Boundary Element Techniques in Computer-

Aided Engineering
NATO ASI Series
Advanced Science Institutes Series

A Series presenting the results of activities sponsored by the NATO Science

Committee, which aims at the dissemination of advanced scientific and technological
knowledge, with a view to strengthening links between scientific communities.

The Series is published by an international board of publishers in conjunction with the

NATO Scientific Affairs Division

A Life Sciences Plenum Publishing Corporation

B Physics London and New York

C Mathematical and D. Reidel Publishing Company

Physical Sciences Dordrecht and Boston

D Behavioural and Martinus Nijhoff Publishers

Social Sciences DordrechtiBoston/Lancaster
E Applied Sciences

F Computer and Springer-Verlag

Systems Sciences BerlinlHeidelberglNew York
G Ecological Sciences

Series E: Applied Sciences - No. 84

Boundary Element Techniques
in Computer-Aided Engineering
edited by

C.A. Brebbia
Institute for Computational Mechanics
Ashurst, Southampton S04 2AA
UK

1984 Martinus Nijhoff Publishers

Dordrecht / Boston / Lancaster
Published in co-operation with NATO Scientific Affairs Division
Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Study Institute on Boundary Elements in CAD,
Southampton, England, September 19-30, 1983

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

NATO Advanced Study Institute on Boundary Elements in
CAD (1983 : Southampton, Hampshire)
Boundary element techniques in computer aided
engineering.

(NATO advanced science lost i tutes series. Series E.

Applied sciences; 84)
"Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Study Institute on
Boundary Elements in CAD, Southampton, England,
September 19-30, 1983"--T .p. verso.
Includes bibliographies and index.
1. Boundary value problems--Data processing--
Congresses. 2. Engineering--Data processing--Congresses.
I. Brebbia, C. A. II. North Atlantic Treaty Organiza-
tion. Scientific Affairs Division. III. Title.
IV. Series: NATO advanced institutes series. Series E,
Applied sciences; no. 84.
TA347.B69N37 1983 515.3'5'O~.854 84-16710
ISBN 90-247-3065-1

ISBN- 13: 978-94-009-6194-4 e-ISBN- 13: 978-94-009-6192-0

DOl: 10.1007/978-94-009-6192-0

Distributors for the United States and Canada: Kluwer Academic Publishers, Inc.,
190 Old Derby Street, Hingham, MA 02043, USA
Distributors for the UK and Ireland: Kluwer Academic Publishers, MTP Press Ltd,
Falcon House, Queen Square, Lancaster LA 1 1RN, UK
Distributors for all other countries: Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, Distribution
Center, P.O. Box 322, 3300 AH Dordrecht, The Netherlands

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a

retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the
publishers,
Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, P.O. Box 163, 3300 AD Dordrecht, The Netherlands

Copyright © 1984 by Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht

Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1984
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE XI

Chapter 1. Weighted Residual Formulation of AT-?l ')ximate Methods

by C.A. Brebbia Page 1

1.1. Introduction
1.2. Basic Definition
1.3. Approximate Solutions
1.4. Method of Weighted Residuals
1.5. Weak Formulations
1.6. The Inverse Problem
1.7. Conclusions
References

Chapter~ Boundary Element Methods

by J.J. Connor and C.A. Brebbia Page 23

2.1. Fundamentals of Functional Analysis

2.2. Generalized Green's Formula
2.3. Variational Formulation
2.4. Weighted Residual Scheme
2.5. Boundary Element Formulation of Poisson's Equation
2.6. Fundamental Solutions
2.7. Boundary Discretisation and Systems Equations
2.8. Computation of Integrals - 2D case
Bibliography

Chapter 3. Boundary Integral Equations

by M.A. Jaswon Page 57

3.1. Simple-layer Formulations

3.2. Double-layer Formulations
3.3. Direct Formulations
3.4. Indirect Vector Formulations
3.5. Direct Formulations
References

v
Chapter 4. Scalar and Vector Potential Theory

by M.A. Jaswon Page 71

4.1. The Simple-layer Potential

4.2. The Double-layer Potential
4.3. Green's Formula
4.4. Identification of Scalar and Vector Symbolism
4.5. Somig1iana's Identity
4.6. Rigid-body Displacement Field
References

Chapter 5. Potential Problems in Two Dimensions Page 85

by G.T. Symm

5.1. Introduction
5.2. Flow past an Obstacle
5.3. Discretisation
5.4. Green's Boundary Formula
5.5. Applications
5.6. Boundary Singularities
5.7. Composite Domains
5.8. Conclusion
References

Chapter 6. Three-dimensional Axisymmetrica1 Potential Problems

by G.T. Symm Page 101

6.1. Introduction
6.2. The Newtonian Potential
6.3. Discretisation
6.4. General Domain
6.5. Axisymmetric Problems
6.6. Conclusion
References

VI
Chapter 7. Heat Transfer Applications

by H.L.G. Pina Page III

7.1. Introduction
7.2. Integral Equations associated with Steady Heat
Conduction Problems
7.3. Nume.rical Solution of the Integral Equations
7.4. Poisson's Equation
7.5. Non-homogeneous Bodies; Method·of Subregions
7.6. Anisotropic Bodies
References

Chapter 8. Numerical Inteji!ration and other C2S!utational Technigues

by H.L.G. Pina Page 127

8.1. Introduction
8.2. Isoparametr1c Elements
8.3. Numerical Integration
References

Chapter 9. Startinji! to work with Boundar~ Elements

by G. Kuich Page 141

9.1. Introduction
9.2. The Boundary Element Method
9.3. Advantages and Disadvantages of the BEM compared
to FEM
9.4. Introduction to BEASY
9.5. Examples
9.6. Conclusions
References

Chapter 10. Experiences in Boundary Element Applications

by G. Kuich Page 159

10.1 Introduction
10.2. Pre- and Post Processing
10.3. C.A.D. Coupling
10.4. Installation on Different Computers
10.5. Recommendations for BEM use

VII
Chapter 11. Electrostatics Problems

by R. Adey Page 177

11.1. Introduction
11. 2. Theoretical Basis
U.3. Boundary Elements
11.4. Applications
U.S. Conclusions
References

Chapter 12. A Boundary Element Solution of the Wave Equation

by D.J. Danson Page 191

12.1. Introduction
12.2. Theoretical Development
12.3. Boundary Conditions
12.4. Numerical Implementation
12.5. Velocities and Pressures
12.6. Identification of Areas in Shadow
12.7. Test Example
12.8. Conclusions
References

Chapter 13. Elasticity Problems

by D.J. Danson Page 201

13.1. Introduction
13.2. Governing Equations
13.3. Boundary Integral Formulation
13.4. Two Dimensional Elasticity Problems
13.5. Three Dimensional Elasticity Problems
13.6. Axisymmetric Elasticity Problems
References
Appendix

Chapter 14. Elasticity Problems with Body Forces

by D.J. Danson Page 239

14.1. Introduction
14.2. Transformation to Boundary Integrals
14.3. 2D Body Forces
14.4. 3D Body Forces
14.5. Axisymmetric Body Forces
References
Appendix

VIII
ChaEter 15. Time DeEendent Problems

by C.A. Brebbia Page 261

l5.I. Introduction
15.2. Time Dependent Diffusion
15.3. The Scalar Wave Equation
15.4. Transient Elastodynamics
15.5. Mass Matrix Representation
15.6. Conclusions
References

ChaEter 16. Time DeEendent Potential Problems

by H. Pina Page 293

l6.I. Introduction
16.2. Integral Formulation of Heat Conduction Problems
16.3. Numerical Solution of the Integral Equations
16.4. Conclusions
References

Chapter 17. Plate Bending Problems Page 315

by M. Stern

17.I. Pre liminarie s

17.2. Reciprocal Work Relation
17 .3. Boundary Integral Representations
17.4. Concluding Remarks
References

Chapter 18. A Choice of Fundamental Solutions

by M. Stern Page 327

18.1. Introductory Remarks

18.2. A simple example: 2D Heat Conduction
18.3. A more significant example: Plane Elastostatics
18.4. Concluding Remarks
References

Chapter 19. Formulation for Cracks in Plate Bending

by M. Stern Page 345

19.1. Fundamental Solutions for Cracks

19.2. Augmented Boundary Integral Equations
19.3. Concluding Remarks
References

IX
Chapter 20. Fracture Mechanics Stress Analysis, I.

by C. Atkinson Page 355

20.1 Introduction
20.2. Stress Intensity Factors
20.3. Integral Equation Methods for Crack Tip
Stress Analysis
References

Chapter 21. Fracture Mechanics Stress Analysis, II

by C. Atkinson Page 377

21.1. Introduction
21.2. Invariant Integral based on the Energy
Momentum Tensor
21.3. Invariant Integrals deduced from Betti's
Reciprocal Theorem
21.4. Some Numerical Results for a Nocht Problem
21.5. A Problem of Debond Stress Analysis
References

Chapter 22. BEM in Geomechanics

by R. Butterfield Page 399

22.1. Introduction
22.2. Notation and some Basic Ideas
22.3. BEM applied to the Interaction between
Structures and the Supporting Ground
22.4. Inhomogeneity, Zoning and Layering
22.5. E1astop1asticity
22.6. Concluding Remarks
References

Chapter 23. An Asymptotic Error Analysis and Underlying Mathematical

Principles for Boundary Element Methods

by W.L. Wendland Page 417

23.1. Projection Methods and Garding's Inequality

23.2. Examples of Strongly Elliptic Boundary Integral
Equations
23.3. Asymptotic Convergence of Ga1erkin type Boundary
Element Methods
23.4. Asymptotic Convergence of Collocation Methods
References

Subject Index Page 437

x
 PREFACE

This book constitutes the edited proceedings of the Advanced

Studies Institute on Boundary Element Techniques in Computer Aided
Engineering held at The Institute of Computational Mechanics, Ashurst
Lodge, Southampton, England, from September 19 to 30, 1984.

The Institute was held under the auspices of the newly launched
"Double Jump Programme" which aims to bring together academics and
industrial scientists. Consequently the programme was more industr-
ially based than other NATO ASI meetings, achieving an excellent
combination of theoretical and practical aspects of the newly
developed Boundary Element Method.

In recent years engineers have become increasingly interested

in the application of boundary element techniques for'the solution
of continuum mechanics problems. The importance of boundary elements
is that it combines the advantages of boundary integral equations
(i.e. reduction of dimensionality of the problems, possibility of
modelling domains extending to infinity, numerical accura'cy) with
the versatility of finite elements (i.e. modelling of arbitrary
curved surfaces). Because of this the technique has been well
received by the engineering and scientific communities.

Another important advantage of boundary elements stems from

its reduction of dimensionality, that is that the technique
requires much less data input than classical finite elements. This
makes the method very well suited for Computer Aided Design and
in great part explains the interest of the engineering profession
in the new technique.

The book reviews the fundamental theoretical concepts and the

more recent developments with emphasis on their applicability in
an industrial environment. Theoretical lectures were complemented
by computer workshops which were carried out using available
industrial codes, some of them developed at The Computational
Mechanics Institute. During the ASI participants had occasion to
run problems of relevance to their industries. Although it was
not possible to include these results in this book, the emphasis
on practical applications is reflected in some of the chapters
written by well-known industrial researchers.

I am grateful to the lecturers for their excellent chapters.

Authors contributing to this book are as follows:-

Dr R. Adey, Computational Mechanics Centre, U.K.

Dr C. Atkinson, Imperial College, London, U.K.
Dr C.A. Brebbia, Southampton University and Institute of Computational
Mechanics, U.K.
Professor R. Butterfield, Southampton University, U.K.
Professor J.J. Connor, M.I.T. U.S.A.
Dr D~J. Danson, Computational Mechanics Inc. Boston, U.S.A.
Professor M.A. Jaswon, The City University, London, U.K.
Dr G. Kuich, FEMCAD, Switzerland
Professor H.L.G. Pina, Instituto Superior Tecnico, Lisbon, Portugal
Professor M. Stern, University of Texas, Austin, U.S.A.
Dr G.T. Symm, National Physical Laboratory, London, U.K.
Professor W. Wendlnnd, University of Darmstadt, Germany

CARLOS A. BREBBIA
Editor
Chapter 1

WEIGHTED RESIDUAL FORMULATION OF APPROXIMATE METHODS

C. Brebbia

Southampton University and Computational Mechanics Centre

1. INTRODUCTION

Boundary integral equations were until recently, considered to

be a different type of analytical method, somewhat unrelated
to other approximate methods such as finite differences or
finite elements. They became known in Europe through a series
of Russian authors amongst them Mikhlin [1), Kupradze [2) and
Smirnov [3) and a predecessor of this work - Kellogg [4) - who
applied integral equations to solve potential problems in 1953.
Work in other numerical methods was also greatly influenced by
the work of Kantorovich-Krylov [5), Courant and, Hilbert [6),
Collatz [7) and Morse and Fesbach [8). This work had important
consequences for the development of finite elements in the
1960's although this is not clearly understood by many resear-
chers. Another important development in approximate analysis
was the investigation of mixed formulations which allows for
the inclusion of different types of governing equations and
subsidiary conditions in a variational type statement. These
formulations are nowadays called Hu-Hashizu and their
exposition for structural mechanics can be seen in the book by
Hashizu [8).

Applications of boundary integral equations methods in

engineering were carried out during the 1960's and 1970's in
the pioneering work of Jaswon and Symm [10), Massonet [11),
Hess [12) and many others.

