Four bar linkage odd behaviour? (Simscape Multibody)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rodders
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Linkage multibody
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on unexpected behavior observed in the four bar linkage simulation using Mathworks Simscape Multibody. The user compared results with Autodesk Inventor, which behaved as anticipated, while Simscape exhibited erratic dynamics when initial positions were altered. Key parameters included densities and volumes of the connector, rocker, and crank links, with no friction or external forces applied. The user concluded that the simulation's behavior deviated from expected physical principles, particularly regarding equilibrium positions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Simscape Multibody 2023 for simulation modeling.
  • Familiarity with Autodesk Inventor for mechanical simulations.
  • Knowledge of four bar linkage mechanisms and their dynamics.
  • Basic principles of physics related to equilibrium and forces.
NEXT STEPS
  • Investigate the impact of initial conditions on Simscape Multibody simulations.
  • Learn about the physics of four bar linkages and their equilibrium states.
  • Explore advanced features of Autodesk Inventor for dynamic simulations.
  • Review Mathworks documentation on troubleshooting simulation discrepancies.
USEFUL FOR

Mechanical engineers, simulation specialists, and anyone involved in modeling dynamic systems using Simscape Multibody or Autodesk Inventor will benefit from this discussion.

Rodders
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Dear community,

I posted this thread in Mathworks Simscape Community two days ago or so. And I have decided to record a video and post all the information in this forum. This is my first time, so hello and thanks for reading!

Last month I was playing around with Simscape Multibody and I realized something. They have a "four bar linkage" preset to simulate its physical behaviour, so I changed a bit the initial positions and I found this:



I have simulated the same mechanism in Autodesk Inventor and It behaves as I expected (as a pendulum). I supposed that the simmetric position in this case should be the equilibrium position, the attractor.

Then, I decided to create a new simulation in Matlab and this very weird situation popped up. But I do not see why, how, where... I mean, It goes far beyond my understanding.

Some data are:

-Connector Link (Yellow bar):
-Density: 1000 kg/m^3
-Volume: 10x2x0.5 cm^3

-Rocker Link (Red bar):
-Density: 100 kg/m^3
-Volume: 25x2x0.5 cm^3

-Crank Link (Blue bar):
-Density: 100 kg/m^3
-Volume: 25x2x0.5 cm^3

Conditions:
-No friction.
-No external foces.
-Just gravitation acting.
-State targets (initial positions): specified in the video. Sorry about the size. Please watch full screen in 1080.

I would appreciate your comments on this issue, please, I really need it...

Thanks again!
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
So, what exactly is the issue? Looks to me like the simulation is not reflecting reality due to some minuscule unbalance in forces.
 
Thanks for your feedback Mech_Engineer, really appreciate it.

I have refused the possibility you mention because, when initial positions are eliminated (see 1:28 in the embedded video) the linkage behaves as expected. It oscillates around the equilibrium position (the attractor), the simmetric position. I cannot believe that just by changing its initial position, the physical behaviour could vary in such a different way...

I have simulated dynamically the linkage in Autodesk Inventor, and it behaves as shown in the video below:



It definitely looks better... I refuse to believe that a change in initial position might affect (in this way) the dynamics of the mechanism.

To double-check the dynamics of this mechanism, I have simulated in Matlab the mechanism and I have come across the following result:



My results are quite similar to Simscape Multibody (similarly wrong?).
As you can see (adjusting the resolution to 1080p), it seems there is an attractor when the angle on the upper-left is set to 0.7 Rad, the mechanism shows a minimal displacement. It seems that this position is its equilibrium position, but this is definitely wrong, as it is supposed to be the simmetric position.

I feel quite lost in this regard... Sometimes physical problems are quite frustrating and mind blowers. This one is blowing my self-esteem! XD

Thanks a lot for your time, hope anyone can help me...
 
Solved in Mathworks Community (link to the thread).

Thanks to everyone
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
17K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K