Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Finite
Element
Analysis
Thermomechanics of Solids
David W. Nicholson
CRC PR E S S
Boca Raton London New York Washington, D.C.
Nicholson, D.W.
Finite element analysis : thermomechanics of solids / David W. Nicholson.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-8493-0749-X (alk. paper)
1. Thermal stresses—Mathematical models. 2. Finite element method. I. Title.
TA418.58.N53 2003
620.1′121—dc21 2002041419
This book contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources. Reprinted material
is quoted with permission, and sources are indicated. A wide variety of references are listed. Reasonable
efforts have been made to publish reliable data and information, but the author and the publisher cannot
assume responsibility for the validity of all materials or for the consequences of their use.
Neither this book nor any part may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic
or mechanical, including photocopying, microfilming, and recording, or by any information storage or
retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publisher.
The consent of CRC Press LLC does not extend to copying for general distribution, for promotion, for
creating new works, or for resale. Specific permission must be obtained in writing from CRC Press LLC
for such copying.
Direct all inquiries to CRC Press LLC, 2000 N.W. Corporate Blvd., Boca Raton, Florida 33431.
Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are
used only for identification and explanation, without intent to infringe.
Dedication
Preface
Thousands of engineers use finite-element codes, such as ANSYS, for thermome-
chanical and nonlinear applications. Most academic departments offering advanced
degrees in mechanical engineering, civil engineering, and aerospace engineering offer
a first-level course in the finite-element method, and by now, almost all undergraduates
of such programs have some exposure to the finite-element method. A number of
departments offer a second-level course. It is hoped that this text will appeal to
instructors of such courses. Of course, it hopefully will also be helpful to engineers
engaged in self-study on nonlinear and thermomechanical finite-element analysis.
The principles of the finite-element method are presented for application to the
mechanical, thermal, and thermomechanical response, both static and dynamic, of
linear and nonlinear solids. It provides an integrated treatment of:
• Basic principles, material models, and contact models (for example, linear
elasticity, hyperelasticity, and thermohyperelasticity).
• Computational, numerical, and software-design aspects (such as finite-
element data structures).
• Modeling principles and strategies (including mesh design).
The text is designed for a second-level course, as a reference work, or for self
study. Familiarity is assumed with the finite-element method at the level of a first-
level graduate or advanced undergraduate course.
A first-level course in the finite-element method, for which many excellent books
are available, barely succeeds in covering static linear elasticity and linear heat transfer.
There is virtually no exposure to nonlinear methods, which are topics for a second-
level course. Nor is there much emphasis on coupled thermomechanical problems.
However, many engineers could benefit from a text covering nonlinear problems
and the associated continuum thermomechanics. Such a text could be used in a
formal class or for self-study. Many important applications have significant nonlin-
earity, making nonlinear finite-element modeling necessary. As a few examples, we
mention polymer processing; metal forming; rubber components, such as tires and
seals; biomechanics; and crashworthiness. Many applications combine thermal and
mechanical response, such as rubber seals in hot engines. Engineers coping with
such applications have access to powerful finite-element codes and computers.
However, they often lack and urgently need an in-depth but compact exposition of
the finite-element method, which provides a foundation for addressing future prob-
lems. It is hoped this text also fills this need.
Of necessity, a selection of topics has been made, and topics are given coverage
proportional to the author’s sense of their importance to the reader’s understanding.
Topics have been selected with the intent of giving a unified and complete, but still
compact and tractable, presentation. Several other excellent texts and monographs
have appeared over the years, from which the author has benefited. Four texts to
which the author is indebted are:
1. Zienkiewicz, O.C. and Taylor R.L., The Finite Element Method, Vols. 1
and 2, McGraw Hill, London, 1989.
2. Kleiber, M., Incremental Finite Element Modeling in Nonlinear Solid
Mechanics, Chichester, Ellis Horwood, Ltd., 1989.
3. Bonet, J. and Wood, R.D., Nonlinear Continuum Mechanics for Finite
Element Analysis, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1997.
4. Belytschko, T., Lui, W.K, and Moran, B., Nonlinear Finite Elements for
Continua and Structures, New York, John Wiley and Sons, 2000.
Kronecker Product algebra (KPA) has been widely used in control theory for many
years (Graham, 1982). It is highly compact and satisfies simple rules: for example,
the inverse of a Kronecker Product of two nonsingular matrices is the Kronecker
Product of the inverses. Recently, a number of extensions of KPA have been intro-
duced and shown to permit compact expressions for otherwise elaborate quantities
in continuum and computational mechanics. Examples include:
KPA with recent extensions can completely replace other notations in most cases
of interest here. In the author’s experience, students experience little difficulty in
gaining a command of it.
The first three chapters concern mathematical foundations, and Kronecker Product
notation for tensors is introduced. The next four chapters cover relevant linear and
nonlinear continuum thermomechanics to enable a unified account of the finite-element
method. Chapters 8 through 15 represent a compact presentation of the finite-element
method in linear elastic, thermal, and thermomechanical media, including solution
methods. The final five chapters address nonlinear problems based on a unified set of
incremental variational principles. Material nonlinearity is treated also, as is geometric
nonlinearity and nonlinearity due to boundary conditions. Several numerical issues in
nonlinear analysis are discussed, such as iterative triangularization of stiffness matrices.
Acknowledgment
Finite Element Analysis: Thermomechanics of Solids is the culmination of many
years of teaching and research, made possible through the love and patience of my
wife Linda and son Michael, to whom this is dedicated. To my profound love, I
cheerfully add my immense gratitude. Much of my understanding of the advanced
topics addressed in this book arose through the highly successful research of my
then-doctoral student, Dr. Baojiu Lin. He continued his invaluable support by pro-
viding comments and corrections on the manuscript. Also deserving of acknowledg-
ment is Ashok Balasubranamian, whose careful attention to the manuscript has
greatly helped to make it achieve my objectives. Thanks are due to hundreds of
graduate students in my courses in continuum mechanics and finite elements over
the years. I tested and refined the materials through the courses and benefited
immensely from their strenuous efforts to gain command of the course materials.
Finally, I would like to thank CRC Press for taking a chance on me and especially
for Cindy Renee Carelli for patience and many good suggestions.
Table of Contents
Chapter 1 Mathematical Foundations: Vectors and Matrices...............................1
1.1 Introduction....................................................................................................1
1.1.1 Range and Summation Convention ................................................1
1.1.2 Substitution Operator ......................................................................1
1.2 Vectors............................................................................................................2
1.2.1 Notation ...........................................................................................2
1.2.2 Gradient, Divergence, and Curl ......................................................4
1.3 Matrices..........................................................................................................5
1.3.1 Eigenvalues and Eigenvectors.........................................................8
1.3.2 Coordinate Transformations............................................................9
1.3.3 Transformations of Vectors .............................................................9
1.3.4 Orthogonal Curvilinear Coordinates.............................................11
1.3.5 Gradient Operator..........................................................................16
1.3.6 Divergence and Curl of Vectors....................................................17
Appendix I: Divergence and Curl of Vectors in Orthogonal
Curvilinear Coordinates................................................................................18
Derivatives of Base Vectors ..........................................................18
Divergence.....................................................................................19
Curl ................................................................................................20
1.4 Exercises ......................................................................................................20
9.3.4 Element for Plate with Membrane and Bending Response .......135
9.3.5 Axisymmetric Element................................................................135
9.3.6 Three-Dimensional Element .......................................................136
9.3.7 Elements for Conductive Heat Transfer .....................................137
9.4 Exercises ....................................................................................................137
Mathematical
1 Foundations: Vectors
and Matrices
1.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides an overview of mathematical relations, which will prove useful
in the subsequent chapters. Chandrashekharaiah and Debnath (1994) provide a more
complete discussion of the concepts introduced here.
ai bi = ∑a b = a b + a b
i =1
i i 1 1 2 2 + a3 b3 (1.1)
The repeated index is “summed out” and, therefore, dummy. The quantity aijbjk in
th
Equation (1.2) has two free indices, i and k (and later will be shown to be the ik
entry of a second-order tensor). Note that Greek indices do not imply summation.
Thus, aα bα = a1b1 if α = 1.
1 i= j
δ ij = (1.3)
0 i≠ j
v3
v
e3
v2
e2 2
e1
v1
1
1.2 VECTORS
1.2.1 NOTATION
Throughout this and the following chapters, orthogonal coordinate systems will be
used. Figure 1.1 shows such a system, with base vectors e1, e2, and e3. The scalar
product of vector analysis satisfies
e i ⋅ e j = δ ij (1.4)
It is an obvious step to introduce the alternating operator, εijk, also known as the
th
ijk entry of the permutation tensor:
ε ijk = [e i × e j ] ⋅ e k
*T) v = vi e i w = wi e i (1.7)
v1 w1
*M) v = v2 w = w2 (1.8)
v3 w3
It is compact, but also risks confusion by not displaying the underlying base
T T
vectors. In *M notation, the transposes v and w are also introduced; they are
displayed as “row vectors”:
v ⋅ w = (vi e i ) ⋅ ( w j e j )
= vi w j e i ⋅ e j
*T)
= vi w jδ ij
= vi wi (1.10)
in which θvw is the angle between the vectors v and w. The scalar, or dot, product is
v × w = vi w j e i × e j
*T)
= ε ijk vi w j e k (1.14)
Additional results on vector notation are presented in the next section, which
introduces matrix notation. Finally, the vector product satisfies
and vxw is colinear with n the unit normal vector perpendicular to the plane containing
v and w. The area of the triangle defined by the vectors v and w is given by 12 v × w .
dφ
*M) dφ = dx (1.16)
dx
∂( )
∂x
∂( )
*M) ∇( ) = (1.17)
∂y
∂
( )
∂z
and clearly,
T
*M) d ( ) = ∇( ) (1.18)
dx
∫ ∇φ dV = ∫ nφ dS (1.19)
∫ ∇v dV = ∫ nv dS
T T
(1.21)
Another important relation is the divergence theorem. Let V denote the volume
of a closed domain, with surface S. Let n denote the exterior surface normal to S,
and let v denote a vector-valued function of x, the position of a given point within
the body. The divergence of v satisfies
∫ dx dV = ∫ n vdS
dv T
*M) (1.22)
∂
(∇ × v)i = ε ijk v (1.23)
∂x j k
which is the conventional cross-product, except that the divergence operator replaces
the first vector. The curl satisfies the curl theorem, analogous to the divergence
theorem (Schey, 1973):
∫ ∇ × v dV = ∫ n × v dS (1.24)
Finally, the reader may verify, with some effort that, for a vector v(X) and a
path X(S) in which S is the length along the path,
∫ v ⋅ dX(S) = ∫ n ⋅ ∇ × v dS . (1.25)
∇ × v = 0. (1.26)
1.3 MATRICES
An n × n matrix is simply an array of numbers arranged in rows and columns, also
known as a second-order array. For the matrix A, the entry aij occupies the intersection
of the i row and the j column. We may also introduce the n × 1 first-order array a,
th th
In the current context, a first-order array is not a vector unless it is associated with
a coordinate system and certain transformation properties, to be introduced shortly.
In the following, all matrices are real unless otherwise noted. Several properties of
first- and second-order arrays are as follows:
The sum of two n × n matrices, A and B, is a matrix, C, in which cij = aij + bij.
The product of a matrix, A, and a scalar, q, is a matrix, C, in which cij = qaij.
T
The transpose of a matrix, A, denoted A , is a matrix in which aijT = a ji A is
called symmetric if A = A , and it is called antisymmetric if A = −A .
T T
The ij entry of the identity matrix I is δij. Thus, it exhibits ones on the diagonal
th
1
*T) det(A) = ε ε a a a (1.29)
6 ijk pqr ip jq kr
det(I) = 1
−1
If det(A) ≠ 0, then A is nonsingular and there exists an inverse matrix, A ,
for which
If c and d are two 3 × 1 vectors, the vector product c × d generates the vector
c × d = Cd, in which C is an antisymmetric matrix given by
0 −c3 c2
*M) C = c3 0 −c1 (1.34)
− c2 c1 0
Recalling that c × d = εikjckdj, and noting that εikjck denotes the (ij) component
th
We will see later that C is a second-order tensor if c and d have the transformation
properties of vectors.
1 1
A = As + Aa , As = [A + A T ], Aa = [A − A T ] (1.36)
2 2
( A − λ j I )x j = 0 (1.37)
The solution for xj is trivial unless A − λjI is singular, in which event det(A − λjI) =
0. There are n possible complex roots. If the magnitude of the eigenvectors is set to unity,
they may likewise be determined. As an example, consider
2 1
A= (1.38)
1 2
The equation det(A − λjI) = 0 is expanded as (2 − λj) − 1, with roots λ1,2 = 1, 3, and
2
1 1 −1 1
A − λ1I = A − λ2 I = (1.39)
1 1 1 −1
Note that in each case, the rows are multiples of each other, so that only one row
is independent. We next determine the eigenvectors. It is easily seen that magnitudes
of the eigenvectors are arbitrary. For example, if x1 is an eigenvector, so is 10x1.
Accordingly, the magnitudes are arbitrarily set to unity. For x1 = {x11 x12} ,
T
x11 + x12 = 0 2
x11 + x12
2
=1 (1.40)
λ1 0 . . .
0 λ2 . . .
A[x1 : x 2 :K x n ] = [x1 : x 2 :K x n ] . . . . . (1.41)
. . . λ n−1 0
. . . 0 λ n
AX = XΛ (1.42)
yij = x iT x j = δ ij (1.43)
−1
so that Y = I. We can conclude that X is an orthogonal tensor: X = X . Further,
T
X T AX = Λ A = X Λ XT (1.44)
and X can be interpreted as representing a rotation from the reference axes to the
principal axes.
*T) e ′j = q ji e i (1.45)
*M) QQ T = I (1.46)
in which case the matrix Q is called orthogonal. An analogous argument proves that
Q Q = I. From Equation (1.30), 1 = det(QQ ) = det(Q)det(Q ) = det (Q). Right-
T T T 2
v ′ = v ′j e ′j
*T) = v ′j q ji e i
= vi e i (1.47)
*M) v = Q T v ′ (a ) v ′ = Qv ( b) (1.48)
th T
in which qij is the ji entry of Q .
We can also state an alternate definition of a vector as a first-order tensor. Let
v be an n × 1 array of numbers referring to a coordinate system with base vectors
ei. It is a vector if and only if, upon a rotation of the coordinate system to base
vectors e ′j , v′ transforms according to Equation (1.48).
Since ( ddφx )′ dx ′ is likewise equal to dφ,
*M) dφ ′ = dφ Q T (1.49)
dx dx
for which reason dφ/dx is called a contravariant vector, while v is properly called a
covariant vector.
Finally, to display the base vectors to which the tensor A is referred (i.e., in
tensor-indicial notation), we introduce the outer product
ei ∧ e j (1.50)
A = aij e i ∧ e j (1.51)
e i ∧ e j ⋅ e k = e iδ jk
Ab = aij e i ∧ e j ⋅ bk e k
= aij bk e i ∧ e j ⋅ e k
= aij bk e iδ jk
= aij b j e i (1.52)
as expected.
∆ R = R P − R Q ≈ dR x (1.53)
where
dR x = dxi e i (1.54)
dR y = ∑ dy g
1
α α
gα = hα γ α
dx j dx j
hα =
dyα dyα (1.56)
dxi
dyα
γα = dx j dx j
ei
dyα dyα
1 dxi
= e
hα dyα i
in which hα is called the scale factor. Recall that the use of Greek letters for indices
implies no summation. Clearly, γα is a unit vector. Conversely, if the transformation
is reversed,
dR y = g i dyi
dyi
= g dx (1.57)
dx j i j
∑ dx
dyi dyα
ej = g = hα γ α (1.58)
dx j i α j
We restrict attention to orthogonal coordinate systems yj, with the property that
γ αT γ β = δ αβ (1.59)
Under restriction to orthogonal coordinate systems, the initial base vectors ei can be
expressed in terms of γα using
( )
e i = γ Tj e i γ j
1 ∂xi
= γ
hi ∂y j j
1 ∂xi ∂x k
= e (1.61)
hi h j ∂y j ∂y j k
and furnishing
1 ∂xi ∂x k
= δ ik (1.62)
hi h j ∂y j ∂y j
Also of interest is the volume element; the volume determined by the vector
dRy is given by the vector triple product
and h1h2h3 is known as the Jacobian of the transformation. For cylindrical coordinates
using r, θ, and z, as shown in Figure 1.2, x1 = rcos θ, x2 = rsin θ, and x3 = z. Simple
manipulation furnishes that hr = 1, hθ = r, hz = 1, and
which, of course, are orthonormal vectors. Also of interest are the relations der =
eθ dθ and deθ = −er dθ.
x3
ez
x2
er eθ
x1
r
cos θ sin θ 0
v ′ = Q(θ )v Q(θ ) = − sin θ cos θ 0 (1.65)
0 0 1
d d dQ(θ )
v ′ = Q(θ ) v + v
dt dt dt
∂ dQ(θ ) T
= v′ + Q (θ )v ′ (1.66)
∂t dt
where the partial derivative implies differentiation with θ instantaneously held fixed
and
− sin θ cos θ 0
dQ(θ ) dθ
= − cos θ − sin θ 0 (1.67)
dt dt
0 0 1
x3
eφ er
φ
π φ
φ
x2
eθ θ
θ
x1
dQ(θ ) T dQ(θ ) T
T
Q (θ ) +
d
0= (Q(θ )Q T (θ )) = Q (θ ) (1.68)
dt dt dt
In fact,
0 1 0
dQ(θ ) T dθ
Q (θ ) = −1 0 0 (1.69)
dt dt
0 0 0
It follows that
d ∂
v′ = v′ + ω × v′ (1.70)
dt ∂t
in which ω is the axial vector of Ω.
Referring to Figure 1.3, spherical coordinates r, θ, and φ are introduced by the
transformation
r = x1e1 + x 2 e 2 + x3 e 3
Now er has the same direction as the position vector: r = rer. Thus, it follows that
e r = cos θ cos φ e1 + sin θ cos φ e 2 + sin φ e 3 e1 = cos θ cos φ e r − sin θ eθ − sin φ cos θ eφ
v = v1e1 + v2 e 2 + v3 e 3 v ′ = vr e r + vθ eθ + vφ eφ . (1.76)
Eliminating e1, e2, e3 in favor of er, eθ, eφ and using *M notation permits writing
Suppose now that v(t), θ, and φ are functions of time. As in cylindrical coordinates,
d ∂
v′ = v′ + ω × v′ (1.78)
dt ∂t
dQ (θ )
where ω is the axial vector of dt Q T (θ ). After some manipulation,
0 cos φ 0 0 0 1
dQ(θ ) T dθ dφ
Q (θ ) = − cos φ 0 sin φ + 0 0 0
dt dt dt
0 − sin φ 0 −1 0 0
∂ψ
dψ = dx
∂xi i
*T)
∂ψ
= [∇ψ ] ⋅ dr, dr = e i dxi ∇ψ = e i (1.80)
∂xi
Clearly, dψ is a scalar and is unaffected by a coordinate transformation. Suppose
that x = x(y): dr′ = gi dyi. Observe that
∂ψ
dψ = dx
∂xi i
∂ψ
= ∑ h1 ∂y
α α α
hα dyα
γ α ∂ψ
=
∑ α
⋅
hα ∂yα
∑ β
hβ dyβ γ β
(1.81)
γ α ∂ψ
(∇ψ )′ = ∑h
α α ∂yα
(1.82)
∂ψ eθ ∂ψ ∂ψ
∇ψ = e r + + ez (1.83)
∂r r ∂θ ∂z
∂ψ eθ ∂ψ e z ∂ψ
∇ψ = e r + + (1.84)
∂r r cos φ ∂θ r ∂φ
1 ∂ ∂ ∂
(∇ ⋅ v ) ′ = (h2 h3 v1′ ) + (h3 h1v2′ ) + (h1h2 v3′ ) (1.85)
h1h2 h3 ∂
1y ∂y 2 ∂y 3
and
1 ∂ ∂
(∇ × v ) ′ = h1 (h3 v3′ ) − (h2 v2′ )γ 1
h1h2 h3 ∂y2 ∂y3
∂ ∂
− h2 (h3 v3′ ) − (h1v1′ )γ 2
∂y1 ∂y3
∂ ∂
+ h3 (h2 v2′ ) − (h1v1′ )γ 3 (1.86)
∂y1 ∂y 2
and
∂yl ∂yβ
ek = g =
∂x k l ∑h
β
β
∂x k
γβ
∂xα
gα = e hα = gα ⋅ gα (a.1)
∂yk k
From Equation (a.1),
∂gα ∂ 2 xα
= e
∂y j ∂yk ∂y j k
α β α β ∂ 2 xα ∂yβ
= ∑
β j
hβ γ β ,
j
= hβ
∂yk ∂y j ∂x k
(a.2)
The bracketed quantities are known as Cristoffel symbols. From Equations (a.1 and a.2),
dhα dg
= γα ⋅ α
dy j dy j
α α
= hα (a.3)
j
Continuing,
∂γ α 1 ∂gα γ α ∂hα
= −
∂y j hα ∂y j hα ∂y j
α β
∑
1
= cαjβ γ β , cαjβ = (1 − δ αβ ) hβ (a.4)
β
hα j
DIVERGENCE
The development that follows is based on the fact that
dv ′ dv
∇ ⋅ v = ∇ ′ ⋅ v ′ = tr = tr (a.5)
dr ′ dr
dv ′ = dv j γ j + v j dγ j (a.6)
∂v j
dv j γ j = γ j dyk
∂yk
∂v j
= ∑ h1 ∂y
α α α
γ j (hα dyα )
1 ∂v j
= ∑ h
α α ∂yα
γ j ∧ γα ⋅
∑ (h γ dy )
β
β β β
1 ∂v j
= ∑ h
α α ∂yα
γ j ∧ γ α ⋅ dr′
(a.7)
Similarly,
∂γ j
vjd γ j = vj dyk
∂yk
v j ∂γ j
= ∑ h
α α ∂yα
(hα dyα )
v j ∂γ j
= ∑ h
α α ∂yα
∧ γα ⋅
∑ (h γ dy )
β
β β β
v j ∂γ j
= ∑ h
α α ∂yα
∧ γ α ⋅ dr′
v
= ∑ j
hα
∑ c jαβ γ β ∧ γ α ⋅ dr′
(a.8)
α β
Consequently,
dv = 1 ∂v j δ + v c , ∂vα
dr βα h ∂y jβ
α α
j jβα
∇⋅v = ∑ h1 ∂y
α α α
+ v j c jαα
(a.9)
CURL
In rectilinear coordinates, the individual entries of the curl can be expressed as a
th
divergence, as follows. For the i entry,
∂vk
[∇ × v]i = ε ijk
∂x j
∂ (i )
= w w (ji ) = ε jki vk
∂x j j
= ∇ ⋅ w (i ) (a.10)
∇ ⋅ w (1)
∇ × v = ∇ ⋅ w (2) (a.11)
∇ ⋅ w ( 3)
The transformation properties of the curl can be readily induced from Equation (a.9).
1.4 EXERCISES
1. In the tetrahedron shown in Figure 1.4, A1, A2, and A3 denote the areas
of the faces whose normal vectors point in the −e1, −e2, and −e3 directions.
Let A and n denote the area and normal vector of the inclined face,
respectively. Prove that
A1 A A
n= e + 2e + 3e
A 1 A 2 A 3
ε ijk σ jk = 0, i = 1, 2, 3.
v × w = Vw
n
e3
A2 A1
e2 2
e1 A3
1 −1/ 2 1 1/ 3
A= B=
−1/ 3 1/ 4 1/ 2 1/ 4
a b
C=
c d
1 d −b
C−1 =
ad − bc −c a
6. For the matrices in Exercise 4, find the inverses and verify that
(AB) −1 = B −1 A −1
7. Consider the matrix
cos θ sin θ
Q=
− sin θ cos θ
Verify that
(a) QQ = Q Q
T T
−1
(b) Q = Q
T
Qa = a
q s
a= b=
r t
verify that
a T Cb = b T C T a
x − y
v=
x + y
X
1
∫ n × vdS = ∫ ∇ × vdV
∫ n × AdS = ∫ ∇ × A dV T
using
a11 = x + y + x 2 + y 2
a12 = x + y + x 2 − y 2
a21 = x + y − x 2 − y 2
a22 = x − y − x 2 − y 2
12. Obtain the expressions for the gradient, divergence, and curl in spherical
coordinates.
Mathematical
2 Foundations: Tensors
2.1 TENSORS
We now consider two n × 1 vectors, v and w, and an n × n matrix, A, such that v =
Aw. We now make the important assumption that the underlying information in this
relation is preserved under rotation. In particular, simple manipulation furnishes that
v′ = Qv
= QAw
∗
)
= QAQTQw
= QAQT w ′. (2.1)
The square matrix A is now called a second-order tensor if and only if A′ = QAQ .
T
(A T )′ = (QAQT )T
T
= QT ATQT (2.2)
A ′ B′ = (QAQ T )(QBQ T )
= QA(QQ T )BQ T
= QABQ T (2.3)
(A + B)′ = A ′ + B′
= QAQ T + QBQ T
A′ −1 = (QAQT )−1
−1
= Q T A −1Q −1
= QA −1Q T . (2.5)
25
( xx T )′ = x ′x ′ T
= (Qx )(Qx ) T
= Q( xx T )Q T (2.6)
Next,
dφ
T
H = .
d
d 2φ = dx T H dx (2.7)
dx d x
However,
dx ′ T H ′ dx ′ = (Q dx ) T H ′Q dx
T
∂u
du T = dx T (2.9)
∂x
and also
T
∂
du T = dx T u T . (2.10)
∂x
We conclude that
T
∂u ∂u T
= T. (2.11)
∂x ∂x
∂u ′ ∂u T
=Q Q , (2.12)
∂x ′ ∂x
∂u
from which we conclude that is a tensor. We can similarly show that I and 0
∂x
are tensors.
2.2.1 DIVERGENCE
Recall the divergence theorem ∫ c Tn dS = ∫ ∇Tc dV. Let c = A T b, in which b is an
arbitrary constant vector. Now
∫
b T An dS =
∫ ∇ (A b)dV
T T
=
∫ ∇ A dV b
T T
∫
= b T [∇ T A T ]T dV . (2.13)
)
∫ AndS − ∫ [∇ A ] dV = 0.
* T T T
(2.14)
In tensor-indicial notation,
∫ b a n dS − ∫ b [[∇ A ] ] dV = 0.
i ij j i
T T T
i
(2.15)
∂
bi
∫ [
aij − [∇ T A T ]T ] dV = 0. (2.16)
∂x j
i
∂ ∂
[∇ T A T ]i = aij = a T. (2.17)
∂x j ∂x j ji
∇ ⋅ A = [∇ T A T ]T . (2.18)
α 1T
A = α T2 , (2.19)
T
α3
th
in which α iT corresponds to the i row of A:[α iT ] j = aij . It is easily seen that
∇ T A T = (∇ T α 1 ∇ Tα 2 ∇ T α 3 ). (2.20)
=
∫ c n dSb ,
ij j l cij = ε ijk akl bl . (2.21)
From the divergence theorem applied to the tensor cij = εijk akl bl,
n × AbdS = ∂
∫ i ∫ ∂x j
(ε ijk akl bl )dV
∂a
∫
= ε ijk kl dV bl
∂x j
∂
= ∇ × A T dV b ,
∫ i
if [∇ × A]il = ε ijk a .
∂x j kl
(2.22)
[
∇ × A = ∇ × α1 ∇ × α2 ∇ × α3 . ] (2.23)
[
∇ × A T = ∇ × β1 ∇ × β2 ∇ × β3 . ] (2.24)
∇ 2 A = [∇ 2 β 1 ∇ 2β 2 ∇ 2β 3 ]. (2.26)
∇ 2β i = ∇(∇ ⋅ β i ) − ∇ × ∇ × β i . (2.27)
∇ 2 A = ∇(∇ ⋅ A T ) − ∇ × [∇ × A T ]T . (2.28)
2.3 INVARIANTS
Letting A denote a nonsingular, symmetric, 3 × 3 tensor, the equation det(A − λl) =
0 can be expanded as
λ3 − I1λ2 + I2 λ − I3 = 0, (2.30)
in which
1 2
I1 = tr(A) I2 = [tr (A) − tr(A 2 )] I3 = det(A). (2.31)
2
Here, tr (A) = δijaij denotes the trace of A. Equation 2.30 also implies the Cayley-
Hamilton theorem:
A 3 − I1A 2 + I2 A − I3 I = 0, (2.32)
from which
1
I3 = [tr(A 3 ) − I1tr(A 2 ) + I2 tr(A)]
3 (2.33)
−1 −1
A = I [A − I1A + I2 I]
3
2
= ars q pr qqs
= arsδ rs . (2.34)
2 3 2 3
Likewise, tr(A ) and tr(A ) are invariant since A, A , and A are tensors, thus I1,
I2, and I3 are invariants. Derivatives of invariants are presented in a subsequent section.
manipulation,
d T d
d 2 Π = dx T Π dx
dx dx
= dx T A dx. (2.35)
x T Ax = x T XΛΛT x
= y T Λy, (y = X T x )
= ∑λ y .
i
2
i i
(2.36)
The last expression can be positive for arbitrary y (arbitrary x) only if λi > 0, i =
1, 2,…, n. The matrix A is semidefinite if x Ax ≥ 0, and negative-definite (written
T
BT Bx j = λ j BT x j
= − λ j Bx j
= − λ2j x j . (2.37)
Τ
Since B B is positive-definite, it follows that − λ2j > 0. Thus, λ j is imaginary:
2
λ j = iµ j using i = −1. Consequently, B2 x j = λ2j x j = − µ 2j x j, demonstrating that B
is negative-definite.
write
BT B = X Tb ∆ b X b
1 1
= X Tb ( ∆ b ) 2 YY T ( ∆ b ) 2 X b
T
1
1
= X Tb ( ∆ b ) 2 Y X Tb ( ∆ b ) 2 Y , (2.38a)
in which Y is an (unknown) orthogonal tensor. In general, we can write
1
B = Y T (∆ b ) 2 X b . (2.38b)
λ1 0 . . .
