Damping Boundary Conditions for a Reduced Solution Domain Size and Effective Numerical Analysis of Heterogeneous Waveguides

  • S. DuczekEmail author
  • S. M. H. Hosseini
  • U. GabbertEmail author
Part of the Research Topics in Aerospace book series (RTA)


In the current chapter we focus on the development of numerical methods to reduce the computational effort of finite element (FE)-based wave propagation analysis and to enable the modelling of heterogeneous cellular structures. To this end, we take two different approaches: (1) implementation of damping boundary conditions to reduce the solution domain, and (2) development of methodologies to approximately capture the heterogeneities of cellular sandwich materials. The main advantage of our approach is seen in the fact that it can be implemented in commercial FE software in a straightforward fashion. Using these approaches we can study the interaction of guided waves with heterogeneous and cellular microstructures with a significantly reduced numerical effort. By means of parametric studies we then extract important variables that influence the behavior of elastic waves in sandwich panels.


  1. 1.
    Ahmad ZAB (2011) Numerical simulation of Lamb waves in plates using a semi-analytical finite element method. VDI Fortschritt-Berichte Reihe 20 Nr. 437Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alpert B, Greengard L, Hagstrom T (2002) Nonreflecting boundary conditions for the time-dependent wave equation. J Comput Phys 180:270–296MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aurenhammer F, Klein R (1999) Voronoi diagrams. Technical Report, Technical University of Graz & FernUni HagenzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balendra S (2005) Numerical modeling of dynamic soil-pile-structure interaction. Master’s Thesis, Washington State University, Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barton R, Carter FWS, Roberts TA (1974) Use of reticulated metal foam as flash-back arrestor elements. Chem Eng J 291:708Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bérenger JP (1994) A perfectly matched layer for the absorption of electromagnetic waves. J Comput Phys 114:185–200MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bray H (1972) Design opportunities with metal foam. Eng Mater Des 16:16–19Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Drozdz M, Moreau L, Castaings M, Lowe MJS, Cawley P (2006) Efficient numerical modelling of absorbing regions for boundaries of guided waves problems. In: AIP conference proceedings, vol 820, p 126Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fiedler T (2008) Numerical and experimental investigation of hollow sphere structures in sandwich panels. Trans Tech Publications, ZurichGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hosseini SMH (2013) Ultrasonic guided wave propagation in cellular sandwich panels for structural health monitoring. VDI Fortschritt-Berichte Reihe 20 Nr. 456Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hosseini SMH, Gabbert U (2013) Numerical simulation of the Lamb wave propagation in honeycomb sandwich panels: a parametric study. Compos Struct 97:189–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hosseini SMH, Duczek S, Gabbert U (2013) Non-reflecting boundary condition for Lamb wave propagation problems in honeycomb and CFRP plates using dashpot elements. Compos Part B 54:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hosseini SMH, Kharaghani A, Kirsch C, Gabbert U (2013) Numerical simulation of Lamb wave propagation in metallic foam sandwich structures: a parametric study. Compos Struct 97:387–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hosseini SMH, Duczek S, Gabbert U (2014) Damage localization in plates using mode conversion characteristics of ultrasonic guided waves. J Nondestruct Eval 33:152–165Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kohr T, Petersson BAT (2009) Wave beaming and wave propagation in lightweight plates with truss-like cores. J Sound Vib 321:137–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Krez R, Hombergsmeier E, Eipper K (1999) Manufacturing and testing of aluminium foam structural parts for passenger cars demonstrated by example of a rear intermediate panel. In: Proceedings metal foams and porous structuresGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liu GR, Jerry SQ (2003) A non-reflecting boundary for analyzing wave propagation using the finite element method. Finite Elem Anal Des 39:403–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lysmer J, Kuhlemeyer R (1969) Finite dynamic model for infinite media. J Eng Mech Div 95:859–877Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Moser F, Laurence JJ, Qu J (1999) Modeling elastic wave propagation in waveguides with finite element method. NDT & E Int 32:225–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mustapha S, Ye L, Wang D, Lu Y (2011) Assessment of debonding in sandwich CF/EP composite beams using A 0 Lamb. Compos Struct 93:483–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oh T, Popovics JS, Ham S, Shin S (2012) Practical finite element based simulations of nondestructive evaluation methods for concrete. Comput Struct 98–99:55–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Paget CA (2001) Active health monitoring of aerospace composite structures by embedded piezoceramic transducers. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Aeronautics Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Qi X, Rose JL, Xu C (2008) Ultrasonic guided wave nondestructive testing for helicopter rotor blades. In: 17th world conference on nondestructive testing, Shanghai, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Raghavan A, Cesnik C (2005) Lamb-wave based structural health monitoring. Damage prognosis: for aerospace, civil and mechanical systems. Wiley, New York, pp 235–258Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ruzzene M, Scarpa F, Soranna F (2003) Wave beaming effects in two-dimensional cellular structures. Smart Mater Struct 12:363–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sim I (2010) Nonreflecting boundary conditions for time-dependent wave propagation. Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Science, University of Basel, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Song F, Huang G, Kim J, Haran S (2008) On the study of surface wave propagation in concrete structures using a piezoelectric actuator/sensor system. Smart Mater Struct 17:55024–55032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Song F, Huang GL, Hudson K (2009) Guided wave propagation in honeycomb sandwich structures using a piezoelectric actuator/sensor system. Smart Mater Struct 18:125007–125015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Suranat K (1980) Transition finite elements for three-dimensional stress analysis. Int J Numer Methods Eng 15:991–1020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Terrien N, Osmont D (2009) Damage detection in foam core sandwich structures using guided waves. In: Leger A, Deschamps M (ed) Ultrasonic wave propagation in non homogeneous media. Springer proceedings in physics, vol 128, Springer, Berlin, pp 251–260Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Thompson L (2006) A review of finite element methods for time-harmonic acoustics. J Acoust Soc Am 119:1315–1330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Thwaites S, Clarck NH (1995) Non-destructive testing of honeycomb sandwich structures using elastic waves. J Sound Vib 187(2):253–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wang L, Yuan F (2007) Group velocity and characteristic wave curves of Lamb waves in composites: Modeling and experiments. Compos Sci Technol 67:1370–1384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Weber R (2011) Numerical simulation of the guided Lamb wave propagation in particle reinforced composites excited by piezoelectric patch actuators. Master’s Thesis, Institute of Numerical Mechanics, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Weber R, Hosseini SMH, Gabbert U (2012) Numerical simulation of the guided Lamb wave propagation in particle reinforced composites. Compos Struct 94:3064–3071CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wierzbicki E, Woźniak C (2000) On the dynamic behavior of honeycomb based composite solids. Acta Mech 141:161–172CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Willberg C, Duczek S, Vivar Perez JM, Schmicker D, Gabbert U (2012) Comparison of different higher order finite element schemes for the simulation of Lamb waves. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 241–244:246–261CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Willberg C, Mook G, Gabbert U, Pohl J (2012) The phenomenon of continuous mode conversion of Lamb waves in CFRP plates. Key Eng Mater 518:364–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Yoshimura H, Shinagawa K, Sukegawa Y, Murakami K (2005) Metallic hollow sphere structures bonded by adhesion. In: The 4th international conference on porous metals and metal foaming technologyGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zhu HX, Hobdell JR, Windle AH (2000) Effects of cell irregularity on the elastic properties of open-cell foams. Acta Mater 48(20):4893–4900CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of MechanicsOtto von Guericke University MagdeburgMagdeburgGermany

Personalised recommendations