Total energy (ETOTAL) is not zero and increasing (Abaqus)?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the behavior of total energy (ETOTAL) in a static analysis using Abaqus, particularly focusing on the differences observed between geometrical linear and non-linear analyses. Participants explore the implications of internal energy and work done in the context of static loading conditions.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that in geometrical linear analysis, internal energy (ALLIE) and work done (ALLWK) are equal, resulting in a total energy of zero.
  • Another participant clarifies that net forces on the element must total zero in static analysis, suggesting that internal energy should increase if work is done on the part.
  • A participant agrees that internal energy increases due to strain energy during loading and asserts that it should equal the external work done, assuming no dissipations.
  • However, the same participant questions why this relationship does not hold in geometrical non-linear analysis, where internal energy does not equal work done.
  • Another participant raises the possibility that the issue could be related to mesh quality, suggesting that more elements may be needed for accurate non-linear results.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the behavior of total energy in non-linear analysis, with some agreeing on the principles of energy conservation in static conditions while others highlight discrepancies in non-linear cases. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the reasons for the observed differences.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include potential dependencies on mesh quality and the assumptions underlying the analysis methods used. The discussion does not resolve the mathematical or conceptual discrepancies noted by participants.

hari123
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I have performed a small static analysis with one element (C3D8). The bottom face of element is completely constrained, and the top part is displaced.

In the geometrical linear analysis, the internal energy (ALLIE) and the work done (ALLWK) are equal. So, with ETOTAL = ALLIE - ALLWK, the total energy was zero. But in the case of geometrical non-linear analysis, ALLIE > ALLWK and the total energy (Etotal) was increasing over the time.

How is this possible ??, the total energy has to be constant, and should be zero for the case of static analysis.

Note:
Please find the attached inp file, and the energy plots for the linear and non-linear cases.
 

Attachments

  • Linear.png
    Linear.png
    4.8 KB · Views: 808
  • NonlineAR.png
    NonlineAR.png
    7.3 KB · Views: 819
  • Inputfile.txt
    Inputfile.txt
    1.8 KB · Views: 671
Engineering news on Phys.org
As a point of clarification, the net forces on the element must total up to zero if it's a static analysis. The internal energy should increase if the simulation is doing work on the part, right?
 
Yup, the internal energy will increase (due to increase in strain energy) during loading. And it should be technically equal to the external work done on the body. (assuming no dissipations and other factors).

This law (internal energy = workdone) can be observed in the geometrical linear version of my model (attached above). But in the case of geometrical no linear analysis, this law (internal energy ≠ workdone) is not satisfied, and i would like to know why?
 
Have you looked to see if this is a mesh problem? Could be that for accurate nonlinear results you need more elements?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K