machines
Article
Vibro-Impact Response Analysis of Collision with
Clearance: A Tutorial
Yongjie Xu 1 , Yu Tian 1 , Qiyu Li 1 , Yanbin Li 2 , Dahai Zhang 2 and Dong Jiang 1, *
Citation: Xu, Y.; Tian, Y.; Li, Q.; Li, Y.;
Zhang, D.; Jiang, D. Vibro-Impact
Response Analysis of Collision with
Clearance: A Tutorial. Machines 2022,
10, 814. https://doi.org/10.3390/
machines10090814
Academic Editor: Jiaying Zhang
Received: 14 August 2022
Accepted: 9 September 2022
Published: 16 September 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Machines 2022, 10, 814. https://doi.org/10.3390/machines10090814
1 School of Mechanical and Electronic Engineering, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
2 Institute of Aerospace Machinery and Dynamics, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China
* Correspondence: jiangdong@njfu.edu.cn
Abstract: A collision with clearance causes obvious nonlinearity in structures, and dynamic response
analysis plays an important role in predicting the mechanical performance of the structure. The
general form of the nonlinear dynamic equation of a structure and the clearance modeling method
are introduced, and the clearance-caused nonlinear term is expressed by nonlinear impact forces.
Different clearance collision models of local nonlinear structures are presented. The relationships
between different impact forces and clearances are analyzed by two rigid sphere models. The solution
methods of the nonlinear dynamic equation are compared by a vibro-impact response, such as
the Newmark-β method combined with the Newton–Raphson method, generalized α method and
precise integration method. The single degree of freedom model is adopted to compare the efficiency
of the different numerical integration algorithms. Taking the beam structure model as a case study,
the accurate nonlinear collision model with clearance is established by using the impact force model
with high accuracy, and the accuracy of the model is verified by comparing the reference model with
the numerical model.
Keywords: clearance; impact force; vibro-impact response; nonlinear dynamic equation
1. Introduction
Due to a collision with clearance, the vibration of a structure will be significantly
aggravated. The accuracy and working efficiency will be reduced [1–3]. The nonlinear
force generated by the clearance will affect the vibration of the structure [4,5]. It is of critical
significance to study the nonlinear characteristics of a collision.
Clearances in structures have gradually attracted attention, and are always represented
as a contact force model [6–11]. Askari et al. [12] established a nonlinear contact model in
a closed form by using multiple sets of spring-damping elements to equal the spherical
hinge contact. Considering the changes in contact surfaces, Li et al. [13] established a
comprehensive wear prediction method for multi-clearance joint planar mechanical systems
and used the improved nonlinear contact force model to evaluate the internal forces of
joints. Venanzi et al. [14] introduced a method to evaluate the influence of clearance on
the precision of a kinematic pair. Flores et al. [15] made a comprehensive analysis of the
continuous contact force model of soft materials in multi-body dynamics. Wang et al. [16]
established a contact force model suitable for a spherical hinge by substituting the neutral
stiffness coefficient of the Flores model with the nonlinear stiffness coefficient. Tian et al. [17]
gave a comprehensive review of analytical, numerical and experimental methods for multi-
body mechanical systems with clearances.
The influence of clearances on the dynamic characteristics of structures has been
studied widely [18–23]. Erkaya et al. [24,25] studied the influence of a clearance hinge
on manipulator kinematics and dynamics based on the Lankarani–Nikravesh nonlinear
contact force model. By the means of numerical simulation and experiment, the influence of
clearance on mechanism vibration and mechanism noise were studied. Flores [26] studied
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/machines
Machines 2022, 10, 814 2 of 18

the hinge with clearance, and the results show that the larger the friction is in the collision
process, the more obvious the nonlinear behavior of the structure is. At the same time,
a lot of numerical simulations and experimental analyses have been carried out on the
impact dynamics of the clearance structure, but the representation form of clearance is
complex and the calculation is difficult. On this basis, it is necessary to select an appropriate
clearance model and efficient dynamic response analysis method to obtain the accurate
nonlinear dynamic response of structures with clearance. Alves et al. [27] considered the
model based on Hertz contact theory and added a damping term to conduct a comparative
study of the contact force model.
Numerical integration methods are adopted to obtain the response of the structure.
Liu et al. [28] proposed a new time-domain dynamic Galerkin method, using the shape
function to approximate three parameters of dynamic load, kernel function response and
measured structural response, and then using the shape function as a weighting function
to build a forward model. Fan et al. [29] proposed a dynamic load identification algorithm
combining Newmark-β and the self-filtering algorithm, which solved the problem of the
large iteration error in the calculation process. Simsek et al. [30] used Newmark-β and the
direct iteration method to solve nonlinear motion equations of functionally graded beams.
Sun et al. [31] proposed a Wavelet Galerkin scheme-based precise integration time-domain
method to decrease the dispersion error.
The fundamental method to solve the clearance problem is to accurately model the
structure with nonlinear clearance and accurately describe the dynamic characteristics of
the structure with nonlinear clearance. Then, the characteristics of the clearance can be
reasonably used to guide the design and manufacture processes. Vibro-impact response
analysis of a collision with local clearance can be assessed in three steps:
Step 1: Establish the dynamic equation of the nonlinear structure with local clearance.
Step 2: Select the description method of clearance and the model of nonlinear impact force.
Step 3: Select the solving method of the nonlinear dynamic equations.
In this paper, the method of describing the local clearance, the impact force model and
the solving method of the nonlinear dynamic equations are introduced. The accuracy of
the response solving by the impact force model and the computational efficiency of the
solving method are compared and analyzed through the single degree of freedom model
and beam structure model.

2. Vibro-Impact Response Analysis

2.1. Nonlinear Dynamics Equations of Structures with Clearances
The dynamic equation of the structure without collision can be expressed as
.. .
Mx + Cx + Kx = F (1)
. ..
where x is the displacement matrix, x is the velocity matrix, x is the acceleration matrix, M
is the mass matrix of the structure, C is the damping matrix, K is the stiffness matrix and F
is the external force matrix.
Introducing the impact force into the dynamic equation, we can obtain
.. .
Mx + Cx + Kx = F + Fn (2)

where F n is the contact force matrix. In the dynamic equation of structure with clearance, the
contact force vector F n determines the dynamic features in the process of collision. Different
clearance description methods produce different impact force models. It is very important
to compare different clearance description methods to select the appropriate impact force
model for accurately describing the dynamic characteristics of structures with clearance.
There are many methods to characterize the dynamic characteristics of clearance struc-
tures, including the constraint description method and the force description method [32].
The constraint description method is divided into the massless bar method and the spring-
 impact force model for accurately describing the dynamic characteristics of structures
with clearance.
There are many methods to characterize the dynamic characteristics of clearance
Machines 2022, 10, 814 3 of 18
structures, including the constraint description method and the force description method
[33]. The constraint description method is divided into the massless bar method and the
spring-damping method, as shown in Figure 1 (a), (b). The responses of these two meth-
damping
ods can bemethod,
obtainedasbyshown in Figure (1).
using Equation 1a,b.
TheThe responses
massless of these does
bar method two methods
not considercanthebe
obtained
elastic by using Equation
deformation at contact (1).
and The massless
the clearancebarismethod doestonot
equivalent considerrigid
a massless the elastic de-
bar. This
formation
method at contact and
is calculated the clearance
simply, is equivalent
but it ignores to a massless
the problems of elastic rigid bar. Thisand
deformation method
energy is
calculated simply, but it ignores the problems of elastic deformation and energy
loss, so the results are not accurate and can only be used as a reference. The spring-damp- loss, so the
results
ing are not
method accurate
connects theand can only
impact be of
points used as a reference.
clearance The
structures spring-damping
with method
springs and dampers
connects the impact points of clearance structures with springs and dampers
to characterize their impact behavior. Compared with the massless bar method, this to characterize
their impact
method behavior.
considers Compared
the elastic with the and
deformation massless
energybarloss
method, this method
but ignores considers
the energy conver-the
elastic
sion deformation
between and energy loss but ignores the energy conversion between colliders.
colliders.

Clearance d Clearance d Elastic deformation δ

Fn Fn

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 1. Description
Figure 1. Description methods
methods of
of clearance:
clearance: (a)
(a) massless
massless bar
bar method;
method; (b)
(b) spring-damping
spring-damping method;
method;
(c) force description method.
(c) force description method.

