This page uses CSS to present the content in the best possible manner.
If you can see this message, then CSS is not enabled in your browser,
and the page will not appear as the designer intended.
The finite element technique is becoming increasingly
important as an analytical tool for composite or laminated structural design.
Such structural components usually consist of many parameters including
the type of material used and the material properties as well as the layer
stacking sequences. Their design stages, in most cases, are further complicated
by the presence of geometric discontinuities, large stress gradients, large
displacements and rotations, and material nonlinearities. Various means
of analysis exist for response prediction with different levels of accuracy,
capability and efficiency. Some of these may affect only a small section
of the structures in question, and attempting to discretize the entire
domain with 3D solid elements for capturing such critical phenomena can
lead to a large, prohibitively expensive analysis. Accuracy and efficiency
are thus becoming two major concerns in any finite element analysis that
are forcing engineers and design analysts to seek reliable and accurate
yet economical methods for determining the responses of structural components.
A large percentage of finite element analyses
make use of dimensionally reduced element types that are defined in terms
of a reduced geometric representation with associated element properties
that account for the dimensions not included. In other words, a thin sheet
of material can be represented by an equivalent surface with a thickness
attribute, namely plate or shell, while a long slender region can be represented
by a beam, a line with cross-sectional properties. These element types
produce more computationally efficient models, thus reducing analysis time
and cost. Also, they require less data and are easier to construct than
solid models and are thus especially suitable for conceptual design evaluation
and optimisation.
Beam, plate and shell finite elements can adequately
predict accurate structural responses for problems away from discontinuities.
But, the simplifying assumptions of the theories make them too restrictive
for capturing the critical details near any geometric or material discontinuities
or near traction-free edges of a laminated model where a 3D stress field
exists. One of the ideal procedures is therefore to unite the reduced or
lower dimensional element types with higher dimensional elements in a single
finite element model, with the former modelling long or thin regions away
from boundaries or discontinuities and the latter modelling either more
complex geometries or the behaviour in the boundary regions. These idealised
models, however, present mathematical difficulties at the connections between
the differing element types due to the incompatibility of their nodal degrees
of freedom. Some scheme is therefore required for coupling the differing
element types so that compatibility of displacements and stress equilibrium
can be established at the dimensional transition.
A method via multi-point constraint equations
for coupling two-dimensional composite structures to their equivalent one-dimensional
beam elements is briefly presented below. Similar procedures are also applicable
to coupling
of shells and 3D solids.
In common with method adopted for solid-beam coupling and solid-shell coupling, the basic principle of the technique is that the work done on both sides of the interface between dimensions is equated (Monaghan et al., 1998; McCune et al. 2000; Shim and Armstrong, 2001; Shim et al., 2001). Consider for example a 2D-1D n-layered laminated model subjected to a terminal pure bending moment Mz as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. 2D-1D model subjected to bending moment Mz
Equating the work done on both sides of the interface yields
![]() |
(1)
|
Since, based on the usual Mechanics of Materials,
![]() |
(2)
|
where Ex(k) is the Young's modulus of ply k along
the x direction and Ik is the second moment of area about the
neutral z-axis,
![]() |
(3)
|
Eliminating Mz from the equation and replacing the 2D continuum
displacement U with the finite element nodal displacement, equation (3)
becomes
![]() |
(4)
|
This equation can then be expressed as a multi-point constraint equation
of the form
|
|
(5)
|
and can be applied in ABAQUS using the *EQUATION command.
Analysis Results
Based on this approach, some sample results as
shown below are obtained. The elements employed in the analyses were 2D
eight-noded quadrilaterals and 1D quadratic elements.
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
|
Figure 7. Superelement model of a honeycomb sandwich flap
Figure 7 illustrates the use of substructuring to be integrated into
mixed dimensional modelling, where the 2D reinforced region of the sandwich
flap was condensed out into a stiffness superelement. The uniformly distributed
load acting on the 2D elements was built into the substructure during its
creation. As beam elements were coupled to the 2D edge at the dimensional
interface, only one retained node was required to join the superelement
with the rest of the model or beam elements. The local stresses and deformations
in the 2D model of the edge, if required, could also be recovered from
the substructured analysis model. Condensing out the superelement is a
time-consuming operation. But once this cost has been incurred, the full
2D detail of the behaviour in the stiffened edge, including the effect
of any stress concentration, is available for basically the same cost as
that incurred by using a line stiffener in the global model. As substructuring
can isolate possible changes outside the superelement to save time during
reanalysis, rapid redesign or modification of the complete structure may
be executed with ease.
References
McCune, R. W., Armstrong, C. G. and Robinson,
D. J. (2000). Mixed dimensional coupling in finite element models. International
Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 49, 725-750.
Monaghan, D. J., Doherty, I. W., McCourt, D. and
Armstrong, C. G. (1998). Coupling
1D beams to 3D bodies. 7th Inthernational Meshing Roundtable,
Sandia National Laboratories, Dearborn, Michigan, 285-293.
Shim, K. W. and Armstrong, C. G. (2001). 2D-1D
coupling of composite structures. 9th ACME Conference, Birmingham,
UK, 119-122.
Shim, K. W., Monaghan, D. J. and Armstrong, C.
G. (2001), Mixed
dimensional coupling in finite element stress analysis,
10th
International Meshing Roundtable, Sandia National Laboratories, Newport
Beach, California, 269-277.