Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
In addition, the following countries have resellers for Altair Engineering: Colombia, Czech Republic, Ecuador, Israel, Russia,
Netherlands, Turkey, Poland, Singapore, Vietnam, Indonesia
Official offices with resellers: Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Malaysia, Italy, Japan, Korea, Spain, Taiwan, United
Kingdom, USA
In addition to HyperWorks® trademarks noted above, Display Manager™, Simulation Manager™, Compute Manager™, PBS™,
PBSWorks™, PBS GridWorks®, PBS Professional®, PBS Analytics™, PBS Desktop™, PBS Portal™, PBS Application Services™,
e-BioChem™, e-Compute™ and e-Render™ are trademarks of ALTAIR ENGINEERING INC.
Altair trademarks are protected under U.S. and international laws and treaties. Copyright© 1994-2014. Additionally, Altair software
is protected under patent #6,859,792 and other patents pending. All other marks are the property of their respective owners.
ALTAIR ENGINEERING INC. Proprietary and Confidential. Contains Trade Secret Information. Not for use or disclosure outside of
ALTAIR and its licensed clients. Information contained inHyperWorks® shall not be decompiled, disassembled, or “unlocked”,
reverse translated, reverse engineered, or publicly displayed or publicly performed in any manner. Usage of the software is only as
explicitly permitted in the end user software license agreement.
Table of Contents.................................................................................................................... 3
Exercise 2a: Stress and displacement analysis in a simply supported beam. ................ 33
Chapter 1
Introduction
1- HyperWorks Overview
HyperWorks®, The Platform for Innovation™, is built on a foundation of design
optimization, performance data management, and process automation. HyperWorks is an
enterprise simulation solution for rapid design exploration and decision-making. As one of the
most comprehensive CAE solutions in the industry, HyperWorks provides a tightly integrated
suite of best-in-class tools for modeling, analysis, optimization, visualization, reporting, and
performance data management. Leveraging a revolutionary “pay-for-use” token-based business
model, HyperWorks delivers increased value and flexibility over other software licensing
models. Firmly committed to an open-systems philosophy, HyperWorks continues to lead the
industry with the broadest interoperability to commercial CAD and CAE solutions.
HyperWorks 12.0 is the new version of Altair’s CAE software suite. It includes a large
number of new functionalities to support optimization-driven product design and predictive multi-
physics analysis, combined with a strong focus on usability and performance. Highlights are:
AcuSolve – Finite element computational fluid dynamics (CFD) solver licensed under
• HyperWorks
• One low unit-draw for all RADIOSS solutions - 25 HWU for up to 4 processors.
License decay function for massive use of RADIOSS finite element solver for simulation
• driven innovation
• solidThinking – “where ideas take shape” is now part of the HyperWorks offering
• Next generation simulation data management solution fully integrated
• More HyperWorks enabled partners through the HyperWorks Partner Alliance
New licensing technology now fully owned and developed by Altair helps to better manage
• und utilize HyperWorks licenses
• New framework for the integration of finite element and multi-body dynamics pre- and post-
• Manage personal and team CAE data from well integrated GUIs inside HyperWorks.
Share data among multiple engineering teams for collaboration between users with the
• appropriate access rights.
• Connect to PDM systems to obtain product BOM (Bill of Materials) and CAD geometry.
Capture the best practices and automate the most tedious phases of the product
• development process.
• Author, edit, and execute processes inside HyperWorks or in standalone mode.
Run, monitor and manage your CAE jobs locally or on a cluster via a drag-n-drop desktop
• client interface.
• Added AcuSolve – Native finite element computational fluid dynamics (CFD) solver
• Advanced Mass Scaling technology is a breakthrough in explicit simulation performance
• A new multi-domain implementation increases accuracy of detailed explicit simulation
• Hybrid-MPP for explicit solver for extended scalability
Further increased scalability thru SPMD version for frequency response analysis as well as
• other solver performance improvements
New non-linear implicit structural solutions for a wide range of contact, material and post-
• buckling problems
New structural analysis types like response spectrum, complex eigenvalues, and pre-
• stressed normal modes
• Generalized method for component mode synthesis
• Full vehicle wizard support for H-Tire and F-Tire in MotionView and MotionSolve
• Greatly improved controls co-simulation and solver robustness of MotionSolve
• All new automated and modular assembly management in MotionView
• Built-in, easy-to-use, and powerful file management system in MotionView
Innovative application of the Equivalent Static Load Method for the optimization of geometric
• and material non-linear problems
• New manufacturing constraints for topology optimization
• A new global search option to avoid being stuck in a local solution
• New algorithms for multi-objective and robust design
• Easy to use multi-Excel spreadsheet optimization and study
• New user profiles for CFD, Noise and Vibrations (NVH), Crash, and drop test simulation
• Advanced crash modeling environment HyperCrash tightly integrated
• Durability Director for solving from load assessment to life estimation
AcuConsole, pre-processor for AcuSolve CFD solver, including automatic mesh generation
• for complex geometries
Expanded modeling of physical phenomena for metal and polymer extrusion, stamping,
• welding, and mold filling
HyperWorks Desktop
HyperWorks Integrated user environment for modeling and visualization
Desktop
HyperMesh Universal finite element pre- and post-processor
MotionView Multi-body dynamics pre- and post-processor
HyperView High performance finite element and mechanical systems post-
processor, engineering plotter, and data analysis tool
HyperGraph Engineering plotter and data analysis tool
ScriptView HyperWorks IDE (Integrated Development Environment) for developing
and debugging TCL and HyperMath Language (HML) scripts
Templex General purpose text and numeric processor
HyperWorks Solvers
OptiStruct Design and optimization software using finite elements and multi-
body dynamics
HyperWorks Enterprise
Collaboration A solution that organizes, manages, and stores CAE and test data
Tools throughout the simulation life cycle
Process Process automation tool for HyperWorks and third party software;
Manager Processes can be created with the help of Process Studio.
