MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems Manual: Linear Analysis

MSC Nastran 2020

Service Pack 1

Demonstration Problems Manual

- Linear Analysis
Corporate Europe, Middle East, Africa
MSC Software Corporation MSC Software GmbH
4675 MacArthur Court, Suite 900 Am Moosfeld 13
Newport Beach, CA 92660 81829 Munich, Germany
Telephone: (714) 540-8900 Telephone: (49) 89 431 98 70
Toll Free Number: 1 855 672 7638 Email: [email protected]
Email: [email protected]

Japan Asia-Pacific
MSC Software Japan Ltd. MSC Software (S) Pte. Ltd.
Shinjuku First West 8F 100 Beach Road
23-7 Nishi Shinjuku #16-05 Shaw Tower
1-Chome, Shinjuku-Ku Singapore 189702
Tokyo 160-0023, JAPAN Telephone: 65-6272-0082
Telephone: (81) (3)-6911-1200 Email: [email protected]
Email: [email protected]

Worldwide Web
www.mscsoftware.com

Support
http://www.mscsoftware.com/Contents/Services/Technical-Support/Contact-Technical-Support.aspx

Disclaimer
MSC Software Corporation reserves the right to make changes in specifications and other information contained in this document
without prior notice.
The concepts, methods, and examples presented in this text are for illustrative and educational purposes only, and are not
intended to be exhaustive or to apply to any particular engineering problem or design. MSC Software Corporation assumes no
liability or responsibility to any person or company for direct or indirect damages resulting from the use of any information
contained herein.

User Documentation: Copyright  2020 MSC Software Corporation. Printed in U.S.A. All Rights Reserved.
This notice shall be marked on any reproduction of this documentation, in whole or in part. Any reproduction or distribution of this
document, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of MSC Software Corporation is prohibited.
This software may contain certain third-party software that is protected by copyright and licensed from MSC Software suppliers.
Additional terms and conditions and/or notices may apply for certain third party software. Such additional third party software terms
and conditions and/or notices may be set forth in documentation and/or at http://www.mscsoftware.com/thirdpartysoftware (or successor
website designated by MSC from time to time).
PCGLSS 8.0, Copyright © 1992-2016, Computational Applications and System Integration Inc. All rights reserved. PCGLSS 8.0 is
licensed from Computational Applications and System Integration Inc.
MSC, Dytran, Marc, MSC Nastran, Patran, the MSC Software corporate logo, e-Xstream, Digimat, and Simulating Reality are
trademarks or registered trademarks of the MSC Software Corporation and/or its subsidiaries in the United States and/or other
countries. Hexagon and the Hexagon logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries.
NASTRAN is a registered trademark of NASA. FLEXlm and FlexNet Publisher are trademarks or registered trademarks of Flexera
Software. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
Use, duplicate, or disclosure by the U.S. Government is subjected to restrictions as set forth in FAR 12.212 (Commercial Computer
Software) and DFARS 227.7202 (Commercial Computer Software and Commercial Computer Software Documentation), as
applicable.
U.S. Patent 9,361,413
July 24, 2020
NA:V2020SP1:Z:Z:Z:DC-DPM-PDF
 Contents
MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems Manual
Contents

Preface
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Typographical Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Feature Cross Reference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
List of MSC Nastran Books . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Technical Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Training and Internet Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1 Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic External

Superelement Optimization
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Model Setup. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Optimization Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Case A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Case B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Case C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Modeling Tips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Input File(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

2 Modal Analysis with Glued Contact

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Solution Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
FEM Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Modeling Tips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Input File(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Main Index
 ii MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems Manual

Video. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
SimXpert Example Video . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Patran Example Video . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

3 Beams: Composite Materials and Open Cross Sections

Summary - Composite Beam. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Solution Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
FEM Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Modeling Tips. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Input File(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Summary - VKI and VAM Beam Formulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Solution Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
FEM Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Input File(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

4 Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion

Summary - Beam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Solution Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Optimization Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Modeling Tips. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Summary - Torsion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Solution Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Optimization Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Modeling Tips. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Input File(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

5 Engine Mount Topology Optimization

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Solution Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
FEM Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Main Index
 iii

Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Modeling Tips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Input File(s). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

6 Wheel Topology Optimization

Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Solution Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
FEM Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Modeling Tips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Input File(s). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

7 Fluid-structure Interaction (FSI) Frequency Responses

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Model Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Modelling Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Input File(s). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

Main Index
 iv MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems Manual

Main Index
Documentation Feedback
At MSC Software, we strive to produce the highest quality documentation and welcome your feedback.
If you have comments or suggestions about our documentation, write to us at: documentation-
[email protected].
Please include the following information with your feedback:
 Document name
 Release/Version number
 Chapter/Section name
 Topic title (for Online Help)
 Brief description of the content (for example, incomplete/incorrect information, grammatical
errors, information that requires clarification or more details and so on).
 Your suggestions for correcting/improving documentation
You may also provide your feedback about MSC Software documentation by taking a short 5-minute
survey at: http://msc-documentation.questionpro.com.

Note: The above mentioned e-mail address is only for providing documentation specific
feedback. If you have any technical problems, issues, or queries, please contact Technical
Support.
 Preface

Preface

 Introduction 2

Typographical Conventions 2

Feature Cross Reference 3

List of MSC Nastran Books 4

Technical Support 5

Training and Internet Resources 5

Main Index
 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems 2
Preface

Introduction
This demonstration problems manual, written for those with a working knowledge of Nastran, highlights the steps
necessary to use the advanced features of the MSC Nastran 2014, including contact, elastic-plastic creep, elastomeric
material nonlinearities and heat transfer. The subsequent application examples focus on how to include these advanced
features by making relatively modest changes to existing MSC Nastran bulk data files using either a text editor or using a
pre- and post-processing program like SimXpert.
Every application example has a working input file(s) available to simulate the results found in each chapter, and upon
clicking its name, it will be downloaded into your browser to use. Once an understanding of how to invoke a new feature
has been reached, you are encouraged to experiment by changing some of the input parameters and rerunning the
application. Furthermore, as confidence grows, these models can serve as stepping stones to more complex simulations that
can help you better understand and improve your simulations.

Typographical Conventions
The section provides a brief overview of the typographical conventions used in the document to help the user better follow
the MSC Nastran documentation.
This section describes some syntax that will help you in understanding text in the various chapters and thus in facilitating
your learning process. It contains stylistic conventions to denote user action, to emphasize particular aspects of a MSC
Nastran run or to signal other differences within the text.

Courier New Represents command-line options of MSC Nastran and results from f04/f06 files.

Example: nast20200 memorymax=16gb myjob.dat

“Quoted Text” Represents command-line options of MSC Nastran for in-line text.

Example: memorymax=16gb
Arial Font To represent elements properties and GUI elements. It is also used to highlight
Interface elements in steps.

Example: RBE3 and RSPLINE are interpolation elements and are not rigid.
Red Text Represents items in the examples that we to emphasize.

Example: smp =16

Blue Text Represent cross-reference to elements within guides and elements of other guides.

Example: The nonlinear procedure (NLSTEP) is used.

Bold Text Represents items in the text that we want to emphasize.

Example: dmp =4
Italic Text Represents references to manuals/documents.
Model properties in example summary.
Equations used for analytical solutions.

Main Index
 3

Note: Since there is no user interface in MSC Nastran, we shall use bold font to emphasize.

Feature Cross Reference

The basic features in Table P-1 are cross referenced to each chapter for your convenience. Click the chapter number in the
table to go to the summary of that chapter.

Table P-1 Feature Cross Reference

Load
Ch. Sol Element Type(s) Material Loads/BC Contact Control
1 200 3-D Isotropic Elastic Point Load no
2 103 3-D Isotropic Elastic Glued Contact yes NLPARM
3 101 Beam Composites Point Load no
4 200 2-D, & 3-D Isotropic Elastic Point Load no
5 200 3-D Isotropic Elastic Point Load no
6 200 3-D Isotropic Elastic Point Load no

Main Index
 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems 4
Preface

List of MSC Nastran Books

A list of some of the MSC Nastran documents is as follows:.

Installation and Release Guides

 Installation and Operations Guide
 Release Guide
Reference Guides
 Quick Reference Guide
 DMAP Programmer’s Guide
 Reference Guide
 Utilities Guide
Demonstration Guides
 Linear Analysis
 Implicit Nonlinear (SOL 400)
 Explicit Nonlinear (SOL 700)
User’s Guides
 Getting Started
 Linear Static Analysis
 Dynamic Analysis
 Embedded Fatigue
 Embedded Vibration Fatigue
 Thermal Analysis
 Superelements and Modules
 Design Sensitivity and Optimization
 Rotordynamics
 Implicit Nonlinear (SOL 400)
 Explicit Nonlinear (SOL 700)
 Aeroelastic Analysis
 User Defined Services
 Non Linear (SOL 600)
 High Performance Computing
 DEMATD

Main Index
 5

You may find any of these documents from MSC Software at:
http://simcompanion.mscsoftware.com/infocenter/index?page=home

Technical Support
For technical support phone numbers and contact information, please visit:
http://www.mscsoftware.com/Contents/Services/Technical-Support/Contact-Technical-Support.aspx
Support Center (http://simcompanion.mscsoftware.com)

The SimCompanion link above gives you access to the wealth of resources for MSC Software products. Here you will find
product and support contact information, product documentations, knowledge base articles, product error list, knowledge
base articles and SimAcademy Webinars. It is a searchable database which allows you to find articles relevant to your
inquiry. Valid MSC customer entitlement and login is required to access the database and documents. It is a single sign-
on that gives you access to product documentation for complete list of products from MSC Software, allows you to manage
your support cases, and participate in our discussion forums.

Training and Internet Resources

MSC Software (www.mscsoftware.com)

MSC Software corporate site with information on the latest events, products and services for the CAD/CAE/CAM
marketplace.
http://simcompanion.mscsoftware.com

The SimCompanion link above gives you access to the wealth of resources for MSC Software products. Here you will find
product and support contact information, product documentations, knowledge base articles, product error list, knowledge
base articles and SimAcademy Webinars. It is a searchable database which allows you to find articles relevant to your
inquiry. Valid MSC customer entitlement and login is required to access the database and documents. It is a single sign-
on that gives you access to product documentation for complete list of products from MSC Software, allows you to manage
your support cases, and participate in our discussion forums.
http://www.mscsoftware.com/msc-training

The MSC-Training link above will point you to schedule and description of MSC Seminars. Following courses are
recommended for beginning Nastran users.
NAS101A - Linear Static and Normal Modes Analysis using MSC Nastran

This course serves as an introduction to finite element analysis. It includes discussion of basic features available in MSC
Nastran for solving structural engineering problems. In this course, all finite element models will be created and edited
using a text editor, not a graphical pre-processor. Proper data structure of the MSC Nastran input file is covered. At the
conclusion of seminar, the student will be familiar with fundamental usage of MSC Nastran.

