Compliant Interface in Component Mode Synthesis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierangelo Masarati ◽  
Fanny Darbas ◽  
Israël Wander
Keyword(s):  
Rigid Body ◽  
Structural Component ◽  
Strain Energy ◽  
Rigid Body Motion ◽  
Component Mode Synthesis ◽  
Body Motion ◽  
Structural Components ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Flexible Models

Abstract Substructuring, or component mode synthesis, requires components to share interface regions. When components modeled with rather different, often incompatible levels of refinement need to be connected, correctly defining the interfaces may be important. This work proposes the definition of the reduction of interface regions to the equivalent rigid-body motion which minimizes the strain energy in the structural component. The proposed formulation provides a natural and physically sound solution for the connection of detailed structural components within coarse, multi-rigid-body and 1D flexible models.

A Generalized Component Mode Synthesis Approach for Multibody System Dynamics Leading to Constant Mass and Stiffness Matrices

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Gerstmayr ◽  
Astrid Pechstein
Keyword(s):  
Rigid Body ◽  
Mass Matrix ◽  
Rigid Body Motion ◽  
Component Mode Synthesis ◽  
Body Motion ◽  
Mode Shapes ◽  
Relative Deformation ◽  
Constant Mass ◽  
Constant Matrix ◽  
Flexible Deformation

A standard technique to reduce the system size of flexible multibody systems is the component mode synthesis. Selected mode shapes are used to approximate the flexible deformation of each single body numerically. Conventionally, the (small) flexible deformation is added relatively to a body-local reference frame, which results in the floating frame of reference formulation (FFRF). The coupling between large rigid body motion and small relative deformation is nonlinear, which leads to computationally expensive non-constant mass matrices and quadratic velocity vectors. In the present work, the total (absolute) displacements are directly approximated by means of mode shapes, without a splitting into rigid body motion and superimposed flexible deformation. As the main advantage of the proposed method, the mass matrix is constant, the quadratic velocity vector vanishes and the stiffness matrix is a co-rotated constant matrix. Numerical experiments show the equivalence of the proposed method to the FFRF approach.

A Generalized Component Mode Synthesis Approach for Flexible Multibody Systems With a Constant Mass Matrix

2012 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Astrid Pechstein ◽  
Daniel Reischl ◽  
Johannes Gerstmayr
Keyword(s):  
Rigid Body ◽  
Multibody Systems ◽  
Mass Matrix ◽  
Rigid Body Motion ◽  
Flexible Multibody Systems ◽  
Component Mode Synthesis ◽  
Body Motion ◽  
Mode Shapes ◽  
Flexible Multibody ◽  
Flexible Deformation

A standard technique to reduce the system size of flexible multibody systems is the component mode synthesis. Selected mode shapes are used to approximate the flexible deformation of each single body numerically. Conventionally, the (small) flexible deformation is added relatively to a body-local reference frame which results in the floating frame of reference formulation (FFRF). The coupling between large rigid body motion and small relative deformation is nonlinear, which leads to computationally expensive nonconstant mass matrices and quadratic velocity vectors. In the present work, the total (absolute) displacements are directly approximated by means of global (inertial) mode shapes, without a splitting into rigid body motion and superimposed flexible deformation. As the main advantage of the proposed method, the mass matrix is constant, the quadratic velocity vector vanishes, and the stiffness matrix is a co-rotated constant matrix. Numerical experiments show the equivalence of the proposed method to the FFRF approach.

A planar reconfigurable linear rigid-body motion linkage with two operation modes

2014 ◽  
Vol 228 (16) ◽  
pp. 2985-2991 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guangbo Hao ◽  
Xianwen Kong ◽  
Xiuyun He
Keyword(s):  
Rigid Body ◽  
Single Mode ◽  
Rigid Body Motion ◽  
Body Motion ◽  
Reference Guide ◽  
Revolute Joints ◽  
Operation Modes ◽  
Straight Line ◽  
Motion Stage ◽  
Motion Mode

A planar reconfigurable linear (also rectilinear) rigid-body motion linkage (RLRBML) with two operation modes, that is, linear rigid-body motion mode and lockup mode, is presented using only R (revolute) joints. The RLRBML does not require disassembly and external intervention to implement multi-task requirements. It is created via combining a Robert’s linkage and a double parallelogram linkage (with equal lengths of rocker links) arranged in parallel, which can convert a limited circular motion to a linear rigid-body motion without any reference guide way. This linear rigid-body motion is achieved since the double parallelogram linkage can guarantee the translation of the motion stage, and Robert’s linkage ensures the approximate straight line motion of its pivot joint connecting to the double parallelogram linkage. This novel RLRBML is under the linear rigid-body motion mode if the four rocker links in the double parallelogram linkage are not parallel. The motion stage is in the lockup mode if all of the four rocker links in the double parallelogram linkage are kept parallel in a tilted position (but the inner/outer two rocker links are still parallel). In the lockup mode, the motion stage of the RLRBML is prohibited from moving even under power off, but the double parallelogram linkage is still moveable for its own rotation application. It is noted that further RLRBMLs can be obtained from the above RLRBML by replacing Robert’s linkage with any other straight line motion linkage (such as Watt’s linkage). Additionally, a compact RLRBML and two single-mode linear rigid-body motion linkages are presented.

