a unique coupling surface has to be used, therefore, two coupling
surfaces are needed.
The first coupling surface, for modeling the inside of the bunker, consists of the following facets:
The 180 degrees cylindrical surface and the two open sides of the bunker. The two open sides are represented
by dummy shell elements. These are elements 1 to 2240.
The top of the ground that lies within the bunker. This is a square and is formed by elements 2241 to 3280.
These facets make up a closed coupling surface, as shown in Figure 431.
This coupling surface contains gas inside, and therefore Euler elements outside the coupling surface should not be
processed and so the COVER is OUTSIDE.
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 681
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
Figure 431
Coupling Surface 1
Figure 432
Coupling Surface 2
This coupling surface is used for simulating the gas outside the coupling surface. So Euler elements inside the coupling
surface should not be processed and the COVER has to be set to INSIDE. The second coupling surface uses the second
Euler mesh and serves as inner boundary surface for this Euler mesh. The outside boundary of this mesh is where the
Euler domains ends and boundary conditions for this boundaries are provided by a FLOWDEF. The FLOWDEF is
chosen as nonreflecting. Waves exit the Euler domain with only little reflection.
Main Index
To get an accurate expansion of the blast wave, the diffusion should be kept at a minimum, and therefore the Roe solver
with secondorder is used. Interactive failure will be used for the bunker structure, while porosity will be used for the
open sides:
The bunker elements can fail and gas flows through the failed elements from outside the bunker into the
bunker. All elements of the bunker are assigned to a BSURF, and occur in both coupling surfaces. They are
able to fail interactively, using the COUP1FL entry. These parts are formed by elements 1 to 1600. The nodes
of the failed elements are constrained in space by using PARAM, NZEROVEL, YES, to preserve the geometry
of the coupling surfaces from severe distortion.
Since gas can flow through the two sides without any obstruction, these two areas are modeled with BSURF
entries, and are opened by using a PORFLCPL entry. These sides are modeled with dummy shell elements and
consist of elements 1601 to 2400.
The couple cards refer to meshnumber. The first mesh for the Euler elements inside the bunker is created and
initialized by:
3(8/(5
0(6+
QG2UGHU
%2;
(8/(5
The value 2ndOrder activates the Roe solver with secondorder accuracy. The property id is the link between the
TICEUL1 entry 101 and the MESH entry. The second Euler mesh for the Euler elements outside the bunker is created
and initialized by:
3(8/(5
0(6+
QG2UGHU
%2;
(8/(5
Results
Figures 433 and 434 show a fringe plot and an isosurface. Figure 434 has been created by Ensight.
Figure 433
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 683
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
Figure 434
Isosurfaces Created using SIE Variable for the Two Euler Domains
Main Index
(
(
36+(//
0$7(5,$/ '(),1,7,216
0$7'
0$7'(8/
(26*$0
0DWHULDO VWHHO LG
H
0DWHULDO $,5 LG
H
JURXQG
0$75,*
H
/RDG &DVHV
*HQHUDO &RXSOLQJ
&283/(
*(1(5$/
,16,'(
%685)
2876,'(
7+58
H
/$5*(
%27+
325)&3/
&283,17
7+58
5LJLG %RG\ &RQVWUDLQWV
63&'
63&'
63&'
63&'
63&'
Main Index
7+58
%685)
325)&3/
/($.$*(
%685)
7+58
7+58
&283/(
&283 )/
21
7+58
7+58
&283 )/
21
5,*,'
5,*,'
5,*,'
5,*,'
5,*,'
05
05
05
05
05
21
21
CHAPTER 43 685
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
63&'
7$%/('
5,*,'
05
(1'7
0HVK GDW
0(6+
%2;
(8/(5
,QQHU (XOHU
0(6+
%2;
(8/(5
3(8/(5
3(8/(5
QG2UGHU
QG2UGHU
7,&(8/
7,&5(*
7,&5(*
63+(5(
63+(5(
63+(5(
63+(5(
7,&(8/
7,&5(*
63+(5(
63+(5(
7,&9$/
6,(
7,&9$/
6,(
)/2:'()
)/2: %27+
(1''$7$
Main Index
+<'52
For simulations with coupling surfaces with failure, the Roe solver is used. The secondorder Roe solver is used to
minimize the diffusion of the blast wave.
Two types of result files are required:
ARC which includes the Euler element results
d3plot which includes the Lagrangian element results
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 687
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
d
a
Main Index
c
d
e
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 689
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
a
b
d
e
Main Index
a
b
d
e
f
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 691
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
a
b
d
e
f
g
Main Index
g
f
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 693
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
e
f
h
g
Main Index
h
b
e
f
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 695
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
a
b
c
d
e
f
h
g
Main Index
a
b
c
e
n
l
m
Main Index
i
k
CHAPTER 43 697
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
a
b
e
l
m
Main Index
a
b
d
e
l
m
i
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 699
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
a
b
d
e
f
Main Index
b
d
f
b
d
c
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 701
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
a
b
e
f
Main Index
b
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 703
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
c
d
f
h
f
g
Main Index
a
b
d
f
d
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 705
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
a
b
d
e
g
f
h
i
l
k
Main Index
a
b
c
e
g
f
h
l
i
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 707
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
c
e
d
g
f
h
Main Index
d
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 709
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
c
d
e
f
g
Main Index
a
c
e
Useful Tip!
If using Show Selection List option, the elements
selected are shown in Selected Items dialog
g
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 711
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
b
c
e
f
g
Main Index
d
e
f
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 713
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
b
c
Main Index
b
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 715
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
Create Porosity
a. LBCs tab: Accessory
b. Select PORFCPL
c. For ID, enter 81
d. For Title, enter PORFCPL_81
e. For SIZE, select LARGE
f. Activate FLOW, select BOTH
g. Activate and double click COUP1FL, select Select
h. For Entity Selection, select COUPLE_8; click OK
i. Click Modify
c
a
d
e
h
j
Main Index
Create Leakage
a. In the Model Browser tree, select PSHELL_2_model.dat
b. Select Show Only
c. LBCs tab: Accessory
d. Select LEAKAGE
e. From the Pick Window: select Shells for BSURF
f. In the Main Window: select all the elements
g. Click Done
h. For ID, enter 1
i. For Title, enter LEAKAGE_1
j. For NPOR, enter 1
k. Click Modify
d
f
e
j
k
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 717
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
Modify Leakage
a. In the Model Browser tree, double click LEAKAGE_1
b. Double click SUBID1
c. For Entity Selection, select BSURF_4; click OK
d. For PORTYPE1, select PORFCPL
e. Double click PORTYPID1, select Select
f. For Entity Selection, select PORFCPL_81; click OK
g. Activate COEFF1, select CONSTANT
h. Activate COEFFV1, enter 1.0
i. Click Modify
a
d
h
i
Main Index
b
c
e
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 719
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
b
d
e
i
g
Main Index
i
b
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 721
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
a
c
d
b
Main Index
Create Parameters
a. Job Parameters tab: PARAM
b. For Name, enter PARAM_1
c. For SID, enter 1
d. For N, enter DYINISTEP
e. For V1, enter 1.E7
f. Click Create
g. For Name, enter PARAM_2
h. For SID, enter 2
i. For N, enter DYMINSTEP
j. For V1, enter 1.E8
k. Click Create
b
d
i
f
Main Index
h
j
k
CHAPTER 43 723
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
c
d
e
f
h
i
j
k
m
n
o
p
Main Index
c
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 725
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
a
b
Main Index
d
e
f
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 727
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
Main Index
b
d
a
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 729
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
a
c
b
Main Index
a
c
b
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 731
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
g
f
e
i
j
h
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 733
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
e
d
c
b
Main Index
a
b
c
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 735
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
g
f
d
Main Index
c
a
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 737
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
a
b
e
d
h
g
Main Index
b
a
Main Index
CHAPTER 43 739
Blastwave Hitting a Bunker
b
c
Main Index
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_43a.dat
MSC Nastran input file for l=blast on bunker using Fast Coupling technique
nug_43b.dat
nug_43c.dat
Main Index
44
Main Index
Concentric Spheres
with Radiation
Summary
742
Introduction
Modeling Details
Material Modeling
Solution Procedure
Results
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
743
743
750
750
751
797
752
796
753
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
T = 0
t = 0.05
i
2
= 0.7
R = 1.5
T=?
o
2
= 1.0
o
1
= 0.9
t = 0.01
R=1
T = 1000
Material properties
k 1 = 4.0W in K
k 2 = 6.0W in K
= 3.66x10 11 W in K
Analysis characteristics
Boundary conditions
Inside sphere temperature fixed at 1000 K. The heat sink is ambient temperature at zero
K where the radiation to space boundary condition is applied on the outer sphere.
StefanBoltzmann constant is (above).
Element type
4node QUAD4
FE results
710.5
710.0
709.5
709.0
708.5
708.0
Main Index
Analytic
Gaussian integration
Hemicube
710.30
709.85
708.91
CHAPTER 44 743
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
Introduction
This problem demonstrates the ability of the Nastran SOL 400 thermal nonlinear solution sequence to perform thermal
radiation view factor calculations using the Hemicube and Gaussian integration methods. The Gaussian adaptive
integration view factor calculation method has been with Nastran for many years. The view factor computed by the
Gaussian method is extremely accurate. However, as the problems get big, computation time is roughly proportional
to the number of surfaces squared. The introduction of Hemicube method in MSC Nastran permits the solution of
very large scale view factor problems where previously the use of the Gaussian method was overly time intensive. As
compared to the adaptive Gaussian method, we have seen an improvement in CPU speed of 33 times in some
problems. The CPU time increases linearly with the number of radiation surfaces because in Hemicube, the
computation time is linearly proportional to the number of surfaces. In this problem, we have an analytical solution in
which we compare both Hemicube and the Adaptive Gaussian integration methods to see which method offers the
most accuracy.
Modeling Details
Figure 441
As shown in (Figure 441), the inner sphere with radius equal to 1 inch is subjected to a constant temperature of
1000K (red). There is radiation exchange between the inner and the outer sphere (orange). The outer sphere radiates
to space at an ambient temperature of zero K with view factors equal to 1.0.
Reference Solution
For these two diffuse isothermal concentric spheres, the view factors need to be determined. Since all of the energy
leaving the inner sphere (1) will arrive at the outer sphere (2), F 1 2 = 1.0 . The reciprocity relation for view factors
Main Index
gives A 1 F 1 2 = A 2 F 2 1 , or F 2 1 = R 1 R 2 2 . Since the inner sphere cannot see itself, F 1 1 = 0 . Finally since energy
must be conserved, the sum of all view factors of a closed cavity must be unity, which yields, F 2 2 = 1 R 1 R 2 2 .
Notice how the number of view factors grow as the square of the number of surfaces, i.e. two surfaces yield 4 view
factors. Given the geometry of the spheres as R 1 = 1 and R 2 = 1.5 , the four view factors become:
F1 1 = 0 F1 2 = 1
4
5
F 2 1 =  F 2 2 = 9
9
. Below is an equation for calculation of outer sphere temperature where the outer sphere is
radiating to space at absolute zero and a view factor of 1. (Holman, Jack P. Holman Heat Transfer. McGrawHill,
2001).