Main Index
 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems 6
Preface

NAS101B - Advanced Linear Analysis using MSC Nastran

This course is a continuation of NAS101A - Linear Static and Normal Modes Analysis using MSC Nastran. In this class,
you will learn: Theory of buckling analysis and how to perform a buckling analysis About rigid elements - MPC,
RBAR,RBE2, and RBE3 Modeling with interface element CINTC and connectors Lamination theory and composite
materials MSC Nastran composite theory Failure theories Linear contact and permanent glued contact Different model
checks Modeling tips and tricks
NAS120 - Linear Static Analysis using MSC Nastran and Patran

This seminar introduces basic finite element analysis techniques for linear static, normal modes, and buckling analysis of
structures using MSC Nastran and Patran. MSC Nastran data structure, the element library, modeling practices, model
validation, and guidelines for efficient solutions are discussed and illustrated with examples and workshops. Patran will be
an integral part of the examples and workshops and will be used to generate and verify illustrative MSC Nastran models,
manage analysis submission requests, and visualize results. This seminar provides the foundation required for intermediate
and advanced MSC Nastran applications.

Main Index
 Chapter 1: Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic External Superelement
Optimization

Rapid Road Response

Optimization of a Camaro
1 Model using Automatic
External Superelement
Optimization

Summary 8

Introduction 9

Optimization Solutions 10

Results 16

Modeling Tips 16
 Input File(s) 17

Main Index
 CHAPTER 1 8
Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic External Superelement Optimization

Summary

Title Chapter 1: Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic
External Superelement Optimization, AESO
Features • Grids 23K
• Total degrees of freedom 137K
• Degrees of freedom in residual 7K
• Elements 37K
• Subcases 2
• Frequencies 3
Geometry

Material properties Mild Steel (E = 2x107 Psi, nu = 0.28, rho = 7.835x10-5 lbf-s2/in4)
Analysis type Modal/Direct Frequency Analysis
Boundary conditions See the asm file, aeso9.asm, containing boundary connection data
Element type CQUAD4, CTRIA3, CROD
Loads Random inputs applied on left and right suspension, including cross-correlation (see
Figure 1-2)
FE results
5 .0 E -0 3

4 .0 E -0 3
S um m ed A c c e le ra tio

3 .0 E -0 3
S UM Ini t
S um final
2 .0 E -0 3

1 .0 E -0 3

0 .0 E +0 0
4 6 8 10 12 14
F re qu e nc y (H z )

Main Index
 9 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 1

Introduction
The purpose of the example is to illustrate how to run an Automatic External Superelement Optimization, AESO, job and
to demonstrate significant performance gain can be achieved with AESO. Learn more about the capability, consult MSC
Nastran Design Sensitivity and Optimization User’s Guide. It is assumed that the reader is experienced in performing
modal frequency analysis. The discussion of the analysis modeling is kept to minimum.
The Camaro model is provided by General Motor Corp (Figure 1-1). Random inputs are applied on left and right
suspension, including cross-correlation (Figure 1-2). The road response optimization task is solved by varying spring
constants of the engine mount to achieve maximum ride comfort. Both a regular (or a single shot) optimization run and
an AESO run are performed. The efficiency and accuracy of the solutions are compared between two approaches.

Figure 1-1 Camaro Model

1.60E-02

1.20E-02
Input Spectra

LEFT SUSP
8.00E-03
RIGHT SUSP
REAL L/R
4.00E-03
IMAG L/R

0.00E+00
4 6 8 10 12 14
-4.00E-03
Frequency

Figure 1-2 Input Load Power Spectra

Main Index
 CHAPTER 1 10
Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic External Superelement Optimization

Model Setup
The task will be solved in three design scenarios that are described in detail in the Optimization Solution section. Each of
three cases is solved by a single run approach and the AESO run approach. Then, the results and performance data are
compared between two approaches. It has been observed that the single shot run may fail without any appropriate
diagnostic error message in the log file when design cycle is greater than 1 due to some modeling issue. However, this
behavior does not show up in the AESO runs. In this document, the results from good single shot runs will be presented
but the input file is not included.
The AESO approach should demonstrate that
 Accurate and very efficient solution can be obtained
 The reduced model allows to perform re-analyses and/or optimization tasks many times rapidly
 Much larger performance gain is achieved with Analysis=DFREQ

Optimization Solutions

Case A
This design case is to minimize the sum of RMS acceleration at driver’s seat and passenger’s seat while limiting the PSD
response at steering column by varying nine spring constants of the engine mount. Listing 1 shows the required design
model set up for Case A.

Main Index
 11 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 1

Listing 1 Design model set up for Case A

...
DESOBJ = 1020
DESSUB = 101
...
BEGIN BULK
$ design model set up
DESVAR 11 K5307 1.0 0.01 3.0
......
DESVAR 24 K5018 1.0 0.01 3.0
DVCREL1 5307 CELAS2 5307 K
11 1246.3
......
DVCREL1 5018 CELAS2 5018 K
24 1120.
FREQ1 4 6.0 0.1 60
$ LHS - Acceleration at Driver's seat
DRESP1 1033 ACC1033 RMSaccl 3 620 1033
$ RHS - Acceleration at Passenger's seat
DRESP1 2033 ACC2033 RMSaccl 3 620 2033
$
$ sum of RMS accelerations at Driver's and Passenger's seats
DRESP2 1020 sumrms 1020
dresp1 1033 2033
DEQATN 1020 object(driver,pass) = driver + pass
$
DRESP1 9105 ACC9005 PSDACCL 620 3 MAX 9005
DCONSTR 101 9105 2.5e-3
DOPTPRM DESMAX 20 P1 1 P2 15 conv1 5.e-3
Each AESO job requires two separate runs: an AESO creation run and an AESO assembly run.
To activate an AESO creation run, you need to add the following user input to a regular optimization job (bold face in
Listing 2): 1) an FMS ASSIGN statement that specifies the file name for the assembly run that will be generated from the
AESO creation run and 2) a keyword on DOPTPRM entry, autose = 1 that activates an AESO creation run.

Listing 2 Required user inputs for activating AESO creation run

assign aeso='test9_2.dat'
.....
begin bulk
doptprm desmax 5 p1 1 P2 15
delx 0.2 delp 0.8 autose 1

After the creation run is complete, search for the user information message 9181 in the f06 file that indicates a successful
run.

Main Index
 CHAPTER 1 12
Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic External Superelement Optimization

^^^
^^^ USER INFORMATION MESSAGE 9181 (FEA)
^^^ THE JOB IS TERMINATED FOR AN AUTO EXTERNAL CREATION RUN
^^^

The input file for the assembly run (aeso9_2.dat) is automatically generated from the creation run. Its Bulk Data section
contains the residual model (or the design model) while the Control Section is the identical copy from the original
optimization job. Some special contents in an assembly run are shown in bold face in Listing 3. The FMS ASSIGN statement
references the Nastran Master database file and the DBLOCATEstatement identifies the data block that contains various
boundary matrices. The INCLUDE statement includes an assembly file that include boundary connection data. Notice that
the AUTOSE = 1 request on the DOPTPRM entry added for the creation run has been changed to AUTOSE = 0.

Listing 3 Special contents in an assembly file

nastran buffsize= 65537
nastran rseqcont=1
assign se1= './test9.MASTER'
dblocate datablk(EXTDB) logical=se1, CONVERT(SEID=1)
SOL 200
CEND
......
BEGIN BULK
include './test9.asm'
DOPTPRM DESMAX 5 P1 1 P2 15
DELX 0.2 DELP 0.8 AUTOSE 0

Figure 1-3 shows that the sum of RMS is reduced from the initial value of 0.154 to the final of 0.130 by the road response
optimization. Table 1-1 compares the accuracy of the results and performance in terms of Clock time between the regular
approach and the AESO approach and clearly shows that the AESO is able to obtain the same final design but with one
fifth of the time spent by a single shot run.

Main Index
 13 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 1

5.0E -0 3

4.0E -0 3

S u m m ed A cce leratio
3.0E -0 3
S UM Ini t
S um fi nal
2.0E -0 3

1.0E -0 3

0.0E +0 0
4 6 8 10 12 14
F re q u en cy (H z )

Figure 1-3 Sum of RMS Reduced from 0.154 to 0.130

Table 1-1 Results and Performance Data for Case A

Init. Max Init. Max # Design Clock Time
Case A Initial OBJ Final OBJ Const Const Cycle (Minute)
Single Shot Run 0.1534 0.0639 0.1329 -0.2102 9 37

AESO Creation 5
Run
AESO Assembly 0.1534 0.0639 0.1319 -0.2102 9 1
Run
ASEO Total 6

Performance 6
Ratio

Main Index
 CHAPTER 1 14
Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic External Superelement Optimization

Case B
This case minimizes the RMS acceleration at Driver’s seat and maintains frequency dependent limits on PSD acceleration
at driver’s seat by varying nine spring constants of the engine mount. Listing 4 shows the required design model set up for
Case B.

Listing 4 Design Model Set up for Case B

...
DESPBJ = 1033
DESSUB = 101
...
BEGIN BULK
$ design model set up

$ Desin model set up

$
DESVAR 11 K5307 1.0 0.01 3.0
......
DESVAR 24 K5018 1.0 0.01 3.0
DVCREL1 5307 CELAS2 5307 K
11 1246.3
......
DVCREL1 5018 CELAS2 5018 K
24 1120.
$ LHS - Driver's seat to floor (Response for Objective to be minimized)
DRESP1 1033 ACC1033 RMSaccl 3 620 1033
DRESP1 1133 ACC1033 PSDACCL 620 3 1033
DCONSTR 101 1133 1133
DOPTPRM DESMAX 20 P1 1 P2 15 conv1 5.e-3
TABLED1 1133
0.0 1.0e03 6.0 1.0e-3 7.0 1.7e-3 8.0 1.7e-3
12.0 2.0e-4 endt

Notice that in Case B, the design objective now is to minimize an RMS acceleration at Driver's seat while limiting
maintaining the frequency dependent limits on the PSD acceleration at Driver seat. The rest of the analysis model is kept
the same. Therefore, the outputs from the creation run for Case A can be reused here except replacing the objective and
constraints for Case A (Listing 1) with that for Case B formulation (Listing 4).
Figure 1-4 shows that the RMS acceleration at Driver's seat is reduced from the initial of 0.071 to the final of 0.058. Table 1-2
compares the accuracy of the results and performance dat between the regular approach and the AESO approach. Again,
AESO achieves the same final design as the single shot run. Since no creation run is required because it can reuse the results
from the Case A's creation run, the speed up by the AESO run vs. a single shot run for Case B is a factor of 33.

