×
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

Error message: Solver Problem, Zero pivot

Error message: Solver Problem, Zero pivot

Error message: Solver Problem, Zero pivot

(OP)
Dear Abaqus specialists,

i am currently working on the FE Analysis of an indentor Test in order to examine the failure mechanisms (cracking and Delamination) of coated Tools. Unfortunately my Simulation Always Aborts giving the following error message:

Solver problem. Zero pivot when processing D.O.F. 1 of 49 nodes. The nodes have been identified in node set WarnNodeSolvProbZeroPiv_1_1_50_1_1.



I have a Picture of the model and the nodes specified in the warning set. These node are exclusively located within the Coating-Substrate interface. I would be glad About any ideas and Inputs. Thank you in Advance.




RE: Error message: Solver Problem, Zero pivot

This message indicates either underconstraint or overconstraint. The main question here is what interactions and BCs (I guess that in this case only interactions) are applied to the nodes identified in the warning set ?

Did you get any other warnings ? Could you share your model’s files here ?

RE: Error message: Solver Problem, Zero pivot

(OP)
Thanks for your answer.

For the coating-substrate contact i used a Node to Surface contact with finite sliding. Do you mean the Data file? The Data file for the interaction section looks like the following:


***NOTE: DUE TO EXCESSIVE REPORTING, THE ECHO OF THE *SURFACE OPTION IS BEING
SUPPRESSED.
*contactpair, interaction=_INTERFACE_CONTACT-PROP, adjust=ASSEMBLY_VERBINDUNGSKNOTEN
*contactpair, interaction=RW_CVD, type=SURFACETOSURFACE
*surfaceinteraction, name=INTERFACE
*surfacebehavior
*surfaceinteraction, name=RW_CVD
*surfacebehavior, pressure-overclosure=HARD
*surfaceinteraction, name=TEST_INTERFACE
*surfaceinteraction, name=XFEM
*surfacebehavior
*surfaceinteraction, name=_INTERFACE_CONTACT-PROP
*surfacebehavior
*contactpair, interaction=_INTERFACE_CONTACT-PROP, adjust=ASSEMBLY_VERBINDUNGSKNOTEN
*contactpair, interaction=RW_CVD, type=SURFACETOSURFACE
*enrichment, name=XFEM, type=PROPAGATIONCRACK, elset=ASSEMBLY__PICKEDSET14, interaction=XFEM
*surfaceinteraction, name=INTERFACE
*surfaceinteraction, name=RW_CVD
*friction, sliptolerance=0.005
*surfacebehavior, pressure-overclosure=HARD
*surfaceinteraction, name=TEST_INTERFACE
*surfaceinteraction, name=XFEM
*surfacebehavior
*fracturecriterion, type=VCCT, normaldirection=MTS, mixedmodebehavior=BK, unstablegrowthtolerance
*surfaceinteraction, name=_INTERFACE_CONTACT-PROP
*cohesivebehavior
*damageinitiation, criterion=MAXS

***WARNING: THE SECOND MAXIMUM SHEAR TRACTION AT FAILURE MUST BE GREATER THAN
ZERO FOR COHESIVE ELEMENTS, SURFACE_BASED COHESIVE BEHAVIOR, OR
XFEM ELEMENTS IN 3D; OTHERWISE, IT WILL BE ASSIGNED THE SAME VALUE
OF THE FIRST MAXIMUM SHEAR TRACTION.
*damageevolution, type=ENERGY, power=1, mixedmodebehavior=BK
*surfacebehavior
*fracturecriterion, type=VCCT, normaldirection=MTS, mixedmodebehavior=BK, unstablegrowthtolerance
*surfaceinteraction, name=INTERFACE
*surfaceinteraction, name=RW_CVD
*surfaceinteraction, name=TEST_INTERFACE
*surfaceinteraction, name=XFEM
*surfaceinteraction, name=_INTERFACE_CONTACT-PROP
*boundary
*boundary
*boundary
*boundary
*boundary
*contactpair, interaction=_INTERFACE_CONTACT-PROP, adjust=ASSEMBLY_VERBINDUNGSKNOTEN
*contactpair, interaction=RW_CVD, type=SURFACETOSURFACE
*enrichment, name=XFEM, type=PROPAGATIONCRACK, elset=ASSEMBLY__PICKEDSET14, interaction=XFEM
*surfaceinteraction, name=INTERFACE

