Finite Element Approach for Composite Magneto-Piezoelectric Materials Modeling in ACELAN-COMPOS Package

  • Natalia V. KurbatovaEmail author
  • Dmitry K. Nadolin
  • Andrey V. Nasedkin
  • Pavel A. Oganesyan
  • Arcady N. Soloviev
Part of the Advanced Structured Materials book series (STRUCTMAT, volume 81)


The problem of material properties identification for modern active composites is closely connected to the state of the art methods of design and manufacturing using composite and smart materials. This chapter deals with computer design of multiscale two-phase piezomagnetoelectric (magnetoelectric) bulk composites in finite element software ACELAN-COMPOS. These composites consist of piezomagnetic and piezoelectric fractions of irregular structures. The complex approach for the homogenization problem of such composites include the effective moduli method, computer modeling of the representative volumes with microstructure features, and the finite element technologies for solving the static problems for the representative volumes. Representative volumes are widely used as geometrical models for such problems. The three-dimensional application is demonstrated for piezomagnetoelectric and piezoelectric materials. A specific set of boundary conditions applied to the representative volume enables us to determine effective moduli of the material. The first step of such modeling consists in describing a material distribution inside the representative volumes with a known percentage of each material. Three algorithms were created to simulate random material distribution for specific patterns: biphasic composite with connectivity of each phase, granules of predefined size and regular rods.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



This work was supported by the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia, competitive part of state assignment, No. 9.1001.2017/PCh.