More recently researchers have been applying the 'direct'

method of analysis, i.e. the one in 'Io7hich the physical vari-
ables of the problem are used instead of "sources". This
method together with the use of higher order functions to
define the surface of the domain, gave origin to the boundary
element technique. The technique was consolidated even further
when the relationship between boundary integral equations and
other approximate methods of analysis was resolved. This was
done by Brebbia [13) who in 1978 published the first book for
which the title "Iloundary Elements" was used. More recently

1
2

this work has been extended to encompass a large range of

time dependent and non-linear problems [14].

This Chapter deals with the fundamentals of approximate

methods of analysis, including boundary solutions. The
different techniques are presented as special cases of weighted
residual formulations, in order to classify and systematize
them. The development of such formulations is discussed in
detail and they are essential for the understanding of methods
such as finite and boundary elements.

2. BASIC DEFINITIONS

Let us first consider some basic definitions of functional

analysis which can be used to define a series of numerical
techniques. The first idea is the concept of an operator as
a process which applied to a function or set of functions,
produces another function, i.e.

LCu) = b in fl (1)

where ~C ) is the operator - not necessarily linear - which

applied to u produces b. A typical differential operator is
Laplace, Le.

Xc ) (2)

fl represents the domain over which the operation (1) is

carried out.

One can also define the 'inner product' operation, which

for two vectors can be denoted as,

<
...u -+
w>=<u
-+ ...
w> (3)

Notice that the dot represents the scalar product of the

vectors and the bracket may indicate different types of
operations. The most common is the integration over the fl
domain, L e .

<
...u -+
w> =
r -+ -+
• w dfl (4)
J u

The inner product can be carried out for scalar quantities

and using operators, i.e.
(
< ~(u), W > = J ~(u)w dfl (5)
 3

One can now use the idea of the inner product to define
the 'transposed' form of (5) whic~ gives the adjoint of ~( )
operator, which will be called ~ ( ).

Let us assume that by integrating by parts one can transform

(5) into,

< J:(u), w > < u ,X* (w) > + Boundary terms (6)

The boundary terms on the right hand side are valid over the
r boundary of the ~ region. They can be written in terms of
an inner product or integrals on the boundary as,

< ,t(u) , w >

- < * (w),
G S(u) >r (7)

S, G and S ,G
,~ *
are in general differential operators,
associated with the boundary conditions of the problem as
will be seen in the next examples.

Example

Consider the equation,

x(u) ~ ~ + du + U in x (a)
dx' dx

(where 0 < x < 1). The inner product of ;( (u) with a function
w is
1
r
< {(u), w > {d U + du + u} w dx
-2- (b)
J dx' dx
0

Integrating by parts one can see that,

1 1
r {d dw
r {d-dx'-U+ -du
+ u}
2 2
W dx W - - + w} u dx
! dx J dx' dx
0 0
(c)

(dull 1
)
+ rw {dU + uJ -
1- dx u'dx) o J
4
Notice that the first integral on the R.H.S. gives the adjoint
operator i.e.

t.* (w) = d 2 w _ dw + w '" ;(w)

dx 2 dx
(d)

The operators on the r boundary as defined in equation (7) are

now,

du
G(u) = - + U S(u) = u
dx
(e)
dw
G* (w) = dx S* (w) w

As ~*(w) '" ~(w) the problem is not 'self-adjoint'.

Example 2

One can now study a higher - fourth - order equation, i.e.

in x (a)

In this case, after sufficient number of integrations by

parts we obtain,

1 1
f L(u) w dx f ~:~ u dx + [w ~:~I
o o (b)

The domain operator is now 'self adjoint' i.e. ,t.* (u)

t.c ) and the boundary operators are

and similarly for SI* ' G*1 etc. Notice that in a beam
application the S conditions are called kinematic, displace-
ments or essential conditions and the G's are usually named
as mechanical, forces or natural boundary conditions.
 5

3. APPROXIMATE SOLUTIONS

The above definitions will now be applied to investigate how to

construct approximate solutions. Let us consider a physical
problem defined in terms of its governing equation,

~(u ) b in (l (8)
o

(where the U o represents the exact - usually unknown -

solution of the problem) and boundary conditions.

Essential S(u o ) = s on f1 part of the boundary

Natural G(u ) g on f2 part of the boundary

0

(9)

In most practical engineering applications we will be

forced to substitute the value of Uo by an approximation such
as,

n
u = L OI.k <Pk + 01. 0 (10)
k=l

where <Pk represents a set of complete and admissible ,

linearly independent functions. The OI.k are unknowns and 01. 0 is
added to satisfy the non-homogeneous part of the boundary
conditions.

Substituting the approximation (10) into the set of

equations (8) and (9) gives error or residual functions such
that,

E = (u) - b .f 0 in (l

S(u) - s .f 0 ( 11)

G(u) - g .f 0

A,simple application will suffice to illustrate the

character of these functions.

Example 3

Let us assume that one wishes to investigate the following

equation
 6

u
-0.12 o
/"----- ....... , ..: -0.6
/
/' "-
// .-" '-'_.'," ,t-1. 0
-0.10 \

-0.08 - \ I
/ .. /
AU"',
....
'.,
\
\ ,
/'
- -0.8
"+, II / / " \ +'
-0.06
I..
\,/. "" \ /
A\
~i -0.6
-0.04
i/\E l:\\ ~-0.4
/" '. ,. '-\\ i
-0.02 I/ "~ /~"
..... :f \~ -0.2
6' , " ,
O.O~__~~__~__·~~~-~··~__~··~~~~__~__~_·~___ x
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Figure Behaviour of the error and u function.

0.8

0.7 L.14
+-0.12
0.6

0.5
i -0.10

0.4
-0.08

0.3
-0.06
0.2
-0.04

0.1 -0.02

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Figure 2 Point collocation solution

 7

b in x (0 < x < 1) (a)

with homogeneous essential boundary conditions at x o and

x : 1, i. e.

o (b)

The exact solution of (a) ~s easily known for constant b, i.e.

b
Uo :"2 x (x-1).

Let us now take an approximation to see what happens, for

instance

u ~ U : a sin ~x (c)
o
Then the residual function E in x (notice that E1 E2 - 0)
is

~:~ - b - a~2 sin ~x - b (d)

The coefficient a is still unknown. In order to determine it

we can apply different techniques. For the moment let us
simply consider that E = 0 at x : ~ (point collocation). Thus,

E : - a~2 - b (e)

a : - b /~2

One can now compute the values of the two functions, i.e.
the error and the approximation to u o ' i.e.

b
u 1fT sin ~x

E : b sin ~x - b

Their behaviour (for b : 1) is shown in figure 1 where one can

appreciate that although the error function is zero at x : ~
the error as measured by the difference between the approximate
u - and exact - U o - solution is maximum at that point.

4. METHOD OF WEIGHTED RESIDUALS

The strategy in the weighted residual techniques is to dis-

tribute the errors £, £1 and E2 using different functions
and then to find out the values of the unknown parameters
in the approximate solution.
 8
These errors are reduced by distributing them with pre-
scribed weighting functions in such a way that the product of
the residuals by the weighting functions is set to zero over
nand r.

The weighting functions are formed by a linearly independent

set of functions such as,

(12)

which for compactness can also be written in terms of a function

w using a series of arbitrary coefficients Si' i.e.

(13)

Let us consider for the moment that the boundary conditions

are identically satisfied on the r 1 and f2 parts of the
boundary. Then we only need to distribute the E error
function over n, i.e.

I E W dn o (14)

As S. are arbitrary this equation is totally equivalent to

the following set;

f E Wi dn o i 1,2, ••• (15)

n

Example 4

Let us consider the following equation,

d2 u
:c. (u o ) - b = __ 0 + u
dx 2 0
+ x = 0 (a)

with homogeneous boundary conditions u = 0 at x = 0 and x = 1.

We can now replace U o by an approximate function 'u' such

that,

Notice that this function identically satisfies the

homogeneous boundary conditions.
 9
The weighted residual expression (14) would be,

1
J EW dx o in 0 < x < 1 (c)
o
with a residual,

d2 u
E = dx' + U + x ~ (-2+x-x 2 )U 1 + (2-6x+x'-x 3 )U 2 + x (d)

l1e can now propose a weighting function w such that it defines

the point collocation technique. To this end the function Wi
are now Dirac delta functions, valid at points i in n i.e.

(e)

If we now specialize for point 1 at x = 1/4 and point 2 at

x = ~, substitution of (e) into (c) represents that

(f)

These two equations give the following system,

(g)

from which we can obtain u 1 = 6/31 ; u 2 = 40/217.

The values of u 1 and U z can now be substituted into (b)

and (d) to obtain,

x (1-x)
u = 217 (42 + 40x) (h)
and
1
E = 2T7 (- 4 + 19x - 2x 2 - 4Ox3) (i)

Plotting these results in figure 2 one can see how the

approximation behaves.
10
The Galerkin Method

An important case of weighted residuals is the Galerkin method

which has many applications in engineering. Its generalization
for instance constitutes the basis of most finite element work.

In Galerkin method the approximate function is also defined

as,

+ '" + ao (16)

but the weighting function is less general than the one

described by equation (13), and is given by a combination of
the same <Pi functions, i.e..

( 17)

In other words, the weighted residual expression (15) can now

be written,

o i 1,2, ... (18)

Example 5

Let us consider the same equation as in the previous example,

i. e.
d2 u
£ (u o ) - b = __0 +
dx 2
U
0
+ x = 0 (a)

also with homogeneous boundary conditions u o at x o and

x = 1.

If we now approximate Uo by,

u (b)
o

where <PI = x(l-x) ; <P2 = x 2 (I-x), the a 1a 2 coefficients can be

found from the followlng two relationshlps,

1 1
r

0
f £ <PI dx 0 I
J
0
£ <P2 dx 0 (c)

The £ function is as before,

 11

0.8
e:
0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4 0.08
_ 0.06
0.3

0.2 0.04

0.1 0.02

"-.
=t.:..
0.08
.'..f.. -0.02

-0.04
\.
\.
\ -0.06

-0.08

Figure 3 Results for Galerkin's example

12
£ = (-2 + x + x 2 )a 1 + (2 - 6x + X2 - x 3 )a 2 + x (d)

Hence (c) implies two integrations, i.e.

] [x + (-2+x-'x 2 )a 1 + (2-6X+X 2 _X 3 )a 2 ]x(1-x)dx o

(e)
o

1
J [x + (-2+x-x 2 )a 1 + (2-6x+x'-x 3 )a 2 ]x 2 (1-x)dx 0
o

After performing these integrals one finds the following system

of equations,

[ ] )"') L:l
3 3
10 20 (f)
3 13
20 105 la 2

from which the values of a 1 , a 2 can be obtained, i.e.

_ 71
a 1 - 369 (g)

Functions u and £ can now be written as

u =
71 + liT
x(1-x) { 369 7x}

£ =~
369
(-2+x-x 2 ) + ~ (2-6x+X 2 _X 3 ) + x
41

Their values are plotted in figure 3 where they are

compared against the exact solution u o '

5. WEAK FORMU~ATIONS

The examples treated in the previous sections were restricted

to the case of approximate functions identically satisfying
the boundary conditions of the problem. \~eighted residuals
can also be used to approximate the boundary conditions - i.e.
to distribute £1 and £2 functions - and in this way allow only
for their partial satisfaction and more significantly, the
use of a set of functions having relaxed requirements.
 13

a)

f df
dx

b)

~ x
~
; I

df
f dx

c)

Figure 4 Function continuity

14
Let us consider for simplicity the second-order equation
used in examples 4 and 5, i.e.

d2 u
X(u) - b = dx 2 + U + x o<x < 1 (16)

and its weighted residual statement,

J {~:~ + u + x} w dx o (17)

o
it is clear that a different order of continuity is required for
u than for w. To define this continuity requirement we need to
introduce a classification for the degree of continuity of a
function. Let us assume that a function f is discontinuous at
a discrete point but is finite throughout the region (figure 4a)
its now defining the condition

f f2 dx < 00 (18)

This function is said to be 'square integrable'.

If we impose the same type of conditions on the first

derivative (figure 4b) rather than the function itself, f is
said to be 'first derivative square integrable' function with
the following norm

J {f2 + (~!J'} dx < (19)

Similarly if the second derivative is considered in the same

way (figure 4c) we can say that the function is 'second
derivative square integrable' if

(20)

It is now clear that the approximate function u in equation

(17) needs to be second derivative square integrable while w
is required to be 'square integrable' only. We can however
reduce the order of the continuity required for u simply by
integrating by parts, i.e.
 15

1 1 1
f {~:~ + u + X}W dx - f {~~ ::} dx + f (u+x)w dx
o o 0

1 (21)
+ [q w10

where q = ~u. Notice that now both functions u and w need to

be 'first x derivative square integrable'.

If equation (21) is integrated by parts once more one can

obtain the following expression,
1 1
1 (d'w r
- + w}u dx +J x u dx
o
+xJw dx
J
0
1dx'
0

r 1
+ [q wl1 _ lu dwl (22)
0
L dxl• 0

Notice that now higher order continuity is required for

the weighting function w than for the approximation u.