***WARNING: PLEASE CHECK TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INTERACTION PARAMETER IS USED
ON THE *ENRICHMENT OPTION FOR LEFM CRITERION OR LOW CYCLE FATIGUE
ANALYSIS.
*surfaceinteraction, name=RW_CVD

***WARNING: PLEASE CHECK TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INTERACTION PARAMETER IS USED
ON THE *ENRICHMENT OPTION FOR LEFM CRITERION OR LOW CYCLE FATIGUE
ANALYSIS.
*surfaceinteraction, name=TEST_INTERFACE

***WARNING: PLEASE CHECK TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INTERACTION PARAMETER IS USED
ON THE *ENRICHMENT OPTION FOR LEFM CRITERION OR LOW CYCLE FATIGUE
ANALYSIS.
*surfaceinteraction, name=XFEM
*surfaceinteraction, name=_INTERFACE_CONTACT-PROP

***WARNING: PLEASE CHECK TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INTERACTION PARAMETER IS USED
ON THE *ENRICHMENT OPTION FOR LEFM CRITERION OR LOW CYCLE FATIGUE
ANALYSIS.
*contactpair, interaction=_INTERFACE_CONTACT-PROP, adjust=ASSEMBLY_VERBINDUNGSKNOTEN
*contactpair, interaction=RW_CVD, type=SURFACETOSURFACE
*enrichment, name=XFEM, type=PROPAGATIONCRACK, elset=ASSEMBLY__PICKEDSET14, interaction=XFEM
*output, field, frequency=2
*output, history, variable=PRESELECT
*output, field, frequency=2
*output, history, variable=PRESELECT, frequency=10
*elementoutput, directions=YES
*elementoutput, directions=YES
*output, field, frequency=2
*output, history, variable=PRESELECT
*output, field, frequency=2
*output, history, variable=PRESELECT, frequency=10
*elementoutput, directions=YES
*elementoutput, directions=YES


SLAVE : ASSEMBLY_S_SURF-4
MASTER: ASSEMBLY_M_SURF-4
DISTANCE
NODE ADJUSTED REMARKS/WARNINGS

14463 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.50000 , 4.00000E-02).
14464 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.49800 , 4.00000E-02).
14465 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.49600 , 4.00000E-02).
14466 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.49400 , 4.00000E-02).
14467 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.49200 , 4.00000E-02).
14468 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.49000 , 4.00000E-02).
14469 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.48800 , 4.00000E-02).
14470 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.48600 , 4.00000E-02).
14471 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.48400 , 4.00000E-02).
14472 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.48200 , 4.00000E-02).
14473 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.48000 , 4.00000E-02).
14474 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.47800 , 4.00000E-02).
14475 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.47600 , 4.00000E-02).
14476 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.47400 , 4.00000E-02).
14477 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.47200 , 4.00000E-02).
14478 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.47000 , 4.00000E-02).
14479 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.46800 , 4.00000E-02).
14480 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.46600 , 4.00000E-02).
14481 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.46400 , 4.00000E-02).
14482 4.00000E-10 ADJUSTED TO ( 0.46200 , 4.00000E-02).

***WARNING: FOR CONTACT PAIR (ASSEMBLY_S_SURF-4-ASSEMBLY_M_SURF-4), NOT ALL
THE NODES THAT HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED WERE PRINTED. SPECIFY
*PREPRINT,CONTACT=YES FOR COMPLETE PRINTOUT.


I hope this will help you. As you can see, other interaction related warnings occur during the simulation.

RE: Error message: Solver Problem, Zero pivot

Since you want to model delamination with through-thickness crack propagation using surface-based cohesive behavior and XFEM, try creating additional small partition of a substrate under the coating layer and assign enrichment to this region as well.