0 λ2 . . .
1 1
BT B = X Tb ∆ X b ,
2 ∆ b2 = . . . . . , (2.38c)
b
. . . . 0
. . . 0 λn
in which the positive square roots are used. It is easy to verify that ( BT B ) 2 = B and
that BT B > 0 . Note that
T
T
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
1 1 1 1
− − − −
B B T B 2
B B T B 2
= B B T 2
[B B] T
B B 2
= I. (2.38d)
B = Z BT B
1
= ZX Tb ∆ b2 X b . (2.38e)
and b is written as
a1b
a2 b
a⊗b = . . (2.41)
.
an b
Then,
Note that uJK = uJI = 1 and uIK = uIJ = 1, with all other entries vanishing. Hence
if m = n, then uJI = uIJ, so that Unm is symmetric if m = n.
Relation 2: If A and B are second-order n × n tensors, then
I n ⊗ BT = (I n ⊗ B) T . (2.45)
(A ⊗ B) (C ⊗ D) = AC ⊗ BD. (2.46)
a ⊗ b = VEC([ab T ]T ). (2.48)
Symmetry of Unn was established in Relation 1. Note that VEC(A) = Unn VEC(A ) =
T
−1
U 2nn = I n2 U nn = U Tnn = U nn . (2.49)
Unn is hereafter called the permutation tensor for n × n matrices. If A is symmetric, then
(U nn − I n2 ) VEC(A) = 0. If A is antisymmetric, then (Unn + Inn)VEC(A) = 0.
If A and B are second-order n × n tensors, then
= [U nn VEC(B)]T VEC(A)
= tr(BA), (2.50)
VEC(ACBT ) = I n ⊗ AVEC(CBT )
= (I n ⊗ A)(B ⊗ I n )VEC(C)
= B ⊗ AVEC(C). (2.51)
VEC[(ACBT )T ] = VEC(BCT A T )
= A ⊗ BVEC(CT )
= A ⊗ BU n2 VEC(C). (2.52)
Consequently, if C is arbitrary,
B ⊗ A = U n 2 A ⊗ BU n 2 . (2.55)
(A ⊗ B)(A −1 ⊗ B −1 ) = AA −1 ⊗ BB −1
= In ⊗ In
= I n2 . (2.56)
The Kronecker sum and difference appear frequently (for example, in control
theory) and are defined as follows:
A ⊕ B = A ⊗ In + In ⊗ B A B = A ⊗ I n − I n ⊗ B. (2.57)
A⊗B α j βk y j ⊗ zk
(2.58)
A⊕B α j + βk y j ⊗ zk
A B α j − βk yj ⊗ zk
As proof,
α j y j ⊗ βk zk = α j βk y j ⊗ zk
= Ay j ⊗ Bz k
= (A ⊗ B)(y j ⊗ z k ). (2.59)
if r = VEC(R), then
a T Rb = tr[ba T R]
= b T ⊗ a T r. (2.60)
Note that
= I n ⊗ A VEC(CBD)
−1
hence, TEN22(ACB) = In ⊗ ATEN22(C)In ⊗ B. Upon writing B = C A, it is obvious
−1
that VEC(B) = TEN22(C )VEC(A). However, TEN22(C)VEC(B) = VEC(A), thus
−1 −1 −1
VEC(B) = [TEN22(C)] VEC(A). We conclude that TEN22(C ) = TEN22 (C).
Furthermore, by writing A = ĈB , it is also obvious that Un a = TEN22(C)Unb,
T T
−1 −1 −1
However, note that (Q ⊗ Q) = Q ⊗ Q = Q ⊗ Q = (Q ⊗ Q) . Hence,
T T T
It follows that
Q ⊗ Q.
Finally, letting Ca and Cb denote third-order n × n × n tensors, respectively,
thereby satisfying relations of the form A = Cab and b = Cb A, it is readily shown
that TEN21(Ca) and TEN12(Cb) satisfy
Tensor outer products are commonly used in continuum mechanics. For example,
Hooke’s Law in isotropic linear elasticity with coefficients µˆ and λˆ can be written as
ˆ δ E
Tij = µˆ (δ ikδ jl + δ ilδ jk ) Ekl + λδ i, j = 1, 2, 3, (2.66)
ij kl kl
in which Tij and Eij are entries of the (small-deformation) stress and strain tensors
denoted by T and E. Here, δij denotes the substitution (Kronecker) tensor. Equation 2.66
exhibits three tensor outer products of the identity (Kronecker) tensor I: δik δjl, δil δjk,
and δijδkl. In general, let A and B be two nonsingular n × n second-order tensors
with entries a ij and bij; let a = VEC(A) and b = VEC(B). There are 24 permutations
of the indices ijkl corresponding to outer products of tensors A and B. Recalling the
definitions of the Kronecker product, we introduce three basic Kronecker-product
functions:
With t = VEC(T) and e = VEC(E), and noting that U9e = e (since E is symmetric),
we now restate Equation 2.66 as
The proof is presented for several of the relations in Equation 2.68. We introduce
tensors R and S with entries rij and sij. Also, let s = VEC(S) and r = VEC(R).
a.) Suppose that sij = aij bkl rkl. However, aij bkl rkl = aij b lk rkl , in which case b kl
T T
= VEC T (B)VEC(R)a
= ab T r
Since s = TEN22(aij bkl)r, it follows that TEN 22( aij bkl ) = C1 (A, B), as
shown in Equation 2.68.
b.) Suppose that sij = aik bjl rkl. However, aik bjl rkl = aik rkl b lj, thus S = ARB . Now
T T
s = VEC(ARBT )
= I ⊗ AVEC(RBT )
= I ⊗ AB ⊗ Ir
= B ⊗ Ar
s = VEC(AR T BT )
= I ⊗ AB ⊗ IVEC(R T )
= B ⊗ AU 9 r
Let C denote a fourth-order tensor with entries cijkl. If the entries observe
cijkl = c jikl ( a)
cijkl = cklij (c )
TEN22(C)Un2 = TEN22(C) (c )
−1
C is totally symmetric if C is totally symmetric. (2.75)
−1 −1
Note that TEN22(C) Un2 = TEN22(C) implies that Un2 TEN22(C ) = TEN22(C ),
−1 −1
while Un2 TEN22(C) = TEN22(C) implies that TEN22(C ) Un2 = TEN22(C ).
Finally, we prove the following: for a nonsingular n × n tensor G,
T
GCG is totally symmetric if C is totally symmetric. (2.76)
−T
Equation 2.76 implies that TEN22(GCG ) = I ⊗ G TEN22(C)I ⊗ G , so that
T
T
TEN22(GCG ) is certainly symmetric. Next, consider whether A′ given by
A ′ = GCG T B′ (2.77)
G −1 A ′G − T = CG −1 B′ G − T . (2.78)
−1 −T
Now G A′G is symmetric since C is totally symmetric, and therefore A′ is
symmetric. Next, consider whether B′ given by the following is symmetric:
B′ = G − T C −1G −1 A ′ (2.79)
∂f ∂f ∂f ∂f
df (A) = da = tr dA , = . (2.81)
∂aij ij ∂A ∂A ij ∂aij
∂f T
df (A) = VEC T VEC( dA)
∂A
∂f
= da. (2.82)
∂a
∂I1 ∂ T
= (i a ) = i T
∂a ∂a
∂I2 ∂ 1 T 2
= (i a) − a T a
∂a ∂a 2
= I1i T − a T (2.83)
and
so that
∂I3
= VEC(A −1 ) / I3 (2.85)
∂a
2.7 EXERCISES
ε ijk σ jk = 0, i = 1, 2, 3.
tr(AB) = tr(BA) .
Introduction to
3 Variational and
Numerical Methods
3.1 INTRODUCTION TO VARIATIONAL METHODS
Let u(x) be a vector-valued function of position vector x, and consider a vector-
valued function F(u(x), u′(x),x), in which u′(x) = ∂u/∂x. Furthermore, let v(x) be a
function such that v(x) = 0 when u(x) = 0 and v′(x) = 0 when u′(x) = 0, but which
is otherwise arbitrary. The differential d F measures how much F changes if x
changes. The variation δ F measures how much F changes if u and u′ change at
fixed x. Following Ewing, we introduce the vector-valued function φ (e: F) as follows
(Ewing, 1985):
dΦ
δ F = e , (3.2)
de e=0
∂F ∂F
δF = ev + tr ev ′ , (3.3)
∂u ∂u ′
∂F ∂F
in which ∂u ′ ev ′ = ∂u ′ ev ′ij . If F = u, then δ F = δ u = ev. If F = u ′, then δ F = δ u′ =
ev′. This suggests the form
ij
∂F ∂F
δF= δ u + tr δ u′ . (3.4)
∂u ∂u′
1. δ (.) commutes with linear differential operators and integrals. For exam-
ple, if S denotes a prescribed contour of integration:
∫ δ ( )dS = δ ∫ ( )dS. (3.5)
43
5. Other than for number 2, the variation is arbitrary. For example, for two
vectors v and w, v d w = 0 implies that v and w are orthogonal to each
T
other. However, v δ w implies that v = 0, since only the zero vector can
T
du
strain-displacement E=
dx
stress-strain S = EE
dσ
equilibrium =0 (3.8)
dx
d 2u
EA = 0. (3.9)
dx 2
The following steps serve to derive a variational equation that is equivalent to the
differential equation and endpoint conditions (boundary conditions and constraints).
E,A
P
L
L
d 2u
∫0
δ u EA
dx 2
Adx = 0. (3.10)
d δuEA du − dδu EA du dx = 0
L
∫
0
dx
dx dx
dx
(3.11)
dδu du
L L
∫
du
dx EA dx dx = δuEA dx . (3.12)
0 0
Step 3: Identify the primary and secondary variables. The primary variable is
present in the endpoint terms (rhs) under the variational symbol, l, and is
u. The conjugate secondary variable is EA du dx
.
Step 4: Satisfy the constraints and boundary conditions. At x = 0, u is pre-
scribed, thus δu = 0. At x = L, the load P = EA dudx
is prescribed. Also, note
that ( du ) EA du = δ ( 1 EA( du )2 ) .
dx dx 2 dx
Step 5: Form the variational equation; the equations and boundary conditions
are consolidated into one integral equation, δF = 0, where˙
L 2
1 du
F=
∫0
EA
2 dx
dx − Pu( L). (3.13)
th
The j variation of a vector-valued quantity F is defined by
d jΦ
δ jF = e j j . (3.14)
de e=0
∂ T ∂ ∂ ∂
T
δu F F
∂u ∂u ∂u ∂u ′
δ 2 F = {δ u T δ u ′ T}H , H= T T , (3.15)
δ u ′ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂
∂u ∂u F F
′ ∂u ′ ∂u ′
G=
∫ F(x, u(x), u′(x))dV + ∫ h (x)u(x) dS,
T
(3.16)
in which V again denotes the volume of a domain and S denotes its surface area. In
addition, h is a prescribed (known) function on S. G is called a functional since it
generates a number for every function u(x). We first concentrate on a three-dimensional,
rectangular coordinate system and suppose that δ G = 0, as in the Principle of
Stationary Potential Energy in elasticity. Note that
∂ ∂F ∂F ∂ ∂
δ u = tr δ u ′ + F δ u. (3.17)
∂x ∂u ′ ∂u ′ ∂x ∂u ′
The first and last terms in Equation 3.17 can be recognized as divergences of
vectors. We now invoke the divergence theorem to obtain
0 = δG
∂F ∂F
=
∫ ∂u δ u + tr ∂u′ δ u′ dV + ∫ h (x)δu(x) dS
T
∂F ∂ ∂F ∂F
=
∫ ∂u − ∂x ∂u′ δ u dV + ∫ n T
∂u ′ ∫
δ udS + h T ( x )δ u( x ) dS. (3.18)
∂F ∂ ∂F
− = 0 T. (3.19)
∂u ∂x ∂u ′
u( x ) prescribed x on S1
T ∂F
n ∂u ′ + h1 ( x ) = 0 on S x on S − S1
T T
Let D > 0 denote a second-order tensor, and let π denote a vector that is a
nonlinear function of a second vector u, which is subject to variation. The function
F = 12 π T Dπ satisfies
∂π T ∂π T ∂π ∂ ∂π T
δ F = δ uT Dπ δ 2 F = δ uT Dπ δ u + δ u T T δ uDπ .
∂u T ∂u T
∂u ∂u ∂u
(3.20)
Despite the fact that D > 0, in the current nonlinear example, the specific vector
∗
u satisfying δ F = 0 may correspond to a stationary point rather than a minimum.
is achieved as xn. Further suppose for simplicity’s sake that xn is “close” to the actual
(0)
solution xn+1 for the (n + 1) increment of λ. Using x = xn as the starting value,
st
Let ∆n+1,j denote the increment xn( +j +11) − xn( +j )1. Then, to first-order in the Taylor series
df −1 −1
∆ n +1,j − ∆ n +1,j−1 = − f(x(j) ) −
df
f(x(j−1) )
dx x(j) dx x(j−1)
−1
[
≈ − f(x(j) ) − f(x(j−1) )
df
dx x(j)
]
−1
≈ − ∆ n +1,j−1 + 0 2
df df
x x(j)
dx (j) dx
≈ ∆ n +1,j−1 + 0 2 (3.22)
−1
∂ϕ
∆ n +1,j = −
∂u u(nj+)1
[ϕ ( u ) − λ v ] ,
( j)
n +1 j+1 u(jn ++11) − u(nj+)1 = ∆ n +1,j . (3.24)
in which, for example, the initial iterate is un. One can avoid the use of an explicit
matrix inverse by solving the linear system
∂ϕ
( )
∂u ( j ) ∆ n+1, j = ϕ u n+1 − v j +1
( j)
u (nj++11) = u (nj+)1 + ∆ n+1, j . (3.25)
un +1
ψ (u, λ ) = β 2 [λ − λ n ] + v T (u − u n ) − Σ 2 = 0, (3.26)
ϕ (u) − λv 0
= . (3.27)
ψ 0
u (nj++11) − u (nj+)1
J ′ = −
( )
ϕ u ( j ) − λ( j ) v
n +1 n +1
,
J
J′ =
−v
. (3.28)
λ( j +1) − λ( j )
n+1 n
ψ (
u ( j)
n +1 , λ )
n +1
v T β 2
J + v v T / β2 − v / β I 0
J′ = T . (3.29)
0T β v /β β
Τ 2
The determinant of J′ is now β det(J + v v /β
β ). Ideally, β is chosen to maximize
2
det (J′).
3.3 EXERCISES
L 2
EA dx − Pu( L )
∫
1 du
F=
0 2 dx
d 2u
EA =0
dx 2
d 4w
EI =0
dx 4
d 2w d 3w
M = − EI V = EI
dx 2 dx 3
w(0) = w ′(0) = 0 M ( L) = 0, V( L) = V0 .
Z
neutral axis
v0
V
E,I
x
L
Kinematics
4 of Deformation
The current chapter provides a review of the mathematics for describing deformation
of continua. A more complete account is given, for example, in Chandrasekharaiah
and Debnath (1994).
4.1 KINEMATICS
4.1.1 DISPLACEMENT
In finite-element analysis for finite deformation, it is necessary to carefully distin-
guish between the current (or “deformed”) configuration (i.e., at the current time or
load step) and a reference configuration, which is usually considered strain-free.
Here, both configurations are referred to the same orthogonal coordinate system
characterized by the base vectors e1, e2, e3 (see Figure 1.1 in Chapter 1). Consider a
body with volume V and surface S in the current configuration. The particle P
occupies a position represented by the position vector x, and experiences (empirical)
temperature T. In the corresponding undeformed configuration, the position of P is
described by X, and the temperature has the value T0 independent of X. It is now
assumed that x is a function of X and t and that T is also a function of X and t. The
relations are written as x(X, t) and T(X, t), and it is assumed that x and T are
continuously differentiable in X and t through whatever order needed in the subse-
quent development.
deformed
x
e2
X undeformed
e1
51
Q'
ds P'
Q * dS
P *
u(X, t ) = x − X. (4.1)
Now consider two close points, P and Q, in the undeformed configuration. The
vector difference XP − XQ is represented as a differential d X with squared length
dS = d X d X. The corresponding quantity in the deformed configuration is dx, with
2 T
dS = dx dx.
2 T
∂x
dx = Fd X F= (4.2)
∂X
F = UΣV T , (4.3)
in which U and V are orthogonal and Σ is a positive definite diagonal tensor whose
Kinematics of Deformation 53
entries λj, the singular values of F, are called the principal stretches.
λ1 0 0
Σ = 0 λ2 0 (4.4)
0 0 λ3
4.2 STRAIN
The deformation-induced change in squared length is given by
1
ds2 − dS2 = d X T 2 Ed X E = [FT F − I], (4.5)
2
in which E denotes the Lagrangian strain tensor. Also of interest is the Right Cauchy-
Green strain C = F F = 2E + I. Note that F = I + ∂ u /∂ X. If quadratic terms in
T
1 ∂u ∂u
T
EL = + . (4.6)
2 ∂X ∂X
E = V ( Σ 2 − I)V T
1
(4.7)
2
1
Under pure rotation x = QX, F = Q and E = 2 [Q Q − I] = 0. The case of pure
T
dR = ∑ dY H Γ
α
α α α dr = ∑ dy h γ
β
β β β
(4.8)
dr = ∑ dy h γ
α
α α α
= ∑ ∑ dy h (γ
β α
α α α ⋅ Γ β )Γ β
= ∑ ∑ dy h q
β α
α α
T
Γ
βα β
∑∑∑q
hα dyα
= T
βα
H dY Γ
ζ β α
Hζ dYζ ζ ζ β
∑∑∑q
hα dyα
= T
βα
(Γ ∧ Γ ζ ) Hζ dYζ Γ ζ , (4.9)
ζ β α
Hζ dYζ β
in which Γβ denotes the base vector in the curvilinear system used for the undeformed
configuration.
This can be written as
hα ∂yα
dr = Q T F ′dR, [Q T ]βα = qβα
T
[F ′]αζ = , (4.10)
Hζ ∂Yζ
1 1
E = [ F T F − I ] = [ F′ T F′ − I ],
2 2
from which
1 h 2β ∂y β ∂y β
[ E]ij =
2
∑ β
H H ∂Y ∂Y
i j i j
− δ
ij .
(4.11)
Displacement Vector
The position vectors can be written in the form R = ZiΓi, r = z jγj. The displacement
vector referred to the undeformed base vectors is
u = [z j q ji − Z i ]Γ i , q ji = γ j ⋅ Γ i . (4.12)
Cylindrical Coordinates
In cylindrical coordinates,
Kinematics of Deformation 55
2
We now apply the chain rule to ds in cylindrical coordinates:
ds 2 = dr ⋅ dr = dr 2 + r 2 dθ 2 + dz 2
dr dθ r dθ dθ
2 2
= dR +
dr 1 dr
RdΘ + dZ + r dR + RdΘ + r dZ
dR R dΘ dZ dR R dΘ dZ
2
+ dR +
dz 1 dz dz
RdΘ + dZ
dR R dΘ dZ
dR
= {dR RdΘ dZ} C RdΘ , (4.14)
dZ
in which
dθ
2 2 2
cRR = + r +
dr dz 1
eRR = (c − 1)
dR dR dR 2 RR
1 dr r dθ 1 dz
2 2 2
cΘΘ =
1
+ + eΘΘ = (c − 1)
R dΘ R d Θ R d Θ 2 ΘΘ
dθ
2 2 2
cZZ = + r +
dr dz 1
eZZ = (c − 1)
dZ dZ dZ 2 ZZ
dr 1 dr dθ r dθ dz 1 dz
cRΘ =
1
+ r + eRΘ = c
dR R dΘ dR R dΘ dR R dΘ 2 RΘ
1 dr dr r dθ dθ 1 dz dz
cΘZ =
1
+ r + eΘZ = c
R dΘ dZ R dΘ dZ R dΘ dZ 2 ΘZ
dθ dθ
cZR = + r r +
dr dr dz dz 1
eZR = c .
dZ dR dZ dR dZ dR 2 ZR
(4.15)
If quadratic terms in the displacements and their derivatives are neglected, then
uΘ
uR ≈ r − R ≈θ −Θ uZ ≈ z − Z , (4.16)
R
dr du dθ d u du u dz duZ
≈1+ R r ≈ R Θ = Θ − Θ ≈
dR dR dR dR R dR R dR dR
1 dr 1 du R r dθ R + uR 1 duΘ u 1 duΘ 1 dz 1 duZ
≈ = 1+ ≈1+ R + ≈
R dΘ R d Θ R dΘ R R dΘ R R dΘ R dΘ R dΘ
dr du R dθ duΘ dz du
≈ r ≈ ≈1+ Z
dZ dZ dZ dZ dZ dZ
du R 1 duΘ uΘ 1 ∂u R 1 du Z du R
− + +
dR 2 dR R R ∂R 2 dR dZ
1 ∂u R 1 duΘ 1 du Z
EL = Θ − Θ +
1 du u uR 1 duΘ
+ dZ + . (4.17)
2 dR R R ∂R R R dΘ 2 R dΘ
1 du Z du 1 duΘ 1 du Z du Z
+ R +
2 dR dZ 2 dZ R dΘ dZ
We now introduce the particle velocity v = ∂ x/∂ t and assume that it is an explicit
function of x(t) and t. The velocity-gradient tensor L is introduced using dv = Ldx,
from which
dv
L=
dx
dv dX
=
dX dx
˙ −1 .
= FF (4.19)
1
D = [L + LT ], (4.20)
2
can be regarded as a strain rate referred to the current configuration. The correspond-
ing strain rate referred to the undeformed configuration is the Lagrangian strain rate:
1
E˙ = [F T F˙ + F˙ T F]
2
= F T [FF + F − T F˙ T ]F
1 ˙ −1
2
= F T DF. (4.21)
Kinematics of Deformation 57
1
W = [L − LT ]. (4.22)
2
˙ T,
L = QQ (4.24)
˙ T + QQ
which is antisymmetric since 0 = I˙ = [QQ T ]• = QQ ˙ T = QQ
˙ T + (QQ
˙ T )T .
˙
Hence, D = 0 and W = QQ , thus explaining the name of W.
T
∑v γ
dr dyα
v(y, t ) = = α α, vα = hα . (4.25)
dt α
dt
1 ∂v j
[L]βα = =
dv
δ jβ + v j c jβα .
dr βα hα ∂yα
1 α β
c αjβ = (1 − δ αβ ) hβ (4.26)
hα j
α β ∂ 2 xα ∂yβ
= hβ
j ∂yk ∂y j ∂x k
1 1
Of course, [D]βα = [[L]βα + [L]αβ ], [W]βα = [[L]βα − [L]αβ ].
2 2
dr dθ dz
v= e +r e + e
dt r dt θ dt z
= vr e r + vθ eθ + vz e z . (4.27)
Observe that
dv = dvr e r + dvθ eθ + dvz e z + vr de r + vθ deθ
dvr 1 dv r dv v
dr + rdθ + r dz − θ rdθ
dr r dθ dz r
dv 1 dv dv v
dv = θ dr + θ rdθ + θ dz + r rdθ
dr r dθ dz r
dv z 1 dv z dv z
dr + rdθ + dz
dr r dθ dz
dvr 1 dv r vθ dv r
dr dr −
r dθ r dz
dv
1 dvθ vr dvθ
= L rdθ , L= θ + .
(4.29)
dr r dθ r dz
dv z 1 dv z dv z
dz
dr r dθ dz
Now
dr dθ dφ
v= e r + r cos φ eθ + r e
dt dt dt φ
= vr e r + vθ eθ + vφ eφ
eθ = − sin θ e1 + cos θ e 2
Next,
vr
v′ = Qv, v = vθ , v′ referred to e1, e2 , e3
v
φ
(4.31)
cos φ cos θ cos φ sin θ sin φ
Q = − sin θ cos θ 0
− sin φ cos θ − sin φ sin θ cos φ
Kinematics of Deformation 59
dv = QQT dv * + dQQT v
dvr
= dv * + dQQT v, dv* = dvθ referred to e r , eθ , eφ (4.32)
dv
φ
Recall that
0 cos φ 0 0 0 1
dQ(θ ) T dθ dφ
Q (θ ) = − cos φ 0 sin φ + 0 0 0 . (4.33)
dt dt dt
0 − sin φ 0 −1 0 0
0 cos φ 0 0 0 1
1 1
dQQ T = − cos φ 0 sin φ r cos φ dθ + 0 0 0 rdφ
r cos φ r
0 − sin φ 0 −1 0 0
(4.34)
and
cos φvθ dθ + vφ dφ
dQQ T v = − cos φvr dθ + sin φvφ dθ
− sin φvθ dθ − vr dφ
0 vθ vφ dr
1
= 0 − vr + tan φvφ 0 r cos φ dθ . (4.35)
r
0 − tan φvθ − vr r dφ
Finally,
dvr 1 dv r 1 dv r
dvr dr r cos φ dθ r dφ
dr
dv
dvθ
dv* = dvθ = θ
1 dvθ 1
r cos φ dθ (4.36)
dr r cos φ dθ r dφ
dv dvφ dvφ dvφ rdφ
φ 1 1
dr r cos φ dθ r dφ
and
dvr 1 dv r 1 dv r
0 vθ vφ
r cos φ dθ dφ
dr r
dvθ 1
L= θ
dv 1 dvθ 1
+ 0 − vr + tan φvφ 0
dr r cos φ dθ r dφ r
dv dvφ dvφ
φ
1 1
0 − tan φvθ − vr
dr r cos φ dθ r dφ
dvr 1 dv r vθ 1 dv r
vφ
dr + +
r cos φ dθ r r dφ r
v r − tan φvφ
= θ .
dv 1 dvθ 1 dvθ
− (4.37)
dr r cos φ dθ r r dφ
dv 1 dvφ tan φvθ 1 dvφ vr
φ − −
dr r cos φ dθ r r dφ r
dV0 = d X1 ⋅ d X 2 × d X 3 = d X1d X 2 d X 3
(4.39)
d X1 = dX1e1 d X 2 = dX2 e 2 d X 3 = dX3 e 3 .
dx j
The vectors dXi deform into dxj = ej dXi. The deformed volume is now readily
dx i
verified to be
dV = dx1 ⋅ dx 2 × dx 3
1
= JdV0 , J = det (F) = det 2 (C), (4.40)
and J is called the Jacobian. To obtain J for small strain, we invoke invariance and
J = det(C ) to find
1 1
det 2 (C) = det 2 [I + 2 E]
Kinematics of Deformation 61
in which EI, EII, EIII are the eigenvalues of EL, assumed to be much less that unity.
The linear-volume strain follows as
1
evol = det 2 (C) − 1
≈ tr( EL ), (4.42)
d 1 dI3
J=
dt 2 J dt
J
= tr(C −1C
˙)
2
J
= tr(F −1 F − T [F T F˙ + F˙ T F])
2
J
= tr(F −1 F˙ + F −1 F − T F˙ T F)
2
J
= [tr(F −1 F˙ ) + tr(F −1 F − T F˙ T F)]
2
F −1 F˙ + F − T F˙ T
= J tr
2
= J tr(D). (4.43)
n dS = JF − T n 0 dS0 , (4.44)
F −Tn0
dS = J n T0 C −1 n 0 dS0 n= . (4.45)
n T0 C −1 n 0
n
n0
During deformation, the surface normal changes direction, a fact which is impor-
tant, for example, in contact problems. In incremental variational methods, we
consider the differential dn and d(ndS):
dt
d dJ − T d F −T
[n dS] = F n 0 dS0 + J n 0 dS0 . (4.46)
dt dt dt
dJ
= J tr(D)
dt
dJ − T
F n 0 dS0 = tr(D) JF − T n 0 dS0
dt
= tr(D)n dS. (4.47)
−T
Also, since d(F F ) = 0, then
T
dF − T dF T − T
= −F −T F
dt dt
= − LT F − T . (4.48)
Finally, we have
d[ndS]
= [tr(D)I − LT ]ndS. (4.49)
dt
Next, we find with some effort that
−1
dC
−T
n0 −T
F n0 n T0 n0
dn dF dt
= − T −1
dt dt n T0 C −1 n 0 n T0 C −1 n 0 n C n 0
0
Kinematics of Deformation 63
du
du = dX
dX
= [ EL + ω ]d X, (4.51)
1 ∂u ∂u
T
ω= − . (4.52)
2 ∂X ∂X
cos θ sin θ 0
x = − sin θ cos θ 0X
0 0 1
θ2
1 − 2 θ 0
θ
2
≈ −θ 1− 0 X, (4.53)
2
0 0 1
thus,
θ2
− 2 0 0 0 θ 0
θ
2
EL = 0 − 0 , ω = −θ 0 0 . (4.55)
2
0 0 0 0 0 0
Evidently, the normal strains do not vanish, but are second-order in θ, while ω
is first-order in θ. Under the assumption of small deformation, nonlinear terms are
neglected so that EL is regarded as vanishing.
