Standard input data for FEM–MBS coupling: importing alternative model reduction methods into SIMPACK

Various research areas in the field of vehicle modelling, structural mechanics, engine dynamics, microelectromechanical systems (MEMS), etc. require the utilization of both multibody system formalism (MBS) and finite element method (FEM) in order to sufficiently capture the model's dynamics. The FEM–MBS coupling is accomplished by reducing the dimension of the FE-modelled part and then importing it into an MBS-code for further simulation. When using commercial FEM (Nastran, ANSYS, etc.) as well as MBS (SIMPACK) software packages the necessary standard input data (SID) file is needed for the coupling procedure (FEMBS interface). A problem arises by the restriction that both commercial FEM and MBS codes support only two condensation methods (Guyan reduction and component mode synthesis (CMS)), thus disabling the direct application of any other reduction approach (e.g. from the field of control theory) that actually could be better. In this article, the theoretical background of an implemented FEM–MBS interface (MORPACK) is presented allowing the application of any kind of reduction method for FE-modelled structures and furthermore their import (Ritz approximation) into SIMPACK via the SID file generation. A benchmark problem (UIC60-rail) is used in order to capture in SIMPACK the discrepancy between the standardized CMS and the Krylov subspace method (KSM), as one of the alternatives offered by the interface.

[1]  M. Friswell,et al.  Model reduction using dynamic and iterated IRS techniques , 1995 .

[2]  B. Lohmann,et al.  Parametric Order Reduction of Proportionally Damped Second Order Systems , 2006 .

[3]  M. Otter,et al.  An Object-Oriented Data Model for Multibody Systems , 1993 .

[4]  Robert H. Halstead,et al.  Matrix Computations , 2011, Encyclopedia of Parallel Computing.

[5]  Timothy A. Davis,et al.  Direct methods for sparse linear systems , 2006, Fundamentals of algorithms.

[6]  Zu-Qing Qu,et al.  Model Order Reduction Techniques with Applications in Finite Element Analysis , 2004 .

[7]  Michael Beitelschmidt,et al.  Simulation of constrained mechanical systems , 2007 .

[8]  R. Guyan.  Reduction of stiffness and mass matrices , 1965 .

[9]  M. Bampton,et al.  Coupling of substructures for dynamic analyses. , 1968 .

[10]  Ahmed A. Shabana,et al.  Dynamics of Multibody Systems , 2020 .

[11]  Peter Benner,et al.  Dimension Reduction of Large-Scale Systems , 2005 .

[12]  G. M.,et al.  A Treatise on the Mathematical Theory of Elasticity , 1906, Nature.

[13]  Timothy A. Davis,et al.  Direct Methods for Sparse Linear Systems (Fundamentals of Algorithms 2) , 2006 .

[14]  Athanasios C. Antoulas,et al.  Approximation of Large-Scale Dynamical Systems , 2005, Advances in Design and Control.

[15]  Yousef Saad,et al.  Iterative methods for sparse linear systems , 2003 .

[16]  Oskar Wallrapp,et al.  Standardization of flexible body modeling in multibody system codes , 1994 .

[17]  M. Arnold,et al.  Simulation Algorithms in Vehicle System Dynamics , 2004 .

[18]  R. Schwertassek,et al.  Dynamik flexibler Mehrkörpersysteme , 1999 .

[19]  Jr. Roy Craig,et al.  Coupling of substructures for dynamic analyses - An overview , 2000 .

[20]  Ahmed A. Shabana,et al.  Flexible Multibody Simulation and Choice of Shape Functions , 1999 .