Nonlinear Analysis of Cables and Ropes
Theory and Physics
Cable Nonlinearity
Professor, why is cable analysis nonlinear?
Cables have zero compressive stiffness (only transmit tension) and their shape changes significantly under load. Like a catenary (suspended cable), they sag under self-weight, and their stiffness changes with tension. They are inherently geometrically nonlinear.
Catenary Theory
Catenary curve of a cable under self-weight:
$H$ is horizontal tension, $w$ is weight per unit length.
Modeling in FEM
Summary
Suspension Bridge Cables and the Chain Problem
The natural shape (catenary curve) of a suspension bridge cable was mistakenly described as a parabola by Galileo in 1638, and the correct formula y=a·cosh(x/a) was derived by Huygens in 1691. The equation for this catenary curve was also solved independently around the same time by Leibniz and Bernoulli, making it one of the most intense examples of independent discovery competition in mathematical history. FEM cable analysis finds the suspended shape through geometrically nonlinear iterations that update nodal coordinates.
Physical Meaning of Each Term
- Inertia term (mass term): $\rho \ddot{u}$, i.e., "mass × acceleration". Have you ever experienced being thrown forward when slamming on the brakes? That "feeling of being carried away" is precisely the inertial force. Heavier objects are harder to set in motion and harder to stop once moving. Buildings shake during earthquakes because the ground moves suddenly while the building's mass "gets left behind". In static analysis, this term is set to zero, which assumes "forces are applied slowly enough that acceleration can be ignored". It absolutely cannot be omitted for impact loads or vibration problems.
- Stiffness term (elastic restoring force): $Ku$ and $\nabla \cdot \sigma$. When you pull a spring, you feel a "force trying to return it", right? That's Hooke's law $F=kx$, the essence of the stiffness term. Now a question—if you pull an iron rod and a rubber band with the same force, which stretches more? Obviously the rubber band. This "resistance to stretching" is the Young's modulus $E$, which determines stiffness. A common misconception: "high stiffness = strong" is incorrect. Stiffness is "resistance to deformation", strength is "resistance to failure"—they are different concepts.
- External force term (load term): Body force $f_b$ (gravity, etc.) and surface force $f_s$ (pressure, contact force, etc.). Think of it this way—the weight of a truck on a bridge is a "force acting on the entire volume" (body force), while the force of the tires pushing on the road surface is a "force acting only on the surface" (surface force). Wind pressure, water pressure, bolt tightening force... all are external forces. A typical pitfall here: getting the load direction wrong. Intending "tension" but ending up with "compression"—it sounds like a joke, but it actually happens when coordinate systems are rotated in 3D space.
- Damping term: Rayleigh damping $C\dot{u} = (\alpha M + \beta K)\dot{u}$. Try plucking a guitar string. Does the sound continue forever? No, it gradually fades away, right? That's because vibrational energy is converted to heat by air resistance and internal friction in the string. Car shock absorbers work on the same principle—they intentionally absorb vibrational energy to improve ride comfort. What if damping were zero? Buildings would keep swaying forever after an earthquake. Since that doesn't happen in reality, setting appropriate damping is crucial.
Assumptions and Applicability Limits
- Continuum assumption: Treats material as a continuous medium, ignoring microscopic heterogeneity.
- Small deformation assumption (for linear analysis): Deformation is sufficiently small compared to initial dimensions, and the stress-strain relationship is linear.
- Isotropic material (unless otherwise specified): Material properties are independent of direction (anisotropic materials require separate tensor definition).
- Quasi-static assumption (for static analysis): Ignores inertial and damping forces, considering only the balance between external and internal forces.
- Non-applicable cases: For large deformation/large rotation problems, geometric nonlinearity is required. For plasticity, creep, and other nonlinear material behaviors, constitutive law extensions are needed.
Dimensional Analysis and Unit Systems
| Variable | SI Unit | Notes / Conversion Memo |
|---|---|---|
| Displacement $u$ | m (meter) | When inputting in mm, unify loads and elastic modulus to MPa/N system. |
| Stress $\sigma$ | Pa (Pascal) = N/m² | MPa = 10⁶ Pa. Be careful of unit system inconsistency when comparing with yield stress. |
| Strain $\varepsilon$ | Dimensionless (m/m) | Note the distinction between engineering strain and logarithmic strain (for large deformations). |
| Elastic modulus $E$ | Pa | Steel: ~210 GPa, Aluminum: ~70 GPa. Note temperature dependence. |
| Density $\rho$ | kg/m³ | In mm system: tonne/mm³ (= 10⁻⁹ tonne/mm³ for steel). |
| Force $F$ | N (Newton) | Unify as N in mm system, N in m system. |
Numerical Methods and Implementation
FEM Settings for Cables
```
*ELEMENT, TYPE=T3D2 $ 3D truss element
*NO COMPRESSION $ No compression
*STEP, NLGEOM=YES
*STATIC
```
Determining Initial Shape (Form-finding)
Finding the initial shape (catenary) of a cable using FEM:
Finding the initial shape (catenary) of a cable using FEM:
1. Apply self-weight to the cable.
2. Find the equilibrium shape with NLGEOM=YES.
3. Use the obtained shape as the initial shape.
Summary
Cable Finite Element Formulation and Elastic Catenary
FEM for cables includes bar elements (tension only) and more accurate elastic catenary elements. Elastic catenary elements analytically account for self-weight and elastic deformation within the element, allowing accurate shape representation even for long cables (spanning hundreds of meters) with just a few elements. To achieve the same accuracy with bar elements, mesh refinement is needed so that sag per element is less than 2% of the slack, increasing the number of elements by 50-100 times.