The force
force description
descriptionmethod
methodmainlymainlyuses uses impact
impact force to represent
force to representthe the
collision be-
collision
havior
behavior of of
structures
structures with
withclearance
clearanceafter
aftercontact,
contact,asasshown
shownin inFigure
Figure 1c.
1c. The
The response
response of
this method can be obtained by using Equation (2). The method transforms the geometry
constraints into force constraints and simulates the collision of two objects at the contact
position when
when two twocolliders
colliderscontact,
contact,if ifthe motion
the motion state and
state andenergy lossloss
energy simulated
simulatedby the
by
the collision
collision forceforce are consistent
are consistent withwith the actual
the actual situation.
situation. Therefore,
Therefore, the selection
the selection of theof the
colli-
collision
sion forceforce
is theiskey
thepoint
key point
of thisof this method.
method. When the Whentwo the two colliders
colliders are separated,
are separated, the colli-
the collision
sion force is force is removed
removed and the and
motionthe motion
state at state at the separation
the separation time is time is retained
retained for
for subse-
subsequent analysis and calculation.
quent analysis and calculation.
The analysis of the three clearance simulation methods shows that, in the massless
method and the spring-damping method, the clearance clearance is is replaced
replaced byby equivalent
equivalent compo-
compo-
nents and
nents and the
the characteristics
characteristics ofof the
the clearance
clearance areare simulated
simulated as as much
much asas possible, which is
possible, which is
an equivalent
an equivalent method.
method. TheThe force
force description method is
description method is more
more practical. The impact
practical. The force
impact force
between composite
between compositestructures
structuresisisa afunction
functionofofthe theelastic
elasticdeformation
deformation of the contact
of the surface,
contact sur-
and the energy loss in the collision process is taken into account. The following
face, and the energy loss in the collision process is taken into account. The following fo- focuses on
the characterization of the impact force.
cuses on the characterization of the impact force.
2.2. Model of Nonlinear Impact Force
2.2. Model of Nonlinear Impact Force
In this section, the characteristics of commonly used contact impact force models are
In this section, the characteristics of commonly used contact impact force models are
compared to provide a reference for the subsequent selection of appropriate impact force
compared to provide a reference for the subsequent selection of appropriate impact force
models for nonlinear dynamics calculations. Due to the continuity of several contact force
models for nonlinear dynamics calculations. Due to the continuity of several contact force
models and the universality of some parameters, the common parameters are explained
models and the universality of some parameters, the common parameters are explained
first, which will not be repeated in the subsequent formula. The parameters of impact force
first, which will not be repeated in the subsequent formula. The parameters of impact
are shown in Table 1.
force are shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Parameters of impact force.

Parameters Definition
Fn Nonlinear impact force
K Coefficient of contact stiffness
δ Elastic deformation
.
δ Derivative of elastic deformation
. (−)
δ Relative collision velocity
Machines 2022, 10, 814 4 of 18

(1) Hertz contact force model

The Hertz [33] contact force model is a kind of nonlinear contact force model. The
contact deformation of the collision body represented by Hertz is a completely elastic
deformation, which is mainly applicable to the quasi-static contact problem of an elastic
body. The contact force formula is
Fn = Kδn (3)
For the centripetal collision of two rigid balls, K can be obtained by the following expression
h i1
4 R1 R2 2
K= 3π (σ1 + σ2 ) R1 − R2
1 − v21 (4)
σ1 = πE1
1 − v22
σ2 = πE2

where R1 and R2 are the radius, v1 and v2 are Poisson’s ratio, E1 and E2 are the
elastic modulus.
(2) Hunt–Crossley (H-C) contact force model
The Hertz contact force model is widely used and has a good effect on low-speed
collisions and uncoordinated contacts. However, the Hertz model does not take into
account the energy loss of the collider in the collision process. Therefore, Hunt and Crossley
proposed an improved contact collision force model based on Hertz contact theory and
considering the damping in the collision process [34], which can be expressed as follows
.
Fn = Kδn + bδn δ (5)

where b is the damping coefficient, which is determined by the recovery coefficient ce , and
the recovery coefficient is determined by the material parameters. Considering the case of
center collision, the relationship between ce and b can be written as Equation (6)

2b .
ce = 1 − δ0 (6)
3K

(3) Lankarani–Nikravesh (L–N) contact force model [35]

Building on the work of Hunt and Crossley, Lankarani and Nikravesh added material
damping to the modeling of structures with gaps. It is assumed that material damping is the
main cause of energy loss in the process of contact collision, and a new impact force model
was established based on the assumption that the relative velocity is low. The model takes
into account the material properties and impact velocity. Chen et al. [36] established the
normal force and tangential force of the clearance joint based on the Lankarani–Nikravesh
contact force model, and studied the influence of the clearance value and crank driving
speed on dynamic behavior, including the slider motion response, contact force, crank
driving torque, etc. Bifurcation diagrams with different clearance values and different
crank driving speeds were also studied. The contact force formula of this model is
. (−)
Fn = Kδn + D δ (7)
D = ηδn

where D is the damping coefficient of the collider material, η is the viscous damping factor
and Kδn is the elastic deformation force in the contact collision process and is consistent with
.
the elastic deformation force in Hertz theory. D δ is the damping force, which constitutes
the contact collision process and represents the energy loss behavior of the collider in the
processing of the collision.
Machines 2022, 10, 814 5 of 18

The energy loss in the collision process can also be obtained by integrating the contact
force along the loop of the viscous ring, as shown in Equation (8)
 . 
3(1 − c2e )δ
Fn = Kδn 1 + . (−)
4δ (8)
3K (1 − c2e )δn
D= . (−)
4δ

(4) Gonthier contact force model

Gonthier et al. pointed out that the above three collision force models were established
based on point contact theory, and would not be applicable if the contact area was larger
than the contact body. Therefore, a new viscous damping factor model suitable for a large
contact area during a collision was proposed, and the expression of the collision force
is as follows [37] " . #
n 1 − c2e δ
Fn = Kδ 1 + (9)
c2e . (−)
δ
In the formula, ce can be obtained by the following expression

d K
χ= (10)
ce . (−)
δ

where χ is the internal damping coefficient, and the dimensionless coefficient d ≈ 1 − ce 2 .

(5) Flores contact force model [38]
Flores et al. studied the contact collision between an elastic body and a rigid body; they
assumed that the energy loss in the collision process was caused by the internal damping
of the material and regarded the collision–recovery process as a single degree of freedom
dynamic system, and they established another expression of energy loss

1 . (−)
5/2
∆E = χ(1 − ce )δ δmax (11)
4
where δmax is the maximum elastic deformation; then the internal damping coefficient χ in
the collision process can be obtained

8(1 − c e ) K
χ= . (−) (12)
5ce
δ
Then the Flores impact force model can be obtained
" . #
n 8(1 − c e ) δ
Fn = Kδ 1 + . (−) (13)
5ce
δ
In order to compare and analyze the characteristics of the nonlinear impact force
models, a single impact of two rigid balls with different diameters is taken as a case for nu-
merical simulation. It is assumed that the spheres are made of the same material, with elastic
. (−)
modulus E = 207 GPa, Poisson ratio µ = 0.3, initial relative impact velocity δ = 0.3 m/s,
material recovery coefficient ce = 0.5, ball mass m = 0.04 kg, radius R1 = 10 mm for sphere
1 and R2 = 9.9 mm for sphere 2. Each of these values is substituted into the formula in
Table 2. The relation between the elastic deformation of the ball and the impact force is
shown in Figure 2.
 0.3 m/s, material recovery coefficient ce = 0.5, ball mass m = 0.04 kg, radius R1 = 10 mm for
sphere 1 and R2 = 9.9 mm for sphere 2. Each of these values is substituted into the formula
 8 (1 − ce of
in Table 2. The relation between the elasticn deformation ) the
 ball and the impact force is
Fn = K  1 + ( − )  (13)
shown in Figure 2. 5c   e 
Machines 2022, 10, 814 6 of 18
Table 2.In
Expressions of differentand
order to compare impact force models.
analyze the characteristics of the nonlinear impact force
models, a single impact of two rigid balls Expression
Model with different diameters
of Impact Forceis taken as a case for
numerical simulation. It is assumed that models.
the spheresn are made of the same material, with
Table
Hertz
2. Expressions
contact
elastic modulus = 207 GPa, Poisson ratioFμn == 0.3,
of different
forceEmodel
impact force
K initial relative impact velocity 𝛿̇ (−) =
Model
0.3 m/s, material
Hunt–Crossley recovery
contact force coefficient
model ce = 0.5,  n +mbof= nImpact
= Kmass
Expression
Fnball  kg,Force
0.04 radius R1 = 10 mm for
sphere 1 and R = 9.9 mm for sphere 2. Each of these values
n is substituted
( −) into the formula
Lankarani–Nikravesh contact force model Fn =n K  n+ Dn .
Hertz contact force model
2 F = Kδn
inHunt–Crossley
Table 2. The contact
relationforce
between
modelthe elastic deformation
Fn = Kδ +of bδthe
δ ball and the impact force is
shown in Figure 2. contact force model
Lankarani–Nikravesh n 1 −c  
. (−) 2

Gonthier contact force model K Kδn +

Fn F=n = 1 +Dδ 22 e . ( − ) 
δ
Fn = Kδn 1 + c 
e 1− c
Table 2. Expressions
Gonthier of different
contact force model impact force models. c2ee . (−)

( )
δ
n +88Impact
(11−− ce )ceδ Force 
.
 