HyperMath Solutions
Manufacturing Solutions
HyperXtrude An finite element solver and user environment that enables engineers to
analyze material flow and heat transfer problems in extrusion and rolling
applications
HyperMold Provides a highly efficient and customized environment for setting up
models for injection molding simulation with Moldflow and Moldex3D
HyperWeld Provides an efficient interface for setting up models and analyzing
friction stir welding with the HyperXtrude Solver
Forging Provides a highly efficient and customized environment for setting up
models for complex three-dimensional forging simulation with
DEFOM3D
Results Mapper Process Manager-based tool that provides a framework to initialize a
structural model with results from a forming simulation
Engineering Solutions
CFD High quality tools for CFD applications enabling the engineer to perform
modeling, optimization and post-processing tasks efficiently.
NVH HyperWorks environment customized for automotive full vehicle NVH
modeling and analysis needs.
Crash Tailored environment in HyperWorks that efficiently steers the Crash
CAE specialist in CAE model building, starting from CAD geometry and
finishing with a runnable solver deck in both solvers RADIOSS and LS-
DYNA.
Drop Test The Drop Test Manager is an automated solution that allows the user to
either simulate a single drop test or a choice of multiple iterations with
the aim of finding the sensitivity of process variables like initial orientation
and drop height in a typical drop test by controlling the run parameters
and conditions with ease.
Durability Solver-neutral, process-oriented customization of HyperWorks that
Director addresses many of the challenges associated with assessing the fatigue
life of mechanical components.
Suspension Industry specific solution that is integrated with MotionView and utilizes
Director many aspects of HyperWorks to assist with the engineering of vehicle
suspensions.
HyperCrash CAE pre-processor tool developed to support the non-linear finite
element solver, Altair RADIOSS
HyperView Player Plug-in and stand-alone utility to share and visualize 3-D CAE models
and results
solidThinking
Solver Overview
The pre-processing for OptiStruct is done using HyperMesh or HyperCrash and the
post-processing is done using HyperView and HyperGraph. For more information about the
HyperWorks suite of products, please refer to our online help documentation.
2 – RADIOSS Overview
Altair® RADIOSS® is a leading structural analysis solver for highly non-linear problems
under dynamic loadings. It is highly differentiated for Scalability, Quality and Robustness, and
consists of features for multi-physics simulation and advanced materials such as composites.
RADIOSS is used across all industry worldwide to improve the crashworthiness, safety, and
manufacturability of structural designs. For over 20 years, RADIOSS has established itself as a
leader and an Industry standard for automotive crash and impact analysis.
Finite element solutions via RADIOSS include:
A typical set of finite elements including shell, solid, bar, and spring elements, rigid
bodies as well as loads, a number of materials, and contact interfaces are available for
modeling complex events.
Chapter 2
Kx = f
Where:
o K : It is the global stiffness matrix
o x : It is the displacement vector response to be determined.
o f : It is the external forces vector applied to the structure.
We will proposal now a small static example that will be used to better understand what
a static analysis is. The example is shown in the following image:
This is a column that is formed by two different regions with uniform cross-section.
The methodology that will be described here can be easily extended to any kind of
problem. First we need to represent the structure as nodes and elements. For this case, it is
clear that we need at least two elements, one for each distinct section.
