Skip to main content
Log in

A finite element approach for simplified 2D nonlinear dynamic contact/impact analysis

  • Original
  • Published:
Archive of Applied Mechanics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, a simplified numerical approach for finite element dynamic analysis of an inelastic solid structure subjected to solid object impact is presented. The approach approximates the impacting solid as the selected multiple nodes, for which mass of the impactor is distributed. The node-to-segment contact formulation with the penalty constraint technique incorporated is employed to impose contact conditions between the nodes and the surface of the receiver structure. The node-to-segment algorithm is integrated into Newton–Raphson time integration scheme and the Lagrange multiplier technique is applied to enforce the identical displacements for the selected nodes throughout the analysis process. The approach is verified using two-dimensional plane strain models considering elastic-perfectly-plastic material behavior. The results obtained using the proposed approach are in a good agreement with those simulated using a commercial finite element code, ABAQUS dynamic/implicit, in terms of displacements and stress distribution fields. The proposed approach is shown to be computationally superior to general finite element method-based contact/impact analysis without significantly sacrificing the accuracy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alves, J., Peixinho, N., da Silva, M.T., et al.: A comparative study of the viscoelastic constitutive models for frictionless contact interfaces in solids. Mech. Mach. Theory 85, 172–188 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2014.11.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Asano, N.: A virtual work principle using penalty function method for impact contact problems of two bodies. Bull. JSME 29(249), 731–736 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bathe, K.J.: Finite Element Procedures, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, Prarson Education Inc, Watertown (2016)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Batoz, J., Dhatt, G.: Incremental displacement algorithms for nonlinear problems. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 14(8), 1262–1267 (1979)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Big-Alabo, A., Harrison, P., Cartmell, M.P.: Contact model for elastoplastic analysis of half-space indentation by a spherical impactor. Comput. Struct. 151, 20–29 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2015.01.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Brake, M.: An analytical elastic-perfectly plastic contact model. Int. J. Solids Struct. 49(22), 3129–3141 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2012.06.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cook, R.D., Malkus, D.S., Plesha, M.E., et al.: Concepts and Applications of Finite Element Analysis, 4th edn. Wiley, New York (2001)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Dassault Systèmes ABAQUS 6.14 Analysis User’s Manual. Providence (2014)

  9. Francavilla, A., Zienkiewicz, O.C.: A note on numerical computation of elastic contact problems. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 9, 913–924 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.1620090410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ghaednia, H., Pope, S.A., Jackson, R.L., et al.: A comprehensive study of the elasto-plastic contact of a sphere and a flat. Tribol. Int. 93, 78–90 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2015.09.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ghaednia, H., Wang, X., Saha, S., et al.: A review of elastic–plastic contact mechanics. Appl. Mech. Rev. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4038187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Goudreau, G., Hallquist, J.: Recent developments in large-scale finite element Lagrangian hydrocode technology. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 33(1), 725–757 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7825(82)90129-3

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Hallquist, J., Goudreau, G., Benson, D.: Sliding interfaces with contact–impact in large-scale Lagrangian computations. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 51(1), 107–137 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7825(85)90030-1

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Her, S.C., Liang, Y.C.: The finite element analysis of composite laminates and shell structures subjected to low velocity impact. Compos. Struct. 66(1–4), 277–285 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jackson, R.L., Green, I.: A finite element study of elasto-plastic hemispherical contact against a rigid flat. J. Tribol. 127(2), 343–354 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.1866166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Khoei, A., Biabanaki, S., Parvaneh, S.: 3D dynamic modeling of powder forming processes via a simple and efficient node-to-surface contact algorithm. Appl. Math. Model. 37(1), 443–462 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2012.03.010

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Kulak, R.: Adaptive contact elements for three-dimensional explicit transient analysis. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 72(2), 125–151 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7825(89)90156-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kumar, N., Shukla, M.: Finite element analysis of multi-particle impact on erosion in abrasive water jet machining of titanium alloy. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 236(18), 4600–4610 (2012)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Laursen, T.A.: Computational Contact and Impact Mechanics: Fundamentals of Modeling Interfacial Phenomena in Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis. Springer, Berlin (2013)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee, J., Liu, W., Hong, J.W.: Impact fracture analysis enhanced by contact of peridynamic and finite element formulations. SI Exp. Test. Comput. Model. Dyn. Fract. 87, 108–119 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2015.06.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Leon, S.E., Paulino, G.H., Pereira, A., et al.: A unified library of nonlinear solution schemes. Appl. Mech. Rev. 64(4), 040803-1–040803-26 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4006992

