Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

RBE2

The RBE2 (Radar à Balayage Electronique 2 plans) is a family of multimode fire control radars developed by in collaboration with for the French multirole Rafale combat aircraft. Initially introduced in the as a (PESA) system operating in the X-band, it provides all-weather detection, tracking, and engagement capabilities against air, sea, and ground targets. The radar's design emphasizes agility, with electronic beam steering enabling rapid scanning and simultaneous multi-target handling. The RBE2 has evolved through several variants to meet advancing operational demands. The original RBE2 PESA version supported core functions like air-to-air interception and ground mapping, but was upgraded to the RBE2-AA (AESA) in the early 2000s, featuring approximately 838 transmit/receive modules for enhanced performance. This AESA iteration, Europe's first combat-proven airborne AESA radar, offers superior , including real-time 3D terrain-following for low-altitude navigation, high-resolution (SAR) imaging, and resistance to electronic jamming. It has logged over 150,000 flight hours and is integrated on Rafale jets operated by seven nations (, Egypt, , , , the , and ), with Serbia having ordered the aircraft for future integration. Further upgrades, such as the RBE2-XG with expanded , ensure adaptability to future threats like low-observable targets and beyond-visual-range engagements with missiles such as the . Key capabilities of the RBE2 include look-up/look-down multi-target tracking in cluttered environments, precise ground target designation for weapons delivery, and seamless integration with the Rafale's Spectra suite for contested airspace operations. Its allows for ongoing enhancements, drawing on Thales' six decades of expertise, making it a cornerstone of the Rafale's omnirole versatility across air superiority, strike, and reconnaissance missions.

Introduction

Definition

The RBE2, or Element type 2, is a constraint element in finite element analysis (FEA) software, such as MSC Nastran, used to enforce rigid connections between a single independent grid point, known as the or reference , and multiple dependent grid points, referred to as slave s. This element models situations where connected nodes must undergo identical motion without relative deformation, effectively distributing forces and moments from the dependent nodes to the independent node while preserving the structural integrity of the assembly. The core principle of the RBE2 element is that the independent node fully defines the translational and rotational displacements for all attached dependent nodes, ensuring that the entire set behaves as a single undeformable . This kinematic linkage transmits all —three translations and three rotations—from the master node to the slaves, with user-specified options to selectively constrain certain if needed. By imposing these rigid ties, the element prevents any local deformation within the connected group, making it suitable for modeling bolted joints, rigid fixtures, or simplified representations of complex substructures in linear static and dynamic analyses. Mathematically, the RBE2 enforces kinematic constraints through multipoint constraint (MPC) equations that relate the displacements and rotations of the dependent nodes to those of the independent node. Specifically, the vector of a dependent \mathbf{u}_d is given by \mathbf{u}_d = T \mathbf{u}_i, where \mathbf{u}_i is the vector of the independent and T is a derived from the relative positions and orientations of the nodes. Unlike physical elements that contribute to the global , the RBE2 is purely kinematic and adds no or properties of its own; instead, it modifies the system's by eliminating those of the dependent nodes through equations, often implemented via methods like Lagrange multipliers or direct . This approach ensures numerical efficiency while accurately capturing behavior in FEA simulations.

Historical Development

The RBE2 element was developed as part of 's () program, which originated from a 1964 initiative to create a unified finite analysis tool for structural problems across NASA centers, with development contracted to MacNeal-Schwendler Corporation in 1966 and the first public release occurring in 1971. This program addressed the need for efficient simulation of complex structures, where modeling was essential to represent interconnected components without excessive computational cost. Introduced in early versions, the RBE2 enabled the simulation of rigid bodies by enforcing kinematic s among multiple grid points, facilitating accurate in applications such as and . Its design as a multi-point element allowed for the rigid connection of dependent to an independent reference node, promoting conceptual in modeling rigid assemblies. The element's evolution saw its integration into commercial finite element solvers beginning in the 1970s with MSC , a proprietary extension of the original that provided ongoing support and enhancements for industrial use. By the 1990s, it was adopted in Altair OptiStruct, launched in as a solver emphasizing optimization alongside . Further adaptation occurred in the 2010s with Autodesk Inventor , following Autodesk's acquisition of NEi Software, embedding RBE2 capabilities directly into CAD workflows for broader engineering accessibility. Key milestones in RBE2's development include the of its bulk format within NASTRAN's input structure, which ensured compatibility and ease of use across analyses. Later enhancements, such as those in MSC 2003, improved multi-point handling to better accommodate large-scale models by optimizing generation and reducing numerical ill-conditioning. In March 2023, acquired MSC Software, continuing the development of MSC , with version 2025.1 released in 2025, introducing enhancements for and .