First we need a finite element model to solve the problem. In our case, we will use rod
elements as shown in the following image:
The model is composed then by 3 nodes {1, 2, and 3} and 2 elements {1 and 2}, a
material that is associated to two different properties A1 and A2. Every node has only one DOF
(x) and the finite element matrix for this one-dimensional rod element can be written as:
AE AE
−
K= L L
AE AE
−
L L
Then we can evaluate the matrix for each element based on the input data:
314.16 * 210 314.16 * 210
− 659.74 − 659.74
K1 = 100 100 =
314.16 * 210 314.16 * 210 − 659.74 659.74
−
100 100
78.54 * 210 78.54 * 210
− 82.47 − 82.47
K2 = 200 200 =
78.54 * 210 78.54 * 210 − 82.47 82.47
−
200 200
Now, the next step is to assemble this element to form the global stiffness matrix:
1 2 3
1 659.74 − 659.74 0
KG =
2 − 659.74 659.74 + 82.47 − 82.47
3 0 − 82.47 82.47
Now, we need to write the force and the displacement vector:
0 x1
f = 0 x = x2
− 10 x
3
659.74 − 659.74 0 x1 0
− 659.74 742.21 − 82.47 x = 0
2
0 − 82.47 82.47 x3 − 10
We have a prescribed null displacement for node 1, so we can eliminate the first line and the
first column of our system:
742.21 − 82.47 x2 0
− 82.47 82.47 x = − 10
3
To solve this problem we just need to invert the Global stiffness matrix and multiply both sides:
x 2 − 0.0152
=
x3 − 0.1364
With the displacement vector defined, it is possible to determine the element strain,
stresses and forces:
Strain
∆L x 2 − x1 − 0.0152 − 0
ε1 = = = = −1.52 * 10 −4 mm / mm
L L1 100
∆L x 3 − x 2 − 0.1364 − 0.0152
ε2 = = = = −6.06 * 10 − 4 mm / mm
L L2 200
Stress
σ 1 = Eε 1 = −1.52 * 10 −4 * 210 = −0.032GPa
σ 2 = Eε 2 = −6.06 * 10 −4 * 210 = −0.127GPa
Forces
f1 = σ 1 A1 = −0.032 * 314.16 = −10KN
f 2 = σ 2 A2 = −0.127 * 78.54 = −10KN
This is a very simple example, but it is very efficient in summarizing the finite element
methodology. All the calculus demonstrated here is done automatically by the solver. If the user
needs more detail about finite element method, it can be found in the online documentation or in
the referenced books.
o HTML Reports
This opens the new card in the Entity Editor. From here, the user can input the material
name, select the material type, the Young Modulus [E] and Poisson [Nu]:
The Entity Editor allows for editing of cards of various types and values. Some fields have drop-
down menus, some have entity selection areas, some have text or numerical entry fields.
The HyperBeam panel will open, allowing the user to select a section to edit in the HyperBeam
application. The following examples will use a solid circle section type, found on the standard
section subpanel of the HyperBeam panel.
Clicking create will bring the user to the HyperBeam application with a representation of the
cross section loaded in a new beam section. In the lower left hand corner, change the
Parameter for Radius to 10.0. The beam section onscreen will change automatically.
Also, rename the beam section to A1 to indicate which bar property this section should be
associated with.
In HyperMesh Desktop, right-click in the Model Browser to select Create > Property. In
the Entity editor, set the name for the first property to A1 and select a color. Set the card
image to PROD, selecting Yes to change the card image when appropriate, set the Material
to Steel, and select the A1 beam section for the beamsec property. Selecting the beam
section automatically populates other parts of the card image.
Create another PROD property card for the A2 property, filling it with the appropriate
material and beam section.
Then the user should input the Component name, pick the respective property using the
Property tab and click on Create:
After create these 2 components the user should see 2 new groups called Component and
Assembly Hierarchy with 2 instances called A1 and A2 on both:
The user should create a node at this coordinates: (0, 0, 0), (100, 0, 0) and (300, 0, 0)
In our case it is necessary to create crod elements. The user should use the Element
Types panel to setup the rod to crod as shown below:
The Create rod panel can be accessed by the Mesh > Create > 1D Elements > Rods
pull down menu:
This will open the rod elements create panel, where the user should first select the right
property for each element and then pick the nodes to create it:
Step 5 – Define the constraint load collector and apply the model
constraint.
Right-click in the Model Browser, and choose Create > LoadCollector to access the
load collector pop-up window to create the load collector.
After creating this load collector, the user should see a new group called LoadCollector with an
instance named SPC in the Model Browser:
Now the user can use the BCs > Create > Constraints to fix the DOF that are not
allowed to move:
In OptiStruct the rod element is a spatial element and has 3 DOFs (Ux, Uy and Uz). To
reproduce the simple configuration we had on the first section, we need to remove all Uy and Uz
DOFs and the Ux at node 1 as we did in the first section:
Now there are only 2 DOFs in this model Ux2 and Ux3.
Step 6 – Define the force load collector and apply the loads.
Create a new load collector from the Model Browser context menu:
The user should enter in the name and a card image (if necessary) into the Entity
Editor and click on create:
After creating this load collector, the user should see a new instance called Force on the
LoadCollector group in the Model Browser:
Now the user should create the force in the -X direction at node3. It can be done from BCs >
Create > Forces:
This access the create forces panel where the user needs to select the node, magnitude and
direction to create the force:
This will access the LoadSteps panel where the user should select the SPC and the
load for a static load case and click on create to create the load step.
This will add a new group to the Model Browser tree named Loadstep with an instance
named Force:
o Request H3D Result file and suppress the html and status output:
Now the user should define a file name and submit the job:
In HyperView on the toolbar, click on contour and select displacement and click
Apply. This will generate the contour shown below:
The measure button can be used to compare this results with the one solved in the
first section. Just click on Add and change the measure type for Nodal contour and select
nodes 2 and 3:
As we can see in the measures notes, the values match with the results evaluated in our first
section. There are many other post-processing functions that will be discussed later and for
more specific details the user should use the online help.
