Compulem B Simcms, Vol. 8. pp. 175-183. Pcrgmnon Pn:s 1978.

Printed in Great Btitain

A SIMPLE QUADRILATERAL SHELL ELEMENT

RICHARDH. MACNEAL
The MacNeal-Schwendler Corporation, Los Angeles, CA 90041,U.S.A.

(Received 23 September 1976)

Abstract--The paper describes a new four-noded quadrilateral shell element, called QUAJI4, which is based on
isoparametric principles with modifications which relax excessive constraints. The modifications include reduced
order integration for shear terms, enforcement of curvature compatibility, and the augmentation of transverse
shear flexibilityto accountfor a deficiency in the bending strain energy. Practical features are discussed, including
conversion to a nonplanar shape, coupling between bending and stretching, mass properties, and geometric
stilfness. Experimental results are described which illustrate the accuracy and economy claimed for the element.

INMtODUCTlON stresses, curvatures and higher order derivatives as de-

The subject of this paper is a simple quadrilateral shell
element called QUAD4 which has recently been released
for public use in a proprietary version of NASTRAN.t It
has been designed to combine the properties of several
older NASTRAN elements[l] into a single element, to
augment their capabilities, and at the same time to re-
duce the cost of analysis. The objective was to produce
an element which, while simple in formulation, would be
reasonably accurate and would support a wide variety of
applications. Although a discussion of the approach used
in the formulation is undoubtedly of greater general
interest, the following list of the major features in the
released version of the QUAD4 element is mentioned for
completeness and relevance to certain aspects of the
formulation.
* General warped quadrilateral shape.
- Elastic coupling between bending and stretching.
- Transverse shear flexibility.
- Anisotropic material properties.
- Variable thickness.
* Geometric stiffness (e.g. for elastic stability analy-
sis).
- Non-uniform temperature distribution (for thermal
stress analysis).
- Both consistent and lumped mass properties.
An important future development is the introduction
of nonlinear material properties (plasticity). This feature,
and also the elastic coupling between bending and
stretching, both require that membrane strains and bend-
ing strains be formulated in a compatible manner. This is
not the case with the older NASTRAN elements whose
membrane and bending properties were developed in-
dependently using unrelated approaches.
An important general feature of NASTRAN which
limits the choice of element formulation is that, with rare
exceptions, the degrees of freedom consist of the three
components of translation and the three components of
rotation at discrete points. This feature excludes, for
all practical purposes, elements which employ strains,
tMSC/NASTRAN, developed by The MacNeal-Schwendler
corporation.
tSee Ref. [4] for an account of the early development of shape
functions.
&ntdard means, in the present context, conforming dis-
placement elements without reduced order integration or other
devices to improve accuracy.
grees of freedom, but it enhances the attractiveness of
isoparametric displacement elements [2] which do not, in
general, use such quantities as degrees of freedom. Other
features of isoparametric elements which are attractive
for the achievement of the objectives set for the new
QUAD4 element are a consistent formulation of mem-
brane and bending strains, particularly for thick shell
elements[3], and low cost, both in development and in
application, achieved by the use of shape functi0ns.t
Unfortunately, standard) isoparametric thick shell ele-
ments are not noted for high accuracy, except when the
number of edge nodal points is increased to a large value.
The simplest member of the quadrilateral family, namely
an element with four nodes, which would otherwise be
most suitable for our purposes, does not even appear in
the literature on isoparametric elements. The reason for
the omission is that the accuracy of the element is
extremely poor; it is, in fact, nonconvergent unless the
thickness is allowed to exceed the other dimensions of
the element.
The attractions of the four-noded thick-shell iso-
parametric element were sufficient, however, to spur an
investigation of means to improve its accuracy. It was
known, from recent related work on simple membrane
and solid elements[5], that reduced order integration of
transverse shear strain, which had heretofore been ap-
plied only to higher order elements [6], could alleviate the
worst features of the element and raise its competence to
the constant strain level. Some very early work on beam
elements [7] provided clues for raising the competence to
the linear strain level. Further discoveries were soon
made, as will be described, leading to a four-noded
element with nearly complete linear strain competence.
BEAM ELEMENT
The application of isoparametric principles to the
derivation of a beam element is instructive because it
exposes the deficiencies of the standard approach and
reveals the necessary corrections. It suggests, further-
more, a method for improving the more important two-
dimensional case.
Consider the prismatic beam segment shown in Fig. 1
together with an assumed cubic displacement function
w=w,tw,~tw,~2tw3.$3tyJ (1)
where -yr is a constant transverse shear strain. The

