Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 27 (2003) 115–124

www.elsevier.com/locate/enganabound

Nonlinear dynamic analysis of heterogeneous orthotropic membranes

by the analog equation method
John T. Katsikadelis*, George C. Tsiatas
Department of Civil Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Zografou Campus, GR-15773 Athens, Greece
Received 15 December 2001; accepted 21 February 2002

Abstract
In this paper the analog equation method, a BEM-based method, is employed to analyze the dynamic response of flat heterogeneous
orthotropic membranes of arbitrary shape, undergoing large deflections. The problem is formulated in terms of the three displacement
components. Due to the heterogeneity of the membrane, the elastic constants are position dependent and consequently the coefficients of the
partial differential equations governing the dynamic equilibrium of the membrane are variable. Using the concept of the analog equation, the
three-coupled nonlinear second order hyperbolic partial differential equations are replaced with three uncoupled Poisson’s quasi-static
equations with fictitious time dependent sources. The fictitious sources are represented by radial basis functions series and are established
using a BEM-based procedure. Both free and forced vibrations are considered. Membranes of various shapes are analyzed to illustrate the
merits of the method as well as its applicability, efficiency and accuracy. The proposed method is boundary-only in the sense that the
discretization and the integration are restricted on the boundary. Therefore, it maintains all the advantages of the pure BEM.
q 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Nonlinear dynamic; Heterogeneous; Orthotropic; Membrane

1. Introduction the material or from the variable thickness of the membrane.

The modern technology has provided us with light
materials that can withstand great tensile forces. This
enables the use of tensile structures to cover spans with
dimensions of about 100 m. Among them the membranes
play an important role. Therefore, a rigorous analysis to
predict their response under static and dynamic loads
becomes very important.
In the linear membrane theory we assume that the
additional stretching of the membrane due to the in-service
transverse load is small and the stress resultants are
predetermined and remain unchanged during the out-of-
plane deformation. However, with the increasing transverse
load, the additional stretching of the membrane cannot be
neglected. A consequence of this is the coupling of the
transverse displacement with the in-plane ones and the
governing differential equations are coupled and nonlinear.
Modern materials, mostly composite, exhibit anisotropy.
Heterogeneity may also appear, which may arise either from
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ 30-772-1654; fax: þ30-772-1655.
E-mail address: jkats@central.ntua.gr (J.T. Katsikadelis).
0955-7997/03/$ - see front matter q 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 5 5 - 7 9 9 7 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 8 9 - 9
In the latter case the equations are more complicated, since
the heterogeneity is reflected in the coefficients of the
differential equations, which become position dependent.
The solution of the membrane equations is a very difficult
mathematical problem. Analytical solutions as well as
approximate ones for the static problem of isotropic and
homogeneous membrane are listed in Ref. [1]. Numerical
solutions for the same problem have been obtained by the
FEM [2] and by the AEM [1]. Moreover, AEM has been
employed for the static problem of orthotropic and
heterogeneous membranes [3].
The membranes under static loads preclude instability.
However, dynamic loads complicate the analysis. The effect
of the airflow has great practical significance, because
negative loads produced by the wind (suction) may reach up
to 1.1 kN/m2. Under loads of such magnitude membranes
often experience extremely strong vibrations. Vortex shed-
ding may produce harmonic lift forces. Flutter and galloping
are wind effects that require also dynamic analysis. As the
membranes undergo large deflections, the linear dynamic
analysis is inadequate to predict their response and to study
their dynamic characteristics. Hence, nonlinear vibration
116 J.T. Katsikadelis, G.C. Tsiatas / Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 27 (2003) 115–124

