Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Thesis/Dissertation Collections
1989
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Thesis/Dissertation Collections at RIT Scholar Works. It has been accepted for inclusion
in Theses by an authorized administrator of RIT Scholar Works. For more information, please contact ritscholarworks@rit.edu.
JOHN E. MARTIN
A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the
Requirements for the Degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
ill
Mechanical Engineering
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rochester, New York
May 1989
Approved by:
Dr. JOiSepb S. Torok (AdvisQr)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This
work
siblings
is dedicated to my
Chris, Sandy
diversions
provided
Susan Martin.
and
during
mother
it.
needed
Thank
you
for
and
and
three
my
kind
you.
thesis and
other
professional matters.
To Dr.
Hany Ghoneim,
for his
assistance when
learning
was
to use
ANSYS.
deeply
To
Tony
Lam
smoothly
as
it did,
To the
and
My
know how
have
much
gone as
To my friends, I-en
companionship
concerning ANSYS.
want you to
and
"Samuel"
light diversions
members of
Lin
you
Shashank Kolhatkar,
my thesis defense
and
committee:
crazy
time.
who
provided
study my
with
time to
me
Hany
Ghoneim
and suggestions.
Finally, I
helped
me
would
find the
like
to thank
my fellow
members
to go on and accomplish
that
from
I
the
Rochester Chapter
needed to
something
face the
remarkable with
of
challenges
my life.
NSA. You
in my life.
ABSTRACT
The efficiency
using
degree
of
university
of
version of
freedom
ANSYS to
The
model.
model
perform a series of
is based
divided into
different
three and
Based
potential
tolerance of
CPU seconds)
freedom
of
CPU
savings
placed
Minimizing
four
three to
along
time needed to
in CPU time. It is
the substructure
the number of
time needed to
boundary
find
plate elements.
find
of
degrees
a solution with a
study,
used, the
each case
freedom
an
study, a
configurations.
a great
in
natural
be found for
demonstrated
boundaries has
In
648
for
each case
configurations
respectively.
degree
In
by
shown that
could
also
master
master
In the
which resulted
of a non-substructured
digits
examined
substructured solutions
frequencies
significant
using STTF 63
for different
Optimal
is
four substructures,
experiments, it is
upon numerical
frequencies
CPU
of small models
four
substructure configuration.
analysis
baseline
solution
an appreciable
within a
(17.49-70.16
degrees
of
of
freedom is
desired level
shown
of accuracy.
THESIS OUTLINE
ABSTRACT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION TO SUBSTRUCTURING
1)
Basic Concepts
2)
Mathematical
Theory
CHAPTER 2.
BACKGROUND/LITERATURE SEARCH
CHAPTER 3.
EXAMPLE PROBLEMS
1)
ID
2)
2D Truss
Spring
CHAPTER 4.
CHAPTER 5.
SUBSTRUCTURING IN ANSYS
1)
2)
3)
4)
Relating
the
Passes
a) General File
Handling
b) Substructure Connectivity
c) Combination
of
Post
Processing Files
CHAPTER 6.
of
Freedom
Finding
the
Run Files
Totals
CASE STUDIES
1)
Description
of
Problem
a) Modal Analysis
of the
Space Structure
b) History
c) Material ASTM 5052 Aluminum
d) Other
ii
of an
Automotive
2)
Research
a) One Substructure
b) Two Substructures
c) Three Substructures
d) Four Substructures
CHAPTER 7.
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
1)
ANSYS COMMANDS
2)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ui
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
vii
LIST OF SYMBOLS
viii
CHAPTER 1.
INTRODUCTION TO SUBSTRUCTURING
CHAPTER 2.
10
CHAPTER 3.
EXAMPLE PROBLEMS
23
CHAPTER 4.
34
CHAPTER 5.
SUBSTRUCTURING IN ANSYS
39
CHAPTER 6.
CASE STUDIES
49
CHAPTER 7.
CONCLUSIONS
--
82
REFERENCES--
88
90
100
IV
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE
PAGE
1 1
Models
.2
.3
A Graphic Explanation
of
the
Master
1.4
2. 1
Schematic of the
Highlighted
Boeing 747
2.2
Schematic
Substructures
the
and of
Slave Degrees
of
Freedom
the
Wing-Body Intersection
in the Analysis
Intersection of the Boeing 747
of
Wing-Body
with
and
used
of the
11
12
2.3
13
2.4
14
the
Wing
Structure
of the
and
3.1
ID
3.2
2D Truss
4. 1
Degrees
of
Displaying
Freedom, Boundary
Two Kinds
Internal
the
and
of
5.1
5.2
the
Generation
5.3
the
Stress Passes
5.4
6. 1
6.2
Plots
6.3
A Table
6.4
6.5
of the
the
Results
35
36
and the
and
41
Use Passes
of the
44
45
-
Center Section
Displaying
29
Master
4.2
of the
24
48
50
51
Baseline Analyses
52
55
Study
56
6.6
6.7
6.8
6.9
6.10
Case
58
65
the
69
Two-Substructure
Study
6.12
6.13
6.14
63
Study
6. 1 1
Case
62
Three-Substructure
Handling
the
for
70
Study
72
the
76
One-Substructure
Study
the
File
Handling
for
77
the
Study
7. 1
7.2
A. 1
vi
the
85
86
99
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
PAGE
6. 1
6.2
6.3
6.4
Data for
the
One-Substructure Case
Study
Study
Study
Study
VII
59
66
73
78
LIST OF SYMBOLS
Ad(v,p)
Generalized Form
Ae
Matrix
Ai
Ao
Matrix Assembled
ALPHA
BDOFi
Number
BETA
Angle
Bi
Bp
Preconditioning Matrix
Damping Matrix
CDOFi
Number
Ci
Co
Cosine
Young's Modulus
F(t)
f(s)
Spatial Distribution
Fl F2
used to
of
of
of the
find ALPHA in
of
to
the
out of the
of the
of
Inclination
of
of
Dirichlet Problem
Substructures
Dirichlet Problem
Substructure i
Constrained Degrees
Angle
all
of the
Kron's Matrix
Inclination
of
Dirichlet Problem
Load in
of
of
Freedom in Substructure i
Truss Element
Dynamic Equation
the
F3F4
in
Basic Substructure
Fa Fb Fc
Nodal Forces
FDOFi
Number
Fi
Forces
at the
Fm
Vector
Containing Loads
Fml
of
Freedom
of
Substructure 1
pm2
of
Freedom
of
S ubstructure 2
Fmi
Master Degrees
of
Freedom
of
S ubstructure i
Fj
of
used
the
Free Degrees
Ends
of the
the
of
Freedom in Substructure i
Static
Spring
Element
VIII
of
Freedom
FnlUm)
Fc.
Sum
Fp
Es
Vector
Fsl
the
Slave Degrees
of
Freedom
of
Substructure 1
Fs2
the
Slave Degrees
of
Freedom
of
Substructure 2
Fsi
of
Freedom
of
Substructure i
Fsub
Fsubl
Fsub2
Fsubi
Fxi Fyi
Force in
the
and
Y Directions
of the
Fxj Fyj
Force in
the
and
Y Directions
of
Stiffness Matrix
K1K2
Spring
Ks
Spring Stiffness
Kss Ksm
Kms Kmm
Submatricies
Kssl Ksml
Kmsl Kmml
and
and
Kssi Ksmi
Kmsi Kmmi
and
Ksub
Ksubl
Ksub2
Ksubi
Lg
Length
Mass Matrix
of
Fm Vectors for
all
of
of a
Master
Substructures
Stiffnesses that
of the
make
to
Fp
Slave Degrees
of
Freedom
Given Substructure
the
i th End
of
Element
End
of
Element
th
Given Substructure
Truss Element
IX
Mss
Msm
Submatricies
of the
MmsMmm
P
Modal Coordinates
l(t)
R(w)
Kron's Matrix
SO)
Si
Sine
TBDOF
Angle
of
Inclination
Total Number
of
TDOFi
Total Number
of
Degrees
TMDOF
Total Number
of
Master Degrees
TNBMDOF
Total Number
of
Nonboundary Degrees
TOTLi
Vector
Ui
Um
Master Degree
Uo
Sum
Uv
Approximation Function
Vi Zi
Orthogonal Vectors
that
Vo Zo
Orthogonal Vectors
that
Natural
wl w2
of
of
of
Truss Element
the
Model
Freedom in Substructure i
of
Freedom in
the
Model
of
of
Freedom Vector
in
the
Numerical Solution
of
Dirichlet Problem
Frequency
the
Model
w3 w4
for x(t)
Amplitude
x(t)
x'(t)
First Derivative
x"(t)
Second Derivative
Xa Xb Xc
Nodal Displacements
Xbi
Basis Functions
Xi
End Displacements
Xj
vector
Xm
Vector
Xml
Master Degree
of the
of the
of
used
Subspace S
of
Containing
of
(D)
Spring of Stiffness
Master Degrees
of
Ks
Freedom
Xm2
Master Degree
of
Xmi
Master Degree
of
Xl
Xri
Xs.
Vector
Xs2
Slave Degree
of
Xsi
Slave Degree
of
Xti Yti
and
Y Displacement
of
th
End
of
Truss Element
Xtj Ytj
and
Y Displacement
of
th
End
of
Truss Element
%i
Fraction
th
Containing
of the
Slave Degrees
Total Number
of
of
Freedom
Free Degrees
XI
of
Freedom in Substructure i
CHAPTER 1
An Introduction to
The
advent of
high
speed
digital
certain
types
of
problems, but
and size.
geometry
use
long enough
and
ANSYS,
are available
Finite
they
are capable of
use on
many
[1], [2]
finite
or
the
analysis of a
large finite
for solving
more efficient
element software
dynamic
extremely
large
micro computers to
versatile and
has
finite
made
and
geometry
be found in
They
supercomputers.
element
decomposing
dividing
large finite
the model
into
individually
analyzed
into
may be
solving
finite
variety
boundary
conditions.
demonstrate
the
applicability
of the
element method.
In the
few
to
for analyzing
These
of static and
variety
The availability
method of preference
finite
complete
performing
of geometries.
limited
are often
finite
made the
analytical techniques
for
has
computers
Certain
Substructuring
"master"
degrees
Once
freedom
which
is
of
freedom. The
this equation
performed once
initial
the
is known
to produce condensed
be
solved
is solved, its
This
for
analysis
substructures
separated
degrees
of
step,
each substructure
substructure.
They
are
will
degrees
be
of
provide
are placed
information
in
is
being
The degrees
freedom. The
other
expanded
in
consists of
substructures are
in
terms of a
eventually
degrees
of
by
combined
freedom in the
performed
into
carried
freedom
equations are
degrees
of
a series of calculations
freedom that
The
of
each substructure.
into
as substructures.
into
strategy
Substructuring
be
used
expansion
solution
One commonly
governing
solution can
known
condensed
as substructuring.
governing
in terms
desirable
often
individually.
of each substructure.
During
solved
element model
model.
be
model, it is
in
the main
substructure
degrees
governing
In
in
freedom
they
are the
only
are used to
link
master
of
where
certain
boundaries
be
freedom in
master
governing
divided into
of
so that the
degrees
of
freedom
included to improve
FIGURE 1.1
EXAMPLES OF THREE-DIMENSIONAL
FINITE ELEMENT MODELS
Patran Model
Images 3D Model
of a
of
Parabolic Antenna
Supersap
Model
of a
Mounting Bracket
Valve
Housing
FIGURE 1.2
SUBSTRUCTURE DISCRETIZATION
SS 1
SS2
SS3
Figure 1.2
Discretization
of the
SS2
SSI
Figure 1
Discretization
of the
SS3
.2
accuracy in
main
more
by
often performed
Once
equation.
can
be
large
Finally,
form
governing
large
one
then solved
is expanded,
the solution
for
slave
degrees
master
in terms
degrees
of
of
freedom
degrees
freedom
freedom. Once
degrees
of the master
of
of
in
the substructure
process
in the governing
The
in terms
so that
it is in
the
known.
are
freedom This
added together to
is
solved
condensed
the condensed
matrix equation
The
analysis.
information concerning
is created, it is
matrix equation
be
They can
equation.
governing
is
like dynamic
certain cases
degrees
of
freedom in
degrees
of
the model.
freedom
of
each
substructure.
Substructure
analysis
is
Generation
in terms
each substructure
the condensed
resulting
governing
equation
is
structures.
finite
As
matrix equations
solved
often
in terms
because it is
large
finite
efficiently
savings
with conventional
in CPU time
Time may
among
also
scheme, the
by
difficult to
The
model will
finite
not
must
to
be
element
of
the
capacity
Even
have
to
added
in
solving
and software to
when
of the
hardware
One
handle. Since
is
reason that
than would
small enough
solved
between iterations
to
for
to
complex
be
solved
CPU time
be
user
large
the number of
can
for in
made
not used
in many
will
be saved, is
that the
a standard analysis.
In
only
design iteration
need
to
have
their
For
substructures
certain analysis
problems
in
types,
way that
extra
it is
that
much more
file
in
are
a standard analysis.
extra master
is
be discretized into
order
increase in
an
techniques, substructuring
freedom
substructuring is
be
freedom. The
have
be beyond
of
The
degrees
saved
use pass,
several analysts.
be
In the
for
element models
matrix equation
of that substructure.
to the analyst.
freedom
governing
level.
used,
replaces one
from
of
of the master
technology has
aerospace
substructuring
degrees
of passes:
of the master
Substructuring is
kinds
degrees
Substructuring
of
CPU time
freedom
will
FIGURE 1.3
MASTER DEGREES OF FREEDOM IN A SUBSTRUCTURE
<>
for the
opportunities
The
most
important
be
not
part of
substructuring is
Likewise,
from the
degree
the
have
ability
a major
impact
help determine
functions
equations.
Since
initial
and expansion
the
formulas
degrees
freedom
of
equation
freedom,
the
upon
of the expansion
expansion
the
of
formula
the
in
accuracy
terms of the
models, the
by formulas
of
of the condensation
degrees
degree
of
of
The
analysis
freedom
in
of that
freedom
solution
condensation and
matrix
governing
types, the
condensation
be different.
formulas
for
more
matrix equations
accuracy
will
many
smaller
governing
The ability
solution.
substructure will
For
are
formulae
There
are compatible.
savings
boundary
each substructure.
into the
which enter
The
matrix equation
is
are
based
upon
from
the
remaining
slave
degrees
freedom.
of
Kss
Ksm
Xs.
ES
(1.1a)
Fm
(1.1
Kms
Xm
and
Xs.
are the
displacement
displacements respectively,
Xs
results
Kmm
and
Xm
vectors
Fm
and
containing
Fs_ are
the
corresponding load
vectors.
degree
of
Solving
b)
freedom
(1.1 a) for
in
-1
Xs.
which can
freedom
Kss*{Fs.
vector
(1.2)
Ksm*Xm}
is in
degree
Xm
-1
Kmm*Xm
Equation (1.3)
can
be
Kms*Kss*
{Fs_
Ksm*Xm}
Kms*Kss*Ksm)*Xm
which
{Fm
Kms*Kss*Fs_}
(1.4)
rewritten as
Ksub*Xm
in
(1.3)
-1
-1
be
Fm
rearranged to obtain
(Kmm
which can
the values
for Ksub
and
Fsub
1.5)
Fsjik
are given
by
6
the
following formulae:
of
-1
Ksub
Kmm
Kms*Kss*Ksm
(1.6 a)
-1
Fsub
Equations (1.6 a)
degree
of
and
freedom
stress passes
(1.6 b)
Fm
Kms*Kss*Fs
(1.6
into terms
The
configuration.
master
degree
(1.2)
equation
to
freedom
solution
is
the slave
degrees
of
of
find
of
b)
its
master
then expanded
freedom
in the
of the given
substructure.
dynamic finite
x'(t)
and
x"(t) are
in
the components
mass
distribution
the
vectors
loads
C*x'(t)
K*x(t)
time.
of
equation of motion
for
(1.7)
and second
on the
degrees
This
K*x(t)
of
results
derivatives
mass
in
matrix,
damping
freedom. For
which approximates
F(t) is
matrix.
modal
analysis, the
0_
forcing
damping
and
(1.8)
expressed as
(1.9 a)
X*SIN(wt)
the
the
The basic
F(t)
M is the
vector x(t).
omitted.
generally
motion
function
M*x"(t)
Since harmonic
the
displacement
of the
is
is
element model
M*x"(t)
where
so that
x"(t)
The
equation of motion
(1.8) is
(1.9
-w*X*SIN(wt)
b)
2
(K
Equation
vectors
(1.10)
X. This
explained
in [3].
can
be
w*M)*X
solved
equation can
for
be
(1.10)
the natural
condensed
degrees
of
freedom
:
equation
using the
(1.10) is in
the
following reduction
form
equation
(1.10) is
as
are separated.
2 Mss
Ksm
-
Kms
Kss
Once
frequencies,
Kmm
of
Msm
(1.11),
Mms
Mmra
Xs.
=
0.
formulae:
7
(1.11)
Xm
be
condensed
FIGURE 1.4
DISCRETE DYNAMIC SYSTEM MODEL
-1
Ksub
Kmm
Kms*Kss*Ksm
(1.12 a)
-1
Msub
It is
Mmm
-1
Mms*Kss*Ksm
in
shown
analysis,
formulation that
in the
exists
stiffness
mass
In
master
formulation is identical
formulation,
freedom
expanded
in the
master
The
stress pass
Xm. The
include
degrees
of
static
an exact
freedom
that
the natural
degree
master
for
(1.6 a), is
or
is
that
(1.12b)
to that used
(1.12 a)
freedom
of
by
(1.12b)
dynamic analysis,
degree
given
relationship between
of
Mss*Kss*Ksm)
uncondensed matrix.
degree
This
a).
distribution
master
(1.6
equation
-1
Kms*Kss*(Msm
of
be
careful to
input
distribution.
frequencies,
freedom
w, and the
be
following expression:
using the
-1
Xs.
One factor
model.
that
Since the
is
quite significant
in dynamic substructuring is
stiffness relationships
in
a substructure are
degrees
of
freedom
(1.13)
-Kss*Ksm*Xm
of that substructure.
readily
condensed
distribution
within the
altering
The
the mass
the stiffness
possible
relationship between
load
vector.
Because there
(1.1)
are no
condensation problems associated with a static model, the substructured solution of a static
problem can
be
distribution is
not a
linear relationship
solutions when
Accuracy
in
solved
large
degrees
in the
enough
model.
Mass
distribution
governing
of
the
matrix
equations,
Dynamic problems,
in less
in
which
accurate
substructuring is implemented.
their
basic
of
distribution
degrees
freedom,
use pass.
If the
of
freedom in
the user
analyst
of
the model.
increases the
is
not
However, by increasing
potential savings of
be improved
CPU time
matrix equation
afforded
by
by increasing
the number of
(1.5)
that will
be
a substructured model.
