• RBE2 vs.

RBE3 on FEMAP with NX

Nastran
Posted on 13 October, 2015by Blas Molero (IBERISA)

I receive many questions from clients and users of FEMAP and NX NASTRAN related to
the elements RBE2 and RBE3 , and often I see a misuse of them in the Finite Element
Models that come to me, many do not distinguish in general between a rigid element RBE2 and
another RBE3, they do not know their differences and therefore what type of element is the
most appropriate at each moment, so I will try to clarify the basic concepts so that from now on
those who have problems will help them.
Another source of error is the misuse of the elements RBE2 and RBE3 at the meshing
level in the FEMAP pre and postprocessor itself, generating many queries for error reasons
during the subsequent calculation with the NX NASTRAN Finite Element solver: among the
most typical they find the double-dependence , we have to learn to avoid them from the
moment of the mesh! Double dependence occurs when two rigid elements share a
dependent node .
If your model contains double dependencies, the NX NASTRAN solver will not be able to
correctly solve the model's degrees of freedom, and will give you an error. NX NASTRAN users
have the resource PARAM, AUTOMPC, YES available(in FEMAP it is activated during the
definition of the analysis in the NASTRAN Bulk Data Options ) that automatically solves many
of the problems caused by the double dependencies. But my best advice is to solve the
problem by the user at meshing level, not let the NX Nastran solver make decisions on
their own , OK ?. So you know what to do when you receive an error message of the following
type:

1
 Another typical error is to apply restrictions on dependent nodes of any of the rigid
elements RBE2 or RBE3 . For example, in the following image the user has created an
element RBE3 and in node # 9212 (the central node of the spider) has applied the constraints
TX = TY = TZ = 0, error !!. The # 9212 node is the DEPENDENT node of the RBE3 that
depends exclusively on the INDEPENDENT nodes of the RBE3 element (the nodes in the "legs"
of the spider), a node can belong at most to a single dependent set, therefore it is not possible
to apply no restriction on nodes dependent on rigid elements, the error is secure, OK ?.
The technical description is as follows: the problem occurs when a degree of freedom
(DOF) is defined as dependent on an MPC (the so - called M-set ) and at the same time a
restriction (the so - called S-set ) is applied with the order SPC ( Single-Point Constraint ). The
error message indicates that the X component (that is, the DOF) is illegally defined in
the UM set ( User-defined M-set ) and in the US set ( User-defined S-set ). Both sets are
mutually exclusive since all the MPC ( Multi-Point Constraints ) equations are processed before
applying the SPCThe m-set degrees of freedom are eliminated from the matrix.
When the NX NASTRAN solver tries to apply the SPC, the degree of freedom in question
is no longer available and the fateful FATAL error message appears . The normal correction so
that this does not happen is to modify the MPC so that the degree of freedom in question is
independent (N-set), then there is no conflict.
*** USER FATAL MESSAGE 2101 (GP4)
GRID POINT 9212 COMPONENT 1 ILLEGALLY DEFINED IN SETS UM US
GRID POINT 9212 COMPONENT 2 ILLEGALLY DEFINED IN SETS UM US
GRID POINT 9212 COMPONENT 3 ILLEGALLY DEFINED IN SETS UM US

2
 R-type elements are elements that impose fixed constraints between the movement
components of the nodes to which they are connected. Therefore, an R-type element is
mathematically equivalent to a multipoint constraint equation (this is what is known
as Multipoint Constraints Equations, MPC ). Each restriction equation expresses a
dependent degree of freedom as a linear function of the independent degree of freedom.
In general, R-type elements are called rigid elements , but it is not correct. The
elements that are exactly rigid are the RROD, RBAR, RBE1, RBE2 and RTRPLT . The
elements RBE3 and RSPLINE are called interpolation elements and are not rigid , is that
clear?