analysis is necessary. The governing equations are coupled the two-dimensional, in general multiply connected, domain
nonlinear partial differential equations of hyperbolic type. V in the xy-plane bounded by the K þ 1 nonintersecting
Therefore, their solution raises a much more difficult contours G0 ; G1 ; …; GK (Fig. 1). The membrane is
problem compared to the static one. With regard to the prestressed either by imposed displacement u~ ; v~ or by
dynamic problem there are FEM formulations [2] but, to the external
Si¼K forces T~ x ; T~ y acting along the boundary G ¼
authors knowledge, no numerical results have been pub- i¼0 Gi : Moderate large deflections are considered. They
lished. The AEM has been successfully employed to solve result from nonlinear kinematic relations, which retain the
the dynamic problem of isotropic membranes, linear square of the slopes of the deflection surface, while the strain
heterogeneous [4] as well as of nonlinear homogeneous [5]. components remain still small compared with the unity.
In this paper the AEM is employed to nonlinear dynamic This theory is good for considerably large deflections. Thus,
analysis of heterogeneous membranes, which without the strain components are given as
restricting the generality are assumed orthotropic. Accord-
1x ¼ u;x þ 1
w2;x ð1aÞ
ing to this method, the three-coupled nonlinear partial 2
differential equations of hyperbolic type are replaced with 1y ¼ v;y þ 1
w2;y ð1bÞ
2
three equivalent quasi-static Poisson’s equations under
fictitious time dependent loads. These fictitious loads are gxy ¼ u;y þ v;x þ w;x w;y ð1cÞ
represented by radial basis function series and are where u ¼ uðx; y; tÞ; v ¼ vðx; y; tÞ are the in-plane displace-
established using a procedure based on BEM [5]. Sub- ment components and w ¼ wðx; y; tÞ is the transverse
sequently, the displacements and the stress resultants at any deflection due to load g ¼ gðx; y; tÞ acting in the direction
point and instant are computed from their integral normal to its plane.
representations, which are used as mathematical formulas. Using Hamilton’s principle and neglecting the in-plane
Several membranes are analyzed to illustrate the merit of the inertia forces we obtain the following differential equations,
method and its capabilities. The developed method is which govern the dynamic equilibrium of the membrane
boundary-only in the sense that the discretization and
integration are limited only to the boundary. Thus, the Nx;x þ Nxy;y ¼ 0 ð2aÞ
method maintains all the advantages of the pure BEM. Nyx;x þ Ny;y ¼ 0 ð2bÞ
rw;tt 2 Nx w;xx 2 2Nxy w;xy 2 Ny w;yy ¼ g ð2cÞ
2. Problem statement and governing equations
in V; together with the boundary conditions
Consider a thin flexible initially flat elastic membrane Tx ¼ T~ x or u ¼ u~ ð3aÞ
consisting of heterogeneous orthotropic linearly elastic
Ty ¼ T~ y or v ¼ v~ ð3bÞ
material having surface mass density rðx; yÞ occupying
Tx w;x þ Ty w;y ¼ V~ or w ¼ w~ ð3cÞ
on G; and the initial conditions
wðx; y; 0Þ ¼ w
~0 ð4aÞ
wðx; _~ 0
_ y; 0Þ ¼ w ð4bÞ
in V: The tilde over a symbol designates prescribed
quantity.
The quantities
Nx ¼ C1 1x þ C1y ð5aÞ
Ny ¼ C1x þ C2 1y ð5bÞ
Nxy ¼ C12 gxy ð5cÞ
are the membrane forces, in which
E1 h
C1 ¼ ; ð6aÞ
1 2 n1 n2
E2 h
C2 ¼ ð6bÞ
1 2 n1 n2
E1 n 2 h E2 n 1 h
C¼ ¼ ð6cÞ
Fig. 1. Domain V occupied by the membrane. 1 2 n1 n2 1 2 n1 n2
 J.T. Katsikadelis, G.C. Tsiatas / Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 27 (2003) 115–124 117

C12 ¼ Gh ð6dÞ 3. The analog equation method

are the stiffness coefficients of the orthotropic membrane
with E1 ; E2 and v1 ; v2 are the elastic moduli and the Poisson
coefficients in the x and y directions, respectively, constraint
by the relation E1 n1 ¼ E2 n2 ; and G is the shear modulus [6].
Note that for heterogeneous material the stiffness
coefficients are position dependent, namely C1 ¼ C1 ðx; yÞ;
C2 ¼ C2 ðx; yÞ; C ¼ Cðx; yÞ and C12 ¼ C12 ðx; yÞ: Moreover,
Tx ¼ Nx cos a þ Nxy sin a
Ty ¼ Nxy cos a þ Ny sin a
are the boundary tractions; a ¼ ]x; n: It should be noted
that mixed boundary conditions could also be applied.
The prestress can be applied either before the action of
the transverse load or simultaneously. In the first case, the
transverse load should be applied with homogeneous in-
plane boundary conditions ðu ¼ 0; v ¼ 0Þ and the mem-
brane forces in Eq. (2c) should be augmented by those
resulting from the prestress. In this analysis, without
restricting the generality, it is assumed that the membrane
is prestressed by imposed boundary displacements acting
simultaneously with the transverse load. Namely, the
assumed boundary conditions are
u ¼ u~
v ¼ v~
w¼w
~ ð8cÞ
The initial boundary value problem described by Eqs.
(4), (8) and (9) is solved using the analog equation method
(AEM) following the procedure employed for nonlinear
homogeneous membranes [5]. This method is applied to the
problem at hand as follows.
Let u ¼ uðx; y; tÞ; v ¼ vðx; y; tÞ and w ¼ wðx; y; tÞ be the
sought solution of Eq. (9). These functions are twice
ð7aÞ differentiable in V: Thus, applying the Laplace operator to
them yields
ð7bÞ
72 ui ¼ bi ðx; y; tÞ; i ¼ 1; 2; 3 ð10Þ
where bi are fictitious sources depending also on time. Eqs.
(10) are quasi-static, that is the time variable appears as a
parameter. Note that here and in what it follows u1 ; u2 and
u3 stand for the functions u; v and w; respectively. Eqs. (10),
which henceforth will be referred to as the analog equations
of the problem at hand, indicate that the solution of Eqs. (9)
could be established by solving these three uncoupled
Poisson’s equations under the boundary conditions (8), if
the fictitious sources bi ði ¼ 1; 2; 3Þ were known.
The fictitious sources are established using BEM.
Following the idea of Nardini and Brebbia [7], bi are
approximated by
ð8aÞ
ð8bÞ X
M
bi ¼ aðiÞ
j fj ð11Þ
j¼1

