You are on page 1of 17

INTERNATIONALJOURNAL FOR NUMERICAL METHODS IN ENGINEERING

,

VOL. 28,687-703 (1989)

EIGENVALUE ANALYSIS OF COMPATIBLE AND INCOMPATIBLE RECTANGULAR FOUR-NODE QUADRILATERAL ELEMENTS
W. L. HACKER AND H.L. SCHREYER

Department oJ Mechanical Engineering, University uf New Mexico, Albuquerque, N M 87131, U.S.A.

SUMMARY Exact analytical expressions for the eigenvalues of the elastic stiffness matrix are obtained for the four-node, rectangular, quadrilateral element. A procedure is given for identifying alternative hourglass modes and eigenvalues which render the element incompatible but with non-monotonic convergence assured. A convergence study confirms that for the special case of when the hourglass modes coincide with beam bending the element can serve as a beam element. Analytical expressions are given for the resulting element stiffness matrix.

INTRODUCTION
The stiffness matrix for any element consists of the sum of the matrix product of eigenvectors with each product multiplied by an eigenvalue. If some of the eigenvalues are set to zero, perhaps indirectly by an approximate method for generating stiffness matrices, all stiffness associated with these modes is lost. Surprisingly, such elements often produce results which are improvements over the exact formulation. Unfortunately, if the boundary conditions are not sufficiently kinematic in nature then the global stiffness matrix is singular and spurious deformations, often called hourglass modes, may evolve to the point that the solution is meaningless for dynamic problems, Of course, static solutions cannot be obtained either for such circumstances. The singularity is often removed by assigning an arbitrary non-zero eigenvalue at the elcment level to these element hourglass eigenvectors, in which case numerical solutions can be obtained that are often very good approximations to analytical solutions. With the finite element method, convergence can be proved provided the element shape functions and nodal variables represent complete polynomials up to an order that depends on the governing differential equation. The test for completeness is the essence of the ‘patch test’. If the hourglass modes are not required for the representation of a complete polynomial, then any approximate eigenvalue can be used and convergence is still assured. In fact, from a numerical viewpoint one might want to select an approximate eigenvalue to minimize the condition number of the global stiffness matrix. To our knowledge, this criterion has not been invoked in any of the studies on hourglass control. However, since compatibility along the element boundaries is no longer guaranteed, convergence may not be monotonic. Furthermore, for a given problem, a judicious choice of the replaced eigenvalue can lead to approximate solutions that are more accurate than those obtained using the exact element stiffness matrix. Unfortunately, the choice is problem and element dependent. There have been numerous contributions’ - 5 on the subject of hourglass control involving issues such as efficiency, accuracy and convenience. Efficiency and convenience are tied with the

0029%5981/89/030687-17$08.50 0 1989 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 22 April 1988 Revised 18 August 1988

NOTATION In this section.~ ) ( -s) l N2 = 1 Y) ( 1 . L. as shown previously by Wilson et aL6 A convergence study is given for the element with the incompatible beam mode for model problems with and without transverse shear.S) ~3 a( + = a(i + r ) ( i +s) N4 = $(1-r)(l +s) in which r and s are local co-ordinates. analytical expressions for the eigenvalues are obtained for the fournode. The superscript T designates a transpose. As part of the development. exact eigenvalues provide insight into the physical significance associated with the various procedures related to reduced integration and the control of zero energy modes.688 W. rectangular. HACKER AND H. (+g) Figure I . and the basis functions are associated with the nodes shown in Figure 1.. One of these modes is associated with pure bending. The notation associated with a rectangular quadrilateral element is illustrated in Figure 1. The usual nodal basis functions are defined to be N' =ail . Instead. A scalar function. s). It is shown that a family of modes can be specifically associated with a wide range of eigenvalues. -> . quadrilateral element. SCHREYER global solution algorithm and will not be discussed here. &(r. basic relations are summarized for ease of reference. These expressions serve as a basis from which the effects of aspect ratio and approximate hourglass eigenvalues can be evaluated. the freedom to select hourglass eigenvalues is investigated in dctail for the four-node quadrilateral. Co-ordinates and node numbers used to define elements (-. Furthermore. is represented over the element by in which represents the row vector of nodal variables identified by superscripts and ( N ) denotes the row vector of nodal basis functions. L.

