0
Research Papers

Parallelized Finite Element Analysis of Knitted Textile Mechanical Behavior

[+] Author and Article Information
D. Liu

Theoretical and Applied Mechanics Group,
Department of Mechanical Engineering
and Mechanics,
Drexel University,
2991 W. School House. Ln., Apt. PW21,
Philadelphia, PA 19144

S. Koric

National Center for Supercomputing
Applications;
Department of Mechanical Science
and Engineering,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
Urbana, IL 61801

A. Kontsos

Theoretical and Applied Mechanics Group,
Department of Mechanical Engineering
and Mechanics,
Drexel University,
3141 Chestnut St.,
Philadelphia, PA 19104
e-mail: antonios.kontsos@drexel.edu

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Materials Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING MATERIALS AND TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received May 10, 2018; final manuscript received September 28, 2018; published online December 20, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Anna Pandolfi.

J. Eng. Mater. Technol 141(2), 021008 (Dec 20, 2018) (10 pages) Paper No: MATS-18-1132; doi: 10.1115/1.4041869 History: Received May 10, 2018; Revised September 28, 2018

Direct numerical simulations (DNS) of knitted textile mechanical behavior are for the first time conducted on high performance computing (HPC) using both the explicit and implicit finite element analysis (FEA) to directly assess effective ways to model the behavior of such complex material systems. Yarn-level models including interyarn interactions are used as a benchmark computational problem to enable direct comparison in terms of computational efficiency between explicit and implicit methods. The need for such comparison stems from both a significant increase in the degrees-of-freedom (DOFs) with increasing size of the computational models considered as well as from memory and numerical stability issues due to the highly complex three-dimensional (3D) mechanical behavior of such 3D architectured materials. Mesh and size dependency, as well as parallelization in an HPC environment are investigated. The results demonstrate a satisfying accuracy combined with higher computational efficiency and much less memory requirements for the explicit method, which could be leveraged in modeling and design of such novel materials.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Brechet, Y. , and Embury, J. D. , 2013, “Architectured Materials: Expanding Materials Space,” Scr. Mater., 68(1), pp. 1–3. [CrossRef]
Bouaziz, O. , Bréchet, Y. , and Embury, J. D. , 2008, “Heterogeneous and Architectured Materials: A Possible Strategy for Design of Structural Materials,” Adv. Eng. Mater., 10(1–2), pp. 24–36. [CrossRef]
Ashby, M. , 2013, “Designing Architectured Materials,” Scr. Mater., 68(1), pp. 4–7. [CrossRef]
Liu, D. , Christe, D. , Shakibajahromi, B. , Knittel, C. , Castaneda, N. , Breen, D. , Dion, G. , and Kontsos, A. , 2017, “On the Role of Material Architecture in the Mechanical Behavior of Knitted Textiles,” Int. J. Solids Struct., 109, pp. 101–111. [CrossRef]
Liu, D. , Shakibajahromi, B. , Dion, G. , Breen, D. , and Kontsos, A. , 2018, “A Computational Approach to Model Interfacial Effects on the Mechanical Behavior of Knitted Textiles,” ASME J. Appl. Mech., 85(4), p. 041007. [CrossRef]
dell′Isola, F. , Steigmann, D. , and Corte, A. D. , 2016, “Synthesis of Fibrous Complex Structures: Designing Microstructure to Deliver Targeted Macroscale Response,” ASME Appl. Mech. Rev., 67(6), p. 060804. [CrossRef]
Suard, M. , Martin, G. , Lhuissier, P. , Dendievel, R. , Vignat, F. , Blandin, J. J. , and Villeneuve, F. , 2015, “Mechanical Equivalent Diameter of Single Struts for the Stiffness Prediction of Lattice Structures Produced by Electron Beam Melting,” Addit. Manuf., 8, pp. 124–131. [CrossRef]
Machado, G. , Louche, H. , Alonso, T. , and Favier, D. , 2015, “Superelastic Cellular NiTi Tube-Based Materials: Fabrication, Experiments and Modeling,” Mater. Des., 65, pp. 212–220. [CrossRef]
Meza, L. R. , and Greer, J. R. , 2014, “Mechanical Characterization of Hollow Ceramic Nanolattices,” J. Mater. Sci., 49(6), pp. 2496–2508. [CrossRef]
Rodney, D. , Fivel, M. , and Dendievel, R. , 2005, “Discrete Modeling of the Mechanics of Entangled Materials,” Phys. Rev. Lett., 95, p. 108004. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Assidi, M. , Dos Reis, F. , and Ganghoffer, J.-F. , 2011, “Equivalent Mechanical Properties of Biological Membranes From Lattice Homogenization,” J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 4(8), pp. 1833–1845. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Laurent, C. P. , Latil, P. , Durville, D. , Rahouadj, R. , Geindreau, C. , Orgeas, L. , and Ganghoffer, J. F. , 2014, “Mechanical Behaviour of a Fibrous Scaffold for Ligament Tissue Engineering: Finite Elements Analysis vs. X-Ray Tomography Imaging,” J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 40, pp. 222–233. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Kutt, L. M. , Pifko, A. B. , Nardiello, J. A. , and Papazian, J. M. , 1998, “ Slow-Dynamic Finite Element Simulation of Manufacturing Processes,” Comput. Struct., 66(1), pp. 1–17. [CrossRef]
Sun, J. S. , Lee, K. H. , and Lee, H. P. , 2000, “Comparison of Implicit and Explicit Finite Element Methods for Dynamic Problems,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 105(1–2), pp. 110–118. [CrossRef]
Naghibi Beidokhti, H. , Janssen, D. , Khoshgoftar, M. , Sprengers, A. , Perdahcioglu, E. S. , Van den Boogaard, T. , and Verdonschot, N. , 2016, “A Comparison Between Dynamic Implicit and Explicit Finite Element Simulations of the Native Knee Joint,” Med. Eng. Phys., 38(10), pp. 1123–1130. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Prior, A. M. , 1994, “Applications of Implicit and Explicit Finite Element Techniques to Metal Forming,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 45(1–4), pp. 649–656. [CrossRef]