175
176 H. MACNEAL
RICHARD

-_C The second term is negligible only if the length of the

(a) (b)
4 segment is small compared to its depth, which is an
x.
intolerable requirement for practical analysis. The term
woe& 0,
t- can, however, be removed by the simple expedient of
lk ignoring the term w& in the equation for y,. This is
Fig. 1. Beam element. equivalent, in the jargon of finite element analysis, to
employing “reduced order integration” (in this case a
curvature x, the transverse shear strain y and the strain single Gauss point located at .$= 0) in the computation of
energy E,as computed by exact analysis, will be com- the strain energy due to transverse shear. When applied
pared with the same quantities computed for a beam to the derivation of a quadrilateral membrane element,
element constructed by a standard isoparametric for- this expedient produces a good non-conforming
mulation. element [5] which is similar to one derived independently
The results from exact analysis are by Turner ef af.[8], Pian[9] and Wilson et al. [lo] at
earlier dates.
Turning next to the cubic term (w,), it is seen that the
x. =$w2+3nC) isoparametric formulation contains a wj term in yi,
whereas the exact result contains a wj term in xe. Thus,
Ye= y* it is possible that the deficiency in bending energy (the
(2)
xL2 term) can be compensated by an increase in the
Ee=;l (EIx:tGAy,z) df transverse shear energy. For the special case when yI =
1 0, the energies due to w3 are
i
In the isoparametric formulation, the distributions of 96EI
both the lateral displacement, w, and the rotation of the E,(w) = I’ w3*1
normal, 0 = awlax - 7” are defined by the shape func-
tions
1 (9)
E,(w,)= y w,’
N,=(l-g)/2; Nb=(1tg)/2 (3) I

which have derivatives which will be the same if GA is selected equal to 12E1/12.
For the case when “/r# 0, static equilibrium can be used
N: = aN,Jag = -l/2; N;, = aNJag = l/2. (4) to produce the following exact relationship

The values of the displacements and rotations pro- yr=-:‘aX 43E1 wgt (higher order terms). (10)
vided by eqn (1) at the two ends of the beam segment GAi%=s
are:
Ignoring the higher order terms and replacing GA by
w.=w,-w,tw*-wg; w~=w~tw,tw~tw~t’yJ GA* ineqn (7), the energies due to Weare

e, =;(w,-2w,t3w3: e, +w,+2w,t3w3 Ee(ws)=

1
(5) (11)
The resulting expressions for curvature and transverse Ei(w3 =
shear strain are

which will be the same if

X~=~=~(B.N:+B~N;)=~WJ~Z
GA*=($&)-'. (12)
n=~-e=f(~~N:+wdlT;)-B,N,-BbNb - (6)
The term 1*/12EI will be called the residual bending
= t -$w,t w*T) flexibility. The result expressed by eqn (12) was used in
i
the early 1950s in connection with the development of an
electrical analogy for beams[7]. Internal forces are easily
Numerical integration using two Gauss points produces evaluated because the product GA*yiis equal to the
exact results, so that the strain energy of the iso- correct transverse shear force for the beam segment and
parametric beam element may be expressed as the product EIx, is equal to the correct bending moment
at the center of the beam segment.
Ei=;r_’ (EIx,ztGAy:)
d.$ (7) To summarize, a two-node beam element which is
1 accurate to third order in lateral displacement can be
obtained from the isoparametric formulation by comput-
Considering only the quadratic term (wz) the ratio of ing the transverse shear strain at the center of the
the strain energy for the isoparametric element to the element and by altering the elastic coefficient for trans-
exact strain energy is verse shear to include a term called the residual bending
flexibility. Neither of these modifications affects the rigid
body properties of the element, since they only modify
(8)
the elastic coefficients and the locations where strains
 A simple quadrilateralshell element 177

