Tugas 07 MEH - Chapter 9

TUGAS 7
METODE ELEMEN
HINGGA
2021
CHAPTER 9
1
Structural Analysis with the Finite Element Method
by Eugenio Onate
CHAPTER 9
MISCELLANEOUS: INCLINED SUPPORTS,
DISPLACEMENT CONSTRAINS, ERROR
ESTIMATION, MESH ADAPTIVITY ETC.
2
9.1 Introduction
1. Boundary Conditions in Inclined Supports
2. Methods to link different element types
3. General constraints in the nodal displacements
Deals with
1. Condensation and recovery algorithms

2. Mesh symmetries
3. Elastic supports
4. Computation of nodal stresses
5. Estimation of the solution error and application to
adaptive mesh refinement
Hal. 309 - 310 | Alfetra Henoch Tandita (1706036021) 3

9.1 Introduction
1. Boundary Conditions in Inclined Supports
2. Methods to link different element types

9.1 Introduction
3. General constraints in the nodal displacements
4. Condensation and recovery algorithms

9.1 Introduction
5. Mesh Symmetries
6. Elastic Supports

9.1 Introduction
7. Computation of Nodal Stresses
8. Estimation of the solution error

and application to adaptive mesh refinement

9.2 Boundary Conditions in Inclined Supports
Node k
u' ≠ 0
v' = 0
u & v (global axis) --> u' v' (local axis)

by Lk



Hal. 311 - 312 | Imam Taufik Rahmadi (2006545931) 11
Rigid elements
Above transformation is applied to all the

elements containing u3, v2 and v3. Hence,
these DOFs no longer appear in the final
assembled system
Hal. 313 - 314 | M.Jeva Ikramullah (1706035896) 14
9.4 DISPLACEMENT CONSTRAINTS
Figure 9.5 shows examples of more complex displacement constraints:
• Nodes B and C in Figure 9.5a are considered to be separated but

having the same local displacement
• Nodes A and B in Figure 9.5b are pin-jointed, thus enforcing the

same displacements for both nodes.
• The displacements of the end nodes for the beam AB in the

frame of Figure 9.5c can be constrained so as to ignore the axial
deformation in the analysis.
The final system involves only 3 DOFs for each floor (uA or uB, θA and θB),
thus allowing for a pure bending solution.
Hal. 313 - 314 | M.Jeva Ikramullah (1706035896) 15

Contain constrain
square non-
singular matrix
DOFs to be retained DOFs to be eliminated
The simplest case with g = 0. From Eqs.(9.11) and (9.12) we have
Matrix T  transforms
the element stiffness
matrix as and the
equivalent nodal force
vector as
Hal. 315 - 316 | Sarah Fatihah Nugroho (2006546253) 16

If the value of can be computed from Eqs.(9.11)-(9.13) as
The assembled (symmetric) stiffness matrix can be written before the constraints are enforced as
Note:
X (9.17) is not
symmetric
This equation can be transformed using Eq.(9.14) as
How to fix it:
multiply first the second
row of Eq.(9.16) by and
add the result to the first
X row of Eq.(9.17). Then
multiply the second row
of Eq.(9.17) by −.

Given by Eq. (9.16)
Transformation matrix
of Eq. (9.14)

Example 9.2
Compute the displacements in the mesh of three bar elements of Figure 9.6
imposing u1 = u2
Matrix Stiffness
Nodal Forces Vector
Hal. 317 - 318 | Ida Royana Tambunan (2006545912) 19

Example 9.3
Solve the problem of Figure 9.6 using the Lagrange multipliers method

9.4.3 Penalty method
can be
written as
The potential energy of the structure Π is now augmented by the penalty function
where [α] is a diagonal matrix of penalty numbers αi.
Obviously, if p = 0 then the constraints (9.24) are satisfied and there is no need to add anything to Π.
Stationarity of Π yields
For αi → ∞ Eq.(9:26) tends to As the α i grow the solution of Eq.(9.26) evolves so that
the constraint equation (9.24) is progressively better satisfied.
The equilibrium equation for finite values of the αi's is deduced from Eqs.(9.22b), (9.24) and (9.26) as
from which a can be obtained.
Hal. 319 - 320 | Daniel Alvin Giovanni S. (20065445591) 22

Example 9.4: Solve the problem of Figure 9.6 using the penalty method.
CTαC can be interpreted as the stiffness matrix of a bar element (with α = EA/l) linking nodes 1
and 2. Obviously α → ∞ implies increasing the rigidity of this element and the constraint is
approximated. The new system of equations is
which yields

9.4.3 Penalty method
The penalty method, despite its simplicity, can pose numerical problems. Consider, for instance,
Eq.(9.27) with g = 0 and [α] = α. The system of equilibrium equations degenerates for large
values of α to
Clearly the solution “locks” for α → ∞ giving a = 0, unless matrix CTC is singular. This
singularity can be anticipated by observing the number of rows and columns in this matrix. This
problem is similar to the singularity requirement for the shear stiffness matrix in order to
prevent shear locking in Timoshenko beams and Reissner-Mindlin plate and shell elements.