Technical Formulation

Node Configuration

In the RBE2 element, node configuration centers on a single independent grid point, designated as GN, which retains full control over all —three translational and three rotational—allowing it to serve as the reference for the rigid body's motion. This independent acts as the point, where external loads, conditions, or connections to other elements are typically applied, ensuring that the entire rigid assembly responds kinematically to inputs at this location. Dependent grid points, denoted as GMi, are multiple nodes rigidly tied to the independent node, with their motions fully determined by the independent node's displacement and rotation. These dependent nodes can number in the thousands across all continuation entries for a single RBE2 in MSC Nastran, though practical limits may vary by software implementation or model complexity. The connection forms a virtual rigid link between the independent and dependent nodes, where dependent nodes inherit the rigid body motion without introducing physical stiffness matrices between them; instead, the software generates internal multipoint constraints to enforce this linkage. This setup creates a conceptual spider-like structure, with the independent node at the center and dependent nodes at the periphery, ideal for modeling rigid attachments like bolted connections or lumped masses. All nodes in an RBE2 are defined using standard grid point entries, referenced in the global coordinate system or user-specified local systems via the GRID card's coordinate ID field. Offsets between the independent and dependent nodes are derived directly from their geometric positions in these coordinate systems, with the solver computing transformation matrices internally to account for any relative displacements or rotations during analysis. Dependent degrees of freedom are interpreted in the output coordinate system of each respective node, ensuring accurate rigid enforcement even when nodes use cylindrical, spherical, or other non-Cartesian frames. This coordinate handling maintains the rigid body's integrity without requiring explicit user-defined offsets in the element definition.

Degrees of Freedom and Constraints

The RBE2 element designates a single independent where all (DOFs)—three translations (TX, TY, TZ) and three rotations (RX, RY, RZ)—are active and unconstrained by the itself. This independent serves as the point for the rigid , allowing full motion that propagates to dependent nodes. For dependent nodes, the RBE2 allows specification of which DOFs are rigidly constrained to the independent through component codes, typically denoted as 1 through 6 corresponding to , , TZ, , RY, and RZ, respectively. These codes are entered as a string of up to six unique digits without blanks (e.g., "123" for translations only or "123456" for all DOFs), applying the rigid constraint only to the selected components at each dependent ; unspecified DOFs remain free and unaffected by the . Multiple dependent nodes can be connected to the same independent , enabling complex rigid assemblies. The constraints enforced by the RBE2 follow the kinematics of rigid body motion in three dimensions, where the displacement at a dependent node \mathbf{u}_j is related to the displacement \mathbf{u}_i and rotation \boldsymbol{\theta}_i at the independent node i by the equation: \mathbf{u}_j = \mathbf{u}_i + (\mathbf{r}_j - \mathbf{r}_i) \times \boldsymbol{\theta}_i Here, \mathbf{r}_i and \mathbf{r}_j are the position vectors of the independent and dependent nodes, respectively. This formulation applies component-wise to the selected DOFs, assuming small rotations for linear analysis, and ensures that translations at dependent nodes include both direct displacement from the independent node and lever-arm effects from rotations. These constraints introduce additional equations into the global finite element system, effectively imposing infinite between connected nodes for the specified DOFs, which can artificially increase overall model if the RBE2 is overused or applied to flexible components. Dependent DOFs cannot be further constrained by other elements like single-point constraints or additional rigid bodies, preventing conflicts in the system assembly.

