Applied Mechanics and Materials Vols.

638-640 (2014) pp 1716-1719 Submitted: 2014-06-18

© (2014) Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland Accepted: 2014-06-29
doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.638-640.1716 Online: 2014-09-19

Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis of Space Frame Structures by Discrete

Element Method

Nian Qi1, a, Jihong Ye1, b

1
The Key Laboratory of Concrete & Prestressed Concrete Structures of the Ministry of Education,
Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China
a
qi_nian529@126.com, byejihong@seu.edu.cn

Keywords: Nonlinear dynamic analysis, Frame structures, Discrete element method, Parallel-bond
model

Abstract. This document explores the possibility of the discrete element method (DEM) being
applied in nonlinear dynamic analysis of space frame structures. The method models the analyzed
object to be composed by finite particles and the Newton’s second law is applied to describe each
particle’s motion. The parallel-bond model is adopted during the calculation of internal force and
moment arising from the deformation. The procedure of analysis is vastly simple, accurate and
versatile. Numerical examples are given to demonstrate the accuracy and applicability of this method
in handling the large deflection and dynamic behaviour of space frame structures. Besides, the method
does not need to form stiffness matrix or iterations, so it is more advantageous than traditional
nonlinear finite element method.

Introduction
The study of nonlinear dynamic analysis of frame structures has been an important subject in classical
mechanics. Numerous related papers can be found in the literature that offers a variety of methods of
analysis [1,2]. Currently, the most popular approach for this analysis is to develop finite element
method. As well known, either total Lagrangian (TL) or updated Lagrangian (UL) formulations have
been widely used to solve large deflection problems with static and dynamic loads of beam [3].
Besides, a co-rotational formulation assumed a set of convected coordinates that is fixed on the
element is developed [4]. Regardless of their successful applications, the simulation of geometrically
nonlinear analysis of frame structures is not an easy task.
The discrete element method (DEM) was introduced by Cundall for the analysis of rock mechanics
problems and then applied to soils by Cundall and Strack [5]. In the DEM, the interaction of the
particles is treated as a dynamic process with states of equilibrium developing whenever the internal
forces balance [6]. The calculations performed in the DEM alternate between the application of
Newton’s second law to the particles and a force-displacement law at the contacts. Newton’s second
law is used to determine the translational and rotational motion of each particle arising from the
contact forces, applied forces and body forces acting on it, while the force-displacement law is used to
update the contact forces arising from the relative motion at each contact. Now DEM has got
successful applications in discontinuous media engineering fields, such as geotechnical engineering,
mining engineering and material separation and so on [7,8]. In contrast, the DEM is seldom used to
solve problems in continuum mechanics, especially in space frame structures.
In the presented work, the DEM is applied to nonlinear dynamic large analysis of space frame
structures. A given frame is divided into a proper number of rigid particle elements (spherical shape)
mutually connected by spring systems between elements. Several numerical examples are presented
in the paper to illustrate numerical verifications.

All rights reserved. No part of contents of this paper may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission of Trans
Tech Publications, www.ttp.net. (ID: 128.210.126.199, Purdue University Libraries, West Lafayette, USA-12/07/15,01:21:46)
 Applied Mechanics and Materials Vols. 638-640 1717

Equations of Motion
Consider a continuous planar frame structure (Fig. 1) whose configuration can be viewed as a set of
finite particles with springs connected to each other, as show in Fig. 2.
l1

mα

Fig. 1 Planar frame structure Fig. 2 DEM particle model

The symbol mα denotes the mass of an arbitrary particle α . Assume that the interactions between
the particle mα and its neighbors can be modeled by the springs connected to it. The spring element
does not carry any mass. Mass, external and internal forces are all lumped at particles. In this paper,
the total mass and total moment inertia of mass of an arbitrary particle α are defined as
nc
mα = mα + ∑ mKα (1)
K =1
nc
Jα = Jα + ∑ J Kα (2)
K =1

Where mα and Jα are the mass and moment inertia of mass attached to particle α ; nc the number
of elements connected with particle α ; mKα the mass contributed from elements , which can be
1
evaluated by mKα = ρ lK , where ρ is the mass per unit length, lK the element length of element K .
2
Similarly, J Kα can be calculated by J Kα = mKα γ 2 , in which γ denotes the radius of gyration of the
cross-section at the node (on element K ) connected to particle α .
Finally, the equation of motion of the particle at time t can be derived via Newton’s law,
.. nc
mα d = P + ∑ FK (3)
K =1
Where d is the particle displacement vector, P the external force vector, including the force and
moment; FK the internal contact force, including contact force and contact moment.

Evaluation of deformation and internal contact forces

In DEM, the force-displacement law relates the displacement between two particles at a contact to the
contact force acting on the particles. The internal force and moment arising from the deformation of
the cement material are represented by a parallel-bond model. The parallel bonds can transmit both
forces and moments between particles.
The total force and moment carried by the parallel bond are denoted by Fi and M i , respectively.
The force and moment vectors can be resolved into normal and shear components with respect to the
contact plane as
Fi = Fi n + Fi s
(i = x, y, z ) (4)
M i = M in + M is
Where Fi n , Fi s and M in , M is denote the axial- and shear-directed forces and moments, respectively.
When the bond is formed, are initialized to zero. Each subsequent relative displacement and rotation
increment at the contact results in an increment of elastic force and moment that is added to the
current values. The elastic force-increments occurring over a timestep of ∆t are given by
1718 Progress in Industrial and Civil Engineering III

∆Fi n = K n ∆U in
(5)
∆Fi s = K s ∆U is
∆M in = k s ∆θin
(6)
∆M is = k n ∆θis
The meaning of symbols in equation (5,6) and the calculation of stiffness parameters , namely,
K , K s , k n and k s can be found in Ref. [9], which there have some more details.
n

Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis of Cantilever Beam

In this example we consider a cantilever beam under a ramping duration load as shown in Fig. 3.
Behdinan adopted a co-rotational method for dynamic analysis with 4 beam elements [10]. Here the
beam was represented by 8 particles and the deflection time histories (see Fig. 4) obtained is in good
agreement with that reported in Ref. [10]. The maximum displacement at the tip is 22.7in and it shows
the validity of the DEM in nonlinear analysis.

E = 30 × 10 6 psi
25
ρ = 4.567 × 10 − 3 lb s 2 /in 4 P (t )
)
A = 21.9 in 2 I = 100 in 4 n
i 20
(
t
n
e 15
120 in m
e
c
la
p
si 10
P (t ) Ref.[10]
d
l
5 a DEM
10 lb cit 5
r
e
v
0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0.2 s t Time (s)
Fig. 3 Beam geometry and load history Fig. 4 Time response of the cantilever tip

Reticulated Dome under Impact Load

This example analyzes the nonlinear dynamic response of a single-layer reticulated dome under the
impact load upon the node B (Fig. 5). The elastic material properties of the members are: E=195GPa,
density ρ = 7800kg/m3 and the size of steel tube is Φ130×5mm. The number of nodes and members
are 169 and 462, respectively. In the simulation of DEM, a total of 3355 particles with the radius
range from 215mm to 220mm are introduced.

y
B B
x
15m

x
30m 30m

(a) (b)
Fig. 5 The geometry of initial reticulated dome: (a) elevation, (b) plan
 Applied Mechanics and Materials Vols. 638-640 1719

The function of impact load is given as follows,

 t
 P0 × , t < 0.02
P (t ) =  0.02 (7)
0, t ≥ 0.02
The displacement response at the node B of the dome with different peak values is plotted in Fig. 6.
In order to compare to verify the efficiency and validity of DEM, the analysis by employing ANSYS
software is also operated. Unfortunately, it could not be completed with a converged response in
ANSYS ( P0 = 6000 KN) because the dome had undergone extremely large displacement. Fig. 7 shows
the final configuration of the deformed reticulated dome at time step (t=0.1s) when the peak value of
P0 is 6000KN. Thus, the DEM is confirmed well to apply to nonlinear dynamic analysis for frame
structures.
0
4000KN,DEM
5000KN,DEM
6000KN,DEM
Displacement /m

-1

-2

4000KN,ANSYS
-3 5000KN,ANSYS

0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10

Time /s

Fig. 6 Z-direction displacement-time curve at the Fig. 7 The final configuration of the
node B of the dome with different peak values deformed dome at time=0.1s

Conclusions
In this paper, the classical problem of nonlinear dynamic analysis for space frame structures was
considered. The DEM was developed to obtain solutions for dynamic response of frames subjected to
large geometrical changes and complicated excitations. The results of numerical examples
demonstrate the method is suitable to nonlinear dynamic analysis of frame structures. It is shown that
the DEM has significant advantages in terms of its simplicity, accuracy and efficiency.

Acknowledgements
This work is supported by the National Science Foundation for Distinguished Young Scholars of
China (51125031).

References
[1] Mondkar D P, Powell G H. Int J Numer Meth Eng. Vol. 11(1977), p. 499
[2] Wang C Y,Wang R Z. J Mech. Vol. 22(2006), p. 235
[3] Bathe K J. Finite element procedures in engineering. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ(1982)
[4] K. M Hsiao. Int J Numer Meth Eng. Vol. 37(1994), p. 75
[5] Cundall P A, Strack ODL. Geotechnique. Vol. 29(1979), p. 47
[6] D.O. Potyondy, P.A. Cundall. Int J Rock Mech Min. Vol. 41(2004), p. 1329
[7] D.O. Potyondy. Int J Rock Mech Min. Vol. 44(2007), p. 677
[8] Yang D M, Ye J Q. Comp Mater Sci. Vol. 50(2011), p. 858
[9] Qi N, Ye J H. J Southeast Univ. Vol. 43(2013), p. 917
[10] K. Behdinan, M.C. Stylianou and B. Tabarrok. Comput Method Appl M. Vol. 154(1998), p. 151
Progress in Industrial and Civil Engineering III
10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.638-640

Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis of Space Frame Structures by Discrete Element Method

10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.638-640.1716