You are on page 1of 18

Institut f

ur Baustatik und Baudynamik

Enhanced Assumed Strain Method for Non-Linear Finite Elements

By
Pratik Upadhyay and Harsh Sharma

Supervisor
Anne Schauble

Contents
1 Notations

2 Introduction

2.1

The problem of Locking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.2

Various possible approaches to prevent locking . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.3

Concept of the EAS Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3 The Formulation of EAS Method

3.1

Mixed Finite Element Formulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.2

Algorithmic Box . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11

4 Testing and Verification

12

4.1

Description of Test Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12

4.2

Geometrically Linear EAS Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

13

4.2.1

Cooks Membrane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

13

4.2.2

Distortion Test Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

14

Geometrically Non-Linear EAS testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15

4.3.1

Curved Beam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15

4.3.2

Distortion test - Curved Beam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16

4.3

5 Suggested Future Work on this element

17

6 References

17

Notations

Symbol

Meaning

Total Strain

Ec

Compatible Strain

e
E

Enhanced Strain

eb

Body forces

e
t

Traction forces

Cauchy Stress

b S
S,

2nd Piola Kirchhoff Stress

Free Parameters for Enhanced Strain

Non Linear Strain displacement Matrix

Ni

Components of Shape function matrix

Material Matrix

Gij

Geometric Stiffness matrix

Interpolation Matrix

Jacobian Matrix

W0S

Free energy function

f ext

External force

f int

Internal force

Residual

Stiffness Matrix

Introduction

This report deals with the problem of locking in finite elements and various methods to overcome it.The
methods are briefly discussed in the following sections and one of the methods viz. Enhanced Assumed
Strain Method is presented in detail. The implementation of an EAS 8 noded Hexahedral element is
carried out for a Non-Linear problem.

2.1

The problem of Locking

Locking means the effect of a reduced rate of convergence for coarse meshes in dependence of a critical
parameter. In simpler terms, locking occurs when a finite element behaves too stiffly during deformation,
due to the way its shape functions are defined. The discretization of the variational principle gives rise
to parasitic shear stress terms ,which cause the formation of hour glass modes in the element. Nearly
all first order FE except Bernoulli beams and Kirchhoff-love shell elements show this kind of behaviour.
This problem is very pronounced in cases of bending. It is also exacerbated with an increasingly
slender element.The kind of locking problems considered here are :
Shear Locking
Volumetric Locking
Volumetric locking is less pronounced in case of compressible materials (i.e Poisson ratio 0)

2.2

Various possible approaches to prevent locking

In this section various possible approaches used to eliminate locking are described briefly.
1. Selective Reduced Integration
This is a kind of reduced integration scheme which establishes a good compromise between
efficiency and stability. The strain energy is split into different parts and integrated with different
rules. Reduced integration leads to rank insufficiency for example for Q1 - it is also possible and
used, but with hourglass stabilization. Selective reduced integration is possible to reduce shear
locking by 2x2 integration for normal part, 1 Gauss Point for shear part. It is capable of removing
all kinds of locking.
2. Method of Incompatible modes
This is one of the first non-conforming finite element methods. It removes both shear and
volumetric locking by use of incompatible displacement modes added to the standard element.In
effect,local degrees of freedom are added to the element which do not interact with the global
system.These DOFs are eliminated by Static Condensation
3. Assumed Natural Strain Method
The above described methods dont perform so well with distorted meshes or with plate and shell
elements.As a result the ANS method based on the Hu-Wazishu principle is used. At its core
the method is a collocation method, where certain sampling points are selected and strain values
within the element are interpolated from these points.
3

4. Hybrid Stress Formulations


These methods are based on the Hellinger Reisner Variational principal. The idea is to make stress
a free parameter rather than dependent on displacements. As a result we can simply choose not
to approximate the parasitic terms. This method requires inversion of the material matrix, which
is not always possible with non-linear material behaviour.
5. Enhanced Assumed Strain Method Formulations(EAS)
This method is derived from the Hu Wazishu Principle. These are the most popular elements in
commercial codes due to the computational efficieny.However it is not so good for shell elements
as it cannot elimnate trapezoidal locking. More about this method is discussed in the following
section.

