Element Methods
Proceedings of the Third International Seminar,
Irvine, California, July 1981
Editor: C. A. Brebbia
CML PUBLICATIONS
This work is subjekt to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the material is oonoerned,
specifically those of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, broadQlS!ing. reproduction by photocopying machine
or similar means, and storage in data banks. Under § 54 of the German Cqlyright Law where copies are rrnde for
other than private use a fee is payable to 'Verwertungsgesellschaft Wort', Munich.
The use of registered names, trademarks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific
statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free forge
neral use.
2061/3020  543210
v
CONTENTS
Introductory Remarks IX
C.A. Brebbia
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
C.A. Brebbia
I. HISTORICAL NOTE
advantages of using BEM against FEM are also pointed out and
the use of parabolic BEM for stress concentration problems is
advocated. Patterson and Sheikh lszl propose using non
conforming BEM other than constants, to avoid the problem of
defining the normal at corner points or having errors propaga
ting into the system due to a change in the nature of the
boundary conditions. They conclude that interelement continuity
is not necessary with BEM and demonstrate this through several
numerical examples.
Finally, BEM are also well suited for the small computers
mainly microprocessors, which are nowadays being used in many
engineering offices. BEM solutions tend to require less
matrices and data storage than FE solutions whiie having a
large number of repetitive operations such as numerical
integration which can be economically carried out by a micro
computer. BE appears ideally suited for computer aided design
activities due to the smaller amount of data generally required.
This is an important advantage specially when dealing with
three dimensional problems and more emphasis should be put into
developing efficient CAD systems based on BE.
REFERENCES
25. Chang, Y.P., Kang, C.S. and Chen, D.J., The Use of Funda
,~entalGreen's Function for the Solution of Problems of
~at Conduction in Anisotropic Media, Int. J. Heat Mass
Tr:msfer, 16, pp.I9051918 (1973).
26. Wrobel, L.C. and Brebbia, C., The Boundary Element Method
for SteadyState and Transient Heat Conduction, 1st Int.
Conf. Numerical Methods in Thermal Problems, Swansea,
Taylor, C. and Morgan, K. (Eds), Pine ridge Press (1979).
51. Seabra Pereira, M.F., C.A. Mota Soares and L.M. Oliveira
Faria, A Comparative Study of Several Boundary Elements
in Elasticity, in this book.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
K = ~~ J 0'(q)dq, (1)
AB
where 6 satisfies Laplace's equation
(2)
M = b/a (5)
m = a/b, (6)
so that
M = 1/m, (7)
(8)
m = DG(~), (9)
where 6 satisfies Laplace's equation (2) subject to the
boundary conditions
( 11 )
then
~and
1
0:,
1
i = 1,2, ••• ,N, (16)
N
} 0'.
j=1 J
J( J.) loglqqildq N
~ 0.
j=1 J
J( .)
J log'lqqildq 11"0.
1
= 0,
EXAMPLES
Problem 1
To compute the capacitance K between opposite sides AB and CD
of a unit square (Figure 1). In this case, it is immediately
evident that M = 1.0 whence it follows from Equation (4) that
K = 0.01756. Indeed, it is obvious from Method 2 that K will
have this value for any quadrilateral with a similar degree of
symmetry, as proved by Lampard (1957), who derived the analytic
formula
D, . . . .          , C
G L
A''B ~
Table 1
Capacitance K and Module M for a unit square (Figure 1)
(22)
Problem 2
To compute the capacitance K between opposite sides AB and CD
of a 2 by 1 rectangle (Figure 2). In this case, it is
immediately evident that M = 0.5 whence, from Equation (4),
K = 0.08930.
9
y r
D~~c
G L
A''B~
X
Table 2
Capacitance K and Module M for a rectangle (Figure 2)
Problem 3
To compute the capacitance K between sides AB and CD of the
Lshaped domain, formed by removing a unit square from a square
of side 2, shown in Figure 3. In this case, m 0.577350 =
=
(Gaier, 1972), whence M 1.7321 from Equation (7) and
=
K 0.001756 from Equation (4).
Ar~
',D
B''c~
X
Table 3
Capacitance K and Module M for an Lshape (Figure 3)
N
K( 1) M(2) K(2) M(2a) K(2a)
48 0.001534 1. 7224 0.001810 1.7348 0.001741
96 0.001621 1.7295 0.001771 1. 7327 0.001753
128E 0.001764 1.7326 0.001753 1. 7320 0,001756
48 0.001892 1.7278 0.001780 1. 7358 0.001736
96 0.001851 1.7312 0.001761 1.7330 0.001751
128E 0.001763 1. 7333 0.001750 1. 7323 0.001755
128* 0.001757 1. 7321 0.001756 1.7320 0,001756
Problem 4
To compute the capacitance K between sections AB and CD of the
boundary of the Lshaped domain, formed by removing a unit
square from a square of side 2, shown in Figure 4. In this
case, m = 1.279262 (Gaier, 1972), whence M = 0.7817 from
Equation (7) and K = 0.0351 from Equation (4).
y r
r~c
B~,A
~~~~~
D X
Table 4
Capacitance K and Module M for an Lshape (Figure 4)
CONCLUSION
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author wishes to thank his colleague G.F. Miller for some
useful comments on the first draft of this work.
REFERENCES
Symm, G.T. (1980) The Robin problem for Laplace's equation. NPL
Report DNACS 32/80.
14
ABSTRACT
I. Introduction
As manufacturers of electrical equipment strive for higher ef
ficiency, more effort has been put into obtaining efficient
and accurate numerical means to predict stray losses. A large
class of problems involves a slowly timevarying magnetic field
in a conducting medium. In these problems, the displacement
currents can be ignored when compared with the conduction cur
rent. There is extensive literature on finite difference
(Roberts (1959) and King (1966)) and Finite Element (Carpenter
(1975), Chari (1973), Carpenter (1977), Sato (1977), Salon
(1979)) solutions to these problems. In this paper, the eddy
current problem is formulated using an electric vector poten
tial function. Only the twodimensional case is considered,
so that the eddy currents will have two components, say x and
y, and be constant in the third dimension z. With the restric
tions that the displacement currents be ignored and that the
material is isotropic and linear, the governing differential
equation is derived in section II. By means of Green's identi
ty, this differential equation is then transformed into an in
tegral equation. With certain restrictions placed on the forc
ing function term, the potential can be written entirely as a
line integral on the boundary. This is shown in section III.
In section IV, a set of s~multaneous equations is obtained and
in section V, a sample problem is worked and the results are
compared to a finite element solution.
15
(10)
Defining
cl = jWj.JO (11)
we"obtain Helmholtz's equation,
(12)
T(x,y) = a. 2(J
J H0 Gdsdn + J(dn
T~G  GvT
dn)dB (15)
R B
In order to evaluate the Green's function, we return to Equa
tion (13), which reduces to
2 ~ o(~x,~y)
(3 G +
a?" r1 eG
dr 
a.2G
<, 0
I
(16)
where
r = v'(sx) 2 + <ny)" (17)
The solution of Equation (16) , is
G(s,n;x,y) = CI 0 (a.r) + DK (a.r)
0
(18)
where I and K are modified Bessel functions of the first and
0 0
second kinds order zero, respectively. From the behavior of
this function at infinity we deduce that C must equal zero.
1
The constant D is found to be 2n by integrating Equation (16)
aG
over a small disk located at r = o. The term dh in Equation
(15) is evaluated as
ClG ()G Clr
a,1 = ar an (19)
where
ar
ClG   £.... K (a.r)
2n 1
(20)
and
ar
dn ~ cos 1jJ (21)
where K1 is the modified Bessel function of the first kind or
der one. The terms are defined in Figure 1.
17
T(x,y) = ~; fJ H K
0 0 (ar) d~dn + 2 ~ fTK1 (ar) cosljJ dB
R B
1
 2 1T Jar 0
~ (ar)dB (22)
B
The surface integral involving the forcing function can be
transformed into a line integral if H is limited to the class
0
of functions which satisfy Laplace's Equation,
\7 2 H
0
=0 (23)
Defining a new function g, such that
17 2 g = K (ar) (24)
0
The first integral in Equation (22) can be written
+ z 1 JaR
~ (ar)dB (29)
a on o
B
Using this result in Equation (22) gives
+ azf i3
2n TK 1 (ar)cos~dB  27flfClT
o .... 0
(ar) dB (30)
B B
Thus the potential at any point within the region is complete
ly expressed in terms of an integral on the boundary. To re
move the singularities which occur on the boundary, we will al
low (x,y) to approach the point(x' ,y') on the boundary. The
singularity will be integrated around on a semicircular path,
~B, as shown in Figure 2.
R
Figure 2 Integrating around singularities
+
1
2n
f ClnoKo(ar)dB
ClH
+
1
2n
fdH
dnoKo(ar)dB
B~B ~B
(31)
Any singularities have now been isolated into the three inte
grals around ~B. Using the asymptotic property of K0 that
K (ar) ~· in r as r ~ o (32)
0
in the integrals along ~B, the integrals are evaluated as fol
lows:
For the first integral,
lim
e:~o
~H
21T o
K 1 (ar)cos~dB~fHo ~
on o
(ar)dB
~xB
~B
=1 J
21TH "(inr)dB
3
~B o olt
=1 f
21T H
1T
0
1
(e:d8)
e:
 H
0
(33)
0
For the second integral 2
lim
e:~o
1
(aH
Jp
n o
(ar)dB 1 f Oe:.tne:) = 0 (34)
6B M
For the third integral
lim
e:~o 2 ~ f TK1 (ar')cos~dB = 2! {: Tt(e:d8)
~B
T(x' ,y')
2 (35)
And for the fourth integral
lim  _!
e:~o 21T
f~
6B
an
(ar)dB =
0
I
~B
Q<e:tne:)dB 0 (36)
lf()T (ar)dB
 ~
1T on o (37)
aT
of the potential T and its normal derivative, an' are assumed
to be constant on each segment and equal to its value in the
center of the segment. The values of r in Equation(J7) are dis
tances between the field points and points on the boundary.
Approximating the integral by a summation
N N
T1• nH aL H K 1 (arij)cos~i.~s. + ~L T.K1 (ar )
0 j=l 0 J J l~l J ij
j#i j#i
1N dT.
:;L ..,..JK (ari.)
" on o J
~s .
J
j=l
j#i
 !T0
TiiK (ar)ds.
I o
(38)
an
i
The two integrals in Equation (38) contain the singularities.
The first of these integrals is zero, since the direction co
sine is zero. The second integral has been evaluated in Luke,
and shown to be
2 2
!TI IK 0 (ar)ds ~\ d_
= =tt.. a2K+l 
L<~'
n a\
"'n~'1.. ck(3 2K+ 1} (39)
ank=o k=o
i
where aMi
6 = 4 (40)
where the ~ and ck values are found in Table I.
Table I
K
0 2.000 0.8456
1 0.6667 0.5041
2 0.100 0.1123
Using Equation (38) at each node on the boundary gives the fol
lowing matrix equation.
aT
[J][TJ + [Kl[ann] = [F]
where
Jii 1 (41)
(44)
a. )'
F = 1T ·L H K (a.r .. )coslj! .. LIS. + H (45)
j=l 0 1 ~J ~J J 0
i~j
V. Sample Problem
The formulation was tested on the configuration shown in Figure
3. This is a square conductor 10 mm on each side and extending
to infinity in the z direction. A uniform applied magnetic fi
eld, H0 is impinging on the conductor in the z direction. Due
to symmetry, only onefourth of the conductor must be modeled.
For the boundary conditions we set T = 0 on the conductor sur
face and ~! = 0 on the two lines of symmetry. The resulting
set of equations can be written as
[J] [T] + [K] [ ~!] = [F] (46)
In Equation (46), there would normally be two unknowns at each
boundary element. In this example, either T or ~! is specified
at every point and the system of equations may be solved.
The boundary of the quarter conductor was divided into 72
equal boundary elements. Equation (46) was solved using a
Gaussian elimination technique. The results were compared to
a finite element solution of the same problem and the results
are shown in Figure 4 for both the real and imaginary parts of
the potential. The results are very close, with a small error
occurring at the corner.
VI. Conclusions
A boundary element method has been presented for the slowly
varying magnetic field. The results have been validated by
comparison with a finite element solution of a sample problem.
Very little attempt was made to optimize the number of nodes in
either the finite element or the boundary element problem, but
it seems clear that the boundary element method is capable of
achieving high accuracy with fewer equations than the differen
tial methods.
22
I
I
I T=O
I
I
II_ _____ _
J.l =J.lo
fJ =5.0xl0 4mho/mm
H = 1. 6 Amps/rom
0
Figure 3
Sample Problem, 10 mm x 10 mm
0 on dotted lines
.·
~.; ........... I
r·· '~,. _ . . ,\. I
·~, ...
r···~,,. ...,\ \ I
·, ,_\ \ \ I
\, \ \ !I I I
\
I
•\
\
i
1
iI
I
t
!
I
I
t
'
~
I
I i
I
•, i I 1
: \ ~ ! I i
:............................................~ ...............i ..........! ........L. .... .I
: ' ' • I I
Figure 4a
Real Part of Electric Vector Potential
23
:·· ·,
iM··.... ..
:! ·.,.
..... ,
r··~. ~ .. , :
. ·.. ~....... ·~
\ '
i
I .... , \
r. ....... "·\. \,
·......... , \
I
'... \
•\
'
' ·., \ i i
\ '\ i
' \ \ i
i
i
\
\ \·, i '\
l i
.
\
i
\
l I
i
1
l
i..........,..............................i .................l .............~.............i........._i
Figure 4b
Imaginary Part of Electric Vector Potential
0.5
0.4
T
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
Node Number
Figure 4c
Real Part of Potential T on the boundary
24
1.0
BIM
FEM
0.8
0.6
T
0.4
0.2
0
Node Number
Figure 4d
Imaginary Part of Potential T on the Boundary
0.5
0
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
o.oo~L~L~L~L~4~
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Node Number
Figure 4e Real Part of Potential T on the Diagonal
25
References
INTRODUCTION
(2)
u 0 (x,t)
1
2/irt J'"' "x• C':;r' ), .,
0
(4)
(8)
r,,,,
u1(£,t) w2 <t>
where
W1(t)
1
wl <t>  2rrrt exp ( ~~ )dy (9)
w2 <t>
1
w2 <t>  2/rrt
r,,,,
0
exp ( ~2)
4t dy (10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
Determination of u 1 (x,t)
The solution of u(x,t) leads to the need for an evluation of
u 1 (x,t). For one dimensional problems Smirnov 10 has shown
that
1
ul(x,t)
2rrrt
(14)
_L (£x)2) dT
+ 2rrrt (£x) exp (  
4(tT)
where ~(t) and x(t) are the source intensities of two dipoles
situated at x=O and x=£, respectively. These functions may
be determined by the following weakly singular Volterra
integral equations of the second kind,
29
exp( £ 2 /4(t1:)}
where the kernel, K(t,1:) (17)
2(il (t1:) 3 2
r.,,.,, <j>(1:)d1:
n
i~O
A~n)
l. <Pi
0 (18)
r.,,.,,x,,,., n
i~O
A. (n)
l. xi
0
where the interval (o,t) has been divided into n subintervals
(ik,(i+l)k) (i=O, ..... ,nl,k=constant), A~n) are the series
of integrals involving the kernel K(t,1:) ~nd <j>. = <j>(ik),
Xi= X(ik). Using the above integration formulae, equations
(15) and (16) lead to solutions at time nk for each of the
point intensities as,
n1 ( )
"
<Pn =Wj(nk) + 9 i~O Aon
1 A(n)
n
(20)
l
h so that xi=ih. Then
x·+1
1
u 0 (x,t) f(y) exp (  (xy)2) d
4t y
xi
1 xx·) +
erf ( 2Ttl. (22)
2
It  (xx · >2)
+ exp ( ~ 
Tf
where
(23)
(25)
where
(26)
and
A . = erf ' !1, . ) (27)
nJ ( 21(nJ1)k
n1 (28)
u 1 (x,t) I:
j=O
where,
A . (x) (29)
nJ
v(O,t) = v(l,t) = 1
whilst the initial condition becomes
v(x,O) = 0
A series of results for this problem are set out in Table 1
where comparisons are shown with the CrankNicholson finite
difference method using comparable time steps and a variety
of distance steps.
u(O,t) u(l,t) =0
subject to the initial condition
u(x,O) x(lx) 0 ~ X ~ 1
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
PROBLEM ONE
PROBLEM THREJ<.:
t = 0.1
X 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
0.01 0.0293 0.0556 0.0765 0.0900 0.0946
0.005 0. 0295 0.0560 0.0771 0.0906 0.0953
0.0025 0. 0296 0.0562 0.0774 0.0910 0.0957
0.001 0.0297 0.0564 0.0776 0.0913 0.0960
PROBLEM FOUR
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
av grad p
+ (v. grad)v =  (Euler)
at   p
(2)
bv neratoom
PRESSUR
RELIEF
PRESSURE
RELIEF
bv neratoom
f WATER/STEAM
'V
2
~(~, t) 
1
2 2
a 2~ = 0 (6)
c at
The pressure is related to the potential by the Bernouilli
equation
(7)
(8)
at 2
c
2
+oo ( 10)
= fdt fdr{y(r,t)G~(r,t)O(rr )o(tt )}
00 v  ~ o
42
I a~ I +oo aR O(tt )
= fdA 4TIR[an]t 41T fdt fdA~{ 2ret
Q ret oo Q R
1 a
+ Rc at(o(ttret)}
,L fdA{.!.[.a!J
R ~n t=t
~ (~(r,t
aR R
)~(r t ))} (16)
ret R2 an
411
~ a ret c ' ret
43
Boundary conditions
The first consideration concerning the boundary is the choice
of the geometry. A reasonable choice for the boundary is (a
part of) the inner flow shroud enclosing the rod bundle or the
structural limits of the header, depending on the assumed
reaction site. For the moment these structures are assumed to
be rigid, so the corresponding boundary condition is that the
velocity normal to the surface vanishes;
d(j) =0 ( 18)
<ln
In a later stage we hope to replace this condition by a more
realistic condition derived from the elasticplastic response
of the structure.