1 = 0.9
= 1
out
= 0.7
inner
T 1 = 1000
2
A1 = 4 R1
A2 = 4 R2
A 1 = 12.566
A 2 = 28.274
1
1
1 +A
C =    1
1 A2 2
inn er
C = 1.302
A1 T1
D 2 = A1 + C 2 A2
out
D 2 = 2.545 10 11
0.25
T2 = D2
T 2 = 710.299
This solution assumes perfect conduction (no resistance to heat flow) in the outer sphere.
While, in general, the view factors cannot be obtained from analytical solutions, in this simple problem, the view
factors can be found analytically and we can use these view factors in a simple three grid model to check our analytic
solution above. One grid represents the inner sphere, another represents the outer sphere, and the last grid represents
the ambient temperature of the outer sphere.
Nastran test file: user1_point.dat
$Model concentric sphere with two nodes
$ Length in Inches
$! NASTRAN Control Section
NASTRAN SYSTEM(316)=19
$! File Management Section
$! Executive Control Section
SOL 400
CEND
ECHO = NONE
$! Case Control Section
TEMPERATURE(INITIAL) = 21
TITLE=MSC.Nastran job created on 05Dec03 at 13:33:05
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 745
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
SUBCASE 1
$! Subcase name : subcase_1
$LBCSET SUBCASE1
lbcset_1
SUBTITLE=Default
SPCFORCES(SORT1,PRINT,REAL)=ALL
OLOAD(SORT1,PRINT,REAL)=ALL
THERMAL(SORT1,PRINT)=ALL
FLUX(PRINT)=ALL
ANALYSIS = HSTAT
SPC = 23
NLSTEP = 1
BEGIN BULK
$! Bulk Data Pre Section
PARAM
SNORM
20.
PARAM
K6ROT
100.
PARAM
WTMASS
1.
PARAM* SIGMA
3.6580E11
PARAM
POST
1
PARAM
TABS
0.0
$! Bulk Data Model Section
RADM
11
0.0
0.9
RADM
12
0.0
0.7
RADM
13
0.0
1.
PHBDY
1 12.566
PHBDY
2 28.274
GRID
101
0.0
0.0
GRID
102
1.
0.0
$!
SPOINT
777
CHBDYP
1
1
point
10
+
11
CHBDYP
2
2
point
10
+
12
CHBDYP
3
2
point
+
13
SPC
23
101
1
1000.
SPC
23
777
1
0.0
RADBC
777
1.
3
RADCAV
+
VIEW
VIEW3D
RADSET
RADMTX
RADMTX
RADLST
TEMPD
TEMP
TEMP
NLSTEP
+
+
+
Main Index
RadMat_1
RadMat_1
RadMat_1
PHBDY_1_
PHBDY_2_
0.0
0.0
1.
1.
1.
101
0.0
102
0.0
102
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
+
+
+
1
10
10
1
10
10
1
21
21
21
1
GENERAL 25
FIXED
1
HEAT
PW
+
1
1
0.012.56637
215.70922
1
1
2
900.
777
0.0
101
1000.
1.
1
0.001
1.E7AUTO
+
+
+
ENDDATA b1272084
Notice that the StefanBoltzmann constant (sigma) is 3.66e11 W/in2/K4 and, the radiation matrix is define above by
the RADLST and RADMTX, RADMTX =
A1 F1 1 = 0
A2 F2 1
A 1 F 1 2 = 12.566 1
4
5
= 28.274  A 2 F 2 2 = 12.566 9
9
0 12.56637
sym 15.70796
The radiation matrix must be symmetric to conserve energy (reciprocity relation A 1 F 1 2 = A 2 F 2 1 ), and the
symmetric terms are not entered. Running this three node problem yields the output below with the temperature of the
outer sphere of 710.31, agreeing to within 4digits of our analytic solution of 710.3.
T E M P E R A T U R E
POINT ID.
TYPE
V E C T O R
ID
VALUE
101
1.000000E+03
777
0.0
ID+1 VALUE
ID+2 VALUE
ID+3 VALUE
ID+4 VALUE
ID+5 VALUE
7.103098E+02
Solution Highlights
The following are highlights of the Nastran input file necessary to model this problem using 700 elements to represent
the inner and outer spheres with 1268 radiating surfaces:
$! NASTRAN Control Section
NASTRAN SYSTEM(316)=19
$! File Management Section
$! Executive Control Section
SOL 400
CEND
ECHO = SORT
$! Case Control Section
TEMPERATURE(INITIAL) = 33
SUBCASE 1
$! Subcase name : NewLoadcase
$LBCSET SUBCASE1
DefaultLbcSet
THERMAL(SORT1,PRINT)=ALL
FLUX(PRINT)=ALL
ANALYSIS = HSTAT
SPC = 35
NLSTEP = 1
BEGIN BULK
$! Bulk Data Pre Section
PARAM
WTMASS
1.
PARAM
GRDPNT 0
NLMOPTS HEMICUBE1
PARAM* SIGMA
3.6580E11
PARAM
POST
1
$! Bulk Data Model Section
PARAM
OGEOM
NO
PARAM
MAXRATIO
1e+8
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 747
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
The use of a steadystate thermal analysis is indicated by ANALY=HSTAT. The NLMOPTS parameters indicate that we
are using the Hemicube method as the view factor calculation method. If one desires to run the Gaussian integration
method, then you do not need the NLMOPTS bulk data entry.
The inner sphere is composed of CHBDYG elements (see command details below) numbered from 6987 through
7214, and the outer sphere is from 7215 to 7734. The set1 ID option is used on the RADCAV bulk data entry to sum
up all the view factors between the inner and outer spheres for comparisons against theory.
Main Index
6987
3390
6988
3404
3403
AREA4
3397
AREA4
3389
3
4
5
4
4
4
0.9
0.7
1.
0.9
0.7
1.
YES
0
4
0.0
KSHD
3389
2
3398
2
3390
3
3
Radm_3
Radm_4
Radm_5
0.0
0.1
0.0
In this case, we have CHBDYG element 6987 with TYPE='AREA4' bounded by grid 3390, 3389, 3397, 3398. The
normal vector is defined by the grid connectivity and is directed from the inner sphere to the outer sphere (Figure 442
and Figure 443). The internal sphere has KSHD defined on the 4th field of the VIEW data entry, which means that this
group of elements can shade the view of other elements. The external sphere has KBSHD defined which means that
these elements can also be shaded by other elements. The reason that we have specified the shading flag is to speed
up the sorting for these potential blockers in the view factor calculations. In general when the surface is very complex,
the use of the flag called BOTH is recommended. The RADSET option tells us there is only 1 cavity in the model, and
the 2nd field on the VIEW points to the IVIEWF or IVIEWB on the CHBDYG field 5th or 6th, respectively. For a plate
element, there is top and the bottom surface for view factor calculations. For a solid element, only the front side
IVIEWF should be used. The inner sphere here is represented by number as 1 on the field 5 (IVIEWF) on the CHBDYG.
The 7th and 8th represent the ID for the RADM option where 7th field is the top surface RADM ID and the 8th field is
the bottom surface RADM ID. The RADM specified the emissivity used for the sphere and, in this case, the emissivity
for the inner sphere is equal to 0.7.
The RADCAV bulk data entry indicates that we will print the summary of view factor calculations. In this case, we
have a complete enclosure and, therefore, the view factor summation should equal 1.0. The surface numbers 703, 704
are the ID numbers for the CHBDYG that has the radiation exchange.
*** VIEW FACTOR MODULE *** OUTPUT DATA *** CAVITY ID =
SURFI
6987
6988
6989
6990
6991
SURFJ
SUM
SUM
SUM
SUM
SUM
4 ***
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
5.19803E02
6.14400E02
4.30822E02
4.36718E02
5.08568E02
SCALE
9.99998E01
9.99997E01
9.99988E01
1.00000E+00
1.00000E+00
Main Index
6497
5
33
6497
6467
5987
6497
6468
5989
6497
6469
5997
6497
6497
1.
5975
1.
5976
1.
5996
1
0.0
0
AREA4
5976
0
AREA4
5975
0
AREA4
5975
0.0
6467
5986
6468
5988
6469
5987
5
5
5
CHAPTER 44 749
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
Please note the negative EID represents that the radiation to space is effected from the back surface (opposite to the
direction of normal) of the element.
Also, we have the temperature boundary conditions applied to all grids on the inner sphere at 1000 K via the SPC
option.
SPC
RADBC
1000.
RADBC
NODAMB
FAMB
CNTRLND
EID1
EID2
EID3
etc.
10
10
Example
1
RADBC
1.0
101
10
Field
Contents
Type
NODAMB
I>0
FAMB
Radiation view factor between the face and the ambient point.
R>0
CNTRLND
I>0
EIDi
Remarks:
1. The basic exchange relationship is:
if CNTRLND = 0, then q = FAMB e T 4e T 4amb
if CNTRLND > 0, then
4
Main Index
Default
Figure 442
Figure 443
Material Modeling
Thermal conductivity value is supplied on the MAT4 bulk data entry.
MAT4
MAT4
1
2
4.
6.
Iso_1
Iso_2
Solution Procedure
The nonlinear procedure used is defined using the following NLPARM entry:
NLSTEP
+
+
Main Index
FIXED
HEAT
1
1
UPW
1.
0.001
0.001
1.E7PFNT
+
+
CHAPTER 44 751
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
In thermal analysis, the TEMPD bulk data entry specifies the initial temperature for the nonlinear radiation analysis.
In this case, an initial guessed temperature of 800 was used. A casual selection of initial guessed temperature is not
so important in a nonlinear conduction and convection thermal analysis. However, for nonlinear radiation analysis
where the thermal radiation transfer is given by Q = A T 14 T 24 , an initial guess is very helpful. The error (residual)
is proportional to the temperature to the 4th power. It is. therefore, recommended to specify a higher estimated
temperature in a radiation dominant problem.
The default method for the NLPARM is the AUTO method in SOL 400 analyses. The convergence criterion is based
on UPW. In this problem, you can achieve convergence by either the PFNT method (as above) or the AUTO method:
NLSTEP
+
+
FIXED
HEAT
1
1
UPW
1.
0.001
0.001
1.E7AUTO
+
+
The U convergence criterion measures the error tolerance for the temperature. It has a recommended value of 1.0e3
or smaller for thermal problem. The P and W convergence criteria measure the error tolerances for the load and work,
respectively.
The number of increments is specified on the 3rd field of the NLPARM data entry (NINC). This should be set to 1 for
steadystate thermal analyses since convergence can be achieved in one step only. This, typically, is not the case for
structural analyses, where NINC is set to 10 by default. Generally, the PFNT or FNT methods are used for highly
nonlinear mechanical analyses.