are computed, but not the manner in which strains are The terms in the first two rows represent rigid body
computed. The extension to a two-dimensional rec- motions and constant transverse shear strains, the terms
tangular element is self-evident for the case of bending in in the third row represent constant curvatures and the
a direction parallel to a side of the element. terms in the fourth row represent curvatures that vary
linearly with 6 and n. The only curvature term that is
ELASlWfJTWNEBOFAPLANEQUADRIL.ATF.RAL&LEMENT correctly treated by standard isoparametric theory is w, 1.
The properties of a plane quadrilateral element se- It follows directly from the discussion of the beam
parate into membrane properties associated with inplane element that the terms We and woZrequire reduced order
displacements (u, u), and bending properties associated integration of the energy due to transverse shear and that
with out-of-plane displacements and rotations (w, a, /?). the terms wW and wo3 can be corrected by the in-
The element that will be described has twenty independent troduction of residual bending flexibility. It might be
external degrees of freedom consisting of (u, u, w, a, B) at imagined, by analogy with the membrane case, that the
each of its four corners. The internal degrees of freedom treatment of terms w21 and wi2 can be improved by
are the strains in the middle surface {em}= la, e,., 7JT, the evaluating the twist, xXY,at the center of the element.
curvatures k} = lxx,xr, xX,lT, and the transverse shear This surmise is incorrect, as will now be shown.
strains (7’) = [rX, yYIT. Since it is proposed to treat ‘yXY According to isoparametric theory, as applied to a
differently than G and eY,and to treat xXYdifferently than xX four-noded quadrilateral element, the rotations of the
and x,., it is necessary to define an element coordinate normals, a = aw/%x- ‘yXand /3 = aw/ay - 7Y are bilinear
system with axes approximately parallel to the edges of the functions of 5 and 9, i.e.
element. For the non-rectangular case, the method of
selecting axes shown in Fig. 2 is recommended.
The only modification to standard isoparametric theory (13)
for membrane action is that the shear strain, 7._, is
computed at the center of the element (5 = n = 0). This
value is used to evaluate stresses and strain energy at a For the special case of a rectangular element with side
2 x 2 array of Gauss points, together with strains, E, and lengths Ax and Ay, the corresponding curvatures are
eY, computed directly at these points. The justification
for the modification follows directly from the example of
the beam element. Whereas the standard isoparametric
formulation requires the edges to remain straight when
the corners are displaced, the modified formulation per-
mits them to be curved; for example, a pure inplane
bending couple produces quadratic curvature of two
opposing sides and no shear strain. The selection of one
formulation or the other is a matter of practical ap-
plication since special circumstances can be described
where one or the other is correct. It turns out that the It will be noted that the linear terms are not independent
modified formulation is better in most practical exam- and that the conditions for dependence can be stated in
ples. the form
For bending action, a number of modifications are ax ax
ry=x
required to overcome the deficiencies of standard iso- ax ay
parametric theory. Let the lateral displacement be ex-
pressed as a double power series in the parameters 5, n:
(19
ax ax
x)r=Y
w = w&lt w*o[ t wrJ,qt w2& t w&q t * * * (12)
ay axI*

These conditions are similar to the curvature com-

and arrange the coefficients in a pyramid, as shown
patibility conditions for a plate with zero transverse
below :
shear strains
WOO

WlO WOl

W20 WI1 WOZ !?52!$

w30 W21 WI2 WI3
(16)
4 !$rZ2?$
1.

Although we do not assume the transverse shear

strains to be zero in the final form of the element, it is
nevertheless true that the conditions of eqn (16) are, in
most cases, a much better approximation to the true state
of strain than the conditions of eqn (15). The conditions
of eqn (16) are satisfied if the twist used to compute
strain energy is taken to be

j:, = 2,& - XDXY (17)

Fig. 2. Method for selecting axes of the element coordinate
system. where ,& is the value of twist computed by eqn (14) at
178 RCIHARDH. MACNEAL.

integration point (g), and ,& is the value of twist computed

by eqn (14) at ,$= n = 0. With the modification indicated by
eqn (17), the energy due to bending is computed by
numerical integration at a 2 x 2 array of Gauss points. This
results in an energy deficiency (difference between E, and
$) whose leadii terms are, for the special case of a
rectangular element with homogeneous material proper-
ties,

