Hi
I have a problem where I am trying to vary the stiffness spatially across a structured interface. The whole idea is to vary the stiffness vertically, with a bulk stiffness of 8GPa decreasing smoothly over 100 micrometres to 2GPa. To achieve this I have been using the USDFLD subroutine in Abaqus to create a functionally graded material. The base Fortran code Ive started with is attached as txt file.
To vary the stiffness I have created a field variable to relate Young's modulus to the y-coordinate system which would be really easy to get the desired result if it was just one part (as shown in the contour plot). The main issue I have with varying stiffness when both parts are present in the assembly is the area where these intersect each other vertically prevents my current code from working. Im very new to using subroutines, I think it should be fairly easy to create a code to enable the stiffness to vary for both identical parts.
The code I have works for one part, so would it be possible to take the functionally graded component and export it as a part and then assemble and add boundary conditions from there?
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Alex
what kind of analysis do you want to perform? i would try the temperatur method to assign the functionally graded material. It is much easier to implement and you dont need to code.
here is an example:
https://youtu.be/muoL_nmWcew
Hi Ronald Heinz Norbert Wagner , thanks for your help!
Its a static implicit analysis, I have the two structured interfaces and there are loaded in tension representing a single lap joint setup.
The temperature method and it seems to be quite an efficient way to model the variation in stiffness. Im having an issue with defining the analytical field correctly.
Ive currently set the 'temperature' data to correspond to the y-axis starting from the origin to the top of one of the parts (0.0076), this is FGM material. To vary the stiffness for the second part (top component), Ive created a second material (FGM-2) with stiffness and coordinates corresponding from bottom to top of 0.0075 to 0.0151.
The analytical field I have in the image suggests that the 'temperature' variable starts high and decreases from top to bottom instead of being high for both bulk parts and decreasing at the interface.
Hope that explanation makes sense, if you have any suggestions as to where things might have went awry that would be great!
Alex
The analytical field looks fine to me, starts at y = 0 and increases from there on, you have to define the material data accordingly. Keep in mind that, you use the temperatur as a coordinate. You only need one material. If you still have problems send me a detail of the geometry and i will publish a video on my youtube channel.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Engineering
- Mechanical Engineering