12345 23
FEA model
Model Information
o Force = 1000 N (Applied in a segment equivalent to 2mm)
o Beam properties: L = 1000, B = 10 and H = 20 mm
o Material Steel: E =210000 MPa and Nu=0.3
o UNITS: N, mm, ton, s
Theoretical Results
F *L H
M max c * 3FL
σ max = = 4
B* H 3
2
= = 375MPa
I 12 2 BH 2
Here we will use MAT1 which is a linear isotropic material that can represent the steel
behavior well. For more details about this material or other material formulations, please
refer to the online help.
4. Click return twice to accept the mesh and exit the panel.
3. From the pull down menu, click on BCs > Create > Constraints.
4. Change the entity selection from nodes to points
5. Select the lower left-hand side point and fix 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 DOFs.
12345
6. Select now the lower right-hand side point and fix 2 and 3 DOFs.
12345 23
It is always important to setup the right BCs, the user should never over constrain the model
because in general leads to wrong results. Be careful before adding any constraint to the
model.
With this card, the displacement result will be written in the H3D result file.
3. Under GLOBAL_OUTPUT_REQUESTS, select the STRESS and fill out the card as shown
below:
OptiStruct will show on the screen what it is writing in the .out file.
5. Look for the card PARAM panel and setup AUTOSPC NO, as shown below:
4. Wait until the message Process completed successfully appears in the prompt window.
This message means that the process has run without error and the result files are available
for post-processing.
3. Click on the contour toolbar button and select as the result Displacement. Click
Apply. Click on Edit Legend… and change the properties, as shown below:
4. Click OK.
5. Click on the Deformed toolbar button and set the Scale: Scale factor, Type: Uniform
and Value: to 10. Change the undeformed shape: to edges and click Apply.
6. Click on the Top button in the lower right-hand side of the window in the view controls
menu.
7. Click on the Page Layout toolbar button and select the 3 window layout .
8. Click on the Note toolbar button and change the actual text in the Description: to
BEAM MODEL and click Apply. From the pull-down menu, click Edit > Copy Window and
click on the second window, then click Edit > Paste Window. Repeat this procedure for the
third window.
In the end, the page should look as below:
Total displacement
9. With the third window active, click on the contour toolbar button and change the contour
type to Von Mises Stress. Click to uncheck the Max: selected in the Display tab and edit the
legend to set the numerical precision to 3. Using the ctrl + middle mouse button, apply a
zoom to the maximum stress on the window 3, as shown below:
Total displacement (mm) and Von Mises (MPa) [ELEMENT SIZE 10 mm]
As we can see the displacement results are very good with an error ~0.5%. However, the
stress results are not good with an error superior to 50%.
Here if the user plots the XX stress in the global system, it will be easy to understand why
the model can’t represent the right solution. The first element on the top is in compression
and the bottom element is tension. This means that there is a BIG STEP between it that is
not captured with this coarse mesh. To improve it, the user will need to refine the mesh.
1. Now coming back to HyperMesh Desktop, click return to close the OptiStruct launch panel.
2. To refine the mesh, select the automesh panel with a uniform size of 5 mm. (refer to Step 6
for more detail)
Total displacement (mm) and Von Mises (MPa) [ELEMENT SIZE 5 mm]
Now with 4 elements along the height, it is possible to represent better the bending
behavior. If the user plots the XX stress again, it will be clear that there is some step yet but
the transition now is a lot better.
Total displacement (mm) and Von Mises (MPa) [ELEMENT SIZE 2.5 mm]
Now with 8 elements along the height, it is possible to better represent the bending
behavior. If the user plots the XX stress again, it will be clear that there is some step yet but
the transition now is a lot better.
Looking on the models we had simulated it, will be easy to notice that there is no important
change in stress or displacement at the end of the beam. We can conclude that the model with
5mm was good for these 2 regions, but looking to the center of the beam, we can easily see that
the last model is much better. To solve this problem, the best approach is to refine the mesh
only where it is necessary.
1. Now coming back to HyperMesh, the user should click return to close the OptiStruct launch
panel.
2. To refine the mesh where it is necessary the user should look at the stress results and
define regions based on the stress gradient. To divide the component, select Geometry >
Edit > Surface
This is just a suggestion; the size, the number of segments and progression is dependent of
the problem, but a good reference is that the mesh transition should not exceed 25% in size.
Another important point here is that we want to have elements with a size of 0.5 mm at the
force region. This means that the region where the force will be applied will have more then
one node, which should be distributed among them so it will not create a mathematical
singularity.
3. To save class time this model is already prepared, just open the file BEAM_REF.hm.
4. Run the model using the OptiStruct panel. (Refer to Step 11 for reference)
Total displacement (mm) and Von Mises (MPa) [NON-UNIFORM ELEMENT SIZE]
Now with 50 elements on the height it is easy to see that the bending behavior is well
represented.