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. MATLAB version 9.8.0 (R2020a). The Mathworks Inc., Natick (2020)

  23. Neto, A.G., Pimenta, P.M., Wriggers, P.: A master-surface to master-surface formulation for beam to beam contact. Part I: frictionless interaction. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 303, 400–429 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2016.02.005

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Pham, T.M., Hao, Y., Hao, H.: Sensitivity of impact behaviour of RC beams to contact stiffness. Int. J. Impact Eng. 112, 155–164 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2017.09.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Puso, M.A., Laursen, T.A.: A mortar segment-to-segment contact method for large deformation solid mechanics. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 193(6), 601–629 (2004)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Sha, Y., Hao, H.: Nonlinear finite element analysis of barge collision with a single bridge pier. Eng. Struct. 41, 63–76 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.03.026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Stadter, J., Weiss, R.: Analysis of contact through finite element gaps. Comput. Struct. 10(6), 867–873 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7949(79)90055-5

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Suwannachit, A., Nackenhorst, U., Chiarello, R.: Stabilized numerical solution for transient dynamic contact of inelastic solids on rough surfaces. Comput. Mech. 49(6), 769–788 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-012-0722-x

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Wriggers, P., Van Vu, T., Stein, E.: Finite element formulation of large deformation impact–contact problems with friction. Comput. Struct. 37(3), 319–331 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7949(90)90324-U

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Xing, W., Zhang, J., Song, C., et al.: A node-to-node scheme for three-dimensional contact problems using the scaled boundary finite element method. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 347, 928–956 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2019.01.015

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Zavarise, G., De Lorenzis, L.: A modified node-to-segment algorithm passing the contact patch test. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 79(4), 379–416 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.2559

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Zavarise, G., De Lorenzis, L.: The node-to-segment algorithm for 2D frictionless contact: classical formulation and special cases. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 198(41), 3428–3451 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2009.06.022

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Zhang, Y., Zhu, P., Lai, X.: Finite element analysis of low-velocity impact damage in composite laminated plates. Mater. Des. 27(6), 513–519 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was in part supported by a Space Technology Research Institutes Grant (No. 80NSSC19K1076) from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)’s Space Technology Research Grants Program. Additionally, the authors are grateful for the continuous support received from the University of Connecticut and its Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering throughout this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ramesh B. Malla.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Financial interests: The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Seungwook Seok: Formerly, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA.

Appendix

Appendix

1.1 A Sensitivity analysis of penalty parameter

Many studies (for example, [2, 12, 13, 17, 24]) have been extensively conducted to find the optimum value or range for the penalty parameter (in Eq. 2) that ensures reliable and accurate analysis results. Comparison of the suggested ranges for the penalty parameter in these studies shows the penalty parameter can differ by at most the order of magnitude \(10^7\) times depending upon the used materials, contact geometries, element types, etc. Unfortunately, no universal analytical expression for determining appropriate penalty parameter value exists. Therefore, this study carried out sensitivity analysis for the choice of penalty stiffness.

The penalty stiffness values were adjusted proportional to the Young’s modulus of the receiver material, as \(\epsilon _N=\kappa E^{\textrm{rec}}\), where \(E^{\textrm{rec}}\) is the Young’s modulus of the receiver material and \(\kappa \) is the associated scale factor. A wide range of \(\kappa \) was considered. To this end, \(\kappa \) was set to increase 10 times for each individual run from \(10^{-2}\) to \(10^{+2}\). The indentation model (Sect. 3.1.2) was used for this sensitivity test. Figure 18 shows results of the computed impact force and displacement of the node in impact for different \(\kappa \) values considered. As expected, both the impact force and the local nodal displacement were very sensitive to variation in the penalty parameter. Out of the five simulation runs, the run with \(\kappa =1\) (i.e., \(\epsilon _N=E^{\textrm{rec}}\)) provided the force and displacement histories the most comparable to the ABAQUS results. It should be mentioned that a more accurate result was obtained with \(\kappa =1.1\) but the difference was not significant when compared with \(\kappa =1\).

Fig. 18
figure 18

Sensitivity analysis results of the penalty parameter \(\epsilon _N\): a Impact force and b y-direction (vertical) displacement of the receiver node in impact

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Seok, S., Shahriar, A., Montoya, A. et al. A finite element approach for simplified 2D nonlinear dynamic contact/impact analysis. Arch Appl Mech 93, 3511–3531 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00419-023-02451-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00419-023-02451-y

Keywords

Navigation