The letters R.s+a4rs) (10) Convergence for the finite element method requires only that the finite element representation for the dependent variable 4 be complete in first order polynomials (for second order differential equations). v") . it is useful to have analytical expressions for eigenvalues. However. it is immediately apparent that the contribution from the 'hourglass' mode is irrelevant with regard to convergence and it follows that an alternative value for the eigenvalue of a stiffness matrix associated with the hourglass mode can be used without affecting the rate of convergence. Define an extended displacement vector to be the combination (11) in which superscripts designate nodal values. r s } (6) Then the vector of nodal basis functions is given by i w =Cml {PI so that an alternative representation for (7) 4 is 4 = ( P ) lmlT {41 Suppose the nodal variables are represented as a linear combination of the modes given in (4): {41= a. exact representations of the eigenvalues of the element stiffness matrix for the rectangular. u3. it follows from (8) that + a3 {G. u4. four-node quadrilateral do not appear to be available in the literature. G. respectively. it is particularly convenient to introduce the modes associated with the unit square as follows: where the vectors are of unit length and mutually perpendicular with respect to the 2-norm.r.j w 1 (5) which is orthogonal because of the properties of the columns. Construct the modal matrix Cml=C{RI jGr3 {G.. STIFFNESS MATRIX FOR THE RECTANGULAR FOUR-NODE QUADRILATERAL To study in detail the effects of underintegration and hourglass control. vl.ANALYSIS OF RECTANGULAR ELEMENTS 689 As pointed out by Flanagan and Belytschkol. appropriate definitions for extended 02. ( w ) = (u1. Let II and v denote the two components of the displacement vector in the x and y directions.s. (N+ a2 &I Not surprisingly. constant gradients with respect to r and s. respectively. d. and the polynomial vector ( p } = (pi'= +(I. G.) + a4 w 1 (9) 4 =+(a1 +a2r+a3. and H are used to suggest a uniform translation (rigid body). for plane stress and strain. Similarly. and an 'hourglass' mode. Thus. A derivation for these eigenvalues is given next. u2.

SCHKEYER polynomial and modal matrices are in which the partitioning and use of null vectors and matrices is self evident. it is convenient to introduce stress and strain vectors with a factor of J2 associated with shear to preserve the capability to easily compute norms: (a)=<~11.h 0 0 ~ _ _ _0 r b$ b$ a 3 In the definition of the element stiffness matrix. HACKER AND H. an operator matrix is needed Then where the gradient matrix [GI is given by l o !a [G]=[L][P]= O O 0 ~ a S 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 1 - O 1 O b b a. It follows that For plane problems. L. L.690 W.{ = [El (4 To obtain strains from displacements.~22rfia12) The elasticity matrix [El is defined such that I. it is convenient to define a stiffness gradient matrix for the element as follows: [K]" =Z{[k]G) (19) .

v ) .ANALYSIS OF RECTANGULAR ELEMENTS 69 1 in which the operator I { } indicates that each component of the matrix argument is integrated over the element. The result is that the 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E 2 0 O .(1 +v)(l-Zv) Ez=- YE1 1-v SO The resulting expression for [klG.v z whereas for plane strain E E(l .G O O G b 0 0 0 0 0 [KIG = 0 0 0 0 0 0 G D I O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b 0 0 . the elasticity matrix is 0 0 2G where 2G = E/(1+ v). which is given in the Appendix. $ (23) For an isotropic material.G a ~ 2 : 0 a O O O g E 1 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D. It follows that they have the same eigenvalues and if (e)" denotes an eigenvector of [ K I G .then the corresponding eigenvector of [ K ] is { = [MI MG . - . respectively. = YEl 1. with E and v denoting Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio. or I{ The argument is )=I1[ -1 { jTdrds ub -1 Then the element stiffness matrix becomes CK1= [MI CKIG[ I M' (22) which implies that [ K ] and [ K I G are similar matrices. For plane stress E El =E . is simple enough integrations can be performed analytically.

