Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Mac Nastran
Mac Nastran
Mac Nastran
F r i d a y, 1 4 J u n e 2 0 1 3 Blog Archive
2013 (16)
THEORY SERIES: Implicit vs Explicit - Introduction June (9)
WELCOME!
THEORY SERIES THEORY SERIES: Implicit vs Explicit -
Introduction...
It is necessary to iterate the solution to be able to solve non-linear problems (using 2015 (2)
methods such as Newton-Raphson shown below, etc.) for many real-world problems. These
nonlinearities can be associated with:
About Me
1. Contact
2. Material Behaviour
3. Geometric Responses
The process by which an iterative implicit solution is obtained, is shown below: Douglas
Marriott
View my complete
profile
1 of 4 17-Jun-15 11:57 PM
MSC Software UK Nonlinear: THEORY SERIES: Implicit vs Explicit - I... http://mscsoftwareuk.blogspot.in/2013/06/theory-series-implicit-vs-explic...
DYNA3D was created in 1976 in order to simulate the impact of the Full Fusing Option
(FUFO) nuclear bomb for low altitude release (impact velocity of ~40 m/s).
DYNA3D used explicit time integration to study nonlinear dynamic problems, with the
original applications being mostly stress analysis of structures undergoing various types of
impacts. It was further developed for automobile crash test simulations to become primary
explicit code base today.
MSC.Dyna was the commercial version of DYNA3D offered by MSC which incorporated the
explicit structural component built around FEM. DYNA3D also evolved into LS-DYNA and
other explicit solvers on the market today.
MSC.Pisces was an explicit CFD hydrocode that solved fluid motion based on FVM (Finite
Volume Method). Dytran introduced these two codes together to simulate the accurate
interaction between both fluid and structural domains.
In recent releases of MSC Nastran a new solver has been introduced (SOL700), that
comprises the structural component from LS-DYNA, and the fluid component from Dytran.
This has introduced advanced fluid-structure interaction directly to the Nastran community
within a single environment.
The process flow for an explicit time integration method is shown below:
2 of 4 17-Jun-15 11:57 PM
MSC Software UK Nonlinear: THEORY SERIES: Implicit vs Explicit - I... http://mscsoftwareuk.blogspot.in/2013/06/theory-series-implicit-vs-explic...
Explicit is more appropriate for high speed events, because the time step constrained by
the event itself and the assumption of lumped mass. The use of reduced integration
elements also mean that each step is considerably faster than implicit. A benefit of the
small time step approach is that extreme nonlineararities can be handled by virtue of the
relatively small change in state between each time step. Therefore it is more suited to
highly chaotic or nonlinear events such as crash/impact and fluid-structure interaction
from explosions and sloshing (to name a few).
From the graph below it can be seen that there is an overlap between Implicit and Explicit
solutions, which will increase as computing power becomes more available. This enables
Implicit solutions to use parallel computing to solve faster nonlinear problem more
efficiently, while the same computing powers decreases the solving time for Explicit
solutions, enabling longer duration events.
3 of 4 17-Jun-15 11:57 PM
MSC Software UK Nonlinear: THEORY SERIES: Implicit vs Explicit - I... http://mscsoftwareuk.blogspot.in/2013/06/theory-series-implicit-vs-explic...
More to come!
Labels: Theory
4 of 4 17-Jun-15 11:57 PM