3
RBE2
Mixing elements whose rigidity differs orders of magnitude can cause problems of bad
conditioning of the matrix of rigidity ( ill-conditioning error ), causing that the model of Finite
Elements can not be solved. For example, simulating a rigid joint using 1-D CBAR / CBEAM
beam elements with extremely large values of its Inertia Moments I1, I2 causes, surely, an ill-
conditioning error .
The element RBE2 ( Rigid Body Element, Type 2) of NX NASTRAN uses restriction
equations to couple the movement of the degrees of freedom in the dependent nodes with the
movement of the degrees of freedom of the independent node. Consequently, the RBE2
elements do not contribute directly to the stiffness matrix of the structure and therefore the
problem of ill-conditioning is avoided . The RBE2 element is a very powerful tool for rigidly
connecting different components, or different nodes of the same component together.
In an element RBE2 the node in the center of the " spider " is the node with the
six INDEPENDENT degrees of freedom , and the nodes in the base of the legs of the spider are
the nodes with DEPENDENT degrees of freedom , which can not be dependent on no other
rigid element or restriction . The following error message would appear written in the file *
.F06 if we apply restrictions on dependent nodes belonging to an RBE2 element:
USER FATAL MESSAGE 2101 (GP4)
GRID POINT xxx COMPONENT x ILLEGALLY DEFINED IN SETS UM US
The following image shows an RBE2 element that rigidly links nodes 1, 2, 3 and 4
(dependent) with node 101 (independent). The four dependent nodes move in space like a rigid
body , with no relative movement between them, rotating and moving exactly the same as
independent node 101 does.

4
 Creation in FEMAP of an RBE2 : playing with the degrees of freedom (DOF) active in
the field DEPENDENT we can achieve the following effects:
 WELD (solid junction): activating the 6 degrees of freedom TX, TY, TZ, RX, RY, RZ.
 BOLT (screwed connection): activating TX, TY, TZ (leaving the rotations free).

RBE3

The RBE3 element is a powerful tool to efficiently distribute loads and masses in a Finite
Element Model. Unlike RBE2, RBE3 does not add additional rigidity to the structure. The loads
of Forces and Moments applied in the center of the spider (also known as reference node , or
dependent node) are distributed in the independent nodes (also called master grids )
analogous to the classic analysis of screws, the force is Distributes in the screws proportionally
to the weighting factors.
 STEP # 1 : The loads applied in the reference node are transferred to the weighted
center of gravity of the independent nodes resulting in an equivalent Force and Moment.
 STEP # 2 : The Force & Moment loads applied in the CoG are transferred to the
independent nodes ( master grids) according to the weighting factor of each node.
The mass applied in the reference node is distributed in the independent nodes in a similar way
to the forces, the mechanism used is the same.

5
 The following image shows the element RBE3 created in FEMAP: a very common
mistake is also activate the degrees of freedom of rotation on separate nodes , NEVER ! ,
the recommendation is to activate only the degrees of freedom TX, TY, TZ , is that clear? In
some very extreme case it makes sense to activate the degrees of freedom of rotation, for
example when all the independent nodes are collinear , and therefore the RBE3 becomes
unstable by rotation around the axis.

6
Application Examples
First of all, here is a case where the RBE2 element is misused: it involves applying a
load FX = 1000 N in the center of the hole, as shown in the following figure.

 RBE2 : the following image shows the deformed rigid body of the hole when an RBE2
element is used to distribute the load, clearly the RBE2 element stiffens the structure
artificially. The FREE BODY allows to see the distribution of loads in the nodes of the hole, it
is anything but regular !!.

7
 RBE3 : using an RBE3 element the structure is deformed according to its own
rigidity, the RBE3 element does not add any additional rigidity, and the FREE BODY shows
a regular load distribution (1000N / 40 nodes = 25 N) since the central node of the spider
(dependent) is in the CdG of the nodes of the hole (independent).
 If the device used to apply the load does not stiffen the structure, the use of an RBE3
element is always the most reasonable option.