SCHREYER in which D .0) (el) = ( ( R ) .0.0. The eigenvectors can be determined by inspection. and the eigenvectors associated with the element stiffness matrix follow from (23). (0)) I.(:El +$G) By inspection. LEI U 0 b U 0 CKlE = which yields one additional zero eigenvalue and three non-trivial eigenvalues. After eliminating the rows and columns associated with these eigenpairs. The results are summarized as follows: A1 =o ( e l ) " = (1.) G . two of the eigenvalues are zero and two more are readily identified as the diagonal terms given by (28) in rows where all other components are zero. and reordering the remaining rows and columns. L.( -+- .0.='(!Ela 3 +iG) D2 =.=O A 4:. HACKER AND H L.0.0.0. the resulting reduced matrix assumes the form E.692 W.

The first two modes correspond to rigid body translations in the r and s directions. or the elements are said to ‘lock up’. and v = 0. There is a symmetry about the value of 4 6 = 1. extension and stretching modes. The last two are referred to as flexure modes and involve only the ‘hourglass’ mode for one or the other of the displacement components. Normalizing factors have been included for completeness. while the third mode describes rigid body rotation. while the eigenvalue for the first flexure mode (JV7)decreases initially until a/6 = 1.25.ANALYSIS OF RECTANGULAR ELEMENTS (30h) It is seen that the eigenvectors of [ K ] are orthogonal. The eigenvalues are normalized with respect to E . Plots of the eigenvalues as functions of aspect ratio are given in Figures 3 and 4. respectively. . The mode shapes are shown in Figure 2. the eigenvalues associated with some of the modes become infinite and the result is that an approximate solution can be much too stiff. If the aspect ratio is one (a = b) then the eigenvalues of the two flexure modes are equal. The fourth. respectively.73 and then increases. most eigenvalues increase in value except that the one associated with the stretching mode (&) approaches zero. fifth and sixth eigenvectors are often referred to as the shear. When this occurs. the unique eigenvalue and eigenvectors are given by (30i) These mode shapes are also shown in Figure 2. In certain instances. For an increase in aspect ratio above 1.

For the sake of completeness.. L. the full element stiffness matrix is also given in the Appendix. A? and A. the first six eigenvalues are the same but A? and A8 become zero and the corresponding eigenvectors are then referred to as hourglass modes. are infinite. L.694 W. Instead of an exact integration. A typical example for which notoriously poor results are obtained with the use of the four-node quadrilateral element is that of an incompressible material (v = Q) in plane strain. A6. In a repesentation similar to that associated with (9)and (lo). if one point integration is used to evaluate the integrals of (18) then it is a relatively easy matter to show that the eigenvectors remain the same as those associated with exact integration. and consequently A.- --- -----I Rigid Body Mode (s direction): j=l Rigid Body Mode (rotation): Shear Mode: r---------1 Extension Mode: Stretching Mode: r-. SCHREYER Rigid Body Mode (r direction): y . it can be shown from (13) that the hourglass modes only . Flexure Mode 2: c L- _-- Figure 2. HACKER AND H. Mode shapes with second set of flexural mode shapes shown for an aspect ratio of one This is particularly true if the element modes associated with these eigenvectors are an essential component of the true deformation pattern. Furthermore. in which case El..

Eigenvalues as functions of aspcct ratio for flexural modes .ANALYSIS OF RECTANGIJLAR ELEMENTS 695 Aspect ratia. Eigenvalues as functions of aspect ratio for first three dcforniation modes 00 ' ' ' I ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' * ' ' - Figure 4. o/b Figure 3.