Results
Temperature K (Grid 367)
Analytic
Gaussian integration
Hemicube
710.5
710.30
709.85
708.91
710.0
709.5
709.0
708.5
708.0
Analytic
Gaussian integration
Hemicube
Main Index
Figure 444
Hemicube Results
Modeling Tips
The current model uses 1268 surfaces to define the radiating surfaces of both spheres. The CPU run times for the
Gaussian and Hemicube methods are nearly the same, at 27 seconds.
Figure 445, however, shows the dramatic increase in run time for the Gaussian model and the clear benefits of the
Hemicube method as the number of surfaces increases.
At 20,000 surfaces, the Gaussian model takes 33 time longer to complete.
CPU Time (s)
12000
10000
Gaussian
8000
Hemicube
6000
4000
2000
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
Number of Surfaces
Figure 445
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 753
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
Units
a. Tools: Options
b. Observe the User Options window
c. Select Units Manager
d. For Basic Units, specify the model units:
e. Length = m, Mass = kg, Time = s, Temperature = Kelvin, and Force = N
b
d
c
Main Index
b
c
h
i
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 755
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
b
c
e
d
f
g
j
h

Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 757
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
a
b
c
h

Main Index
e
d
f
g
h
ik
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 759
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
b
c
a
e
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 761
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
b
c
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 763
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
b
c
d
e
gf
Main Index
b
c
d
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 765
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
Main Index
b
c
d
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 767
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
Main Index
b
c
d
e
c
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 769
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
d
e
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 771
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
Main Index
d
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 773
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
Main Index
a
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 775
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
b
c
Main Index
a
b
e
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 777
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
Main Index
c
d
e
f
h
i
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 779
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
Main Index
c
d
e
g
h
i
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 781
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
c
d
g
e
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 783
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
d
e
f
h
i
Main Index
b
c
e
f
g
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 785
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
b
c
e
f
Main Index
b
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 787
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
d
e
Main Index
c nlmopts,hemicube,1
b
a
d
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 789
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
c
b
Main Index
d
e
f
g
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 791
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
Main Index
d
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 793
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
Main Index
f
e
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 795
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
c
d
Main Index
b
709.3
1000
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_44a.dat
nug_44b.dat
nug_44c.dat
Ch_44b.SimXpert
Ch_44c.SimXpert
Main Index
CHAPTER 44 797
Concentric Spheres with Radiation
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 24 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
710.5
710.0
709.5
709.0
708.5
708.0
Analytic
Figure 446
Main Index
Gaussian integration
Hemicube
710.30
709.85
708.91
45
Main Index
Summary
799
Introduction
Modeling Details
Solution Highlights
Results
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
800
800
800
803
862
807
862
808
CHAPTER 45 799
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
Units: mm, g, sec, C
Copper
Aluminum
10 X 10 X 8
1.295 X 1.295 X 0.2
Material properties
k Cu = 0.386W mm K
Cp Cu = 0.383J g K
k Al = 0.204W mm K
Cp Al = 0.896J g K
Analysis characteristics
Boundary conditions
All material is initially at 25oC then a heat flux is applied on top surface of the copper
chip for 10 seconds.
Element type
8node CHEXA
FE results
Main Index
Introduction
This problem demonstrates the transient thermal capability of SOL 400 in solving a short duration heating on a chip
through a copper tab attached to an aluminum backing.
Modeling Details
Units: mm, g, sec, C
Copper
Aluminum
10 X 10 X 8
1.295 X 1.295 X 0.2
Figure 451
2
Z
In many applications, the power dissipation inside integrated circuits is transient in nature. The device maybe turned
on for 10 seconds or less. The above model (Figure 451) consists of D2pak copper tab mounted on the aluminum heat
sink. Due to the symmetry, only a quarter of the model is meshed.
Solution Highlights
The following are highlights of the Nastran input file necessary to model this problem:
$! NASTRAN Control Section
NASTRAN SYSTEM(316)=19
$! File Management Section
$! Executive Control Section
SOL 400
CEND
ECHO = SORT
$! Case Control Section
IC = 13
SUBCASE 1
$! Subcase name : NewLoadcase
$LBCSET SUBCASE1
DefaultLbcSet
THERMAL(SORT1,PRINT)=ALL
FLUX(PRINT)=ALL
ANALYSIS = HTRAN
SPC = 15
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 801
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
DLOAD = 16
NLSTEP = 1
BEGIN BULK
$! Bulk Data Pre Section
PARAM* SIGMA
1.7140E9
PARAM
POST
1
$! Bulk Data Model Section
PARAM
PRGPST
NO
MAT4
1
0.386
0.383 0.00895
MAT4
2
0.204
0.896 0.00271
PSOLID
1
1
PSOLID
2
2
$ CHBDYG Surface Elements
CHEXA
126
1
17
18
1
+
147
183
CHEXA
127
1
179
181
147
+
148
184
CHEXA
128
1
18
20
2
+
149
147
CHEXA
129
1
181
185
149
+
150
148
$ Loads for Load Case : tran
TABLED1
1 LINEAR LINEAR
+
0.0
1.
10.
1.
10.1
+
ENDT
$!
TLOAD1
1
2
1
QBDY3
2
1.5
0
2176
CHBDYG
2176
AREA4
148
150
158
156
$ Dynamic Load Table : flux_time
TABLED1 1
0.
1.
10.
1.
10.2
0.
100.
0.
ENDT
$ Default Initial Temperature
TEMPD
13
25.
DLOAD
16
1.
1.
1
NLSTEP
1
12.
+
GENERAL 10
0
5
+
FIXED
600
5
+
HEAT
UPW
0.01
0.01
0.01ITER
+
10
2
0.2
Cu
Al
PSOLID_1
PSOLID_2
19
179
181+
183
180
182+
181
185+
147
182
186+
0.0
100.
+
0.0+
20.
0.
+
+
+
+
The transient thermal analysis is indicated by ANALY=HTRAN. The IC option in the case control section points to the
initial temperature of the model. In this case, The IC=1 points to the TEMPD in the bulk data section, and the initial
temperature is set at 25 oC. The DLOAD bulk data in the case control either points to the DLOAD in the bulk data with
same ID.
Furthermore, the DLOAD in the bulk data section can then point to the multiple load set ID that refers to either
TLOAD1, which called a time dependent table TABLED1 or TLOAD2 which has built in function such as unit step, sine,
or cosine functions.
Main Index
TABLED1
+
+
TLOAD1
QBDY3
CHBDYG
1 LINEAR LINEAR
0.0
1.
10.
ENDT
1
2
2
1.5
0
2176
AREA4
148
150
158
16
1.
1.
DLOAD
1.
10.1
0.0
100.
+
0.0+
2176
156
1
Field 3 on the TLOAD1 record has an integer value of 2 which points to a transient heat load of QBDY3 with this same
set ID. In the field 6 of the TLAOD1 is the ID of timedependent table of this heat flux. We see that the heat load is 1.0
from time equals to 0 to 10 seconds and, at 10.2 seconds, we shut this heat load back to zero.
Solution Procedure
The nonlinear procedure used is defined through the NLSTEP entry:
NLSTEP
+
+
+
+
1
GENERAL 10
FIXED
600
HEAT
UPW
10
12.
0
5
2
5
0.01
0.01
0.2
0.01ITER
+
+
+
+
We are running a total 600 time steps with equal steps of 0.02 seconds and output the temperature at every 5th step.
This means that the temperature will then be output at 0.1, 0.2, and 0.3 seconds, respectively. Also we can use the
Method called FIXED and the convergence is set on the error on temperature (U) with 0.01 as the error tolerance. Grid
point 195 is the fastest responding in the copper tab; it is also used in subsequent graphs to illustrate how fast the chip
heats up and cools down.
Figure 452
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 803
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
Results
Figure 453
Figure 454
Suppose that the user decided to add a fan to increase the cooling on top. To simulate this, we will apply convection
boundary condition on the top surface where the convection coefficient is a function of time and the ambient
temperature is also at 25oC. We can then compare this run against the previous run that has no convection. Convection
is applied as a heat transfer coefficient of H = 0.02W mm 2 C . The temperature contours at 5 seconds are shown in
Figure 455.
Main Index
Figure 455
Another comparison between the two models is shown in Figure 456, where the influence of the cooling is very
obvious with the entire model returning to the initial conditions after about 20 seconds.
Figure 456
By applying the convection on the top surface, the temperature of the chip is now cooled from 40.3 to 33.2oC. In this
run we have a total of three time dependent boundary conditions. The DLOAD in the bulk data section (Nastran test
file Chip_spcd1.dat) points to multiple TLOAD1 options as shown in the table below.
TLOAD1 ID
SPCD/DAREA
Grid (enforced
temperature as a
function of time)
H(time)
2556
Heat flux(time)
Tambient(time)
Boundary
Conditions
Main Index
TABLED1 (ID)
2
1
2555
CHAPTER 45 805
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
1
2
6
3
5
8
1 LINEAR LINEAR
0.0
1.
10.
ENDT
2 LINEAR LINEAR
10.
0.02
0.0
20.
0.02
ENDT
3 LINEAR LINEAR
0.0
1.
100.
4
3
2555
5
4
21
2556
8
7
21
3
2176
148
21
23
24
1
GENERAL 10
FIXED
600
HEAT
UPW
10
1
3
2
1
1
2555
2555
25.
2555
2556
2556
0.02
0
AREA4
158
2556
1.5
150
25.
4
1.
12.
0
5
2
7
1.
1.
10.1
1.
100.
+
1.+
0.02
5.
0.02
10.
+
0.02+
1.
0.0
ENDT
1.
25.
1.0
2176
156
1.
0.01ITER
5
0.01
0.01
0.2
1.
6
+
+
+
+
SPOINT 2555 indicates the ambient temperature for the convection, while SPOINT 2556 represents the variation of
convection coefficient with time.
Main Index
CONV
Specifies a free convection boundary condition for heat transfer analysis through connection to a surface element
(CHBDYi entry).
Format:
1
CONV
EID
PCONID
FLMND
CNTRLND
TA1
TA2
TA3
TA4
TA5
TA6
TA7
TA8
CONV
101
201
301
10
Example:
Field
Contents
10
Type
Default
EID
PCONID
I>0
FLMND
I>0
CNTRLND
I>0
TAi
2556
8
7
21
CONV
CHBDYG
2201
2201
17
Main Index
2556
2556
4
18
2556
0.02
AREA4
37
1.
1.0
2556
73
2555
CHAPTER 45 807
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
The SPOINT 2556 is on the field 5 (CNTRLND) on the CONV, and the SPOINT 2555 is on the field 6 (TA1). The
field 6 on the MAT4 option is the convection coefficient times the tabeld1 ID 2 where this a function of time. At time
equal to zero, the value is equal to 0.02, and time equal to 10 seconds, the value is 0.03.
For SPOINT 2556, we used SPCD and SPC1 to specify enforced temperature as a function of time. The value of 1.0
that specified on the field 5 on the SPCD bulk data entry actually is a scale multiplier to the TABLED1 ID 2 that it refers
to.
The ambient temperature is constant at 25oC, but we could make it time dependent as well. It is important that for any
enforced temperature as a function of time or any use of a control node in RADBC or CONV bulk data entries, that a
value of 1 is specified on field 5 on the TLOAD1 or TLOAD2 entry to indicate that this refers to the SPCD.
