MSC Software UK Nonlinear: THEORY SERIES: Implicit vs Explicit - I... http://mscsoftwareuk.blogspot.in/2013/06/theory-series-implicit-vs-explic...

Articles and links for the MSC UK Nonlinear community

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...

Implicit vs Explicit - Introduction TIPS SERIES: Cost of Implicit Nonlinear

Analysis
TIPS SERIES: Mentat Selection Methods
Implicit Structural Solutions THEORY SERIES: Linear vs Nonlinear
Development of the finite element method began in earnest in the middle to late 1950s for Displacement
airframe and structural analysis. By the late 1950s, the key concepts of stiffness matrix and ARTICLE: Dytran | Cellular Structure
element assembly existed essentially in the form used today. NASA issued a request for Impact Absorp...
proposal for the development of the finite element software NASTRAN (developed TOOLS: OpenFSI Overview
by MSC.Software) in 1965.
ARTICLE: Dytran | Fluid-Filled Container
Impacts
Steady State or Static Equilibrium (ΣF = 0)
TIPS: Building your own OpenFSI routine
Force = Stiffness x Displacement
In actual practice, inverting the stiffness matrix to solve the system of equations for July (1)
displacement is highly inefficient. MSC Nastran uses a more efficient matrix decomposition October (5)
procedure rather than the matrix inversion method.
November (1)

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

Search This Blog

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...

Explicit Structural Solutions

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.

The history of Dytran (initially known as MSC.Dytran) is an evolution from DYNA3D to

MSC.Dyna which was then merged with MSC.Pisces to become MSC.Dytran.

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.

Dynamic Equilibrium (ΣF = ma+cv+kx)

Using the Lumped Mass approach to de-couple the system of equations, there is no need
for a matrix inversion and a significant increase in computational speed can be attained.
However, for stability purposes, it is required that the time step size is smaller than the

time it takes for a stress wave to pass through an element.

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...

Choosing between Implicit and Explicit

Implicit is generally most efficient in solving for static and quasi-

static equilibrium, therefore long duration nonlinear events would be suitable.

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!

Posted by Douglas Marriott at 17:53

Labels: Theory

Newer Post Home Older Post

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Simple template. Powered by Blogger.

4 of 4 17-Jun-15 11:57 PM