It seems natural when working with expression (22) to

substitute the appropriate boundary conditions in the last two
terms, such as

Natural conditions q q
(23)
Essential conditions u u

Let us assume that we do that by defining u = u at x o and

q q at x = 1. This gives,
1 1
f {~:: + w}u dx + fx u dx + [q ul x =l - [q wlx=o
o o

- IlU -I
dwl
+
1- dxj'
dw 1
u = 0 (24)
dx. x=l . x=o

One should however be aware of the approximation involved in

this operation. This is easy to see by integrating by parts
(24) with a view of returning to expression (17). If we carry
out the necessary integrations of d'w/dx' and pass the
derivatives to u one finds the following expression,
16

I {~:~
1

+ u + x}w dx + r (q-q)~ljx~1 + [(u-~) ~:L=o o (25)

o

i.e. one has not returned to the same expression as (17) but to,
1

f [ w dx + [[2w]x=1 + [[1 dwl o (26)

dxJx=o
o

Equation (26) points out the character of the approximations

involved.

Example 5

Let US consider again the same equation as previously, i.e.

d'u
= dx' + U + x u < x < 1 (a)

but now with an essential boundqry condition u o at x o and

the natural condition q = du/dx = q at x = 1.

We will first find an approximate solution satisfying both

conditions identically and then one satisfying only the essent-
ial conditions identically and the natural one in an approximate
fashion by using the weak formulation approach.

i) First Solution The following polynomial identically

satisfies both boundary conditions,

u ax' + (q -2x)x
(b)
aq, + qx

The error or residual function in the domain is given by

[ = 2a + qx - 2ax + ax' + x (c)

The corresponding weighting function is q,1 hence the weighted

residual statement can be written as follows,

dx' - 2x)dx o (d)

o
After integrating this expression we can find the value of the
 17
the a parameter which is

a ; - O.5208(q + 1) (e)

Hence we can write the value of the approximate function u

u ; qx - O.5208(q + 1)(x 2 - 2x) (f)

ii) Second Solution We will now propose a polynomial which

satisfies only the essential boundary condition identically,
i. e.

(g)

The starting statement can now be written as

(h)

o
where (i)

Integrating by parts to reduce the order of differentiation,

and simplifying the satisfaction of the natural boundary
condition we obtain,

1
r idu
J [Six
dw l
dx - (u+x)wJ dx (j)
o
We can substitute u and w into (j) which gives

r
J [(2a 1x + a 2 )(26 1x + 6 2 ) - (a 1x 2 + a 2x + x)(6 1x2 + 6 2x ))dx

(k)

After integration and grouping together the terms in 6 16 2

one can write the following system,

[:;: ,:;:,] (::1 i~ ::;: 1 (9,)

 18

u 2nd solution ~
...---) i 0

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2 _

0.1

x
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Figure 5 Approximate Satisfaction of Natural

Boundary Conditions
 19

from where we obtain

~1 0.9859 + 1.9864q
(m)
~2 -0.4319 - 0.43229q

One now finds that the approximate value of u can be written

as,

u • (0.9859 + 1.9864q)x + (-0.4319 - 0.4322q)x 2 (n)

From where the value of q = du/dx results, i.e.

du
q = dx = ~1 + 2~2x

= (0.9859 + 1.9864q)x + 2(-0.4319 - 0.43229q)x (0)

The value of q at x =1 can be found by specializing (0) for

x = 1, resulting in

q1X=1 = 0.1221 + 1.22q I q (p)

Hnece the value of q at x = 1 is not equal to q but an approx-

imation.

The values of the two approximations for q are plotted in

figure 5 for q = O. The example demonstrates how the
approximate satisfaction of natural boundary conditions affects
the results.

6. THE INVERSE PROBLEM

Up to now we have considered functions which satisfy some

boundary conditions and are approximate in the domain. We will
now investigate functions which identically satisfy the govern-
ing equations and only approximately the boundary conditions.
This approach gives origin to boundary solutions in general and
in particular to boundary element formulations.

These functions can be of two types.

i) F~nctions ~hich sati~fy the ho~ogen:o~sveIsion of the

govern~ng equat~ons ~(u) or the~r adJo~nt ~(w) = O.
=0
ii) Functions which satisfy the adjoint version of the
governing equations for the case of unit change or loads,
i.e. they use a Green's function of fundamental solution as
weighting.
20

i) Homogeneous Equation Case

Consider again for simplicity the equation

d2 u (27)
dx' + U + x

with essential boundary conditions u = u at x = 0 and x = 1.

The starting weighted residual expression for (27) is given
by

1
{ddx2u
2
} - dwUX=1
f
o
+ U + x w dx + [(u-u) dx x=o = 0 (28)

Integrat ing by parts we can find the adjoint expression, Le.

1 1
x=1 [- dWr=l _
J {ddx2W
2 + w} u dx rx
J
w dx + [q w]x=o - ~ dx - o (29)
x=o
0 0

We can now search for a solution which satisfies the homogeneous

equation

d2 w
dx 2 + W =0 (30)

and has two degrees of freedom. The solution is

w ~1 cos x + S2 sin x
(31)
dw
dx = - ~1 sin x + S2 cos x

Substituting (31) into (29) the integral expression for u _ 0

reduces to

1
Jx w dx + [q w] x=1 - [q w]x=o = 0 (32)
o
Expanding this expression one can write

1
Jx(Sl cos x + S2 sin x)dx + ql(SI cos 1 + S2 sin 1)
o
o (33)
 21

Grouping together the terms in 61 and B2 we can find the qo and

q1 unknowns, which in this case give the exact solution, i.e.

qo =~-1
=_1_ _ 1 (34)
sin 1 ql sin 1

ii) Fundamental Solution Case

Consider again expression (29) but look now for a function that
satisfies the equation

d'w /':,. (35)

dx' + W 1

where /':,i represents a delta Dirac function applied at the point

xi. The function satisfying (35) can be written as,

w = ! sin Irl (36)

where r is the distance between the point Xi of application

of the charge and any other point. Substituting (36) into the
first integral in (29) gives

1 1
J (d'
i
dx'
w
+ W
)
u dx
J /':,.
1
u dx u.
1
(37)

o o

u. indicates the value of the u function at x. point.

1 1

Here for u - 0 at x = 0, 1 integral (29) reduces to,

1
x=1
- x w dx - [q wlx=o
u.
1
0
f (38)

Integration of this: equation gives also the exact solution for

qo and ql·

7. CONCLUSIONS

This chapter presents the fundamentals of approximate methods

of analysis includiag boundary solutions. It is now accepted
that boundary elements is another type of approximate solution
which can be studied_using ~he concepts of approximation and
weighting which are popular with engineers and mathematicians.
Weighted residuals have been used to classify and systematize
the domain and boundary solutions. This approach appears to be
the most appropriate way of looking at the approximate
22

techniques in order to simplify their interpretation and under-

stand the relationship between the different methods.

REFERENCES

1. MIKHLIN, S.G. "Integral Equations" Pergamon, NY, 1957.

2. KUPRADZE, O.D. "Potential Methods in the Theory of

Elasticity" David Davey and Co., NY 1965.

3. SMIRNOV, W.J. "Integral Equations and Partial Differential

Equations" in a Course in Higher Mathematics, Vol. IV,
Addison-Wesley, London, 1964.

4. KELLOGG, O.D. "Foundations of Potential Theory" NY 1953.

5. KANTOROVICH, L.V. and KRYLOV, V.I. "Approximate Methods

of Higher Analysis" Nordhoff, Gro~lingen 1958.

6. COURANT, R. and HILBERT, D. "Methods of Mathematical

Physics" Interscience, NY, 1953.

7. COLLATZ, L. "The Numerical Treatment of Differential

Equations" 3rd Edition, Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1967.

8. MORSE, P. and FESBACH, H. "Methods of Theoretical Physics"

Part I & II, McGraw-Hill, NY 1953.

9. WASHIZU, K. "Variational Methods in Elasticity and

Plasticity" 2nd Ed. Pergamon, NY, 1975.

10. JASWON, M.A. & G. SYMM "Integral Equation Methods in

Potential Theory and Elastostatics" Academic Press,
London & N.Y., 1977.

11. MAS SONET , C.E. "Numerical Use of Integral Procedures in

Stress Analysis" in "Stress Analysis" (O.C. Zienkiewicz
& G.S. Holister, Eds.), Wiley, London, 1966.

12. HESS, J.L. and Smith, A.M.O. "Calculation of Potential

Flow around Arbitrary Bodies" Progress in Aeronautical
Sciences, Vol.8 (D. Kuchemann, Ed.) Pergamon Press,
London, 1967.

13. BREBBIA. S.A. "The Boundary Element Method for Engineers"

Pentech Press, London, Halstead Press NY, 1978 and 1980.

14. BREBBIA, C.A., J. TELLES and L. WROBEL "Boundary Element

Methods - Theory and Applications in Engineering" Springer
Verlag, Berlin & N.Y., 1983.
Chapter 2

BOUNDARY ELEMENT METHODS

J. J. Connor and C. A. Brebbia

M.l.T. Cambridge, Mass. USA and University of Southampton,

Southampton, UK.

1. FUNDAUENTALS OF FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS

An operator is a process which applied to a function or a set

of functions produces another function, i.e.,

L(u) = b (1)

where L(u) is the operator which applied to u produces b; u

and b may be scalars or vectors; L( ) may be an ordinary
differential operator such as

L( ) a ~ + a ~+ a 2 ( ) (2)
o dx 2 1 dx

a partial differential operator such as

(3)

or an integro operator
t
L( ) JV(t-T). ( )dT (4)
o

which can also be written in terms of convolution notation as

L( ) = v(t)*( ) (5)

Most of the operators encountered in engineering formulations

are differential but for some problem areas, such as visco-
elasticity and transient response, one needs to consider

23
 24

integro or integro-differential operators.

Another important definition of functional analysis is

the generalized inner product. Given two vector functions
~ and ~, the product is denoted as

<~ , v > - <~ • v > (6)

where the dot represents the scalar product of U,v at a point

and the brackets may indicate different types of operations.
The most common operation is an integration over a domain 0,
i.e.

<~ v >
J u.v dO
0

Other operations are the convolution,

t
< ~ v > r u(t-t) ·v(t)dT
J - -
(8)
0

and integration over a certain region of the domain. In

pa~ticular, if the region is the boundary, r, enclosing the
domain, the operation is denoted by

< u , ~ >r = J~.~ dr (9)

r
Having d~fined'the operator L( ) as in (1), one can now intro-
duce the concept of its adjoint. The adjoint of an operator
is similar, conceptually, to the transpose of a matrix. Let
u and v be two arbitrary functions and multiply (1) by v.
We wish to determine how the operations can be transferred
to the v function, i.e.,

[L(u)]v = *
[L (v)]u+ ( 10)

where L*( ) is referred to as the adjoint of L. Forming the

inner product over the domain.

< L(u), v > = JL(u) v dO ( 11)

o
and integrating by parts until all derivatives (we are talking
about differential operators) are passed to v gives
 25

It follows that

(e)

p(u,v) du d
a v - - u - (a v) + aluv
o dx dx 0

Example 2

Let US consider

d2 {b 0 ~} +d- {b dx
L(u) = dX2
dx 2 dx l dU} + b 2u (a)

One obtains after two integrations of the inner product,

12 12 d2 u d 2 v du dv
v L(u)dx [h dx 2 dx 2 hI dx dx + b 2uv)dx
J J 0 -

xI xI
(h)

+ r{d
LV - dx
(
b 0d-
2
dx-
u) + b -dU} + dv
2 I dx dx {- h 0
d 2 Upx2
dx 2 I
-'xI

This result corresponds to the point where we have converted

the integral such that all the terms have, individually, the
same order derivatives in x for u and v. Continuing for
two more integrations gives the final result,

+ [V{ddx (b d 2u) dU}_ + dv {-b d 2U}]X2 (c)

o dx 2 + b l dx dx 0 dx 2
xl
 26
This expression can be written as,

< L(u), v > < u, L* (v) > + < R(u,v)-R(v,u), 1 > (d)

where L* ( ) = L( ), i.e. the operator is self adjoint, and the

R(u,v) term has the form

(e)

Interchanging u and v in R(u,v) gives R(v,u).

2. GENERALIZED GREEN'S FORMULA

Formula (12) specialized for the one dimensional case is

sometimes called Lagrange's identity. Green extended the
derivation to partial differential operators and also expressed
the 'bilinear concomitant' p(u,v) as a product of four sets of
terms, represented in vector form for generality here as

S* (v)
( 13)
G*(v)

We write (12) as,

< v, L(u) > - < u, L*(v) >

< ~ *(v), G(u) >r - < ~(u), Q*(v) >r (14)

This is equivalent to requiring

< p(u,v), 1 >r = < ~* (v), Q(u) >r

(15)
- < ~(u), G* (v) >r

Equation (15) is called Green's formula and we will shortly

see that the sand G vector differential operators are
related to the boundary conditions for the scalar differential
operator, L.

For the case of self-adjoint operat~rs, such as the one

encountered in example 2, we find that L = Land S* = S,
G* = G. This occurs because the boundary terms for the-second
phase- of the integration are similar to the terms during the
first phase; u and v are interchanged and a-I is introduced.
Hence (14) becomes
 27

< v, L(u) > - < u, L(v) >

(16)
< S(v), G(u) >r - < S(u), g(v) >r

Example 3

We return to Example 2. Comparing (16) with (c) leads to

_G(u) = {~(b
dx 0
dZu) + b du
dx 2 1 dx - b d2U}
o -dx 2
(a)

It is conventional to define the forms of Sand G after the

first phase of the integration. Notice that the-order of S
and G is equal to half the order of L(). Hence if L( ) is of
order 2n, .S and G will have terms of order n. S will involve
derivatives up to order n-1 according to our convention for
defining S (i.e. result after the first n integrations). The
boundary conditions are defined as

Essential

.E(u) = s (a prescribed vector)

(b)
Natural

Q(u) = ~ (a prescribed vector)

.kpplied to Example 2, one needs to specify,

u or d (b d2 u) b du_
dx 0 dx 2 + 1 dx - gl

and

du
dx or

at each point on the boundary.

