Chapter 37: Local Adaptive Meshing

37 Local Adaptive Meshing


Summary 554

Introduction 555

Modeling Details 556

Mesh Refinement Process Definition 557

Material Modeling 558

Loading and Boundary Conditions 558

Solution Procedure 559

Results 559

Modeling Tips 563
 Input File(s) 564

Video 564
554 MD Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 37

Summary
Title Chapter 37: Local Adaptive Meshing
Features • 2-D structure mesh refinement
• Region to be refined defined by property identifier
• Mesh adaptivity criterion based on error indicator
• Free-Free structure
Geometry
H = 0.4 m
d = 0.2 m
s = 0.02 m
σmax
F = 280 N
F d H F

σnominal

Material properties E = 69GPa ,  = 0.33 ,  = 3200kg/m

3

Analysis characteristics Linear static analysis using local adaptive meshing functionality
Boundary conditions Automatic inertia relief (INREL = -2)
Applied loads Tensile axial loading acting on the shortest edge of the plate (F = 280 N)
Element type 4-node, 3-node 2-D elements (QUAD4/TRIA3)
FE results 1. Stress at the most critical point for each refinement cycle
2. Stress concentration factor to compare with theoretical results
Stress Concentration
2.5
σmax Theoretical (2.157)
Kt=
σnominal Numerical

2.0

Refinement Cycle

1.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
 CHAPTER 37 555
Local Adaptive Meshing

Introduction
This problem demonstrates the ability of the mesh refinement capability to converge on the correct solution in terms
of stress distribution. A very simple structure has been considered to enable a comparison between theoretical and
numerical results.
F
Theory, based on net section, states that if the nominal stress  nom = --------------------- is defined as the stress acting on the net
 H – d s
section (defined as the section that results from the difference between the width of the plate and the diameter of the

max
- , where  max is the actual stress
hole), then the stress concentration factor due to the presence of the hole is k t = -----------
 nom
at the critical point. The stress concentration factor can be calculated from the empirical relationship shown in
Figure 37-1.

Kt
3.0 2 3
⎛ d ⎞ ⎛ d ⎞ ⎛ d ⎞
kt = 2 + 0.284 ⋅ ⎜1 − ⎟ − 0.600 ⋅ ⎜1 − ⎟ + 1.320 ⋅ ⎜1 − ⎟
⎝ H ⎠ ⎝ H ⎠ ⎝ H ⎠

2.5

2.0

1.5
d
H
1.0
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00
Figure 37-1 Graphical Representation of Stress Concentration Factor versus d/H

The theoretical results and input data are shown in Table 37-1.

Table 37-1 Input Data and Theoretical Results

Applied Stress
Load Concentration Nominal Maximum
(N) Geometrical Data (m) Factor Stress (Pa) Stress (Pa)
F H d s kt  nom  max

280.0 0.4 0.2 0.02 2.157 70000.0 150990.0

556 MD Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 37

Modeling Details
A numerical solution has been obtained with MD Nastran’s solution sequence 101 for a 2-D representation of a free-
free plate with a hole in its central region. The details of finite element model, contact simulation, material, load,
boundary conditions and solution procedure are discussed below.

Figure 37-2 Initial Finite Element Model with Zoom in the Critical Region

The initial finite element model consists of:

M O D E L S U M M A R Y

NUMBER OF GRID POINTS = 964

NUMBER OF CQUAD4 ELEMENTS = 872
NUMBER OF CTRIA3 ELEMENTS = 12

The case control section of the input contains the typical entries for a linear static analysis. The only command that
has been added to activate the mesh refinement is HADAPT. This, in turn, specifies the use of the bulk data entries,
HADAPTL and HADACRI that control all the refinement process (see next section for details):

ECHO = NONE
HADAPT = 1
PARAM POST 0
PARAM,INREL,-2
SUBCASE 1
TITLE=First mesh
LOAD = 2
DISPLACEMENT(PLOT,SORT1,REAL)=ALL
STRESS(PLOT,SORT1,REAL,VONMISES,BILIN)=ALL