Implementation in Software

Bulk Data Entry Format

The RBE2 element in NASTRAN-compatible finite element software is defined using a bulk data entry card that specifies the rigid connection between an independent reference grid point and multiple dependent grid points. The entry enforces kinematic constraints such that the dependent (DOFs) at the listed grids move rigidly with the independent DOFs at the reference grid, facilitating modeling in . The standard bulk data format begins with the keyword "RBE2" followed by the element ID (EID), which is a unique integer identifier for the element (typically 0 < EID < 100,000,000). The next field is the reference grid point ID (REF or GN), an integer greater than 0 designating the independent node whose DOFs control the motion. This is followed by the component mask (CM), a blank-free string of digits from 1 to 6 (e.g., "123456" for all translational and rotational DOFs: UX, UY, UZ, RX, RY, RZ) indicating which DOFs at the dependent grids are constrained to the reference node. Subsequent fields list the dependent grid point IDs (GM1, GM2, etc.), integers greater than 0, with up to eight per line; additional grids are specified on continuation lines starting with a blank or "+" in the first column. An optional ALPHA field at the end of the last continuation line specifies the thermal expansion coefficient (a real value greater than 0 or blank if not applicable).
FieldContentsType/FormatExample Value
1Entry nameCharacterRBE2
2EID (element )Integer > 01
3REF (reference ID)Integer > 02
4 (DOF component mask)Digits 1-6, no blanks123456
5-9GM1 to GM5 (dependent grids)Integer > 0 (up to 8 total per entry)3, 4, 5
ContinuationAdditional GM fieldsInteger > 06, 7
LastALPHA (thermal coeff.)Real > 0 or blank(blank)
In free-field format, fields are separated by commas, while fixed-field uses columns 1-8, 9-16, etc., with right-justification for integers and exponential notation for reals. Dependent DOFs specified in cannot overlap with those constrained elsewhere in the model, such as in single-point constraints or other multipoint constraints. For example, the following entry defines an RBE2 element with ID 1, connecting dependent grids 3, 4, and 5 rigidly to independent grid 2 across all six DOFs:
RBE2,1,2,123456,3,4,5
This syntax ensures the dependent nodes translate and rotate exactly as the reference node, with no weighting factors in the core implementation—extensions for weights are available in some vendor-specific variants but not standard.

Practical Modeling Guidelines

When implementing RBE2 elements in finite element analysis models, particularly in software like NX or MSC , they are most effective for representing truly rigid connections, such as bolted joints where high preload ensures no slip or rigid diaphragms that maintain planar motion across a surface. In these scenarios, the independent serves as the reference point with full , while dependent nodes are rigidly tied to it, transferring loads without deformation. Best practices recommend limiting the number of dependent nodes per RBE2 to essential ones, such as those on a head or perimeter, to prevent over-constraining the structure and introducing unintended . For bolted joints, pairing RBE2 with elements like CBAR allows extraction of forces for further , while for diaphragms, connecting peripheral nodes to a central independent preserves in-plane rigidity. To avoid numerical singularities and model , the independent must be adequately supported by the surrounding , ensuring no unconstrained modes exist. Applying single-point constraints (SPCs) solely to the independent , rather than dependent ones, prevents fatal errors like over-constraint violations. For complex assemblies, multiple RBE2 elements can distribute loads effectively, but dependent nodes should not serve as independent nodes in chained elements, as this risks circular dependencies or multiple dependencies leading to singularities. Nesting is permissible if it forms a hierarchical without loops, but test models should confirm before full-scale . RBE2 elements inherently add no or to the model, which simplifies rigid connections but requires supplementation for dynamic analyses involving heavy components. In such cases, attach a CONM2 concentrated element to the independent to represent lumped and properties accurately, ensuring proper load distribution without altering the rigid behavior. This approach is particularly useful for modeling mounts or enclosures, where the RBE2 links the to multiple attachment points. Verification of RBE2 usage focuses on detecting artificial from rigid constraints, which can skew load paths and results. Compare model outputs, such as reaction forces or mode shapes, against physical prototypes to validate overall behavior, or substitute RBE2 with flexible alternatives like RBE3 in sensitivity studies to quantify impacts—RBE2 typically increases local rigidity compared to interpolated constraints. Free-body diagrams and summation checks in output files (e.g., F06 in ) further confirm and prevent errors.