Modeling Tips
The transient thermal analysis involved a lot more data compared to a steady state thermal analysis since every time
step requires a temperature distribution. It is sensible to monitor those nodes that handle the timedependent boundary
conditions. In this case, the convection coefficient as a function of time is applied to SPOINT 2556 which, when
plotted as a graph in SimX, should behave as described by the input. The other point of interest is where the heat load
is applied.
Adaptive time stepping facilitates capturing transient thermal behavior more precisely than uniform stepping, because
the length of each time step changes based upon changes in temperature. To invoke adaptive time stepping requires
the nonlinear procedure defined through the NLSTEP entry:
NLSTEP,6,12.0
,GENERAL,10,1,10
,ADAPT,0.001,1.0E5,0.5
,HEAT,U,1.0E6,1.0E6,1.0E6,AUTO
and a backward Euler thermal operator with the NDAMP parameter:
PARAM,NDAMP,0.5
This will run for a total time period of 12 seconds with an initial time step of 12/1000. The minimum time step is
12*1e5; the convergence is set to U and is at 1e6. The allowable range of the NDAMP parameter is 2.414 to 0.414,
and any NDAMP value that violates this range is reset to the closest allowable value. Here it triggers the backward
Euler operator. (NDAMP = 0 would be the CrankNicholson operator). The adaptive time stepping would avoid the
small oscillation seen in Figure 454 since the backward Euler operator is both stable and immune to oscillations. The
input files nug_45c.dat and nug_45d.dat use this operator.
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 809
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
d
c
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 811
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
c
d
Main Index
i
c
f
g
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 813
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
d
e
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 815
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
c
d
e
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 817
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
c
d
Main Index
c
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 819
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 821
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
Main Index
d
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 823
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
Main Index
j
g
f
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 825
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
Main Index
c
d
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 827
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
Main Index
c
b
e
d
g
i
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 829
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
Main Index
Material Properties
a. Design material properties for Copper and Aluminum
b. Materials and Properties tab: Material/Isotropic
c. For Name, enter Copper
d. For Youngs Modulus, enter 210
e. For Poissons Ratio, enter 0.28
f. For Thermal Conductivity, enter 0.386
g. For Specific Heat, enter 0.383
h. For Thermal Density, enter 0.00895
i. Click OK
c
d
e
g
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 831
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
c
d
e
g
h
Main Index
Element Properties
a. Define element properties for Copper and Aluminum parts of the model
b. Materials and Properties tab: 3D Properties/Solid
c. For Name, enter SOLID_Copper
d. For Entities screen, select the solid elements that are to represent the Copper
e. under Material on the Model Browser tree, select Copper
f. Click OK
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 833
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
b
c
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 835
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
c
d
d
e
f
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 837
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
e
f
g
Main Index
d
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 839
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
b
e
c
Main Index
f
e
g
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 841
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
.
.
b
d
c
Main Index
e
f
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 843
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 845
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
Main Index
d
b
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 847
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
Main Index
d
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 849
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
d
e
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 851
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
e
f
g
Main Index
d
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 853
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
c
d
Main Index
g
f
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 855
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
d
c
Main Index
e
f
b
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 857
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 859
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
Main Index
d
b
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 45 861
Transient Thermal Analysis of Power Electronics using SOL 400
Main Index
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_45a.dat
MSC Nastran transient thermal input file  fixed step without cooling
nug_45b.dat
MSC Nastran transient thermal input file  fixed step with cooling
Ch_45a.SimXpert
nug_45c.dat
MSC Nastran test deck using adaptive approach for heating only
nug_45d.dat
MSC Nastran test deck using adaptive approach for heating with convection cooling
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 30 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
Figure 457
Main Index
46
Main Index
Summary
864
Introduction
Modeling Details
Solution Highlights
Results
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
865
865
867
868
913
869
912
870
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
Chip
Leads
Case
Paste
14 x 14 x 3.22
Units: mm, N, C
Material properties
Material
k W mm C
E N mm 2
(1/C)
Lead frame
0.147
6.9x104
1.0x106
Chip
0.168
5.52x104
1.0x105
Case
0.0714
4.5x104
1.0x106
Paste
0.02016
2.0x103
1.0x105
Analysis characteristics
Boundary conditions
Thermal boundary conditions: The heat flux is applied on top surface of the chip with heat flux
equal to 0.025 W/(mm2 oC). Convection heat transfer with ambient (at 70 oC). Top surface of the
case  4.05x105 W/(mm2 oC). Bottom Surface of the case  2.026x10 5 W/(mm2 oC) Sides
(adjacent to the lead frame where it is fixed)  7.0x105. There is radiation loss on top of the outer
case to ambient at 40 oC with emissivity equal to 0.8 and view factor is 1.0. Structure boundary
conditions: Fix the end of the lead frame.
Element type
8node CHEXA
FE results
Main Index
Displacement Contours
CHAPTER 46 865
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Introduction
This example demonstrates the chaining of thermal and structural analysis in SOL 400 whereby the first step is a
nonlinear steady state thermal analysis subject to heat flux on the chip, convection and radiation boundary conditions,
and the second step is a nonlinear static analysis using the temperatures from the first step. The thermal stress analysis
chaining has always been available in the linear heat transfer to linear static analysis using param, heatstat,yes in the
SOL 101 run. However, it was not possible previously in Nastran to run a nonlinear heat transfer followed by the static
analysis in a single execution because SOL 101 is a linear heat transfer solution. The only alternative is to run a
nonlinear thermal analysis using SOL 153 and used the resulting temperature punch file as the input thermal load for
your stress analysis. The user can output a punch file by specifying TEMP(PRINT,PUNCH)=all in the first run. This
will create a punch file that consists of temperature for every grids in the model. In the thermal stress run he can use
the TEMP(LOAD)=1 in the case control to use the temperature load in the static run. Chaining of thermal and structural
analyses facilitates design studies based on:
1. changing the materials properties
2. changing the thermal boundary conditions
3. changing structure constraints
whereby the temperatures as well as the corresponding displacements are visualized in a single run.
Modeling Details
Bonded joints are used in the design of a circuit board. A change in temperature due to the equipment operation can
introduce stresses in joined materials of dissimilar thermal expansion coefficient. In this case we have chip heating
due to the applied power, causing thermal gradients in the different materials which, together with the fixed
displacements cause high stresses near the end of the lead frame.
The chip dimension (Figure 461) is 3.80 mm by 3.80mm with thickness equal to 0.7 mm. It is mounted on top of
adhesive (paste). The outer case dimension is 14 mm by 14 mm by 3.22 mm.
Chip
Figure 461
Main Index
14 x 14 x 3.22
Figure 462
Outer Case
A heat flux is applied to the top surface of the chip with heat flux equal to 0.025 W/(mm2oC). The top surface, bottom
surface and the sides (adjacent to the lead frame where it is fixed) of the case are subjected to convection heat loss.
Heat is convected to the environment at 70oC. The respective heat transfer coefficient for the top, bottom and sides
are 4.05x105 W/(mm2oC), 2.026x105 W/(mm2oC) and 7.00x105 W/(mm2oC). Finally there is a radiation loss on top
of the outer case to ambient environment of 40oC with emissivity equal to 0.8 and view factor is 1.0.
The structural boundary conditions include fixing the end of the lead frame as shown in Figure 463.
Figure 463
Material Properties
k W mm K
E N mm 2
(1/C)
Chip
0.147
6.9x104
1.0x106
Lead Frame
0.168
5.52x104
1.0x105
Material
1.0x106
1.0x105
Case
0.0714
4.5x10
Paste
0.02016
2.0x103
In running a thermal stress analysis, it is important to check you have specified a thermal coefficient of expansion on
the field 7 on the MAT1 bulk data entry. Otherwise, there will be no thermal expansion in your problem.
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 867
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
It is important that you have a consistent set of units. In this case, the thermal conductivity has units of W/(mm2 K),
and therefore your Young's modulus should be in the unit of N/(mm2). This consistency also applies to the StefanBoltzmann constant also used in the radiation boundary conditions with units of W/(mm2 K).
Solution Highlights
The following are highlights of the Nastran input file necessary to model this problem:
$! NASTRAN Control Section
NASTRAN SYSTEM(316)=19
$! File Management Section
$! Executive Control Section
SOL 400
CEND
ECHO = SORT
$! Case Control Section
TEMPERATURE(INITIAL) = 33
SUBCASE 1
$! Subcase name : NewLoadcase
$LBCSET SUBCASE1
ANALYSIS = NLSTAT
STEP 1
$LBCSET
STEP1.1
Thermal
$! Step name : Thermal
ANALYSIS = HSTAT
SPC = 36
LOAD = 37
NLSTEP = 2
TSTRU = 38
THERMAL(SORT1,PRINT)=ALL
FLUX(PRINT)=ALL
STEP 2
$LBCSET
STEP1.2
Structural
$! Step name : Structural
SPC = 11
ANALYSIS = NLSTAT
NLSTEP = 3
TEMPERATURE(LOAD) = 38
DISPLACEMENT(SORT1,PRINT,REAL)=ALL
STRESS(SORT1,PRINT,REAL,VONMISES,CORNER)=ALL
BEGIN BULK
$! Bulk Data Pre Section
PARAM
SNORM
20.
PARAM
K6ROT
100.
PARAM
WTMASS
1.
PARAM
LGDISP
1
PARAM
TABS
273.15
PARAM* SIGMA
5.6699E14
PARAM
POST
1
$! Bulk Data Model Section
Main Index
There are two steps in this analysis. The first step is associated with the thermal boundary conditions as indicated with
ANALY=HSTAT. The second step is the thermal stress analysis and the structure boundary condition which the
ANALY=NLSTAT. The TEMP(load)=1 in the second step will allow the Step 2 to pick up the calculated temperature
from step 1 as the thermal load for the calculation of thermal stress. Please note that the param,lgdisp,1 is required
when chaining thermal and structural analyses. The TEMP(INITIAL)=9 points to the TEMPD,9,0.0 in the bulk data
section. This indicates the initial stress free temperature is at zero degrees. The thermal strain is then equal to the
product of the linear coefficient of thermal expansion times the change in temperature. In this example, the thermal
coefficient of expansion is constant, temperature dependency is also readily possible.
Following is the output from the thermal analysis and thermal stress analysis.
1
0
JUNE
LOAD STEP =
POINT ID.
6320
6327
6333
1.00000E+00
TYPE
S
S
S
ID
VALUE
8.666747E+01
8.697186E+01
8.657732E+01
T E M P E R A T U R E
ID+1 VALUE
8.661747E+01
8.687786E+01
8.654223E+01
ID+2 VALUE
8.657528E+01
8.679778E+01
8.651408E+01
POINT ID.
