×
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

Nonlinear spring element produces much smaller amplitude than analytical solution

Nonlinear spring element produces much smaller amplitude than analytical solution

Nonlinear spring element produces much smaller amplitude than analytical solution

(OP)
Hello, everyone!

I am trying to using nonlinear spring elements in a FEM model, but first I want to run some test problems. I found nonlinear spring elements produced much smaller amplitude than analytical solution for SDF system. The problem is defined as following:

*Heading
**
** PARTS
**
*Part, name=Part-1
*Node
1, 0., 0., 0.
*Nset, nset=Part-1-RefPt_, internal
1,
*Nset, nset=_PickedSet2, internal
1,
*Nset, nset=_PickedSet3, internal
1,
*Element, type=MASS, elset=_PickedSet3_Inertia-1_
1, 1
*Mass, elset=_PickedSet3_Inertia-1_
1.,
*Spring,elset=Springs/Dashpots-1-spring, nonlinear, dependencies=1
2
0,0
288.0,0.18
6180.0,10
*Element, type=Spring1, elset=Springs/Dashpots-1-spring
2, 1
*End Part
**
**
** ASSEMBLY
**
*Assembly, name=Assembly
**
*Instance, name=Part-1-1, part=Part-1
*End Instance
**
*Nset, nset=Set-1, instance=Part-1-1
1,
*Nset, nset=_PickedSet6, internal, instance=Part-1-1
1,
*Nset, nset=_PickedSet7, internal, instance=Part-1-1
1,
*End Assembly
**
** BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
**
** Name: BC-1 Type: Displacement/Rotation
*Boundary
_PickedSet6, 1, 1
_PickedSet6, 6, 6
**
** PREDEFINED FIELDS
**
** Name: Predefined Field-1 Type: Velocity
*Initial Conditions, type=VELOCITY
_PickedSet7, 1, 0.
_PickedSet7, 2, 20.
** ----------------------------------------------------------------
**
** STEP: Step-1
**
*Step, name=Step-1, nlgeom=NO, inc=10000
*Dynamic,application=TRANSIENT FIDELITY
0.001,0.1,2e-08
**
** OUTPUT REQUESTS
**
*Restart, write, frequency=0
*Output, field, frequency=0
**
** HISTORY OUTPUT: H-Output-2
**
*Output, history, frequency=1
*Node Output, nset=Set-1
A2,V2,U2
*End Step

The spring is designed to have a stiffness 1600 for u < 0.18, and 600 for u>0.18.
The mass of the object is 1; the initial velocity of the object is 20.
The displacement vs acceleration figure is as following, the slope of the curve is the same as expected.

The displacement and velocity curve seem OK, too.


However, the amplitude should be 0.78 instead of 0.6 as in the result.

The amplitude can be calculated by the potential energy. The initial kinetic energy is 20^2/2=200. The potential energy at displacement 0.6 is 0.18^2*1600/2+(0.6^2-0.18^2)*600/2=125, which is much smaller than the initial kinetic energy.

RE: Nonlinear spring element produces much smaller amplitude than analytical solution

Draw out the force/displacement curve for the spring, divide the area underneath it into two triangles and a rectangle, and you should be able to locate the missing potential energy.

RE: Nonlinear spring element produces much smaller amplitude than analytical solution

(OP)
Thanks a lot! I now understand what is happened.

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