FE Analysis - 1 - LR - 2012

University of Naples Federico II – Faculty of Engineering
prof. Luciano Rosati, Dept. of Structural Engineering
VARIATIONAL FORMULATIONS
PRINCIPLE of VIRTUAL FORCES

vs.
PRINCIPLE of VIRTUAL
DISPLACEMENTS
FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 1
TIMOSHENKO BEAM
w(z)
v(z)
Strains
dw
 a  w  Extensional curvature
dz
d
    Bending curvature
dz
dv
  v     Shear strain
dz
TIMOSHENKO BEAM
Internal Virtual Work
Let us consider a triplet Nˆ , Tˆ , Mˆ of functions NOT associated with the
previously defined strains via constitutive relations.
The expression of the internal virtual work is the following:
l l l
Li   Nˆ ( z )  a ( z ) dz   Tˆ ( z )  ( z ) dz   Mˆ ( z )  ( z ) dz
0 0 0
or equivalently:
l l l
Li   Nˆ w dz   Tˆ (v    ) dz   Mˆ   dz
0 0 0

TIMOSHENKO BEAM
 f g
l l
  f  g dz   f g  dz
l
0 Integration Rule by Parts
0 0
Integrating by parts the internal virtual work we obtain:
Li  Nˆ w0   Nˆ  w dz  Tˆ v 0   Tˆ  v dz   Tˆ  dz  Mˆ  0   Mˆ   dz

l l l l l l l
0 0 0 0
where:
N w0  Nˆ (l ) w(l )  Nˆ (0) w(0)
ˆ l
T v0  Tˆ (l ) v(l )  Tˆ (0) v(0)

ˆ l
M  0  Mˆ (l )  (l )  Mˆ (0)  (0)
ˆ l

TIMOSHENKO BEAM
Positive Internal and External Forces
M(0) M(l) mx
Internal External
N(0) N(l) Forces Fz Forces
T(0) T(l) Fy
Internal and external forces at z = l have the same signs, while they are
discordant at z = 0; thus:
Fz (l ) w(l )  Fz (0) w(0)  Nˆ (l ) w(l )  Nˆ (0) w(0)
Fy (l ) v(l )  Fy (0) v(0)  Tˆ (l ) v(l )  Tˆ (0) v(0)
m x (l )  (l )  m x (0)  (0)  Mˆ (l )  (l )  Mˆ (0)  (0)

TIMOSHENKO BEAM
Therefore
e e o e the
eeend
d reactions
eac o s aare
e the
e following:
o o g
R A1  Fz (0) R B1  Fz (l )
R A 2  Fy (0) R B 2  Fy (l )
R A3  m x (0) R B 3  m x (l )
while the dual kinematic parameters are defined by:
s A1  w(0) s B1  w(l )
s A 2  v(0) s B 2  v(l )
s A 3   ( 0) s B 3   (l )

TIMOSHENKO BEAM
We thus obtain the specialization of the Fundamental Identity of Mechanics
to the case of the Timoshenko beam:
Nˆ  a dz   Tˆ  dz   Mˆ  dz   Rˆ Ai s Ai   Rˆ Bj s Bj   Nˆ  w dz   Tˆ v dz   Mˆ   Tˆ  dz
3 3
l l l l l l
 0 0 0
i 1 j 1
0 0 0
v, w,  Nˆ , Tˆ , Mˆ
where the functions v, w, , as well as Nˆ , Tˆ , Mˆ are completely arbitrary but

they must be continuous with their derivates and possess a degree of
continuity sufficient to make the integrals well-defined.
Once more we remind that the hat superimposed on the internal force
f
functions
ti Nˆ , Tˆ , Mˆ emphasizes
h i th
the ffactt that
th t they
th are completed
l t d unrelated
l t d from
f
the displacement functions, in the sense that the former cannot be obtained
from the latter via a constitutive relation.