Flores contact force model
Model
Flores contact force model K Kδn n11+of
FnExpression
F=n = 5ce . (−)
( −) 
Hertz contact force model
δ
Fn = K  5ce  
Hunt–Crossley contact
d force model Fn = K +δb  n n

Lankarani–Nikravesh contact force model Fn = K  n + D ( − )

F '  1 − c F 
v0 2

Gonthier contact force model Fn = K nn 1 + 2 e (n− ) 

 ce  
 8 (1 − ce )  
Flores contact force model Fn = K  n 1 + 
 5ce  ( − ) 
(a) (b)
d δ
Figure
Figure2. 2.
Schematic
Schematicdiagram of single
diagram collision
of single withwith
collision clearance structure.
clearance (a) Before
structure. the collision.
(a) Before (b)
the collision.
State of collision.
(b) State of collision.
1.25
v0 Fn' Fn
According to the Figure 3, under the same contact material, initial impact velocity
and recovery H-Ccoefficient, there are viscous rings that appear in the simulation results
L-N
of
1.00all nonlinear impact force models except the Hertz model. The results of the Hunt–
Gonthier
Crossley model Hertz and the Lankarani–Nikravesh model are close to each other, and the
results of the Flores
Gonthier model and the Flores model are basically the same. In order to
Impact force(kN)

0.75
further (a)
compare the characteristics of the above nonlinear impact(b) force models, Figure 4
presents the schematic
Figure 2. Schematic diagram
diagram of the
of single relationship
collision between
with clearance the elastic
structure. deformation
(a) Before of the
the collision. (b)
slider
State ofand the impact velocity.
collision.
0.50

1.25

0.25 H-C
L-N
1.00 Gonthier
Hertz
0.00
0 Flores
1 2 3 4
Impact force(kN)

0.75 Deformation(mm)

0.50

0.25

0.00
0 1 2 3 4

Deformation(mm)

Figure 3. Diagram of relation between the elastic deformation and the impact force.
 and recovery coefficient, there are viscous rings that appear in the simulation results of all
nonlinear impact force models except the Hertz model. The results of the Hunt–Crossley
model and the Lankarani–Nikravesh model are close to each other, and the results of the
Gonthier model and the Flores model are basically the same. In order to further compare
the characteristics of the above nonlinear impact force models, Figure 4 presents the sche-
Machines 2022, 10, 814 7 of 18
matic diagram of the relationship between the elastic deformation of the slider and the
impact velocity.

0.3

0.2
H-C

Impact velocity(m/s)
0.1 L-N
Gonthier
0.0 Hertz
Flores
-0.1

-0.2

-0.3

0 1 2 3 4

Deformation(mm)

Figure
Figure 4.
4. Diagram
Diagram of
of the
the elastic
elastic deformation
deformation and
and the
the impact
impact velocity.
velocity.

As can be
be seen
seenfrom
fromFigure
Figure4,4,since
sinceenergy
energy loss
loss in in
thethe collision
collision process
process is not
is not consid-
considered,
the separation
ered, velocity
the separation in the
velocity in Hertz model
the Hertz does
model notnot
does change and
change is is
and still 0.30.3m/s.
still m/s. The
separation velocity
separation velocity of the Hunt–Crossley model and the Lankarani–Nikravesh
Lankarani–Nikravesh model is
close to 0.2 m/s. The separation velocity of the Gonthier
m/s. The separation velocity of the Gonthier model model and
and the
the Flores
Flores model is
m/s,which
0.15 m/s, whichisiscompletely
completely consistent
consistent with
with the
the recovery
recovery coefficient. This
This indicates that
determination of
the determination of the damping
damping coefficient
coefficient in these two models is more accurate than
other models.

2.3. Solving
2.3. Solving Method
Method of
of Nonlinear
Nonlinear Dynamic
Dynamic Equations
Equations
When the
When the impact
impact force
force is
is expressed
expressed as
as the
the nonlinear
nonlinear term,
term, many
many numerical
numerical solutions
solutions
with different accuracies and efficiencies have been developed since most nonlinear
with different accuracies and efficiencies have been developed since most nonlinear dy- dy-
namic equations
namic equations do
do not
not have
have analytical
analytical solutions. If two
solutions. If two of
of displacement, velocity and
displacement, velocity and
acceleration can be found at a given time, the third can be obtained. According to the differ-
acceleration can be found at a given time, the third can be obtained. According to the
ent assumptions of acceleration and velocity, the multi-step integration method is formed,
different assumptions of acceleration and velocity, the multi-step integration method is
such as the Newmark-β method [39,40], generalized α method and precise integration
formed, such as the Newmark-β method [40,41], generalized α method and precise inte-
method. The theories of several methods are introduced below to provide parameters for
gration method. The theories of several methods are introduced below to provide param-
the subsequent comparison of these numerical algorithms.
eters for the subsequent comparison of these numerical algorithms.
(1) Newmark-β
(1) Newmark-βmethod
methodcombined
combinedwithwithNewton-Raphson
Newton-Raphson method
method [42]
[41]
Newmark-β directly
Newmark-β directly discretizes
discretizes the
the dynamics
dynamics equation
equation into
into an
an algebraic
algebraic equation
equation
through the difference to solve it. The following assumptions are made in the calculation
through the difference to solve it. The following assumptions are made in the calculation

1 = nxn + (1 −  ) tnxn + tnx+n1+1

. . .. ..
xn +
x1n += x + (1 − γ)∆tx + γ∆tx (14)
(14)
 
. 1 .. ..
xn +1 = xn + ∆txn + − β ∆t2 xn + β∆t2 xn+1 (15)
2
. ..
where xn is the displacement at tn time, xn is the velocity at tn time, xn is the acceleration at
tn time, ∆t = tn+1 − tn , two parameters γ and β are introduced, and are usually required

1 1
γ ≥ 0.5, β ≥ ( + γ )2 (16)
4 2
To make sure that the computation is unconditionally stable. The calculation formula
is further derived below.
The acceleration can be eliminated from Equations (14) and (15), and the velocity
expression at tn+1 can be obtained
   
. γ .. γ γ .
xn +1 = 1 − ∆txn + (xn +1 − xn ) + 1 − xn (17)
2β β∆t β
Machines 2022, 10, 814 8 of 18

The acceleration expression at tn+1 can be obtained from Equation (15)

 
.. 1 1 . 1 ..
xn +1 = 2
(xn +1 − xn ) − xn − − 1 xn (18)
β∆t β∆t 2β

Substitute Equations (14) and (15) into the equation of motion at tn+1
.. .
Mxn+1 + Cxn+1 + Kxn+1 = Fn+1 (19)

With xt+∆t as an unknown quantity, the equation is sorted out and the following
equation is obtained
Kx
e n +1 = F en +1 (20)
where:
1 γ
K
e = K+ M+ C (21)
β∆t2 β∆t
The displacement was solved by Equation (20), and the result was substituted into
Equation (18) to obtain the acceleration at tn+1 . Then, the speed at tn+1 could be calculated by
using Equation (14). At this point, the motion state at tn+1 has been calculated, and they can
be used as the starting values to calculate the motion state at the next moment, and so on.
The above method has high accuracy in the process of solving linear problems, but
there is a cumulative error in solving the nonlinear dynamic response. The Newton–
Raphson method is introduced to calculate the displacement at tn+1 . When there is a
nonlinear term in the structure, Equation (21) can be changed to
!
1 γ .