2.3

Concept of the EAS Method

The EAS Method is an alternative to the hybrid stress formulation. It is capable of eliminating shear
and volumetric locking. In the hybrid stress formulation, the shear stresses are simply removed. In
the EAS formulation we add free parameter strain components, also called (enhanced strains).
The added quantities are removed with the help of a variational constraint and static condensation.
As a result, the stiffness matrix is the same size as a standard element. Furthermore, the material
matrix need not be inverted, making it preferable for non-linear material behaviour.
The starting point for the EAS method is the Hu-Wazishu principle.

Z
HW (u, , ) =

[(uT LT ) uT p T ( Lu) T ( C)]d

u P d

T nT (u u)d (1)

du

Instead of immediately discretizing the principle, we Re-Parametrize the strain tensor as follows
= c + e = Lu + e

(2)

= u + e = Lu + e

(3)

The stresses are eliminated from the variational principle by use of an orthogonality condition. Thus
R
R
the enhanced assumed strains e
, mustsatisf ythef ollowingcondition. T ed = T ed = 0

The free parameters (i ) that control the enhanced strains are statically condensed out during the
discretization.
A complete derivation for a 3-D Geometrically Non-Linear Element is done in the next section

The Formulation of EAS Method

In this work, we introduce three independent variables as Second Piola Kirschoff Stress, Enhanced
Strains and Displacements into weak form via Hu Washizu mixed finite element formulation. Further,
the Second Piola Kirschoff stress will be eliminated via Orthogonality condition.
The main idea is to split the total strain field into compatible and enhanced parts as follows:

E := Ec + E

(4)

Where, compatible strains Ec are defined as geometrically non-linear Green-Langrangian strains for
are interpolated via a
displacement based iso-parametric 3D element. The enhanced strains E
interpolation matrix in iso-parametric space, which will be mapped to real physical space. Compatible
strain parts Ec are given as follows:

T

1
I + Gradu I + Gradu I
(5)
2
Further, with the Hu-Washizu priniciple, we introduce the following three field variational function:
Ec =

S) = int (u, E,
S) + ext (u)

= (u,
E,

(6)

Assuming the material to be homogenous and hyper-elastic, following expressions for internal and
external potentials are introduced:
Z



S:E
dV
W0S Ec + E

int =

(7)

Where W0S is the internal stored energy for the reference confiiguration. Further, the potential
corresponding to external conservative forces is give as
Z

Z
e udV
0 b

ext =

et udA

(8)

Now, to obtain the weak form, we make first variation of the total Potential function equal to zero
=

Z 

W0S




E + E S : E dV
c

Z
e udV
0 b

et udA MIN

(9)

For to be minimum, its first variation should vanish


= 0

(10)





S u, E,
S = d u , E
 , S = 0
= D u, E,
d =0

(11)

u = u + u

(12)

 = E
+  E

(13)

Where, first variation could also be written as

Where,

S = S + S

(14)

The first variation of Potential function can be represented as follows

=! 0
u +
: S +
: E

u
S
E
As mentioned in paper from S.Klinkel and W.Wagner, above equation can be simplified to
=

Z
B

W0S
: Ec dV
E

e udV
0 b
B

et udA +
B


W0S

S : EdV

(15)

S : EdV
= 0 (16)

With Ec can be described as follows


Ec =


T

1
GradT u I + Gradu + I + Gradu Gradu
2

(17)

we get following
Since, the first variation has to vanish for any arbitrary variations u and E
relations
Z

S : EdV
=0

(18)

Z
B

W0S
E


W0S

S : EdV
=0
E
B
Z
Z
c
e
et udA = 0
: E dV
0 b udV
B

(19)
(20)

From the above equations we get the following Euler Langrangian equations
=0
E

(21)

W0S
=S
E

Div FS + 0 b = 0

(22)
(23)

:=
In the previous expression for funtional variation, we introduce stress term S


S =
u, E,

Z
B

: Ec dV
S

Z
e udV
0 b

W0S
E

et udA+
Z

S : EdV
S

S : EdV

(24)

