Explicit solvers (LS-Dyna) : Are they faster and more accurate then implicit FEM (Marc) for solving large plastic deformation

Normal
0
21

false
false
false

MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Normale Tabelle";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

Why are implicit solvers (implicit FEM software) such as MSC.Marc, Deform, Forge, are preferred (dominates) to explicit FEM (LS-Dyna) in solving large deformation quasi-static problems such as e.g. in case of metal forming with an expectation sheet metal forming/IHU? Are explicit solvers (LS-Dyna) are faster in solving large plastic deformation quasi-static problems  (Forging)? How about the accuracy of the results when compared with implicit solvers? Are explicit solvers or contact algorithms used in explicit FEM (LS-Dyna) faster in Elasto-Plastic slide contact with friction?