When the membrane is prestressed by boundary tractions, where fj ¼ fj ðrÞ are M approximating radial basis functions
the displacements u~ ; v~ can be first established using and aðiÞ ðiÞ
j ¼ aj ðtÞ are 3M coefficients to be determined. Note
the solution of the corresponding static problem with that r ; rjP ¼ lP 2 Pj l is the distance between the colloca-
gðx; yÞ ¼ 0 and traction boundary conditions [3]. In any tion point pj : {xj ; yj } and any point P : {x; y} [ V < G
case, attention should be paid, so that the prestress results in (Fig. 2).
tensile forces N1 ; N2 in the principal directions to avoid We look for a solution of the form u i þ upi ; where u i is the
wrinkling of the membrane. homogeneous solution and upi a particular one. The
Substituting Eqs. (5) into Eqs. (2) and using Eqs. (1), we particular solution is obtained as
obtain the equations of motion for the heterogeneous X
orthogonally anisotropic membrane in terms of the upi ¼ aðiÞ ^j
j u ð12Þ
displacement components where u^ j ¼ u^ j ðrjP Þ ¼ u^ j ðx; yÞ is a particular solution of
ðC1 u;x þ Cv;y Þ;x þ ðC12 u;y þ C12 v;x Þ;y
72 u^ j ¼ fj ð13Þ
 
C C
¼ 2 1 w2;x þ w2;y 2ðC12 w;x w;y Þ;y ð9aÞ The homogeneous solution is obtained from the boundary
2 2 ;x
value problem
ðC2 v;y þ Cu;x Þ;y þ ðC12 u;y þ C12 v;x Þ;x
  72 u i ¼ 0; in V ð14aÞ
C C
¼ 2 2 w2;y þ w2;x 2ðC12 w;x w;y Þ;x ð9bÞ
2 2 ;y

rw;tt 2 ½C1 ðu;x þ 12 w2;x Þ þ Cðv;y þ 12 w2;y Þw;xx

2 2½C12 ðu;y þ v;x þ w;x w;y Þw;xy 2 ½C2 ðv;y þ 1

2 w2;y Þ

þ Cðu;x þ 1
2 w2;x Þw;yy ¼ g ð9cÞ
For the conciseness of the expressions the differentiations of
the terms including the position dependent coefficients have
not been performed. Fig. 2. Field point P source point q and collocation point Pj :
118 J.T. Katsikadelis, G.C. Tsiatas / Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 27 (2003) 115–124

ð
X
M
ui;xy ðP; tÞ ¼ 2 ½up;xy ðrPq Þui;n ðq; tÞ 2 u i ðq; tÞup;nxy ðrPq Þdsq
u i ¼ u~ i 2 aðiÞ
j u ^ j; on G ð14bÞ G
j¼1
X
M
þ aðiÞ
j ðtÞ^
uj;xy ðrjP Þ ð19dÞ
Thus, writing the solution of Eq. (14a) in integral form, we j¼1
have
ð
ð ui;yy ðP; tÞ ¼ 2 ½up;yy ðrPq Þui;n ðq; tÞ 2 u i ðq; tÞup;nyy ðrPq Þdsq
cui ðP; tÞ ¼ 2 ½up ðrPq Þui;n ðq; tÞ 2 u i ðq; tÞup;n ðrPq Þdsq ; G
G ð15Þ X
M
þ aðiÞ
j ðtÞ^
uj;yy ðrjP Þ ð19eÞ
i ¼ 1; 2; 3 j¼1

where rPq ¼ lq 2 Pl is the distance between the field point The expressions of the derivatives of the kernel functions
P : {x; y} [ V < G and source point q : {j; h} which varies are given in Appendix A.
during the integration. The final step of AEM is to apply Eqs. (9) to M discrete
Moreover, points inside V (Fig. 3) after, of course, performing the
1 differentiation of the terms including the position dependent
up ðrPq Þ ¼ lnðrPq Þ ð16Þ coefficients. We, thus, obtain a set of 3M simultaneous
2p
equations of the form
is the fundamental solution of the Laplace equation and
Fjð1Þ {ðui;x Þj ; ðui;y Þj ; ðui;xx Þj ; ðui;xy Þj ; ðui;yy Þj } ¼ 0 ð20aÞ
1 cos f
up;n ðrPq Þ ¼ ð17Þ Fjð2Þ {ðui;x Þj ; ðui;y Þj ; ðui;xx Þj ; ðui;xy Þj ; ðui;yy Þj } ¼ 0 ð20bÞ
2p rPq

