Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Practical Aspects of The Finite Element Method
Practical Aspects of The Finite Element Method
net/publication/232896029
CITATIONS READS
7 323
3 authors:
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Project of Preservation and Conservation of Tiwanaku and Akapana Pyramid View project
RISKCOAST "Tools for preventing and managing coastal-georisks in the framework of Global Change" View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Manuel Pastor on 27 May 2014.
Slide 1
1.- Introduction (I)
• FEM has become a powerful engineering analysis tool
• Many engineers use commercial codes : ANSYS, ABAQUS,......
• Beginners face questions such as :
i) Which element ?
ii) How many elements and how big ?
iii) Which material model ?
iv) Is there any saving in reduced integration
2
Slide 2
1.- Introduction (II)
• The questions we will address are:
2) Volumetric locking
3) The risks of reduced integration
4) Failure loads
5) Why cannot we choose all elements for geotechnical analysis ?
3
Slide 3
2.- The misteries of bending (I)
• Not all elements perform satisfactorily under bending contitions
• Linear triangles and bilinear quadrilaterals produce a much stiffer
response than they should
M M
4
Slide 4
2.- The misteries of bending (II)
• Displacement field :
u − EI
M
xy v − EI
M
1 − x 2
−u 0 y
• Strain field x − EI
M
y y 0 xy 0 0
0
5
Slide 5
2.- The misteries of bending (III)
Finite Element solution with linear quadrilateral
• Shape functions: x
N1 1
1 − x − y xy N2 1
4
1 x − y − xy
4
1 2
N3 1
4
1 x y xy N4 1
4
1 − x y − xy
6
Slide 6
2.- The misteries of bending (IV)
• B matrix :
−1 y 0 1−y 0 1y 0 −1 − y 0
B 0 −1 x 0 −1 − x 0 1x 0 1−x
−1 x −1 y −1 − x 1 − y 1 x 1 y 1 − x −1 − y
• Shear locking
8
Slide 8
2.- The misteries of bending (VI)
u0 −u 0
2
1 2
0 0
1
u0 −u 0
9
Slide 9
2.- The misteries of bending (VII)
• Poor bending performance for T3 and Q4
10
Slide 10
Volumetric locking (I)
• Let us assume a material with a Poisson coeficient close to 0.5
• Bulk modulus: K 31−2
E
→∞
Y F
3 4 6
1
X
1 2 5
12
Slide 12
Volumetric locking (III)
• A simple test : incompressible patch test (Nagtegaal,Hughes)
ndof = 2
nrestr ? u a 1 a 2 x a 3 y a 4 xy
v b 1 b 2 x b 3 y b 4 xy
x a2 a4 y y b3 b4 x
v a 2 b 3 b 4 x a 4 y
• Element incompressibility restriction
14
Slide 14
Risks of reduced integration (I)
• Reduced integration consists of using an integration rule of smaller
degree than required to integrate exactly polinomials existing in
the stiffness matrix of undistorted elements
Tv Th Rot
Dil B1 B2
S1 S2
• Description
• Rigid body modes : Zero energy 16
Slide 16
Risks of reduced integration (III)
17
Slide 17
Risks of reduced integration (IV)
• Non rigid body zero energy modes might be a problem
18
Slide 18
Failure loads (I)
• Elastoplastic problems also present quasi incompressible conditions
• Footing on vertical slope
Material properties
Tipo de material E(Pa) y (Pa)
Suelo Von Mises 1.0E5 0.35 200.0
Zapata Elásticolineal 1.0E8 0.35
- Theoretical Solución
20
Slide 20
Failure loads (III)
“Right”
Orientation
(r)
“wrong”
Orientation
(w)
21
Slide 21
Failure loads (IV)
• Force-displacement diagrams for H = 0.00
Quadrilaterals Triangles
22
Slide 22
Failure loads (V)
23
Slide 23
Failure loads (VI)
24
Slide 24
5.- Why cannot we use all elements ..........? (I)
• Let us consider the saturated consolidation problem
σy σ 'y p
τ xy τ ' xy
τ xy τ ' xy
p
σx σx = σ 'x + p
σ 'x
τ xy τ ' xy
τ xy τ ' xy p
σ 'y
σy
• Space discretization
′
S − mp b 0 T ′
B d − Qp̄ f u
m Su̇ − ∇ k∇p
T T ṗ
∇ k w b 0
T . .
Q∗ Q u Hp̄ C p̄ f T
26
Slide 26
5.- Why cannot we use all elements ..........? (III)
with a column of 20
0.8
elements 0.8
0.6 0.6
z/L
q4p4
z/L
0.4 0.4
(a) (b)
• Results 0.2 0.2
a) Q* = 104MPa
0. 0.
0. 0.5 1 1.5 0. 0.5 1 1.5 2
0.8 0.8
Q8P4 Q8P4
0.6 0.6
q8p8
z/L
z/L
0.4 0.4
(c) (d)
Q* = Water and grain 0.2 0.2
compressibility 0.
0. 0.5 1 1.5 0.
0. 0.5 1 1.5
p/q p/q
28
Slide 28
5.- Why cannot we use all elements ..........? (V)
• Zienkiewicz & Taylor patch test (1986)
KT −Q dΔ ū n Gu
. −
−QT 0 d Δp̄ n −Gp
. −1
dΔ ū n K Q. dΔp̄ n K G u
−1 u p
.
Q K. QdΔp̄ n − G p Q T K −1 G u
T −1
n p × n p = (n p × nu )(nu × nu )(nu × n p ) } nu ≥ np
u p
• nu = 0 < np = 3
Test not satisfied
Precribed displacement
Prescribed Pressure
• nu = 0 < np = 2 u p
Test not satisfied
30
Slide 30
5.- Why cannot we use all elements ..........? (VII)
• Constraints
• nu = 14 > np = 6
Test satisfied
u p
KT −Q dΔ ū n Gu
. −
−Q T
0 d Δp̄ n −Gp
32
Slide 32
6.- Our favorite solver (Do we have any?)
• One of the main computational tasks in the FEM is linear
Equation system solving
33
Slide 33
6.- Our favorite solver (Do we have any?)
• Iterative solvers like preconditioned conjugate gradient are
excellent choices : Easy to program
Does not require renumbering
x k1 x k k pk
rk1 rk − k Apk
T
r k1 r k1
k
T
r k Ar k
pk1 p k1
k pk
enddo 36
Slide 36
6.1 Conjugate gradient methods (III)
• Two important orthogonality properties
pTi Apkj 0
PTj rk1 0 where P j p1 , . . . , pj
37
Slide 37
6.1 Conjugate gradient methods (IV)
pk1 zk1 k pk
38
Slide 38
6.2 Skyline storage scheme (I)
• To do so would imply :
a) A huge waste of storage space given the sparsity of
The coefficient matrix (many coefficients are 0)
b) A huge waste of computational effort since matrix operations
on null coefficients are trivial
• Because of this it is important to use an efficient storage scheme
39
Slide 39
6.2 Skyline storage scheme (II)
• It consists of storing the stiffness matrix in a vector including the
diagonal terms and the off diagonal terms between the diagonal
And the farthest non zero off diagonal term, for each row (column)
2 −2 0 0 −1 i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
−2 3 −2 0 0 ai 2 −2 3 −2 5 −3 10 −1 0 0 4 10
0 −2 5 −3 0
i 1 2 3 4 5
0 0 −3 10 4
jdiagi 1 3 5 7 12
−1 0 0 4 10
40
Slide 40
7.- Concluding remarks
View publication stats