As we can see the in the XY plot above the stress distribution evaluated by our model is in
accordance with the analytical solution that we were trying to reproduce. We now know how to
improve the model to match a known solution. Although this is not the case for real world
models where the analytical solution doesn’t exist and where the finite element method can
really show its advantage. The next exercise will cover this application.
123456
13456
FEA model
Model Information
o Force = (12000,12000, -20000) N
o Material Aluminium:
• E =70000 MPa
• Nu = 0.33
• S0 = 240 Mpa
• SADM = 0.7*S0
o UNITS: N, mm, ton, s
Problem Setup
Copy the file: nafems1.hm
Step 1: Launch HyperMesh Desktop with OptiStruct bulk profile and open the
nafems1.hm model
Step 2: Create the Aluminum material named “Aluminum” with the properties
shown in the image below.
Material data
Step 3: Create the solid property named BRACKET and assign it to the solid
component “Lower Torsion Link1”
*SPC is the load collector with the constraints, on this model SPC.
*Load is the load collector with the Force, on this model Force.
FORMAT H3D
DISPLACEMENT (H3D) = ALL
PARAM, AUTOSPC, NO
STRESS (H3D, ALL, CENTER) = YES
STRAIN (H3D, ALL) = ALL
TITLE = NAFEMS BRACKET
OUTPUT, H3D, ALL
OUTPUT, HTML, , NO
OUTPUT, STAT, , NO
SCREEN OUT
SPCFORCE (H3D, ALL) = ALL
The titles listed under Card in the Model Browser image above show the sections under
which each set of cards can be found.
Von Mises Stress (Elem. Size = 10 mm), deformed shape scaled 100x
o It is easy to notice that the stress results are not good. (Discontinuities)
Step 9: Repeat the whole process for the model with 6.5 mm nafems2.hm
6.5 mm
Von Mises Stress and total displacement (Elem. Size = 6.5 mm)
Step 10: To save time the next models are already solved, the user should only
use the report template to confirm the values.
Von Mises Stress and total displacement (Elem. Size = 5 mm) nafems3.h3d
Von Mises Stress and total displacement (Element Size = 3 mm) nafems4.h3d
Von Mises Stress and total displacement (Element Size = 2 mm) nafems5.h3d
Von Mises Stress and total displacement (Element Size = 0.55 mm) nafems6.h3d
Von Mises Stress and total displacement (Element Size = 0.17 mm) nafems7.h3d
Convergence table
Model Element Size Von Mises Displacement
(mm) (MPa) (mm)
1 10 60.2 1.06
2 6.5 63.3 1.08
3 5 69.5 1.09
4 3 73.0 1.10
5 2 80.0 1.10
6 0.55 84.4 1.09
7 0.17 89.3 1.09
Chapter 3
Modal Analysis
1 – Definitions
A modal analysis calculates the frequency modes or natural frequencies of a given system,
but not necessarily its full time history response to a given input. The natural frequency of a
system is dependent only on the stiffness of the structure, the mass which participates with
the structure (including self-weight) and the boundary conditions.
Consider the motion equation, where the damp and external forces are null. This leaves the
equation in the reduced form known as the Free Vibration equation:
Mɺxɺ + Kx = 0 (1)
The solution for this equation can be evaluated if we proposal a general harmonic solution
with the form:
Where:
The harmonic hypothesis helps to find the equation solution, but it has a physical importance
that we will discuss further. This solution shows that all DOFs of the structure, when submitted
to a free vibration, will move synchrony with each other.
If we substitute the equation 2 into 1 performing the differentiation on the first term:
− ω 2 MΦ sin(ωt ) + KΦ sin(ωt ) = 0
(K − ω M )Φ = 0
2
(3)
This is the equilibrium equation for a structure performing free vibration, which can be
rewritten in terms of the eigenvalues λ =ω2:
[K − λM] Φ = 0
Where:
• K is the stiffness matrix of the structure
• M is the mass matrix.
• The solution of the eigenvalue problem yields n eigenvalues λ, where n is the
number of degrees of freedom.
• The vector Φ is the eigenvector corresponding to the eigenvalue λ.
The eigenvalue problem in OptiStruct is solved using a matrix method called the Lanczos
Method. This method is very efficient when not all eigenvalues are required. This is the
case for structural problems where only a small number of the lowest eigenvalues are
normally important.
* It requires that the mass matrix be positive semidefinite and the stiffness be symmetric.
The natural frequencies can be evaluated from solution of the Eigenvalues as shown below:
ωi
fi =
2π
(4)
Where:
f i → i-th natural frequency
ωi → i-th circular frequency
The natural frequencies and normal modes of a structure can be a function of the load and
the damping present on the system. This kind of analysis is defined as pre-stressed and
damped modal analysis respectively. These analyses will not be covered here.
It is useful to know the modal frequencies of a structure as it allows you to ensure that the
frequency of any applied periodic loading will not coincide with a modal frequency and
hence cause resonance, which could lead to large responses and consequently fails.