is its normal derivative with respect to point q [ G; rw€ 2 Fjð3Þ {ðui;x Þj ; ðui;y Þj ; ðui;xx Þj ; ðui;xy Þj ; ðui;yy Þj } ¼ gj ð20cÞ
f ¼ ]rPq ; n: Finally, c ¼ 1; a=2p; 0 depending on
Using Eqs. (19) to evaluate the derivatives of ui at the M
whether P [ V; P [ G; P  V < G; respectively; a is the
points inside V and substituting them in Eqs. (20) yield a set
angle between the tangents to the boundary at point P: For
of 3M nonlinear equations of motion for the coefficients
points where the boundary is smooth it is c ¼ 1=2:
aðiÞ
j ðtÞ; namely
On the basis of Eqs. (12) and (15), the solution of Eq. (10)
for points P inside V ðc ¼ 1Þ is written as FjðiÞ ðaðiÞ
j ;a€ ðiÞ
j Þ ¼ 0; j ¼ 1; 2; …; M; i ¼ 1; 2; 3 ð21Þ
ð
ui ðP; tÞ ¼ 2 ½up ðrPq Þui;n ðq; tÞ 2 u i ðq; tÞup;n ðrPq Þdsq which can be solved numerically to evaluate the 3M
G coefficients aðiÞ
j : The final step of AEM can be
X
M implemented only numerically using the procedure pre-
þ aðiÞ
j ðtÞ^
uj ðrjP Þ ð18Þ sented in Section 4.
j¼1

It is apparent that the displacements ui defined by Eq. (15) 4. Numerical implementation

are functions of x; y: The first and second derivatives of the
displacements for points inside V are obtained by direct The BEM with constant elements is used to approximate
differentiation of Eq. (18). Thus, we have the boundary integrals in Eq. (15). If N is the number of the
ð boundary nodal points (Fig. 3), then Eq. (15) when applied
ui;x ðP; tÞ ¼ 2 ½up;x ðrPq Þui;n ðq; tÞ 2 u i ðq; tÞup;nx ðrPq Þdsq
G
X
M
þ aðiÞ
j ðtÞ^
uj;x ðrjP Þ ð19aÞ
j¼1

ð
ui;y ðP; tÞ ¼ 2 ½up;y ðrPq Þui;n ðq; tÞ 2 u i ðq; tÞup;ny ðrPq Þdsq
G
X
M
þ aðiÞ
j ðtÞ^
uj;y ðrjP Þ ð19bÞ
j¼1

ð
ui;xx ðP; tÞ ¼ 2 ½up;xx ðrPq Þui;n ðq; tÞ 2 u i ðq; tÞup;nxx ðrPq Þdsq
G
X
M
þ aðiÞ
j ðtÞ^
uj;xx ðrjP Þ ð19cÞ
j¼1 Fig. 3. Boundary discretization and domain nodal points.
 J.T. Katsikadelis, G.C. Tsiatas / Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 27 (2003) 115–124 119