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE SEARCH
Although
more attention
has
analysis
seen more
development.
developments
Its implementation
then, substructuring
of a
this
concerning
investigation
Although
to the
in
747
body
not
was
that there
in 1968
from
in
small sections
in
mentioned
this chapter
form
of
Many
of the
was
early
being
finite
in ANSYS
and
new
in digital
a significant volume of
as
the
Since
elements
well.
information
discovered
during
technical
journals.
date back
books,
in
to articles
is recent,
element
totally
when advances
text
not a
is
finite
a notable example
introduced in 1972,
surprising
1960s. G. Kron
industry,
airliner
ranged
in the 1960's,
the aerospace
wide
it
where
applications, substructuring is
capabilities
the eighties, as
Boeing
including NASTRAN,
substructuring in
started to spread
were
substructuring
wing-body intersection
codes
finite
and
on
[7].
Turner
Milsted
forced response,
different
examined several
with
and
and
Kron substructuring,
uses generalized
forces
and
be
which can
displacements
The
equation
characteristic
related
to modal analysis
for compatibility
for both
used
modal analysis
at substructure
be
solved
boundaries
R(w) is Kron's
w, squared.
This
problem
extraction method.
uses the
bisection
Creating
large
and
matrix, in
(2.1)
method
solving
substructures.
substructures are
the
A less
Sturm counting
to solve transcendental
the
One
Kron
broken up into
is
is
method of
expensive solution
(2.1)
is
10
frequency,
standard eigenvalue
Williams [9],
which
effective.
can
be extremely
This may
coordinate reduction.
the modal
and
in
using the
Wittrick
functions, is
additional substructures.
but
a polynomial
to analyze
characteristic problem
approach
However,
output.
is
R(w)*B=0
where
to
in
which
reduce the
involved
makes
Coordinate
demanding
for
the original
time needed to
it computationally
reduction
is
a method
FIGURE 2.1
747
THE ANALYZED SECTIONS OF THE BOEING
CARGO
Intersection Highlighted
747 Schematic With Wing-Body
(From Hansen
11
et.
al.)
FIGURE 2.2
SUBSTRUCTURES USED IN THE ANALYSIS OF THE BOEING 747
Schematic
of
Substructures
used
in the Analysis
of the
(From Hansen
12
Wing-Body
et.
al.)
Intersection
of the
Boeing 747
FIGURE 2.3
MONOCOQUE CENTER SECTION
SUBSTRUCTURES A & B
of
(From Hansen
13
et.
al.)
FIGURE 2.4
WING & WHEEL WELL AREA
SUBSTRUCTURES C & D
TORQUE BOX
KEEL BEAM
of the
Wing Structure
and
(From Hansen
14
Wheel Well
et.
al.)
that
is usually invoked
Two
substructure.
at the substructure
common
forms
level to
degrees
of
freedom in the
condensation,
which reduces
the size of the mass matrix, and modal truncation, in which the number of modes to be extracted
reduced.
using
Both
truncation, it is important to
modal
The counting
Method,
is
which
finding
slow at
Method
algorithm
used to
find the
upon
quadratically
roots of a
One alternative,
the roots.
find
applied to the
S(A) is
matrix
substructuring
still
faster.
of
implies
scheme
Lanczos
The Lanczos
Kron
In
in [10], is
is
Bisection
to replace the
converges
This
(2.2)
equation
problem
is
Newtonian iteration
that
algorithm avoid
iteration
process can
be
the
does
costly
is reliable,
similar to the
be
can
Kron
in Kron
used
terms,
which
into
a tridiagonal
Kron
condensation of the
faster
is computationally
Sehmi [12]
by
and
as a
way
of
avoiding
matrix
employed.
matrix to a scalar
tridiagonalization,
expensive.
compatibility
indefinite
is
than the
Method. Unfortunately, it
converts them
in
above
matrix to scalar
algorithm
Lanczos
described
In
explored
and
(2.2)
which
above,
to condense the
use of the
the
the roots
condensation.
into
necessary
The
is
The Bisection
is
which
containing functions
Sturm-based
transcendental
where
when
[8].
more modes
with
successfully
based
for
solve
However,
is
matrix
equations
form. This is
Not only
can the
CPU time.
other words
The #
of steps
to solve
for
necessary
desired
the
The
<
(2.3)
eigenvalues
dynamic
substructuring.
substructuring
is
although somewhat
Dynamic substructuring is
frequencies, but
reduces
no assurance that an
uncommon, method
the number of
important
degrees
mode shape
of
not
15
an efficient method of
be difficult to defend.
freedom
has
in the
carried
been
into the
missed.
general
evaluating
of
mode
Since dynamic
eigenvalue
One way
category
analysis, there
assuring that
mode
shapes
have
been
not
distribution.
These
The
Ritz
vectors
use of special
Ritz
special
substructuring by providing
use of special
is to
missed
Ritz
vectors
a closer
is
first
function
the
time
of
only.
set of special
and
accuracy
spatial
of
load
dynamic
The
C*LT
U_ is
that are
is based
M*U_"
where
vectors
in [13].
explored
vectors
Ritz
use
K*U_
f(s)*r(t)
Ritz vectors, Xl is
(2.4)
distribution
of
loading
and
r(t) is a
Xl*Y
2.5)
T
Substituting for U
and
premultiplying
Xr
Xr in
by
T
*M*Xr*Y"
(2.6)
equation
can
be
for
special
Ritz
be found
using
be
*f(s)*r(t)
(2.6)
eigenvalue
formulation
2.7)
the system.
using the
spatial
as
input
form
the
initial Ritz
f(s)
(2.8)
vector.
be
vectors can
obtained
by
a recurrence relationship.
Xri+1
It has been
solution than
shown
[14],
using the
substructuring
M*Xri
form
Ritz
with special
Ritz
In
In [16],
(2.9)
of special
large
Xr
by
K*Xrl
by
*Xl *M'*Xr]*P
P, that diagonialize
vector can
yields.
Xr *K*Xr*Y
solved
[Xr *K*Xr
(2.4)
Xr *C*Xr*Y
The first
equation
one experiment
containing
NASTRAN
was
structures.
One
major
difficulty
with
over
1000 degrees
50% less
to the
[15], dynamic
than
it
substructuring
16
was
of
for
of
are still
degrees
boundary
many
of
freedom
be
to
define in
Modal
level,
interface degrees
One
can
lead to
recursive
This
substructures.
structure
freedom. Static
erroneous results
The Ritz
due
shape.
of
lack
vectors could
freedom
counter-productive
to the
the
boundary
The Ritz
condensation of
[16].
degrees
of
for
be difficult
requires an extra
problems with
interface degrees
of a clear method
dynamic
static
substructure
Theory
ones.
by
for
Prakash
of
large
freedom is
the condensation
holds
several
Indian Remote
Sensing
substructuring
preconditioning
accuracy
level,
where
it is
easier to
matrix
in
[17]
Prabhar [16].
and
large
was analyzed
investigated using
One factor
freedom,
formulation is based
substructuring,
substructuring,
[16]. However, if
Bramble
of
interface degrees
be
which could
procedure was
substructures versus
accurate
deflected
reduction of
Satellite
the
matrix.
In performing
slave
of
general problems.
which approximate
some models.
Most
solved.
for
into
of
inherently
judge
desired
static
using
less
master and
accuracy.
defined
on two-dimensional
domains. The
with
the
Dirichlet
problem.
Lu
f in
where u
bounded domain D in R,
the
on the
boundary
of
(2. 10)
and
SUM( d/dxi(aij(d/dxj)))
vj
The
generalized
of this
formulation is
Ad(v,p)
(2. 1
SUM(aij*(dv/dxi)*(dp/dxj)*dx)
i.j
l.O
1
which
is defined for
Galerkin finite
all
element
and
formulation
and
an
approximate
Equation
(2.11) leads
solution.
To
better fits
parallel
17
to
1)
suDspaces
(substructures), S^(D),
Ad(U,P)
In
(2.12), Uv is
j, (D)
in
which results
for
(f,P)
an approximation of the
function
all
S,t,(D)
Uv is
u.
formulation
(2. 12)
composed of the
basis functions
of
follows.
as
Uv
SUM(ALPHAi*Xbi)
(2.13)
i=l
where
ALPHAi is the
can
be
Ae*
ALPHA
which can
be
the matrix
Ae is usually "ill-conditioned",
solved
be
situation can
symmetric
for the
changed
(2.14)
ALPHA. The
coefficient vector
both
-l
in
by
sides
equation
ALPHA
inverse
This
definite
of a positive
(2.15) is
Bp*F
(2.15)
Bramble, Pasciak
several
the
that
-l
Bp*Ae*
stated
formulation is
Bp.
matrix
The formulation
this
by premultiplying
"preconditioning"
difficulty with
(2.15)
Schatz
and
easier to
solve.
In [18],
easier to analyze.
high quality
Substructuring
however, like
mesh
intricate
large
be implemented
when
which
have
be computationally
model.
one
One
solution
CPU time
using
model substructures
spent
to this problem
less
than perfect.
CPU
time.
forces
is
by
to
have
fine
exhibiting
fine
detailed
mesh
for
detailed
There
models with
are
problems,
Mesh compatibility is
rest of the
in
geometry
both
higher-order
portions of a
relatively
boundary
sides to
with
However, it
with a
domain
the portions of
remaining
each substructure
the substructures on
balance accuracy
mesh
geometry.
the
simpler
Unfortunately,
modeling the
intricate features
large
small computers.
It is necessary
expensive to continue
It is desirable to
This
with
with small
the assessment of
relatively
meshes.
on
is working
have
the substructures
would
compatibility that
particularly troublesome
small
is
large models,
have
must
similar
concentration,
superfine mesh.
elements
in the
18
the
intermediate
higher-order
regions.
This
is implemented
method
deleting
by
nodes to produce
generating
lower-order linear,
quadratic and
variable-order elements.
common theme
substructuring to
found in
model types
for
which
substructuring to be
Linear finite
problem
applied to
element and
and
many nonlinear,
substructuring
in
turn
problems that
non-positive
definite
in
involve
small
strains and
problems.
be formulated
problems can
Substructuring is
use.
to solve the
Dirichlet
equation
where u
is the
definite
not
^.(?uj=f
where v
substructuring is currently
positive
In [19], Gunzburger
deformations.
literature is
the current
much of
The
gradient operator.
on the
region
elements.
(2.16)
inD
The
boundary
of
D is divided into
subregions, Di
can
(i=l,n),
which are
subregion.
Kss
Ksm
Us
Es
Kms
Kmm
Um
Fm
(2.17)
In
equation
(2.17), Us.
"master"
boundary
or
together to
form
contains the
degrees
of
system-wide
internal
freedom.
"slave"
These
equation
matrix
degrees
or
of
freedom
the
of
contains the
be
added
form
:B2
Fl
F2
Am
:Bm
Um
Fm
Cm
:Ao
Uo
Fo
:B1
A2
U_m
Ul
U2
Al
and
(2.18)
CI C2
Where
Ai is the Kss
Bi is
the
Ksm
Q is
the
Kms
Ao is the
Ui
is the
sum of the
vector
Kmm
matrices
containing the
for
slave
all substructures
degrees
of
19
freedom for
substructure
Usually
definite,
(Ai, Bi, Ci
for
and
Ao)
degrees
boundary
the
of equation
of
(2.18)
the
following
expression:
[Ao
-1
SUM(Ci*Ai*Bi)]*Uo
Fo
i=i
The displacements
(2. 19)
i=i
internal degrees
of the
-1
SUM(Ci*Ai*Fi)
of
freedom, Ui,
are computed
as
-l
Ui
The
in
is
above system
which the
decompose
matrices,
the
degree
Ai*(Fi
Bi*Uo)
acceptable
Ai,
of
if the
problem
are nonsingular.
freedom
vectors as
Ui
=Vi
Uo
Vo
l,...,n
One
method of
are
dealing
(2.20)
many
with
nonlinear problems
is
this
to
orthogonally
follows:
Zi
Zo
l,...,n
(2.21)
l,...,n
(2.22)
so that
Vi*Zi
=0
Vo*Zo
Uo
and
and
Zi
are solved
with
low strains,
nonlinearities are
a turbine
proposed
solvable
rotating beams
theory
NASA
without
used to make a
stiffer than
inverting Ai.
The Vs
and
Zs
Ui, i=l...n.
In [20], substructuring is
behavior
for
predicts
using linear
and
large
centrifugal
small
nonlinear
techniques.
space structures.
force due
[21]. In large
manned space
geometrically
space
to
high
Two
problem,
examples
which
containing
In rotating beams,
geometric
of structural
nonlinear
helicopter rotor or
will
deformations
has
components
will
be
used
far
in the
correspondingly
significantly
add
up
form
of
[22].
There is
a unified approach
for treating
20
geometric
are
divided into
have
substructures which
The deformation
applicable.
junction degrees
by
to a solution
upon
freedom to form
of
Three
the solution.
interfaces
in
which
common parameters to
of substructures and
are:
the number
so that
The
quantity is
vary
nonlinearity is significant,
element
a whole component.
limiting process
using
which geometric
deformations,
small
in
the components
results can
be
made to converge
deformation
of
between
constraints
compatibility
substructures.
Two
large
space structure.
communication
that
are then
for the
technology
usual method of
includes
damping
for
assembled
The inclusion
good,
and ground
actual
damping
of
frequencies
in
damping
deleting-off
diagonal
there are
limitations
developed for
been
One
are.
enough
it isn't
case
Hermes
data
frequencies agreeing
with
didn't
use
well
in the
was
found
was generated
of
a case
from
the
study
Hermes
for
a mathematical model
main component.
The
substructures
substructures.
test
be
case studies
known how
collected on the
It
in
examined
using
data into
analyzed
eigenproblem
It is hard
lack
of atmospheric
models.
Finally,
More information
to
orbit
damping
in
modal truncation
about substructure
[25].
communication
analytical solutions.
that
and
few documented
substructure synthesis,
for the
be found in [24]
synthesis can
Since
of
displacements
is
involves establishing
a structural model
modal
beam
orbit
damping effects
into
analysis
in its
involving a rotating
approximations of the
for dynamic
damping factors,
modal
establish
satellite
synthesizing
mathematically
analysis.
results against
one
increased.
of substructure synthesis
comparing substructuring
The
detailed in [20],
which
damping
factors
technology
Hermes
in
satellite against
spacecraft
that
is
found
and what
by
its
substructured solutions
it is easy
are
to compare
inflight data
admirably well,
to
with modal
damping.
The literature
21
has been
directed
to analyze
large
advantage of
standard
during
large,
models and
developing
expanding
the use of
finite
this research
focused
substructured models
on methods of
[8]
[18].
governing
expended to
implement the
composite materials
plastic
equations.
by
These
used to
linearize
be
Much
hardly
industry
of the effort
There does
dynamic substructuring
techniques
be
for
lack
That
case
study
compared the
models
substructuring
using
an
exact
technique.
22
has been
benefit from
developing
substructure
cases, substructuring
intermediate
in
use of
enough to
large
by
be
used
sized models.
The
time required
can
be
with special
modal
small or
study
by
using
certain
case
freedom
solve
seem to
large to
major
finite
only
CPU
CPU
nonlinear models
[20]. In
too
One
surprising
be
CPU
methods reduced
nonlinear models.
to verify standard
also
using substructuring
amount of
discretizations,
while
nonlinear problems.
principles.
surprising that
substructuring in
the aerospace
deformation has
substructuring
use of
It is
not
reducing the
substructuring to
Thus, it is
element techniques.
CPU time
found in [15].
1,000 degrees
analyzing the
of
same
CHAPTER 3
The
following
in Chapter 1.
The first
one-dimensional
was chosen
illustrate
for its
It
elements.
spring
is
example
The
simplicity.
will
simple
be
static
used to
analysis of a
is
structure
of
outlined
of
comprised
substructuring
and
on a nontrivial model.
substructuring technique
second example
Substructuring Techniques
Since both
be conveniently
solutions.
The first
shown
problem
in Figure 3.1
involves
a.
The
model
Kl
1 is fixed,
substructure no.
force F
applied to
Since both
same
for both
and
last node,
for
Fi, Fj Xi
and
Xj
Equations (3.1)
can
be
node
4,
Each
substructure contains
K2.
the
spring
element shown
-Ks
Xil
Ks
Xjl
0,
node
has
on
a positive
first step
Kl
is
the
is deduced
by
and
The
K2.
standard matrix
in Figure 3.1 b is
(3.1)
Fj
corresponding displacements
and
used to assemble a
degrees
master
the
Fi
forces
are the
b. The
basic unit,
the same
freedom,
node
matrix equations
-Ks
of
the
Ks
consisting
involve
substructures.
constitutive equation
where
structure
it.
substructures
assembling the
is
spring
local
Kl
of
and
matrix equation
K2. The
for
springs are
of end nodes
and
j.
joined
substructure are
at the slave
located
degree
at the end
nodes a and c.
Kl
Kl
Equation
(3.2)
freedom from
can then
the master
K2)
-K2
K2
-K2
be
rewritten
degrees
(Kl
of
K2)
-Kl
-K2
Xa
Xb
Xc
-Kl
(Kl
in
the
Fa
Fb
Fc
following form
(3.2)
which separates
the slave
degrees
freedom.
-Kl
-K2
Xb
Fb
Xa
Xc
Fa
Fc
(3.3)
Kl
0
0
K2
23
of
FIGURE 3.1
ID SPRING PROBLEM
Substructure 1
Substructure 2
^AA^AA^
;
V V v
j V V v
Kl
L-> K2
\
->
XI
A,
V
Kl
IaVaw
a^
->
X2
K2
->
X3
X4
Figure 3. 1 a
The Basic Model
Xi
Xj
Figure 3.1 b
Spring Element
MDOF
Nodes a,
Figure 3.1 c
Basic Substructure
24
~~"-e
T7
Equation (3.3) is
thus
in
the standard
Kss
Ksm
Kms
Kmm
form
(3.4)
differing boundary
corresponding
0, fixed
generation passes
As
conditions.
its
Fm
a result, the
0, 1, 2
global coordinates
so that
Xm
have
XI
-K2
K2
-K2
condensed so
that
FI
conditions
it is in terms
X2
Xmi
and
Fsubi
freedom
stiffness
found from
the
are the
of the master
matrix,
displacement
force vector,
following
be
substructure
to
switched to the
node
leaving
the
Ksubi,
(3.5)
F2
Ksubi*Xmi
where
and c will
due
separated
boundary
have been
equation.
(K1+K2)
Once the
b,
coordinates a,
2, 3, 4. The first
or
local
substructures
degrees
of
freedom
as
be
can
follows
Fsubi
(3.6)
vector of
the master
degrees
The corresponding
respectively.
of
freedom
of substructure
equivalent master
expressions
(3.5)
degree
of
be
can
[2].