+ wo3wzJ. (18)
1
The w&, and w& terms are correctable by the in-
troduction of residual bending flexibility. The term
proportional to Poisson’s ratio is not correctable.
(-1,-I)

I (1,-I)

The integration points for transverse shear must be
selected carefully. It is clear, from the case of the beam
element, that the points where yX is evaluated must lie
along the line f = 0. Two points are selected at T.J= 2 l/d/3
as shown in Fig. 3, in order to obtain the correct strain
energy for a linear variation of yXin the q direction. The
transverse shear strains at the integration points are related
to the components of motion at the corner points (j) by the
equation
(19)
Fig. 3. Placement of points to evaluate transverse shear strains.
connecting corner points (i) and (j) is written in the form
[K;] = [DilTIZ"
t Zblel[Dj] (22)
where [Zs] is a matrix of real transverse shear flexi-
bilities and [Zb] is a matrix of residual bending flexi-
bilities. The dimension of each is [(volume) x(modul-
us)]-‘. In the case of [Z”] the volume effect is treated by
pre- and post-diagonal multipliers, thus:
[Z”] = [V”]-‘[G”]-‘[V”]- (23)

where

rd(2.k)0
[Di] is evaluated from the shape function, Ni, and its
derivatives, NXj and NY,,by the equation

rNfi -w 0 1

(20)
[VS]= ! ;

0
d/(ubtb)
0
0
0
0
s.w
0
0
0
0
,hudtd)
1.
i
(24

J. is the two-dimensional Jacobian at point (a), t@is

the thickness for transverse shear at point (a), etc. For a
where superscripts identify the points in Fig. 3 where the
rectangular element, J, = Jb = J, = Jd = AxAy/4. The ex-
terms are evaluated. tra factor of two under the radical occurs because there
For the special case of a rectangular element, the
are only two integration points for each strain com-
substitution of eqn (12) into eqn (19) gives the general
ponent rather than four.
result
For isotropic materials [G”] = G”[Z], where [I] is a
(4x 4) identity matrix. For the general case of aniso-
yX= - $ (w& t w& + wSO)t (higher order terms) tropic transverse shear material, let

yr = - & (wo2qt w&q t was)t (higher order terms)

1.
(21)
The terms proportional to 5, n and 517 vanish at the
integration points. The terms proportibnal to We and was
are used to correct the wf and w& terms in the bending
energy deficiency (eqn 18).
Proceeding by analogy with the case of the beam
element, the stiffness matrix due to transverse shear
where G;,, G;, and G& are the elements of the 2 x2
matrix of transverse shear moduli. ‘Thetreatment of x-y
coupling in eqn (25) is consistent with the symmetrical
arrangement of the integration points shown in Fig. 3.
The residual bending flexibility matrix is

(l-a)A.?/E,, 0 0

lZ”l= & (1 t a)Ax*/&, 0 0 (26)

