Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
DOI 10.1007/s13369-014-1232-2
123
Arab J Sci Eng
z v
2b 2c
(a) u
w
(b) (c)
most shortcomings in the standard element particularly in may be of the following form [7]:
flexural analysis. The addition of incompatible displacement
modes to lower-order displacement-based elements was re- u 8 ui
evaluated and a new method of stress recovery was presented v = Ni vi + [P] {} (2)
in which incompatible modes are introduced [6]. This study w i=1 wi
shows that it is still the most suitable element that can be
where [P] is the additional incompatible displacement modes
used for flexural analysis.
that will be used to correct the displacement error and defined
In this study, the formulation and calculation algorithm
as[7]:
of the 3D incompatible brick element are presented. A com-
puter program (three-dimensional finite element incompati- P1 P2 P3 0 0 0 0 0 0
ble program (3D FEIP)) has been developed in FORTRAN
code to implement the calculation algorithm. Several sub- [P] = 0 0 0 P1 P2 P3 0 0 0 (3)
routines have been written to execute different tasks in the
0 0 0 0 0 0 P1 P2 P3
program. Verification and parametric study have been con-
ducted to validate the code and to study the effect of some and
analytical parameters on flexural analysis of beam.
{}T = 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 (4)
123
Arab J Sci Eng
y
v/ y
/ = J / y
(6) z w/z
{} = = (15)
x y
u/ y + v/ x
/ /z
yz
v/z + w/ y
where zx u/z + w/ x
x/ y/ z/ Ni / x 0 0
0 Ni / y 0
J = x/ y/ z/ (7)
0 0 Ni /z
x/ y/ z/
[Bi ] =
Ni / y Ni / x
(16)
0
Therefore,
0 Ni /z Ni / y
/ x /
Ni /z Ni / x
0
1
/ y = J / (8)
/z /
{di }T = u i vi wi (17)
where
J11 J12 J13
1 [Ba ] = [B1 ] [B2 ] [B8 ] (18)
J = J21 J22 J23 (9)
J31 J32 J33
{da }T = u 1 v1 w1 .. u 8 v8 w8 (19)
2.2 StressStrain Relationships
(20)
[B] = [B1 ] [B2 ] . [B8 ] ... P P P (12) The derivatives of additional shape functions can be written
1 2 3 as follows:
Equation (12) can be written as follows: Pi Pi Pi Pi
= J11 + J12 + J13 (21a)
x
8
Pi Pi Pi
Pi
{} = [Bi ] {di } + P (13) = J21 + J22 + J23 (21b)
y
i=1
Pi Pi Pi Pi
or = J31 + J32 + J33 (21c)
z
{} = [Ba ] {da } + P (14) Upon substitution into Eq. (22) in order to obtain [P ]
123
Arab J Sci Eng
2 J11 0 0 2 J12 0 0 2 J13 0 0
0
2 J21 0 0
2 J22 0 0
2 J23 0
0 0 2 J 0 0 2 J 0 0 2
J33
P = 31 32 (22)
2 J21 2 J11 0 2 J
2 J22 12 0 2 J
2 J23 13 0
0 2 J
2 J31 0 2 J
2 J32 0 2 J
2 J33
21 22 23
2 J31 0 2 J
2 J11 0 2 J
2 J12 0
2 J13
32 33
or
2.3 Element Stiffness
[K ] = Wi W j Wk f (i , j , k ) |J |i jk (30)
The standard 3D element stiffness matrix is evaluated using
i j k
the following relationship:
where
[K ] = [B]T [D] [B] dV (23) i, j and k are the sampling points.
V W is the weight of Gauss numerical integration.
