Basic Matrix Approach in FE

The basic matrix approach
for three simple finite elements

(with more general but specific discusssions)
Pauli Pedersen
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Solid Mechanics
Technical University of Denmark
Nils Koppels Allè, Building 404, DK-2800 Kgs.Lyngby, Denmark
email: pauli@mek.dtu.dk
WORKING PRINT
May 19, 2008

c
ii Pauli Pedersen: The basic matrix approach ...
The basic matrix approach

for three simple finite elements
c
Copyright 2007 by Pauli Pedersen,
ISBN 06
Preface
For a course where the students write a finite element code from scratch, a
small book on Element Analysis, (Pedersen 1984), is available in Danish. earlier book
In order to obtain transparent analytical results linear, small strain models
and isotropic material behaviour are assumed in that book. Furthermore, the
results are presented in element local reference coordinate systems, where
the geometry of the elements could be described by a minimum of non-
dimensional parameters.
The present notes are based on three recent published papers, (Peder-
sen 2005a), (Pedersen 2005b), (Pedersen 2006a), and concentrates mainly
on three most simple elements (linear displacements), but extend to global
reference coordinate system, to non-isotropic material behaviour, and, most present book
important, include the possibility for the non-linear Green-Lagrange strain
measure. email:
The note is intended as a non-traditional supplement to the many good pauli@mek.dtu.dk
books on the Finite Element Method (FEM), and hopefully the readers find
the efforts worth-while. Critics and suggestions for improvements are most
welcome, e.g. by email to pauli@mek.dtu.dk chapters on
The first half (chapter 2 - 13) is a unification of the three recent papers basic
with focus on the basic matrix approach, i.e., the possibility to break down approach
to one dimension. I am afraid this is boring, presenting the formulas directly
to program without numerical integration (my own programs are build on
that). The available analytical results give additional possibility for insight.
As stated with a citation from (Felippa, Crivelli and Haugen 1994) that better
explains the motivation ”clean separation of physical effects. The importance
of this factor should not be underestimated, because physical transparency is
the key to success in nonlinear analysis.” general
The first 13 chapters are specifically oriented towards the basic matrix ap- chapters
proach and the three specific finite elements. The remaining chapters are more
general, and these chapters are including because the presentations might not
be so well known, although the subjects are found important.
Chapter 14 put forward the simplicity obtained for power law non linear
elasticity (14.11) and the available analytical constitutive matrices for secant
(14.13) as well as for tangent (14.19) behavior.
iii
c
iv Pauli Pedersen: The basic matrix approach ...
Chapter 15 on potential relations and sensitivities is published as an ap-

pendix in (Pedersen 2003). Again the power law non linear elasticity is as-
sumed and the simplicity is close to linear elasticity, you may say a first step
towards more complicated problems.
The most familiar notation was √ used in the first chapters, but in chapter
16 the obtained simplicities by the 2-notation are presented with invariant
length of strain and stress vectors. The use of projection matrices (and the
physical picture of this) is not common and the derivations and explanations
in section 16.5 are found useful.
Chapter 17 on sensitivity analysis focus on mutual elastic energy and
on multiple eigenfrequencies. For these more advanced sensitivity analyses,
physical explanations are attempted.
It is found thought-provoking that almost all CPU time is spent on the few
statements listed on page 79 in section 18.1 and they are therefore presented
(these statements I used for many years). The effectiveness of the subspace it-
eration method also deserves a presentation, and a presentation as a projection
into energy spaces is chosen.
Finally in chapter 19 the example in section 19.2 is repeated from papers
because the sizes and signs of the errors are impressive. Section 19.1 is an
attempt to explain a more simple problem of the same origin.
Kgs. Lyngby, Summer 2007
Pauli Pedersen
Contents
Preface iii
Contents v
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Actual elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.3 Presented extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.4 General layout of the note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.5 Layout of chapters and notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.6 Additional comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2 Element geometry and nodal positions 5

2.1 LDTR: the four geometry parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2 LDRI: the five geometry parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3 LDTE: the nine geometry parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3 Displacement assumptions and nodal displacements 9

3.1 LDTR: the interpolations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2 LDRI: the interpolations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.3 LDTE: the interpolations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4 Displacement gradients 13
4.1 LDTR: the four displacement gradients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.2 LDRI: the four gradients and
one relative displacement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.3 LDTE: the nine displacement gradients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5 Strain measures 17
5.1 LDTR: the three strains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.2 LDRI: the four strains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.3 LDTE: the six strains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6 Strain/displacement matrices 21
6.1 LDTR: two strain/displacement sub-matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6.2 LDRI: two strain/displacement sub-matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6.3 LDTE: three strain/displacement sub-matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
v
c
vi Pauli Pedersen: The basic matrix approach ...
6.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
7 Basic matrices 25
7.1 LDTR: three basic matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7.2 LDRI: six basic matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
7.3 LDTE: six basic matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
7.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
8 Secant stiffness matrices 29

8.1 LDTR: the linear combinations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
8.2 LDRI: the linear combinations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
8.3 LDTE: the linear combinations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
8.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
9 Stress measures and

material parameters 37
9.1 LDTR: the three stresses and the 3 × 3 constitutive matrix . . . . . 38
9.2 LDRI: the four stresses and the 4 × 4 constitutive matrix . . . . . . 39
9.3 LDTE: the six stresses and the 6 × 6 constitutive matrix . . . . . . 39
9.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
10 Newton-Raphson iterations 41
10.1 Residuals and Newton-Raphson iterations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
10.2 The stress stiffness matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
10.3 Convergence criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
11 Tangent stiffness matrices 43

11.1 LDTR: the linear combinations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
11.2 LDRI: the linear combinations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
11.3 LDTE: the linear combinations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
11.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
12 Equivalent nodal loads 49

12.1 LDTR: the load matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
12.2 LDRI: the load matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
12.3 LDTE: the load matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
12.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
13 Consistent mass matrices 53

13.1 LDTR: the mass matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
13.2 LDRI: the mass matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
13.3 LDTE: the mass matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
13.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
14 Energy densities 55
14.1 Strain and stress energy densities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
14.2 Energy densities in
1D non-linear elasticity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
2D and 3D non-linear elasticity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
14.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Contents vii
15 Potential relations 61
15.1 Definitions, relations and sensitivities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
15.1.1 Relations with power law elasticity . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
15.1.2 Derivatives of elastic potentials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
15.2 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
16 Strain/stress descriptions and effective energy densities 65

16.1 Strain and stress vectors
for 2D problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
16.2 3D strain/stress transformations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
16.3 Dilatation, distortion, deviatoric strains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
16.4 Hydrostatic stress, deviatoric stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
16.5 Distortional energy densities
and effective measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
16.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
17 Sensitivity analysis 73
17.1 Sensitivity analysis for
mutual elastic energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
17.2 Sensitivity analysis for compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
simple eigenvalues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
multiple eigenvalues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
18 Numerical tools 77
18.1 Gauss factorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
18.2 Linear solutions by
forward and backward substitutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
18.3 Super element technique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
18.4 Power method and inverse iteration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
18.4.1 Rate of convergence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
18.4.2 Orthogonalization and shift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
18.5 Subspace iteration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
19 Errors from linear strain models 87

19.1 Cantilever illustration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
19.2 Expansive dilatation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
19.2.1 Annular plate example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
References 91
Index 93
c
viii Pauli Pedersen: The basic matrix approach ...
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Background
The personal background for these notes is related to the combination of optimization
and finite element (FE), (Pedersen 1973). To gain insight complete analytical ele- early
ment analysis was attempted, which without using algebraic computer language was experience
challenging. Later when algebraic computer language were used like in (Pedersen
and Megahed 1975) and (Pedersen 1977), results for several 1D, 2D, axisymmetric,
and 3D elements were obtained and contained in a small book (Pedersen 1984) in
Danish, and used for a course where the students write a finite element code from
scratch.
The goal was to present the theory in a transparent manner without numerical
integrations, and in order to obtain that, linear, small strain models and isotropic
material behaviour were assumed. Furthermore, these results are presented in local non-
reference coordinate systems, where the geometry of the elements could be described dimensional
by a minimum of non-dimensional parameters: for a triangular element only two pa- geometry
rameters, for an axisymmetric element only three parameters, and for a tetrahedron
element only five parameters. The use of selected coordinate systems implies numer-
ical rotation to a global reference coordinate system before practical use.
1.2 Actual elements

three
The present note concentrates on only three elements elements
• LDTR:
a Linear Displacement TRiangle with only three nodal points at the trian- LDTR,
gle corners. All element parameters, such as thickness, density and material plane
parameters are constant within each element, and the element thus models con- 2D element
stant strain, constant stress (constant reference stresses), and constant energy
density. No numerical integration is needed.
• LDRI:
a Linear Displacement RIng with triangular cross-section and nodal circular LDRI,
lines through the corners of the triangular cross-section. Element parameters, axisymmetric
such as density and material parameters are constant within each element, but element
as the tangential strain is also linear depending on radial displacement, then
strains, stresses and energy density will not be completely constant. To keep
simplicity these quantities are evaluated at the center of the triangular center,
and in this approximation no numerical integration is needed.
1
c
2 Pauli Pedersen: The basic matrix approach ...
• LDTE:
LDTE, vol- a Linear Displacement TEtrahedron with only four nodal points at the tetrahe-
ume dron corners. All element parameters, such as density and material parameters
3D element are constant within each element, and the element thus models constant strain,
constant stress (constant reference stresses), and constant energy density. No
numerical integration is needed.
1.3 Presented extensions

With these most simple element models, some of the assumptions behind the 1984
book are released.
• Results are presented directly in a global reference coordinate system. Thus

global for the LDTR element the number of geometry parameters are extended from
reference 2 to 4, for the LDRI element from 3 to 5, and for the LDTE element from 5 to
9. The transparency of the influence from element geometry is still kept, and
is described by a number of low order basic matrices.
• The extension from isotropic material behaviour to orthotropic is also made

orthotropic possible without extensive complications, and for the LDTR element even
general anisotropy is accounted for.
• The third and most complicated extension is from linear strain models (lin-
Green- ear in displacement gradients) to a model based on Green-Lagrange strains.
Lagrange These extensions have recently been published in (Pedersen 2005a), (Pedersen
strains 2005b), and (Pedersen 2006a). A specific finite element program is written to
test numerically these results, that by direct comparisons was confirmed with
an algebraic computer program.
Transparency of these analytical results for the secant stiffness matrices as well
as for the tangent stiffness matrices is obtained by describing the final results as linear
combinations of the basic matrices. As complete analytical expressions are available
a number of conclusions are directly extracted.
1.4 General layout of the note

Most chapters are short and may hardly be named chapters. The line of presen-
chapter tation agrees with the natural line of development, starting with element geome-
”flow” try described by nodal positions. Then express element displacements by the nodal
displacements and with the chosen linear displacement assumptions get displace-
ment gradients that are constant within the element and are expressed directly in the
nodal positions. The displacement gradients constitute the building blocks behind
the different definitions of strain. In chapter 5 the linear strains as well as the Green-
Lagrange strains are expressed in the displacements gradients, which enable to set
up analytically the strain/displacement matrices for linear strains as well as for the
Green-Lagrange strains, i.e., the matrices that multiplied to the nodal displacements
give the strains.
The notion of basic matrices is defined in chapter 7 and related to setting up
the force equilibriums at the directional level. These matrices are expressed directly
in the nodal positions of the elements and have dimension of length. Chapter 8 is
Introduction 3
of major importance and directly lists analytical expressions for the secant stiffness
matrices, that determines the equilibrium as it follows directly from the principle of
virtual work. The secant stiffness matrices are expressed without the use of stresses,
but the involved material parameters are the secant constitutive parameters. In chapter
9 stress and constitutive matrices are discussed and non-linear material behaviour is
addressed, but restricted to power law elasticity. After description of the Newton-
Raphson method the symmetric tangent stiffness matrices are presented in chapter
11.
Equivalent nodal loads and consistent mass matrices for the three elements, finish
in chapters 12 and 13 the part of the note directly related to the basic matrix approach.
The remaining chapters 14 - 19 are more general, and these chapters are including
because the subjects are found important and the actual presentation might not be so
well known.
1.5 Layout of chapters and notation

The first chapters are written in accordance with a unified layout which, although
boring, makes it easier for the reader to get an overview of the information available
in the note. With three sub-sections in the chapters (one on the LDTR element, one
on the LDRI element, and one on the LDTE element) some repetition is involved
but the information on each of the three elements will then be rather self containing.
Most chapters ends with a summary for the contents of the chapter.
The main notation of the note is the matrix notation with the somewhat labori-
ousness use of brackets around the symbols to focus on the fact that sets of values
and/or expressions are involved. The notation is combined with tensor notation for
indexing and comma for differentiation. To be specific the following are applied: notation
[] Notation for rectangular and quadratic matrices.
{} Notation for column vectors.
{ }T Notation for row vectors, with T as notation for transpose.
[S]ij Outer index or indexes on matrices and vectors

indicate sub matrices (sub vectors).
[Txy ] Inner index or indexes in matrices and vectors are part of the name,
and not related to the notion of sub matrices.
vi,j Notation for partial differentiation is comma, i.e., vi,j := ∂xj .

∂vi
{H},j Differential of a matrix or a vector means

differentiation of each components of the matrix (vector).
:= Symbol for definition.
1.6 Additional comments

in house
The note does not try to give proper references, and is merely based on in house references
research and experience. Thus the reference list will mainly contain references to the
c
authors work, realizing that so many good books on the finite element method are
available and the present note should only be seen as a supplement with alternative
presentations.
Chapter 2
Element geometry and nodal

positions
The three elements are described in Cartesian coordinate systems. For the plane
triangular element an arbitrary chosen two dimensional system with x, y axes, for Cartesian
the axisymmetric element with triangular cross section of the ring with r, z axes and coordinates
denote the rotational direction by the angle θ, and finally for the tetrahedron element
an arbitrary chosen three dimensional system with x, y, z axes.
The geometry of the elements is described by the position of the corner points that
also serves as nodal points in the FE model. When translations have no influence, nodal
relative positions are used to reduce the number of parameters. Areas and volumes points
are expressed directly in these relative positions.
2.1 LDTR: the four geometry parameters

y
p3
PSfrag replacements
(p3 , p5 )
p5 (p2 , p4 )
p4
(0, 0) p2 x
Figure 2.1: Definition of parameters p2 − p5 , that describe the triangle shape. The
order of the three nodes is restricted by p2 p5 − p3 p4 > 0.
Figure 2.1 shows a triangular element with parameterization by the parameters

p2 − p5 . A parameter p1 is in addition used for the axisymmetric elements in section
2.2, but is not needed for the plane linear displacement triangle used for plane prob-
lems in a Cartesian coordinate system with axes x, y. Translation of the element has
5
c
conforming no influence on the element stiffnesses and also the element size, characterized by
elements a length parameter h, is without influence. That conforming elements has the same
stiffness matrices is proved later.
area The area a of the element is determined by
1
a = (p2 p5 − p3 p4 ) > 0 (2.1)
2
with enforced positive condition by the order of the three nodes. The constant thick-
constant ness of the element is t, and the element volume V is thus V = a · t
thickness Although the coordinates of the Cartesian coordinate system are chosen as x, y
volume the i, j index notation is also applied, meaning that i can be x or y and similar for j
in this two-dimensional description.
2.2 LDRI: the five geometry parameters

Figure 2.2 shows a triangular cross-section of an axisymmetric ring-element with
parametrization by the parameters p1 − p5 . Translation of the element in the axial
direction (z-direction) has no influence on the element stiffnesses.
The cross sectional area a of the element cross-section is determined by
1
a = (p2 p5 − p3 p4 ) > 0 (2.2)
2
with enforced positive condition by the order of the three nodes. The volume V of
volume the ring element is approximated by
approxi-
mation V̄ = ar̄ (2.3)
where r̄ is the radial position of the center of the element, as Figure 2.2 also shows.
PSfrag replacements
p2 +p3 p4 +p5

(r̄, z̄) = p1 + 3
, 3
z p3
(p1 + p3 , p5 )
p5 (r̄, z̄) (p1 + p2 , p4 )
p4
(p1 , 0)
p1 p2 r
Figure 2.2: Definition of parameters p1 − p5 , that describes the triangle shape. The
order of the three nodes is restricted by p2 p5 − p3 p4 > 0. The position of the center
(r̄, z̄) is used for evaluation of quantities that are non-constant in the element, thus
implying an approximation.
Element geometry and
nodal positions 7
2.3 LDTE: the nine geometry parameters

Figure 2.3 shows the most simple tetrahedron finite element with linear displacement
assumption with parametrization by the parameters p1 − p9 . Translation of the ele-
ment has no influence on the element stiffnesses.
The volume V of the element is determined by volume
1
V = (p1 p5 p9 − p1 p6 p8 + p2 p6 p7 − p2 p4 p9 + p3 p4 p8 − p3 p5 p7 ) > 0 (2.4)
6
with enforced positive condition by the order of the four nodes.
z (p7 , p8 , p9 ) y
PSfrag replacements
(p4 , p5 , p6 )
(p1 , p2 , p3 )
x
(0, 0, 0)
Figure 2.3: Definition of parameters p1 − p9 , that describes the tetrahedron geometry.

The order of the four nodes is restricted by p1 p5 p9 − p1 p6 p8 + p2 p6 p7 − p2 p4 p9 +
p3 p4 p8 − p3 p5 p7 > 0.
c
2.4 Summary
• As it is documented in chapter 7 all the basic matrices of the elements are
p- expressed directly in terms of the p-parameters defined in the present chapter
parameters on element geometry. This relates to the fact that the three simple elements are
based on linear displacement assumptions.
• for the LDTR element it is stated that the stiffness matrices are equal for con-
forming elements. For the LDTE element a linear dependences on size will
later be shown, and also for the LDRI element similarities also exist, but in
general more complicated due to the dependence on position in radial direc-
tion.
Chapter 3
Displacement assumptions and

nodal displacements
The nodal degrees of freedom for the three elements treated are all translations (La- nodal
grangian elements), and only problems without directional coupling in the interpo- translations
lation are treated, i.e., the displacements in a given direction depend only on the
element nodal displacements in the same direction.
Furthermore, the same displacement assumption in all directions, i.e., the same
interpolation {N } displacement
assumption
vi = {N }T {D}i (3.1)
for all directions i. The vector {N } of shape functions is factorized into the vector of
direct displacement assumptions {H} (space-dependence) and the space-independent
matrix [K]−1 that includes information about element geometry and node positions shape
{N }T = {H}T [K]−1 (3.2)
functions
For the three elements the vectors {H}, and the matrices [K], [K] −1 are listed below. non-
Non-dimensional definition of these vectors/matrices is chosen. dimensional
matrices
3.1 LDTR: the interpolations
Although the coordinates of the Cartesian coordinate system are chosen as x, y the
i, j index notation is also applied, meaning that i can be x or y and similar for j in
this two-dimensional description. The element displacement assumption for a dis-
placement vi in the i-direction is
vi = {H}T [K]−1 {D}i (3.3)

PSfrag replacements
where the vector {D}i contains the nodal displacements in direction i. y
Dealing with a linear displacement assumption in the x, y coordinate system give p3
x y p5
{H}T = {1 } (3.4) p4
h h
where h is a reference length, that is not involved in the final results. p2 x
9
c
The matrix [K] constitutes the row vectors {H}T evaluated at the three nodal
positions, and thus is independent of space. Inserting the nodal positions in {H} T
for the three nodes give
 
1 0 0
[K] =  1 p2 /h p4 /h  (3.5)
1 p3 /h p5 /h
The determinant of [K] is
1
|[K]| = (p2 p5 − p3 p4 ) (3.6)
h2
and the inverse of [K] is
 
2a 0 0
1 
[K]−1 = (p4 − p5 )h p5 h −p4 h  (3.7)
2a
(p3 − p2 )h −p3 h p2 h
[K]−1 LDTR where the triangular area a as noted before is
1
a = (p2 p5 − p3 p4 ) (3.8)
2
ements Note, that the sums of each row two and three of matrix [K]−1 are all zero.
3.2 LDRI: the interpolations

z p3
For the axisymmetric ring-element the index notation means that i can be r or z. With
a linear displacement assumption in the r, z coordinate system
p5 (r̄, z̄)
r z
p4 {H}T = {1 } (3.9)
h h
p1 p2 rwhere h is a reference length, that is not involved in the final results.
The matrix [K] constitutes the row vectors {H}T evaluated at the three nodal po-
sitions, and thus is independent of space. Inserting the nodal (circular lines) positions
in {H}T for the three nodes give
 
1 p1 /h 0
[K] =  1 (p1 + p2 )/h p4 /h  (3.10)
1 (p1 + p3 )/h p5 /h
1
|[K]| = ((p1 + p2 )p5 − (p1 + p3 )p4 ) (3.11)
h2
and the inverse of [K] is
 
2a 0 0
1 
[K]−1 = (p4 − p5 )h p5 h −p4 h  (3.12)
2a
(p3 − p2 )h −p3 h p2 h
[K]−1 LDRI where the triangular area a as noted before is
1
a = (p2 p5 − p3 p4 ) (3.13)
2
Note, that the sums of each row two and three of matrix [K]−1 are all zero. as the
case for the LDTR plane triangular elements.
Displacement assumptions 11
3.3 LDTE: the interpolations

For the tetrahedron element the element displacement assumption for a displacement
vi in the i-direction (i = x, i = y, or i = z) is as shown in general in (3.3). z
With a linear displacement assumption in the x, y, z coordinate system y
PSfrag replacements
x y z
{H}T = {1 } (3.14)
h h h
x
where h is a reference length, that is not directly involved in the final results.
The matrix [K] constitutes the row vectors {H}T evaluated at the four nodal
positions, and thus is independent of space. Inserting the nodal positions in {H} T
for the four nodes give
 
1 0 0 0
 1 p1 /h p2 /h p3 /h 
[K] =  1 p4 /h p5 /h p6 /h 
 (3.15)
1 p7 /h p8 /h p9 /h

1
|[K]| = (p1 p5 p9 − p1 p6 p8 + p2 p6 p7 − p2 p4 p9 + p3 p4 p8 − p3 p5 p7 ) > 0 (3.16)
h3
Writing the inverse of [K] as
 
6V 0 0 0
1 
 −qx h p5968 h p3829 h p2635 h 
[K]−1 (3.17)

=
6V  −qy h p6749 h p1937 h p3416 h 
−qz h p4857 h p2718 h p1524 h
where the tetrahedron volume V as noted before is [K]−1 LDTE

1
V = (p1 p5 p9 − p1 p6 p8 + p2 p6 p7 − p2 p4 p9 + p3 p4 p8 − p3 p5 p7 ) (3.18)
6
and with definition of a short notation, exemplified by parameter
p5968 := p5 p9 − p6 p8 (3.19)
combinations
Additional three practical parameters are defined
qx = p5968 + p3829 + p2635

qy = p6749 + p1937 + p3416
qz = p4857 + p2718 + p1524 (3.20)
Note, that the sums of each row two, three and four of matrix [K] −1 are all zero.
c
3.4 Summary
• the vector of shape functions is factorized into a vector {H} containing the
polynomial displacement assumption components and a space independent
matrix [K]−1 that is directly evaluated by the nodal positions
• the vector {H} and the matrix [K] are defined with non-dimensional compo-
nents
Chapter 4
Displacement gradients
The displacement gradients are non-dimensional and recognized as physical quanti-

ties in contrast to strains, that are concepts at our definition. Analysis without strains physical
is in fact possible. quantities,
In this chapter the displacement gradients for the three elements are determined, concepts
and based on these gradients linear strains are defined (linear in the displacement
gradients) as well as non-linear Green-Lagrange strains
4.1 LDTR: the four displacement gradients