L.(.696 W. 4 -E. these terms vanish so that an exact integration yields a matrix [K]" similar to that of (27) with the exception that 0=(u> u=<u){N)+(~){H)f D.ah 2 c I 4= $ll.21 +4(E1c22 -~ Gc23 +-+-) ab (34) Gc24 hZ in which y7 and y8 are free parameters.?. consider the following modification to the polynomial matrix: in which andfand g are polynomials which are zero at each node (to ensure convergence).1 = c12 = c21 = c22 = 0 c I 3 = -.=D in which h" )+'-. a number of terms appear which are odd in r or s. 5: )+--El+ 3 a G -- 2E2c11+4 ab ah ( ab 7 a2 I I :) ' . . HACKER AND H. It follows that c. it is not surprising that appropriate artificial eigenvalues for the flexure modes can provide results that are more accurate than those obtained with the same mesh and exact eigenvalues. The form of (31) implies that y and fare activated only by hourglass modes in a coupled manner since (1 3) now yields (33) { N l +(a> (HI9 Supposeiand g are even functions of I and s. INCOMPATIBLE MODES Because an incompatible deformation field is a kinematic relaxation. When integrated.+-G 2E2(. in the expression for [k]". L. Compatibility is maintained if y a n d f a r e zero over the boundary of the element.ah ~ 2 = 3 --j-y8ab 2 (37) c24= 4 ~ ah . SCHREYER contribute to the quadratic polynomial part of u and ti and convergence is unaffected provided the rank deficiency is removed. To illustrate this feature and to provide an example of an incompatible element. Then.

Load case A depicts an applied moment while case B is that of a LOAD CASE B L E=l V = 0. Conversely. in which case E . Then the four-node quadrilateral transitions automatically to an efficient beam element. y s a = $b/a. as illustrated previously by Wilson et a1. Since convergence is assured no matter what values are chosen for these particular eigenvalues.25 . for specific choices of the hourglass eigenvalues. However.ANALYSIS OF RECTANGULAR ELEMENTS 697 and If y 7 and y e are chosen to minimize A7 and resulting eigenvalues are respectively. the eigenvalues given by (39) incorporate the assumption of plane stress or strain. = E. an explicit interpretation may be given concerning the nature of the incompatibility that is introduced..I b=l L=4 Figure 5. CONVERGENCE STUDY The cantilever beam depicted in Figure 5 was used to demonstrate the convergence characteristics of the incompatible element. then y7 = ajb. Cantilever beam used for model problem . With this formulation it is a relatively easy matter to explore the effects of alternative choices for fand g. To obtain the complete analogy with beam theory.c . v must be set to zero. One example might be to selectfand g so that integrals over the area of the element are zero with the result that a special rule is unnecessary for evaluating force vectors. and the It is easily seen that the addition of the termsfand g given in (36).6 allows an element to deform in pure bending described by elementary beam theory. which includes the restriction of uniaxial stress. it would seem efficacious to select them to be in the element stiffness matrix.

At the fixed end. Mesh refinement is accomplished by doubling the number of elements in each direction and. all nodes are constrained in both directions. SCFIREYER transverse shear load. Results for the moment load are shown in Figure 7 where the displacement result using the standard ‘fully-integrated‘ element with an aspect ratio of one is given for comparison. L. exact results are obtained for one element through the thickness no matter what aspect ratio is used. Typical mesh used for model problem Number of elements Figure 7.698 W. As expected for the ‘Wilson’ type element. Results of convergence analysis for load case A [moment) . For each case. normalized with respect to the displacement obtained from bcnding theory. thereby. the initial mesh configuration consists of one element through the thickness. and the appropriate number of elements in the longitudinal direction as dictated by the element aspect ratio. maintaining the element aspect ratio. HACKER AND H. L. as indicated in Figure 6. Displacements at the centre of the end of the beam. As more elements are used through the thickness. the accuracy LOAD CASE B A Figure 6 . are used to demonstrate the results.