θ
L
L
θ
X
L
Consider as a second example the following derivation in which the sides of the
unit square rotate toward each other by 2θ.
The deformation can be described by the relations
θ2
x = (1 − cos θ ) X + sin θY ≈ 1 − X + θY
2
(4.56)
θ2
y = sin θX + (1 − cos θ )Y ≈ θX + 1 − Y ,
2
θ2
− 2 θ 0
θ
2
EL = θ − 0 . (4.57)
2
0 0 0
Kinematics of Deformation 65
du
du = dX
dX
= [ EL + ω ]d X (4.58)
∂2 E12 1 ∂2 E ∂2 E22
= 211 + (4.59)
∂x1∂x2 2 ∂x2 ∂x12
X ( λ *)
∫
du
u(X(λ *)) = u(0) + dX
0 dX
X ( λ *) X ( λλ *)
= u(0) +
∫
0
E(X(λ *))dX +
∫0
ω(X)dX. (4.60)
The term u(0) can be interpreted as the rigid-body translation. The first integral
can be evaluated since E(X) and X(λ) are given functions. The second integral can
be rewritten using an elementary transformation as
X ( λ *) 0
∫0
ω(X)dX = −
∫ X ( λ *)
ω(X * − X)d(X * − X). (4.61)
0
−
∫
X ( λ *)
ω(X)d (X * − X) = ω(X(0))(X(λ *) − X(0))
T
0
dω(X * − X)
+
∫X ( λ* )− X ( 0 )
(X * − X) T
d (X * − X)
d (X * − X) . (4.63)
dω(X * − X)
∫ (X * − X) T
d (X * − X)
d (X * − X) = 0 T . (4.64)
now be written as
dω j (X * − X)
∫ (X * − X) T
d (X * − X)
d (X * − X) = 0, j = 1, 2, 3. (4.65)
Ψ ⋅ dX = 0 over
For a suitable differential function Ψ(X), the condition for Ψ
an arbitrary contour is that the curl of Ψ vanishes, from which we express the
compatibility conditions as
dω j (X)
∇ × (X * − X)T = 0, j = 1, 2, 3. (4.66)
d ( X * − X)
Kinematics of Deformation 67
x = αX + βY + γXY y = δX + εY + ζXY ,
At ( X , Y ) = (W , 0) : W + a = αW b = δW
At ( X , Y ) = (0, H ) : e = βH H + f = εH
At ( X , Y ) = (W , H ) : W + c = αH + βH + γ WH H + d = δW + εH + ζWH
a e b
α = 1+ = 1.1 β= = 0.2 δ= = 0.1
W H W
f W + c − (W + a ) − e H + d − b − (H + f )
ε = 1+ = 1.2 γ = = 0.4 ζ= = 0.
H WH WH
Y Y
c
e
d
H H
f
W X X
W
a
undeformed plate deformed plate
Y Y
d
g
h
1
e f
X X
1
a b
element at time t element at time t+dt
Kinematics of Deformation 69
Solution: First, represent the deformed position vectors in terms of the unde-
formed position vectors using eight coefficients determined using the given
geometry. In particular,
x = α + βX + γY + δXY y = ε + ζX + ηY + θXY .
α = 0.1dt ε = 0.05dt
β = 1 + 0.2 dt ζ = 0.1dt
γ = 0.2 dt η = 1 − 0.1dt
δ = −0.5dt θ = −0.05dt.
x−X y−Y
The velocities can be estimated using vx ≈ dt
and vy ≈ dt
, from which
4.8 EXERCISES
1. Consider a one-dimensional deformation in which x = (1 + λ)X. What
value of λ is the linear-strain εL error by 5% relative to the Lagrangian
strain E? Use the error measure
E − EL
error = .
E
0.1 0.05
E= .
0.05 0.1
3. Verify that the expressions in the text for F and E in cylindrical coordinates
are consistent with the equation
hα ∂yα
F = Q F ′, [Q T ]βα = qβα
T
[F ′]αζ = ,
Hζ ∂Yζ
(b) Torsion: r = R, θ = Θ + λZ , z = Z
r = λR, θ = Θ, φ = Φ
vr = f (r ), vθ = 0, vφ = 0
Kinematics of Deformation 71
10. For linear strain in rectilinear coordinates and 2-D, the compatibility
relation is
∂2 E12 1 ∂2 E ∂2 E22
= 211 + .
∂x1∂x2 2 ∂x2 ∂x12
E11 = a1 X 2 + a2 XY + a3Y 2
E22 = b1 X 2 + b2 XY + b3Y 2
E12 = c1 X 2 + c2 XY + c3Y 2 .
E11 = a1 + a2 X + a3Y
E22 = b1 + b2 X + b3Y
E12 = c1 + c2 X + c3Y .
Assuming that the origin does not move, find the deformed position of
(X,Y) = (L,L).
Mechanical Equilibrium
5 and the Principle
of Virtual Work
5.1 TRACTION AND STRESS
5.1.1 CAUCHY STRESS
Consider a differential tetrahedron enclosing the point x in the deformed configura-
tion. The area of the inclined face is dS, and dSi is the area of the face whose exterior
normal vector is −ei. Simple vector analysis serves to derive that ni = dSi/dS (see
Exercise 1 in Chapter 1). Next, let dP denote the force on a surface element dS, and
let dP denote the force on area dSi. The traction vector is introduced by τ = dP/dS.
(i )
dPj = ∑ dP .
i
j
i
(5.1)
dP
τ= , (5.2)
dS
from which
dPj( i )
τj = ∑i
dS
dPj( i ) dSi
= ∑i
dSi dS
= Tij ni . (5.3)
73
dF
(2) (1)
dF dS
(2) dS dF (1)
dS
2
(3)
dS
(3)
dF
with
dPj( i )
Tij = . (5.4)
dSi
It is readily seen that Tij can be interpreted as the intensity of the force acting
in the j direction on the facet pointing in the −i direction, and is recognized as the
th
ij entry of the Cauchy stress T. In matrix-vector notation, the stress-traction relation
is written as
τ = T T n. (5.5)
The next section will show that T is symmetric by virtue of the balance of angular
T
momentum. Equation 5.5 implies that T is a tensor, thus, it follows that T is a
tensor. To visualize T, consider a differential cube. Positive stresses are shown on
faces pointing in positive directions, as shown in Figure 5.2.
In traditional depictions, the stresses on the back faces are represented by arrows
pointing in negative directions. However, this depiction can be confusing—the
arrows actually represent the directions of the traction components. Consider the
one-dimensional bar in Figure 5.3. The traction vector te1 acts at x = L, while the
traction vector −te1 acts at x = 0. At x = L, the corresponding stress is t11 = te1 ⋅ e1 = t.
At x = 0, the stress is given by (−te1) ⋅ (e1) = t. Clearly, the stress at both ends, and
in fact throughout the bar, is positive (tensile).
We will see later that the stress tensor is symmetric by virtue of the balance of
angular momentum.
T33
T32
T31
T23
T13
T21
T12 T22
T11
2
t t X
τdS = T Τ ndS
= T Τ JF − T n 0 dS0
dW˙ = dP T u˙
= τ T u˙ dS. (5.7)
Over the surface S, shifting to tensor-indicial notation and invoking the divergence
theorem, we find
W˙ =
∫ τ u˙ dS
T
=
∫ T n u˙ dS
ij i j
∂u˙ j ∂Tij
=
∫ ∂x i
Tij dV + u˙ j
∫ ∂xi
dV . (5.8)
∂Tij
We will shortly see that static equilibrium implies that = 0, which enables
∂x i
us to conclude that
∂u˙ j
W˙ =
∫ ∂x i
Tij dV . (5.9)
∂u̇ j
Returning to matrix-vector notation, since = [L]ji, then
∂x i
˙ =
W
∫ tr(TL )dV T
=
∫ tr[T(D − W)]dV ,
=
∫ tr[TD]dV (5.10)
since the trace vanishes for the product of a symmetric and antisymmetric tensor.
˙ =
W
∫ tr(TD)dV
=
∫ tr( JTF −1
E˙ F − T )dV0
(5.11)
=
∫ −T −1
tr( JF TF E˙ )dV0
=
∫ tr(SE˙ )dV, S = JF − T TF −1 .
A( x 2 ) = VA( x1 )V T . (5.13)
It turns out that the matrix of time derivatives of the Cauchy stress, Ṫ , is not
objective, while the deformation rate tensor, D, is. Thus, if ξ is a fourth-order tensor,
a constitutive equation of the form Ṫ = ξD would be senseless. Instead, the time
derivative is replaced with an objective stress flux, as explained in the following.
First, note that
F2 = VF1 (5.14)
L 2 = F˙ 2 F2−1
˙ T VF + VF˙ ]F −1 V T
= [VV 1 1 1
= Ω + VL1 V T , ˙ T.
Ω = VV
We seek a stress flux affording the simplest conversion from deformed to unde-
formed coordinates. Note that
dS d
= [JF − T TF −1 ]
dt dt
dS °
= JF − T T F −1 , (5.16a)
dt
in which
o
T = T˙ + tr( D)T − LT − TLT , (5.16b)
o
is known as the Truesdell stress flux. Under pure rotation, F = Q and S˙ = JQ T Q T .
o
To prove the objectivity of T , note that
o
T 2 = T˙2 + T2 tr(D 2 ) − L 2 T2 − T2 LT2
The choice of stress flux is not unique. For example, the stress flux given by
o
T = T − Ttr(D)
= T˙ − LT − T LT (5.17)
∆ 1
T = T˙ + WT − T W, W= (L − LT ). (5.18)
2
∫ ρ dV = 0,
d
(5.19)
dt
d
0= ( ρJ )
dt
∂ ∂ ∂x
= ( ρJ ) + ( ρJ )v( x, t ), v ( x, t ) = . (5.20)
∂t ∂x ∂t
∫ ρw(x, t)dV = ∫
V V0
ρ 0 w( x, t )dV0 . (5.21)
d
∫ ρw(x, t)dV = ∫ ρ dt w(x, t)dV = 0 .
d
(5.22)
dt
∫ τ dS = dt ∫ ρ dt dV .
d du
P= (5.23)
d 2u
∫ τ dS =
∫ ρ
dt 2
dV . (5.24)
∫ τ dS = ∫ T n dS T
∫
= [∇ T T T ]T dV . (5.25)
T T d 2uT
∫
∇ T − ρ
dt 2
dV = 0 T . (5.26)
Since this equation applies not only to the whole body, but also to arbitrary
subdomains of the body, the argument of the integral in Equation 5.26 must vanish
pointwise:
d 2 uT
∇ TT T = ρ . (5.27)
dt 2
d 2uT
∫ S T n 0 dS0 =
∫ ρ0
dt 2
dV0 , (5.28)
d 2uT
∇ T0 S T = ρ0 , (5.29)
dt 2
∫ x × τ dS = dt ∫ x × ρ x˙ dV.
d
(5.30)
∫ x × τ dS = ∫ ε ijk x j τk dS
=
∫ε ijk x j Tlk nl dS
∂
=
∫ ∂x (ε l
ijk x j Tlk )dV
∂
=
∫ε ijk δ jl Tlk dV + ε ijk x j
∫ T dV
∂xl lk
∂
=
∫ε ijk Tjk dV + ε ijk x j
∫ T dV .
∂xl lk
(5.31)
Continuing,
∫ x × ρ x˙ dV = ∫ x × ρ ˙˙x dV + ∫ x˙ × ρ x˙ dV
d
dt
=
∫ x × ρ ˙˙x dV
=
∫ε ijk x j ρ˙˙
x k dV . (5.32)
∂
0=
∫ε ijk ∫
Tjk dV + ε ijk x j
∂xl
Tlk − ρ˙˙
x k dV .
(5.33)
The second term vanishes by virtue of balance of linear momentum (see Equation
5.27), leaving
from Equation 5.6 and Equation 5.11 that S is also symmetric, but that S is not
symmetric.
∂
T − ρu˙˙k = 0 , (5.35)
∂xl kl
and Tlk = Tkl by virtue of the balance of angular momentum. We have tacitly assumed
that x˙˙ = u˙˙k , which is to say that deformed positions are referred to a coordinate
system that does not translate or rotate. A variational principle is sought from
∂
∫ δu ∂x T
k
l
kl − ρu˙˙k dV = 0 ,
(5.36)
u = N T ( x)γ ( t ) , (5.37a)
then
δu k = [N T ( x )]kl δγ l ( t ). (5.37b)
The second term in the variational equation remains as − ∫ δuk ρu˙˙k dV . The first
term is integrated by parts only once for reasons that will be identified shortly: it
becomes ∫ ∂ [δu T ]dV − ∫ ∂δu k T dV . From the divergence theorem,
∂x l k lk
∂x l lk
∂
∫ ∂x [δu T ]dV = ∫ n [δu T ]dS
l
k lk l k lk
∫
= δuk τ k dS, (5.38)
which can be interpreted as the virtual work of the tractions on the exterior boundary.
Next, since T is symmetric,
∂δuk
∫ T dV = δ 3kl Tlk dV
∂xl lk ∫
(5.39)
1 ∂u ∂u
3kl = k + l ,
2 ∂xl ∂x k
and we call 3kl the Eulerian strain. The term ∫δ 3kl Tlk dV can be called the virtual
work of the stresses. Next, to evaluate ∫ δuk τ k dS, we suppose that the exterior
boundary consists of three zones: S = S1 + S2 + S3 . On S1, the displacement uk is
prescribed, causing the integral over S1 to vanish. On S2, suppose that the traction is
prescribed as τ k (s). The contribution is ∫ S δukτ k (s)dS . Finally, on S3, suppose that tk =
2
τ k (s) − [A(s)]kl ul (s), thus furnishing ∫ S3 δukτ k (s)dS − ∫ S3 δuk [A(s)]kl ul (s)dS. The var-
ious contributions are consolidated into the Principle of Virtual Work (Zienkiewicz
and Taylor, 1989) as
(5.40)
γ + [K + H]γ = f (t ) ,
M˙˙ (5.42)
in which
M=
∫ ρN(x)N (x)dV
T
K=
∫ BDB dV T
(5.43)
H=
∫ N(x)AN (x)dV
S3
T
f (t ) =
∫
S2 + S3
N(s) τ k (s)dS
∫ δu ρu˙˙ dV → ∫ δu ρ u˙˙ dV
k k k 0 k 0
(5.44)
∫S2
δukτ k (s)dS +
∫
S3
δukτ k (s)dS →
∫
S20
δukτ k0 (s0 )dS0 +
∫S30
δukτ k0 (s0 )dS0 ,
τ k0 = µτ k µ = J n T0 C −1 n 0 . (5.45)
Next,
1 ∂δ u ∂δ u
T
δ3 = +
2 ∂ x ∂x
1 ∂δ u ∂X ∂δ u ∂X
T
= +
2 ∂X ∂x ∂X ∂x
1
= [δFF −1 + F − T δF T ]
2
= F − T [F T δ F + δF T F] F −1
1
2
= F − T δ EF −1 . (5.47)
Now
∫ δ3 T dV =
kl lk ∫ tr(δ 3T)dV
=
∫ tr(F −T
δ E F −1 T) JdV0
=
∫ tr(δ EJ F −1
T F − T )dV0
=
∫ tr(δ ES)dV 0
∫
= δE ji Sij dV0 . (5.48)
∫ δE S dV + ∫ δu ρ u˙˙ dV = ∫
ji ij 0 k 0 k 0
S20
δuk τ k0 (s0 )dS0 +
∫ S30
δuk τ k0 (s0 )dS0
−
∫ S30
δuk [ µA(s 0 )]kl ul (s0 )dS0 . (5.49)
x
τ = τ0[ ex + ey ]
L
x
A B
Solution: The reactions are denoted as RAx , RAy , RBx , and RBy and are all
assumed to be positive. Clearly, RBx = 0. Force equilibrium requires that
L
∫
x tW
RAx − tW dx = 0 ⇒ RAx =
0 L 2L
L
∫
x tW
RAy + RBy − tW dx = 0 ⇒ RAy + RBy = .
0 L 2L
Balance of moments about A requires that
L
x2
∫
tW
LRBy + tW dx = 0 ⇒ RBy = − .
0 L 3L
5 tW
Accordingly, RAy = .
6 L
T11 T12 0
T = T21 0 0 .
0 0 0
On diagonal AB, find the total transverse force and moment about A.
A L
Solution: The axes are rotated through 45 degrees so that the x-axis coincides
with the diagonal (x′-axis). Now,
T
Fy′ = xx − T xy 2 WL.
2
2
M= LFy′ .
2
3. The plate illustrated has thickness W, width dx, and height dy. The stresses
Txz, Tyz, and Tzz vanish. Find the equations resulting from balancing forces
and moments. In particular, prove that
Txy = Tyx .
Tyy + dTyy
Tyx + dTyx
Txy + dTxy
Txy
dx
Tyx
Tyy
dT dTyx dT dTyx
W Txx + xx dx − Txx dy + W Tyx + dy − Tyx dx = 0 ⇒ xx + =0.
dx dy dx dy
dT dy dTyx
−W Txx + xx dx − Txx dy − W Tyx + dy dxdy
dx 2 dy
dTxy dTyy dx
+ W Txy + dx dydx + W Tyy + dy − Tyy dx = 0.
dx dy 2
4. At point (0,0,0), the tractions τ1, τ 2, τ 3 act on planes with normal vectors
n1, n2, and n3. Find the Cauchy stress tensor T given
1 1
n1 = [e + e 2 + e 3 ] τ1 = [6e 1 + 9e 2 + 15e 3 ]
3 1 3
1 1
n2 = [e + e 2 − e 3 ] τ2 = [0e 1 + 1e 2 + 3e 3 ]
3 1 3
1 1
n3 = [e − e 2 − e 3 ] τ3 = − [4e 1 + 5e 2 + 7e 3 ].
3 1 3
⇒ T11 + T12 + T13 = 6 (1) T21 + T22 + T23 = 9 (2) T31 + T32 + T33 = 1 (3) .
Similarly,
⇒ T11 − T12 − T13 = −4 (7) T21 − T22 − T23 = −5 (8) T31 − T32 − T33 = −6 (9)
The solution is straightforward. For example, adding (1) and (7) furnishes T11 =
1, from which (4) implies T12 = 2.
Solving the equations furnishes us with
1 2 3
T = 2 3 4 .
3 4 5
−T
Solution: Clearly F = Q, thus J = 1. Also, F = Q. It is immediate that S =
Q(t)T and S = Q(t)TQ(t) .
T
5.6 EXERCISES
1. In classical linear elasticity, introduce the isotropic stress and isotropic
linear strain as
s = tr( S) e = tr( EL ),
1 1
sd = s − si ed = e − esi.
3 3
i Tsd = 0 iTed = 0
sd = 2 µed
s = (2 µ + 3λ )e .
x
A B
x y 0
T = y xy 0 .
0 0 0
y
B
A x
st nd
5. Given the Cauchy stress tensor T, find the 1 and 2 Piola-Kirchhoff stress
∆(t)X, in which
tensors if x(t) = Q(t)∆
1 + at 0 0
∆ (t ) = 0 1 + bt 0 .
0 0 1 + ct
T11 T12 0
T = T12 T22 0 .
0 0 0
Now suppose the 1-2 axes are rotated through +θ degrees around the
z-axis, to furnish 1′ − 2′ axes.
Prove that
7. Verify that
1 λ
Eij( L ) = Tij − Tkk δ ij
2µ 2 µ + 3λ
∂w ′
s= = 2ϕ1′n1′ + 2ϕ 2′ n ′2 − pI3 n 3 .
∂e
t = 2ψ 1′m1′ + 2ψ 2′ m ′2 − pi .
What is the volume change? What are the principal stresses and strains?
What is the maximum shear stress?
13. Write out the proof of the Principle of Virtual Work in deformed coordi-
nates.
14. Write out the conversion of the Principle of Virtual Work to undeformed
coordinates.
15. Write out the steps whereby the Principle of Virtual Work leads to
γ + [K + H]γ = f (t ) .
M˙˙
16. Suppose that u = N (x)γγ (t) and assume two dimensions. In 2-D, find B
T T
T
in terms of the derivatives of N (x), in which
311
321 u1
= B ( x )γ (t ), = N ( x ) γ (t )
T T
312 u2
322
1 x y 0 0 0 Φ 0
N T (x) = .
0 0 0 1 x y 0 Φ
in which cijkl are constants and are the entries of a 3 × 3 × 3 × 3 fourth-order tensor,
C. If T and EL were not symmetrical, C might have as many as 81 distinct entries.
However, due to the symmetry of T and EL there are no more than 36 distinct entries.
Thermodynamic arguments in subsequent sections will provide a rationale for the
Maxwell relations:
∂Tij ∂Tkl
= . (6.2)
∂Ekl ∂Eij
It follows that cijkl = cklij, which implies that there are, at most, 21 distinct coeffi-
cients. There are no further arguments from general principles for fewer coefficients.
Instead, the number of distinct coefficients is specific to a material, and reflects the
degree of symmetry in the material. The smallest number of distinct coefficients is
achieved in the case of isotropy, which can be explained physically as follows.
Suppose a thin plate of elastic material is tested such that thin strips are removed
at several angles and then subjected to uniaxial tension. If the measured stress-strain
curves are the same and independent of the orientation at which they are cut, the
material is isotropic. Otherwise, it exhibits anisotropy, but may still exhibit limited
types of symmetry, such as transverse isotropy or orthotropy. The notion of isotropy
is illustrated in Figure 6.1.
In isotropic, linear-elastic materials (which implies linear strain), the number of
distinct coefficients can be reduced to two, m and l, as illustrated by Lame’s equation,
95
T
34
2 1
1 2
3
1 λ
Eij( L ) = T − T δ . (6.4)
2 µ ij 2 µ + 3λ kk ij
The classical elastic modulus E0 and Poisson’s ratio n represent response under
uniaxial tension only, provided that T11 = T, Tij = 0. Otherwise,
T11 ( L)
E22 E( L)
E= ν=− = − 33 . (6.5)
E11( L ) ( L)
E11 E11( L )
1 1 λ ν 1 λ
= 1− = , (6.6)
E 2 µ 2 µ + 3λ
E 2 µ 2 µ + 3λ
1 1+ν
= , (6.7)
2µ E
Leaving the case of uniaxial tension for the normal (diagonal) stresses and
strains, we can write
1 λ 1 λ
E11( L ) = 1− T − (T + T )
2 µ 2 µ + 3λ 11 2 µ 2 µ + 3λ 22 33
1
= [T − ν (T22 + T33 )], (6.8)
E 11
1
( L)
E22 = [T − ν (T33 + T11 )], (6.9)
E 22
and
1
( L)
E33 = [T − ν (T11 + T22 )], (6.10)
E 33
dT = DdEL . (6.12)
In linear isotropic elasticity, the stress-strain relations are written in the Lame’s
form as
dw dw dw dw
S= =2 sT = =2 (a)
dE dC de dc (6.16)
s = VEC( S) e = VEC( E) c = VEC( C ). (b)
Now,
∂w ∂I i
s = 2φi ni , φi = , niT = . (6.17)
∂I i ∂c
From Chapter 2,
and now
dni
TEN 22( Do ) = 4φij ni nTj + 4φi A i , Ai = . (6.20)
dc
Finally,
di
A1 = = 0T (a)
dc
d
A2 = I
dc 2
d
= [ I i − c]
dc 1
= iiT − I 9 (b)
(6.21)
d
A3 = [VEC(C −1 ) I3 ]
dc
d
= [ I i − I1c + VEC(C 2 )]
dc 2
= inT2 − ciT + C ⊕ C
6.3.1 INCOMPRESSIBILITY
The constraint of incompressibility is expressed by the relation J = 1. Now,
J = det F
= det 2 (F)
= det(F) det(F T )
= det 2 (F T F)
= I3 , (6.22)
and consequently,
I3 = 1. (6.23)
1 I1 I2
w ′ = w( I1′, I2′ ) − p( I3 − 1), I1′ = , I2′ = , (6.24)
2 I31/ 3 I32 / 3
∂w ′
s=
∂e
= 2φ1′n1′ + 2φ 2′ n ′2 − pI 3 n 3 (6.25)
T T
∂w ∂w ∂I ′ ∂I ′
φ1′ = φ 2′ = n1′ = 1 n ′2 = 2 .
∂I1′ ∂I2′ ∂c ∂c
−1 −T
To convert to deformed coordinates, recall that S = JF T F . It is left to the
reader in an exercise to derive ψ 1′ and ψ 2′ in which
tr(T ) = i T t
= 2ψ 1′i T m 1′ + 2ψ 2′ i T m ′2 − pi T i
= − i T ip
= −3 p. (6.27)
ds ds
de dp
TEN 22( D ∗ ) = T
− ds 0
dp
ds
= 4[φ1′A1′ + φ 2′ A ′2 + φ11
′ n1′ (n1′ ) T + φ12
′ n1′ (n ′2 ) T (6.28)
de
+ φ 21
′ n ′2 (n1′ ) T + φ 22
′ n ′2 (n ′2 ) T ]
ds
= − I3 n3 .
dp
We seek the relation between s1 and e1, which will be obtained twice: once by
enforcing the incompressibility constraint a priori, and the second by enforcing the
constraint a posteriori.
a priori: Assume for the sake of brevity that e2 = e3. I3 = 1 implies that
c2 = 1/ c1 . The strain-energy function now is w = α [c1 + 2c − 3]. The stress, s1, is
1
now found as
dw 1
s1 = 2 = 2α 1 − 3/2 . (6.30)
dc1 c1
p
w ′ = α [ I1 − 3] − [ I − 1]. (6.31)
2 3
Now
dw ′
s1 = 2 = 2α − p/c1
dc1
dw ′
0 = s2 = 2 = 2α − p/c2
dc 2
(6.32)
dw ′
0 = s3 = 2 = 2α − p/c3
dc3
dw ′
0= = 0 → I 3 = 1.
dp
s1 = 2α − p / c1
c2
= 2α − p / c2
c1
c
= 2α 1 − 2
c1
1
= 2α 1 − 3/ 2 . (6.33)
c1
[
w ′ = α I1 I31/ 3 − 3 − ] p
[ I − 1]
2 3
(a)
dw ′ 1 1 I1 I3 I3
s1 = 2 = 2α 1 3 − 43 − p (b)
dc1 I
3 3 I 3 c1 c1
(6.34)
dw ′ 1 1 I1 I3 I3
0 = s2 = 2 = 2α 1 3 − 43 − p (c)
dc2 I
3 3 I 3 c 2 c 2
dw ′ 1 1 I1 I3 I3
0 = s3 = 2 = 2α 1 3 − 43 − p (d)
dc3 I3 3 I3 c3 c3
dw ′
= 0 → I3 = 1. (6.34e)
dp
2α c2 − c1 p
= , (6.35)
3 c2 c2
1
s1 = 2α 1 − 3/ 2 , (6.36)
c1
as in the a priori case and in the first a posteriori case. Now, the Lagrange multiplier
p can be interpreted as the pressure referred to current coordinates.
6.3.2 NEAR-INCOMPRESSIBILITY
As will be seen in Chapter 18, the augmented strain-energy function
1 p2
w ′′ = w( I1′, I2′ ) − p[ I3 − 1] − (6.37)
2 2κ
serves to enforce the constraint
[
p = −κ I3 − 1 . ] (6.38)
Here, k is the bulk modulus, and it is assumed to be quite large compared to,
for example, the small strain-shear modulus. The tangent-modulus tensor is now
ds ds
de dp
TEN 22 D *( ) =
− ds
T
1
. (6.39)
dp κ
S˙ = JF −1 DDF − T
(6.41)
= JF DF E˙ F −1F − T .