Figure 4.1 shows the numbering of the six nodal degrees of freedom for the LDTR
element. Based on these definitions, the displacement gradients are determined.
d6
PSfrag replacements y
d5
d4
d2 d3
d1
x
Figure 4.1: Definition of nodal displacements d1 − d6 , for plane problems.
The necessary displacement gradients are vx,x , vy,y , vx,y and vy,x , which ex-
pressed by the displacement assumption (3.4), (3.3) in the finite element model are
determined by
vx,x = {H}T,x [K]−1 {D}x vy,y = {H}T,y [K]−1 {D}y
vx,y = {H}T,y [K]−1 {D}x vy,x = {H}T,x [K]−1 {D}y (4.1)
where as an example {H},x means differentiation of all the components in {H} with
respect to the coordinate x. From (3.4) follows the involved vector gradients
1 1
{H}T,x = {0 0} and {H}T,y = {0 0 } (4.2)
h h
13
c
The displacement gradients vx,x , vy,y , vx,y , vy,x in terms of the nodal displace-
LDTR ments d1 − d6 are
displacement 1
gradients vx,x =
2a
( (d3 − d1 )p5 − (d5 − d1 )p4 )
1
vy,y = ( (d6 − d2 )p2 − (d4 − d2 )p3 )
2a
1
vx,y = ( (d5 − d1 )p2 − (d3 − d1 )p3 )
2a
1
vy,x = ( (d4 − d2 )p5 − (d6 − d2 )p4 )
2a
(4.3)
as it is found by evaluating (4.1) with (3.7) and (4.2).
4.2 LDRI: the four gradients and

one relative displacement
Figure 4.2 shows the numbering of the six nodal degrees of freedom for an axisym-
metric ring-element element with triangular cross-section. Based on these definitions
the displacement gradients are determined.
d6
z
PSfrag replacements d5
d4
d2 d3
d1
Figure 4.2: Definition of nodal displacements d1 − d6 for an axisymmetric ring-

element, based on linear displacement assumption.
The displacement gradients vr,r , vz,z , vr,z and vz,r are, with [K]−1 space-independent,
given by
vr,r = {H}T,r [K]−1 {D}r vz,z = {H}T,z [K]−1 {D}z

vr,z = {H}T,z [K]−1 {D}r vz,r = {H}T,r [K]−1 {D}z (4.4)
where as an example {H},r means differentiation of all the components in {H} with
respect to the radial coordinate r. From (3.9) follows the involved vector gradients
1 1
{H}T,r = {0 0} and {H}T,z = {0 0 } (4.5)
h h
The displacement gradients vr,r , vz,z , vr,z , vz,r and the relative displacement v̄r /r̄
in the radial direction (evaluated at the center of the triangular cross-section), in terms
Displacement gradients 15
of nodal displacements d1 − d6 are

1
vr,r = ( (d3 − d1 )p5 − (d5 − d1 )p4 )
2a
1
vz,z = ( (d6 − d2 )p2 − (d4 − d2 )p3 )
2a
1
vr,z = ( (d5 − d1 )p2 − (d3 − d1 )p3 )
2a
1
vz,r = ( (d4 − d2 )p5 − (d6 − d2 )p4 )
2a
v̄r /r̄ = (d1 + d3 + d5 )/(3r̄) = (d1 + d3 + d5 )/(3p1 + p2 + p3 ) (4.6)
where the result for v̄r /r̄ follows from r̄ = p1 + (p2 + p3 )/3 shown in Figure 2.2. LDRI
The remaining part of the results (4.6) is found by evaluating (4.4) with (3.12) and displacement
(4.5). gradients
4.3 LDTE: the nine displacement gradients

Figure 4.3 shows the numbering of the twelve nodal degrees of freedom for a tetrahe-
PSfrag replacements
dron element. Based on these definitions the displacement gradients are determined.
d12
d11
z y
d10
d9
d8
d7
d6
d5
d3
d2
d4
x
d1
Figure 4.3: Definition of nodal displacements d1 − d12 for a tetrahedron element,

based on linear displacement assumption.
The displacement gradients vx,x , vy,y , vz,z and vx,y , vy,x , vx,z , vz,x , vy,z , vz,y are,
with [K]−1 space-independent, given by
vx,x = {H}T,x [K]−1 {D}x vy,y = {H}T,y [K]−1 {D}y vz,z = {H}T,z [K]−1 {D}z
vx,y = {H}T,y [K]−1 {D}x vy,x = {H}T,x [K]−1 {D}y
vx,z = {H}T,z [K]−1 {D}x vz,x = {H}T,x [K]−1 {D}z
vy,z = {H}T,z [K]−1 {D}y vz,y = {H}T,y [K]−1 {D}z (4.7)
where as an example {H},x means differentiation of all the components in {H} with
respect to the coordinate x. From (3.14) follows the involved vector gradients (all
c
space-independent)
1 1 1
{H}T,x = {0 0 0} and {H}T,y = {0 0 0} and {H}T,z = {0 0 0 }
h h h
(4.8)
The nine displacement gradients in terms of the twelve nodal displacements d 1 −

LDTE d12 are
displacement
gradients
1

vx,x = 6V (d4 − d1 )p5968 + (d7 − d1 )p3829 + (d10 − d1 )p2635
1

vy,y = 6V (d5 − d2 )p6749 + (d8 − d2 )p1937 + (d11 − d2 )p3416
1

vz,z = 6V (d6 − d3 )p4857 + (d9 − d3 )p2718 + (d12 − d3 )p1524
1

vx,y = 6V (d4 − d1 )p6749 + (d7 − d1 )p1937 + (d10 − d1 )p3416
1

vy,x = 6V (d5 − d2 )p5968 + (d8 − d2 )p3829 + (d11 − d2 )p2635
1

vx,z = 6V (d4 − d1 )p4857 + (d7 − d1 )p2718 + (d10 − d1 )p1524
1

vz,x = 6V (d6 − d3 )p5968 + (d9 − d3 )p3829 + (d12 − d3 )p2635
1

vy,z = 6V (d5 − d2 )p4857 + (d8 − d2 )p2718 + (d11 − d2 )p1524
1
(4.9)

vz,y = 6V (d6 − d3 )p6749 + (d9 − d3 )p1937 + (d12 − d3 )p3416
with definition of a short notation for combinations of the nine geometry parameters
p1 − p9 , as shown before exemplified by the definition
p5968 := p5 p9 − p6 p8 (4.10)
The results (4.9) are found by evaluating (4.7) with (3.17) and (4.8), and the volume
V is determined by (3.18).
4.4 Summary
• The displacement gradients are all constant in the elements of the present note
• the displacements are expressed linearly in the nodal displacements with coef-
ficients given by the element nodal positions
• for the axisymmetric case the necessary relative radial displacement is approx-
imated by the value at the center of the triangular cross-section
Chapter 5
Strain measures
The linear strains (Cauchy strains, Euler strains, engineering strains) ij are linear in
the displacement gradients vi,j by the definition
1
ij := (vi,j + vj,i ) (5.1)
2
and implies symmetric stiffness matrices, that with linearly elastic material models
are constant.
The Green-Lagrange strains ηij are non-linearly depending on the displacement
gradients and in Cartesian tensor notation defined by
1
ηij := (vi,j + vj,i + vk,i vk,j ) (5.2)
2
which implies stiffness matrices depending on strain.
While displacements and displacement gradients are physical realities, strain is
a concept that is defined. This is the background for choosing different notations,
for linear strains and η for the Green-Lagrange strains. The present chapter list the
strains that are actual for the three simple elements.
17
c
5.1 LDTR: the three strains

For the plane triangular element only three strain components are needed, two longi-
tudinal strains and one shear strain.
In terms of the displacement gradients by definition (5.1) the following expres-
linear sions for the linear strains result
strains
ementsLDTR xx = vx,x , yy = vy,y , 2xy = vx,y + vy,x (5.3)
y
sions for the Green-Lagrange strains result
1 1
ηxx = vx,x + (vx,x vx,x + vy,x vy,x ), ηyy = vy,y + (vx,y vx,y + vy,y vy,y ),
x 2 2
2ηxy = vx,y + vy,x + vx,x vx,y + vy,x vy,y (5.4)
Green-
Lagrange
strains
LDTR
5.2 LDRI: the four strains

For the ring element with triangular cross-section four strain components are needed,
three longitudinal strains and one shear strain.
In terms of the displacement gradients by definition (5.1) and the well known
expression for tangential longitudinal strain θθ in axisymmetric problems, the fol-
ementslinear lowing expressions for the linear strains result
strains
LDRI rr = vr,r , zz = vz,z , θθ = vr /r, ' v̄r /r̄, 2rz = vr,z + vz,r (5.5)
z
where v̄r and r̄ are vr and r evaluated at the center of the triangular cross-section
r̄, z̄.
(r̄, z̄) In terms of the displacement gradients by definition (5.2) the following expres-
r 1 1
ηrr = vr,r + (vr,r vr,r + vz,r vz,r ), ηzz = vz,z + (vr,z vr,z + vz,z vz,z ),
Green- 2
1 1
2
Lagrange ηθθ = vr /r + vr vr /r2 ' v̄r /r̄ + v̄r v̄r /r̄ 2 ,

2 2
strains 2ηrz = vr,z + vz,r + vr,r vr,z + vz,r vz,z (5.6)
LDRI
where v̄r and r̄ are vr and r evaluated at the center of the triangular cross-section r̄, z̄.
Strain measures 19
5.3 LDTE: the six strains

For the tetrahedron element six strain components are needed, three longitudinal
strains and three shear strains.
sions for the linear strains result linear
strains
xx = vx,x , yy = vy,y , zz = vz,z , LDTE
2xy = vx,y + vy,x , 2xz = vx,z + vz,x , 2yz = vy,z + vz,y (5.7) z y
PSfrag replacements
x
Green-
1
ηxx = vx,x + (vx,x vx,x + vy,x vy,x + vz,x vz,x ),
Lagrange
2
1
ηyy = vy,y + (vx,y vx,y + vy,y vy,y + vz,y vz,y ),
2 strains
1
ηzz = vz,z + (vx,z vx,z + vy,z vy,z + vz,z vz,z ), LDTE
2
2ηxy = vx,y + vy,x + vx,x vx,y + vy,x vy,y + vz,x vz,y
2ηxz = vx,z + vz,x + vx,x vx,z + vy,x vy,z + vz,x vz,z
2ηyz = vy,z + vz,y + vx,y vx,z + vy,y vy,z + vz,y vz,z (5.8)
5.4 Summary
• For a set of strains, reference strains can be evaluated, and separate into di-
latational and distortional components (deviatoric strains). A reference strain
related to energy density is defined in chapters 14 and 16.
• Due to the later used matrix expressions it is chosen to write (as example)
vx,x vx,x and not just vx,x
2 .
c
Chapter 6
Strain/displacement matrices
The Green-Lagrange strains ηij are non-linear and in Cartesian tensor notation de-
fined by Green-
Lagrange
strains
1
ηij := (vi,j + vj,i + vk,i vk,j ) (6.1)
2
which implies strain/displacement matrices depending on strain.
A single component of the Green-Lagrange strain tensor is in matrix notation
written
1
0 T
ηij := {Bij 2
} {D} + {D}T [Bij ]{D} (6.2)
2
where {D} contains all the element nodal displacements, the strain/displacement vec-
tor {Bij
0 } gives the linear terms and the symmetric strain/displacement matrix[B 2 ]
ij
gives the non-linear terms. For a specific finite element {Bij
0 } and [B 2 ] are constant
ij
and do not depend on {D}.
With a variation only of {D} follows directly from (6.2),
0 T
dηij = {Bij 2
} {dD} + {D}T [Bij 0 T
]{dD} = {Bij L T
} {dD} + {Bij } {dD} (6.3)
i.e., the vector {BijL }T := {D}T [B 2 ] depends linearly on {D}.

ij
Collecting all the strain components in strain vector notation, (6.2) and (6.3) are
written differential
Green-
Lagrange

1 L
0
{η} = [B ] + [B ] {D} = [B̄]{D} (6.4)
2
strains
{dη} = ([B 0 ] + [B L ]){dD} = [B]{dD} (6.5)
with the matrix [B L ] linearly dependent on the nodal displacement {D} while the
matrix [B 0 ] is independent of {D}. The bar in the matrix [B̄] in (6.4) indicates that
this matrix describes the secant relations (a kind of mean values), while the matrix
[B] in (6.5) describes the tangent relations. The same symbolism for the constitutive
matrices is used in chapter 9.
The Green-Lagrange strains are in (5.2) expressed in displacement gradients, and
these displacement gradients are in chapter 4 expressed linearly in the nodal displace-
ments, see (4.1), (4.4), and (4.7). Inserting these the strain/displacement matrices are
identified, listed below for the three simple elements.
21
c
For later use these matrices are listed on the directional level, as exemplified for
the 3D LDTE element secant relation
{η} = [B̄]{D} = [B̄]x {D}x + [B̄]y {D}y + [B̄]z {D}z (6.6)

remark
Note, that for the present derivation, it is (as by tradition) most simple to define
the strain vector as {η}T := {ηxx ηyy ηzz 2ηxy 2ηxz 2ηyz }, although this definition
do not have invariant length. This problem is in focus in chapter 16.
6.1 LDTR: two strain/displacement sub-matrices

Inserting (4.1) in (6.4) give
{H}T,x {H},x {H}T,x

   
T  [K]−1 + 1 {D}T [K]−T  [K]−1

   
[B̄]x =  {0} x
 {H},y {H}T,y
  2  
T
{H},y {H},x {H}T,y + {H},y {H}T,x
(6.7)
ements
y
{0}T {H},x {H}T,x
   
 T 
 −1 1 T −T 

 [K]−1

 {H},y  [K] + 2 {D}y [K] 
[B̄]y =  {H},y {H}T,y 
T
{H},x T T
{H},x {H},y + {H},y {H},x
(6.8)
x
Note, that the factor 21 in these results cancel with the factor 1
2 in (6.4). Thus the
matrices do not contain the factor 12 .
[B L ]
6.2 LDRI: two strain/displacement sub-matrices

Inserting (4.4) in (6.4) give the terms corresponding to the LDTR element. In addition
for the axisymmetric case the circumferential strain θ = vr /r is needed
   
{H}T,r {H},r {H}T,r
   
 {0}T 
−1 1 
−T 
{H},z {H}T,z 
[B̄]r =   [K] + {D}r [K]  T
 [K]−1
  
 {H}T /r  2  T
{H}{H} /r 2 
   
{H}T,z {H},r {H}T,z + {H},z {H}T,r
ements (6.9)
   
{0}T {H},r {H}T,r
z 
 {H}T,z
  
 1  {H},z {H}T,z 
[B̄]z =   [K]−1 + {D}Tz [K]−T  [K]−1
   
 {0}T 2

  [0] 
(r̄, z̄)
   
{H}T,r {H},r {H}T,z + {H},z {H}T,r
(6.10)
r
Note, that the factor 21 in these results cancel with the factor 1
[B L ] matrices do not contain the factor 12 .
Strain/displacement matrices 23
6.3 LDTE: three strain/displacement sub-matrices

Inserting (4.7) in (6.4) the result is
   
{H}T,x {H},x {H}T,x
   
 {0}T 
 

 {H},y {H}T,y 

   
 {0}  T
1  {H},z {H}T,z 
[B̄]x =   [K]−1 + {D}Tx [K]−T  [K]−1
   
T 2  {H},x {H}T,y + {H},y {H}T,x

 {H},y  
   
 {H}T,z   {H},x {H}T,z + {H},z {H}T,x
   

   
T
{0} {H},y {H}T,z + {H},z {H}T,y
(6.11)
   
{0}T {H},x {H}T,x
   

 {H}T,y 


 {H},y {H}T,y 

   
 T
{0}  1  {H},z {H}T,z 
[B̄]y =  [K]−1 + {D}Ty [K]−T  [K]−1
   
{H}T,x  2  {H},x {H}T,y + {H},y {H}T,x
 
 
   
{0}T   {H},x {H}T,z + {H},z {H}T,x
   
 
   
{H}T,z {H},y {H}T,z + {H},z {H}T,y
(6.12)
{0}T
   
{H},x {H}T,x
{0}T 
   
{H} {H} T
,y
  
   ,y 
   T

T
{H},z  {H},z {H},z
 1  
[B̄]z =   [K]−1 + {D}Tz [K]−T  [K]−1
   
2 T T

 {0}T   {H},x {H},y + {H},y {H},x 
    z y
 {H},x {H},z + PSfrag
T
,z replacements
T
   

 {H}T,x 
  {H} {H} ,x 

T T
{H},y {H},z + {H},z {H},y T
{H},y
(6.13)
x
Note, that the factor in these results cancel with the factor
1
2
1
matrices do not contain the factor 12 .
[B L ]
c
6.4 Summary
• The strain/displacement matrices are obtained directly by expressing the Green-
Lagrange strains in terms of the nodal displacements, via the general definition
general in terms of displacement gradients.
aspects • With the goal of expressing the final stiffness matrices on the directional level,
the strain/displacement matrices on the directional level are listed. For the
LDTR element this gives matrices of the order 3 × 3, for the LDRI element
matrices of the order 4 × 3, and for the LDTE element matrices of the order 6
× 4.
• In these expressions the first term on the right hand sides gives the [B 0 ] matri-
ces, and the second term on the right hand sides without the factor 12 gives the
[B L ] matrices. By the definitions (6.5) the tangent relations [B] follows.
dyadic • It is seen that squared matrices determined as a dyadic product, say {H} ,x {H}T,y ,
product play a major role and will be the background for the definition of the basic ma-
trices related to the matrix products like [K]−T {H},x {H}T,y [K]−1 .
• The definitions of the strain/displacement matrices are based on the traditional

strain vector definitions without invariant lengths. These vector definitions are
modified in relation to the rotational transformations in chapter 16.
Chapter 7
Basic matrices
As later shown in detail with Green-Lagrange strains, the final directional stiffness
sub-matrices can be evaluated as linear combinations of basic matrices defined by definition
Z
[Tij ] := [K] −T
{H},i {H}T,j dV [K]−1 (7.1)
These basic matrices are independent of the material constitutive behaviour and
independent of the actual stress/strain state. The basic matrices are independent of
the strain modeling, i.e., the same for linear strains as for Green-Lagrange strains.
All basic matrix components has dimension of length.
7.1 LDTR: three basic matrices

PSfrag replacements
With (4.2) for the vectors {H},j and (3.7) for the matrix [K]−1 that are all constant y
in the element, the three basic matrices for the LDTR element are determined to p3
(p4 − p5 )2
 
p5 (p4 − p5 ) −p4 (p4 − p5 ) p5
t 
[Txx ] = p5 (p4 − p5 ) p25 −p4 p5  = [Txx ]T (7.2) p4
4a
−p4 (p4 − p5 ) −p4 p5 p24
p2 x
(p2 − p3 )2
 
p3 (p2 − p3 ) −p2 (p2 − p3 )
t 
[Tyy ] = p3 (p2 − p3 ) p23 −p2 p3  = [Tyy ]T (7.3)
4a
−p2 (p2 − p3 ) −p2 p3 p22
 
−(p2 − p3 )(p4 − p5 ) −p3 (p4 − p5 ) p2 (p4 − p5 )
t   and [Tyx ] = [Txy ]T
[Txy ] = −p5 (p2 − p3 ) −p3 p5 p2 p5
4a
p4 (p2 − p3 ) p 4 p3 −p2 p4
(7.4)
Note that the sum of all the individual rows and all the individual columns of
equilibrium
all these basic matrices are zero. This condition follows from equilibrium for all the
stiffness sub-matrices, to hold for all possible material moduli.
These basic matrices has dimension of length. They are independent of the size
of the triangle because the area a scales with second order products of the four param-
eters p2 to p5 . This means that conforming triangles have the same basic matrices, conforming
that are proportional to the element thickness t. triangles
25
c
7.2 LDRI: six basic matrices

With (4.5) for the vectors {H},j and (3.12) for the matrix [K]−1 that are all constant
approxi- in the element when r = r̄ is assumed, the first three basic matrices for the LDRI
mation element are determined to
(p4 − p5 )2
 
p5 (p4 − p5 ) −p4 (p4 − p5 )
πr̄ 
[Trr ] = p5 (p4 − p5 ) p25 −p4 p5  = [Trr ]T (7.5)
ements 2a
−p4 (p4 − p5 ) −p4 p5 p24
similar
matrices
z p3 (p2 − p3 )2
 
p3 (p2 − p3 ) −p2 (p2 − p3 )
πr̄ 
[Tzz ] = p3 (p2 − p3 ) p23 −p2 p3  = [Tzz ]T (7.6)
2a 2
p5 (r̄, z̄) −p2 (p2 − p3 ) −p2 p3 p2
p4
r
 
−(p2 − p3 )(p4 − p5 ) −p3 (p4 − p5 ) p2 (p4 − p5 )
p1 p2 πr̄   and [Tzr ] = [Trz ]T
[Trz ] = −p5 (p2 − p3 ) −p3 p5 p2 p5
2a
p4 (p2 − p3 ) p 4 p3 −p2 p4
(7.7)
Except for the factor πr̄/(2a) these three basic matrices are the same as for plane
LDTR elements. Note that the sum of all the individual rows and all the individual
columns of these three basic matrices are zero. This condition follows from equilib-
rium in the axial direction for all the stiffness sub-matrices to hold for all possible
material moduli.
The remaining three basic matrices are specific for the axisymmetric elements
and relates to the strain component that is proportional to the displacement in the
additional r-direction. The definitions of the additional basic matrices are
basic
matrices
1
Z
[T0r ] := [K]−T {H}{H}T,r dV [K]−1 (7.8)
r
1
Z
[T0z ] := [K]−T {H}{H}T,z dV [K]−1 (7.9)
r
1
Z
[T00 ] := [K]−T {H}{H}T dV [K]−1 (7.10)
r2
By simplified integration (r = r̄) these basic matrices are determined to
 
(p − p5 ) p5 −p4
π 4
[T0r ] = (p4 − p5 ) p5 −p4  and [Tr0 ] = [T0r ]T (7.11)
3
(p4 − p5 ) p5 −p4
 
−(p2 − p3 ) −p3 p2
π
[T0z ] =  −(p2 − p3 ) −p3 p2  and [Tz0 ] = [T0z ]T (7.12)
3
−(p2 − p3 ) −p3 p2
 
1 1 1
2πa 
[T00 ] = 1 1 1  = [T00 ]T (7.13)
9r̄
1 1 1
Basic matrices 27
All six basic matrices has dimension of length. The first three basic matrices are
independent of the size of the triangle because the area a scales with second order
products of the four parameters p2 to p5 . This means that conforming triangles have
the same basic matrices (7.5) - (7.7), that are proportional to the element mean radius
r̄. The last three basic matrices (7.11) - (7.13) change with the size of the triangular
cross section. For larger r̄ the basic matrix [T00 ] will have less importance.
7.3 LDTE: six basic matrices

With (4.8) for the vectors {H},j and (3.17) for the matrix [K]−1 that are all constant
in the element, the six basic matrices for the LDTE element are determined.
With the nine parameters p1 to p9 , defined in Figure 2.3, the element volume V
is
1
V = (p1 p5 p9 − p1 p6 p8 + p2 p6 p7 − p2 p4 p9 + p3 p4 p8 − p3 p5 p7 ) > 0 (7.14)
6
and in terms of the practical definitions in (4.10) and (3.20) the results are
z y
qx2 PSfrag
qx replacements
 
−p5968 qx −p3829 qx −p2635
1  −p5968 qx p25968 p5968 p3829 p5968 p2635 
[Txx ] =  (7.15)
36V  −p3829 qx p5968 p3829 p23829 p3829 p2635 
−p2635 qx p5968 p2635 p3829 p2635 p22635 x
qy2
 
−p6749 qy −p1937 qy −p3416 qy
1  −p6749 qy p26749 p6749 p1937 p6749 p3416 
[Tyy ] =  (7.16)
36V  −p1937 qy p6749 p1937 p21937 p1937 p3416 
−p3416 qy p6749 p3416 p1937 p3416 p23416
qz2
 