TIMOSHENKO BEAM
From the Fundamental Identity of Mechanics one derives:
- the Principle of Virtual Forces (PVF)
- the
th PPrinciple
i i l off Vi
Virtual
t l Di
Displacements
l t (PVD)
(PVD).
The PVF or variational condition of compatibility

reformulates the compatibility between displacements w, v,  and associated
strains a, , , usually expressed in differential, or “strong” form,
 a  w   v     
into an integral, or “weak”, form represented by the specialization of the
Fundamental Identityy of Mechanics to special
p classes of internal forces Nˆ , Tˆ , Mˆ .
Their arbitrariness, which is exploited to specialize the Fundamental Identity of
Mechanics to a form useful for applications, justifies the term “virtual” which is
commonly appended to the name of the principle.

TIMOSHENKO BEAM
PRINCIPLE OF VIRTUAL FORCES (PVF)
Recalling that
Nˆ '  qˆa Tˆ '  qˆ f Mˆ ' Tˆ  mˆ f
it is natural to choose an arbitrary set of self-equilibrated internal forces, that
is a set of internal forces fulfilling the conditions
Nˆ   0 Tˆ   0 Mˆ   0
Thus the Fundamental Identity of Mechanics specializes to
3 3
Nˆ w dz   Tˆ (v    ) dz   Mˆ   dz   Rˆ Ai s Ai   Rˆ Bj s Bj
l l l
 0 0 0
i 1 j 1
Nˆ , Tˆ , Mˆ self equilibrated

TIMOSHENKO BEAM
In order to distinguish between real and virtual schemes we superimpose a
hat ^ on the parameters pertaining to the virtual scheme.
To fix the ideas let us apply the PVF to a cantilever beam with an angular
spring placed at the left end,
end a vertical force acting at the right end and a
thermal distortion  The unknown which is looked for is the rotation B.
Fy

B
A
Displacements system
y
(or real scheme)

TIMOSHENKO BEAM
For simplicity
y we shall make reference to an Euler-Bernoulli model, so that:
  v     0  v   
To determine
T d t i the t ti B we choose
th rotation h a convenient
i t self-equilibrated
lf ilib t d
system, that is a system of forces in equilibrium with the restraints.
mA mB
B
A
Forces system
(or virtual scheme)

EULER-BERNOULLI BEAM
Denotingg byy k the spring
g stiffness or, equivalently,
y by
y c = 1/k its flexibility
y it
turns out to be:
M t
' 
EJ hs
 A  c  m A
Being also N = 0,
0 the PVF specializes to the following:
l
 Mˆ d  mˆ 
0
B B  mˆ A A
that is:
l Mdz l ˆ t
0 M EJ  0 M hs dz  mˆ B B  mˆ A (c  mA )
ˆ

Observing
g that the bending
g moment function is provided by:
y
Mˆ ( z )   mˆ B M ( z )   F  l  z 
the last equation becomes, having assumed couples positive if clockwise:
l F (l  z )dz l  t
0 mˆ B
EJ
  (mB )
0
ˆ
hs
dz  mˆ B B  (mˆ B )[c  ( F  l )]
where a linear dependence upon m̂ B of all addends in the previous relation

is observed. This means that any value of m̂ B can be chosen; for this reason
in the application it is usually set mˆ B  1 . More generally, the set of self-
equilibrated forces to be used in the application of the PVF for the evaluation
of an arbitrary
y displacement
p is associated with a unitaryy value of the force
dual of the displacement which is looked for.
Notice that B is certainly positive whenever  = 0. However, this does not
mean that B is counter-clockwise according to the usual assumption on the
positive convention on rotation. Since B has been derived by the PVF, a
positive value of B implies simply that B makes the virtual force, in this case
m̂ B , perform a (virtual) positive work. Thus, being m̂ B clockwise, a positive B
represents a clockwise rotation as well. On the other hand the geometry of
the beam and the loading conditions clearly indicate that a clockwise rotation
B must be expected.
In conclusion, we get:
l F (l  z )dz l  t dz
0 EJ

0 hs
 B  c  (F  l)
so that B is obtained by evaluating the integrals placed on the left-hand side.