−1 −T
s˙ = JI ⊗ F −1VEC( DF − T E˙ F −1F − T )
S˙ = Do E˙ , (6.43)
in which
Suppose instead that the Jaumann stress flux is used and that
∆
T = DD. (6.45)
Now
[ ]
= JF − T DF − T E˙ F −1 + Ttr(F − T E˙ F −1 ) − (L + W)T − T (LT − W) F −1. (6.46)
For this flux, there does not appear to be any way that Ṡ can be written in the
form of Equation 6.42, i.e., is determined by Ė . To see this, consider
1 1
VEC(D) = VEC(L + LT ) = (I + U 9 )VEC(L). (6.48)
2 2
and we see that if the Jaumann stress flux is used, Ṡ is determined by Ė and the
spin W. Recall that the spin does not vanish under rigid-body rotation.
6.5 EXERCISES
1. In classical linear elasticity, introduce the isotropic stress and isotropic
linear strain as
s = tr( S) e = tr( EL ),
1 1
sd = s − si ed = e − ei.
3 3
Verify that
iTsd = 0 iTed = 0
sd = 2 µed
s = (2 µ + 3λ )e.
1 λ
e= t− (i T t )i, t = VEC(T )
2 µ (2 µ + 3λ )
3. In classical linear elasticity, under uniaxial stress, the elastic modulus E
and Poisson’s ratio ν are defined by
σ 11 ε 22 ε σ 11 ≠ 0
E= ν=− = − 33 ,
ε11 ε11 ε11
σ ij = 0 ij ≠ 11 .
Prove that
1 1 λ λ E
= 1− ν=− µ= .
E 2 µ (2 µ + 3λ )
2( µ + λ ) 2(1 + ν )
nd
6. In undeformed coordinates, the 2 Piola-Kirchhoff stress for an incom-
pressible, hyperelastic material is given by
∂w ′
s= = 2ϕ1′n1′ + 2ϕ 2′ n′2 − pI3n3 .
∂e
Thermal and
7 Thermomechanical
Response
7.1 BALANCE OF ENERGY AND PRODUCTION
OF ENTROPY
7.1.1 BALANCE OF ENERGY
The total energy increase in a body, including internal energy and kinetic energy, is
equal to the corresponding work done on the body and the heat added to the body.
In rate form,
K˙ + Ξ˙ = W˙ + Q˙ , (7.1)
in which:
Ξ is the internal energy with density ξ
Ξ˙ =
∫ ρξ˙ dV; (7.2a)
W˙ =
∫ u˙ τ dS,
T
(7.2b)
Q̇ is the rate of heat input, with heat production h and heat flux q, satisfying
Q˙ =
∫ ρhdV − ∫ n q dS, and
T
(7.2c)
du˙
K˙ =
∫ ρ u˙ T
dt
dV . (7.2d)
It has been tacitly assumed that all work is done on S, and that body forces do
no work.
107
du˙
∫ ρξ˙ + u˙ ρ dt − ∇ T − tr(T D) − ρh + ∇ qdV = 0.
T T T
(7.3)
The inner bracketed term inside the integrand vanishes by virtue of the balance
of linear momentum. The relation holds for arbitrary volumes, from which the local
form of balance of energy, referred to undeformed coordinates, is obtained as
∫ n qdS = ∫ q J F
T T −T
n 0 dS0
=
∫ q n dS
T
0 0 0 q 0 = J F −1q. (7.5)
∫ [ρ ξ˙ − tr(SE)˙ − ρ h + ∇ q ] dV
0 0
T
0 0 0 = 0, (7.6a)
nTq
∫ ∫ ∫
h
H˙ = ρη˙ dV ≥ dV − dS, (7.7a)
T T
in which H is the total entropy, η is the specific entropy per unit mass, and T is the
absolute temperature. This relation provides a “framework” for describing the irre-
versible nature of dissipative processes, such as heat flow and plastic deformation.
We apply the divergence theorem to the surface integral and obtain the local form
of the entropy production inequality:
ρ 0 Tη˙ ≥ h − ∇ T0 q 0 + q T0 ∇ 0 T/ T. (7.7c)
Q˙ = TH˙ . (7.8)
(We shall consider several irreversible effects, such as plasticity, viscosity, and heat
conduction.) In undeformed coordinates, the balance of energy for reversible pro-
cesses can be written as
from which
In solid continua, the stress is often more difficult to measure than the strain.
Accordingly, for solids, the Helmholtz Free Energy (density) f is introduced using
ρ 0 f = ρ 0ξ − ρ 0 Tη, (7.11a)
furnishing
∂η
ce = T , (7.14)
∂T
∂η ∂T
−ρ = . (7.16)
∂E T ∂T E˙
∂ξ ∂ξ ˙
ρξ˙ = tr ρ E˙ + ρ η
∂E η ∂η E
∂ξ ∂ξ ∂η ˙ ∂ξ ∂η
= tr ρ +ρ E + ρ ˙
T. (7.17)
∂E η ∂η E ∂E T ∂η E ∂T E
∂ξ ∂ξ
T= T= , (7.18a)
∂E η ∂η E
thus
∂ξ ∂ξ ∂η ˙ ∂ξ ∂η
ρξ˙ = tr ρ +ρ E + ρ T˙
∂E η ∂η E ∂E T ∂η E ∂T E
∂T ˙ ∂η ˙
= tr T − T E + ρT T. (7.18b)
∂T E ∂T E
∂T ˙
ρξ˙ = tr T − T ˙
E + ρce T. (7.19)
∂T
From Equation 7.13, upon approximating T as T0, T0 ∂∂TT = −αλT0 I. From Fou-
rier’s Law, q = −k∇T. Thus, the thermal-field equation now can be written as
˙ ) + ρc T˙ .
k∇2 T = αλT0tr(E (7.20)
e
The balance of linear momentum, together with the stress-strain and strain-
displacement relations of linear isotropic thermoelasticity, imply that
∂ 1 ∂u ∂u ∂u ∂u
2 µ i + j + λ k − α (T − T0 )δ ij = ρ 2i , (7.21)
∂x j j
2 ∂ x ∂x i ∂
kx ∂t
∂u
µ∇ 2 u + (λ + µ )∇tr( E) − αλ∇T = ρ . (7.22)
∂t 2
The thermal-field equation depends on the mechanical field through the term
αλT0 tr( E˙ ). Consequently, if E is static, there is no coupling. Similarly, the mechan-
ical field depends on the thermal field through αλ∇T, which often is quite small in,
for example, metals, if the assumption of reversibility is a reasonable approximation.
We next derive the entropy. Since ce = T ∂∂Τη is constant, we conclude that it
E
has the form
Now consider f, for which the fundamental relation in Equation 7.11b implies
∂f ∂f
= −η ρ = T. (7.25)
∂T E ∂E T
*
in which f (E), remains to be determined. Integrating the stress,
λ 2
ρf = µ tr( E 2 ) + tr (E) − αλ tr( E)(T − T0 ) + ρf ** (T), (7.27)
2
**
in which f (T) also remains to be determined. However, reconciling the two forms
furnishes (taking f0 = 0)
λ 2
ρf = µ tr(E2 ) + tr (E) − αλ tr(E)T − ρce [T ln(T/T0 ) − 1]. (7.28)
2
−∇ T kT ∇T + ρce T˙ = 0. (7.29)
∫ δ Tn qdS = ∫
S
T
SII
δ Tn T q 0 dS +
∫
SIII
δ Tn T q 0 dS −
∫
SIII
δ Tn T h(T − T0 )dS. (7.31)
T − T0 ~ N TT ( x )θ (t ) δ T ~ N TT ( x )δ θ (t ), (7.32)
K T θ (t ) + M T θ˙ (t ) = fT , (7.34)
in which
K T1 =
∫ B (x)k B (x)dV
T T
T
T
Conductance Matrix
K T2 =
∫SIII
N T ( x )n T hN TT ( x )dS Surface Conductance Matrix
MT =
∫ N (x)ρc N (x)dV
T e
T
T
Thermal Mass Matrix; Capacitance
Matrix
∫ ∫
Consistent Thermal Force;
fT = N T ( x )n T q 0 dS + N T ( x )n T q 0 dS
SII SIII Consistent Heat Flux
Following the same steps used for conductive heat transfer furnishes the varia-
tional principle
S
T
(7.37)
S
T
(7.38)
u( x ) = N T ( x )γ (t ), (7.39)
It follows that
Kγ (t ) + M˙˙
γ (t ) − Ω T θ(t ) = f . (7.41)
K=
∫ B (x)DB(x)dV
T
Stiffness Matrix
M=
∫ N(x)ρN (x)dV
T
Mass Matrix
(7.42)
∫
Ω = αλb ( x )N T ( x )dV Thermoelastic Matrix
T
f=
∫ N(x)τdS Consistent Force Vector .
For the thermal field, assuming that the heat flux q is specified as q0 on the
surface, variational methods, together with the interpolation models, furnish the
equation
∫ N (x)n q dS.
1 1 1
K T θ(t ) + M T θ˙ (t ) + Ωγ˙ (t ) = f , fT = T
(7.43)
T0 T0 T0 T T 0
The combined equations for a thermoelastic medium are now written in state
(first-order) form as
γ˙ (t ) γ˙ (t ) f (t )
d
W1 γ (t ) + W2 γ (t ) = 0
dt
θ(t ) θ(t ) T10 fT (t )
(7.44)
M 0 0 0 K −Ω T
W1 = 0 K 0 , W2 = − K 0 0 .
1
1
0 0 MT Ω 0 MT
T0 T0
7.4 EXERCISES
1. Express the thermal equilibrium equation in:
(a) cylindrical coordinates
(b) spherical coordinates
2. Derive the specific heat at constant stress, rather than at constant strain.
3. Write down the coupled thermal and elastic equations for a one-dimensional
member.
117
in terms of their nodal values, which now become the unknowns in the
finite-element model.
3. The strain-displacement relation and its thermal analog are applied to the
approximations for u and T to furnish approximations for the (Lagrangian)
strain and the thermal gradient.
4. The stress-strain relation and its thermal analog (Fourier’s Law) are
applied to obtain approximations to stress S and heat flux q in terms of
the nodal values of u and T.
5. Equilibrium principles in variational form are applied using the various approx-
imations within each element, leading to element equilibrium equations.
6. The element equilibrium equations are assembled to provide a global
equilibrium equation.
7. Prescribed kinematic and temperature conditions on the boundaries (con-
straints) are applied to the global equilibrium equations, thereby reducing
the number of degrees of freedom and eliminating “rigid-body” modes.
8. The resulting global equilibrium equations are then solved using computer
algorithms.
In problems without severe stress concentrations, much of the mesh data can be
developed conveniently using automatic-mesh generation. With the input file devel-
oped, the analysis processor is activated and “raw” output files are generated. The
postprocessor module typically contains (interfaces to) graphical utilities, thus facil-
itating display of output in the form chosen by the analyst, for example, contours of
the Von Mises stress. Two problems arise at this stage: validation and interpretation.
The analyst can use benchmark solutions, special cases, or experimental data to
validate the analysis. With validation, the analyst gains confidence in, for example,
the mesh. He or she still may face problems of interpretation, particularly if the
output is voluminous. Fortunately, current graphical-display systems make interpre-
tation easier and more reliable, such as by displaying high stress regions in vivid
colors. Postprocessors often allow the analyst to “zoom in” on regions of high
interest, for example, where rubber is highly confined. More recent methods based
on virtual-reality technology enable the analyst to fly through and otherwise become
immersed in the model.
The goal of mesh design is to select the number and location of finite-element
nodes and element types so that the associated analyses are sufficiently accurate.
Several methods include automatic-mesh generation with adaptive capabilities,
which serve to produce and iteratively refine the mesh based on a user-selected error
tolerance. Even so, satisfactory meshes are not necessarily obtained, so that model
editing by the analyst may be necessary. Several practical rules are as follows:
1. Nodes should be located where concentrated loads and heat fluxes are
applied.
2. Nodes should be located where displacements and temperatures are con-
strained or prescribed in a concentrated manner, for example, where “pins”
prevent movement.
3. Nodes should be located where concentrated springs and masses and their
thermal analogs are present.
4. Nodes should be located along lines and surface patches, over which
pressures, shear stresses, compliant foundations, distributed heat fluxes,
and surface convection are applied.
5. Nodes should be located at boundary points where the applied tractions
and heat fluxes experience discontinuities.
6. Nodes should be located along lines of symmetry.
7. Nodes should be located along interfaces between different materials or
components.
8. Element-aspect ratios (ratio of largest to smallest element dimensions)
should be no greater than, for example, five.
9. Symmetric configurations should have symmetric meshes.
10. The density of elements should be greater in domains with higher gradi-
ents.
11. Interior angles in elements should not be excessively acute or obtuse, for
example, less than 45° or greater than 135°.
12. Element-density variations should be gradual rather than abrupt.
13. Meshes should be uniform in subdomains with low gradients.
14. Element orientations should be staggered to prevent “bias.”
Modeling error ensues from inaccuracies in such input data as the material
properties, boundary conditions, and initial values. In addition, there often are
compromises in the mesh, for example, modeling sharp corners as rounded.
Numerical error is primarily due to truncation and round-off. As a practical
matter, error in a finite-element simulation is often assessed by comparing
solutions from two meshes, the second of which is a refinement of the first.
The governing equation for the displacements in rods (also bars, tendons, and
shafts) is
∂2u ∂2u
EA = ρA , (9.1)
∂x 2 ∂t 2
in which u(x, t) denotes the radial displacement, E, Α and ρ are constants, x is the
spatial coordinate, and t denotes time. Since the displacement is governed by a
second-order differential equation, in the spatial domain, it requires two (time-
dependent) constants of integration. Applied to an element, the two constants can
be supplied implicitly using two nodal displacements as functions of time. We now
approximate u(x, t) using its values at xe and xe+1, as shown in Figure 9.1.
The lowest-order interpolation model consistent with two integration constants
is linear, in the form
ue (t )
u( x, t ) = ϕ Tm1 ( x )Φm1γ m1 (t ), γ m1 (t ) = , ϕ Tm1 ( x ) = (1 x ). (9.2)
ue+1 (t )
We seek to identify Φm1 in terms of the nodal values of u. Letting ue = u(xe) and
ue+1 = u(xe+1), furnishes
121
ue ue+1
x
xe xe+1
wet wet +1
we we+1
x
xe xe+1
−1
1 xe 1 xe+1 − xe
Φm1 = = , le = xe+1 − xe . (9.4)
1 xe+1 le −1 1
9.1.1.2 Beams
∂4w ∂2u
EI + ρA 2 = 0, (9.5)
∂x 4
∂t
in which w(x, t) denotes the transverse displacement of the beam’s neutral axis, and
I is a constant. In the spatial domain, there are four constants of integration. In an
element, they can be supplied implicitly by the values of w and w′ = ∂w/∂x at each
of the two element nodes. Referring to Figure 9.2, we introduce the interpolation
model for w(x, t):
we
− we′
w( x, t ) = ϕ Τb1 ( x )Φb1γ b1 (t ), (
ϕ Τb1 ( x ) = 1 x x2 )
x3 , γ m1 (t ) = . (9.6)
we+1
− we′+1
Beam columns are of interest, among other reasons, in predicting buckling according
to the Euler criterion. The z–displacement w of the neutral axis is assumed to depend
only on x and the x–displacement. Also, u is modeled as
∂w( x )
u( x, z ) = u0 ( x ) − z , (9.8)
∂x
in which u0(x) represents the stretching of the neutral axis. It is necessary to know
u0(x), w(x) and ∂w∂(xx ) at xe and xe+1. The interpolation model is now
we
ue (t ) − we′
γ ml = , γ bl = ,
ue+1 (t ) we+1
− we′+1
and
−1
1 xe x e2 x e3
1 x e+1 − xe 0 −1 −2 x e −3 x e2
Φm1 = , Φ b1= .
le −1 1 1 x e+1 x e2+1 x e3+1
0 −1 −2 x e+1 −3 x e2+1
∂2 T ∂T
kA = ρAce . (9.10)
∂x 2
∂t
Xe+2,Ye+2
Xe+1,Ye+1
Xe,Ye X
middle surface
Te (t ) − T0
T( x, t ) − T0 = ϕ Tm1 ( x )Φm1θ1 (t ), θ1 (t ) = . (9.11)
Te+1 (t ) − T0
Now suppose that the displacements u(x, y, t) and v(x, y, t) are modeled on the
triangular plate element in Figure 9.3, using the values ue(t), ve(t), ue+1(t), ve+1(t), ue+2(t),
and ve+2(t). This element arises in plane stress and plane strain, and is called a
membrane plate element. A linear model suffices for each quantity because it provides
three coefficients to match three nodal values. The interpolation model now is
Τ
u( x, y, t ) ϕ m 2 0 T ΦmΤ2 0 T γ u (t )
= (9.12)
v( x, y, t ) 0 T ϕ Τm 2 0 T ΦmΤ2 γ v (t )
−1
ue (t ) ve (t ) 1 1 xe ye
γ u (t ) = ue+1 (t ) , γ v (t ) = ve+1 (t ) , ϕm2 = x , ΦmΤ 2 = 1 xe+1 ye+1 .
ue+2 (t ) ve+2 (t ) y 1 xe + 2 ye+2
∂w ∂w
u( x, y, z, t ) = − z , v( x, y, z, t ) = − z , (9.13)
∂x ∂y
w( x, y, t ) = ϕ Tb 2 ( x, y)Φb 2 γ b 2 (t ) (9.14)
ϕ Tb 2 ( x, y) = 1 y3
1 2
x y x2 xy y2 x3 ( x y + y2 x)
2
γ Tb 2 (t ) = we
( )
− ∂∂w
x e
− ∂∂w
y
e
we +1 ( )
− ∂∂w
x e +1
− ∂∂w
y
e +1
w e+2 ( )
− ∂∂w
x e+2
− ∂∂w
y
e+2
It follows that
− z ∂ϕΤb 2
u(x, y, z, t) ∂x
Τ
v(x, y, z, t) = − z ∂ϕ b 2 Φ γ ( t ). (9.15)
∂y b2 b2
w(x, y, z, t) ϕ Τb 2
Finally, for a plate experiencing both stretching and bending, the displacements are
assumed to satisfy
∂w ∂w
u( x, y, z, t ) = u0 ( x, y, z, t ) − z , v( x, y, z, t ) = v0 ( x, y, z, t ) − z (9.16)
∂x ∂y
and w is a function only of x, y, and t(not z). Here, z = 0 at the middle surface, while
u0 and v0 represent the in-plane displacements. Using the nodal values of u0, v0, and
w0, a combined interpolation model is obtained as
− z ∂ϕΤb 2
u( x, y, z, t ) u0 ( x, y, t ) ∂x
Τ
v( x, y, z, t ) = v ( x, y, t ) + − z ∂ϕb 2 Φ γ (t )
0 ∂y b2 b2
w( x, y, z, t ) w0 ( x, y, t ) ϕ Τb 2
ϕ Τ ∂ϕΤ
m2 0T − z ∂xb 2 Φm 2 0 0 γ u (t )
∂ϕΤb 2
= 0T ϕ Τm 2 − z ∂y 0 Φm 2 0 γ v (t ) . (9.17)
T
0 0T ϕ b 2 0
Τ
0 Φb 2 γ w (t )
In the two-dimensional, triangular element illustrated in Figure 9.3, the linear inter-
polation model for the temperature is
e+2
e+1
r
e
θ
u(r, z, t ) ϕ a1
T
0 T ΦaT1 0 T γ ua1 (t )
= . (9.19)
w(r, z, t ) 0 T ϕ Ta1 0 T ΦaT1 γ wa1 (t )
−1
1 re ze ue we
ϕ Ta1 = (1 r z ), Φa1 = 1 re+1 ze+1 , γ ua1 = ue+1 , γ wa1 = we+1
1 re+2 ze+2 ue+2 we + 2
Now suppose that there are nodes on the axis, and note that the radial displace-
ments are constrained to vanish on the axis. For reasons shown later, it is necessary
to enforce the symmetry constraints a priori in the formulation of the displacement
model. In particular, suppose that node e is on the axis, with nodes e + 1 and e + 2
defined counterclockwise at the other vertices. The linear interpolation model is now
u(r, z, t ) ϕ a 2
T
0 T ΦaT2 0 T γ ua 2 (t )
= (9.20)
w(r, z, t ) 0 T ϕ Ta 2 0 T ΦaT2 γ wa 2 (t )
−1
re+1 ze+1 − ze
ϕ T
a2 = (r z − ze ), Φa 2 = .
re+2 ze+2 − ze
A similar formulation can be used if two nodes are on the axis of symmetry so
that the u displacement in the element is modeled using only one nodal displacement,
with a coefficient vanishing at each of the nodes on the axis of revolution.
ϕ 3TT = (1 x y z)
−1
1 xe ye ze
1 xe+1 ye+1 ze+1
Φ3T =
1 xe + 2 ye+2 ze+2
1 xe + 3 ye+3 ze+3
z
e+3
0
y
e
e+2
x e+1
u( x, y, z, t ) ϕ 3 0T 0T Φ3 0 0 γ u (t )
T
T
v( x, y, z, t ) = 0 ϕ 3T 0T 0 Φ3 0 γ v (t ) (9.22)
w( x, y, z, t ) 0T 0T ϕ 3T 0 0 Φ3 γ w (t )
ue (t ) ve ( t ) we (t )
ue+1 (t ) ve+1 (t ) we+1 (t )
γ u (t ) = , γ v (t ) = , γ w (t ) =
ue+2 (t ) ve+2 (t ) we+2 (t )
ue+3 (t ) ve+3 (t ) we+3 (t )
dϕ Tm1
βTm1 = = (0 1)
dx
∂w
ε ( x , z, t ) = − z , (9.24)
∂x
dϕ Tb1
βTb1 = = (0 1 2x 3x 2 )
dx
Φm1 0 γ m1 (t )
(
β Tmb1 = β Tm1 )
− zβ Tb1
0 Φmb1 γ b1 (t )
Exx
E( x, y) =
Exy
=
∂u
∂x (
1 ∂u + ∂v
2 ∂y ∂x ).
( )
(9.27)
Exy Eyy 12 ∂u + ∂v ∂v
∂y ∂x ∂y
We will see later the two important cases of plane stress and plane strain. In the
latter case, Ezz vanishes and szz is not needed to achieve a solution. In the former
case, szz vanishes and Ezz is not needed for solution.
In traditional finite-element notation, we obtain [cf. (Zienkiewicz and Taylor, 1989)]
Exx
γ u2
ˆ
ε ′ = Eyy = βTm 2 Φ m2 (9.28)
γ v2
E
xy
∂ϕΤm 2
∂x 0Τ
∂ϕΤm 2 Φ 0
βΤm 2 = 0Τ , ˆ = m2
Φ
∂y m2
1 ∂ϕΤ 0 Φm 2
1 ∂ϕΤm 2
∂ym 2
2 2 ∂x
The prime in e′ is introduced temporarily to call attention to the fact that it does
not equal VEC(EL). Hereafter, the prime will not be displayed.
For a plate with bending stresses only,
∂2w
∂x 2
2
e ′( x, y, z, t ) = − z ∂ w2 , (9.29)
∂y
∂2w
∂x∂y
from which
∂2ϕTb 2
∂x 2
∂2ϕT
e ′( x, y, z, t ) = − zβ Tb 2 ( x )Φb 2 γ b 2 (t ), βb2 = 2
b2
. (9.30)
∂y
∂2ϕTb 2
∂x∂y
For a plate experiencing both membrane and bending stresses, the relations can
be combined to furnish
Φm 2 0 γ m 2 ( t )
(
βTmb 2 = βTm 2 )
− zβTb 2 , Φmb 2 = , γ mb 2 ( t ) =
0 Φb 2 γ b2 (t )
∂u
∂r
u
r Φa1 0 γ ua1 (t )
e(r, z, t ) = = β Ta1 (9.32)
∂w 0 Φa1 γ wa1 (t )
∂z
1
2 ( ∂∂uz + ∂∂wr )
0 1 0 0 0 0
z
12 1 r 0 0 0
β Ta1 =
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0 1 0
2 2
in which the prime is no longer displayed. If element e is now located on the axis
of revolution, we obtain
Φa 2 0 γ ua 2 (t )
e(r, z, t ) = baT2 (9.33)
0 Φa1 γ wa1 (t )
1 0 0 0 0
z − ze
1 r 0 0 0
β Ta 2 =
0 0 0 0 1
0 1 0 1 0
2 2
0 1 0
∇T = β TT 2 ΦT 2 θ 2 , β TT2 = . (9.34)
0 0 1
∂u
Exx ∂x
∂v
Eyy ∂y
∂w
Φ3 0 0 γ u 3
Ezz ∂z
e= = = β 3T 0 Φ3 0 γ v 3
( )
(9.35)
Exy 12 ∂u + ∂v
∂y ∂x
0 Φ3 γ w 3
( ) 0
Eyz 12 ∂v + ∂w
∂z ∂y
E 1
zx 2 ( ∂∂wx + ∂∂uz )
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
∇T = β 3TT Φ 3T θ 3 , β 3TT = 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 .
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
(9.36)
in which I is the identity tensor. The Lame’s coefficients are denoted by λ and µ,
and are given in terms of the familiar elastic modulus E and Poisson ratio ν as
E νE
µ= , λ= . (9.38)
2(1 + ν ) (1 − 2ν )(1 + ν )
Letting s = VEC(S) and e = VEC(EL), the stress-strain relations are written using
Kronecker product operators as
The cases of a rod and a beam are recovered by setting γ m1 or γ b1 equal to zero
vectors, respectively.
can be called the tangent-modulus matrix under plane stress (note that, unlike the
previous definition, it is not based on the VEC operator and is not a tensor).
Under plane strain, Exz = Eyz = Ezz = 0. Now, Szz ≠ 0. However, this stress is not
of great interest since its value is not needed for attaining a solution. The quantity
may be of interest later, e.g., to check whether yield conditions in plasticity are met,
but it can be obtained at that point by a postprocessing procedure. The equations of
plane strain are
Sxx E xx
Syy = Dm22 E yy , (9.45)
S E
xy xy
1 ν* 0
E * E ν
Dm22 = ν * 1 0 , E * = , ν* =
1 − ν *2 1 − ν 2
1 − ν
0 0 1 + ν *
and Dm22 is the tangent-modulus tensor in plane strain.
However, in the finite-element method, we will see that we are interested in a
slightly different quantity from Dm21 or Dm22 , as follows. The Principle of Virtual
Work uses the strain-energy density given by 12 Sij Eij. However, elementary manip-
ulation serves to prove that
1 0 0 Exx
1 1
Sij Eij = ( Sxx Syy Szz )0 1 0 Eyy . (9.46)
2 2
0 0 2 Exy
1 ν 0
E
′
Dm21 = ν 1 0 (9.47)
1−ν2
0 0 2(1 + ν )
and similarly for plane strain. (This peculiarity is an artifact of traditional finite-
element notation and does not appear if VEC notation is used.) The stresses are now
given in terms of nodal displacements by
Thin plates experiencing bending only are assumed to be in a state of plane stress.
The tangent-modulus matrix is given in Equation 9.47, and an approximation for
the strain is obtained as
Sxx Exx
ˆ γ (t ).
Syy = Dm 21 Eyy − z Dm 21β Tb 2 Φ (9.49)
b2 b2
S E
xy xy
Sxx Exx
ˆ γ (t ).
Syy = Dm 21 Eyy = Dm 21βTmb 2 ( x, y, z )Φ (9.50)
mb 2 mb 2
S E
xy xy
Srr Err
Sθθ Eθθ Φˆ 0 γ ua1 (t )
= Da = Daβ a1
T a1
, (9.51)
Szz Ezz 0 ˆ γ wa1 (t )
Φ
a1
rz
S rz
E
−1
1 −ν −ν 0
−ν 1 −ν 0
Da = E
−ν −ν 1 0
0 0 0 1 + ν
For use in the Principle of Virtual Work, Da is modified to furnish Da′ , given by
−1
1 0 0 0 1 −ν −ν 0 1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 −ν 1 −ν 0 0 1 0 0
Da′ = E . (9.52)
0 0 1 0 −ν −ν 1 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 + ν 0 0 0 2
Sxx Exx
Syy Eyy
Φ3 0 0 γ u 3
Szz Ezz
= D3 = D3β3 0 Φ3 0 γ v 3
T
(9.53)
Sxy Exy
0
0 Φ3 γ w 3
Syz Eyz
S E
zx zx
−1
1 −ν −ν 0 0 0
−ν 1 −ν 0 0 0
−ν −ν 1 0 0 0
D3 = E
0 0 0 1+ν 0 0
0 0 0 0 1+ν 0
0 1 + ν
0 0 0 0
−1
1 −ν −ν 0 0 0
−ν 1 −ν 0 0 0
−ν −ν 1 0 0 0
D3′ = EJ 6 J6 (9.54)
0 0 0 1+ν 0 0
0 0 0 0 1+ν 0
0 1 + ν
0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
J6 =
0 0 0 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 0
0 2
0 0 0 0
β ΤT 1ΦT 1θ1 1− D
q = − k β ΤT 2 ΦT 2 θ 2 2−D (9.55)
Τ
β T 3 ΦT 3θ 3 3 − D.