K
e (xn +1 ) = M+ C + K + fnl xn+1 , xn+1 , p (22)
β(∆t)2 β(∆t)

where f nl is the nonlinear term and xn+1 is taken as the variable. Equation (20) can be
written as follows
e (xn +1 )xn +1 − F
Ψn+1 = K en +1 = 0 (23)
If the Ψ n+1 first-order is continuously differentiable in Equation (23), let the initial
approximation obtained by the Newmark-β method be x0n+1 , and the k-th iteration ap-
proximation obtained by the Newton–Raphson method be xkn+1 , and Ψ n+1 is the Taylor
expansion and the higher-order term is dropped
 k
∂Ψ
Ψnk+1 + dxkn+1 ≈ 0 (24)
∂x n +1

xkn+1 is obtained by calculating xn+1 in Equation (24)

  −1
k
xkn+ 1 k
+1 = xn +1 − (K T ) n +1 Ψnk+1 (25)

where KT is the tangent stiffness matrix, and the expression is

k .
!k
∂fnl xn+1 , xn+1

∂Ψ 1 γ
(KT )kn+1 = = M+ C+K+ (26)
∂x n +1 β(∆t) 2 β ( ∆t) ∂x
n +1

The above formula can be used to iteratively solve the exact solution at each point in
time and control the error
kxkn+ 1 k
+1 − xn +1 k 2
× 100% < e (27)
kxkn+1 k2
where e is the upper limit of error, and the iteration is stopped after reaching it.
Machines 2022, 10, 814 9 of 18

(2) Generalized α method

On the basis of the Newmark method, the generalized α method [42] introduces a new
algorithm vector parameter a to obtain the expressions of displacement and velocity

. 1
xt+∆t = xt + xt ∆t + ( − β)at ∆t2 + βat+∆t ∆t2 (28)
2
. .
xt+∆t = xt + (1 − γ)at ∆t + at+∆t γ∆t (29)
In the above formula, vector a satisfies the following relation
 .. ..
(1 − αm )at+∆t + αm at = (1 − α f )xt+∆t + α f xt
.. (30)
a0 = x0

The selection of each parameter is as follows

2ρ−1
αm = ρ +1
ρ
αf = ρ +1 (31)
β = 14 (1 + α f − αm )2
γ = 12 + α f − αm

Compared with Newmark-β, the generalized α method has second-order convergence

and better stability.
(3) Precise Adams Multi-step method (precise integration method)
For nonlinear dynamics Equation (2), the precise integration method [43] introduces
dual variables  
q
x= (32)
p
Then the dynamics equation can be written as
.
p = Mq + Cq/2 (33)

where q is the generalized displacement.

The right end term of Equation (32) can be separated into linear and nonlinear parts in
form, which can be described as
.
x = Hx + f (x, t) (34)
For the solution of the nonlinear dynamic equation described by Equation (34),
Duhamel integration is used to describe

Zt
x(t) = e Ht x(0) + e H (t−τ ) f (x, τ )dτ (35)
0

where  
A1 A4
H= (36)
A2 A3

A1 = −M−1 C/2
A2 = CM−1 C/4 − K
(37)
A3 = −CM−1 /2
A4 = M−1
The solution on segment [tk , tk+1 ] can be derived from the above formula
Z η
xk+1 = eHη xk + eH(η −τ ) f (x, tk + τ )dτ (38)
0
Machines 2022, 10, 814 10 of 18

Equation (34) is expressed by Duhamel integration, and introduces η = tk+1 − tk and

x k , x ( t k ).
In the recursive solution of the above equation, the second term (Duhamel integration
term) at the right end is the integral containing the matrix exponential function, and the
properties of the matrix exponential function should be fully used in processing.
In the segment t ∈ [tk , tk+1 ], the nonlinear term f (x, t) is approximated by an m-
degree polynomial

f (x, tk + τ ) = f 0,k + f 1,k τ + · · · + f m,k τ m , τ ∈ [0, η ] (39)

where [f 0,k , f 1,k , . . . ] denotes the coefficient of the approximate polynomial in section k,
and Equation (38) can be expressed as

xk+1 = Φ(η )xk + ηΦ0 (η ) f 0,k + · · · + η m+1 Φm (η ) f m,k (40)

where
Φ(η ) = eHη
Rη (41)
Φm (η ) = 1
ηm +1 eH(η −τ ) τ m dτ
0

where Φ(η) is the state transfer matrix and Φm (η) can be called the Duhamel integration
matrix of external force.
In addition to using the information of the current section [tk , tk+1 ], we can also use the
information of the previous section [tk −2 , tk+1 ], [tk −1 , tk ] for the polynomial approximation
of f (x,t); the most commonly used is the Adams linear multi-step method.
Using tk −2 , tk −1 and tk as interpolation points, approximate Lagrange polynomials of
f (x,t) are obtained

f − 4 f k −1 + 3 f k f − 2 f k −1 + f k 2
fe(x, tk + τ ) = f k + k−2 τ + k −2 τ (42)
2η 2η 2

The unified form of the Adams multi-step method can be derived by substituting the
above Equation (42) into Equation (40):

xk +1 = Φ ( η )xk + η ( Φ 0 ( η ) f k + · · · + Φ − m ( η ) f k − m ) (43)

where Φ0 (η), . . . , Φ−m (η) is determined by the Duhamel integration matrix.

3. Nonlinear Dynamic Response Analysis of Structures with Clearance

3.1. Single Degree of Freedom Model
In order to study the difference and effectiveness of the different numerical integration
methods for nonlinear dynamic response analysis, the projectile launching system is sim-
plified into a single degree of freedom impact vibration model with bilateral clearances, as
shown in Figure 5. In this simplified model, the elastic modulus of the concentrated mass
block is 207 GPa, the Poisson ratio is 0.3, the initial relative movement speed is 8 m/s, the
material recovery coefficient is 0.9, the mass of the concentrated mass block is m0 = 100 kg
and the initial installation clearance is 5 mm.
 In order to study the difference and effectiveness of the different numerical integra-
tion methods for nonlinear dynamic response analysis, the projectile launching system is
simplified into a single degree of freedom impact vibration model with bilateral clear-
ances, as shown in Figure 5. In this simplified model, the elastic modulus of the concen-
Machines 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 19
trated mass block is 207 GPa, the Poisson ratio is 0.3, the initial relative movement speed
Machines 2022, 10, 814 11 of 18
is 8 m/s, the material recovery coefficient is 0.9, the mass of the concentrated mass block
is m0 = 100 kg and the initial installation clearance is 5 mm.
F
F
k d d cch h
khh d d
m
m0 0

kkh h
c
chh
c
c0 0

kk0 0
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
5. Impact
Impactvibration
vibration modelofofstructure
structurewith
withbilateral
bilateral clearances, where kh the is the nonlinear
Figure vibration model of structure with clearances, where
bilateral clearances, where kkhh is the nonlinear
nonlinear
stiffness during
stiffness during collision,
duringcollision, k 0 is the linear stiffness of the structure, ch is the nonlinear damping during
collision,kk00 is
is the
the linear
linear stiffness
stiffness of
of the
the structure,
structure, cchh is
stiffness is the
the nonlinear damping during
nonlinear damping during
collision,cc00isisthe
collision, thelinear
lineardamping
dampingofofthe thestructure,
structure, d d is
is the
the initial
initial installation
installation clearance
clearance and and
m m is the
is 0the
the
collision, c0 is the linear damping of the structure, d is the initial installation clearance and m00 is
mass block of the concentrated
mass block of the concentrated mass. mass.
mass block of the concentrated mass.
In this
In thissimulation
simulationexample,
example,thetheLankarani–Nikravesh
Lankarani–Nikravesh contact
contact force
force model
model is used
is used
used to to
In this simulation example, the Lankarani–Nikravesh contact force model is to
simulatethe
simulate
simulate the
the collision
collision
collision process
process
process between
between
between clearance,
clearance,
clearance, and
and thethe and
above
above thethree
threeabove three
numerical
numerical numerical
integra-
integration
integration
tion algorithms
algorithms algorithms
are used
are used are used
fornumerical
for the for
the numerical the numerical
simulation
simulation simulation
calculation,
calculation, calculation,
anddisplacement
and the and
andthe
the displacement
velocity curves of the slider with time are obtained, respectively. The displacement timeThe
displacement and velocity curves of the slider with time are obtained, respectively.
displacement
curve of the masstime curve
block of the mass
is shown block
in Figure 6. is shown in Figure 6.

7.5 7.5 7.5

5.0 5.0 5.0

Displacement(mm)

Displacement(mm)
Displacement(mm)

2.5 2.5 2.5

0.0 0.0 0.0

-2.5 -2.5 -2.5

-5.0 -5.0 -5.0

-7.5 -7.5 -7.5

0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020
Time(s) Time(s) Time(s)

(a) (b) (c)

Figure6.6. Displacement
Figure Displacementtime
timecurve
curveofofthe
themass
mass block:
block: (a)(a) Newmark-β
Newmark-β method
method combined
combined with
with
Newton–Raphson method; (b) generalized α method; (c) precise integration
Newton–Raphson method; (b) generalized α method; (c) precise integration method.method.