Above equation = 0 is a system of Non-Linear equations which needs to be solved via Newton
Raphson Iteration scheme. We expand around current iteration level k to get




k+1 , Sk+1 = uk , E
k , Sk + D uk , E
k , Sk uk+1 , E
k+1 , Sk+1 = 0
uk+1 , E
Where the second term in the above expression can be extended as

(25)

3.1

c W0S

W0S
k , Sk uk+1 , E
k+1 , Sk+1 =
D uk , E
E
E dV +
Ec
EdV +
EE
EE
B
B
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
W0S
W0S
W0S
c
c

: SdV
E dV +
E
EdV +
E
E dV
S : EdV
E
E
EE
EE
B
B
B
B
B
(26)


Mixed Finite Element Formulations

To describe the compatible strains Ec we use the standard shape function for a 8 node element in

isoparametric space, such that NA B = BA . Using these shape functions we can describe geometry
and displacement fields as
xe =

nX
elem

NI xI

ue =

nX
elem

NI uI

(27)

I=1

I=1

Compatible Green strains can be discretized as


c

E =

nX
elem

BI uI

(28)

I=1

Where BI is Geometrically Non-Linear Strain Displacement Matrix which will be as a function of


displacements u. Further, we introduce the discretization of enhanced strains in Isoparametric space
at an element level as

e = M , , e

(29)

Where, M is interpolation matrix for enhanced strains in isoparametric space. e is internal strain
parameter vector, whose size could be larger than enhanced strain vector. However, this strain in
isoparametric space has to be transformed into real physical space with Jacobian matrix of
isoparametric element evaluated at center of element.
kl =

detJ
ij Jlj0
Jki0 E
detJ0

e = detJ0 TT
E
detJ 0
Where, J0 is Jacobian matrix evaluated at center of the isoparametric element

(30)

(31)

x, y, z,


J0 = x, y, z,

=0,=0,=0
x, y, z,
and T0 can be referred to Paper by Andelfinger and Ramm. Further, to determine the interpolation
Matrix M, we consider a patch test with element-wise constant stresses S0e and satisfy the following
equation
Z

S0e Ee dV = 0

(32)

using expression for Ee and dV = det Jddd we get


Z

S0e

detJ0 T
T detJddd = 0
detJ 0

(33)

All the constant quantities like S0e , detJ0 and T0 can be taken to right side giving a useful relation
for interpolation matrix M
Z


M , , e ddd = 0

(34)

One possible choice for M which satisfy the above patch test can be obtained from Andelfinger and

Ramm. Thus, we can represent the interpolation function GE , , for Enhanced Green Strains in
e as
real physical space E
 detJ0 T

GE , , =
T0 M , ,
(35)
detJ
Now, we use the interpolation functions presented so far to describe the variational formulation. We
assume a hyperelastic material such that elasticity tensor could be represented as
W0S
(36)
EE
Considering that E is symmetric and W0S has potential properties, we can represent C in a 66
matrix form. Further, we define a stress field as
C=

= W0S
S
E

(37)

with following order of vector components


= S11 , S22 , S33 , S12 , S13 , S23
S

T

(38)

Now we make use of the orthogonality condition between enhanced strains and discontinuous stresses
Z

S : EdV
=

S : EdV
=

S : EdV
=

: SdV = 0
E

(39)

and simplify the variational formulation k+1 = 0 into following equation

: EdV

S
+

: E dV
S
c

BZ
B

Z
0 b udV

et udA+
Z

c
c
c

+
E : C : E + S : E dV +
Ec : C : EdV
B
Z
Z
c

: C : EdV

E : C : E dV +
E
= 0 (40)
B

Now making use of the interpolation functions for compatible and enhanced strains as introduced
before
c

E =

nX
elem

e = GE e
E

BI uI

I=1

(41)

we get the discreetized form of the consistent linearization

nX
elem
I=1

uTI

Z

BTI SdV

NTI 0 bdV

nX
elem Z
J=1

Te

NTI etdV +

BTI CBJ


+ GIJ dV uJ +

BTI CGE dV e

Z

GTE SdV

nX
elem

GTE CBJ dV

Z
uJ +

J=1


GTE CGE dV e = 0 (42)