9.4 EXERCISES
1. Modify the rod element to replace the physical coordinate x with the
“natural coordinate” ξ in which
Exx 1 −ν 0 Sxx
1
Eyy = −ν 1 0 Syy
E
E 0 1 + ν Sxy
xy 0
Exx 1 −ν * 0 Sxx
1
Eyy = * −ν * 1 0 Syy ,
E
E 0 1 + ν * Sxy
xy 0
where
E* = E /(1 − ν 2 ), ν * = ν /(1 − ν ) .
8. If
Sxx E Exx
= D̂ .
Syy (1 + ν )(1 − 2ν ) Eyy
∫ δ E S dV + ∫ δu ρu˙˙ dV = ∫ δu τ dS.
ij ij i i i i
(10.1)
u( x, t ) = ϕ T ( x )Φ γ ( t ), E = β T ( x )Φ γ ( t ), S = DE, (10.2)
∫ δu τ dS = δ γ ∫
i i
T
− δγ T
∫
SIII
Φ T ϕ( x )Aϕ T ( x )ΦdSγ (t )
− δγ T
∫
SIV
Φ T ϕ( x )Bϕ T ( x )ΦdS˙˙
γ (t ). (10.3)
139
∫ δE S dV = δ γ Kγ (t),
ij ij
T
K=
∫ Φ β(x)D′β (x)Φ dV
T T
(10.4)
∫ δ ui ρ˙˙u i dV = δ γ M˙˙γ ( t ),
T
M=
∫ ρΦ ϕ(x)ϕ (x)Φ dV,
T T
in which K is called the stiffness matrix and M is called the mass matrix. Canceling
the arbitrary variation and bringing terms with unknowns to the left side furnishes
the equation as follows:
(K + K S )γ (t ) + (M + M S )˙˙
γ (t ) = f
f=
∫SII +SIII
Φ T ϕ( x )τ 0 dS
(10.5)
KS =
∫SIII
Φ ϕ( x )Aϕ ( x )ΦdS
T T
MS =
∫SIV
Φ T ϕ( x )Bϕ T ( x )ΦdS.
Consider a rod with modulus E, mass density ρ, area A, and length L. It is built in
at x = 0. At x = L, there is a concentrated mass m to which is attached a spring of
stiffness k, as illustrated in Figure 10.1. The stiffness and mass matrices, from the
domain, reduce to the scalar values K → EA/L, M → ρAL/3, MS → m, KS → k.
ρAL
The governing equation is ( EA L
+ k )γ + ( 3 + m)γ˙˙ = f .
E,A,L,ρ m k
z
y V0
M0 r m
x
E,I,A,L,ρ kT
FIGURE 10.2 Beam with translational and rotational inertial and compliant boundary conditions.
The shear force V0 and the moment M0 act at L. The interpolation model, incorpo-
rating the constraints w(0, t) = −w′ (0, t) = 0 a priori, is
−1
L2 L3 w( L, t )
w( x , t ) = ( x x )
2 3
. (10.6)
−2 L −3 L2 − w ′( L, t )
The stiffness and mass matrices, due to the domain, are readily shown to be
EI 12 6L 13 35
11
210 L
K= , M = ρAL . (10.7)
L3 6 L 4 L2 210
11
L 105 L
1 2
The stiffness and mass contributions from the boundary conditions are
k 0 m 0
KS = , MS = . (10.8)
mr 2
0 kT 0 2
w˙˙( L, t ) w( L, t ) V0
(M + M S ) + (K + K S ) = . (10.9)
−w˙˙ ′( L, t ) − w ′( L, t ) M0
∂T
k∇ 2 T = ρce . (10.10)
∂t
∂T
∫ δ∇ Tk∇TdV + ∫ δ Tρc
T
e
∂t ∫
dV = δ Tn T qdS. (10.11)
Now suppose that the interpolation models for temperature in the current element
furnish a relation of the form
KT and MT can be called the thermal stiffness (or conductance) matrix and thermal
mass (or capacitance) matrix, respectively.
Suppose that the boundary S has four zones: S = SI + SII + SIII + SIV . On SI, the
temperature is prescribed as T1, from which we conclude that δ T = 0. On SII, the
heat flux is prescribed as n q1. On SIII, the heat flux satisfies n q = n q1 − h1 (T −
T T T
now
M TS =
∫
SIV
ΦTT ϕ T h2 ϕ TT ΦT dS, K TS =
∫
SIII
ΦTT ϕ T h1ϕ TT ΦT dS
fT (t ) =
∫ Φ ϕ n q dS,
Ω
T
T T
T
1 Ω = SII + SIII + SIV
Pn Pn+2
e e+1
n n+1
P1(e) P1(e+1)
e e+1
P2 (e+1)
P2 (e) b. forces in local system
level) and local (element level) systems of notation. The global system of forces is
shown in (a), while the local system is shown in (b). At the center node,
1 −1 un − P2( e )
k (e) =
−1 1 un+1 P1( e )
(10.16)
1 −1 un+1 − P2( e+1)
k ( e+1) =
−1 1 un+2 P1( e+1)
and in this case, k = k = EA/L. These relations can be written as four separate
(e) (e+1)
equations:
k ( e ) un − k ( e )un+1 = − P2( e ) (i)
k (e) −k (e) 0 un − Pn
− k ( e ) k ( e ) + k ( e+1) − k ( e+1) un+1 = 0 (10.19)
0
− k ( e+1) k ( e+1) un+2 Pn+1
K(1)
K(2)
K(3)
K(4)
K(5)
(4) (5)
k22 +k11
K(N–2)
K(N–1)
K(N)
Now, the equations of the individual elements are written in the global system as
˜ ( e ) , K ( e+1) → K
K (e) → K ˜ ( e+1)
1 −1 0 0 0 0
(10.20)
˜ (e)
K = k ( e ) −1 1 0 , ˜ ( e+1)
K = k ( e+1) 0 1 −1 .
0 0 0 0 −1 1
(g)
The global stiffness matrix (the assembled stiffness matrix K of the two-element
member) is the direct sum of the element stiffness matrices: K ( g ) = K ˜ ( e+1) .
˜ (e) + K
Generally, K = ∑e K
(g) ˜ . In this notation, the strain energy in the two elements
( e )
1 ( e )Τ ˜ ( e ) ( e )
V( e ) = γ K γ
2
1 ( e )Τ ˜ ( e+1) ( e )
V( e+1) = γ K γ (10.21)
2
T
γ ( e ) = (un un+1 un+2 ).
were performed with perfect accuracy, the equation would pose no difficulty. How-
ever, in performing computations, errors arise. For example, Pn is computed as
P̂n = Pn + ε n and Pˆn+1 = Pn+1 + ε n+1 , Pn+1 = Pn = P . Computationally, there is now an
unbalanced force, ε n+1 − ε n. In the absence of mass, this, in principle, implies infinite
accelerations. In the finite-element method, the problem of rigid-body motion can
be detected if the output exhibits large deformation.
The problem is easily suppressed using constraints. In particular, symmetry
implies that un+1 = 0. Recalling Equation 10.19, we now have
1 −1 0 un − Pn
EA
−1 2 −1 0 = R , (10.22)
L
0 −1 1 un+2 Pn+1
in which R is a reaction force that arises to enforce physical symmetry in the presence
of numerically generated asymmetry. The equation corresponding to the second
equation is useless in predicting the unknowns un and un+2 since it introduces the
new unknown R. The first and third equations are now rewritten as
EA 1 0 un − P + ε n
= , (10.23)
L 0 1 un+1 P + ε n+1
with the solution
EA EA
un = [ − P + ε n ] , un+2 = [ P + ε n+1 ] . (10.24)
L L
To preserve symmetry, it is necessary for un + un+1 = 0. However, the sum is
computed as
ε n + ε n+1
un + un+1 = . (10.25)
( ELA )
The reaction force is given by R = −[εn + εn+1], and, in this case, it can be considered
as a measure of computational error.
Note that Equation 10.23 can be obtained from Equation 10.22 by simply “striking
out” the second row of the matrices and vectors and the second column of the matrix.
The same assembly arguments apply to the inertial forces as to the elastic forces.
Omitting the details, the kinetic energies T of the two elements are
1 ˙ ( e )T ˜ ( e ) ˜ ( e+1) ˙ ( e )
T= γ [M + M ]γ (10.26)
2
1 1/ 2
˜ ( e ) = m( e )
M
1/ 2 1
(e)
m( e ) = ρAl
1
3
T
γ˙ ( e ) = {u˙e u˙e+1 u˙e+2}
10.3.2 BEAMS
A similar argument applies for beams. The potential energy and stiffness matrix of
th
the e element can be written as
1 T (e)
V (e) = γ K γb
2 b
K11(e) (e)
K12
K (e)
= (10.27)
( e )T (e)
K 21 K 22
=V +
(g) (e)
In a two-element beam model analogous to the previous rod model, V
(e+1)
V , implying that
K 11
(e)
K 12 (e)
0
( e )T ( e +1)
( e +1)
K (g)
= K 21 K + K 11
(e)
22 K12 . (10.28)
0 K (21e+1)T K
( e +1)
22
= ∑e K .
(g) (e)
Generally, in a global coordinate system, K
e+3 e+2
e+3 e+2
6 4
5
e e+1
1 2 3
e,4 e,3 e+1,3
e+1,4
e e+1
In the local systems, the force on the center node induces displacements according to
Globally,
[ ] [
f5 = k3(,e1)u1 + k3(,e2) + k4( e,1+1) u2 + k4( e,2+1)u3 + k4( e,3+1) + k1(,e2+2 ) u4 ]
[
+ k3(,e3) + k4( e,4+1) + k1(,e1+2 ) + k2( e,2+3) ]u + [k5
(e)
3,4 ]
+ k2( e,1+3) u6
[ ]
+ k2( e,4+3)u7 + k1(,e4+2 ) + k2( e,3+3) u8 + k1(,e3+2 )u9 (10.31)
Taking advantage of the symmetry of the stiffness matrix, this implies that the
fifth row of the stiffness matrix is
{
κ 5T = k3(,e1) [k (e)
3,2 + k4( e,1+1) ] k4( e,2+1) [k ( e +1)
4 ,3 + k1(,e2+2 ) ]
[k
(e)
3,3 ]
+ k4( e,4+1) + k1(,e1+2 ) + k2( e,2+3) K symmetry K } (10.32)
Finally, for later use, we consider damping, which generates a stress proportional
to the strain rate. In linear problems, it leads to a vector-matrix equation of the form
γ + Dγ˙ + Kγ = f (t ).
M˙˙ (10.33)
At the element level, the counterpart of the kinetic energy and the strain energy
(e)
is the Rayleigh Damping Function, D , given by D ( e ) = 12 γ˙ ( e ) T D ( e ) γ˙ ( e ) , and the con-
th
sistent damping force on the e element is
fd( e ) (t ) = ∂˙ D( e ) = D( e ) γ˙ ( e ) . (10.34)
∂γ
D( g ) = ∑ Dˆ
e
(e)
. (10.35)
It should be evident that the global stiffness, mass, and damping matrices have
the same bandwidth; the force on one given node depends on the displacements
(velocities and accelerations) of the nodes of the elements connected at the given
node, thus determining the bandwidth.
10.3 EXERCISES
∂Sij
= − bi .
∂X j
Without the body forces, the dynamic Principle of Virtual Work is derived as
∂ 2ui
∫ ∫
δ Eij Sij dV + δ ui ρ
∂t 2 ∫
dV = δ uiτ i dS.
d 6q
Q = 0, Q a constant.
dx 6
q(ξ ) = ϕ T (ξ )Φ γ .
3. Write down the assembled mass and stiffness matrices of the following
three-element configuration (using rod elements). The elastic modulus is
E, the mass density is ρ, and the cross-sectional area is A.
x
L L/2 L
of the elements.
K (3)
K (1) n
K (2)
u( x e , t )
u( x ) = {1 x}Φ .
u( xe+1, t )
For an element xe < x < xe+1, find the matrix Ke such that
u( xe , t ) fe
Ke = .
u( xe+1, t ) fe+1
6. Redo this derivation for Ke in the previous exercise, using the natural
coordinate ξ, whereby ξ = ax + b, in which a and b are such that −1 =
axe + b, +1 = axe+1 + b.
7. Next, regard the nodal-displacement vector as a function of t. Find the
matrix Me such that
••
u( x e , t ) u( xe , t ) fe
Me + K e = ,
u( xe+1, t ) u( xe+1, t ) fe+1
in which ρ is the mass density. Derive Me using both physical and natural
coordinates.
8. Show that, for the rod under gravity, a two-element model gives the exact
answer at x = 1, as well as a much better approximation to the exact dis-
placement distribution.
E g
A L
ρ
E1
A1 L1
ρ1
E2
A2 L2
ρ2
Solution Methods
11 for Linear Problems
11.1 NUMERICAL METHODS IN FEA
which L is a lower triangular, nonsingular matrix (zeroes in all entries above the
diagonal). We can introduce z = L γ and obtain z by solving Lz = f. Next, γ can be
T
l11 0 . . . 0 z1 f1
l21 l22 . . . . z 2 f2
l31 l32 l33 . . . z3 f3
= . (11.1)
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . 0 . .
l
n1 ln 2 . . . lnn zn fn
Assuming that the diagonal entries are not too small, this equation can be solved,
starting from the upper-left entry, using simple arithmetic: z1 = f1/l11, z2 = [ f2 − l21z1]/
l22, z3 = [ f3 − l31z1 − l32z2]/l33,… .
Next, the equation L γ = z can be solved using backward substitution. The
T
equation is expanded as
153
Starting from the lower-right entry, solution can be achieved using simple arith-
metic as γn = fn/lnn,
γ n−1 = [ fn−1 − ln−1,1γ n ]/ln−1,n−1 , γ n−2 = [ fn−2 − ln−2,nγ n − ln−2,n−1γ n−1 ]/ln−2,n−2 , K .
K j −1 k j L j −1 0 LTj −1 λj
Kj = T = , (11.3)
k j k jj λ Tj l jj 0 T l jj
k j = L j −1λ j
(11.4)
l jj = k jj − λ Tj λ j
stiffness matrix.
As an example, consider
1 1
2
1
3
A 3 = 12 1
3
1
4 . (11.5)
13 1
4
1
5
1 0 1 λ 2 1 1
2
= , (11.6)
λ 2 l22 0 l22 12 3
1
1 0
L2 = . (11.7)
1/2 1/ 12
1 1
2
1
3
12 1
3
1
4 = L3L3
T
13 1
4
1
5
1 0 0 1 1
2 l31
= 12 1/ 12 0 0 1/ 12 l32
l31 l32 l33 0 0 l33
1 1
2 l31
= 12 1
3 l31 / 2 + l32 / 12 (11.8)
l31 l31 / 2 + l32 / 12 2
l31 + l32
2 2
+ l33
We conclude that l31 = 1/3, l32 = 1/ 12 , l33
2
= 1/5 − 1/9 − 1/12 = 1
180 .
K = LU. (11.9)
th
Now, the j block of the stiffness matrix admits the decomposition
K j −1 k1 j L j −1 0 U j −1 uj
Kj = T =
k2 j k jj λ Tj l jj 0 T u jj
L j −1U j −1 L j −1u j
= T (11.10)
λ j U j −1 λ Tj u j + u jj l jj
in which it is assumed that the ( j − 1) block has been decomposed in the previous
th
step. Now, uj is obtained by forward substitution using Lj−1uj = k1j, and λj can be
obtained by forward substitution using U Tj −1λ j = k 2 j . Finally, u jj l jj = k jj − λ Tj u j , for
which purpose ujj can be arbitrarily set to unity. An equation of the form Kx = f can
now be solved by forward substitution applied to Lz = f, followed by backward
substitution applied to Ux = z.
dy
= − λy, (11.11)
dt
in which λ is complex. If Re(λ) > 0, for the initial value y(0) = y0, y(t) = y0 exp(−λt),
then clearly y(t) → 0. The system is called asymptotically stable in this case.
We now consider whether numerical-integration schemes to integrate Equation
11.11 have stability properties corresponding to asymptotic stability. For this pur-
pose, we apply the trapezoidal rule, the properties of which will be discussed in a
subsequent section. Consider time steps of duration h, and suppose that the solution
th
has been calculated through the n time step, and we seek to compute the solution at
the (n + 1) time step. The trapezoidal rule is given by
st
dy yn+1 − yn λ
≈ , − λy ≈ − [ y + yn ]. (11.12)
dt h 2 n+1
Consequently,
1 − λh/2
yn+1 = y
1 + λh/2 n
n
1 − λh/2
= y0 (11.13)
1 + λh/2
Clearly, yn+1 → 0 if 11 −+ λλhh//22 < 1, and yn+1 → ∞ if 11 −+ λλhh//22 > 1, in which |·| implies
the magnitude. If the first inequality is satisfied, the numerical method is called A-stable
(see Dahlquist and Bjork, 1974). We next write λ = λr + iλi, and now A-stability
requires that
2
λih
+
2
1 − λr h
2
2
2
< 1. (11.14)
λih
+
2
1 + λr h
2
2
A-stability implies that λr > 0, which is precisely the condition for asymptotic
stability.
Consider the matrix-vector system arising in the finite-element method:
γ + Dγ˙ + Kγ = 0,
M˙˙ γ (0) = γ 0 , γ˙ (0) = γ˙ 0 , (11.15)
•
M 0 p D K p f
+ = . (11.17)
0 I γ − I 0 γ 0
1 1 1
M 0 h (p n+1 − p n ) D K 2 (p n+1 + p n )
+
= 2 (fn+1 + fn ) . (11.18)
0 I 1 ( γ n+1 − γ n ) − I 0 1 ( γ n+1 + γ n ) 0
h 2
From the equation in the lower row, pn+1 = 2h [γγn+1 − γn] − pn. Eliminating pn+1
in the upper row furnishes a formula underlying the classical Newmark method:
h h2
K D γ n+1 = rn+1 , K D = M + D + K
2 4
(11.19)
h2 h2
K yn + M + D p n +
h h h
rn+1 = M + D − (f + f )
2 4 2 2 4 n+1 n
and KD can be called the dynamic stiffness matrix. Equation 11.19 can be solved
by triangularization of KD, followed by forward and backward substitution.
dy
= f ( y). (11.20)
dx
We now use the Taylor series to express yn+1 and fn+1 in terms of yn and fn. Noting
that yn′ = fn and yn′′ = fn′, we obtain
2
For exact agreement through h , the coefficients must satisfy
α +β =0 α +γ +δ = 0 α /2 + γ = 0. (11.23)
yn+1 − yn 1
= [ f ( yn+1 ) + f ( yn )], (11.24)
h 2
It is a “one-step method” using only the values at the beginning of the current
time step.
2
It is second-order-accurate; it agrees exactly with the Taylor series through h .
Applied to dy/dt + λy = 0, with initial condition y(0) = y0, it is A-stable
whenever a system described by the equation is asymptotically stable.
f (ξ ) = α 0 + α 1ξ + α 2ξ 2 + α 3ξ 3 + α 4ξ 4 + α 5ξ 5 + L, (11.25)
from which
∫
2 2
f (ξ )dξ = 2α 1 + 0 + α + 0 + α 5 + 0 + L. (11.26)
−1 3 3 5
Assume that n integration (Gauss) points ξi and n weights are used as follows:
n n n n
∑ g(ξ )w = α ∑ w + α ∑ w α + L + α ∑ w ξ
1
∫ −1
g(ξ )dξ =
i =1
i i 1
i =1
i 2
i =1
i i 2n
i =1
i i
2 n −1
. (11.28)
n n n n n
∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑w ξ
2
wi = 1, wiξ = 0, wiξi2 = 2/3, K, wiξi2 n−2 = , 2 n −1
= 0.
i =1 i =1 i =1 i =1
2n − 1 i =1
i i
(11.29)
It is necessary to solve for n integration points, ξi, and n weights, wi. These are
universal quantities. To integrate a given function, g(ξ), exactly through ξ , it is
2n−i
From (ii) and (iv), w1ξ1[ξ12 − ξ22 ] = 0, leading to ξ2 = −ξ1. From (i) and (iii), it
follows that −ξ2 = ξ1 = 1/ 3. The normalization w1 = 1 implies that w2 = 1.
γ + Kγ = 0,
M˙˙ γ (0) = γ 0 , γ˙ (0) = γ˙ 0 . (11.31)
[K + λ2 M]γˆ = 0. (11.32)
sponding eigenvector vector, γj, can also be computed (see Sample Problem 2).
For the sake of generality, suppose that λj and γj are complex. Let γ Hj denote the
complex conjugate (Hermitian) transpose of γj. Now, λ2j satisfies
γ Hj Kγ j
λ2j = − .
γ Hj Mγ j
Since M and K are real and positive-definite, it follows that λj is pure imaginary:
λj = iωj. Without loss of generality, we can take γj to be real and orthonormal.
Sample Problem 1
As an example, consider
1 0 k11 k12
M= K= . (11.33)
0 1 k12 k22
λ2+,− = [
1
2
−[k11 + k22 ] ± [k11 + k22 ]2 − 4[k11k22 + k122 ] ]
= [−[k ]
1
11 + k22 ] ± [k11 − k22 ]2 − 4 k122 (11.35)
2
so that both λ2+ and λ2− are negative (since k11 and k22 are positive).
th th
We now consider eigenvectors. The eigenvalue equations for the i and j
eigenvectors are written as
It is easily seen that the eigenvectors have arbitrary magnitudes, and for conve-
nience, we assume that they have unit magnitude γ Tj γ j = 1. Simple manipulation
furnishes that
γ Tk Kγ j − γ Tj Kγ k − [ω 2j γ Tk Mγ j − ω k2 γ Tj Mγ k ] = 0. (11.37)
γ Tk Kγ j − γ Tj Kγ k = 0, [ω 2j γ Tk Mγ j − ω k2 γ Tj Mγ k ] = (ω 2j − ω k2 )γ Tk Mγ j = 0.
(11.38)
Assuming for convenience that the eigenvalues are all distinct, it follows that
γ Tj Mγ k = 0, γ Tj Kγ k = 0, j ≠ k. (11.39)
The eigenvectors are thus said to be orthogonal with respect to M and K. The
th th
quantities µ j = γ Tj Mγ j and κ j = γ Tj Kγ j are called the ( j ) modal mass and ( j )
modal stiffness.
Sample Problem 2
Consider
••
2 0 γ 1 k 2 −1 γ 1 0
+ = . (11.40)
0 1 γ 2 m −1 1 γ 2 0
2 −1 γ 1 0
(1)
−1
=
(1)
, [γ ] + [γ ]
(1) 2
1
(1) 2
2 = 1, (11.41)
1/ 2 γ 2 0
implying that γ 1(1) = 1/ 3 , γ 2(1) = 2 / 3 . The corresponding procedures for the sec-
ond eigenvalue furnish that γ 1( 2 ) = 1/ 3 , γ 2( 2 ) = − 2 / 3 . It is readily verified that
T T
γ ( 2 ) Mγ (1) = γ (1) Mγ ( 2 ) = 0, µ1 = 4/3, µ 2 = 4/3,
(11.42)
T T 4 4
γ ( 2 ) Kγ (1) = γ (1) Kγ ( 2 ) = 0, κ1 = [1 − 1/ 2 ], κ2 = [1 + 1/ 2 ]
3 3
X = [γ 1 γ2 γ3 L γ n ]. (11.43)
th T T
Since the jk entries of X MX and X KX are γ Tj Mγ k and γ Tj Kγ k , respectively,
it follows that
µ1 0 . . . κ 1 0 . . .
0 µ2 . . . 0 κ2 . . .
X T MX = . . . . . X T KX = . . . . . . (11.44)
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . µ n . . . . κ n
X T MX˙˙
ξ + X T KXξ = g, ξ = X −1 γ , g = XTf, (11.45)
µ j ξ˙˙j + κ j ξ j = g j (t ). (11.46)
Suppose that gj(t) = gj0 sin (ω t). Neglecting transients, the steady-state solution
th
for the j mode is
gj0
ξj = sin(ω t ). (11.47)
κ j − ω 2µ j
Mγ (ν ) Kγ (ν )
1 ,
Mγˆ (jν +1) = γ (jν +1) = γˆ (jν +1) γˆ (jν +1) M2 γˆ (jν +1) .
T
j
+ j
2 γ (ν ) T M 2 γ (ν ) γ K γ (ν )
( ν ) T 2
j j j j
(11.48)
γ Tj K Mγ j
C(γγ j ) = (11.49)
γ Tj K 2 γ j γ Tj M 2 γ j
is the cosine of the angle between two unit vectors, and as such it assumes the
maximum value of unity when the vectors coincide. A search can be executed on
the hypersphere in the vicinity of the current point, seeking the path along which C(γγj)
increases until the maximum is attained.
Once the eigenvector γj is found, the corresponding eigenvalue is found from
ω j = ( γ Tj Kγ j )/( γ Tj Mγ j ). Now, an efficient scheme is needed to “deflate” the system
2
so that ω12 ,and γ1 no longer are part of the eigenstructure in order to ensure that the
solution scheme does not converge to values that have already been calculated.
Given γ1 and ω12 , we can construct a vector p2 that is M-orthogonal to γ1 by
using an intermediate vector pˆ 2 : p2 = pˆ 2 − γ 1T Mpˆ 2 γ 1. Clearly, γ 1T Mp2 = γ 1T Mpˆ 2 −
γ 1T Mpˆ 2 γ 1T Mγ 1 = 0 assuming µ1 = 1. However, p2 is also clearly orthogonal to Kγγ1
since it is collinear with Mγγ1. A similar procedure leads to vectors pj, which are orthog-
onal to each other and to Mγγ1 and Kγγ1. For example, with p2 set to unit magnitude,
p 3 = pˆ 3 − p T2 pˆ 3p 2 − γ 1T Mpˆ 3 γ 1 . Now, p T2 p 3 = 0 and γ 1T Mpˆ 3 = 0.
Introduce the matrix X1 as follows: X1 = [γγ1 p2 p3 … pn]. For the k eigen-
th
[X KX
T
1 1 ]
− ω 2k X1TMX1 X1−1 γ k = 0, (11.50)
which decomposes to
ω12 0 1 0 0 0
− ω k2 =
˜ η 0
. (11.51)
0T ˜
K 0 T M n −1
n −1 n −1
˜ −ω M
[K ˜ ]η = 0. (11.52)
n −1 k n −1 n −1
The eigenvalues of the deflated system are also eigenvalues of the original system.
The eigenvector ηn−1 can be used to compute the eigenvectors of the original system
using transformations involving the matrix X1. The eigenvalues and eigenvectors of
the deflated system can be computed by, for example, the hypercircle method
described previously.
11.6 EXERCISES
1. Verify that the triangular factors L3 and LT3 for A3 in Equation 11.5 are correct.
2. Using A3 in Equation 11.5, use forward substitution followed by backward
substitution to solve
1
A 3 γ = 1 .
1
36 30 18
K = 30 41 23.
18 23 14
What is the order of the integration method (highest power in h with exact
agreement with the Taylor series)?
5. Find the integration (Gauss) points and weights for n = 3.
6. In the damped linear-mechanical system
γ + Dγ˙ + Kγ = f (t ),
M˙˙
suppose that γ(t) = γn at the n time step. Derive KD and rn+1 such that γ
th
K D γ n+1 = rn+1 .
36 30 24 γ 1 1
30 41 32 γ 2 = 2
24 32 27 γ 3 3
8. (a) Find the modal masses µ1, µ2 and the modal stiffnesses κ1 and κ2 of
the system
••
1 0 γ 1 1 −1 γ 1 10
3 + 27 = sin(10t ).
0 2 γ 2 −1 2 γ 2 20
2 µ A/ L 0 −A
0 4 µ AL/Y 2 −2 µ A/ L .
A 2 µ A/ L 0
10. Put the following equations in state form, apply the trapezoidal rule, and
triangularize the ensuing dynamic stiffness matrix:
γ + Kγ − Σπ = f ,
M˙˙ Σ T γ = 0.
satisfy
du′ ∂u′
= + ω × u′
dt ∂t
(12.1)
d 2 u′ ∂ 2 u′
= 2 + 2ω × u ′ + ω × ω × u + α × u
dt 2 ∂t
∂(.)
where α = ∂∂ωt and ∂ t imply differentiation with the coordinate system instanta-
neously fixed. The rightmost four terms in (12.1) are called the translational, Coriolis,
centrifugal, and angular accelerations, respectively. 2
Applied to the Principle of Virtual Work, the inertial term becomes ∫ δ u′ T ρ d 2
dt
[u′ + X′]dV . Assuming that u′ = ϕ T (X′)Φγ (t ),
d 2 u′ T d 2γ dγ
∫ δ u′ T ρ
dt 2 dV = δγ Μ
dt
2
+ G1
dt
+ (G 2 + A ) γ
(12.2)
∫
M = Φ T ρ ϕ ϕ T d VΦ,
∫
G1 = Φ T ρ ϕ Ω ϕ T d VΦ,
∫
G2 = Φ T ρ ϕ Ω2ϕ T d VΦ,
∫
Α = Φ T ρ ϕΑϕ T d VΦ.
