The continuously improved performance of personal computers enables the real-time motion simulation of complex multibody systems, such as the whole model of an automobile, on a conventional PC, provided the adequate formulation is applied. There exist two big families of dynamic formulations, depending on the type of coordinates they use to model the system: global and topological. The former leads to a simple and systematic programming while the latter is very efficient. In this work, a hybrid formulation is presented, obtained by combination of one of the most efficient global formulations and one of the most systematic topological formulations. It shows, at the same time, easiness of implementation and a high level of efficiency. In order to verify the advantages that the new formulation has over its predecessors, the following four examples are solved using the three formulations and the corresponding results are compared: a planar mechanism which goes through a singular position, a car suspension with stiff behavior, a 6-dof robot with changing configurations, and the full model of a car vehicle. Furthermore, the last example is also analyzed using a commercial tool, so as to provide the readers with a well-known reference for comparison.

Issue Section:
Technical Papers
Keywords:
large-scale systems, mechanical engineering computing, automotive components, automobiles, robots, kinematics
Topics:
Automobiles, Errors, Multibody dynamics, Multibody systems, Robots, Simulation, Vehicles, Equations of motion, Degrees of freedom, Robustness, Kinematics
1.
Campanelli
,
M.
,
Berzeri
,
M.
, and
Shabana
,
A. A.
,
2000
, “
Performance of the Incremental and Non-incremental Finite Element Formulations in Flexible Multibody Problems
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
,
122
(
4
), pp.
498
–
507
.
2.
Fox
,
B.
,
Jennings
,
L. S.
, and
Zomaya
,
A. Y.
,
2001
, “
Numerical Computation of Differential-algebraic Equations for Non-linear Dynamics of Multibody Systems Involving Contact Forces
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
,
123
(
2
), pp.
272
–
281
.
3.
Lankarani
,
H. M.
,
2000
, “
A Poisson-based Formulation for Frictional Impact Analysis of Multibody Mechanical Systems With Open or Closed Kinematic Chains
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
,
122
(
4
), pp.
489
–
497
.
4.
Elias
,
D. A.
, and
Chiang
,
L. E.
,
2003
, “
Dynamic Analysis of Impact Tools by Using a Method Based on Stress Wave Propagation and Impulse-momentum Principle
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
,
125
(
1
), pp.
131
–
142
.
5.
Kim
,
C.
, and
Ro
,
P. I.
,
2002
, “
An Accurate Full Car Ride Model Using Model Reducing Techniques
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
,
124
(
4
), pp.
697
–
705
.
6.
Kang
,
J. S.
,
Bae
,
S.
,
Lee
,
J. M.
, and
Tak
,
T. O.
,
2003
, “
Force Equilibrium Approach for Linearization of Constrained Mechanical System Dynamics
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
,
125
(
1
), pp.
143
–
149
.
7.
Serban
,
R.
, and
Haug
,
E. J.
,
2000
, “
Globally Independent Coordinates for Real-time Vehicle Simulation
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
,
122
(
4
), pp.
575
–
582
.
8.
Lin
,
S.-T.
, and
Huang
,
J.-N.
,
2002
, “
Stabilization of Baumgarte’s Method Using the Runge-Kutta Approach
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
,
124
(
4
), pp.
633
–
641
.
9.
Shabana, A. A., 1998, Dynamics of Multibody Systems, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
10.
Garcı´a de Jalo´n, J., and Bayo, E., 1994, Kinematic and Dynamic Simulation of Multibody Systems, Springer-Verlag, New York.
11.
Cuadrado
,
J.
,
Gutie´rrez
,
R.
,
Naya
,
M. A.
, and
Morer
,
P.
,
2001
, “
A Comparison in Terms of Accuracy and Efficiency Between a MBS Dynamic Formulation With Stress Analysis and a Non-linear FEA Code
,”
Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng.
,
51
(
9
), pp.
1033
–
1052
.
12.
Rodrı´guez, J. I., 2000, “Analysis Eficiente de Mecanismos 3D con metodos topologicos y tecnologia de components en Internet,” Ph.D. Thesis, University of Navarre, Spain.
13.
Bayo
,
E.
, and
Avello
,
A.
,
1994
, “
Singularity Free Augmented Lagrangian Algorithms for Constraint Multibody Dynamics
,”
Nonlinear Dyn.
,
5
, pp.
209
–
231
.
14.
Iltis Data Package, 1990, IAVSD Workshop, Herbertov, Czechoslovakia.
15.
Angeles
,
J.
, and
Ma
,
O.
,
1988
, “
Dynamic Simulation of n-axis Serial Robotic Manipulators Using a Natural Orthogonal Complement
,”
Int. J. Robot. Res.
,
7
(
5
), pp.
32
–
47
.
16.
Jime´nez, J. M., 1993, “Kinematic and Dynamic Formulations for Real-time Simulation of Multibody Systems,” Ph.D. Thesis, University of Navarre, Spain.
17.
Featherstone, R., 1987, Robot Dynamics Algorithms, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
18.
Cuadrado
,
J.
,
Cardenal
,
J.
,
Morer
,
P.
, and
Bayo
,
E.
,
2000
, “
Intelligent Simulation of Multibody Dynamics: Space-state and Descriptor Methods in Sequential and Parallel Computing Environments
,”
Multibody Syst. Dyn.
,
4
, pp.
55
–
73
.
19.
ADAMS 11.0.0 Product Guides, 2000.
Copyright © 2004
 by ASME
You do not currently have access to this content.