0 0 (l+ b)Ay2& Cl- b)Ay*/Ezz
0 U- b)Ay% (l+ bVy2/&
 A simpleq~ate~
where A is the surface area of the element; I0 is the
bending moment of inertia per unit width; Ax =
~xxz~x~-x~-x.& AY =$Y~+Y~-Y~--Y~ and &,&
are the diagonalterms in the elasticmodulusmatrixused to
evalute bending sti&ess, For isotropic materials
E ,, = Ezz= E&l - Y*).
The coefficients(a) and (b) in eqn (26)were evaluated
by numericalexperimentation.It will be noted that their
effect is nil for uniform transverse shear stress. For 7X
proportional to 7, on the other hand, the resulting in-
crements in -yXare proportional to (a). If one considers
the case of a long row of elements subjected to a
torsional couple at one end, it is clear that (a) should be
set equal to zero because the load is carried by twisting
moment rather than by bending. If, on the other hand,
the same load is applied to a very short cantilevered
element, such that all of the load is carried by differential
bending,(a) should be set equal to 1.0.The former case
was judged to be more importantthan the latter, and the
parameters (a) and (b) were initially set to very small
numbers (0.01). Numerical experimentation, to be dis-
cussed later, showed that a somewhatlarger value (0.04)
gave better results in general, and that an aspect ratio
correction, as expressed by the formulas
Cl=
E
e t(l-e)$
was necessary to avoid excessive torsional dis-
placements for elements with large aspect ratios. Note,
incidentally, that a = 1.0 in the limit, AxlAy= 0, in
agreement with previous discussion.The presence of E
as a free parameter underscores the general point that
the design of a finite element necessarily involves a
consideration of the relative importance of different
states of strain, even though said considerationis often
merely impliedby a truncated polynomialexpansion, or
imbedded in a general principle such as element con-
formability.
GEOMETRIC sTIFFN&ssOFA~~~~~
Geometric stifEness[ll,121 is a first order ap-
proximation to geometricallynonlinear behaviour which
is particularlyuseful for the linearized solution of buck-
ling problems. The terms in the geometric stiffness ma-
trix for an element are linear functions of the com-
ponents of stress in the element. For plate and shell
elements it is usual to consider only the membrane
stresses, in which case the elements of the geometric
stiffness matrix, [Kg, can be derived from a potential
function, Eg, by the general expression
(28) inertia per unit width, I, are introduced as normalizing
where
EB =;Ij ({a}TIZl(a)+{b}T~:bl{b})TdS
(29)
shellelement 179
The membrane stress components are evaluated from
a previous iteration and are considered constant in eqn
(28).The calculationvia an isoparametricformulationis
straigh~o~ard since
$=Fzwi, etc.
The accuracy can, however, be improvedby using the
followingexpression for the {b} vector.
(321
where cy and p are evaluated directly at Gauss points,
while yXis evaluated at points (a, b) and yb is evaluated
at points (c, d) in Fig. 3. The improvementin accuracy
occurs because the derivatives awlax and awlayare
bilinearfunctions of ,$and 9 if they are evaluatedby eqn
(32), whereas they are merely constants if they are
evaluated by eqn (31).
PRACTICAL BARON
As stated in the introduction,the new QUAD4element
has been designed to accommodate a wide variety of
practical applications, consistent with reasonable cost
and user convenience. The isoparametric approach pro-
vides a very easy implementation for most of the fea-
tures listed in the Introduction including: elastic coupling
between bending and s~etch~g; transverse shear flexi-
bility; anisotropic material properties; variable thickness;
non-uniform temperature distribution and mass proper-
ties. Only the first and last of these particular features
require additional explanation. It is assumed that inplane
components of strain vary linearly in the normal direc-
tion so that the stress-strain relationships take the form
where {em} is a vector of strains in the middle surface;
j’$, vector of curvatures; {y’), vector of transverse shear
strains; (fj, vector of inplane forces per unit width; {m},
vector of moments per unit width; (q), vector of trans-
verse shear forces per unit width, and [G,], [G,] and [G.,]
are 3 x 3 symmetric matrices and [G3] is a 2~ 2 sym-
metric matrix. The thicknessesfor membraneforces and
transverse shear forces, T and T,, and the moment of
factors to give the [G] matrices the same dimensions~
For isotropic materials, [G,] = [Gs] and fG4] = 0. Prac-
tical applications of the [G,] matrix are shells with offset
nodal points, integrally stiffened shells and layered shells.
Elements of the consistent mass matrix coupling the
same component of translation at two nodal points are
180 RICW H. MACNEAL
obtained from
where the subscript (g) on the Iacobian and on the
thickness references an inte~ation point, and the shape
function NE= (1 f =&) (i + ~~~)~4.Note that there is no
mass coupling to rotational degrees of freedom. A reason
for not including such coupling is that the user has the
option to set [G2] = 0, i.e. to convert QUAD4 into a
membrane element. Other reasons are that eqn (34) is
easy to implement and inexpensive to use. The lumped
mass option, which is even easier and less expensive, is
obtained by summing the terms in each row of eqn (34), a
procedure which clearly gives the correct forces for
uniform acceleration of the element. Since Z iV, = 1, it
follows that the lumped mass at nodal point {i) is
The only feature which has not yet been discussed is
the extension from a plane quadrilateral to a warped
quadrilateral. The approach taken was to modify the
matrices of the plane q~~~a~r~ by pre- and post-