-1
Fsubi
=Fmi
(3.7
Kmsi*Kssi*Ksmi
Kmmi
Ksubi
ai
-1
Applying
the
formulae (3.7)
Ksubi
to the
Kmsi*Kssi*Fsi
first
substructure results
in the
K1*K2
K1+K2
Fsubi
(3.8
13..
following
values
for
Ki'
and
(3.S
Fi
a)
(-K2)*1*F1
F2_
b)
Kl
+K2
The
for
the
first
substructure
K1*K2 *X2
Kl
is
thus.
l*o>
K2
25
The
second substructure
generation pass
is the
has
no
fixed degrees
partitioned
(Kl
form
K2)
of
-Kl
of
its governing
equation
-K2
X3
F3
0
K2
X2
X4
F2
F4
(3.3)
point
which can
be
for the
second
rewritten as.
(3.10)
Kl
0
-Kl
-K2
Using
(3.10) results in
the
formulae (3.7)
following condensed
to condense the
Ksub2
stiffness matrix,
and
governing
force
vector
matrix equation
Fsub2
-1
Ksub2
Kmrn2
Kms2*Kss2*Ksm2
1K1 0
0 K2
*[-Kl
-Kl
Kl
-K2
K1*K2 *
Kl +K2
(3.11a)
(3.11
-K2]
b)
+K2
(3.11c)
-1
Fsub2
Frn2
Kms2*Kss2*Fs2
-Kl
Fp
-K2
(3.11
1
K1+K2
(3.11 e)
[[0]
(3.11
d)
f)
Fp
so that the condensed substructure matrix equation
K1*K2
K1+K2
Now
second substructure
into
displacements.
In this step,
matrix equations
(3.9)
and
which
(3.12)
is known
are combined
K1*K2
Kl +K2
Equation (3.13)
can
be
solved
master
degree
-1
for the
2
-1
X2
X4
of
Fp*
Fp
have been generated, they
into
degree
of
be
freedom
X2
X4
degree
Kl
(3.13)
Fp
master
of
degree
freedom
of
solution
is
K2
freedom displacements
a simple matter of
can
(3.14)
K1*K2
(3.12)
following
master
in
is
X2
X4
assembled
and
for the
in
order
using the
are
known,
to solve
for the
slave
expansion
26
formula [2]
degrees
be done is to
of
freedom XI
-1
Xsi
Since
Kssi(Fsi
(3.5)
of
the
Ksmi*Xmi)
first
substructure
(3.15)
has been reduced, the
submatricies of this
-1
Kssl
Kl
Fs.
Xm.
Xs
displacement
Kl
The
X2
(-K2)*Fp*
Fp*(Kl + K2)
K1*K2
of
freedom is
Kl +K2
K1*K2
K2
b)
(3.16 c)
-K2
degrees
of the slave
(3.16
=F1=0
Ksml
so that the
(3.16 a)
+K2
(3.16 d)
computed as
(3.17)
Kl
(3.10) pertaining
-1
Kss2
Kl
Fs.
Ksm2
Xm
Inserting
Xs_
the quantities
X3
Kl
=
The spring
the
F3
[-Kl
in (3.18) into
(3.18 a)
+K2
X2
X4
-K2
+K2
Fp*(Kl + K2)*
K1*K2
(3.15)
1
2
(3.18d)
yields
l*Fp(Kl + K2)*
K1*K2
(3.19 a)
Fp*fKl + 2*K2)
K1*K2
substructuring
b)
(3.18 c)
-K2]
equation
0-[-Kl
(3.18
(3.19 b)
using
a standard
base line
force/stiffness
method.
27
below
The
results
for
Force/Stiffness Method
Substructuring
XI
Ffi
Kl
X2
Kl
Fp*(Kl_+K2)
Fp*(Kl + K2)
K1*K2
K1*K2
X3
Fp*(Kl
+ 2*K2)
K1*K2
X4
+ K2)
K1*K2
solutions are
in
The
elements.
exact
Further,
structure.
as would
both
since
is
to
have
problems
be
model
half truss
1 to
solely to
either one.
element placed
in
nodes
and
connection at the
by
truss
Therefore,
in the
and
is
is
analyzed to
element
in both
truss elements.
figure 3.2 c,
In
the negative
[1],
the
\E
Lg
Co*Co
Co*Si
Co
Si
and
and
Lg
Co
was
divided into
by
Y direction
Co*Si
Si*Si
-Co*Si
-Si*Si
The
and
Fyj
are the
on the
is to
with respect
of
is
perfect
to the
-Co*Si
and
substructure
belong
cannot
is simply
half
mathematically
is
element
by
3m X 4m
(3),
which
node
1. It is loaded
node
2. The
freedom.
Xti
Yti
for
Xtj
Ytj
modulus and
28
(3)
pattern
Co*Si
Si*Si
forces
join
a truss
for
the
indivual
element, shown in
horizontal.
-Si*Si
Co*Co
Co*Si
displayed
The basic
presented
-Co*Si
area, Young's
two.
develop
-Co*Co
displacements
that
performed
structure
3,
diagonal crossmember,
degrees
the
half
two
The division is
of all
and
matrix equation
BETA
-Co*
-Co*Si
A, E
(3)
generation pass
following
oriented at an angle
of the
substructures,
substructures.
4,
node
distribution considerations,
no mass
used
rectangle which
comprised of two
is
finite
substructure
expected.
involves the
elements.
be
The
2*Fp*fKl + K2)
K1*K2
agreement,
same
K1*K2
2*Fp*(Kl
The two
discrete
Fp*(Kl_2fK2)
length
Fxi
Fyi
(3.20)
Fxj
Fyj
of
and
j.
FIGURE 3.2
2D TRUSS PROBLEM
^^.
3m
100 N
Figure 3.2 a
The Basic Model
MDOF : 1
SI. DOF:2,4
Figure 3.2 b
Substructure Discretization
Figure 3.2 c
Arbitrary Truss Element
29
Since
the truss structure is rectangular, the elements on the opposite sides of the truss
have the
length
same
and angle of
Elements m
be
(4)
and
0.002
from
assembled
4.667 E7
0
0
0
0
0
-1
Elements (2)
and
C5)
4m
BETA
3.500 E7
Element
(3)
0
-1
and slave
(4)
Fx4
Fy4
Fx3
Fy3
(3)
0
-1
0
1
12
-9
-12
16
-12
-16
-9
-12
12
12
-16
9
12
used
steps can
degrees
be
of
saved
by
freedom
4.667 E7 N/m
3.500 E7 N/m
(2)
(5)
Xt2
Yt2
Xt3
Yt3
Xti
Yti
Xt4
Yt4
(2)
(5)
Fx2
Fy2
Fxi
Fyi
Fx4
Fy4
Fx3
Fy3
=
(3.21 b)
2.800 E7 N/m
be
12
will
(3.21 a)
Xti
Yti
Xt3
Yt3
16
Fxi
Fyi
Fx3
Fy3
A few
(1)
Fxi
Fyi
Fx2
Fy2
1.120 E6
element
Xt4
Yt4
Xt3
Yt3
5m (AE)/L
(0.002m*m)(7 E10 N/m*m)/3m
BETA
53.13 Si 4/5 Co
3/5
Since
(4)
Xti
Yti
xa
Yt2
(AE)/L
(0.002m*m)(7 E10 N/m*m)/3m
90
Si = 1
Co 0
0
0
0
0
(1)
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
-1
have the
be divided
assembling
the
by
first
two to
(3.21 c)
stiffness must
be halved.
Thus
the
are separated.
(3.22)
(4.667
(0
10
0)
(0
0)
3.5)
(0
-3.5
(0
-4.667
Since
0) (0
-3.5
-4.667
(0+12X0.056)
12X0.056) (3.5 + 16X0.056)
9X0.056)
-9X0.056
-12X0.056
-12X0.056
-16X0.056
Xt4
Yt4
-9X0.056
-12X0.056
Xti
-12X0.056
-16X0.056
Yti
Xt3
Yt3
(4.667
9X0.056) (0 + 12X0.056)
(0+12X0.056)
(0+16X0.056)
degrees
30
0
0
of
freedom, Xt4
and
Yt4,
equation
(3.22)
reduces to a master
degree
freedom
of
matrix equation of
Kmm*Xml
the
form
Fml
(3.23 a)
or
4.396
10
-0.672
-0.896
Assembling
the
following
Yti
Xt3
Yt3
-0.896
5.171
0.672
-0.672
0.672
0.896
Fyi
Fx3
Fy3
(3.23 b)
(1), (2)
and
(3),
produces
form:
separated
(3.24)
(4.667
(0
0)
10
0) (0
(0
0)
3.5)
-4.667
0
(4.667
+ 9X0.056)
(0 + 12X0.056)
(0+12X0.056)
(0+16X0.056)
-9X0.056
-12X0.056
-3.5
-12X0.056
-16X0.056
There is only
one
fixed degree
Xt2
-3.5
Yt2
-4.667
of
freedom, Xti, in
(0
(0
-9X0.056
-12X0.056
Xti
-12X0.056
-16X0.056
Yti
9X0.056) (0 + 12X0.056)
12X0.056) (3.5 + 16X0.056)
Once
0
3.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.896
0
0
Xt2
Yt2
-3.5
that
is removed,
(3.25)
-0.672
-0.896
0.504
0.672
4.396
-0.672
that equation
Yt3
-100
10
Note
Xt3
becomes.
4.667
0
-3.5
0
-100
-0.896
(3.25) is in
the standard
Yti
Xt3
Yt3
0.672
0
0
0
form
Kss
Ksm
Xs
Fs
Kms
Kmm
Xm
Fm
(3.26)
The
submatricies
equations
Kss2 is
using the
formulae (3.7),
10
used
in
and
by inverting
(1/4.667)
10
(1/3.5)
Fm
first
the
be inverted
can
the
can
be
assembled
into
substructure
diagonal
Since
elements.
-7
-7
=
The inverted
into
matrix
diagonal matrix, it
-1
Kss2
submatrix
(3.27)
0.2143
0
0
0.2857
(3.27)
formulae (3.7 a)
31
and
(3.7
b) in
order to
(3.25)
can
find the
be inserted
substructure
degree
master
freedom
of
Ksub2
10
stiffness matrix,
0.896
-0.672
-0.896
-0.672
0.504
0.672
-0.896
0.672
4.396
10
Thus,
0
0
0
7
10
0
0
0
7
10
they
performed
master
by
degree
0.672
0.896
*10
01
0.2857 1*10
(-0.672
(-0.896
0
0.2857
freedom
(3.28a)
(3.28 c)
-100
for the
0.896
0.672
0.896
-0.672
-0.896
Yti
0.504
0.672
0.672
0.896
Xt3
Yt3
0
0
for
matrix
equation
(-0.672
(3.28 d)
-100
(3.23 b)
0.896)
0.672)
0.896)
0
-3.5
0
0
=:
-100
-3.5
freedom
+
of
(3.28 b)
and
degree
of
freedom displacements in
degrees
of
freedom,
the master
degree
-3.5
0.2143
0
-7
10
0.2143
-7
( 4.396
10
-0.896
Since both
pass.
0.504
0.672
0
0
10
calculated,
-0.672
-0.672
-0.896
Fsub2
0.896
=
Ksub2,
force
the use
be
vectors.
Thus,
the global
becomes
(-0.896
(0.672
( 0.896
-0.672)
(5.171+0.504)
( 0.672 + 0.672)
Yti
Xt3
Yt3
0.896)
0.672)
+ 0.896)
+
(0 + 0)
(0 + 0)
(0 100)
(3.29 a)
That is,
5.292
1.344
1.792
10
Solving equation
(3.29
b)
slave
degree
degrees
of
of
master
-1.792
5.675
1.344
1.344
degree
Yti
Xt3
Yt3
of
connection at node
of the
4,
first
in
1.792
results
b)
in
1.607
10
(3.30)
-9.643
are
Xt4
only be
and
for
expansion
32
the
performed
known, they
Since
substructure,
which
(3.29
-100
freedom displacements
0
0
-2.857
=
freedom displacements in
freedom
Yti
XS
Yt3'
Xm
-1.344
can
be
used to
displacements
partitioned out
substructure
2. The
formula (3.15) is
of
find the
the slave
due to the
stress pass
solved
pin
is
subscript
"i"
Xs2
Xt2
Yt2
10
(3.25), (3.27)
0.2143
0
0
0.2857
(3.30) for
and
is
10
0 0 0
0 0-3.5
-100
Xs2
The
in the
in
the
the X
element
direction,
Three
substructuring
the
had been
of node
no
element
(1)
method
is
digit
node
must
The
to
cannot pivot
be
loading therefore,
in
in length
zero
for
the
or
node
it
correspondance
for
2.
In
33
have been
digits.
body
will move
in
find Yt2
in
the
-1.25
dimensional truss
correspondance might
solid
the two
by
as accurate
problem.
cannot change
X displacement
Castigliano's
2 is
(1) is horizontal,
significant
dimensional spring
(3.32)
Y direction. Since
m.
(3.31)
E-5
X displacement
substructure analysis,
E-5
1.607
0.0
-1.25
mechanics theory.
length. Since
-2.857
following displacements:
Xt2
Yt2
zero
yields
-9.643
which results
into (3.15)
even
problem as
better if
for
the one
the calculations
CHAPTER 4
different
analysis, substructuring
factors. In
about certain
master
degrees
of
Although both
be implimented for
can
other
freedom
in Chapter 3
presented
element types.
Substructuring
of
All forms
substructure.
of
analyses, as
equations,
passes.
which are
in terms
of the master
degrees
be
one must
The
the user
of
freedom.
substructure and
including the
find
The
degrees
slave
of
The
analysis
involve
developed in
are
divide the
In
the one
master
required
in
accurately
degrees
of
substructure
is
for improved
define
the same
the generation
freedom
freedom
into
for
"global"
the master
solution
of that
for
each
substructure,
substructure
is
defined
develop
a condensed
in
being
it into
boundaries
consists of a
if
of the plates.
to
governing
the
degrees
of
freedom in
elements.
that
When
model
freedom
are selected.
boundaries
to
be
Once
the substructure
selected as master
most
dynamic cases, in
accuracy.
types, like
of
of
boundaries
of a substructure
of the
to
such a
enough to
elements, the
is
in Figure 4.2, it is
model
For example, if
substructure.
of
to
behavior
degree
degrees
a substructured problem
of the model.
boundaries
mesh
in
careful
freedom.
It is usually best
substructures.
is
a solution
involved
"local"
more
matrix equation that models the whole structure and solves this matrix equation
degrees
larger,
freedom,
of
long as
accurately
substructuring
applied to
so
be
can
degrees
more
of
is discretized into
freedom. There
are
freedom
are
degrees
information concerning
of
master
degrees
freedom.
substructured model
developed for
displacement vector,
reshuffled so
each substructure.
X^ is in any
order
The
the
matrix equation
desired
by
degrees
of
the user.
freedom
34
finite
may be
The
is
are separated.
of
then
be
It is usually easier,
FIGURE 4.1
it
*
4
i?
4>
of
Freedom
35
FIGURE 4.2
DIFFERENT SUBSTRUCTURE DISCRETIZATIONS FOR A PLATE MODEL
36
however,
Once
separated.
the
finite
resulting
performed
Different
equation.
different formulae
in terms
matrix equation
Matrix condensation is
in
governing
the master
of
conjunction with
all
that the
degrees
formulae
of
user
The governing
has
to
are
do to
conditions and
Thus,
equations.
freedom
freedom.
different governing
analyses use
developed,
of
the
apply
is
degrees
in the
condensed
equation
for
is
Kss
Ksm
Xs.
Es
=
Kms
The
Kmm
load
Xm
(4.1)
Fm
vector can
be
condensed
by
using the
-1
Ksub
Fsub
=Fm
Kmm
Kms*Kss*Ksm
(4.2 a)
-1
resulting in the
a single substructure.
Once
Fsub
The
of
freedom displacements
use pass
elements.
is like
use of standard
finite
certain quantities of
In the
use
interest,
"global"
the
equation,
just
as
extra
they
stress,
are applied
Using
without
incorporates
for the
be
The
user
find
a stress pass.
degrees
Once
applied to the
37
lets the
use pass.
its
of
The
main
into
freedom in the
conditions can
substructures as
performing
is developed in the
in
in
finite elements,
boundary
pass, in
flexibility of being
matrix equations
is in
a generation pass.
use
found.
finite
such as
performed
be input to the
running
has been
"global"
If the
are
a standard
In many problems,
(4.3)
a generation pass
degree
(4.2 b)
condensed equation
Ksub*Xm
for
Kms*Kss*Fs
large
structure.
be incorporated into
"global"
the
degrees
matrix equation
of
limitation
freedom
of
the
of this method of
boundary
applying
is that they
conditions
nonsubstructure degrees of
freedom.
can
only be
After the
degrees
applied to master
boundary
of
freedom
or
conditions
to
the
"global"
degrees
degrees
of
find
Compared
vector created
no major
any
in the
components
The local
is
in terms
displacements
a post
of
master
have
finds
all of
degree
master
of
of
is found,
is implemented.
formula that
This formula
substructure matrix
analyses.
For
can
be
used
is completed, the
degree
master
or
to
the
should
conditions,
of a solution.
vector
be in
master
slave
matrix condensation
formula is
given
is
for
of
of
this
There
nor
is
are
there
the
its
degree
degrees
formulae,
in [2],
standard
stress pass
a given substructure.
it
appears
in
freedom displacement
freedom
of the substructure
in the
any
freedom displacement
freedom displacement
local
find the
of
boundary
freedom displacement
Once
and
accuracy
of
freedom
freedom.
of
geometry
degree
of
displacements in
the
involving model
master
degrees
use pass
degrees
"local"
degree
Once the
to take the
a
master
stresses, that
the slave
"global"
into
its
would
of
such as
for.
solved
considerations
factor that
stress pass
be
complexity
like
modeling
other
can also
the
to the
solved
freedom. Quantities,
of
freedom
performed to
be
formula
varies
original
for different
as
-1
Xs
where
Fs, Kss
and
assemble all of
to solve
order of
Ksm
Kss*{Fs
derived from
for variables
increasing
are
of
interest,
stress pass
equation
degrees
of
(4.1).
freedom into
such as stresses.
node numbers
(4.4)
Ksm*Xm)
and use
it
organized
in
displacement vector, 2L
This displacement
vector should
be
is to
is performed,
the analysis
processing.
38
is
is ready for
post
CHAPTER 5
Substructuring Using
is
Substructuring
be
that must
a multipass method
The
solved.
substructure
it in terms
the
degrees
The
solved
so that
in the
nodes and
These
freedom
of
it
the master
freedom
be
can
The
use pass
in
solution
is to
Fn{Um} is
The
form
function
generation pass
the
basic
of
define
the substructure
and
locate
is just
form
then solved
all
in
of the master
degree
similar
of
to the
freedom.
equation
is
then
freedom displacement
large
matrix equation
in
degree
of
be
finite
in
design
optimization
occurring between
be
for
(5.1)
produced
the
The
in
This is why
scheme, where a
In
in
use
substructures
The ability to
analysis.
the
assembled
elements.