28

3. VARIATIONAL FORMULATION

When the operator is self-adjoin.t, one can transform the

differential equation and boundary conditions to a variational
statement. We just outline the procedure here to stress its
relationship to integral equation methods, but our primary
interest is in weighted residual techniques which allow for
non-self-adjoint operators, including non-linear cases.

Consider the following differential equation,

L(u) + b = 0 in 0 (17)

and boundary conditions,

E.(u) = s on r 1
(18)
Q(u) = ~ on r 2

We multiply equation (17) by v and integrate by parts until we

have balanced derivatives of u and v. This yields

J [L(u)+blv dO = J ~(v) Q(u)dr

(19)
o r
r
+ J [bv + Q(u) "Q(v) ldO
o
where D( ) is a vector contaLnLng derivatives of u or v. We
can also write (19) in terms of scalar product notation,

< L(u)+b, v > = < !(v) , Q(u) >

(20)
+ < b,v > + < Q(u), Q(v) >

As an illustration, the equation discussed in Examples 2 and 3

has the following Q( operator,

d( )
(21)
(IX

i r-T
To interpret (19) as a stationary requirement for a functional,
we define v as the variation of u, i.e.

v = OU (22)
 29

and (20) then takes the form

< L(u)+b, ou > = < ~(OU), Q(u) >r

(23)
+ < b, OU > + < Q(u), D(ou) >

Next,we transform the last inner product by defining a

functional H such that

< H(u) > = 21 < Q(u), D(u) > (24)

This step is possible only when L( ) is a self-adjoint. Since

H is a function of (u'), (du/dx)', etc. the 1/2 is needed when
carrying out the variation. For the case discussed in Example
2,

H(u) =.4 [d'U)' -.!.2 b1 [dUJ'

2 0 dx' dx
+ .!.2 b u'
2
(25)

Noting (24), equation (23) can be written as

< L(u)+b, ou > - <~(OU), Q(u) >

(26)
= 0 < H(u)+bu >

It remains to incorporate the boundary conditions in the

variational statement. As a starting point, we form the
variation of the inner product of S(u) and G(u) on the boundary.
Since S'and G are linear in u, the-variational operator can be
shifted inside the bracket, i.e., o[f(u)] = ~(ou), and the
result is

o < ~(u), Q(u) >~ = < ~(ou), Q(u) >r

(27)
+ < ~(u), Q(ou) >r

Now we require u to satisfy the essential boundary conditions

on r l , Le.

-S(u) -s -
= (28)

where sis prescribed. In methods such as finite elements -

but not- in boundary elements - the variation is usually
30
required to satisfy the homogeneous form of the essential
boundary conditions

~(ou) = 0 on r 1 (29)

The remaining boundary conditions that have to be enforced

are the natural conditions in r 2 •

C(u) = ~ (30)

One way of proceeding is to require eu to be constrained by

(29) and set ~(u) = ~ in (27). This yields

e<~(u),g> =<~(ou)'~>r (31)

- r1 2

Combining (31) with (26) gives the desired result,

e [ < H(u)+bu > + < ~(u), ~ >r

2
(32)
< L(u)+b, eu > + < ~(eu), (~-~(u» >r
2

with ~(eu) = Q on r 1 •

Equation (32) shows that the solution of (17), (18) corres-

ponds to a stationary value of the functional,

I, < H(u)+bu > + < ~(u), ~ >r

2 (33)
(
[H(u)+bujdfl + §.(u)·g dr
J
fl
J
r2

A more general approach which is followed for the boundary

element method and mixed variational formulations is to
include the essential boundary conditions on r 1 as a con-
straint, as well as the natural boundary conditions on r 2 •
In this case, the expanded form of (26) is
 31
o{< H(u)+bu > + < ~(u), ~ >r + <[~(u)-~l, ~(u) >r
2 1

< L(u)+b, au > + < (au), [~-~(u)l >r

2

+ <[~(u)-~l, ~(ou) >r (34)

.1

where now F (ou) is not constrained (i.e. S(ou) ; 0 on r 1 ).

Defining the functional I2 as

I2 = < H(u)+bu > + <[_~(u)-~l, ~(u) >r

1
(35)
+ < ~(u), ~ >r
2

it follows that the statement oI 2 = 0 for arbitrary ou is

equivalent to the complete set of conditions,

L(u) + b 0 in Q
(36)
~(u) = s on r 1

~(u) =~ on r 2

This approach to incorporating all the boundary conditions is

followed in establishing the general weighted residual form.
The important difference is that while the above approach is
only valid for self-adjoint operators, the weighted residual
technique allows us to produce boundary element type state-
ments for any problem.

Example 4

Consider the operator of Example 2.

We have shown that,

_S(u) = dU}
{u , dx

_G (u) = f· A-
dx
(b
0
d 2 u) + b 1 ·du
dx 2 dx -b -d
o dx 2
2U}
32

H(u) - 1 b 1
(d 2 UJ 2 - -1 b 1-
(duJ 2 + _1 b u 2
-"2 0 (dx- 2 2 1 (dx Z Z

For the case where F(u) is specified on fl' the expanded form
is

I f [H(u) + bujdn

~ [(u-s ){~
1 dx
(b
0
d 2 U) + b dU} + (du _ s )(_ b d2 u)j
dx 2 1 dx dx Z 0 dx 2 fl

where

4. WEIGHTED RESIDUAL SCHEME

Let us now consider the set of equations represented by (36).

Our strategy is to propose an approximate solution u contain-
ing.unknown parameters and to establish appropriate values for
these parameters. To avoid proliferation of notation, we shall
drop the superscript tilde on u, and one must keep in mind
that u is now only an approximation. The errors for the
respective equations are

EI L(u) + b in n

El ~(u) - s on fl (37)

EZ = Q.(u) -~ on f2

These errors are reduced by distributing them with prescribed

weighting functions in such a way that the product of the
residuals by the weighting functions is set to zero over nand
f, i.e.

o (38)

where w, ~1 and ~Z are weighting functions (the last two are

vectors). By applying (38) one can determine the unknown
parameters in the approximate function chosen for u.
 33
The key issue is the choice of weighting functions and here
our approach can be guided by the result obtained with the
variational method. Referring back to section 3, we established
a functional whose stationary requirement was equivalent to the
satisfaction of the system given by equation (36). Examination
of equation (34) shows that the right hand side is similar in
form to (38) and suggests that we take the weighting function
for the self-adjoint case to be

w u

Q(w) (39)
- ~(w)

With this choice, the weighted residual expression is identical

to the stationary requirement. Then, for the self-adjoint case,
we require,

J [(L(u) + b]w d + J [~(u) - ~] G(w)dr

(40)
r1

+ J [£ -'Q(u)] E(w)dr 0
rZ
If we require u to satisfy the boundary conditions, the
boundary integrals vanish. If, in addition, we select w from
the basis functions contained in u, i.e.

w $. (41)
~

then we obtain the conventional Galerkin method. We do not

constrain w in this manner when working with boundary elements.

One can generate alternate forms of (40) by integrating

wL(u) by parts. In the conventional finite element method,
one integrates until the order of differentiation for u and w
is balanced, i.e. equalized. In the boundary element approach
we transform (40) to a form where differentiation of u in the
interior, n, is eliminated. Using Green's formula, we can write
(40) as,
34

f [uL(w) + bwjdn + J [-~·~(w) + ~(w)·~(u)jdr

r1 (42)

+f [~.~(w)-i(u)·~(w)jdr 0
r2

The attractiveness of (42) is related to the choice of w .

Suppose one uses, as weighting functions, solutions of the
homogeneous equation

L(w) = 0 (43)

For this choice, the interior integral involving u vanishes

and one has only to work with an expansion for u on the bound-
ary. Interior node points are not required. If, as usual in
boundary elements, we choose a function such that

L(w) = - 6(; - ; )
p
(44)

where 6 is a delta function applied at a point p and ~ is the

distance from the origin, the domain integral becomes the value
of the function u at the point P, i.e.

f uL(w)dn => - up (45)

n

Again, interior node points are not required.

The above procedure for defining the weighting functions

is only valid for self-adjoint operators. One of the signific-
ant advantages of weighted residual formulations is that they
can be used for non-self-adjoint problems as well as for self-
adjoint ones. Because of this feature, it is important to
establish a more general procedure for identifying appropriate
weighting functions.

Let urepresent the exact solution of (36), where L is now

treated as a non-self-adjoint operator. By definition, the
domain integral vanishes for arbitrary w.-

< w, L(u) + b >n o (46)

 35

Noting Green's formula, (14) and the boundary condition

satisfied by u, (46) can be transformed to

< b,w > + < u, L* (w) >

+ < ~* (w) £(u) - ~ £ * (w) >r (47)

1

+ < *
S (w) -l!. - *
~(u) -G (w) >r o
2

Now, in the weighted residual approach, we form the inner pro-

duct of the residuals with appropriate weighting functions.
Our starting point is

< w, L(a) + b > + <[~(a) - ~l, wI >r

1

o (48)

where u denotes the approximate solution. Applying Green's

formula to < wL(u) >,

< w, L(a) > = < a, L*(W) >

+ < ~* (w), £(0) - .~(a), £ * (w) > (49)

and substituting in (48) leads to

< b, w > + < a, L* (w) >

*
+ <[~(a) - ~J, wI + ~ (w), £(a) - ~(a), G (w) * >r
1

(50)

Comparing (47) with (50) shows that both forms are identical
when we select ~1 and ~2 as follows:

~1
= G* (w)
(51)
~2
- s* (w)
36

Then, the appropriate weighted residual expression, (48), is

< L(u)+b, w> + <[~(u)-ll, Q* (w) >r

1 (52)
+ <[Q(u)-a1, - S* (w) >r o
2
or equivalently
r
E:I w dO + f *(w)dr
~1.Q - r *
~2.~ (w)dr 0 (53)
J J
0 r1 r2

Equation (53) reduces to (40) for the self-adjoint case.

5. BOUNDARY ELEMENT FORMULATION OF POISSON EQUATION

We consider first the case where the governing equation is

Poisson's equation. The weighted residuals are
E:I \1 2u + b

E:1 = u - u (54)
E: 2 q - q
where q = au/an. Bar superscripts indicate these values are
prescribed. Notice that here
~(u) = u ,!!.=u
(55)
G(u) 3. q q

Substituting in the weighted residual expression, (40), results

in

f (\l 2 u + b)w dO + f
(56)
n r1

+ f (q-q)w dr =0
r2
Applying Green's formula to w\l2u transforms (56) to

f (bw + uV 2w)dO + f (wq-u- -dW) dr

an
(57)
o r1
(wq- - u -aw) dr o
an

This later form is the one we apply in the boundary element

method. As a point of interest, we could have generated (57)
directly from Equations (46) and (47). According to (47), the
 37

exact solution satisfies

< b, w > + < u, L(w) > + < ~(w). G(u) - ~(u).£(w) > =0
(a)

for arbitrary w when L is self-adjoint. Noting (55) and

partitioning the boundary integral according to the different
boundary conditions results in (57).

In the following sections, we describe how one transforms

the continuous weighted residual expression, (57), into a set
of algebraic equations by specializing the weighting functions
and introducing approximations for the variables.

6. FUNDAMENTAL SOLUTIONS

Our objective here is to generate a weighting function which

satisfies Poisson's equation for a special form of the loading
function. The particular case of interest is when b is a delta
function applied at some arbitrary point, P,

fJ2 W + 1I (~ - ~ ) = 0 (58)
';p

where !J. denotes the delta function, and x is the position

vector for point P. p

We construct a sphere, of radius

E, centred at P and integrate
the equation over the volume
of the sphere. Using Gauss's
formula, the interior integral
of fJ 2 w can be transformed to a
boundary integral,
~----------- Xl
Figure 1

J aw
an
dr (59)

Also,by definition,

r !J.(~ -
I:
for x'P in
~ )dfl
J p
for x p outside (60)
fI

Then, the solution must satisfy the condition,

38

J
r e;
- 1 (61)

We shift to spherical coordinates with the or~g~n at point P,

and denote the radial distance with r. Assuming u is a
function only of r, (61) leads to

awl . 411e:" - 1 (a)

arlr=e:

and it follows that

1
w = 4'Jfr ='41r (62)
lit - itpl

is the solution of (58). It is convenient to include a sub-

script P on w to indicate the location of the applied delta
function (Le. w.p ), In the two dimensional case, we replace
(a) with

awl
ar .2'Jfe: - 1 (a)
r=e;

and obtain

x - x->- I
w = --1 In r = --1 In 1->- (63)
2'Jf 2'Jf P

The funct ons defined by (62) and (63) are referred to as

fundamental solutions of Poisson's equation.