to the mth nodal point on G is written as ^ xy ai

ui;xy ¼ Hxy u i 2 Gxy u i;n þ U ð34eÞ
X
N X
N
cm u m ~ mk u ki 2 Gmk ðui;n Þk ^ yy ai
ui;yy ¼ Hyy u i 2 Gyy u i;n þ U ð34fÞ
i ¼ H ð22Þ
k¼1 k¼1
In the previous expressions Hx ; Hy ; Hxx ; Hxy ; Hyy ; Gx ; Gy ;
where Gxx ; Gxy ; Gyy are known M £ M matrices originating from
ð the integration of the kernels of Eqs. (18) and (19). Since the
~ mk ¼
H up;n ðrmk Þds ð23aÞ displacements and their derivatives are evaluated at points
k
ð P ; Pj inside V; the distance rPq in the kernels does not
Gmk ¼ up ðrmk Þds ð23bÞ vanish and thus the line integrals are always regular.
k Attention should be paid in evaluating the diagonal elements
of the matrices U; ^ U^ y; U
^ xx ; U ^ yy : In that case it is
^ xy and U
in which the integration is carried out on the k boundary
element. rjP ¼ 0 and a limiting process is required (Appendix A).
Applying Eq. (22) to all boundary nodal points and using Eqs. (29) and (30) are used to eliminate the vectors u i and
matrix notation yields u i;n from Eq. (34). Thus we obtain
~ u i 2 Gu i;n
Cu i ¼ H ð24Þ ui ¼ Dai þ Eu~ i ð35aÞ
ui;x ¼ Dx ai þ Ex u~ i ð35bÞ
or
ui;y ¼ Dy ai þ Ey u~ i ð35cÞ
Hu i 2 Gu i;n ¼ 0 ð25Þ
ui;xx ¼ Dxx ai þ Exx u~ i ð35dÞ
where
ui;xy ¼ Dxy ai þ Exy u~ i ð35eÞ
~ 2C
H¼H ð26Þ
ui;yy ¼ Dyy ai þ Eyy u~ i ð35fÞ
with C being a N £ N diagonal matrix including the values
of the coefficient c at the N nodal points on the boundary. where it was set
The boundary conditions (8) when applied to all ^
D ¼ HS 2 GSn þ U ð36aÞ
boundary nodal points give
^x
Dx ¼ Hx S 2 Gx Sn þ U ð36bÞ
^ i
u i ¼ u~ i 2 Ua ð27Þ
^y
Dy ¼ Hy S 2 Gy Sn þ U ð36cÞ
where U ^ ¼ ½^uðrjm Þ ðj ¼ 1; 2; …; M; m ¼ 1; 2; …; NÞ is a
known N £ M matrix and aTi ¼ {aðiÞ ðiÞ ðiÞ
1 ; a2 ; …; aM } is the
^ xx
Dxx ¼ Hxx S 2 Gxx Sn þ U ð36dÞ
vector of the M unknown coefficients of Eq. (11). ^ xy
Dxy ¼ Hxy S 2 Gxy Sn þ U ð36eÞ
Substituting Eq. (27) into Eq. (25) and solving for u i;n we
obtain ^ yy
Dyy ¼ Hyy S 2 Gyy Sn þ U ð36fÞ
21 ^ i 21
u i;n ¼ G Hu~ i 2 G HUa ð28Þ
E ¼ H 2 GRn ð37aÞ
For the sake of convenience, we write Eqs. (27) and (28) as
Ex ¼ Hx 2 Gx Rn ð37bÞ
u i ¼ Sai þ Iu~ i ð29Þ Ey ¼ Hy 2 Gy Rn ð37cÞ
u i;n ¼ Sn ai þ Rn u~ i ð30Þ
Exx ¼ Hxx 2 Gxx Rn ð37dÞ
where it has been set Exy ¼ Hxy 2 Gxy Rn ð37eÞ
^
S ¼ 2U ð31Þ Eyy ¼ Hyy 2 Gyy Rn ð37fÞ
Rn ¼ G21 H ð32Þ Finally substituting Eqs. (35) into Eqs. (21) yields the
^ following system of equations for ai
Sn ¼ 2Rn U ð33Þ
K11 a1 þ K12 a2 ¼ K1 ða3 Þ ð38aÞ
Eqs. (18) and (19) when discretized and applied to the M
nodal points inside V (Fig. 3) give K21 a1 þ K22 a2 ¼ K2 ða3 Þ ð38bÞ
^ i
ui ¼ Hu i 2 Gu i;n þ Ua ð34aÞ M€a3 2 Kða1 ; a2 ; a3 Þ ¼ gðtÞ ð38cÞ

^ x ai where M is the known M £ M generalized mass matrix; Kij are

ui;x ¼ Hx u i 2 Gx u i;n þ U ð34bÞ
known M £ M generalized stiffness coefficient matrices and
^ y ai
ui;y ¼ Hy u i 2 Gy u i;n þ U ð34cÞ Kða1 ; a2 ; a3 Þ a generalized stiffness vector depending on ai :
Eq. (38c) is the semi-discretized equation of motion of
^ xx ai
ui;xx ¼ Hxx u i 2 Gxx u i;n þ U ð34dÞ the membrane. Solving the first two equations for a1 and a2
120 J.T. Katsikadelis, G.C. Tsiatas / Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 27 (2003) 115–124