Asshown
As shownininFigure
Figure6,6,the
theabilities
abilitiesofofthe thethree
three kinds
kinds ofof numerical
numerical integration
integration method
method
to obtain
to obtainthe
thedisplacement
displacementresults
resultsare arebasically
basically identical.
identical. When
When thethe displacement
displacement of the
of the
massblock
mass blockisisgreater
greaterthan
thanthe
theinitial
initialinstallation
installation clearance
clearance of of 5 mm,
5 mm, thethemassmass block
block collides
collides
withthe
with theouter
outerwall.
wall.The
Thedisplacement
displacementcontinues
continuestoto increase
increase until
until thethe velocity
velocity is equal
is equal to to
zero. The displacement reaches a maximum of about 6 mm, and then the mass moves
zero. The displacement reaches a maximum of about 6 mm, and then the mass moves in in
the opposite direction. Until the displacement value is less than 5 mm, the mass block
the opposite direction. Until the displacement value is less than 5 mm, the mass block is is
separated from the outer wall. The collision process is over and the free motion state is
separated from the outer wall. The collision process is over and the free motion state is
entered. Outside
entered. Outsidethetheblack
blackdashed
dashedline lineisisthe
the phase
phase ofof contact
contact andand collision
collision between
between thethe
concentrated mass block and the outer wall. The black dashed line
concentrated mass block and the outer wall. The black dashed line is the free movement is the free movement
stage
stageofofthe
theconcentrated
concentratedmassmassblock
blockthatthatis is
not in in
not collision
collision with thethe
with outerouterwall.
wall.
As shown in Figure 7, the results of the mass velocity obtained by the three numerical
As shown in Figure 7, the results of the mass velocity obtained by the three numerical
integration methods are basically the same. According to the corresponding time in the
integration methods are basically the same. According to the corresponding time in the
displacement curve, the corresponding motion state of the velocity curve can be found. It
displacement curve, the corresponding motion state of the velocity curve can be found. It
can be seen from Figure 7 that in the contact collision stage, the impact force generated
can be seen from Figure 7 that in the contact collision stage, the impact force generated by
by the collision makes the velocity decrease fast. The integral curves of the above three
the collision
methods makesthe
for solving the velocityvibration
nonlinear decreaseresponse
fast. The areintegral
consistentcurves
with the of law
the of
above three
motion.
methods for solving the nonlinear vibration response are consistent with the law of
 Machines
Machines 2022,
2022, 10,
10, x814
FOR PEER REVIEW 1312ofof 19
18

motion.
In orderInto order tostudy
further further
thestudy the computational
computational efficiencyefficiency of the
of the three three integration
integration methods,
methods, Table 3 shows the computation time of the different numerical
Table 3 shows the computation time of the different numerical integration algorithms integration
when
algorithms when
the simulation theissimulation
time 0.02 s. time is 0.02 s.

10 10 10

5 5 5

Velocity(m/s)
Velocity(m/s)

Velocity(m/s)
0 0 0

-5 -5 -5

-10 -10 -10

0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020
Time(s) Time(s) Time(s)

(a) (b) (c)

Figure
Figure 7.
7. Time
Time curve
curve of
of the
the mass
mass block:
block: (a)
(a) Newmark-β
Newmark-β method
method combined
combined with
with Newton–Raphson
Newton–Raphson
method; (b) generalized α method; (c) precise integration method.
method; (b) generalized α method; (c) precise integration method.

Table 3. The computational efficiency of different numerical integration algorithms at 0.02 s

Table 3. The computational efficiency of different numerical integration algorithms at 0.02 s
simulation time.
Machines 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW
simulation time. 13 of 1
Numerical Integration Algorithms Time of Calculation/s
Newmark-β method combined with Newton–Raphson method Time of Calculation/s
Numerical Integration Algorithms
1.3
Newmark-β methodGeneralized
combined withα method
Newton–Raphson method 2.1
1.3
Precise integration
Generalized α method method 2.1 25
Precise integration method 25
Precise integration method 25
As can be seen from Table 3, the Newmark-β method combined with the Newton–
As can be seen from Table 3, the Newmark-β method combined with the Newton–
Raphson
RaphsonAs can method
method
be seen hashasthethe
from highest
highest
Table thecomputational
3,computational
Newmark-β efficiency,
efficiency,
method while while
the
combined thethe
precise
with precise
integration
Newton– integration
methodhas
method
Raphson has the
method thelowest
lowest computational
has thecomputational
highest efficiency.
efficiency.
computational TheThe computation
computation
efficiency, while thetime time
of the
precise ofprecise
the precise in
integration
integration method is 19 times that of the Newmark-β method. Since the model is a single
method
tegration has the
method lowest
is 19computational
times that of efficiency.
the The
Newmark-β computation
method. time
Since of
the the precise
model is a single
degree
degreeofoffreedom
integration method
freedom model
is 19
model andand
times the the
that computational
of the Newmark-β
computational burden is small,
method.
burden there isthere
Since the
is small, no significant
model is a single
is no significan
degree
differenceof freedom
difference ininthethe model
computationaland theefficiency
computational computational
efficiencybetweenburden isthe
small,
the Newmark-β
between there
Newmark-β is nomethod
method significant
combined combined
difference
with the in the computational
Newton–Raphson methodefficiency
and thebetween the Newmark-β
generalized α method. method
In combined
conclusion, the
with the Newton–Raphson method and the generalized α method. In conclusion, the
with the Newton–Raphson
Newmark-β method and the generalized α method. In conclusion, to the
Newmark-βmethod
Newmark-β method
method
combined
combined
combined
withwith
with
the Newton–Raphson
the the Newton–Raphson
Newton–Raphson
methodmethod
method
was
was
planned
was planned
planned
be
to be to be
used for numerical integration solution in the subsequent expansion of the multi-degree
used
used for numerical
for numerical integration solution in the subsequent expansion of the multi-degree
of freedom problemintegration solution
so as to ensure the in the subsequent
computational expansion
accuracy and of the multi-degree of
efficiency.
of freedom
freedom problem
problem so as so
to as to ensure
ensure the the computational
computational accuracy accuracy
and and efficiency.
efficiency.
Different impact forces previously studied were substituted into the system, and the
Different
Different impact
impact forces
forces previously
previously studied
studied
Newmark-β method combined with the Newton–Raphson method was usedwere were substituted
substituted into theinto the
system, system,
and the and the
to calculate
Newmark-β
Newmark-β method
method combined
combined with the
with theNewton–Raphson method was used to calculate
the displacement response of the system. TheNewton–Raphson
results are shown inmethod was used to calculate
Figures 8–13.
the
thedisplacement
displacement response
response of the system.
of the system.The results are shown
The results in Figures
are shown 8–13. 8–13.
in Figures
H-C -4.0
6 L-N
GonthierH-C -4.0
46 Hertz L-N-4.5
Displacement(mm)

Flores Gonthier
24 Hertz -4.5
Displacement(mm)

-5.0
Flores
02

-2 -5.0
0 -5.5
-4
-2
-6 -5.5
-6.0
-4 Magnify
0.0166 0.0168 0.0170 0.0172
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020
-6 Times(s) -6.0
Magnify
0.0166 0.0168 0.0170 0.0172
Figure
0.000 8. Displacement
0.005 0.010 response
0.015 under
0.020different impact forces (recovery coefficient is 0.9).
Times(s)

Figure8.8.Displacement
Figure Displacement response
response under
under different
different impact
impact forces forces (recovery
(recovery coefficient
coefficient is 0.9). is 0.9).

10,000 -4.0
H-C
L-N
Gonthier
5,000 Hertz -4.5
Flores
Velocity(mm/s)

-5.0
0

-5.5
-5,000
 -2 -5.5

D
Disp
-4 -5.5
-4
-6 -6.0
-6 Magnify -6.0
Magnify 0.0166 0.0168 0.0170 0.0172
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.0166 0.0168 0.0170 0.0172
0.000 0.005 0.010
Times(s) 0.015 0.020
Times(s)
Machines 2022, 10, 814 13 of 18
Figure 8.
Figure 8.Displacement
Displacementresponse
responseunder
under different
different impact
impact forces
forces (recovery
(recovery coefficient
coefficient is 0.9)
is 0.9).
10,000
10,000 H-C -4.0 -4.0
H-C
L-N
L-N
Gonthier
Gonthier
5,000
5,000 Hertz -4.5 -4.5
Hertz
Flores

Velocity(mm/s)
Flores

Velocity(mm/s)
-5.0 -5.0
00

-5.5 -5.5
-5,000
-5,000
-6.0 -6.0
Magnify
Magnify
-10,000
-10,000 0.0166
0.0166 0.0168
0.0168 0.01700.0170 0.01720.0172
0.000
0.000 0.005
0.005 0.010
0.010 0.015
0.015 0.020
0.020
Times(s)
Times(s)

Figure
Figure9.9.
Figure 9. Velocity
Velocity
Velocity response
response
response under
under under different
different impact impact
differentforces forces
(recovery
impact (recovery
forcescoefficient
(recovery coefficient
is 0.9). is 0.9).
coefficient is 0.9).
H-C
H-C -4.0
4 L-N -4.0
4 L-N
Gonthier
Gonthier
Hertz
Hertz
mm/s2) )
2