9.5 NODAL CONDENSATION AND SUBSTRUCTURES
9.5.1 Nodal condensation
Let a = [ar, ae]T be the DOFs in a mesh where ar are the boundary DOFs to be retained and ae are
the internal DOFs to be eliminated (Figure 9.7).

9.5.1 Nodal Condensation
If the loads act on the boundary of the

element patch considered, then fe = 0
and Eqs. (9.32) can be simplified
Hal. 321 - 322 | Salfa Zarfatina (1706035845) 26

9.5.1 Nodal Condensation
substituting
It is interesting that if ae contains a single DOF, the

condensation process of Eqs.(9.29)-(9.32) coincides
with the standard Gauss elimination technique for
solving systems of algebraic equations. The
condensation can, therefore, be interpreted as the
first step in the solution of the original assembled
system

9.5.2 Substructuring
Substructuring is advantageous when a
structure is formed by clearly identifiable and
repeated parts. An example is the box girder
bridge of Figure 9.8 where the substructures
1, 2 and 3 are repeated.
The substructuring process includes the following steps:
1) Condensating the DOFs and the loads of each substructure
to the boundary nodes. Each substructure is then transformed
to a “super-element” connected to the other elements
(or substructures) via the boundary nodes.
2) Assembly of the stiffness and nodal force contributions
from the different substructures into a global stiffness
matrix K and a force vector f.
3) Solution of the system Ka = f.
4) Computation (recovery) of the nodal displacements ae, Substructuring has become popular as a
the strains and the stresses for each substructure. parallel computing technique to solve large scale
structural problems. Each substructure is solved in
parallel in a different processor and hence the
computational effort and memory requirements can
be uniformly split among the processors.

Hal. 323 - 324 | Annisa Ayu Wulandari (2006545515) 29
Hal. 323 - 324 | Annisa Ayu Wulandari (2006545515) 30
Hal. 325 - 326 | Syaiful Rachman (2006546303) 31
9.6.2 Cyclic symmetry (Cont'd)
Hal. 327 - 328 | Imam Nakhrowi (2006545925) 34

9.7 STRUCTURES ON ELASTIC FOUNDATION

9.7 STRUCTURES ON ELASTIC FOUNDATION (Cont'd)

We introduce now a standard finite element The effect of the elastic foundation therefore increases the
discretization. This leads to the following equilibrium element stiffness. This leads to smaller
equation for the element nodal deflections values, as expected. For linear elements
Note that H(e) is a full matrix and this introduces a

coupling between the deflection of nodes 1 and 2. A
simplification is to diagonalize H(e) by adding up the
where l(e) is the length of the element side in contact with coefficients of each row. This is equivalent to assume a
the foundation (Figure 9.12). spring of elastic modulus (kl)(e)/2 acting at each node. If
equal length elements are used along the foundation, this
The non-zero terms in matrix H(e) involve the vertical simply implies adding the coefficient (kl)(e) to the diagonal
DOFs of nodes 1, 2 in contact with the foundation. term corresponding to the vertical deflection of the
nodes laying on the foundation in the original element
stiffness matrix.
Hal. 329 - 330 | Erriman Manru (2006545673) 37

where A(e) is the area of the element side in contact with
the foundation. The case of beam and plate elements
laying on an elastic foundation is treated in Volume 2 [On]. Eq.(9:50) gives nodal stresses which are discontinuous
between the adjacent elements (Figure 9.13). This is a
consequence of the finite element formulation where
9.8 COMPUTATION OF NODAL STRESSES continuity is only required to the displacements. Stress
discontinuity is reduced as the mesh is refined. Single nodal
stress values can be obtained via nodal averaging, or by
using the smoothing techniques described in the next
section.
The nodal stresses obtained via Eq.(9.50) are not as
accurate as those obtained by extrapolating to the nodes
the stresses computed at the Gauss points, which are the
optimal stress sampling points within an element (Section
6.7). Different extrapolation techniques are presented
next.
9.8.1 Global smoothing of stresses

 Lanjutan
 The error between the original and smoothed stress fields at each point is
 The values of are obtained by minimizing the following functional
The smoothing matrix M (e) and the “force" vector g(e) for each element can be assembled in the usual manner to form the
global expression of M and g. Solution of the system (9.55) yields the stresses at all nodes. The stress field has the same
continuity than the interpolation function Ni (typically Co continuity is chosen).
Hal. 331 - 332 | Nur Hafidz Hidayat (2006493650) 40

Lanjutan
The smoothing process can be applied independently to each stress component, although a different system of n x n
equations must be solved for each component. The solution is simplified by using a Jacobi iteration scheme [Ral] for
solving Eq.(9.55) as
where MD = diag. M. Typically 4 or 5 iterations are needed to obtain a converged solution [ZTZ].
This technique (also called L2 projection of stresses) can be applied to each individual element. A
simpler stress extrapolation procedure can however be implemented at the element level as explained
next.