The enclosure of the reaction volume is not complete; openings
have to be considered. These openings give entrance to other
parts of the steam generator and the connecting piping system.
The corresponding boundary condition is that of an infinitely
long pipe represented by the radiation condition
(19)
Numerical aspects
Next to the choice of the source function and of the geometry,
the discretisation of the boundary will primarily determine
the success of the BEREPOT calculations. The timestep of the
problem will have to be chosen in accordance with the time
development of the source function. Subsequently, the element
size has to be equal to or greater than the distance traversed
by a wave in a single timestep.
Numerical problems will arise from the fact that the retarda
tion within a single element is not a constant and that this
retardation will not be equal to an integer number of time
steps.
The second problem is solved by linear interpolation between
the two nearestby values. For the solution of the basic
equation (17) it is necessary to evaluate the time derivative
of the potential at the boundary. This evaluation can be done
by a threepoint backward difference formula (Mitzner, 1967)
TEST CASES
0 (22)
46
(rr ).n
 0 
2 (j) (24)
l!.roj
with ci=+I,O,~ for~ resp. inside V, outside V or on the
boundary rl.
By division of the boundary in constant elements, this integral
equation becomes a matrix equation which can be solved by
standard subroutines . The boundary conditions are determined
by the specific case (fig.4): homogeneous in and outflow
through openings at the top or the bottom of one wall of a
rectangular (2D) box. We assume that the normal derivative of
the potential at the boundary is zero everywhere except at
the openings where it is assumed to be a finite constant.
The boundary has been discretised into two meshes
I) 4 elements in the xdirection , 24 for y
2) 8 elements in the xdirection , 48 for y.
The results of the simple BEcode for this case are presented
in fig.S. There the values of the potential along the boundary
(four walls) have been plotted. For comparison, results of a
leastsquar es finite element method, developed in our group
(De Bruijn,l980 ), for this case, are also given in this figure.
Since the potential is defined apart from an arbitrary constant,
these constants have been chosen in such a way that the curves
are close to each other but do not overlap. Note the nice
agreement between the three results.
(O,q) (p,q)
._j
d\P
a;=+u '
s
+
.
.,
p m
q 6 m
s = m
u = m/s
Nx= 8
C!~P_o
C!n ~o Ny= 48
a = .0625 m
b .0625 m
d\P
~u
C!n

_ _.!
__.! s
' 2b
..!
X I >( I
(0,0) (p,O) 2a
box elements
.......
 I I I
""" ._,.a
~\~ :>.
""
elf
~~ "0
l:l
;::J
"'~
0
.0
"'~ 
00
N l:l
0
......
~
elf
Q)
~
C)
~
.....
~ 0)
•.l
~""'""

"0
0
"0"'
'0"
' ..."
\\\
I\ I \
!II 00
II 1
If)
II 1
1;1
;//
// /
/ /.
//
///
//
/ /,
/'l
/'i
//
f1{/
// :1"0000
N:1":t
//~/ ~ ~ ~
II1 Et!1
00
,,,
PoP<:>::
I I I ~~~
~~....:1
1/J II II II
I I I
NM
///
"":!
....
()Q
....::s0 
/_.'I
... I \~,\
"'c0 I X \'
l"j
n
rt>
....::s
Ill
...::r'
l"j
rt>
rt>
I fj\ ' \ \
v/ ·\. 'II '._ / '::.:..1
10 20 30 \ 40 50
time (a.u.)
'>:I
,....
(JQ
.....
rt '"d
::ro
ti rt    f sm jMrs (E ~CT)
(b (b
(b ::s    BEl ~POT !:J. =2
I rt
0. ,.... BEl ~POT !:J. =0,5
a,.... "',. . .
(b
::sC/l 0 ('
,..,.,
,.... I \
::s0 "'
"' '"0
...... 0
r~t
,....
<T ::s ,r"\, (\ (\ j \
0 rt
:><
i
C/l ~_!_
0
~ .p~~·{\1\
\./ ·v· \ ~'11't/
j . ,
ti
n . I ,
(b
,.... j \./'
::s source funct ·on f ;r"·[\ 1 v'\
'\ !\: ,.
"' ~·I " ~ ·' \ 1I \ '1 •~ ' v'
,,_ !!' ' 1,l  , :~ i'~·' v~ ,1 I
' ' 11 Ji\ :'9...~ :: : ·vf \j
IIII ' ' 1~·~·"'"''
~ ~'it' ' I
I I ~ ' ' '"
r'.i,':\~(.!i:: \;
I I I. ' ., :: I'
I " i '~;X:f·~ ,_, •:
I' I
1 ,\/t '" I"' I
20 40 60 80 100
time (a.u.)
~
52
REFERENCES
J.M. Williams
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
n
p2 (l _~d ~~)2
1 HE(6) O (4 )
pz ,
+a + (~d ~~)2
where a is an initially unknown parameter.
bed, P=R
crest
where
r;o i(l/d)ln(T/R), (6)
(7)
i ~ [~  ,m] v ~  ( ;2tJ v f
 [
(10)
[~ _ R2m]v[i _ 1 Jv
For the present work with a singularity at the crest, T = 1, we
take m = A = 1 and v = 2/3 or ~. As the singularity moves away
from the crest, for nearlimiting waves, A decreases from 1 and
ultimately to zero, when ~m 0 v degenerates to ~m, defined in
Equation 7. The remaining features of Equation 10 ensure that
~m,A,v satisfies the bed boundary condition, Equation 3, and is
normalised in the same way as ~m' with n = 1 at T = 1.
59
Table 1. Tests with leading terms and second crest node; d=2.5
No. of subsequent 6
Run N s q coefficients, ec 10 Ps
aO,al, •..•
1 15 so  15  5344
2 15 floating  14  5534
3 15 so yes 14  84
4 15 floating yes 13  400
5 15 so yes 15 1T/420 300
6 15 floating yes 14 1T/420 55
7 15 floating yes 14 1T/l40 55
8 21 floating yes 20 1T/420 18
9 21 floating yes 20 1T/140 >14
10 19 floating yes 18 1T/280 12
(12)
0.2~d~0.5
This constitutes the shallowwater end of the range, which
causes greatest difficulty in most methods and where, for a
given accuracy, N must be largest. Fortunately, however, the
algorithm was well behaved except for the important proviso
that even values of N exceeding about 40 failed to converge.
N was therefore restricted to odd values which gave progress
ively greater accuracy as they increased. Table 2 illustrates
the typical behaviour of a sequence of solutions at d = 0.2,
the limit of the range computed. It is shown in Williams
(1981) that this wave is, to present computing accuracy,
61
106p
s
for e = kTI/200
App. 106
N k=O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
It'ns Ps
49 12 0 22 31 18 1 7 7 4 0 2 2 1 0 0 1 32
53 14 0 16 21 9 1 5 4 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 23
57 16 0 13 15 4 2 4 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 18
63 20 0 8 9 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
79 30 0 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
106
N It'ns k=O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ps
29 8 0 0 3 7 7 5 2 0 2 3 3 2 1 0 0 0 1 1 8
30 15 0 1 1 5 5 4 1 0 2 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 8
31 10 0 1 0 3 4 3 0 0 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
32 21 0 1 0 2 3 2 0 1 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 8

33 11 0 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
s 1. 82517163 q 0.52996266
ao 0.12288679 a 1.06815531
2.5~d::lo.o
Within this deepwater end of the range the general character
istics of the mi.ddle range remained. However, for even N
convergence became very '"slow or sometimes failed altogether.
Furthermore, with N now small the process of finding an optimum
N, which had worked successfully in the middle range, no longer
provided a sufficiently fine control. It was then found that
ec could be used instead to achieve the best accuracy and in
this way ec = 1T/280 was determined to be most suitable. This
value was subsequently adopted throughout the range of d since
it had been found elsewhere not to be critical. The solution
chosen ford= 10.0 used N = 19, with Ps = 12 x 10 6 . As shown
in Williams (1981), this wave is identical, to working accuracy,
with the theoretical extreme of the maximum infinitedepth wave.
63
STUDIES OF CONVERGENCE
I I
III II I
rD
~
L ,
:
: I
:I
i
I /I !
1 I I I ?
tr~ugh line, bed, y = 2 + F2, ljJ =  2 crest line,
x=~L
<I>=~ X
x=<I>=O
t
Steady motion  stream lines and equipotentials Wave motion particle paths
I
I
rP
Steady motion
lWave motion
0)
01
66
CONCLUSIONS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
REFERENCES
M. Pignole
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
Basic equations
The displacement vector u. the strain tensor E and the stress
tensor a are functions of the point. Later on. we shall use
the well known relations.
'V
E = 'V u (I)
'V gradient
'V
'V symmetric gradient
div divergence
A~ ll constant coefficients
73
A
.= A for plane strain
(6)
2 \.1 A
for plane stress
A + 2 \.1
Connected system
In spite of the common use of Equation 5, we prefer consti
tuting a system with Equation 3 and Equation 4. For a homoge
neous case, we write
jA~(div u) I+ 2 \.1 ~ u a 0
(7)
1div a = 0
or
Variational identity
We call w a bounded open set
y its smooth boundary
(~, ~) some couple of a regular vector ~ and a regular
symmetric second order tensor ~
u ~ a (u)
with
A (q,) = ·;.:'f· 'V (tr q,) I + 2 ]..l div q, (12)
(13)
t = cr n (14)
(IS)
(16)
j = 1 '2
[~]
Calculation of ~(j~·)
Substituting for q, J from Equation 16 into Equation 15, we
obtain
N ~(j) = o I(j) (17)
y
where N is the Navier operator
r = lx  Yl (20)
r,i
3r
= ax. =  ar (21)
~
ayi
75
(22)
A."' + u
(23)
Calculation of ~(j)
Using Equations 16 and 19, we obtain
(28)
j, k = 1,2
with
I (II)
[6 ~] "!(12)
[~ 6]
1(21)
[~ ~] i22)
[~ ~]
Calculation of ~(jk)
System 27 28 may be rewritten
= v(jk) (29)
r··. ,
N ~(jk)
].I)
with v(II) =  (30}
'y' ']
:>..*oy'2
with
(35)
(36)
Calculation of ¢(jk)
Using Equations 28 and 34, we obtain everywhere except in y
¢(jk)
(y)H =rz1 [ Dl (oik oj9. + 6l.J
.. oH  ojk oH)
D2
+ (Dl  T) <6ik r,j r, 9. + 0 •• r,k r,.Q.
l.J
+ ok.Q. r' i r' j + 0j 9. r,i r,k)
with
(44)
(45)
T(j)
(y)i
s,  2 ~ n, ~2 s (48)
0
s3 = ~ (2 n1  n2) =  A¥ ~ s 0 (SO)
s4  4 ~ n, = 2 s, (51)
ss 8 ~ D2 8 ~ (A¥+ ~) s0 (52)
(53)
5o TI (A¥ + 2 ~)
s(jk)
(y)i OH
( ,,(jk)) ni
'~'(y) = ~2 f ~~ [s3 (oik r,j + oij r,k)
S4 8 j k r, i + S5 r, i r, j r, k] (54)
+ s 4 ni r,j r,k
+frr
E
1/J(j) • t dr + ( T(j) • u dr +
JrR rR
1/J(j) • t dr J o (Ss)
u
j
(y) = Jr
( T(j) (x) • [u (x)] dr (x)
(y)
r
+ u (j) (x) • It (x)] dr (x)
Jr (y) L!
(56)
k ~;~
+ U (x) • [!: (x)] dr (x) (59)
= r s(jk)
Jr tyl (x) ~ (y) • [u (x~ dr (x)
= t
ol
EP lulr
tlr
u
t
=
(61)
figure
for EP t lu o (63)
I
2 uj (y) y €f J for IP (64)
f_
ajk (y) y€. Q for IP (68)
Indirect methods
The particular identities contain [uJ and I or [t]. We may
construct an infinite number of indirect formulations, each
according to a complementary problem, using Identities 56 58
59 and 60. First, a system has to be solved on r, then we may
compute u and I or t on r and u and a in the domain. We give
some examples.
[u]r = 0 (70)
u. (y) =(
J Jr U Y(j) (x) • [t (x)] dr (x) (71)
=h D~~~)
I
[t.
~ for IP
+ (y)]
2 J
tj (y) (x) (y) • [t (x)] dr (x) 1 (72)
z [t.
J
(y)] for EP
Identity 72 => t on r
Identity 73 => o in d~e domain
(74)
t. (y) =
J
i s(jk) (x)
r (yl
~ (y) • ~ (x)] dr (x) (76)
Next,
Identity 75 => u on rt
Identity 76 => t on ru
Identity 77 => u in the domain
Identity 78 => 0 in the domain.
(79)
and
(80)
We obtain, for y6 r
u. (y)
J =lrt
T (j) (x)
(y)
o lii (xj] dr (x) +Jrr u uU>
(y)
[_t (xj] dr (x)
z 1
[E. (y)]
J
for EP
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
REFERENCES
INTRODUCTION
THEORY
3 aa ..
l: ~J 0 i 1, 21 3 (1)
'1~
J= J
and o .. is the unit tensor known as kronecker delta and A., ]..1
are ~J Lame's constants given as:
A. = E I ( 1 + v) ( 1  2v) ; ll
(4)
u.
~
(x)
I
s
u~~,].(x,y)t.(y)ds
J y
Jt~.(x,y)u.(y)ds
~J
s
J y (5)
= '\. Midnode
L/2
Singular Point
~l+x2+y2yl, xlx2+yl+y2)
2 2
Fig.l. Location of Singular point for Constant element
N
~
(10)
j=l
Linear Elements
The variation of t and u is assumed to be linear within each
element. For N elements equation (8) can be written as
~
j=l
j u* tds
N
~
j=l (11)
Sj
(12)
N
l:
j=l J [·, •,] u * ds { t1x }
t2x
N
l:
j=l
r [ F 1F 2
Js.