Flores -4.2
7 7mm/s

2 Flores -4.2
2
Acceleration(×10
Acceleration(×10

-4.4
0 -4.4
0

-4.6
-2 -4.6
-2
Magnify
-4.8
-4 Magnify
-4.8
-4 0.014994 0.015057 0.015120 0.015183
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.014994 0.015057 0.015120 0.015183
0.000 0.005 Times(s)
0.010 0.015 0.020
Machines 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW Times(s) 14 of 1
Figure 10. Acceleration response under different impact forces (recovery coefficient14is of
Machines 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 0.9).
19
Figure Acceleration
Figure10.10. response
Acceleration under different
response impact forces
under different (recovery
impact coefficient
forces (recoveryis 0.9).
coefficient is 0.9)

H-C -4.32
6 H-CL-N -4.32
6 L-NGonthier
4 Hertz
Gonthier
Displacement(mm)

4 Flores -4.80
Hertz
2
Displacement(mm)

Flores -4.80
2
0
0 -5.28
-2 -5.28
-2
-4 -5.76
-4 -5.76
-6
-6 Magnify
Magnify 0.0162 0.0165 0.0168 0.0171
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.0162 0.0165 0.0168 0.0171
0.000 0.005 0.010
Times(s) 0.015 0.020
Times(s)

Figure11.
Figure
Figure 11.Displacement
11. Displacement
Displacement response
response
response under
under
under different
different
different impact
impact forces
impact forces (recovery
(recovery
forces coefficient
coefficient
(recovery is 0.5).
coefficient is 0.5).
is 0.5).
10,000
10,000
H-CH-C
L-NL-N
Gonthier
Gonthier -6500
-6500
5,000
5,000 Hertz
Hertz
Flores
Velocity(mm/s)

Flores
Velocity(mm/s)

-7000
-7000
00

-7500
-7500
-5,000
-5,000

Magnify -8000
-8000
Magnify
-10,000 0.01504
0.01504 0.01551
0.01551 0.01598
0.01598 0.016450.01645
-10,000
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020
Times(s)
Times(s)

Figure
Figure 12.
Figure12. Velocity
12.Velocity
Velocity response
response
responseunder
under
under different
different impact
impact
different forces
forces
impact (recovery
(recovery
forces coefficient
coefficient
(recovery is 0.5).
is 0.5).
coefficient is 0.5).
H-C -3.0
-3.0
4 L-NH-C
4 L-N
Gonthier
) )
2 2

Gonthier
mm/s

Hertz -3.5
2
mm/s

Hertz
Flores -3.5
2 Flores
7 7
Acceleration(×10
Acceleration(×10

0 -4.0
0 -4.0

-2 -4.5
-2 Magnify -4.5

-4 Magnify
 -7000

Velocity(
0

-7500
-5,000

Magnify -8000

-10,000 0.01504 0.01551 0.01598 0.01645

0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020
Machines 2022, 10, 814 Times(s) 14 of 18

Figure 12. Velocity response under different impact forces (recovery coefficient is 0.5).

H-C -3.0
4 L-N
Gonthier

Acceleration(×107mm/s2)
Hertz -3.5
2 Flores

0 -4.0

-2 -4.5

Magnify
-4 -5.0
0.01470 0.01485 0.01500 0.01515
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020
Times(s)

Figure 13.
Figure 13. Acceleration
Acceleration response
response under
under different
differentimpact
impactforces
forces(recovery
(recoverycoefficient
coefficientisis0.5).
0.5).

It
It can
can be
be seen
seen from
from Figures
Figures 8–13
8–13 that
that the
the Hertz
Hertz contact
contact force
force model
model has
has the
the largest
largest
elastic deformation, which is caused by the minimum energy loss in the collision
elastic deformation, which is caused by the minimum energy loss in the collision process process
without
without considering
considering the the energy
energy loss
loss in
in the
the Hertz
Hertzcontact
contactforce
forcemodel.
model. Compared
Compared withwith
Figure
Figure4,4,ititcan
can bebe seen
seen that
that the
the amount
amount of of elastic
elastic deformation
deformation is
is positively
positively correlated
correlated with
with
the
the change
change in in velocity
velocity in
in the
the collision
collisionprocess.
process.

3.2.
3.2. Multiple
Multiple Degrees
Degrees of
of Freedom
Freedom Model
Model
In
In this section, a hollow shaftstructure
this section, a hollow shaft structurewith
withsome
somenodes
nodescontaining
containingclearance
clearancecontact
contactis
adopted to compare the above modeling method and numerical integration
is adopted to compare the above modeling method and numerical integration algorithm. algorithm. The
engineering
The engineeringbackground
background is theisengine and body
the engine of a missile,
and body and its
of a missile, structural
and schematic
its structural sche-
diagram is shown in Figure 14. In the figure, the relative distance of the
matic diagram is shown in Figure 14. In the figure, the relative distance of the chutechute has been
has
enlarged for clarity. The top, middle and tail of the hollow shaft are, respectively, provided
been enlarged for clarity. The top, middle and tail of the hollow shaft are, respectively,
with two symmetrical slide blocks. The hollow shaft is installed on the chute through the
provided with two symmetrical slide blocks. The hollow shaft is installed on the chute
slide block. Only the clearance between the slide block and the chute in the x direction
through the slide block. Only the clearance between the slide block and the chute in the x
is considered. The geometric dimensions are as follows: hollow shaft with diameter of
direction is considered. The geometric dimensions are as follows: hollow shaft with diam-
190 mm and length of 1000 mm, wall thickness of 5 mm, clearance between chute and slide
eter of 190 mm and length of 1000 mm, wall thickness of 5 mm, clearance between chute
Machines 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW
block of 3 mm, ignoring the influence of gravity. The beam structure finite element 15 of 19
model
and slide block of 3 mm, ignoring the influence of gravity. The beam structure finite
Machines 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 ofele-
19
obtained by simplifying the hollow shaft structure is shown in Figure 15.
ment model obtained by simplifying the hollow shaft structure is shown in Figure 15.

Chute
Chute y
yx y
Hollow shaft y
Hollow shaft xz x
z x
Slide block
Slide block

Figure 14.
Figure 14. Hollow
Hollow shaft
shaft structure
structure model
model with
with impact
impact clearance.
clearance.
Figure 14. Hollow shaft structure model with impact clearance.

x d
x d
z
z

Figure 15. Beam element modeling.

Figure 15.
Figure 15. Beam element modeling.
modeling.
The beam element is used to simulate the hollow shaft structure, and the contact
The
The beam
beam element
element is used to simulate the
the hollow shaft
shaft structure, and the
the contact
clearances are added at bothused
endstoand simulate
the middle hollow
joints. When structure,
the and
vibration contact
displacement
clearances
clearances are added at both ends and the middle joints. When the vibration displacement
of the beamare addedexceeds
element at both ends and the middle
the clearance d, it is fedjoints.
back to the beam element displacement
in the form
of
of the beam element exceeds the clearance d, itit is fed back to the beam element in the form
of the nonlinear impact force. Structural modeling of the hollow shaft, as theinreference
the beam element exceeds the clearance d, is fed back to beam element form
of
of the
the nonlinear
nonlinear impact
impact force.
force. Structural modeling of the hollow shaft, as the the reference
reference
model, is established by ABAQUS. The shell element is used for modeling of the hollow
model,
model, is established by ABAQUS. The shell element is used for modeling of the hollow
shaft, andestablished
the solid element is used for the modeling of the joints modeling and chute, asthe hollow
shown in
shaft, and the solid element is used for the modeling of the joints and
Figure 16. Joints are distributed at both ends and in the middle of the hollow shaft. Thechute, as shown in
Figure
material16.density
Joints was
are distributed
34.41 g/cm3at both
, the endsmodulus
elastic and in the wasmiddle
207 GPaof the
andhollow shaft.ratio
the Poisson The
material density was 34.41 g/cm 3, the elastic modulus was 207 GPa and the Poisson ratio
was 0.3. There are 42 nodes in the hollow shaft section and 62 nodes in the axial direction,
was
for a0.3. There
total arenodes.
of 2064 42 nodes in the hollow shaft section and 62 nodes in the axial direction,
 Figure 15. Beam element modeling.