muItipliers so as to satisfy rigid body properties. Al-
though this procedure is satisfactory only if the deviation
from flatness is moderatly small, it has the virtue of
simplicity and, furthermore, it accommodates the
concept of a warped membrane shell in which forces but
not moments act at nodal points.
Given four non-planar nodal points, a mean plane is
defined that is equi~s~t from the four points, and a
flat finite element is defined that produces forces and
moments at the projections of the four points onto the
mean plane. The normal force, jz, and the moments, m,
and my, can be transferred directly to the nodal points
without disturbing equilibrium, but the transfer of the
inplane forces, fX and f,, creates moment equal to the
forces multiplied by the distance from the mean plane to
the nodal point. These moments are balanced by ad-
ditional normal forces, rather than by additional mo-
ments, in order to accommodate the case of a membrane
shell, which the user can select by setting [GJ = 0.
Although, as mentioned, the moments, m, and m,, can
be transfe~ed from the mean plane to the nodal points
without disturbing equilibrium, the onIy component of
moment that can be transferred from one element to
another is one which is parallel to the intersection of the
mean planes of the two elements. The reason is that any
other component wiIl have a projection along the normal
to one of the two mean planes, which direction has no
sti#ness. It was discovered, during testing, that this
feature results in an extremely weak structural model for
a twisted surface. The remedy was to tilt the element’s
moment vector at a nodal point (m,, m,) into the plane
detkted by the two edges which meet at the nodal point,
and to equilibrate the added moment about the normal,
m,, by inplane forces, fX and f,.. With this modifkation,
moments about the common edge of two adjacent ele-
ments will always be transferred.
tAfter the paper was submitted for publication, it was discovered
that large errors occur when the skew angle of the element exceeds
twenty degrees. This error was traced to coupling between trans-
verse shear strains, and has subsequenuy been corrected.
NUMEWCALBS
Since the QUAD4 element is used in a publicly
available program, it was important that ah of the
capabilities described in the previous section be
thoroughly tested before release. Many of the tests that
were performed were designed to uncover errors in the
code, particularly in relation to material properties and
irregular geometry. Tests with a few elements were
largely sufficient for this purpose. Two of the ex-
periences in this category may be of interest. The first
was a single element torsion test, in which self-equilibrat-
ing lateral forces were applied to the corners of a rec-
unbar element for a series of cases in which the aspect
ratio of the plate was increased from one to twenty. It
was discovered that the deflections become excessively
large for the larger aspect ratios. This defect was cor-
rected by modifying the form of the a and b parameters
to that shown in eqn (27). With this change, the single
element torsional deflections are correct to within 1.5%
for all aspect ratios, as are the results for transverse
shear loads.
The second experience was the analysis of a long
cantilever plate with aspect ratio equal to eleven and a
built-in twist from root to tip of 90”. We were dismayed
to find that the displacements due to lateral end loading
were more than 100 times too large. The reason for this
discrepancy and its correction have been discussed in
connection with the modifications for warped elements.
After modification, results obtained with a 14x 2 mesh of
elements were accurate to about 1%. The same dis-
crepancy exists in the older NASTRAN plate elements,
but it has never been reported by users.
A number of experiments were conducted in order to
test the accuracy and convergence of the element and to
establish a value for the P parameter. The first such
example was the analysis of a laterally loaded thin rec-
tangular plate with either clamped or simple supports,
and either a uniform load or a concentrated load at the
center. Many eiements have been tested with this exam-
ple and reported in the literature, so that the interested
reader can compare QUAD4 with other elements. It is a
good example because, even though the geometry is
simple, the state of stress is not. Figure 4 shows a rather
complete set of results for E = 0.04 and Fig. 5 shows a
less complete set of results for E = 0.01,0.04 and 0.10. It
will be noted from Fig. 5 that the effect of l decreases as
the number of elements increases and that 0.04 appears
to be a good choice for e. This is the value used in the
released version, and in ah of the other tests to be
reported. It will be noted from Fig. 4 that the accuracy is
not particularly sensitive to aspect ratio, type of load or
type of support, that it is quite good for a small number
of elements and that it converges fairly sbwly.
The effect of no~~~~1~ mesh spacing on ac-
curacy is illustrated in Fig. 6. There appears to be some
degradation of accuracy, but perhaps Iess than might be
expected in view of the nonuniform treatment accorded
to different components of straint
Perhaps the most interesting structure that was
analyzed is the cylindrical shell roof shown in Fig. 7,
which has been used to test many elements. Reference
[14] compares the results for nine elements by seven
authors. The results in Fig. 7 compare the new QUAD4
against two older NASTRAN elements. The im-
provement of QUAD4 over QUAD2 is primarily due to
the better treatment of membrane shear strain, since
QUAD2 and QUAD4 have similar accuracies for the
 A simple query shell element 181