9.8.2 Direct local extrapolation
Fig 9.15
where
 The stresses at the end nodes A and B are obtained making s = ± 1/p in (9.59) giving
where
 This technique is easily extended to two and three dimensions.

For instance, using the values at the 2 x 2 Gauss points of a
quadrilateral element (Figure 9.16) the following bilinear stress
interpolation can be written

Hal. 333 - 334 | Vivin Novi Adryana (2006546373) 43
Hal. 333 - 334 | Vivin Novi Adryana (2006546373) 44
Lanjutan..
Hal. 335 - 336 | Agus Mudo Prasetyo (2006545414) 45

Lanjutan 2..
Hal. 335 - 336 | Agus Mudo Prasetyo (2006545414) 46

9.8.4 Iterative Enhancement of The Solution
Hal. 337 - 339 | Vania Callista (1706035984) 47

9.9 ERROR ESTIMATION AND MESH ADAPTIVITY
9.9.1 Basic concepts of error estimation
• The main error source in finite element solution is the discretization error
• The error combines unaccuracies introduced by the interpolation and the mesh
chosen
• Enhanced accurate FEM solutions can be achieved by refining the mesh using a
greater number of elements of smaller size
• An alternative approach is keeping the mesh topology constant and using higher
order elements (p method)
• P method are difficult to implement
• The advances in mesh generation procedures has also favored mesh adaptive h-
method

9.9 ERROR ESTIMATION AND MESH ADAPTIVITY
9.9.2 Error Measures
• Strains and stresses are approximated by
• Vectors for displacement, strains, and stresses at each point
• Global error measure defined by the energy norm
• Alternative error measure: L2 norm
• Square value of the integral error norms can be computed by the sum of element contributions

9.9.3 Error Estimation Techniques
Simple Estimation of the error in stresses at each point:
(9.75)
Finite element solution

Smoothed stresses
Approximate expression of the energy norm of the error:
(9.76)
Procedure to obtain the smoothed stress field

explained in section 9.8
Hal. 340 - 342 | Dyah Ayu Aurellia Yasmiin(1706027080) 50

9.9.4 Mesh Adaption Strategies
A finite element solution is “acceptable” if the two following conditions are satisfied:
a) Global Error Condition
Energy norm of the error is less than a percentage of the total energy norm
(9.77)
(9.78)
Percentage of “admissible”
relative error.
Eq (9.77) allows to define a global error parameter as:
(9.79)
(9.80)

9.9.4 Mesh Adaption Strategies
A finite element solution is “acceptable” if the two following conditions are satisfied:
b) Optimum Mesh Condition
General Adaptive Strategy
Element distribution in the mesh should satisfy a mesh
Element sizes are modified with the
optimality condition: following two objectives:
• To reach optimum distribution of
(9.81)
element size satisfying Eq 9.81
Energy norm of Required value according to a • To reduce the global error so that
the error for particular mesh optimality Eq. 9.77 is satisfied
each element criterion
First, the new element size are
Local error parameter: defined in terms of the actual size and
the local error parameter:
(9.82)
(9.84)
Single error parameter for the element: q is the convergence rate of local
error parameter depending on the
(9.83)
mesh optimality criterion chosen.

Hal. 343 - 345 | Asri Puspita Sari Sidabutar (2006545534) 53
9.9.4.1 Mesh optimality criterion based on the equal distribution of the global energy error
The new element size is obtained from Eq.(9.87a) with
Combining Eqs.(9.81) and (9.88) gives the local error parameter as
From Eq.(9.76) it is deduced
where h is a characteristic element size and d is the

number of dimensions of the problem (i.e d = 3 for
3D problems)

Introducing Eqs.(9.79) and (9.89) into (9.83) gives 9.9.4.2 Mesh optimality criterion based on the global
distribution of the density of the energy error
(9.79)
(9.83) Comparing
(9.89)
(9.82)
The local error parameter is deduced

from Eqs. (9.82) and (9.96)
(9.97)
The single element error parameter

(9.79)

9.9.4.2 Mesh optimality criterion based on the global distribution of the density of the energy error

9.9.4.2 Mesh optimality criterion based on the
global distribution of the density of the energy error
Hal. 346 - 348 | Bias January Parmadi (2006545572) 57