−p4857 qz −p2718 qz −p1524 qz
1  −p4857 qz p24857 p4857 p2718 p4857 p1524 
[Tzz ] =  (7.17)
36V  −p2718 qz p4857 p2718 p22718 p2718 p1524 
−p1524 qz p4857 p1524 p2718 p1524 p21524
 
qx qy −qx p6749 −qx p1937 −qx p3416
1  −p5968 qy p5968 p6749 p5968 p1937 p5968 p3416  and [Tyx ] = [Txy ]T

[Txy ] =
36V  −p3829 qy p3829 p6749 p3829 p1937 p3829 p3416 
−p2635 qy p2635 p6749 p2635 p1937 p2635 p3416
(7.18)
 
qx qz −qx p4857 −qx p2718 −qx p1524
1  −p5968 qz p5968 p4857 p5968 p2718 p5968 p1524  and [Tzx ] = [Txz ]T

[Txz ] =
36V  −p3829 qz p3829 p4857 p3829 p2718 p3829 p1524 
−p2635 qz p2635 p4857 p2635 p2718 p2635 p1524
(7.19)
 
qy qz −qy p4857 −qy p2718 −qy p1524
1  −p6749 qz p6749 p4857 p6749 p2718 p6749 p1524  and [Tzy ] = [Tyz ]T

[Tyz ] =
36V  −p1937 qz p1937 p4857 p1937 p2718 p1937 p1524 
−p3416 qz p3416 p4857 p3416 p2718 p3416 p1524
(7.20)
c
Note, using (3.20), that the sum of all the individual rows and all the individual
columns of these basic matrices are zero. That this must be the case follows from
equilibrium for all the stiffness sub-matrices to hold for all possible material moduli.
equilibrium
Also these basic matrices have dimension of length. They are linearly dependent
of the size of the tetrahedron because the volume V scales with third order products
of the nine parameters p1 − p9 . This means that conforming tetrahedra have the same
conforming basic matrices except for a size factor.
tetrahedra
7.4 Summary
• All components of all the basic matrices have dimension of length.
• Conforming triangles have the same basic matrices. So do conforming tetra-

hedra, except for a size factor.
• In ring elements a few quantities are depending on the radial coordinate. When
these quantities are approximated by the values at the midpoint of the triangu-
lar cross section, then all the basic matrices are constant.
• For the ring element, the three additional basic matrices are related to the tan-
gential strains.
• The basic matrices are the same for linear strains and for Green Lagrange
strains.
Chapter 8
Secant stiffness matrices
The principle of virtual work states virtual work

Z Z
T
{δη} {τ }dV = {δD} T
[B]T {τ }dV = {δD}T {A} (8.1)
where the resulting stresses {τ } are conjugated to the variational strains {δη} and
{A} contains given nodal loads corresponding to the variational displacements {δD}.
The variational strains are compatible with the variational displacements, and the
stresses are in equilibrium with the nodal loads.
The stresses are written in terms of resulting strains and further the resulting
strains in terms of resulting displacements from (6.4) secant
constitutive
{τ } = [L̄]{η} = [L̄][B̄]{D} (8.2) matrix
with the constitutive secant relations described by the secant constitutive matrix [ L̄].
The general equilibrium then follows from the principle of virtual work that must
hold for any variational nodal displacements {δD}. Inserting (8.2) in (8.1) give secant
element
matrix
Z
[B]T [L̄][B̄]dV {D} = [S̄]{D} = {A}
Z
with secant element matrix [S̄] = [B]T [L̄][B̄]dV (8.3)
In general the element secant stiffness matrix [S̄] is non-symmetric because [B] 6=
[B̄]. However, in a Newton-Raphson approach to find a solution to (8.3), the system
secant stiffness matrix is not needed, only the element secant stiffness matrices. The
presentation here is therefore solely on the element level. The element secant stiffness
matrices [S̄] are the physically most important matrices because they determine the
equilibrium. Note, that the involved constitutive matrix [L̄] is the secant constitutive
matrix.
8.1 LDTR: the linear combinations

General non-isotropic, linear strain elasticity in 2D involve six material parameters
with the secant components being secant
constitutive
C̄xxxx , C̄yyyy , C̄xxyy , C̄xxxy , C̄yyxy , and C̄xyxy (8.4) components
29
c
ements
y The relations to the basic matrices are for linear strain models
[S̄]xx = C̄xxxx [Txx ] + C̄xyxy [Tyy ] + C̄xxxy ([Txy ] + [Txy ]T )

[S̄]yy = C̄xyxy [Txx ] + C̄yyyy [Tyy ] + C̄yyxy ([Txy ] + [Txy ]T )
[S̄]xy = [S̄]Tyx = C̄xxxy [Txx ] + C̄yyxy [Tyy ] + C̄xxyy [Txy ] + C̄xyxy [Txy ]T (8.5)
x with the basic matrices listed in (7.2), (7.3), and (7.4).
For general non-isotropic, non-linear strain elasticity in 2D the six material pa-
rameters are combined with the current displacement gradients to give the linear com-
bination factors. The relations are
[S̄]xx = Axxxx [Txx ] + Axxyy [Tyy ] + Axxxy [Txy ] + Axxyx [Txy ]T

[S̄]yy = Ayyxx [Txx ] + Ayyyy [Tyy ] + Ayyxy [Txy ] + Ayyyx [Txy ]T
[S̄]xy = Axyxx [Txx ] + Axyyy [Tyy ] + Axyxy [Txy ] + Axyyx [Txy ]T
[S̄]yx = Ayxxx [Txx ] + Ayxyy [Tyy ] + Ayxxy [Txy ] + Ayxyx [Txy ]T (8.6)
combination and the linear combination factors are

factors 2
Axxxx =(1 + vx,x )(1 + 12 vx,x )C̄xxxx + 12 vx,y C̄xyxy +
( 32 + vx,x )vx,y C̄xxxy
2
Axxyy =(1 + vx,x )(1 + 12 vx,x )C̄xyxy + 12 vx,y C̄yyyy +
( 32 + vx,x )vx,y C̄yyxy
Axxxy =(1 + 12 vx,x )vx,y C̄xyxy + (1 + vx,x ) 12 vx,y C̄xxyy +
2
(1 + vx,x )(1 + 12 vx,x )C̄xxxy + 12 vx,y C̄yyxy
Axxyx =(1 + vx,x ) 12 vx,y C̄xyxy + (1 + 12 vx,x )vx,y C̄xxyy +
2
(1 + vx,x )(1 + 12 vx,x )C̄xxxy + 12 vx,y C̄yyxy (8.7)
2
Ayyxx =(1 + vy,y )(1 + 12 vy,y )C̄xyxy + 12 vy,x C̄xxxx +
( 32 + vy,y )vy,x C̄xxxy
2
Ayyyy =(1 + vy,y )(1 + 12 vy,y )C̄yyyy + 12 vy,x C̄xyxy +
( 32 + vy,y )vy,x C̄yyxy
Ayyxy =(1 + vy,y ) 12 vy,x C̄xyxy + (1 + 12 vy,y )vy,x C̄xxyy +
2
(1 + vy,y )(1 + 12 vy,y )C̄yyxy + 12 vy,x C̄xxxy
Ayyyx =(1 + 12 vy,y )vy,x C̄xyxy + (1 + vy,y ) 12 vy,x C̄xxyy +
2
(1 + vy,y )(1 + 12 vy,y )C̄yyxy + 12 vy,x C̄xxxy (8.8)
Axyxx =(1 + vx,x ) 12 vy,x C̄xxxx + (1 + 12 vy,y )vx,y C̄xyxy +

((1 + vx,x )(1 + 12 vy,y ) + 12 vx,y vy,x )C̄xxxy
Axyyy =(1 + vx,x ) 12 vy,x C̄xyxy + (1 + 12 vy,y )vx,y C̄yyyy +
((1 + vx,x )(1 + 12 vy,y ) + 12 vx,y vy,x )C̄yyxy
Axyxy =(1 + vx,x )(1 + 12 vy,y )C̄xxyy + 12 vx,y vy,x C̄xyxy +
(1 + vx,x ) 12 vy,x C̄xxxy + (1 + 12 vx,x )vy,x C̄yyxy
Axyyx =(1 + vx,x )(1 + 12 vy,y )C̄xyxy + 12 vx,y vy,x C̄xxyy +
(1 + vx,x ) 12 vy,x C̄xxxy + (1 + 12 vx,x )vy,x C̄yyxy (8.9)
Secant stiffness matrices 31
Ayxxx =(1 + 12 vx,x )vy,x C̄xxxx + (1 + vy,y ) 12 vx,y C̄xyxy +

((1 + 12 vx,x )(1 + vy,y ) + 12 vx,y vy,x )C̄xxxy
Ayxyy =(1 + 21 vx,x )vy,x C̄xyxy + (1 + vy,y ) 12 vx,y C̄yyyy +
((1 + 12 vx,x )(1 + vy,y ) + 12 vx,y vy,x )C̄yyxy
Ayxxy =(1 + 12 vx,x )(1 + vy,y )C̄xyxy + 12 vx,y vy,x C̄xxyy +
(1 + 12 vx,x )vy,x C̄xxxy + (1 + vy,y ) 12 vx,y C̄yyxy
Ayxyx =(1 + 12 vx,x )(1 + vy,y )C̄xxyy + 12 vx,y vy,x C̄xyxy +
(1 + 12 vx,x )vy,x C̄xxxy + (1 + vy,y ) 12 vx,y C̄yyxy (8.10)
For orthotropic description (C̄xxxy = C̄yyxy = 0), every second line in (8.7 - 8.10) is
zero. With displacement gradients equal to zero, (8.6) and (8.5) are identical.
8.2 LDRI: the linear combinations

Orthotropic, linear strain elasticity in axisymmetric models involve seven material
parameters with the non-zero secant constitutive components being secant
constitutive
L̄rrrr , L̄zzzz , L̄θθθθ , L̄rrzz , L̄rrθθ , L̄zzθθ , and L̄rzrz (8.11) components
PSfrag replacements
The relations to the basic matrices are for linear strain models
[S̄]rr =L̄rrrr [Trr ] + L̄rzrz [Tzz ] + L̄rrθθ ([T0r ] + [T0r ]T ) + L̄θθθθ [T00 ]
[S̄]zz =L̄rzrz [Trr ] + L̄zzzz [Tzz ] z
[S̄]rz =[S̄]Tzr = L̄rrzz [Trz ] + L̄rzrz [Trz ]T + L̄zzθθ [T0z ] (8.12)
(r̄, z̄)
with the basic matrices listed in (7.5), (7.6), (7.7), (7.11), (7.12) and (7.13). The more
general case with 10 rather independent constitutive components is not treated in the
present note.
r
For orthotropic, non-linear strain elasticity in 3D the seven material parameters
are combined with the current displacement gradients to give the linear combination
factors. The relations are
[S̄]rr =Arrrr [Trr ] + Arrzz [Tzz ] + Arrrz [Trz ] + Arrzr [Trz ]T +

Arr0r [T0r ] + Arrr0 [T0r ]T + Arr0z [T0z ] + Arrz0 [T0z ]T + Arr00 [T00 ]
[S̄]zz =Azzrr [Trr ] + Azzzz [Tzz ] + Azzrz [Trz ] + Azzzr [Trz ]T
[S̄]rz =Arzrr [Trr ] + Arzzz [Tzz ] + Arzrz [Trz ] + Arzzr [Trz ]T +
Arz0r [T0r ] + Arz0z [T0z ]
[S̄]zr =Azrrr [Trr ] + Azrzz [Tzz ] + Azrrz [Trz ] + Azrzr [Trz ]T +
Azrr0 [T0r ]T + Azrz0 [T0z ]T (8.13)
c

factors 2
Arrrr = (1 + vr,r )(1 + 12 vr,r )L̄rrrr + 21 vr,z L̄rzrz
2
Arrzz = (1 + vr,r )(1 + 12 vr,r )L̄rzrz + 21 vr,z L̄zzzz
Arrrz = (1 + 12 vr,r )vr,z L̄rzrz + (1 + vr,r ) 12 vr,z L̄rrzz
Arrzr = (1 + vr,r ) 12 vr,z L̄rzrz + (1 + 12 vr,r )vr,z L̄rrzz
Arr0r = (1 + 12 vr,r )(1 + v̄r,r /r̄)Lrrθθ
Arrr0 = (1 + vr,r )(1 + 21 v̄r,r /r̄)Lrrθθ
Arr0z = (1 + v̄r,r /r̄) 21 vr,z Lzzθθ
Arrz0 = (1 + 12 v̄r,r /r̄)vr,z Lzzθθ
Arr00 = (1 + v̄r,r /r̄)(1 + 12 v̄r,r /r̄)Lθθθθ (8.14)
2
Azzrr = (1 + vz,z )(1 + 12 vz,z )L̄rzrz + 12 vz,r L̄rrrr
2
Azzzz = (1 + vz,z )(1 + 12 vz,z )L̄zzzz + 12 vz,r L̄rzrz
Azzrz = (1 + vz,z ) 12 vz,r L̄rzrz + (1 + 12 vz,z )vz,r L̄rrzz
Azzzr = (1 + 12 vz,z )vz,r L̄rzrz + (1 + vz,z ) 12 vz,r L̄rrzz (8.15)
Arzrr = (1 + vr,r ) 12 vz,r L̄rrrr + (1 + 12 vz,z )vr,z L̄rzrz

Arzzz = (1 + vr,r ) 12 vz,r L̄rzrz + (1 + 12 vz,z )vr,z L̄zzzz
Arzrz = (1 + vr,r )(1 + 12 vz,z )L̄rrzz + 12 vr,z vz,r L̄rzrz
Arzzr = (1 + vr,r )(1 + 12 vz,z )L̄rzrz + 12 vr,z vz,r L̄rrzz
Arz0r = (1 + v̄r,r /r̄) 12 vz,r Lrrθθ
Arz0z = (1 + 21 vz,z )(1 + v̄r,r /r̄)Lzzθθ (8.16)
Azrrr = (1 + 12 vr,r )vz,r L̄rrrr + (1 + vz,z ) 12 vr,z L̄rzrz

Azrzz = (1 + 12 vr,r )vz,r L̄rzrz + (1 + vz,z ) 12 vr,z L̄zzzz
Azrrz = (1 + 12 vr,r )(1 + vz,z )L̄rzrz + 12 vr,z vz,r L̄rrzz
Azrzr = (1 + 12 vr,r )(1 + vz,z )L̄rrzz + 12 vr,z vz,r L̄rzrz
Azrr0 = (1 + 12 v̄r,r /r̄)vz,r Lrrθθ
Azrz0 = (1 + vz,z )(1 + 21 v̄r,r /r̄)Lzzθθ (8.17)
With displacement gradients equal to zero, (8.13) and (8.12) are identical.
8.3 LDTE: the linear combinations

Orthotropic, linear elasticity in 3D involve nine material parameters with the non-
secant zero secant constitutive components being
constitutive
components L̄xxxx , L̄yyyy , L̄zzzz , L̄xxyy , L̄xxzz , L̄yyzz , and L̄xyxy , L̄xzxz , L̄yzyz (8.18)
For the specific case of isotropic elasticity only two parameters are involved, say
L̄xxxx and L̄xxyy
L̄xxxx = L̄yyyy = L̄zzzz , L̄xxyy = L̄xxzz = L̄yyzz , and

L̄xyxy = L̄xzxz = L̄yzyz = 12 (L̄xxxx − L̄xxyy ) (8.19)
Note that for the specific case of L̄xxyy = 13 L̄xxxx (Poisson’s ratio = 0.25), then
L̄xyxy = L̄xxyy and thereby symmetric off diagonal sub-matrices, say [ S̄]Txy = [S̄]xy .
The relations to the basic matrices for the linear strain models are specific
case
[S̄]xx = L̄xxxx [Txx ] + L̄xyxy [Tyy ] + L̄xzxz [Tzz ]
[S̄]yy = L̄xyxy [Txx ] + L̄yyyy [Tyy ] + L̄yzyz [Tzz ]
[S̄]zz = L̄xzxz [Txx ] + L̄yzyz [Tyy ] + L̄zzzz [Tzz ]
[S̄]xy = [S̄]Tyx = L̄xxyy [Txy ] + L̄xyxy [Txy ]T
[S̄]xz = [S̄]Tzx = L̄xxzz [Txz ] + L̄xzxz [Txz ]T
[S̄]yz = [S̄]Tzy = L̄yyzz [Tyz ] + L̄yzyz [Tyz ]T (8.20)
z y
PSfrag replacements
with the basic matrices listed in (7.15), (7.16), (7.17), (7.18), (7.19), and (7.20).
The more general case with 21 rather independent constitutive components is not
x
treated in the present note.
For orthotropic, non-linear strain elasticity in 3D the nine material parameters
are combined with the current displacement gradients to give the linear combination
factors. The relations are
[S̄]xx =Axxxx [Txx ] + Axxyy [Tyy ] + Axxzz [Tzz ]+

Axxxy [Txy ] + Axxyx [Txy ]T +Axxxz [Txz ] + Axxzx [Txz ]T + Axxyz [Tyz ] + Axxzy [Tyz ]T
[S̄]yy =Ayyxx [Txx ] + Ayyyy [Tyy ] + Ayyzz [Tzz ]+
Ayyxy [Txy ] + Ayyyx [Txy ]T +Ayyxz [Txz ] + Ayyzx [Txz ]T + Ayyyz [Tyz ] + Ayyzy [Tyz ]T
[S̄]zz =Azzxx [Txx ] + Azzyy [Tyy ] + Azzzz [Tzz ]+
Azzxy [Txy ] + Azzyx [Txy ]T +Azzxz [Txz ] + Azzzx [Txz ]T + Azzyz [Tyz ] + Azzzy [Tyz ]T
[S̄]xy =Axyxx [Txx ] + Axyyy [Tyy ] + Axyzz [Tzz ]+
Axyxy [Txy ] + Axyyx [Txy ]T +Axyxz [Txz ] + Axyzx [Txz ]T + Axyyz [Tyz ] + Axyzy [Tyz ]T
[S̄]yx =Ayxxx [Txx ] + Ayxyy [Tyy ] + Ayxzz [Tzz ]+
Ayxxy [Txy ] + Ayxyx [Txy ]T +Ayxxz [Txz ] + Ayxzx [Txz ]T + Ayxyz [Tyz ] + Ayxzy [Tyz ]T
[S̄]xz =Axzxx [Txx ] + Axzyy [Tyy ] + Axzzz [Tzz ]+
Axzxy [Txy ] + Axzyx [Txy ]T +Axzxz [Txz ] + Axzzx [Txz ]T + Axzyz [Tyz ] + Axzzy [Tyz ]T
[S̄]zx =Azxxx [Txx ] + Azxyy [Tyy ] + Azxzz [Tzz ]+
Azxxy [Txy ] + Azxyx [Txy ]T +Azxxz [Txz ] + Azxzx [Txz ]T + Azxyz [Tyz ] + Azxzy [Tyz ]T
[S̄]yz =Ayzxx [Txx ] + Ayzyy [Tyy ] + Ayzzz [Tzz ]+
Ayzxy [Txy ] + Ayzyx [Txy ]T +Ayzxz [Txz ] + Ayzzx [Txz ]T + Ayzyz [Tyz ] + Ayzzy [Tyz ]T
[S̄]zy =Azyxx [Txx ] + Azyyy [Tyy ] + Azyzz [Tzz ]+
Azyxy [Txy ] + Azyyx [Txy ]T +Azyxz [Txz ] + Azyzx [Txz ]T + Azyyz [Tyz ] + Azyzy [Tyz ]T
(8.21)
and the involved linear combination factors are combination