Furthermore, the INREL parameter has been included with a value of ‘-2’ to activate the automatic inertia relief
process. It is needed (automatic or manual) because the structure is in free-free conditions (unrestrained). The output
request for displacement has been considered only to check the congruency of the deformation while the stress output
is what we really need for comparison with the theoretical results.
The Bulk Data Section contains the standard options for a linear static analysis plus the specific option for mesh
refinement control.
 CHAPTER 37 557
Local Adaptive Meshing

Mesh Refinement Process Definition

The following options have been added to the standard linear static analysis Bulk Data section to define the mesh
refinement process:
$----------------------------------------------------------------------
$ C A R D S F O R R E F I N E M E N T
$---1---$---2---$---3---$---4---$---5---$---6---$---7---$---8---$---9---
HADAPTL 1 7 1 PROP 2 1
+
HADACRI 1 1 0.9
$----------------------------------------------------------------------
The HADAPTL option specifies the local adaptive mesh refinement control parameters. In particular, referring to the
specific name associated to each field in the MD Nastran Quick Reference Guide, the process has been defined in this
way:

• REPEAT = 7 (5th field): maximum number of refinement cycles executed before the process is stopped
• CRITID = 1 (6th field): associated HADACRI option identifier
• WHEREMET = PROP (7th field): method used to specify the mesh refinement region subjected to the adaptivity
criteria referenced in the associated HADACRI. PROP means that all the elements associated to a specific
property option are considered by the refinement process
• WHEREID = 2 (8th field): Identifier of the mesh refinement region subjected to the selected adaptivity criteria.
Considering the WHEREMET value and the elements used in the finite element model, all the elements
associated to PSHELL which identifier is 2 will be involved in the refinement process
• SNAPMETH =1 (9th field): Method to project, snap, or relax new grid points on mid-edge or mid-face during
the refinement process. The selected value allows the projection onto a smooth approximation of the analysis
domain boundary interpolated from the mesh boundary.
• MAXLEVEL = default (2nd field in the second physical option for HADAPTL): Maximum refinement level
allowed for each individual element in the mesh. No elements will be refined to a level higher than the
specified value. The default value is equal to that one defined in the REPEAT field.
The HADACRI option specifies the mesh adaptivity criterion and the corresponding parameters. In this case, the
method based on a scalar error indicator has been chosen (TYPE = 1 in the 3rd field). According to this criterion a
scalar error indicator Ee is computed in the finite element mesh and an element ‘e’ will be refined if:
2
Ee
-1
--------------------------------
N
1
F 1  ----  E f
2
N
f= 1

where N is the total number of elements in the element set to which it belongs and F 1 is the value specified in the 4th
field of this option (in the specific case F 1 = 0.9 ). Note that the elemental error indicator is computed using the grid
point stresses following the procedure utilized by the ELSDCON Case Control command.
558 MD Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 37

Material Modeling
Isotropic elastic material properties of the deformable body are defined using the following MAT1 option as follows:
MAT1 1 6.9+10 .33 3200.

The Young’s modulus is taken to be 6.9 GPa with a Poisson’s ratio of 0.33. Mass density ( = 3200 Kg/mm3) has
also been specified to support the inertia relief process. Note that the results are not affected by the value included
in this field.