To clarify the damage definition, in this case it should combine approaches used in surface-based cohesive zone modeling and XFEM analyses (with cohesive or LEFM damage):

1) surface-based cohesive behavior and XFEM with cohesive damage:

- material: damage initiation and evolution
- interaction: cohesive behavior, damage

or:

2) surface-based cohesive behavior and XFEM with LEFM damage:

- material: damage initiation
- interaction: cohesive behavior, damage, fracture criterion (type=VCCT)

Make sure that interaction property with fracture criterion is assigned to XFEM crack definition in the second case.

Also try enabling slave adjustment in contact pair definition.

You can perform some quick tests using files provided for the documentation example "Debonding behavior of a double cantilever beam" in Example Problems Guide. Just add XFEM-related features to this model.

RE: Error message: Solver Problem, Zero pivot

(OP)
First of all, thank you very much for the elaborate answer.

Assigning the XFEM to a small portion of the substrate sounds like a good idea, i will try it as soon as i have access again to my work PC. It would'nt help regarding the zero pivot problem though right? Since the simulation aborts before the crack reaches the contact region of coating and substrate.

The 1st approach is quite clear for me and it is the one i was following so far. Here the delamination is solely controlled by the damage and damage evolution in the interaction property module right?

I have some difficulties understanding the 2nd approach though. The crack initiation within the material is clear to me, but i don't understand how the delamination is being carried out here. The VCCT needs a predefined imperfection since it can only model propagation not initiation. So i'm defining the initiation via 'Damage' and after initiation occurs the VCCT takes care of the evolution?

I'm gonna try this out when i'll be at work next time, i am still a bit unsure though what the reason for the Zero Pivot error could be.

Happy holidays!

RE: Error message: Solver Problem, Zero pivot

In the first case (surface-based cohesive behavior and XFEM with cohesive damage) damage intiation and evolution for XFEM crack is specified in material definition. Interaction property with cohesive behavior and damage (initiation + evolution) is defined for delamination as typically done when modeling surface-based cohesive zone.

In the second case (surface-based cohesive behavior and XFEM with LEFM damage) damage initiation for XFEM crack is specified in material but evolution is handled by fracture criterion (type=VCCT) given in the interaction property assigned to XFEM crack. Another interaction property with cohesive behavior and damage (initiation + evolution) handles delamination.

I think that the confusion comes from the fact that you are thinking about modeling delamination with VCCT approach while I'm talking about modeling it using cohesive behavior. Fracture criterion type=VCCT in the second case is used for XFEM damage, not for delamination.

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! Already a Member? Login


Resources

White Paper - The Criticality of the E/E Architecture
Modern vehicles are highly sophisticated systems incorporating electrical, electronic, software and mechanical components. Mechanical systems are giving way to advanced software and electronic devices, driving automakers to innovate and differentiate their vehicles via the electric and electronic (E/E) architecture. As the pace of change accelerates, automotive companies need to evolve their development processes to deliver and maximize the value of these architectures. Download Now
White Paper - Model Based Engineering for Wire Harness Manufacturing
Modern cars, trucks, and other vehicles feature an ever-increasing number of sophisticated electrical and electronic features, placing a larger burden on the wiring harness that enables these new features. As complexity rises, current harness manufacturing methods are struggling to keep pace due to manual data exchanges and the inability to capture tribal knowledge. A model-based wire harness manufacturing engineering flow automates data exchange and captures tribal knowledge through design rules to help harness manufacturers improve harness quality and boost efficiency. Download Now
White Paper - Modeling and Optimizing Wire Harness Costs for Variation Complexity
This paper will focus on the quantification of the complexity related costs in harness variations in order to model them, allowing automated algorithms to optimize for these costs. A number of real world examples will be provided as well. Since no two businesses are alike, it is the aim of this paper to provide the foundational knowledge and methodology so the reader can assess their own business to model how variation complexity costs affect their business. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close