factors
c
2 2
Axxxx = (1 + vx,x )(1 + 12 vx,x )L̄xxxx + 12 vx,y L̄xyxy + 12 vx,z L̄xzxz
2 2
Axxyy = (1 + vx,x )(1 + 12 vx,x )L̄xyxy + 12 vx,y L̄yyyy + 12 vx,z L̄yzyz
2 2
Axxzz = (1 + vx,x )(1 + 12 vx,x )L̄xzxz + 21 vx,y L̄yzyz + 21 vx,z L̄zzzz
Axxxy = (1 + 12 vx,x )vx,y L̄xyxy + (1 + vx,x ) 12 vx,y L̄xxyy
Axxyx = (1 + vx,x ) 12 vx,y L̄xyxy + (1 + 12 vx,x )vx,y L̄xxyy
Axxxz = (1 + 12 vx,x )vx,z L̄xzxz + (1 + vx,x ) 12 vx,z L̄xxzz
Axxzx = (1 + vx,x ) 21 vx,z L̄xzxz + (1 + 12 vx,x )vx,z L̄xxzz
Axxyz = Axxzy = 21 vx,y vx,z (L̄yyzz + L̄yzyz ) (8.22)
2 2
Ayyxx = (1 + vy,y )(1 + 12 vy,y )L̄xyxy + 12 vy,x L̄xxxx + 12 vy,z L̄xzxz
2 2
Ayyyy = (1 + vy,y )(1 + 21 vy,y )L̄yyyy + 12 vy,x L̄xyxy + 12 vy,z L̄yzyz
2 2
Ayyzz = (1 + vy,y )(1 + 12 vy,y )L̄yzyz + 12 vy,x L̄xzxz + 21 vy,z L̄zzzz
Ayyxy = (1 + vy,y ) 12 vy,x L̄xyxy + (1 + 12 vy,y )vy,x L̄xxyy
Ayyyx = (1 + 12 vy,y )vy,x L̄xyxy + (1 + vy,y ) 12 vy,x L̄xxyy
Ayyxz = Ayyzx = 12 vy,x vy,z (L̄xxzz + L̄xzxz )
Ayyyz = (1 + 12 vy,y )vy,z L̄yzyz + (1 + vy,y ) 12 vy,z L̄yyzz
Ayyzy = (1 + vy,y ) 12 vy,z L̄yzyz + (1 + 12 vy,y )vy,z L̄yyzz (8.23)
2 2
Azzxx = (1 + vz,z )(1 + 12 vz,z )L̄xzxz + 21 vz,x L̄xxxx + 12 vz,y L̄xyxy
2 2
Azzyy = (1 + vz,z )(1 + 21 vz,z )L̄yzyz + 12 vz,x L̄xyxy + 12 vz,y L̄yyyy
2 2
Azzzz = (1 + vz,z )(1 + 12 vz,z )L̄zzzz + 12 vz,x L̄xzxz + 21 vz,y L̄yzyz
Azzxy = Azzyx = 12 vz,x vz,y (L̄xxyy + L̄xyxy )
Azzxz = (1 + vz,z ) 12 vz,x L̄xzxz + (1 + 12 vz,z )vz,x L̄xxzz
Azzzx = (1 + 21 vz,z )vz,x L̄xzxz + (1 + vz,z ) 12 vz,x L̄xxzz
Azzyz = (1 + vz,z ) 21 vz,y L̄yzyz + (1 + 12 vz,z )vz,y L̄yyzz
Azzzy = (1 + 12 vz,z )vz,y L̄yzyz + (1 + vz,z ) 12 vz,y L̄yyzz (8.24)
Axyxx = (1 + vx,x ) 12 vy,x L̄xxxx + (1 + 12 vy,y )vx,y L̄xyxy + 12 vx,z vy,z L̄xzxz
Axyyy = (1 + vx,x ) 21 vy,x L̄xyxy + (1 + 12 vy,y )vx,y L̄yyyy + 12 vx,z vy,z L̄yzyz
Axyzz = (1 + vx,x ) 12 vy,x L̄xzxz + (1 + 12 vy,y )vx,y L̄yzyz + 12 vx,z vy,z L̄zzzz
Axyxy = (1 + vx,x )(1 + 12 vy,y )L̄xxyy + 12 vx,y vy,x L̄xyxy
Axyyx = (1 + vx,x )(1 + 21 vy,y )L̄xyxy + 21 vx,y vy,x L̄xxyy
Axyxz = (1 + vx,x ) 12 vy,z L̄xxzz + 21 vy,x vx,z L̄xzxz
Axyzx = (1 + vx,x ) 21 vy,z L̄xzxz + 21 vy,x vx,z L̄xxzz
Axyyz = (1 + 21 vy,y )vx,z L̄yzyz + 12 vx,y vy,z L̄yyzz
Axyzy = (1 + 12 vy,y )vx,z L̄yyzz + 12 vx,y vy,z L̄yzyz (8.25)
Ayxxx = (1 + 12 vx,x )vy,x L̄xxxx + (1 + vy,y ) 12 vx,y L̄xyxy + 12 vx,z vy,z L̄xzxz
Ayxyy = (1 + 21 vx,x )vy,x L̄xyxy + (1 + vy,y ) 12 vx,y L̄yyyy + 12 vx,z vy,z L̄yzyz
Ayxzz = (1 + 12 vx,x )vy,x L̄xzxz + (1 + vy,y ) 12 vx,y L̄yzyz + 12 vx,z vy,z L̄zzzz
Ayxxy = (1 + 12 vx,x )(1 + vy,y )L̄xyxy + 12 vx,y vy,x L̄xxyy
Ayxyx = (1 + 12 vx,x )(1 + vy,y )L̄xxyy + 12 vx,y vy,x L̄xyxy
Ayxxz = (1 + 21 vx,x )vy,z L̄xzxz + 21 vy,x vx,z L̄xxzz
Ayxzx = (1 + 21 vx,x )vy,z L̄xxzz + 21 vy,x vx,z L̄xzxz
Ayxyz = (1 + vy,y ) 21 vx,z L̄yyzz + 21 vx,y vy,z L̄yzyz
Ayxzy = (1 + vy,y ) 12 vx,z L̄yzyz + 21 vx,y vy,z L̄yyzz (8.26)
Axzxx = (1 + vx,x ) 12 vz,x L̄xxxx + (1 + 12 vz,z )vx,z L̄xzxz + 21 vx,y vz,y L̄xyxy
Axzyy = (1 + vx,x ) 21 vz,x L̄xyxy + (1 + 12 vz,z )vx,z L̄yzyz + 12 vx,y vz,y L̄yyyy
Axzzz = (1 + vx,x ) 12 vz,x L̄xzxz + (1 + 12 vz,z )vx,z L̄zzzz + 12 vx,y vz,y L̄yzyz
Axzxy = (1 + vx,x ) 12 vz,y L̄xxyy + 12 vx,y vz,x L̄xyxy
Axzyx = (1 + vx,x ) 21 vz,y L̄xyxy + 21 vx,y vz,x L̄xxyy
Axzxz = (1 + vx,x )(1 + 12 vz,z )L̄xxzz + 21 vx,z vz,x L̄xzxz
Axzzx = (1 + vx,x )(1 + 21 vz,z )L̄xzxz + 21 vx,z vz,x L̄xxzz
Axzyz = (1 + 21 vz,z )vx,y L̄yyzz + 12 vx,z vz,y L̄yzyz
Axzzy = (1 + 12 vz,z )vx,y L̄yzyz + 12 vx,z vz,y L̄yyzz (8.27)
Azxxx = (1 + 12 vx,x )vz,x L̄xxxx + (1 + vz,z ) 12 vx,z L̄xzxz + 21 vx,y vz,y L̄xyxy
Azxyy = (1 + 21 vx,x )vz,x L̄xyxy + (1 + vz,z ) 12 vx,z L̄yzyz + 12 vx,y vz,y L̄yyyy
Azxzz = (1 + 12 vx,x )vz,x L̄xzxz + (1 + vz,z ) 12 vx,z L̄zzzz + 12 vx,y vz,y L̄yzyz
Azxxy = (1 + 12 vx,x )vz,y L̄xyxy + 12 vx,y vz,x L̄xxyy
Azxyx = (1 + 12 vx,x )vz,y L̄xxyy + 12 vx,y vz,x L̄xyxy
Azxxz = (1 + 21 vx,x )(1 + vz,z )L̄xzxz + 12 vx,z vz,x L̄xxzz
Azxzx = (1 + 21 vx,x )(1 + vz,z )L̄xxzz + 12 vx,z vz,x L̄xzxz
Azxyz = (1 + vz,z ) 21 vx,y L̄yzyz + 12 vx,z vz,y L̄yyzz
Azxzy = (1 + vz,z ) 12 vx,y L̄yyzz + 12 vx,z vz,y L̄yzyz (8.28)
Ayzxx = (1 + vy,y ) 12 vz,y L̄xyxy + (1 + 12 vz,z )vy,z L̄xzxz + 21 vy,x vz,x L̄xxxx
Ayzyy = (1 + vy,y ) 12 vz,y L̄yyyy + (1 + 12 vz,z )vy,z L̄yzyz + 12 vy,x vz,x L̄xyxy
Ayzzz = (1 + vy,y ) 21 vz,y L̄yzyz + (1 + 12 vz,z )vy,z L̄zzzz + 12 vy,x vz,x L̄xzxz
Ayzxy = (1 + vy,y ) 21 vz,x L̄xyxy + 21 vy,x vz,y L̄xxyy
Ayzyx = (1 + vy,y ) 12 vz,x L̄xxyy + 12 vy,x vz,y L̄xyxy
Ayzxz = (1 + 21 vz,z )vy,x L̄xxzz + 21 vz,x vy,z L̄xzxz
Ayzzx = (1 + 21 vz,z )vy,x L̄xzxz + 21 vz,x vy,z L̄xxzz
Ayzyz = (1 + vy,y )(1 + 21 vz,z )L̄yyzz + 12 vy,z vz,y L̄yzyz
Ayzzy = (1 + vy,y )(1 + 12 vz,z )L̄yzyz + 12 vy,z vz,y L̄yyzz (8.29)
c
Azyxx = (1 + 12 vy,y )vz,y L̄xyxy + (1 + vz,z ) 12 vy,z L̄xzxz + 21 vy,x vz,x L̄xxxx
Azyyy = (1 + 12 vy,y )vz,y L̄yyyy + (1 + vz,z ) 12 vy,z L̄yzyz + 12 vy,x vz,x L̄xyxy
Azyzz = (1 + 21 vy,y )vz,y L̄yzyz + (1 + vz,z ) 12 vy,z L̄zzzz + 21 vy,x vz,x L̄xzxz
Azyxy = (1 + 21 vy,y )vz,x L̄xxyy + 12 vy,x vz,y L̄xyxy
Azyyx = (1 + 21 vy,y )vz,x L̄xyxy + 12 vy,x vz,y L̄xxyy
Azyxz = (1 + vz,z ) 12 vy,x L̄xzxz + 21 vz,x vy,z L̄xxzz
Azyzx = (1 + vz,z ) 21 vy,x L̄xxzz + 21 vz,x vy,z L̄xzxz
Azyyz = (1 + 21 vy,y )(1 + vz,z )L̄yzyz + 12 vy,z vz,y L̄yyzz
Azyzy = (1 + 12 vy,y )(1 + vz,z )L̄yyzz + 12 vy,z vz,y L̄yzyz (8.30)
With displacement gradients equal to zero, (8.21) and (8.20) are identical.
8.4 Summary
• The secant stiffness determines the equilibrium.
• All secant stiffness matrices are expressed as linear combinations of basic ma-
trices.
• For isotropic elasticity, the special case of Poisson’s ration equal to 0.25 give
rice to symmetric off-diagonal secant stiffness sub-matrices.
• In general the secant stiffness matrix is non-symmetric, due to the factor 1

2
from [B̄] 6= [B].
Chapter 9
Stress measures and

material parameters
As is seen especially in this chapter, a number of different notations are applied for
the constitutive matrices, that describes the material elastic properties. different
The different notation [L] for 3D problems and the notation [C] for 2D problems notations
are used to keep in mind that the 2D matrices are not only depending on material
parameters, but also depend on the modeling from 3D to 2D. This is reflected in the
fact that the same material in a plane stress modeling have a different constitutive
matrix than in plane strain modeling. modeling
Constitutive matrices with a bar, [L̄] and [C̄], express the secant relations from 3D
3D : {τ } = [L̄]{η} and 2D : {τ } = [C̄]{η} (9.1)
to 2D
so the bar indicate a kind of ”mean value”. constitutive
Without a bar, [L] and [C], the constitutive matrices relate variational stresses and secant or
strains tangent
3D : {δτ } = [L]{δη} and 2D : {δτ } = [C]{δη} (9.2)
matrix
Note, that the secant relations may not be so easily obtainable, but the present note is remark
restricted to the non-linear elasticity for which [L̄] and [C̄] are analytically expressed.
The above comments relates to Green-Lagrange strains {η} and conjugated stresses
{τ }. For linear strain modeling {} and conjugated Cauchy stress {σ}, the consti-
tutive matrices are in principle different from the above [L] and [C] as discussed in
(Bathe 1996). In the present note this distinction is not applied.
The stress and strain vectors are until chapter 16 defined in the traditional manner
with a factor of 2 on the shear strains. This has a number of bad consequences √
such as non-invariant length of the involved vectors and matrices. The less used 2-
formulation, argued in (Pedersen 1995), keeps the important invariant properties from
tensor analysis that are especially important for rotational transformations. However,
for evaluation of the stiffness matrices it is decided to keep the vector definition that
most readers are familiar with.
37
c
In order to be specific the individual components of [L̄] and [C̄] are given the four
index notation defined in tensor analysis, where the constitutive behavior is exempli-
physical fied by
interpretation
τij = L̄ijkl ηkl (9.3)
with a direct ”physical” interpretation of a specific components L̄ijkl .

A final comment on notation is that a non-dimensional matrix [α] is used to get
a single non-dimensional value for the strain level. So in relation to power law non-
non- linear elasticity, [α] is defined by
dimensional
constitutive [L̄] = E0 [α] (9.4)
matrix where E0 is a chosen reference modulus of elasticity. The matrix [α] thus describes
by non dimensional values the relations between constitutive components, say the
level of non-isotropy.
9.1 LDTR: the three stresses and the 3 × 3 con-

stitutive matrix
The stresses {τ }, needed for the stress stiffness matrix follows from {τ } = [ C̄]{η},
tangent which written out shows the involved material parameters
constitutive
ementscomponents
    
 τrr  C̄xxxx C̄xxyy C̄xxxy  ηrr 
τzz =  C̄xxyy C̄yyyy C̄yyxy  ηzz (9.5)
y 
τrz

C̄xxxy C̄yyxy C̄xyxy

2ηrz

Note, that the constitutive parameters in (9.5) are the secant moduli.
The extension to non-linear material, modeled as non-linear elasticity (reversible)
is possible and not complicated to include in a program. The power-law material
x description with the same constitutive matrix [C̄] = E0 [α] as in (9.5) is given by
p−1
ηef f
{τ } = E0 [α]{η} (9.6)
ηref
The effective strain ηef f is defined by the non-dimensional part [α] of the constitutive
effective matrix [L̄] = E0 [α],
strain
ηef f := {η}T [α]{η} (9.7)
and linear material may be applied for ηef f ≤ ηref , where ηref is a specified ref-
erence value. While the secant constitutive description in (9.6) is rather simple, the
tangential constitutive description for this model is more complicated. Differentials
of (9.6) and of (9.7) give
p−1 !
ηef f 1−p
{dτ } = E0 T
[α] − 2 [α]{η}{η} [α] {dη} (9.8)
ηref ηref
to be used for the tangential stiffness matrix.

Stress measures 39
9.2 LDRI: the four stresses and the 4 × 4 consti-

tutive matrix
The stresses {τ }, needed for the stress stiffness matrix follows from {τ } = [ L̄]{η},
which written out shows the involved material parameters. Assuming that the mate-
rial is orthotropic with r, z, θ as orthotropic directions give PSfrag replacementstangent
constitutive
components
    

 τrr 
 L̄rrrr L̄rrzz L̄rrθθ 0 
 ηrr 

τzz L̄rrzz L̄zzzz L̄zzθθ 0  ηzz
    
=  (9.9) z
τ   L̄rrθθ L̄zzθθ L̄θθθθ 0  η
 θθ   θθ 

  
τrz 0 0 0 L̄rzrz 2ηrz
 
Note, that the constitutive parameters in (9.9) are the secant constitutive moduli. (r̄, z̄)
The extension to non-linear material, modeled as non-linear elasticity (reversible)
is possible and not complicated to include, see the description in section 9.1 for the r
LDTR element.
9.3 LDTE: the six stresses and the 6 × 6 consti-

tutive matrix
The stresses {τ }, needed for the stress stiffness matrix follows from {τ } = [ L̄]{η},
which written out shows the involved material parameters. Assuming that the mate-
rial is orthotropic with x, y, z as orthotropic directions give
    

 τ xx 
 L̄ xxxx L̄ xxyy L̄ xxzz 0 0 0 
 η xx 




 τ yy




 L̄xxyy L̄yyyy L̄yyzz
 0 0 0 



 η yy




τzz L̄ L̄ L̄ 0 0 0 η
    
xxzz yyzz zzzz zz

= 
 τxy 
   0̄ 0 0 L̄xyxy 0 0   2ηxy  
τ 0̄ 0 0 0 L̄ 0 2η
   
xz xzxz xz

 
   
 

   
τyz 0̄ 0 0 0 0 L̄yzyz 2ηyz
   
(9.10)
Note, that the constitutive parameters in (9.10) are the secant constitutive moduli. tangent
The extension to non-linear material, modeled as non-linear elasticity (reversible) constitutive
is possible and not complicated to include, see the description in section 9.1 for the components
LDTR element.
z y
PSfrag replacements
x
c
9.4 Summary
• The symbols for the constitutive matrix in 3D problems and in 2D problems
are different. This reflects the fact that the components in 2D problems are not
purely material parameters, but also include the modeling from 3D to 2D.
• For non-linear material behaviour the secant and tangent behaviors are differ-
ent. This is indicated with a bar over the secant parameters.
• Only power-law elasticity is described in the present note, i.e., reversibility is

assumed.
• For a set of stresses, reference stresses can be evaluated, and separated into
hydrostatic and deviatoric components . Reference stresses may be von Mises
stress or stress energy density. This aspect is treated in chapter 16.
Chapter 10
Newton-Raphson iterations
The method named Newton-Raphson is a general method for solving a non linear
problem like f (x) = 0. Let first f and x be scalar quantities, and a guess at the k th
iteration xk returns the error (residual) f (xk ) 6= 0. Then using the first order derivate
∇f = dx df
, the searched value is updated by method for
(10.1) a scalar
function
f (xk ) + ∇fk · ∆xk = 0 ⇒ xk+1 = xk + ∆xk
If the procedure converges, it normally converges in few iterations. Note that ∇f =
0, or from a numerical point of view close to zero, must be specifically taken care of.
When f and x are vectors {f } and {x}, a gradient matrix [∇f k ] must be inverted,
and a multi variable Newton-Raphson iteration is method for
{xk+1 } = {xk } − [∇fk ]−1 {f (xk )} (10.2)
a vector
{f (xk )} + [∇fk ]{∆xk } = 0 ⇒
function
10.1 Residuals and Newton-Raphson iterations
An element residual {R} is defined from (8.3) element
{R} = [S̄]{D} − {A} (10.3)
residual
and then iteratively update the estimate {D} by {∆D} found from system
residual
{R} + {∆R} = {0} ⇒ {∆R} = −{R} = [S]{∆D} (10.4)
where the total tangent stiffness matrix [S] is symmetric. This update is done on the system
system level (bold matrices), so that the system tangential stiffness matrix and the tangent
system residual vector must be assembled in the usual finite element manner. matrix
To see that each element tangent stiffness matrix [S] is symmetric, the differential
{dR} at the element level is calculated directly from (8.1) (assuming here {A} not
depending on {D}). Two terms result
Z Z
d([S̄]{D}) = T
[dB] {τ }dV + [B]T {dτ }dV (10.5)
The symmetry related to the second term follows from {dτ } = [L]{dη} and (6.5)
[B]T {dτ } = [B]T [L]{dη} = [B]T [L][B]{dD} (10.6)

and as the tangent constitutive relation [L] is symmetric, so is [B]T [L][B].
41
c
10.2 The stress stiffness matrix

The first term on the right hand side of (10.5) is named the stress stiffness matrix,
and a proof of the symmetry of this matrix can be found e.g. in (Crisfield 1991 and
1997). Here the proof is based directly on the symmetry of the matrices [B ij 2 ] for
the individual strain components, but some rearrangements are needed. With [B 0 ]
independent of {D}, then from (6.3)
{dD}T [B112 ]
 
..
.
 
L
(10.7)
 
[dB] = [dB ] = 
 T [B 2 ] 

{dD} ij
..
 
.
and thus with [Bij

2 ]T = [B 2 ] (follows from the definition (6.2)) the transposed matrix
symmetry
ij
is
proved
(10.8)
2 2
[dB]T = [B11

]{dD}, . . . , [Bij ]{dD}, . . .
Post-multiplying [dB]T with {τ } as needed for (10.5), with summation notation,

give
X
[dB]T {τ } = 2
τij [Bij ] {dD} (10.9)
with summation over all the stresses in the vector {τ }.
10.3 Convergence criteria

The relative norms of displacement increment |{∆D}|r and of residual |{R}|r
{∆D}T {∆D} {R}T {R}

|{∆D}|r = and |{R}| r = (10.10)
{D}T {D} {A}T {A}
are used as convergence criteria.

Chapter 11
Tangent stiffness matrices
The tangent stiffness matrices are symmetric and therefore less complicated than the
secant stiffness matrices. The results are in this chapter presented in a version directly
used for programming, similar to the secant stiffness matrices in chapter 8. symmetric
matrix
11.1 LDTR: the linear combinations
General non-isotropic elasticity in 2D involves six material parameters with the tan-
gent components being general
non-
Cxxxx , Cyyyy , Cxxyy , Cxyxy , Cxxxy , and Cyyxy (11.1) isotropic
For linear strain elasticity the tangent stiffness matrix equals the secant stiffness ma-
trix as presented by the sub-matrices in (8.4). With power law non-linear material the
current tangent moduli are applied. The relations to the basic matrices are for linear
strain models linear
strain
= [S]Txxreplacementsmodel
[S]xx = Cxxxx [Txx ] + Cxyxy [Tyy ] + Cxxxy ([Txy ] + [Txy ]T ) PSfrag
[S]yy = Cxyxy [Txx ] + Cyyyy [Tyy ] + Cyyxy ([Txy ] + [Txy ]T = [S]Tyy y
[S]xy = [S]Tyx = Cxxxy [Txx ] + Cyyxy [Tyy ] + Cxxyy [Txy ] + Cxyxy [Txy ]T (11.2)
For general non-isotropic, non-linear strain elasticity in 2D the six current mate-
rial parameters are combined with the current displacement gradients and the current x
stresses to give the linear combination factors. The results are
non-linear
[S]xx = Axxxx [Txx ] + Axxyy [Tyy ] + Axxxy ([Txy ] + [Txy ]T ) = [S]Txx strain
[S]yy = Ayyxx [Txx ] + Ayyyy [Tyy ] + Ayyxy ([Txy ] + [Txy ]T ) = [S]Tyy model
[S]xy = [S]Tyx = Axyxx [Txx ] + Axyyy [Tyy ] + Axyxy [Txy ] + Axyyx [Txy ]T
(11.3)
43
c

factors
Axxxx =(1 + vx,x )2 Cxxxx + vx,y
2
Cxyxy + τxx +
2(1 + vx,x )vx,y Cxxxy
Axxyy =(1 + vx,x )2 Cxyxy + vx,y
2
Cyyyy + τyy +
2(1 + vx,x )vx,y Cyyxy
Axxxy =(1 + vx,x )vx,y (Cxxyy + Cxyxy ) + τxy +
(1 + vx,x )2 Cxxxy + vx,y
2
Cyyxy (11.4)
Ayyxx =(1 + vy,y )2 Cxyxy + vy,x

2
Cxxxx + τxx +
2(1 + vy,y )vy,x Cxxxy
Ayyyy =(1 + vy,y )2 Cyyyy + vy,x
2
Cxyxy + τyy +
2(1 + vy,y )vy,x Cyyxy
Ayyxy =(1 + vy,y )vy,x (Cxxyy + Cxyxy ) + τxy +
(1 + vy,y )2 Cyyxy + vy,x
2
Cxxxy (11.5)
Axyxx =(1 + vx,x )vy,x Cxxxx + (1 + vy,y )vx,y Cxyxy +

((1 + vx,x )(1 + vy,y ) + vx,y vy,x )Cxxxy
Axyyy =(1 + vx,x )vy,x Cxyxy + (1 + vy,y )vx,y Cyyyy +
((1 + vx,x )(1 + vy,y ) + vx,y vy,x )Cyyxy
Axyxy =(1 + vx,x )(1 + vy,y )Cxxyy + vx,y vy,x Cxyxy +
(1 + vx,x )vy,x Cxxxy + (1 + vy,y )vx,y Cyyxy
Axyyx =(1 + vx,x )(1 + vy,y )Cxyxy + vx,y vy,x Cxxyy +
(1 + vx,x )vy,x Cxxxy + (1 + vy,y )vx,y Cyyxy (11.6)
For orthotropic description (Cxxxy = Cyyxy = 0), every second line in (11.4 - 11.6)
is zero. Without displacement gradients and with stresses equal to zero, (11.3) and
(11.2) are identical.
11.2 LDRI: the linear combinations

Orthotropic, linear strain elasticity in axisymmetric models involves seven material
orthotropic parameters with the non-zero tangent constitutive components being
material Lrrrr , Lzzzz , Lθθθθ , Lrrzz , Lrrθθ , Lzzθθ , and Lrzrz (11.7)
For linear strain elasticity the tangent stiffness matrix equals the secant stiffness ma-
trix as presented by sub-matrices in (8.12). However, with power law non-linear
material the current tangent moduli are applied. The relations to the basic matrices
linear are for linear strain models
strain
model [S]rr =Lrrrr [Trr ] + Lrzrz [Tzz ] + Lrrθθ ([T0r ] + [T0r ]T ) + Lθθθθ [T00 ] = [S]Trr
[S]zz =Lrzrz [Trr ] + Lzzzz [Tzz ] = [S]Tzz
[S]rz =[S]Tzr = Lrrzz [Trz ] + Lrzrz [Trz ]T + Lzzθθ [T0z ] (11.8)
PSfrag replacements
Tangent stiffness matrices 45
z
The more general case with 10 rather independent constitutive components is not
treated in the present note.
For orthotropic non-linear strain elasticity, the seven current material parameters (r̄, z̄)
are combined with the current displacement gradients and the current stresses to give
the linear combination factors. The relations are
r
T
[S]rr =Arrrr [Trr ] + Arrzz [Tzz ] + Arrrz ([Trz ] + [Trz ] )+
Arr0r ([T0r ] + [T0r ]T ) + Arr0z ([T0z ] + [T0z ]T ) + Arr00 [T00 ] = [S]Trr
[S]zz =Azzrr [Trr ] + Azzzz [Tzz ] + Azzrz ([Trz ] + [Trz ]T ) = [S]Tzz
[S]rz =[S]Tzr = Arzrr [Trr ] + Arzzz [Tzz ]+
Arzrz [Trz ] + Arzzr [Trz ]T + Arz0r [T0r ] + Arz0z [T0z ] (11.9)
and the linear combination factors are non-linear

strain
Arrrr = (1 + vr,r )2 Lrrrr + vr,z model
2
Lrzrz + τrr
Arrzz = (1 + vr,r )2 Lrzrz + vr,z
2
Lzzzz + τzz
Arrrz = (1 + vr,r )vr,z (Lrrzz + Lrzrz ) + τrz
Arr0r = (1 + vr,r )(1 + v̄r,r /r̄)Lrrθθ
Arr0z = (1 + v̄r,r /r̄)vr,z Lzzθθ
Arr00 = (1 + v̄r,r /r̄)2 Lθθθθ + τθθ (11.10)
combination
factors
Azzrr = (1 + vz,z )2 Lrzrz + vz,r
2
Lrrrr + τrr
Azzzz = (1 + vz,z )2 Lzzzz + vz,r
2
Lrzrz + τzz
Azzrz = (1 + vz,z )vz,r (Lrzrz + Lrrzz ) + τrz (11.11)
Arzrr = (1 + vr,r )vz,r Lrrrr + (1 + vz,z )vr,z Lrzrz

