A master-surface to master-surface formulation for beam to beam contact. Part II: Frictional interaction

Neto, Alfredo Gay; Pimenta, Paulo de Mattos; Wriggers, Peter

doi:10.1016/j.cma.2017.01.038

Cited by 37 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While the present formulation is suitable for non-localized beam-to-beam contact, it is not truly adapted to enforce localized contact. In such cases, frameworks as presented by Gay Neto et al, 8,15 which enforce contact at a single pair of points, seem more accurate. A scheme that automatically decides whether to enforce point-wise contact or non-localized contact remains for future work.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Beams are widely used to describe the mechanical behavior of slender structures. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] The contact description between the beams (with or without friction 8,9 ) is often an essential part of these mechanical models. Large-deformation frameworks to treat contact between beams with rigid cross-sections can be classified in different ways.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…14 Most schemes can only be used for beams with circular cross-sections, [10][11][12] whereas a few can also be used for beams with elliptical cross-sections. 8,13,[14][15][16] Most schemes can only be used for small contact areas 8,15 (assuming point-wise contact interactions), whereas others are able to treat finite contact areas. 9,10,14,16 Of all the frameworks able to treat frictional contact between beams, only a few are capable to not only account for frictional sliding in the beams' axial directions, but also in the circumferential directions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9,10,14,16 Of all the frameworks able to treat frictional contact between beams, only a few are capable to not only account for frictional sliding in the beams' axial directions, but also in the circumferential directions. 8,17 Finally, all frameworks are beam-to-beam contact schemes, that is, they repel beams if they touch each other. Only recently, we have proposed a beam-inside-beam contact approach that enforces one beam to remain inside another beam.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Beams are widely used to describe the mechanical behavior of slender structures 1‐7 . The contact description between the beams (with or without friction 8,9 ) is often an essential part of these mechanical models.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Frictional interactions for non‐localized beam‐to‐beam and beam‐inside‐beam contact

Magliulo

Lengiewicz

Zilian

et al. 2021

Numerical Meth Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This contribution presents the extensions of beam-to-beam and beam-inside-beam contact schemes of the same authors towards frictional interactions. Since the schemes are based on the beams' true surfaces (instead of surfaces implicitly deduced from the beams' centroid lines), the presented enhancements are not only able to account for frictional sliding in the beams' axial directions, but also in the circumferential directions. Both the frictional beam-to-beam approach as well as the frictional beam-inside-beam approach are applicable to shear-deformable and shear-undeformable beams, as well as to beams with both circular and elliptical cross-sections (although the cross-sections must be rigid). A penalty formulation is used to treat unilateral and frictional contact constraints. FE implementation details are discussed, where automatic differentiation techniques are used to derive the implementations. Simulations involving large sliding displacements and large deformations are presented for both beam-to-beam and beam-inside-beam schemes. All simulation results are compared with those of the frictionless schemes. K E Y W O R D S beam contact, beam-inside-beam contact, beam-to-beam contact, Coulomb's law, friction This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Frictional interactions for non‐localized beam‐to‐beam and beam‐inside‐beam contact

Magliulo

Lengiewicz

Zilian

et al. 2021

Numerical Meth Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Numerical strategy for solving general C¹‐continuous beam‐to‐beam contact problems

Júnior,

Gay Neto,

Wriggers

2023

Numerical Meth Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the context of a multibody numerical environment, when aiming at representing the contact interaction between bodies one needs the inclusion of special mathematical formulations. They can be geometrically described as surface‐to‐surface or line‐to‐line contacts, for instance. The last one is usually the natural choice when addressing beam‐to‐beam contact. In the present work, a geometrically nonlinear structural formulation is combined with a beam‐to‐beam spline‐based contact formulation with a particular numerical strategy to address challenging contact problems. The numerical strategy consists of introducing criteria to evaluate, characterize and decide about the contact problem solutions. According to these criteria, a contact problem solution may be accepted, rejected, or proceed to a degeneration process (as a simplification of the original tentative for the geometric description). The main advantages of the proposed technique are the lack of special contact formulations for ill‐defined contact problems and the automatic switch between degenerated and nondegenerated scenarios. Therefore, one can naturally handle scenarios of pointwise or conformal contact, even in situations of transition between such categories along the model evolution. The adopted spline‐based formulation includes normal and tangential contact contributions. To test the proposed strategy, several pointwise and conformal contact examples are proposed.

show abstract

Perspectives on the Master-Master Contact Formulation

Neto

2022

Current Trends and Open Problems in Computational Mechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A master-surface to master-surface formulation for beam to beam contact. Part II: Frictional interaction

Cited by 37 publications

References 23 publications

Frictional interactions for non‐localized beam‐to‐beam and beam‐inside‐beam contact

Frictional interactions for non‐localized beam‐to‐beam and beam‐inside‐beam contact

Numerical strategy for solving general C¹‐continuous beam‐to‐beam contact problems

Perspectives on the Master-Master Contact Formulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

A master-surface to master-surface formulation for beam to beam contact. Part II: Frictional interaction

Cited by 37 publications

References 23 publications

Frictional interactions for non‐localized beam‐to‐beam and beam‐inside‐beam contact

Frictional interactions for non‐localized beam‐to‐beam and beam‐inside‐beam contact

Numerical strategy for solving general C1‐continuous beam‐to‐beam contact problems

Perspectives on the Master-Master Contact Formulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Numerical strategy for solving general C¹‐continuous beam‐to‐beam contact problems