Jt*ds{ :!x}
2x
sj J
(14)
N
l:
j=l JC·,
s.
F,] u * ds {
t
t2y
!y I
f
N
l:
j=l
J [ .,., }·d~
sj
u1y }
u2y
J
Node
'j+l'
Node
'j  1'
APPLICATIONS
y = 0
t 0 u along AB (i)
X
tX 120 N, ty = 0 along BC (ii)
t ty 0 along CD (iii)
X
u t 0 along DE (iv)
X y
t t 0 along EA (v)
X y
91
!x
~ .X
llOmm
l50mm t
Fig.4. Rect.Plate with a circular hole under uniform tension
D "t =t =0
X y
u =t =0
X y
y
=0 B
Fig.5. Boundary conditions
for Quarter domain
9.
Fig.6C. Linear boundary Element
8. discretization
ax 7.
6.
• • • Finite Element
Solution
5. Conventional
boundary elmt.
Solution
4.
Regular boundary
element solut
3. ion
2.
1.
o.
15 30 45 60
Distance along ED
Fig.7a. Stress distribution along the edge ED of the domain
using constant boundary elements
93
8.
• • • Finite Element
Solution
7.
Conventional
boundary elmt.
solution
ax  Regular boundary
6. element solut
ion
5.
4.
3.
2.
1.
0.
15 30 45 60
<~Distance along
ED
~15omm~
Fig.B. Rect.Plate with a notched
circular hole under uniform D
t =O
c
tension y
u =t =0
X y t =120N
X
••~•~••Finite elmt.solution
Regular boundary
element solution
15 30 45 60
~ Distance along
ED
Fig.lla. Stress distribution along the edge ED of the domain
96
24.
21.
0
X
18.
• • • Finite Element
Solution
Conventio nal
boundary element solution
15.  Regular boundary
solution
12.
9.
6.
3.
o.
15 30 45 60
~~istance a1ong
ED
Fig. 14. Nodal Load distribution acting on bore turface at 16,000 lbs.f total pin load
99
..._+41""'······J.······',......+~
!
Fig. lSa. Constant boundary elemant discretization
Compression
I
I II ~x
Fig. 16a. Comparison of surface stress distributio~ calculated by using conventional and
Regular boundary integral method for conttant elements.
Conventional B.I.M. 2 tons/in 2
Regular B.I.M.
I jl •X
Fig. l6b. Comparison of surface stress distribut~on cala1lated by using Conventional and regular
boundary integral methods for linear e~ements
~
102
80.
l
60.
Stress
variation
along
XX' 40.
20.
60.
Stress
variation
alonq XX'
40.
Conventional B.I.M.
1 20.
Regular B.I.M.
REFERENCES
D.J. Danson
I. INTRODUCTION
~(x) J uki(x,y)ti(y)dSY
s
I
s
Tki(x,y)ui(y)dSY
+ J uk.(x,y)b.(y)dV
:L :L y
(I)
v
Where ~(x) is the displacement at an internal point x in
the k direction
uki(x,y) is the displacement in the i direction at y due
to a unit point load in the k direction at x
Tki(x,y) is the traction in the i direction at y due to
a unit point load in the k direction at x
t.(y) is the traction at y
u:(y) is the displacement at y
b~(y) is the intensity of the body force at y
s:L represents the boundary of body
V represents the domain of the body
The coordinates of the point x are Xj
The coordinates of the point y are yj
The subscript y on dSy, dVy is to indicate that the
coordinates y. and not the coordinates x. are the
integration ~riables. J
J uk.(x,y)
l
b.(y)dV
l y
(3)
v
and for the thermoelastic case
Bk(x) = 1
aE
 2v
Jr Uk l.,.l (x,y) 8(y)dVy (4)
v
J A.k
J JL ••
. dV
,l y J AjkJI.. • • n. (y)dS
l y
(5)
v s
where n.(y) is the unit outward normal at y.
l
r Gk . . . (x,y))
J lGki,jj (x,y ) 
J 'J ~
2(1v)
b ( ) dV
i y y (7)
v
Although Eq. (7) looks a lot more complicated than Eq. (3)
it is much easier to arrange Eq. (7) in a form where it can be
transformed to a boundary integral.
Thus b.(y) may be taken outside the integral in Eq. (7) and
so using ~Eq. (5) we get
dS (8)
y
Rotational Inertia
Let us consider a body of uniform mass density p rotating about
some axis with angular velocity wi. We may without loss of
generality consider the axis of rotation as passing through the
origin of our coordinate system. The acceleration at a point
yi is given in vector notation as
f = W X (W X y) (9)
b =  p W X (W X y) (I 0)
(I I)
Defining
(12)
109
.. J
[n ~J = p WIW2 w~+wf w2w3 (13)
Gk . (x,y)}
Bk(x) = !1 .. ·J( y. {G_ . (x,y)  m,~ dV (15)
~J J k~ ,mm 2 (1v) y
v
which after some manipulation becomes
.. Jr oy
n~J J {Y.J Gk.
~,m
(x,y)}  Gk . . (x,y)
~.J
V m
(16)
dS ( 17)
y
Bk(x) = 2(a!E)
v I 6(y)G . . . . (x,y) G . . (x,y) e .. (y)dV
k~.~JJ ik~,~ ,JJ y
(19)
v
f
yj
{ck . . (x,y)
~.~
e . (y)} dV
,j y
(20)
Thus
4. 2D BODY FORCES
where r is the distance between the force point x and the field
point y
and oki is the Kronecker delta.
uki(x,y)
111
where r. is the unit vector from the force point x to the field
point ~ so that
y.  x.
r. J J
J r
B ( ) )+V J (2 ln (24)
k x = 4nE r r
s
a .. (x)
l.J
s s
*.. (x,y)
s l.J 2 ~" [l(l ln.!_) {n r (b.r. + b.r. + 1v b r o.. )
r mm L J J l. v s s l.J
}] (26)
11 •• p w2 o.. (27)
~J ~J
Bk (x,y)
l2v I }
 2(1v) r ln r ~ dSY
(28)
+ (2 ln..!.. I) (
r
3 2v n y +2r n r
(lv)(l2v) m m mm
J)}
ymrm
+ 2n r (y.r. + r.y.)  (n.r. + r.n.)
mm ~ J ~ J I v ~ J ~ J
I I
2 ( 1v ) (2 ln
+  1){(32v)(n .y. + n.y.)
J ~
r ~ J
s s
where
a.E
Pk(x,y) (l)
= 2 Gk . . . (x,y)n.J
v ~.~J
(31)
and a.E
Qk(x,y) 2(1v) Gki,i (x,y)
113
a.( l+v) { }
Pk (x,y) (ln ..!.  ..!.) n.  n r r
4 'It ( 1v) r 2 k. mmk
(32)
a. (I +v)
Qk(x,y) = 4n(lv) r
k
r (ln ..!.r  ..!.)
2
+ J s~.(x,y)
~J
e(y)dS
y
 J v~.(x,y)
~J
e
,m
(y) n (y)ds
m y
s s
a.E
 1 2 e(x)o .. (33)
 v ~J
S~.(x,y)
~J
= 4 n (~E)
v r mm  v
0
{n r ( 1i 2j  2r.r.) + n.r. + n.r.}
~ J ~ J J ~
(34)
5. 3D BODY FORCES
where R is the distance between the force point x and the field
point y. The symbol R is used when discussing the 3D case so
that equations involving the 3D case are easily distinguished
from the 2D case where the symbol r is used.
I +v r dS
Bk(x,y) (37)
411E J y
s
S~.(x,y)
1J
= 8R
11
rn r (b.r.
L mm 1 J
+ b.r.)
J 1
S:j (x,y) 1
= 811 [{nsrs y: + ~(~~v)nJ(Qimrj + Qjmri)
ym ym
+ vo 1J
.. (rks:<km R n s r s  n s Qsm R + r s Qsmnm)
ym r:
 2R (r Q l.!l.r. + n.r.J + D2v' rn.Q. + nj 11 iml) }]
s sm 1 J J 1 ~ ~1 JID
(40)
115
and (41)
s~.(x,y)
l.J
= aE
B1r( 1v)R2
{n r (~
m m 12v
3r.r.) + n.r.+r.n.}
1. J 1. J 1. J
(42)
Gravitation al loads
We have that
2
R (46)
,mm R
116
(4 7)
bm f r
m,k  r k,m dVy =0 (50)
v
Thus we have shown that both Eq. (37) and Eq. (48) are valid
integral transformations of the body force domain integral. In
other words the form of the body force kernel is not unique.
(51)
2vb r o.. }
S*
.. (x,y) n r { s s ~J
G + b + b
~J mm l2v irj jri
Rotational inertia
A similar process of algebraic manipulation enables the body
force kernels to be computed directly without using the Galerkin
tensor. The results are, for the displacement equation
Bk (x,y) 1+v
4nE
J {nmrmstkJ• YJ•  R st
'km m
n
s
(53)
s~.~J = 4
7T
r[12\1v {nmr ml(rs st ~
sq R
2(stss)) + 2._ n st
1v
ys
1v m ms R
+ r
s
st n }
sm m
..
o~J +2!Ifn r (r. st. YRs + r. st. YRsJ
2\
m m ~ JS J ~s
ym ym)
 [n.~ st.Jm R + n.J st.~m R + r.~ stJ·m nm + r.J st.~m nm
+_II (n st
\) m ms
YRs
~~~J
ro ..  r.r:]
~ J.
_21st J:.r.
mmr~ J
+ nJ.rJJ }]
~
(54)
7. EXAMPLES
Inner radius 30 mm
Outer radius 80 mm
Coefficient of Linear Expansion JQ X J06 /°C
Young 1 s Modulus 210 kN/mm2
Poisson 1 s Ratio 0.3
100
(IIDII)
0
40 80
Analytical solution
200
6 Boundary results } 3D element
0 Internal results
• AxisJ~~D~~etric element
100
radius (IIDII)
60 80
200
Analytical solution
6 Boundary results
20
10
0 20 40 60 80
radius (nnn)
20
0
10
0 20 40 60 80
radius (nnn)
Radius 80 nm
Mass Density 7 • 8 tonne s /m 3
Rotation Speed 10,000 r.~.m.
Young's Modulus 210 kN/nm
Poisson's Ratio 0.3
Radius 78.2 nm
Thickness 50 nm
Mass Density 7. 8 tonnes/m3
Rotation Speed 10,000 r.p.m.
Young's Modulus 210 kN/nm 2
Poisson's Ratio 0.3
REFERENCES
ANALYTICAL BACKGROUND
+ fv b . ( q) u.. (P , Q) dV ( q ) ( 1)
J IJ
where P,Q are points of the surface s of the domain V. Uij and
Tij are the fundamental Kelvin solutions, Cij are coefficients
depending on the geometry of the boundary at the point P, and q
is a point in the domain. Tensor notation is used in this
expression and the indices have the range 1 ,2,3. When body forces
124
Element Library
The following boundary elements have been developed:
 constant, 2D element
 linear, 2D element
parabolic, isoparametric, 2D element
 triangular, constant, 3D element
quadrilateral, isoparametric, linear, 3D element
 quadrilateral, isoparametric, parabolic, 3D element
APPLICATIONS
The different test cases which have been chosen have, in
general, severe stress gradients either because of the geometry
or due to the type of loading.
Different boundary discretizations have been idealized and
the following criteria were adopted: for each case a number m of
nodal points is specified, yielding m/2 parabolic elements or m
linear elements. Coarser meshes have been defined from the
previous cases by simply supressing every other node.
The corresponding meshes for finite element analysis have
been such that the outside nodes coincide with the boundary
element nodes. In the finite element analysis, the isoparametric
parabolic element for plain strain/stress problems has been
used.
The first three case studies are 2D analyses and the last
case is a 3D example. All the analyses were performed in double
precision on an IBM 360/44 with a core memory of 256 kbytes.
Hole in a flat plate
The geometry of the problem is illustrated in figure 2a.
·In the present case the ratio a/b is 5. A constant stress Oo
is applied to the plate at faces x=±a. Figure 2b represents the
mesh used in the finite element analysis (FEM). Due to symmetry
only one quarter of the structure has been modelled.
In Figure 3 the values of the o stresses along the yaxis
are compared with the analytical sol~~ion of the infinite plate
case. The solution corrected for the finite width of the present
proportionsyields a value of 3.93 for the stress concentration
factor Kt = oxx/o 0 •
In Table 1 a comparison of results is done jointly with an
indication of the computer times involved in all analyses. A
good measure of the accuracy of the various analyses is made on
the basis of the o stresses at the point A near the hole. The
discrepancy of thexx results is evaluated in comparison with
the value Kt = 3.93
128
4L~~+
O"o
a l Hole in a square b) FEM mesh
flat plate
Figure 2
1.
•
c
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
y p
p
X
a) Circular disc b) FEM mesh
Figure 4
<JYyD
2P DOF
o  BEM parabolic 120
•  BEM parabolic 60
0.8 c  BEM linear 120
•  BEM linear 60
•  FEM parabolic 344
0.4
[]
0.2 •
Discrepancy CPU
ANALYSIS DOF Kl /Ko % (seconds)
( 1) BEM Parabolic 120 1 '51 0,67 415
( 1) BEM Parabol i c 60 1 ,49 0,67 103
(2) BEM Parabolic 120 1,495 0,33 850
( 1) FEM Parabolic 530 1,48 1 '3 922
K =aliA; a is the applied remote stress.
0
(1) Extrapolation method
(2) Energy Method
The value of the stress intensity factor obtained with the
energy method involves, at the present stage, the execution of
two analyses with two different crack lengths, thus increasing
considerably the computing costs.
CONCLUSIONS
A general purpose Boundary Element program has been deve
loped using several 2D and 3D boundary elements.
Results for particular elastostatics situations without
body forces have been presented and the usage of different
element types have been considered.
In general, the results show that the parabolic 2D element
is much more efficient than the 2D linear element. The linear
boundary element is particularly sensitive to corner regions
where the stress results tend to degradate considerably.
The relative computing costs for the various analyses
have been shown in the Tables. In situations of severe stress
gradients, particularly in the vicinity of point loads the BEM
method appears to offer a reasonable accuracy, of the order of
5%, for relatively modest computing facilities.
FEM analyses with similar refinement on the boundaries to
the BEM discretizations involve rather larger numbers ofnodes
without any benefit in the accuracy of the results, yet more
information is generally provided about the stress and displa
cement fields on the domain.
133
O"yy D ;1614 p
2P1
5.
DOF
o BEM parabolic 120
• BEM parabolic 60
c BEM linear 120
• BEM linear 60
10. X
A FEM parabolic 344
Analytical solution
Timoshenko and
Goodier ( 1970)
5.
w b) linear
REFERENCES
Brebbia, C.A. and Walker,S. 1980, Boundary Element Techniques in
Engineering. Newnes  Butterworths, London.
Cristescu,M. and Loubignac,G. 1978, Gaussian Quadrature Formulas
for Functions with Singularities in 1/R Over Triangles and
Quadrangles. Recent Advances in Boundary Elements Methods,
Editor Brebbia,C.A., Pentech Press, London.
Fairweather,G., Rizzo,F.J. and Shippy,D.J. 1979, On the Numeri
cal Solution of Two  Dimensional Potential Problems by an
Improved Boundary Integral Equation Method, J.Comp. Phys., Vol.
31 ' pg. 96112.
Henshell ,R.D. and Shaw,K.G. 1975, Crack Tip Finite Elements Are
Unnecessary. Int. J. Num.Meth. in Engng. Vol. 9, p 495.
Roark, R.J. and Young,W. 1975, Formulas for Stress and Strain,
5th Ed. MacGrawHill, Tokyo.
Rooke,D.P. and Cartwright,D.J. 1976, Compendium of Stress
Intensity Factors. Her Majesty Stationery Officer, London.
Saada,A.S. 1974, Elasticity, Theory and Applications. Pergamon
Press, Nel"i York.
Stroud,A.H. and Secrest,D. 1966, Gaussian Quadrature Formulas,
Prentice Hall, Int. Inc., London.