Linear Elements (1st-order elements)
Linear interpolation between nodes. Low computational cost but lower stress accuracy. Beware of shear locking (mitigated with reduced integration or B-bar method).
Quadratic Elements (with mid-side nodes)
Can represent curved deformation. Stress accuracy improves significantly, but degrees of freedom increase by about 2-3 times. Recommended when stress evaluation is critical.
Full integration vs Reduced integration
Full integration: Risk of over-constraint (locking). Reduced integration: Risk of hourglass modes (zero-energy modes). Choose appropriately for the situation.
Adaptive Mesh
Automatic refinement based on error indicators (e.g., ZZ estimator). Efficiently improves accuracy in stress concentration areas. Includes h-method (element subdivision) and p-method (increasing order).
Newton-Raphson Method
Standard method for nonlinear analysis. Updates tangent stiffness matrix every iteration. Provides quadratic convergence within convergence radius but has high computational cost.
Modified Newton-Raphson Method
Updates tangent stiffness matrix using initial value or every few iterations. Lower cost per iteration but linear convergence speed.
Convergence Criteria
Force residual norm: $||R|| / ||F_{ext}|| < \epsilon$ (typically $\epsilon = 10^{-3}$ to $10^{-6}$). Displacement increment norm: $||\Delta u|| / ||u|| < \epsilon$. Energy norm: $\Delta u \cdot R < \epsilon$
Load Increment Method
Applies load in small increments rather than all at once. The arc-length method (Riks method) can trace beyond limit points on the load-displacement curve.
Analogy: Direct Method vs Iterative Method
The direct method is like "solving simultaneous equations accurately with pen and paper"—reliable but takes too long for large-scale problems. The iterative method is like "repeatedly guessing to approach the correct answer"—starts with a rough answer but improves accuracy with each iteration. It's the same principle as looking up a word in a dictionary: it's more efficient to open it at an estimated location and adjust forward/backward (iterative method) than to search sequentially from the first page (direct method).
Relationship Between Mesh Order and Accuracy
1st-order elements are like "approximating a curve with a ruler"—represented by straight line segments, so accuracy is limited. 2nd-order elements are like a "flexible curve"—can represent curved changes, dramatically improving accuracy even at the same mesh density. However, computational cost per element increases, so judgment should be based on total cost-effectiveness.
Practical Guide
Cable Practice
Suspension bridge cables, power transmission lines, marine risers, crane wires, etc.
Practical Checklist
Akashi Kaikyō Bridge Cable Analysis
The main cables of the Akashi Kaikyō Bridge (main span 1991m, completed 1998) consist of 290 bundles of Φ127mm PWS (Parallel Wire Strand), with a single cable diameter of 1.12m and total weight of 50,000 tons. During design, shape changes due to wind loads, earthquakes, and temperature variations were evaluated using FEM nonlinear cable analysis, confirming that the deflection at the top of the main towers would be up to 3.8m (for a design temperature difference of 50°C).
Analogy for Analysis Flow
The analysis flow is actually very similar to cooking. First, you buy ingredients (prepare CAD model), do the prep work (mesh generation), apply heat (solver execution), and finally plate it (visualization in post-processing). Here's an important question—which step in cooking is most prone to failure? Actually, it's the "prep work". If mesh quality is poor, the results will be a mess no matter how good the solver is.
Common Pitfalls for Beginners
Are you checking mesh convergence? Do you think "the calculation ran = the results are correct"? This is actually the most common trap for CAE beginners. The solver will always return "some answer" for the given mesh. But if the mesh is too coarse, that answer will be far from reality. Confirm that results stabilize across at least three levels of mesh density—neglecting this leads to the dangerous assumption that "the computer gave the answer, so it must be correct".
Thinking About Boundary Conditions
Setting boundary conditions is like "writing the problem statement" for an exam. If the problem statement is wrong? No matter how accurately you calculate, the answer will be wrong. "Is this surface really fully fixed?" "Is this load really uniformly distributed?"—Correctly modeling real-world constraint conditions is often the most critical step in the entire analysis.
Software Comparison
Cable Tools
SAP2000 Cable Element Track Record
Computers & Structures' SAP2000 is a standard software for cable structure analysis, featuring a standard elastic catenary cable element. It is used worldwide for designing cable-stayed bridges, suspension bridges, and tensegrity structures, and was also used for the nonlinear analysis of the dome stadium in Kaohsiung, Taiwan (300m diameter cable roof). Its OAPI (Open Application Programming Interface), which allows automation of analysis from Python, is highly valued by design firms.
Three Most Important Questions for Selection
- "What are you solving?": Does it have the necessary physical models/element types for nonlinear analysis of cables/ropes? For example, for fluids, the presence of LES support; for structures, the capability to handle contact/large deformation makes the difference.
- "Who will use it?": For beginner teams, tools with rich GUI are suitable; for experienced users, flexible script-driven tools are better. Similar to the difference between automatic transmission (GUI) and manual transmission (scripting) in cars.
- "How far will you expand?": Selection considering future expansion of analysis scale (HPC support), expansion to other departments, and integration with other tools leads to long-term cost reduction.
Advanced Technology
Advanced Cable Research
Wind-induced Vibration and Cable Dynamic Instability
Cables of long-span bridges face problems with "rain-wind induced vibration". When raindrops adhere to the cable surface, changing its cross-sectional shape, aerodynamic instability (galloping) can be induced. This phenomenon, which occurred on the Yokohama Bay Bridge in the 1990s, was addressed by installing dampers (vibration control devices) and applying surface grooving. The phenomenon was reproduced and analyzed through coupled simulation of FFT analysis and elastic cable FEM.
Troubleshooting
Cable Troubles
Related Topics
なった
詳しく
報告