Multibody System Dynamics

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 145–168 | Cite as

Efficient methodology for multibody simulations with discontinuous changes in system definition

Article

Abstract

A new method is presented for accurately and efficiently simulating multi-scale multibody systems with discontinuous changes in system definitions as encountered in adaptive switching between models with different resolutions as well as models with different system topologies. An example of model resolution change is a transition of a system from a discrete particle model to a reduced order articulated multi-rigid body model. The discontinuous changes in system definition may be viewed as an instantaneous change (release or impulsive application of) the system constraints. The method uses a spatial impulse–momentum formulation in a divide and conquer scheme. The approach utilizes a hierarchic assembly–disassembly process by traversing the system topology in a binary tree map to solve for the jumps in the system generalized speeds and the constraint impulsive loads in linear and logarithmic cost in serial and parallel implementations, respectively. The method is applicable for systems in serial chain as well as kinematical loop topologies. The coupling between the unilateral and bilateral constraints is handled efficiently through the use of kinematic joint definitions. The equations of motion for the system are produced in a hierarchic sub-structured form. This has the advantage that changes in sub-structure definitions/models results in a change to the system equations only within the associated sub-structure. This allows for significant changes in model types and definitions without having to reformulate the equations for the whole system.

Keywords

Impulse momentum formulation Divide and conquer scheme Logarithmic complexity Course-graining of models Discontinuous system definitions 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Piedboeuf, J., Gonthier, Y., McPhee, J., Lange, C.: A regularized contact model with asymmetric damping and dwell-time dependent friction. Multibody Syst. Dyn. 11, 209–233 (2004) MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bei, Y., Fregly, B.J.: Multibody dynamic simulation of knee contact mechanics. Med. Eng. Phys. 26(9), 777–789 (2004) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Glocker, C., Pfeiffer, P.: Multiple impacts with friction in multibody systems. Nonlinear Dyn. 7, 471–497 (1995) CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pfeiffer, F.G.: Applications of unilateral multibody dynamics. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. 359(1789), 2609–2628 (2001) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pfieffer, F., Glocker, C.: Multibody Dyanmics with Unilateral Constraints. CISM Courses and Lectures, vol. 421, International Centre for Mechanical Sciences. Springer, New York (2000) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stewart, D.E.: Rigid-body dynamics with friction and impact. SIAM Rev. 42(1), 3–39 (2000) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ambrósio, J.A.C., Pereira, M.S., Dias, J.P.: Crashworthiness analysis and design using rigid-flexible multibody dynamics with applications to train vehicles. Int. J. Num. Method. Eng. 40(4), 655–687 (1997) MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ambrósio, J.A.C., Pereira, M.S., Dias, J.P.: Contact and impact models for vehicle crashworthiness simulation. Int. J. Crashworth. 8, 73–86 (2003) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barhorst, D.: Issues in computing contact forces for non-penetrating rigid bodyes. Algoritmica 10, 292–352 (1993) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Keller, J.B.: Impact with friction. J. Appl. Mech. 53(1), 1–4 (1986) MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lötstedt, P.: Mechanical systems of rigid bodies subject to unilateral constraints. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 42(2), 281–296 (1982) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Trinkle, J., Zeng, D., Sudarsky, S., Lo, G.: On dynamic multi-rigid-body contact problems with Coulomb friction. Z. Angew. Math. Mech. 77(4), 267–279 (1997) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wu, S., Haug, E.J., Yang, S.M.: Dynamics of mechanical systems with Coulomb friction, stiction, impact and constraint addition–deletion. Mech. Mach. Theory 21(5), 401–425 (1986) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ferris, M.C., Mangasarian, O.L., Pang, J.S.: Complementarity: applications, algorithms and extensions. In: Applied Optimization, vol. 50. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (2001) Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brenan, K.E., Campbell, S.L., Petzold, L.R.: Numerical Solutions of Initial-value Problems in Differential-Algebraic Equations. North-Holland, New York (1989) Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Anderson, K.S.: An order-n formulation for the motion simulation of general multi-rigid-body tree systems. Comput. Struct. 46(3), 547–559 (1993) MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rosenthal, D.E.: An order n formulation for robotic systems. J. Astronaut. Sci. 38(4), 511–529 (1990) Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jain, A.: Unified formulation of dynamics for serial rigid multibody systems. J. Guid. Control Dyn. 14(3), 531–542 (1991) MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Featherstone, R.: The calculation of robotic dynamics using articulated body inertias. Int. J. Robot. Res. 2(1), 13–30 (1983) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Anderson, K.S., Sadowski, M.J.: An efficient method for contact/impact problems in multibody systems: tree topologies. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Multibody Dynamics and Vibrations, ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference 2003, (DETC03), number DETC03/VIB-48338, Chicago, IL, 2–6 September 2003 Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Seabra Pereira, M., Nikravesh, P.: Impact dynamics of multibody systems with frictional contact using joint coordinates and canonical equations of motion. Nonlinear Dyn. 9, 53–71 (1996) CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Featherstone, R.: A divide-and-conquer articulated body algorithm for parallel O(log (n)) calculation of rigid body dynamics. Part 1: Basic algorithm. Int. J. Robot. Res. 18(9), 867–875 (1999) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mukherjee, R., Anderson, K.S.: An orthogonal complement based divide-and-conquer algorithm for constrained multibody systems. Nonlinear Dyn. 48(1–2), 199–215 (2007) CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Featherstone, R.: Robot Dynamics Algorithms. Kluwer Academic, New York (1987) Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mukherjee, R., Anderson, K.S.: A logarithmic complexity divide-and-conquer algorithm for multi-flexible articulated body dynamics. J. Comput. Nonlinear Dyn. 2(1), 10–21 (2007) CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kim, S.S., VanderPloeg, M.J.: Generalized and efficient method for dynamic analysis of mechanical systems using velocity transforms. J. Mech. Transm. Autom. Des. 108(2), 176–182 (1986) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nikravesh, P.E.: Systematic reduction of multibody equations to a minimal set. Int. J. Nonlinear Mech. 25(2–3), 143–151 (1990) CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Forrest, L.R., Crozier, P.S., Stevens, M.J., Woolf, T.B.: Molecular dynamics simulation of dark-adapted rhodopsin in an explicit membrane bilayer: coupling between local retinal and larger scale conformational changes. J. Mol. Biol. 333, 493–514 (2003) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kane, T.R., Levinson, D.A.: Dynamics: Theory and Application. Mcgraw-Hill, New York (1985) Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Flaherty, J.E., Loy, R.M., Ozturan, C., Shephard, M.S., Szymanski, B.K., Teresco, J.D., Ziantz, L.H.: Parallel structures and dynamic load balancing for adaptive finite element computations. Appl. Numer. Math. 26(1–2), 241–263 (1998) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Featherstone, R.: A divide-and-conquer articulated body algorithm for parallel O(log (n)) calculation of rigid body dynamics. Part 2: Trees, loops, and accuracy. Int. J. Robot. Res. 18(9), 876–892 (1999) CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical, Aeronautical, and Nuclear EngineeringRensselaer Polytechnic InstituteTroyUSA

Personalised recommendations