Arzzz = (1 + vr,r )vz,r Lrzrz + (1 + vz,z )vr,z Lzzzz
Arzrz = (1 + vr,r )(1 + vz,z )Lrrzz + vr,z vz,r Lrzrz
Arzzr = (1 + vr,r )(1 + vz,z )Lrzrz + vr,z vz,r Lrrzz
Arz0r = (1 + v̄r,r /r̄)vz,r Lrrθθ
Arz0z = (1 + vz,z )(1 + v̄r,r /r̄)Lzzθθ (11.12)
Without displacement gradients and with stresses equal to zero, (11.9) and (11.8) are
identical.
11.3 LDTE: the linear combinations

Orthotropic, linear strain elasticity in 3D involves nine material parameters with the
non-zero tangent constitutive components being
Lxxxx , Lyyyy , Lzzzz , Lxxyy , Lxxzz , Lyyzz , and Lxyxy , Lxzxz , Lyzyz (11.13)
For linear strain elasticity the tangent stiffness equals the secant stiffness matrix as
presented by sub-matrices in (8.20). However, with power law non-linear material
c
the current tangent moduli are applied. The relations to the basic matrices are for
linear strain models
[S]xx = Lxxxx [Txx ] + Lxyxy [Tyy ] + Lxzxz [Tzz ] = [S]Txx
[S]yy = Lxyxy [Txx ] + Lyyyy [Tyy ] + Lyzyz [Tzz ] = [S]Tyy
[S]zz = Lxzxz [Txx ] + Lyzyz [Tyy ] + Lzzzz [Tzz ] = [S]Tzz
[S]xy = [S]Tyx = Lxxyy [Txy ] + Lxyxy [Txy ]T
[S]xz = [S]Tzx = Lxxzz [Txz ] + Lxzxz [Txz ]T
[S]yz = [S]Tzy = Lyyzz [Tyz ] + Lyzyz [Tyz ]T (11.14)
linear The more general case with 21 rather independent constitutive components is not
strain treated in the present note.
model For orthotropic, non-linear strain elasticity in 3D the nine current material param-
z eters are combined with the current displacement gradients and the current stresses
y
ements to give the linear combination factors.
[S]xx =Axxxx [Txx ] + Axxyy [Tyy ] + Axxzz [Tzz ]+
Axxxy ([Txy ] + [Txy ]T )+Axxxz ([Txz ] + [Txz ]T ) + Axxyz ([Tyz ] + [Tyz ]T ) = [S]Txx
x
[S]yy =Ayyxx [Txx ] + Ayyyy [Tyy ] + Ayyzz [Tzz ]+
non-linear Ayyxy ([Txy ] + [Txy ]T )+Ayyxz ([Txz ] + [Txz ]T ) + Ayyyz ([Tyz ] + [Tyz ]T ) = [S]Tyy
strain
model [S]zz =Azzxx [Txx ] + Azzyy [Tyy ] + Azzzz [Tzz ]+
Azzxy ([Txy ] + [Txy ]T )+Azzxz ([Txz ] + [Txz ]T ) + Azzyz ([Tyz ] + [Tyz ]T ) = [S]Tzz
[S]xy =[S]Tyx = Axyxx [Txx ] + Axyyy [Tyy ] + Axyzz [Tzz ]+
Axyxy [Txy ] + Axyyx [Txy ]T +Axyxz [Txz ] + Axyzx [Txz ]T + Axxyz [Tyz ] + Axyzy [Tyz ]T
[S]xz =[S]Tzx = Axzxx [Txx ] + Axzyy [Tyy ] + Axzzz [Tzz ]+
Axzxy [Txy ] + Axzyx [Txy ]T +Axzxz [Txz ] + Axzzx [Txz ]T + Axzyz [Tyz ] + Axzzy [Tyz ]T
[S]yz =[S]Tzy = Ayzxx [Txx ] + Ayzyy [Tyy ] + Ayzzz [Tzz ]+
Ayzxy [Txy ] + Ayzyx [Txy ]T +Ayzxz [Txz ] + Ayzzx [Txz ]T + Ayzyz [Tyz ] + Ayzzy [Tyz ]T
(11.15)
factors Axxxx = (1 + vx,x )2 Lxxxx + vx,y
2 2
Lxyxy + vx,z Lxzxz + τxx
Axxyy = (1 + vx,x )2 Lxyxy + vx,y
2 2
Lyyyy + vx,z Lyzyz + τyy
Axxzz = (1 + vx,x )2 Lxzxz + vx,y
2 2
Lyzyz + vx,z Lzzzz + τzz
Axxxy = (1 + vx,x )vx,y (Lxxyy + Lxyxy ) + τxy
Axxxz = (1 + vx,x )vx,z (Lxxzz + Lxzxz ) + τxz
Axxyz = vx,y vx,z (Lyyzz + Lyzyz ) + τyz (11.16)
Ayyxx = (1 + vy,y )2 Lxyxy + vy,x

2 2
Lxxxx + vy,z Lxzxz + τxx
Ayyyy = (1 + vy,y )2 Lyyyy + vy,x
2 2
Lxyxy + vy,z Lyzyz + τyy
Ayyzz = (1 + vy,y )2 Lyzyz + vy,x
2 2
Lxzxz + vy,z Lzzzz + τzz
Ayyxy = (1 + vy,y )vy,x (Lxxyy + Lxyxy ) + τxy
Ayyxz = vy,x vy,z (Lxxzz + Lxzxz ) + τxz
Ayyyz = (1 + vy,y )vy,z (Lyyzz + Lyzyz ) + τyz (11.17)
Tangent stiffness matrices 47
Azzxx = (1 + vz,z )2 Lxzxz + vz,x

2 2
Lxxxx + vz,y Lxyxy + τxx
Azzyy = (1 + vz,z )2 Lyzyz + vz,x
2 2
Lxyxy + vz,y Lyyyy + τyy
Azzzz = (1 + vz,z )2 Lzzzz + vz,x
2 2
Lxzxz + vz,y Lyzyz + τzz
Azzxy = vz,x vz,y (Lxxyy + Lxyxy ) + τxy
Azzxz = (1 + vz,z )vz,x (Lxxzz + Lxzxz ) + τxz
Azzyz = (1 + vz,z )vz,y (Lyyzz + Lyzyz ) + τyz (11.18)
Axyxx = (1 + vx,x )vy,x Lxxxx + (1 + vy,y )vx,y Lxyxy + vx,z vy,z Lxzxz
Axyyy = (1 + vx,x )vy,x Lxyxy + (1 + vy,y )vx,y Lyyyy + vx,z vy,z Lyzyz
Axyzz = (1 + vx,x )vy,x Lxzxz + (1 + vy,y )vx,y Lyzyz + vx,z vy,z Lzzzz
Axyxy = (1 + vx,x )(1 + vy,y )Lxxyy + vx,y vy,x Lxyxy
Axyyx = (1 + vx,x )(1 + vy,y )Lxyxy + vx,y vy,x Lxxyy
Axyxz = (1 + vx,x )vy,z Lxxzz + vy,x vx,z Lxzxz
Axyzx = (1 + vx,x )vy,z Lxzxz + vy,x vx,z Lxxzz
Axyyz = (1 + vy,y )vx,z Lyzyz + vx,y vy,z Lyyzz
Axyzy = (1 + vy,y )vx,z Lyyzz + vx,y vy,z Lyzyz (11.19)
Axzxx = (1 + vx,x )vz,x Lxxxx + (1 + vz,z )vx,z Lxzxz + vx,y vz,y Lxyxy
Axzyy = (1 + vx,x )vz,x Lxyxy + (1 + vz,z )vx,z Lyzyz + vx,y vz,y Lyyyy
Axzzz = (1 + vx,x )vz,x Lxzxz + (1 + vz,z )vx,z Lzzzz + vx,y vz,y Lyzyz
Axzxy = (1 + vx,x )vz,y Lxxyy + vx,y vz,x Lxyxy
Axzyx = (1 + vx,x )vz,y Lxyxy + vx,y vz,x Lxxyy
Axzxz = (1 + vx,x )(1 + vz,z )Lxxzz + vx,z vz,x Lxzxz
Axzzx = (1 + vx,x )(1 + vz,z )Lxzxz + vx,z vz,x Lxxzz
Axzyz = (1 + vz,z )vx,y Lyyzz + vx,z vz,y Lyzyz
Axzzy = (1 + vz,z )vx,y Lyzyz + vx,z vz,y Lyyzz (11.20)
Ayzxx = (1 + vy,y )vz,y Lxyxy + (1 + vz,z )vy,z Lxzxz + vy,x vz,x Lxxxx
Ayzyy = (1 + vy,y )vz,y Lyyyy + (1 + vz,z )vy,z Lyzyz + vy,x vz,x Lxyxy
Ayzzz = (1 + vy,y )vz,y Lyzyz + (1 + vz,z )vy,z Lzzzz + vy,x vz,x Lxzxz
Ayzxy = (1 + vy,y )vz,x Lxyxy + vy,x vz,y Lxxyy
Ayzyx = (1 + vy,y )vz,x Lxxyy + vy,x vz,y Lxyxy
Ayzxz = (1 + vz,z )vy,x Lxxzz + vz,x vy,z Lxzxz
Ayzzx = (1 + vz,z )vy,x Lxzxz + vz,x vy,z Lxxzz
Ayzyz = (1 + vy,y )(1 + vz,z )Lyyzz + vy,z vz,y Lyzyz
Ayzzy = (1 + vy,y )(1 + vz,z )Lyzyz + vy,z vz,y Lyyzz (11.21)
Without displacement gradients and with stresses equal to zero, (11.15) and (11.14)
are identical.
c
11.4 Summary
• For linear strain models with linear elasticity, the secant stiffness matrix equals
the tangent stiffness matrix
• all element tangent stiffnesses are expressed linearly in the element basic ma-
trices
• the linear combination factors include the current displacement gradients, the
current material parameters and the current stresses
• the tangent stiffness matrix is proved symmetric
• for non-linear problems the difference between two neighbouring secant stiff-
ness matrices may be used to test the tangent stiffness matrix
Chapter 12
Equivalent nodal loads
The application of the virtual work principle in (8.1) is based on only nodal exter-
nal loads {A}. If external volume forces pi in direction i are also actual then the
following must be added to the external virtual work
Z Z
δvi pi dV = {δD}T [K]−T {H}pi dV (12.1)
where δvi = {δD}T [K]−T {H} = {H}T [K]−1 {δD} follows from the displacement
assumption (3.3).
To the general equilibrium (8.3), the following equivalent nodal forces in direc-
tion i are added equivalent
Z nodal forces
{Ap }i = [K] −T
{H}pi dV (12.2)
Forces derived from (12.2) are consistent with virtual work principle in the sense that consistent
the work of these forces equals the work of the distributed volume forces. Surface surface
traction’s and line loads can be treated as special cases with integration over area and traction,
line as alternative to the volume integration in (12.2). line loads
In (12.2) the field of volume forces pi is arbitrary, but it is natural to restrict the
complexity of the external volume force field to that of the assumed displacement
field. Thus the present note restrict to linear variations linear
variations
pi = {H}T {Q}i (12.3)
where the vector of constants {Q}i specifies the force field in direction i. With
the vector of displacement assumptions {H} being non-dimensional, the distribution
vector {Q}i has dimensions of force per volume. Let for the plane LDTR element
{Q}Ti be {Q1 Q2 Q3 }i ; then the magnitude of constant volume force in direction i is
Q1 , while Q2 is the magnitude related to linear variation in x-direction and Q 3 is the
magnitude related to linear variation in y-direction. The mutual relations between normali-
Q1, Q2 , Q3 are normalized so that only Q1 gives volume force at the first node of the zation
triangular element.
Inserting (12.3) in (12.2) give
Z
{Ap }i = [K] −T
{H}{H}T dV {Q}i = [P ]{Q}i (12.4)
49
c
distribution with the equivalent load distribution matrix [P ] defined by:

matrix Z
[P ] := [K] −T
{H}{H}T dV (12.5)
Note that the matrix product [P ][K]−1 is similar to a basic matrix. In chapter 13,
for constant mass density ρ, the mass matrix is determined from [M ] = ρ[P ][K] −1 .
The resulting mass matrices are more simple than the load matrices, and therefore
evaluate the equivalent load matrices as
[P ] = [M ][K]/ρ (12.6)
ements
12.1 LDTR: the load matrix
y The mass matrix in (13.4) and the configuration matrix in (3.5) inserted in (12.6) give
p3
 
4h p2 + p3 p4 + p5
1 
p5 [P ] = 4h 2p2 + p3 2p4 + p5  V (12.7)
12h
p4 4h p 2 + 2p 3 p 4 + 2p 5
p2 x With {Q} V having dimension of force, the non-dimensional part of (12.7) shows
i
that constant volume forces are distributed equally to the three FE nodes. The dis-
tribution of forces linearly varying in the x-direction only depends on the relative
x-coordinates p2 and p3 , and similarly the distribution of forces linearly varying in
the y-direction only depends on the relative y-coordinates p 4 and p5 .
ements
12.2 LDRI: the load matrix
The mass matrix in (13.5) and the configuration matrix in (3.10) inserted in (12.6)
z p3 give
 
4h 4p1 + p2 + p3 p4 + p5
1 
p5 (r̄, z̄) [P ] = 4h 4p1 + 2p2 + p3 2p4 + p5  V (12.8)
12h
p4 4h 4p1 + p2 + 2p3 p4 + 2p5
p1 p2 rAs for the LDTR element, note from the non-dimensional part of (12.8) that constant
volume forces are distributed equally to the three FE nodes. The distribution of forces
linearly varying in the r-direction only depends on the relative r-coordinates p 1 , p2
and p3 , and similarly the distribution of forces linearly varying in the z-direction only
depends on the relative z-coordinates p4 and p5 . When p1 is large (relative to p2 , p3 ),
then the forces linearly varying in the r-direction are distributed almost equally to the
three FE nodes.
Equivalent nodal loads 51
12.3 LDTE: the load matrix

The mass matrix in (13.6) and the configuration matrix in (3.15) inserted in (12.6)
give
 
5h p1 + p4 + p7 p2 + p5 + p8 p3 + p6 + p9
1 
 5h 2p1 + p4 + p7 2p2 + p5 + p8 2p3 + p6 + p9  V (12.9)

[P ] =
20h 5h p1 + 2p4 + p7 p2 + 2p5 + p8 p3 + 2p6 + p9 

5h p1 + p4 + 2p7 p2 + p5 + 2p8 p3 + p6 + 2p9
In principle a similar result as for the LDTR element. The non-dimensional part of
(12.9) shows that constant volume forces are distributed equally to the four FE nodes.
z y
The distribution of forces linearly varying in the x-direction only depends on the rel-
PSfrag replacements
ative x-coordinates p1 , p4 and p7 , similarly the distribution of forces linearly varying
in the y-direction only depends on the relative y-coordinates p 2 , p5 and p8 , and simi-
larly the distribution of forces linearly varying in the z-direction only depends on the
x
relative z-coordinates p3 , p6 and p9 .
12.4 Summary
• Equivalent nodal forces corresponding to volume forces are presented in terms
of distribution matrices.
• Consistent area, line, and point loads can be derived analogously.
• With inertia forces being specific volume forces, close relation exist between
a distribution matrix [P ] and the corresponding mass matrix [M ].
• The mass matrices are more simple than the distribution matrices, and thus are
the background for the evaluation [P ] = [M ][K]/ρ, valid for constant mass
density ρ.
• The distribution matrix enable a direct physical interpretation of a nodal force

distribution.
c
Chapter 13
Consistent mass matrices
The d’Alembert principle converts dynamics to statics by including volume forces d’Alembert
from inertia. In direction i these forces pi are principle
pi = −(−ρω 2 vi ) = ω 2 ρ{H}T K]−1 {D}i (13.1)
where ρ is the mass density, ω 2 the squared angular eigenfrequency, (−ω 2 vi ) the ac-
celeration amplitude in direction i. The displacement vi for the FE model is expressed
in nodal displacement amplitudes {D}i using (3.3). consistent
Inserting (13.1) in (12.2) give the nodal loads in direction i, consistent equivalent inertia
to inertia
Z
2
{Ainertia }i = ω [K] −T
ρ{H}{H}T dV [K]−1 {D}i = ω 2 [M ]{D}i (13.2)
by which the consistent mass matrix is defined

Z
[M ] := [K] −T
ρ{H}{H}T dV [K]−1 (13.3)
and this matrix is similar to a basic matrix when the mass density ρ is assumed con-
stant.
For the three elements in this note, the mass matrices are simple. The full deriva-
tion, including formula for integration over triangular area and tetrahedral volume, no
is given in (Pedersen 1984) and for the LDTE element in (Pedersen 1977). There is direction
no coupling between the two or three directions, so the same mass matrices act in all coupling
directions in the same manner.
13.1 LDTR: the mass matrix

The mass matrix [M ] is the same in both directions (and in allPSfrag replacements
directions), and in a
specific direction therefore of order three y
 
2 1 1
ρta 
[M ] = 1 2 1  (13.4)
12
1 1 2
where ρ is the constant mass density, t the constant element thickness, and a the
x
triangular area given by (2.1). The element total mass is ρta.
53
c
ements
13.2 LDRI: the mass matrix
approxi- For integration in the circumferentially direction the midpoint radial coordinate r̄ is
mation used, and with this approximation the ”same” mass matrix as for the LDTR element,
z with the result for both axial and radial direction being
 
2 1 1
ρ2πr̄a 
(r̄, z̄) [M ] = 1 2 1  (13.5)
12
1 1 2
rwhere ρ is the constant mass density, r̄ the radial coordinate for the cross sectional
triangular center, and a the triangular area given by (2.1). The element total mass for
the ring-element is approximated to ρ2πr̄a.
13.3 LDTE: the mass matrix

The mass matrix is the same in all three directions (and in all directions), and in a
specific direction therefore of order four
 
z 2 1 1 1
y
ements [M ] =
ρV  1 2 1 1 
 (13.6)
20  1 1 2 1 
1 1 1 2
x
where ρ is the constant mass density, V the element volume given by (2.4). The
element total mass is ρV
13.4 Summary
positive • The presented mass matrices are consistent with virtual work principle.
definite • The mass matrices are symmetric and positive definite.
• The eigenvalues of the non-dimensional part of the mass matrices (13.4) and
(13.5) are 4, 1, 1. The eigenvalues of the non-dimensional part of the mass
total matrix (13.6) are 5, 1, 1, 1.
element
mass • For each of the mass matrices, the sum of all the matrix components equals
the total mass of the element.
Chapter 14
Energy densities
For non-linear strain models {η}, {δη} are the vectors of strain and variational strain,
and {τ }, {δτ } are the vectors of conjugated stress and conjugated variational stress.
For linear strain models {}, {δ} are the vectors of strain and variational strain, and
{σ}, {δσ} are the vectors of conjugated stress and conjugated variational stress. In linear strain
this chapter it is chosen to describe energy densities by the linear strain notation, but notation
an identical description follows for non-linear strain notation.
14.1 Strain and stress energy densities

With {}, {δ} being the vectors of strain and variational strain, and {σ}, {δσ} being
the vectors of conjugated stress and conjugated variational stress; then the variational
strain energy density δu is defined by strain
energy
density
Z {}
T
δu = {σ} {δ} ⇒ u = {σ}T {d˜ } (14.1)
0
and thus having the same dimension as stress. The tilde ˜ indicate the difference
between integration variable {˜} and final strain state {}, i.e., the stress function is
{σ} = {σ({˜ })}. The strain energy density is a function of strain, and from the strain
energy density function u stress is obtained by differentiation
du
{σ} = = {σ({})} = [L̄]{} (14.2)
{d}
and by its definition then the secant modulus [L̄]. stress
The variational stress energy density δuσ is defined by energy
Z {σ} density
δuσ = {δσ}T {} ⇒ uσ = {}T {dσ̃} (14.3)
0
The stress energy density is a function of stress and from the stress energy density
function uσ , and the secant compliance relation [L̄]−1 is obtained by differentiation
duσ
{} = = {({σ})} = [L̄]−1 {σ} (14.4)
{dσ}
Together the definitions of variational strain energy density and variational stress
energy density gives
δ({σ}T {}) = δu + δuσ (14.5)
55
c
and with integration from zero elastic energy density to final state follows
u + uσ = {σ}T {} (14.6)
For a one dimensional case Figure 14.1 illustrates the definitions (14.1) and (14.3)
by areas, and the relation (14.6) is also directly recognized.
uσ
PSfrag replacements
u

Figure 14.1: Illustration of strain energy density u (14.1) and of stress energy density uσ
(14.3) by areas.

1D non-linear elasticity
power law
elasticity The analysis is restricted to power law non-linear analysis, because for this model
analytical explicit expressions for the constitutive matrices are obtained.
Although the general case of 3D anisotropic behaviour is described for this non-
linearity, at first a 1D model is treated. The model of power law non-linear elasticity
for a 1D model in terms of σ = σ() is
p−1
σ = Ẽp or more general σ = | | E0 for ≥ 0 (14.7)
0
with the positive material parameters E0 , p and the limit of linearity 0 measured in
strain or in stress by σ0 . The material modulus for linear elasticity is E0 and thus
σ0 = E0 0 . Figure 14.2 shows the drastic influence of the power p in the possible
range 0 < p ≤ 1.
Energy densities 57
σ p
E0
= p−1
0
0.4
0.35
p = 1.0
p = 0.9
0.3
PSfrag replacements p = 0.8
0.25 p = 0.6
p = 0.4
0.2 p = 0.2
p = 0.1
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
0
Figure 14.2: Illustration of the influence from power p in the applied power law non linear
elasticity. For strains smaller than the limiting strain 0 a linear behavior is assumed.
For convenience, here > 0 is assumed, and it follows that the secant modulus secant and
Es and the tangent modulus Et are tangent
σ modulus
Es := = Ẽp−1

dσ
Et := = pẼp−1 = pEs (14.8)
d
Figure 14.3 illustrates the definition of the Et modulus by the tangent at an actual
(, σ) value, and the Es modulus at the same point by the slope from the origin to the
(, σ) value.
Et
actual (, σ)
PSfrag replacements
Es
Figure 14.3: Illustration of the secant modulus Es and the tangent modulus Et .
c
Inserting (14.7) in (14.1), the strain energy density for this material model is
obtained
Z
1
u = Ẽ ˜p d˜
= Ẽp+1 (14.9)
0 p+1
and from (14.6) with (14.9) get

p
u + uσ = σ = Ẽp+1 ⇒ uσ = Ẽp+1 (14.10)
p+1
proportional
The simple proportional relation
relation
uσ = pu (14.11)
between stress energy density and strain energy density often simplifies analysis (and
especially sensitivity analysis for optimal design) to a large extent and give rise to
a number of important general results. However, it should be kept in mind that the
power law non-linear elasticity is a restrictive model.