Computation of Nonlinear Response of Hydraulically Actuated Structures

1997 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. D. Burton ◽  
C. P. Baker ◽  
J. Y. Lew
Keyword(s):  
Rigid Body ◽  
Flexible Structures ◽  
Rigid Body Motion ◽  
Body Motion ◽  
Flexible Beam ◽  
Test Bed ◽  
Ode Models ◽  
Hydraulically Actuated ◽  
Pressure Dynamics ◽  
Low Order

Abstract The maneuvering and motion control of large flexible structures are often performed hydraulically. The pressure dynamics of the hydraulic subsystem and the rigid body and vibrational dynamics of the structure are fully coupled. The hydraulic subsystem pressure dynamics are strongly nonlinear, with the servovalve opening x(t) providing a parametric excitation. The rigid body and/or flexible body motions may be nonlinear as well. In order to obtain accurate ODE models of the pressure dynamics, hydraulic fluid compressibility must generally be taken into account, and this results in system ODE models which can be very stiff (even if a low order Galerkin-vibration model is used). In addition, the dependence of the pressure derivatives on the square root of pressure results in a “faster than exponential” behavior as certain limiting pressure values are approached, and this may cause further problems in the numerics, including instability. The purpose of this paper is to present an efficient strategy for numerical simulation of the response of this type of system. The main results are the following: 1) If the system has no rigid body modes and is thus “self-centered,” that is, there exists an inherent stiffening effect which tends to push the motion to a stable static equilibrium, then linearized models of the pressure dynamics work well, even for relatively large pressure excursions. This result, enabling linear system theory to be used, appears of value for design and optimization work; 2) If the system possesses a rigid body mode and is thus “non-centered,” i.e., there is no stiffness element restraining rigid body motion, then typically linearization does not work. We have, however discovered an artifice which can be introduced into the ODE model to alleviate the stiffness/instability problems; 3) in some situations an incompressible model can be used effectively to simulate quasi-steady pressure fluctuations (with care!). In addition to the aforementioned simulation aspects, we will present comparisons of the theoretical behavior with experimental histories of pressures, rigid body motion, and vibrational motion measured for the Battelle dynamics/controls test bed system: a hydraulically actuated system consisting of a long flexible beam with end mass, mounted on a hub which is rotated hydraulically. The low order ODE models predict most aspects of behavior accurately.

Structures of the Phosphazenes [ClC(NPCl3)2]+PCl6 − and [CH3C(NPCl3)2]+SbCl6 − at 90 K

1997 ◽  
Vol 53 (6) ◽  
pp. 953-960 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Belaj
Keyword(s):  
Rigid Body ◽  
Motion Analysis ◽  
Rigid Body Motion ◽  
Body Motion ◽  
Torsion Angles ◽  
Ionic Compounds ◽  
Intramolecular Motions

The asymmetric units of both ionic compounds [N-(chloroformimidoyl)phosphorimidic trichloridato]trichlorophosphorus hexachlorophosphate, [ClC(NPCl3)2]+PCl^{-}_{6} (1), and [N-(acetimidoyl)phosphorimidic trichloridato]trichlorophosphorus hexachloroantimonate, [CH3C(NPCl3)2]+SbCl^{-}_{6} (2), contain two formula units with the atoms located on general positions. All the cations show cis–trans conformations with respect to their X—C—N—P torsion angles [X = Cl for (1), C for (2)], but quite different conformations with respect to their C—N—P—Cl torsion angles. Therefore, the two NPCl3 groups of a cation are inequivalent, even though they are equivalent in solution. The very flexible C—N—P angles ranging from 120.6 (3) to 140.9 (3)° can be attributed to the intramolecular Cl...Cl and Cl...N contacts. A widening of the C—N—P angles correlates with a shortening of the P—N distances. The rigid-body motion analysis shows that the non-rigid intramolecular motions in the cations cannot be explained by allowance for intramolecular torsion of the three rigid subunits about specific bonds.

scholarly journals Understanding rigid body motion in arbitrary dimensions

2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 035021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francois Leyvraz
Keyword(s):  
Rigid Body ◽  
Rigid Body Motion ◽  
Body Motion ◽  
Arbitrary Dimensions

Double strange attractors in rigid body motion with linear feedback control

1981 ◽  
Vol 86 (2) ◽  
pp. 63-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
R.B. Leipnik ◽  
T.A. Newton
Keyword(s):  
Feedback Control ◽  
Rigid Body ◽  
Rigid Body Motion ◽  
Strange Attractors ◽  
Body Motion ◽  
Linear Feedback ◽  
Linear Feedback Control
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document