The modified element stiffness matrix [K ] reveals the flex-
With the additional mode, the stiffness matrix can be written ural response because it has the effect of incompatible or
as: non-conforming displacement mode, {}. The obtained dis-
placement vector, {da }, will be used only to obtain the strain
[Ba ]T
[K ] = T [D] [Ba ] P dV (24) and stress in the element because the displacement mode,
P
V {}, is nodeless displacement vector.
or
[B ]T [D] [B ] [B ]T [D] P
[K ] = a a a
T dV 3 ProgramAlgorithm
T
P [D] [Ba ] P [D] P
V
Incompatible element stiffness subroutine and different aux-
(25)
iliary subroutines have been developed to include the addi-
The element equilibrium equation can be represented as: tional modes. The calculation algorithm of the element stiff-
ness is described in the flowchart shown in Fig. 2.
[K aa ]24x24 [K a ]24x9 {da }24x1 {Fa }24x1
= (26)
[K a ]9x24 [K ]9x9 {}9x1 {0}9x1
To remove the nodeless displacements {}, static condensa- 4 Program Code Verification and Parametric Study
tion will be used and Eq. 26 can be written as:
To verify the developed code of incompatible element, two
[K aa ] [K a ] [K ]1 [K a ] {da } = {Fa } (27) cantilever beams with different loading and different meshes
have been analyzed and the results have been compared.
Therefore, the condensed stiffness matrix (order of 24x24) Moreover, a parametric study has been conducted to investi-
that will be used in the incompatible element is gate the effect of mesh size and type of loading on deflection
and developed stresses. For each beam, the analysis has been
[K ] = [Ba ]T [D] [Ba ] carried out three times as follows:
V
T 1
[Ba ]T [D] P P [D] P 1. Using 3D incompatible element (with incompatible
mode).
P [D] [Ba ] dV
T
(28) 2. Using standard 3D element (without incompatible mode).
3. Theoretical solution (closed-form solution).
For the use of Gauss quadrature numerical integration in
order to estimate Eq. , the equation takes the form
The theoretical solution is obtained from the classical beam
theory [8]. Displacement in terms of bending moment in
[K ] = f (i , j , k )dV (29) a beam can be obtained from the second-order differential
V equation as follows, assuming that the beam cross section is
123
Arab J Sci Eng
Call shape function subroutine to find Ni and their derivatives with respect
to x, y and z at integration points G, G and G
Implement the static condensation procedure to find the condensed stiffness matrix of Eq. 28
[K]
Write stiffness matrix [K] into a file for use in the solution
123
Arab J Sci Eng
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
-0.001 -0.0005
-0.002 -0.001
Displacement, m
Standard Element Standard Element
Displacement, m
-0.005 -0.0025
-0.006 -0.003
-0.007 -0.0035
Number of elements
-0.008
Number of elements
Fig. 5 Displacement versus number of elements due to gravity load,
Fig. 4 Displacement versus number of elements due to concentrated Beam I
load, Beam I
0
-0.0001 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Standard Element
-0.0003
Theoretically
The comparisons were conducted for the displacement at free -0.0004
-0.0005 Incompatible Element
end and normal stress in x-direction near the fixed end versus
the number of elements (mesh size) as shown in Figs. 4, 5, 6, -0.0006
7, 8, and 9 for different loading cases (see Table 1 for loading -0.0007
cases). -0.0008
Number of elements
As shown in Figs. 4, 5, and 6, the displacement results
at free end using incompatible element coincide mostly on Fig. 6 Displacement versus number of elements due to uniform load,
the theoretical values. The standard element reveals over- Beam I
stiffening behavior more than incompatible element for all
loading cases. Moreover, normal stress in x-direction results
ing the analysis were five elements in the longitudinal direc-
is very close to the theoretical solution as shown in Figs. 7,
tion (see Table 1). Figures 10, 11, 12, and 13 show the analysis
8, and 9 especially with finer meshes (small element). These
results of deflection and normal stress for concentrated load
results give an evidence of the accuracy of the 3D incom-
and moment at free end. The concentrated moment on the
patible element in the flexural analysis of beam for different
free end was applied as coupled forces at the free face nodes.
loading cases.