2D and 3D non-linear elasticity
effective
strain/stress Extension to 2D and 3D models is not trivial, and the definitions of effective strain
and of effective stress must be chosen appropriately. In matrix notation the differen-
tial strain energy density du is similar to the variation in (14.1)
du = {σ}T {d} (14.12)
In analogy with (14.7) the constitutive secant modulus is

p−1 p−1
e e
{σ} = E0 [α]{} ⇒ {σ} = [L̄]{} with [L̄] = E0 [α]
0 0
(14.13)
assuming linear elasticity for e ≤ 0 , and with the non-dimensional and constant
constitutive matrix [α] describing the relative moduli (isotropy as well as non-isotropy). The
secant reference strain is 0 (say the yield strain) and the corresponding reference modulus
modulus E0 . It follows from (14.13) that at the reference strain 0 , the scalar secant modulus
is independent of the power p. The fact that the matrix [α] is constant means that the
non-isotropic relations are unchanged, only the stiffness magnitude changes through
the factor ep−1 .
Inserting (14.13) in (14.12), with [α] being symmetric, give
p−1
e
du = E0 {}T [α]{d} (14.14)
0
and the effective strain e must be defined so that {}T [α]{d} can be integrated.
From the energy related definition
2e := {}T [α]{} (14.15)

Energy densities 59
follows by differentiation with [α] constant and symmetric
2e de = 2{}T [α]{d} (14.16)
and thus inserted in (14.14) the one dimensional result
E0 E0
du = pe de = Ẽpe de with Ẽ = (14.17)
0p−1 0p−1
which is integrated to obtain the relations proved for the 1D case, i.e.,
1
u = Ẽp+1 and uσ = pu (14.18)
p+1 e
constitutive
The constitutive tangent modulus is obtained by differentiating (14.13) to get,
with the use of (14.16),
tangent
modulus
p−1
e 1−p
{dσ} = E0 [α] [I] − 2 {}{}T [α] {d} = [L]{d} (14.19)
0 e
or alternatively written for the constitutive tangent modulus

p−1
e 1−p
[L] = E0 [α] − 2 {ζ}{ζ}T with {ζ} = [α]{} (14.20)
0 e
showing the influence of the dyadic product {ζ}{ζ}T .

Figure 14.4 shows the factor (e /0 )p−1 , that by the displacement iterations is
determined for each element. It follows from Figure 14.4 that domains close to e =
0 are most sensitive.
p−1
e
0
0.8
p = 0.9
Sfrag replacements p = 0.8

0.6
0.4 p = 0.6
p = 0.4
0.2
p = 0.2
p = 0.1 e
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
Figure 14.4: Illustration of the stiffness factor (e /0 )p−1 as function of the effective strain
e .
c
14.4 Summary
• The notations u for strain energy density and uσ for stress energy density are
chosen as alternative to the use of complementary energy density in order to
focus on the relational dependence.
• The sum of these energy densities is u and only for linear elasticity is u = uσ
= 12 (u + uσ ) = 12 u.
• Even for all non linear elasticity is u = u + uσ .
• For power law non linear elasticity with power p is uσ = pu , and secant as
well as tangent constitutive matrices are analytical available.
• Note the misprint in the references (Pedersen 2005a), (Pedersen 2005b), and
(Pedersen 2006a), where in formulas corresponding to 14.19 the denominator
2 and should be η 2 , as here and
2e for Green-Lagrange strains is written ηref ef f
in an earlier reference (Pedersen and Taylor 1993).
Chapter 15
Potential relations
This chapter shows some important potential relations and then the sensitivity analy-
sis directly in energy terms, for linear as well as for non-linear power law elasticity.
These results are often used as a basis for other problems. For detail on the results
in this chapter see (Pedersen 1998) and (Masur 1970). Although not new, results like
(15.10) and (15.14) are not so well known, and not intuitively understandable, even not well
for the case of linear elasticity (p = 1). For optimal design these results give rise to known
important simplifications.
15.1 Definitions, relations and sensitivities

The general equation of energy equilibrium is energy
equilibrium
U + Uσ + Uext = 0 (15.1)
with elastic strain energy U and elastic stress energy Uσ (elastic complementary en-
ergy) from the corresponding densities u , uσ integrated over the structure/continuum
volume V internal
Z Z potentials
U = u dV and Uσ = uσ dV (15.2)
and the external potential Uext is defined by external

Z Z potential
Uext := −( Ti vi dA + pi vi dV ) (15.3)
with surface traction’s Ti , volume forces pi , corresponding displacements vi , and

area A surrounding the volume V . The surface traction’s and the volume forces are
assumed to be given. The displacements vi (displacement field) with resulting strains,
stresses and energy densities are the solution for a given design, i.e. the solution for
a given static problem of elasticity. assumed
For power law elastic materials resulting in the density relation u σ = pu ev- power law
erywhere in the continuum or structure, give in total Uσ = pU and the equilibrium elasticity
(15.1) is then simplified to
(1 + p)U = −Uext (15.4)
with 0 < p ≤ 1 being a material power law constant.
61
c
15.1.1 Relations with power law elasticity

Defining the total potential Π and the total complementary potential Π C by
Π := U + Uext = −ΠC (15.5)
total using Π + ΠC = 0, give from (15.4) the relations

potentials p
Π = −pU = −Uσ = Uext = −ΠC (15.6)
1+p
potential and by p > 0 and U > 0 get Uσ > 0, ΠC > 0, Π < 0 and Uext < 0. From
relations this follows that design for a number of differently stated extremum problems are
equivalent and that their values at the extrema are related as
p
max Π = −min ΠC = −min pU = −min Uσ = max Uext (15.7)
1+p
with p = 1 for the specific case of linear elasticity.
15.1.2 Derivatives of elastic potentials

The derivative of the total potential Π with respect to an arbitrary parameter, say a
design parameter h, is
dΠ/dh = (∂Π/∂h)f ixed strains + (∂Π/∂) (d/dh) = (∂Π/∂h)f ixed strains

(15.8)
because of stationary total potential ∂Π/∂ = 0 (virtual work principle) with respect
to kinematically admissible strain variations.
For design-independent external loads, (∂Uext /∂h)f ixed strains = 0, the defini-
design tion (15.4) gives
independent
(15.9)
loads (∂Π/∂h)f ixed strains = (∂U /∂h)f ixed strains
and then from (15.6), (15.8) and (15.9) get the result that is frequently used in design
optimization
1
dU /dh = − (∂U /∂h)f ixed strains (15.10)
p
local
design For a local design parameter he that only changes the design in the region e of
parameter the structure/continuum this gives the possibility of a localized determination of the
sensitivity for the total elastic strain energy
1
dU /dhe = − (∂((ū )e Ve )/∂he )f ixed strains (15.11)
p
where (ū )e is the mean strain energy density in the region of he and where Ve is
the corresponding volume. Note that the only difference between linear (p = 1) and
non-linear material is the factor 1/p, and for a condition on stationarity dU /dhe = 0,
remark p has no influence.
Note, that the sensitivity is not physically localized, but still without approxima-
tion it is possible to determine the sensitivity localized.
Potential relations 63
For the complementary potentials even more simple results are available
dΠC /dh = ∂ΠC /∂h f ixed stresses + ∂ΠC /∂σ (dσ/dh) = ∂ΠC /∂h f ixed stresses

(15.12)
because of stationary total complementary potential ∂ΠC /∂σ = 0 (complementary

virtual work principle) with respect to statically admissible stress variations. From
Uσ = ΠC then follows
dUσ /dh = (∂Uσ /∂h)f ixed stresses (15.13)
which with the relation p(dU /dh) = (dUσ /h) and (15.13), (15.10) gives
(∂Uσ /∂h)f ixed stresses = − (∂U /∂h)f ixed strains (15.14)
valid also for p 6= 1. Formula (15.14) can also be found in the optimal design paper
by (Masur 1970).
15.2 Summary
• With proportionality between strain energy and stress energy, simple propor-
tional relations to external potential and to total potentials exist.
• From this follows that sensitivity analyses are simplified, and alternative opti-
mization objectives can be chosen.
• First order sensitivities with fixed strain fields or fixed stress fields result from
the virtual work principle or from the virtual complementary work principle.
c
Chapter 16
Strain/stress descriptions and

effective energy densities
In the previous chapters the specific definition of the strain vectors and of the stress
vectors
√ has not been important. Rotational transformations are more specific and rotational
the 2 formulation is chosen for these, see (Pedersen 1995) and (Pedersen 1987). transfor-
This also enables the use of projection matrices to obtain deviatoric components in mations
matrix notation and from this a derivation of deviatoric energy densities (von Mises
stresses), i.e., energy density without hydrostatic influence.
16.1 Strain and stress vectors

for 2D problems
The traditional forms in 2D problems for linear strain, {}T = {11 22 212 } and for
conjugated Cauchy stresses {σ}T = {σ11 σ22 σ12 }, are different in form and have traditional
no invariant lengths, say, |{}|2 = 211 + 222 + 4212 has different values in different forms
Cartesian coordinate
√ systems.
With the 2 formulation the lengths are invariant and the rotational transforma- √
tions are then the same for strains and stresses. The definitions are 2
√
{}T := {11 22 212 } {η}T := {η11 η22 2η12 }
√ formulation
√ √
{σ}T := {σ11 σ22 2σ12 } {τ }T := {τ11 τ22 2τ12 } (16.1)
that all have invariant lengths, such as |{}|2 = 211 + 222 + 2212 .
Figure 16.1 shows two Cartesian coordinate systems a and b, rotated mutually
by the angle θ, defined from system a to system b positive anticlockwise. A strain
description {a }, or any of the four in (16.1) in coordinate system a, is then rotated to
a description {b } in coordinate system b by pre-multiplication with the orthogonal
matrix [T ], i.e., [T ]−1 = [T ]T orthogonal
(16.2) rotation
matrix
{b } = [T ]{a } ⇒ {a } = [T ]T {b }
With reference to the angle definition in Figure 16.1 the orthogonal matrix [T ]
for 2D rotation is
 √ 
1 + cos 2θ 1 − cos 2θ √2 sin 2θ
1
[T ] := 1√− cos 2θ 1√+ cos 2θ −√ 2 sin 2θ  (16.3)
2
− 2 sin 2θ 2 sin 2θ 2 cos 2θ
65
c
ya
yb xb
PSfrag replacements
θ xa
Figure 16.1: Cartesian coordinate systems a and b with their mutual rotation, with angle θ
defined from a to b positive anticlockwise.
For 3D problems the 6 ×6 matrix [T ] is more complicated as seen in section 16.2,

but the simplicities described are the same.
16.2 3D strain/stress transformations

The tensor, the matrix and the vector notations for a 3D strain state at a material point
tensor, are
matrix and
vector (ij )a for i and j = x, y, z
notations
 
(xx )a(xy )a (xz )a
[a ] =  (xy )a (yy )a (yz )a 
(xz )a(yz )a (zz )a
√ √ √
{a }T = {(xx )a (yy )a (zz )a ( 2xy )a ( 2xz )a ( 2yz )a } (16.4)
with index a to indicate that the description refers to a Cartesian coordinate system
a.
All the results from linear algebra for symmetric, real matrices can now be ap-
plied to the strain matrix, starting with the properties of invariants for similar matri-
ces. The following combinations of strains are invariants, i.e., they are the same in
invariants all Cartesian coordinate systems
I1 = xx + yy + zz

I2 = (xx yy − 2xy ) + (xx zz − 2xz ) + (yy zz − 2yz )
I3 = |[]|
2
I4 = I1 − 2I2 (16.5)
corresponding to the trace (1st order norm), a 2nd order norm, the determinant (3rd
order norm), and the squared Frobenius norm (2nd order norm), respectively.
Other combinations of the three independent norms are also√possible. Note that
the squared length of the strain vector, when defined with the 2 factor, is also in-
variant
{}T {} = I4 (16.6)

Strain/stress descriptions 67
The next property of the strain matrix is the existence of real eigenvalues with
real, mutually orthogonal eigenvectors. In terms of the shown invariants, the third
order characteristic polynomial to determine these eigenvalues is
−3 + I1 2 − I2 + I3 = 0 (16.7)
and in the coordinate system of principal directions, i.e., the orthogonal eigenvector characteristic
directions, the strain matrix simplifies to polynomial,
  eigenvalues
1 0 0
[principal ] =  0 2 0  (16.8)
0 0 3
which means only normal strains (also invariants). Still it is needed to decide about
the ordering of these principal strains, normally chosen to be principal
values
3 ≤ 2 ≤ 1 (16.9)
From eigenvalue theory it also follows that 3 , 1 are the extreme normal strains, i.e.,
3 ≤ any normal strain ≤ 1 (16.10)
The important practical problem of transformation of the strain description to

the description in a rotated Cartesian coordinate system, is also a general problem in
linear algebra. The orthogonal transformation matrix of directional cosines is defined
by
 
l1 m 1 n1
[Γ] :=  l2 m2 n2  with [Γ]−1 = [Γ]T (16.11)
l2 m 3 n3
where the components of [Γ] are direction cosines. Then the transformation formulas
are direction
cosines
[a ] = [Γ]T [b ][Γ]
[b ] = [Γ][a ][Γ]T (16.12)
With transformation from principal strains (16.12) simplifies to

 
1 0 0
[b ] = [Γ]  0 2 0  [Γ]T
0 0 3
= 1 {l}{l}T + 2 {m}{m}T + 3 {n}{n}T (16.13)
known as spectral decomposition, that is possible for all symmetric matrices. spectral
All the formulas shown in this section for linear strain are similar valid for the decomposition
conjugated Cauchy stress state {σ}, for the Green-Lagrange strain state {η} and their
conjugated stress state {τ }. The deviatoric descriptions, to be given in following
sections, have similar transformation formulas.
c
16.3 Dilatation, distortion, deviatoric strains

Still discussing deformation at a point, i.e., a concept defined by a limiting process,
the deformation is divided into a pure volumetric change (dilatation) and a change in
shape (distortion)
Deformation = Dilatation + Distortion (16.14)
The dilatation is defined by ∆V /V , where V is the volume at the point in ques-

dilatation tion (limiting process). In terms of small strains giving
∆V
= xx + yy + zz = 1 + 2 + 3 = I1 (16.15)
V
incompres- and thus the trace of the strain matrix directly gives the dilatation. An incompressible
sible material must therefore have I1 = 0.
material The deviatoric strains are defined such that they give no dilatation. Normally the
symbol e is used, and in tensor notation with Kronecker’s delta δ ij written
eij = ij − δij kk /3 (16.16)
distortion In reality deviatoric strains e can be obtained as a projection and in matrix notation
can be described by a projection matrix [P ]
 
2 −1 −1 0 0 0
 −1 2 −1 0 0 0 
 
1 −1 −1 2 0 0 0 
{e} = [P ]{} with [P ] :=    (16.17)
3 0 0 0 3 0 0  
 0 0 0 0 3 0 
0 0 0 0 0 3
projection
matrix The distortion is described directly by the deviatoric strains, that have principal
deviatoric strains determined by
deviatoric
strains −e3 − I2e e + I3e = 0 (16.18)
with deviatoric invariants similar to (16.5) and specifically with I 1e = 0. Defining

the mean value ē of normal strains
xx + yy + zz 1 + 2 + 3 I1
¯ = = = (16.19)
3 3 3
The total strain state is
{}T = {e}T + {¯
¯ ¯ 0 0 0} (16.20)
16.4 Hydrostatic stress, deviatoric stress

The mean value σ̄ of the three normal stress components is named the hydrostatic
stress
σxx + σyy + σzz σ1 + σ 2 + σ 3 Iσ1
σ̄ = = = (16.21)
3 3 3
hydrostatic and is a stress invariant.
stress
The deviatoric stress is defined such that its hydrostatic stress is zero. Normally,
the stress symbol σ is then changed to s and in analogy with deviatoric strains (16.16),
in tensor notation
sij = σij − δij σkk /3 (16.22)
or in vector notation with projection matrix
{s} = [P ]{σ} (16.23)
deviatoric
The total stress can then be written stresses
{σ}T = {s}T + {σ̄ σ̄ σ̄ 0 0 0} (16.24)
In material models the strength is often assumed to be independent of the hydrostatic

stress, and then a formulation in deviatoric stresses is useful.
16.5 Distortional energy densities

and effective measures
The total energy density u, equal to the sum of strain and stress energy density u =
u + uσ , is with linear strain definition expressed in strains as
u = {}T {σ} = {}T [L̄]{} (16.25)
where [L̄] is the secant constitutive matrix. The total energy density only from distor-
tion is given the notation ud and expressed in the deviatoric strains {e} that according
to (16.17) are obtained with the projection matrix [P ] simply by {e} = [P ]{} and
get
ud = {e}T [L̄]{e} = {}T [P ][L̄][P ]{} (16.26)
Thus with a transformed constitutive matrix [P ][L̄][P ], the invariant distortional en-
ergy ud is directly obtained from the total strains.
For isotropic constitutive matrix with only two independent quantities, say L̄xxxx
and L̄xxyy , this product is determined from the definition in (16.17) and get
[P ][L̄][P ] = (L̄xxxx − L̄xxyy )[P ][P ] = 2Ḡ[P ] (16.27)
as the secant shear modulus Ḡ = L̄xyxy for isotropic materials is 2Ḡ = L̄xxxx −
L̄xxyy . For the distortional energy density ud distortional
energy
ud = 2Ḡ{}T [P ]{} = 2Ḡ{}T [P ][P ]{} = 2Ḡ{e}T {e} (16.28)
density
and the level of deviatoric strains {e}T {e} = {}T [P ]{} determines the distortional
energy density except for the factor 2Ḡ, where Ḡ is the secant shear modulus of the
isotropic material.
Formulated in stresses give
u = {}T {σ} = {σ}T [L̄]−1 {σ} (16.29)

c
ud = {s}T [L̄]−1 {s} = {σ}T [P ][L̄]−1 [P ]{σ} (16.30)
where the vector of deviatoric stresses {s} is determined by projection {s} = [P ]{σ}.
Direct determination for an isotropic material gives
1
[P ][L̄]−1 [P ] = [P ] (16.31)
2Ḡ
and the deviatoric energy density in stresses is
1 1
ud = {σ}T [P ]{σ} = {s}T {s} (16.32)
2Ḡ 2Ḡ
stress
formulation Expanding the part without the factor 1/Ḡ give the squared von Mises stress
1 1 2
{σ}T [P ]{σ} = {s}T {s} = σvonM ises
2 2
2 2 2 2
σxx + σyy + σzz − σxx σyy − σxx σzz − σyy σzz + 3σxy 2
+ 3σxz 2
+ 3σyz (16.33)
Thus the squared von Mises stress is proportional to the deviatoric energy density and
can be used as an effective stress. In material models the strength is often assumed
to be independent of the hydrostatic stress and then the von Mises stress is a valuable
von Mises measure.
stress For 2D problems (xy problems) the plane strain case carries directly over since
plane 2D by assumption zz = 0, and thus the 3 × 3 projection matrix
problems 1

1 −1 0

[P ] :=  −1 1 0  (16.34)
2
0 0 2
gives results as for the 3D problems.

For plane stress problems zz is not zero but in general
L̄zzxx xx + L̄zzyy yy + 2L̄zzxy xy

zz = (16.35)
L̄zzzz
With isotropic material L̄zzxx = L̄zzyy and L̄zzxy = 0, so zz is proportional to

the sum (xx + yy ), and the deviatoric behaviour is kept with the projection matrix
non- (16.34).
isotropic For a non-isotropic material there is no meaning in calculating a single effective
material stress and comparisons based on total strains/stresses are needed. The transformed
constitutive matrix [P ][L̄][P ] (or [P ][L̄]−1 [P ]) will still be useful for calculating the
deviatoric (dilatational) energy density.
16.6 Summary
• Strains and stresses are described differently when Cartesian coordinate sys-
tems are rotated.
• In a specific Cartesian coordinate system there are no shear components, but

only normal components, named principal values. These values include the
extreme normal values.
√
• For rotational transformations in vector notation, the 2-notation that results
in invariant strain/stress vector lengths is preferred. Rotations are then per-
formed by pre-multiplication with an orthogonal matrix [T ], being the same
for strains as well as for stresses.
• Deviatoric components (without dilatation or without hydrostatic) are obtained

with pre-multiplication with the projection matrix [P ].
• Pre- and post-multiplication of the constitutive matrix with the projection ma-
trix give a matrix, that directly gives the deviatoric energy density (without
dilatation or hydrostatic).
• For isotropic materials this transformed matrix will directly be the projection
matrix times a factor with the shear modulus, see (16.27) and (16.31).
c
Chapter 17
Sensitivity analysis
This chapter presents only the most simple results from sensitivity analysis with the
goal to show the non intuitive results that often are obtained. Especially the fact that
the sensitivity of a global quantity like potentials, can often be determined without
involving the change in the displacement/strain field or alternatively the change in the
stress field. For more general information on sensitivity analysis see (Michaleris, references
Tortorelli and Vidal 1994) or the book (Kleiber, Antunez, Hien and Kowalczyk 1997).

mutual elastic energy
Firstly, derive the simple result for the design sensitivity of mutual elastic energy,
which as special cases may express displacement sensitivity or compliance sensitiv-
ity. By mutual elastic energy means the non physical energy that is defined from mutual
”interaction” of two different displacement fields (vectors). The presentation is re- definition
stricted to linear elasticity and given in finite element notation.
In the present chapter most matrices are system matrices without using, as earlier,
the bold notation and matrices on the element level are given the subindex e. A
functional Φ is defined by the scalar product no bold
notation
Φ := {A}T {D} (17.1)
where {A}T is a row vector of prescribed constants and the displacement column
vector {D} for the system is the solution to the linear system
[S]{D} = {Q} (17.2)
with the stiffness matrix [S] explicitly depending on design. The load vector {Q} is
in this simple presentation assumed independent of design. Then the differential of design
displacement {dD} can be expressed by the differential of stiffness [dS] independent
[S]{dD} = −[dS]{D} (17.3)
load
Take the ”cost” vector {A} as an artificial (design independent) load vector and
solve for the corresponding displacements {D̃}
[S]{D̃} = {A} ⇒ {D̃}T [S] = {A}T (17.4)
73
c
by transpose and based on a symmetric stiffness matrix [S] T = [S]. Analogously to

(17.3) follows
{dD̃}T [S] = −{D̃}T [dS] (17.5)
Inserting (17.4) in (17.1), the objective Φ can alternatively be expressed by the

mutual elastic energy, defined as
Φ = {D̃}T [S]{D} (17.6)
mutual because it expresses the interaction between the physical displacements {D}
mutual and the artificial displacements {D̃}.
elastic Necessary equations are now available to derive a simple expression for the dif-
energy ferential of the functional Φ, which in principle has three terms
dΦ = {dD̃}T [S]{D} + {D̃}T [dS]{D} + {D̃}T [S]{dD} (17.7)
Substituting (17.3) and (17.5) into (17.7) give
dΦ = −{D̃}T [dS]{D} (17.8)
without which is an expression where the change in physical displacements {dD} and the
displacement change in artificial displacements {dD̃} is not directly involved, just imply the minus
change sign.
The gradient of the functional Φ with respect to any specific design parameter h
is therefore
dΦ d[S]
= −{D̃}T {D} (17.9)
dh dh
With Φ written in terms of mutual elastic energy, it is possible to accumulate from
a number of design domains, say finite elements e, Φ = e Φe . Then with a local
P
design parameter he that only has influence on the element stiffness matrix [S]e give
localized a localized determination of the gradient
parameter dΦ d[S]e
= −{D̃e }T {De } (17.10)
dhe dhe
that might be interpreted as the negative domain change of mutual elastic energy in
fixed displacement fields (fixed strain fields). The order of the matrices in (17.10) is
' 10, to be compared to the order of the system matrices in (17.9) which might be of
order 104 − 105 .
17.2 Sensitivity analysis for compliance

Let the general vector {A} in (17.1) and (17.4) be the actual load vector {Q}, then
the mutual energy Φ will be the physical compliance equal to the total elastic energy
compliance U
= elastic (17.11)
energy
Φ = U = {Q}T {D}
The artificial displacements {D̃} will also be the physical displacements {D} and
the sensitivity of total elastic energy from (17.9) with a general design parameter h is
dΦ dU d[S]
= = −{D}T {D} (17.12)
dh dh dh
Sensitivity analysis 75
and with a local design parameter he

dΦ dU d[Se ]
= = −{De }T {D} (17.13)
dh dh dhe
The second order sensitivities are more complicated, but some general informa-
tion is available, see (Cheng and Pedersen 1997). Written at the system level give
from differentiation of (17.13)
d2 Φ d2 U 2
T d [S] d[S] d{D}
2
= 2
= − {D} 2
{D} − 2{D}T =
dh dh dh dh dh
d2 [S] d{D}T d{D}
− {D}T 2
{D} + 2 [S] (17.14)
dh dh dh
when the relation (17.3) is again applied. The fact that the stiffness matrix is positive compliance
definite gives us important information about the second term in (17.14), which is 2. order
always positive. sensitivity

simple eigenvalues
From the definition of the element mass matrices in chapter 13 follows the symmetric
system mass matrix [M ], and assuming here linear elasticity the system stiffness
matrix [S] is also symmetric. Force equilibrium without damping and external forces
for eigenvalue ωr and eigenvector {Dr } gives
[S]{Dr } = ωr2 [M ]{Dr } (17.15)
which is also written as energy equilibrium free