99
100
101
102
103
1.00000E+00
TYPE
G
G
G
G
G
T1
7.002653E04
8.090116E04
8.938556E04
1.037468E03
1.272494E03
D I S P L A C E M E N T
T2
5.229975E04
5.227823E04
5.234344E04
5.227153E04
4.961967E04
Main Index
Temperature Contours
T3
1.484855E03
1.456455E03
1.425087E03
1.400765E03
1.366653E03
PAGE
896
STEP 1
ID+3 VALUE
8.654037E+01
8.672908E+01
8.649251E+01
ID+4 VALUE
8.651233E+01
8.667010E+01
8.647716E+01
11, 2010
ID+5 VALUE
8.649082E+01
8.661977E+01
MSC Nastran
5/21/10
SUBCASE 1
Results
Figure 464
5/21/10
V E C T O R
JUNE
LOAD STEP =
MSC Nastran
SUBCASE 1
1
0
11, 2010
V E C T O R
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
R1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
R2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
PAGE
STEP 2
R3
9546
CHAPTER 46 869
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Figure 465
Figure 466
Modeling Tips
Always check consistency of units; the basic units are mm, N, and oC(K).
$watt/mm.C
MAT4
1
.147
$ Material Record : mat1.2
$ Description of Material :
MAT4
2
.168
$ Material Record : mat1.3
$ Description of Material :
MAT4
3
.0714
$ Material Record : mat1.4
$ Description of Material :
MAT4
4
.02016
$
Main Index
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
MAT1,1,6.9e4,,0.3,,1.0e6
$ Material 2 : leadframe
MAT1,2,5.52e4,,0.3,,1.0e5
$ Material 3 : new
MAT1,3,4.5e4,,0.3,,1.0e6
$ Material 4 : paste
MAT1,4,2.0e3,,0.3,,1.0e5
Units
a. For default workspace, select Structures
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 871
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
d
c
Main Index
e
2009 MSC.Software Corporation
Main Index
WS98
CHAPTER 46 873
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 875
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Material Properties
a. Material properties of the imported model
b. Double click, one at a time, on each of the four material names
c. Observe the thermalmechanical contents of the material forms
d. Click Cancel
Main Index
c
b
d
WS912
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 877
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Element Properties
a. Element properties of the imported model
b. Double click, one at a time, on each of the four material names
c. Observe the element property contents of the property forms
d. Click Cancel
Main Index
f
.
i
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 879
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Main Index
c
d
e
f
g
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 881
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Main Index
e
f
h
i
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 883
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Main Index
c
d
e
f
g
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 885
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 887
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
e
f
g
h
j
k
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 889
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Main Index
b
c
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 891
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Main Index
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 893
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
c
d
e
f
Main Index
b
c
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 895
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
b
c
e
f
g
Main Index
b
c
d
e
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 897
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
c
d
Main Index
b
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 899
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
b
d
d
f
Main Index
d
e
f
g
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 901
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
b
c
d
Main Index
c
d
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 903
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 905
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 907
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
e
f
Main Index
b
c
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 909
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Main Index
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 911
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Main Index
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_46.dat
Ch46.SimXpert
Main Index
CHAPTER 46 913
Thermal Stress Analysis of an Integrated Circuit Board
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 28 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
Thermal Contours
Figure 467
Main Index
Displacement Contours
47
Main Index
Summary
915
Introduction
Modeling Details
Solution Procedure
Results
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
916
916
923
926
925
926
922
CHAPTER 47 915
Dynamic Impact of a Rigid Sphere on a Woven Fabric
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
R = 1 cm
Material properties
E = 10GPa , = 1500kg m
Analysis characteristics
Nonlinear transient analysis with adaptive time stepping and geometric nonlinearity due
to large displacements and large rotations
Boundary conditions
Fabric is clamped on all four sides; sliding, frictional contact between the beam elements
of the fabric and between the fabric and the sphere.
Applied loads
The rigid sphere hits the fabric at the center with an initial velocity of 100m s .
Element type
FE results
Main Index
Introduction
This example demonstrates the beamtobeam contact capabilities of MSC Nastran SOL 400. In contrast to the
standard gridtosegment based contact, beamtobeam contact is a true segmenttosegment contact, in which the
beam elements are able to touch each other at arbitrary locations midway between the grid points of the elements and
can slide along each other, with or without friction. The model consists of a woven fabric which is impacted by a rigid
sphere. The fabric is a plane weave and consists of 2 12 sinusoidally shaped yarns. It is clamped along the four sides
and the yarns are initially in contact at their intersections (see Figure 471). The total area of the fabric is 6 6 cm 2 . The
sphere, with a radius of 1cm and a mass density of 981.25 kg m 3 , hits the fabric with an initial velocity of 100m s at
the center.
R = 1 cm
Figure 471
Geometry of the Fabric with the Beam Elements Displayed with the True Cross Section
Modeling Details
A numerical solution has been obtained with MSC Nastrans SOL 400. The details of the finite element model, contact
simulation, material, load, boundary conditions, and solution procedure are discussed below.
The case control section of the input contains the following options for a nonlinear analysis:
BCONTACT = 0
SUBCASE 1
STEP 1
ANALYSIS=NLTRAN
TSTEPNL = 1
BCONTACT = 1
SPC = 1
IC = 2
The analysis is a nonlinear transient analysis and contains a single subcase with one step. The step has time stepping
procedure and convergence control settings defined via TSTEPNL, contact table and parameters via BCONTACT, fixed
displacements (or single point constraints) via SPC, initial velocity via IC, and the displacements results for
the .f06 (output) file.
Large displacement effects are included in the nonlinear analysis using the option:
Main Index
CHAPTER 47 917
Dynamic Impact of a Rigid Sphere on a Woven Fabric
PARAM
LGDISP
The large strain option is activated for the nonlinear property extensions PBEMN1 to the beam elements, via the option:
NLMOPTS LRGSTRN 1
This option selects (among other things) the updated Lagrange formulation of these elements, which is needed for a
proper treatment of the large rotations of the beams.
Element Modeling
The yarns are modelled by 1440 2node CBEAM elements with an elliptical cross section. The orientation vector v
that is used to construct the local element y and zdirections of the beams points in the basic Ydirection for the yarns
in the basic Xdirection and it points in the basic Xdirection for the yarns in the basic Ydirection. The element ydirections of the beams are thus parallel to the basic XYplane. The major axis of the elliptical cross section coincides
with the element ydirection and is also parallel to the basic XYplane. The minor axis coincides with the element zdirection (see Figure 471 and Figure 472).
zelem
b
a
yelem
Figure 472
The semimajor and semiminor axes of the cross section are a = 1.25mm and b = 0.5mm , so that the area and the
moments of inertia of the cross section read:
6
A = ab = 1.9635 10 m ,
(471)
13 4
3
I 1 =  a b = 7.6699 10 m ,
4
(472)
13 4
3
I 2 =  ab = 1.2272 10 m .
4
(473)
The crosssection properties for the yarns are defined via the PBEAM option as follows:
PBEAM*
*
*
*
1.227184630E13
0.000000E+00
1.963495408E06 7.669903939E13
0.000000E+00 4.448544285E13
0.000000E+00
Main Index
The nonlinear extensions to the beam elements can be activated using the PBEMN1 property extension to the regular
PBEAM or PBEAML options in the manner shown below:
PBEMN1
LS
This PBEMN1 option selects a thin elastic beam element with transverse shear effects, which is similar to the standard
CBEAM element with only a PBEAM property, except that the former allows nonlinear material behavior, such as
plasticity effects, to be used for the beam elements. In this example, no nonlinear material effects are considered, but
the beam elements with and without the property extension will be compared in the elastic regime.
Modeling Contact
The standard contact algorithm of MSC Nastran is based on a gridtosegment approach. The grid points on the surface
of the touching (or slave) contact body can touch the segments on the surface of the touched (or master) contact body.
Here, the segments of a contact body are, for example, the faces of solid elements, the top and bottom surfaces of shell
elements, and the surface of a rigid contact body. The gridtosegment algorithm works well for contact between solid,
shell and rigid contact bodies. It even works fine if the slave body consists of beam elements and the master is a solid,
shell or rigid contact body. In that case, the grid points of the beams can touch the segments on the surface of the solid,
shell or rigid body.
If both slave and master body consist of beam elements, then the gridtosegment approach is not very convenient.
Beams generally touch each other somewhere in the middle of the element and not necessarily at the grid points. The
beamtobeam contact algorithm of MSC Nastran SOL 400 addresses this case. It is a true segmenttosegment contact
algorithm, in which the beam elements of the slave contact body can touch the beam elements of the master contact
body at arbitrary points midway between the grids of the elements. Moreover, beam elements which are in contact
can slide along each other with or without friction. The beamtobeam contact algorithm is activated by the BEAMB
option to BCPARA. It supplements the standard gridtosegment algorithm, that is, the grid points of a beam contact
body can touch the surface of solid, shell or rigid bodies through the gridtosegment algorithm and, if beamtobeam
contact is activated, then the beam elements can also touch beam elements of another (or the same) contact body.
The cross section of the beam elements is taken into account when two beam elements are coming in contact, but the
actual shape of crosssection, defined by PBEAM or PBEAML, for example, is ignored. Instead, a circular crosssection
is assumed for contact. The radius of the contact crosssection is called the beam contact radius and must be defined
via the BCBMRAD option. The beam contact radius is defined on a per element basis and may vary from element to
element. However, if a beam element is initially in contact with another beam element and during the analysis slides
off that element to a third beam element with a different contact radius, the sudden jump in the contact radius may lead
to convergence problems. Therefore, the contact surface of the beam elements of a contact body is smoothed by
averaging the beam contact radii of the elements at the common grid points. The resulting contact surface for a
sequence of beam elements is a piecewise conically shaped surface (see Figure 473). Note that the beam contact
radius is not used when the grid points of the beam element touch a solid, shell or rigid contact body.
Main Index
CHAPTER 47 919
Dynamic Impact of a Rigid Sphere on a Woven Fabric
Tr
u
Be
am
(s
Co
nta
ct
oo
th
ed
)C
Ra
diu
s=
on
ta
0.1
ct
5m
Su
rfa
ce
Be
am
Co
nta
ct
Ra
diu
s=
0.1
0m
Figure 473
Conically Shaped (Smoothed) Contact Surface Obtained by Averaging the Beam Contact
Radii at the Grids
The present example contains three contact bodies. The first two bodies consist of the beam elements representing the
yarns in the basic Xdirection and the beam elements representing the yarns in the basic Ydirection, respectively (see
Figure 471). The third contact body is the rigid sphere. The beamtobeam contact algorithm is used to model contact
between the yarns. The standard gridtosegment based contact algorithm handles contact between the grid points of
the yarns and the rigid sphere. Friction is included in the analysis, in the form of the force based, bilinear Coulomb
friction model (type 6).
The BCPARA bulk data option defines the number of bodies in contact and contact parameters like the friction type
FTYPE and the beamtobeam contact flag BEAMB.
BCPARA
NBODIES
3 BEAMB
FTYPE
The deformable contact bodies are defined by the bulk data entries BCBODY and BSURF. The BCBODY option defines
the contact body with its ID, dimension, type of body etc. and BSURF identifies the elements forming the deformable
body.