Let
e us now
o app
apply
y the
e PVF to
o the
e so
solution
u o o of a s
statically
a ca y indeterminate
de e aes structural
uc u a
scheme, namely a beam elastically clamped at the left end and with a roller at
the right end.
The loads applied on the beam are a uniform vertical load and a given vertical
displacement at the clamped end.
The real and virtual schemes are follows:
q M
1
A B 1l A
B
 X
1
Displacements system Forces system
(or real scheme) (or virtual scheme)

Thus, the equation representing the PVF yields:
ˆ Mdz  1   l   c  m A 
l
o EJ
M
The real bending moment on the real scheme can be expressed as the sum
of the moment M0 associated with the applied loads, evaluated on the isostatic
scheme resulting from the elimination of the redundant supports, and of
the virtual
irt al moment MM̂ amplified by
b X.
X
q M
1
A B 1l A
B
 X
1
(or real scheme) (or virtual scheme)
Thus, it turns out to be:
M ( z )  M 0 ( z )  X  Mˆ ( z )
And the PVF equation becomes:
M 0  X  Mˆ 
l
dz  1   l   c  m A 
o M
ˆ
EJ
Considering that the expression of the bending moment pertaining to the virtual
scheme is given by:
Mˆ ( z )  1  l  z 
the PVF equation can be rewritten in the form:
M
1 l  z  dz    l   c  m A 
l
 o
EJ
(PVF1)

Furthermore, the value of the bending moment at A is given by:
m A   M 0 (0)  X  Mˆ (0)
so that
th t the
th equation
ti off PVF can be
b expressed
d in
i the
th form:
f
l
1 l  z 
M  X  Mˆ 
dz    l   c   M 0 (0)  X  Mˆ (0) 

0
o
EJ
Thus, the following equation in the unknown quantity X is derived:
l M0 l Mˆ
0 1 (l  z ) EJ dz  X  0 1 (l  z ) EJ dz    c  l  M 0 (0)  X  l  Mˆ (0)

If the structure to solve is n-times statically indeterminate, it is necessary to
write a system of n equations because n independent compatibility conditions
have to be imposed on a suitably defined statically determinate scheme.
2 schemes of virtual forces

A B C
From a computational point of view, the PVF is not-particularly convenient for

iperstatic structures since the choice of redundant supports can be completely
arbitrar and cannot be easily
arbitrary easil automatized.
a tomati ed

Mechanical interpretation
p of PVF:
It has been already emphasized that the PVF represents an alternative

formulation expressed in integral or “weak”
formulation, weak form,
form of the compatibility relation
between displacements and strains; this relation is naturally expressed in
differential or “strong” form.
Thus to give physical insight of the PVF equation,
Thus, equation we are
going to show that it actually represents a compatibility condition expressed
in terms of absolute or relative displacements.

To this end let us consider the following
g schemes:
q
1
A 0 1l A
B vB B

1
and write the PVF equation:

M0
1 v  1   l   c  m A    M dz   M
l l
0
B
ˆ  ˆ dz (PVF2)
0 0
EJ

We
e now
o app
apply
y the
e PVF to
o the
e following
o o g sc
schemes:
e es
X 1
Xl A 1l A
B B
X 1
in order to evaluate v BX :
Mˆ  Mˆ
1  v  l   c  m    M
l MX l
X
B
X
A
ˆ dz   X dz (PVF3)
0 0
EJ EJ

Su
Summing g up the
e equa
equations
o s PVF2 a
andd PVF3 3a
andd co
comparing
pa g the
e resulting
esu g
expression with PVF1 we ultimately infer that:
v B0  v BX  0
Thus, it has been shown that the application of the PVF actually amounts to
imposing a compatibility equation expressed in terms of absolute (or relative)
displacements.