Taking w to be a fundamental solution for point P and

applying (57), we obtain an expression for the actual solution,
u, at P in terms of a prescribed domain integral and surface
integrals involving u and its normal derivative. According
to the definition of w:p '

r ->-->-
J f[-t(w - wp)]df!
f! (a)
- f 1->- ->- ;: - f
x=xp P

Then, (57) yields

 39
(
(~ wi:' - u- aan wp ) dr
- u
l:'
+
J
(l
b w d(l
p
+
J
r1
an
(64)

(
+ J (wpq - u ~ w )dr
an p
= 0
r2
We utilize (b4) in two ways. Firstly, we can generate the
solution at a set of interior points once the function and its
normal derivative are known on the boundary. Secondly, by
taking P at various points on the boundary, and introducing
approximations for u and au/an in terms of a finite number
of parameters, we can establish a system of algebraic equations
for the unknown parameters. This set of equations can be
solved and the distribution of u and au/an on the boundary can
be evaluated, allowing one then to evaluate the interior values
of u.

Locating point P on the boundary requires special consider-

ation of the boundary integrals since the fundamental solution
is singular at P; We visualize the actual boundary in the
neighbourhood of P to be replaced by a segment of a sphere in
radius E centred at P, integrate over the distorted zone, and
then let E approach O. When the actual surface is smooth, as
illustrated in Figure 2, the
segment will be a hemisphere.
If the surface has a discon-
tinuity, the analysis is more
difficul t.

We treat first the "smooth"

case. The terms encountered
in the integration are
Fig. 2 au a
Wp an and u an wp. Noting

that n r and using (62)

(a)
a -1
an wp 41Tr2

Then,
(
u ..l. w dr lim r.
L
-1 1l
[21TE2]
J an P E .... 0
U •
41T ETJ
rE
1 1
2 ul po~nt
. P -2 up
 40

Ilni:l,

f
r
~,
l' an
au dr lim
e: ... 0
o (65)

e:
The same result is obtained for the two dimensional case.
Therefore, when the weight ing function corresponds to a unit
delta -function (referred to as a source) applied at a point
p on the boundary, and the bound ry is smooth, the weighted
residual expression has the following form

- ~ up + Jb wp dQ + f (:~ wp - u aan wpJ dr o (66)

n r
where the boundary integral does not include the singularity.
It is understood that one takes

u = u
(a)
au
an q

when evaluating the boundary terms in (66).

When the source is applied at a point where the actual

boundary is not smooth, the contribution of the singularity
will not be =-1/2. Considering the 2 dimensional case shown
in Figure 3,

- J....
211
In r

(a)

"interior"

Figure 3

and

r -ll
f
a

r
u an wp dr lim
e: ... 0
t· 211E:]
[ (1I+a)f:]
(67)
e:
1 0.
- "2 (1 + - )u p
11

( au
J wp an dr 0
r
e:
 41

The 3D case is more compl icated and we will develop later

another strategy for evaluating the contribution of the
singularity. For now, we write the result as

(68)

Introducing (68) in (64), and rearranging terms yields the

general form of the weighted residual statement for a source
applied at an arbitrary point (P) on the boundary,

q - Cp)U p +
(
a
J u an
r
WF dr -
I
r
wpq dr I
n
b Wp ,Ut (69)

where q au/an. Note that Cp 0 when the boundary is smooth

at P.

7. BOUNDARY DISCRETIZATION AND SYSTEHS EQUATIONS

The unique feature of (69) is that it involves only u and

au/an on the boundary r, i.e., one does not need to specify the
distribution of u in the interior domain, n. This is the
essential difference between a finite element formulation and
the boundary element formulation. An interior integral involv-
ing the loading, b, needs to be evaluated, but the integrand
is known. Also, as we shall show later, this interior integral
can be avoided when the function defining b has a certain form.

In the Boundary Element Hethod, one starts by discretizing

the boundary into segments (surface area segments for 3D
problems; line segments for 2D problems). The segments may be
straight or curved. Figure
4 illustrates this opera-
r2 q = q tion for a 2D geometry,
using straight line seg-
/
~6
/' 7 ments. The segments can
Y be identified as belonging
r 8
4
/
to either the rl region
(essential boundary con-
I 3 dition u = ~) or the r 2
9 region (natural boundary
condition q = With q).
present geometric modelling
software, one defines a
domain by specifying its
boundary in terms of line
or surface area segments.
Figure 4 Therefore, the discretiza-
tion operation can be
embedded in the specifica-
42

tion of the geometry. In the finite element approach, an

additional step involving discretization of the interior domain
is required, and this introduces difficulty when the geometry
is complex.

Next, we introduce expansions for u and q over the element

domains. We assume, for the moment, that there are no pre-
scribed boundary ·conditions. They can be incorporated into
the system equations after the various matrices have been
generated. This approach is also followed in the Finite Element
Method. We write for element (segment) j,

(0)
q = 1)1. Q.
-J -J

Figure 5
where: U. contains the values
-J of u associated with
discrete points in
segment j and 1j are
the corresponding interpolation functions; Qj and 1. are
the corresponding terms for the normal derivative, J q •

The simplest choice is a uniform distribution, i.e., con-

stant values for u and q over the segment. Here, one writes,

(71)

and identifies the values with the midpoint of the segment.

The next higher level of approximation is a linear

approximation,

(72)

where s is measured from a con-

venient point, usually the
midpoint of the segment. One
transforms (72) into (70) by
selecting two points on the
segment, say jl and j2'
Figure 6
 43

and expressing a o and al in terms of u·l' Uj2. It is convenient

to work with points located symmetricaIly wlth respect to the
midpoint, e.g.,

51 - 5*
(73)
+ 5
*
52
For this case,

a = HU jl + u j2 )
0
(74)

al
= 25* (u j2 - u jl )

and
u.
-J
{u jl ; u j2 }

5 5
cpo
-J
{HI - 5* HI + - ) }
5*

One can choose 5* arebitrarily but two choices are most

convenient:

the end points of the segment, 5* R../2

J
ii) the Gaussian integration points, 5* R.. /213
J
The first choice results in a reduction in the total number
of unknowns since adjacent elements have a common unknown at
the intersection point. The second choice is convenient for
numerical integration but involves more unknowns. Imposition
of the boundary condition is treated by specifying the values
of u or q on the segment. It is assumed that the actual
variation coincides with the "approximate" variation.

One has the flexibility of working with different expansions

for U and q over the element. Also, one can change expansions
from one element to another. Inter-element continuity is not
a requirement for the Boundary Element Method whereas it is a
serious constraint for the Finite Element Method.

In what follows, we suppose there are N boundary elements.

The weighted residual expression for a source applied at an
arbitrary point, P, on the boundary is expressed as a summation
of integrals over the elements. Then, (69) becomes

(& - Cp)u p + Jl [J u a~ wp dr - J wp q dr] J b wp dO

=

rj rj 0 (75)
44

where rj denotes the boundary for the j-th element. In general

point P will be located on one of the elements. Introducing
(70) in (75) results in

o - CF)u P + J UI f·
J=l
r.
a w
J an P
u.
dr J -J - [I r.
) 1J
w 1jJ. dr o.
P "'J -'-J
J J

Jb w dn (76)
P
n

Suppose there are Nu unknown u values and Nq unknown q values

after the boundary conditions on r 1 and r Z have been enforced.
Then, we take point P at those discrete points on the boundary
where either u or q is unknown. That is, we locate P at the
discrete u points on r 2 and the discrete q points on rl' This
will generate N + N equations having the following typical form,
u q

N
o - C)u + I F'
p.
(77)
P Pi j=l 1

i = 1,2, ••• ,N + N
u q

Since the element "unknown" matrices.!:!.j , ~ may contain pre-

scribed quantities, we need to pass the terms associated with
the boundary conditions over to the right hand side and combine
them with F' Reordering the unknowns,
Pi

u
(78)

.9. {q l' q2 ' .•• , qN

q

the finar set of equations is written as

H" - G" (79)

"
v

AX = F

As an illustration, we consider constant q and linear u over

the element. We identify the u unknowns with the end points
 45

(nodes for the geometric discretization) and q with the value

of the normal derivative at the mid point of the segment. For
the discretization shown in Figure 8,

N 6
N 3 (u 4 ,u 5 ,u6 prescribed)
u
N
q
2 (Q1,Q2,q3,q4 prescribed)
u {u 1 ,u 2 ,u 3 }

{Q4,Q5 }
Fig. 8

The fundamental solution, wp , is applied at nodes 1,2,3, and

at the midpoint of segments 5 and 6. For each source location,
one loops over the elements, generates H' and G' , introduces
the boundary constraints, and then generates H~ by superimposing
the contributions of adjacent segments to the-individual nodes.
Typical element matrices are (positive sense counterclockwise).

!!.1

Elements 1 and 2 contribute in the colunm of H" corresponding

to u1; a similar operation is applied for u2,u3' Note that
C~ = 0 when the actual boundary is smooth at the point of
application ,of the source. This will ~lways be true for
interior points in the element. The end points may correspond
to a geometric discontinuity of the "actual" boundary and one
has to account for this effect by including the appropriate
value for C~~ Also, when Pi coincides with a modal point, up.
is the corresponding nodal value. At an interior point, up. ~
is a'linear combination of the nodal values. For example, ~u.
is the aver~ge value when Pi is taken as the midpoint. These Pi
comments apply only when the variation of u is linear and the
element values are identified with the end values.

An alternate approach which utilizes only points in the

interior of the element is illustrated in Figure 9. Treatment
of boundary discontinuities and the need to superimpose element
contributions is avoided, at the expense of having to solve
for additional unknowns.
46

N =6
N = S
u
N =' 2
q
U = {u 1 ,u 2 '.·· ,uS}
.9. = {qS,q6}

Figure 9

The most convenient (as regards implementation) approach is to

use the same expansions for u and q.

ul e 1ement J. = 4>. U.
-J-J
(SO)
ql e1 ement J. = 4>. Q.
-J-J

The basic equation (76) simplifies to

[J Wp 4>.
-J
drJQ.
-J
]
r.
J

(S1)

Suppose there are "p" interpolation points per element. We

apply sources at these points On the total boundary, and
generate p x N = N equations. --
p
N
~p
k~l (Hik~ - Gikqk) = Fi (S2)
i, = 1,2, ••• ,NP
If adjacent elements have certain interpolation points in
 47

common, e.g., if interpolation functions are located at the end

points of the elements, we superimpose the element contributions
and reduce the number of variables. Lastly, the boundary con-
ditions on u and q are introduced, and the order is further
reduced. The final result corresponds to (79).

For example, a linear expansion with interpolation points

coinciding with the geometric nodal points has N values of u
and q. Sources are applied at the N nodes and (82) represents
N equations in 2N unknowns. However, a total of N values are
prescribed and (82) reduces to (79) after the boundary con-
ditions are enforced, i.e., N variables are deleted.

Up to now, we have not discussed how one evaluates Cp , the

additional'contribution of the singularity when the actual
boundary has a discontinuity (tangent plane is not unique) at
the source. The 2D case is straightforward but the 3D case is
difficult. Therefore, an alternate procedure has been
established.

Our starting point is the general weighted residual express-

ion, (76) which allows for arbitrary expansions for u and q
over the element domain.

[[ fr.i j [J
r.
J J

(83)

We locate point Pi at all the independent interpolation

points for the elements. By independent, we mean multiple
points have been disregarded. For example, if the u and q
expansions are identical, they have the same interpolation
points, say n locations, and we evaluate (83) at these locations
on the element. \fuen an interpolation point coincides with
the geometric end point for the element, it is common with the
adjacent element and (83) needs to be evaluated only once as
one loops over the elements. We disregard the Non-smooth dis-
continuity term (Cp.)up. for the moment, and also assume no
boundary conditions; On~ obtains a set of equations which are
written as

Note that $£* does not contain the contribution from CPi; only
the uPi/2 term is included.
48

Now, consider the case where b = 0 and u is constant through-

out the domain, Q. The normal derivative vanishes at all
points, since u is constant. We require the boundary element
formulation to reproduce this solution. Formally, one sets

~ = f= 0
(85)
<jJ= a{ 1,1 •••. ,1

He have to add terms to ~* to account for boundary discontin-

uities. Ass·uming the geometric discretization is such that the
boundary discontinuities are confined to the boundaries of the
elements (end points for the 2n case), this step is necessary
only for those interpolation points located on the element~
boundaries. The correction involves the diagonal terms in~
for row locations corresponding to boundary nodal points. -

We need to modify ~3

The corrected equations are

written as

Fig. 10

where d) is a diagonal matrix. Enforcing (85) for arbitrary a

requires ~* +D) to be singular. This is satisfied by select-
ing the entries-in 0 such that the sum of the columns in the
combined matrix is a
null vector. Then,

IJ
-[ d1
d2
.J (87)

d.
1. 2 ?t:.
1.J
j=l ,2, •••

Once~* is generated, the above operation can be readily

carried out. The remaining steps are the same as previously
described. One introduces the prescribed boundary conditions
and transfers the known terms to the right hand side. This
results in the "reduced" system
(88)
 49

Mid-element node

Figure 11 Boundary Elements: (a) Constant,

(b) Linear,
(c) Quadratic.