$ yarns parallel to basic Xdirection
BCBODY
1
3D DEFORM
BSURF
1
1
2
8
9
10
16
17
18
24
25
26
1
3
11
19
27
4
12
20
28
5
13
21
29
6
14
22
30
7
15
23
31
2
63
71
79
87
64
72
80
88
65
73
81
89
66
74
82
90
67
75
83
91
Note that the dimension of the two deformable contact bodies is set to 3D even though the bodies consist of 1D beam
elements. This is because the contact body lives in 3Dspace, that is, all grid points have 3 displacement degrees of
freedom.
Main Index
The rigid sphere is defined as a loadcontrolled rigid contact body using a BCBODY bulk data option. The BCBODY
includes the NURBS surface definition of the sphere. The CONTROL field is set to the ID (1) of the control grid point
associated with the body. In contrast to a position or velocity controlled rigid body, the loadcontrolled body does not
have a prescribed motion. Instead, the displacement degrees of freedom of the control grid point are the displacements
of the rigid body and can be controlled by single point constraints or loads on the control grid point in the usual way.
In this example, the rigid body will be free to move in the basic Zdirection, while the motion in the other two
directions will be suppressed via single point constraints (see below).
The sphere is initially located in the positive Zhalf space of the basic coordinate system, at some distance from the
fabric. During the initial contact search, the body will be moved towards the fabric, such that it just touches the fabric
at start of the first time step. This initial contact body approach is activated by the BCONTACT = 0 case control option.
During the approach, the rigid body is moved in the direction of the velocity defined by the APPROV section of the
BCBODY.
$ rigid sphere
BCBODY*
3
*
0
*
0
*
1.00000000E+00
*
RIGID
*
*
APPROV
*
*
NURBS
*
3
$ control points
*
3D
0.00000000E+00
0.00000000E+00
RIGID
0
0.00000000E+00
1
0.00000000E+00
5
24
0
1
0.00000000E+00
1sphere
0.00000000E+00 1.00000000E02
9
3
48
0
0.00000000E+00 1.00000000E02
1.20000000E02
The rigid body represents a solid sphere with a mass density of 981.25 kg m 3 , a radius of 1cm and a total mass of just
over four (4) grams. The mass of the sphere can conveniently be assigned to the loadcontrolled rigid body through a
concentrated mass element (CONM2) at the control grid point of the rigid contact body:
CONM2*
2000
4.1102503884E3
To identify how the contact bodies can touch each other, the BCTABLE option is used. BCTABLE with ID 0 is used to
define the touching conditions at the start of the analysis, during the initial contact search and the contact body
approach. The BCTABLE with ID 1 is the main BCTABLE used to define the touching conditions for later time steps
in the analysis, and it is flagged using BCONTACT = 1 in the case control section. The two BCTABLEs are identical
and specify that the yarns parallel to the basic Xdirection (contact body 1) can touch the yarns parallel to the basic Ydirection (contact body 2) and that the grid points of both beam contact bodies can touch the rigid sphere (contact body
3). The BCTABLEs also define the friction coefficient (0.1) for all possible contact combinations.
$ contact table for initial rigid body approach
BCTABLE
0
2
SLAVE
1
0.10
0
0
0
MASTERS
2
3
SLAVE
2
0.10
0
0
0
MASTERS
3
Main Index
0
0
CHAPTER 47 921
Dynamic Impact of a Rigid Sphere on a Woven Fabric
$
$ main contact table
BCTABLE
1
SLAVE
MASTERS
SLAVE
MASTERS
1
0
2
2
0
0
3
0.10
0.10
The definition of the beam contact radii for the beam elements completes the contact setup. The radii are defined via
the BCBMRAD option. This is a mandatory option if beamtobeam contact is used. Since the beams generally will
touch each other in the direction of the minor axis of the elliptical crosssection of the beam elements (see
Figure 471), the beam contact radius is set equal to the semiminor axis a for all beam elements in the model.
$ beam contact radius
BCBMRAD 5e4
ALL
Material Modeling
The isotropic, Hookean elastic material properties of the deformable body are defined using the MAT1 option as
follows:
MAT1*
*
1.000000E+10
0.000000E+00
1.500000E+03
0.000000E+00
Youngs modulus is taken to be 10GPa and the mass density is set to 1500 kg m 3 .
1
185
488
791
858
1161
1464
1465
123456
186
489
792
859
1162
2
187
490
793
860
1163
3
188
491
794
1156
1164
4
189
492
795
1157
1165
5
485
493
855
1158
1461
124
486
494
856
1159
1462
184
487
790
857
1160
1463
The rigid sphere is allowed to move only in the basic Zdirection and is given an initial velocity in that direction
towards the fabric. As explained in the preceding section, the motion of the sphere is controlled by the displacements
of the control grid point of the body, so the displacements of the control grid in the basic X and Ydirection are
suppressed,
SPC1
12
and the grid is given an initial velocity of 100m s in the negative basic Zdirection via the TIC option.
TIC
100.
The latter is selected via the IC case control option in the step.
Main Index
Solution Procedure
The timestepping procedure to be used is defined through the following TSTEPNL entry:
TSTEPNL
.100
0
400 5e7
PFNT
UV
In a dynamic contact analysis in MSC Nastran SOL 400, the GeneralizedAlpha operator with zero spectral radius is
automatically chosen by the program. The GeneralizedAlpha operator uses two parameters NDAMP and NDAMPM in
its formulation. By varying the values of these parameters, the spectral radius can be varied from 0.0 to 1.0. For contact
problems, NDAMP is automatically taken as 0.0 and NDAMPM as 1.0, yielding a spectral radius of zero. This is wellsuited to damp out high frequencies that are normally excited during the impact process. Other features that are
automatically used by the dynamic contact algorithm to avoid high frequency content include the following: There is
no projection of the contacting segment onto the contacted segment. A contacting segment that falls within the distance
tolerance is simply constrained in its current position. Also, if there is penetration detected during the NewtonRaphson iterations, the maximum penetration is used as a scaleback factor to reduce the time step and restart the
increment with the reduced time step.
The TSTEPNL entry controls the time stepping for the solution. Important parameters of the TSTEPNL entry are as
follows:
ID (2nd field of entry 1)  The ID is used as a crossreference in the case control section to identify the
TSTEPNL entry to be used for a particular step.
NDT, DT, NO (3rd  5th fields of entry 1)  These parameters control the total simulation time, the initial
analysis time step, the output frequency and the maximum possible time step. The product of NDT and DT
defines the total simulation time  in the current problem, the total simulation time comes out to be 2x104 s.
NO is left as blank in the current problem  the default value of NO is 1  this implies that for this problem,
output is desired at every single step. In addition, the maximum time step cannot exceed NO times DT  which
means that for this problem, the maximum time step cannot exceed 5e7s. In general, for impact problems,
given that the energy conversion (from kinetic energy to strain energy and viceversa) occurs during very
small time intervals, it is important to keep tight control over the timesteps.
METHOD, KSTEP (6th and 7th fields of entry 1)  In the present problem, METHOD is taken as PFNT. FNT or
PFNT is a recommended default for contact problems. PFNT denotes Pure Full Newton Technique wherein
the operator matrix is reformed at every iteration. KSTEP is left as blank in the present problem, which for the
PBEAM + PBEMN1 elements case will default to 1 and for the PBEAM case will default to 1. KSTEP = 1
indicates that the stiffness at the start of the next increment is taken to be the same as the stiffness at the last
iteration of the previous increment while KSTEP = 1 indicates that the stiffness is again updated at the start
of the next increment.
CONV (9th field of entry 1) and EPSU (2nd field of entry 2)  In the present problem, this is taken as UV. U
indicates displacement control and V indicates the vector component method. The ratio of the maximum
iterative change in the displacement over the maximum incremental change in the displacement is calculated.
Convergence is established when this ratio is < EPSU (0.1 in the present problem). Note that, by default, for V
style checking, separate checks are made over translational degrees of freedom and over rotational degrees of
freedom. If the rotational check is deemed to be unnecessary, use can be made of the MSCLPRM,MRCONV,N,
in which N is set to 2 or 3 to bypass the rotation check.
Main Index
CHAPTER 47 923
Dynamic Impact of a Rigid Sphere on a Woven Fabric
MAXBIS (2nd field of entry 3)  controls the maximum number of bisections allowed for each time step. In
the present problem, this number is set to 0. It should be noted that the penetration check and possible timestep cutback is independent of the value of MAXBIS or DTBIS (the smallest bisection time possible).
ADJUST (3rd field of entry 3)  controls the time step skip factor for automatic time step adjustment. The
blank field allows ADJUST to default to 5 in the present problem. A nonzero ADJUST value allows the
following additional checks at the end of an increment:
After the first 2 increments wherein the usergiven timestep is used, the analysis is restarted with either the
same time step or possibly a smaller timestep. If the prescribed time step violates frequencybased time
step estimates, then the first 2 increments are repeated with the programevaluated time step. This restart
allows good accuracy at the start of the analysis if a high initial time step has been prescribed.
At a frequency of every ADJUST increments, the dominant frequency of the system is estimated and is used
to evaluate the optimal time step. The number of steps (MSTEP) to resolve this dominant period can be
defined by the user (4th field of entry 3). MSTEP defaults to 10 (for mildly nonlinear) and 20 (for highly
nonlinear). The time step for subsequent increments is reduced by a factor of or if the optimal time
step is smaller than the current time step. Similarly, the time step for subsequent increments is increased by
a factor of 2 or 4 if the optimal time step is larger than the current time step.
The final optimal time step for the next increment is based on two algorithms  the frequency algorithm
(which allows both increase and decrease in time steps and is only checked when ADJUST > 0) and the
output algorithm (which is independent of the ADJUST value). After the frequency algorithm comes up
with predicted time step, the time step may again be adjusted such that it satisfies the frequency requirement
and becomes an even submultiple (1, 1/2, , etc.) of the required output time. Note that if the time step is
reduced arbitrarily due to a penetration cutback, then the time steps for the next few increments may be
changed unevenly before they become regularized.
Results
Figure 474 shows the final deformed shape of the fabric in two views. The contact status is displayed as well. The
latter is 1 at the grid points of beam elements in contact and 0 otherwise and indicates that the yarns are in contact at
the crossings. The displacement in the basic Zdirection of the rigid sphere is plotted as a function of time in
Figure 475 for different friction coefficients and for standard beam elements with only a PBEAM property as well as
for beam elements with a PBEMN1 nonlinear extension. The first conclusion that can be drawn from this figure is the
fact that, in the elastic regime, the standard beam element and the beam element with the nonlinear extension give
basically the same results. The difference, of course, is that the beam element with PBEMN1 extension can also be
used with material nonlinearities, such as plasticity effects. The second thing that stands out is the effect of the
friction. Due to friction, the yarns moreorless stick to each other, so there is less sliding and the fabric behaves stiffer
than without friction. This can also be seen from Figure 476, in which the final deformed shapes are drawn for the
frictionless case and the case with friction.