39
boundary
input file.
modeled as elements
substructures.
(Um).
substructured
each
vector
In many
useful
of
terms of
(5.1)
be
stress
include
{0}
one
a standard analysis
to
degrees
This
is
it
geometry in
the master
pass
equation
The
of that structure.
form
the
a vector
generation passes to
the whole
models
boundary conditions
degree
The
equation that
freedom
of
found in the
Fn{Um}
where
degrees
use
governing
for
matrix equations
input to the
governing
equation
of each substructure.
use pass.
in terms
produce condensed
a condensed
like (5.1),
solved
of
degree
into
of
passes
equations
governing
generation
ANSYS
mix elements
model undergoes
an optimization
into
the
several
scheme, the
elements
in the
be
As has been
or
pass commands
pass
input file,
finds the
which
substructure.
not
is
also
only for
degree
Since
of
degree
of
should
is
pass
input commands,
displacements
has been
solved and
of model creation or
which
be
a generalized use
The
are to
has its
stress pass
for
of
freedom displacements
each substructure
Some
as a standard analysis.
It
file,
to a standard analysis
nonsubstructure elements.
identical
almost
They
in Appendix 1.
setting
The
input file is
be
One
calculated.
own
module,
A list
have any
/STRESS,
be
and
performed on
of some of the
input file
not
does
are
basic
stress
included in
Appendix 1.
There is
Each
passes.
so that
they
they
can
position which
they
will
be
be
for
moved
be
written
always writes
ANSYS
display the
Files
with
substructuring
whole structure
in ANSYS have
is determined
its
output
files to
overwritten
other reasons.
accessed at the
by
by
in
than
files.
have to be
substructures
modified so that
be
combined
in
to
its
the number
in
form, FILE#,
that
the output
files
and can
filename. A
files
of these
a name of the
These files
Many
The individual
accessed properly.
be linked together,
can
order to
more to
are
usually
of
ANSYS
moved
and
the
according
There
are also
has
accessed
if these files
be
to
be
only
form
/COPY,NFROM,NTO,NORF,NORT
where
NFROM
NORF
and
rewind
key prevents
and
NORT
starting
point.
such as
file
The
NTO
the system
no rewind
from
key
is
keys for
the
file to be
files
copied
"rewinding"
an optional
the specified
function that
stacking.
40
copied
from
file,
can
from
and to.
so that
be
and
useful
If
to,
it can be
in
respectively.
accessed at
its
some manipulations
FIGURE 5.1
FILE HANDLING
FOR MULTIPLE SUBSTRUCTURES
(file 13)
(ssi
SSNF8)
rV
STRESS PASS 1
STRESS PASS 4
STRESS PASS 2
AUX
2^
41
Another important
ANSYS is
a program with
in the
substructures
freedom coupling
In degree
limited intelligence.
Two
use pass.
It
must
forms
common
substructure connectivity.
connect the
degree
of
freedom coupling,
of
as
of
consideration
coupling
equation
This coupling
use pass.
is
boundary degrees
equation
is implemented
by
the
CP
command
follows:
Degree
of
In
This has
which
each
CP coupling
coupling
the
The
likelihood
form
node number as
of an
of
being the
input
degrees
The
other
freedom,
of
is
must
be
begin level
shown
performed
Thus, by using
up
different
a node
In
freedom in
which
the
the use
that since
not
with
the
by
two modules.
also
of
boundary
which
node
and
FILE3 in the
AUX5 modules,
renumbering is
before the
and
The
nodes on the
boundary degrees of
from FTLE2
the same
corresponding
AUX4
have
substructures that
renumbering
consult
is involved in
of
node
connectivity,
that it
degree
AUX4
distinct
degrees
drawback is
the
master
that
of
two
error occurring.
same node.
a substructure so
information concerning
substructure.
boundary
degrees
many CP coupling
renumbering
post
so
substructure
As is
one pair of
boundary
NODE2.
coupled to
boundary
its
only
NODE1 is
the
sides of the
the number of
and
both
so that
freedom coupling,
Using
connecting substructure,
AUX5
of
doubling
equation couples
drawbacks. ANSYS
freedom
degree
which
seem to
other
boundary
CPU
the
ROTZ) for
...,
the substructures on
the effect of
substructures together.
increases
freedom (UX,
order to use
increases
pass,
six
of
be input for
must
coupling.
degree
disadvantages.
freedom
of
in the
created
in
stress pass.
library
use pass.
AUX5
node
For
more
substructure.
Appendix 1.
deflections for
its
own
a given
order to postprocess the whole structure, the user must assemble the substructure
for
42
module.
This
subprogram, AUX1,
substructure post
by AUX1.
Thus if the
iterations, AUX1
not too
difficult
AUX1
module can
In
have
will
operations
from
read
and avoid
found
CPU times
convenient
reason
The
for
an
input file. As
has
to structure the
way
This
stress pass
file copying
stress pass
pass.
The
All
of the
files 2
node
input files
module
is
for
FTLE8
input files
to structure the
command
file
used
input
following
statement
is
handling
and node
individual
a result of
on an
meaningless.
has its
It is
easier to
modify
input file.
own
by providing
input files is
the substructures
contains
file
out of the
input before
also used
renumbering
only the
for
commands
generation pass
remaining
and
in Figures 5.2
shown
handling
way
5.3.
for
needed
for
The first
the
first
the second to
and perform
last
of the
and
AUX4
node
renumbering
input file
which moves
generation pass
are similar
commands
as well as move
files 2
re-renumbering
AUX5
of the
input file
substructure out of
in format
before any
node
first
More information
files 2
and
commands to
cleaning up
3 back into
boundary
The
The
It
degree
place.
of
freedom displacement
There
contains commands
the way.
before
the
is
AUX5
into
to
processing file
each post
issued.
and node
to prepare
the whole
steps or
separate
decided
FINISH
input file
pass
structure
AUX4
perform an
post
in
set
intent is
was
/INPUT, 27
The
combines the
understood.
AUX1
generation
generation pass.
first
why it
last,
running
data
substructure
the
one
only
collect the
able to store
There
begin level.
substructuring in ANSYS
One
be
routine
be found in Appendix 1.
pass to
user
a series of
to use, once
order to render
renumbering
from the
accessed
structure.
output
be
must
processing file,
43
boundary nodes
for the
files 2
second
and
FIGURE 5.2
INPUT FILES FOR SUBSTRUCTURING FN ANSYS
GENERATION & USE PASSES
FINISH
/EXE
/INPUT,27
PASS'
FINISH
/EXE
/INPUT,27
LAST GENERATION PASS INPUT FILE
/COPY,2,36
OUT OF
/COPY,3,37
/AUX4
PASS'
FILES 2 & 3
!WAY
! NODE RENUMBERING FOR 2nd TO LAST SS
FINISH
/PREP7
FINISH
/EXE
/INPUT,27
/COPY,2,22
OF WAY
/COPY,3,23
/AUX4
FINISH
/PREP7
PASS'
! USE PASS
FINISH
/EXE
/INPUT,27
44
FIGURE 5.3
INPUT FILES FOR SUBSTRUCTURING FN ANSYS
STRESS PASSES
,F.
/COPY,13,8
/COPY,32,2
/COPY,33,3
/AUX5
FINISH
/STRES,!
END
FINISH
/COPY, 12,20
/COPY,34,2
/COPY,35,3
/AUX5
,E
FINISH
/STRES, 2
END
FINISH
LAST STRESS PASS INPUT FILE
/COPY,36,2
/COPY,37,3
/AUX5
FINISH
/STRESS,LAST #
/COPY, 12,23
END
FINISH
/COPY, 12,24
/AUX1
FINISH
45
handling
the
operations
There
of
in
used
used
in
be
master
freedom
TOTAL
and
analyses of
a substructure.
freedom
setting
degrees
the
substructures
in
proportion
along
To implement
file
value
in
values
are
in
degrees
of
included in
substructure
that
The
constrained
by the D
free degrees
first
takes
by taking
boundary degrees
FDOFi
next
of
in
the number of
the total
freedom
TDOFi
This brings up
master
inventory
in
in
Another
of
degree
case of
degrees
of
of
dynamic
freedom among
the
freedom
each substructure.
of each substructure.
degrees
degrees
number of
number of
BDOFi
percentage
of
the master
those
of
of
The degrees
freedom (TDOF) in
which are
freedom
find
along the
(CDOF)
degrees
of
freedom for
of
of
that
boundary
which
are
freedom
and
degrees
the
free degrees
is found for
46
a given
subtracting
of
off the
freedom.
(5.2)
of all
percentage
free degrees
freedom for
CDOFi
fraction
This
the number of
free degrees
each substructure.
free degrees
stating
the problem
the substructures.
degrees
freedom
of
The
each substructure.
be found
listed.
substructure can
which
nor constrained
number of constrained
freedom (FDOF) in
distribution
number of
in dynamic analysis, in
accurately defines
boundaries
placed
already
use pass
to the number of
in the
directly
of
substructure.
taking
substructure
degrees
The
in the
master
freedom
of
number of
file
for selecting
useful
be especially
command can
TOTAL
freedom
of
all of the
command
of the
the same
contained
The M
ANSYS to
problem
freedom
has
in
have
It is
a substructure.
of
of
in the
used
boundaries. TOTAL
The TOTAL
degrees
degree
nonboundary
be
substructure
These M
the master
dynamic
to
cornmancL
extra master
realistic.
freedom (MDOF) in
freedom
of
freedom to be
the
moved and
file handling, is
about
freedom along
by
the others
stress passes
list
degrees
degrees
Information
module.
last
stress pass
AUX1
master
of
freedom in the
a given substructure
by
free degrees
freedom in
of
all substructures.
%i
Finally,
must
to
first decide
the
TOTAL
nonboundary
number of
the values
This
for the
values
master
degrees
is the
value
total number of
boundaries
freedom for
of
For every
number of
substructure
nonboundary
technique could
be
nonboundary degrees
nonboundary
nonboundary
of
master
master
on the completed
freedom (TMDOF) to be
be
master
used
of
TMDOF
in
used
for
dividing
=
of
degrees
finds
the
of
statement.
To
by
subtracting
degrees
of
adding
by
the
freedom.
by
counting
the number of
them at the
boundary degrees
two.
(5.5)
TOTAL
freedom
last
by
of
would add
is found
the percentage
freedom
but in
by
for that
substructure and
of that substructure.
(5.6)
order to
products of
up, the
are added.
freedom
value
%i*TNBMDOF
substructure,
the total
(5.4)
be found
can
by
that number
BDOFi
freedom
of
total master
the
TBDOF
freedom
boundary degrees
=
TOTAL
in
used
SUM(BDOF)/2
degrees
freedom
degrees
of
structure, or
degrees
of
one to
degrees
boundary
TOTLi
This
degrees
TBDOF
adding
substructure
of
in
TNBMDOF
The
statements
problem.
substructuring
find
find
(5.3)
FDOFi/SUM(FDOF)
The
sum
is
is
be
subtracted
added
to the
from
the number of
number of
boundary
substructure.
BDOFi
+ (TNBMDOF
47
SUM(%j*TNBMDOF)
(5.7)
FIGURE 5.4
A METHOD FOR FINDING TOTAL VALUES
EXAMPLE PROBLEM
The following example problem as illustrates the method for finding TOTAL values. It is
based upon a simple three substructure problem involving a model that will be used in the case
studies.
THE BASICS
TDOF1
TDOF2
TDOF3
252
336
216
BDOFI
BDOF2
BDOF3
108-
252
336
216
SUM(FDOFj)
84
48
=
132
132/528
228/528
168/528
12
24
0
+
=
=
228
%i
PERCENTAGES
%1
%2
%3
CDOF1
CDOF2
CDOF3
108
84
48
FDOFi=TDOFi
FREE DOF:
FDOF1
FDOF2
FDOF3
TMDOF
12
24
200
CDOFi
BDOFi
132
228
168
+
168
528
FDOFi/SUM(FDOFj)
0.250
0.432
0.318
TOTAL VALUES
TBDOF
0.5*SUM(BDOFj)
TNBMDOF
TMDOF
TOTLI
TOTL2
TOTL3
BDOFI
BDOF2
BDOF3
TOTLu
TMDOF
0.5*(108
TBDOF
200
84
120
48)
120
80
108 + 0.250*80
84 + 0.432*80
%2*TNBMDOF
(TNBMDOFSUM(%j*TNBMDOF)
+ %l*TNBMDOF
200
48
108 + 20 = 128
118
84 + 34
48 +(80 20
=
34)
74
CHAPTER 6
CASE STUDIES
DESCRIPTION OF PROBT
The
modal analysis of
6. 1. The
structure was
beam
elements couldn't
be
Fiat Xl/9
drive
components.
Therefore,
modeled
justify
for
design
problem that
involves the
frame for
A few early
the use of
on a simple
in Figure
substructuring
be
discrete
The
plate elements.
structure
has
two tubular
frame sections,
each
train.
The
center section
is
to
be
manufactured
5052
aluminum
good
structure
10 to 20
not
based
the structure was changed to one with a monocoque center section which
using
front
connected to the
are
a tubular space
originally
upon
elements.
follow
based
could
FM
be
noted
has
The
version of
ANSYS that
substructure combinations.
The
as
research
is
has
shown
will
of
be
investigator to
The four
in transportation
corrosion and
applications.
the model
does
used to perform
spend more
It
aluminum.
was chosen
geometry
ASTM
[26].
see
limits inherent
The simplicity
time performing
The
panel contains
the
conform to
for its
may
to the
of
the
have
all of their
degrees
of
in Figure 6.1.
cumulated
three and
freedom fixed,
use
panels of
However, simplicity
realistic.
university
model
is
from
four
in
a series of
substructures.
four
Each
case studies
case
49
in
which
discretized
comparison of several
FIGURE 6.1
THE BASIC STRUCTURE
with
50
FIGURE 6.2
MODE SHAPE PLOTS
First Mode
Second Mode
Third Mode
Fourth Mode
51
FIGURE 6.3
BASELINE ANALYSIS
In
reliability
of
the
baseline solution,
the
baseline
four
times.
NATURAL FREQUENCIES
The
frequencies
listed below.
following
data tables
as
for
each of the
four
analyses.
They will
wl =7.384
w2
9.734
w3
15.55
w4
18.43
CPU TIMES
The CPU times
required
the values.
The
the normal
averaged
1st Analysis
2nd Analysis
3rd Analysis
4th Analysis
Tsoln
168.45
158.33
160.61
165.95
Tpost
3.58
3.44
3.22
3.56
Averaging
TsolnAvg
0.25*(168.45
TpostAvg
158.33
0.25*(3.58
52
160.61
+
3.44
165.95)
3.22
163.33
3.56)
3.45
different
master
degree
comparison of master
of
the model.
from the
CPU
solution
In the
dubious.
degree
of
from
times
distorting
discretization
the
discovered
that the
would
first four
plots of the
discretization. The
first four
An initial
results.
Since CPU
only
analyses were
is
upon
baseline
performing
averaged, as is
sensitive to
natural
the
master
frequencies
an analysis
indication
of the
configurations provides an
analysis
be based
by performing
freedom
frequencies
time.
given substructure
configurations will
efficiency
for the
run-to-run variation
master
freedom
seem
of
configurations
Solution efficiency is
factor in
freedom
degree
minimum amount of
model.
of
In
of this
order
degree
freedom
53
one analysis
several
different
four
variation
CPU
of
dynamic
configuration.
It
was also
As
a major
form
in Figure 6.3.
of
any
is
for
time
accuracy
of the
CASE STUDY #1
along
between the
command
This
is
model
a combination
placed
FOUR SUBSTRUCTURES
floor
and the
the substructure
substructures
using
used to place
has been
solved
backplate,
the
proportionality
degrees
master
master
of
degrees
degree
of
degrees
of
substructures
of
freedom
freedom be
divided
are
freedom for
of
master
method outlined
degrees
120
requires that
These
substructures.
optimal mass
freedom
distribution.
configurations with
to
the
220 (100
nonboundary).
The
listed for
inherent
the total
These
each master
degree
five
of
CPU time
results can
frequencies
postprocess
freedom
configuration:
CPU time
be
by
first four
which
baseline
analysis.
