George Laird, Ph.D., P.E.

, Principal Mechanical Engineer

Adrian Jensen, EIT, Sr. Staff Mechanical Engineer

Femap and LS-DYNA: Rocket

Science Made Easy
FEMAP SYMPOSIUM 2014
Femap Symposium 2014
May 14-16, Atlanta, GA, USA Discover New Insights
Unrestricted Siemens AG 2014
Agenda
LS-DYNA: Unified Numerical Architecture for FEA

Focus of Presentation
(Abstract)
Why Explicit
Implicit versus Explicit
Element Quality is Paramount
Building LS-DYNA Models
Best Practices
LS-DYNA Unified Solver

Page 2 2014-05-15
Femap + LS-DYNA:
Rocket Science Made Easy

ABSTRACT
LS-DYNA is well-known in the world of transient, dynamic nonlinear
analyses but is often perceived as a difficult code to use on a daily basis
for general implicit-type work that more standard implicit codes have
dominated for years. To address this perception gap, this paper
demonstrates how easily Femap can be used to drive LS-DYNA in the
solution of simple linear static analyses all the way to the most complex
simulations involving aviation seats and satellites. Along the way, the
capabilities of Femap and LS-DYNA will be showcased to show how
one analysis package can solve problems from rigid-body dynamics to
normal modes analysis (PSD) to complete system level models. Case
studies will be used to highlight the effectiveness of this combination.

Page 3 2014-05-15
LS-DYNA: Unified Numerical Architecture

Why Explicit?

Page 4 2014-05-15
Explicit Solves Where Implicit Cant

16g Seat Crash Test

TSO-C127a / SAE AS8049A / 14 CFR Part 25.562

Femap FEA Model FEA + LS-DYNA Model Validation is Gold

Page 5 2014-05-15
Explicit Solves Where Implicit Cant

Page 6 2014-05-15
Explicit Solves Where Implicit Cant

Page 7 2014-05-15
Explicit Solves Where Implicit Cant
Cargo Net Impact Impact of Plastic
Development Analysis Foams

Plastic Thread Modal Digger Tooth Failure

Design Analysis Simulation

Page 8 2014-05-15
Explicit Solves Where Implicit Cant

Page 9 2014-05-15
LS-DYNA: Unified Numerical Architecture

Implicit versus Explicit?

Page 10 2014-05-15
 Implicit versus Explicit

Explicit only works when there is acceleration (dynamic) whereas an implicit approach can solve the dynamic
and the static problem. For dynamic problems, this means that we are solving the following equation:
+ + =
where n=time step. A common terminology is to call the part the internal force in the structure. The basic
problem is to determine the displacement at some future time or +1 , at time +1 .
In conceptual terms, the difference between Explicit and Implicit dynamic solutions can be written as:

: +1 = , , , 1 , 1 ,
All these terms are known at time state n and thus can be solved directly .
For implicit, the solution depends on nodal velocities and accelerations at state n+1, quantities which are
unknown:
: +1 = +1 , +1 , , , .
Given these unknowns, an iterative solution at each time step is required.
Explicit is fast since it is a direct linear algebra calculation to arrive at all quantities for the future time. It also
means that you cant jump very far ahead. Implicit, you have to calculate future entities and requires a
decomposition of the stiffness and mass matrices pain in the ass and slow. But one can use large steps.

Page 11 2014-05-15
Implicit versus Explicit

Explicit: Direct No Iteration Implicit: Matrix Algebra & Iteration

Page 12 2014-05-15
 Implicit versus Explicit: Explicit Time Step

Explict: F = ma + cv + ku and solve for +1 = , , , 1 , 1 ,

(no F = Ku solution with = since there is no mass)

10e6
(1 2 )
CAluminum = = 11,400 mph
2.75x104

1"
= = = 5.0106 second
11,400

Page 13 2014-05-15
 Implicit versus Explicit: Explicit Time Step

Standard Mesh: Solution Controlled Better Hex Mesh & 3x Faster

by Misc. Small Elements

Page 14 2014-05-15
 Implicit versus Explicit: Explicit Time Step

Mesh Controls but there are tricks: Mass Scaling & CPU Scaling

Page 15 2014-05-15
 Implicit versus Explicit
Dont Fear the Explicit

Standard Linear Implicit Explicit / Implicit Explicit

Page 16 2014-05-15
LS-DYNA: Unified Numerical Architecture

The Importance of Mesh

Page 17 2014-05-15
 The Importance of Mesh Quality

Classic Explicit Classic Implicit

Clean, Mapped Mesh Random Element Shapes

Explicit propagates at the speed of sound

o Mapped mesh provides greater confidence
o Typically worth the effort to spend time on mastering the quad and hex meshing techniques

Page 18 2014-05-15
The Importance of Mesh:
Looks Aint Everything

Explicit Elements Use 1-Point Guass Integration (default)

Explicit can be very sensitive to

mesh density due to element
formulation and nonlinear effects

Page 19 2014-05-15
 The Importance of Mesh:
A Couple of Bad Elements Can Kill You

Bad Elements Can Generate Interesting results

Solution stability can be affected by bad elements

Femap provides Explicit Time Step checking
Time spent up-front typically pays dividends
Explicit contains more physics and it helps to
understand them in debugging

Page 20 2014-05-15
LS-DYNA: Unified Numerical Architecture

Building LS-DYNA Models in

Femap

Page 21 2014-05-15
 Building LS-DYNA Models
Render Unto Caesar.