R
Where, the part B GIJ dV is the so called Geometric or Initial-Stress stiffness matrix.
Here we introduce the following quantities
f

int

BTI SdV

(43)

ext

NTI 0 bdV

=
B

Z
+

NTI etdV


BTI CBJ + GIJ dV

k=

(44)

(45)

BTI CGE dV

(46)

GTE SdV

(47)

GTE CBJ dV

(48)

GTE CGE dV

(49)

h=
B

Z
=
B

Z
H=
B

using above terms we can re-write the discretized consistent linearization of weak form as follows


uT f int f ext + ku + T + T h + u + H = 0

(50)

which should be satisfied for any arbitrary values of uT and T , thus we get following system of
equations

"

# "
#"
#
f int f ext
k T
u
+
=0
h
H

(51)

performing Static Condensation on above system of equations to eliminate we get


= H1 h H1 u

(52)

f int f ext + ku + T = 0

(53)

f int f ext + ku T H1 h T H1 u = 0

(54)

re-arranging these equations we get



k T H1 u = f int f ext + T H1 h

(55)

KT u = R

(56)

where KT = k T H1 and R = f int f ext + T H1 h.


We then perform the following update procedure
uk+1 = uk + u

(57)

k+1 = k H1 h + u

(58)

And we are performing the stress recovery with following equation


= C Ec + E

10

(59)

3.2

Algorithmic Box

Following Algorithm is followed for the Finite Element Implementation

11

4
4.1

Testing and Verification


Description of Test Cases

To verify that the formulation of the element is stable and gives correct results, first we performed a
test study on a standard cantilever arrangement meshed with a single element and compared tip
displacement from 3 different sources: NumPro Implementation, Maple and ABAQUS. We obtained a
good similarity in the results, which verifies that our NumPro FE implementation works fine. The
cantilever beam is modeled in ABAQUS with xxxx element. Total tip load applied is 1280 N
distributed equally on all the 4 nodes.

Figure 1: Cantilever modeled with Single Element - Geometry

Figure 2: Cantilever modeled with Single Element - Material

Figure 3: Cantilever Tip Displacement Plot - ABAQUS


Tool
Tip Displacement

ABAQUS MAPLE
0.0198

0.018

NumPro
0.0188

The closely approximated solutions for tip displacement confirms the validity of our Element
formulation against commercial FE code ABAQUS. The element used in ABAQUS is C3D8R with
enhanced hourglass formulation.
12

4.2

Geometrically Linear EAS Testing

To study the Linear behaviour of Hexaeder8-EAS element we first take up the Standard Cooks
Membrane test for a varying mesh density to perform the convergence study. Further, we perform a
distortion test study to check the behaviour of Hexaeder8-EAS element with increasing trapezoidal
locking.
4.2.1

Cooks Membrane

In first test, we take up the popular Cooks Membrane to check the antilocking behaviour of
Hexaeder8-EAS elements in the geometrically linear setting. We compare the solutions with standard
Hexaeder8. We observe that Hexaeder8-EAS gives good antilocking response in geometrically linear
case. Following is the Cooks membrane used for the study.

Figure 5: Cooks Membrane FE Mesh

Figure 4: Cooks Membrane Description

Mesh Desnity
Hexaeder8

44

66

1515

18.577 22.008

24.363

Hexaeder8-EAS 23.242 25.909

25.129

As expected, the Hexaeder8-EAS already gives a stabilized converged solution. Following is the
graphical representation for the convergence study:

Figure 6: Tip Displacement vs. Element Numbers

13

4.2.2

Distortion Test Study

Next we try to understand the antilocking behaviour of Hexaeder8-EAS elements by performing a


distortion test study. We check the cantilever tip displacement for Hexaeder8 and Hexaerder8-EAS
elements with increasing distortion parameter s. Following is the model used for distortion test study:

Figure 7: Problem Description


As the distortion parameter s is increased, it will cause increase in the locking and it is expected that
the solutions for standard Hexaeder8 element will be worse then Hexaeder8-EAS element. The reason
being the capability of Hexaeder8-EAS element to tackle locking problem better than Hexaeder8
element. However, in this case, increasing the distortion parameter increases the trapezoidal locking.
As it is well known fact that EAS method is sensitive to trapezoidal locking, the displacements for
Hexaeder8-EAS element decreases at a higher rate than Hexaeder8 element. But, the solution
accuracy is still much better for Hexaeder8-EAS element. Following Table summarizes the results for
the distortion test study:
Distortion

Hexaeder8

0.0048485 0.0046165 0.0043529 0.0040443 0.0037267

Hexaeder8-EAS 0.020001

0.017935

0.015909

0.013849

0.012013

Further, to get a quantitative understanding, we calculate the Displacement Ratio w(s)/w(0), with
w(0) as the tip displacement for the case of Hexaeder8-EAS element. Following table shows the
displacement ratios:
Distortion

Hexaeder8

24.24 23.08 21.76 20.22 18.63

Hexaeder8-EAS 100

89.67 79.54 69.24 60.06

Following two figures are the graphical representation of the above tables:

Figure 9: Displacement Ratio vs. Distortion

Figure 8: Displacement vs. Distortion

14

4.3

Geometrically Non-Linear EAS testing

We perform the non-linear testing in two parts: first we study the convergence behaviour for a curved
cantilever beam with tip load and varying mesh density. Further, we perform a distortion test study
to understand the antilocking behaviour of Hexaeder8-EAS elements in non-linear setting.
4.3.1

Curved Beam

To test the anilocking behaviour of Hexaeder8-EAS element for geometrically non-linear problems, a
45-degree bend cantilever with a tip concentrated load is used. The cantilever has a radius of 100cm
and a cross-section of 1cm1cm. A convergence study was performed on this cantilever beam with
increasing number of elements from an initial mesh of 16 elements. Following picture shows the
contour plots for tip displacement for the case of 16 element mesh.

Figure 10: Curved cantilever beam with tip load


Following table summarizes the convergence study done for the curved cantilever beam with varing
mesh density.
Mesh Density

16

Hexaeder8

0.40837 0.44309 0.45976 0.4638

Hexaeder8-EAS 0.4681

25

40

50

0.46861 0.46882 0.46887

As expected, the Hexaeder8-EAS element gives much better and converged solution as compared to
Hexaeder8 element. Following is the graphical representation of the above table:

Figure 11: Displacement vs. Mesh Density

15

4.3.2

Distortion test - Curved Beam

In this section we try to understand the antilocking behaviour of Hexaeder8-EAS elements towards
increasing trapezoidal locking. We perform simulation on a curved beam with 10 elements and
varying radius of curvature R. Reducing R increases the curvature and thus will create an effect of
increased trapezoidal locking. Following table summarizes the test results.
Radius(cm)

80

60

40

20

Hexaeder8

0.0025257 0.0025234 0.0025205 0.002496

Hexaeder8-EAS 0.0026742 0.0026717 0.0026685 0.0026415


Further, as expected, the displacements for Hexaeder8 Element is smaller as compared to
Hexaeder8-EAS when Radius is small, due to higher locking in Hexaeder8 element. The following
figure shows the graphical representation of the above table.

Figure 12: Displacement vs. Beam Radius

16

Suggested Future Work on this element

The EAS element implemented here eliminates the problems of Volumetric and Shear locking, thus
making it usable for bending problems.
The next step would be to make it capable of being used in thin structures as a substitute for shell
elements. For this purpose Trapezoidal locking must be eliminated from the element. We suggest
looking into the DSG (Discrete Strain Gap) method for this purpose.
Also the current element implements a mathematically inconsistent stress calculation method. This
can be changed to a variationally consistent formulation as described in [1].

References
1. A Geometrical Non-Linear Element Based On The EAS Method. institut f
ur Baustatik,
Karlsruhe mitteilung 5 (1997): n. pag. Print.
2. Belytschko, Ted, W. K Liu, and B Moran. Nonlinear Finite Elements For Continua And
Structures. Chichester: Wiley, 2000. Print.

17