Comparisons with Similar Elements

RBE2 vs. RBE3

The RBE2 element functions as a kinematic rigid link in finite element analysis software such as MSC Nastran, where a single independent grid point defines the motion for multiple dependent (slave) grid points, enforcing that the slaves follow the master exactly across specified (DOFs). This connection adds infinite to the model, effectively assuming infinite rigidity between the connected nodes and transmitting full motion without allowing relative deformation. In contrast, the RBE3 element serves as an interpolation constraint, connecting multiple independent grid points to a single dependent (reference) grid point, where the motion of the dependent point is determined by weighted averages of the independent points' motions across selected DOFs. Unlike RBE2, RBE3 does not add any stiffness to the structure; instead, it distributes forces and moments from the dependent point to the independent points based on user-defined weighting factors, enabling compliant connections suitable for load averaging without altering the model's overall flexibility. The primary distinction lies in their enforcement of rigidity: RBE2 imposes strict kinematic constraints that prevent relative motion between nodes, ideal for scenarios assuming infinite rigidity, whereas RBE3 permits deformation by interpolating motions, avoiding artificial stiffening that could skew results in flexible assemblies. For instance, RBE2's DOF constraints ensure dependent nodes rigidly track the independent node, while RBE3's interpolation allows for more realistic force distribution in non-rigid scenarios. Selection between RBE2 and RBE3 depends on the physical connection modeled: RBE2 is appropriate for welded or bolted joints requiring exact rigid enforcement, whereas RBE3 is preferred for spider-like connections, such as hubs or distributed supports, to prevent over-stiffening the model and ensure accurate load sharing.

RBE2 vs. Other Rigid Elements

The RBE2 element in NASTRAN extends the functionality of the earlier RBAR (rigid bar) element by allowing a single independent grid point to rigidly connect to multiple dependent grid points, thereby enforcing uniform rigid body motion across a group of nodes. In contrast, the RBAR element is limited to connecting exactly two grid points, functioning as a simple rigid link that transmits forces and moments while maintaining equal displacements and rotations in specified degrees of freedom (DOFs), often with optional offsets for modeling eccentric connections. This multi-node capability of RBE2 makes it particularly advantageous for applications requiring distributed load transfer or stiffness enforcement over complex geometries, whereas RBAR remains suitable for straightforward pairwise rigid links, such as simulating hinges or transitions between structural components. Compared to the RJOINT element, which models specialized mechanical joints like revolute or spherical connections between two typically coincident grid points, RBE2 provides a more general approach to enforcement without built-in motion limits or selective flexibility. RJOINT constrains specific DOFs (e.g., allowing about one while rigidly fixing translations) through parameters like pin flags and definitions, making it ideal for mechanisms with defined kinematic behavior. RBE2, however, assumes full rigidity in the connected DOFs via multipoint constraints (MPCs) or stiffness matrices, lacking the joint-specific nonlinearities—such as contact or large deformation limits—that RJOINT can incorporate in advanced analyses. One key advantage of RBE2 over these alternatives is its simplicity in achieving multi-node rigidity, reducing the need for multiple RBAR elements that could over-constrain the model or complicate setup. Additionally, RBE2 maintains with RBAR in by supporting similar DOF selection and parameters, allowing seamless integration in legacy models while enabling expanded connectivity.

Applications and Limitations

Common Use Cases

RBE2 elements are frequently employed in finite element analysis to model and rigid attachments within structural assemblies, where they enforce kinematic constraints to simulate infinitely stiff connections without explicitly modeling fasteners. For instance, in representing bolt preload distribution, an RBE2 connects a single reference node at the end to multiple dependent nodes across the washer or flange area, ensuring uniform load transfer. In and modeling, RBE2 elements simulate rigid end caps or diaphragms to preserve cross-sectional integrity under loading, preventing distortion by rigidly linking peripheral to a central . This approach is particularly useful in analyses of tubular structures, where it maintains a circular cross-section at the rigidized end while allowing the rest of the model to deform realistically. Within applications, RBE2 elements connect lugs and brackets in structures, such as mounts and attachments, by creating rigid spiders that approximate bolted interfaces with high . For example, in and attachment modeling for vertical takeoff vehicles, RBE2 rigid bars represent bolted connections to distribute loads accurately across the assembly. In the automotive sector, RBE2 elements provide rigid body representations for engine mounts and suspension components, linking a central mass or reference point to multiple attachment locations to capture dynamic behavior without excessive mesh complexity. A common setup models the engine as a concentrated tied via RBE2 to its mounting points on the , facilitating and durability assessments. Similarly, for suspension links, RBE2 enforces constraints, simulating rigid connections in cornering fatigue analyses. As a representative example, RBE2 is used to tie the nodes of shell elements on a plate to a central reference node, distributing uniform loading across the surface while treating the assembly as kinematically rigid, which simplifies boundary condition application in plate-like structural components.