Timoshenko and Goodier 1970, Theory of Elasticity, McGrawHill,
Tokyo.
135
~
~ REGION A 2 REGION B
2~o,
0 2 r
Figure 9. Regions of integration
1 0 •1 r
If the singularity is located in a corner node or in ami~
side node, the integration region is transformed in the squares
A orB, respectively, by applying simple linear transformation
techniques to the domain of integration.
The integral (13) can be transformed as follows
136
ff  1  1~ +n
2 2 f(~.n)d~ dn ( 1 4)
~ r
where the function (/~ 2 +n 2 /r) f(Cn) is suitably represented by
polynomials.
The values of ~. and n. have been found by calculating the
common roots of orthbgonal polynomials in ~ and n. Using a least
square technique the corresponding weights Ai have been evalua
ted. The Gauss point coordinates and the corresponding weights
are indicated in Table 4.
REGION B
~.
I I n.I I A.
I
1 0.74772761 0.84529169 0.49133682
2 0.0 0.87119449 0.84924859
3 0.74772761 0.84529169 0.49133682
4 0.77589199 1. 7321786 0.19429025
5 0.0 1.71964092 0.34350839
6 0.77589199 1. 7321786 0.19429025
7 0.72502542 0.15427398 0.36769444
8 0.0 0.14090886 1.5127182
9 0.72502542 0.15427398 0.36769444
137
INTRODUCTION
THEORY
N
i i
c u + 2: (1)
j=l
i
where c is the unknown coefficient at 'i'
N = Number of boundary elements in which the domain is
divided,
u and t are displacement and traction respectively,
u* is the fundamental solution for two dimensional
elasticity given as,
1 + v (xiyi) (xfyj)}
u*
87TE(l\l)r
~l (34\1) 6l.J
.. + (2)
r2
t *
(3)
0
u
0
(4)
0
t
0
dS
:,] t'
(5)
Is.
[pl
0
0
dS
J
1 2
u (~) Fl u y + F2 u y
y
1 (7)
t t2
X
(~) = Fl t X + F2 X
1
t t2
y
(~) = F 1 t y + F2 y
where
h
xi,j1
= JcF 1 t*Jx dS h
X,
~,j
JcF 2 t*Jx dS
s.J 1 S,
J
g
xi,j1
JcF 1 u*Jx dS gx.
~,j
f [F 2 u*]x dS
s.J 1 s.
J (9)
h
yi 1 j 1
J[F 1 t*Jy dS h
y, . = f [F 2 t
*
Jy dS
s.J 1
~,J
s.
J
g *
: J[F 1 u Jy dS gy, . = J[F 2 u*]y dS
Yi,j1 ~,J
Sj1 Sj
141
That is two equations are set up for each node (one for
each direction) taking into account the contributions made by
the adjoining elements. This approach gives rise to problems
mentioned earlier in the 'Introduction' section. Also, the
determination of ci in Equation (8) is cumbersome. To over
come these problems 'Regular Boundary Integrals for Non
Conforming Elements' are employed here. In this method, free
domsof an element are not defined at the geometric nodes
i.e.~= ±1 but at~= ±1/2 (Figure.2). Also, the singular
point is relocated outside the domain and along positive nor
mal to the boundary (taken as L/2 in the present case study
where Lis the length of the element) at any node 'i'
[Patterson and Sheikh,l981]. The resulting integrals are
then regular over the whole domain and no special treatment is
required for the evaluation of singular integrands (ci = 0) •
I; + 1
N N
L: [h ]u L: [g ]t
X,
j=l xi,2jl ~ j=l xi,2jl X.~
N N
L: [h ]u L: [g Jt
j=l Yi,2jl yi j=l Yi,2jl yi
N N (11)
L: [h ]u L: [g ]t
j=l xi,2j X.~ j=l xi,2j X,~
N N
L: [h ]u L: [g ]t
j=l Yi,2j yi j=l Yi,2j yi
where
*
h ]X dS h
xi,2jl J [Flt xi,2j
JcF 2 t*Jx ds
h
*
Yi,2jl
f [F 1 t ]y dS h
Yi,2j
JcF 2 t*Jy dS
(12)
g *
xi,2jl f [Flu ]X dS g
xi,2j
JcF 2u*]x dS
*
g
Yi,2jl J [F 1u ]y dS g
Yi,2j f
*
[F 2 u ]y dS
APPLICATIONS
a = 1 em b = 2 em P = 1000 N/cm 2
Q
p (13)
i
Ia r I I • •
    • Exact Solution
i Conventional
loel Boundary Elmt.
Solution
Solution using
NonConforming
Linear Boundary
Elements
r=a r=b
Fig. 4. Comparison of Exact Solution with Solutions obtained
using Conventional and nonconforming linear elements
145
Radial
Disp. 1.1 0.872 00 0.801 0.825
10° 0.802 0.825
30° 0.810 0.828
45° 0.828 0.830
8.
• • • Exact Solution
7. Nonconforming Boundary
Element Solution
6.
5.
4.
3.
2.
0 D c
Distance along the die
ct .x
I
D c
u t 0
y y
t (given)
y
t 0
y
A B
Fig.lO . Bounda ry Condit ions for quarte r domain
0
f'·
Ul
rt Convent ional Linear Elements
§
(l
ro NonConf orming Linear Elements
~
1'
0
::l
LO
ro
£'ro
t>j
0
0
H\
rt
::r
ro
'0
1'
~
rt
ro =====":..~== =~::.===,::== == 
=== ==== ...=..=.=~== ~=
;.~"':.====~~..:....:~= ===..: :::: "'=""":;.""::."="=: 
... =~~."';;:' '=
= == =~~ ='= ==..;::::=
E
a
y
Fig. 11. Stress distribu tion along edge ED of the plate
151
REFERENCES
ui (l) =fa Jb
a b
155
(1)
where
dj(c) =the displacement discontinuity in the lj = cj
direct1on at c corresponding to a mode j displacement dis
contuity;
nk(c) the kth component of the unit normal vector to the
segment at c;
U~(l,c) =the displacement in the li direction due to a
force 1n the lj direction at c ; i.e., the Green's function
of the medium; and
A,~= Lame's constant and the shear modulus, respectively.
The notation u~·~eans the derivative of U~ with respect to
ck . Expressio~s for U may be found in Love [1944, p. 185],
Mindlin and Cheng [1950] and Press [1965]. The displacement
discontinuity dj is reckoned positive if it acts in the posi
tive cj direct1on on the side of the segment with the positive
normal n(c) For the planar segment n(c) = n = (1,0,0) .
u = ctu~
where u is the vector of displacements in the global coordi
nate system and C is the transformation matrix which trans
forms a vector in the global coordinate system to one in the
local coordinate system. The superscript t denotes thematrix
transpose. Thus, the displacements at any point due to a dis
placement discontinuity d on a segment may be written
3
u=Ud= L:u .. d. (2)
j=l lJ J
156
FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
The use of the Volterra integral readily allows a number
of developments of the theory which would be useful in appli
cations. These are discussed below.
1. Extension to semiinfinite media
To derive the fundamental equations for the displacements
and stresses in a semiinfinite medium, the Green's functions
for such a medium would be substituted into eq. (1) and in
tegrated, assuming a constant displacement discontinuity, as
before. The resulting expresssions, which are additive to
those of the infinite medium, could be incorporated into the
function subroutines of the computer program in a straightfor
ward manner.
2. Integration over general quadrilaterals
With rectangular segments, it is difficult to model sur
faces whose boundaries are not at right angles to one another.
An example is a boundary segmenf whose edge lies along the line
bd in Fig. 5. To model such a boundary, it would be necessary
to integrate eq. (1) over a general quadrilateral or a triangle.
By means of suitable transformations, a general quadri
lateral may be transformed into a square region over which the
integration may be performed. Consider the quadrilateral shown
in Fig. 7 whose area is denoted R~ . The transformation to
R~ from the standard region R is
4
c2 = ~ hi (x2,x3)c2i = p(x2,x3)
1=1
(4)
where c2i and c3i are the local coordinates of the corners
of the quadrilateral and the functions hi are given by
h3 = t(1x 2) (Ix 3)
[Bathe and Wilson, 1976, p. 131]. An integral of a function
f over R~ is then given by
(5)
162
or
(6)
Kt d = 0 (7)
dw
Eliminating d between eqs. (6) and (7) yields the required
stiffness matrix for the region H :
CONCLUSIONS
The development of the DDM for the analysis of three
dimensional elastic media is relatively straightforward if the
Volterra integral is used to derive the fundamental solution.
The use of the Volterra integral permits the identification of
the DDM as a boundary integral procedure with a different in
fluence function. It also allows:
1) a relatively easier means of extending the technique
to semiinfinite media,
2) more flexible representation of boundary surfaces in
three dimensions by means of integration over general
quadrilaterals, and
3) a natural linkage with finite element analysis.
A working computer code has been developed and tested.
Two major difficulties in the computer implementation of the
technique are the large size of the system of equations to be
solved and the definition of the location and geometry of three
dimensional models. The large size of the system of equations
can be decreased by either the use of symmetry or the elimina
tion of nonexistent modes of displacement discontinuity, or
both. Alternatively, the equations can be solved by an out of
core solution algorithm. The ability to visualize and prepare
the input data for threedimensional models would be greatly
enhanced by the use of an interactive graphics system.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank Dr. Ken Matthews and
Mr. Byron Stewart of Golder Associates in Vancouver, B.C., for
suggesting the mining problem shown in this paper. The first
author would like to gratefully acknowledge the assistance pro
vided by Dr. Tom Hughes of Stanford University with regard to
the problem of linking the DDM with finite elements.
REFERENCES
BATHE, K.J. and E.L. WILSON [1976] Numerical Methods in Finite
Element Analysis, PrenticeHall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
BERRY, D.S. and T.W. SALES [1962] An Elastic Treatment of
Ground Movement due to Mining III. Three Dimensional Problem,
Transversely Isotropic Ground, J. Mech. Phys. Solids, lQ, 7383.
CHEN, W.T. [1964] Displacement Discontinuity Over a Transversely
Isotropic Halfspace, IBM J. Res. and Dev., ~, 435442.
CHINNERY, M.A. [1961] Deformation of the Ground Around Surface
Faults, Bull. Seis. Soc. Amer., ~, 355372.
164
g Global Coordinates
Local Coordinates
c Source Coordinates
INPUT
r1odel geometry
Boundary conditions
Compute matrix of
influence coefficients
Solve system of
equations
OUTPUT
Displacements and
stresses
a
r.....
~
"\
i\ p
\
a
j p
g3 into page
Ana lytica 1
Numerical 91
1.0 93 =r
V1
V1
(!)
s..
....,
V1
0.8
7Sll/P
p
92 =r
"0 0.6
(!)
N
<tJ
E 0.4
s..
0
z
0.2
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
91/a
3.0
V1
V1
g 3 into page
s.. 2.0
(!)
....,
V1
"0
(!)
N
<tJ
E
s.. 1.0
0
z
sll;P
7
0.0
0.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
9/a
~~
I I I I 180m
c
I I I I 11
Detail of pane 1
discretization
shaft/
a : ( 300, 1000, 0)
0 100 m
b: (0, 1000, 0)
c: (200tan15°, 1000+200tan 215°, 300cosa) a o sin 1 (zt~n15°)
d: (200tan15°, 1200, 200tan15°)
e: (150, 1000, 150)
1020
1040
1060
1080
..s 1100
....,
..<:::
c.
a
OJ 1120
1140
1160
1180
1200
1020
1040
1060
1080
..5 llOO
...,
.c:
c.
ll20
"'
Cl
ll40
1160
ll80
1200
x3
+1
R
1 +1
x2
3
1
FE Mesh
or
Michel Dubois
Research Engineer
CETIM  France
ABSTRACT
NOTATION
+ +
¥
<VI, v2> 3 =
s
surface of v 3 ; the bilinear application is then defined by :
+ + + + j +
V3v1. v2 dV3, < vl ,v2 > S 3= ~v1.v2dS3
+ (!)
J J
the boundary curve of V2 ; the bilinear application is then
define1 by : + + + + + +
< VI,Vz > V2 = V2v1.v2dV2, < vl,v2)s 2= S 2v1.v2 dS 2 (2)
where dV 2 is the differential elementary area on the referen
ce surface and dS 2 is the differential elementary arc on the
boundary curve.
If I= I, v 1 is the reference fibre of a beam, and s 1 repre
sents the boundary points of v 1 ; the bilinear application
is then defined by :
<~1.~2>v =Jv~1·~2dV1, <~1.~2>s
1 ~1·~2 Is
1 1 ..... 1 .....
where dV 1 is the differential elementary arc and vl .v 2 S1
I
(3)
GENERALIZED MODELIZATIONS
€· • e. . with i, j = I , 2, 3 (6)
~J ~J
+'
The corresponding symmetrtcal components of 3cr~ reduce
to classical stress cr~J
ij
(} with i, j = 1,2,3 (7)
(9)
(10)
(II)
1"t1 = N (12)
BASIC EQUATIONS
The generalized strains have covariant components I E·.
I l.J
kij in the natural reference frame
I
E• • (13)
l.J
where the generalized strain vectors are defined by compa
tibility equations :
I+ lit.1. =Cl 1..Ie
E • (14)
1. '
I+ r_,_i I ij + I j +
0 on. 0 nigj 0 n gj
1.
I+ I+ i n· I ij + I j > (17)
]1 11
1. ]1 nigj ]1 n g·J
Transformation of I + i I + i I+ I+
(J ]1 into on ' Jln is
symbolically written
I + I+ l+ i I + i
(J
Jl n
N ( (J ]1 (18)
n '
I +i I+ i
Vectors a and Jl verify equilibrium equations
for the quasistatic case here to be considered :
+ I+ i I+ i I+ (Jg)
+ 0 g. X a +a i Jl + c =O
1
179
(24)
The generalized modelizations defined by the above equa
tions are called IDGM according to whether~ = 3 2 1.
The generating model is 3DGM while 2DGM and IDGM may be
considered as simplified representations.
The GR2 and GRI are then obtained from GR3 by the same way
as in classical 2MD shells and IMD beams theories [2],[1].
180
FUNCTIONAL FORMULATION
Transformation of basic equations into integral relations is
performed by a former presented method [4], L5], making use
of distributions theory {8/. In a first step, functions
equations are transf~rmed into linear continuous functionals
equations. The Iti, e are prolonged by zero if ~ VI ,t
by using the characteristic function :
.....
if ~ ~ VI
{ 01
if x f. VI (26)
and we apply in distribution sense at (H (VI)Iu,H(VI)Ie)
the composed second order linear differential operator :
L =D o R o C (27)
where D, R, C, are respectively defined by (20), (23),(15),
We use distributions derivation formulas like
v cS (SI )
<li (H (VI) +v) = H (VI ) <l i v+  ni+ (28)
and :
Clj <li (H (VI) :;j ) = H(VI) <lj <li :;j <lj (ni:;j o (SI))
INTEGRAL RELATIONS
Let IE (Iu , I H ) be the tempered elementary solution
of L The (6 x 6) Iu and I H matrix has components
I I+ + I H
Uij = ui.gj (34)
ij
where Iu. and I H
are respectively displacements and rot~
tions cofresponding to concentrated forces and couples at
origin in direction
~
Iu.
~
g. :
and I H. are tempered
~
solutions of
I+ I =t +I +I
L ( Ui , H i) (gi o (0), gi o (O)) (35)
with i o (0) being the I dimensional DIRAC distribution.
The elementary solution IE is obtained by HORMANDER'S
method ru
By convolution product of IE with (33), we obtain then
I I + ~ I~ I+ +
<( U, H) (x 0, {_..£., _£) (t; )>
vi
I + I
+ I+ I+ +
H)(x t;),( an, ~n)(t; )>S
+ <( U,
I I + + I+ I + + I
 <(T ( U, H))( xt;), ( u, 8) (l:)>s
I
(36)
which are integral relations available for any ~ E VI
(I= 3,2,1),! being an integration variable.
