{"id":{"repo_id":"nps","oai_identifier":"oai:calhoun.nps.edu:10945/24335"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/nps/oai:calhoun.nps.edu:10945/24335","repository":{"repo_id":"nps","name":"Naval Postgraduate School","base_url":"https://calhoun.nps.edu/server/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Wave propagation in finite element and mass-spring-dashpot lattice models","abstract":"Numerical efficiency comparisons of a four-node finite element model (FEM), a mass-spring lattice model (MSLM), and a mass-spring-dashpot lattice model (MSDLM) are investigated. Specifically, the error in the ultrasonic phase speed with variations in Poisson's ratio and angle of incidence is evaluated in each model of an isotropic elastic solid. With regard to phase speed, materials with constant N grid spaces per P-wavelength having Poisson's ratios between 0.0 and 0.25 are modeled more accurately with the MSLM. Materials with Poisson's ratios between 0.35 and 0.5 and N grid spaces per P-wavelength are more accurately modeled with the FEM. Materials whose Poisson's ratio is between 0.25 and 0.35 are modeled equally accurately. With regard to phase speed, viscoelastic materials modeled with FEM and MSDLM show good agreement with known analytical solutions. The computational expense of all three models is also examined. The number of floating point operations (FLOPS) needed to achieve a specified phase speed accuracy is calculated for each different model. While the FEM and MSLM have nearly the same computation cost, the MSDLM is 5 times more costly than either the FEM or MSLM.","abstract_html":"Numerical efficiency comparisons of a four-node finite element model (FEM), a mass-spring lattice model (MSLM), and a mass-spring-dashpot lattice model (MSDLM) are investigated. Specifically, the error in the ultrasonic phase speed with variations in Poisson's ratio and angle of incidence is evaluated in each model of an isotropic elastic solid. With regard to phase speed, materials with constant N grid spaces per P-wavelength having Poisson's ratios between 0.0 and 0.25 are modeled more accurately with the MSLM. Materials with Poisson's ratios between 0.35 and 0.5 and N grid spaces per P-wavelength are more accurately modeled with the FEM. Materials whose Poisson's ratio is between 0.25 and 0.35 are modeled equally accurately. With regard to phase speed, viscoelastic materials modeled with FEM and MSDLM show good agreement with known analytical solutions. The computational expense of all three models is also examined. The number of floating point operations (FLOPS) needed to achieve a specified phase speed accuracy is calculated for each different model. While the FEM and MSLM have nearly the same computation cost, the MSDLM is 5 times more costly than either the FEM or MSLM.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Holt-Phoenix, Marianne S."],"institution":"Monterey California. Naval Postgraduate School","degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":"Naval Engineering","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2006,"date_issued":"2006","date_published":"2006","updated_at":"2026-07-27T20:26:38Z","subjects":[],"languages":["en_US"],"rights":["This publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States."],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://hdl.handle.net/10945/24335","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Naval Engineering","Mechanical Engineering"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Holt-Phoenix, Marianne S."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["June 2006"]},{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2012-12-13T18:44:00Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2012-12-13T18:44:00Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2006"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Monterey California. Naval Postgraduate School"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en_US"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["This publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States."]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://hdl.handle.net/10945/24335"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["CIVINS (Civilian Institutions) Thesis document"]},{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Numerical efficiency comparisons of a four-node finite element model (FEM), a mass-spring lattice model (MSLM), and a mass-spring-dashpot lattice model (MSDLM) are investigated. Specifically, the error in the ultrasonic phase speed with variations in Poisson's ratio and angle of incidence is evaluated in each model of an isotropic elastic solid. With regard to phase speed, materials with constant N grid spaces per P-wavelength having Poisson's ratios between 0.0 and 0.25 are modeled more accurately with the MSLM. Materials with Poisson's ratios between 0.35 and 0.5 and N grid spaces per P-wavelength are more accurately modeled with the FEM. Materials whose Poisson's ratio is between 0.25 and 0.35 are modeled equally accurately. With regard to phase speed, viscoelastic materials modeled with FEM and MSDLM show good agreement with known analytical solutions. The computational expense of all three models is also examined. The number of floating point operations (FLOPS) needed to achieve a specified phase speed accuracy is calculated for each different model. While the FEM and MSLM have nearly the same computation cost, the MSDLM is 5 times more costly than either the FEM or MSLM."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Wave propagation in finite element and mass-spring-dashpot lattice models"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.department":["Naval Engineering","Mechanical Engineering"],"dc:creator":["Holt-Phoenix, Marianne S."],"dc:date":["June 2006"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2012-12-13T18:44:00Z"],"dc:date.available":["2012-12-13T18:44:00Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2006"],"dc:description":["CIVINS (Civilian Institutions) Thesis document"],"dc:description.abstract":["Numerical efficiency comparisons of a four-node finite element model (FEM), a mass-spring lattice model (MSLM), and a mass-spring-dashpot lattice model (MSDLM) are investigated. Specifically, the error in the ultrasonic phase speed with variations in Poisson's ratio and angle of incidence is evaluated in each model of an isotropic elastic solid. With regard to phase speed, materials with constant N grid spaces per P-wavelength having Poisson's ratios between 0.0 and 0.25 are modeled more accurately with the MSLM. Materials with Poisson's ratios between 0.35 and 0.5 and N grid spaces per P-wavelength are more accurately modeled with the FEM. Materials whose Poisson's ratio is between 0.25 and 0.35 are modeled equally accurately. With regard to phase speed, viscoelastic materials modeled with FEM and MSDLM show good agreement with known analytical solutions. The computational expense of all three models is also examined. The number of floating point operations (FLOPS) needed to achieve a specified phase speed accuracy is calculated for each different model. While the FEM and MSLM have nearly the same computation cost, the MSDLM is 5 times more costly than either the FEM or MSLM."],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://hdl.handle.net/10945/24335"],"dc:language.iso":["en_US"],"dc:publisher":["Monterey California. Naval Postgraduate School"],"dc:rights":["This publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States."],"dc:title":["Wave propagation in finite element and mass-spring-dashpot lattice models"],"dc:type":["Thesis"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-27T20:26:38Z"}