To define the subsequent dynamic analyses (i.e., transient, frequency response, PSD, etc.) ,
they should be based on Modal results. With a previous knowledge about the important
modes, the analyst can chose the appropriate time or frequency step to solve the problem.
If the analyst needs to work with a big model then the modal analysis results can be used to
solve the FRF or Transient simulation. This is called a modal FRF or Modal Transient,
where the equations are solved using a method called Modal superposition. This makes the
dynamic solution much less expansive then the direct integration.
A modal analysis plays a key role when the analyst needs to compare the dynamic analyses
with physical tests. It helps to define the right equipment that should to be used and the
right location for accelerometers and strain gages. It helps during the test as well to
understand the test results and correlate the virtual model with the prototype.
It is possible sometimes only with a modal analysis to find out if a design change will
improve the dynamic performance of the system. In summary, the modal analysis is used to
determine the normal modes and normal shapes, but it also helps to understand the whole
system and helps to understand all other dynamic analysis.
All output quantities for a modal analysis are based on the relative displacements of a mode
shape, and then the output quantities can be compared for a certain mode, but not
necessarily between different modes.
For linear elastic problems that are properly setup (no rigid body rotation or translation), the
stiffness and mass matrices and the system in general are positive definite. These are the
easiest matrices to deal with because the numerical methods commonly applied are
guaranteed to converge to a solution. When all the qualities of the system are considered:
1) Only the smallest eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the lowest modes are desired
2) The mass and stiffness matrices are sparse and highly banded
It is also possible to test a physical object to determine it's natural frequencies and mode
shapes. This is called an Experimental Modal Analysis. The results of the physical test
can be used to calibrate a finite element model to determine if the underlying assumptions
made were correct (for example, material properties, boundary conditions, etc.).
ɺɺ + C uɺ + Ku = F
Mu
Where M is the mass matrix, ü is the 2nd time derivative of the displacement u (i.e. the
acceleration), uɺ is the velocity, C is a damping matrix, K is the stiffness matrix, and F is the
force vector. The only terms kept are the 1st and 3rd terms on the left hand side which gives
the following system:
ɺɺ + Ku = 0
Mu
This is the general form of the eigensystem encountered in structural engineering using the
FEA. Further, harmonic motion is typically assumed for the structure so that ü is taken to
equal -λu, where λ is an eigenvalue, and the equation reduces to:
(K − λM )u = 0
where the solution of the eigenvalue problem yields n eigenvalues λ, where n is the number
of degrees of freedom. The vector u is the eigenvector corresponding to the eigenvalue.
Step 1 – Generate a FEM model with the material and properties already setup
(Chapter 1 section 3)
FEM model
Step 2 – Define the constraint LoadCollector and the constraint for this
simulation.
A Modal loadstep definition for OptiStruct looks like the following lines:
SUBCASE 1
SPC=1
METHOD(STRUCTURE)=2
This defines:
1. The Normal modes subcase 1
2. The Constraints are defined in the LoadCollector 1
3. The number of modes and other parameters are defined on the LoadCollector 2
that have to be an Eigrl type.
h
L b
Problem description
Problem Statement
• Geometry:
o (L = 1000, h = 10, b = 10 mm)
• One load case: Normal Modes
o 3 first modes
• Material STEEL:
o ρ = 7.8e-9 T/mm3 [RHO] Density
o E = 210000 MPa [E] Young’s modulus
o ν = 0.3 - [nu] Poisson’s ratio
Problem Setup
You should copy the file: BEAM_SHELL_MODAL.hm
Step 2: Mesh the model and create and assign the materials and properties
1. From the 2D page, select automesh.
2. Select the single surface, set the element size to 1000, and click mesh to mesh the
surface with all other options set to default, and making one element across the face.
3. Right-click in the Model Browser and select Create > Material.
4. In the Entity Editor, name the new material Beam and set the card image to MAT1. Set
the following values: E = 210000, nu = 0.3 and rho = 7.85e-9. Click return to close
the card editor and return to the main menu.
5. Right-click in the Model Browser and select Create > Property.
6. In the Entity Editor, name the new material BeamShell with a PSHELL card image.
7. Assign the Beam material to this property and set T to 10.
8. In the Model Browser, assign the new property created above to the comp beam.
2. On the Analysis page, select the constraints panel and create the following constraints:
• With the entity selector set to surfs and the single surface in the model selected,
uncheck all DOFs except DOF 3 and click create to constrain Uz = 0
• With the entity selector set to lines, check all DOFs and select the edge closest to
the origin. Click create to constrain that edge in all six degrees of freedom.
3. Create/Edit a LoadCollector with card image EIGRL named EIGRL and edit the card
with the following settings.
4. Right-click in the Model Browser to create a new loadstep of Analysis Type Normal
modes named Normal_Modes and fill in the parameters as follows.