01 03 06 IO

Percent error

Regular mesh Irregular mesh

Uniform load + 0.69% - 5.94%

Center load + 2.35% - 2.37%

Fig. 6. Effect of nonrectangular mesh on error in central deflec-

tion. 4 x 4 Mesh in quadrant of a square plate. Simple supports.
e = 0.04.

1.4

zc T
? (2x2) iMesh size far quadmnt) /

2 4 6 8 N=O 2 4 6 8

Fii. 4. Error in central deflection of a rectangular plate, E = 0.04.

(a)

:i yff(/y%,%2~l151~

00 ml 300 4m 500 600

c=O.lO

Ll Fii.
Numbrraf degrees af frsedom
7. Midside deflectionof a shell roof under gravityload.

lateral deflection of plates. In order to shed light on why

Pi. 5. Effect of c on error in central deflection of a square plate:
(a) Uniform load, simple supports, (e/b)= 1, (b) center load,
clamped supports, ($b) = 1.
the QUAD4 element converges from above, the 2X2
case was rerun with each element in the mesh replaced
by jet facets containing 4 elements. The results were
virtually identical, indicating that the excess flexibility of
the structural model is primarily due to the use of the flat
elements on a curved surface. A tentative rule of thumb
based on this single example is that en~ee~ng accuracy
(4%) is achieved if the included angle per element is ten
degrees or less.
The cylindrical compressor blade described in Fig. 8
was analyzed in order to test the dynamic capability of
QUAD4. The best available data for this problem are
laboratory test results[l6,l;rl and the numerical cal-
culations of Olson and ~~~rg[l7] using a 4 x 4 mesh
of triangular shell elements with 36 degrees of freedom
per element. It is notable that, for the second mode, the
most refined QUAD4 model agrees well with Olson’s
calculations but not with the test results. The most
probable reason is that the test frequency is reduced by
ancient flexibility to a larger degree for the second
182 RICHARDH. MACNEAL

86.6

139.2

251.3

348.b

393 4

533.4

751i
7404

Fig. 8. Vibration mode frequencies of a cylindrical compressor blade.

1
Mode Beam 1 Coarse Fine .\

Physical Properties

Length = 10.0

Height 1.0

Thickness = . 05

Po~sson’s Ratio = l/3

Fig. 9. Torsion-ben~mg buckling of an end-loaded cantilever.