Potential Drawbacks

While RBE2 elements provide a straightforward means to enforce rigid connections in finite element models, they introduce several limitations that can compromise analysis accuracy if not carefully managed. One primary drawback is the addition of infinite stiffness to the structure, which enforces identical motion among dependent nodes without allowing any relative deformation. This artificial rigidization can over-constrain the model, leading to unrealistic load paths and potentially inaccurate global stiffness predictions, particularly in assemblies where components exhibit some flexibility. RBE2 elements are formulated under small displacement theory, restricting their applicability to scenarios involving minimal rotations and translations. In large deformation or nonlinear analyses, such as those using NASTRAN's SOL 106, the elements do not update their geometry or constraints dynamically, resulting in erroneous behavior and unreliable results. For instance, rotations at the independent node may not properly translate to dependent nodes beyond small angles, exacerbating inaccuracies in dynamic or contact-heavy simulations. Thermal loading presents another challenge, as the rigid constraints of RBE2 prevent natural expansion and , distorting and distributions. To mitigate this in some solvers, a formulation can be employed, but it introduces additional stiffness terms that may ill-condition the global , increasing numerical and difficulties. Improper application of boundary conditions to dependent nodes can trigger solver errors, such as NASTRAN's User Fatal Message 2101, due to conflicts in (DOFs). Furthermore, the "lever arm" effect—where translations at dependent nodes arise from rotations at node—demands precise DOF selection to avoid unintended amplifications or spurious in modal analyses. These issues underscore the need for judicious use, often favoring alternatives like RBE3 for distributed loading or CBUSH for compliant connections in complex models.