REFERENCES
1. INTRODUCTION
TiJ" (x,y) = 
8n;(1v)r
2 { (12v) fn oij + (3)
where
or Yi  xi
r,i = Clyi = r
v and E are elastic constants, r is the distan
ce between pointe x and y, 5ij is the delta
function, ui is a component of the unit outward
normal of the surface. The repeaten inrlex in a
procuct is to be understood as a summation over a II
the indices.
where
N1(g) = t <g,+1) (g 2+1) <g,+g21)
N5(g) =~ <g,+1} ( 1g~) etc. [6J
187
~1 ~1
2 4
2
3
MJ(g) = l4 (1  g,> (1  g 2)
(6)
The points x, at which the integral equations are
expressed are internal points of the surface ele
ment not identical with the nodal points in terms
of which the boundary coordinates, the displace
ments and/or the tractions are expressed. General
ly the number of the equations after the discreti
zation of BIE and the number of unknown values of
the nodal displacements and/or tractions are dif
ferent, i.e. in the matrix form
[ Tij] {uj}  [uij J {tj} = { o} i
j
= 1 ,2 ••• n
= 1,2 ••• p
(7)
J
where [ Tij and [ Uij J
are matrices of the coef
ficients determined from the numerical solution of
the BIE {1), {uj} and {tj} are the displacement
vector and the traction vector, respectively, of
the nodal points.
I If <
1 1
11 1' 112> d 111 d1]2 = (10)
1 1
n1 n2
LL
i==1 j=1
+ E: '
= 
I
ss0
and when this is used we receive
(14)
= I
ss 0
[ uj (y)  uj (x) J ds
where S0 denotes the area of the element with a
singularity point.
 J skij(x,y) uk(y) ds
s
where
Dkij = : 2 { ( 12 v) [ Bki r , j + B kj r , i  Bij r, k ] +
skij = rJ~ { 3
2 ar [ (12v)
an 5ij r,k +
 nj r ,i + ni r ,j J
where
1  2v
K = 8n:(1v)
We shall assume that region D consists of two
parts mutually complementary to the infinite space.
SC"r
s
Fig. 2. Crack of arbitrary contour in infinite
space
ui (x) • I
s+
tj (y) uij (y,x) de  (17)
ui (x) = 
+
J t. uj (y) T!j (y,x) de (19)
8 cr
where
+
t. uj = uj  uj
The stress components ere obtained frem equation
( 19)
= !J.(u~,J + uj,a.> for a.= 1 ,2
(20)
+
= 21J. [ v u a., a. + (1v) uJ,J J _L_
12v
and by integration by par~ we get
= J t. uj ( y) aT!j(y,x)
'* ds =
s+ oya.
cr
•  ) •uj,a T!j(y,x) ds
or
194
T
ij
,.  !L[ 2
r2 r
Hence, form the preceding relationships and from
equation (20) we receive
0 33 E 2
• 8n:(1v J
+ )
8 cr
for a., ~,y .. 1, 2
The integrals in equation (21) are understood in
the sense of Cauchy's principal values. Now, we can
take up the numerical solution of the system of
integral equations of first order (21) where dis
placements on the surface of the crack to which the
known loads o33 and/or oa. 3 are applied. The
crack surface is approximated by meaas of surface
elements. Then, the Cartesian coordinates of any
point of the element are expressed in terms of co
ordinates of nodal points and shape functions in
terms of local coordinates. For this purpose, we
can use immediately the elements shown in Fig. 1
with the corresponding shape functions. As it will
be shown later for pennyshaped cracks or ellipti
cal cracks it is advantageous to use a transition
element, Such an element permits matching of one ele
ment with two elements sidebyside [1]. For the
195
I
A c B
N1 = 41 (10 ( 1 1])
1
 4 (11~1) ( 1 1])
1
N2 .. 4 (1~) ( 1+1])
1 1
N3 '"'4 ( 1+ ~) ( 11]) 4 (11~1) ( 11])
1
N4 ""4 (1 + ~) (1+1])
1
N5 =2 (1l~i> ( 11])
'7)
it)
where
[J] .. ( ~t
..Q..z ~
01] 01]
Po = Mh1
y (1  L)
h
1
p1 = M I
I  moment of inertia of the crosssection
area of the beam
112
x1 •010Sm
Q4
....... ......
...,
' ''
''
' ',
'' ' a numerical results [3]
for a/b .. 2; b/h=O
\j)
0.7 L__'~:L:=:::::!::;;!=
30 60 90 120 150 180
Reference s:
[1] D.M. Tracey: 3D elastic singulari ty element
for evaluatio n of K along an arbitrary crack
front; Int. J. Fracture 9, 1973, 340343
[2] S.E. Benzley: Represen tation of singulari ties
with isoparame tric finite elements, Int. J.
Num. Meth. Eng. a, 1974, 537545
[3] T.A. Cruse, G.J. Meyers: Three dimension al
fracture mechanics analysis, Journal of the
structura l division, Proceedin gs of the Ame
rican Society of Civil Engineers , 103, 1977,
309320
204
CETIM  France
INTRODUCTION
Seven years ago, CETIM developed a computer program based on
the Boundary Integral Equation method to analyse three dimen
sional structures under mechanical loading. At that time, the
boundary conditions that could be taken into account by the
program were :
This is the reason why, since 1975, all the analy~s of three
dimensional comjact bodies have been performed by using this
program, I I1. 12 , 121.
I
207
Two examples are given below, the first one concerns elasti
city problems whose Governing Equation is the Navier's
Equation, (fig.2), the second one concerns steady state heat
transfer problems whose governing equation is the Laplace
Equation (fig.3).
208
Boundary
Integral B.I.E. B. I.E.
Equation
with : i 1,2,3 ; j I ,2 ,3
t tension
with : l£ = Flux
In those equations, the Kernels T .. and Tare varying as
1/R 2 and the Kernels Uij and U ar~Jvarying as 1/R in the
three dimensional case (fig.4).
fig.4
D
triangular element
fig.7
quadrangular element
fig.8
CYCLIC SYMMETRY
When analysing a body whose. geometry is the same from one
sector to another around a given axis, and when the loading
is radial, it is possible to restrain the analysis of the
behaviour of the total structure to the one of only one
sector by imposing a normal displacement equal to zero on
every element of the radial surfaces representing the sector.
But when the loading is not radial (for example, torsion
problem), it is no longer possible to study the behaviour
of a sector alone with the following boundary conditions :
given tension or given displacement on the surface, because
on surfaces "inside the volume" (fig.9), tension and displa
cements are both unknowns.
211
surfaces
inside the
volume
Fig.12
214
z
on
surface
c
fig.l3
The conclusion of the study was that the stresses were too
important at the basis of the pawn for the force that had to
be transmitted. In order to come back to a reasonable level
of stresses in this area it was decided to increase the
diameter of the pawn,
SLIDING ON INTERFACE
When there is contact between two bodies, three kin~of
contact may exist :
 perfect,
 contact with friction,
 perfect sliding,
When the contact zone is known and when the kind of contact
is perfect sliding, the conditions are (fig.J4).
Subregion a
Subregion b
fig,l4
216
Subregion a
Subregion b
fig. 15
 In the shaft :
_ vpr R2 2R1 2
u r (r,z)
E
[ 2
1v
Rz 1
u z (r,z) .E
E
[ I  v2 Rz 2 R1 2
Rz 1
(r,z) v p Rz Rl
2 2
0 rr oee<r,z) =2 Rz
a
zz
(r,z) = p
arz = a ez = a re 0 ue 0
v
arr (r,z) 2 p R1 2 [ R!z  ~J
v
oee<r,z)  2 p R1 2 ( R> + ~J
I
.!Lj
I
h p_2
r 111
I
r
fig.l6
218
 ....,,,
   1',.......
~
'
'
Sector of 45 degrees
\
\
X
fig.17
ur(r=IOunn) 3.16 10 3 3.13 10 3 3.14 10 3 3.16 10 3 3.13 10 3 3.14 10 3
uz(z=2.5unn) 3.33 10 3 3.31 10 3 3.33 10 3 8.03 10 5 7.97 10 5 8.41 10 5
3
u (z=5unn) 6.66 10 3 6.63 10 3 6.69 10 1.61 10 4 1.55 10 4 1.62 10 4
z
u (z=7.5unn) 9.99 10 3 9.37 10 3 1.00 10 2 2.41 10 4 2.27 10 4 2.35 10 4
z
2
uz(z=IOunn) 1.33 10 2 1.33 10 2 1.35 10 3.21 10 4 2.99 10 4 3.25 10 4
Table
~
co
0
"'"'
Shaft (*) Hollow cylinder i
I
Theoretical Numerical result Theoretical Numerical result
Result Result
daN/mm 2 Min Max dan/mm2 Min Max
cr r 3.375 3.19 3.47
cre 3.375 3. 13 3.63
cr r  30 29.7  30
crr(r=IOmm) 3.375 3.15 3.47
cr 9 (r=l0mm) 5.625 5,53 5.72
crr(r=l5mm) .875 1.21 1.28
cr 9 (r=l5mm) 3. 125 3.07 3. 12
cr (r=20mm) 0 109 101
r
cr 9 (r=20mm) 2.250 2. 19 2.25
cr z 0 103 10 1
x Results on the axis of the shaft are not taken into account.
Table 2
221
CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BIBLIOGRAPHY
H. Antes
ABSTRACT
BASIC EQUATIONS
(2)
D • N • u = £
 ,...., ,...., 
+ E:Q* (3)
u = g* • (5)
G • ,....,
R
,....,
(6)
K. £ (7)
~
1
K £ (8)
~
T 1 Q*
D
 
• K
 
• (D • N • u  E
....... .......
) p* = .......
+ ....... 0 (9)
This equation (9), the reduction of the two systems (1) and (4),
can be called the Navier's equation of the linear shell theory.
(10)
n. 11
a ( 11)
n.22
a (22)
n.12
2a ( 12)
m (11)
8 (11)
m(22)
8 (22)
m ( 12)
28 ( 12)
RECIPROCAL THEOREM
( 12)
E = B • E:
 ~
(14)
+ Ir (Rs • E) T •
~
v . (~G • ;J!,l df

( 16)
DT · B · E:
  f"'oJ
= DT · E
 I"Y
= 0 in n
~
(17)
1 T 2 1T 2K*
fr <~s • ~l · v • (R • 1/Jldr
G ~
JE •~r
n~
dn . (19)
2 T 1 2T 1K*
= j(R
r s
·E) · V • (R
~  G
·1/i)df
~
jE
n~
•!:
~
dQ. (20)
Here only modified strains E and stress functions 1/1 are used
to express the unknown quantities. This new formulation of
the reciprocal theorem can be combined with the well known
Betti's reciprocal theorem, for shells in the here introduced
vectormatrix notation given by
1 T T 2 1T 2*
Jr (RG • u) · V • (R
~  s • cr)df +
~
fu · ~p
n~
drl
2 T T 1 2T 1*
= f<R ·ul
r G ~
·V

• <~ 8 ~)dr+J~
n ·,e drl. (21)
JE1T
n~
2
•<Jdrl =
~
j(RG
r
•U)
~
1 T
•V

T
· (R
s
2
~
1T 2*
·cr)df+}u •p dQ.
n~ ~
(22)
. 2 T 1 2T 1K*
j(R ·E) ·V· (R ·'l')dfjE ·!: drl. (23)
r s ~ G ~ n~ ~
229
(25)
u
T (x ) =
f [ (R • 1jJ (y))
T • v T • (~s • ~* (~,x_l)
~ "'P r G ~ ~  "'
(28)
Here III
denotes the Cauchy principal value of the boundary
integral. The characteristic matrices ~ 1 (X) and ~ 2 (il are
calculatedas the limiting values (Hartmann 1980)
I V T * ,. ,. . , ) df Y
. , ,y. . , = ,y. . , + pw)
lim · (R · S (y, (30)
s 
p ~or
p
 
IQG* (y,x) ·I K* (x)dD . (32)
,....,,...., ,...._, ,...., X
3u 3 3E*
T
·az
~3
dZ
(x )
~p
f[ (~G • _t (x_) ) T ·V <~s (X
"'P~
,y))
r
3cr*
 (R · u(y)) T . v
G ~ ~
T
<~s . az ~3
(x ,y)) ]dr
"'P ~ y
3E 3
 J _::_ (x ,x)· rK* (x) dQ (33)
Q dZ "'P~ ~ X
3u 3 3cr*
T ~3
3E 3
 JQ _::_
d\1
<y_,?:_{) • LK* (x) drl
· · ~ ~ X
(34)
l
uk (x ) +
f (R l T
• ~) • vT
2
<~s · f!..ldf (35)
~p r G
2
becomes substituting thy stress function ~ by equation (6) and
the displacement field ~ by the relation (3)
T l
I (D. N. ~)l T (~ • !? • ~ • ;J:.l d
2
uk(x ) +
n  ~p
+ f (R • u)
l T
• V
T
• (~S •
2
f!._) df (36)
r G ~ 
fn[u1,1 <~3,22 +
1
R ~2,2l  u1,2<~3,12 +
1
R ~2,1l
1 1
+ u2,2(~3,11  R ~1,1)  u2,1 (~3,12  R ~1,2)
(37)
2
a 1 'l" arctan yX + b(xlnr + c1x (38)
a 2 x · arctan y + biy ln r 2 + c 2 y
.?!.
. (39)
233
1 2 2 2
=R [a 2 xy • arctan yX + (b 31 x + b 32 y ) ln r ] . (40)
a 1
+ f[R <w 2 , 1 (x,b) w2 , 1 (x,b))+ <w 3 , 12 <x,blw 3 , 12 (x,b))]dx=o,
a
(41)
1
0 (43)
'R a<22l ,1 + 13 <22> ,1  13 <12 > ,2
0 (44)
= 0 (45)
(46)
1 T T 2 lT 2
Jr (RG • u)
~
· v · (Rs • cr)dr
~
+ fu · ~p*
rl~
drl =
f(R
~ s
(~~ EQ*llT
~
· v · (R
G
• ,T,ldr +
~
+j[EQ*T · f + (EQ*
n,.....; . . .; ""J
~) T
f"oJ
· fK* ]drl
,..._,
(48)
( 3) 1 1 ( 3v) 2 2 2
1/J
3
=
R 21l
[xy ·arctan ~ + 1 6 (x  y ) ln r ]
y
(51)
CONCLUSIONS
APPENDIX
1
0 Vlbl 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
F
1
K K
0 0
236
2
(1+V) a12
F syrnm.
Et
(1v) (a12) 2
( a 11 l 2 12 11
a a
11 22
+va a
12 22
1 Et syrnm. a a
~ =~
1v 11 22
 2 a a
0 0 1 0
b2b1 0 1 0 0
2 1
b1 0 0 0
2 2
a
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
1
0 0 0 0
2
0 0 l
N 0
0 0
0
1
j
237
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
:= 0 0 0 0 0
~s
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 D1 0 D2
0 0 0 0 D2 D1
0 0 )
0 0
R := 0 0
G
REFERENCES
Torbjorn Andersson
INTRODUCTION
Basic relationship A B
Consider two linearly elastic bodies n and n bounded by cy
lindrical surfaces. The traces gf the goundary surfaces in the
(x 1 ,x 2 )plane are the curves f and f respectively. The
geometry and all variable quantities are independent of the
x 3coordinate. The problem is thus considered as a plane pro
blem in the (x 1 ,x 2 )system, Figure 1.
the two bodies are in contact with each other. The contact
region can be separated into two parts. On one part res sliding
occurs i.e. the surfaces in contact move relative to each
other. This part is called the slip region. On the other part
rca' called the adhesion region, no sliding occurs. Thus
rA rA + rA
c ca cs
f Hk.. k
(P,Q)~u.(Q)df(Q) = f Uk.. (P,Q)~t.(Q)dT(Q),
k k=A,B (1)
k l.J J k l.J J
r r"
From the previous load state a normal gap between the contact
boundaries can be calculated, Figure 2. This gap is denoted
u~'n where n is the load step under consideration.
k
Four new displacement components v. (k A,B) in the local
coordinate system can now be definea.