Machines 2022, 10, 814
The beam element is used to simulate the hollow shaft structure, and the contact
clearances are added at both ends and the middle joints. When the vibration displacement
15 of 18
of the beam element exceeds the clearance d, it is fed back to the beam element in the form
of the nonlinear impact force. Structural modeling of the hollow shaft, as the reference
model, is established by ABAQUS. The shell element is used for modeling of the hollow
shaft, and the solid element is used for the modeling of the joints and chute, as shown in
shaft, and the solid element is used for the modeling of the joints and chute, as shown in
Figure 16. Joints are distributed at both ends and in the middle of the hollow shaft. The
Figure 16. Joints are distributed at both ends and in the middle of the hollow shaft. The
material density was 34.41 g/cm3 , the elastic modulus was 207 GPa and the Poisson ratio
material density was 34.41 g/cm3, the elastic modulus was 207 GPa and the Poisson ratio
was 0.3. There are 42 nodes in the hollow shaft section and 62 nodes in the axial direction,
was 0.3. There are 42 nodes in the hollow shaft section and 62 nodes in the axial direction,
for a total of 2064 nodes.
for a total of 2064 nodes.

(a) (b)
Figure 16. Finite element model: (a) cutaway view of finite element model; (b) slider distribution
Figure 16. Finite element model: (a) cutaway view of finite element model; (b) slider distribution
position of finite element model.
position of finite element model.

The equivalent physical

The equivalent physical parameters
parametersof ofthe
thebeam
beamstructure
structurewere
were obtained
obtained according
according to
to
thethe material
material andand structure
structure sizeofofthe
size thehollow
hollowshaft,
shaft,and
andthe
theM,
M,CCand and K
K can
can be
be calculated
calculated
by
by the
the reference
reference model
model established
established by by ABAQUS.
ABAQUS. At At the
the same
same time,
time, the
the numerical
numerical model
model
by MATLAB and the reference model by ABAQUS
by MATLAB and the reference model by ABAQUS were used to analyzewere used to analyze the natural char-
the natural
acteristics in free–free state. The comparison results of the first three order
characteristics in free–free state. The comparison results of the first three order natural natural fre-
quencies
frequencies of the two methods are given, as shown in Table 4. The analysis shows that the
of the two methods are given, as shown in Table 4. The analysis shows that the
first
first three
three natural
natural frequencies
frequencies andand modes
modes ofof vibration
vibration based
based onon the
the numerical
numerical method
method andand
ABAQUS
ABAQUS are are basically
basically consistent,
consistent, thus
thus verifying
verifying the
the correctness
correctness of of the
the numerical
numerical modal
modal
analysis solution program.

Table 4. Modal
Table 4. Modal frequency
frequency analysis
analysis results
results of
of simplified
simplified model.
model.

Mode Model Model Reference Model/Hz Numerical Model/Hz

Reference Model/Hz Numerical Model/Hz
Mode First bending mode 477 477
Second bending mode 1035 1035
Third bending mode 1614 1637

After mode matching, nonlinear response analysis was carried out. The axial freedom
of the hollow shaft structure was constrained and the radial excitation force F = 100 sin(20πt)
was applied to each node of the hollow shaft in the same direction. In order to achieve the
same constraint effect as the beam structure, all the nodes of the chute were constrained
with all degrees of freedom, and only the impact force was considered when the simulated
slider was in contact with the rigid surface. At the same time, the axial degrees of freedom
were constrained at both ends of the shaft to ensure the vertical collision between the slider
and the chute.
Figure 17 shows the vibration response analysis results based on the numerical model
and the reference model under sinusoidal excitation. The results of the nonlinear vibration
response based on the numerical model and the reference model are consistent as a whole.
The main differences are as follows: the amplitude of each rebound after a collision is
inconsistent, and the amplitude of the acceleration response is different to some extent. The
main reason lies in the inconsistent contact stiffness in the Hertz contact model solved by
ABAQUS and MATLAB. The reference model established by ABAQUS has more nodes
and is more consistent with the response under actual working conditions. The numerical
model established by MATLAB is simplified from the reference model, and the number of
nodes is less, which is a relatively idealized structure.
 as a whole. The main differences are as follows: the amplitude of each rebound after a
collision is inconsistent, and the amplitude of the acceleration response is different to
some extent. The main reason lies in the inconsistent contact stiffness in the Hertz contac
model solved by ABAQUS and MATLAB. The reference model established by ABAQUS
Machines 2022, 10, 814 has more nodes and is more consistent with the response under actual working 16 of 18 condi
tions. The numerical model established by MATLAB is simplified from the reference
model, and the number of nodes is less, which is a relatively idealized structure.
4 ×106
10
3 8
6
2

Displacement (mm)

Acceleration (mm/s2)
4
1
2
0 0

-1 -2
-4
-2
-6
-3
-8
-4 -10
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Time (s) Time (s)

(a) (b)
4 ×106
8
3
6
2
Displacement (mm)

Acceleration (mm/s2)
1 2
0 0
-1 -2
-2 -4

-3 -6

-4 -8
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Time (s) Time (s)

(c) (d)
Figure17.
Figure 17. Dynamic
Dynamic response
responseanalysis
analysisresults
resultsofofsimplified
simplified model:
model: (a)(a) displacement
displacement in the
in the ref-reference
erence model; (b) acceleration in the reference model; (c) displacement in the numerical model;(d) accel
model; (b) acceleration in the reference model; (c) displacement in the numerical model;
eration
(d) in the numerical
acceleration model.
in the numerical model.

4. Conclusions
4. Conclusions
In this paper, the modeling method of a nonlinear structure with clearance and the
In this paper, the modeling method of a nonlinear structure with clearance and the
solution method of the nonlinear vibration response are presented, which are verified
solution method
by the single of of
degree thefreedom
nonlinear vibration
model and theresponse are presented,
beam structure model. which are verified by
The nonlinear
the single
term of thedegree of freedom
nonlinear model and
dynamic equation the beam structure
is exemplified model.
by the impact Themodel,
force nonlinear
and term o
the nonlinear
the nonlinearcharacteristics
dynamic equation is exemplified
of different by the
collision models areimpact forceThe
compared. model, and the non
numerical
solution algorithm of theofnonlinear
linear characteristics differentdynamic response
collision analysis
models is studied. The
are compared. Theaccuracy andsolution
numerical
computational
algorithm of efficiency of the Newmark-β
the nonlinear method combined
dynamic response analysiswith the Newton–Raphson
is studied. The accuracy and
method, generalized α method and precise integration method are compared. Under the
condition of ensuring the calculation accuracy, the Newmark-β method combined with the
Newton–Raphson method has the highest computational efficiency. Then, the results of the
numerical model and the reference model of a hollow shaft structure are compared; both
the displacement and velocity of the structure are basically the same, and the magnitude of
the acceleration response is basically the same, which provides a method for calculating
the dynamic response of a nonlinear structure. Other nonlinear impact force models and
corresponding nonlinear solution methods will be studied in the subsequent work by
building complex structures.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, D.J.; funding acquisition, D.J.; methodology, Y.T., Q.L.
and Y.L.; resources, Y.T.; software, Y.X.; validation, Y.X., Q.L. and Y.L.; writing—original draft, Y.X.;
writing—review and editing, Y.T., Q.L., Y.L., D.Z. and D.J. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.
11602112), the Natural Science Research Project of Higher Education in Jiangsu Province (20KJB460003),
the QingLan Project, the National Natural Science Foundation of China (52005100), the Natural
Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (BK20190324), the Jiangsu Association for Science and
Technology Young Talents Lifting Project (TJ-2022-043), the Fundamental Research Funds for the
Central Universities and the Zhishan Youth Scholar Program of SEU (2242021R41169).
Machines 2022, 10, 814 17 of 18

Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication
of this paper.