Airplane Seat 16g Sled Test with ATD

Build model in Femap

o Check Explicit Time Step
o Add Contacts
o Material Laws
o Perform FEA checks (component masses)

Add anthropomorphic test device

o Leverage LS-PrePost Dummy Positioning
o Create *Include file and add to Femap

Post Process in LSPP

o Fast
o Extensive support of results files and cross-plotting
o Tracking ability for objects that move

Page 22 2014-05-15
 Building LS-DYNA Models
Glue the Un-Hexable and Tet the Rest.

Viscoelastic Plastics and Seal Design

Hex mesh is more robust

o Gluing between hex regions
o Easy within Femap

Four-Node Tetrahedrals
o Tet Growth Ratio = 1.0
o ELFORM=13

Femap Fully Supports Axisymmetric

Full Contact / Full Nonlinear (super sweet for seal analysis)
o Material Stress/Strain Curves
o Femap base material support
o Robust model setup for quick runs

Page 23 2014-05-15
 Building LS-DYNA Models
Be Economical..and Play Chess Hex

Blade-Out Containment

Turbine Blade Hexed

o Complex Hexing in Femap

Model Organization
o LS-DYNA likes Properties
o Contact based on Properties

Implicit Spin Up
o Femap verification - Static

Implicit / Explicit Switching

o Femap base material support
o Robust model setup for quick runs

Page 24 2014-05-15
 Building LS-DYNA Models
Leverage the Complete Toolbox

Bird-Strike (FEA + SPH)

Build in Femap
o RBE2 to CNRB
o Composite to *PART_COMPOSITE
o Model Checkout

LSPP for SPH

Page 25 2014-05-15
LS-DYNA: Unified Numerical Architecture

Best Practices

Page 26 2014-05-15
Best Practices

No Substitute for Organic Learning Get On-Line and Ramp Up

Page 27 2014-05-15
 Best Practices

No Substitute for Organic Learning

Our LS-DYNA Class Notes Are Open to Femap Clients

Page 28 2014-05-15
Best Practices

No Substitute for Organic Learning

Page 29 2014-05-15
Best Practices

Attend Classes and Conferences Networking is Awesome

Visit
Predictive Engineering
at Booth 300

We will be presenting papers on

DEM and SPH Methods

Page 30 2014-05-15
LS-DYNA: Unified Numerical Architecture

LS-DYNA Implicit and Multi-Physics

Page 31 2014-05-15
LS-DYNA:
Unified Numerical Architecture for Everything

LS-DYNAs Objective is MPP for Every Discipline

Page 32 2014-05-15
LS-DYNA: One Code Strategy
Unified Numerical Architecture for Everything

Combine the Multi-Physics Capabilities into One Scalable Code for Solving
Highly Nonlinear Transient Problems to Enable the Solution of Coupled
Multi-Physics and Multi-Stage Problems

Implicit Capabilities (partial list)

Static and Dynamic Linear and Nonlinear Analysis
Normal Modes Analysis and Flexible Body Analysis
Frequency Domain Analysis, Response Spectrum, PSD, NVH, Fatigue
Acoustic Analysis (BEM Method and FEM)

Explicit Capabilities (partial list)

o Dynamic Nonlinear Analysis and Rigid Body Dynamics
o FSI with ALE or CFD (compressible / incompressible solvers)
o DEM, SPH, EFG, Electromagnetism, Optimization, Topology

Page 33 2014-05-15
 LS-DYNA: Unified Solver Capabilities

LS-DYNAs Objective is MPP for Every Discipline: Implicit Mechanics

CPU Scaling Normal Modes / PSD

Page 34 2014-05-15
 LS-DYNA: Unified Solver Capabilities

Strong Coupling Between DEM and FEA

Page 35 2014-05-15
 LS-DYNA: Unified Solver Capabilities

FSI with ALE (short duration / explicit) and CFD (long duration / implicit)

Page 36 2014-05-15
 LS-DYNA: Unified Solver Capabilities

FSI with ALE (short duration / explicit) and CFD (long duration / implicit)

Page 37 2014-05-15
Predictive Engineering, Inc.

George Laird, Ph.D., P.E.

Principal Mechanical Engineer
Adrian Jensen, BSME, EIT
Sr. Mechanical Engineer

Predictive Engineering, Inc.

2505 SE 11th, Suite 310
Portland, OR 97202-1063
Phone: +01 (503) 206-5571
Mobile: +01 (503) 201-2688
E-mail:
FEA@PredictiveEngineering.com
Located in Portland, OR

Page 38 2014-05-15