54
in
mode shapes
baseline solution,
following
computed
the
items
wl
are
to w4,
for that
has
CPU time
the
configuration.
first four
needed
natural
to solve and
FIGURE 6.4
SUBSTRUCTURE DISCRETIZATION FOR
THE
55
FIGURE 6.5
TOTAL VALUES FOR
THE FOUR-SUBSTRUCTURE CASE STUDY
BASICS:
TDOFl=
6*10*6
360
BDOFI
18*6=
108
CDOF1
4*6
24
4*5*6
120
BDOF2=
7*6=
42
CDOF2
2*6=
12
TDOF3=
4*5*6
120
BDOF3=
7*6=
42
CDOF3
2*6=
12
TDOF4=
6*6*6
216
BDOF4=
8*6=
48
CDOF4
TDOF2
TBDOF
0.5*(BDOF1
BDOF2
BDOF3
FDOFi
FREE DOF:
24
228
FDOF2= 120-
42-12=
66
66
FDOF1
360
108
FDOF3
120-
42-12=
FDOF4
216-
48-
SUM(FDOF)
228
%1=
228/528
0.432
%2=
66/528
0.125
%3=
66/528
0.125
TDOFi
BDOF4)
BDOFi
0=168
66
66
168
%i
PERCENTAGES:
528
FDOFi
/SUM(FDOF)
56
0.5*(108
CDOFi
42
42
48)
120
TOTAL VALUES:
TDOF
TOTi
BDOFi
TOT4
BDOF4
TOTu
TDOF
%i*(TDOF
(TDOF
108
42
TOT3= 42
TOT4
48
TOTu = 140
=
0.432*(140
TOT2=
0.125*(140-120)=
108
42
0.125*(140-120)=
42
(140
108
42
42
48
160
0.432*(160
108
TOT2= 42
TOT3= 42
TOT4 = 48
TOT2=
TOT3=
TOT4
TOTu
120
120)
(8
3))
116
+ 3=
45
45
6 54
+ 3=
48
108 + 17 = 125
42+ 5= 47
0.125*(160- 120)= 42+ 5= 47
(160 120 (17 + 5 + 5))
48 + 13
120)
+ 0.125*(160- 120)=
+
+
61
66
=180
TOTI
TOTu
TDOF
SUM(%i*(TDOF
=160
TOTI
TDOF
TBDOF
140
TOTI
TDOF
TBDOF)
0.432*(180
120)
108
26
+ 0.125*(180- 120)=
42+
8=
+ 0.125*(180- 120)=
42+
8=
(180
0.432*(200
120
(26
8))
48
134
50
50
18
=180
200
TOTI
108
TOT2= 42
TOT3= 42
TOT4
48
TOTu
200
=
142
52
42
120)= 42 + 10= 52
120 (34 + 10 + 10)) = 48
120)
108
+ 0.125*(200-
0.125*(200
0.432*(220
34
+ 10=
+ 0.125*(200- 120)=
26
TDOF
220
TOTI
TOT2=
TOT3=
TOT4
TOTu
108
42
42
48
220
120)
+ 0.125*(220- 120)=
+ 0.125*(220- 120)=
+
(220
120
(43
13
108
42
42
+
43
+ 13=
151
55
+ 13=
13))
57
48
55
+ 31
79
74
TBDOF)))
FIGURE 6.6
FILE HANDLING FOR THE-FOUR SUBSTRUCTURE CASE STUDY
GEN PASS 1
GEN PASS 2
GEN PASS 4
GEN PASS 3
(F8_
F8
SS4)
(FILE13 )
FILE8
(SSI
SS4
F8
STRESS PASS 1
STRESS PASS 4
STRESS PASS 3
STRESS PASS 2
(*)
I
31,32,33,34
58
F8)
TABLE 6.1
DATA FOR THE
# OF MDOF
140
FOUR-
160
180
200
220
GEN
SSI
18.52
19.51
18.84
19.32
19.98
GEN
SS2
5.73
5.68
5.10
5.17
5.55
GEN
SS3
5.83
5.99
5.59
5.27
6.18
GEN
SS4
10.65
10.85
11.47
11.82
12.23
40.73
42.03
41.00
41.58
43.94
31.89
45.60
57.02
71.64
96.69
TOTLGENPS
PASS
USE
BASELINE
vl
7.401
7.386
7.385
7.384
7.384
7.384
v2
9.739
9.737
9.735
9.735
9.735
9.734
v3
15.79
15.60
15.56
15.55
15.55
15.55
v4
18.87
18.74
18.49
18.44
18.44
18.43
STRS PS SSI
11.51
11.18
11.40
10.91
11.13
STRS PS SS2
4.08
3.98
4.08
4.24
3.81
STRS PS SS3
4.37
3.59
3.75
3.90
3.68
STRS PS SS4
7.81
7.24
7.41
7.20
7.06
TOTL STRS PS
27.77
25.99
26.64
26.25
25.68
AUX1 FL CMB
5.56
4.66
4.62
4.74
4.90
163.33
POST PROC
5.86
5.51
5.30
5.08
5.44
3.45
134.58
149.29
176.65
166.78
TOTAL
111.81
123.79
59
The
most
striking
CPU time
when
case studies
using substructuring
was
configuration could
than the
CPU time
time
by
saved
CPU time.
savings of
file
CPU time
in
analyzed
degree
baseline
these
freedom
of
solution and
was possible
because the
freedom
was greater
fewer degrees
solving
being
the model
This
for saving
a realistic potential
Even though
methods.
for
small
relatively
of
needed
by
the generation
As the
number of master
converged to the
solution
substructuring is
of
freedom that
baseline
solution.
solved
of
freedom
in the
use pass.
set of equations.
amount of
CPU
configuration,
freedom,
see
significant
reduction
mass
in
This is exactly
Thus, increasing
degrees
freedom
produced a solution
find
of
master
dealing with
freedom
increased.
were
increased
is
to solution efficiency,
model comprised of
200
baseline
in CPU time.
60
required more
degrees
The
is the
Increasing
of
increased
the
as the
CPU time
that would
of
be
than a smaller
degrees
the
baseline
comparable to
degree
containing 200
master
into
optimum master
case
degrees
the mass
carried
the order
which
it is less ideal in
While
anticipated.
time needed to
a model
be
what should
the substructured
distribution
of
increased,
distribution in
with respect
digit
solution.
in
used
a nonsubstructured model,
degrees
used
freedom
Increasing
The CPU
degrees
in
structure.
the mass
of
producing
would exist
This improved
solution.
baseline
capable of
distribution in the
use pass made
degrees
freedom
of
master
total
degrees
freedom has
17.49 seconds,
of
3 to 4
10.5 %
The
next case
THREE SUBSTRUCTURES
study involves
freedom (120)
freedom
are
as the
5. The TOTAL
command
is
used
used to
degree
of master
degrees
The
master
of
freedom
degrees
of
of
freedom
varies
in the first
case study.
Each
as the model
in
model
the
first
to
degree
the
configuration:
substructure
postprocess
first four
baseline
first four
each pass
mode shapes
same
basic
which
natural
for that
61
has
This
of
case
degrees
of
degrees
of
in Chapter
freedom in
lists
the
following items
frequencies
configuration.
the
master
nonboundary).
the natural
model and
that solution.
solved
floor,
in the first
master
degrees
in that configuration;
analysis of the
220 (100
the
method outlined
has been
case study.
in Table 6.2,
freedom
The remaining
of these configurations
boundary
distribution. This
non-
optimally
configurations.
freedom
three substructures:
substructures
backpiece,
This discretization
discretization
discretized into
a model
each
These
frequencies
CPU
for
CPU time
results can
obtained
time needed to
find
be
by
and
FIGURE 6.7
SUBSTRUCTURE DISCRETIZATION FOR
THE THREE-SUBSTRUCTURE CASE STUDY
62
FIGURE 6.8
TOTAL VALUES FOR
THE THREE-SUBSTRUCTURE CASE STUDY
BASICS:
TDOF1
6*7*6
252
BDOFI
108
CDOF1
2*6
12
TDOF2
14*4*6
336
BDOF2=14*6=
84
CDOF2
4*6
24
TDOF3
6*6*6
216
BDOF3
8*6=
48
CDOF3
TBDOF
0.5*(BDOF1
FDOFi
FREE DOF:
=252-
FDOF2
336-
84-24
FDOF3
216-
48
SUM(FDOF)
PERCENTAGES:
132
%i
TDOFi
BDOFi
132/528
0.250
%2
228/528
0.432
BDOF3)
228
0=
168
+
168
0.5*(108
CDOFi
132
FDOFi
228
%1
18*6
BDOF2
108- 12=
FDOFI
528
/SUM(FDOF)
63
84
48)
120
TOTAL VALUES:
TDOF
TOTi
BDOFI
TOT3
BDOF3
TOTu
TDOF
108
84
48
140
+ 0.250*(140-
108
84
48
160
+ 0.250*060-
(160
108
84
48
180
0.250*(180
108
84
48
200
0.250*(200
0.432*(20O-120)
(200
0.250*(220
TOT2=
108
84
0.432*(220-120)
TOT3
TOTu
48
220
(220
TOT2=
TOT3=
TOTu
TDOF=
TOT2=
TOT3=
TOTu
BDOF)
TBDOF
120)
120)
+ 0.432*(140-
(140
-120 -(5
=108
84
+ 8))=
48
5
8
7
=113
=
92
55
+ 0.432*060-
120
120)
120)
(10
+ 10=118
101
84+17
48+13= 61
=108
=
17))
=180
TOTI
TOT2=
TOT3=
TOTu=
TOT2=
TOT3
TOTu
+ 0.432*080-
+ (180-
120
120)
120)
-(15
+ 26))=
108
84
48
108
84
48
+
+
15 = 123
26=110
19= 67
200
TOTI
TDOF
(TDOF
160
TOTI
TDOF
%I*(TDOF
140
TOTI
TDOF
120
120)
(20
34))
20=128
34=118
26= 74
220
TOTI
120
(25
133
108 + 25
127
84 + 43
48 + 32= 80
=
120)
43))
64
SUM(%i*(TDOF
TBDOF)))
FIGURE 6.9
FILE HANDLING FOR THE
THREE-
GEN PASS 3
GEN PASS 2
GEN PASS 1
(F8 SS2)
(F8_ SSI
F8
SS3)
FILE8
USE
PASS
(FILE13)
FILE8
(SS2 F8)
SSI F8
STRESS PASS
SS3
STRESS PASS 3
STRESS PASS 2
31,32,33,34
65
F8)
TABLE 6.2
DATA FOR THE
* OF MDOF
140
THREE-
160
180
200
220
GEN
SSI
10.95
10.71
10.60
10.60
11.29
GEN
SS2
15.90
15.79
16.35
16.36
18.06
GEN
SS3
12.28
12.50
12.12
12.25
13.45
TOTLGENPS
39.13
39.00
39.07
39.21
42.80
USE
33.21
47 48
55.28
69.19
101.89
PASS
BASELINE
vl
7.402
7.390
7.387
7.384
7.384
7.384
v2
9.742
9.737
9.736
9.735
9.735
9.734
v3
15.92
15.65
15.57
15.56
15.55
15.55
v4
18.67
18.47
18.45
18.44
18.44
18.43
STRS PS SSI
8.68
8.11
7.42
6.95
7.62
STRS PS SS2
11.65
10.98
10.03
9.76
10.80
STRS PS SS3
12.22
12.40
10.54
10.28
11.20
TOTL STRS PS
32.55
31.49
27.99
26.99
29.62
163.33
5.66
5.20
5.07
5.21
5.05
3.45
POST PROC
TOTAL
110.55
123.17
127.41
66
140.60
179.36
166.78
Like the
four-substructure
previous
case
used
to
baseline
find
has
simulation also
Increasing
master
degree
However,
it had in the
litde
this savings
four-substructure
model.
closer to the
study.
is less
The
three-
than
natural
frequencies
difference between
and the
of
freedom
saves
degrees
It is difficult to decide
of the
natural
natural
5.82 %
frequencies from
baseline
frequencies
converge upon
from the
four-substructure
fourth
natural
three-
frequency
67
of the
baseline
CPU
220
time.
corresponding
study
tend to
be
substructure case
cases tend to
tends to
die frequencies
time
frequencies disappears
frequencies
With
CPU
of
whether or not
increases
degrees
the same effect upon the solution correspondence and the amount of
a solution as
of
CPU
the
demonstrates
be
degrees
solution.
have better
worse.
of
The
freedom
6.10. One
Figure 6.7
TWO SUBSTRUCTURES
case
is the
substructure
The
substructures
study, the
model was
same
floor
from the
second case
in the
used
using the
Since
this case
two,
previous
nonboundary).
study
a sixth case
The
other
As in the
of
contains
has been
cases
cases
falls into
The
items for
by
the range of
can
have
master
The total
degree
of
each master
degree
of
118
CPU
freedom
first four
CPU
baseline
natural
time needed to
first four
solution used
in Chapter 5
and
freedom
of
than the
freedom (10
of
freedom
of the
later
natural
lists
the
following
frequencies
produced
which
case studies.
These
results
The baseline
68
108
nonboundary).
first four
in
of
degrees
degrees
by
requires
divided among
frequencies deduced
find
are
in
Table 6.3,
the
degrees
master
number of master
configuration:
freedom
shown
distribution.
freedom
of
in Figure
master
be
boundary
#2. It is
optimal mass
CPU
degrees
12 fewer
shown
a combination of
proportionality
freedom for
Study
is
This discretization
welded together.
master
in Case
is
section that
The remaining
five
top
same method of
degrees
five
study
two substructures as
is
other substructure
divided into
basic
FIGURE 6.10
SUBSTRUCTURE DISCRETIZATION FOR
THE TWO-SUBSTRUCTURE CASE STUDY
Substructures
The Monocoque Center Section Discretized into Two
69
FIGURE6.il
TOTAL VALUES FOR
6*7*6
252
BDOFI
18*6
108
CD0F1=2*6=12
TDOF2
100*6
600
BDOF2
1 8*6
108
CDOF2
TBDOF
0.5*(BDOF1
FDOFi
FREE DOF:
FDOFI
=252
FDOF2
SUM(FDOF)
108
PERCENTAGES:
%1
132/600
TDOFi
0.5*(108
BDOFi
132
%i
24
468
468
=
600
FDOFi /
108)
CDOFi
12=132
108
600
BDOF2)
SUM(FDOF)
0.22
70
108
4*6
24
TOTAL VALUES:
TDOF
TOTi
BDOFi
TOT2
BDOF2
TOTu
TDOF
%i*(TDOF
(TDOF
BDOF)
TBDOF
=118
TOTI
TOT2
TOTu
TDOF
108
108
+ 0.22*018-
=108 +
108)
3)
108
0.22*038
(138 108
108)
7)
+ (118-
108
111
115
=118
=138
TOTI
TOT2
TOTu
TDOF
108
108
23
108
=108
11
39
108
124
=108
16
54
162
=115
=
131
+
+
0.22*058 108)
(158 108-11)
1 19
147
178
=
0.22*(178
(178 108
108)
16)
108)
20)
108)
108-25)
108
108
178
108
108
198
+
+
0.22*098
(198 108
108
0.22*(218
(218
198
TOTI
TOT2
TOTu
TDOF
108
=108
=158
TOTI
TOT2
TOTu
TDOF
=138
TOTI = 108
TOT2=108
TOTu= 158
TDOF
108
20
=108
70
108
+
+
25
85
=108
128
178
218
TOTI
TOT2
TOTu
108
218
71
133
193
% 1 *(TDOF
TBDOF))
FIGURE 6. 12
FILE HANDLING FOR THE
TWO-
GEN PASS 1
GEN PASS 2
31,32,33,34
72
TABLE 6.3
DATA FOR THE
TWO-
#OF MDOF
118
138
158
178
198
218
GEN
SSI
10.50
10.93
10.80
10.53
11.37
10.81
GEN
SS2
29.18
33.80
36.41
37.95
43.16
42.37
TOTL GEN PS
39.68
44.73
47.21
48.48
54.53
53.18
USE PASS
21.99
34.68
41.94
57.31
79.69
90.28
BASELINE
vl
7.432
7.398
7.389
7.386
7.384
7.384
7.384
v2
9.755
9.740
9.737
9.737
9.736
9.736
9.734
v3
16.48
15.76
15.61
15.56
15.56
15.55
15.55
v4
18.97
18.50
18.45
18.44
18.44
18.44
18.43
STRS PS SSI
7.22
8.30
7.37
7.16
8.14
7.61
STRSPSSS2
20.01
21.52
19.92
19.38
20.27
20.52
TOTL STRS PS
27.23
29.82
27.29
26.54
28.41
28.13
163.33
5.38
5.63
5.25
5.44
5.62
5.42
3.45
POST PROC.
TOTAL
94.28
114.86
121.69
137.77
73
168.25
177.01
166.78
While the
general results were similar to the results of the two previous case studies, there were a
were surprising.
effective at
solution
degrees
It is
also
pattern with
all
four
of
simulations
from
as the ones
The
having
interesting to note
that results
fit into
find
pertaining
a pattern
baseline
in
study
not seem to
One
for 10
extra
be
as
major reason
experienced an
solutions to
If the
model.
present case
have
the
It
analyses of the
latter
between
case
study
efficiency
originally
increase in
nonboundary
increase
be
or
fit into
time needed to
Instead,
in
expected
baseline
terms of
CPU time
74
not
of the model.
did
was
increasing
The
case
optimal positions
which
involving
in this
in the
study did
freedom.
contained
this case
models
to
in
not
less CPU
latter
case
time
study
correspondence.
to yield solutions.
necessarily have
Thus,
direct
CASE STUDY #4
ONE SUBSTRUCTURE
case study, the whole center section was modeled as one substructure with no
nonsubstructure elements
input into in
Since
it is
freedom along
other nonoptimum
the substructure
Since
there are no
convenient
analyzed
boundary
every
arbitrarily
master
using
freedom intervals
total of seven
different
using
using 140
degree
of
CPU
freedom
degrees
degrees
natural
frequencies
standard
20
of
CPU
its
to place master
freedom
degrees
of
freedom
the
of
The
model was
configurations.
freedom. The
by
20
lists
master
The
analyses
degree
the
natural
following
items for
frequencies
of
The
baseline solution,
results
each
produced
that case.
was
was analyzed.
first four
in
study, it
case
configurations.
of
which
degrees
freedom in this
master
connect
The TOTAL
location.
freedom increased
of
for
necessary
freedom
be
and the
of
in Table 6.4,
configurations:
at
degree
degrees
of
a total of
master
freedom
master
of
degree
followed had
The
degree
any
placed master
that
or at
not
doesn't
by
CPU
pertaining to the
which shows
the
first four
model.
75
FIGURE 6.13
SUBSTRUCTURE DISCRETIZATION FOR
THE ONE-SUBSTRUCTURE CASE STUDY
Substructure
The Monocoque Center Section Discretized into One
76
FIGURE 6. 14
FILE HANDLING FOR THE
ONE-
GEN
PASS
( FILE8 )
USE
PASS
(fileh)
( FILE8 )
STRESS PASS
(FILE12)
77
TABLE 6.4
DATA FOR THE
* OF MDOF
ONE-
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
36.97
43.81
46.86
50.23
54.72
59.85
66.30
3.56
4.54
6.63
10.43
15.02
20.38
30.81
vl
7.395
7.389
7.385
7.384
7.384
7.384
7.384
7.384
v2
9.743
9.739
9.736
9.735
9.735
9.735
9.735
9.734
v3
15.80
15.61
15.56
15.56
15.55
15.55
15.55
v4
19.00
18.54
18.44
18.44
18.44
18.44
18.44
18.43
STRS. PASS
22.84
22.97
22.78
24.24
22.82
23.80
25.90
163.33
POST PROC.
4.43
4.42
4.50
4.24
4.06
4.16
4.34
3.45
67.80
75.74
80.77
89.14
96.62
GEN. PASS
USE
PASS
TOTAL
78
108.19 127.35
BASELINE
15.55
166.78
The
results of the
first three
study
number of master
digit correspondence
significant
freedom. This
master
case
The level
case studies.
surprisingly low
of
latter
degrees
case
of
which
freedom
than
degrees
the
high level
correspondence
freedom, every
Even the
solutions.
degrees
mode
having
Since
master
with
a mere
the model
degrees
120
of
140
or
of master
degrees
allowing the
above case
case
of
extra
master
from
freedom,
of
time,
which
for
agreement
degrees
of
use more
master
the
first
to
degrees
fewer
less CPU
for this
apparent reason
degrees
distribution.
optimal mass
CPU
level
This
of
Thus,
baseline
containing 20
master
fourth
comprised
of a
that can
single
model
also
reduces
requires
is
79
as
is
larger
substructure
model.
there are no
baseline
provide
Since
number
by
checking that
in the
52.7 CPU
correlation.
superior
the substructure
boundary
number
the
a savings of a minimum of
minimum
from
shown
produce a similar
fewer
the amount of
the
time.
when compared
multiple-substructure
This significantly
in CPU
efficiency
in
results
of solution
freedom
in
savings
single-substructure
savings
is insignificant
to use than a
large
is probably due
by ANSYS,
model
easier
selected or renumbered.