we may write 5. Numerical examples

a1 ¼ S1 ða3 Þ ð39aÞ
On the basis of the numerical procedure presented in
a2 ¼ S2 ða3 Þ ð39bÞ Section 4 a FORTRAN code has been written and numerical
results for certain membranes have been obtained, which
M€a3 2 Sða1 ; a2 ; a3 Þ ¼ gðtÞ ð39cÞ illustrate the applicability, effectiveness and accuracy of the
method. The employed approximating functions fj are the
The initial conditions for Eq. (39c) result from Eq. (35a) multiquadrics [10], which are defined as
when combined with Eqs. (4) and (8c). Thus, we have pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
f j ¼ r 2 þ c2 ð43Þ
a3 ð0Þ ¼ D21 ðw
~ 0 2 EwÞ
~ ð40aÞ
where c is an arbitrary constant and
a_ 3 ð0Þ ¼ D21 w
_~ 0 ð40bÞ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
r ¼ ðx 2 xj Þ2 þ ðy 2 yj Þ2 ; j ¼ 1; 2; …; M ð44Þ
The time step integration method for nonlinear equations of
motion can be employed to solve Eq. (9c). In each iteration with xj ; yj being the collocation nodal points inside V: Using
for a3 within a time step, the current value of a3 is utilized to these radial basis functions the particular solution of Eq.
update the vectors a1 and a2 on the basis of Eqs. (39a) and (13) is obtained as
(39b). In general, a good convergence is achieved for
prestressed membranes, which becomes worse with c3 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  1 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
u^ j ¼ 2 ln c r 2 þ c2 þ c2 þ ðr 2 þ 4c2 Þ r 2 þ c2 ð45Þ
decreasing prestress. The methods may fail to converge in 3 9
the absence of prestress. In this paper, a time step
In obtaining the results, the value c ¼ 1 was employed,
integration method based on the AEM [8] was employed
which was found to be the optimum one for the static
to solve Eq. (39c) and the results were cross-checked by the
problem. In the latter case existing solutions were available
average acceleration method. Once the vectors ai ðtÞ have
for comparison [1]. The employed number of the interior
been computed the displacements vectors ui ðtÞ and their
points was not large. Hence no ill-conditioning problems
derivatives at any instant t are computed from Eq. (35). For
had to be encountered in obtaining the numerical results
points P [ V not coinciding with the nodal points the
[11]. The results, however, may not be very good when the
respective quantities are computed from the discretized
domain is irregular or multiply connected. This problem can
counterparts of Eqs.(18) and (19).
be overcome by decomposing the domain into two or more
subdomains of regular shape [12].
4.1. Evaluation of the reactions on the boundary
The derivatives of u^ j and their limits for rjP ¼ 0 are given
in Appendix A.
The in-plane reactions on the boundary are evaluated
from Eq. (7) while the transverse reaction from Eq. (3c). It is
5.1. Square heterogeneous membrane
apparent that their evaluation requires the knowledge of the
derivatives ui;x ; ui;y on the boundary. These derivatives can
A square heterogeneous isotropic ðl ¼ 1Þ membrane,
be computed from the normal and tangential derivatives on
subjected to a uniform load, has been analyzed ðN ¼
the boundary working as follows.
100; M ¼ 49Þ: The membrane was prestressed by
The values of the normal derivative ui;n at the boundary
boundary displacements as shown in Fig. 4, which
nodal points can be computed using Eqs. (12) and (30).
result in approximately uniform prestress in the
Thus, we have
membrane. The employed data are a ¼ 2:5 m;
ui;n ¼ u i;n þ upi;n ¼ ðSn þ U
^ n Þai þ Rn u~ i ð41Þ r=h ¼ 7850 kg/m 3, u~ ¼ v~ ¼ 0:02 m; h ¼ 0:002 m;
 yÞE1 h=ð1 2 n1 n2 Þ; C2 ¼ Cðx;
C1 ¼ Cðx;  yÞE2 h=ð1 2 n1 n2 Þ;
where U ^ n ¼ ½^u;n ðrjm Þ ðj ¼ 1; 2; …; M; m ¼ 1; 2; …; NÞ:
The tangential derivative could be established from its
integral representation. However, it is computed here using
numerical differentiation of ui along the boundary, because
the integral representation, though it may give more
accurate values [9], requires the evaluation of hypersingular
integrals.
Subsequently, we obtain
( ) " #( )
ui;x cos a 2sin a ui;n
¼ ð42Þ
ui;y sin a cos a ui;t

in which a ¼ ]x; n: Fig. 4. Prestress by imposed boundary displacements.

 J.T. Katsikadelis, G.C. Tsiatas / Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 27 (2003) 115–124 121

Fig. 5. Time history of the central deflection in the square heterogeneous

membrane.


C12 ¼ ð12 n1 ÞCðx;yÞE 
pffiffi 1 h=2ð12 np1 nffiffi2 Þ; C ¼ Cðx;yÞE1 n2 h=ð12
n1 n2 Þ; E1 ¼ E= l; E2 ¼ E l; n1 ¼ 0:3; n2 ¼ ln1 ;
E ¼ 110,000 kN/m2. Two cases of stiffness variation
have been studied (i) Cðx;yÞ  ¼ 10ð1þ br 2 =a2 Þ=7; r ¼
2
ðx þy Þ 2 1=2
with b ¼ 9 and (ii) Cðx;yÞ  ¼ 10: In both
cases the total stiffness
Ð of the membrane was kept Fig. 7. Contours of the ratio w=w0 for the square membrane in the lb-plane.

unchanged, that is V Cðx;yÞd V ¼ 40a2 : In Fig. 5 results
for the natural vibrations with wðx;y;0Þ ¼ 0:4 sinðpx=aÞ
sinðpy=aÞ and wðx;y;0Þ
_ ¼ 0: Moreover, in Fig. 6, the 5.2. Membrane of arbitrary shape
dependence of the period on the maximum amplitude is
shown. It is worth noting that the variation of the ratios In this example, the heterogeneous orthotropic mem-
T=T0 in both cases, T0 is the respective period of the brane of arbitrary shape shown in Fig. 8 was analyzed
linear vibration, differ negligibly, although the difference ðN ¼ 100; M ¼ 49Þ: Its boundary is defined by the curve
of T is appreciable. Since there are no available r ¼ aðlsin ul3 þ lcos ul3 Þ; 0 # u # 2p: The membrane is
numerical results for comparison except for the homo- prestressed by un ¼ 0:04 m in the direction normal to the
geneous isotropic membrane [5] the ratio w=w0 has been boundary while ut ¼ 0 in the tangential direction. The
computed for various values of the parameters l and b employed data p pffiffi h ¼ 0:002 m; r=h ¼ 5000
ffiffi a ¼ 5:0 m;
are
which characterize the orthotropy and heterogeneity. kg=m3 ; E1 ¼ E=pffiffil; E2 ¼ E l; n1 ¼ 0:3; n2 ¼ ln1 and
Herein, w and w0 are the central deflections of the G ¼ E=2ð1 þ n1 lÞ where E ¼ 110,000 þ kr 2, r ¼ ðx2 þ
heterogeneous orthotropic membrane and that of homo- y2 Þ1=2 and k constant. In Fig. 9 results for natural
geneous isotropic. From Fig. 7 it is concluded that the vibrations are presented for l ¼ 1 and k ¼ 0 as
limit of w=w0 !1; for l !1 and b !0; as it was
anticipated. Another worth mentioning conclusion drawn
from Fig. 7 is that there are infinite number of sets of l
and b that can produce w ¼ w0 ; namely, all points lying
on the curve w=w0 ¼ 1 of the lb-plane.