Choi, H.-H. , Hwang, S.-M. , Kang, Y. H. , Kim, J. , and Kang, B. S. , 2002, “Comparison of Implicit and Explicit Finite-Element Methods for the Hydroforming Process of an Automobile Lower Arm,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 20(6), pp. 407–413. [CrossRef]
Kugener, S. , 1995, “Simulation of the Crimping Process by Implicit and Explicit Finite Element Methods,” AMP J. Technol., 4, pp. 8–15.
Rust, W. , and Schweizerhof, K. , 2003, “Finite Element Limit Load Analysis of Thin-Walled Structures by ANSYS (Implicit), LS-DYNA (Explicit) and in Combination,” Thin-Walled Struct., 41(2–3), pp. 227–244. [CrossRef]
Harewood, F. J. , and McHugh, P. E. , 2007, “Comparison of the Implicit and Explicit Finite Element Methods Using Crystal Plasticity,” Comput. Mater. Sci., 39(2), pp. 481–494. [CrossRef]
Koric, S. , Hibbeler, L. C. , and Thomas, B. G. , 2009, “Explicit Coupled Thermo-Mechanical Finite Element Model of Steel Solidification,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 78(1), pp. 1–31. [CrossRef]
Jung, D. W. , and Yang, D. Y. , 1998, “ Step-Wise Combined Implicit–Explicit Finite-Element Simulation of Autobody Stamping Processes,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 83(13), pp. 245–260. [CrossRef]
Wang, R. , and Huawu, L. , 2012, Advances in Textile Engineering, Trans Tech Publications, Zurich, Switzerland.
Chapman, R. A. , 2013, Smart Textiles for Protection, Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, MA.
Lorussi, F. , Galatolo, S. , Bartalesi, R. , and De Rossi, D. , 2013, “Modeling and Characterization of Extensible Wearable Textile-Based Electrogonimeters,” IEEE Sens. J., 13(1), pp. 217–228.
Arjmandi, M. , Ramezani, M. , Giordano, M. , and Schmid, S. , 2017, “Finite Element Modelling of Sliding Wear in Three-Dimensional Woven Textiles,” Tribol. Int., 115, pp. 452–460. [CrossRef]
Karimian, M. , Hasania, H. , and Ajeli, S. , 2014, “Numerical Modeling of Bagging Behavior of Plain Weft Knitted Fabric Using Finite Element Method,” Indian J. Fibre Text. Res., 39, pp. 204–208. http://nopr.niscair.res.in/handle/123456789/28921
Dixit, A. , Misra, R. K. , and Mali, H. S. , 2014, “Compression Modeling of Plain Weave Textile Fabric Using Finite Elements,” Materialwiss. Werkstofftech., 45(7), pp. 600–610. [CrossRef]
Lin, H. , Clifford, M. J. , Long, A. C. , and Sherburn, M. , 2009, “Finite Element Modelling of Fabric Shear,” Modell. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng., 17(1), p. 015008. [CrossRef]
Vassiliadis, S. G. , Kallivretaki, A. E. , and Provatidis, C. G. , 2007, “Mechanical Simulation of the Plain Weft Knitted Fabrics,” Int. J. Clothing Sci. Technol., 19(2), pp. 109–130. [CrossRef]
Tran, P. , Ngo, T. , Yang, E. C. , Mendis, P. , and Humphries, W. , 2014, “Effects of Architecture on Ballistic Resistance of Textile Fabrics: Numerical Study,” Int. J. Damage Mech., 23(3), pp. 359–376. [CrossRef]
Rao, M. , Duan, Y. , Keefe, M. , Powers, B. , and Bogetti, T. , 2009, “Modeling the Effects of Yarn Material Properties and Friction on the Ballistic Impact of a Plain-Weave Fabric,” Compos. Struct., 89(4), pp. 556–566. [CrossRef]
Duan, Y. , Keefe, M. , Bogetti, T. , Cheeseman, B. , and Powers, B. , 2006, “A Numerical Investigation of the Influence of Friction on Energy Absorption by a High-Strength Fabric Subjected to Ballistic Impact,” Int. J. Impact Eng., 32(8), pp. 1299–1312. [CrossRef]
McKee, P. J. , Sokolow, A. C. , Yu, J. H. , Long, L. L. , and Wetzel, E. D. , 2017, “Finite Element Simulation of Ballistic Impact on Single jersey Knit Fabric,” Compos. Struct., 162, pp. 98–107. [CrossRef]
Durville, D. , 2012, “ Contact-Friction Modeling Within Elastic Beam Assemblies: An Application to Knot Tightening,” Comput. Mech., 49(6), pp. 687–707. [CrossRef]
Samadi, R. , and Robitaille, F. , 2014, “ Particle-Based Modeling of the Compaction of Fiber Yarns and Woven Textiles,” Textile Res. J., 84(11), pp. 1159–1173. [CrossRef]
Wang, Y. , and Sun, X. , 2001, “ Digital-Element Simulation of Textile Processes,” Compos. Sci. Technol., 61(2), pp. 311–319. [CrossRef]
Belytschko, T. , Liu, W. K. , Moran, B. , and Elkhodary, K. , 2013, Nonlinear Finite Elements for Continua and Structures, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
Koric, S. , and Thomas, B. G. , 2006, “Efficient Thermo-Mechanical Model for Solidification Processes,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 66(12), pp. 1955–1989. [CrossRef]
Hill, R. , 1965, “A Self-Consistent Mechanics of Composite Materials,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 13(4), pp. 213–222. [CrossRef]
Bathe, K.-J. , 2015, Finite Element Procedures, PHI Learning Private Limited, Delhi, India.
Peirce, F. T. , 1947, “Geometrical Principles Applicable to the Design of Functional Fabrics,” Text. Res. J., 17(3), pp. 123–147. [CrossRef]
Farin, G. , 2001, Curves and Surfaces for CAGD: A Practical Guide, 5th ed., Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington, MA.
Catmull, E. , and Rom, R. , 1974, “A Class of Local Interpolating Splines,” Computer Aided Geometric Design, Academic Press, New York.
ABAQUS, 2013, “User's Manual, Version 6.13,” Dassault Systems, Pawtucket, RI.
iForge, 2017, “ iForge-NCSA's IIndustrial HPC resource,” iForge.
Koric, S. , and Gupta, A. , 2016, “Sparse Matrix Factorization in the Implicit Finite Element Method on Petascale Architecture,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 302, pp. 281–292. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