Loading and Boundary Conditions

No boundary conditions have been defined because the structure is not constrained.
The loading involves application of concentrated forces (to simulate uniform load distribution) at the nodes located on
the shortest edges of the plate:
$ Loads for Load Case : Case_2
LOAD 2 1. 1. 1 1. 3 1. 4
1. 5
$ Nodal Forces of Load Set : TENSILE_FORCE_Central_NEG
FORCE 1 252 0 20. -1. 0. 0.
FORCE 1 253 0 20. -1. 0. 0.
FORCE 1 254 0 20. -1. 0. 0.
FORCE 1 255 0 20. -1. 0. 0.
FORCE 1 256 0 20. -1. 0. 0.
FORCE 1 257 0 20. -1. 0. 0.
FORCE 1 258 0 20. -1. 0. 0.
FORCE 1 735 0 20. -1. 0. 0.
FORCE 1 736 0 20. -1. 0. 0.
FORCE 1 737 0 20. -1. 0. 0.
FORCE 1 738 0 20. -1. 0. 0.
FORCE 1 739 0 20. -1. 0. 0.
FORCE 1 740 0 20. -1. 0. 0.
$ Nodal Forces of Load Set : TENSILE_FORCE_Central_POS
FORCE 3 504 0 20. 1. 0. 0.
FORCE 3 505 0 20. 1. 0. 0.
FORCE 3 506 0 20. 1. 0. 0.
FORCE 3 507 0 20. 1. 0. 0.
FORCE 3 508 0 20. 1. 0. 0.
FORCE 3 509 0 20. 1. 0. 0.
FORCE 3 510 0 20. 1. 0. 0.
FORCE 3 959 0 20. 1. 0. 0.
FORCE 3 960 0 20. 1. 0. 0.
FORCE 3 961 0 20. 1. 0. 0.
FORCE 3 962 0 20. 1. 0. 0.
FORCE 3 963 0 20. 1. 0. 0.
FORCE 3 964 0 20. 1. 0. 0.
$ Nodal Forces of Load Set : TENSILE_FORCE_Ends_POS
FORCE 4 503 0 10. 1. 0. 0.
FORCE 4 958 0 10. 1. 0. 0.
$ Nodal Forces of Load Set : TENSILE_FORCE_Ends_NEG
FORCE 5 251 0 10. -1. 0. 0.
FORCE 5 734 0 10. -1. 0. 0.
 CHAPTER 37 559
Local Adaptive Meshing

Solution Procedure
According to the HADAPTL and HADACRI control options, the refinement process starts with a preliminary calculation
(CYCLE = 0 or ANALYSIS number 1) using the initial finite element model. Then, the refinement process starts and
continues up to a number of cycles equal to REPEAT (3rd field in HADAPTL). During these cycles, each element
involved will be refined up to MAXLEVEL value (2nd field in the second physical option in HADAPTL).
As result of each refinement cycle the following files will be generated (xxxx.bdf is the generic name of the input
file and):
• xxxx.n.bdf – It contains the grid points, the elements and the MPC options related to the refined mesh
created at the specific refinement cycle
• xxxx.n.xdb – It contains the model and the results for the specific refinement cycle.
where n is the number of the generic refinement cycle.
Furthermore, the standard files xxxx.log, xxxx.f04, xxxx.f06 are generated. In the last one, it is possible to read
some information about the refinement process show in the example below:
^^^------------------------------------------------------
^^^GLOBAL NUMBER OF ELEMENTS: 1096
^^^AVERAGE ERROR INDICATOR: 1.766260E+03
^^^CHANGE IN AVERAGE ERROR INDICATOR: 5.402161E-01 %
^^^------------------------------------------------------
^^^* * * E N D O F A N A L Y S I S #: 2 * * *
^^^------------------------------------------------------
by which it is possible to verify how it is proceeding and when the specific cycle is finished.

Results
The first result to analyze is the way in which the finite element mesh is changed during the refinement cycles. In the
figure below all the refined models are summarized. Note that the MPC relationships used to establish the congruency
between regions with different meshes are not displayed to make the images clearer.
560 MD Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 37

Refinement Cycle 1

Refinement Cycle 2

Refinement Cycle 3

Refinement Cycle 4

Refinement Cycle 5

Refinement Cycle 6

Refinement Cycle 7

Figure 37-3 Refined Finite Element Models

 CHAPTER 37 561
Local Adaptive Meshing

Looking at the refined meshes obtained in the subsequent cycles, it can be seen how important it is to activate a
projection onto a smooth approximation of the analysis domain boundary from the mesh boundary (SNAPMTHD field
in HADAPTL option). In fact, it avoids the creation of kinks that create two problems:
• Driving the refinement process around the geometrical singularities
• Generating stress concentration in the singular regions
Displacement output has been required only to verify the correctness of the solution in terms of deformed structure.
The use of PARAM.INREL,-2 enables a meaningful deformed structure in the case of free-free boundary conditions
(Figure 37-4). The deformation seems to be congruent with the applied loads.