Main Index
 15 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 1

3.0E-03
P a s s e n g e r A c c e l e ra

2.5E-03

2.0E-03
2033 Init
1.5E-03
2033 Final
1.0E-03

5.0E-04

0.0E+00
4 6 8 10 12 14
Frequency (Hz)

Figure 1-4 RMS Reduced from 0.071 to 0.058

Table 1-2 Results and Performance Data for Case B

Init. Max Final Max # Design Clock Time
Case B Initial OBJ Final OBJ Const Const Cycle (Minute)
Single Shot Run 0.0713 0.0586 0.2855 -0.0025 14 33

AESO Creation 0
Run
AESO Assembly 0.0713 0.0584 0.2855 -0.0201 9 1
Run
ASEO Total 1

Performance 33
Ratio

Case C
This case is exactly the same as Case A except the frequency response is solved by the Direct Frequency Analysis Solver.
Specifically, the ANALYSIS (Case)=MFREQ Case Control command in Case A is replaces by ANALYSIS (Case)=DFREQ
command in Case C.

Main Index
 CHAPTER 1 16
Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic External Superelement Optimization

Therefore, the same discussions presented for Case A can be directly applied here. Table 3 compares the results and
performance data between a single shot run and shows the relationship to Case C. Again, the final design from AESO agrees
well with that from a single shot run. However, the performance gain by AESO is a factor of 40.
In fact, the assembly run could be run directly by assessing the database file and asm file and the assembly run file generated
from the creation run for Case A since these files are identical if ANALYSIS=MFREQ or ANALYSIS=DFREQ. Therefore, the
performance gain would be a factor of 244 (i.e. 244=244/1) assuming the time spent by the assembly run for Case B is still
five minutes.

Table 1-3 Results and Performance Data for Case C

Init. Max Init. Max # Design Clock Time
Case A Initial OBJ Final OBJ Const Const Cycle (Minute)
Single Shot Run 0.1535 0.1327 -0.0631 -0.2073 9 244

AESO Creation 5
Run
AESO Assembly 0.1534 0.1327 -0.0636 -0.2062 9 1
Run
ASEO Total 6

Performance 40
Ratio

Results
Figure 1-3 and Figure 1-4 are the results of the sum of RMS Reduced for Case A and Case B respectively.
Table 1-1 list the results and performance data for CaseA.
Table 1-2 list the results and performance data for Case B.
Table 1-3 list the results and performance data for Case C.

Modeling Tips
This section provides some guideline or modeling tips for performing AESO tasks:
 Only database option is supported in AESO. No op2 or punch option is supported.
 The nondesigned part is treated as a single part component and can not be further partitioned.
 The performance gain achieved by an AESO job depends on the size of the analysis model, the ratio of the design
model size vs. the analysis model size and number of boundary points shared by designed part and nondesigned
part. A general rule of thumb is that the relative ratio should be less than 10%. The smaller the ratio, the more
performance gain can be achieved.

Main Index
 17 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 1

 The UIM 7824 from the creation run lists the size of your analysis model and design model (in terms of number
of the grid points). DRATIO may be adjusted for a larger or smaller residual model.

 Submit the AESO creation run with SCR=NO option to store the Nastran database. An assembly run does not
require that option.
 It is recommended to use Matrix domain based domain decomposition (domain solver acms(partopt=dof) for
large scale normal modes or model frequency tasks, say the total number of degrees of freedom is half million or
higher.
 ASSIGN AESO=’fn’ is required in the creation to define a file name of the assembly file. Directly assigning the
original job name to filename should be avoided. A good practice is to add some suffix to the original file name
such as myjob_2nd.dat where myjob is the original file name.
 General guidelines or limitations to the manual External Superelement analysis also apply to AESO.
 Refer to the MSC Nastran Release Guide for more guidelines and limitations.

Input File(s)
Case A

File Description
nug_29.dat Minimize the sum of RMS acceleration at the driver's seat and passenger's
seat while limiting the PSD response at steering column by varying nine
spring constants of the engine mount. The Modal Frequency Response
Analysis is performed using ANALYSIS=MFREQ in the Case Control
Command.

Case B

File Description
nug_29b.dat Minimizes the RMS acceleration at Driver's seat and maintains frequency
dependent limits on PSD acceleration at driver's seat by varying nine spring
constants of the engine mount. The Modal Frequency Response Analysis is
performed using ANALYSIS=MFREQ in the Case Control Command.

Main Index
 CHAPTER 1 18
Rapid Road Response Optimization of a Camaro Model using Automatic External Superelement Optimization

Case C

File Description
nug_29c.dat Exactly the same as Case A except the Direct frequency Analysis Solver is
utilized. Specifically, the ANALYSIS=MFREQ Case Control command in
Case A is replaced by ANALYSIS=DFREQ command in Case C.

Main Index
 19 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 1

Main Index
 Chapter 2: Modal Analysis with Glued Contact

2 Modal Analysis with

Glued Contact


Summary 21

Introduction 22
 Solution Requirements 22
 FEM Solutions 22

Results 24

Modeling Tips 27

Input File(s) 27
 Video 27

Main Index
 21 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 2

Summary

Title Chapter 2: Modal Analysis with Glued Contact

Contact features • Glued Contact between two bodies with dissimilar meshes
• Stress Free Projection
• Contact tolerance bias factor = 0.0
Geometry • Shroud outside diameter = 0.46 m t

• Hub diameter = 0.26 m

• Width = 0.12 m d2 d1

• Shroud thickness = 0.02 m

w

9
Material properties E = 210 10 Pa ,  = 0.3 ,  = 7850kg  m 3
Linear elastic material
Analysis type Modal analysis using SOL 103
Boundary conditions • Free-Free
• Glued contact between vanes and shroud
Applied loads None
Element type • 8-node hexahedral elements
• 10-node tetrahedral elements
FE results Natural frequencies and mode shapes

Mode Shape 7 @ 1,130 Hz Mode Shape 8 @ 1,131 Hz

Mode Shape 9 @ 1,168 Hz Mode Shape 10 @1,774 Hz

Main Index
 CHAPTER 2 22
Modal Analysis with Glued Contact

Introduction
The shrouded vanes shown in Figure 2-1, consisting of twelve vanes with a central hub and an outer shroud, uses contact to
join dissimilar meshes during a modal analysis. The hub and vanes contain higher-order tetrahedral elements while the
shroud has linear hexahedral elements. The glued contact parameters preclude separation after initial contact and change
the original coordinates of the nodes in contact to insure stress free contact between the dissimilar meshes.

Figure 2-1 Shrouded Vanes Model

Solution Requirements
The modal analysis assumes free-free boundary conditions and returns ten natural frequencies and their associated mode
shapes of which the lowest six correspond to rigid body motion.

FEM Solutions
An eigenvalue analysis has been performed with MSC Nastran’s SOL 103 for the element mesh shown in Figure 2-2. The
vanes and the hub are modeled using higher order tetrahedral elements while the shroud is modeled using linear hexahedral
elements. Both using BCBODY and BSURF entries. Contact body ID 1 is identified as all the elements making the vanes and
hub whereas contact body ID 2 is identified as the elements making the shroud respectively as:
BCBODY 1 3D DEFORM 1 0
BSURF 1 10000 10001 10002 10003 10004 10005 10006
...
and
BCBODY 2 3D DEFORM 2 0
BSURF 2 100000 100001 100002 100003 100004 100005 100006
...

Main Index
 23 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 2

Figure 2-2 FEA Mesh for the Shrouded Vanes Model

The BCTABLE - Glued Option entries shown below identify that these bodies are glued to each other:
BCTABLE 0 1
SLAVE 2 0. 0. 0. 0. 1
1 1 0
MASTERS 1
BCTABLE 1 1
SLAVE 2 0. 0. 0. 0. 1
1 1 0
MASTERS 1
The BCTABLE option shows that contact body ID 2, the shroud, has been selected as the touching body, the SLAVE,
whereas contact body ID 1, the vanes, has been selected as the touched body, the MASTERS. This selection is due to the
fact the average element size for the vanes in the contact area is slightly larger than that of the shroud as shown in Figure 2-3.
The IGLUE parameter of the BCTABLE option activates the glue option. The JGLUE parameter is turned off to ensure
that no nodes separate once in contact. Additionally, the ICOORD parameter is turned on to modify the coordinates of the
nodes in contact to ensure stress-free initial contact.
The BCPARA entries activate the quadratic contact option and indicate that a bias factor of 0 (actually a small nonzero
number of 1 x 10-16) has been selected:
BCPARA 0 NBODIES 2 MAXENT 13824 MAXNOD 18348
IBSEP 2 BIAS 1.-16

Main Index
 CHAPTER 2 24
Modal Analysis with Glued Contact

Figure 2-3 Relative Element Size Between the Shroud and Vanes in the Contact Area

The vanes and the shroud are both modeled using the same material. The material properties are isotropic and elastic with
Young’s modulus, Poisson’s ratio, and density defined with MATBV as
$ Referenced Material Records
$ Material Record : inner_mat
$ Description of Material :
MAT1 1 2.1+11 .3 7.85+3
$ Material Record : outer_mat
$ Description of Material :
MAT1 2 2.1+11 .3 7.85+3

The Lanczos procedure is selected for the real eigenvalue problem using the METHOD (Case) and EIGRL entries in which ten
modes are desired:
METHOD=13
...
EIGRL,13,,,10

Results
The obtained modes are listed in Table 2-1. The first six modes are rigid body modes. Mode shapes 7 to 10 are shown in
Figure 2-4.

Table 2-1 Obtained Modes and Frequencies

Mode Frequency (Hz)
1 6.911939E-04
2 6.290693E-04
3 4.908829E-04
4 4.434468E-04

Main Index
 25 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 2

Table 2-1 Obtained Modes and Frequencies (continued)

Mode Frequency (Hz)
5 2.943299E-04
6 7.051053E-05
7 1.130332E+03
8 1.131441E+03
9 1.168441E+03
10 1.774218E+03

Mode Shape 7 @ 1,130 Hz Mode Shape 8 @ 1,131 Hz

Mode Shape 9 @ 1,168 Hz Mode Shape 10 @1,774 Hz

Figure 2-4 Mode Shapes and Corresponding Frequencies

Main Index
 CHAPTER 2 26
Modal Analysis with Glued Contact

To check the efficacy of gluing dissimilar messes on natural frequencies, Test 53 (Selected Benchmarks for Natural
Frequency Analysis, Abbassian, F, Dawswell, D J, and Knowles, N C, NAFEMS Ref R0015, 1987) was performed on glued
mesh below.