(a) Number of SDI and EQI and (b) reaction force versus course strain of implicit simulation for different mesh size

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Reaction force comparisons for implicit with/without stabilization (a) and out-of-plane contour for implicit without stabilization (b) and with stabilization (c)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

(a) Out-of-plane motion (U3) resulting from the contact and friction behavior between yarns; (b) motions of contact zones observed for each yarn including combined rotation, sliding and spin about the yarn's centerline; and (c) reaction force of a 3 × 3 model under course tensile loading

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Flowchart of SDI and EQI in implicit scheme with contact and friction behavior

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Parametric geometry based on material characterization (a), spline curves built by control points (b) and a 3 × 3 finite element model (c) for knitted textile

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

(a) Different domain size defined by number of unit cell and (b) strain energy per unit cell for domain size from 3 × 3 to 12 × 12

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

von Mises stress contour for explicit analysis within 100% CT (a) and 10% CT (b); kinetic energy and strain energy comparisons between implicit static analysis and explicit analysis within 100% CT (c) and 10% CT (d)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Reaction force comparison between implicit and explicit simulations for domain: (a) 3 × 3, (b) 6 × 6, (c) 9 × 9, and (d) 12 × 12

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Wall clock time ratio (implicit/explicit) and energy ratio (kinetic energy/strain energy) evolution for different domain size from 3 × 3 to 12 × 12

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Comparisons of (a) reaction force and (b) out-of-plane motion contour between implicit (top) and explicit (bottom) analysis for c15w15

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Comparison between implicit and explicit solver for wall clock time versus number of parallel process

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison between implicit and explicit solver for parallel speed-up

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison between implicit and explicit solver for peak nodal memory consumption

Tables

Errata

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In