TIMOSHENKO BEAM
PRINCIPLE OF VIRTUAL DISPLACEMENTS (PVD)
The Principle of Virtual Displacements represents the theoretical basis of the
traditional Finite Element Method (FEM), i.e. the one based on the so-called
displacement approach.
We start by y using
g the Fundamental Identity y of Mechanics to enforce in weak
form the equilibrium conditions between the applied loads on the beam q a ,
qt , m and the relevant internal forces N, T, M:
N   q a
T   qt
M   T  m
In other words we are expressing a variational condition of the equilibrium
existing between external and internal loads on the real scheme, i.e. on the
structural scheme we are going to solve.

TIMOSHENKO BEAM
The Fundamental Identity of Mechanics becomes:
3 3
 N wˆ  dz   T (vˆ  ˆ ) dz   M ˆ  dz   R sˆ Ai   RBj sˆ Bj   q a wˆ dz   qt vˆ dz   mˆ dz

l l l l l l
Ai
0 0 0 0 0 0
i 1 j 1
vˆ, wˆ ,̂
where, similarly y to PVF, a hat has been superimposed

p p to the “virtual” fields,
i.e. to fields which are suitably chosen in order to enforce the condition, in this
case equilibrium, on the actual scheme.
virtual fields v, w and  are usually termed “test
The “virtual” test functions
functions” since they are
used “to test” the equilibrium conditions. From the mathematical standpoint they
have to possess a suitable degree of continuity in order to make the integrals
defined In particular the derivatives vˆ,w
well defined. wˆ  and ˆ  need to be at least
piecewise continuous.
TIMOSHENKO BEAM
ˆ and 
Clearly, the arbitrariness of vˆ, w ̂ can be suitably specialized to simplify
the previous equation. For instance, in the case of fixed restraints or restraints
with imposed displacements the virtual displacements can be assumed to be
zero at the restrained sections of the beam so that the sums in the p previous
equation vanish.
Stated equivalently,
equivalently the virtual displacements can be
conceived as “variations” of the actual displacements, what motivates the
symbols vˆ   v, w ˆ   w, ˆ   commonly encountered in the literature. This
interpretation further motivates the previous assertion according to which
“virtual” displacements can be assumed to be zero at the restrained sections
where zero or given displacements are assigned. Actually, if the real
di l
displacements t assume such h values
l att the
th restrained
t i d sections,
ti th i variations,
their i ti
i.e. the “virtual” displacements, must be zero at these sections.
TIMOSHENKO BEAM
Remark:
We emphasize once more, although this aspect has been already pointed out
with reference to the PVF, that the addends of the previous equation do not
represent expended work but only a mathematical interaction between dual
quantities, the real and the virtual ones, which comes out with terms
having dimension of work.
Let us now apply the PVD to an Euler-Bernoulli beam model. Thus, the shear
strain  vanishes, T = M' and the distributed couples m can be eliminated since
th have
they h no dual
d l kinematic
ki ti counterpart,
t t i.e.
i there
th i no kinematic
is ki ti quantity
tit
which can be associated with m so as to produce “virtual” work.

We consider the following scheme
F
B
A
in which the rotation B is looked for. Recalling that the virtual displacements
can be considered as a variation of the actual ones,
ones the “virtual”
virtual scheme has
to be defined so that vˆ, wˆ and ̂ can be expressed as function of displacement
parameters assigned at B. In other words we characterize the virtual
di l
displacement t vˆ, w d ̂ˆ as variations
ˆ and i ti off the
th actual
t l ones by
b assigning
i i virtual
it l
displacement fields which are expressed as functions of parameters
representing arbitrary displacements at B. In turn, such parameters can be
considered as variations of the actual, and unknown, values of the
displacements at B.
Clearly, in order to characterize the virtual displacements as specified above
we need d to
t imagine
i i the
th beam
b clamped
l d att B and d subject
bj t tot the
th virtual
it l
parameters, namely the vertical, and horizontal displacement as well as the
rotation at B. This means that the application of PVD requires to take into
account a new structural model in which additional constraints have been
added. Thus, for hand calculations, the PVD is not particularly suited for
statically
y determinate structures;; actually,
y, in this case,, the solution can be
obtained by solving a system of equations whose order is equal to the number
of additional restraints imposed to the original, real, structure.
F
B B
A A
Forces system Displacements system
(real scheme) (virtual scheme)
For these reasons we show the application
pp of the PVD by
y making
g reference
to a simple statically indeterminate structural model.
Let us consider a beam clamped at one end and hinged at the other one,
subject to a uniform vertical load:
A B
The virtual scheme to consider is,, in a certain sense,, in p

