Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/springer-journals/the-efficiency-of-direct-integration-methods-in-elastic-contact-impact-u92sQj3JG4
References (10)
-
K.J. Bathe (1976)
Numerical Methods in Finite Element Analysis. Prentice-Hall -
J.T. Yeh W.H. Chen (1990)
Three-dimensional finite element analysis of static and dynamic contact problems with frictionComp. & Struc., 35
-
K. Bathe, E. Wilson (1976)
Numerical methods in finite element analysis -
Y.C. Fung (1982)
Foundation of Solid Mechanics. Prentice-Hall -
I.H. Guzelbey (1992)
Finite and boundary element analysis of elasto-plastic finite strain contact problems. [PhD Thesis] -
Y. Fung, D. Drucker (1966)
Foundation of Solid MechanicsJournal of Applied Mechanics, 33
-
T.J. Hughes (1987)
The Finite Element Methods: Linear Static and Dynamic Finite Element Analysis. Prentice Hall -
I.H. Guzelbey B. Kanber (2003)
Boundary element analysis of contact problems using artificial boundary node approachActa Mechanica Sinica, 19
-
A. Erklig (2003)
Finite element analysis of finite strain elasto-plastic impact problems. [PhD Thesis] -
O.C. Zienkiewicz (1971)
The Finite Element Methods in Engineering. 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill
- Publisher
- Springer Journals
- Copyright
- 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
- ISSN
- 0567-7718
- eISSN
- 1614-3116
- DOI
- 10.1007/s10409-005-0048-4
- Publisher site
- See Article on Publisher Site
Abstract
Abstract A comparison of direct integration methods is made and their efficiency is investigated for impact problems. Newmark, Wilson–θ, Central Difference and Houbolt Methods are used as direct integration methods. Impact analysis includes that of elastic and large deformation based upon updated Lagrangian including buckling check. The results show that the direct integration methods give different results in different contact-impact cases.
Journal
Acta Mechanica Sinica – Springer Journals
Published: Aug 1, 2005