×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

MPC_RBE2 vs. FASTENERS SIMULATION

MPC_RBE2 vs. FASTENERS SIMULATION

MPC_RBE2 vs. FASTENERS SIMULATION

(OP)
Can MPC RBE2 with 6 d.o.f. be used correctly to simulate bolt in FEM instead of bar and other things.....The mpc shape i'm talking is to create from a 3d model an indipendent node at one face and all dipendent connected in an umbrella shape...the other face of the same solid the other node and the other solid nodes (hole nodes all around instead )....
|  | /|o
|  |/ |
|  |  |
| /|  |
|/_|o |
|\ |  |
| \|  |
|  \  |
|  |\ |
|  | \|o                ?????

RE: MPC_RBE2 vs. FASTENERS SIMULATION

Remember the RBE2 MPC will be infinitely stiff and will create local stress/strain concentrations.  Take these into account when you interpet your results.

Jxc

RE: MPC_RBE2 vs. FASTENERS SIMULATION

Following jxc's line of thought; if the stress at the hole is the important thing for you to calculate (that is, your goal is the accurate computation of the stress field at the hole), then these MPC RBE2 if they are indeed 'infinitely stiff' (I can't vouch for that since I don't use this software), you will not be able to use them and still reach a goal of computing accurate stress fields at the holes (if that's your goal). If however all you are interested in is getting the load transfer correct, you might be able to use these MPC RBE2. BTW, what FEA software is this?

RE: MPC_RBE2 vs. FASTENERS SIMULATION

I recommend a combination of beam and rbe2 elements.
I'm using a beam to model the bolt, and an RBE connection of the bolt to the shell elements.
this way the connection is stiff, but the bolt has the real material properties.

for extremely precise calculations, model in 3D bolt and body, but I think it's overkill.

RE: MPC_RBE2 vs. FASTENERS SIMULATION

I recommend NOT using an RBE2 and use instead a CBUSH (pref zero length).  You then have the freedom to calculate equivalent fastener stiffness which will result in more realistic load transfer.

See also post about CBUSH rotational stiffness (dated today).

RE: MPC_RBE2 vs. FASTENERS SIMULATION

Hello,

You can't use a rigid body element (infinitely stiff) to model a bolt (finite stifness). The load path will be wrong.

IF you don't (or can't) use continuum elements, you can define a rigid body on both solids and linked each master node of the two rigid bodies by a bush element (to simulate a prestressed bolt).

An easy way to choose among the different proposals would be to compare 3D model and "bush" models especially if you often simulate the same bolt connections.

Regards,

Torpen

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources