hexagon logo

Flex to rigid contact modeling is giving very high peaks in forces

I am modeling a flex to rigid contact. In this I have two queries. First is regarding IMPACT function, it works decently well when surfaces remain in contact. But where there is frequent attach-detach scenario, I am getting random and impractical forces. 
Second question is regarding contact force recorded in result file: I downloaded a macro from simcompanion which basically collates all the nodes and then calculated damping force and stiffness force seperately using inputs and basic IMPACT function. The total force given by this macro does not match with the force shown in result file. So what is the validity of the force shown in result file.
  • Can you give some details of the contact settings, parts materials..., please?
  • sure. I am using IMPACT function with 60000 N/mm stiffness , 1.2 exponent, 0.5% damping (notably, I have tried damping variation from 0.5% to 5%) of stiffness. I haven't activated friction.
    Rigid body material is Steel. Flexbody material, I believe is Steel as well (Its a leafspring so it is definitely a steel alloy).
     
    I have tried variations of stiffness from 10k to 100k and damping from 0.5% to 5%. Also tried playing with exponent from 1.2 to 2.2.
     
  • Download HertzWin and use that to get better estimate for the contact stiffness. Add increasing forces, read out the penetration and plot force vs displacement in Excel. Fit a power trendline and you have good guesses for stiffness and exponent.
    Do not use damping values higher than 0.1% of stiffness value for metallic materials. Probably even lower than that. There is not much damping in steel-steel contact (here is a nice procedure: take a ball bearing ball and let it bounce on a steel plate, measure height, apply logarithmic decrement, correct for aerodynamic resistance)
     
    Make sure that your solver settings are tight enough so that the solver is converged. For contact problems, HHT is usually good. Start with error=1e-5 and hmax=1e-3 and decrease until solutions converge.
  • Thanks for the inputs @Jesper Slattengren​ . Let me try this approach. I will come to this thread once I try this method.
  • Hi @Jesper Slattengren​  I tried exploring Hertzwin and succeeded partially in extracting the data. It would be great if you could guide some more on how to find the displacement from the software. I could see Impression in results section but I believe it is not the displacement that we seek. Some more guidance in this direction will be really helpful.
  • Select the materials and the dimensions and contact type. For you, probably a line contact with the Length=width of the leaf spring, radius 1 rather large (50 mm?) and radius 2 infinite can come fairly close to leaf-leaf contact.
     
    Enter a low force. I often start at 10N. Read the "Impression" field. That is the penetration. Note the unit (and the unit changes with load to whatever is suitable, between nm, micro-meter (um) and mm.
    Type these values into an Excel sheet (penetration vs force).
    Repeat this. I usually get good data by using 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, 500, 1000, 2000, 5000, 1000 N
    Now you have a table in Excel.
    Plot this data. Add a trendline and format the trendline as "Power" (k*x^e). Select to show the equation in the plot. Format the numbers in the equation to have enough significant figures to read k and exponent. Use those values.
     
    But contact with flex bodies are always tricky to get smooth values from. From the FE mesh a Parasolid geometry is created that is tessellated and the contact is calculated with this surface. At each time, the Parasolid is adjusted for the deformation.
    Have you changed the CONTACT_FACETING_TOLERANCE parameter in the preferences setting? If not, it is worth trying. Default is around 300 and you can increase this to get a "smoother" surface. But still discretized so if the contact slides from one facet to another, there will be a discontinuity in the forces. No reason to use a value over 3000.
     
     
  • Thank you very much for the detailed explanation on Hertzwin. I will try out this method. I have used faceting value upto 600 and got improved results but was not sure about the upper limit of the value. I will do more iterations with higher values of faceting and will check the sensitivity of it.. Thanks a lot again. I will come back on this after trying out some more variations.