The
digit
uses
also requires
have boundaries in
The
master
degrees
freedom
efficiency, but it is
for
placed
is high for
baseline
the
It
100
boundary
containing
This
100
involving
case
be
can
solution
converges upon a
study
other
involving
case
freedom
two significant
freedom, it
study to
baseline
results of the
3.09 % deviation.
master
of
baseline
for the
solution
is that,
freedom
of
degrees
worst
freedom, had
of
one case
degree
master
from
from the
but
baseline
baseline
case
of
freedom. The
of
a maximum of
any
and
with
has
interesting,
are quite
solution
does
not
master nodes to
must
be
of solution
be
performed.
passes
and
significantly
choice
for many
The
with which
greatest
be larger
The
mesh.
can
The
be implemented,
one-
for
for
large
one-
interesting
the
of
aspect of the
number of master
In the first
freedom increases
there might
be
a similar
ANSYS
latter
case
the
CPU
degrees
to solve the
freedom.
freedom
of
matrix
condensation.
by
used
degree
it
that
The only
Since
is
a restriction on
the master
degree
in
can
investigation
freedom
be
its
number of master
the
with
the
prevented the
needed
increasing
to solve the
generation
Results
also
Unfortunately,
in
indicated
the
that
degrees
degrees
of
increase in
existence questionable.
of
Since
freedom, it has
the
final
provided
in the
generation pass
components seem
freedom
with
model.
utilized
or make
to clash
Interference
used.
this
model.
major steps
of
of
enough
freedom in the
of
is probably due
these
in
CPU time
on the
time
being
increase
As the
configuration are
degree
influenced
variation
this question.
study is
freedom
case
degrees
of
master
be large
needed
case
study, it
CPU
time
160
ANSYS
insight into
for
degrees
some
substructure model
degrees
be feasible.
wavefront restrictions of
increasing
Another
usefulness of the
wavefront requirements
generation pass
solution of
Both
handling required.
limitation to the
substructure size.
can
in
problems
it
file
of
the master
freedom
and the
configuration,
80
degrees
by
it is
likely
that the
increase is significantly
influenced by
display
master
explain
used
solve
of
why the
in the
freedom
stress
generation
of
number of master
a change
degrees
in the
degrees
degree
generation pass.
by
the
which
had
not
freedom. The
of
other case
This is because
TOTAL
command.
formula,
studies,
a major
This
fraction
of their
(1.13),
similar
to the one
needed to
pass,
it.
81
equation
CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSIONS
One
potential
least
natural
to compute the
baseline
solutions resulted
in
four
of three to
natural
study) to 70.16
digits,
sec
(for the
The
one
is the
four
is
the solution
model
increases,
freedom
solution
What
CPU
freedom
also
of
mass
freedom in the
equation
naturally
to
however,
on
the
However,
model was
degrees
of
the
accuracy
number of master
equation
to the above
a certain
degree
increase in
degrees
in
factors,
this
of
freedom
increasing
the master
of
the
influence
influence, particularly
the solution
efficiency
boundaries has
The
have
dynamic
the
degree
of
the
upon
of a model.
expected,
Due
freedom).
Increasing the
The improvement in
governing
are
a consequence of the
As the
requires more
CPU
case
they
of a
amount of
expected.
be
model.
efficiency
is
of
the
models.
distribution is
was not
increasing
that
distribution in the
efficiency
configuration that
increases the
This improved
degrees
number of master
degree
demonstrate
for
the solution
of
optimal
tolerance
within a
considerable, because
contains
upon
These
acceptable
impact
of
be
greatest
freedom
Both
be
(it
small
substructured model.
in the
of
sec
accurate
provided
case studies
degrees
solution.
corresponding
of
master
a particular model
number of master
from 17.49
less
investigated
solution.
considers to
study
strong
were at
over that
baseline frequencies
investigator
in CPU time
of the
most effective
considered to
substructured model
freedom in
is relatively
each case
Many
solution.
Substructuring is typically
of
which range
for
a significant savings
which the
These savings,
application considered.
Three
computed
baseline
the
frequencies
significant
frequencies
possessing
solution.
optimal solutions
that
frequencies in
needed
is
definite
distinct
of the model.
discretized into
relating
solution
freedom
along the
of
placed
of a given model.
of
It
would
not emerge.
efficiency
82
impact
degrees
pattern
the
the
was
have
efficiency
What did
substructure
case
four substructures,
involving
studies
had
had
was
would
had
substructure
level
an
included in the
analyze
improve the
mass
CPU
In
time.
along the
However,
cases,
of
increasing
distribution.
freedom, it
of
freedom
efficiency
of
While
the
this algorithm
CPU time
in
less
This
accurate.
degrees
of
provide a required
efficiency
level
The
of
of
noticeably
a
were placed
freedom
will not
for
to compensate
one
only
CPU time
freedom
is
degrees
of
freedom. Thus,
are
needed to
sufficiently
increased
the
demonstrated
small,
are
in
be
be
degrees
needed
of
fraction
of
of
degrees
an
from
of
freedom
needed to
improvement in the
boundary
master
degrees
of
solution
degrees
freedom in
of
the
efficiency
relevant
model
of
it
placed master
83
degrees
the
this algorithm
the number of
applicable
This
uses an
is usually
master
Increasing
number of master
intended to be
ANSYS
are
number of
the solution
above could
that
master
result
but it has
studies,
the
CPU time
the
is
fewer
uses
increases
by
number of master
it may be desirable to
in
amount of
study
the process.
must
boundary
the decrease
is relatively
should result
When
freedom
The
this
CPU time in
decreasing
following recommendations
of the principles
of
for
reason
to offset the
degrees
The
freedom in
enough
amount
of
effective at
However, if
the
two-substructure case
case studies.
exchange of
be
structure
four
degrees
not
by a small
four
than the
of solution accuracy.
master
degrees
freedom
study
placed upon
if it
the amount of
degrees
would
it
master
of
had
and
freedom is
as well as
degrees
which case
of
and
accuracy
The
this rule.
of the model.
may
freedom
of
of the model
to
becoming
master
as opposed
of
boundary
increase
accuracy
distribution
discover
to
study consisting
degree
algorithm
model
boundary
case
degrees
a master
mass
difficult
was
master
equation and
exceptions to
degrees
master
master
When
and solution
find
boundaries
the model.
boundary
these
boundaries,
substructure
efficiency
boundary
improve
governing
distribution
most
It
their substructure
along
needed to
use pass
the model.
not
placed
The fourth
efficiency.
of solution efficiency.
interior location.
freedom
case studies.
placed
arbitrarily
boundary, it does
substructure
in
no
of
superior solution
yield
superior
degrees
close
very
be
degrees
easier
of
many
If the
Since
freedom, it
involving
less file
substructures, because
multiple
using
limitations
of particular
front restrictions,
in
boundaries
boundary
extra
such a
is
master
Each
be
nonboundary
or
degrees
distribute
master
model generation
of
boundary
degrees
freedom
to
degrees
of
several
freedom
of
distribution
mass
best
the
freedom in the
different
is
substructure
If the
on the substructure
placed on a substructure
also
increases
number of
discretizations, it
boundary
the
It is
also
desirable
to
discretize
in
the structure
such a
stress passes
half
not
performing
may
approach or exceed
solving
a
way
as to avoid
CPU time
to
the number of
handling
and other
These
produced
performing
model the
unchanging
in
the
iterations
can
be
performed
be
can
found in
saved
using the
by
in
be
generation pass
updated can
be
the
eliminating
is
one
generation
files
master
of the total
substructures.
output
the
required.
Hence,
file
CPU
be best
would
reducing
the
by decreasing
provided
Minimizing
by
Adding
distribution
solution
model.
analysts, makes a
bookkeeping
wavefront
freedom that is
of
improve
For efficiency,
by
several
among
substructures are to
degree
greatest restriction to
number of master
degrees
number of
master
any
of
ANSYS
The
may be limited
impractical. If multiple
are minimized.
or the need to
one-substructure model
the model
model
containing
is that the
versions of
A multiply-substructured
wave
a model
stress
passes
for
for
certain
those
substructures.
The
results can
demonstrates
solution
degrees
summarized
optimal master
amount of
be
degree
CPU time
of
by
boundary
freedom
master
configurations
to solve and
post-process
degrees
has
substructure
no
boundary
of
freedom
the results.
in Figure 7.1
84
on solution efficiency.
The
case studies
boundaries.
master
and
degrees
have
The fourth
of
case
study involves
FIGURE 7.1
CPU TIMES FOR THE OPTIMUM MASTER DEGREE OF FREEDOM
CONFIGURATION FOR EACH CASE STUDY
TT7T7TTT7-,
s/ssss/s/,
/////////,
/S//S//SS,
ssss/ss/s.
/////////,
s/s/ss/s /
in
ss/ssss/s,
/////////,
//S////S/,
SSS/S//S
/S//S/S/S,
///S////S,
/SS////SS
CO
D
m
O
Q
s
o
sssssssss.
(uuiu^t
rTTTTTTT-rr
IW-TWWW^
\N\\\\\\\\\S\\\S\SS\\\\N\\\\\\S\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
xxwxwxxx
WWW WWNW
SWWSWS'
\\\S\\\\V\\\\\\\\\\\\
\\\N\\\S\S
\XXXXXNNNNNN\NXXXXXXX
WXXXXXXNXXXXXXX*
*wwwwwwwww
.WW
wwwww*
wwwww*
wwwww*
wwwww*
wwwwswww WW \W WS WWW WWNWWWWW \w A\NN
NNNXXXNNXXNNXXX xxxxxxx WWW XXXXNXXXXX XXXWXXX W\ ,XNXXXXNN wwwww *
wwwww*
\\\\\\\\\\\\.\\\ xxxxx
wwwwwwwwwwww w\ ,ww
XNXXXXXXXX*
WWWNWWNWS NXNNXW XNXXXXXXXXXXNWXNXXXXW w\ ,WXX
wwwww*
wwwwwwws xxxxxxx
WWWWW NXNXXXXXNN \\\ AWN
wwwww*
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxx
WXXXXXXXX XXX ,N\W
nnnn
XXXXXXXXXXNNNNN
WXXXXXXXXNXXXXXXXX \ w WWWWN wwwww*
r\i
oo
U3
V7TrrTTr77T77T77T77777TTTTTTTTTT7TT777
f/Sf//f/SS///////SS/SS/SS/fS//S////SS/
S/SS////SS/SS/S/SS//SSSSS//S//S//S//S/
//S/////S//SS///////S//S/S////////////
f////////S//////////////f/////////////
in
o
X/l
o
r-
.xxxxn
O
in
CO
WW WW WW
WW
xn
XNN
WW NWS
WW
WW
WW
WW
WW
WW
WW
7777TTTTTTTTTTT-,
s/ / /
/ s / s
////////S/S//SS,
On
SS/SS/S//SSS//S,
///////////////,
/////S/////S///,
/ss/s/sssssss/s,
in
CO
/ / / / s / SS/SS//SS//S//S,
f////SS////////S/////S//S//////f//////
/ / / / / / / / / / ///////S//////S,
/ / / ? ?/ ////SS//S//S///
f//S/SS////SS//S/SSSSSS/S//S//S//S//S/
/ s s / s s / / s / S///S//S/SSS/SS.
////////////S/S////////////S/////S////
/ // /
f/////S////////////////////S/////S//S/
oo
CO
///S//S/SS/SS////SS/S//SS//S/S///S/////S/ / s / / / / / s / s y / sssssssss/ss/ss,
f/////////////////f///////////S////////// /S//S//// / / / ////////S////S/
r//sss/////ss//ss/s/ssssss/s//s//s//s//// / s / / s / / s / / s / s/ss/ss/s/ss/ss,
SSSSSS/////SS/SS/SSSSS/SS/S///SS/SSSS//SS
OO
XXX\
w w\
WV
WW WW nnnv
WW WW WW
WW WW WW
7777
' / / /
'SSS/SS/S//SSSSSS/SSSS/SS/SSS/S/SSS/SS
.N
WWWWW*
.
v\\\\\v\\\\\\\\\\ \\ nx
XXXXXXXXXXXNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNXXXXXXXXN
\\\\\s\\\\\\\\\ xxxxxxx
NXXNNNNNNXXXXXNNNNN \\\ AWN
NXXXXXXXXXXXXN
WW wwwwwwwwwwww \ w
in
XNXXXXXXXX*
///////S///S/SS,
O
a
S
o
CO <M
vD
-J
w
TTTTTrrrXT W
^ *. *, ^ ^ V
S.XXXX XXX WW
www
nxxxx XXX xxxx
xnnn
WW xnxnxxxx XXN XXX XXX
XXX N\N XXX
WW XXX \\\w
WW www
XXX XXX X w
WXXXXXXNXXXXXNXXXX \*\WW
www ,\\\\\\N NW x XX x\x
XXX w\
WW NX WW
WWWWW WWWWWW WW
WW nxxxxnn XXX n\n
v"WTWWW*WWWWWW<,
<;
vXNXXXXXXXXXXXXXNXXXXXXX
,wwwsw\wwwwwwww
PQ
NXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
in
x\ \ XNNNNNXXXX
XXX XXXXXXXXXX
X\ X
NXXNXXNNX
NNNN XXXN
WW XXXN
XXX XNNNNNXXXX
XXXX NNNN
XXX XNXXXXXXXX
VXXX NNNN
xxxxxxxxx NNXXXXXXXXV
XXXXXX*.
XXXXXXXNNX
WXXXX*xxxxxx wx
nnnnnnn XXX XXX x\x x\\
.XXXXXXX
TTTTTTTTTT
x\x NNNNNNXXXX
.XXXXXXX
zn
O
Q
.XXXNXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
eh
(XI
ON
vr
CQ
.XXXXXXXXXXXNXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XNNNNXXNNNNXXNNNNNNNNNNN'
www
WWW WS
.XXX
X*
XXXX xxxxn
wwwww
WWW XXXXX
XXX
WN w\ x\\ XXXXXXXNXX
NXXXXX*-
vNXXXX*
WW
www
WW
vww
.wxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"
www
NNNNNN*
NNNN*-
P
in
S
o
o
CM
,WSWWW\WWNNNNVNWN
NNNNNX
CC
01
^r1
CD
O
O
O
Q
LJ
LJ
Ctl
Li_
to
L_
O
CM
o
CD
LlJ
LjJ
01
CD
LjJ
Q
LJ
CD
O
Ctl
LJ
E-h
Ll_
CO
CU
r\i
Ctl
o
CO
LJ
y
CD
LJ
Ctl'
L_
Q
L_J
'
DI
OrT
cn
[ZH)
X3N3riD3dJ
86
-i
lack
boundary
of
demonstrated
degrees
of
of master
master
degrees
in Figure 7.1.
freedom
degrees
of
freedom is
on solution correlation
freedom
of
a given substructure
discretization. As the
number
increases,
solution.
The
performed
using
a simple model
a restricted version of
to problems
software packages.
analysis
that
many
involving
However, it is
solution.
As
advised to
solutions
nonboundary
with
basic
not certain
may
not
degrees
of
invest in
are
master
of the
little
research
drawn from
be
learned
principles
number of
section are
in this
applicable.
known.
87
during
minicomputer.
principles should
For example, in
and to solve
VAX 8810
how these
an analyst
effect on
planning to
several
basic
use
be
hardware
applied
be
and
for
all
the
accuracy
substructuring
problems
for
the
of
would
which
be
the
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
Hughes, Thomas J. R.; The Finite Element Method: Prentice Hall; 1987
[4]
[5]
Falk, Howard; Beardsley, Charles W.; Finite Element Analysis Packages for Personal
Computers"; Mechanical Engineering: V107, Nl; Jan 1985; PP. 54-71
[6]
Hansen, S. D.; Anderton, G. L.; Connacher, N. E.; Dougherty, C. S.; "Analysis of the
747 Aircraft Wing-Body Intersection"; Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Matrix
Methods in Structural Mechanics: Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio; Oct
and
Applications
of
A Route
to
CAD/CAM";
Mechanical
"
15-17 1968
[7]
[8]
Turner, G. L.;
[9]
Wittrick, W. H.;
Frequencies
263-84
[10]
of
use
and
Sehmi, N. S.; "Newtonian Procedure for the Solution of the Kron Characteristic
Value Problem"; Journal of Sound and Vibration: V100, N3; Jun 8, 1985; PP.
409-21
[11]
Simpson, A.;
and
[12]
[13]
Substructure Analysis":
Journal
of
PP. 1944-54
[14]
Wilson, E. L.;
Superposition
of
[15]
[16]
Prakash, B. G.;
of
Large
PP. 539-52
88
[17]
Bramble,
[18]
[19]
Gunzburger, M. D.;
Nicolaides, R. A.;
the
"On
Elements
PP. 291-7
Superelement
Algorithms and
Partial Differential
V2; 1986; PP. 243-56
Substructuring
Numerical Approximation
by
of
[20]
Wu, Shih-Chin;
[21]
1985
[22]
Turcic, D. A.; Midah, A.; "Generalized Equations of Motion for the Dynamic Analysis of
Elastic Mechanism Systems"; Journal of Dynamic Systems. Measurement and Control:
V106; 1984; PP. 243-260
[23]
Lips, K. W.;
Substructure
Vigneron, F. R.;
"Damping Synthesis for a Spacecraft Using
Component Data"; Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets: V23, N2;
and
[24]
Vigneron, F. R.; "Ground Test Derived Flight Values of Damping for a Flexible
Procedings of the Symposium on Dynamics and Control of
Spacecraft";
Non-Rigid Spacecraft: Frascati, Italy; May 1977; ESA-SP-117; PP. 325-33
[25]
[26]
Handbook
of
89
APPENDIX 1
Appendix 1
contains specific
information
in Chapter 5. For
are referenced
input file
that shows
variations of a standard
the pass
in
question.
handling
for the
lists
in
The
list
stress pass
contains the
is
files
of the generation
in
performed
the
generation
basic
The
display
STRESS.
the three
The AUX4
(FTLE8)
list
and sample
files
there is a
a substructured analysis.
output
substructuring
about the
auxiliary
and
and use
AUX5
(FTLE13)
90
the
There
are
detailed file
The
renumbering
passes,
respectively.
different
substructures
The AUX1
into
a series
GENERATION PASS
INPUT COMMANDS
ANALYSTS TYPE AND OPTIONS
KAN,7
KAY,2,0
,N
KAY,5,N
KAY,6,0
--
,1
,2
,3
KAY,7,0
,1
--
,2
TOTAL
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
D
F
P
T
NT
HFLOW
DISPLACEMENT CONSTRAINTS
POINT FORCE
PRESSURE
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
NODAL TEMPERATURE
HEAT FLOW
91
KAN,7
KAY,2,0
KAY,5,M
KAY,6,2
KAY,7,0
ET,1,JSTIF1
SUBSTRUCTURE
ET,L,JSTIFL
R,l,...
R,0
EX,l,EFORMATl
! INPUT MATERIAL PROPERTIES
DENS,1 J3ENSITY FOR MAT1
NUXY.l, POISSON R FOR MAT1
EX,PJ FOR MATP
DENS,P,DENSITY FOR MATP
NUXY,0,POISSON R FOR MATP
! SPECIFY
GENERATE ELEMENTS USING FIRST EL TYPE, FIRST REAL CONST AND FIRST
MATERIAL, THEN CHANGE TYPE, REAL AND MAT AND GENERATE OTHER
ELEMENTS
D,...
