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

AI Thread Summary
In a static analysis using a single C3D8 element, the total energy (ETOTAL) was zero, aligning with the principle that internal energy (ALLIE) equals work done (ALLWK). However, during geometrical non-linear analysis, ALLIE exceeded ALLWK, resulting in an increasing total energy over time. This raises questions about the conservation of energy in static conditions, as total energy should remain constant and zero. The discussion suggests that the discrepancy may be linked to mesh quality, indicating that a finer mesh could yield more accurate non-linear results. The inquiry seeks clarification on why the internal energy does not equal the work done in the non-linear scenario.
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: 780
  • NonlineAR.png
    NonlineAR.png
    7.3 KB · Views: 793
  • Inputfile.txt
    Inputfile.txt
    1.8 KB · Views: 648
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?
 
How did you find PF?: Via Google search Hi, I have a vessel I 3D printed to investigate single bubble rise. The vessel has a 4 mm gap separated by acrylic panels. This is essentially my viewing chamber where I can record the bubble motion. The vessel is open to atmosphere. The bubble generation mechanism is composed of a syringe pump and glass capillary tube (Internal Diameter of 0.45 mm). I connect a 1/4” air line hose from the syringe to the capillary The bubble is formed at the tip...
Thread 'Physics of Stretch: What pressure does a band apply on a cylinder?'
Scenario 1 (figure 1) A continuous loop of elastic material is stretched around two metal bars. The top bar is attached to a load cell that reads force. The lower bar can be moved downwards to stretch the elastic material. The lower bar is moved downwards until the two bars are 1190mm apart, stretching the elastic material. The bars are 5mm thick, so the total internal loop length is 1200mm (1190mm + 5mm + 5mm). At this level of stretch, the load cell reads 45N tensile force. Key numbers...
I'd like to create a thread with links to 3-D Printer resources, including printers and software package suggestions. My motivations are selfish, as I have a 3-D printed project that I'm working on, and I'd like to buy a simple printer and use low cost software to make the first prototype. There are some previous threads about 3-D printing like this: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/are-3d-printers-easy-to-use-yet.917489/ but none that address the overall topic (unless I've missed...
Back
Top