References
1. Banerjee, A.; Chanda, A.; Das, R. Historical Origin and Recent Development on Normal Directional Impact Models for Rigid
Body Contact Simulation: A Critical Review. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2017, 24, 397–422. [CrossRef]
2. Li, X.; Yao, Z.; Wu, R. Modeling and analysis of stick-slip motion in a linear piezoelectric ultrasonic motor considering ultrasonic
oscillation effect. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2016, 107, 215–224. [CrossRef]
3. Paez Chavez, J.; Pavlovskaia, E.; Wiercigroch, M. Bifurcation analysis of a piecewise-linear impact oscillator with drift. Nonlinear
Dyn. 2014, 77, 213–227. [CrossRef]
4. Yaqubi, S.; Dardel, M.; Daniali, H.M.; Ghasemi, M.H. Modeling and control of crank-slider mechanism with multiple clearance
joints. Multibody Syst. Dyn. 2016, 36, 143–167. [CrossRef]
5. Machado, M.; Moreira, P.; Flores, P.; Lankarani, H.M. Compliant contact force models in multibody dynamics: Evolution of the
Hertz contact theory. Mech. Mach. Theory 2012, 53, 99–121. [CrossRef]
6. Wen, G.; Yin, S.; Xu, H.; Zhang, S.; Lv, Z. Analysis of grazing bifurcation from periodic motion to quasi-periodic motion in
impact-damper systems. Chaos Solitons Fractals 2016, 83, 112–118. [CrossRef]
7. Jiang, H.; Chong, A.S.E.; Ueda, Y.; Wiercigroch, M. Grazing-induced bifurcations bifurcations in impact oscillators with elastic
and rigid constraints. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2017, 127, 204–214. [CrossRef]
8. Nordmark, A.B.; Piiroinen, P.T. Simulation and stability analysis of impacting systems with complete chattering. Nonlinear Dyn.
2009, 58, 85–106. [CrossRef]
9. Wagg, D.J. Rising phenomena and the multi-sliding bifurcation in a two-degree of freedom impact oscillator. Chaos Solitons
Fractals 2004, 22, 541–548. [CrossRef]
10. Sharkawy, A.-N.; Mostfa, A.A. Neural networks’ design and training for safe human-robot cooperation. J. King Saud Univ. -Eng.
Sci. 2021, 1–15.
11. Wu, B.; Wu, Y.; Liu, M.; Liu, J.; Jiang, D.; Ma, S.; Yan, B.; Lu, Y. Mechanical Behavior of Human Cancellous Bone in Alveolar Bone
under Uniaxial Compression and Creep Tests. Materials 2022, 15, 5912. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
12. Askari, E. Mathematical models for characterizing non-Hertzian contacts. Appl. Math. Model. 2021, 90, 432–447. [CrossRef]
13. Li, B.; Wang, M.S.; Gantes, C.J.; Tan, U.X. Modeling and simulation for wear prediction in planar mechanical systems with
multiple clearance joints. Nonlinear Dyn. 2022, 108, 887–910. [CrossRef]
14. Venanzi, S.; Parenti-Castelli, V. A new technique for clearance influence analysis in spatial mechanisms. J. Mech. Des. 2005, 127,
446–455. [CrossRef]
15. Flores, P.; Machado, M.; Silva, M.T.; Martins, J.M. On the continuous contact force models for soft materials in multibody
dynamics. Multibody Syst. Dyn. 2011, 25, 357–375. [CrossRef]
16. Wang, G.X.; Liu, H.Z.; Deng, P.S. Dynamics Analysis of Spatial Multibody System With Spherical Joint Wear. J. Tribol. Trans.
ASME 2015, 137, 021605. [CrossRef]
17. Tian, Q.; Flores, P.; Lankarani, H.M. A comprehensive survey of the analytical, numerical and experimental methodologies for
dynamics of multibody mechanical systems with clearance or imperfect joints. Mech. Mach. Theory 2018, 122, 1–57. [CrossRef]
18. Koshy, C.S.; Flores, P.; Lankarani, H.M. Study of the effect of contact force model on the dynamic response of mechanical systems
with dry clearance joints: Computational and experimental approaches. Nonlinear Dyn. 2013, 73, 325–338. [CrossRef]
19. Zhang, X.; Zhang, X.; Chen, Z. Dynamic analysis of a 3-(R) under bar RR parallel mechanism with multiple clearance joints. Mech.
Mach. Theory 2014, 78, 105–115. [CrossRef]
20. Marques, F.; Isaac, F.; Dourado, N.; Flores, P. An enhanced formulation to model spatial revolute joints with radial and axial
clearances. Mech. Mach. Theory 2017, 116, 123–144. [CrossRef]
21. Skrinjar, L.; Slavic, J.; Boltezar, M. A review of continuous contact-force models in multibody dynamics. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2018,
145, 171–187. [CrossRef]
22. Ma, J.; Chen, G.; Ji, L.; Qian, L.; Dong, S. A general methodology to establish the contact force model for complex contacting
surfaces. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2020, 140, 106678. [CrossRef]
23. Zhou, J.; Xu, L.; Zhao, J.; Hang, X.; Zhou, H. Effective excitation conditions for the intense motion of the ginkgo seed-stem system
during mechanical vibration harvesting. Biosyst. Eng. 2022, 215, 239–248. [CrossRef]
24. Erkaya, S.; Uzmay, I. Experimental investigation of joint clearance effects on the dynamics of a slider-crank mechanism. Multibody
Syst. Dyn. 2010, 24, 81–102. [CrossRef]
25. Erkaya, S.; Uzmay, I. Investigation on effect of joint clearance on dynamics of four-bar mechanism. Nonlinear Dyn. 2009, 58,
179–198. [CrossRef]
Machines 2022, 10, 814 18 of 18

26. Flores, P. A parametric study on the dynamic response of planar multibody systems with multiple clearance joints. Nonlinear Dyn.
2010, 61, 633–653. [CrossRef]
27. Alves, J.; Peixinho, N.; da Silva, M.T.; Flores, P.; Lankarani, H.M. A comparative study of the viscoelastic constitutive models for
frictionless contact interfaces in solids. Mech. Mach. Theory 2015, 85, 172–188. [CrossRef]
28. Liu, J.; Meng, X.; Jiang, C.; Han, X.; Zhang, D. Time-domain Galerkin method for dynamic load identification. Int. J. Numer.
Methods Eng. 2016, 105, 620–640. [CrossRef]
29. Fan, Y.; Zhao, C.; Yu, H.; Wen, B. Dynamic load identification algorithm based on Newmark-beta and self-filtering. Proc. Inst.
Mech. Eng. Part C-J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 2020, 234, 96–107.
30. Simsek, M. Non-linear vibration analysis of a functionally graded Timoshenko beam under action of a moving harmonic load.
Compos. Struct. 2010, 92, 2532–2546. [CrossRef]
31. Sun, G.; Ma, X.; Bai, Z. A Low Dispersion Precise Integration Time Domain Method Based on Wavelet Galerkin Scheme. IEEE
Microw. Wirel. Compon. Lett. 2010, 20, 651–653. [CrossRef]
32. Flores, P.; Ambrosio, J.; Claro, J.C.P.; Lankarani, H.M.; Koshy, C.S. A study on dynamics of mechanical systems including joints
with clearance and lubrication. Mech. Mach. Theory 2006, 41, 247–261. [CrossRef]
33. Guo, Y.; Mi, H.; Habibi, M. Electromechanical energy absorption, resonance frequency, and low-velocity impact analysis of the
piezoelectric doubly curved system. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2021, 157, 107723. [CrossRef]
34. Haddadi, A.; Hashtrudi-Zaad, K. Real-Time Identification of Hunt-Crossley Dynamic Models of Contact Environments. IEEE
Trans. Robot. 2012, 28, 555–566. [CrossRef]
35. Ma, J.; Qian, L. Modeling and simulation of planar multibody systems considering multiple revolute clearance joints. Nonlinear
Dyn. 2017, 90, 1907–1940. [CrossRef]
36. Chen, X.; Shuai, J.; Yu, D.; Wang, Q. Dynamics analysis of 2-DOF complex planar mechanical system with joint clearance and
flexible links. Nonlinear Dyn. 2018, 93, 1009–1034. [CrossRef]
37. Li, B.; Wang, S.-M.; Yuan, R.; Xue, X.-Z.; Zhi, C.-J. Dynamic characteristics of planar linear array deployable structure based on
scissor-like element with joint clearance using a new mixed contact force model. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C-J. Mech. Eng. Sci.
2016, 230, 3161–3174. [CrossRef]
38. Hou, Y.-l.; Deng, Y.-j.; Zeng, D.-X. Dynamic modelling and properties analysis of 3RSR parallel mechanism considering spherical
joint clearance and wear. J. Cent. South Univ. 2021, 28, 712–727. [CrossRef]
39. Chen, D.; Yang, J.; Kitipornchai, S. Free and forced vibrations of shear deformable functionally graded porous beams. Int. J. Mech.
Sci. 2016, 108, 14–22. [CrossRef]
40. Arani, A.G.; Kiani, F.; Afshari, H. Free and forced vibration analysis of laminated functionally graded CNT-reinforced composite
cylindrical panels. J. Sandw. Struct. Mater. 2021, 23, 255–278. [CrossRef]
41. Cao, Z.; Fei, Q.; Jiang, D.; Zhu, R.; Jin, H. Sensitivity Analysis of Nonlinear Transient Response Based on Perturbation in the
Complex Domain. J. Comput. Nonlinear Dyn. 2021, 16, 011001. [CrossRef]
42. Erlicher, S.; Bonaventura, L.; Bursi, O.S. The analysis of the Generalized-alpha method for non-linear dynamic problems. Comput.
Mech. 2002, 28, 83–104. [CrossRef]
43. Zhang, S.Y.; Deng, Z.C. An improved precise integration method for nonlinear dynamic system. Mech. Res. Commun. 2003,
30, 33–38.