Comparison and Evaluation of Different Simulation Environments for Rigid Body Systems

TL;DR

This paper compares four rigid body simulation environments, analyzing their modeling, solvers, and handling of numerical issues using a complex crane boom benchmark to guide users in selecting appropriate tools.

Contribution

It provides a detailed comparison of four simulation tools focusing on modeling, solvers, and numerical problem handling for complex mechanical systems.

Findings

Adams and Simscape excel in handling complex boundary conditions.

OpenModelica offers flexible modeling but has limitations in static equilibrium.

VEROSIM provides robust solutions for redundant constraints.

Abstract

Rigid body dynamics simulators are important tools for the design, analysis and optimization of mechanical systems in a variety of technical and scientific applications. This study examines four different simulation environments (Adams, Simscape, OpenModelica, and VEROSIM), focusing in particular on the comparison of the modeling methods, the numerical solvers, and the treatment of numerical problems that arise especially in closed-loop kinematics (esp. redundant boundary conditions and static equilibrium problem). A novel and complex crane boom of a real forestry machine serves as a practical benchmark application example. The direct comparison of the different solution approaches in the examined simulation tools supports the user in selecting the most suitable tool for his application.