242
(2a)
(2b)
(3)
v b.v (4b)
e e
]1
ve
Figu.e 3 Friction coefficient as a function of
effective slip
,___
+ (,n1 _ n2) n1 (6)
.. ~ tl
t2
slipsurface
::...___
t3
3 2
t2 + !::,tE,3
2 2
t2
2
tl + !::,tE,2
2 2
tl
2
0 tl
Second
_,.,_
First load step 01: adhesion
12: slip
Third  II  23: slip
(7)
This ensures that after each load step the condition for slip,
t 2 = : ~t 1 is valid, see Figure 4.
r
A B
/1v1 + L'lv1 0, /1tA  L'lt1B 0,
A
t1 < 0, t1B<O (Sa)
c 1
A B L'ltA  MB= 0
r 11v 2 + 11v 2 0, (Sb)
ca 2 2
k + k E: k
r
cs
/1tA  L'ltB=
2 2
o, M2= l.l11tl + 11t 2 • (k = A,B) (Sc)
f NTA.. o,n df
~ 1J ul +
fA Ui2
A
u
•ts,nar
2 (9a)
fA T
c cs
+ B
f u~. /1t.df +
J
f u~.
1]
M.dr +
J
f B(U~l l.lUi2) M 1dr +
BB J 1
rB
1
r r r
c ca cs
B o,n
 f (1a)Til ul df + f Bu~1 2 11l·rar
2 (9b)
rB r
c cs
rk rk k k
( L'lui' L'lti) (lOa)
c
rk (11v. , /1t.) (lOb)
ca 1 1
rk k +
cs (/1vl, /1tl), (11v2 , l.J/1tl) (lOc)
245
Outside the contact region there is cne relation for one un
known quantity and inside the contact region there are two
relations for two unknown quantities.
Until now it has been assumed that the adhesion and slip
zones are the correct ones and that the tangential traction in
the slip zone has the right sign. One way to find the correct
solution in each increment is to get a solution for an assumed
contact condition that is not violating itself. In the assumed
adhesion zone the total tangential traction has to satisfy
Jt 2 J < ~Jt 1 J. In the slip zone the friction force should work
against the relativeAdisplHcement increments. The condition
sign (t 2) # sign (~u 2 + ~u 2 ) has thus to be fulfilled.
x.
l.
I'm.
l.
~
m
~u.
l.m
, ~t.
l.m
(12)
From
o,n equations
. (2) and (12) it can be concluded that
l. and
~v.
u1 are l.nterpolated by ~m·
~vlslsvls
[~
0
UB
TA
0
1
0, 0
UBs TB
J 0
0
GtA
StB
~v2alsv2a
2s 1
A I
A
o,n ~v2s Sv2s
au 1 0
~ E:,n
~uB !SuB
0
t2
I
M1 St 1
(1a) u~' n 0 aj a
Mlsj Stls
M2al St2a
B B
~v2sl 8v2s
(14)
n_j~
i&1VV1~V<RkkRxd
\ element limit
(17)
(20)
Computer program
A computer program system for solving elastostatic contact
problems with friction using the Boundary Element Method is
developed. The program system is built up of three programs
and data are transformed between the program by use of disc
store, Figure 8. The programs are written for twodimensional
plane strain or plane stress problems and linear elastic
material properties. The shape functions for describing dis
placement and traction variation over each element are assumed
to be constant.
Input
Input
Displacement Displacement
Traction Traction
Stress
APPLICATION
Problem 1
An elastic roller on an elastic foundation is considered. The
BEM model of the two bodies is shown in Figure 9.
50 element
E 4000 [N/mm 2 ]
v = .35
R = 50 mm
tany = .20
50 element
E 4000 [N/mm 2 ]
v = .35
~ 10.0
.a 8. 0
:r:
~ 6 .o
z BEM solution
~ 4 • 0 1.,,ff+
E< Hertz:
2
~ 2 • 0 1.c'f+ p = 'ITEb
~ 32(1 v 2 )R
8 0.0 L________. _________. _______~
FORCE P [N/mm]
100~~~~,
Shear stress
100L..~~~~
5.0 2.5 0 2.5 5.0
CONTACT LENGTH x [.nun]
Figure 11 Elastic roller on elastic foundation, contact
pressureandshear stress distribution on the
foundation
253
Load
case CD 0 G) ®
load
step 8 8 9 9 Nr
)1 .05 .01 .25 .30
pl 591 591 0 0 N/mm
p2 0 0 549 549 II
2
pmax 95 95 90 90 N/mm
Pmax 93 93 88 88 II
Hertz
b 8.0 8.0 8.1 8.1 mm
bHertz 8.1 8.1 7.8 7.8 II
Problem 2
A circular disc is placed in a cylindrical cutout of an infinite
plate. The radii of the hole of the plate and the disc are
approximately the same. In the BEM calculations the clearance
is assumed to be ~R/R = 0.003. The BEM oodel is shown in Figure
12.
'rr"'
.6
I.....~ r·~1
,.....
/.I
......•\t•~
•1• r:~."."
<3?,\
3
.4
v~r:~r ~/
Ar•<·~,_iJ /
l•/
r
0
.2 ~~ ,(
()I
()I
;::l.
........ ........
.o
l IPI@
0 ~
~
@
e e
d
te
.
0
0..
~. ~I
1'
p:: p::
~
p
Ul
Ul Ul
.2
~~ ~
~d>
M/~QR

l'~o
~
CY
Ul
"' 'oo
p.. ~ .4
.0 .0

8 Ul
I :}
0 .4 .0
z~ ril~
• Contact pressure
0 Shear stress
G) .4 .5
0 ::r:
0 Ul .6
90 60 30 0 30 60 90
CONTACT ANGLE ¢0
Problem 3
Load transfer in mechanical assemblage is of practical interest
255
since high stress gradients often occur and the stiffness pro
perties often determine the load transfer. A problem where a
part K of the load P is transferredbetween the sheets by a steel
rivet is shown in Figure 14.
Steel rivet
Alsheet
(lK)P ~
2.5
.·
I I
~ = 0.0 ~ = 0.2
./
K=l.O y
/
2.0 ~r1~~++~,
•
• K = 1.0
•
I 0.8 · ··
~·.............
ill . . . .··
• / 0 8
~I \
1.5
rt.·4~ ·.·~·,\
··
II I ·......._
··
0. 6
.
__ ......
~
0.6 /.yl·\~
r 'I"
!'{,...
0.4
··
./
•
.r··~
1.0 t~·~~\ ·v·/;;. . .~
~~·IY
1
\ ·"·r.._ ··
.
0.
\n.z •'•...... /
\
t\ •,
/.
0 0
;t:~~8:_tf_~ i
b b
........ ........ 0.5
0.. 1'
·y
1\
"
I • ·;;··•c:.;:::~,·
I ··.".J...i:::
 ........ J.....•
11 l/ ~r··1 •
& '• _&'//; ~ .4/
0.0 ~~+~~~~~~~~
.~ ·~,............
'··/ ./. 2
•
Contact pressure
• Shear stress
a0
p
=b = lOO[N/nmh
I I I
0.5
90 60 30 0 30 60 90
CONTACT ANGLE ¢
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
R. C. Batra
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
p = p0 (1  u. .), (1)
J.,l.
Ev
(3)
n.o .. n. 0, x1 ~ b (6)
l. l.J J
u2 = 0, (9)
012 = 0, (10)
where
(11)
262
Taking the inner product of both sides of Equation (2) with wi,
integrating the resulting equation over the domain n consisting
of the region occupied by the layer above the plane x 2 = 0 and
using the divergence theorem, we obtain
where
gk Lijkt w1,]
. . nt. (14)
( )  ~(m)= 0 (15)
Lijkt wi,j 't k
Indentation
Thickness/R 0 Load P/(Gb) Indentation/b Thickness
.2343 2.162 .2784 .2486
.2092 2.182 .2550 .2550
.1883 2.216 .2368 .2631
.1674 2.272 .2190 .2738
.1454 2.303 .1974 .2820
.1172 2.633 .1802 .3218
Remarks
We should emphasize that the results presented above and the
conclusions drawn are applicable only to the geometric config
uration studied herein. For other values of geometric para
meters, one will expect similar qualitative and not necessarily
quantitative results.
For the present problem the CPU time and the core require
266
ment for the finite element solution and the boundary element
solution were virtually the same. In the boundary element
solution of the problem the grid used had 10 elements across
the thickness of the layer and 35 elements across the circum
ference. The boundary element solution perhaps gave slightly
better values of tractions at the bond surface. The grid data
in both caseswere generated internally in the computer program
and required the same effort.
REFERENCES
IO
g r id
e le m e n t
B o u n d a ry
F ig . 2
268
Qj
<J
"'
.....
"";:J
Ol
'1:1
U) en en
U)
"': 2v 0
1::
,.0
II II II Qj
D .c:
VI ctl;lo .j..J
.j..J
"'
Ol
Qj
Ol
ct~IQ) Ol
Qj
""
.j..J
<ll
<"")
00
..i
""'
.4 8o =.209
71 =.45
r=
10::: .3
.....
0
0:::
:!:.
~
.....
1.&.1 .2
0:::
::::>
en
en
1.&.1
0:::
Q.
.I
0 .25 .5 .75
e
8o
Fig. 4 Pressure distribution at the contact surface; effect of layer thickness 1\)
!B
2 "'..s
0
1.5
y
ROBO
UNDEFORMED
DEFORMED SURFACE
(S; =.766)
.5
DEFORMED
SURFACE (S;= .883
,.,
~
Ia:
0
'a:
.6
..!
C)
..._,
Si= .766
Ql .209
"i .3~
.... Bo=
a.
rv
..J
272
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
to that used in this paper, but there are differences in both the
formulation and application of the integral equations.
FORMULATION
(1)
Using polar coordinates (r,e) and letting S be the angle from the
radial direction to the outer normal yields
M (w) = D{
 O+v)'V 2w + 0v) ~(  aw + 
I  I a2w  a2w ) cos 2S
n 2 r ar r2 ae2 ar2
 2 .L
ar
aw )
( .!r ae sin 2aJ t
r (8a)
FIGURE 1
K
+ ~ L <Mt(w)i>EI <Mt(E)i> wl 0 (10a)
k=1 qk Pqk Pqk qk
where
~=lim J
e+O r
b{Vn(E)iwl
Pq q
Mn(E)i:l
Pq q
+ ~~~
Pq
Mn(w)i EIVn(w)i}dsl
q Pq q q
E
{10b)
By placing the ongm of the polar coordinate at point P the
singular function E that satisfies Equation (5) is
( 11)
d = _1_ (12)
2
4A 1T
276
Making use of Equations (11 ), (8a) and (8c) and separating in real
and imaginary parts gives
Ei(Ar) =i c J (Ar)
0
03a)
~(Ar) = c Y (Ar) + d
0
K0 (Ar) ( 13b)
i
~ (Ar) = Ni =  i AC J 1 (Ar) cos8 ( 13c)
J 1 ( Ar)
 c D A (1v) r  cos28 } (13e)
(13f)
· { [ 3 A3 (1V)
.
Vn(E) 1 = V 1. =  1 c D J 1(Ar) A cos8 + 2
(13i}
_ co~38)}
277
03 j)
E~ = i c J 0 (At.) 05a)
fQ
= 05c)
(15e)
{15f)
=0 {15g)
278
( 15h)
{15 i)
= ic {16a)
2
' i ' .cAe:
1 lml2= 0
lJmNI {16c)
e:+o fQ e:+O
2 1
lim rJf 1 im  ( cd)  =0 ( 16d)
e:+O fQ e:+O n e:
1 im M~ {16e)
e:+O fQ
lim Mj lim D A2
e:+O
(~ c+d) logAe:
n
(16f)
e:+O fQ
1 im vj ( 16g)
e:+O fQ
lim Vj 2 2
= 1 im  D A ( C+d) 
e:+O n
1
e:
{16h)
e:+O fQ
The results of Eqs. (16) are substituted into Eq. (lOb) and we have
279
 E~ Vn(w)l} dsl
Pq q q
K
 L [ <Mt(w)l> 0 (18a)
k=l qk
and
~ { 1 WI  Mf
Pq q Pq q
R
Mn(w)l El Vn (w)l
Pq q
K
 L[ < Mt(w) I>
R
El  < rr
...R
> wl] WI = 0 08b)
k=l qk Pqk Pqk qk p
Again, making use of Eqs. (8a to 8c) and writing the kernals in
imaginary and real parts gives
(20a)
280
(20b)
. J1(Ar)
Ny1 (Ar) = i c [A J o (Ar) cos4> cosS  r  cos(4>+S)] (20c)
~(Ar)
y
= A(c Y0 (Ar)  d K0 (Ar)) cos4> cosS
(c Y1(Ar) + d K1(Ar))
 r
· cos(4>+S) (20d)
. A2
M~(Ar) = i c D {J 1(Ar) [~ cos4> (1+V+(1v) cos2S)
J (Ar)
 2 ;~v) cos(4>2S)] + (1v) A~ cos(4>2S)} (20e)
(21a)
R
EYI = [c Y 1 (A.e:) + d K 1(A.e:)] cosq, (21b)
~
i Jl(A.e:)
NY I =  i c ["A J 0 (A.e:)  e:1 cosq, (21c)
Mi
Yl
~
282
TR = DOv) {~ 2
(c Y0 (A.E:)  d K0 (>..e:)) 2 (c Yl (A.e:)
rl e:
~
+ d K 1 (A. E)) }s i ncj> (21h)
J 1 (A.e:)
vi A.
= i c D {J 0 ( A.e:) [A.3 + 0v) :zl coscp +  e :  [>..2
rl e:
~
+ 2(1v)] coscj>} (21i)
2
e:
1 im E
e:+O y~
l
= 1 im i c
e:+O
~e: coscp = 0 (22a)
limN
e:+O y~
l
= lim i c [A.
e:+O
~~] coscp = I~A coscp (22c)
(22e)
limTil =0 (22g)
€+0 y
~
limVRI
€+0 y
~
Again, the results of Eqs. (22a to 22j) can be substituted in Eq. (106)
in order to determine q;. However, we see that the limit does not
10b) by~ = w  w I r
converge. This can be corrected by replacing w of Eqs. (lOa and
Note, this assumption does not affect its
derivatives, also note hat along r 8 we have
(23a)
(23b)
dw
wl = wl  wl = £ dnl (24a)
fQ Q p \.,(
dwl .
Also, d
np IS
When the results of Eqs. (24a), (24b) and (22a) to (22j) are
substituted in Eq. (10b), ¢i is found to be
1 . . dw . .
J5 {\t (wl wl) Myt dnl + Nyt Mn(w)l Eyt Vn(w)l} dsl
r Pq q q Pq q Pq q Pq q q
K
 I [ < Mt (w) I> EYl  < \ l > (wl  wl )] =0 (26a)
k=l
pk Pqk Pqk qk p
and
Jr D.! {V R
YI w I
(
 wI )  MR
YI
dw N R M ( )
dn I + YI n w I  EYRI Vn (w )I}d s I
Pq q P Pq q Pq q Pq q q
K R .
I [ < Mt (w) I
k=1 >E I
y
 < T
y
I >
qk Pqk Pqk
1 aw (26b)
 2>.. a~l =o
p
The integral equations (18) and (26) are for a singular point P
inside of the region n. The equations involve only the boundary
unknowns of effective shear, bending moment, normal slope and
displacement.
~~ = f,
p
PVfpq wlq  Mjpq :1q + ~ ~(w) I  El
pq q pq
Vn(w) l}dsl
q q
(27R)
1 K R
 5 kL [ <Mt (w) I > EI  <rl
...R
> wl 1
qk pqk pqk qk
Kt" ~~ + K
.. a.,p n ~npI
a
= _Dl
rf{~l
y
(wlwl ) r.Jyl ddw +
nl
rfyl M (w) I
n
pq q p pq q pq q
pq q q
1 K R ...R
D k=l
L [ <Mt (w)l >E
yl
 qY1 > (wl  wl)
qk pqk pqk qk pk
K . i
 kL [ <Mt (w) I > El  <T I > (wl )] (27I)
qk pqk pqk qk
and
286
(281}
K
I [ <Mt (w) I > Ei  <Ti > (w w )
k=l yl yl I I
qk pqk pqk qk p
NUMERICAL SOLUTION
COMPUTER PROGRAM
however, requires twice as much computer time. The true and false
roots found from the real parts of Eqs. (27) and (28) are easily
separated, if one looks at corresponding mode shapes.