The matrix M is the conventional positive-definite and symmetric mass matrix; the
Coriolis matrix G1 is antisymmetric; the centrifugal matrix G2 is negative-definite; and
the angular acceleration matrix A is antisymmetric. Also, Ω ˙ = QQ
˙ T, A = Ω ˙.
167
y
r
θ E,A,L,ρ
x
f0 sin ωt
d2
∫ δ u′ T ρ
dt 2
X′d V = −δγ T frot ,
∫
frot = Φ T ρϕ [Ω2 + A]X′d V. (12.3)
d2γ dγ
M + G1 + [K + G 2 + A]γ = f − frot . (12.4)
dt 2 dt
Consider a rod attached to a thin shaft rotating steadily at angular velocity ω
(see Figure 12.1), with f0 = 0.
If r is the undeformed position along the shaft, the governing equation is
d 2u
EA = −ω 2 [r + u]. (12.5)
dr 2
Assuming a one-element model with u(r, t ) = ru( L, t ) L , we obtain
EA ρω 2 AL L
∫
r
L − u( L, t ) = − ρω A
2
rdr
3 0 L
ρω 2 AL2
=− (12.6)
3
Clearly, u(L, t) becomes unbounded if ω becomes equal to the natural frequency
ω= EA ρAL , in which case, ω is called a critical speed.
3 3
r = rc + ξ + u , (12.7)
in which rc is the position vector to the center of mass; ξ is the relative position-
vector from the center of the mass to the undeformed position of the current point,
referred to rotating axes; and u is the displacement from the undeformed to the
deformed position in the rotating system (see Figure 12.2).
The balance of linear momentum becomes
∂Sij
rci + ξ˙˙i + u˙˙i ].
= ρ[˙˙ (12.8)
∂ξ j
∂Sij
∫ δr ∂ξ
ci
j
rci + ξ˙˙i + u˙˙i ] dV = 0.
− ρ[˙˙
(12.9)
z
u(ξξ,t)
ξ(t)
rc(t)
Now ∫ δ rci ρξ˙˙i dV = δ rci ∫ ρξ˙˙i dV = 0 by virtue of the definition of the center of mass.
Next ∫ δ rci ρu˙˙i dV = 0 on the assumption, for which a strong argument can be made,
that deformation does not affect the position of the center of mass. Then,
∫ δ rci ρ˙˙
rci dV = δ rci ˙˙
rci ∫ ρdV = δ rci mr˙˙ci . Finally,
∂Sij ∂Sij
∫δ r ci
∂ξ j
dV = δ rci
∫ ∂ξ j
dV
∫
= δ rci Sij n j dS
∫
= δ rci τ i dS
= δ rci Pi (12.10)
∂S
∫ ∂ξ j
rci + ξ˙˙i + u˙˙i ] dV = 0.
δξi ij − ρ[˙˙
(12.11)
First,
and δ [ ∫ ρξi dV ] = 0, Recall that ξ̇ξ = ω × ξ and the corresponding variational relation
is δ ξ = δθ × ξ, ω = θ˙. Now,
= δ θT [ω × Jω + Jα ] (12.14)
∂Sij ∂ ∂ξ
∫δξ ∂ξ
i
j
dV =
∫ ∂ξ (δξ S )dV − ∫ δ ∂ξ S dV
j
i ij
i
j
ij
∫
= (δξi Sij ni )dS
∫
= δξiti dS
= δ θ T m,
∫
m = ξ × t dS (12.15)
m = ω × Jω + Jα . (12.16)
Equations 12.10 and 12.16 can be solved separately from the finite-element
equation for the displacements, to be presented next, to determine the origin and
orientation of the “body axes.”
Now consider the variation δ u′:
∂σ ij
∫ δu′ ∂ξ
i
j
rci + ξ˙˙i + u˙˙i ] dV = 0.
− ρ[˙˙
(12.17)
First, note that ∫ δui′ρdVr˙˙ci = 0 since ∫ δui′ρdV = 0. The remaining terms are exactly
the same as for a body with a fixed point, and consequently it reduces to
d2γ dγ
M + G1 + [K + G 2 + A] γ = f − frot (12.18)
dt 2 dt
∫
G1 = Φ T ρ ϕΩϕ T dVΦ,
∫
G2 = Φ T ρ ϕΩ2ϕ T dVΦ,
∫
A = Φ T ρ ϕAϕ T dVΦ,
∫
frot = Φ T ρ ϕ[Ω2 + A]X′dV
12.3 EXERCISES
1. Consider a one-element model for a steadily rotating rod (see Figure 12.1)
to which is applied an oscillatory force, as shown. Find the steady-state
solution.
2. Find the exact solution for u(r) in Exercise 1. Does it agree with the one-
element solution? Try two elements. Is the solution better? By how much?
b
a
if
∫ ρudV = 0 and ∫ ρξ × udV = 0,
then
F = m˙˙r0 M = Jα + ω × Jω.
Thermal, Thermoelastic,
13 and Incompressible Media
13.1 TRANSIENT CONDUCTIVE-HEAT TRANSFER
13.1.1 FINITE-ELEMENT EQUATION
The governing equation for conductive-heat transfer without heat sources, assuming
an isotropic medium, is
k∇ 2 T = ρce T˙ . (13.1)
K Tθ + MT θ˙ = −q(t )
(13.2)
∫
K T = ΦTT β T kβ TT ΦT dV ,
∫
MT = ΦTT ϕ T ρceϕTT ΦTT dV
T
This equation is parabolic (first-order in the time rates), and implies that the
temperature changes occur immediately at all points in the domain, but at smaller
initial rates away from where the heat is added. This contrasts with the hyperbolic
(second-order time rates) solid-mechanics equations, in which information propa-
gates into the medium as finite velocity waves, and in which oscillatory response
occurs in response to a perturbation.
θ n+1 − θ n θ + θn q + qn
MT + K T n+1 = − n+1 , (13.3)
h 2 2
from which
h h h
K DT = MT + K r = MT θn − K T θn − (q n+1 + q n )
2 T n+1 2 2
173
For the assumed conditions, the dynamic thermal stiffness matrix is positive-
definite, and for the current time step, the equation can be solved in the same manner
as in the static counterpart, namely forward substitution followed by backward
substitution.
d θT MT θ
= −θ K T θ < 0.
T
(13.5)
dt 2
vanishes.
To examine the modes, assume a solution of the form θ(t) = θ 0j exp(λjt). The
eigenvectors θ 0j satisfy
µ j =k κ j = k
θT0 j MT θ0 k = Tj , θT0 j K T θ0 k = Tj (13.6)
0 j≠k 0 j≠k
and we call µ Tj and κ Tj the j modal thermal mass and j modal thermal stiffness,
th th
respectively. We can also form the modal matrix Θ = [θθ01 … θ0n ], and again
µ Tj 0 . . 0 κ Tj 0 . . 0
0 µ Tj . . . 0 κ Tj . . .
ΘTMT Θ = . . . . . , ΘTK T Θ = . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
0 . 0 .
. . . . . .
(13.7)
−1
Let ξ = Θ θ and g(t) = Θ q(t). Pre- and postmultiplying Equation 13.2 with Θ
T T
κ t κ
ξ j = ξ j 0 exp − Tj
µTj
t +
∫
0
exp − Tj (t − T ) gj dτ ,
µTj
(13.9)
illustrating the monotonically decreasing nature of the response. Now there are n
uncoupled single degrees of freedom.
∫ δE [2µE + λE δ ] dV + ∫ δu ρü dV − αλ ∫ δE (T − T )δ
ij ij kk ij o i i o ij 0 ij ∫
dVo = δu j t j dSo .
(13.11)
u = N T ( x )γ (t ), E ij → E = BT ( x )γ (t ), T − T0 = v T ( x )θ (t ), ∇T = BTT ( x )θ (t ),
(13.12)
γ (t ) + Kγ (t ) − Σθ(t ) = f (t ),
M˙˙
∫
Σ = αλ Bν T dVo . (13.13)
M, K: nm × nm , γ (t ), f (t ): nm × 1, Σ: nm × nt , θ (t ): nt × 1.
We next address the thermal field. The energy-balance equation (from Equation
7.35), including mechanical effects, is given by
K T θ(t ) + MT θ˙ (t ) + T0 Σ T γ˙ (t ) = −q, q=
∫ ν n ⋅ qdS. (13.15)
Case 1:
γ (t ) + T0 ΣK T−1 Σ T γ˙ (t ) + Kγ (t ) = f (t ).
M˙˙ (13.16)
Q1z˙ + Q 2 z = f (13.17)
M 0 0 γ˙
Q1 = 0 K 0 z = γ
0 0 M T / T0 θ
0 K −Σ f
Q 2 = − K 0 0 f = 0
ΣT 0 K T / T0 −q / T0
Clearly, Equation 13.17 can be integrated numerically using the trapezoidal rule:
Q + h Q z = Q − h Q z + h [f + f ]. (13.18)
1 2 2 n+1 1 2 2 n 2 n+1 n
d 1 T
z Q1z = − z T Q 2 z
dt 2
= −z T
1
[Q + Q 2T z
2 2
]
= −θθT K T θ (13.19)
and z must be real. Assuming that θ ≠ 0, it follows that z ↓ 0, and hence the system
is asymptotically stable.
dT
u( x, t ) = xγ (t )/ L, E( x, t ) = γ (t )/ L, T − T0 = xθ (t )/ L, = θ (t )/ L. (13.20)
dx
The thermoelastic stiffness matrix becomes Σ = αλ ∫Bν dV → Σ = αλ A/2. The
T
ρAL ˙˙ EA 1
γ+ γ − α λ Aθ = f0
3 L 2
(13.21)
1 ρce AL ˙ 1 kA 1
θ+ θ + α λ Aγ˙ = − q 0
T0 3 T0 L 2
λtr( E) → − p. (13.23)
together with the incompressibility constraint Eijδij = 0. There now are two inde-
pendent principal strains and the pressure with which to determine the three principal
stresses.
∂w
In a compressible elastic material, the strain-energy function w satisfies Sij = ∂Eij ,
and the domain term in the Principle of Virtual Work can be rewritten as ∫δEijSijdV =
∫δ wdV. The elastic-strain energy is given by w = µ Ei j Ei j + λ2 Ekk2. For reasons
explained shortly, we introduce the augmented strain-energy function
∫ δw′dV + ∫ δ u ρ u˙˙ dV = ∫ δ u τ dS .
o
T
o o
T
o (13.26)
Now, considering u and p to vary independently, the integrand of the first term
becomes δw′ = δEij[2µEij − pδij ] − δ pEkk , furnishing two variational relations:
∫ δE S dV + ∫ δu ρ u˙˙ dV = ∫ δ u τ dS
ij ij o
T
o o
T
o (a)
(13.27)
The first relation is recognized as the Principle of Virtual Work, and the second
equation serves to enforce the internal constraint of incompressibility.
We now introduce the interpolation models:
u = N T ( x ) g (t ) e = BT ( x ) g ( t )
(13.28)
Ekk = bT ( x ) g(t ) p( x ) = x T ( x ) p(t )
Mγ˙˙(t ) + Kγ (t ) − Σπ(t ) = f
(13.29)
∫
Σ = bξ T dVo , Σ T γ (t ) = 0
Assuming that these equations apply at the global level, use of state form
furnishes
M 0 0 γ˙ (t ) 0 K − Σ γ˙ (t ) f (t )
d
0 K 0 γ˙ (t ) + − K 0 0 γ (t ) = 0 . (13.30)
dt
0 T 0T 0 π(t ) Σ T 0T 0 π(t ) 0
M 0 0 γ˙ (t )
d 1 T
( γ˙ (t ) γ T (t ) π T (t )) 0 K 0 γ (t ) = 0 (13.31)
dt 2
0 T 0T 0 π(t )
13.5 EXERCISES
1. Find the exact solution for a circular rod of length L, radius r, mass density
ρ, specific heat ce , conductivity k, and cross-sectional area A = πr2. The
initial temperature is T0, and the rod is built into a large wall at fixed
temperature T0 (see figure below). However, at time t = 0, the temperature
T1 is imposed at x = L. Compare the exact solution to the one- and two-
element solutions. Note that for a one-element model,
kA ρc AL
θ ( L, t ) + e θ˙( L, t ) = − q( L).
L 3
L
r
T0 T1,t>0
2. State the equations of a thermoelastic rod, and put the equations for the
thermoelastic behavior of a rod in state form.
3. Put the following equations in state form, apply the trapezoidal rule, and
triangularize the ensuing dynamic stiffness matrix, assuming that the tri-
angular factors of M and K are known.
γ + Kγ − Σπ = f,
M˙˙ Σ T γ = 0.
2 µA / L 0 −A u( L) f
0 4 µAL / Y 2 −2 AL / Y v(Y ) = 0
A 2 AL / Y 0 p 0
z
T
θ0
r0
section after twist
181
u = −Yθ , v = Xθ . (14.1)
It is also assumed that torsion does not increase the length of the member, which
is attained by requiring that axial displacement w only depends on X and Y. The
quantity w(X, Y) is called the warping function.
It is readily verified that all strains vanish except Exz and Eyz, for which
1 ∂w ∂θ 1 ∂w ∂θ
Exz = − y , Eyz = + x . (14.2)
2 ∂x ∂z 2 ∂y ∂z
∂Sxz ∂Syz
+ = 0. (14.3)
∂x ∂y
∂ψ ∂ψ
Sxz = , Syz = − . (14.4)
∂y ∂x
We must satisfy the compatibility condition to ensure that the strain field arises
from a displacement field that is unique to within a rigid-body translation and
rotation. (Compatibility is automatically satisfied if the displacements are considered
the unknowns and are approximated by a continuous interpolation model. Here, the
stresses are the unknowns.) From the stress-strain relation,
1 1 ∂ψ 1 1 ∂ψ
Exz = Sxz = , Eyz = Syz = − . (14.5)
2µ 2 µ ∂y 2µ 2 µ ∂x
∂ 1 ∂ψ 1 dθ ∂ 1 ∂ψ 1 dθ
− + y + − − x = 0, (14.6)
∂y 2 µ ∂y 2 dz ∂x 2 µ ∂x 2 dz
ψ
n
dy ds n x = cos χ = dy/ds
n y = sin χ = dx/ds
dψ z –dx
∂ 2ψ ∂ 2ψ dθ
+ 2 = −2 µ . (14.7)
∂x 2 ∂y dz
For boundary conditions, assume that the lateral boundaries of the member are
unloaded. The stress-traction relation already implies that τx = 0 and τy = 0 on the
lateral boundary S. For traction τz to vanish, we require that
Upon examining Figure 14.2, it can be seen that nx = dy/ds and ny = −dx/ds, in
which s is the arc length along the boundary at z. Consequently,
dy dx
τz = S − S
ds xz ds yz
dy ∂ψ dx ∂ψ
= +
ds ∂y ds ∂x
dψ
=
ds (14.9)
dψ dψ
= − x −y dxdy (14.10)
dx dy
dy
y
sxz x
dx syz
Integration furnishes
dψ dψ
∫
T = − x
dx
+y
dy
dxdy
d ( xψ ) d ( yψ ) dx dy
∫
= −
dx
+
dy − ψ dx + dy dxdy
xψ
∫
= − ∇ ⋅ dxdy + 2 ψ dxdy
yψ ∫ (14.11)
Application of the divergence theorem to the first term leads to ∫ψ [xnx + yny]ds,
which vanishes since y vanishes on S. Finally,
∫
T = 2 ψ dxdy. (14.12)
th
The integrals are evaluated over a set of small elements. In the e element,
approximate ψ as ν TT ( x, y)ψ e ηe , in which νT is a vector with dimension (number of
rows) equal to the number of nodal values of ψ. The gradient ∇ψ has a corresponding
interpolation model ∇ψ = β TT ( x, y)ψ e ηe , in which βT is a matrix. The finite-element
counterpart of the Poisson Equation at the element level is written as
K (Te ) ηe = 2 µθ ′ fT( e )
∫
K (Te ) = ψ eT β T β TT dxdyψ e (14.15)
∫
fT( e ) = ψ eT ν T ( x, y)dxdy
and the stiffness matrix should be nonsingular, since the constraint y = 0 on S has
−1
already been used. It follows that, globally, ηg = 2 µθ ′ K (Tg ) fT( g ) . The torque satisfies
∫
T = 2ψ dxdy
= 2 ηTg fT( g )
−1
= 4 µθ ′ fT( g ) K(Tg ) fT( g )
T
(14.16)
Under in-plane compressive loads, the resistance of a thin member (beam or plate)
can be reduced progressively, culminating in buckling. There are two equilibrium
states that the member potentially can sustain: compression only, or compression
with bending. The member will “snap” to the second state if it involves less “potential
energy” than the first state. The notions explaining buckling are addressed in detail in
subsequent chapters. For now, we will focus on beams and plates, using classical
equations in which, by retaining lowest-order corrections for geometric nonlinearity,
in-plane compressive forces appear.
z
y
Q0
E,I,A,L,ρ
x
P
M0
For the beam shown in Figure 14.4, the classical Euler buckling equation is
EIw iv + Pw ′′ + ρAw
˙˙ = 0, (14.17)
and P is the axial compressive force. The interpolation model for w(x) is recalled
Φ γ. Following the usual variational procedures (integration by parts)
as w(x) = ϕ (x)Φ
T
furnishes
∫ δ wρAw˙˙ dx → δ γ M˙˙γ , T
∫
M = Φ T ϕ ( x )ρAϕ T ( x )dVΦ (14.18)
∫ δ w[EIw iv
∫
+ Pw ′′]dx = δ w ′′EIw ′′dx − δ w ′Pw ′dx
∫
− [(δ w )( − Pw ′ − EIw ′′′)]0L − [( −δ w ′)( − EIw ′′)]0L
At x = 0, both δ w and −δ w′ vanish, while the shear force V and the bending
moment M are identified as V = −EIw′′′ and M = −EIw′′. The “effective shear force”
Q is defined as Q = −Pw′ − EIw′′′.
For the specific case illustrated in Figure 14.3, for a one-element model, we can
use the interpolation formula
−1
L2 L3 w( L )
w( x ) = ( x 2
x )
3
γ (t ), γ (t ) = . (14.19)
−2 L −3 L2 − w ′( L)
1335
11
210L
M = ρALK 0 , K0 = . (14.20)
210 L
11 1 L2
105
Similarly,
65 1L
∫
P 10
δ w ′Pw ′dx = δ γ T K γ, K1 =
L 1 10
1 2 2
L 15 L
(14.21)
12 6L
∫ δ w′′EIw′′dx = δ γ
EI
T
K γ, K2 =
L3 2 6 L 4 L2
EI K − P K γ + ρALK ˙˙ Q0
L3 2 L 1 0γ = f, f = . (14.22)
M0
PL
2
cof K2 − K1
EI
γ= f, (14.23)
PL
2
det K2 − K1
EI
EI K − P K − ω 2 ρALK γ = f . (14.24)
L3 2 L 1 0 0
0
det 3 K 2 − K1 − ω 02 ρALK 0 = 0.
EI P
(14.25)
L L
V0
P
M0
L L
65 1 L
∫
P 10
δ w ′Pw ′dx = δ γ T
K γ, K1 =
L 1 10
1 2 L2
L 15
(14.26)
12 6L
∫ δ w′′EIw′′dx = δ γ
EI
T
K γ, K2 =
L3 2 6 L 4 L2
12 6 L P 65 1 L
EI 10
3 − γ = f (14.27)
L 6 L 4 L2 L 10
1 L 2 2
15 L
V1 w( L )
f = , γ =
M1 − w ′( L)
Consider the symmetric case in which M0 = 0, with the implication that w′(L) = 0.
The equation reduces to
12 EI − 6 P w( L) = V , (14.28)
L3 5 L 1
Next, consider the antisymmetric case in which V0 = 0 and w(L) = 0. The coun-
terpart of Equation 14.28 is now
4 EI − 2 PL ( − w ′( L)) = M , (14.29)
L 15 1
and P2 = 30EI/L .
2
If neither the constraint of symmetry nor axisymmetry is applicable, there are two
critical buckling loads, to be obtained in Exercise 2 as 27.8 EI2 and 8.9 EI2 . These values
L L
are close enough to the symmetric and antisymmetric cases to suggest an interpretation
of the two buckling loads as corresponding to the two “pure” buckling modes.
Compare the obtained values with the exact solution, assuming static condi-
tions. Consider the symmetric case. Let w(x) = wc(x) + wp(x), in which wc(x) is
the characteristic solution and wp(x) is the particular solution reflecting the per-
turbation. From the Euler buckling equation demonstrated in Equation 14.17, wc(x)
has a general solution of the form wc(x) = α + β x + γ cos κ x + δ sin κ x, in which
κ = PL2 / EI . Now, w = −w′ = 0 at x = 0, −w′(L) = 0, and EIw′′′(L) = V1, expressed
as the conditions
1α + 0 β + 1γ + 0δ = − w p (0)
0α + 1β + 0γ + κδ = − w ′p (0)
(14.30)
0α + Lβ − γκ sin κL + δκ cosκL = − w ′p ( L)
or otherwise stated
− w p (0) 1 0 1 0 α
− w ′p (0) 0 1 0 κ β
Bz = , B= , z=
− w ′p ( L) 0 L −κ sin κL κ cosκL γ
− EIw ′′′( L) + V 0 κ 3 sin κL −κ 3 cosκL δ
p 1 0
(14.31)
For the solution to “blow up,” it is necessary for the matrix B to be singular,
which it is if the corresponding homogeneous problem has a solution. Accordingly,
we seek conditions under which there exists a nonvanishing vector z, for which Bz = 0.
Direct elimination of α and β furnishes α = −γ and β = −κδ. The remaining
coefficients must satisfy
− sin κL cosκL − κL γ 0
= . (14.32)
sin κL cosκL δ 0
Clearly, the symmetric solution in the previous two-element model (Pcrit = 10 EI/L )
2
not as accurate, unlike the symmetric part. This issue is addressed further in the
subsequent exercises.
Up to this point, it has been implicitly assumed that the beam column is initially
perfectly straight. This assumption can lead to overestimates of the critical buckling
load. Consider a known initial distribution w0(x). The governing equation is
d2 d2 d2
2
EI 2 ( w − w0 ) + P 2 ( w − w0 ) = 0, (14.33)
dx dx dx
or equivalently,
d2 d2 d2 d2 d2 d2
EI w + P w = EI w 0 + P w . (14.34)
dx 2 dx 2 dx 2 dx 2 dx 2 dx 2 0
The crookedness is modeled as a perturbation. Similarly, if the cross-sectional
properties of the beam column exhibit a small amount of variation, for example,
EI(x) = EI0[1 + ϑ sin(π x/L)], the imperfection can also be modeled as a perturbation.
Eh 2 ∂2 w ∂2 w ∂2 w
∇ 4 w + Px 2 + Py 2 + Pxy =0 (14.35)
12(1 − ν )
2
∂x ∂y ∂x∂y
(see Wang 1953), in which the loads are illustrated as shown in Figure 14.6. The usual
Pxy Py
x Pyx h
Px
(14.36)
∂2 w ∂2 w ∂2 w
∫ δw Px 2 + Py 2 + Pxy
∂x ∂y ∂x∂y
dA = dw(nx
∫ ny )p dS
wx
− {δ wx
∫ δ wy}P dA,
wy
(14.37)
p=
[
P ∂w + 1 P
x ∂x 2 xy
∂w
∂y ] , Px
P=
1
2 Pxy
[
1 P ∂w + P
2 xy ∂x y
∂w
∂y ] 12 Pxy
Py
wx
∇w = = β1Tb 2 Φb 2 γ b 2 , VEC(W) = βT2 b 2 Φb 2 γ b 2 . (14.38)
wy
We also assume that the secondary variables (n ⋅ ∇)∇ w, (n ⋅ ∇)∇w, and also
2
[ P ∂ w + 1 P ∂w ]
x ∂x 2 xy ∂y
are prescribed on S.
[ Pxy ∂ ∂w
2
1 w
∂x
+ P ]
y ∂y
[K b 21 − K b 22 ]γ b 2 = f (14.39)
Eh 2
K b 21 =
∫
Φ T β βT dAΦb 2
12(1 − ν 2 ) b 2 2 b 2 2 b 2
∫
K b 22 = ΦbT2 β1b 2 Pβ1Tb 2 dVΦb 2
Pxy
λ
φ
θ Py
Px
emanating from the origin represents a proportional loading path. Let the load
intensity, λ, denote the distance to a given point on this line. By analogy with
spherical coordinates, there exist two angles, θ and φ, such that
Now,
ˆ (θ , ϕ )
K b 22 = λK b 22
K b 22 b2 ∫
ˆ (θ , ϕ ) = Φ T β Pˆ (θ , ϕ )βT dVΦ
1b 2 1b 2 b2 (14.41)
For each pair (q, f), buckling occurs at a critical load intensity, λcrit(θ, φ),
satisfying
ˆ ] = 0.
det[K b 21 − λ crit (θ , φ )K (14.42)
b 22
A surface of critical load intensities, λcrit(θ, φ), can be drawn in the loading space
shown in Figure 14.7 by evaluating λcrit(θ, φ) over all values of (q, f) and discarding
values that are negative.
14.3 EXERCISES
−1
1 x1 y1 ψ1
ψ ( x, y) = (1 x y)1 x2 y2 ψ 2 .
1 x3 y3 ψ 3
(2,3)
(3,2)
(1,1)
x
2. Find the torsional constant for a unit square cross section using two
triangular elements.
3. Derive the matrices K0, K1, and K2 in Equations 14.20 and 14.21.
4. Compute the two critical values in Equation 14.23.
5. Use the four-element model shown in Figure 14.5, and determine how much
improvement, if any, occurs in the symmetric and antisymmetric cases.
6. Consider a two-element model and a four-element model of the simple-
simple case shown in the following figure. Compare Pcrit in the symmetric
and antisymmetric cases with exact values.
V0
P
M0
L L
d 4w d 2w
EI 4
+ P 2 = 0.
dx dx
L
EI 12 6L L
P 12 6L
∫ 0
δ w ′′EIw ′′dx = δ γ T
L3 6 L
γ ,
4 L2 ∫
0
δ w ′Pw ′dx = δ γ T
L 6 L
γ .
4 L2
V0
M0 P
Introduction to Contact
15 Problems
15.1 INTRODUCTION: THE GAP
In many practical problems, the information required to develop a finite-element
model, for example, the geometry of a member and the properties of its constituent
materials, can be determined with little uncertainty or ambiguity. However, often
the loads experienced by the member are not so clear. This is especially true if loads
are transmitted to the member along an interface with a second member. This class
of problems is called contact problems, and they are arguably the most common
boundary conditions encountered in practical problems. The finite-element commu-
nity has devoted, and continues to devote, a great deal of effort to this complex
problem, leading to gap and interface elements for contact. Here, we introduce gap
elements.
First, consider the three-spring configuration in Figure 15.1. All springs are of
stiffness k. Springs A and C extend from the top plate, called the contactor, to the
bottom plate, called the target. The bottom of spring B is initially remote from the
target by a gap g. The exact stiffness of this configuration is
2 k δ <g
kc = (15.1)
3k δ ≥ g.
From the viewpoint of the finite-element method, Figure 15.1 poses the following
difficulty. If a node is set at the lowest point on spring B and at the point directly
P
contactor
δ
A B C
k k k
g
target
195
P contactor
δ
A B
C
k k k
kg
target
below it on the target, these nodes are not initially connected, but are later connected
in the physical problem. Furthermore, it is necessary to satisfy the nonpenetration
constraint whereby the middle spring does not move through the target. If the nodes
are considered unconnected in the finite-element model, there is nothing to enforce
the nonpenetration constraint. If, however, the nodes are considered connected, the
stiffness is artificially high.
This difficulty is overcome in an approximate sense by a bilinear contact element.
In particular, we introduce a new spring, kg, as shown in Figure 15.2.
The stiffness of the middle spring (B in series with the contact spring) is now
denoted as km, and
−1
1 1
km = + . (15.2)
k kg
It is desirable for the middle spring to be soft when the gap is open (g > δ ) and
to be stiff when the gap is closed (g ≤ δ ):
2 k + 0.01k g>δ
kc ≈ (15.4)
2 k + 0.99k g ≤ δ.
