Publications

Results 51–100 of 101
Skip to search filters

Sierra/SolidMechanics 4.50 Verification Tests Manual

Merewether, Mark T.; Plews, Julia A.; Crane, Nathan K.; de Frias, Gabriel J.; Le, San L.; Littlewood, David J.; Mosby, Matthew D.; Pierson, Kendall H.; Porter, V.L.; Shelton, Timothy S.; Thomas, Jesse D.; Tupek, Michael R.; Veilleux, Michael V.; Xavier, Patrick G.; Clutz, Christopher J.R.; Manktelow, Kevin M.

Presented in this document is a small portion of the tests that exist in the Sierra/SolidMechanics (Sierra/SM) verification test suite. Most of these tests are run nightly with the Sierra/SM code suite, and the results of the test are checked versus the correct analytical result. For each of the tests presented in this document, the test setup, a description of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra/SM code results to the analytic solution is provided. Mesh convergence is also checked on a nightly basis for several of these tests. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems. Additional example problems are provided in the Sierra/SM Example Problems Manual. Note, many other verification tests exist in the Sierra/SM test suite, but have not yet been included in this manual.

More Details

Sierra/SolidMechanics 4.50 Theory Manual

Merewether, Mark T.; Plews, Julia A.; Crane, Nathan K.; de Frias, Gabriel J.; Le, San L.; Littlewood, David J.; Mosby, Matthew D.; Pierson, Kendall H.; Porter, V.L.; Shelton, Timothy S.; Thomas, Jesse D.; Tupek, Michael R.; Veilleux, Michael V.; Xavier, Patrick G.; Manktelow, Kevin M.; Clutz, Christopher J.R.

Presented in this document are the theoretical aspects of capabilities contained in the Sierra / SM code. This manuscript serves as an ideal starting point for understanding the theoretical foundations of the code. For a comprehensive study of these capabilities, the reader is encouraged to explore the many references to scientific articles and textbooks contained in this manual. It is important to point out that some capabilities are still in development and may not be presented in this document. Further updates to this manuscript will be made as these capabilities come closer to production level.

More Details

A thermal-mechanical finite element workflow for directed energy deposition additive manufacturing process modeling

Additive Manufacturing

Stender, Michael S.; Beghini, Lauren L.; Sugar, Joshua D.; Veilleux, Michael V.; Subia, Samuel R.; Smith, Thale R.; San Marchi, Christopher W.; Brown, Arthur B.; Dagel, Daryl D.

This work proposes a finite element (FE) analysis workflow to simulate directed energy deposition (DED) additive manufacturing at a macroscopic length scale (i.e. part length scale) and to predict thermal conditions during manufacturing, as well as distortions, strength and residual stresses at the completion of manufacturing. The proposed analysis method incorporates a multi-step FE workflow to elucidate the thermal and mechanical responses in laser engineered net shaping (LENS) manufacturing. For each time step, a thermal element activation scheme captures the material deposition process. Then, activated elements and their associated geometry are analyzed first thermally for heat flow due to radiation, convection, and conduction, and then mechanically for the resulting stresses, displacements, and material property evolution. Simulations agree with experimentally measured in situ thermal measurements for simple cylindrical build geometries, as well as general trends of local hardness distribution and plastic strain accumulation (represented by relative distribution of geometrically necessary dislocations).

More Details

Sierra/Solid Mechanics 4.48 User's Guide

Merewether, Mark T.; Crane, Nathan K.; de Frias, Gabriel J.; Le, San L.; Littlewood, David J.; Mosby, Matthew D.; Pierson, Kendall H.; Porter, V.L.; Shelton, Timothy S.; Thomas, Jesse D.; Tupek, Michael R.; Veilleux, Michael V.; Gampert, Scott G.; Xavier, Patrick G.; Plews, Julia A.

Sierra/SolidMechanics (Sierra/SM) is a Lagrangian, three-dimensional code for finite element analysis of solids and structures. It provides capabilities for explicit dynamic, implicit quasistatic and dynamic analyses. The explicit dynamics capabilities allow for the efficient and robust solution of models with extensive contact subjected to large, suddenly applied loads. For implicit problems, Sierra/SM uses a multi-level iterative solver, which enables it to effectively solve problems with large deformations, nonlinear material behavior, and contact. Sierra/SM has a versatile library of continuum and structural elements, and a large library of material models. The code is written for parallel computing environments enabling scalable solutions of extremely large problems for both implicit and explicit analyses. It is built on the SIERRA Framework, which facilitates coupling with other SIERRA mechanics codes. This document describes the functionality and input syntax for Sierra/SM.