8
Here I leave the video where I explain the step-by-step example:

9
 The following image shows an industrial hydraulic equipment formed by a structural deposit
on whose screwed cover it is moored different mechanical components (hydraulic blocks,
electric motors, etc ...) whose mass and position of its CoG is very important to consider in the
different static analyzes and dynamic

The following image shows the Finite Element Model of the hydraulic reservoir
where CONM2 point mass elements areplaced in the CdG of the components attached to the
hydraulic tank to capture its mass, using an RBE3 element to join them to the tank lid.

10
The following picture shows the detail of the screw connection between the cover and the tank
body: the screw is mesh with a CBAR beam element and the union between the screw head
and the cover is made using RBE2 elements activating only the degrees of freedom
translation TX, TY, TZ in the dependent nodes, leaving the rotations free. In addition, contact at
the body-lid junction is included in the calculation using CGAP 1-D elements of explicit node-to-
node contact working only by compression.

11
12
 The third example is a comparison between distributing a load in the structure using
elements RBE2 or RBE3. It's an example very similar to the first one, but here I'm going to show
you how to play with the weighting factors that the RBE3 elements offer, so even if it's just
repeating some concepts, it's worth it. Here I leave the video where I explain the step-by-step
example:
It is a Z-shaped cantilever beam meshed with 2-D Shell CQUAD4 elements with a fully
embedded end and a transversal load of value FY = -1800 N is applied on the opposite side (the
total number of nodes along the free end is 18, so in case of a uniform distribution the load per
node should be 1800/18 = 100 N).

 RBE2 : the FREE BODY from FEMAP shows at the free end an even less uniform
distribution of forces, together with the characteristic mode of rigid body deformation.
 Seeing the deformed can be said that the elements RBE2 comply with the theory of
beams (which by the way, is a " chestnut ", no one is confused!, Is valid for solid sections,
but in open sections of small thickness Shell elements CQUAD4 is the perfect solution): the
flat section remains flat .
 Look at the value of the resulting displacement: URES = 0.178 mm .

13
 RBE3 : using a constant interpolation factor (default option) the load is uniformly
distributed in all nodes of the free end of the beam of value 1800/18 = 100 N. But the
uniform load distribution causes in the wings an excess both of transverse load as
deformation .
 The maximum displacement is URES = 3.091 mm .

14
15
 RBE3 with interpolation factor : by applying a weighting factor of 1.0 we can
download the wings a little, reducing the maximum deformation.
 The maximum displacement resulting URES = 1,208 mm , but we are still far from
that obtained using RBE2 rigid elements.

16
 RBE3 with weighting, but distributing the load only in the core : we will assume that
the transverse load is only transmitted through the core (that is, the wings do not transmit
any load), maintaining the previous weighting factor.
 In this case the resultant displacements URES = 0.178 mm (assuming a quadratic
weighting) are similar to those initially obtained with a rigid element RBE2 (beam theory),
but it does not impose the condition that " the flat sections remain flat " as it does RBE2.
 The key: the shear force acting on the free end of the beam is not linear: it reaches its
maximum value in the neutral plane and approaches zero in the upper and lower fiber.

17
18
 And to finish a final example to answer the question: How does an RBE3 distribute the
loads when the force applied to the reference node (the dependent node) does not pass
through the CdG of the independent nodes (ie the master ones)? grids )? .

 Well here is the answer : the resulting forces in the FREE BODY are intuitively not
very obvious, note that there are forces in the opposite direction on the left side of the
plate. The moment caused by the decentering of the load makes necessary the appearance
of forces in the opposite direction to achieve balance.
 Note also the activation of the degree of freedom RX in the independent nodes,
necessary to solve the model since all the master nodes are aligned, otherwise the solver
NX NASTRAN will give you an error.

19
Well, nothing, I hope it helps you and it is useful and interesting and enjoy the elements RBE2
and RBE3 with FEMAP and NX NASTRAN as much as I write this publication !!.

Greetings,
Blas.

20