mode (which has no node line on the surface) than for
any other mode.
Geometric stiffness was tested by means of the buck-
ling problem illustrated in Fig. 9, which is a fairly severe
test because the stresses due to the apphed foad are
non-u~orm within each element, and because the buck-
liig modes involve both latera bending and twist. It will
be noted that the results for the fine mesh exceed the
theoretical results. A possible explanation is that the
theoretical results do not account for restraint of warping
(differential bending).
The accuracy of the QUAD4 element appears to be
satisfactory and to compare favorably with the older
NASTRAN elements, but an even more gratifying result
is that computer time for stiffness matrix assembly and
stress recovery are greatly reduced. In a recent bench-
mark comparison of QUAD2 and QUAD4 invofviug 420
elements, the cost of each of these operations was re-
duced by approximately a factor of 5. The importance of
matrix assembly and stress recovery for problems of this
size is illustrated by the fact that the total cost for the
analysis was reduced by forty percent. Although recent
improvements in the general procedures for matrix as-
sembly within NASTRAN[fbf account for part of the
 A simple quadrilateral shell element
cost reduction, much of the credit is due to the inherent
simplicity of the isoparametric formulation on which
QUAD4 is based.
CONCLUDINGREMARKS
The QUAD4 fills a conspicuous void at the lowest rank
in the hierarchy of isoparametric thick-shell elements
and it appears to meet the tests of accuracy, versatility
and cost. The new features which were necessary to
convert an outcast into a respectable element are: special
attention given to each component of strain and cur-
vature with regard to the selection of points where it is
evaluated, and the addition of residual bending flexibility
in the transverse shear terms. These ideas can also be
applied to higher order members in the family of iso-
parametric thick-shell elements. Each of the specific
modifications in the QUAD4 (reduced order integration
of shear terms, satisfaction of curvature compatibility,
and residual bending flexibility) has its analog for higher
order elements. An eight-noded curved shell element
which is currently being developed by the author will be
reported when test results are available.
1. R. H. MacNeal, (ed.), The NASTRAN Theoretical Manual,
NASA SP-221(011.
Section 5.8(Aur.1972).
2. 0. C. Zienkiewiczy The Finite tilekent Mhthodin Engineering
Science. McGraw-Hill,London (1971).
3. Ibid. Chap. 14.
4. B. M. Irons and A. Razzaque, The evolution of the iso-
parametric element. Proceedings of the World Congress on
Finite Element Methods in Structural Mechanics Bourne-
mouth, Dorset, England, Vol. 1, pp. D.l-D.27 (12-17 Oct.
1975).
5. MSClNASTRAN Application Manual, Sections 2.8 and 2.17.
The MacNeal-Schwendler Corp., Los Angeles, Calii. (Jan.
1975).
6. 0. C. Zienkiewicz, J. Too and R. L. Taylor, Reduced in-
183
tegration technique in general analysis’of plates and shells.
Int. J. Numer Meth. Engng 3, US-90 (1971).
7. W. T. Russell and R. H. MacNeal, An improved electrical
analogy for the analysis of beams in bending. J. Appl. Mech.
(Sept. 1953).
8. M. J. Turner, R. W. Clough, H. C. Martin and L. J. Topp.
Stiffness and deflection analysis of complex structures. J.
Aero. Sci. 23, 805-823, 854 (1956).
9. T. H. H. Pian, Derivation of element of stiffness matrices by
assumed stress distributions. AlAA J. 2, 1333-1336(1964).
10. E. L. Wilson, R. L. Taylor, W. Doherty and J. Ghaboussi,
Incompatible displacement models. Int. Symposium Num.
Como. Meth. Struct. Mech. Univ. of Illinois at Chamuaien.
Urbana, 1971,Academic Press, New York (1973). L -
11. H. C. Martin, On the derivation of stiffness matrices for the
analysis of large deflection and stability problems. University
of Washington, Department of Aeronautics and As-
tronautics, Report 66-4 (June 1966).
12. P. V. Marcal, Finite element analysis of combined problems
of material and geometric behaviour. Proc. Am. Sot. Mech.
Eng. Conf. on Computational Approaches in Applied Me-
chanics p. 133 (June 1969).
13. A. C. Scordelis and K. S. Lo, Computer analysis of cylindrial
shells. J. Am. Cont. Inst. Gl, 539-561 (1%9).
14. C. Sander and P. Beckers, Delinquent finite elements for
shell idealization. Proc. World Gong. on Finite Elem. Meth.
in Struct. Mech., Boumemouth, England. Vol. II, pp. 2.1-2.31
(12-17 Oct. 1975).
15. R. W. Clough and J. L. Tocher, Finite element stiffness
matrices for analysis of plate bending. Proc. Conf. on Matrix
Merh. in Stncct. Mech. AFFDL Report AFFDL-TR-66-80
(Dec. 1965).
16. M. D. Olson and G. M. Lindberg, Vibration analysis of
cantilevered curved plates using a new cylindrical shell finite
element. AFFDL Report AFFDL-TR-68-150,pp. 247-269.
17. M. D. Olson G. M. Lindberg, Dynamic analysis of shallow
shells with a doubly-curved triangular finite element. J.
Sound Vib. 9(3), 299-318 (1971).
18. C. W. McCormick, Sparse matrix operations in finite element
analysis, Presented at ASCE Annual Convention, Philadel-
phia, Pennsylvania (27 Sept.-l Oct. 1976).