Title Simply-Supported Solid Annular Plate, Axisymmetric Vibration

Contact features Glued Contact between two bodies with dissimilar meshes
Stress Free Projection
Geometry and Mesh

Geometry A θ
R
A

o
Z α = 10

4.2 m
0.6 m

1.6 m

Gluing
Surface
Mesh
9
Material properties E = 200 10 Pa ,  = 0.3 ,  = 8000kg  m 3
Linear elastic material
Analysis type Modal analysis using SOL 103
Boundary conditions u = 0 for all nodes on axial planes of symmetry. uz = 0 along section AA
Element type 10-node tetrahedral elements, 20-node hexahedral elements
FE results

fref = 18.583 Hz fref = 140.15 Hz fref = 224.16 Hz

fMD = 18.666 Hz fMD = 140.03 Hz fMD = 224.56 Hz

z z r

R R R
Flexural Flexural Extensional
Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3

fref = 358.29 Hz fref = 629.19 Hz

fMD = 362.71 Hz fMD = 658.97 Hz

z z

R R

Flexural Flexural
Mode 4 Mode 5

Main Index
 27 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 2

Modeling Tips
Glued contact with no separation ensures that nodes do not separate once in contact. Stress-free initial contact modifies
the coordinates of the nodes in contact to close any gaps between the two bodies. Quadratic contact allows midside nodes
to participate in the glued contact. Insuring that the dissimilar meshes join properly requires there are no artificial stresses
induced by nodes slightly off the contact surface, and the displacement field is completely continuous across the contact
surface.
This technique of “gluing” dissimilar meshes together facilitates faster model building by not requiring the meshes to be
contiguous across all nodes. Furthermore, as in this application example, joining different element types assists modeling
flexibility.

Input File(s)

File Description
nug_25_1.dat Linear Hexahedral and Parabolic Tetrahedral Elements
nug_25_2.dat Glued Annular Plates NAFEMS Test #53

Video

SimXpert Example Video

Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately two minutes and explains how the
steps are performed.

Figure 2-5 Video of the Above Steps

Main Index
 CHAPTER 2 28
Modal Analysis with Glued Contact

Patran Example Video

Click on the link below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately two minutes and explains how the
steps are performed.

Figure 2-6 Video of the Above Steps

Main Index
 29 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 2

Main Index
 Chapter 3: Beams: Composite Materials and Open Cross Sectionss

Beams: Composite
3 Materials and Open Cross
Sections


Summary - Composite Beam 31

Introduction 32

Solution Requirements 32

FEM Solution 34
 Modeling Tips 35

Input File(s) 35

Summary - VKI and VAM Beam Formulations 35

Introduction 36
 Solution Requirements 36
 FEM Solution 37

Input File(s) 39

Main Index
 31 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 3

Summary - Composite Beam

Title Chapter 3: Composite Beam
Geometry Straight Cantilever Beam with load (Fy or Fz) applied at Free-End
Y, Ye
Fy

Fz

Z, Ze X, Xe
Element coordinate (Xe, Ye, Ze) coincides with Basic Coordinate (X,Y,Z)

Material properties • Linear elastic orthotropic material using MAT8

• Assumptions: E33 = 0.8E22; E13= E23= E12
• Theta on PCOMP/PCOMPG specifies the angle between X-axis of material coordinate
and X-axis of element coordinate.
Analysis type Linear static analysis
Boundary conditions Cantilever configuration
Applied loads Bending
Element type CBEAM3
FE results • Converted PBEAM3 from PBMSECT
• Stress recovery - screened based on max failure index
• bdf file for FE mesh of cross section shown here

X Y

Main Index
 CHAPTER 3 32
Beams: Composite Materials and Open Cross Sections

Introduction
Composite materials have found increasing applications in many applications and slender structures like rotor blades or
high-aspect-ratio wings may be modeled in one-dimension as a 1-D beam provided the complex cross sectional properties
(ultimately represented as a 2-D finite element mesh) can be captured properly. Here, a new way for composite beam
analysis is introduced. The Variational Asymptotic Method (VAM) computes the properties of a beam’s arbitrary cross
section containing composite materials. VAM, the mathematical basis of VABS, splits a general 3-D nonlinear elasticity
problem for a beam-like structure into a two-dimensional (2-D) linear cross-sectional analysis and a 1-D nonlinear beam
analysis. For details on VAM, refer to Yu, W., Volovoi, V., Hodges, D. and Hong, X. “Validation of the Variational
Asymptotic Beam Sectional Analysis (VABS)”, AIAA Journal, Vol. 40, No. 10, 2002 (available at
http://www.ae.gatech.edu/people/dhodges/papers/AIAAJ2002.pdf). VAM’s key benefit lies in the ability to model a beam
made of composite material with only 1-D elements, namely CBEAM3.

Solution Requirements
In general, the solution requires the layup of composite material MAT8 and the description of this general or arbitrary cross
section. PCOMP entries are used to provide the composite layup and PBMSECT entry is utilized to describe the profile of cross
section and the link to the composite layup via PCOMP. An example is shown as follows:

$
$ Composite case
PBMSECT 32 1 OP 0.015
OUTP=101,C=101,brp=103,c(1)=[201,pt=(15,34)]
pcomp 101 -0.1 5000. hill 0.0
501 0.05 0.0 501 0.05 90.0
501 0.05 -45.0 501 0.05 45.0
501 0.05 0.0
pcomp 201 5000. tsai 0.0 SYM
501 0.05 -45.0 501 0.05 45.0
501 0.05 0.0
$MAT1 501 3.6 .3
mat8,501,2.0e7,2.0e6,.35,1.0e6,1.0e6,1.0e6,0.0,+
+,0.0,0.0,0.0,2.3e5, 1.95e5, 13000., 32000., 12000.

The theta field on PCOMP is utilized to specify the angle between the X-axis of the material coordinate and the X-axis of
the element coordinate. A cutout of the FEM mesh at the intersect of OUTP=101 and BRP=103 illustrates the ply layup
shown in Figure 3-1.

Main Index
 33 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 3

PCOMP 201 -45, 45, 0, 0, 45, -45

X Y P
0 C
45 O
-45 M
P
90 1
P 0 0
C 0
O 45 1
M -45
P
90
1
0 0
1
Figure 3-1 Intersection of Ply Layups 101 and 201

Main Index
 CHAPTER 3 34
Beams: Composite Materials and Open Cross Sections

FEM Solution
The converted PBEAM3 for PBMSECT,32 is as follows:

*** USER INFORMATION MESSAGE 4379 (IFP9B)

THE USER SUPPLIED PBMSECT BULK DATA ENTRIES ARE REPLACED BY THE FOLLOWING PBEAM3 ENTRIES.
CONVERSION METHOD FOR PBARL/PBEAML - .
PBEAM3 32 0 4.7202E+00 8.3059E+01 2.9578E+01 -1.5664E+01 3.2316E+01 0.0000E+00
1.8014E+01 4.2136E+00 1.7100E+01 -2.7858E+00 3.8881E+00 -3.5404E+00 4.7202E+00 2.6994E+00
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00
1.2253E+08 -2.1160E+05 8.1193E+04 -2.4761E+06 -3.7193E+06 7.9049E+06 -2.1160E+05 2.1792E+06
-1.7859E+06 1.9780E+07 5,4643E+05 -3.5845E+05 8.1193E+04 -1.7859E+06 2.7228E+07 1.7190E+07
2.9835E+04 2.1407E+06 -2.4761E+06 1.9780E+07 1.7190E+07 2.2332E+08 5.8182E+06 -1.2186E+06
-3.7193E+06 5.4643E+05 2.9835E+04 5.8182E+06 2.1349E+09 -4.0706E+08 8.9040E+06 -3.5845E+05
2.1407E+06 -1.2186E+06 -4.0706E+08 7.5602E+08

Note that the MID field of above PBEAM3 has value of 0 which is a flag for using the Timoshenko 6 x 6 matrix stored from
the seventh line of PBEAM3. Timoshenko 6 x 6 matrix includes cross sectional and material properties. The cross-sectional
shape and the FE mesh is shown in Figure 3-2. The coordinate shown in the figure matches with element coordinate.

X Y

Figure 3-2 Cross-sectional Shape and the Corresponding FE Mesh

Full cross sectional stress recovery can be performed with PARAM,ARBMSS,YES in bulk data and FORCE (Case) =setid in
case control. The stresses screened based on maximum failure index is shown as follows:

Main Index
 35 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 3

1 VAB ALGORITHM USING CORE OF PBMSECT MARCH 6, 2007 MSC Nastran 3/ 6/07 PAGE 14
TRANSVERSE TIP LOAD
0 SUBCASE 1

S T R E S S E S I N L A Y E R E D C O M P O S I T E E L E M E N T S ( BEAM3 )

ELEMENT GRID PLY D I R E C T S T R E S S E S FAILURE MAXIMUM STRENGTH

ID ID ID NORMAL-1 NORMAL-2 NORMAL-3 SHEAR-12 SHEAR-23 SHEAR-13 THEORY FAIL. INDEX RATIO
FLAG
2 302 2 2.468E+01 1.601E+01 2.670E+00 2.323E+01 4.991E-01 3.724E+00 TSIA-WU 7.161E-04 4.035E+02
102 2 1.685E+01 1.619E+01 -7.230E-01 1.993E+01 -1.377E-01 -5.572E-01 TSAI-WU 7.258E-04 4.470E+02
1301 2 1.588E+01 1.594E+01 -7.167E-01 1.938e+-1 -1.162e-01 -5.280e-01 TSAI-WU 7.193E-04 4.569E+02

Modeling Tips
CBEAM3 is considered a straight beam if PID points to PBMSECT, ID. The third point is ignored during the formation of
element matrices. During data recovery, the stresses for the third point are computed based on the forces recovered which
may not be correct.
PARAM,ARBMSTYP,TIMOSHEN must be present to access VAM for composite beam.

Input File(s)

File Description
Vabcore1.dat Composite beam with MAT1.