Y Nodal value
Nodal value
u or q

y ~ dx
x
or q r
r = (x,y)

+-__ ____ ____

~ ~ ~_x
-1''-------- x

Figure 12 Quadratic Boundary Elements

 50

H F (88)

8. COMPUTATION OF INTEGRALS - 2D Case

One has flexibility in discretizing the boundary and selecting

the order of the expansion. The simplest boundary discretiza-
tion is linear segments. Curved segments can be treated using
classical differential geometry concepts for a curve, and allow
more versatility in modelling complex shapes. With respect to
expansions, one can work with constant, linear, quadratic, etc.
distributions. A constant expansion requires minimal effort
for establishing the various matrices but, of course, is the
least accurate. Quadratic expansions, coupled with the use of
curved boundary segments, appear to be optimal with respect to
cost and accuracy. Figure 11 shows the various types of dis-
cretization. The term "node" refers to the interpolation point
for the expansion. This usage is the same as the terminology
for the Finite Element Method. In what follows, we sketch out
briefly certain aspects for a second order isoparametric formu-
lation, i.e., where the boundary geometry and variables (u,q)
are defined by quadratic expansions.

Consider the element shown in Figure 12. A local node

numbering scheme is introduced to identify the end nodes (1,2)
and the midpoint (3). We express the cartesian coordinate, u,
and q in terms of their values at the node points and interpol-
ation functions. In general,

<1>1 s«;-1)/2

<1>2 s(s+1)/2

<1>3 (1-1;)(1+0

where s is a dimensionless curvilinear coordinate varying from

minus 1 to plus 1. The correlation between nodes and s values
is shown in Figure 13.
i,;= -1 i,;= +1 Integration with respect to r
• • • is transformed to i,; integration
using the differential relation-
ship (see Figure 12).
Figure 13
 51

dr = IJI dE; (90)

{ (:~J 2 + (:p 2} i

f = x or y or u or q

With (90), one writes

+1

I
r
J
g dr = g IJI dE; (91)
r. -1
J

The complexity of the integrand necessitates the use of numerical

quadrature. Gaussian quadrature formulas for various polynomial
approximations are listed below.

+1
r
I J h{E;)dE;
-1

n i E;i w.
l.
(linear) 0 2

2 {cubic} + 1/13 +1

2 - 1/13 +1 (92)

3 (quintic) 0 8/9

2 +1:6 5/9

3 -r.6 5/9

The next aspect concerns the fundamental solutions. Figure 14

shows two typical segments (i,j) with a source located at an
arbitrary point on segment i. The fundamental solution behaves
according to

w = ;; In I~I (a)
52
->-
n. Noting that w is axisymmetric,
J the normal derivative on
segment j is given by

aWl aw cos C-; ,;r.)

ani segment ar J
source

Figure 14

The unit normal vector is at a point and determined from

(dx -7
1
ldf ~-71
4-
t.
J TJT 1
+
dE; J J (94)
4-
n.
=m [ddE;Y -7
1
1
dx -7
+ dE; J
J
J

When the segments are straight, aw/an vanishes on the

segment where the source is applied. Computations are carried
~ut with the curvilinear coordinate, E;, as the primary variable;
r is determined by x(E;) and y(E;). See Figure 15.

The interior integral of b*wp requires special considera-

tion. \{e note that w decays repidly away from the source.
Therefore, the discretization of the interior domain with area
elements should be consistent with this behaviour, i.e., we
need small elements near the source and gradually allow the
element size to increase with r. One strategy employing a
polar grid is shown in Figure 16. Four local axes having their
origin at "i", the source location, and oriented 45° with
respect to each other comprise the radial base lines.
Circumferential lines are located at varying distances from
the source. This defines the "basic" polar grid which is then
discretized into triangular elements having the polar nodes and,
if necessary, the boundary nodes as vertices. Implementation
of this approach requires a logical procedure for checking
whether a polar node point is contained in the domain. Assum-
ing Mi interior elements are generated around source "i", the
integration is expressed as
M.1

j=l
L [I
>l.
(95)

J
Two dimensional Gaussian quadrature can be applied for the
element integrations. See Figure 17.
 53

---
global coordinates

(~~ ,y~; I)-local coordinate

Integrat ion ./. J J
point £, - - - - 4
Y

boundary element

Figure 15 Integration over a Boundary Element

Internal element

on r

Figure 16 Internal Elements - GRID

54
When b is constant over the domain, this operation is not
necessary. We express the solution of

'fl2 U + b = 0 b constant
u=;ionr 1 q
as

where u is the particular solution corresponding to b. We

apply p the Boundary Element Method to

o (96)

with modified boundary conditions

(97)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BREBBIA, C.A. "The Boundary Element Method for Engineers"

Pentech Press, London, Halstead Press, NY, 1978, Second
Edition 1980.

BREBBIA, C.A. and S. WALKER "Boundary Element Techniques in

Engineering" Butterworths, London, NY, 1980.

BREBBIA, C.A., J. TELLES and L. WROBEL "Boundary Elements -

Theory and Applications in Engineering" Springer Verlag,
Berlin, NY, 1984.

BREBBIA, C.A. (Ed.) "Progress in Boundary Element Methods,

Vol. 1" Pentech Press, London and Halstead Press, NY, 1981.

BREBBIA, C.A. (Ed.) "Progress in Boundary Element Methods,

Vol. 2" Pentech Press, London and Springer-Verlag, NY 1983.

BREBBIA, C.A. (Ed.) "Recent Advances in Boundary Elements"

Proceedings of the 1st Int. Conf. on BEM. Pentech Press,
London, 1981.

BREBBIA, C.A. (Ed.) "New Developments in Boundary Element

Methods" Proceedings of the 2nd Int. Conf. on BEM,
Southampton 1980. CM[. Publications, Southampton 1980.
Second Edition 1983.

BREBBIA, C.A. (Ed.) "Boundary Element Methods", Proceedings

of the 3rd Int. Conf. on BEM, California 1981, Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, NY, 1981.
 55

loc:£.
global coordinates

coordinates

(x~.y~;O.1)

m'th internal element

Figure 17 Integration over an Internal Element

56

BREBBIA, C.A. (Ed.) "Boundary Element Methods in Engineering"

Proceedings of the 4th Int. Conf. on BEM, Southampton, 1982.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin - NY, 1982.

BREBBIA, C.A. (Ed.) "Boundary Element Methods" Proceedings

of the 5th Int. Conf. on BEM, Hiroshima, 1983, Springer-Verlag,
Berlin - NY, 1983.
Chapter 3

BOUNDARY INTEGRAL EQUATIONS

M. A. Jaswon
Department of Mathematics, The City University, London, E.C.l.

1. SIMPLE-LAYER FORMULATIONS
According to the Dirichlet existence-uniqueness theorem, there
exists a unique harmonic function ~ in Bi which assumes
prescribed continuous boundary values on a Liapunov surface aBo
To construct ~ in Bi, we write
~(e) = f g(.E.,.9)a(g)dq ; .E.
Co Bi , (l)
aB _.
where a appears as a hypothetical Holder-contin~ous source
density to be determined. In principle a = - 1TI (~i + f~),
but neither ~i nor fe are known ab initio. TI
An effective way forward is to note~oth sides of (1) remain
continuous at aB, i.e. both ~ and its representation remain
continuous at aB, so yielding the boundary relation

= ~(.E.) ; .E. c:. aBo

J g(.E.,.9)a(g)dq (2)
aB
This may be viewed as a Fredholm integral equation of the first
kind for a in terms of ~ on aB, with a unique solution
enabling us to generate ~ throughout Bi from (1).
According to the exterior Dirichlet existence-uniqueness
theorem, there exists a unique regular harmonic function ~ in
Be which assumes prescribed continuous boundary values on aBo
Clearly ~ may be constructed by solving equation (2) as before,
and utilising a to generate the simple-layer potential
~(.E.) = f g(.E.,.9)cr(g)dq ; .E. c. Be' (3)
aB
Despite its power and simplicity, equation (3) has not yet been
widely exploited in the solution of Dirichlet problems. However,
57
58

an exceptional case is ~ = 1 i.e. the capacitance problem of

electrostatics. In this case the charge density A satisfies
the equation

( g(p,q)A(q)dq ; £ caB (4)

J
-- -
aB
and we note that
(1) A > 0 on aB, so providing the capacitance

K = J A(g)dq > 0 ; (5)

aB
(2) A generates the simple-layer potential

IaB g(£,.9. h (g)dq = 1 ; £ c. Bi (6)

(3) A satisfies, in addition to equation (4), the normal

derivative equation (12) presented below.
Equation (4) has been solved numerically for various closed
surfaces as a means of computing their electrostatic
capacitance [l,2,3J.
According to the interior Neumann existence theorem, there
exists a unique (up to an arbitrary constant) harmonic function
~ in Bi , which assumes prescribed continuous normal-derivative
values ~i on aB subject to the Gauss condition

aB
I ~i (.9.)dq = o. (7)

To construct ~ in Bi' we introduce the representation (1) as

before, with ~i assumed Holder-continuous on a Liapunov surface
aBo This yields the boundary relation

IaB gi (£,.9.)cr(.9.)dq - 271cr(£) = ~i (£) ; £ c. aB, (8)

which may be viewed as a Fredholm integral equation of the

second kind for cr in terms of ~j. Despite the singularity
in the kernel, classical Fredholm theory applies: the
homogeneous equation

J gi (£,.9.)cr(.9.)dq - 271cr(£) o £ c aB (9)

aB
 59

has a non-trivial solution 0 = A, corresponding with the non-

trivial solution ~ = 1 of the adjoint homogeneous equation

I g(£'.9.)i~(9)dq
aB
- 271~(£) = 0 ; £ Co aB, (10)

so that a solution exists subject to the orthogonality

condition

I ~(p)~i(£)dp = I ~i(£)dp =
aB aB
0, (11)

i.e. the Gauss condition (7). By suitable normalisation, A

may be identified with the unique solution, A, of equation (4),
since this yields the normal derivative equation

I
aB
gi (e.,.9.) A(.9.)dq - 271A(£) = 0; £ Co aBo (12)

Accordingly, equation (8) has the general solution

o = 0 + kA ( 13)
o

within the space of Holder-continuous functions, where 0 0

is a particular solution and k is an arbitrary constant.
This solution generates the class of potentials

I
aB
g(£,.9.)oo(.9.)dq + k I
aB
g(£,.9.)A(.9.)dq, (14)

i.e.

I
aB
g(£,.9.)oo(.9.)dq + k; .E. Co Bi + aB, (15)

each characterised by the same normal derivative ~i on aBo

According to the exterior Neumann existence-uniqueness theorem,
there exists a unique regular harmonic function ~ in Be' which
assumes prescribed continuous normal-derivative values ~e on aBo
The Gauss condition (7) is not necessary. Also, ~ may not be
unique if aB has a sharp edge, so providing the fundamental
loophole for aerofoil theory. Utilising the representation
(3), we obtain the integral equation

J g~(£>.9.)o(.9.)dq - 2710(£) = ~~(£) ; £ c. aB (16)

aB
60

for ° in terms of ~~. In this case, however, the homogeneous

equation

J g~ (£,.g) °(g) dq - 2110(£) = 0; £ c aB, (17)

aB
and therefore also its associated adjoint equation

J g(£,.9.)~T(9)dq - 2n(£) = 0 ; £ caB. (18)

aB
has a non-trivial solution. Accordingly. equation (16) has a
unique solution 00' which generates the unique exterior
potential

J g(£ •.9.)oo(.9.)dq ; £ c Be + aB (19)

aB
characterised by ~~ on aBo

Operating with J .•• dp upon both sides of (16). we find

aB

= J o(.9.)dq Jg~ (£ •.9.) - 211 Jo(£)dp •

aB aB aB
where the order of the double integral has been interchanged by
invoking Fubini's theorem. Now

.J g~(£>.9.)dp = J g(£ •.9.)~dq = -211 .9..£ c aB

aB aB
from (37). whence

J ~~(£)dp = -211 J J
o(.9.)dq - 211 o(£)dp = -411Jo(£)dP•
aB aB aB (20)

This provides a useful check on ° , and it also shows that

 61
-2 (
~ = O{r ) as r if J ~~(p)dp = O.
+ 00

aB
The same procedure applied to (8) gives the expected result

J ~i{£)dp = O. An important companion result is

aB

J ~(£)A{£)dp = J o{£)dp, (21)

aB aB

as may be proved by operating with J ... A{£)dp

aB
upon both sides of (2) and again invoking Fubini's theorem:

IaB~ (£) A{£)dp = JaB A(£) {Ia8g(£,.g) o(s) dqlJdp ,

= J o(g)dq J g{£,S)A{£)dp = J o(g)dq ,
aB aB aB

since

IaBg{£,S)A{j~)dp = J g(9.,£)A(~)dp
aB
= 1 ; .9.,£ GaB.

2. DOUBLE-LAYER FORMULATIONS
The representation
~(£) = J g{£,.9.)i].l{.9.)dq ; E. Co Bi (22)
aB
provides a classically preferred alternative to (1) fo~.