Consequently, the model with the contact is too stiff by 0.5% when the gap
is open, and too soft by 0.33% when the gap is closed (contact). One conclusion
that can be drawn from this example is that the stiffness of the gap element should
be related to the stiffnesses of the contactor and target in the vicinity of the contact
point.
in which δij = uij + uji is the relative displacement. The force in the spring connecting
the i contactor node and j target node is fij = kij(gij)δij. The total normal force
th th
dSc
c1 c3
c2
α31
k(g31)
t1 t2 t3
dSt
As an example of how the spring stiffness might depend upon the gap, consider
the function
kij ( gij − δ ij )
= k0 ε + (1 − 2ε ) 2 tan −1 α ( gij − δ ij − γ ) 2 − ( gij − δ ij − γ ) , (15.6)
π 2
where γ, α, and ε are positive parameters selected as follows. When gij − δij − γ > 0,
kij attains the lower-shelf value, k0ε, and we assume that ε << 1. If gij − δij − γ < 0, kij
approaches the upper-shelf value, k0 (1 − ε). We choose γ to be a small value to
attain a narrow transition range from the lower- to the upper-shelf values. In the
range 0 < gij − δij < γ, there is a rapid but continuous transition from the lower-shelf
(soft) value to the upper-shelf (stiff) value. If we now choose α such that αγ = 1,
kij becomes k0 /2, when the gap closes (gij = δij). The spring characteristic is illustrated
in Figure 15.4.
The total normal force on a contactor node is the sum of the individual contact-
element forces, namely
Nc
ftj = ∑ k (g
i
ij ij − δ ij )δ ij cos(α ij ). (15.7)
Clearly, significant forces are exerted only by the contact elements that are
“closed.”
k ij
k0 εk 0
k 0 /2
εk 0 δij –gij
dSt
t1 t3
t2
c1 c2 c3
dSc
15.4 EXERCISES
F
k
k
k k
H
L
k ( gij − δ ij )
= k0 ε + (1 − 2ε ) 2 tan −1 α ( gij − δ ij − γ )2 − ( gij − δ ij − γ ) .
π 2
Introduction to
16 Nonlinear FEA
16.1 OVERVIEW
The previous section addressed finite-element methods for linear problems. Appli-
cations that linear methods serve to analyze include structures under mild loads,
disks and rotors spinning at modest angular velocities, and heated plates. However,
a large number of problems are nonlinear. Plasticity is a nonlinear materials theory
suited for metals in metal forming, vehicle crash, and ballistics applications. In
problems with high levels of heat input, mechanical properties, such as the elastic
modulus, and thermal properties, such as the coefficient of specific heat, can be
strongly temperature-dependent. Rubber seals and gaskets commonly experience
strains exceeding 50%. Soft biological tissues typically are modeled as rubberlike.
Many problems involve variable contact, for example, meshing gear teeth. Heat
conducted across electrical contacts can be strongly dependent on normal pressures.
Fortunately, much of the linear finite-element method can be adapted to nonlinear
problems, as explained in this chapter. The next chapter focuses on isothermal
problems. The extension to thermomechanical problems will be presented in a
subsequent chapter.
201
K( γ )∆γ + Μ( γ )∆˙˙
γ = ∆f, (16.1)
AE 0 γ
1 + α γ = P . (16.2)
L L
Suppose the load is applied in increments, ∆ jP, and that the load at the n load
th
step is Pn. Suppose further that the solution γ n is known at the n load. We now
th
consider the steps necessary to determine the solution γ n+1 for Pn+1. We introduce the
increment ∆nγ = g n+1 − γ n. Subtracting Equation 16.2 at the n step from the equation
th
at the (n + 1) step, the incremental equilibrium equation for the n increment is now
st th
AE 0 γ + ∆ nγ
1 + 2α n+1 ∆ γ = ∆nP . (16.3)
L L n
g( x ) = βx + ζ x 2 − η = 0. (16.4)
[βx ν + ζ x ν − η]
2
x ν +1 = x ν − , x 0 = η / β. (16.5)
β + 2ζ x ν
SAMPLE PROBLEM 1
The efficiency of this scheme is addressed as follows. Consider ζ = 1, β = 12, and
η = 1. The correct solution is x = 0.0828. Starting with the initial value x = 0, the
first two iterates are, approximately, 121 = 0.833, and 121 (1 − 144
1
) = 0.0828 . This illus-
trates the rapid quadratic convergence of Newton iteration.
u( X ) = ue + ( X − Xe )(ue+1 − ue ) le
1
= NTae , NT = {x − x x − x e}, (16.6)
le e
in which a eT = {ue ue+1}. Now, u(Xe) = ue and u(Xe+1) = ue+1 are viewed as the
unknowns to be determined using the finite-element method. The Lagrangian strain
Pe
xe,ue
g
xe+1,ue+1
Pe+1
E = Exx is given by
2
∂u 1 ∂u
E= +
∂x 2 ∂x
2
ue+1 − ue 1 ue+1 − ue
= +
le 2 le
1 −1
1 1 T 1 ae .
= {−1 1} a e + ae 2 (16.7)
le 2 le −1 1
Note that
dE = BT da e , B = B L + B NL a e (16.8)
1 −1 1 1 −1
BL = B NL = .
le 1 le2 −1 1
The vector BL and the matrix BNL are the strain-displacement matrices.
The following sections illustrate two different approaches to formulating a finite-
element model for the rubber rod. One is based on satisfying the incompressibility
constraint a priori. The second is based on satisfying the constraint a posteriori,
which is typical of finite-element code practice. In addition, we also include a slight
variant involving a near-incompressibility constraint in an a posteriori manner.
D
w= (c + c + c3 − 3), subject to c1c2 c3 − 1 = 0 , (16.9)
2 1 2
in which D is the (small-strain) elastic modulus. We can show, with some effort,
that under uniaxial tension, c2 = c3.
We first enforce the incompressibility constraint a priori by using the substitution
1
c2 = c3 = . (16.10)
c1
D
w= [2 E + 1 + 2 /(2 E + 1) −1/ 2 − 3] . (16.11)
2
nd
The (2 Piola-Kirchhoff) stress, S, defined in Chapter 5, is now obtained as
∂w
S=
∂E
1
= D[1 − (2 E + 1)−3/ 2 ]. (16.12)
3
The tangent modulus, D, is also required:
∂S
DT =
∂E
= D(2 E + 1)−5/ 2 . (16.13)
D p
w* = [c + c + c3 − 3] − (c1c2 c3 − 1) , (16.14)
2 1 2 2
in which the Lagrange multiplier, p, is the (true) hydrostatic pressure. The augmented
energy is stationary with respect to p as well as c1, c2, and c3, from which it follows
that c1c2c3 − 1 = 0 (incompressibility).
The stresses satisfy
∂w * ∂w * D p c1c2c3
S3 = =2 = − = 0.
∂E3 ∂c3 2 2 c3
Xe +1
Xe +1
Pee
∫
Xe
BSe AdX − P e − ρg
∫ Xe
N T AdX a e = 0,
Pe =
Pe
e+1
, (16.16)
in which the third term represents the weight of the element, while Pe represents the
forces from the adjacent elements. In an incremental formulation, we can replace
the loads and displacements by their differential forms. In particular,
Xe +1 Xe +1
d Pe =
∫ Xe
BdSAe dX +
∫Xe
d BSAe dX
= K e da e
= {K1e + K 2 e + K 3e + K 4 e} da e (16.17)
in which
Xe +1
K1e = Ae
∫ Xe
B L DT BTL dX
DT Ae 1 −1
= (16.18a)
le −1 1
Xe +1
K 2 e = Ae
∫ Xe
(
DT B L a eTB NL + B NL a e BTL dX )
DT Ae [ue+1 − ue ] 1 −1
= 2 (16.18b)
le le −1 1
Xe +1
K 3e = Ae
∫ Xe
B NL a ea eTBTNL dX
2
DT Ae ue+1 − ue 1 −1
=
le le −1
(16.18c)
1
Xe +1
K 4 e = Ae
∫ Xe
B L SdX
SAe 1 −1
= (16.18d)
le −1 1
and
Xe +1 Xe +1
∫ ∫
1 1
DT = DT dX , S= SdX. (16.19)
le Xe le Xe
Ke = κ , κ= 1 + 2 + l + l . (16.20)
−1 1 le le e e
Suppose (ue+1 − ue)/le is small compared to unity, with the consequence that E
is also small compared to unity. It follows in this case that DT ≈ D, S ≈ S. As a
result, Ke reduces to the stiffness matrix for a rod element of linearly elastic material
experiencing small strain:
EAe 1 −1
Ke = . (16.21)
le −1 1
1 −1 0 − dPr
κ = , (16.22)
−1 1 du1 dP
in which dPr is an incremental reaction force that is not known a priori (of course,
from equilibrium, dPr = dP). For the only unknown reaction, this last equation
“condenses” to
kdu1 = dP . (16.23)
x1 A,ρ
X u1
P
For later use, the current shape function degenerates to the expression N → N =
X/X1.
The (Lagrangian) strain is given by
2
u1 1 u1
E(u1 ) = + , (16.24)
X1 2 X1
1 u
B→ B= + 12 . (16.25)
X1 X1
nd
The (2 Piola-Kirchhoff) stress S is now a function of u1:
−
3
2
2
1 u 1 u
S(u1 ) = D1 − 2 1 + 1 − 1 . (16.26)
3 X1 2 X1
X1
X1
φ (u1 ) =
∫
0
BSA dX − P − ρg
∫
0
N T A dX a e
−
3
1 u1 1 u1
2 2
1 u1 X
= + 2 AX1 D1 − 2 + − 1 − P − ρgA 1 u1
le le 3 X1 2 X1 2
= 0. (16.27)
th
when u1 is the solution. Consider an iteration process in which the j iterate u1j has
been determined. Newton iteration determines the next iterate, u1j +1, using
κ (u1j )∆ j u1 = −φ (u1j )
(16.28)
u1j +1 = u1j + ∆ j u1.
often obtained using an incremental procedure. Suppose that the solution has been
obtained at previous load steps. A starting iterate for the current load step is obtained
by extrapolating from the previous solutions. As an example, suppose the solution
is known at the load P = k∆P, in which ∆P is a load increment. The load is now
incremented to produce P = (k + 1)∆P, and the solution u1,k+1 at this load is determined
using Newton iteration. It is frequently satisfactory to start the iteration using
u10,k +1 = u1. This numerical procedure is illustrated more extensively at the end of
this chapter.
The superscript indicates the element index, and the subscript indicates the node
index. If no external force is applied at xe+1, the interelement force balance is
expressed as
e
k21 e
(
due + k22 )
+ k11e+1 due+1 + k12e+1due+2 = 0 . (16.31)
Equation 16.32 illustrates that the (incremental) global stiffness matrix is formed
by “overlaying” Ke and Ke+1, with the entries added in the intersection.
Pee
xe,ue
P,Ae
e
Pe+1
xe+1,ue+1 e+1
Pe+1
P,Ae+1
xe+2,ue+2
ρe+1
e+2
x
If Ke = Ke+1 and dPee = − dPee++11 = − dP , overlaying the element matrices leads to the
global (two-element) relation
1 −1 0 du1 − dP
κ −1 2 −1 du2 = 0 . (16.33)
0 −1 1 du3 dP
Note that Equation 16.33 has no solution since the global stiffness matrix has
no inverse: the second row is the negative of the sum of the first and last rows. This
suggests that, due to numerical errors in the load increments, the condition for static
equilibrium is not satisfied numerically, and therefore that the body is predicted to
accelerate indefinitely (undergo rigid-body motion). However, we also know that the
configuration under incremental loads is symmetric, implying a constraint du2 = 0.
This constraint permits “condensation,” that is, reducing Equation 16.33 to a system
with two unknowns by eliminating rows and columns associated with the middle
incremental displacement:
The condensed matrix is now proportional to the identity matrix, and the system
has a solution. In general, stiffness matrices can easily be singular or nearly singular
(with a large condition number) unless constraints are used to suppress “rigid-body
modes.”
ψ ( x ) = 0, (16.35)
−1
dψ ( x j )
x j +1 = x j − ψ (x j ) . (16.36)
dx
−1 −1
dψ ( x j ) dψ ( x j −1 )
x j +1 − x j = x j − x j −1 − ψ (xj ) − ψ ( x j −1 )
dx dx
−1
dψ ( x *) d 2ψ ( x *)
= x j − x j −1 − + ( x j − x *)
dx dx 2
−1
dψ ( x *) dψ ( x *) d 2ψ ( x *)
× ψ ( x *) + ( x j − x*) − + ( x j −1 − x*)
dx dx dx 2
dψ ( x *)
× ψ ( x *) + ( x j −1 − x*) + L
dx
−1
dψ ( x *) dψ ( x *)
= 1 − ( x − x j −1 ) + O([ x j − x j−1 ]2 )
dx dx j (16.37)
16.5.1 EXAMPLE
The performance of Newton iteration procedure is illustrated using a simple example
showing convergence problems. Consider
2
ϕ ( x) = tan −1 ( x ) − y = 0. (16.38)
π
The goal is to find the solution of x as y is incremented in the range (0,1). Clearly,
x approaches infinity as y approaches unity, so that the goal is to generate the x(y)
relationship accurately as close as possible to y = 1. The curve appears as shown in
Figure 16.4. As y is incremented by small amounts just below unity, the differences
in x due to the increment are large, so that the solution value is far from the initial
iterate.
th
Suppose that y is incremented such that the n value of y is
yn = n∆y. (16.39)
( )
−1
dφ x nν+1
x nν++11 = x nν+1 − ( )
φ x nν+1 , (16.40)
dx
ν
is the ν iterate for the solution xn+1.
th
in which x n+1
0
Of course, a starting iterate, x n+1 , is needed. An attractive candidate is xn+1.
However, this may not be good enough when convergence difficulties appear.
Newton iteration was implemented for this example in a simple problem using
increments of 0.001. A stopping criterion of 10 iterations was used. Convergence
was found to fail near y = 0.999.
16.6 EXERCISES
1. Doing the algebra, make judicious choices of starting iterates, and develop
the first few iterates for the roots of the equations
x 2 + 3x + 2 = 0
x2 − 1 = 0
( x − 1)2 = 0
Incremental Principle
17 of Virtual Work
17.1 INCREMENTAL KINEMATICS
Recall that the displacement vector u(X) is assumed to admit a satisfactory approx-
imation at the element level in the form u(X) = ϕ (X)Φ Φ γ (t). Also recall that the
T
deformation-gradient tensor is given by F = ∂∂xx . Suppose that the body under study
is subjected to a load vector, P, which is applied incrementally via load increments,
∆jP. The load at the n load step is denoted as Pn. The solution, Pn, is known, and
th
the solution of the increments of the displacements is sought. Let ∆nu = un+1 − un,
so that ∆nu = ϕ (X)Φ Φ∆nγ. By suitably arranging the derivatives of ∆nu with respect
T
Product algebra from Chapter 2, we readily find that, to first order in increments,
∆ n e = VEC( ∆ n E)
1
= [I ⊗ FT + FT ⊗ IU]VEC( ∆ n F)
2
1
= G∆ n g, GT = [I ⊗ FT + FT ⊗ IU]M (X)∆ n g. (17.1)
2
1
VEC( ∆ n« ) = [F − T F −1 ⊗ F − T U + F −1 ⊗ F − T F −1 ]M∆ n g. (17.2)
2
215
∆J = Jtr(F −1∆ n F)
= JVEC T (F −1 )VEC( ∆ n F)
T
d[n dS]
= [tr(D)I − LT ]n dS
dt
dn
= [(nT Dn)I − LT ]n (17.4)
dt
d
dS = [tr(D) − nT Dn]dS
dt
∆ n S = ∆ n SF T + S∆ n F T . (17.6)
For the Cauchy stress, the increment must take into account the rotation of the
underlying coordinate system and thereby be objective. We recall the objective
o
Truesdell stress flux, ∂ T / ∂t, introduced in Chapter 5:
o
∂ T/∂t = ∂T/∂t + Ttr(D) − LT − TLT . (17.7)
o
∂S/∂t = J F −1∂ T/∂tF − T . (17.8)
o
VEC( ∆ n T ) = 1 F T ⊗ FVEC( ∆ n S). (17.9)
J
o
Furthermore, once VEC( ∆ n T ) has been determined, the (nonobjective) incre-
ment of the Cauchy stress can be computed using
o
∆ n T = ∆ n T + Ttr( ∆ n FF −1 ) − ∆ n FF −1T − T F − T ∆ n F T , (17.10)
from which
o
VEC( ∆ nT ) = VEC( ∆ n T ) + [TVEC T (F − T ) − (T F − T ) ⊗ I − I ⊗ (T F − T )]M∆ n γ . (17.11)
∫ T n dS = ∫ ρu˙˙ dV.
T
(17.12)
∫ S n dS = ∫ ρ u˙˙ dV ,
T
0 0 0 0
(17.13)
st
in which, as indicated before, S is the 1 Piola-Kirchhoff stress, S denotes the surface
(boundary) in the deformed configuration, and n0 is the surface normal vector in the
undeformed configuration. Suppose the solution for S is known as Sn at time tn and
is sought at tn+1. We introduce the increment ∆ n S to denote Sn+1 − Sn . A similar
definition is introduced for the increment of the displacements. Now, equilibrium
applied to Sn+1 and Sn implies
∫∆ S n n
T
0 dS0 =
∫ ρ ∆ u˙˙ dV .
0 n 0
(17.14)
∇ T ∆ n S T = ρ0 ∆ n u
˙˙ T . (17.15)
(17.16)
in which τ 0 is the traction experienced by dS0. The fourth term describes the virtual
external work of the incremental tractions. The first term describes the virtual internal
work of the incremental stresses. The third term describes the virtual internal work
of the incremental inertial forces. The second term has no counterpart in the previ-
ously formulated Principle of Virtual Work in Chapter 5, and arises because of
geometric nonlinearity. We simply call it the geometric stiffness integral. Due to the
importance of this relation, Equation 17.16 is derived in detail in the equations that
follow. It is convenient to perform the derivation using tensor-indicial notation:
∂ ∂ ∂
∫ δ∆ u ∂X (∆ S )dV = ∫ ∂X [δ∆ u (∆ S )]dV − ∫ ∂X [δ∆ u ]∆ S dV
n i
j
n ij 0
j
n i n ij 0
j
n i n ij 0
∫
= δ∆ nui ρ0 ∆ nu˙˙i dV0 . (17.17)
The first term on the right is converted using the divergence theorem to
∂
∫ ∂X [δ∆ u (∆ S )]dV = ∫ δ∆ u (n ∆ S )dS
j
n i n ij 0 n i j n ij 0
∫
= δ∆ n uiτ 0 j dS0 (17.18)
To first-order in increments, the second term on the right is written, using tensor
notation, as
∂
∫ ∂X [δ∆ u ]∆ S dV = ∫ tr(δ∆ F∆ S )dV
j
n i n ij 0 n n 0
∫
= tr(δ∆ n F[ ∆ n SFT + S∆ n FT ])dV0
∫ ∫
= tr(FTδ∆ n F∆ n S)dV0 + tr(δ∆ n FS∆ n FT )dV0 (17.19)
1
∫ tr(F δ∆ F∆ S)dV = ∫ tr 2 [F δ∆ F + δ∆ F F]∆ S dV
T
n n 0
T
n n
T
n 0
∫
= tr(δ∆ nΕ T ∆ nS)dV0 (17.20)
∆ n S = D( X, γ n )∆ n E, (17.21)
∆ n s = χ( X , γ n ) ∆ n e (17.22)
Also for present purposes, we assume that ∆ττ 0 is prescribed on the boundary S0, a
common but frequently unrealistic assumption that is addressed in a subsequent section.
In VEC notation, and using the interpolation models, Equation 17.16 becomes
KT =
∫ M GχG M dV T T
0 KG =
∫ M S ⊗ IM dV
T
0
M=
∫ ρ Φ ϕϕ Φ dV
0
T T
0 ∆n f =
∫ ρ Φ ϕ∆τ dS
0
T
0 0
KT is now called the tangent modulus matrix, KG is the geometric stiffness matrix,
M is the (incremental) mass matrix, and ∆nf is the incremental force vector.
τ dS = τ 0 dS0 n T q dS = n T0 q 0 dS0
(17.25)
−1
dS = µdS0 µ = J n C n0 =
T
0 n ⊗ n n3
T
0
T
0
∆µ ≈ dµ = m T dc ≈ m T ∆c, m T = n T0 ⊗ n T0 A 3 / 2 µ. (17.26)
∆τ = ∆ τ − A TM ∆u. (17.27)
1 τ
∆τ0 = ∆τ − 2 ∆µ
µ µ
1 τ
= ( ∆ τ − ATM ∆u) − 2 mT ∆c (17.28)
µ µ
From the Incremental Principle of Virtual Work, the rhs term is written as
1 τ
∫ δ∆u ∆τ dS = ∫ δ∆u µ (∆ τ − A ∆u) − µ
T
0 0
T T
M 2
mT ∆c dS0 .
(17.29)
τ
∫ µ ∆τ dS , ∫ ∫µ
1
∆f = 0 K BF = NATM N T dS0 , K BN = 2
mT G dS0
The first boundary contribution is from the nonlinear elastic foundation coupling
the traction and displacement increments on the boundary. The second arises from
geometric nonlinearity when the traction increment is prescribed on the current
configuration.
contactor
n
g
m
y(x)
foundation
the osculating plane of point of interest, are negligible. Suppose that the interface
can be represented by an elastic foundation satisfying the incremental relation
∆τ n = − k ( g)∆un . (17.31)
displacement vectors. Since the only traction to consider is the normal traction (to
the contactor surface), the transverse components of ∆u are not needed (do not result
from work). Also, k(g) is a nonlinear stiffness function given in terms of the gap by,
for example,
k ( g) =
kH π − arctan(α g − ε ) + k , k H /k L >> 1. (17.32)
π 2 k r
L
As in Chapter 15, when g is positive, the gap is open and k approaches kL, which
should be chosen as a small number, theoretically zero. When g becomes negative,
the gap is closed and k approaches kH, which should be chosen as a large number,
theoretically infinity to prevent penetration of the rigid body).
Under the assumption that only the normal traction on the contactor surface is
important, it follows that τ = tnn, from which
∆τ = ∆τ n n + τ n ∆ n. (17.33)
The contact model contributes the matrix Kc to the stiffness matrix as follows
(see Nicholson and Lin, 1997b):
= −δ∆γ T K c ∆γ (17.34)
∫ ∫
K c = −2 Nnτ n mT βT dSc 0 + kc ( g)NnnT N T µ dSc 0 + Nτ n µhT dSc 0 .
∫
To update the gap, use the following relations proved in Nicholson and Lin (1997-b).
The differential vector, dy, is tangent to the foundation surface, hence, m dy = 0. It
T
follows that
0 = mT du + gmT d n + m Tn dg
(17.35)
mT ∆u + gmT ∆ n
∆g = − .
mTn
mT N + ghT
∆g = Γ T ∆γ , ΓT = − , hT = [n[(nT F − T ) ⊗ nT ] − nT ⊗ F − T ]MT .
mTn
(17.36)
[
δe = BTL + BTNL ( γ ) δ γ ]
1
BTL = (I ⊗ I + I ⊗ IU)M(X)
2
(17.38)
BTNL =
1
2
(
I ⊗ FuT + Fu ⊗ IU M(X) )
∂u
Fu = .
∂X
∫
Φ( γ , f ) = [(B L + B NL ( γ )]s dVo + N T ρu
˙˙ dVo ,
∫ ∫
f = N T τ o dSo . (17.39)
−1
∂Φ (ν)
( )
γ (nv++11) = γ (nν+)1 − J −1Φ γ (nν+)1,fn+1 , J= (
γ n+1, fn+1 ) (17.40)
∂γ
or as a linear system
( ) (
J γ (nv++11) − γ (nv+)1 = Φ γ (nv+)1, fn+1 , )
(17.41)
[ ]
γ (nv++11) = γ (nv+)1 + γ (vn++11) − γ (nv+)1 .
If the load increments are small enough, the starting iterate can be estimated as the
th
solution from the n load step. Also, a stopping (convergence) criterion is needed
to determine when the effort to generate additional iterates is not rewarded by
increased accuracy.
Careful examination of the relations from this and the incremental formulations
uncovers that
J = KT + KG , (17.42)
so that the incremental stiffness matrix is the same as the Jacobian matrix in Newton
iteration. This, of course, is a satisfying result. The Jacobian matrix can be calculated
by conventional finite-element procedures at the element level followed by conven-
tional assembly procedures. If the incremental equation is only solved once at each
load increment, the solution can be viewed as the first iterate in a Newton iteration
scheme. The one-time incremental solution can potentially be improved by additional
iterations, as shown in Equation 17.41, but at the cost of computing the “residual”
Φ at each load step.
17.9 BUCKLING
Finite-element equations based on classical buckling equations for beams and plates
were addressed in Chapter 14. In the classical equations, geometrically nonlinear
terms appear through a linear correction term, thereby furnishing linear equations.
Here, in the absence of inertia and nonlinearity in the boundary conditions, we briefly
present a general viewpoint based on the incremental equilibrium equation
KT =
∫ M GχG M dV
T T
0 KG =
∫ M S ⊗ IM dV .
T
0 (17.44)
in which the circumflex implies a reference value along the stress path at which l = 1,
and the negative signs on the stresses are present since buckling is associated with
compressive stresses. At the element level, the equation now becomes
ˆ )∆γ = ∆f .
(K T − λK (17.47)
G n +1 n +1
At a given load increment, the critical buckling load for the current path, as a
function of two angles determining the path in the stress space illustrated in
Chapter 14, is obtained by computing the l value rendering (K T − λK ˆ ) singular.
G
17.10 EXERCISES
Tangent-Modulus Tensors
18 for Thermomechanical
Response of Elastomers
18.1 INTRODUCTION
Within an element, the finite-element method makes use of interpolation models for
the displacement vector u(X, t) and temperature T(X, t) (and pressure p = − trace(ττ)/3
in incompressible or near-incompressible materials):
u( X , t ) = NT ( X )γ (t ), T( X , t ) − T0 = ν T ( X )θ (t ), p = ξ T ( X )ψ (t ), (18.1)
f1 = VEC(F − I) = M1 g = U T M2 g, f2 = VEC(F T − I) = M2 g, δe = b Tδ g,
(18.2)
1 T
b = M2G, GT = (F ⊗ I + I ⊗ F T U), ∇T = bTT q
2
and e = VEC(E) is the Lagrangian strain vector. Also, ∇ is the gradient operator
referred to the deformed configuration. The matrix β and the vector βT are typically
expressed in terms of isoparametric coordinates.
227
With φ known as a function of T, I1, I2, and I3, the entropy density η per unit
mass and the specific heat ce at constant strain are obtained as
∂η ∂φ
ce = T η=− . (18.3)
∂T E ∂T
∂φ ∂φ
s T = ρ0
∂e T
=2 ∑ρ φ n ,
i
0 i i φi =
∂Ii
. (18.4)
∂s ∂2φ
DT =
∂e T
=4 ∑ ∑ ρ φ n n + 4∑ ρ φ A ,
i j
0 ij i
T
j
i
0 i i φij =
∂Ii ∂I j
. (18.5)
An expression for DT has been derived by Nicholson and Lin (1997c) for
compressible, incompressible, and near-incompressible elastomers described by
strain-energy functions (Helmholtz free-energy functions) and based on the use of
stretch ratios (singular values of F) rather than invariants.
where ξ is a material function satisfying the constraint ξ(J, T ) = 0 and J = I31 2 = det(F).
It is easily shown that φd depends on the deviatoric Lagrangian strain Ed, due to the
introduction of the deviatoric invariants J2 and J3. The Lagrange multiplier λ is, in
fact, the (true) pressure p:
∂ξ
p = −trace(T )/3 = . (18.7)
∂J T
∂p ∂ξ
κ =− =κ0 . (18.10)
∂J T ∂J T
Alternatively, the latter term results from retaining the lowest nonvanishing term
in a Taylor-series representation of φ about f (T)J − 1.
3
∂φd
η=− + πα f 4 (T)/ρ0 , π = p/ f 3 (T). (18.14)
∂T
∂φd
s T = ρ0 − π f 3 (T)n3T / J
∂e T,π
(18.15)
T
∂s ∂ ∂φd
DTP =
∂e T,π
= ρ0
∂e ∂e [
− π f 3 (T) 2A3 / J − n3n3T / J 3 ]
The latter approach is thought to possess the convenient feature of allowing direct
use of test data, for example, from uniaxial tension. We will now examine several
cases.
The strain-energy function depends only on I1, I2, and incompressibility is expressed
by the constraint I3 = 1, assumed to be satisfied a priori. In this category, the most
widely used models include the Neo-Hookean material:
φ = C1 ( I1 − 3), I3 = 1 (18.16)
φ = C1 ( I1 − 3) + C2 ( I2 − 3), I3 = 1, (18.17)
in which C1 and C2 are material constants. Most finite-element codes with hyper-
elastic elements support the Mooney-Rivlin model. In principle, Mooney-Rivlin
coefficients C1 and C2 can be determined independently by “fitting” suitable load-
deflection curves, for example, uniaxial tension. Values for several different rubber
compounds are listed in Nicholson and Nelson (1990).