perfect duality
y with
the one considered in the PVF. In this last one we assumed a statically
determinate system by eliminating the redundant supports. On the contrary,
in the PVD,
PVD we add a number of supports so as to transform the original
structural scheme in a clamped-clamped beam and considering a number of
unit-value imposed displacements corresponding to the restrained degrees
of freedom.
Thus, to solve our problem, we consider the following schemes
q
A B A B
v(z) B v(z)
1
Forces system Displacements system
(real scheme) (virtual scheme)
where a unit rotation is imposed at the support at B and vˆ ( z ) is the relevant
displacement functions.
Let us further denote by v(z)
( ) the displacement function of the real scheme on
which the equilibrium between the actual external and internal loads is enforced.
Therefore, the general equation of PVD assumes the simplified form:
l l
 0
M̂ dz   qvˆdz
0
The bending moment M can be expressed in terms of the real displacement

v(z) as:
M ( z )   EJ  v  ( z )
so as to obtain the equation:
0  EJv vˆdz  0 qvˆdz

l l
where it has been employed the well-known relation:

̂   vˆ

holding for the Euler-Bernoulli beam model.
On the other hand,, it can be set:
v( z )  v0 ( z )   B  vˆ( z )
where the function v0(z) represents the displacement function on the clamped-
clamped beam.
Substituting
g the p
previous expression
p in the equation
q supplied
pp by
y the PVD one
obtains:
l l l
 EJ vvˆdz     EJ vˆvˆdz   qvˆdz
0
0 B
0 0
i.e. a linear equation in B.

Notice that the first integral vanishes as a result of the Colonnetti’s theorem.

Remark:
The result based on Colonnetti’s theorem clearly shows that the value of B
does not depend
p on v0. Hence,, the evaluation of the function v0((z),
), that is the
displacement function on the clamped-clamped structural scheme, is
completely unnecessary for evaluating the internal force in the beam.
Actually, disposing of the displacements and rotations at the end of the beam,
it is possible to evaluate the end reactions via the stiffness matrix. Consequently,
the internal forces at any section of the beam can be obtained by equilibrium.
equilibrium

On the other hand the knowledge of v0(z) is necessary if one wants to evaluate
exactly the displacements and rotations along the beam.
The previous considerations concerning v0(z) carry over directly to the 2D or 3D
case in
i which
hi h the
th knowledge
k l d off v0(z)
( ) is
i nott only
l unnecessary for
f evaluating
l ti the
th
displacement parameters of the FEM model but it is also impossible to achieve.
This represents a minor problem since the displacement field in each element
is anyway approximated; hence the distinction between the amount due to the
external loads on the fixed-end scheme and the one due to the fixed-end
reactions, yet each of them impossible to determine, becomes inessential.