*
Dirichlet problems, where ].I appears as a hypothetical Holder-
continuous source density to be determined. In principle
].I = r~-f), but of course f is not available ab initio.
An effective way forward is to note that ~ remains continuous at
aB, whereas the integral jumps by -2~].I{£) at E. caB, so
yielding the boundary relation
62

f g(e.,.9.)i ll (g)dq
+ 2n"ll(e.)= <p(e.) ; .e. c. aBo (23)
aB
This may be viewed as a Fredholm integral equation of the second
kind for II in terms of <p , to which classical Fredholm theory
applies: the homogeneous equation

f g(.e.,.9.)i ll (.9.)dq
+ 2lfll(.e.) = 0 ; .e. c. aB (24)
aB
is mathematically equivalent to (18) and therefore has no non-
trivial solution; consequently equation (23) has a unique
solution, which generates <p in Bi via (22).
The representation
<p(.e.) = f g(.e.'.9.)~Il(.9.)dq ; .e. C Be (25)
aB

does not, in general, provide an alternative to (3) for

exterior Dirichlet problems. Thus, replacing equation (23) by
its exterior version
(
J g(.e.'.9.)~Il(q)dq + 2lfll(.e.) = <p(.e.) ; .e. caB, (26)
aB

we obtain the homogeneous equation

f g(.e.'.9.)~Il(.9.)dq + 2lfll(.e.) = 0 ; .e. c: aB, (27)

aB

and associated adjoint equation

f g~(.e.'.9.)A(.9.)dq + 2lfA(.e.) = 0 .e.c aB, (28)

aB
which are mathematically equivalent to (10), (9) respectively.
to the orthogonality condition f
Clearly, therefore, equation (26) only has a solution subject
q,(.e.)A(.e.)dp = 0, i.e.
aB
provided <p = 0(r- 2) as r + as follows from (21). This
00

limitation stems fundamentally from the fact that

J g(E.'.9.)~Il(.9.)dq = 0(r- 2 ) as r + whereas in general
00,

aB
 63
~ = 0(r- 1
) as r ~ 00. The difficulty may be overcome by
writing
(29)

i.e. f g(E.,.9.)~]J(9)dq + 21T]J(e) _ c

ill'
.
.e.c.aB, (30)
aB

and choosing constant c so that

f A(.e.)
r
~~ (.e.) - cl dp = f A(.e.) ~ (.e.)dp - cf
lElJ A(p)
1.e.1 dp= O. (31)
aB L aB aB

This value of c ensures that equation (30) has a general

solution ]J = ]Jo+k, where]J is a particular solution and k
is an arbitrary constant, wgich generates the unique potential

f g(.e.'.9.)~]Jo(q)dq + kf g(.e.'.9.)~dq; .e. c Be' (32)

aB aB

i.e. J g(.e.,.9.)~
]Jo(.9.)dq p Co B
- e
(33)
aB
for insertion into the representation (29).
3. DIRECT FORMULATIONS
Both the Dirichlet and Neumann problems may be formulated
directly through Green's boundary formula. Thus, given ~ on
aB (interior Dirichlet problem), it becomes a Fredholm
integral equation of the first kind for ~i in terms of ~, i.e.

f g(.e.>.9.)~F9)dq = I g(.e.'.9.)i~(9)dq - 21T~(.e.); .e.

Co aBo (34)

aB aB
This has a unique solution as already noted in connection with
equation (2). With ~ ,~i both known on aB, we may generate ~
throughout Bi via Green's formula. It requires proof,
however, that ~i satisfies the Gauss condition (7) : operating
with f ... A(.e.)ap upon both sides of equation (34), and
aB
interchanging the order of integration where appropriate, we
obta in
J ~i(.9.)dq f g(.e.'.9.)A(p)dP=I~(g)dq J g(.e.'.9.)iA(.e.)dP-21TI~(.e.)A(E.)dP'
aB aB aB aB aB
64

i. e.
jel>i(g)d q f g(g,E)A(e)dp = f 4>(g)dq f gi(g,E)A(e)dP- 2Tff4>(e)A(e)dP,
aB aB aB

i.e. f 4>i(g)dq = 2Tf f 4>(g)A(g)dq - 2Tff4>(.e)A(.e)dP = 0, (35)

aB aB

on bearing in mind (4), (12) with .e,g interchanged.

Given 4>i on aB (interior Neumann problem), equation (34) now
reads as

f g(.e,g)i4>(g)dq - 2Tf4>(.e) = f g(.e,g)4>i (g)dq ;.e c aB,(36)

aB aB
i.e. a Fredholm integral equation of the second kind for 4> in
terms of 4>i. This has an associated homogeneous equation

f g(.e,g)i4>(g)dq - 2Tf4>(.e) = 0 ; .e caB, (37)

aB
and adjoint equation

f gi (.e,g)A(g)dq - 2TfA(.e) = 0; .e c. aB, (38)

dB
which are mathematically equivalent to (27), (28).
Consequently, equation (36) only has a solution subject to the
orthogonality condition

f A(.e) {f l
g(.e,g)4>i (g) dq dp = 0,
dB aB J
i.e. f 4>i (g)dq f g(.e,g)A(.e)dp = f 4>i (g)dq f g(.e,g)A(.e)dp
aB dB aB dB

= f 4>i (g)dq = 0, (39)

dB
which is the expected Gauss condition. In this case,
equation (36) has the general solution
4>=4>o+k, (40)
where 4>0 is a particular solution .and k is an arbitrary constant,
in complete agreement with the family of simple-source
 65
solutions (13). With ~ ,~i both known on aB, we may generate
~ throughout Bi via Green's formula.

The exterior Dirichlet problem is formulated by the equation

aB
I g(e.'.9.)~~(9)dq I g(e.'.9.)~~(.9.)dq
=
aB
- 21T~(E) ; .E. c aB,(41)

i.e. a Fredholm integral equation of the first kind for ~~ in

terms of ~. This has a unique solution, which satisfies the
relation

aB
I ~~(.9.)dqaB
= -41T I A(.E.)~(.E.)dp, (42)

as also follows by eliminating a between (20) and (21).

The exterior Neumann problem is formulated by the equation

aB
I g(.E.,.9.)~~(.9.)dq I
- 21T~(.E.) = g(.E.'.9.)~~(.9.)dq ; .E. c aB,(43)
aB
i.e. a Fredholm equation of the second kind for ~ in terms of
~e. This always has a unique solution as follows by reference
to equation (18).
The Dirichlet and Neumann conditions are particular cases of a
prescribed linear relation
a~ + S~' = Y; ~' ~~
1
or ~'e (44)
at each point of aBo Thus,
a = l,S = 0, Y given (continuous) on aB (45)

defines the Dirichlet problem, and

a = O,S = 1, Y given (continuous) on aB (46)
defines the Neumann problem. An existence-uniqueness
theorem is available for the Robin problem of heat conduction,
defined by
a < 0, S = 1, Y given (continuous) on aBo (47)

Finally, an existence-uniqueness theorem is available for the

difficult mixed problem defined by
a =l,S=O onaB 1 ;a=O,S=l onaB 2 }

aB = aB 1 + aB 2 ' Y given (continuous) on aBo (48)

Essentially, in all these cases, we couple the local condition
66

(44) with the global condition (34) or (41) to determine a

compatible ~.~' on aBo so allowing us to generate ~ in Bi or
Be via the appropriate Green's formula. Generally speaklng.
an analytical solution is out of the question even for
specialised boundaries. However. we may attempt a numerical
solution by discretising aB into n surface elements centred
about the n pivotal (collocation) pOints 91' ... 9 .
Conditions (34) or (41) provide n linear equationsnbetween
the 2n unknowns ~1' ••• ~n ; ~~ ••.. ~~ at these points. Also
condition (44) may be discretised to provide another set of
n linear equations between these 2n unknowns. Accordingly. we
have sufficient equations to compute all the unknowns. so
enabling ~ to be computed through any part of Bi of Be via
a discretised version of Green's formula.
4. INDIRECT VECTOR FORMULATIONS
Corresponding with the electrostatic integral equation (4). we
introduce the six vector integral equations

I g(~>.9.)As(g)dq = Ils(~); S = 1.2 •.•. 6 (49)

aB .E. caB.
These are not Fredholm equations since g(Paqn) = 0Ip-ql-2
as I.E.-ql =} O. However. they have solutions in principle
given oy
1
AS = - 41i (fs)~; s = 1.2 •••. 6 (50)

where fs is the unique regular displacement field in Be which

satisfies fs = Ils on aBo Since 115 = 0 on aBo it follows from
(49) that AS also satisfy the traction equations

I gi(.E.·~)As(~)dq
aB
- 2TIA S (E)=0 ; s = 1.2 ••.• 6
.E. c: aB • (51)

i.e. the adjoint system of equations to the system (62) -

see Scalar & Vector Potential Theory. Although these are not
Fredholm systems. they play an entirely parallel role to that
played by (12). (10) in the scalar theory.
Vector Dirichlet problems may be formulated by the vector
equation (2). following a parallel analysis to that of the
scalar theory. Thus. operating upon both sides of (2) by
I ... As(E)dP. and interchanging the order of integration at
appropriate stages. we find

IaB~(E)As(E)dp = Icr(q)lls(~)dq
aB
s = 1.2 ••.. 6 (52)
 67
in parallel with (21).
Kupradze was the first to propose that the vector interior
Neumann problem could be formulated by the vector integral
equation (8). with the associated homogeneous systems (9).
(10). Naively applying classical Fredholm theory to this
system. it follows that a solution only exists if

I <p~(£)].Is'-E)dp =
aB
0; s = 1.2 •.•. 6. (53)

i.e. if the prescribed tractions form a self-equilibrated

distribution of forces and moments over aBo as expected on
physical grounds. Subject to (53). the general solution of
equation (8) now appears as

(54)

where 00 is a particular solution and ks are arbitrary scalar

coefficients. This generates the class of displacement fields

I
aB
g(£ •.9)oo(g)dq + ks I
aB
g(£ •.9.)As(g)dq ; £C Bi + aBo

i.e.
pcB.1
-
+ aB 1.• (55)

each characterised by the same traction vector <p~ on aBo

The vector exterior Neumann problem is formulated by (16).
with the associated homogeneous systems (17). (18). As for the
scalar case. this has a unique solution which generates the

.I ...
regular exterior displacement field (19). Operating with
].1 (p)dp
s -
upon both sides of (16). we find
aB
I <p~(£)].Is(£)dp = I
aB
-4n
aB
cr(£)].Is(£)dp; s = 1.2 •..• 6.

i.e.
aB
I <P~(£hs(£)dp I = -4n
aB
<p (£) As (£)dp (56)

from (52).
68

i.e. the resultant force and moment of the exterior tractions

on aB are directly known in .terms of ~,A s on aBo
Vector Dirichlet problems may also be formulated by the vector
double-layer equations (23), (26). The interior equation (23)
has a unique solution. However, the exterior equation (26)
only has a solution subject to the orthogonality condition

I ~<'e)As<'e)dp
aB
= 0; s = 1,2, ••• 6 (57)

which means - as expected - that the tractions associated with

~ on aB must form a self-equilibrated system. If so, the
general solution of this equation appears as
. 6

~ = ~o + L ks~s
1
' (58)

where ~Q is a particular solution and ks are arbitrary scalar

coefficlents. This generates the unique displacement field

I g<'e.'.9.)~~o<,g)dq
aB
+
6

~ ks J g<'e.,.9.)~~s(.9.)dq;.E. c Be ,(59)
aB

I g(.E.'.9.)~~o(.9.)dq
i.e.
; .E. c Be + aBo (60)
aB
Condition (57) stems essentially from the fact that the vector
representation (25) has only 0(r- 2 ) behaviour at infinity,
whereas a regular exterior ~ has in general 0(r- 1 ) behaviour
at infinity.
Following (29), we extend the vector representation (25) by
writing
~(.E.) = J g(.E.,.9.)~~(.9.)dq + ~·g(.9.·.E.)q=O
aB -
+ E. AV. 9(.9.,.E.).9.=0 ; .E. cBe (61)

where a,b ar~ constant vectors to be determined

It will be noted that both additional terms in (61) have 0(r- 1 )

behaviour as r +~. Written out in component form these
appear as
 69
3

~.g(g,£) = L aag(qaPn) ; n = 1,2,3

1

b_a__ b_a_>
1 aq2 2 aql
3

~ "Il.g(g,.e) = L (~ "11) ag(qaPn); n = 1,2,3.

1

Operating upon both sides of (61) by J... As(£)dp , we find

aB

J~(£)As(~)dp = ~·Jls(g) + ~ A11. Jls(g) = a·Jls(g) = as'

aB s = 1,2,3 (63)

= ~·Jls(g)g=o + b 1\ Il·Jls(g)g=o = ~ 1\ 1l·J1s(g)g=o = 2b s

s = 4,5,6 (64)

With these values of j!,Q the integral equation

Jg(£,g)~Jl(g)dq + 27TJl(e) = ~(£) - ~·g(g'£)q=O-g

1\ Il· g(g,.e.)q=o
aB - -
(65)
always has a solution, of the form (58), which generates ~ in
Be via (61).
5. DIRECT FORMULATIONS
As first proposed by Rizzo, Somigliana's boundary formula may
be exploited to attack vector Dirichlet and Neumann problems.
Thus, given the displacement vector ~ on aB (interior Dirichlet
problem), equation (34) now reads as a vector integral equation
of the first ~ind for ~{ in terms of~. This has a unique
solution ~i ' as already noted for the vector equation (2).
Operating with_ J ....
As(p)dp upon both sides of (34), we see
aB
that ~i satisfies the relations
J~F~hs(£)dp = 0 ; s = 1,2, •.• 6 (66)
aB
70

as expected on physical grounds.

Given the traction vector ~{ on aB (interior Neumann
problem). equation (36) now reads as a vector integral
equation of the second kind for ~ in terms of ~i .
Subject to condition (66). this has a solution which appears as
6

~ = ~o + l:1 ks ].I S (67)

where ~o is a particular solution and ks are arbitrary constants.