{Dr }T [S]{Dr } = ωr2 {Dr }T [M ]{Dr } (17.16)
undamped
vibration
and from that follows the Rayleigh quotient
{Dr }T [S]{Dr }
ωr2 = (17.17)
{Dr }T [M ]{Dr }
With symmetric coefficient matrices, the differentials of (17.16) give
{Dr }T [dS]{Dr } − ωr2 {Dr }T [dM ]{Dr } = d(ωr2 ){Dr }T [M ]{Dr } (17.18)
as the sum of the remaining terms 2({dDr }T [S]{Dr }) − ωr2 {dDr }T [M ]{Dr }) is
zero according to the equilibrium (17.15).
The normalized eigenvector {∆r } is defined by {∆r }T [M ]{∆r } = 1 and for normalized
any design variable h give eigenvector
d(ωr2 ) d[S] d[M ]
= {∆r }T {∆r } − ωr2 {∆r }T {∆r } (17.19)
dh dh dh
This result can be found in (Wittrick 1962).
Converting from system level to element level, when the design parameter h e is
localized, give
d(ωr2 ) d[Se ] d[Me ]
= {∆r e }T {∆r e } − ωr2 {∆r e }T {∆r e } (17.20)
dhe dhe dhe
c
A further simplification may be obtained for homogeneous relations for stiffness

matrices as well as for mass matrices, defined by
d[Se ] n d[Me ] m
= [Se ] and = [Me ] (17.21)
dhe he dhe he
physical and then for this case the sensitivity can be given a physical interpretation
interpretation d(ωr2 ) T 2 T

= n{∆r e } [Se ]{∆r e } − ωr m{∆r e } [Me ]{∆r e } /he
dhe
= (nUe − mTe ) /he (17.22)
where Ue = {∆r e }T [Se ]{∆r e } is the normalized total elastic energy in design do-
main (element) e, and Te = ωr2 {∆r e }T [Me ]{∆r e } is the normalized kinetic energy
in design domain (element) e.

multiple eigenvalues
The case of multiple eigenvalues is often excluded in sensitivity formulations, but in
practical reality it is a physical important example that must be properly dealt with. With [M ]
important and [S] symmetric, there is always a complete set of eigenvectors, even when some
of them have the same eigenvalue. All eigenvalues and eigenvectors are real.
The problem is that when the eigenvector {∆} is not unique, the sensitivity is
only defined as a directional derivative (h positive scalar coefficient to a specified
design direction), and furthermore {∆} can be any linear combination of the set
of eigenvectors all with the same eigenvalue ω 2 . Only for some specific {∆} ˆ the
sensitivity (17.19) has a physical meaning.
To find the specific {∆}ˆ vectors let us deal only with the bimodal case, where
with {∆1 }, {∆2 } being two arbitrary, but mutual orthogonal eigenvectors.
{∆} = c1 {∆1 } + c2 {∆2 }
T
{∆1 } [M ]{∆2 } = 0, c21 + c22 = 1 ⇒ {∆}T [M ]{∆} = 1 (17.23)
Inserting this expansion for {∆} in (17.19) give
dω 2
= c21 g11 + c22 g22 + 2c1 c2 g12 with
dh
d[S] d[M ]
gmn := {∆m }T ( − ω2 ){∆n } (17.24)
dh dh
orthogonal and thus depending on c1 , c2 . Extreme values of dω 2 /dh can be found by solving
sensitivities the eigenvalue problem constituted by these sensitivities

g11 − g g 12
(17.25)

=0
g12 g22 − g
The eigenvalues of this matrix are the true sensitivities, with corresponding eigen-
vectors {∆}.
ˆ When the eigenvalues ga , gb to (17.25) are found, the corresponding
eigenvectors {∆ ˆ b }, that return gab = gba = 0, are determined, which means
ˆ a }, {∆
that the mutual sensitivities are zero.
Note, that this case learns us the primary importance of eigenvectors as compared
to eigenvalues.
Chapter 18
Numerical tools
The numerical tools are an essential part of finite element analysis and the major
numerical tools should be understood by the FE users. Of main interest is the solution
of linear equations and of linear eigenvalue problems. The critical aspects are
• the necessary computer execution time
• the necessary computer storage
• the robustness of the method
This chapter is restricted to problems with symmetric coefficient matrices and de-
scribes the Gauss factorization that uses most of the computer execution time for
a FE program, say 80 %. The super element technique is an alternative solution
technique with several important applications, and this technique is therefore given
a special section. The remaining part of the chapter concentrates on numerical tools
for solving eigenvalue problems with focus on rate of convergence, shift and orthog-
onalization. Finally the effective method named subspace iteration is described.
18.1 Gauss factorization

Any non singular symmetric matrix can be factorized into a product of three matrices,
a lower matrix [l], a diagonal matrix [d], and an upper matrix equal to the transposed
lower matrix [l]T . For the stiffness matrix [S] this is lower,
[S] = [l][d][l]T (18.1)
diagonal,
and upper
which is expanded to find more detail formulas for this factorization. An example of
a system of order 3 is
matrices
     
S11 S12 S13 l11 0 0 d1 0 0 l11 l21 l31
 S12 S22 S23  =  l21 l22 0   0 d2 0   0 l22 l32 
S13 S23 S33 l31 l32 l33 0 0 d3 0 0 l33
  
l11 d1 0 0 l11 l12 l13
=  l21 d1 l22 d2 0   0 l22 l23  (18.2)
l31 d1 l32 d2 l33 d3 0 0 l33
Note that by post multiplication with a diagonal matrix (as here [d]), each column
component is multiplied with the corresponding diagonal element. (With pre mul-
tiplication with a diagonal matrix each row component is multiplied with the corre-
sponding diagonal element.)
77
c
From the example (18.2) follows directly that the diagonal components in the
matrix [S] are
i i−1
(18.3)
X X
2 2
Sii = lij dj lij = lii di + lij dj
j=1 j=1
which for Gauss factorization with lii = 1 gives the diagonal components of the
diagonal diagonal matrix [d]
components i−1
(18.4)
X
2
di = Sii − lij dj
j=1
These components are also named the pivot components.

The off diagonal components in the matrix [S] are
i
(18.5)
X
Ski = Sik = lij dj lkj + lii di lki
j=1
off diagonal which for Gauss factorization with lii = 1 gives the off diagonal components of [l]
components  
i−1
(18.6)
X
lki = Ski − lij dj lkj  /di
j=1
bandwidth A band matrix is a matrix where all components outside a band around the diag-
onal (diagonal plus co diagonals) are zero. The bandwidth m for a symmetric matrix
is defined as the number of lower co diagonals plus 1 (the diagonal). This is the in-
teger value important for the necessary computer storage as well as for the necessary
computer execution time. The summations in (18.4) and (18.6) can then be limited
to the non zero part.
With a chosen storage of ”half” the symmetric matrix [S] and a chosen ordering
of calculations (18.4) and (18.6), the strategy for computer programming must be
Fortran chosen. The fact that this calculation takes the major part of the computer execution
factorization time for a finite element program, makes these few computer lines interesting and
code Figure 18.1 shows the core code of a FORTRAN program, personally used for many
years.
Let n denote the number of degrees of freedom and m the bandwidth, a major
part of the necessary computer storage is proportional to n · m, while a major part
(the factorization) of the necessary computer execution time is proportional to n · m 2 .
Note the importance of a moderate bandwidth.
Numerical tools 79
Figure 18.1: FORTRAN code for Gauss factorization of a symmetric band matrix, stored in
the array SYSTEM FLEXI for input as well as for output.
18.2 Linear solutions by

forward and backward substitutions
To obtain a linear solution with [S] as coefficient matrix, then in addition to the
Gauss factorization, a forward substitution followed by a backward substitution are
performed. With multiple load cases (multiple right hand sides), or with the inverse
iterations to be described in section 18.4, the expensive Gauss factorization is needed
only once and the substitutions do not take much computer time, compared to the
factorization. two/three
Introducing the factorization, the procedure applied to stiffness [S], displace- step
ments {D}, and actions {A} follows procedure
[S]{D} = {A} ⇒ [L][d][L]T {D} = {A}
solved in a three step procedure:
[L]{Ỹ } = {A} forward substitution
{Y } = [d]−1 ]{Ỹ } scalar multiplication
[L]T {D} = {Y } backward substitution (18.7)
Fortran
Figure 18.2 shows the core code of a FORTRAN program for this forward and substitution
backward substitutions, used in conjunction with the result from the Gauss factoriza-
tion code.
code
c
Figure 18.2: FORTRAN code for forward and backward substitution, with array I DISPL as
input (right hand side) as well as output (solution).
18.3 Super element technique

Solution by a super element algorithm corresponds to solving the overall finite ele-
ment equilibrium equation, say of order 10000 to 100000,

[S]cc [S]cn {D}c {A}c
[S]{D} = {A} or = (18.8)
[S]Tcn [S]nn {D}n {A}n
static with static condensation of the non super degrees of freedom {D} n and thus getting
condensation a lower order system, say of order 10 to 100, for the super degrees of freedom {D}c.
For the case {A}n = {0} no condensation of {A}c is involved
[Sc ]{Dc } = {Ac } with [Sc ] = [S]cc − [S]cn [S]−1 T

nn [S]cn (18.9)
where {Dc }, {Ac } are the actual super degrees of freedom and the directly corre-
sponding nodal loads. If {A}n 6= {0} the condensed loads are determined by
{Ac } = {A}c − [S]cn [S]−1

nn {A}n (18.10)
This super element technique is well known, and thus only comments on the
practical evaluation of the super element matrix [Sc ] are given. Note that this is just
practical an alternative solution technique and not a further approximation.
evaluation The practical evaluation of the super element matrix [Sc ] as specified by (18.9)
may seem complicated, but from the basic definition of stiffness, as force (at a super
dof.) per unit displacement (at the same or another super dof.), follows that a specific
column of [Sc ], say column k, is determined by a unit forced displacement at the
unit forced corresponding dof. All the other contact dof. are fixed to zero, and the calculated
displacement reactions corresponding to the super dof. is then the column k of [S c ].
This implies that without performing the matrix calculation in (18.9), the super
element matrix is obtained by solving a number of load cases, corresponding to the
Numerical tools 81
number of super dof., and doing so by procedures already available in a finite element
code. The computational costs of solving for these additional load cases correspond
at most to one additional Gauss factorization, and for larger systems far less computer
execution time is used. contact
The super finite element technique is recently applied to the solution of contact applications
problems, see (Pedersen 2006c), (Pedersen 2006b) and (Pedersen 2007).
18.4 Power method and inverse iteration

Methods for solving eigenvalue problems may roughly be classified into
• methods that first find the eigenvalue and then evaluate the eigenvector
• methods that first find the eigenvector and then evaluate the eigenvalue
In short terms the methods to find eigenvectors are described, and these methods are
the most used in relation to FE problems.
Although the power method is not the essential tool for FE eigenvalue problem,
it is a natural starting point for this description. For the dynamic system displace- solution
ment {D̃},√assume a separation into a dynamic factor eiωt where i is the imaginary separation
unit (i = −1), ω is an angular frequency and t is time, and a time independent
displacement vector {D} (amplitudes). Displacements, velocities, and acceleration
are then
d{D̃} d2 {D̃}
{D̃} = eiωt {D}, = iωeiωt {D}, = −ω 2 eiωt {D} (18.11)
dt dt2
Force equilibrium with system stiffness matrix [S] and system mass matrix [M ]
without damping and external forces is
d2 {D̃}
[M ] + [S]{D̃} = 0 (18.12)
dt2
which for the amplitude displacement vector {D} gives
([S] − ω 2 [M ]){D} = 0 or
2
[S]{D} = ω [M ]{D} = ω {Y } 2
(18.13)
where the force vector {Y } describes the magnitude of inertia forces, resulting from
displacement vector {D}. Writing (18.13) in standard form
[A]{D} = ω 2 {D} with [A] = [M ]−1 [S] (18.14)
or on the alternative standard form name

1 eigenvector
[A]{D} =
ω2
{D} with [A] = [S]−1 [M ] (18.15) eigenvalue
Note that the name eigenvector relate to the fact that the vector {D} is transformed
into itself except for a scaler factor, the eigenvalue ω 2 in (18.14) and 1/ω 2 in (18.15).
c
The power method originates from (18.14) and the iteration procedure is
{Xk } = [A]{Xk−1 } = [A]k {X0 } with [A] = [M ]−1 [S] (18.16)
name where {Xk } is iteration number k based on the initial guess {X0 }. It is clear that the
power name power method comes from the iteration factor [A] being raised to the power k.
method The method is proved (in section 18.4.1) to converge to the eigenvector {D L }
with the largest eigenvalue ωL2 . Largest is the numerically largest, absolute value.
The inverse iteration method originates from (18.15) and the iteration procedure
is
{Xk } = [A]{Xk−1 } = [A]k {X0 } with [A] = [S]−1 [M ] (18.17)
where {Xk } is iteration number k based on the initial guess {X0 }. The name inverse
inverse iteration method comes from the eigenvalue being an inverse quantity, here (ω 2 )−1 .
iteration Because the power method is proved to converge to the eigenvector with the
largest eigenvalue, the method of inverse iteration will converge to the eigenvector
{DS } with the smallest eigenvalue ωS2 . Smallest is the numerically smallest, absolute
value.
18.4.1 Rate of convergence

To understand the positive as well as the negative aspects of the method of inverse
iteration, the proof for convergence is presented. For convenience using λ = ω 2 for
the eigenvalue. With {Dr } being an eigenvector, that may be multiplied with any non
zero constant, (18.15) gives
1 1
[A]{Dr } = {Dr } and [A]k {Dr } = {Dr } (18.18)
λr λkr
where {Dr } is the eigenvector corresponding to the eigenvalue λ r .

Any start vector {X0 } in inverse iteration (18.17) can be written in the complete
eigenvector space of eigenvectors
space n
(18.19)
X
{X0 } = cr {Dr }
r=1
where n is the order of the problem. This possible expansion is proved for symmetric
matrices [S] and [M ]. Inserting (18.19) in (18.17) and using (18.18) give
n n
1
(18.20)
X X
{Xk } = [A]k {X0 } = [A]k cr {Dr } = cr {Dr }
λkr
r=1 r=1
proof of which can be rewritten to see the influence of the smallest eigenvalue {D 1 }
convergence n n
!
1 X λ1 k 1 λ1 k
(18.21)
X
{Xk } = k cr ( ) {Dr } = k c1 {D1 } + cr ( ) {Dr }
λ1 λr λ1 λr
r=1 r=2
Numerical tools 83
From this last expression a number of conclusions can be drawn proof

• Assume |λr | > |λ1 | for all r > 1 and c1 6= 0, then (18.21) proofs {Xk } ⇒ conclusions
{D1 } for k ⇒ ∞, except for a factor.
• Assume |λr | > |λ2 | for all r > 2 and c1 = 0, then (18.21) proofs {Xk } ⇒
{D2 } for k ⇒ ∞, except for a factor.
• Assume |λ2 | = |λ1 | and |λr | > |λ2 | for all r > 2 and c1 , c2 non zero, then
(18.21) shows that {Xk } will not converge, but always be a linear combination
of {D1 } and {D2 }.
• For |λ2 | ' |λ1 |, then (18.21) shows that {Xk } will converge slowly.
With convergence to {D1 }, then for a ”large” number of iterations k only the
influence of {D1 } remains
c1 c1 {Xk−1 }
{Xk } ' {Dr } and {Xk−1 } ' {Dr } ⇒ ' λ1 (18.22)
λk1 k−1
λ1 {Xk }
which should be read in the sense that the eigenvalue is the ratio between components eigenvalue
in two following iterations. The fact that this is for any (non zero) part of {X k } means evaluation
that bounds can be established. Alternatively the eigenvalue can be evaluated from
the Rayleigh quotient.
18.4.2 Orthogonalization and shift

The force equilibrium (18.11) is written as an energy equilibrium without the time
factor eiωt , i.e., the potential amplitude equals the kinetic amplitude energy
{D}T [S]{D} = ω 2 {D}T [M ]{D} (18.23)
equilibrium
from which follows the Rayleigh quotient Rayleigh
{D}T [S]{D}
quotient
ω2 = or with normalization
{D}T [M ]{D}
ω 2 = {∆}T [S]{∆} when {∆}T [M ]{∆} = 1 (18.24)
,i.e., {∆} = {D}/ {D}T [M ]{D}.

p
With the symmetric problem matrices [S] and [M ], the mutual orthogonalization
of the eigenvalues are proved orthogonal
{∆i }T [M ]{∆j } = δij and {∆i }T [S]{∆j } = δij λi (18.25)
properties
where δij is the Kronecker’s delta (i 6= j ⇒ δij = 0 and i = j ⇒ δij = 1).
The shown orthogonalization property is the tool to avoid convergence to specific
eigenvectors, say to {∆1 }, by iterating with vectors for which the corresponding
expansion coefficient is zero (c1 = 0). Assuming a non orthogonalized vector {X̃k } at
iteration k, then subtract the non wanted part c1 {D1 } by making the result orthogonal
to {∆1 }
({X̃k }T − c1 {∆1 }T )[M ]{∆1 } = 0 ⇒

T T
{X̃k } [M ]{∆1 } = c1 {∆1 } [M ]{∆1 } = c1 (18.26)
c
A modified inverse iteration procedure with orthogonalization against known pair

of eigen pars λi , {∆i } is then
{X̃k } = [A]{Xk−1 } with {Xk } = {X̃k } −

X
ci {∆i }
i known
with ci known from ci = {X̃k }T [M ]{∆i } (18.27)
orthogo-
nalized In theory it should be enough to orthogonalize only in the first iteration, but
inverse random computer errors may reintroduce the unwanted eigenvectors. It is therefore
iteration suggested to orthogonalize in each iteration step. The shown procedure to find higher
order eigenvectors has its limitations and demands high precision with respect to the
eigenvectors to be orthogonalized against.
The standard form (18.17) should not be used for practical computation, because
[A] = [S]−1 [M ] may not be a symmetric matrix ([S]−1 is symmetric but a product of
two symmetric matrices may not be symmetric). Even though a formulation to keep
symmetry is possible, then the valuable band structure of the [S] matrix is destroyed.
practical Thus the practical formulation is the solution like in a statical problem
physical (18.28)
procedure [S]{X̃k } = [M ]{Xk−1 } = {Yk−1 }
which also has a more direct physical interpretation as iterating on the displacements
resulting from an improved inertia force distribution {Y }.
Alternative methods or combination methods are necessary. These useful im-
provements are described next. First, the method using shift of the total eigenvalue
spectrum is described. The eigenvalue λ is presented relative to a specified shift value
λ̄, i.e., λ = λ̄ + ∆λ. Introducing this shift in (18.13) gives
[S]{D} = (λ̄ + ∆λ)[M ]{D} ⇒ ([S] − λ̄[M ]){D} = ∆λ[M ]{D} (18.29)
spectrum and thus inverse iteration based on this formulation will converge towards the eigen-
shift vector with the smallest distance to the shift (the numerically smallest ∆λ). Note
that the corresponding eigenvalue can be both below and above the prescribed shift
value.The procedure without orthogonalization with reference to (18.28) is
([S] − λ̄[M ]){X̃k } = [M ]{Xk−1 } = {Yk−1 } (18.30)
The method of shift can be used with or without orthogonalization. The use of
user shift value λ̄ includes a number of possibilities for the user,
controls • control of the searching eigenvalue spectrum (around the shift value)
• control of the convergence rate by influence on the ratios (λ 1 /λr )
however, the tool to identify what is determined is needed, i.e., the numbers of eigen-
values below the determined eigenvector.
This information is available after the Gauss factorization of [S] − λ̄[M ], because
the number of negative numbers in the diagonal of the factorized results ([d] from
(18.4)) equals the number of eigenvalues below the shift value λ̄. This is often named
Sturm sequence check.
Numerical tools 85
18.5 Subspace iteration

The method named subspace iteration involves inverse iteration with multiple itera-
tion vectors that are forced to be mutually orthogonal (in the sense of [M ] and [S]
orthogonal) to avoid converging to equal vectors. This means that iterations are per-
formed with a space spanned by vectors rather than with the vectors themselves. subspace
A more detailed description of subspace iteration can be found in (Bathe 1996). To reality
relate to the procedures (18.27), (18.30) the subspace iteration in a non detailed de-
scription with shift is
([S] − λ̄[M ])[X̃k ] = [M ][Xk−1 ] with [Xk ] = [X̃k ][Z] (18.31)
where the system matrices ([S], [M ]) are of order n × n, i.e., of order 10 4 − 106 ,
and the displacement subspace matrix [X] is of order n × m, with m of size 5 - 20.
The matrix [Z] of linear combination factors are thus of order m × m. This matrix is
determined after definition of lower order spaces of energies, followed by solution of
a new matrix eigenvalue problem, that because of the low order m is solved in full.
Define a matrix of mutual kinetic energies [T̃ ] of order m × m
[T̃ ] = [X̃k ]T [M ][X̃k ] (18.32)
and as the mass matrix [M ] is symmetric, so will [T̃ ] be. It may be stated, that the
displacement vectors are projected into a space of mutual kinetic energies. mutual
Also a matrix of mutual potential energies [Ũ ] of the same order m×m is defined kinetic
energies
[Ũ ] = [X̃k ]T [S][X̃k ] (18.33)
also being symmetric. Thus also projecting the displacement vectors into a space of
mutual potential energies mutual
For the two symmetric matrices [T̃ ] and [Ũ ] an eigenvalue problem is defined, potential
either in terms of a single solution λ, {Z} or in terms of the full solution [λ], [Z] energies
with the diagonal matrix [λ] containing all the eigenvalues and the modal matrix [Z]
containing column wise all the corresponding eigenvectors.
[Ũ ]{Z} = λ[T̃ ]{Z} or [Ũ ][Z] = [T̃ ][Z][λ] (18.34)
This small scale problem of order m is solved in full and thus there is no prob- complete
lem with close or even multiple eigenvalues. This removes the main critics of the solution
simple inverse iteration, and furthermore normally improves the execution time for
convergence.
To see that the transformation in (18.31) corresponds to a mutual orthogonaliza-
tion, the matrix [T ] for the transformed subspace [Xk ] = [X̃k ][Z] is
[T ] = [Xk ]T [M ][Xk ] = [Z]T [X̃k ]T [M ][X̃k ][Z] = [Z]T [T̃ ][Z] (18.35)
where the final expression [Z]T [T̃ ][Z] according to the solved eigenvalue problem mutual
(in the energy space) is diagonal. If the matrix [Z] is normalized to give [Z] T [T̃ ][Z] = orthogona-
[I], then the eigenvalues are obtained by [λ] = [Z]T [Ũ ][Z]. It can be proved that the lization
eigenvalues found are the eigenvalues most close to the shift value λ̄ in (18.31).
c
Chapter 19
Errors from linear strain models
Finite element solutions based on linear strain definition are in practice applied to
a large number of displacement/strain/stress analyses, and serious errors may some-
times result due to the chosen strain measure.
From an engineering point of view the answer to this is, not always to use non-
linear strain definition, but to have an understanding for problems which may be
critical to solve with linear strain definition.The present chapter intends to establish
some general understanding of the cause for the errors, starting with an example.
19.1 Cantilever illustration

cantilever
Figure 19.1 shows a cantilever beam, treated with additional displacement constraints illustration
at the original free end. The four different cases (a - d) gives rather different solution
in terms of the transversal displacement at the original free end, different with linear
strain compared to results with Green-Lagrange strain.
a free end
frag replacements
upper support
b
mid support
c
lower support
d
linear strain Green-Lagrange strain