A B A B
v0 (z) v(z)
1
Determination of the test function:
q vˆ( z )  A  BzB  Cz
C 2  Dz
D 3
v IV ( z )  0
EI vˆ '( z )  B  2Cz  3Dz 2

From
o the
e bou
boundary
da y co
conditions:
d o s
vˆ(0)  0 vˆ(l )  0;
vˆ '(0)   A  0 vˆ '(l )   B  1
the values of the integration constants are:
A0 B0
1 1
C  D  l  D
l l2
Th
Thus, it turns
t outt to
t be:
b
1 1
vˆ( z )   z 2  2  z 3
l l
2 3
vˆ ( z )   z  2  z 2
l l
Check of the expression thus obtained:
l3
vˆ( z )  l  2  0
l Right!!!
vˆ ( z )  2  3  1
Let us further evaluate the second derivate of the test function:

2 6
vˆ ( z )   2 z
l l
N
Now it is
i possible
ibl to
t calculate
l l t the
th previous
i i t
integral:
l
2
l l 2 6  l 4 36 2 24 
0 EJ v
ˆ 
 v
ˆ dz  EJ  0  l l 2 
   z  dz  EJ  0  l 2 l 4  z  l 3  z dz 
 

l
4 36 z 3
24 z  2
4 12 12  4 EJ
 EJ   2  z  4   3    EJ   2  l  4  l 3  3  l 2  
l l 3 l 2 0 l l l  l
Thus, it has been obtained a stiffness coefficient dual of the bending moment;
Analogously, the integral:
l
 qvˆdz
0
represents the well-known

well known perfectly-fixed
perfectly fixed joint reaction of the beam.
beam

Mechanical interpretation of PVD:
To give physical insight of the PVD equation, it is possible to show that

it actually
y represents
p an equilibrium
q condition expressed
p in terms of the static
quantity dual of the unknown displacement, in this case a rotation.
Thus, by applying twice the PVD to the structures reported in the next slide,
Thus slide
the PVD equation amounts to enforcing the rotational equilibrium
of the reactive couples exerted by the fictitiously added constraint at B.
M B0   B  Mˆ B  0
Stated equivalently, the reaction of the rotational support which has been
fi titi
fictitiously
l added
dd d att B has
h tot be
b zero!!!
!!!

To prove the previous result it is sufficient to apply twice the PVD to the
schemes on the left by considering the scheme on the right as displacement
system.
A B A B
A B A B
B
1

FE Analysis - 1 - LR - 2012

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

FE Analysis - 1 - LR - 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

University of Naples Federico II – Faculty of Engineering

prof. Luciano Rosati, Dept. of Structural Engineering

PRINCIPLE of VIRTUAL FORCES

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 3

Integrating by parts the internal virtual work we obtain:

Li  Nˆ w0   Nˆ  w dz  Tˆ v 0   Tˆ  v dz   Tˆ  dz  Mˆ  0   Mˆ   dz

T v0  Tˆ (l ) v(l )  Tˆ (0) v(0)

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 4

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 5

while the dual kinematic parameters are defined by:

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 6

where the functions v, w, , as well as Nˆ , Tˆ , Mˆ are completely arbitrary but

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 7

The PVF or variational condition of compatibility

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 8

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 9

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 10

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 11

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 12

where a linear dependence upon m̂ B of all addends in the previous relation

so that B is obtained by evaluating the integrals placed on the left-hand side.

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 15

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 17

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 18

2 schemes of virtual forces

From a computational point of view, the PVF is not-particularly convenient for

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 19

It has been already emphasized that the PVF represents an alternative

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 20

and write the PVF equation:

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 21

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 22

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 23

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 24

 N wˆ  dz   T (vˆ  ˆ ) dz   M ˆ  dz   R sˆ Ai   RBj sˆ Bj   q a wˆ dz   qt vˆ dz   mˆ dz

where, similarly y to PVF, a hat has been superimposed

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 27

The virtual scheme to consider is,, in a certain sense,, in p

The bending moment M can be expressed in terms of the real displacement

0  EJv vˆdz  0 qvˆdz

where it has been employed the well-known relation:

i.e. a linear equation in B.

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 33

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 34

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 35

Determination of the test function:

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 36

Let us further evaluate the second derivate of the test function:

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 38

represents the well-known

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 39

To give physical insight of the PVD equation, it is possible to show that

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 40

FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Variational Formulations - 41

You might also like