Result Table
500
250
100
50
20
10
0.5
Note that those meshes shaded in orange are outside of traditional bounds acceptable in
FEA for element aspect ratio while the results in blue are in violation of acceptable limits
for shell element thickness bounds as it regards bending behavior. Results in both of
these regions will be calculated, but are not considered good modeling practice.
MODES CONVERGENCY
10000.00
1000.00
Freq (Hz)
100.00
10.00
1.00
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
1 / elem size
Analytical Solution:
EI EI EI
f 1 = 0.7482 = 8.3 f 2 = 1.8732 = 52.2 f 3 = 3.1342 = 146.2
mL4 mL4 mL4
5 Bolt link
Problem description
Problem Information
• Determine if the Bracket Baseline geometry pass the Dynamic criteria:
o Natural frequencies > 350 Hz.
• Compressor: (Mass = 3 kg and CG = (-5.2, -14.5, 65.2)
• Material STEEL:
o ρ = 7.8e-9 T/mm3 [RHO] Density
o E = 210000 MPa [E] Young’s modulus
o ν = 0.3 - [nu] Poisson’s ratio
Problem Setup
You should copy the file: BRACKET_COMPRESSOR_FEA_2nd.hm
Step 4: Create a PSOLID property and assign the new property to the
FEA_Bracket component.
Step 5: In the 1D > masses page, create a mass element at the dependent node
of the RBE3.
Q1: How much you trust on the first mode you have got on this analysis?
______________________________________________________________________
Q2: Is there any result that you can look to identify if your model is good?
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
Q4: How can you determine where the mesh needs to be refined?
______________________________________________________________________
Expected result:
100.0%
10.0%
ERROR
1st
2nd
1.0%
0.1%
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
TIME
To do this kind of simplification the analyst needs to have know-how about the
system behavior, in general we can assume that the bolt is strong enough
(SIZE/MAT) to not change the modal result. But the compressor geometry needs to
be studied before any simplification.
Answer 1: How much you trust on the first mode you have got on this analysis?
To answer this question the analyst should verify:
• The first mode is like was expected. (shape and value)
• The mesh is refined enough (Mode shape, strain energy convergence).
• Are there any tests, analytical or past results to calibrate the model.
Answer 2: Is there any result that you can look to identify if your model is good?
Strain energy can give to the analyst a very good indication if the mode is well
refined. It works like the stress for a static analysis.
But in general the analyst doesn’t know the FEA error, then the measure needs to
be made based on the response variance, if it is less than a certain amount
considered admissible the model is ok.
Answer 4: How can you determine where the mesh needs to be refined?
Again the highest strain energy shows the places where the mesh needs to be
refined.
Chapter 4
Buckling Analysis
Thin structures subject to compression loads that haven’t achieved the material
strength limits can show a failure mode called BUCKLING. This failure can be analyzed
using a technique well known as “linear buckling analysis”.
1 – Definitions
Linear buckling is a mathematic tool used to predict the theoretical buckling
strength of an ideal elastic structure. It is solved by first applying a reference level of loading,
Pref, to the structure. A standard linear static analysis is then carried out to obtain stresses
which are needed to form the geometric stiffness matrix KG. This new matrix is evaluated
using the initial stiffness matrix augmented by the initial stress matrix corresponding to
the load specified in the static load step, multiplied with a factor that is determined such
that the resulting matrix has zero as its lowest Eigen frequency. The buckling loads are then
calculated by solving an eigenvalue problem:
[K − λK G ]x = 0
Κ is the stiffness matrix of the structure and λ is the multiplier to the reference load. The
solution of the eigenvalue problem generally yields n eigenvalues λi, where n is the number
of degrees of freedom (in practice, only a subset of eigenvalues is usually calculated). The
vector x is the eigenvector corresponding to the eigenvalue.
The eigenvalue problem is solved using a matrix method called the Lanczos method.
Not all eigenvalues are required. Only a small number of the lowest eigenvalues are
normally calculated for buckling analysis. The lowest eigenvalue λCr is associated with
buckling and the critical or buckling load is:
In order to run a linear buckling analysis, an EIGRL bulk data entry needs to be
given because it defines the number of modes to be extracted. The EIGRL card needs to
be referenced by a METHOD statement in a SUBCASE in the subcase information section.
In addition, it is necessary to use a STATSUB card to reference the appropriate referential
PRef ,SUBCASE.
static loading,
STATSUB cannot refer to a subcase that uses inertia relief. In such cases, the
stiffness matrix is positive semi-definite and the buckling eigenvalue solution ends in
singularity.
The buckling analysis will ignore zero-dimensional elements, MPC, RBE3, and
CBUSH elements. These elements can be used in buckling analysis, but they do not
contribute to the geometric stiffness matrix, KG. By default, the contribution from the rigid
elements to the geometric stiffness matrix is not included. Users have to add PARAM,
KGRGD, YES to the bulk data section to include the contribution of rigid elements to the
geometric stiffness matrix.