_ 0.8 07 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Number of elements Figure 8.’ and perhaps others. The results for a beam with significant shear deformation are even more interesting. results for the standard element form a basis for comparison. The fact that the solution with the modified element converges rapidly to values only slightly below the exact analytical solution for the mid-point of the beam tip is a consequence of the relaxation introduced into the hourglass mode by setting Poisson’s ratio to zero.ANALYSIS OF RECTANGIJLAR ELEMENTS 699 1. . Results o convergence analysis for load case B (transverse force) f actually deteriorates but always remains better than that of the standard element. The solution is above that given by bending theory. If Poisson’s ratio is identically zero. then the results using the Wilson type element always produce the beam solution no matter how many elements are used in the thickness direction. as shown in Figure 8 where. The approach can be considered as special cases of the procedures described by Bergan and Felippa’ for triangular membrane elements. which is a demonstration of the fact that shear deformation is an inherent part of the element. and by Belytschko and Bachrach’ for general four-node quadrilaterals with the distinction that analytical expressions for eigenvalues have been given here. about the poor bending response of the conventional four-node quadrilateral.G + c Lu g 0._ U 5 t Q . and results using the standard element converge to the beam solution in the usual manner.9 m . but since Poisson’s ratio is not zero in general for these eigenvalues. again. The reason for the decrease in accuracy is that element modes other than the bending mode become capable of describing the structural bending response. and respond to concerns by Prathap. the uniaxial stress state associated normally with pure bending is not reflected in the solution. These results add to previous studies that demonstrate the potential benefit of using hourglass modes to enhance the performance of an element without affecting convergence.

APPENDIX With the form of the elasticity matrix given in (24) and the gradient matrix of (21) it follows that 0 0 0 0 b2El 0 0 0 a2G b2E. The fully integrated element stiffness matrix that follows from (22) is . Ih =--E. Flanagan were particularly helpful and encouraging. It is easily shown that a 2 x 1 integration scheme yields while a 1 x 2 scheme results in n A. The procedure developed in the paper also serves to illustrate how specific incompatible modes can be associated with reduced values for hourglass eigenvalues in which case convergence (non-monotonic) is maintained. 3a A8 = lb G 3u (43) with no changes in the other eigenvalues. Kcy and D. These expressions serve as a basis for evaluating the effects of aspect ratio.s u2Gr 0 0 abG 0 0 ahE2r abE. incompressibility and underintegration. s 2+ a 2 C r 2 ) 0 0 0 0 0 abE. 0 0 ahGr uhE2s ah(E2 G)rs abCr 0 b2G 0 + 0 0 a2El abC 0 a2Elr 0 a b E g abGs + b2Gs a 2 E l r (a2E. The procedure provides an alternative interpretation of the element stiffness matrix when hourglass modes consistent with beam bending are incorporated. With one point integration all terms involving r or s vanish so that conclusions given in the text concerning eigenvalues arc easily obtained. 0 ahE2s 0 abCs ab(E2 G)rs 0 h2Gs Ikl" 1 =m 0 h 2 E l s u2Gr ( h Z E .700 W L IIAC'KFK A N D H L SCHREYER CONCLUSION With the use of a similarity transformation the derivation of analytical expressions for the eigenvalues of the elastic stiffness matrix becomes an elementary operation for the four-node rectangular element.r2+h2Gs2) An exact integration over the clement results in (27). ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Discussions with S. The formulation provides additional insight into many of the existing algorithms which exploit the hourglass modes for improved accuracy and computational efficiency.