M,...
!
!
!
!
TOTAL,#OF MDOF
F,...
P,...
ACEL,.
LWRTTE
LWRTTE
AFWRJTE
FINISH
/EXE
/INPUT,27
'
'
92
USE PASS
INPUT COMMANDS
ET,ID#,JSTIF
DOF,UX,...,ROTZ
JSTTF
50 FOR SUBSTRUCTURE
SUBSTRUCTURE ELEMENTS
E,I,J,K
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
D
F
P
T
NT
HFLOW
Any boundary
F, NT,
and
DISPLACEMENT CONSTRAINTS
POINT FORCE
PRESSURE
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
NODAL TEMPERATURE
HEAT FLOW
condition can
HFLOW
can
be
be
93
degrees
of
KANANAL TYPE #
KAY,...
ET,1,50
ET,2,JSTIF2
ET,L,JSTIFL
R,l,...
R,0,'...
EX,1,EF0RMAT1
DENS,1 DENSITY FOR MAT1
NUXY,l,POISSON R FOR MAT1
DOF,ALL
TYPE,1
! SUBSTRUCTURE ELEMENTS
E,l,...
! INPUT SS 1 TO N
E,N,'...
TYPE,2
REALJTRST REAL
MATJTRST MATERIAL
M,...
TOTAL/TOTAL DOF
D,...
LWRTTE
AFWRJTE
FINISH
/EXE
/INPUT,27
94
STRESS PASS
INPUT COMMANDS
/STRES S,SENUM,SEOFS
NSTRES,NUM
ITER,NITTER,NPRINT,NPOST
STRESS
PASS
END
TERMINATES COMMAND
STRESS PASS EXPANSIONS
95
INPUT AND
STARTS
/EXEC
/STRES
,M
ITER,P, 1,1
NSTRES
! PERFORM L TTERATIONS
,L
END
FINISH
! LEAVE MODULE
96
NODE RENUMBERING
INPUT COMMANDS
/AUX4
(OR/AUX5)
NNUM,NOD#l
,NOD#2
RENUM,F#1,F#2
COPY,F#2,F#l
AN
AUX4/AUX5
LEVEL
VERSION
OF
THE
/COPY
RENUMBERED
! ENTER MODULE
NNUM, 1,11
NNUM,2,22
NNUM,3,33
NNUM,4,44
NNUM,5,55
RENUM,8,39
COPY,39,8
FINISH
97
INPUT COMMANDS
/AUX1
SRANGE,LS1,IT1,LS2,IT2
SCOMB,LS 1
,IT1
,LS2,IT2
COMB,F#l,F#2,F#3
FINISH
! SELECT ITERATIONS 1 TO 4
COMB,20,22,25
COMB,23,24,26
COMB,25,26,31
SCOMB, 1,2,1,2
COMB,20,22,25
COMB,23,24,26
SCOMB, 1,1, 1,1
COMB,25,26,32
COMB,23,24,26
SCOMB, 1,1, 1,1
COMB,25,26,34
FINISH
98
FIGURE A. 1
FILE HANDLING FOR
AUX 1 EXAMPLE PASS
FILE 20
FILE 22
FILE 24
FILE 23
FILE 26
FILE 25
FILE N
*N
31,
32,33,34
99
APPENDIX 2
Appendix 2
each of
consists of the
four
the
remaining three
for
each case
case studies.
count
down
with
The first
three, two
university
version of
case
during one
study
"FILE POOL
passes.
The
ANSYS
error
runs.
run.
four
which
order
lists
during
files that
for
from performing
models
can
be
by
the
accessed
input
in
shutting down
the
first
with
The first
In
contains
the number of
interactive
file
input files
Limitations in
FULL"
are
study
dynamic
command
case
needed to substructure
fewer files
run covered
AUX1 file
100
be
The
interactive
other
run.
KAN, 2
KAY,
KAY,
KAY,
KAY,
1,-1
2, 4
3, 4
7, 4
ET,1,63
R,l,.2
EX,1,10.2E6
!
1
DENS,l,2.513E-4
NUXY,1,.33
K,l
K,2,53
ANALYSIS TYPE
MODAL ANALYSIS
MODAL ANALYSIS OPTIONS
=
ELEMENT TYPE 1
PLATE
ELEMENT PROPERTIES SET 1
MATERIAL PROPERTIES SET 1
-
K, 3, 53, 42
K,4,,42
K,5,39.15,59.7
K,6,13.85,59.7
K, 7, 53,
,27
K,8,,,27
K, 9, 53, 42, 22
K, 10,
K, 11, 45. 3, 63. 7, 19. 5
K, 12, 7. 7, 63. 7, 19. 5
L, 1,2,5
,42,22
L,2,3,4
L,3,4,5
L,4,l,4
Li
.J
,5
L,6,4,2
L,2,7,3
L,7,8,5
L,8,l,3
L,8,10,4
L, 10, 4,3
L,7,9,4
11,9,3,3
L, 9,10, 5
L, 11, 12, 5
L,9,ll,2
L,ll,5,3
L, 10, 12, 2
L,12,6,3
A, 1,2, 3, 4
A, 4, 3, 5, 6
A, 1,2, 7, 8
A, 1,8, 10, 4
A, 2, 7, 9, 3
A, 6, 5, 11, 12
A, 10, 9, 11, 12
AMESH,ALL
D,1,ALL,,,2
CONSTRAIN NODES
WRITE ANSYS
/EXE
/INPUT, 27
PERFORM
43
46
D, 43, ALL
D, 46, ALL
AFWRIT
FILE
FINISH
BASELINE ANALYSIS
101
FILE18
INPUT, CS1GN1
1
!
USE PASS
1ST STRESS
PASS
'.
2ND STRESS
PASS
3RD
PASS
FINISH
INPUT, CS1GN2
INISH
INPUT, CS1GN3
FINISH
INPUT, CS1GN4
FINISH
'
INPUT, CS1US4
FINISH
/POST1
SET, 1,1
SET, 1,2
SET
,1,3
SET, 1,4
FINISH
/
INPUT, CS1ST1
FINISH
'
INPUT, CS1ST2
FINISH
INPUT, CS 1ST?
STRESS
FINISH
i
INPUT, CS1ST4
'EOF
/
INPUT, CS1AX1
'
PLOT
PLOT
2ND
MODE SHAPE
PLOT
3RD
MODE
SHAPE
PLOT
4TH
MODE
SHAPE
END
FINISH
/COPY, 31, 12
POST1
SHOW,
SET, 1,1
/VIEW, 1,2,1,
,,1
.5
/ANGLE, 1,-90
PLDISP,2
FINISH
/COPY, 32,12
PQST1
SET, 1,1
/VIEW, 1,2,1,. 5
/
/ANGLE, 1,-90
PLDISP,2
FINISH
/COPY, 33, 12
/P0ST1
SET, 1,1
/VIEW, 1,2,1,
/ANGLE, 1,-90
.5
PLDI5P,2
FINISH
/COPY, 34, 12
'P0ST1
SET, 1,1
/VIEW, 1,2,1,
.5
/ANGLE, 1,-90
LDISP,2
FINISH
'EOF
OF
2ND RUN
102
CS1GN1.DAT
/PREP7
KAN, 7
KAY, 5,1
AY, 6, 2
ANALYSIS TYPE
SUBSTRUCTURE GENERATION PASS
STORE MATRICIES IN FIRST POSITION IN FILE8
STORE K & M MATRICIES IN FILER
ELEMENT TYPE 1
PLATE
ELEMENT PROPERTIES SET ">
MATERIAL PROPERTIES SET 1
=
FT, 1,63
R,l, 2
EX,I,10.2E6
DEN3,l,2.513E-4
MUXY,1,
.33
K,l
K,2,53
K. 3, 53,42
K,4,,42
X,5,39. 15,59. 7
K, 6, 13. 85, 59. 7
K, 7, 53,
K
,27
,27
L,l,2,5
L,2,3,4
[,,3,4,5
L 4 1 4
L, 3,5,2
,
L,5,6,5
L,6,4,2
L
3
,
L,8,l,3
A, 1,2, 3, 4
,4,3,5,6
1,2,7,3
AMESH,ALL
D,1,ALL,,,2
^,
D, 43, ALL
D, 46, ALL
M, 7, ALL, 11
M. 16, ALL, 18
M, 31, ALL
M, 33, ALL, 37
M, 44, ALL, 45
M, 51, ALL, 52
TOTAL, 151
AFWRIT
FINISH
/EXE
/INPUT,
27
CONSTRAIN NODES
WRITE ANSYS
FILE
SET EXECUTE
MODE
PERFORM
43
&
46
OF FREEDOM
103
PASS
CS1GN2.DAT
2, 29
/COPY, 3, 31
-COPY,
/PREP7
AN, 7
c>.AY,5,2
'.
KAY, 6, 2
ET,1,6 3
R,l,.2
FX,1,10.2E6
ANALYSIS TYPE
SUBSTRUCTURE GENERATION PASS
STORE MATRICIES IN 2ND POSITION ON FILE8
STORE K & M MATRICIES ON FILES
ELEMENT TYPE 1
PLATE
ELEMENT PROPERTY SET 1
MATERIAL PROPERTY SET 1
=
DENS,l,2.513E-4
MUXY,1,.33
M,l,,,50
M, 60, 100
2ND
SUBSTRUCTURE
FILL, 1,60
INPUT SUBSTRUCTURE GEOMETRY
K,l
K.,2,,42
K, 3,, 42, 22
K.,4,,,27
L,l,2,4
^
L
L
.\,
3
4
4
3
1,2, 3, 4
AMESH.ALL
0,61, ALL
D, 69, ALL
M, 62, ALL, 66
M, 73, ALL, 74
61
&
'
CONSTRAIN NODES
69
OF FREEDOM
"0TAL,55
.jDELET,1,60
AFWRIT
FINISH
/EXE
/INPUT, 27
104
PASS
CS1GN3.DAT
AUX4
NNUM, 62, 11
NNUM, 6 3, 13
NUM, 64, 17
NNUM, 6 5, 16
MNUM,7
3,51
NNUM, 7 4, 5 2
RENUM,8,39
COPY, 39,3
FINISH
/COPY, 2, 32
'COPY, 3, 3 3
-'PREP7
KAN 7
KAY
ANALYSIS TYPE
SUBSTRUCTURE GENERATION PASS
STORE MATRICIES IN 3RD POSITION ON FILE8
STORE K & M MATRICIES ON FILES
ELEMENT TYPE 1
PLATE
ELEMENT PROPERTY SET 1
MATERIAL PROPERTY SET 1
=
,5,3
KAY
,6,2
ET,1,63
H,l,.2
EX,1,10.2E6
OENS,l,2.513E
TOXY 1
33
,
M,l,,,50
N, 80, 100
FILL, 1,30
K,l,53
CONSTRAIN
SELECT
MASTER
DELETE
OFFSET NODES
WRITE ANSYS
K, 2, 53, 42
K, 3, 53, 42, 22
K, 4, 53,
,27
,1,2,4
o
_.
"1
J5
L,3,4,4
L,4,l,3
A, 1,2, 3,4
AMESH,ALL
D, 81, ALL
0,8 9, ALL
K, 8 2, ALL, 86
NODES
81
&
DEGREES
89
OF FREEDOM
M, 93, ALL, 94
TOTAL, 55
NDELET,1,80
AFWRIT
FINISH
/EXE
'INPUT, 2 7
105
FILES
CS1GN4.DAT
/
A.UX4
NNUM, 8 2, 7
3RD
SUBSTRUCTURE
MNUM,83,3
NUM, 84, 9
.>fNUM,85,lQ
M NUM, 93, 45
NNUM, 9 4, 4 4
RENUM,8, 3 9
COPY, 3 9,8
FINISH
/COPY, 2, 34
'COPY, 3, 35
MOVE FILES
3 FROM 3RD SUBSTRUCTURE
GENERATION PASS OUT OF WAY
'PREP7
KAN
ANALYSIS TYPE
SUBSTRUCTURE GENERATION PASS
STORE MATRIX IN 4TH POSITION ON FILE8
STORE K & M MATRICIES ON FILES
ELEMENT TYPE 1 = PLATE
ELEMENT PROPERTY SET 1
MATERIAL PROPERTY SET 1
=
KAY, 5, 4
KAY
ET,1,63
EX,1,10.2E6
CENS,l,2.513E-4
MUXY
M, 1,130
N,100,,,150
FILL, 1,100
K, 1,53, 42, 22
'
INPUT
SELECT
!
!
DELETE
SUBSTRUCTURE GEOMETRY
K, 2,
K, 3, 45. 3, 63. 7, 19. 5
K, 4, 7. 7, 6 3. 7, 19. 5
,42,22
',5,39.15,59.7
<\, 6, 13. 85, 59. 7
L,l,2,5
L,3,4,5
L,5,6,5
_i
L,3,5,3
L,4,6,3
A, 1,3, 4, 2
A, 5, 3, 4, 6
AMESH,ALL
M,
M,
M,
M,
M,
101, ALL
109, ALL
119, ALL
MASTER
DEGREES
OF FREEDOM
122, ALL
125, ALL, 128
TOTAL, 7 9
MDELET, 1,100
AFWP.IT
FINISH
/EXE
' INPUT 2 7
,
i
i
WRITE
OFFSET NODES
FILES
ANSYS
PERFORM
106
PASS
FS1US4.DAT
<
AUX4
NNUM, 10 1,8 6
W NUM, 109, 66
MUM, 119, 31
MNUM,125,34
NNUM, 126, 35
NNUM, 127, 36
NNUM, 123, 3 7
NNUM, 12 2, 3 3
R.ENUM
COPY, 39
1 Q
J
FINISH
'COPY,7
'COPY, 3
/PREP 7
KAN 2
37
KAY, 2, 4
KAY
KAY
ANALYSIS TYPE
MODAL ANALYSIS
MODAL ANALYSIS
OPTIONS
,3,4
,7,4
FT, 1,50
DOF TJX UY US
ELI
E,2
F,3
,
R9TX ROTY
,
!
!
ROT"
,
SUBSTRUCTURE
ELEMENT TYPE 1
DOF FOR EACH NODE
SUBSTRUCTURE ELEMENTS
=
E,4
M, 7, ALL, 11
M, 16, ALL, 18
M, 31, ALL
',33, ALL, 37
A, 51, ALL, 52
M, 44, ALL, 45
M, 66, ALL
M, 86, ALL
TOTAL, 2 20
MASTER
>
AFWRIT
FINISH
WRITE
PERFORM USE
'EXE
/INPUT, 2
DEGREES
OF FREEDOM
SUBSTRUCTURES
ANSYS
FILE
107
FOR
ALL
CS1ST1
.DAT
PLACE
SET EXECUTE MODE
13,
/COPY, 29, 2
'COPY,
'COPY,
EXEC
/ STRES
ITER
MSTRES
END
-J
A.
1
t
J-
,1
,1
STRESS
PASS
EXPAND
1ST
1ST SUBSTRUCTURE
DATA SETS 'MODES)
FOR
4
,4
PERFORM
1ST
STRESS
PASS
108
CS1ST2.DAT
'COPY, 12
'
AUX5
32
'COPY, 3 3
'
MOVE FILES
/EXEC
NNUM,
NUM,
NNUM,
NNUM,
,2
OF WAY
17, 6 4
NNUM, 52
74
39
3
73
8
3
COPY, 9
RENUM
OUT
13,63
65
PASS
11, 6 2
16
51
NNUM
1ST STRESS
FINISH
/COPY,
'
,4,1
STRES
ITER
NSTRES
END
&
FOR
2ND SUBSTRUCTURE
4
1
PERFORM
2ND
STRESS
PASS
109
INTO
PLACE
\S1ST3.DAT
'COPY, 12, 2
/AUX5
NNUM, 7, 8 2
NUM, 8, 83
cJNUM,9,84
NNUM, 10, 3 5
NNUM, 4 5, 9 3
NNUM, 44 94
RENUM,3
39
COPY, 39,
FINISH
FOR
'COPY, 34,2
'COPY, 3 5, 3
MOVE FILES
/EXEC
'
STRES
ITER, 4,1
M STRES, 4
END
3RD
SUBSTRUCTURE
3RD
STRESS
PASS
110
INTO
PLACE
CS1ST4.DAT
/COPY.l
'
MOVE
AUX5
NNUM, 86
NUM, 66
n NUM,
31
NNUM, 34
35
NNUM, 36
NNUM, 3 7
NNUM, 3 3
NNUM
RENUM
COPY, 3 9
,101
,109
,119
,125
126
,127
,123
,122
,39
,3
FINISH
/COPY, 3 6,2
'COPY, 3 7,3
ITER 4
M STRES
,
MOVE FILES
&
'
STRESS
1,1
EXPAND
4
1
PERFORM
'.
MOVE
/EXEC
/ STRES
END
INTO
PLACE
STRESS
PASS
FINISH
'COPY,!
,24
OUTPUT
111
4TH
STRESS
PASS
OUT
OF THE WAY
7S1AX1.DAT
1
AUX1
3 RANGE
,1,1,1,4
1ST
MODE
SHAPE
2ND
MODE
SHAPE
'.
3RD
MODE
SHAPE
4TH
MODE
SHAPE
COMB, 2 3, 2 4, 26
SCOMB, 1,1, 1,1
COMB, 25, 26, 3 2
SCOMB. 1,3, 1,3
COMB, 20, 22, 25
COMB, 2 3, 24, 26
SCOMB, 1,1, 1,1
COMB, 25, 26, 33
SCOMB, 1,4, 1,4
COMB, 20, 22, 25
COMB, 23, 24, 26
SCOMB,!, 1,1,1
COMB, 2 5, 26, 34
112
FOR
LOAD STEP
FILE18
/ INPUT
CASE STUDY 2
,CS2GN1
,CS2GN2
,CS2GN3
FINISH
/ INPUT
FINISH
/INPUT
FINISH
/ INPUT
USE PASS
,CS2US3
FINISH
/P0ST1
VIEW NATURAL
FREQUENCIES
SET,1, 1
SET,1, 2
SET,1, 3
SET,1, 4
FINISH
/INPUT
FINISH
,C32ST1
1ST STRESS
PASS
/INPUT
,CS2ST2
2ND STRESS
PASS
FINISH
/ INPUT
,CS2ST3
3RD STRESS
PASS
FINISH
/COPY, 31,12
PLOT
PLOT
PLOT
3RD MODE
SHAPE
PLOT
4TH MODE
SHAPE
/POST1
/SHOW,
SET,1, 1
/VIEW, 1,2,1,
,,1
/ANGLE
PLDISP
.5
,1,-90
,2
FINISH
/COPY, 32,12
/POST1
SET, 1,
/VIEW, 1,2,1,
/ANGLE
PLDISP
.5
,1,-90
,2
FINISH
/COPY, 33,12
/POST1
SET,1, 1
/VIEW, 1,2,1,
/ANGLE
PLDISP
.5
,1,-90
,2
FINISH
/COPY, 34,12
/POST1
SET,1,
/VIEW,
/ANGLE
PLDISP
FINISH
1,2,1,-5
,1,-90
,2
/EOF
113
CS2GN1.DAT
/PREP 7
KAN, 7
KAY, 5,1
KAY, 6, 2
ANALYSIS TYPE
SUBSTRUCTURE GENERATION PASS
STORE MATRICIES IN 1ST POSITION ON FILE18
STORE KSM MATRICIES ON FILE8
ELEMENT TYPE 1
PLATE
ELEMENT PROPERTY SET 1
MATERIAL PROPERTY SET 1
=
ET,1,63
R,l,.2
EX,1,10.2E6
DENS,l,2.513E-4
NUXY,1,
.33
K,l
!