As shown in Figs. 10 and 11, the deflection values in the
longitudinal direction of the beam obtained by the incom-
4.2 Beam II patible element are almost the same as the theoretical values.
The previous observation of over-stiffening behavior of stan-
In this beam, other types of comparison were conducted dard element is also recognized in Beam II. Moreover, the
to investigate the displacement and normal stresses in x- incompatible elements gave normal stresses very close to the
direction along the span. The numbers of elements used dur- theoretical values as shown in Figs. 12 and 13. The calculated
123
Arab J Sci Eng
3.00E+06 0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Vertical Deflection, cm
-0.05
2.50E+06
Normal stress, N/mm 2
-0.1
2.00E+06 -0.15
Standard Element Incompatible Element
-0.2
1.50E+06 Theoretically Standard Element
-0.25
Theoretically
1.00E+06 Incompatible Element -0.3
-0.35
5.00E+05 Distance cm
0.00E+00
Fig. 10 Vertical deflection due to concentrated load, Beam II
0 10 20 30 40
Number of elements
0
Fig. 7 Normal stress versus number of elements due to concentrated
-0.01 0 50 100 150 200 250
Vertical Deflection, cm
load, Beam I
-0.02
-0.03 Incompatible Element
1.80E+06 -0.04 Standard Element
1.60E+06 -0.05 Theoretically
N/mm 2
1.40E+06 -0.06
1.20E+06 -0.07
1.00E+06 -0.08
Normal stress,
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 3.5
Number of elements 3
2.5 Incompatible Element
Normal stress,
Fig. 8 Normal stress versus number of elements due to gravity load, 2 Standard Element
Beam I 1.5 Theoretically
1
4.50E+05 0.5
N/mm 2
4.00E+05 0
0 50 100 150 200 250
3.50E+05
Distance cm
3.00E+05
Normal stress,
0 10 20 30 40 0.6
Number of elements 0.5
0.4 Incompatible Element
Normal stress,
Fig. 9 Normal stress versus number of elements due to uniform load, 0.3 Standard Element
Beam I 0.2 Theoretically
0.1
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
stresses are located at the Gaussian points, which explains the Distance cm
step distribution shown in Fig. 12 due to the stress gradient.
Fig. 13 Normal stress due to concentrated moment, Beam II
5 Conclusion
accurate simulation for the flexural behavior has been ach-
The incompatible or non-conforming element has improved ieved by the developed 3D FE program code. The developed
the flexural response and gives more accurate results for program code for the 3D incompatible element yields very
deflection and stresses in comparison with the standard ele- accurate results for finer FE meshes for different loading
ment.The analysis results for the studied problems show that cases.
123
Arab J Sci Eng
References 5. Wilson, E.L.; Taylor, R.L.; Doherty, W.P.; Ghaboussi, J.: Incompat-
ible displacement models. In: Fenves et al. (eds.) Numerical and
1. Cook, R.D.; Malkus, D.S.; Plesha, M.E.: Concepts and Applications Computer Method in Structural Mechanics, pp. 4357. Academic
of Finite Element Analysis. Wiley, New York (2002) Press, London (1973)
2. Cook, R.D.: Finite Element Modeling For Stress Analysis. Wiley, 6. Wilson, E.L.; Ibrahimbegovic, A.: Use of incompatible displace-
New York (1995) ment modes for the calculation of element stiffnesses or stresses.
3. Beyabanaki, S.A.R.; Jafari, A.; Biabanaki, S.O.R.; Yeung, M.R.: Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 7, 229241 (1990)
A coupling model Of 3-D discontinuous deformation analysis (3-D 7. Krishnamoorthy, C.S.: Finite Element Analysis, Theory and Pro-
DDA) and finite element method. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 34(1B), 107119 gramming, 2nd ed. Tata McGraw Hill Comp. Ltd., New Delhi (2001)
(2009) 8. Hinton, E.; Owen, D.R.J.: Finite Element Programming. Academic
4. Taylor, R.L.; Beresford, R.J.; Wilson, E.l.: A non-conforming ele- Press, London (1983)
ment for stress analysis. Int. J. Numer. Method Eng. 10, 12111219
(1976)
123