Summary - VKI and VAM Beam Formulations

Title Chapter 33: VKI and VAM Beam Formulations

Geometry Straight Cantilever Beam with load (Fy or Fz) applied at Free-End
Y, Ye
Fy 0.04
Z

X Y 0.5

Fz 1.0

Z, Ze X, Xe
Element coordinate (Xe, Ye, Ze) coincides with Basic Coordinate (X,Y,Z)

Material properties Linear elastic isotropic material

Analysis type Linear static analysis
Boundary conditions Cantilever configuration

Main Index
 CHAPTER 3 36
Beams: Composite Materials and Open Cross Sections

Applied loads Bending load with forces applied at free end

Element type CBEAM, CBEAM3
FE results • Converted PBEAM/PBEAM3 from PBMSECT
• bdf file for FE mesh of cross section
• Stress recovery - screened based on max failure index

X Y

Results Isotropic with VKI Isotropic with Composite with

VAM MAT1 using VAM

Disp at free end 49.987 49.974 49.977

Smax at fixed end 74974 74956 75351

Introduction
In MSC Nastran, there are two formulations to compute sectional properties. Both formulations use the finite element
method. The first one is named after its third party vender, VKI, which solves a series of equations (see documentation of
PBMSECT in Quick Look Guide) to obtain sectional properties. The other formulation is Variational Asymptotic Method
(VAM), see attached for details on VAM Theory. While VKI formulation is for isotropic material only, VAM is capable to
compute beam sectional properties for isotropic and composite material.

Solution Requirements
PBMSECT bulk data entry is utilized to describe the shape of I section and PARAM,ARBMSTYP is used to control the
selection of formulation. Note that default value for PARAM,ARBMSTYP select VKI formulation to compute sectional
properties of arbitrary cross section with isotropic material. However, PARAM,ARBMSTYP,TIMISHEN must be present in
the bulk data section if PBMSECT entry with Core and/or Layer keywords exists in the file.

Main Index
 37 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 3

$ to select VAM
PARAM,ARBMSTYPE,TIMOSHEN
.
$.......2.......3.......4.......5.......6.......7.......8.......9.......10.....
$ Section profile
$
$ 1 -- 2 -- 3
|
|
$ 4 -- 5 -- 5
$
point 1 -0.50 0.23
point 2 0.00 0.23
point 3 0.50 0.23
point 4 -0.50 -0.23
point 5 0.00 -0.23
point 6 0.50 -0.23
$
$.......2.......3.......4.......5.......6.......7.......8.......9.......10.....
SET1 101 1 2 5 6
SET1 201 2 3
SET1 102 5 4
$
$ Ply properties
$.......2.......3.......4.......5.......6.......7.......8.......9.......10.....
$MAT8 501 20.59e6 1.42e6 0.42 0.89e6 0.89e6 0.89e6
$MAT1 501 1.+7 .3
$
$ isotropic case using T keyword
PBMSECT 31 1 OP +
OUTP=101,t=0.04,BRP(1)=201,BRP(3)=102
$
$ isotropic case using C and MAT1
PBMSECT 32 OP +
OUTP=101,CORE=301,CORE(1)=[101,PT=(1,2)],CORE(2)=[202,PT=(5,6)],+
BRP(1)=201,CORE(3)=[201,PT=(2,3)], +
BRP(3)=102,CORE(3)=[102,PT=(5,4)]

FEM Solution
The converted BEAM for PBMSECT,31 from VKI is as follows:

*** USER INFORMATION MESSAGE 4379 (IFP9A)

THE USER SUPPLIED PBEAML/PBMSECT BULK DATA ENTRIES ARE REPLACED BY THE FOLLOWING PBEAM ENTRIES.
CONVERSION METHOD FOR PBARL/PBEAML - FINITE ELEMENT METHOD.
PBEAM3 31 1 9.6800E-02 4.4896E-03 6.6689E-03 -8.0299E-19 5.2448E-05 0.0000E+00
2.5000E-01 5.0000E-01 2.5000E-01 -5.0000E-01 -2.5000E-01 -5.0000E-01 -2.5000E-01 5.0000E-01
1.5197E-01 6.9769E-01 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 3.6170E-04 3.6170E-04
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 4.1043E-11 7.5134E-10 4.1043E-11 7.5134E-10

Main Index
 CHAPTER 3 38
Beams: Composite Materials and Open Cross Sections

The converted BEAM/PBEAM3 for PBMSECT,31 and 32 from VAM is as follows:

*** USER INFORMATION MESSAGE 4379 (IFP9A)

THE USER SUPPLIED PBEAML/PBMSECT BULK DATA ENTRIES ARE REPLACED BY THE FOLLOWING PBEAM ENTRIES.
CONVERSION METHOD FOR PBARL/PBEAML - FINITE ELEMENT METHOD.
PBEAM3 31 1 9.6800E-02 4.4902E-03 6.6696E-03 0.0000E+00 5.5566E-05 0.0000E+00
2.5000E-01 5.0000E-01 2.5000E-01 -5.0000E-01 -2.5000E-01 -5.0000E-01 -2.5000E-01 5.0000E-01
1.5346E-01 7.0201E-01 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 3.5121E-04 3.4121E-04
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00
*** USER INFORMATION MESSAGE 4379 (IFP9B)
THE USER SUPPLIED PBMSECT BULK DATA ENTRIES ARE REPLACED BY THE FOLLOWING PBEAM3 ENTRIES.
CONVERSION METHOD FOR PBARL/PBEAML - .
PBEAM3 32 0 9.6800E-02 4.4902E-03 6.6696E-03 0.0000E+00 5.5566E-05 0.0000E+00
2.5000E-01 5.0000E-01 2.5000E-01 -5.0000E-01 -2.5000E-01 -5.0000E-01 -2.5000E-01 5.0000E-01
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00
9.6800E+05 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 2.6041E+05
-5.9944E-04 1.5708E-04 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 -5.9944E-04 5.6910E+04 -7.1497E-05
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 4.4898E+04 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00
0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 0.0000E+00 6.6693E+04

Note that the MID field of above PBEAM3 has value of 0 which is a flag for using the Timoshenko 6 x 6 matrix stored from
the seventh line of PBEAM3. Timoshenko 6 x 6 matrix includes cross-sectional and material properties. The cross-sectional
shape and the FE mesh is shown in the following Figure 3-3:

X Y

Figure 3-3 Cross sectional Shape and the Corresponding FE Mesh

Regular beam stresses at extreme point from different formulation is shown in following table:

Composite with MAT1

Results Isotropic with VKI Isotropic with VAM using VAM
Disp at free end 49.987 49.974 49.977
Smax at fixed end 74974 74956 75351

Main Index
 39 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 3

Input File(s)

File Description
nug_33a.dat Isotropic and Composite beam with MAT1 using VAM
nug_33b.dat Isotropic beam using VKI

Main Index
 Chapter 4: Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion

4 Topology Optimization
MBB Beam and Torsion

 Summary - Beam 41

Introduction 41

Solution Requirements 42

Modeling Tips 45

Summary - Torsion 47
 Introduction 48

Solution Requirements 48

Modeling Tips 53

Input File(s) 54

Main Index
 41 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 4

Summary - Beam

Title Chapter 4: Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion

Topology optimization • Compliance minimization
features • Mass target
• Checkerboard free
• Minimum member size control
• Mirror symmetry constraints
Geometry Units: m P = 200.0 N
12 x 2 x 0.01 Plate

(Symmetry) (Mesh 4800 Elements)

Material properties Young’s Modulus = 2x105 MPa, Poisson’s ratio = 0.3

Analysis type Static analysis
Boundary conditions Supported on rollers at one point and fixed support at another point.
Applied loads A concentrated force = 100.0 N (half model)
Element type 4-node liner QUAD elements
Topology result Material distribution
)

P = 200.0 N

Introduction
An MBB beam example (a half model shown in Figure 4-1) is used to demonstrate (a) basic MSC Nastran topology
optimization capabilities without manufacturing constraints, (b) minimum member size control, and (c) mirror symmetry
constraints. The structural compliance (i.e., total strain energy) is minimized with a mass target 0.5 (i.e., 50% material
savings). The loading and boundary conditions are shown in Figure 4-1. The structure is modeled with 4800 CQUAD4
elements.

Main Index
 CHAPTER 4 42
Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion

P = 100.0 N

Figure 4-1 MBB Beam

Solution Requirements
This MBB beam is well accepted by academic and industry for topology optimization validation.
Design Model Description
Objective: Minimize compliance
Topology design region: PSHELL
Constraints: Mass target = 0.5 (i.e., mass savings 50%)
(a) Minimum member size control and/or
(b) Mirror symmetry constraints

These solutions demonstrate:

 A distinct design can be obtained by MSC Nastran topology optimization with checkerboard free algorithm (as
default)
 The minimum member size is mainly used to control the size of members in topology optimal designs.
Preventing thin members enhances the simplicity of the design and, hence, its manufacturability. Minimum
member size is more like quality control than quantity control.
 By using symmetry constraints in topology optimization, a symmetric design can be obtained regardless of the
boundary conditions or loads.

Main Index
 43 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 4

Optimization Solution
Basic compliance minimization
The input data for this example related to topology optimization model is given in Listing 1. A TOPVAR =1 Bulk Data
entry is used to define a topological design region. XINIT=0.5 on the TOPVAR entry matches the mass target constraint
so that the initial design is feasible. The rest values on the TOPVAR entry are default values that are recommended for
general topology optimization applications. Type one design responses DRESP11 and 2 identify compliance and fractional
mass, respectively. DCONSTR1 specifies the mass target. DESOBJ (Case)=1 in Case Control Command selects DRESP11
entry to be used as a design objective (minimization as default) and DESGLB (Case) = 1 selects the design constraint
DCONSTR1 to be applied in this topology optimization task.

Listing 1 Input File for MBB Beam

DESOBJ = 1
DESGLB = 1
SUBCASE 1
$ Subcase name : Default
SUBTITLE=Default
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
ANALYSIS = STATICS
BEGIN BULK
DCONSTR 1 2 .5
TOPVAR, 1 , Tshel, Pshell, , , , , 1
DRESP1 1 COMPL COMP
DRESP1 2 FRMASS FRMASS
Figure 4-2 shows the topology optimized result that is smoothed and remeshed by using Patran. This optimal design is
very clear without any checkerboard effect. It is noticed that there are some small members.

Figure 4-2 MBB Beam Topology Design

Minimum Member Size Control

The MBB beam (shown in Figure 4-1) is used here to demonstrate the minimum member size control capability.

Main Index
 CHAPTER 4 44
Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion

The input data for this example related to topology optimization with “minimum member size” is given in Listing 2. The
minimum member size value is defined by the TDMIN = 0.5 parameter on the DOPTPRM entry and corresponds to the
length of 10 elements.

Listing 2 Input File for MBB Beam with Minimum Member Size
DESOBJ = 1
DESGLB = 1
SUBCASE 1
$ Subcase name : Default
SUBTITLE=Default
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
ANALYSIS = STATICS
BEGIN BULK
DOPTPRM, TDMIN, 0.5
DCONSTR 1 2 .5
TOPVAR, 1 , Tshel, Pshell, , , , , 1
DRESP1 1 COMPL COMP
DRESP1 2 FRMASS FRMASS
The Figure 4-3 shows the topology optimized result with “minimum member size” TDMIN=0.5. Compared the design
shown in Figure 4-2, this design with “minimum member size” is obviously much simpler and there are no tiny members at
all.