More Details

Sierra/SolidMechanics 4.48 Verification Tests Manual

Plews, Julia A.; Crane, Nathan K.; de Frias, Gabriel J.; Le, San L.; Littlewood, David J.; Merewether, Mark T.; Mosby, Matthew D.; Pierson, Kendall H.; Porter, V.L.; Shelton, Timothy S.; Thomas, Jesse D.; Tupek, Michael R.; Veilleux, Michael V.; Xavier, Patrick G.

Presented in this document is a small portion of the tests that exist in the Sierra / SolidMechanics (Sierra / SM) verification test suite. Most of these tests are run nightly with the Sierra / SM code suite, and the results of the test are checked versus the correct analytical result. For each of the tests presented in this document, the test setup, a description of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra / SM code results to the analytic solution is provided. Mesh convergence is also checked on a nightly basis for several of these tests. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems. Additional example problems are provided in the Sierra / SM Example Problems Manual. Note, many other verification tests exist in the Sierra / SM test suite, but have not yet been included in this manual.

More Details

Sierra/SolidMechanics 4.46 Example Problems Manual

Plews, Julia A.; Crane, Nathan K.; de Frias, Gabriel J.; Le, San L.; Littlewood, David J.; Merewether, Mark T.; Mosby, Matthew D.; Pierson, Kendall H.; Porter, V.L.; Shelton, Timothy S.; Thomas, Jesse D.; Tupek, Michael R.; Veilleux, Michael V.

Presented in this document are tests that exist in the Sierra/SolidMechanics example problem suite, which is a subset of the Sierra/SM regression and performance test suite. These examples showcase common and advanced code capabilities. A wide variety of other regression and verification tests exist in the Sierra/SM test suite that are not included in this manual.

More Details

Sierra/SolidMechanics 4.48 Capabilities in Development

Plews, Julia A.; Crane, Nathan K.; de Frias, Gabriel J.; Le, San L.; Littlewood, David J.; Merewether, Mark T.; Mosby, Matthew D.; Pierson, Kendall H.; Porter, V.L.; Shelton, Timothy S.; Thomas, Jesse D.; Tupek, Michael R.; Veilleux, Michael V.; Xavier, Patrick G.

This document is a user's guide for capabilities that are not considered mature but are available in Sierra/SolidMechanics (Sierra/SM) for early adopters. The determination of maturity of a capability is determined by many aspects: having regression and verification level testing, documentation of functionality and syntax, and usability are such considerations. Capabilities in this document are lacking in one or many of these aspects.

More Details

Library of Advanced Materials for Engineering (LAME) 4.48

Plews, Julia A.; Crane, Nathan K.; de Frias, Gabriel J.; Le, San L.; Littlewood, David J.; Merewether, Mark T.; Mosby, Matthew D.; Pierson, Kendall H.; Porter, V.L.; Shelton, Timothy S.; Thomas, Jesse D.; Tupek, Michael R.; Veilleux, Michael V.; Xavier, Patrick G.

Accurate and efficient constitutive modeling remains a cornerstone issues for solid mechanics analysis. Over the years, the LAME advanced material model library has grown to address this challenge by implement- ing models capable of describing material systems spanning soft polymers to stiff ceramics including both isotropic and anisotropic responses. Inelastic behaviors including (visco)plasticity, damage, and fracture have all incorporated for use in various analyses. This multitude of options and flexibility, however, comes at the cost of many capabilities, features, and responses and the ensuing complexity in the resulting imple- mentation. Therefore, to enhance confidence and enable the utilization of the LAME library in application, this effort seeks to document and verify the various models in the LAME library. Specifically, the broader strategy, organization, and interface of the library itself is first presented. The physical theory, numerical implementation, and user guide for a large set of models is then discussed. Importantly, a number of verifi- cation tests are performed with each model to not only have confidence in the model itself but also highlight some important response characteristics and features that may be of interest to end-users. Finally, in looking ahead to the future, approaches to add material models to this library and further expand the capabilities are presented.

More Details

Sierra/SolidMechanics 4.48 Goodyear Specific

Plews, Julia A.; Crane, Nathan K.; de Frias, Gabriel J.; Le, San L.; Littlewood, David J.; Merewether, Mark T.; Mosby, Matthew D.; Pierson, Kendall H.; Porter, V.L.; Shelton, Timothy S.; Thomas, Jesse D.; Tupek, Michael R.; Veilleux, Michael V.; Xavier, Patrick G.