9.9.4.2 Mesh optimality criterion based on the
global distribution of the density of the energy error

9.9.4.3 Mesh refinement strategy based on
the point-wise error in stresses





Maximum error in stresses







9.9.5 Construction of an adapted mesh



9.9.6 Examples of mesh adaptivity
Hal. 349 - 351 | Andreas (1806202992) 74

Hal. 349 - 351 | Andreas (1806202992) 75

Hal. 349 - 351 | Andreas (1806202992) 76

Hal. 349 - 351 | Andreas (1806202992) 77

Hal. 352 - 354 | Susilo Widyatmoko (2006493871) 78
TERIM
A
KASIH
85

Tugas 07 MEH - Chapter 9

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Tugas 07 MEH - Chapter 9

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TUGAS 7

1. Condensation and recovery algorithms

Hal. 309 - 310 | Alfetra Henoch Tandita (1706036021) 3

1. Boundary Conditions in Inclined Supports

2. Methods to link different element types

Hal. 309 - 310 | Alfetra Henoch Tandita (1706036021) 4

3. General constraints in the nodal displacements

4. Condensation and recovery algorithms

Hal. 309 - 310 | Alfetra Henoch Tandita (1706036021) 5

Hal. 309 - 310 | Alfetra Henoch Tandita (1706036021) 6

7. Computation of Nodal Stresses

8. Estimation of the solution error

Hal. 309 - 310 | Alfetra Henoch Tandita (1706036021) 7

u & v (global axis) --> u' v' (local axis)

Hal. 309 - 310 | Alfetra Henoch Tandita (1706036021) 8

Hal. 309 - 310 | Alfetra Henoch Tandita (1706036021) 9

Hal. 309 - 310 | Alfetra Henoch Tandita (1706036021) 10

Above transformation is applied to all the

Figure 9.5 shows examples of more complex displacement constraints:

• Nodes B and C in Figure 9.5a are considered to be separated but

• Nodes A and B in Figure 9.5b are pin-jointed, thus enforcing the

• The displacements of the end nodes for the beam AB in the

Hal. 313 - 314 | M.Jeva Ikramullah (1706035896) 15

DOFs to be retained DOFs to be eliminated

The simplest case with g = 0. From Eqs.(9.11) and (9.12) we have

Hal. 315 - 316 | Sarah Fatihah Nugroho (2006546253) 16

Hal. 315 - 316 | Sarah Fatihah Nugroho (2006546253) 17

Hal. 315 - 316 | Sarah Fatihah Nugroho (2006546253) 18

Nodal Forces Vector

Hal. 317 - 318 | Ida Royana Tambunan (2006545912) 19

Hal. 317 - 318 | Ida Royana Tambunan (2006545912) 21

where [α] is a diagonal matrix of penalty numbers αi.

from which a can be obtained.

Hal. 319 - 320 | Daniel Alvin Giovanni S. (20065445591) 22

Hal. 319 - 320 | Daniel Alvin Giovanni S. (20065445591) 23

Hal. 319 - 320 | Daniel Alvin Giovanni S. (20065445591) 24

Hal. 319 - 320 | Daniel Alvin Giovanni S. (20065445591) 25

If the loads act on the boundary of the

Hal. 321 - 322 | Salfa Zarfatina (1706035845) 26

It is interesting that if ae contains a single DOF, the

Hal. 321 - 322 | Salfa Zarfatina (1706035845) 27

Hal. 321 - 322 | Salfa Zarfatina (1706035845) 28

Hal. 327 - 328 | Imam Nakhrowi (2006545925) 34

Hal. 327 - 328 | Imam Nakhrowi (2006545925) 35

Hal. 327 - 328 | Imam Nakhrowi (2006545925) 36

Note that H(e) is a full matrix and this introduces a

Hal. 329 - 330 | Erriman Manru (2006545673) 37

Hal. 329 - 330 | Erriman Manru (2006545673) 39

 The values of are obtained by minimizing the following functional

Hal. 331 - 332 | Nur Hafidz Hidayat (2006493650) 40

Hal. 331 - 332 | Nur Hafidz Hidayat (2006493650) 41

 This technique is easily extended to two and three dimensions.

Hal. 331 - 332 | Nur Hafidz Hidayat (2006493650) 42

Hal. 335 - 336 | Agus Mudo Prasetyo (2006545414) 45

Hal. 335 - 336 | Agus Mudo Prasetyo (2006545414) 46

Hal. 337 - 339 | Vania Callista (1706035984) 47

Hal. 337 - 339 | Vania Callista (1706035984) 48

• Vectors for displacement, strains, and stresses at each point

• Global error measure defined by the energy norm

• Alternative error measure: L2 norm

Hal. 337 - 339 | Vania Callista (1706035984) 49

Finite element solution

Approximate expression of the energy norm of the error:

Procedure to obtain the smoothed stress field