# Structural Scale

Line 51: | Line 51: | ||

* Porcine Brain | * Porcine Brain | ||

**[[Coupled Dynamic Experiments/Modeling]] | **[[Coupled Dynamic Experiments/Modeling]] | ||

+ | * Woodpecker Beak | ||

+ | **[[Structure-mechanical properties relations]] | ||

== Geomaterials == | == Geomaterials == |

## Revision as of 22:22, 7 December 2013

Metals • Ceramics • Polymers • Biomaterials • Geomaterials • References

## Introduction

The key to structural scale applications is employing the "best" numerical method for the application. Typically, for solid mechanics, finite element methods are employed and used mostly for the engineering applications described in this CyberInfrastructure.

## Material Models

Finite element codes can be divided into two categories: implicit quasi-static codes and explicit dynamic (hydrodynamic) codes. Some examples of implicit quasi-static codes include commercial codes such as ABAQUS (Simulia), MSC Nastran, and ESI-Pamstamp. Some open network implicit codes include TAHOE and CALCULIX. Some examples of explicit dynamics codes include Dyna, LS-Dyna, Pronto, and ABAQUS-Explicit. TAHOE and CALCULIX also provide some explicit dynamics solvers as well.

## Metals

The structural scale information essentially requires the constitutive model that is received from the macroscale. Although common practice finite element analysis does not include heterogeneities from microstructures, defects, and inclusions within the mesh related to the constitutive model, the MSU plasticity-damage 1.0 model allows the incorporation of such materials science information. The quantities that can be included in this version of the constitutive model are the grain size, particle size and volume fraction of particles, pore size and volume fraction or pores (porosity level), nearest neighbor distances of pores and particles. Hence, each element in the finite element mesh would have a different value for each of the quantities and hence the strength and ductility of the material in those domains. Several examples that show that by not using the heterogenous distributions of microstructures, defects, and inclusions include the redesign of a Cadillac control arm ^{[1]}, the Corvette engine cradle ^{[2]}, and a powder metal steel engine bearing cap ^{[3]}.

Some examples of using different finite element simulations with associated input decks using our MSU plasticity-damage 1.0 can be garnered from the following locations:

- Cadillac control arm (ABAQUS-Implicit)
^{[1]} - Corvette cradle (ABAQUS-Implicit)
- Dodge Neon crash (LS-Dyna)
- Forming of aluminum plate (ABAQUS-Implicit)
- Crush of aluminum tube (ABAQUS-Explicit)
- Axial Crushing of Multi-Cell Multi-Corner Tubes (LS-Dyna)

#### Hydroforming

## Ceramics

## Polymers

### ISV Polymer Modeling

A general inelastic internal state variable model for amorphous glassy polymers

### Application

Characterization and failure analysis of a polymeric clamp hanger component

## Biomaterials

- Rams Horn
- Porcine Brain
- Woodpecker Beak

## Geomaterials

## References

- ↑
^{1.0}^{1.1}Horstemeyer, M.F., Wang, P., “Cradle-to-Grave simulation-Based Design Incorporating Multiscale Microstructure-Property Modeling: Reinvigorating Design with Science,”*J. Computer-Aided Materials Design*, Vol. 10, pp. 13-34, 2003. - ↑ M.F. Horstemeyer, D. Oglesby, J. Fan, P.M. Gullett, H. El Kadiri, Y. Xue, C. Burton, K. Gall, B. Jelinek, M.K. Jones, S. G. Kim, E.B. Marin, D.L. McDowell, A. Oppedal, N. Yang, “From Atoms to Autos: Designing a Mg Alloy Corvette Cradle by Employing Hierarchical Multiscale Microstructure-Property Models for Monotonic and Cyclic Loads,” MSU.CAVS.CMD.2007-R0001, 2007
- ↑ Hammi, Y, Horstemeyer, MF, Stone, T., Sanderow, H., Chernenkoff, R., Weber, G., "Powder-Metal Performance Modeling of Automotive Components AMD-410, 2009