References

  1. [1]
    RBE2 - Radartutorial.eu
    The improved RBE2-AA radar system uses an active electronically scanning array (AESA) with about 838 Transmit/Receive modules in Gallium-Arsenide technology.
  2. [2]
    RBE2 AESA Fire control Radar | Thales Group
    First AESA combat proven european airborne fire control radar, the RBE2 AESA delivers superior air dominance, agility and resilience in contested ...
  3. [3]
    Detect and pursue - Dassault Aviation
    The Rafale C137 is the first European combat aircraft equipped with an active phased array radar (RBE2 AESA), delivery by Dassault Aviation and Thales to DGA.
  4. [4]
    [PDF] Reference Guide - MSC Nastran 2020
    Jul 24, 2020 · You may also provide your feedback about MSC Software documentation by taking a short 5-minute survey at: http://msc-documentation.questionpro.
  5. [5]
    RBE2
    RBE2 Bulk Data Entry defines a rigid body whose independent degrees-of-freedom are specified at a single grid point and whose dependent degrees-of-freedom are ...
  6. [6]
    [PDF] some organizational aspects of nastran - NC State Repository
    The development of NASTRAN began with the activities of a NASA committee which decided, in 1964, that a new computer program should be written to satisfy NASA' ...
  7. [7]
    Analysis Companies - History of CAD - Shapr3D
    The MSC team was awarded a contract for the development of NASTRAN in July 1966. MSC was responsible for defining the analytical aspects of the software while ...
  8. [8]
  9. [9]
    [PDF] THE NASTRAN THEORETICAL MANUAL
    Mar 1, 1976 · The documentation for the NASTRAN computer program consists of four manuals: the Theoretical. Manual, the User's Manual, the Programmer's ...
  10. [10]
    Autodesk Inventor Nastran 2024 Help | RBE2
    User's Guide within Inventor; Nastran Solver Reference Guide. Introduction · Section 1: NASTRAN Command Line · Section 2: Initialization · Section 3: Case ...Missing: documentation | Show results with:documentation
  11. [11]
    Analysis Origins - MSC and NASTRAN - nafems
    The birth of a proprietary version, called MSC/NASTRAN, occurred in 1971 because NASA had not provided for any ongoing user support, error correction, and ...
  12. [12]
    Q&A with Altair's CMO Jeff Brennan: Celebrating 20 Years of ...
    Oct 10, 2014 · Throughout 1996-1997, Altair took over the complete development of OptiStruct, adding software developers and investing heavily in the product.
  13. [13]
    Autodesk brings NASTRAN to the Cloud and into CAD Applications
    Aug 19, 2014 · Within 30 days of the NEi acquisition; NASTRAN was available to mechanical users. It appeared in the workflow as an option to replace the ...
  14. [14]
    [PDF] THE NASTRAN USER'S MANUAL
    Mar 1, 1976 · The User's Manual is one of four manuals that constitute the documentation for NASTRAN, the other three being the Theoretical Manual, ...Missing: RBE2 | Show results with:RBE2
  15. [15]
    [PDF] MSC.Nastran 2003 - METU | Aerospace Engineering
    ... Displacements at Grid Points (SPCD, SPC), 267. □ Multipoint Constraints, 271. □ Contact Problem Using Linear Static Analysis, 275. ❑ Introduction, 275.
  16. [16]
    The RBE2 Element - Hexagon Nexus
    The RBE2 provides a very convenient tool for rigidly connecting the same components of several grid points together. You should note that multiple RBARs or ...
  17. [17]
    [PDF] Nastran RBE2 vs RBE3 Rigid Elements - EnDuraSim
    RBE2 Rigid element used to approximate the effect of a bolt head / washer. For an RBE2 rigid element, the single node is the "independent node". It has 6 ...
  18. [18]
    [PDF] NX Nastran Connection Elements (RBE2, RBE3 and CBUSH) and ...
    • RBE2 transfer stiffness as a rigid body among the independent/dependent node set. • The analyst can control the DOF's where stiffness is transfer but at ...
  19. [19]
    [PDF] Normal Modes - Rigid Element Analysis with RBE2 and CONM2
    The goal of the example is to maintain a circular cross section at the rigid end of the tube, (using RBE2 elements), while performing a modal analysis.
  20. [20]
    [PDF] Femap and NX Nastran Best Practices - Applied CAx
    And RBE2 and their cousin, RBE3 are great for opening doors to idealization efficiency. RBE2 with Beam Elements: Bolt Preload. RBE3 to Smear Mass and Force. For ...
  21. [21]
    [PDF] 1 Some Observations On The Current Status of Performing Finite ...
    In NASTRAN, multipoint constraints are created internally with the rigid elements RBAR, RBE1, RBE2, RBE3. RBE1 defines a rigid body connected to an arbitrary ...
  22. [22]
    [PDF] MSC Nastran 2022.1 Quick Reference Guide - Hexagon
    Mar 16, 2022 · At Hexagon Manufacturing Intelligence, we strive to produce the highest quality documentation and welcome your feedback. If you have comments or ...
  23. [23]
    [PDF] Linear Static Analysis User's Guide - MSC Nastran 2022.1 - Hexagon
    Mar 14, 2022 · NASTRAN is a registered trademark of NASA. FLEXlm and FlexNet Publisher are trademarks or registered trademarks of Flexera. Software. All other ...
  24. [24]
    [PDF] VIPR III VADR SPIDER Structural Design and Analysis
    The strut and the engine fan attachments were modeled using rigid bar elements (RBE2) representative of the rigid bolted connections. The strut fitting was also ...
  25. [25]
    [PDF] Design Study and Concept Development of Structural Components ...
    Jul 31, 2019 · The pins for the engine mount and thrust lugs are also assumed to be relatively stiff, thus RBE2 rigid element spiders between the center point ...
  26. [26]
    [PDF] Advanced Vehicle Body Concept Modeling Approach Using ...
    As for the academic case study, also for this vehicle body analysis case the RBE2 connections increase the concept model stiffness whereas the RBE3 elements are ...
  27. [27]
    RBE2 Vs RBE3 - Stress Ebook LLC.
    Jan 28, 2015 · The RBAR or RBE2 element can be used for connecting two nodes to model a 'rigid' welded type connection, with all 6 DOFs, or a pinned connection ...
  28. [28]
    What Is The Difference Between A Kinematic (RBE2) And A ...
    RBE2's are infinitely rigid and RBE3's inherently have zero stiffness boils down to the element definition and the concept of dependent and independent nodes.