Figure 19.1: Illustration of solutions for cantilever beam problems, subjected to four different
boundary conditions at the initial free end. Principle displacements and end-reactions shown
for linear strain formulation as well as for Green-Lagrange strain formulation.
87
c
Let us first analyze the results with linear strain. The axial translation of the mid
point (beam axis) of the free end is always zero due to symmetry. Thus the case c)
and case a) will have identical solutions and case c) does not give reaction at the mid
linear point constrained free end.
strain Due to the tilt it is seen in case a) that the upper point moves towards the fixed
results end and the lower end moves away from the free end. Constraining the upper end of
the free end will thus involve a tensile reaction force, while constraining the lower
end will involve a compressive reaction force, both of the same magnitude due to
symmetry.
Both these cases correspond to the same moment load from the reactions, and
thus will give also the same result, both with smaller transversal translation than the
cases a) and c).
Then analyze the results with Green-Lagrange strains, assuming for convenience
(adjusting the external shown force) that the axial displacement at the lower end for
the complete free end is zero, summing up the results of tilt and transversal/axial
displacement. The tensile reaction for case b) with upper point constraint will thus
be twice the tensile force for case c) with mid point constraint. Totally case a) and
d) with Green-Lagrange strain for this case give the same results, while case c) gives
lower transversal displacement while case b) gives still lower transversal displace-
Green- ment than case c).
Lagrange Assuming the solutions with Green-Lagrange strains to be ”exact”, it is found
strain that the linear solution for case a) is only little in error, the linear solution for case
results b) is too flexible, the linear solution for case c) is also too flexible, while the linear
solution for case d) is too stiff. Figure 19.2 shows how important the correct strain
modeling can be for an annular plate, and the indirect background for these results is
therefore discussed.
19.2 Expansive dilatation

If an element is rotated the angle θ, then an erroneous pure expansive dilatation that
amounts to (1 − cos θ) results for linear strain models. This follows from the fact
that pure rigid body rotations are not possible with linear strain models, because this
will contradict the linearity of the results. Thus the expected strain error (compres-
sive dilatation as often stated in textbooks) is compensated by displacement errors
proof (expansive dilatation).
from Depending on the boundary condition the expansive dilatation give the back-
linearity ground for understanding the final errors. The final errors are indirect, they can be
positive as well as negative, and they are due to an erroneous displacement field for
problems which involve rotations; that need not be large.
19.2.1 Annular plate example

The plate is modeled by 8000 triangular (almost equal sized) ring elements giving in
total 8242 degrees of freedom. Through the thickness are 10 quadrangles each di-
vided into four triangles, and along the radial direction 200 quadrangles each divided
into four triangles.
PSfrag replacements
Errors from linear strain models 89
case I
z
case II
w
case III
h = 0.04
case IV
b = 0.2 case V
a = 1 → a/b = 5
r
FE linear strains FE non-linear strains Linear strain error Boundary
w = 0.044 m w = 0.036 m + 22 % case I
w = 0.025 m w = 0.018 m + 39 % case II
w = 0.044 m w = 0.026 m + 69 % case III
w = 0.025 m w = 0.036 m - 31 % case IV
w = 0.018 m w = 0.016 m + 13 % case V
Figure 19.2: Axisymmetric model of a circular plate with a circular hole (annular
plate) with five cases of boundary condition at the outer edge. Uniform pressure
load p = 106 Pa in the z-direction, isotropic material with modulus of elasticity
E = 2 · 1011 Pa and Poisson’s ratio 0.3. All lengths in meter. Resulting displacement
in axial direction at the outer edge is w. The symbolism in the case V indicate that
this cross-section can not rotate. The size of the displacements are not large but only
equal the thickness of the plate.
The plate example gives similar results as discussed in relation to Figure 19.1 for
the beam example, and the discussion of the plate example will be a repetition of the
discussion related to the beam example. errors
As a conclusion, note that in evaluating the results from a linear strain analysis it with small
must be remembered that rotations give rise to expansive dilatation of the order 0.002 rotations
for rotation equal to θ = 3◦ , and if this expansion is not possible due to boundary
conditions, then an analysis based on Green-Lagrange strain may be necessary.
c
References
Bathe, K. J. (1996), Finite Element Procedures, second edn, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, USA.
1037 pages.
Cheng, G. and Pedersen, P. (1997), ‘On sufficiency conditions for optimal design based on
extremum principles of mechanics’, J. Mechanics of Physics and Solids 45(1), 135–150.
Crisfield, M. A. (1991 and 1997), Non-linear Finite Element Analysis of Solids and Struc-
tures, Vol. 1 and 2, Wiley, Chichester, UK. 345 and 494 pages.
Felippa, C., Crivelli, L. A. and Haugen, B. (1994), ‘A survey of the core congruential formu-
lation for geometrically non-linear TL finite elements’, Archives Comp. Meth. Engng.
pp. 1–48.
Kleiber, M., Antunez, H., Hien, T. D. and Kowalczyk, P. (1997), Parameter Sensitivity in
Nonlinear Mechanics, Wiley, Chichester, UK. 406 pages.
Masur, E. F. (1970), ‘Optimum stiffness and strength of elastic structures’, J. Eng. Mech.
Div., ASCE EM5, 621–649.
Michaleris, P., Tortorelli, D. A. and Vidal, C. A. (1994), ‘Tangent operators and design
sensitivity formulations for transient non-linear coupled problems with applications to
elastoplasticity’, Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng. 37, 2471–2499.
Pedersen, P. (1973), ‘Some properties of linear strain triangles and optimal finite element
models’, Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng. 7, 415–429.
Pedersen, P. (1977), ‘On computer-aided analytical element analysis and the similarities of
tetrahedron elements’, Int. J. Numer. Meth. Engng. 11, 611–622.
Pedersen, P. (1984), Element-analysis (in Danish), Solid Mechanics, DTU. 99 pages.
Pedersen, P. (1987), ‘A note on plasticity theory in matrix notation’, Comm. in Applied Nu-
merical Methods 3, 541–546.
Pedersen, P. (1995), ‘Simple transformation by proper contracted forms’, Comm. in Numeri-
cal Methods in Engineering 11, 821–829.
Pedersen, P. (1998), ‘Some general optimal design results using anisotropic power law non-
linear elasticity’, Structural Optimization 15, 73–80.
Pedersen, P. (2003), ‘A note on design of fiber-nets for maximum stiffness’, J. of Elasticity
73, 127–145.
Pedersen, P. (2005a), ‘Analytical stiffness matrices with Green-Lagrange strain measure’, Int.
J. Numer. Meth. Engng. 62, 334–352.
Pedersen, P. (2005b), ‘Axisymmetric analytical stiffness matrices with Green-Lagrange
strains’, Computational Mechanics 35, 227–235.
Pedersen, P. (2006a), ‘Analytical stiffness matrices for tetrahedral elements’, Computer
Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 196, 261–278.
Pedersen, P. (2006b), ‘A direct analysis of elastic contact’, Computational Mechanics
37(1), 221–231.
91
c
Pedersen, P. (2006c), ‘On shrink fit analysis and design’, Computational Mechanics
37(2), 121–130.
Pedersen, P. (2007), ‘On the influence of clearance in orthotropic disc-pin contacts’, Com-
posite Structures 79, 554–561.
Pedersen, P. and Megahed, M. M. (1975), ‘Axisymmetric element analysis using analytical
computing’, Computers and Structures 5, 241–247.
Pedersen, P. and Taylor, J. E. (1993), Optimal design based on power-law non-linear elastic-
ity, in P. Pedersen, ed., ‘Optimal Design with Advanced Materials,’, Elsevier, pp. 51–66.
Wittrick, W. H. (1962), ‘Rates of change of eigenvalues, with reference to buckling and
vibration problems’, J. Royal Aeronautical Soc. 66, 590–591.
Index
[K]−1 LDRI, 10 displacement gradients, 2

[K]−1 LDTE, 11 energy density, 1
[K] −1 LDTR, 10 material parameters, 1
√
2 reference stresses, 1
formulation, 65 strain, 1
p-parameters, 8 stress, 1
3D strain/stress transformations, 66 thickness, 1
constant thickness, 6
Actual elements, 1 constitutive secant matrix, 37
additional basic matrices, 26 constitutive secant modulus, 58
Additional comments, 3 constitutive tangent matrix, 37
anisotropy, 2 constitutive tangent modulus, 59
Annular plate example, 88 contact applications, 81
approximation, 26, 54 control of the convergence rate, 84
area, 6 control of the searching spectrum, 84
assumed power law elasticity, 61 Convergence criteria, 42
axisymmetric element, 1 coordinate systems, 5
axisymmetric example, 88 corner points, 5
axisymmetric ring-element, 6, 10 cross-section of element, 6
axisymmetric system, 5
d’Alembert principle, 53
Background, 1 definition, 25
Backward substitution, 79 definitions of strain, 2
bandwidth, 78 Definitions, relations and sensitivities, 61
Basic matrices, 25 deformation, 68
basic matrices, conclusions, 28 Derivatives of elastic potentials, 62
bold matrices, 41 design independent load, 73
design independent loads, 62
Cantilever illustration, 87 determinant as 3rd order norm, 66
cantilever illustration, 87 determinant of [K], 10, 11
Cartesian coordinates, 5 deviatoric (dilatational) energy density, 70
Cauchy strains, see linear strains, 17 deviatoric invariants, 68
chapter flow—textbf, 2 deviatoric strains, 68
chapters on basic approach, iii deviatoric stresses, 69
characteristic polynomial, eigenvalues, 67 diagonal matrices, 77
co diagonals, 78 diagonal components, 78
code of Fortran program, 78 different notations, 37
combination factors, 30, 32, 33, 44–46 differential Green-Lagrange strains, 21
complementary energy density, 60 differential strain energy density, 58
complete set of eigenvectors, 76 differentiation of vector, 15
complete solution, 85 dilatation, 68
complete space of eigenvectors, 82 Dilatation, distortion, deviatoric strains, 68
compliance 2. order sensitivity, 75 direction cosines, 67
compliance = elastic energy, 74 directional decoupling, 9
computer execution time, 77 directional level, 22
computer storage, 77 displacement assumption, 9
condensation of [S], 80 Displacement assumptions and nodal displacements, 9
condensation of {A}, 80 Displacement gradients, 13
conforming elements, 6 displacement gradients, 14–16
conforming tetrahedra, 28 distortion, 68
conforming triangles, 25 Distortional energy densities and effective measures, 69
consistent inertia, 53 distortional energy density, 69
consistent line loads, 49 distribution matrix, 50
Consistent mass matrices, 53 dyadic product, 24
consistent surface traction, 49 dynamics to statics, 53
constant in an element
density, 1 earlier book, iii
93
c
Early experience, 1 index notation, 6, 9

early experience, 1 inertia force distribution, 84
effective strain, 38 inertia forces, 81
effective strain/stress, 58 internal potentials, 61
eigenvalue ⇒ eigenvector, 81 interpolation, 9
eigenvalue evaluation, 83 invariant vector lengths, 65
eigenvalues of mass matrix, 54 invariants, 66
eigenvector ⇒ eigenvalue, 81 Inverse iteration, 81
eigenvector space, 82 inverse iteration, 82
elastic strain energy, 61 inverse of [K], 10, 11
elastic stress energy, 61
Element geometry and nodal positions, 5 kinetic energy space, 85
element residual, 41
element size, 6 Lagrangian elements, 9
elements, 1 largest, absolute eigenvalue, 82
email: pauli, iii Layout of chapters and notation, 3
Energy densities, 55 LDRI
Energy densities in 1D non-linear elasticity, 56 [K]−1 , 10
Energy densities in 2D and 3D non-linear elasticity, 58 basic matrices, 26
energy equilibrium, 61, 75, 83 definition, 1
engineering strains, see linear strains, 17 displacement gradients, 14
equilibrium, 25, 28 geometry parameters, 6
equilibrium simplified, 61 Green-Lagrange strains, 18
equivalent nodal forces, 49 interpolations, 10
Equivalent nodal loads, 49 linear combination factors, 32
erroneous pure expansive dilatation, 88 linear strains, 18
errors secant constitutive components, 31
with small rotations, 89 strain/displacement sub-matrices, 22
Errors from linear strain models, 87 tangent combination factors, 45
errors indirect, 88 tangent constitutive components, 39
Euler strains, see linear strains, 17 LDRI: six basic matrices, 26
Expansive dilatation, 88 LDRI: the five geometry parameters, 6
explicitly depending on design, 73 LDRI: the four gradients and one relative displacement,
external potential, 61 14
external volume forces, 49 LDRI: the four strains, 18
extrema relations, 62 LDRI: the four stresses and the 4 × 4 constitutive matrix,
extreme normal strains, 67 39
LDRI: the interpolations, 10
factorization, 77 LDRI: the linear combinations, 31, 44
factorize the vector, 9 LDRI: the load matrix, 50
force distribution vector, 49 LDRI: the mass matrix, 54
force equilibrium, 75 LDRI: two strain/displacement sub-matrices, 22
force equilibriums at the directional level, 2 LDTE
Fortran factorization code, 78 [K]−1 , 11
Fortran substitution code, 79 basic matrices, 27
Forward substitution, 79 definition, 2
four index notation, 38 displacement gradients, 15
free undamped vibration, 75 geometry parameters, 7
Frobenius norm as 2nd order norm, 66 Green-Lagrange strains, 18, 19
interpolations, 11
Gauss factorization, 77 linear combination factors, 33
general aspects, 24 linear strains, 18, 19
general chapters, iii secant constitutive components, 32
general non-isotropic, 43 strain/displacement sub-matrices, 23
geometry tangent combination factors, 46
non-dimensional, 1 tangent constitutive components, 39
geometry parameters, 5–7 LDTE: six basic matrices, 27
global reference, 2 LDTE: the interpolations, 11
Green-Lagrange strain results, 88 LDTE: the linear combinations, 32, 45
Green-Lagrange strains, 2, 21 LDTE: the load matrix, 51
Green-Lagrange strains LDRI, 18 LDTE: the mass matrix, 54
Green-Lagrange strains LDTE, 19 LDTE: the nine displacement gradients, 15
Green-Lagrange strains LDTR, 18 LDTE: the nine geometry parameters, 7
LDTE: the six strains, 19
higher order eigenvectors, 84 LDTE: the six stresses and the 6 × 6 constitutive matrix,
homogeneous relations, 76 39
hydrostatic stress, 68 LDTE: three strain/displacement sub-matrices, 23
Hydrostatic stress, deviatoric stress, 68 LDTR
[K]−1 , 10
in house references, 3 basic matrices, 25
incompressible material, 68 definition, 1
Index 95
displacement gradients, 13 off diagonal components, 78

geometry parameters, 5 order of element matrices, 74
interpolations, 9 order of nodes, 6, 7
linear combination factors, 30 order of system matrices, 74
secant constitutive components, 29 orthogonal properties, 83
strain/displacement sub-matrices, 22 orthogonal rotation matrix, 65
tangent combination factors, 44 orthogonal sensitivities, 76
tangent constitutive components, 38 Orthogonalization, 83
LDTR: the four displacement gradients, 13 orthogonalized inverse iteration, 84
LDTR: the four geometry parameters, 5 orthotropic, 2
LDTR: the interpolations, 9 orthotropic material, 44
LDTR: the linear combinations, 29, 43
LDTR: the load matrix, 50 parameter combinations, 11
LDTR: the mass matrix, 53 physical interpretation, 38, 76
LDTR: the three strains, 18 physical quantities, concepts, 13
LDTR: the three stresses and the 3 × 3 constitutive ma- pivot components, 78
trix, 38 plane 2D element, 1
LDTR: three basic matrices, 25 plane 2D problems, 70
LDTR: two strain/displacement sub-matrices, 22 plane system, 5
length parameter, 6 polynomial displacement assumption, 12
linear combination factors, 85 positive definite, 54, 75
linear displacement assumption, 9–11 post multiplication, 77
linear eigenvalue problems, 77 potential energy space, 85
linear equations, 77 Potential relations, 61
linear strain model, 43, 44, 46 potential relations, 62
linear strain notation, 55 power law elasticity, 56
linear strain results, 88 Power method, 81
linear strains LDRI, 18 practical evaluation, 80
linear strains LDTE, 19 practical important, 76
linear strains LDTR, 18 practical physical procedure, 84
linear variations, 49 pre multiplication, 77
local design parameter, 62 Preface, iii
localized determination, 75 present book, iii
localized parameter, 74 Presented extensions, 2
lower matrices, 77 principal values, 67
projection matrices, 65
material elastic properties, 37 projection matrix, 68
method for a scalar function, 41 proof conclusions, 83
method for a vector function, 41 proof from linearity, 88
modeling from 3D to 2D, 37 proof of convergence, 82
multiple iteration vectors, 85 proportional relation, 58
multiple load cases, 79
mutual definition, 73 radial position, 6
mutual elastic energy, 74 Rate of convergence, 82
mutual kinetic energies, 85 Rayleigh quotient, 83
mutual orthogonalization, 83, 85 reference length, 9–11
mutual potential energies, 85 references, 73
Relations with power law elasticity, 62
name eigenvector eigenvalue, 81 relative positions, 5
name power method, 82 remark, 22, 37, 62
Newton-Raphson iterations, 41 Residuals and Newton-Raphson iterations, 41
no bold notation, 73 rigid body rotations, 88
no direction coupling, 53 robustness, 77
nodal circular lines, 1 rotational transformations, 65
nodal degrees of freedom, 9
nodal displacements, 9 secant and tangent modulus, 57
nodal points, 5 secant constitutive components, 29, 31, 32
nodal positions inserted, 10, 11 secant constitutive matrix, 29
nodal translations, 9 secant element matrix, 29
non singular matrix, 77 secant relations, 21
non-dimensional constitutive matrix, 38 Secant stiffness matrices, 29
non-dimensional geometry, 1 Sensitivity analysis, 73
non-dimensional matrices, 9 Sensitivity analysis for compliance, 74
non-isotropic material, 70 Sensitivity analysis for multiple eigenvalues, 76
non-linear strain model, 43, 45, 46 Sensitivity analysis for mutual elastic energy, 73
normalization, 49 Sensitivity analysis for simple eigenvalues, 75
normalized eigenvector, 75 serious errors, 87
not well known, 61 shape functions, 9
notation, 3 Shift, 83
numbering, 13–15 shift value, 84
Numerical tools, 77 short notation, 11
c
similar matrices, 26 variational stress energy density, 55

smallest, absolute eigenvalue, 82 virtual work, 29
solution separation, 81 volume, 6, 7, 11
space-dependent, 9 volume 3D element, 2
space-independent, 9 volume approximation, 6
specific case, 33 von Mises stress, 70
spectral decomposition, 67
spectrum shift, 84 without displacement change, 74
standard form, 81 without hydrostatic influence, 65
static condensation, 80
stationary total complementary potential, 63
stationary total potential, 62
Strain and stress energy densities, 55
Strain and stress vectors for 2D problems, 65
strain by differentiation, 55
strain energy density, 55
Strain measures, 17
Strain/displacement matrices, 21
Strain/stress descriptions and effective energy densities,
65
stress by differentiation, 55
stress energy density, 55
stress formulation, 70
Stress measures and material parameters, 37
Sturm sequence check, 84
Subspace iteration, 85
subspace reality, 85
Summary, 8, 12, 16, 19, 24, 28, 36, 40, 48, 51, 54, 60,
63, 71
super degrees of freedom, 80
Super element technique, 80
surface traction, 61
symmetric matrix, 43
symmetry proved, 42
system mass matrix, 81
system residual, 41
system stiffness matrix, 81
system tangent matrix, 41
tangent constitutive component, 39

tangent constitutive components, 38, 39
tangent modulus, 57
tangent relations, 21
Tangent stiffness matrices, 43
tensor, matrix and vector notations, 66
tetrahedron corners, 2
tetrahedron element, 7
tetrahedron volume, 11
The stress stiffness matrix, 42
three dimensional system, 5
three elements, 1
total element mass, 54
total energy density, 69
total energy density from distortion, 69
total potentials, 62
trace as 1st order norm, 66
traditional forms, 65
traditional strain vector definitions, 24
translation of element, 6, 7
triangle corners, 1
triangular area, 10
triangular plane element, 5
two/three step procedure, 79
unit forced displacement, 80

upper matrices, 77
user controls, 84
variational strain, 55
variational strain energy density, 55
variational stress, 55

Basic Matrix Approach in FE

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Basic Matrix Approach in FE

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The basic matrix approach

for three simple finite elements

May 19, 2008

The basic matrix approach

Chapter 15 on potential relations and sensitivities is published as an ap-

Kgs. Lyngby, Summer 2007

2 Element geometry and nodal positions 5

3 Displacement assumptions and nodal displacements 9

8 Secant stiffness matrices 29

9 Stress measures and

11 Tangent stiffness matrices 43

12 Equivalent nodal loads 49

13 Consistent mass matrices 53

16 Strain/stress descriptions and effective energy densities 65

19 Errors from linear strain models 87

1.2 Actual elements

1.3 Presented extensions

• Results are presented directly in a global reference coordinate system. Thus

• The extension from isotropic material behaviour to orthotropic is also made

1.4 General layout of the note

1.5 Layout of chapters and notation

{} Notation for column vectors.

{ }T Notation for row vectors, with T as notation for transpose.

[S]ij Outer index or indexes on matrices and vectors

vi,j Notation for partial differentiation is comma, i.e., vi,j := ∂xj .

{H},j Differential of a matrix or a vector means

:= Symbol for definition.

1.6 Additional comments

Element geometry and nodal

2.1 LDTR: the four geometry parameters

Figure 2.1 shows a triangular element with parameterization by the parameters

2.2 LDRI: the five geometry parameters

p5 (r̄, z̄) (p1 + p2 , p4 )

2.3 LDTE: the nine geometry parameters

Figure 2.3: Definition of parameters p1 − p9 , that describes the tetrahedron geometry.

Displacement assumptions and

vi = {H}T [K]−1 {D}i (3.3)

3.2 LDRI: the interpolations

3.3 LDTE: the interpolations

The determinant of [K] is

where the tetrahedron volume V as noted before is [K]−1 LDTE

qx = p5968 + p3829 + p2635

The displacement gradients are non-dimensional and recognized as physical quanti-

4.1 LDTR: the four displacement gradients

Figure 4.1: Definition of nodal displacements d1 − d6 , for plane problems.

as it is found by evaluating (4.1) with (3.7) and (4.2).

4.2 LDRI: the four gradients and

Figure 4.2: Definition of nodal displacements d1 − d6 for an axisymmetric ring-

vr,r = {H}T,r [K]−1 {D}r vz,z = {H}T,z [K]−1 {D}z

of nodal displacements d1 − d6 are

4.3 LDTE: the nine displacement gradients

Figure 4.3: Definition of nodal displacements d1 − d12 for a tetrahedron element,

The nine displacement gradients in terms of the twelve nodal displacements d 1 −

5.1 LDTR: the three strains

5.2 LDRI: the four strains

Lagrange ηθθ = vr /r + vr vr /r2 ' v̄r /r̄ + v̄r v̄r /r̄ 2 ,

5.3 LDTE: the six strains

i.e., the vector {BijL }T := {D}T [B 2 ] depends linearly on {D}.

{η} = [B̄]{D} = [B̄]x {D}x + [B̄]y {D}y + [B̄]z {D}z (6.6)

6.1 LDTR: two strain/displacement sub-matrices

{H}T,x {H},x {H}T,x

T  [K]−1 + 1 {D}T [K]−T  [K]−1

6.2 LDRI: two strain/displacement sub-matrices

u + uσ = {σ}T {} (14.6)

du = {σ}T {d} (14.12)

2e := {}T [α]{} (14.15)

2e de = 2{}T [α]{d} (14.16)