Fig. 6. Period versus maximum central defection in the square

heterogeneous membrane. Fig. 8. Membrane of arbitrary shape and distribution of the internal points.
122 J.T. Katsikadelis, G.C. Tsiatas / Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 27 (2003) 115–124
Fig. 9. Time history of the central deflection in the membrane of arbitrary
shape.
compared with those given in Ref. [5]. The employed
initial conditions are wðx; y; 0Þ ¼ deflection surface pro-
duced by the static load g0 ¼ 0:242 kN=m2 and
_ y; 0Þ ¼ 0: Moreover, the time histories of wðtÞ
wðx;  ¼
wð0; 0; tÞ=wst and N x ¼ Nx ð0; 0; tÞ=ðNx Þst at the center of
the membrane for various values of k and l are shown in
Figs. 10 and 11, when wðx; y; 0Þ ¼ deflection surface
produced by the static load g0 ¼ 3 kN=m2 and
_ y; 0Þ ¼ 0: Finally, the forced vibrations have
wðx;
been studied under the so-called ‘static’ load g ¼ g0 t=t1
Fig. 10. Time history of the central deflection in the membrane of arbitrary
shape for various values of k and l; w0 ¼ max: deflection in each case.
Fig. 11. Time history of the membrane force at the center of the membrane
of arbitrary shape for various values of k and l:
Fig. 12. Time history of the response ratio RðtÞ under ‘static’ load at the
center of the membrane of arbitrary shape for various values of k and l:
if 0 # t # t1 and g ¼ g0 if t1 # t ðt1 ¼ 10 sÞ
with zero initial conditions. The time histories of RðtÞ ¼
wð0; 0; tÞ=wst ; N x ðtÞ ¼ Nx ð0; 0; tÞ=ðNx Þst and N y ðtÞ ¼
Ny ð0; 0; tÞ=ðNy Þst for various values of k and l are shown
in Figs. 12 – 14. Note that wst ; ðNx Þst and ðNy Þst designate
the central deflection and membrane forces produced by
the static load g0 :
Fig. 13. Time history of the response ratio N x under ‘static’ load at the
center of the membrane of arbitrary shape for various values of k and l:
Fig. 14. Time history of the response ratio N y under ‘static’ load at the
center of the membrane of arbitrary shape for various values of k and l:
 J.T. Katsikadelis, G.C. Tsiatas / Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 27 (2003) 115–124 123