Two widely studied strain-energy functions are due to Blatz and Ko (1962). Let G0
be the shear modulus and v0 the Poisson’s ratio, referred to the undeformed config-
uration. The two models are:
ν0
1 1 − 2ν 0 1− 2ν 0 1 + ν0
ρ 0φ1 = G0 I1 + I3 − I3 −
2 ν0 ν0
(18.18)
1 I
ρ 0φ 2 = G0 2 + 2 I3 − 5
2 I3
Let w denote the Helmholtz free energy evaluated at a constant temperature, in which
case it is the strain energy. We note a general expression for w which is implemented
w( J1, J2 , J ) = ∑ ∑ C ( J − 3) ( J − 3) + ∑ ( J − 1) /D ,
i j
ij 1
i
2
j
k
r
k
k Jr = J /(1 + Eth ),
(18.19)
in which Eth is called the thermal expansion strain, while Cij and Dk are material
constants. Several codes also provide software for estimating the model coefficients
from user-supplied data.
Several authors have attempted to uncouple the response into isochoric (incom-
pressible) and volumetric parts even in the compressible range, giving rise to func-
tions of the form φ = φ1(J1, J2) + φ2(J). A number of proposed forms for φ2 are
discussed in Holzappel (1996).
Lin (1996) has been proposed by Holzappel and Simo (1996) for compressible
elastomers described using stretch ratios.
ρ 0φ (λ , T) = ∑ µ (λ
1
p
αp
− 1), T fixed. (18.22)
F(A) = ∑φ A .
0
j
j
(18.23)
Here, φj are constants. A compact expression for the differential dF(A) is pre-
sented using Kronecker Product notation.
The reader is referred to Nicholson and Lin (1997c) for the derivation of the
following expression. With f = VEC(F) and a = VEC(A),
1 T
df ( a) = F′ ⊕ F′da + Wdω
2
∝
df
F ′( A ) = ∑ jφ A
0
j
j −1 dF
dA
= ITEN 22
da
(18.24)
1
W = −( F − AF′/2)T ( F − AF′/2) + ( AT ⊗ F′ − F′ T ⊗ A)
2
We now apply the tensor derivative to elastomers modeled using stretch ratios,
especially in the model presented by Ogden (1986). In particular, a strain-energy
function, w, was proposed, which, for compressible elastomers and isothermal
response, is equivalent to the form
w = tr
∑ ξ [C
i
i
ζi
− I ] ,
(18.26)
in which ci are the eigenvalues of C, and ξi, ζi are material properties. The tangent-
modulus tensor χ appearing in Chapter 17 for the incremental form of the Principle
χ=4 ∑ζ ξ (ζ − 1)C
i
i i i
ζi −2
⊕ Cζ i −2 /2 + 4 ∑ ζ ξ [A
i
i i
T
A]′ Wi (18.27)
3 − ζi ζ ζ ζ i − 1 ζi −2 ζ −2
Wi = − C i ⊗C i + [C ⊗ C − C ⊗ C i ]. (18.28)
2 2
1
w = tr
∑ ξ [Cˆ
i
i
ζi
− I] + κ ( J − 1)2 ,
2
(18.29)
in which κ is the bulk modulus. The expression for χ in Equation 18.27 is affected
by these modifications.
To accommodate thermal effects, it is necessary to recognize that w is simply
the Helmholtz free-energy density ρoφ under isothermal conditions, in which ρo is
the mass density in the undeformed configuration. It is assumed that φ = 0 in the
undeformed configuration. As for invariant-based models, we can obtain a function
φ with three terms: a purely mechanical term φM, a purely thermal term φT , and a
mixed term φTM. Now, with entropy, η, φ satisfies the relations
∂ϕ ∂ϕ
s T = ρo η=− . (18.30)
∂e T ∂T e
Following conventional practice, the specific heat at constant strain, ce = T∂η /∂Te,
is assumed to be constant, from which we obtain
On the assumption that thermal effects in shear (i.e., deviatoric effects) can be
φM = tr
∑ ξ [Cˆ
i
i
ζi
− Ι ] .
(18.32)
Of greatest interest is φTM. The development of Nicholson and Lin (1996) furnishes
κ [β 3 (T) J − 1]2
φ TM = β (T) = (1 + α (T/T0 )/3) −1 . (18.33)
2ρ
The tangent-modulus tensor χ′ = ∂ s/∂ e now has two parts: XM + XTM, in which
XM is recognized as χ, derived in Equation 18.29. Without providing the details,
Kronecker Product algebra furnishes the following:
κ 3 β3 n nT
χTM = β 2 n3n3T + ( β 3 J − 1)A3 − 3 2 3 . (18.34)
Jρ J J
ρ0 χ˙ = s T e˙ − ∇0T q 0 + ρ0 h
where s = VEC(S) and e = VEC(E). Here, χ is the internal energy per unit mass, q0
is the heat-flux vector, ∇0 is the divergence operator referred to undeformed coor-
dinates, and h is the heat input per unit mass, for simplicity’s sake, assumed inde-
pendent of temperature. The state variables are thus e and T. The Helmholtz free
energy, φr per unit mass, and the entropy, η per unit mass, are introduced using
φr = χ − Tη. (18.36)
Now,
[ ]
ρ 0 Tη˙ i 2 = −∇ T0 q0 + ρ 0 h i . (18.39)
This allows us to say that the viscous dissipation is “absorbed” as heat. We also
suppose that reversible effects are “absorbed” as a portion of the heat input as follows:
[
ρ0 Tη˙ r = −∇T0 q0 + ρ0 h r . ] (18.40)
it follows that
The function Ψ is selected such that Λi and Λt are positive scalars, in which case
the inequalities in Equations 18.44a and 18.44b require that
Now, Ψt represents thermal effects, and we assume for simplicity’s sake that Λt is
a material constant. Inequality in Equation 18.46 implies that
( )
− ∇T0 q 0 − ρ0 h i = − sTi e˙ + ρ0ci T˙ (18.53)
and
∂η ∂η
ρ0 Tη˙i 2 = ρ0 T i 2 e˙ + ρ0 T i 2 T˙ (18.54)
∂e ∂T
and
∂ηi 2 ∂ηi 2
− siT = ρ0 T , ci = T . (18.55)
∂e ∂T
Upon adding the relations, we obtain the thermal-field equation
Here, φrm represents the purely mechanical response and can be identified as the
conventional, isothermal, strain-energy density function associated, for example,
with the Mooney-Rivlin model. Again, I1, I2, I3 are the principal invariants of the
(right) Cauchy-Green strain tensor. The formulation can easily be adapted to stretch
ratio-based models, such as the Ogden (1986) model. The function φrt(T) represents
the purely thermal portion of the Helmholtz free-energy density. Finally, φrtm(T, I3)
represents thermomechanical effects, again based on the assumption that the primary
coupling is through volumetric expansion. The quantity φro represents the Helmholtz
free energy in the reference state, and, for simplicity’s sake, is assumed to vanish.
The forms of φrt and φrtm are introduced in the current presentation:
and α is the volumetric coefficient of thermal expansion. For the sake of illustration,
for Φrm(I1, I2, I3), we display the classical two-term Mooney-Rivlin model:
in which J1 = I1/ I31/ 3 and J2 = I2 / I32 / 3 are the “deviatoric invariants” of C. The revers-
ible stress is obtained as
sr = 2φ j n j φ j = ∂φr /∂I j
(18.61)
n1 = i, i = VEC(I) n1 = I1i − c, c = VEC(C) n3 = I3VEC(C−1 )
The viscous stress si depends on the shear part of the strain rate as well as the
temperature. However, since the elastomers of interest are nearly incompressible, to
good approximation si can be taken as a function of the (total) Lagrangian strain rate.
The current framework admits several possible expressions for Ψi, of which an
example was already given in Section 6.3. Here, taking a more general viewpoint,
we seek expressions of the form Ψi = 12 e˙ T Dv (e, T)e˙ , in which Dv is called the
viscosity tensor; it is symmetric and positive-definite. (Of course, the correct expres-
sion is determined by experiments.) The simplest example was furnished in Section
18.6.3. As a second example, to ensure isotropy, suppose that Ψi is a function of J̇1
and J˙2 : Ψi ( J˙1 , J˙2 ), and note that
J˙1 = m1T e˙, m1T = 2 iT − 1 I1 n3T I31 3 J˙2 = mT2 e˙, mT2 = 2 nT2 − 23 I2 n3T I32 3 .
I I
3 3 3
(18.63)
[
Ψi = µ1 (T) C1v J˙12 /2 + C2 v J˙2 2 , ] (18.64)
in which C1v and C2v are positive material coefficients. We obtain the viscosity tensor,
[
Dv = µ (T) C1v m1m1T + C2 v m2 mT2 . ] (18.65)
tensor D, in particular, Ψi = µ(T)tr(D )/2, which has the advantage in that the
2
which is positive-definite.
in which τ0 denotes the traction vector on the undeformed surface S0. As illustrated
in the examples in the previous section, we expect that the dissipation potential has
the form Ψi = 12 ėT Dv(e, T) ė, from which
si = Dv e˙ , (18.68)
in which Dv is again the viscosity tensor, and it will be taken as symmetric and
positive-definite. (It is positive-definite since siTe˙ ≥ 0 for all e˙ .) Equation 18.67 is
thus rewritten as
∫ δe D e˙dV = ∫ δu t dS − ∫ δe s dV .
T
i 0
T
0 0
T
r 0 (18.69)
[
ρ0 (η˙ r + η˙i 2 ) = −∇T0 q0 + ρ0 h / T, ] (18.70)
and note that it is in rate form, in contrast to the equation of mechanical equilibrium
(see Equation 18.69). For the sake of a unified rate formulation, we first introduce
the integrated form of this relation. The current value of ηr + ηi2, assuming that the
initial values of the entropies vanish, is now given by
ρ0 (ηr + ηi 2 ) =
∫ [[−∇ q + ρ h]/ T]dt.
T
0 0 0 (18.71)
)dV0 = δ T
∫ ∫ [[−∇ q + ρ h]/ T]dt dV .
∫ δ Tρ (η + η
0 r i2
T
0 0 0 0 (18.72)
(The motivation behind writing Equations 18.71 and 18.72 is simply to establish
how a rate principle is obtained in the thermal field as the counterpart of the rate
(incremental) principle for the mechanical field.) Upon approximating T in the
denominator by T0 and letting k denote the thermal conductivity, we can obtain the
thermal-equilibrium equation in the form
∫ ∫
+ [k (∇0δ T)T ∇0δ T/T0 ]dV0 = δ Tρ0 h/T0 dV0 − nT (δ Tq/T0 )dS0
∫ (18.74)
18.9 EXERCISES
1. Derive explicit forms of the stress and tangent-modulus tensors using the
Helmoltz potential in Equation 18.20.
2. Derive the quantities m1 and m2 in Equation 18.63.
3. Verify Equation 18.58 by recovering ce upon differentiating twice with
respect to T.
4. Substitute the required interpolation models in Equations 18.69 and 18.74
to obtain an element-level finite-element equation for the mechanical and
thermal fields.
Inelastic and
19 Thermoinelastic Materials
19.1 PLASTICITY
Plasticity and thermoplasticity are topics central to the analysis of important appli-
cations, such as metal forming, ballistics, and welding. The main goal of this section
is to present a model of plasticity and thermoplasticity, along with variational and
finite-element statements, accommodating the challenging problems of finite strain
and kinematic hardening.
19.1.1 KINEMATICS
Elastic and plastic deformation satisfies the additive decomposition
D = D r + Di , (19.1)
∃=
∫ Ddt ∃r =
∫ D dt
r ∃i =
∫ D dt.
i (19.2)
E˙ = F T DF
∫
Er = F T D r Fdt
∫
Ei = F T D i Fdt. (19.3)
19.1.2 PLASTICITY
We will present a constitutive equation for plasticity to illustrate how the tangent
modulus is stated. The ideas leading to the equation will be presented subsequently
in the section on thermoplasticity. With χ e = ITEN22(De) and De denoting the
243
C
S11 A
E
D
E
B
Ei F E11
tangent-modulus tensor relating the elastic-strain rate to the stress rate (assuming
a linear relation), the constitutive equation of interest is
−1
e˙ i = Ci s˙, e˙ e = Ces˙, Ce = χ e , k˙ = Ke˙ i
T
∂Ψ ∂Ψ ∂Ψ T (19.4)
∂Ψ ∂Ψi
Ci = i H, H = − i + i K i .
∂s ∂s ∂ei ∂k ∂s
Sll
Sl
Sll
Sl
Slll
A reference point interior to the yield surface, sometimes called the back stress,
must be identified to serve as the point at which the elastic strain vanishes. Com-
bined isotropic and kinematic hardening are shown in Figure 19.2(c). However, the
yield surface contracts, which is closer to actual observations (e.g., Ellyin [1997]).
0749_Frame_C19 Page 246 Wednesday, February 19, 2003 5:34 PM
Sll
Sl
Slll
The rate of movement must exceed the rate of contraction for the material to remain
stable with a positive tangent modulus.
Combining the elastic and inelastic portions furnishes the tangent-modulus tensor:
[ ]
−1
χ = χe−1 + Ci = [I + χeCi ]−1 χe . (19.5)
Suppose that in uniaxial tension, the elastic modulus is Ee and the inelastic
modulus-relating stress and inelastic strain increments are Ei, and Ei << Ee. The total
Ei
uniaxial modulus is then .
(1 + E i / E e )
19.2 THERMOPLASTICITY
As in Chapter 18, two potential functions are introduced to provide a systematic
way to describe irreversible and dissipative effects. The first is interpreted as the
Helmholtz free-energy density, and the second is for dissipative effects. To accom-
modate kinematic hardening, we also assume an extension of the Green and Naghdi
(G-N) (1965) formulation, in which the Helmholtz free energy decomposes into
reversible and irreversible parts, with the irreversible part depending on the “plastic
strain.” Here, it also depends on the temperature and a workless internal state variable.
where χo is the internal energy per unit mass in the undeformed configuration and
s = VEC(S), e = VEC(E), and β0 is the flux per unit mass associated with α0. However,
note that β = 0, thus βi = −ββr. Also, c is the internal energy per unit mass, q0 is the
heat-flux vector referred to undeformed coordinates, and h is the heat input per unit
mass, for simplicity’s sake, assumed independent of temperature. The state variables
are Er , Ei , T, and α 0.
The next few paragraphs will go over some of the same ground as for damped
elastomers in Chapter 18, except for two major points. In that chapter, the stress
was assumed to decompose into reversible and irreversible portions in the spirit of
elementary Voigt models. In the current context, the strain shows the decomposition
in the spirit of the classical Maxwell model. In addition, as seen in the following,
it proves beneficial to introduce a workless internal variable to give the model the
flexibility to accommodate phenomena such as kinematic hardening.
The Helmholtz free energy, φ , per unit mass and the entropy, η, per unit mass
are introduced using
φ = χ − Tη. (19.7)
Now,
Extending the G-N formulation, let s* = ρ0∂φi /∂ei and assume that ηi = −∂φi /∂T
T
α 0 = βT0i . Now,
and ρ0∂φi /∂α
On the expectation that properties governing heat transfer are not affected by
strain, we introduce the decomposition into inelastic and thermal portions:
Λt
Ψ = Ψi + Ψt ρ0 Ψt = q T0 q 0 , (19.15a)
2
−∇0 T / T = q 0 / Λ t . (19.15b)
e˙ r = Cr (s − s*)• + ar T˙ . (19.16)
e˙ i = Ci (s − s*)• + ai T˙ (19.17a)
Πi (∋, ei , k, T, ηi 2 ) = 0, (19.18)
and Πi is called the yield function. Here, the vector k is introduced to represent the
effect of the history of inelastic strain, ėi , such as work hardening. It is assumed to
be given by a relation of the form
The “consistency condition” requires that Π̇i = 0 during thermoplastic flow, from
which
d Πi d Πi d Πi ˙ d Πi ˙ d Πi
∋˙ + e˙ + k+ T+ η˙ = 0. (19.20)
d∋ dei i dk dT dηi i
T
dΠ i d Πi
e˙ i = Λ i (a) η˙ i = Λ i (b). (19.21)
d∋ dηi
0749_Frame_C19 Page 250 Wednesday, February 19, 2003 5:34 PM
Equation 19.14a suggests that the yield function may be identified as the dissi-
pation potential: Πi = ρ0Ψi. Standard manipulation furnishes
e˙ i = Ci ∋˙ + ai T˙ η˙i 2 = biT ∋˙ + ci T˙
T T
∂Ψ ∂Ψi ∂Ψ ∂Ψi
Ci = i H ai = bi = i H (19.22)
∂∋ ∂∋ ∂∋ ∂T
∂Ψ
2
∂Ψ ∂Ψ ∂Ψ T ∂Ψ ∂Ψ
ci = i H H = − i + i K i + i i
∂T ∂ei ∂k ∂∋ ∂ηi 2 ∂T
and H must be positive for Λi to be positive. Note that, in the current formulation,
the dependence of the yield function on temperature accounts for ci. The thermody-
namic inequality shown in Equation 19.13a is now satisfied if H > 0.
Next, note that s* depends on ei , T, and α 0 since s* = ρ0∂φi /∂ei. For simplicity’s
T
sake, we neglect dependence on α 0 and assume that a relation of the following form
can be measured for s*:
T
∂ ∂
s˙* = Γe˙ i + ϑ T˙ Γ= Ψ ϑ T = ∂2 Ψi / ∂ei ∂T. (19.23)
∂ei ∂ei I
19.3.1 EXAMPLE
We now provide a simple example using the Helmholtz free-energy density function
and the dissipation-potential function to derive constitutive relations. The following
expression involves a Von Mises yield function, linear kinematic hardening, linear
work hardening, and linear thermal softening.
0749_Frame_C19 Page 251 Wednesday, February 19, 2003 5:34 PM
φ = φr + φi ρ0φi = k3eiT ei
(19.25)
ρ0φr = eTr Cr−1e r / 2 − a T Cr−1 (T − T0 )e r + ρ0 c′r T(1 − ln(T / T0 ))
Finally,
∂ 2φ r
cr = −T = c′ (19.27)
∂T 2
Λt
Ψ = Ψi + Ψt ρ0 Ψt = q T0 q 0 (19.28)
2
∋∋T k2 ∋
Ci = H ci = k22 H ai = bi = H (19.31)
∋T ∋ ∋T ∋
Sll
T3
T2
T1
T4
T0
T0
T0
T0
Sl
T0 T0
Slll
T
∂Ψi
1 − k , 1−
k
≥0
k ∂∋ k if
µω e˙i =< 1 − > , <1− >= Ψi Ψi
Ψi ∂Ψi ∂Ψi
T Ψi 0, otherwise,
∂∋ ∂∋
(19.32)
and Ψi(∋, ei, k, T, ηi) is a loading surface function. The elastic response is still
considered linear in the form
e˙ r = χ r−1s˙ + α r T.
˙ (19.33)
T
∂ ∂
s˙* = Γe˙ i + ϑT˙ Γ= Ψ ϑ T = ∂2 Ψi /∂ei ∂T. (19.34)
∂ei ∂ei i
Sll
∗
S
stress point
Sl
Slll
T
∂Ψi
χ k ∂∋
⋅s˙ = χ r e˙ + χ r α r T˙ − Γ − r < 1 − > . (19.35)
µv Ψi ∂Ψi ∂Ψi
T
∂∋ ∂∋
In particular, the Incremental Principle of Virtual Work is now stated, to first order, as
T
∂Ψi
χ ∂∋
∫ ∫
k
= δ∆uT ∆τ dSo + δ∆eT Γ − r < 1 − > dVo
µv Ψi ∂Ψi ∂Ψi
T
∂∋ ∂∋
(19.36)
f˙ = Ξ( f , ei , T ), (19.37)
0749_Frame_C19 Page 255 Wednesday, February 19, 2003 5:34 PM
S11
E3
E2
E1
E11
for which several specific forms have been proposed. To this point, a nominal stress
is used in the sense that the reduced ability of material to support stress is not
accommodated.
The second school of thought is more empirical in nature and is not dependent
on a specific mechanism. It uses the parameter D, which is interpreted as the fraction
of damaged area Ad to total area Ao that the stress (traction) acts on. Consider a uniaxial
tensile specimen with damage, but experiencing elastic behavior. Suppose that dam-
aged area Ad can no longer support a load (is damaged). For a given load P, the true
stress at a point in the undamaged zone is S = A −P A = 1 −1 D AP = 1 −1 D S ′. Here, S′
o D o
is a nominal stress, but is also the measured stress. If E is the elastic modulus
measured in an undamaged specimen, the modulus measured in the current specimen
will be E′ = E(1 − D), demonstrating that damage is manifest in small changes in
properties.
As an illustration of damage, suppose specimens are loaded into the plastic
range, unloaded, and then loaded again. Without damage, the stress-strain curve
should return to its original path. However, due to the damage, there are slight
changes in the elastic slope, in the yield stress, and in the slope after yield (exag-
gerated in Figure 19.5).
From the standpoint of thermodynamics, damage is a dissipative internal variable.
In reality, the amount of mechanical or thermal energy absorbed by damage is probably
small, so that its role in the energy-balance equation can be neglected. At the risk of
being slightly conservative, in dynamic (adiabatic) problems, the plastic work can be
assumed to be completely converted into heat. Even so, for the sake of a consistent
framework for treating dissipation, a dissipation potential, Ψd, can be introduced for
damage, as has been done, for example, by Bonora (1997). The contribution to the
irreversible entropy production can be introduced in the form D Ḋ ≥ 0, in which D
is the “force” associated with flux Ḋ . Positive dissipation is assured if we assume
∂Ψd 1
D = , Ψd = Λ (e , T, k ) D˙ 2 , Λ d (ei , T, k ) > 0. (19.38)
∂D˙ 2 d i
0749_Frame_C19 Page 256 Wednesday, February 19, 2003 5:34 PM
An example of a satisfactory function is Λd (ei , T, k) = Λdo ∫(s − s*) ėi dt, Λdo a
positive constant, showing damage to depend on plastic work.
Specific examples of constitutive relations for damage are given, for example,
in Bonora (1997).
At the current values of the damage parameter, the finite-element equations are
solved for the nodal displacements, from which the inelastic strains can be computed.
This information can then be used to update the damage-parameter values. Upon
doing so, the damage-parameter values are compared to critical values. As stated
previously, if the critical value is obtained, the element is deleted. The path of deleted
elements can be viewed as a crack.
The code LS-DYNA Ver. 9.5, (2000) incorporates a material model that includes
viscoplasticity and damage mechanics. It can easily be upgraded to include thermal
effects, assuming that all viscoplastic work is turned into heat. Such a model has
been shown to reproduce the location and path of a crack in a dynamically loaded
welded structure (see Moraes [2002]).
19.6 EXERCISES
1. In isothermal plasticity, assuming the following yield function, find the
uniaxial stress-strain curve:
t
Ψi = (s − k1ei )T (s − k1ei ) − ko + k2
∫
0
e˙ i T e˙ i dt .
Assume small strain and that the plastic strain is incompressible: tr(Ei ) = 0.
2. Regard the expression in Exercise 1 as defining the reference-yield surface
in viscoplasticity, with viscosity hv. Find the stress-strain curve under
uniaxial tension if a constant strain rate is imposed.
Advanced Numerical
20 Methods
In nonlinear finite-element analysis, solutions are typically sought using Newton
iteration, either in classical form or augmented as an arc-length method to bypass
critical points in the load-deflection behavior. Here, two additional topics of interest
are briefly presented.
257
A = A l + diag(A) + A u, (20.3)
1 1
lower(A) = Al + diag(A), upper(A) = Au + diag(A). (20.4)
2 2
Note that: (a) the product of two lower-triangular matrices is also lower-triangular,
and (b) the inverse of a nonsingular, lower-triangular matrix is also lower-triangular.
Likewise, the product of two upper-triangular matrices is upper-triangular, and the
inverse of a nonsingular, upper-triangular matrix is upper-triangular. In proof of (a),
let L and L be two n × n lower-triangular matrices. The ij entry of the product
(1) (2) th
matrix is given by ∑ k =1,n lik lkj . Since L is lower-triangular, lik(1) vanishes unless
(1) ( 2 ) (1)
k ≤ i. Similarly, lkj( 2 ) vanishes unless k ≥ j. Clearly, all entries of ∑ k =1,n lik(1)lkj( 2 ) vanish
unless i ≥ j, which is to say that L L is lower-triangular.
(1) (2)
l11a1 j =0
l21a1 j + l22 a2 j =0
l j1a1 j + l j 2 a2 j + l j 3a3 j + L + l jj a jj = 1
−1 −1
Forward substitution establishes that akj = 0, if k < j, and ajj = l jj , thus, A = L is
lower-triangular.
from which
(
∆L = L 0 lower L−01 ∆KL−0T − L−01 ∆L∆LT L−0T . ) (20.9)
The factor of 1/2 in the definition of the lower and upper matrix functions is
motivated by the fact that the diagonal entries of L−01 ∆L and ∆LT L−0T are the same.
Furthermore, for banded matrices, if ∆L and L0 have the same semibandwidth,
b, it follows that, for the correct value of ∆L, L−01 ∆KL−0T − L−01 ∆L∆LT L−0T is also
banded, with a bandwidth no greater than b. Unfortunately, it is not yet clear how
to take advantage of this behavior.
An iteration scheme based on Equation 20.9 is introduced as
(
∆L( j +1) = L 0 lower L−01 ∆KL−0T − L−01 ∆L( j ) ∆L( j ) L−0T
T
)
(20.10)
(
∆L(1) = L 0 lower L−01 ∆KL−0T )
Explicit formation of the fully populated inverses L−01 and L−0T can be avoided
by using forward and backward substitution. In particular, L−01 ∆K = [L−01 ∆k1
L−01 ∆k 2 K L−01 ∆k n ], where ∆k1 is the first column of ∆K. We can now solve for
b j = L−01∆k j by solving the system L0 bj = ∆kj.
in which (∆A)∞ is the solution (converged iterate) for ∆A. Consider the iteration
scheme
1
max λ j ( ∆A ∝ ) < min λ (A), (20.14)
j 2 k k
in which λj(∆A) denotes the j eigenvalue of the n × n matrix ∆A. Clearly, convergence
th
is expected if the perturbation matrix has a sufficiently small norm. Applied to the current
problem, we also expect convergence will occur if max j | λ j ( ∆L∞ ) |< 12 mink | λk (L) |.
a 0 a2 ab
L0 = , K0 = . (20.15)
b c ab b 2 + c 2
a 0 a2 ab
L= , K0 = (20.16)
b c + d ab b 2 + (c + d )2
so that
0 0
∆K = . (20.17)
0 d (2c + d )
We are interested in the case in which d/c << 1, for example, d/c = 0.1, ensuring
that the perturbation is small. We also use the fact that
1 c 0
L−01 = . (20.18)
ac − b a
The correct answer, which should emerge from the iteration scheme, is
0 0
∆L∝ = . (20.19)
0 d
The initial iterate is found from straightforward manipulation as
0 0
∆L =
(1)
1 d . (20.20)
0 d 1+
2 c
d 1 +
1 d
−d
2 c
=
d
= 5% (20.21)
0 0
∆L( 2 ) = 1 ∆
2
0 ∆−
2 c
0 0
= (20.22)
d 1 − − 1 d3
2 3
0 d
8 c
2
c
d2 1 + 1 d
error = 8
c2 c
= 0.011 +
1 (20.23)
80
K MM K MP dγ dfM
T = = . (20.24)
− K MP 0 dψ 0
If KMM is singular, it can be replaced with K′MM = KMM + χKMP K MP , and χ can be
T
j +1
K ′MM K MP dγ dfM
= j , (20.25)
− K TMP I / ρa dψ dψ / ρa
th
in which the superscript j denotes the j iterate and ra is an acceleration parameter.
This scheme converges rapidly for suitable choices of ra.
If the assumed pressure fields are discontinuous at the element boundaries, this
method can be used at the element level to eliminate pressure variables (see Hughes,
1987). In this event, the global equilibrium equation only involves displacement
degrees-of-freedom.
For each iteration, it is necessary to solve a linear system. Computation can be
expedited using a convenient version of the LU decomposition. Let L1 and L2 denote
lower-triangular matrices arising in the following Cholesky decompositions:
Forward and backward substitution can now be exploited to solve the linear
system arising in the incremental finite-element method.
20.3 EXERCISES
a 0 0 a b d a2 ab ad
K = b c 0 0 c e = ab b2 + c2 bd + ce
d e f 0 0 f ad bd + ce d 2 + e 2 + f 2
a 0 0 a b d
K + ∆K = b c 0 0 c e + g
d e+g f 0 0 f
a2 ab ad
= ab b2 + c2 bd + c(e + g) .
ad bd + c(e + g) d 2 + (e + g) 2 + f 2
2. Verify that the product and inverse of lower-triangular matrices are lower-
triangular using
a 0 d 0
L1 = , L2 = .
b c e f
2 −1 1
A = −1 2 −1.
−1 1 0
2
Ab = −1.
1
265
267
Tvergaard, V., Influence of voids on shear band instabilities under plane strain conditions,
Int. J. Fracture, 17, 389–407, 1981.
Ziegler, H. and Wehrli, C., The derivation of constitutive relations from the free energy and
the dissipation function, Adv. Appl. Mech., 25, 187, 1987.