!
AFWRIT
FINISH
WRITE ANSYS
/EXE
/INPUT, 27
PERFORM
K,2,53
K, 3, 53, 42
K,4,,42
K,5,39.15,59.7
K,6,13.35,59.7
L,l,2,5
L,2,3,4
L,3,4,5
L,4,l,4
L,5,6,5
L,6,4,2
A, 1,2, 3, 4
A, 4, 3, 5, 6
AMES H, ALL
D,1,ALL, ,
M, 3, ALL, 11
M, 16, ALL, 18
M, 31, ALL
M, 33, ALL, 37
TOTAL, 13 3
,2
OF FREEDOM
FILE
114
CS2GN2.DAT
/COPY, 2, 29
/COPY, 3, 31
MOVE FILES
/PREP 7
KAN, 7
&
ANALYSIS TYPE
SUBSTRUCTURE GENERATION PASS
STORE MATRICIES IN 2ND POSITION ON FILE8
STORE K & M MATRICIES ON FILE8
ELEMENT TYPE 1
PLATE
ELEMENT PROPERTY SET 1
MATERIAL PROPERTY SET 1
=
KAY, 5, 2
KAY, 6, 2
ET,1,63
R,l,.2
EX,1,10.2E6
DENS,l,2.513E-4
NUXY,1,.33
N,l,,,50
N,50,,,100
!
!
2ND SUBSTRUCTURE
FILL, 1,50
K,l
K,2,53
K, 3, 53, 42
K,4,,42
K,5,,,27
K,6,53,
K, 7, 53, 42, 22
K, 8,
/VIEW, 1,2,1,
,27
,42,22
.5
L,l,2,5
L,2,3,4
L,3,7,3
L,7,6,4
L,6,5,5
L,5,8,4
L,8,4,3
L,4,l,4
L,l,5,3
L,2,6,3
A, 1,2, 6, 5
A, 1,5, 8, 4
A, 6, 2, 3, 7
/SHOW,,,l
AMESH,ALL
NDELET,1,50
D, 51, ALL,,, 52
57
OF FREEDOM
FINISH
/EXE
/INPUT, 27
D, 57, ALL
D, 60, ALL
M, 53, ALL, 56
M, 75, ALL
M, 79, ALL
M, 82, ALL, 84
M, 91, ALL, 95
60
TOTAL, 127
AFWRIT
115
US2GN3
/AUX4
2ND
SUBSTRUCTURE
NNUM, 53, 3
NNUM, 54, 4
NNUM, 55, 5
NNUM,
NNUM,
NNUM,
NNUM,
NNUM,
NNUM,
NNUM,
NNUM
56, 6
79, 11
84, 18
83, 17
82, 16
91, 7
92, 8
,93,9
NNUM, 94, 10
RENUM,8,39
COPY, 39, 8
FINISH
/COPY, 2, 32
/COPY, 3, 33
/PREP 7
KAN, 7
KAY, 5, 3
KAY, 6, 2
ET,1,63
R,l,.2
EX,1,10.2E6
DENS,l,2.513E-4
NUXY,1,.33
N, 1,130
N, 110,150
FILL, 1,110
K, 1,53, 42, 22
K,2,
DELETE
SUBSTRUCTURE
,42,22
K,3,45.3,63.7,19.5
K,4,7.7,63.7,19.5
K,5,39.15,59.7
L,5,6,5
L,l,3,2
L,3,5,3
L,2,4,2
L,4,6,3
A, 1,3, 4, 2
A, 5, 3, 4, 6
AMESH,ALL
NDELET, 1,110
M, 111, ALL
M, 119, ALL
M, 129, ALL
OFFSET NODES
SELECT MASTER DEGREES
'
OF FREEDOM
M, 132, ALL
M, 135, ALL, 138
TOTAL, 80
AFWRIT
FINISH
/EXE
/INPUT, 2 7
116
CS2US3.DAT
/AUX4
3RD SUBSTRUCTURE
RENUMBER
NNUM,
NNUM,
NNUM,
NNUM,
111, 95
119, 75
129, 31
132, 33
NNUM, 135, 34
NNUM, 136,35
NNUM, 13 7, 36
NNUM, 138, 37
RENUM,8,39
COPY, 39, 8
FINISH
/COPY, 2, 34
/COPY, 3, 35
/PREP 7
KAN, 2
KAY, 2, 4
ANALYSIS TYPE
MODAL ANALYSIS
KAY
KAY
MODAL ANALYSIS
OPTIONS
,3,4
,7,4
ET,1,50
! ELEMENT TYPE 1
SUBSTRUCTURE
I DOF FOR EACH NODE
DOF,UX,UY,UZ,ROTX,ROTY,ROTZ
'
E,l
SUBSTRUCTURE ELEMENTS
E,2
E,3
! MASTER DEGREES OF FREEDOM FOR ALL
M, 3, ALL, 11
=
M, 16, ALL, 18
M, 31, ALL
M, 33, ALL, 37
M, 75, ALL
M, 95, ALL
TOTAL, 220
THREE
AFWRIT
WRITE ANSYS
/EXE
/INPUT, 27
SUBSTRUCTURES
FILE
FINISH
117
CS2ST1.DAT
/COPY, 13,8
/COPY, 29, 2
/COPY, 31, 3
/EXEC
/ STRES
ITER
NSTRES
,4,1,1
END
118
C32ST2.DAT
/COPY, 12, 36
/AUX5
MOVE FILES
NNUM, 11, 79
NNUM, 16,82
NNUM, 17, 83
NNUM, 18,84
NNUM, 3, 53
NNUM, 4, 54
NNUM, 5, 55
NNUM, 6, 56
NNUM, 8, 92
NNUM, 9, 93
NNUM, 10, 94
NNUM, 7, 91
RENUM,8,39
COPY, 39, 8
FINISH
/COPY, 32, 2
/COPY, 33, 3
ITER
,4,1,1
NSTRES
END
&
FOR
2ND SUBSTRUCTURE
/EXEC
/ STRES
4
i.
PERFORM
2ND
STRESS
119
PASS
SUBSTRUCTURE
INTO
PLACE
CS2ST3.DAT
/COPY, 12, 37
/AUX5
NNUM, 95,
NNUM, 75,
NNUM, 31,
NNUM, 33,
NNUM, 34,
NNUM, 35,
NNUM, 36,
NNUM, 37,
111
119
129
132
135
136
137
138
RENUM,8,39
COPY, 39, 8
FINISH
/COPY, 34, 2
/COPY, 35, 3
MOVE FILES
/EXEC
/STRES, 3
ITER, 4, 1,1
END
FINISH
PERFORM
/AUX1
SRANGE,1,1,1,4
NSTRES
&
FOR
3RD
SUBSTRUCTURE
INTO
PLACE
3RD
STRESS
PASS
1ST MODE
2ND MODE
3RD MODE
4TH MODE
120
FILE
3
1
/ INPUT, C33GN2
"TNISH
INPUT, CS 3 US 2
USE PASS
'
VIEW NATURAL
INPUT, C33GM1
'
FINISH
FINISH
/
POST1
SET,
SET,
SET,
SET,
FREQUENCIES
1,1
1,2
1,3
1,4
FINISH
'INPUT,CS3ST1
1ST
STRESS
PASS
2ND
STRESS
PASS
PLOT
1ST
MODE
SHAPE
PLOT
2ND MODE
SHAPE
PLOT
3RD MODE
SHAPE
PLOT
4TH
FINISH
,'INPUT,CS3ST2
FINISH
/COPY, 3 1,12
,'POSTl
/SHOW,,
SET
,1
,1,1
'VIEW,
'
1,2,1,
ANGLE
.5
,1,-90
PLDISP, 2
FINISH
/COPY, 32, 12
/POST1
SET, 1,1
/VIEW, 1,2,1,
ANGLE, 1,-90
.5
.LDISP,2
FINISH
/COPY, 33, 12
/POST1
SET
,1,1
/VIETL 1,2,1,
'ANGLE, 1,-90
PLDISP, 2
.5
FINISH
/COPY, 34, 12
MODE SHAPE
/POST1
SET, 1,1
'VIEW, 1,2,1,. 5
/ANGLE, 1,-90
PLDISP, 2
FINISH
/EOF
121
CS3GN1.DAT
'PREP 7
KAN,
KAY
ANALYSIS TYPE
SUBSTRUCTURE GENERATION PASS
STORE MATRICIES IN 1ST POSITION ON FILES
STORE K & M MATRICIES ON FILE3
ELEMENT TYPE 1
PLATE
ELEMENT PROPERTY SET 1
MATERIAL PROPERTY SET 1
=
,5,1
AY, 6, 2
1 , 63
2
R 1
EX,1,10.2E6
ET
DENS,l,2.513E-4
NUXY,1,
.33
K,l
K,2,53
K, 3, 53, 42
K.,4,,42
K,5,39. 15,59.7
L,l,2,5
~*
~>
L
L
3
4
4
,
4
1
5
4
n
<-
L,5,6,5
L, 5,4,2
A
A, 4, 3,5,6
\MESH,ALL
D,1,ALL,,,2
M, 3, ALL, 11
'
OF FREEDOM
M, 16, ALL, 18
M, 31, ALL
ALL, 37
.,,33,
TOTAL
AFWRIT
FINISH
,13
3
!
WRITE ANSYS
FILE
/EXE
'.
/INPUT, 27
SET EXECUTE
PERFORM 1ST
MODE
SUBSTRUCTURE GENERATION
122
PASS
CS3GN2.DAT
'
2, 29
'COPY, 3, 31
'COPY,
'PREP 7
AN, 7
ANALYSIS TYPE
SUBSTRUCTURE GENERATION PASS
STORE MATRICIES IN 2ND POSITION ON FILE8
STORE K Sl M MATRICIES ON FILES
ELEMENT TYPE 1
PLATE
ELEMENT PROPERTY SET 1
rvAY,5,2
'.
KAY
1
,6,7
ET,1,63
EX,1,10.2E6
'.
M,l,,,50
M, 50,,, 100
FILL, 1,50
K,l
DENS,l,2.513E-4
MUXY,1,.33
INPUT
SUBSTRUCTURE GEOMETRY
K.,2,53
K, 3, 53, 42
K,4,,42
K.,5,,,27
K, 6, 53,, 27
K, 7, 53, 42, 22
K, 8,, 42, 22
K, 9, 45. 3,63.7,19.5
K, 10, 7, 7, 63. 7, 19. 5
K, 11, 39. 15, 59. 7
K, 12, 13. 85, 59. 7
L 1, 2 , 5
L,2,3,4
,
'
,3,7,3
7,6,4
L,6,5,5
L,5,8,4
u,
L,8,4,3
L,4,l,4
L,l,5,3
L,2,6,3
1,7,3,5
L,9,10,5
0,11,12,5
L,7,9,2
L,8,10,2
L,9,ll,3
L, 10, 12, 3
A, 1,2, 6, 5
A, 1,5, 8, 4
A, 6, 2, 3, 7
h, 8, 7, 9, 10
A, 12, 11, 9, 10
AMES H, ALL
NDELET,1,50
D, 51, ALL,
D, 57, ALL
D, 60, ALL
M, 5 3, ALL, 56
',79, ALL
rf, 82, ALL, 84
M, 91, ALL, 94
M, 123, ALL, 128
,,52
OFFSET
DELETE
CONSTRAIN
SELECT
NODES
NODES
MASTER
123
51
52
DEGREES
57
& 60
OF FREEDOM
TOTAL, 193
AFWRIT
FINISH
WRITE ANSYS
''EXE
/INPUT, 27
124
FILE
CS3US2.DAT
AUX4
FOR
2ND
SUBSTRUCTURE
NNUM, 79, 11
NNUM, 82, 16
TNUM,83,17
,t
NUM, 84
NNUM
18
53
.j
NNUM, 54
NNUM, 55
NNUM, 56
NNUM, 92
NNUM, 93
NNUM, 9 4
NNUM, 91
NNUM, 123',31
W NUM, 125 34
NNUM, 126 35
.4
.5
.6
,8
.9
.10
,7
NNUM, 127 36
NNUM, 123 37
33
NNUM, 124
RENUM
8
'TJPY,3 9
,
39
3
FINISH
/
COPY
'COPY, 3
33
&
MOVE FILES
GENERATION PASS
'
ANALYSIS TYPE
OF WAY
/PREP7
KAN
KAY
MODAL
,2,4
ANALYSIS
MODAL ANALYSIS
OPTIONS
KAY, 3, 4
"AY, 7,4
ELEMENT TYPE 1
SUBSTRUCTURE
DOF FOR EACH NODE
DOF,UX,UY,US,ROTX,ROTY,ROTZ
E,l
SUBSTRUCTURE ELEMENTS
E,2
! MASTER DEGREES OF FREEDOM FOR BOTH
M, 3, ALL, 11
-
^T,l,50
SUBSTRUCTURES
AFWRIT
FINISH
/EXE
WRITE
/INPUT, 2 7
M, 16, ALL, 18
M, 31, ALL
M, 33, ALL,
37
TOTAL, 218
',
ANSYS
FILE
PERFORM USE
125
CS3ST1.DAT
'COPY, 13,3
'COPY, 29, 2
/COPY, 31, 3
PLACE
EXEC
STRES
ITER
,4,1,1
NSTRES
END
STRESS
PASS
EXPAND
1ST
FOR
4
1ST
SUBSTRUCTURE
DATA SETS
4
PERFORM
1ST
STRESS
PASS
126
(MODES)
CS3ST2.DAT
/COPY, 12,35
'AUX5
'
1ST
STRESS
FOR
2ND
PASS
OUT OF WAY
SUBSTRUCTURE
NNUM, 11, 79
MUM, 16,82
NNUM
,17,83
NNUM, 18, 8 4
NNUM, 3, 5 3
NNUM, 4, 5 4
NNUM, 5, 55
NNUM, 6, 56
NNUM, 8, 92
NNUM
NNUM
,9,93
,10,94
NNUM, 7, 91
NNUM, 31, 123
NNUM, 34, 125
NNUM, 35, 126
NNUM, 36, 127
NNUM, 37, 128
NNUM, 3 3, 124
RENUM,3,33
COPY, 3 9, 8
FINISH
/COPY, 3 2, 2
'COPY, 3 3, 3
MOVE FILES
/EXEC
/ STRES
ITER, 4, 1,1
STRESS
PASS
&
FOR
2ND
SUBSTRUCTURE
2ND SUBSTRUCTURE
DATA SETS (MODES)
1ST
PERFORM
2ND
STRESS
/COPY, 12,36
/AUX1
SRANGE,1,1,1,4
!
'.
1ST
SCOMB, 1,2,1,2
COMB, 35, 36, 32
2ND MODE
SCOMB, 1,3,1,3
COMB, 35, 36, 33
3RD MODE
PLACE
FOR
EXPANDS
'STRES
INTO
END
PASS
FINISH
SCOMB
,1,4,1,4
WND
STRESS
MODE
4TH MODE
127
PASS
OUT
OF THE WAY
FOR
LOAD STEP
FILE
18
FOR
CASE STUDY
INPUT,C34GN1
4
!
GENERATION PASS
USE PASS
VIEW NATURAL
STRESS
PLOT
1ST MODE
SHAPE
PLOT
2ND
MODE
SHAPE
PLOT
3RD
MODE
SHAPE
PLOT
4TH MODE
SHAPE
FINISH
/
INPUT, CS4US1
INISH
'POST1
FREQUENCIES
1 1
SET, 1,2
SET, 1,3
SET, 1,4
SET
FINISH
/
INPUT, CS4ST1
PASS
FINISH
,'POSTl
/SHOW,,,l
'VIEW, 1,2,1,. 5
/ANGLE, 1,-90
SET, 1,1
PLDISP, 2
SET, 1,2
PLDISP, 2
SET, 1,3
PLDISP, 2
SET, 1,4
PLDISP, 2
FINISH
'EOF
128
CS4GN1.DAT
'PREP 7
KAN, 7
KAY, 5,1
AY, 6, 2
ET,1,63
ELEMENT TYPE
PI
ELEMENT PROPERTY
.2
EX,1,10.2E6
MATERIAL
PLATE
SET 1
PROPERTY
SET
DENS,l,2.513E-4
NUXY,1,
.33
K.,1
K,2,53
INPUT GEOMETRY
K, 3, 53, 42
K,4,,42
K,5,39.15,59.7
,27
K,8,,,27
K, 9, 53, 42, 22
K.,10,
,42,22
0,3,4,5
L,4,l,4
0,3,5,2
L,5,6,5
L,6,4,2
,2,7,3
-,7,8,5
L,8,l,3
L 8 10 4
,
L,10,4,3
L,7,9,4
L,9,3,3
L,9,10,5
L, 11, 12, 5
L,9,ll,2
L,ll,5,3
L, 10, 12, 2
L, 12,6,3
h, 1,2, 3, 4
A, 4, 3, 5, 6
A, 1,2, 7, 8
A, 1,8, 10,4
fl,2,7,9,3
A, 6, 5, 11, 12
MO, 9, 11, 12
AMESH,ALL
D,1,ALL,,,2
NODES
CONSTRAIN
WRITE
PERFORM
43
D, 43, ALL
D, 46, ALL
TOTAL, 2 0
AFWRIT
INISH
'EXE
'
INPUT 2 7
ANSYS
FILE
GENERATION
129
PASS
&
46
CS4US1.DAT
2, 3 2
/COPY, 3, 3 3
/ PREP 7
AN, 2
kAY,2,4
'COPY,
KAY
KAY
ANALYSIS TYPE
MODAL ANALYSIS
MODAL
OPTIONS
.ANALYSIS
,3.4
,7,4
ET,1,50
ELEMENT TYPE
SUBSTRUCTURE
'
/INPUT, 27
130
CS4ST1.DAT
/COPY, 13, 8
/COPY, 32, 2
/COPY, 33,3
EXEC
PLACE
SET EXECUTE MODE
/ STRES
ITER
NSTRES
,4,1,1
END
MOVE
STRESS PASS
EXPAND 1ST 4 DATA SETS
PERFORM STRESS
PASS
131
(MODES)