This document covers Sierra/SolidMechanics capabilities specific to Goodyear use cases. Some information may be duplicated directly from the Sierra/SolidMechanics User's Guide but is reproduced here to provide context for Goodyear-specific options.

More Details

Sierra/SolidMechanics 4.48 User's Guide: Addendum for Shock Capabilities

Plews, Julia A.; Crane, Nathan K.; de Frias, Gabriel J.; Le, San L.; Littlewood, David J.; Merewether, Mark T.; Mosby, Matthew D.; Pierson, Kendall H.; Porter, V.L.; Shelton, Timothy S.; Thomas, Jesse D.; Tupek, Michael R.; Veilleux, Michael V.; Xavier, Patrick G.

This is an addendum to the Sierra/SolidMechanics 4.48 User's Guide that documents additional capabilities available only in alternate versions of the Sierra/SolidMechanics (Sierra/SM) code. These alternate versions are enhanced to provide capabilities that are regulated under the U.S. Department of State's International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) export-control rules. The ITAR regulated codes are only distributed to entities that comply with the ITAR export-control requirements. The ITAR enhancements to Sierra/SM in- clude material models with an energy-dependent pressure response (appropriate for very large deformations and strain rates) and capabilities for blast modeling. Since this is an addendum to the standard Sierra/SM user's guide, please refer to that document first for general descriptions of code capability and use.

More Details

Library of Advanced Materials for Engineering (LAME) 4.44

Plews, Julia A.; Crane, Nathan K.; de Frias, Gabriel J.; Le, San L.; Littlewood, David J.; Merewether, Mark T.; Mosby, Matthew D.; Pierson, Kendall H.; Porter, V.L.; Shelton, Timothy S.; Thomas, Jesse D.; Tupek, Michael R.; Veilleux, Michael V.; Xavier, Patrick G.

Accurate and efficient constitutive modeling remains a cornerstone issues for solid mechanics analysis. Over the years, the LAME advanced material model library has grown to address this challenge by implementing models capable of describing material systems spanning soft polymers to s ti ff ceramics including both isotropic and anisotropic responses. Inelastic behaviors including (visco) plasticity, damage, and fracture have all incorporated for use in various analyses. This multitude of options and flexibility, however, comes at the cost of many capabilities, features, and responses and the ensuing complexity in the resulting implementation. Therefore, to enhance confidence and enable the utilization of the LAME library in application, this effort seeks to document and verify the various models in the LAME library. Specifically, the broader strategy, organization, and interface of the library itself is first presented. The physical theory, numerical implementation, and user guide for a large set of models is then discussed. Importantly, a number of verification tests are performed with each model to not only have confidence in the model itself but also highlight some important response characteristics and features that may be of interest to end-users. Finally, in looking ahead to the future, approaches to add material models to this library and further expand the capabilities are presented.

More Details

Thermal mechanical finite element simulation of additive manufacturing; process modeling of the LENS process

American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Pressure Vessels and Piping Division (Publication) PVP

Stender, Michael S.; Beghini, Lauren L.; Veilleux, Michael V.; Subia, Samuel R.; Sugar, Joshua D.

Laser engineered net shaping (LENS) is an additive manufacturing process that presents a promising method of creating or repairing metal parts not previously feasible with traditional manufacturing methods. The LENS process involves the directed deposition of metal via a laser power source and a spray of metal powder co-located to create and feed a molten pool (also referred to generically as Directed Energy Deposition, DED). DED technologies are being developed for use in prototyping, repair, and manufacturing across a wide variety of materials including stainless steel, titanium, tungsten carbidecobalt, aluminum, and nickel based superalloys. However, barriers to the successful production and qualification of LENS produced or repaired parts remain. This work proposes a finite element (FE) analysis methodology capable of simulating the LENS process at the continuum length scale (i.e. part length scale). This method incorporates an element activation scheme wherein only elements that exceed the material melt temperature during laser heating are activated and carried through to subsequent analysis steps. Following the initial element activation calculation, newly deposited, or activated elements and the associated geometry, are carried through to thermal and mechanical analyses to calculate heat flow due to radiation, convection, and conduction as well as stresses and displacements. The final aim of this work is to develop a validated LENS process simulation capability that can accurately predict temperature history, final part shape, distribution of strength, microstructural properties, and residual stresses based on LENS process parameters.