Figure 4-3 MBB Beam Topology Design with “Minimum Member Size”

Mirror Symmetric Constraints

Since the loads applied on the MBB beam are not symmetric, the topology optimized designs Figures 4-2 and 4-3 are not
symmetric. The MBB beam is employed again to demonstrate the mirror symmetric constraint capability that enforces the
design to be symmetric about a given plane.
To apply symmetric constraints on designed properties, users need to create a reference coordinate system using a
rectangular coordinate system CORD1R or CORD2R. In this example, grid 10001 (location x=3, y=1, and z=0) is defined as
the origin. Grid 10002 (x=3, y=1, and z=1) lies on the z-axis, and grid 1003 (x=4, y=1, and z=0) lies in the x-z plane.
CORD1R CID=1 defines a reference coordinate system. A continuation line “SYM” enforces the property PSHELL=1 to be
symmetric about the planes YZ and ZX in the reference coordinate system CID=1. In addition, a minimum member size
TDMIN=0.15 is applied. The input data for this example is given in Listing 3.

Main Index
 45 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 4

Listing 3 Input File for MBB Beam with Mirror Symmetry Constraints

DESOBJ = 1
DESGLB = 1
SUBCASE 1
$ Subcase name : Default
SUBTITLE=Default
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
ANALYSIS = STATICS
BEGIN BULK
CORD1R 1 10001 10002 10003
GRID 10001 3. 1. 0.0
GRID 10002 3. 1. 1.0
GRID 10003 4. 1. 0.0
TOPVAR, 1 , Tshel, Pshell, , , , , 1
, SYM , 1 , YZ , ZX
, TDMIN, 0.15
DRESP1 1 COMPL COMP
DRESP1 2 FRMASS FRMASS
DCONSTR 1 2 .5
Figure 4-3 shows the topology optimal result with symmetric constraints and minimum member size.

Figure 4-4 MBB Beam with Symmetric Constraints and Minimum Member Size

Modeling Tips
The quality of the results of a topology optimization task is a strong function of how the problem is posed in MSC Nastran.
This section contains a number of tips:
 A DRESP1=COMP is introduced to define the compliance of structures for topology optimizations. The response is
usually used as an objective to maximize structural stiffness in static analysis problems.
 A DRESP1=FRMASS is introduced to define the mass fraction of topology designed elements. The
DRESP1=WEIGHT is the total weight of all structural and nonstructural mass. For topology optimization tasks, a
DRESP1=FRMASS response is recommended to define a mass reduction target in a design constraint.

Main Index
 CHAPTER 4 46
Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion

 The POWER field on the TOPVAR entry has a large influence on the solution of topology optimization problems.
A lower POWER often produces a solution that contains large “grey” areas (area with intermediate densities 0.3 –
0.7). A higher value produces more distinct black and white (solid and void) designs. However, near singularities
often occur when a high POWER is selected.
 A TCHECK parameter on DOPTPRM is used to turn on/off the checkerboard free algorithm. This default normally
results in a better design for general finite element mesh. However, if high order elements and/or a coarser mesh is
used, turning off the filtering algorithm may produce a better result.
 The TDMIN parameter is mainly used to control the degree of simplicity in terms of manufacturing
considerations. It is common to see some members with smaller size than TDMIN at the final design since the small
members have contributions to the objective. Minimum member size is more like quality control than quantity
control. It is in general recommended that TDMIN should not be less than the length of 3 elements.
 Maximum design cycle DESMAX=30 (as default) is often required to produce a reasonable result. More design
cycles may be required to achieve a clear 0/1 material distribution, particularly when manufacturability constraints
are used.
 There are many solutions to a topology optimization: one global and many local minimization. It is not unusual
to see different solutions to the same problem with the same discretization by using different optimization solvers
or the same optimization solver with different starting values of design variables.
 In a multiple subcase problem, a DRSPAN (Case) Case Control Command can be used to construct a weighting
function via a DRESP2 or DRESP3. For example, a static and normal mode combined problem, the objective can be
defined as
c1 0
obj = weight1  ----- + weight2  -----
 c 0   1

where weight1 and weight2 are two weighting factors. c 1 is the calculated compliance and 1 is the calculated
eigenvalue via DRESP1 definition. c 0 and 0 are the initial value of these responses.
 To obtain a rib pattern by topology optimization, a core non-designable shell element thickness must be defined
together with two designable above and below the core thicknesses. That is, add two designable elements for each
regular element.
 If some elements are disconnected on the final topology design proposal, the mass target may be too small to fill
the design space.

Main Index
 47 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 4

Summary - Torsion

Title Chapter 34: A Torsion Beam

Topology optimization • Compliance minimization
features • Mass target
• Checkerboard free
• Minimum member size control
• Mirror symmetry constraints
Geometry

P = 1000
+
P = 1000

+
Z
Units: m
Length = 16 and width = 4 and height = 4

Material properties Young’s Modulus = 2.1x105MPa, Poisson’s ratio = 0.3, density = 1.0
Analysis type Static analysis
Boundary conditions Cantilever
Applied loads A pair of twisting forces = 1000.0 N at the free end
Element type 8-node HEXA elements
Topology result Material distribution
)

Main Index
 CHAPTER 4 48
Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion

Introduction
A torsion beam is used here to demonstrate the extrusion and casting constraints. Figure 4-5 shows the FEM model of the
torsion beam. A pair of twisting forces is applied on one end while the other end is fixed. 2048 CHEXA elements are used for
this model. The objective is to minimize the structural compliance with mass target of 0.3 (i.e., 70% material savings).

P = 1000
+
P = 1000

+
Z
Units: m
Length = 16 and width = 4 and height = 4

Figure 4-5 Torsion Beam

Solution Requirements
This torsion beam is utilized to show MSC Nastran topology optimization extrusion and casting constraint capabilities.
Design Model Description
Objective: Minimize compliance
Topology design region: PSOLID
Constraints: Mass target = 0.3 (i.e., mass savings 70%)
(a) Extrusion constraints
(b) Casting constraints with one or two dies

Three solutions demonstrate:

 By using extrusion constraints in topology optimization, a constant cross-section design along the given extrusion
direction can be obtained regardless of the boundary conditions or loads.
 The use of casting constraints can prevent hollow profiles in topology optimization so that the die can slide in a
given direction. One or two die options are available for selection.
 Some combined manufacturing constraints are allowed in topology optimization to achieve design goal.

Main Index
 49 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 4

Optimization Solution
Extrusion Constraints With One Die
If is often to see some topology optimized designs can contain cavities that are not achievable or require a high cost
manufacturing process. For example, the result from the torsion beam without manufacturing constraints is shown in
Figure 4-6. Clearly, this topology design proposal is not achievable by casting.

Figure 4-6 Torsion Beam without Manufacturing Constraints

The extrusion constraints enforce a constant cross-section design along the given extrusion direction. The input data related
to imposing an extrusion constraint along the z-axis in the basic coordinate system (as the default option) is given in Listing
4.

Listing 4 Input File for Torsion Beam with Extrusion

DESOBJ = 1
DESGLB = 1
SUBCASE 1
$ Subcase name : Default
SUBTITLE=Default
ANALYSIS = STATICS
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
$ Direct Text Input for this Subcase

Main Index
 CHAPTER 4 50
Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion

BEGIN BULK
DRESP1 2 Frmass FRMASS
DRESP1 1 COMPL COMP
DCONSTR 1 2 .3
TOPVAR, 1 , TSOLID, PSOLID, .3, , , , 1
, EXT , , Z
PSOLID 1 1 0
Figure 4-7 shows the topology optimized result with extrusion constraints. It is obvious that the design has a constant cross-
section along the z-axis.

Figure 4-7 Torsion Beam with Extrusion Constraints in Z-Axis

Casting Constraints with One Die

A torsion beam (shown in Figure 4-5 is used here to demonstrate the combination of one die casting manufacturability
constraints and mirror symmetric constraints.
The casting constraints with one die option enforce that the material can only be added to the region by “filling up” in the
given draw direction from the bottom (or, stated another way, that voids extend from the top surface and do not reappear
in the die direction). To apply casting constraints and symmetric constraints on designed properties, a reference coordinate
system CID=1 is defined by using a rectangular coordinate system CORD1R. A CAST continuation line defines casting
constraints in the Y direction and one die is a default option. Another SYM continuation line defines symmetric constraints
about the YZ plane. The input data related to the topology optimization model is given in Listing 5.

Main Index
 51 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 4

Listing 5 Input File for Torsion with One Die

DESOBJ = 1
DESGLB = 1
SUBCASE 1
$ Subcase name : Default
SUBTITLE=Default
ANALYSIS = STATICS
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
$ Direct Text Input for this Subcase
BEGIN BULK
DRESP1 2 Frmass FRMASS
DRESP1 1 COMPL COMP
DCONSTR 1 2 .3
CORD1R 1 5 167 7
PSOLID 1 1 0
TOPVAR, 1 , TSOLID, PSOLID, .3, , , , 1
, CAST, 1 , Y, , YES
, SYM, 1 , YZ
Figure 4-8 shows the topology optimized result with one die casting constraints. It is observed that the design material is
added by “filling up” in the Y direction from the bottom. In addition, the design is symmetric about the YZ plane in the
reference coordinate system CID=1.

Figure 4-8 Torsion Beam with One Die Casting Constraints in Y Direction

Main Index
 CHAPTER 4 52
Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion

Casting Constraints with Two Dies

A torsion beam (shown in Figure 4-5 is also used here to demonstrate two die casting manufacturability constraints.
The input for two die casting constraints is similar to the one die option in Example 5. Here, the difference is that 2 are
selected for the DIE field on the TOPVAR entry. The input data related to imposing two die casting constraints is given in
Listing 6.