Main Index
Figure 474
Contact Status (red is touching) and Final Deformed Shape of the Fabric
Figure 475
Main Index
CHAPTER 47 925
Dynamic Impact of a Rigid Sphere on a Woven Fabric
(a)
Figure 476
(b)
Deformed Shape Without Friction (a) and With Friction Coefficient of 0.2 (b)
Modeling Tips
The beamtobeam contact algorithm is a symmetric algorithm, in the sense that the same contact condition is found,
whether beam element A is touching beam element B, or element B is touching element A. This means that the choice
of the slave and master contact bodies on the BCTABLE entry is less important for beamtobeam contact than it is for
the standard gridtosegment based contact. For the latter, the proper choice of slave and master may be critical in
certain cases, particularly if the mesh densities of the bodies differ significantly.
In this chapter, no nonlinear material effects such as plasticity, are considered. The standard CBEAM element with only
a PBEAM or PBEAML property supports only elastic material behavior, but if the nonlinear extension PBEMN1 is used
in combination with the PBEAML property, nonlinear material effects can be taken into account. The PBEAML can then
refer to, for example, a MAT1 material with an associated MATEP entry, to include plasticity effects. Note that the shape
of the crosssection must be known to the program to be able to do the crosssection integration, required for nonlinear
material behavior. Therefore, a beam element with a PBEAM property cannot support nonlinear material effects, not
even with a PBEMN1 extension.
In the present problem, the output frequency NO is defined as 1. This causes output at every step and also prevents the
time step from increasing beyond the initial value (5e7 seconds). In many contact / impact problems, it is beneficial
to have a time step value that does not exceed the userprescribed initial time step value  however one may not desire
a NO value of 1 always since that may cause very large output file sizes. For such cases, a larger value of NO (NO =
5, 10, etc.) can be prescribed and ADJUST can be set to 0. The ADJUST = 0 setting forces the program to bypass
the frequency check thereby preventing any time step increase and the output algorithm ensures that the time step is
regularized as quickly as possible and that output is produced whenever the time reaches NO times DT.
Main Index
Input File(s)
File
Description
nug_47a.dat
MSC Nastran input with standard beam element but without friction
nug_47ax.dat
MSC Nastran input with beam element with nonlinear extension PBEMN1 but without friction
nug_47b.dat
nug_47bx.dat
MSC Nastran input with beam element with nonlinear extension PBEMN1 and friction
Video
Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 30 minutes and explains how
the steps are performed.
R = 1 cm
Figure 477
Main Index
48
Main Index
Summary
928
Introduction
Modeling Details
Solution Procedure
Results
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Reference
929
930
933
934
935
935
933
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
Material properties
AS
E a = E m = 50000Mpa , a = m = 0.33 , s
AS
SA
= 1931.4Mpa , C a = 8.66 , s
C m = 6.66
= 1631.7Mpa ,
SA
= 1688.7Mpa , f
= 1558.8Mpa ,
Analysis characteristics
Quasistatic analysis using: fixed time stepping and material nonlinearity due to plastic
or thermoelastic behavior
Boundary conditions
Applied loads
Element type
FE results
History plots of stress versus strain (zcomponents) for a specific node for both the
mechanical and thermomechanical model
Stress Strain Relation for Mechanical and ThermoMechanical Model
800
T=150 Vol_mart=100%
ThermMech T=0
T=150
700
ThermMech T=30
700
T=70
ThermoMech T=50
T=0
Mech T=0
T=10
600
Mech T=30
T=30
600
Mech T=50
T=50
500
500
400
Stress ZZ
Stress ZZ
400
300
200
200
100
100
0
0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
100
0.012
0.014
0.016
0.018
0
0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
100
200
Strain ZZ
Main Index
300
200
Strain ZZ
0.01
0.012
0.014
0.016
0.018
CHAPTER 48 929
Shape Memory Analysis of a Stent
Introduction
This problem demonstrates the ability of MSC Nastran SOL 400 to model shape memory materials. The most common
materials which have shape memory properties are alloys of nickel and titanium. The shape memory effect is due to a
phase change between martensite and austenite phases in the alloy. These phases have identical chemistry but different
crystalline structures; bodycenteredtetragonal for martensite and facecenteredcubic for austenite. Transitioning
between these two phases requires only a small amount of activation energy giving the transformation. A cold
collapsed stent sheathed in a catheter can be deployed in a plaque lined blood vessel by the selfexpansion caused by
the change in room to body temperature, with the stent expansion keeping the vessel open and blood flowing properly.
In other words, the stents remembered shape keeps the blood vessel open.The martensite phase forms when the
material is cooled down, or it can form when stress is applied to a hot material. In this phase extensive deformation
can occur as a thermoelastic martensitic shear mechanism. This deformation can be undone when the material is reheated, or at simple unloading of a hot material. When a hot (unstrained) specimen is cooled it is initially in the
austenite phase. Upon cooling between martensite start M s and martensite finish M f temperature the specimen will
change to the martensite phase. Conversely starting from a cold specimen which is in a martensic phase upon heating
between austenite start A s and austenite finish A f temperatures, the specimen will change to the austenite phase.
Different temperature ranges can be distinguished T M s , M s T A f , A f T T c , where T c is defined as the
temperature above which the yield strength of the austenite phase is lower than the stress required to induce the
austenitemartensite transformation. Uniaxial tensile tests will show the following responses. For T M s , the
specimen is completely in the martensite phase. The stress versus strain curves will display a smooth parabolic type
behavior, the deformation is caused by the movement of defects such as twin boundaries and the boundaries between
variants. Unloading occurs nearly elastically and the accumulated deformation caused by the reorientation of the
existing martensite and the transformation of any preexisting austenite, remains after the specimen is completely
unloaded. Note that the deformation is entirely due to oriented martensite and this would be recoverable upon heating
to temperatures above the ( A s A f ) range. This would show the shape memory effect. For A f T T c , the specimen
shows pseudo elastic behavior. In this range the specimen is in the austenite phase, and stress induced martensite is
formed, along with the associated deformation; upon unloading the martensite is unstable and reverts to austenite
thereby undoing the accumulated deformation. For T T c when the stress is higher than the yield stress no phase
transition takes place, and the austenite phase will deform plastically which cannot be undone. Figure 481 shows
thermomechanical response of NiTi, the data is of Miyazaki et al. (1981). In this case, M s = 190K , M f = 128K ,
A s = 188K , and A f = 221K . Two different models are available to simulate the shape memory behavior: a
mechanical model, and a thermomechanical model. The thermomechanical model describes the complete behavior
as discussed before. The mechanical model only describes the super elastic behavior, and thus can only be used at
higher temperatures. In this example, a stent will be analyzed at different ambient temperatures. Simple loading and
unloading is applied. Stressstrain graphs will show the response at the different ambient temperatures.
Main Index
(b) 153K
(a) 77K
(c) 164K
300
200
100
0
400
0
(d) 224K
0
(e) 232K
(f) 241K
300
200
100
0
(h) 273K
(i) 276K
400
200
Ms = 190K
AF = 221K
2
Figure 481
4 0
2
4
Strain (%)
Thermal history
Modeling Details
Figure 482 shows a representation of the stent which is modeled. At a prescribed ambient temperature the stent is
loaded and unloaded by prescribing the displacement in the zdirection. For modeling reasons isotropic material is
chosen at the end parts of the stent. In this way no local effects will occur where the displacements are prescribed.
Smaller steps are chosen during the unloading part. Small steps are also needed to capture the shape memory behavior.
Figure 482
Main Index
CHAPTER 48 931
Shape Memory Analysis of a Stent
The case control section of the input file contains the following options for nonlinear analysis:
ENDC
TEMPERATURE(INITIAL) = 1
DISPLACEMENT(SORT1,REAL)=ALL
SPCFORCES(SORT1,REAL)=ALL
STRESS(SORT1,plot,REAL,VONMISES,BILIN)=ALL
NLSTRESS(SORT1,plot,REAL,VONMISES,BILIN)=ALL
SUBCASE 1
STEP 1
TITLE=Loading.
ANALYSIS = NLSTATIC
NLPARM = 1
SPC = 2
LOAD = 3
STEP 2
TITLE=Unloading.
ANALYSIS = NLSTATIC
NLPARM = 2
SPC = 4
LOAD = 3
Two STEPS are defined to do the loading and the unloading. It is possible to obtain extra post quantities to examine
the behavior of the shape memory material. To do this, the NLOUT option should be used in combination with the
NLSTRESS option in the following way:
NLSTRESS(NLOUT=10)=ALL
BEGIN BULK
NLOUT
10
VOLFMART
CPHSTRN
See the MSC Nastran Quick Reference Guide for which output quantities can be selected. In this case the volume
fraction of martensite and the phase transformation strain tensor will be printed in the .f06 file and can be
postprocessed in SIMX..
Large displacement effects are included in the nonlinear analysis using the large strain option:
NLMOPTS LRGS
For the mechanical model the multiplicative decomposition formulation is used, this is set automatically for the
elements using this material behavior. It can be activated for the whole model using
NLMOPTS LRGS
Element Modeling
Besides the standard options to define the element connectivity and grid coordinate location, the bulk data section
contains various options which are especially important to do nonlinear analysis, and are needed to be able to use shape
memory material. The nonlinear extensions to lowerorder solid element, CHEXA can be activated by using the
PSLDN1 property option to the regular PSOLID property option in the manner shown below:
PSOLID
PSLDN1
+
C4
Main Index
1
1
1
1
SOLI
0
1
L
+
+
The PLSLDN1 option allows the element to be used with different kinds of inelastic material models, one being the
shape memory model. This element is also used in both large displacement and large strain analyses and has no
restrictions on the kinematics of deformation unlike the regular CHEXA elements with only PSOLID property entry.
Material Modeling
The material properties for the thermomechanical model is given using the MATSMA option. The mechanical model
uses a subset of these properties. The following material properties for the shape memory material are used:
E a = E m = 50000Mpa
Youngs modulus
a = m = 0.33
Poissons ratio
AS
AS
= 1631.7Mpa
= 1931.4Mpa
C a = 8.66
SA
SA
= 1688.7Mpa
= 1558.8Mpa
C m = 6.66
This data corresponds to temperature ranges where the martensite austenite phase transformations take place at
o
martensite is taken M f ra c = 0 for all cases except for the case where T i n it = 150 C , then the volume fraction of
martensite is M f ra c = 1 .
The corner parts of the stent are modeled using isotropic material properties using the MAT1 option.
MATSMA
MAT1
Main Index
1
50000.
50000.
0.
300.
2
2
0.33
0.33
0.
4.
50000.
200.
1.E05
1.E05
100.
2.
0.008573
1.E+20
1.E+20
1.E+20
0.
2.75
.33
1.
1631.7
1688.7
1931.4
1558.8
8.66
6.66
0.
3.
1.
CHAPTER 48 933
Shape Memory Analysis of a Stent
Solution Procedure
The nonlinear procedure used is defined through the following NLPARM entry:
NLPARM
NLPARM
1
2
30
60
PFNT
PFNT
PV
PV
ALL
ALL
30 Increments are used for the loading and 60 increments for the unloading. Two STEPS are defined to do the loading
and unloading. The analysis is performed at different ambient temperatures to study the material behavior,
respectively.