CONCLUSIONS
The method used in this paper provides a viable and useful means of
determining frequencies and mode shapes of arbitrarily shaped thin
uniform elastic plates. At this time, nothing can be said about the
relative merits of this method as opposed to the finite element method
or the mixed method proposed by Bi!'zine (4). Since all of these
methods produce acceptable results, the criteria for choice must be
computer costs. Comparisons of these methods will be the subject
of future research.
REFERENCES
INTRODUCTION
DYNAMIC STIFFNESS
s 2 u.  su.
1. 1.0
 u.1.0 (4)
295

Writing s = iw and defining the body force to be
P.
l. 1.0
K. +
l.
u.1.0 (5) + iw u.
the frequency dependent differential equation of motion takes
the form
2 ,..,_. 2 ,..,_. 2
(c ) u ... + c  c
u. + en u. + P. = 0. (6)
s J,Jl.
p s l.,JJ l. l.
where w is the circular frequency.
The transformed boundary conditions are
 u . = u.
l. l.
(7 a)
0.l.J.
J
n. = T'il:l. = t.l. (7 b)
where T is a differential operator.
i=1
n
l: J
r.
u*dsi ¥
i=1
ft*
I'.
i
ds.L u . ( 14)
L L
where u ri_~* ds ( 16 a)
T (16 b)
rJt*
 ds
T u !::! .t I
( 17 a)
T T + _!_ I (17 b)
2
Equation ( 17) allows us to establish the dynamic stiff
ness matrix of one or several foundations. The surface of the
soil represents the boundary of the domain which is discretized
by boundary elements. They may be divided into two parts: One
part, with index i, stems from the foundation, the remaining
297
[i]
tion (17) may be partitioned as follows:
[
~i~ ~ia]
Ta~ Taa ua
=[ !:!i~
Ua~
!:!ia]
Uaa
[!i]
ta
( 18)
     
As all boundary elements belong to the same horizontal plane
some of the coefficients become zero because at the surface
~~ = 0 (19 a)
(19 b)
(19 c)
(20)
u = a u •
(22)
dA. M. (23a,d)
~ ~
298
K2 L:
].
f
A.
t2 dA.l ' M2 L:
i
f
A.
t3 r1 dA.l (23b,e)
l l
K3 L:
i
f
A.
t3 dA.l ' M3 L:
i fA.
t2 r1 dA.l
l l (23c,f)
 L:
i
f
A.
t1 r 2dAi.
l
p aT A t (24)
where A is a diagonal matrix and stands for the area of the in
dividual boundary elements of the foundation.
(25 a)
1 i
2 .!:! (25 b)
299
I a
u (25 c)
2 
Equation (25 b) shows that, within the above mentioned assump
tions, the displacementtractionrelation of the foundation is
not affected by the tractionfree part of the surface. It is
therefore sufficient to introduce boundary elements only at the
location of the foundation itself. This simplification results
in considerably reduced numerical effort.
~~=~ (26)
where the complex dynamic stiffness is defined as
(27)
(28)
NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
K (36)
with a = w ·b (37)
0 c
s
where b is the half sidelength of the foundation,and KR and KI
are dimensionless stiffness coefficients. Inversion of~ yields
the flexibility matrix
F = FR + i FI
   (38)
again divided into real and imaginary part.
With shear modulus G and sidelength b they can be written in
dimensionless form:
for the displacements
fR G b FR (39 a)
G (39 b)
and for the rotations and the torsional degrees of freedom
fR G b 3 FR (39 c)
G (39 d)
.. .
i!
0 8 8
lil
.;
Iii
.;
..
Iii
~
"'
..8 .
8
lil
.:~
~
i
0
~
0
i! i!
0
.8 0
lil
.;
Iii
.;
.Iii
.~
.
8
Tlil
.: d
~
Iii
0
~
0
8
oo·• BL ·o !IG"O 't'O Bl"O 0 o• ·o so ·o 110 ·o 110 ·o so ·o
"~">I .ou Z~">l
.8
!i!
"'
.8
8
~
g
~
g
~
g
N
~
N
8
N
g
~
li!
g
0
~
0
8
oe·o st ·o 31 '0 89'0 '19'0 0 OT ·~ 10'l 9b'O Z&'O 98'0
X~\j ZT'>t
8
~
g
..;
g
~
g
N
~
N
8
N
g
~
f\1
g g
0 0
~
0
8
oo·• oo·o oe·o oro os·o 0 oo~.~~,t~~.~~~o~~="·o~,~•.~o.+4 ~
X~\j Z~\j
.
8
oo.7..1~~~·o~=••~.o~=~~.o~=~~·o~4~
xwx~~
.!l
w
= e = const. (41)
whereas for constant hysteretic damping n becomes
n= w ·e con st. (42)
Figures 3 to 6 show the dependency of stiffness coefficients
on the dimensionless frequency a 0 for various values of the
damping coefficients n and 8. It can be shown that the real
parts of the dynamic stiffness matrix decrease with growing a
which corresponds to a reduction of the stiffness of the sprigg
in the model. Simultaneously damping increases in a way which
depends on the chosen damping model.
!::1 }(
x2
45°
>xi 2
v
:.____j,_:t0
xf
xl
g g
~ ~
e e
f!i f!i
~ ~
<i <i
8 8
g g
g g
~ ~
0
~ ~
" "
~ ~
~ 0 ~ 0
X X
[;: al
~ ~
fil g
.; .;
g
.
g ci
.g
g g
,.,., ee.·o zo·o zo·o ci
""''"'
Ol ·~ 'fG"O ci OT '0 90"0 90'0
Zf\j nRwx~">l
g g
~ ti
e e
.
~
0 .
~
0
<i
<i
8 8
g g
g g
~ ~
~ ~
~
" 0
"~
0
~
.; 0
0
X
X
:il g
~ ~
.g
c
_/ g
.;
.
g
.
g
g b
Ol'l so·• zo·• 96"0 "6"0 ci OT '0 90"0 20'0zc·o so·o ci
zp nRWX'f">l
"
8 8
!l !l
~
~
~ ~
~
~
~ ~
!a 5I
g g
iii
'2
~
~ ·~f!
"'
~
~ ~
"'
.; 0
)( t: ~
al ~
ti ti
g
.;
.g
8
0
8 8
!l !l
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
;i ;i
!a !a
g g
g iii
~ !i
~ f!
"' "g
!i!
.; 0 .; 0
)( )(
~ al
ti ti
CONCLUSION
Although our results are given here only for rigid, flat
foundations on homogeneous soil the method can easily be ex
tended to embedded foundations on layered soil.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
REFERENCES
Cruse, T.A. and Rizzo, F.J. "A Direct Formulation and Numeri
cal Solution of the General Transient Elastodynamic Problem I"
Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 22, 1968
SYNOPSIS
INTRODUCTION
RAFTS
Uplift
A 30m square, 2m thick raft resting on a clay soil 40m thick
vJith:
Ev = 10 + l.Oz MN/m 2 , Eh/Ev = 2.3, ~vh = 0.1, Vhh = 0.15
and Gvh/Ev = 0.661;
where z is the depth below the underside of the raft, has been
subjected to a uniform uplift pressure of 200kN/m 2 • The raft
material is of unit weight, 25kN/m~ and elastic moduli E =
28GN/m 2 , v = o. 2.
200
a~~~~~~~
a 5 1a (m) 15
a~~~~~~~~_,
'(5
Vl
E
'zE 2
>,
'iii
c
<I>
c
c<I>
E
0
~
a
West
·~~
I
Layout of reactor building
0 10 (m) 20
Silos on Chalk
Settlement observations for a complex of four grain silos
supported on independent 23m diameter, 1.2m thick raft founda
tions founded on soft chalk have been reported by Burland and
Davidson (1976). The layout of the complex, in which each
silo weighs approx~mately 4lMN and has a storage capacity of
120MN, is shown in Fig. 5.
Measured • West} of r.
• East
E 't.
.s
c
••
50
Q)
E
~
~
Qj
(f)
100
or..,.~~
~
z
~0.2 ~~~~
~
::J
Ill
Ill
Cll
L.
~0.4
'(5
(f)
10
Hogging
,"' 
20 \
\
c '
Cll
E
0
............... ' , ,
~
30
'''v" " Transverse
,. 68. 230m ~
~
B$6(:)$
Silo No.1 Silo No.2 Silo No.3 Silo No.4
for both the elastic and for the 11 elastoplastic 11 analysis are
shown for comparison. Agreement is tolerably good given the
complex behaviour of chalk, which exhibits creep characteris~
tic·s, and is much improved when the "elastoplastic' 1 nature of
the material is modelled by the imposition of an upper limit
of O.?MN/fi 2 on the soil pressures.
LAWPILE
20 Silo No.2
E
.s •
+
c
<11
E
...
..9:!
+
~ 20 ..S_ilo_N_o_.4+,
60
Elastoplastic
   Elastic
• Measured
Figure 7 Computed and Observed settlement of silos
Diaphragm Wall
In ordef to illustrate the use of the program in predicting
the behaviour of a diaphragm wall consideration has been given
to the case study reported by Burland and Hancock (1977) of
the basement wall to the underground car park constructed at
the Houses of Parliament, London. The wall has a nominal
thickness of l.Om and an over all height of approximately
28.0m, supporting retained soil to a height of about 17.0m
The car park was constructed from the top, down, after the in
stallation of the wall, by casting the uppermost floor slab
and then excavating the material below down to the next slab
level and so on. In this manner the floor slabs act as both
temporary and permanent strutts to support the diaphragm wall.
The soil profile and construction stages are shown in Fig. 8,
together with the assumed soil properties used in the analy
sis.
u: 0
·~.
_o
0 ·
• ,"0
2 C'=Im2
<?
t~ 
.~:
0
. .; 0' = 30°
~ 0
·o t.
.o
oil d.
j_
: o. 'a
o o· 6
c u'o
0
(f) .,
'.:
~ 8
_<s: E
.:r.::. w 0
 _;.;:: 0 0
:s:
'X'.:::: 0 12
__?t 0.
0
..... 1t.
~..::::
:s:0
__><: Qj
0 0
.0 16 0 0
0
.J::.
_'t.= 15.
* g 18 0
0
0
>. 0 0
0
u x=
c ~ 20 0
0 0
o 0
c ~; 0
0
0
_J
22
0
0
)';_=
21.
~
__ ,.,.
:r_ 26
0
0
0 0
;;r
__g 28
{mm)
20 30
4 2
6
Floor slobs
8
_ 4_
10
12
g _ 5_
0
~
14
0
a.
0
16
~<I> 18
.D
:Ea. 20
<I>     S1mpson et ol {1979)
0
22      Burland & Hancock {1977)
    Present
24
·:·:·:·:·:·:·::·:·:·:·:· Range of recorded
::::::::::::::::::::::::: movements
26
28
200
 
 
.~
.......
Vl
0
ljJ /
150
z /
~
/
/
Q)
l)
' 7      Observed
.E 100 I
0 I
+'
c I
0 I
N
I
'
0 50 I
I
I
I
I
OL~~~~~
0 10 20 30 40 50
Displacement at soil surface (mm)
.....
~
g2.0
0
2.5
3.0
CONCLUSION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
REFERENCES
M. Predeleanu
INTRODUCTION
GOVERNING EQUATIONS
lJ
t .. = a ..
lJ lJ
+ao .. (2)
a ..
l.]
2N x d E: .. +
l.J
I A X dE: + Q X dG J 0 ij (3)
a Q X dE: + R * dG (4)
where by A X d 1jJ is noted the Stieltjes convolution of
two real valued functions A and 1jJ defined by
( a. .
l.J
+ ao l.J
.. ) , J. + F. =
l.
o (6)
a, i i =
..
and by the fluid flow equation of the Darcy type
s C e s + q ) (7)
INTEGRAL REPRESENTATION
Reciprocal theorem
If the porous med~um B is subjected to two loading programs
J(a), = 1,2, then governing fields of the corresponding defor
med configurations verify the following reciprocity relation
1 2  t (I) • (2)
L12 (J ,¢ )= !ds(x) f P. (x,tT)u. (x,T) dT
3B o ~ ~
I t (I) (2)
+ 0 f 3s(x) f g (x,tT)O,i (x,T)nidT
~ 3B o
+ £ dv(x) £ t
Fi
(I)
(x,tT)ui
• (2)
(x,T)dT
2 I
1 21 (J ' ¢ ) (13)
0 (15)
We obtain
where
k k
A . =A .. n.
nl lJ J
(18)
Fi(x,t) (19)
where
B •
n1
= BlJ
•• n .•
J
J and cp are defined respectively by Equations (17) and (18).
Equations (16) and (20) define a coupled linear integra
differential equations system for the unknown fields ui anda.
330
From Equations (16) and (20) it is easy to see that the dis
placement field and the fluid pressure are directly determined
in every interior point of the medium if the boundary and
inside inputs are known
t
f dv(x) f n(tT) F.(x,T) x.dT +
B o l. l.
• ~ t k .
u(y,t)+; ds(x) f A.(x,y,tT)u.(x,T)dT
k dB 0 m. 1
332
.f t k
 f ds(x) f a.(x,y,tT)t .(x,T) dr +
() B o 1 n1
..!. jds(x) JtCk(x,y,tT) 0 ,. (x;r:)n.dT
S ()B o • k 1 1
where t .
n1
= t 1J
.. n.
J
It is worth noting the following:
a. For the stress boundary value problem in which surface
tractions and the fluid pressure are prescribed over the
entire boundary () B for all time, the third terms of the
Equations (30) and (31) are known. On the other hand for the
mixed boundary value problem, these theorems contain the
unknownfields on some parts of the boundary.
b. For certain singular Kernels Q (like A.. and B.. for
instance) and regularity conditions for 1 J the 1 J density
wand the boundary () B some additional terms (jumps) of type
nw(y,t) can be separated from the singular integral defined
by Equations (30)(3l).The calculations of these limits are
performed after eliminating the time convolution integrals
by Laplace transformation. Otherwise, the regularity condi
tions must be imposed for the time and spatial integral
operations.
c. The analogy between the consolidations theory of porous
media and coupled theory of thermoviscoelasticity allows the
use of some fundamental solutions (see Nowacki (1962), Derski
(1965)).If supplementary hypothesis concerning the noncou
pled interaction between the two phases, is adopted, then
important simplifications may be introduced. On the other
333
FINAL REMARKS
REFERENCES
M. Brunet
INTRODUCTION
PLASTICITY RELATIONS
f(o .. a .. )o~=O ( 1)
lJ lJ
Therefore
•p • ()f
E: •• \ (2)
lJ dO ..
lJ
338
0 ( 3)
8 .. E•p ••  0 (4)
lJ lJ
a .. = C f.P .. ( 5)
lJ lJ
alJ.. = ~(o lJ
.. a .. )
lJ
( 6)
~.
lJ
= C(sp) f_P ..  d (f:P) f:P Ep..
lJ lJ
(7)
with
X ••
lJ
1
a ..  3 8 . . a
lJ J.J mm
•
and ~p
~  [23 •p ij E•p ij
E
J 1/2 (8)
where c(£P) and d(sp) are two material functions which could be
determined from uniaxial cyclic tests.
wE;P
~e vanishes in (9) and we get the cyclic steady behaviour
when ~ = w = 0.