Listing 6 Input File for Torsion with Two Dies

DESOBJ = 1
DESGLB = 1
SUBCASE 1
$ Subcase name : Default
SUBTITLE=Default
ANALYSIS = STATICS
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
$ Direct Text Input for this Subcase
BEGIN BULK
DRESP1 2 Frmass FRMASS
DRESP1 1 COMPL COMP
DCONSTR 1 2 .3
CORD1R 1 5 167 7
PSOLID 1 1 0

TOPVAR, 1 , TSOLID, PSOLID, , , , , 1

, CAST, 1 , Y, 2, YES
, SYM , 1 , YZ
PSOLID 1 1 0
Figure 4-9 shows the topology optimized result with two die casting constraints. It is observed that the design material grows
from the splitting plane in opposite directions along the y-axis specified in the reference coordinate system CID=1. The
splitting plane is determined by optimization and in this case corresponds to the

Main Index
 53 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 4

Figure 4-9 Torsion Beam with Two Die Casting Constraints in Y-Axis

Modeling Tips
 It is recommended that a base line topology optimization job (without any manufacturability constraints) be
carried out before a topology optimization solution with manufacturability constraints. Benefits are:
a. A topology optimization without restriction may result in a better design
b. The design proposal from the no restriction run may give some hints for imposing manufacturability
constraints.
 Topology optimization with manufacturability constraints often needs more material to fill the design space.
Therefore, the design with manufacturability constraints usually requires a relatively bigger mass target (less
material savings) than the one without manufacturability constraints.
 The casting constraints may have difficulty dealing with a design model that has one or more non-smoothed
boundary surfaces to be designed. It is recommended to use smooth surfaces for topology designed boundary
surfaces.

Main Index
 CHAPTER 4 54
Topology Optimization MBB Beam and Torsion

Input File(s)
File Description
nug_34a.dat Basic compliance minimization
nug_34b.dat Minimum member size
nug_34c.dat Mirror symmetry constraints
nug_34d.dat Extrusion constraints
nug_34e.dat One die casting constraints
nug_34f.dat Casting constraints with two dies

Main Index
 Chapter 5: Engine Mount Topology Optimization

5 Engine Mount Topology

Optimization

 Summary 56

Introduction 57

Solution Requirements 58

FEM Solutions 58

Results 61
 Modeling Tips 61

Input File(s) 61

Main Index
 CHAPTER 5 56
Engine Mount Topology Optimization

Summary

Title Chapter 5: Engine Mount Topology Optimization

Topology optimization • Averaged compliance minimization
features • Multiple TOPVAR entries
• Multiple load cases
• Displacement constraints
Geometry
Front Mount Beam
Link

Front Mount Beam

Trunnion
Front Mount Ring

Thrust Strut

Material properties Young’s Modulus = 1.05x105 MPa, Poisson’s ratio = 0.32

Boundary conditions Supported on rollers at one point and fixed support at another point.
Applied loads 14 load cases (forces)
Element type HEXA, PENTA, TETRA, and RBE3
Topology result Material distribution
)

Main Index
 57 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 5

Introduction
The main goal is to minimize the compliance of the engine-front-mount-beam (shown in Figure 5-1) with mass target 0.3
(material savings 70%) and displacements within a range (-0.6, 0.6) at selected 5 grids. The analysis model has 14 load
cases. The finite element model is shown in Figure 5-2. There are 62306 CHEXA elements, 703 CPENTA elements, 31 CTETRA
elements, and 5 RBE3 elements.

Link

Front Mount Beam

Trunnion
Front Mount Ring

Thrust Strut

Figure 5-1 Front-Mount-Beam

Front Mount Beam

Figure 5-2 Front-Mount-Beam FE Model

Main Index
 CHAPTER 5 58
Engine Mount Topology Optimization

Solution Requirements
Design Model Description
Objective: Minimize averaged compliance
Topology design region: PSOLID = 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, and 10
Constraints: Mass target = 0.3 (i.e., mass savings 70%)
Displacements at grid points 76095, 76096, 76419, 76420, and 76421 for all
14 load cases within the range (-6.0, 6.0)

This solutions demonstrates:

 The averaged compliance can be used for topology optimization problems with multiple load case to achieve an
efficient design concept.
 Multiple topological design parts are allowed.
 Displacement constrains can be well treated in topology optimization.

FEMSolutions
The input data related to the topology optimization model is given in Listing 7.
The TOPVAR entries define five topological design parts with XINIT (initial design=0.3 that matches the mass target so
the initial design is feasible (reduce CPU time spent on optimizer.
In order for a structural response to be used either as an objective or a constraint, it first must be identified on a DRESPi
Bulk Data entry. The DRESP1 entries 720-850, for example, identify the compliance. DRSPAN (Case) and SET (Case) Case
Control Commands are then used to select one compliance DRESP1 entry for each subcase that are used in DRESP2,1000
response. The equation response DRESP2,1with the attribute FUNC=AVG spans all subcases to calculate averaged
compliance of the structure. A DESOBJ (Case) Case Control Command selects DRESP2,1 to be an objective.
DRESP1,282 defines a fractional mass response. This mass target is imposed by the upper bound on the DCONSTR,200
entry. As always, fractional mass constraints should be applied at the global level in a design optimization by using
DESGLB (Case). Separate DRESP1 entries 1 -5 identify displacements responses at gird points. There responses are
constrained by the bounds set using a corresponding set of DCONSTR entries.
Listing 7 Input File for Engine Mount

analysis=statics

set 1 = 200
set 2 = 201
set 3 = 202
set 4 = 203
set 5 = 204
set 6 = 205
set 7 = 206

Main Index
 59 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 5

set 8 = 207
set 9 = 208
set 10 = 209
set 11 = 210
set 12 = 211
set 13 = 212
set 14 = 213
DESOBJ = 1000
DESGLB = 50
DESSUB = 1
$ Direct Text Input for Global Case Control Data
$ ==================================================================
$ ==================================================================
SUBCASE 1
LOAD = 1
DRSPAN = 1
SUBCASE 2
LOAD = 2
DRSPAN = 2
SUBCASE 3
LOAD = 3
DRSPAN = 3
SUBCASE 4
LOAD = 4
DRSPAN = 4
SUBCASE 5
LOAD = 5
DRSPAN = 5
SUBCASE 6
LOAD = 6
DRSPAN = 6
SUBCASE 7
LOAD = 7
DRSPAN = 7
SUBCASE 8
LOAD = 8
DRSPAN = 8
SUBCASE 9
LOAD = 9
DRSPAN = 9
SUBCASE 10
LOAD = 10
DRSPAN = 10
SUBCASE 11
LOAD = 11
DRSPAN = 11
SUBCASE 12
LOAD = 12
DRSPAN = 12
SUBCASE 13
LOAD = 13
DRSPAN = 13

Main Index
 CHAPTER 5 60
Engine Mount Topology Optimization

SUBCASE 14
LOAD = 14
DRSPAN = 14
$ ===================================================================
BEGIN BULK
$ *******************************************************************
$ Written by : MSC/NASTRAN
$ Version : 4.51
$ Translator : MSC/NASTRAN
$ From Model : D:\users\mulf\bmwroll\fmb.mod
$ Date :
$ *******************************************************************
$
$234567812345678123456781234567812345678
$DCONSTR 1 20 6. 6.1
$23456781234567812345678123456781234567812345678123456781234567812345678
$DCONADD 1 15 16 17 18 19 21 22
$ 23 24 25 50
DCONSTR 1 1 -6. 6.0
DCONSTR 1 2 -6. 6.0
DCONSTR 1 3 -6. 6.0
DCONSTR 1 4 -6. 6.0
DCONSTR 1 5 -6. 6.0
DCONSTR 50 50 .3
TOPVAR, 1 , psolid, Psolid, .3, , , , 1
TOPVAR, 2 , psolid2, Psolid, .3, , , , 2
TOPVAR, 3 , psolid3, Psolid, .3, , , , 3
TOPVAR, 4 , psolid8, Psolid, .3, , , , 8
TOPVAR, 5 , psolid9, Psolid, .3, , , , 9
TOPVAR, 6 , psolid10, Psolid, .3, , , , 10
$234567812345678123456781234567812345678123456781234567812345678
DRESP1 50 w FRMASS
DRESP1 1 d disp 123 76095
DRESP1 2 d1 disp 123 76096
DRESP1 3 d2 disp 123 76419
DRESP1 4 d3 disp 123 76420
DRESP1 5 d4 disp 123 76421
$234567812345678123456781234567812345678123456781234567812345678
DRESP1, 200, COMP1, COMP
DRESP1, 201, COMP2, COMP
DRESP1, 202, COMP3, COMP
DRESP1, 203, COMP4, COMP
DRESP1, 204, COMP5, COMP
DRESP1, 205, COMP6, COMP
DRESP1, 206, COMP7, COMP
DRESP1, 207, COMP8, COMP
DRESP1, 208, COMP9, COMP
DRESP1, 209, COMP10, COMP
DRESP1, 210, COMP11, COMP
DRESP1, 211, COMP12, COMP
DRESP1, 212, COMP13, COMP
DRESP1, 213, COMP14, COMP

Main Index
 61 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 5

$234567812345678123456781234567812345678123456781234567812345678
DRESP2 1000 COMPL AVG
DRESP1 200 201 202 203 204 205 206
207 208 209 210 211 212 213

Results
A topology result shown in Figure 5-3 is obtained by MSC Nastran. The topology optimization design proposal is smoothed
by Patran.

Figure 5-3 Front-Mount-Beam Topology Optimization Proposal

Modeling Tips
 If multiple mass targets (multiple DRESP1=FRMASS) are used, it is recommended each TOPVAR's initial value
XINIT matches its corresponding mass target.

Input File(s)
File Description
nug_35.dat Minimize averaged compliance/displacement constraints

Main Index
 Chapter 6: Wheel Topology Optimization

6 Wheel Topology
Optimization

 Summary 63

Introduction 64

Solution Requirements 64

FEM Solutions 65

Results 65
 Modeling Tips 66

Input File(s) 66

Main Index
 63 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 6

Summary

Title Chapter 6: Wheel Topology Optimization

Topology optimization Cyclical symmetry constraints
features
Geometry

Material properties Young’s Modulus = 1.0x107 PSI, Poisson’s ratio = 0.3, density = 1.0 LBF/in3
Boundary conditions Fixed at some points
Applied loads Force = 1000.0 LBS in direction of gravity
Element type HEXA, RBE3
Topology result Material distribution
)

Main Index
 CHAPTER 6 64
Wheel Topology Optimization

Introduction
A wheel model shown in Figure 6-1 is used to demonstrate MSC Nastran topology optimization cyclical symmetry
capabilities. The wheel is modeled with six-sided solid elements (118156 CHEXA). The wheel outer layers and bolts are
nondesignable. One load case is considered. The structural compliance is minimized (i.e., minimize the total strain energy
of the structure) with a mass target 0.1 (i.e., remove 90% of the material). Although the load is not cyclically symmetric
about the Y-axis, the design is required to be cyclically symmetric about the Y-axis with five segments.

Figure 6-1 Wheel FE Model

Solution Requirements
Design Model Description
Objective: Minimize averaged compliance
Topology design region: PSOLID (blue)
Constraints: Mass target = 0.1 (i.e., mass savings 90%)
The design is forced to be cyclical symmetry about the Y-axis with five
segments.

