XANSYS Message: 23713 [Go back to message list]
No rating yet
Rate item:

Subject: Re: contact question
Author: DENNIS NILSSON dennis.nilsson.656@
Date: 2001-05-12 08:43:00

Lunyu,
If you had followed the XANSYS netiquette you'd probably got your
answers already!!!

If comparing the two methods by accuracy and efficiency the main
differences are:
For accuracy, the kinematic contact condition is always exactly
enforced in the Lagrange multiplier method, thus making this method
always the most accurate. The penalty method always introduces
penetrations, which can be controlled by changing the penalty
parameter. The accuracy of the penalty method therefor depends on the
choice of the penalty parameter. Too small penalty parameter gives
large penetrations, which may give unacceptable errors. Too big penalty
parameter may produce numerical problems in the solution process.

For efficiency, the Lagrange multiplier method introduces new unknowns
(the Lagrange multipliers), thus it always increases the dimension of
the equation system to be solved, which may increase the time for
solving the problem. The penalty method does not introduce new unknowns
and therefor does not expand the equation system to be solved. However,
extra contributions are added to the global stiffness matrix and these
changes the profile of the stiffness matrix.

You have to choose the right method carefully depending of the problem
you are running. If you are running and implicit solution you can
choose both the Lagrange multiplier and the Penalty method. But for an
explicit solution only the Penalty method is avaliable. However, this
is not really true, the Lagrange method can be used in an explicit
solution toghether with a time intregration method to obtain an
explicit-implicit method.

It think you have to sit down and read some contact matrerial before
you start running a contact analysis to make sure you understand the
difference between the Lagrange multiplier method and the Penalty
method. Notice that there are two more methods, the Augmented and the
Pertubed method.
Best regards

ANKER - ZEMER Design AB
Dennis Nilsson
MSc Mech.Eng, Application Engineer CAE
dennis.nilsson@a...

----- Original Message -----

> I am also working on contact problem. But I am not familiar with
> it.
> Is there anyone who knows the penalty function and lagrange
> multiplier?

> Thanks


Posts possibly associated with message #23713AuthorDateScore
23694contact questionlunyu_ma@2001/05/11 
23713Re: contact questionDENNIS NILSSON dennis.nilsson.656@2001/05/12 
35625Another Contact QuestionMark Roman2002/04/02 
35651Re: Another Contact QuestionJoel Berg jlb@2002/04/03 
35654Re: Another Contact QuestionRick Fischer2002/04/03 
35658Re: Another Contact QuestionNeil Hodge2002/04/03 
35675Re: Another Contact QuestionMark Roman2002/04/03 
35679Re: Another Contact QuestionNeil Hodge2002/04/03-5
35681Re: Another Contact QuestionNeil Hodge2002/04/03 
35684Re: Another Contact QuestionRick Fischer2002/04/035
35686Re: Another Contact QuestionMark Roman2002/04/03 
35687Re: Another Contact QuestionNeil Hodge2002/04/03 
35690Re: Another Contact QuestionRick Fischer2002/04/03 
35692Re: Another Contact QuestionMark Roman2002/04/03 
35707Re: Another Contact QuestionRick Fischer2002/04/04 
46462Contact Question (cont173-target170)men9pi Men9pi@2003/02/06 
46463Re: Contact Question (cont173-target170)Moez Jellouli2003/02/06 
46464Re: Contact Question (cont173-target170)Men9pi@2003/02/06