(47) then the corresponding fully integrated element stiffness matrix is [K*] = . by interchanging Li and h. u2. u4. -B. B.( E 2 + c. Suppose the displacement variables are ordered in the conventional manner ( w * ) = ( ul. -B.-(E2 . tl3. v I . by interchanging El and G. B.NTS 70 1 in which the submatrices are BI B2 B.) 4 1 1 B . -B.ANALYSIS OF RECTANGULAR ELEMF.c ' ~u3. and B6 are obtained from B2 and B 3 . -4BL B3 B3 symm. -'B2 4 B6 145) CK121= [ symm. O n the other hand. v4) .G ) 8-4 Note that B. respectively. -B7 [KZIl and = CK12I' B7 = . B4 B. B. -B7 B8 B7 -R. B7 -B8 -B7 B. is obtained from B.

‘A uniform strain hexahedron and quadrilateral with orthogonal hourglass control’. The use of (22) yields the element stiffness matrices in the form of either (44) or (48). and hence the submatrices [K12J and [K..F2 0 0 14.$ 0 0 0 0 [K]“ = 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ifl 0 0 0 0 A70 0 0 0 0 n. are unaffected by the hourglass eigenvalues. Belytschko.. REFERENCES 1. .L. it may be useful to have element stiffness matrices expressed in terms of eigenvalues so that the effect of changing any one eigenvalue can be evaluated. (30g) and (30h). P. the use of [KIG= 1 jLi{ei}(. D. HACKER AND H. (e i ) G i=4 8 (49) leads to r o o 0 a y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A.702 W. L. Flanagan and T. SCHREYER For applications in computer codes. .]. 0 0 n:f 0 in which A7 and 0 0 0 0 np . 17. 679-706 (1981). and the remaining terms are The superscripts are used to suggest which eigenvalues are involved. where The terms B7 and B .j . I n f . To this end. methods eng. 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 A 8 & are given by (28). numer. while the subscripts indicate relative positions in the matrix.

Jacquotte and J . 1: Element Technology. K. Kennedy. J.. Liu and J. 2. E. 251 276 (1984). 7. 6. 4. T. Taylor. I n t . J. W. P. .. 128-1 52. A. L. Hughes and E. E. M. Numerical und Computer Models in Struclural Mechanics. pp. Felippd.). 5. 21. 43. T. 57-72 (1978). R. 279-301 (1986). R . Eng. Fenves et al. methods geomecb. Finite Element Methodsfor Plate and Shell Structures. methods eng. N. Prathap. j . Wilson. pp. Frazier. Int. C. methods eng. 54.. j . Hughes. Chapter 5. ‘Incompatibledisplacement models’.inear Static and Dynamic Finite Element Analysis.. Schulz.K. Mech. The Finite E l m e n t Method: I. T. Methods Appl. 1039-1048 (1985). Ghaboussi. New York. Eng. 21. Academic Press. numer. J. ‘Treatment of hourglass patterns in low order finite element codes’. numer. Methods Appl. Eng. 339-363 ( I 984). Mech. Englewood Cliffs. A. Belytschko and W. 0. Doherty and J.. 10. J. 3. Methods Appl. ‘Efficient implementation of a triangular membrane element with drilling freedoms’.Ong. Belytschko. Comp. Bachrach. Prentice-Hall.-J. in S.. Vol.J. U. ‘The poor bending response of the four-node plane stress quadrilateral’. (eds. T. J. G. j . in T. S. Swansea. Comp. 9. 44. Koslofland G. P.ANALYSIS OF RECTANGULAR E L E M E N T S 703 2. Mech. Bergan and C. 8. 1973. ‘Finite elcment hourglassing control’. ‘Efficient implementation of quadrilaterals with high coarse-mesh accuracy’. ‘Analysis of hourglass instabilities and control in underintegrated finite element methods’. 1987. Comp. L. Pineridge Press.). numer. 43-57. Hinton (eds. Oden.. ‘Hourglass control in linear and nonlinear problems’. Int. D. 825-835 (1985).. R.-P. G . W.