This solutions demonstrates:

 By using cyclical symmetry constraints in topology optimization, a rotational symmetric design can be obtained
regardless of the boundary conditions or loads.
 CASI solver provides a major speed up for large 3-D problems in static analysis.

Main Index
 65 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 6

FEM Solutions
The input data for this example related to topology optimization model is given in Listing 8. The coordinate system
(CORD2R = 1) is created to be used to specify cyclical symmetric constraints. The field CS (cyclical symmetric axis) on the
SYM line is Y-axis with NCS (number of cyclical symmetric segments) = 5. It is noticed that SMETHOD (Case) = ELEMENT
is used to select CASI iterative solver. The CASI iterative solver released in MSC Nastran can provide a major speedup in
the solution of large static analyses.

Listing 8 Input File for Wheel

DESOBJ = 10
DESGLB = 1
ANALYSIS = STATICS
SMETHOD = ELEMENT
SUBCASE 1
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
BEGIN BULK
CORD2R 1 10.512 33.3312 12.9921 -22.209833.3312 4.88385
28.388 33.3313 -19.7297
DCONSTR 1 2 .1
TOPVAR 1 PSOLID PSOLID .1 2
SYM 1 Y 5
DRESP1 2 FRM FRMASS
DRESP1 10 COMP COMP

Results
Figure 6-2 shows the topology optimized result that is smoothed by using Patran. It is noticed that cyclical symmetry is
obtained even though the loading is not cyclically symmetric.

Figure 6-2 Wheel Topology Design

Main Index
 CHAPTER 6 66
Wheel Topology Optimization

Modeling Tips
 CASI solver is limited to compliance minimization topology optimization problem only.
 The cyclical symmetry constraints can also be used for rotational parts <60°. In addition, the starting surface must
be XY plane for cyclical symmetric CS=X, YZ plane for CS=Y; ZX plane for CS=Z, respectively. The cyclical
symmetric segment (NCS) must also be defined in 360 for this case. For example, a 90° rotational part has three
segments, NCS must be set to NCS=12 in 360°.

Input File(s)

File Description
nug_36.dat Cyclical symmetry constraints

Main Index
 67 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 6

Main Index
 Chapter 7: Fluid-structure Interaction (FSI) Frequency Responses

Fluid-structure Interaction
7 (FSI) Frequency
Responses


Introduction 69

Model Setup 69

Modelling Guidelines 75

Input File(s) 75
 Results 75

Main Index
 69 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 7

Introduction
The coupled fluid-structure method can be utilized to analyze the dynamics of compressible fluids contained within
arbitrarily shaped structures. To model a three-dimensional fluid with conventional solid elements (CHEXA, etc.) using
acoustic property and material data. Each grid point in the fluid defines the pressure at its location as its degree of freedom.
The fluid is automatically connected to the structure via the geometry and ACMODL Bulk Data inputs. Porous-Elastic
Material, PEM, positioned between structure and fluid can simulate soundproofing material. Panels can be defined to
provide integrated response data. Applications for the coupled fluid-structure option are automotive and truck interiors,
aircraft cabins, and acoustic devices, such as loudspeakers and microphones.

Model Setup
A basic Nascar model is used to demonstrate FSI with PEM in frequency response analysis. There are three major
components in FSI with PEM input deck setup, namely structure (Figure 7-1), cavity (or fluid; Figure 7-2) and trim
components (Figure 7-3). Trim components are used to model non-structural items such as dashboard padding, carpet and
roof lining and, in general, positioned between structure and cavity.

Figure 7-1 Structure

Main Index
 CHAPTER 7 70
Fluid-structure Interaction (FSI) Frequency Responses

Figure 7-2 Cavity

Figure 7-3 Trim Components

Main Index
 71 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 7

Figure 7-4 Full (Structure+Cavity+Trim Components)

Case control and bulk data entries specific to FSI with PEM will be mentioned in following sections.

Case Control
TRIMGRP is used to select trim component IDs, TRMCID, for the analysis. In following example, trim component 1
and 2 are included for the analysis.
SET 99 = 1,2
$
TRIMGRP = 99

Note: TRIMGRP can be changed at SUBCASE level which is similar to SPC/MPC and etc.

Main Index
 CHAPTER 7 72
Fluid-structure Interaction (FSI) Frequency Responses

Main Bulk Data section:

Bulk data entries, ACPEMCP and TRMCPL, must be prepared for each trim component, TRMC. AEPEMCP is to
describe the interfacing conditions between structure and TRMC in field 3 and 4 and interfacing conditions between
TRMC and cavity in field 5 and 6. The input for field 3 to 6 of ACPEMCP is the SET1/SET3 ID which has the interfacing
GIDs of trim component and must be placed under the corresponding 'BEGIN BULK TRMC=tmrcid'. TRMCPL is to
provide the parameters (or tolerance) for the coupling logic.
$============================================================================
===
$ Trim Interface Definition
$============================================================================
===
$-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------0----
---
$ACPEMCPTID SGLUED SSLIDE SOPEN SIMPER
$ SCUX SCUY SCUZ SCRX SCRY SCRZ SCFP
$-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------0----
---
ACPEMCP 1 101 102 103 104
ACPEMCP 2 201 202 203 204
$ Interface Coupling Parameters
$-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------0----
---
$TRMCPL TID CTYPE PLTOL GAPTOL1 GAPTOL2 GAPTOL3 GAPTOL4
$-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------0----
---
TRMCPL 1 SGLUED 0.01 0.01
TRMCPL 1 SSLIDE 0.25 0.1
TRMCPL 1 SIMPER 0.01 0.01
TRMCPL 1 SOPEN 0.25 0.1
TRMCPL 2 SGLUED 0.01 0.01
TRMCPL 2 SSLIDE 0.25 0.1
TRMCPL 2 SIMPER 0.01 0.01
TRMCPL 2 SOPEN 0.25 0.1
$

Main Index
 73 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 7

$============================================================================
===
For frequency response loading, RLOAD1, DAREA, and FREQ1 bulk data entries are utilized to define frequency
dependent loads as follows.
$......1.......2.......3.......4.......5.......6.......7.......8.......9.....
..0
$ Set of frequencies range used for FRF
FREQ1,10,1.0,1.0,199
$ Subcase_1 Data
$ ------------------
$ Dynamic loading condition
DLOAD,1,1.,1.,10
$ Frequency-dependant dynamic load
RLOAD1,10,110,,,1000
$ Scale factors for dynamics loads --> along Z axis grid 7154
DAREA,110,7154,3,1.
The FREQ1 in above example is known as forcing frequencies which is specific for loading and can be selected via
FREQUENCY=fid in case control.

Encapsulated Bulk Data under 'BEGIN BULK TRMC=trmcid':

This section is similar to main bulk. It has GRID, connection, property and material entries which are specific to trim
component trmcid. In addition, it also has the SET1/SET3 entries that are mentioned on ACPEMCP of trim component
trmcid.
For trim component, only 3D element types are supported. Since each 3D element of a trim component has both solid
and fluid phases, PSOLID with 'PORO' for field 8 of PSOLID and MATPE1 were implemented for user to provide
material properties of PEM. A set of PSOLID/.MATPE1/MAT1/MAT10 for TRMC=1 is shown as follows. Detail
description for each field of MATPE1 and PSOLID can be found in Quick Reference Guide and will not be repeated here.
BEGIN BULK TRMC=1
$$------------------------------------------------------------------------------$
$ STRUCTURE FACE
$-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------0-------
$PSOLID PID MID IN ISOP PORO
$ Porous part 1 (FOAM 1)
PSOLID 10 101 TWO FULL PORO

Main Index
 CHAPTER 7 74
Fluid-structure Interaction (FSI) Frequency Responses

$
$ CAVITY FACE
$-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------0-------
$ Solid part 1 (SOLID 1)
PSOLID 12 100
$$------------------------------------------------------------------------------$
$$ Material Definition Cards $
$$------------------------------------------------------------------------------$
$ FOAM 1
$ POROUS PARAMETERS
$-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------0-------
$MATPE1 MID MAT1 MAT10 BIOT
$ VISC GAMMA PRANDTL POR TOR AFR VLE TLE
$-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------0-------
MATPE1 101 1001 1101 1.0 +
+ 1.82-5 1.40 7.138-1 9.21-1 1.74 43588 6.68-5 1.223-4
$-------2-------3-------4-------5-------6-------7-------8-------9-------0-------
$ ELASTIC PARAMETERS
$MAT1 MID E G NU RHO A TREF GE
MAT1 1001 16000 0.3 950.56 0.34
$ FLUID PARAMETERS
$MAT10 MID BULK RHO C GE ALPHA
MAT10 1101 1.225 340.0
$ FLUID PARAMETERS EQUIVALENT TO MAT10 OF FOAM 1
$$------------------------------------------------------------------------------$
$ SOLID 1
$ ELASTIC PARAMETERS
$MAT1 MID E G NU RHO A TREF GE
MAT1 100 77.0+6 0.35 3800 0.236
$$------------------------------------------------------------------------------$
FREQ 1 1.0 2.0 3.0 5.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 +
+ 50.0 70.0 100.0 150.0 200.0

Main Index
 75 MSC Nastran Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 7

FREQ or FREQx entry is a required input for each trim component which specifies master frequencies and must have same
ID as TRMCID. The reduced impedance matrix, contributed of trim component on system viscous damping matrix, will
be generated at master frequencies. For a forcing frequency at solution generation process, interpolation among RIM at
master frequencies occurs to process RIM at the forcing frequency.

Modelling Guidelines
Features
A typical PEM job can have three disjoint models; namely structure, cavity and, at least one trim component (TRMC).
Trim components are positioned between structure and cavity. Coupling between structure/TRMC, TRMC/cavity and
structure/cavity are detected automatically with consideration of user provide tolerance.
Material Properties:
MATPE1 entry is used specifically for PEM under 'BEGIN BULK TRMC='.

Input File(s)
The description and type of file is given in the table below.

File Description
pemtmgp3.dat Modal frequency response with PEM input file.

Results
The fluid-structure interaction, FSI, analysis with PEM is performed using the input deck discussed in previous sections.
The sound pressure at Grid 30606 of cavity is shown in Figure 7-5. Load 1 is applied at engine mount and the results at grid
30606 with 3 separate trim component configurations are compared with no PEM setup. In general, PEM lowered the
peak responses. However, sound pressure below 20hz is not audible by human ear. Hence, results below 20Hz should be
ignored.

Main Index
 CHAPTER 7 76
Fluid-structure Interaction (FSI) Frequency Responses

Figure 7-5

Structure response can be impacted by FSI with PEM as well. Displacement of Z-direction of grid 161 is shown in
following plot.

Main Index