  1. Bathe K, Wilson EL (1976) Numerical Methods in Finite Elements Analysis. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NGoogle Scholar
  2. Belokon AV, Skaliuh AS (2010) Mathematical Modeling of Irreversible Processes of Polarization (in Russ.). FIZMATLIT, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  3. Belokon AV, Eremeyev VA, Nasedkin AV, Solov’yev AN (2000) Partitioned schemes of the finiteelement method for dynamic problems of acoustoelectroelasticity. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics 64(3):367–377Google Scholar
  4. Belokon AV, Nasedkin AV, Solov’yev AN (2002) New schemes for the finite-element dynamic analysis of piezoelectric devices. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics 66(3):481–490Google Scholar
  5. Benzi M, Wathen AJ (2008) Some preconditioning techniques for saddle point problems. In: Schilders WHA, van der Vorst HA, Rommes J (eds) Model Order Reduction: Theory, Research Aspects and Applications, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, Mathematics in Industry, vol 13, pp 195–211Google Scholar
  6. Benzi M, Golub GH, Liesen J (2005) Numerical solution of saddle point problems. Acta Numerica 14:1–137Google Scholar
  7. Bowen CR, Perry A, Kara H, Mahon SW (2001) Analytical modelling of 3-3 piezoelectric composites. Journal of the European Ceramic Society 21(10):1463–1467Google Scholar
  8. Eremeyev VA, Nasedkin AV (2017) Mathematical models and finite element approaches for nanosized piezoelectric bodies with uncoulped and coupled surface effects. In: Sumbatyan MA (ed) Wave Dynamics and Composite Mechanics for Microstructured Materials and Metamaterials, Springer, Singapore, Advanced Structured Materials, vol 59, pp 1–18Google Scholar
  9. Iyer S, Venkatesh TA (2014) Electromechanical response of (3-0,3-1) particulate, fibrous, and porous piezoelectric composites with anisotropic constituents: A model based on the homogenization method. International Journal of Solids and Structures 51(6):1221–1234Google Scholar
  10. Kurbatova NV, Nadolin DK, Nasedkin AV, Nasedkina AA, Oganesyan PA, Skaliukh AS, Soloviev AN (2017) Mathematical models and finite element approaches for nanosized piezoelectric bodies with uncoulped and coupled surface effects. In: Sumbatyan MA (ed) Models of active bulk composites and new opportunities of ACELAN finite element package. In: Methods of wave dynamics and mechanics of composites for analysis of microstructured materials and metamaterials, Springer, Singapore, Advanced Structured Materials, vol 59, pp 133–158Google Scholar
  11. Lee J, Boyd JG, Lagoudas DC (2005) Effective properties of three-phase electro-magneto-elastic composites. International Journal of Engineering Science 43(10):790–825Google Scholar
  12. Li JY (2000) Magnetoelectroelastic multi-inclusion and inhomogeneity problems and their applications in composite materials. International Journal of Engineering Science 38(18):1993–2011Google Scholar
  13. Martínez-Ayuso G, Friswell MI, Adhikari S, Khodaparast HH, Berger H (2017) Homogenization of porous piezoelectric materials. International Journal of Solids and Structures 113(Supplement C):218–229Google Scholar
  14. Nan CW, Bichurin MI, Dong S, Viehland D, Srinivasan G (2008) Multiferroic magnetoelectric composites: Historical perspective, status, and future directions. Journal of Applied Physics 103(3):031,101Google Scholar
  15. Nasedkin A (2014a) Modeling of magnetoelectric composites by effective moduli and finite element methods. theoretical approaches. Ferroelectrics 461(1):106–112Google Scholar
  16. Nasedkin A (2017) Size-dependent models of multiferroic materials with surface effects. Ferroelectrics 509(1):57–63Google Scholar
  17. Nasedkin AV (2010) Some finite element methods and algorithms for solving acousto-piezoelectric problems. In: Paronov IA (ed) Piezoceramic Materials and Devices, Nova Science Publ., NY, pp 177–218Google Scholar
  18. Nasedkin AV (2014b) Multiscale computer design of piezomagnetoelectric mixture composite structures. AIP Conference Proceedings 1627(1):64–69Google Scholar
  19. Nasedkin AV, Shevtsova MS (2011) Improved finite element approaches for modeling of porous piezocomposite materials with different connectivity. In: Paronov IA (ed) Ferroelectrics and Superconductors: Properties and Applications, Nova Science Publ., NY, pp 231–254Google Scholar
  20. Nasedkin AV, Skaliukh AS, Soloviev AN (2014) New models of coupled active materials for finite element package ACELAN. AIP Conference Proceedings 1637(1):714–723Google Scholar
  21. Newnham RE, Skinner DP, Cross LE (1978) Connectivity and piezoelectric-pyroelectric composites. Materials Research Bulletin 13(5):525–536Google Scholar
  22. Nguyen BV, Challagulla KS, Venkatesh TA, Hadjiloizi DA, Georgiades AV (2016) Effects of porosity distribution and porosity piezoelectric foams. Smart Materials and Structures 25(12):125,028Google Scholar
  23. Ramesh R, Kara H, Bowen CR (2005) Finite element modelling of dense and porous piezoceramic disc hydrophones. Ultrasonics 43(3):173–181Google Scholar
  24. Ringgaard E, Lautzenhiser F, Bierregaard LM, Zawada T, Molz E (2015) Development of porous piezoceramics for medical and sensor applications. Materials 8(12):8877–8889Google Scholar
  25. Rybyanets AN (2010) Ceramic piezocomposites: modeling, technology, characterization. In: Paronov IA (ed) Piezoceramic Materials and Devices, Nova Science Publ., NY, pp 115–174Google Scholar
  26. Rybyanets AN (2011) Porous piezoceramics: theory, technology, and properties. IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control 58(7):1492–1507Google Scholar
  27. Rybyanets AN, Nasedkin AV, Naumenko AA, Shvetsova NA, Lugovaya MA, Petrova EI (2015) Optimization of finite element models for porous ceramic piezoelements by piezoelectric resonance analysis method. In: Paronov IA, Chang SH, Theerakulpisut S (eds) Advanced Materials – Studies and Applications, Nova Science Publ., NY, pp 147–168Google Scholar
  28. Skaliukh AS, Soloviev AN, Oganesyan PA (2015) Modeling of piezoelectric elements with inhomogeneous polarization in acelan. Ferroelectrics 483(1):95–101Google Scholar
  29. Soloviev AN, Oganesyan PA, Skaliukh AS (2015) Modeling of piezoelectric elements with inhomogeneous polarization by using acelan. In: Paronov IA, Chang SH, Theerakulpisut S (eds) Advanced Materials – Studies and Applications, Nova Science Publ., NY, pp 169–192Google Scholar
  30. Tang T, Yu W (2008) Variational asymptotic homogenization of heterogeneous electromagnetoelastic materials. International Journal of Engineering Science 46(8):741–757Google Scholar
  31. Topolov VY, Bowen CR (2009) Electromechanical Properties in Composites Based on Ferroelectrics. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Vanderbei RJ (1995) Symmetric quasidefinite matrices. SIAM Journal on Optimization 5(1):100–113Google Scholar
  33. Vernigora GD, Lupeiko TG, Skaliukh AS, Soloviev AN (2011) About polazarition and effective properties identification for porous ceramics. DSTU Herald (Russ edition) 11(4 (55)):462–469Google Scholar
  34. Zhang ZK, Soh AK (2005) Micromechanics predictions of the effective moduli of magnetoelectroelastic composite materials. European Journal of Mechanics - A/Solids 24(6):1054–1067Google Scholar
  35. Zienkewicz OC, Morgan K (1983) Finite Elements and Approximation. John Wiley and Sons, N.Y.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Natalia V. Kurbatova
    • 1
    Email author
  • Dmitry K. Nadolin
    • 1
  • Andrey V. Nasedkin
    • 1
  • Pavel A. Oganesyan
    • 1
  • Arcady N. Soloviev
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Mathematics, Mechanics and Computer ScienceSouthern Federal UniversityRostov-on-DonRussia
  2. 2.Department of Theoretical and Applied MechanicsDon State Technical UniversityRostov-on-DonRussia

Personalised recommendations