×
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

Incompatible Mode Elements

Incompatible Mode Elements

Incompatible Mode Elements

(OP)
Hello everyone.

Simple question: what are incompatible mode elements and how are they used? I'd like to get a general idea of the difference between this type of elements to the others (reduced, fully-integrated etc) and why are they so powerful for bending analyses - without going into too much maths.

Google search for 'incompatible mode elements' have produced unsatisfactory results. At least, none that are not riddled with too much technical/mathematical details.

Thanks y'all.
jo

RE: Incompatible Mode Elements

Dear Jo,
This is related to the use of low-order elements. In NX Nastran, when using CHEXA 8-nodes & CPENTA 6-nodes solid elements with no midside nodes, reduced shear integration with bubble functions is the default. This is recommended because it minimizes shear locking and Poisson's ratio locking and does not cause modes of deformation that lead to no strain energy.

The effects of using non default values are as follows:
• "IN = 3" produces an overly stiff element.
• If "IN = 2" and the element has midside nodes, modes of deformation may occur that lead to no strain energy.
• Standard isoparametric integration (ISOP = "FULL" or 1 and IN = 2 or 3) produces an element overly stiff in shear. This type of integration is more suited to nonstructural problems.

For geometric nonlinear analysis, it is recommended not to use incompatible modes by setting IN=2 or 3. If bending behavior is significant, it is highly recommended to use elements with midside nodes.

Best regards,
Blas.
 

RE: Incompatible Mode Elements

Incompatible mode elements are formulated in such a way that bending is better represented. Consider a 2-D linear plane element which in general has 2 dof/node (8 dof/element for a quad). If you formulate an incompatible mode element then 2 additional internal dof are included which have a parabolic displacement interpolation function. These internal dof are then condensed out of the final element formulation and the resulting element will provide a better representation of a constant bending situation than the original formulation.

Use of incompatible mode elements can provide significant reduction of run times and results improvement in both 2 and 3-D where bending is present..

Hope this gives you a bit more of what you were looking for....

Ed.R.
 

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