In addition, through the EXCLUDE subcase information entry, users may decide to
omit the contribution of other elements to the geometric stiffness matrix, effectively allowing
users to control which parts of the structure are analyzed for buckling. The excluded
properties are only removed from the geometric stiffness matrix, resulting in a buckling
analysis with elastic boundary conditions. This means that the excluded properties may still
be showing movement in the buckling mode.
In practice then, the structure with offset can reach excessive deformation before the
limit load is reached. (Note that more complex structures, such as frames or structures
experiencing bending moments buckle via limit load, even in absence of ZOFFS on the
element card). Furthermore, in a fully nonlinear approach, additional instability points may
be present in the limit load path.
π 2 EI
PCr =
(KL )2
Where:
PCr = Critical force (vertical load on column)
E = Young’s Modulus
I = Area moment of inertia
L = Column Length
K = Column effective length:
Both ends pinned (K=1)
Both ends fixed (K=0.5)
One end fixed and other pinned (K=0.699…)
One end Fixed and the other Free (2.0)
Problem description
Model Information
• Design Criteria:
o Buckling: FIRST MODE > (1.5 x).
o Static: U < 20 mm and Von Mises < 70 MPa.
• Material Aluminum:
o ρ = 2.1e-9 T/mm3 [RHO] Density
o E = 70000 MPa [E] Young’s modulus
o ν = 0.33 - [nu] Poisson’s ratio
Problem Setup
Copy the file: WING.hm
Step 2: Run a static analysis and verify the design for static failure.
The load, constraints and loadcases have already been created. All you have to do is
to submit the job.
For SPC, choose load collector constraints, for STATSUB, choose loadstep
PRESSURE and for METHOD(STRUCT), choose EIGRL LoadCollector.
For SPC choose load collector constraints, for STATSUB, choose loadstep TIP and
for METHOD(STRUCT), choose EIGRL LoadCollector.
For SPC, choose load collector constraints, for STATSUB, choose loadstep SUM and
for METHOD(STRUCT), choose EIGRL LoadCollector.
Step 4: Save the file under a new name, run the analysis, and study the results
Chapter 5
1 – Definitions
With inertia relief, the applied loads are balanced by a set of translational and
rotational accelerations. These accelerations provide body forces, distributed over the
structure in such a way that the total sum of the applied forces on the structure is zero. This
provides the steady-state stress and deformed shape in the structure as if it were freely
accelerating due to the applied loads. Boundary conditions are applied only to restrain rigid
body motion. Because the external loads are balanced by the accelerations, the reaction
forces corresponding to these boundary conditions are zero. This calculation is automated in
OptiStruct.
Inertia relief boundary conditions may be defined in the bulk data section of the input
deck or they may be determined automatically by the solver.
o The SUPORT and SUPORT1 bulk data entries are used to define up to six
reaction degrees of freedom of the free body.
SUPORT entries will be used in all relevant subcases and therefore do
not need to be referenced in the Subcase Information section.
SUPORT1 entries need to be referenced by a SUPORT1 data selector
statement for use within a subcase.
o Inertia relief boundary conditions may be generated automatically by using
PARAM, INREL, -2.
In OptiStruct, inertia relief can be applied to linear static, nonlinear gap, modal
frequency response (with residual vectors), and transient response (with residual vectors)
analyses. A static case with inertia relief cannot be referenced in a linear buckling analysis.
Inertia relief is meaningless in normal modes analysis.
o It is important to notice that the fictitious supports should just remove the rigid body
motion and not add an improper constraint.
4 load cases
o 2 Gs on Z
o 3 Gs on Y
o 3 Gs on X
o 4.7 Gs SUM
Problem description
Model Information
• Design Criteria:
o Max Rel. disp. < 500 mm.
o Von Mises < 70 MPa. (Aluminum)
• Total Mass: 3.09 ton.
• Material:
Material [E] [RHO] Nu
MPa Ton/mm3
Aluminum 70000 2.1 x 10-9 0.33
Solar_panel 20000 1 x 10-11 0.4
System 1000 1 x 10-13 0.3
Antenna 20000 1 x 10-11 0.4
Problem Setup
Copy the file: Satellite.hm
Step 3: Create the four linear load cases with the name and details listed
below, if you have doubt on it take a look on the end of this exercise:
All load steps will have the same fictitious support:
Suport: (SUPORT1 load type)
i. Node 2: Uy = 0
ii. Node 3: Ux, Uy, Uz = 0
iii. Node 4: Ux, Uy, = 0
Hints
1. Create a load collector named SUPPORT with no card image.
2. On the Constraint Panel create the constraint listed on Step 3 with load types:
SUPPORT1.
3. Create a LoadCollector named 2 Gz with no card image.
4. Go to the force panel and create the force on the RBE3 center node (1) with the value
and direction described Step 3.
5. Repeat Steps 3 and 4 for the other 2 load directions 3 Gy and 3 Gx.
6. Create another LoadCollector named SUM 4.7 G with card image load and fill out the
card, as shown below:
7. Create the 4 load steps for each force applied as shown below:
LOAD = 2Gz_force
LOAD = 3Gy_force
LOAD = 3Gz_force