Advertisement

Physical Mesomechanics

, Volume 21, Issue 4, pp 341–350 | Cite as

Consideration of Stress Stiffening and Material Reorientation in Modal Space Based Finite Element Solutions

  • D. MarinkovićEmail author
  • M. Zehn
Article
  • 11 Downloads

Abstract

Structural deformations are an important aspect of many engineering tasks. They are typically resolved as “off-line” finite element computations with accuracy set as the primary objective. Though high computational efficiency is always an important aspect, in certain applications its priority is of equal or similar importance as the accuracy itself. This paper tackles the problem of proper extension of linear models with the objective of keeping high numerical efficiency and covering moderate geometric nonlinearities. Modal-space based approach is addressed as one of the standard techniques for robust model reduction. Two extensions are proposed to account for moderate geometric nonlinearities in modal-space based solutions, one accounting for stress stiffening effect and the other for moderate material rigid-body rotations during deformation. Examples are provided to demonstrate the applicability and discuss the aspects of proposed techniques.

Keywords

model reduction modal space geometric nonlinearity finite element method structural deformation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Marinkovic, D., Zehn, M., and Marinkovic, Z., Finite Element Formulations for Effective Computations of Geometrically Nonlinear Deformations, Adv. Eng. Software, 2012, vol. 50, pp. 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dietz, S., Hippmann, G., and Shupp, G., Interaction of Vehicles and Flexible Tracks by Co–Simulation of Multibody Vehicle Systems and Finite Element Track Models, Int. J. Vehicle Mech. Mobility, 2002, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 327–384.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Busch, M. and Schweizer, B., Coupled Simulation of Multibody and Finite Element Systems: An Efficient and Robust Semi–Implicit Coupling Approach, Arch. Appl. Mech., 2012, vol. 82, no. 6, pp. 723–741.ADSCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Swidergal, K., Lubeseder, C., Wurmb, V.I., Lipp, A., Meinhardt, J., Wagner, M., and Marburg, S., Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Blankholder’s Vibration in a Forming Tool: A Coupled MBS–FEM Approach, Product. Eng., 2015, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 623–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nguyen, V.A., Zehn, M., and Marinkovic, D., An Efficient Co–Rotational FEM Formulation Using a Projector Matrix, Facta Univer. Mech. Eng., 2016, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 227–240.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ordaz–Hernandez, K., Fischer, X., and Bennis, F., Model Reduction Technique for Mechanical Behaviour Model–ling: Efficiency Criteria and Validity Domain Assessment, Proc. IMechE. C. J. Mech. Eng. Sci., 2008, vol. 222, no. 3, pp. 493–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ćojbašić, Z., Nikolić, V., Petrović, E., Pavlović, V., Tomić, M., Pavlović, I., and Ćirić, I., A Real Time Neural Network Based Finite Element Analysis of Shell Structure, Facta Univer. Mech. Eng., 2014, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 149–155.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hambli, R., Chamekh, A., and Salah, H.B.H., Real–Time Deformation of Structure Using Finite Element and Neural Networks in Virtual Reality Applications, Finite Elem. Analysis Design., 2006, vol. 42, no. 11, pp. 985–991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Craig, R.R. and Bampton, M.C.C., Coupling of Substructures for Dynamic Analyses, AIAA J., 1968, vol. 6, no. 7, pp. 1313–1319.ADSCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schwertassek, R. and Wallrapp, O., Dynamik Flexibler Mehrkorpersysteme, Braunschweig/Wiesbaden: Vieweg Verlagsgesellschaft, 1999.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dietz, S., Wallrapp, O., and Wiedemann, S., Nodal Versus Modal Representation in Flexible Multibody System Dynamics, in Proc. Int. Conf. Advanced in Computational Multibody Dynamics’ Multibody Dynamics 2003, Ambrosio, J.A.C., Ed., Lisbon: IDMEC/IST, 2003.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Xue, Z.P., Li, M., and Jia, H.G., Modal Method for Dynamics Analysis of Cantilever Type Structures at Large Rotational Deformations, Int. J. Mech. Sci., 2015, vol. 93, pp. 22–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Poon, C.W. and Chang, C.C., Identification of Nonlinear Elastic Structures Using Empirical Mode Decomposition and Nonlinear Normal Modes, Smart Struct. Syst., 2007, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 423–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bathe, K.J., Finite Element Procedures, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1996.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Popov, V.L. and Hess, M., Method of Dimensionality Reduction in Contact Mechanics and Friction, Berlin–Heidelberg: Springer, 2015.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hess, M. and Popov, V.L., Method of Dimensionality Reduction in Contact Mechanics and Friction: A User’s Handbook. II. Power–Law Graded Materials, Facta Univer. Mech. Eng., 2016, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 251–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Structural AnalysisTechnische Universität BerlinBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Faculty of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of NisBelgradeSerbia

Personalised recommendations