Toward robust and accurate contact solvers for large deformation applications: a remapping/adaptivity framework for mortar-based methods
In recent years, the mortar method has proven to be an effective spatial discretization strategy for large deformation contact problems, particularly when such problems feature deformable-to-deformable contact. The mortar approach has been shown to greatly enhance both the spatial accuracy and the robustness with which such problems can be solved in many circumstances. In this work, we concern ourselves with problems that arise in the context of many practical applications, both in manufacturing and in other areas. Specifically, it is frequently necessary to remesh a problem in the midst of an ongoing incremental loading strategy, either because of adaptive mesh refinement being used to improve resolution, or excessive mesh distortion which necessitates an overall remeshing. This work focuses on a particularly important issue associated with contact remeshing; i.e., the remapping of contact variables after the remesh so that a simulation can successfully continue. We develop and demonstrate our algorithm in the context of a mortar-discretized approach to contact. The approach is applicable to either two or three dimensional analysis, and is demonstrated by a number of three dimensional numerical examples.
KeywordsContact Large deformation Remapping Mortar methods Friction
The early stages of this work were funded by Michelin Tire Company; this support is gratefully acknowledged.
- 6.Stoker C (2006) Developments of the arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian method in non-linear solid mechanics. Phd Thesis, University of TwenteGoogle Scholar
- 8.Laursen TA (2002) Computational contact and impact mechanics. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- 9.Yang B, Laursen T, Meng X (2005) Two dimensional mortar contact methods for large deformation frictional sliding. Int J Numer Methods Eng 62:1183–1225 Google Scholar
- 10.Yang B (2006) Mortar finite element methods for large deformation contact mechanics, PhD Thesis, Duke UniversityGoogle Scholar
- 12.Si H (2013) TetGen: A Quality Tetrahedral Mesh Generator and a 3D Delaunay Triangulator. WIAS Technical, Report No. 13Google Scholar
- 13.Espinosa HD, Zavattieri PD, Emore GL (1998) Adaptive FEM computation of geometric and material nonlinearities with application to brittle failure. Mech Mater 29:75–105Google Scholar
- 16.Oprea J (2007) Differential geometry and its applications. Mathematical Association of America, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- 17.Hertzmann A, Zorin D (2007) Illustrating smoth surfaces. Proceedings of the 27th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, pp 517–526Google Scholar
- 18.Bergou M, Wardetzky M, Robinson S, Audoly B (2008) Grinspun eitan discrete elastic rods. Proc ACM 27(3):63Google Scholar
- 19.Hanson A, Ma H (1995) Parallel Transport Approach to Curve Framing. Indiana University, Techreports-TR425 11:3–7Google Scholar
- 24.Taylor RL (2014) A Finite Element Analysis Program (FEAP), Version 8.4 Programmer Manual, JanuaryGoogle Scholar