Figure 37-4 Deformed Structure

Also, the stress distribution is as we expect.

Figure 37-5 von Mises Stress Distribution Relative to the Last Refinement Cycle

The stress level in the critical point is compared with the theoretical one and the relative stress concentration factor is
calculated. The resulting data are summarized in the following table together with other general information related
to refinement effects on mesh size and error indicator.

The error percentages are calculated according to the following relationship:

Calculated value – Theoretical value
Error% = ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  100
Theoretical value

while, as already mentioned, the stress concentration factor is calculated as:

 max
k t = -----------
-
 nom
562 MD Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 37

Referring to Table 37-1, the theoretical values for maximum stress and stress concentration factor are:

Maximum Stress = 150990 N/m2

Nominal Stress = 70000 N/m2
Stress Concentration Factor = 2.157

Table 37-2 Results Comparison

Maximum Stress
Global Average Stress
Refinement von Mises Concentration
Number of Error Concentration
Cycle elements Indicator
Stress
Factor
Factor Error
(N/mm2) (%)
0 880 - 115461.46 1.649 -23.53
1 1100 1756.77 130292.07 1.861 -13.71
2 1568 1766.26 137223.50 1.960 -9.12
3 2900 1582.74 141407.04 2.020 -6.35
4 6476 1211.11 145797-84 2.083 -3.44
5 16326 838.27 148861.35 2.127 -1.41
6 41060 530.66 150535.57 2.151 -0.30
7 98996 338.77 150545.23 2.151 -0.29

Two important considerations can be seen in Table 37-2:

• The evaluated stress concentration factor is close to the theoretical one. The relative error is about 0.3%.
• The differences between two subsequent maximum stresses decreases increasing the refinement level
(Figure 37-6).
 CHAPTER 37 563
Local Adaptive Meshing

Stress Concentration
2.5
σmax Theoretical (2.157)
Kt=
σnominal Numerical

2.0

Refinement Cycle

1.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Figure 37-6 Theoretical/Numerical Stress Concentration Factor Comparison

Modeling Tips
Some suggestions can be helpful to define the best refinement process:
The refinement can be limited using the field MAXLEVEL in the HADAPTL option. None of the elements in the mesh
will be refined to a level larger than MAXLEVEL. Limiting this process is necessary to avoid run-away refinement. In
this example, the default value (MAXLEVEL = REPEAT) has been used not only to test the right convergence towards
the theoretical stress but also the limited improvement introduced in the latest refinement cycles.
Kinks (e.g., sharp internal corners that lack C 1 continuity) should be avoided in order to limit their influence:

• on the refinement process (if they exist, the refinement is concentrated around the geometrical singularities)
• on results (avoiding kinks prevents fictitious stress singularities)
Kinks can be controlled defining SNAPMTHD = 1 in the HADAPTL option. In this example, the relaxation/projection
method has been activated for the grid points created by the procedure; to verify its positive effect, change SNAPMTHD
from 1 to 0 and see how the refinement process behaves. The refined meshes are concentrated along the geometrical
singularities (sharp corners or kinks of a polygonal hole) and the results (the maximum value always increases) will
continue to subdivide elements near the kinks.
564 MD Demonstration Problems
CHAPTER 37

Setting SNAPMTHD = 1 ensures the geometry of the hole is correctly represented during the refinement process. By
creating a cylindrical coordinate system at the center of the hole, all the grid points that have been generated on the
boundary are all at R = 0.1 m, exactly the radius of the circle (the error is on the fifth decimal digit). It confirms the
need to use the SNAPMTHD = 1 relaxation/projection procedure.

Input File(s)
File Description
nug_37.dat MD Nastran input file for local adaptive meshing example
nug_37.bdf MD Nastran input file for local adaptive meshing example used in video
nug37.SimXpert MD Nastran input file for local adaptive meshing example

Video
Click on the image or caption below to view a streaming video of this problem; it lasts approximately 30 minutes and
explains how the steps are performed.

H = 0.4 m
d = 0.2 m
s = 0.02 m
σmax
F = 280 N
F d H F

σnominal

Figure 37-7 Video of the Above Steps