In order to complete the constitutive relationships, assume
that the total strain increment can be decomposed into an elas
tic part and a plastic part :
e
in which Dijkl 1s the elastic material tensor :
D~.kl
lJ
= __ E_
(1+v)
[o.ko.l + o.lo.k + (1:v2 )o .. okl]
1 J 1 J v lJ
(11)
2
A
• =1[ 3f
De •
E
a.+S acrij ijkl kl
J ( 12)
with
a + S (13)
and
•p
E •• ( 14)
lJ Gijkl Ekl
ep •
(J ••
Dijkl Ekl ( 15)
lJ
in which
G
ijkl
= _1_[lf_
a+SL3crij
De _lf_J
ijkl 3crk1
( 16)
ep e _ D~. ( 17)
Dijkl = Dijkl lJmn Gmnkl
0
8 0
011 (811+\1822) 1 ~~ E 11
8
0
E
022 (822+\1811) 1 ~~ E22
Q
012 8YM.
( 19)
where
R and P
Q = R + 2(1v 2 ) P
with
* A= 32 [
Bo 2o~  (~o + ~e
w£P l
)o 0 Tj
for the complex nonlinear hardening rule (9). These cases are
incorporated in the solution procedure analyzed with the boun
dary element method.
C..
lJ J
rUlJ.. (P,Q)i.(Q)df
~.(P) = Jr' J

lr'~1 lJ.. (P,Q)~.(Q)df
J
(20)
+ ~n LlJ. .k(P,q)e:.k(q)
op
J
dn
,1
+ 2 r .r .r k] ( 21 )
'1 ,J '
(22)
where (23)
 L: ijk
and
S1·J·k = G ~ 2 ~r [(12\!) o .. r k
2rr( 1v)r 2 I on 1J •
G
    { 2( 1v) (oiJ" r.k r.l + okl r . r . )
27T( 1v)r 2 •1 .J
(25)
NUMERICAL IMPLEMENTATION
(26)
After applying the boundary conditions the system can be
reordered and we obtain
(27)
(28)
in which [c•J represents the independent terms and [n•] stands
for the plastic strain integral. As it was shown in [7], the
343
(30)
(35)
Then we solve
(36)
If
NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
II£Pll~1 li£PII~
II£PII~1
0.1
~p
o constant BE (40)
• linear BE (20)
E
0.05 E
0
00
40mm
0 E = 70000MPa
0 234 567 8 v = 0.33
Rate of convergence ( step 3 ) t = 1.0 mm
H'= 0.3E
do= 300 MPa
2000
BE Analysis Kinematic
1000 • Hardening. LlP=120 daN
MPa
200
I
I
I
I
I
I
0.2 I
j
I
I
I
I '
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A
K
I ............. 20 BE Analysis
Cyclic transient behaviour
""'~ · Cyclic steady behaviour
do 200 MPa
~ t:J t:22
1<122 y
E 200000 MPa
0.3
E 8 0 = 54666 MPa
E
0
co
f IIJo 0.00513 MPa1
~ == 0.011 MPa1
.Q 65.3
1
..._...../ '%
40mm""
Figure 2
347
600
E = 189270 MPa
do= 470 MPa
H' = 0.35 E
Internal cell
or finite element
348
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
INTRODUCTION
BASIC EQUATIONS
b.
I 2(~~ . + _v_ ·p )  _1_
u + u ( I)
j, U l2v t, Q,j ~J,~ l2v Ekk,j G
a .. ( 3)
~J
in which o~J
.. is the Kronecker delta.
a .. (4)
~J
•p
a .. (5)
~J
( ) * (6)
k c
where ( ) and ( ) stand for Kelvin part and complementary
part respectively.
s load point
q field point
s' omage of s
IP1 1= IP21= 1
R,
s
x,
(
Kdl [s(lv) 2  (34v)] ln R +
[04v) R~  2c xJ
( 7)
Kd {  [}l(Iv) 2  (34v)] ln R +
[04v)ri + 2c xJ
= 
R2
354
e arctan(Rz'R 1)
r = (r. r.) !
1 1
I
R = (R. R.) ~
1 1
R. =x.(q) x.(s')
1 1 1
c = x 1 (s) > 0
X = XI (q) > 0
K = I I [81rG( 1v)]
d
+ 16cx Rf }
R6
2 [R (r 2 +2c 2)  2cr 2+2xr 2 (12v)]
 K
s
{<x + 3c)(l2v) + I 2 2 2
R2 R4
(9)
355
+ 16ci r~ }
R6
where
Ks = 1/[411(1v)] ( 10)
c c
p .. (I I)
~J
0 jki "Ilk
and
c =...!_ [crJki  v c
Ejki OR.H ojk] (12)
2G
r h* •p
J d(l ( 13)
+ 0 jki e:jk
(l
where r represents the total boundary of the body, r• the part
of r in which x1 > 0 and n stands for the domain of the body
that has to be always located within the halfplane x1 ~ 0.
Note that the second boundary integral is performed over r•
because the fundamental solution is zero on the surface of the
halfplane and hence the integral vanishes there.
(14)
c .. u.
1J J
* p. dr 
I u1J..
r
J I
r'
p *.. u. dr +
1J J Ju1]*..
(l
b.
J
d(l
* •p
+
I e:jki ojk d(l (16)
(l
357
•p
where ajk was given in expression (5).
.
a ..
~J
(I 7)
f.. ( 18)
1]
358
In addition,
Ac c c
0 ijkQ. = 0 ijU  v 0 ijDml 0U ( 19)
and
c c
G [aakii + aak~J (20)
ax; ax.
J ~
I
r'
(21)
A*
fn
:P <ill 0 (22)
Eki 0ijki
hence,
p *
f. • (E )
~J J pijk ~
r'
df (23)
~.
~
= P(~.
~J
 v £'Pkk o~J
.. )n.J (24)
fl2 = 0
G •p •p
2(1v) (£22  £11) (25)
(26)
g .. 8
I _ ~2~p
 _(Iv) •p oij
_ ij + (I4v)crH J fore> 0 (27)
~J
and
gl2 = 0
I
 4(1v) Lcr22 all
r:P •p J for c = 0 (28)
_ G
f ..     
r, ·p..
!Jc ·p
+ EH o,. J (29)
~J 4(1v) ~J ~J
Notice that expressions (25), (27) and (28) still remain valid.
NUMERICAL IMPLEMENTATION
EXAMPLES
Thick cylinder
In the first example the plane strain expansion of a thick
cylinder subjected to internal pressure is studied. Ideal
plasticity under von Mises yield criterion is assumed with the
362
tI
I
I
\
b= 2a
a= 100mm
\"
y
0.8
0.6
Analytical
0.4 • • • B.E.M.
0.2
E 12000. dN/mm 2
a~
10 00
+
I
I
I
08
!
plast1c elast1c
06
l
04 o/00 =0 755
Analytical !
. . . B.EM !
!
02
I '/a
10 12 14 16 18 20
Figure 4. Circumferencial stress distribution in thick cylinder. Plastic front at r' =1. 6a
Strip footing
In this example, the plane strain analysis of a flexible strip
footing under uniform loading is presented. The finite soil
stratum is discretized taking full advantage of both, symmetry
and freesurface condition, using the reduced number of 14
boundary elements and 42 internal points as shown in figure 5.
E 30000 psi
c = 10 psi (cohesion)
$ 20° (angle of internal friction)
'J = 0.3
3 tan$ r 3c
! p + ~J2 0
(9+12tan 2 ~) (9+12tan 2$)!
where p is the hydrostatic component of the stress tensor and
J 2 is the second invariant of the deviatoric stresses.
365
160
FEM ( MC)
••• BE M (MC)
12 0 B E.M (0  P)
a v
80
l
4.0
12ua/ l
•
.......
4 6 81 12 2 14 2 14 8
I '!1i l D D D
Figure 7 . Spread of plastic zones at different load levels.
MohrCoulomb yield criterion .
366
Shallow tunnel
In a recent paper the present authors have applied the elasto
plastic boundary element technique to solve the problem of a
deep circular excavation of radius r' in an infinite medium.
The great advantages of the technique were then pointed out when
comparing results with different finite element solutions.
Herein, an analogous problem is studied by considering the
tunnel to, be shallow, located within the semiinfinite domain
and with its centre at a depth of 5r'.
E 500 ksi
c = 0.28 ksi
<P 30°
\) = 0.2
av + yh (vertical stress)
0.4o (horizontal stresses)
v
where a is a uniform pressure that may be due to an overburden
of wate¥ or very weak material, y is the unit weight of the rock
and h is the distance from the ground surface.
r
 ~
y
.
I
I
I
I
5 r·
I
r
I
,~,.
2 .25r·
7.5
,,
I \ deep tunnel
shallow tunnel
5.0
2.5
r,
/
/ ~r'
2 3 4 5
Figure 9. Final stresses along the horizontal section through the medium
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
I. INTRODUCTION
i) Equilibrium equations
a'· . . + b.
l.J. J l.
= 0 in n (2. I)
where o .. and b. are the stress and body forces components and
n is th~Jdomain~
ii) Displacementstrain relationships
£ ••
l.J
= 2I (ul.,J
.. + u .. )
J,l.
in n (2.2)
where ui,j and Eij are the displacement derivatives and strain
components respectively.
where G and v are the shear modulus and Poisson's ratio resp
ectively and oP. ar'e the initial stress componentslO
l.J
iv) Boundary conditions
* * * bk
ui
J pik
r
~ dr +
J uik
r
Pk dr +
J
n
uik dn
+ * crmk dn
Eimk
0
(2.6)
J
n
* uik
pik' * and E*~mk a~e Kelvin's fundamental solutions 4 for
d~splacements, ~ract~ons and strain respectively, and their
values are given by:
(2. 7)
iiK = 6ii
axK
x2
r.K = k = x~x~
GxK ,
,,
(PI v,:c;,v ~,
'2
'1
P (load pomt)
,,
Fig.1 Geometric parameters. Fundamental solutions
a
Ol / /
// LINEARLY ELASTIC / ,;:_.LINEARLY ELASTIC CURVE
/
/
/ ///
/
// /LOADING CURVE ...,
e: (compress1on ) £ ( tractaon ) £ {compression) E ( tract•on)
'UNLOADING CURVE 6E UNLOADING CURVE
+ J (2. 8)
n
the value cik has been determined by different authors 1 • 2 •
r 0
(J • •
~J I
r
s.~J'k ~ dr
J
r
D.~J'k pk dr +
J Dijk bk
n
drl +
J
n
Fijmk o mk drl
(
0 0
 (Jmk ~mk'. dr 1  CJ •• (2.9)
J ~J l.J
rl
3r r.
{ 2;:;

L(IZv)o .. r k + v(o.kr . + o.kr .)  4r.. r .r k]
s.~J'k on ~.J ' ~ ,J J .~ .~ ,J •
(2. 10)
(2. II)
u = 'PT ua.
on r
p 'PT pa.
and
ao ljJT 0 oa. in Q
where Ua., Pa., ba. and ooa. are the nodal values for displacements,
tracti~ns,~body forces and initial stresses respectively. ;pT and
pT are interpolation functions such as those used in finite
elements 7 •
Notice that we need to consider Ua. and Pa. only on the boundary
in order to solve the integral equations, while Ba. and cr 0 a. have
to be defined over the whole domain.
377
NE NE
(J
)
uc + I p * cpT dr. ju I u* cpT dr.) pa.
j=l J  J  j=l  J
r. r.
J J
NCELL
+ N~ELL( J u* lj!T dO.)ba.+ I [J e: * lj!T dQ. )o oa.
J=l J  j=l  J 
0. n.
J J
NP
+ I u* p (3. 2)
~v.
j=l J
cu + h u G P + D b + E a· 0 + V P (3. 3)
 _u
I (3.4)
n.
J
For triangular cells and linear interpolation the follow
ing function can be used
(3. 5)
with
378
( 3.6 )
(3.9 )
* I
E~mk(p,S,r) = e~mk(p,S),r (3.10)
n
This can be integrated over r remaining only to carry out
the integral over the angle a. The a integral is performed
numerically using a four or six Gauss integration rule. Once
these integrals are computed over cells one obtains the matrix
E.
(3.12)
379
AX (3. 13)
X M + K a0 (3. 14)
where
(3. 15)
a = D P  S U + D + WP
v
+ F a0  o0 (3.16)
with
F =F  I (3.18)
a = T  S X+ F a (3.19)
 _o
a = N + B cr0 (3.20)
where
N T  S M
(3.21)
B F S K
5. APPLICATIONS
,
1
40' PARABOLIC CURVE
y =1501b/tt 3
G =1061b/ft2
v = 0 .3
Kill =0.2
~~~ff~ri~~~

I
BOUNDARY NODES
'BOUNDARY ELEMENTS
CAl
Fig. 7 Steep valley. Elastic solution Fig. 8 Steep valley. Notension solution ~
384
Semicircular tunnel
The semicircular tunnel, fig. 9 is a comparison example pre
viously solved by Bath 12 , 13 using an isoparametric quadratic
finite elements program. The loading and the boundary conditions
were chosen to make this example an optimum numerical test
rather than try to reproduce an actual tunnel.
Deep tunnel
The tunnel example shown in fig. II was used for a hydro
electric power station and taken from Valliappan 11 • He analysed
it on a notension problem using 500 constant elements and 276
nodes mesh with a finite element program. The fig. 12 and fig.
13 show the discretization of this tunnel for the boundary
element solution, both with and without prestressing forces.
A 48 nodes and 39 elements boundary mesh was used for both cases,
the internal cells for initial stress integration are plotted
in the same figures. For the first case the only applied forces
are those corresponding to the removal of the material. Fig. 14
shows the initial elastic and final notension solutions. The
results are very similar to those presented in (II) using the
Finite Element Method.
385
r
Ov=H .Y
 
I• Ou =H .Y
H = 116  y
I
I
I
""V""
~ 28.8 %
~ 40 . 0 %
• 100%
I 8l
*!:m;i~=~=!®!:}.t::!m=~~~=a.W:;mm~mmtW:=w=w.l=~=!~J=i~:Ifl:@imi:;:~ir:l*?:m!:r::!:ill!:~:!*?.i~~!m;®.;;;S}[~
u(lt) I v (It)
y
~ E
,f" <;"
N
#',f"v 6 (Venical displacement at B) II
0 .08 + 0 .4 I
0.06 + 0 .3 u A Horilontal
( displacement at A )
Y.~~~i~~; ;~~~§~;q
:/~... .... : .... :
0 04 + 0 .2 ...... 
\ ··t



0 .02 . ......  X
~~:,.... ..........
6.o 1 i~~9{¥~:~{;~~:·.~·,.
4% 40% 64 % 100% P(LOAD) . . ~.··r···•·,..·.>1'· ~'~>
,' \\./,r\ / ' \ ,/ \, ./ \, / '.\:
,/•'! ,'/: ,.,/' 1,',' : ,,•'"' :
t·:::'i.JO. + JI:,~ *··If·'' :
/~;:~::t~~:~:~~~t!"~,)t.:>
Fig . 11 Displacements at the structure Fig . 12 Boundary discretization and internal cells
grourld surface
~{U<:i?''imii···
l
·· ,._ RWti¥1U!llh:""'i ·· 'f
E
N
•
:1:
FISSURES DIRECTION
~
388
6. CONCLUSION
This paper also presents, for the first time, the way in
which concentrated prestressing forces can be introduced in the
Boundary Element Method.
389
I. REFERENCES
r *
u. (p) 0
Eimk(p,q)omk(q) dQ(q) (A. I}
~
J
stresses are related to displacement derivatives as follows
(au. (p)
)
2Gv auJI. (p} au. (p)
a •• (p) =   cS
~J ax (p + G
12v ij ai('p') a:tri;T
p
+ J
ax. (p) (A.2)
J J
Notice that the initial stresses are being interpolated on the cell,
one can write
(A.3)
(A.4)
a a a a n
~ =~(e)+ ~ 1 (e)r
o
+ ••• ~
n
(e).r (A.5)
,,,a
"' = .,ra = .,ra( p ) + 2A
I (ba cos e + aa sin8)r (A.6)
(A. 7)
(A. B)
(A. I 0)
with
2A (A.II)
R(6)
b 1 cose + a 1 sine