Results
Analyses are performed for the thermomechanical and mechanical models at different temperatures. Figure 483
shows the stressstrain relationship for one node (node number 1292) at different ambient temperatures for the thermomechanical model. The zcomponent of the stress and strain of this node is collected during the loading and unloading
o
and plotted in the figure. At T = 150 C an analysis is performed with a martensite volume fraction of 0% and an
analysis with a volume fraction of 100%. Note that for 0% martensite no plastic behavior occurs. If no martensite is
present no plastic behavior can occur, and due to the low temperature no martensite can form due to stress. Physically
this would however be an unstable situation, and the martensite volume fraction should be set. This is different for
o
T = 75 C where martensite will form if none is present, and the material will show plastic behavior. Also note that
o
since these are temperatures below A f = 20 C the plastic deformation cannot be undone. This only happens for the
o
case where T = 30 C , and T = 50 C . The simulation for T = 10 C stops prematurely, because it cannot find
convergence. The material behavior can be sensitive during unloading, in this case reducing the timestep further did
not help. What would help to get convergence in this case is to refine the mesh.
Figure 484 compares the results of the mechanical model with the thermomechanical model. The mechanical model
is designed to simulate the superelastic behavior, so it should be used for higher temperatures. The results show a
similar response.
Main Index
Modeling Tips
The behavior of the shape memory material can be quite sensitive to the loading. Therefore, the user must use
sufficiently small timesteps, and the mesh should be fine enough. It is best to use the PFNT option of NLPARM for
stability.
Stress Strain Relation for ThermoMechanical Model
800
T=150 Vol_mart=100%
T=150
700
T=70
T=0
T=10
600
T=30
T=50
500
Stress ZZ
400
300
200
100
0
0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
0.012
0.014
0.016
0.018
100
200
Strain ZZ
Figure 483
800
ThermMech T=0
ThermMech T=30
700
ThermoMech T=50
Mech T=0
Mech T=30
600
Mech T=50
500
Stress ZZ
400
300
200
100
0
0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
0.012
0.014
0.016
0.018
100
200
Strain ZZ
Figure 484
Main Index
CHAPTER 48 935
Shape Memory Analysis of a Stent
Input File(s)
File
Description
o
nug_48a.dat
nug_48b.dat
nug_48c.dat
nug_48d.dat
nug_48e.dat
nug_48f.dat
nug_48g.dat
nug_48h.dat
nug_48i.dat
o
o
o
o
o
Reference
Miyazaki, S., Otsuka, K., Suzuki, S. 1981. Transformation pseudoelasticity and deformation behavior in a Ti50.6at%Ni alloy. Scripta Metallurgica, 15 (3); 287292.
Main Index
49
Main Index
Summary
937
Introduction
Modeling Details
Solution Procedure
Results
Modeling Tips
Input File(s)
Video
938
938
943
944
979
946
978
947
CHAPTER 49 937
Shell Edge Contact
Summary
Title
Features
Geometry
Units: m, N, s
y'
x'
x'
shell edge contact
z'
y
45o
10.0 m
z'
shell edge contact
x'
5 x 2 x 0.05
y'
x
10.0 m
Material properties
Analysis characteristics
Boundary conditions
Case 1:
Upper and lower half of plate are connected using glued edge contact
Fixed conditions at all four edges
Inplane displacements restrained at all nodes except those nodes at the edges of the
glued contact line
Case 2:
Edgetoedge contact between two square tubes
Clamped condition at bottom edge of lower tube
Applied loads
Element type
FE results
Displacement Contours
Case 1: Mode 1 134.18 Hz
Seam
Main Index
Introduction
The 3D contact capability introduced in MSC Nastran supported a general node to surface contact in all translational
degrees of freedom. The feature of shell edge to shell edge contact was added in the R3 release of MSC Nastran. The
following two cases are considered to demonstrate two different types of shell edge contact.
Case 1:
Modal analysis of thick rhombic plate. This is a NAFEMS test case involving evaluation of
natural frequencies of a fully clamped rhombic plate. The plate is divided into two equal
parts in the vertical direction. These two parts are meshed with different mesh densities and
then connected with inplane glued edge contact.
Case 2:
Diagonal crushing of two square tubes. This model demonstrate the capability of general
shell edge contact by crushing the lower square tube with the upper square tube as a result
of the edge contact between the two tubes.
Modeling Details
MSC Nastran's solution sequences 103 and 400 are used to demonstrate the shell edge contact capability with the two
test cases. The details of the finite element model, contact simulation, material, load, boundary conditions, and solution
procedure for these two models are discussed below.
Case 1: Two equal parts of rhombic plate are meshed with different mesh densities of 16 x 32 and 20 x 40 CQUAD4
elements. These two parts do not share any node at their common edge as they are connected using inplane glued edge
contact. The FE model used for the modal analysis (SOL 103) shown in Figure 491 and the case control section part
of the input is given below:
SUBCASE 1
METHOD = 1
BCONTACT = 1
SET 10 = 1,2,3,4,5,6
SET 20 = 137,182,213,280,327,593,600,639,703,744
SPC = 2
OMODE = 10
DISP(PLOT,PUNCH)=20
The modal analysis method to be used for extracting the eigenvalues is referenced by the METHOD option, and the
associated contact table to be used is referenced by the BCONTACT option. The SPC option refers to the set of
boundary conditions to be applied and the OMODE option identifies the list of modes to be extracted.
Main Index
CHAPTER 49 939
Shell Edge Contact
Case 1
Case 2
bsurf1
bsurf1
bsurf2
bsurf2
Y
Z
X
Z
Figure 491
Case 2: The rectangular sides of each square tube are meshed using 5x10 CQUAD4 elements. The FE details for the
SOL 400 analysis of Case 2 are given in Figure 491. The case control section part of the input for this model is given
below:
SUBCASE 1
STEP 1
ANALYSIS = NLSTATIC
NLPARM = 1
BCONTACT = 1
SPC = 2
LOAD = 1
DISPLACEMENT(SORT1,REAL)=ALL
SPCFORCES(SORT1,REAL)=ALL
STRESS(SORT1,REAL,VONMISES,BILIN)=ALL
BOUTPUT(SORT1,REAL)=ALL
This section defines convergence controls via NLPARM, contact table and parameters via BCONTACT, applied
displacements and loads via SPC and LOAD, and the displacements, stress, and contact results for the output file.
Material Modeling
The isotropic, Hookean elastic material properties of the deformable body for Case 1 are defined in the SI
(international) system using the following MAT1 option:
MAT1
2.+11
.3
8000.
The MAT1 entry for Case 2 is given in the same system below:
MAT1
Main Index
2.1+11
.3
1.
Element Modeling
Besides the standard options to define the element connectivity and grid coordinate location, the bulk data section
contains various options with special relevance to nonlinear analysis. For the SOL 400 analysis of Case 2, the
nonlinear extensions to the lowerorder shell element, CQUAD4, are activated by using the PSHLN1 property option
in conjunction with the regular PSHELL property option in the manner shown below:
PSHELL
PSHLN1
1
1
C4
1
1
DCT
.05
For the modal analysis of Case 1, regular CQUAD4 elements are defined using the following PSHELL option.
PSHELL
1.
Modeling Contact
The BCPARA option used for the Case 2 model is given below. It defines the number of bodies in contact, together
with the maximum number of contact entities (e.g. patches), nodes on the periphery of the contact surfaces and bias
factor. The general shell edge contact option is enabled by activating the beam to beam contact flag BEAMB.
BCPARA
BIAS
.95
BEAMB
The definition of the contact bodies consists of the BCBODY Bulk Data Entry which defines the deformable body
including the body ID, dimensionality, type of body, type of contact constraints and friction, etc. while the BSURF
identifies the elements forming a part of the deformable body. The following BCBODY entries are used for cases 1 and
2. Figure 492 identifies the contact bodies used in both these models.
BCBODY
BSURF
Figure 492
Main Index
1
1
8
16
3D
1
9
17
DEFORM
2
10
18
1
3
11
19
0
4
12
20
5
13
21
6
14
22
7
15
23
CHAPTER 49 941
Shell Edge Contact
To identify the interaction between the contact bodies, the BCTABLE Bulk Data Option is used. BCTABLE with ID 0
is used to define the touching conditions at the start of the analysis. This is an optional entry required in SOL 400 for
contact analysis and it is flagged in the case control section through the optional BCONTACT = 0 option. The
BCTABLE with ID 1 is used to define the touching conditions for later increments in the analysis, and it is flagged using
BCONTACT = 1 in the Case Control Section.
A contact option, COPTxfamily, in BCTABLE allows more advanced control on how the contact bodies should
interact with each other. COPTxfamily is defined using the formula COPTx=A+10*B+1000*C, where the terms A, B,
and C are defined as follows:
A: the outside of the solid elements in the body
= 1:
both top and bottom faces will be in the contact description, thickness offset will be included
(DEFAULT)
= 2:
only bottom faces will be in the contact description, thickness offset will be included
= 3:
only bottom faces will be in the contact description, shell thickness will be ignored
= 4:
only top faces will be in the contact description, thickness offset will be included
= 5:
only top faces will be in the contact description, shell thickness will be ignored
= 6:
both top and bottom faces will be in the contact description, shell thickness will be ignored
Note if B = 6 for both bodies in a contact combination, then nodes that separate from a body, cannot come in contact
again in the current step or in subsequent steps unless a different flag is chosen for one of the bodies.
B (rigid bodies): the rigid surface
= 1:
only the beam/bar edges are included in the contact description (DEFAULT)
= 10: only the free and hard shell edges are included in the contact description
= 11: both the beam/bar edges and the free and hard shell edges are included in the contact description
Note that C has no effect if beamtobeam contact is not switched on (i.e., BEAMB is left as 0 on BCPARA).
The following BCTABLE entries are used for the SOL 103 analysis of Case 1:
BCTABLE
Main Index
1
SLAVE
2
0
FBSH
0.
0
1.+20
1
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
3
60
60
It is important to note that the inplane edge glued contact is activated by assigning value 60 for COPTS1 and COPTM1
in the 4th line of the BCTABLE option. The value 60 (B = 6) signifies that the edges are checked for contact without
taking the shell thickness into account. Glued contact is defined by using a value of 3 for IGLUE in the 2nd line of the
BCTABLE option. The value of IGLUE=3 allows moments to be transmitted across the contacting interface. JGLUE=0
in the 5th field of the 2nd line following keyword SLAVE ensures that glued nodes do not separate during the modal
analysis. The contact status plot for Case 1 is presented in Figure 492.
For the SOL 400 analysis of Case 2, the regular shell edge contact option is activated by assigning value of 10010
(B=1 and C=10) for COPTS1 and COPTM1 in the following BCTABLE entries:
BCTABLE
BCTABLE
0
SLAVE
2
0
FBSH
MASTERS 1
1
SLAVE
2
0
FBSH
MASTERS 1
0.
0
1.+20
1
0.
0
0.
0.
0
1.+20
1
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.<