More Details

Sandia fracture challenge 2: Sandia California’s modeling approach

International Journal of Fracture

Karlson, Kyle N.; Foulk, James W.; Brown, Arthur B.; Veilleux, Michael V.

The second Sandia Fracture Challenge illustrates that predicting the ductile fracture of Ti-6Al-4V subjected to moderate and elevated rates of loading requires thermomechanical coupling, elasto-thermo-poro-viscoplastic constitutive models with the physics of anisotropy and regularized numerical methods for crack initiation and propagation. We detail our initial approach with an emphasis on iterative calibration and systematically increasing complexity to accommodate anisotropy in the context of an isotropic material model. Blind predictions illustrate strengths and weaknesses of our initial approach. We then revisit our findings to illustrate the importance of including anisotropy in the failure process. Mesh-independent solutions of continuum damage models having both isotropic and anisotropic yields surfaces are obtained through nonlocality and localization elements.

More Details

The second Sandia Fracture Challenge: predictions of ductile failure under quasi-static and moderate-rate dynamic loading

International Journal of Fracture

Boyce, B.L.; Kramer, S.L.B.; Bosiljevac, Thomas B.; Corona, Edmundo C.; Moore, J.A.; Elkhodary, K.; Simha, C.H.M.; Williams, B.W.; Cerrone, A.R.; Nonn, A.; Hochhalter, J.D.; Bomarito, G.F.; Warner, J.E.; Carter, B.J.; Warner, D.H.; Ingraffea, A.R.; Zhang, T.; Fang, X.; Lua, J.; Chiaruttini, V.; Mazière, M.; Feld-Payet, S.; Yastrebov, V.A.; Besson, J.; Chaboche, J.L.; Lian, J.; Di, Y.; Wu, B.; Novokshanov, D.; Vajragupta, N.; Kucharczyk, P.; Brinnel, V.; Döbereiner, B.; Münstermann, S.; Neilsen, Michael K.; Dion, K.; Karlson, Kyle N.; Foulk, James W.; Brown, A.A.; Veilleux, Michael V.; Bignell, John B.; Sanborn, S.E.; Jones, C.A.; Mattie, P.D.; Pack, K.; Wierzbicki, T.; Chi, S.W.; Lin, S.P.; Mahdavi, A.; Predan, J.; Zadravec, J.; Gross, A.J.; Ravi-Chandar, K.; Xue, L.

Ductile failure of structural metals is relevant to a wide range of engineering scenarios. Computational methods are employed to anticipate the critical conditions of failure, yet they sometimes provide inaccurate and misleading predictions. Challenge scenarios, such as the one presented in the current work, provide an opportunity to assess the blind, quantitative predictive ability of simulation methods against a previously unseen failure problem. Rather than evaluate the predictions of a single simulation approach, the Sandia Fracture Challenge relies on numerous volunteer teams with expertise in computational mechanics to apply a broad range of computational methods, numerical algorithms, and constitutive models to the challenge. This exercise is intended to evaluate the state of health of technologies available for failure prediction. In the first Sandia Fracture Challenge, a wide range of issues were raised in ductile failure modeling, including a lack of consistency in failure models, the importance of shear calibration data, and difficulties in quantifying the uncertainty of prediction [see Boyce et al. (Int J Fract 186:5–68, 2014) for details of these observations]. This second Sandia Fracture Challenge investigated the ductile rupture of a Ti–6Al–4V sheet under both quasi-static and modest-rate dynamic loading (failure in (Formula presented.) 0.1 s). Like the previous challenge, the sheet had an unusual arrangement of notches and holes that added geometric complexity and fostered a competition between tensile- and shear-dominated failure modes. The teams were asked to predict the fracture path and quantitative far-field failure metrics such as the peak force and displacement to cause crack initiation. Fourteen teams contributed blind predictions, and the experimental outcomes were quantified in three independent test labs. Additional shortcomings were revealed in this second challenge such as inconsistency in the application of appropriate boundary conditions, need for a thermomechanical treatment of the heat generation in the dynamic loading condition, and further difficulties in model calibration based on limited real-world engineering data. As with the prior challenge, this work not only documents the ‘state-of-the-art’ in computational failure prediction of ductile tearing scenarios, but also provides a detailed dataset for non-blind assessment of alternative methods.

More Details
Results 51–100 of 101
Results 51–100 of 101