6. Conclusions Using Eqs. (A2) the derivatives of the fundamental

solution may be expressed as
In this paper a boundary-only method has been presented
1 rx 1 ry
for large deflection dynamic analysis of initially flat upx ¼ ; upy ¼ ;
heterogeneous elastic membranes, which without excluding 2p r 2p r
general anisotropy are assumed orthotropic. The method is 1 ry2 2 rx2
based on the concept of the analog equation. From the upxx ¼ ; upyy ¼ 2upxx ;
2p r 2
presented analysis and the numerical examples the follow-
ing main conclusions can be drawn. 1 rx ry
upxy ¼ 2 ; ðA3Þ
p r2
(a) As the method is boundary-only it has all the
1 ðry2 2 rx2 Þrn þ 2rx ry rt
advantages of the BEM, i.e. the discretization and upnxx ¼ 2 ; upnyy ¼ 2upnxx ;
integration are performed only on the boundary. p r3
(b) The static fundamental solution of the Laplace 1 ðry2 2 rx2 Þrt 2 2rx ry rn
equation is employed to derive the integral represen- upnxy ¼ 2
p r3
tation of the solution.
(c) The deflections and the stress resultants are computed
at any point using the respective integral representation
as mathematical formulas. A.2. Derivatives of the function u^ j
(d) Accurate numerical results for the displacements
and the stress resultants are obtained using For the approximating radial basis functions of multi-
multiquadrics. quadric type Eq. (13) yields after integration
(e) The solution of the static problem can be obtained
c3 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  1 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
using the same computer program if the inertia u^ j ¼ 2 ln c r 2 þ c2 þ c2 þ ðr 2 þ 4c2 Þ r 2 þ c2 ðA4Þ
forces are neglected. 3 9
(f) The concept of the analog equation in conjunction where
with radial basis functions approximation of the qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
fictitious sources renders BEM a versatile compu- r ¼ ðx 2 xj Þ2 þ ðy 2 yj Þ2 ðA5Þ
tational method for solving difficult nonlinear
dynamic problems in engineering described by Differentiating Eq. (A4) gives
coupled nonlinear differential equations. !
1 2 2 c3
u^ j;x ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi r þ 2c 2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ðx 2 xj Þ
3 r 2 þ c2 r 2 þ c2 þ c
Appendix A !
1 2 2 c3
u^ j;y ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi r þ 2c 2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ðy 2 yj Þ
3 r 2 þ c2 r 2 þ c2 þ c
A.1. Derivatives of the kernel functions
2 3
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
The derivatives of the distance 1 2
6 2 3 2 r þc þc 7
2
u^ j;xx ¼ 2 2 3=2 4r þ c pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 2 5ðx 2 xj Þ
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 3ðr þ c Þ r 2 þ c2 þ c
r ¼ ðj 2 xÞ2 þ ðh 2 yÞ2 ;
ðA1Þ !
1 2 2 c3
{x; y} [ V; {j; h} [ G þ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi r þ 2c 2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ðA6Þ
3 r 2 þ c2 r 2 þ c2 þ c
are evaluated from the following relations 2 3
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2 2
1 6 2 3 2 r þc þc 7
j2x h2y u^ j;yy ¼ 4r þ c pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 2 5ðy 2 yj Þ
rx ¼ 2rj ¼ 2 ; ry ¼ 2rh ¼ 2 ; 3ðr 2 þ c2 Þ3=2 r 2 þ c2 þ c
r r
!
ry2 r2 rx ry ðA2Þ 1 2 2 c3
rxx ¼ ; ryy ¼ x ; rxy ¼ 2 ; þ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi r þ 2c 2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
r r r 3 r 2 þ c2 r 2 þ c2 þ c
2 3
rn ¼ 2ðrx nx þ ry ny Þ; rt ¼ 2ð2rx ny þ ry nx Þ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2 2
1 6 2 3 2 r þc þc 7
3=2 4
u^ j;xy ¼ 2 2
r þ c pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 2 5ðx 2 xj Þðy 2 yj Þ
nj ; nh are directional cosines of the outward normal vector 3ðr þ c Þ r 2 þ c2 þ c
to the boundary at point {j; h}:
124 J.T. Katsikadelis, G.C. Tsiatas / Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 27 (2003) 115–124

It can be readily proved that [5] Katsikadelis JT. Dynamic analysis of nonlinear membranes by the
analog equation method. A boundary only solution. Comput Model
c
lim u^ j;x ¼ 0; lim u^ j;y ¼ 0; lim u^ j;xx ¼ ; Engng Sci 2002;29:170– 177.
r!0 r!0 r!0 2 [6] Lekhnitskii SG. Theory of elasticity of an anisotropic body. San
ðA7Þ Francisco: Holden-Day, Inc.; 1963.
c
lim u^ j;yy ¼ ; lim u^ j;xy ¼ 0 [7] Nardini D, Brebbia CA. New approach to vibration analysis using
r!0 2 r!0
boundary elements. Boundary elements methods in engineering,
Berlin: Springer; 1982.
[8] Katsikadelis JT. A new time step integration scheme for structural
dynamics based on the analog equation method. In: Kounadis AN,
editor. Collection of papers dedicated to Prof. P.S. Theocaris. Athens:
References National Technical University of Athens; 1994. p. 80 –100.
[9] Graciani E, Mantič V, Parı́s F, Cañas J. A critical study of
[1] Katsikadelis JT, Nerantzaki MS, Tsiatas GC. The analog equation hypersingular and strongly singular boundary integral representations
method for large deflection analysis of membranes. A boundary-only of potential gradient. Comput Mech 2000;25:542–59.
solution. Comput Mech 2001;27:513–23. [10] Golberg MA, Chen CS, Karur SP. Improved multiquadric approxi-
[2] Leonard JW. Tension structures. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1988. mation for partial differential equations. Engng Anal Bound Elem
[3] Katsikadelis JT, Tsiatas GC. The analog equation method for 1996;18:9–17.
large deflection analysis of heterogeneous orthotropic membranes. [11] Kansa EJ, Hon YC. Circumventing the ill-conditioning problem with
A boundary-only solution. Engng Anal Bound Elem 2001;25: multiquadric radial basis functions: applications to elliptic differential
655–67. equations. Comput Math Appl 2000;39:123–37.
[4] Katsikadelis JT, Nerantzaki MS. A boundary-only solution to [12] Tsiatas GC, Katsikadelis JT. The domain decomposition method for
dynamic analysis of non-homogeneous elastic membranes. Comput large deflection analysis of membranes. XXIII Yugoslav Congress of
Model Engng Sci 2000;1:1–9. Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Belgrade, Yugoslavia; 2001.