The exterior Dirichlet problem is formulated by equation (41).
read as a vector integral equation of the first kind for ~e in
terms of~. This has a unique solution. which satisfies the
relations

J ~~(~)].Is(~)dq = -4n f As(~)~(~)dp ; s = 1.2 •.•. 6 (68)

aB aB
so confirming the conclusion (56) already obtained by
earlier arguments.
Given ~e on aB (exterior Neumann problem). equation (43)
now reads as a vector integral equation of the second kind
for ~ in terms of ~~. This always has a unique solution.
As already mentioned. the vector Dirichlet and Neumann
conditions are particular cases of the vector boundary
relations (44) connecting ~.~' on aBo Coupling this local
relation with the global relation (34). (36). etc .• we have
sufficient vector equations to determine ~ ,~' on aBo
Chapter 4

SCALAR AND VECTOR POTENTIAL THEORY

M. A. Jaswon
Department of Mathematics, The City University, London, E.C.l.

1. THE SIMPLE-LAYER POTENTIAL

This provides a specialised representation for harmonic
functions, which proves to be particularly convenient for
solving certain boundary-value problems. Physically speaking,
it models the properties of continuous electrostatic charge
distributions over closed conductors, so providing an easy
entry into the theory. Thus, if charges are introduced on a
smooth, closed, conducting surface aB, we posit a continuous
charge density o(q) at every q ~ aBo It is convenient to
write dq for the area element-at q, in which case o(q)dq
defines the charge strength assocTated with dq. This generates
an electrostatic potential g(p,q)o(q)dq at any point p of
space, where - - - -
9(R,.9.)= 9(.9.,R) = IR-.9.1- 1 • (l )
Superposing the contributions from allover aB, we construct
the simple-layer potential
V(R) = f g(R,.9.)o(.9.)dq ; RC Bi'Be,aB (2)
aB
where Bi denotes the interior domain enclosed by aB and Be
denotes the infinite domain exterior to aBo Although the main
properties of V are intuitively clear on physical grounds, its
precise mathematical properties depend upon the smoothness of
aB and of 0 as will now be discussed.
To ensure that V has the mathematical properties detailed
below, we first require that 0 be Holder-continuous on aBo
Roughly speaking, Holder-continuity is stronger than ordinary
continuity but weaker than differentiability. More precisely,
it means that
1o(R)-o(.9.) 1 < DI.e.-.9.1 a ; 0 < a ~ 1, D > 0 (3)

71
72
for any p,q C dB. The strongest class of Holder-continuous
functions 1s defined by a=l, since the condition (i.e. the
Lipschitz condition)
1cr (e)-cr (g) 1 < 01.£.-.9.1 ; 0 > 1 (4)

implies (3) as Ip-ql + 0 but not vice-versa. Holder-continuity

is stronger than-ordinary continuity, because any admissible
choice of a,O in (3) guarantees ordinary continuity but not
vice-versa. However, differentiability is stronger than (4),
since the existence of
1cr(.£.)-cr(.9.) 1
lim as 1.£.-.9.1 + 0 (5)
1.£.-.9.1
implies (4) but not vice-versa. Kellogg [lJ.
Similar considerations hold for the smoothness properties of
dB, i.e. we require

(6)

where ~'~q are the unit normal vectors at any .£.,g C dB. This
is a Liapunov surface. If dB has the local equatlon z = z(x,y)
at any point p C dB, with the z-axis pointing in the normal
direction at p, then (6) implies that the partial derivatives
ZX,Zy are Holaer-continuous at p. However, zxx etc., do not
necessarily exist at p, i.e. the Liapunov surface has a
continuously varying normal direction - but not necessarily a
curvature - at every point. A simple example is provided by
the circular cylinder capped by hemisphere at each end, since
the curvature jumps on passing from the cylinder to the
hemisphere whilst the normal direction remains continuous.
Subject to (3), (6) above, the main properties of V may be
summarised as follows.
(1) V is continuous and differentiable to any order in Bi,Be'

I
Also
---ap;:- = ~~l (.£.,.9.)cr(.9.)dq (7)
dB
etc., where .£. = (Pl'P2'P).
(2) V satisfies Laplace's equation in Bi,Be i.e.

I/V(.£.) = J ,,,,zg(e.,.9.)cr(.9.)dq = 0 ; E. c Bi ,Be (8)

aB
2
since v g = 0, E. F.9.. Accordingly, V is a harmonic function
 73
everywhere except at aBo

(3) V(e) = 1£1- 1 J o(g)dq + 1£1- 3 J

(£·3)0(g)dq + 01£1- 3 (9)
aB aB
as 1£1 ~ 00 • Accordingly, V is a regular harmonic function
in Be.
(4) V(p) exists at every p Co aB, and it is continuous at p
with respect to its neighbouring values in Bi,Be i.e. -

as -1
p. ~p - ; -1
p. Co B·l
1
(10)
as .E.e + £ ; .E.e c. Be

(5) V is continuous and differentiable on aBo Also, in line

with (7),

-- =
aV(£) J atag (£,.9.)o(g)dq ; £ c. dB, (11)
dt aB
where a/at denotes differentiation along any tangential
direction to dB at £.
(6) V has two formally distinct normal derivatives V~,Vi
at p caB pointing into Be,Bi respectively. These
may~e constructed by writing

V~(£) = J g~(£,.9.)o(.9.)dq - 27[0(£) ; £ Co dB (12)

aB

Vi (£) = J gi (£,.9.)cr(.9.)dq - 27[0(£) ; £ Co aB (13)

dB
where ge(p,q) denotes the exterior normal derivative of g
at £ keeping-.9. fixed, and similarly for gi. Since

gi (£,.9.) + g~ (£,.9.) =0 (14)

it follows that

The integrands in (12), (13) become singular when .9. = £. For

example, if aB is a sphere of radius a, with
74
R = (O,O,r)r=a' ~ = a(sinecosw,sinesinw,cose),
then

showing that
lim 9~(R'~) as q + P = lim(-4a 2sin ~)-l as e + O,etc.
- - (16)

However, the integrals exist and may be readily evaluated to

give

J g~ (R,g)dq = -
aB
I
aB
gi (R,~)dq -21T; R c. aB (17)

on putting dq = a 2 sin dedw. It is straightforward, though

tedious, to perform the integrations for R c Be,Bi i.e.
r > a, r < a respectively. We find

J ar
aB
age
I
aB
agi dq = 0
ar
( 18)

and clearly these integrals jump by 21T when r = a in

consequence of the singularity. A useful exercise is to
construct the V generated by 0 = 0 0 (a cons.) on r = a. Simple
analysis gives 2
41Ta 0 0
Ve r ' Vi = 41Tao 0 ' (19)

from which

(20)

in accordance with (18) since

aVe
ar
a (
= ar J ge(R,~)oodq = 00 I -ar ago
dq, etc. (21)
aB aB
At r = a, the expression (20) becomes
 75

( _aVe) = -41T(1 ;; V' (p), (avo)

ar r=a 0 e-
-'
ar r=a
= 0 ;; ,-
V~(p). (22)

These may alternatively be obtained by substituting (17) into

(12), (13) :

V~(E.) = -21T(10 - 21T(10 = -41TO O ' Vi(e) = 21TO O-21T(10=0 (23)

i.e. the contribution -21TO in (12), (13) cancels the jump in

the integrals (18) at aBo This inclusion may be generalised
to any Liapunov surface by an appropriate limiting analysis.
2. THE DOUBLE-LAYER POTENTIAL
This provides a specialised representation for harmonic
functions of equal importance to that of the simple-layer
potential. Physically speaking it models the properties of
continuous dipole distributions, e.g. elementary magnets,
over open or closed smooth surfaces. A unit dipole at q c aB
generates the dipole potential g(P.q)'. i.e. the normal-
derivative of g at q keeping p fixea. at any point p of space.
As before. we introauce' two fOrmally distinct normaT derivatives
g(p.q)e • g(p,q)i at q whether for closed or open boundaries,
ana which have-equal status since ge = -~i. Utilising
g(p,q)i ' a dipole of stren~th-density ~(~) per unit area at
q generates the potential g{p,q)e ~(q)dq at p. Superposing
the contributions from allover aB, we construct the double-
1ayer potenti a1
W(e) = f g(E.'~)i ~(~)dq ; .E. ¢ aB (24)
aB
at any point outside aBo
Subject to ~ being Holder-continuous and aB a Liapunov surface.
the main properties of Wmay be summarised as follows.
(J) Wis continuous and differentiable to any order outside aBo
Also

(25)

etc .• where .E. = (Pl.P2,P3).

(2) Wsatisfies Laplace's equation everywhere outside aBo i.e.

\/2W(.E.) = f \/2g(.E.·~)i ~(~)dq = 0 ; .E. ¢ aB (26)

aB
76
since V2g(£'~)e = 0, £ f~. Accordingly, Wis a harmonic
function everywhere except at aBo
(3) W(£) = 01£1- 2 as 1£1 ->- '" , (27)

so that Wcan only represent a restricted class of regular

harmonic functions as 1£1 ->- "'.
(4) W(p) exists at every p caB, but it jumps on passing from
aB to neighbouring points outside aBo More precisely, if
£i'£e are points on each side of aB near £, then

1imW(£i) = W(£) + 21T11 (£)}

£i ->- £
; £ c aB (28)

= W(£) - 21111 (£)

£e -+- £
assuming that W(£) is defined everywhere by (24).
(5) Even if 11 is Holder.-continuous, the normal derivatives Wi,
We are not necessarily finite though they satisfy the relation
limWi(£i) + limW~(£e) = 0; £ Co aBo (29)

£i ->- £ £e ->- £
(6) The separate limits in (29) exist if 11 is Holder-
continuously differentiable, in which case the tangential
derivative of Walso exists :

aw(p)
at - =
f 1ta (£·~)il1(g)dq
; £ c. aB (30)
aB
as in (11). Also ~ satisfies the limiting relations
. aW(£i) aW(£) al1(£)
11m ~ ar-- + 21T ar-- }
£i -+- £
(31)
aW(£e) aW(£) ajl(p)
1im -at-- ar-- - 21T at -
e
£e ->- £
where a/ati' a/ate denote differentiations parallel to a/at
at £i'£e respectively.
 77

Given ~ = ~o (a cons.) over an open aB, we obtain

W(e) = ~o J
g(e,.9.)i dq = llOrl (32)
aB
where rI denotes the solid angle subtended at p by aB. This
interpretation immediately yields the result -

J g(~'.9.) i dq
= 411 ; £ c Bi (33)
aB
for aB closed, which may be viewed as the Gauss flux theorem
applied to a unit simple source at £. It follows from (28)
that

J g(£>.9.)i dq = 211 ; £c. aB, (34)

aB
(35)

As will be seen later, these simple topological results play an

important role in the theory of Fredholm integral equations.
For ease of reference, we note the corresponding results:

J g(£>.9.) ~ dq = -411 ; £ c. Bi ' (36)

aB
= -211 ; £ c. aB, (37)
=0 ; £ c Be· (38)
These may be verified for the sphere of radius a by choosing
£ = (O,O,z), .9. = (r sinecosw ,r sinesinw ,r cose)r=a'
so that
dq = a\inededw
2 2 )-1/2
g(£,.9.)- = (z + r - 2zrcose r=a '

in performing the integration for the cases z < a, z = a,

z > a respectively.
3. GREEN'S FORMULA
It has been noted above that the simple-layer and double-layer
78
potentials are harmonic functions under broad conditions.
However, an arbitrary harmonic function may not always be
representable by such potentials. For instance, the harmonic
function ~ = k (a cons.) can not be represented by a simple-
layer potential inside the unit circle. Again, the harmonic
function ~ = r- 1 can not be represented by a double-layer
potential in the infinite domain exterior to a closed surface.
To construct a more powerful potential representation for
harmonic functions, we posit a harmonic function ~ in Bi , which
assumes a continuous set of boundary values ~(q), and boundary
normal derivatives ~i(q), as q runs over aBo These boundary
data, regarded as source densTties, generate the double-layer
potential

J g(E.>.9.)i~(g)dq, (39)
aB
and the simple-layer potential

- J g(£'.9)~~(9)dq, (40)
aB
which have the properties associated with W,V respectively for
Holder-continuous boundary data on a Liapunov surface aBo
Superposing (39) and (40) yields the identity

J g(£'.9)i~(g)dq - J g(£'.9.)~i (g)dq = 41T~(£); £ C Bi (41)

aB aB
valid for any harmonic ~ on Bi . This is Green's formula.
Formula (41) can be readily extended from p Co Bi to £ Co aBo
Thus (40) remains continuous, but (39) jumps by -21T~T£) ,at
aB so providing the boundary formula

, J g(£,.9.)iCP(.9.)dq - f g(£'.9.)~i(.9.)dq = 21T~(e) ; £ c.aB.(42)

aB aB
This differs essentially from (41) in that ~ on the right-hand
side is now a boundary value of cp, i.e. from the same set
as enters into the first integral, i.e. (42) is a functional
relation between cp,~j on aB which ensures their compatibility
as boundary data. As p crosses from aB to Be' the double-layer
integral suffers a second jump - 21T~(£) yielding Green's
reciprocal theorem .

J g(£'.9.)i~(.9.)dq
- J g(£'.9.)~i (.9.)dq = 0 ; £ Co Be (43)
aB aB
This may be proved directly by noting that g(£,.9.) is a harmonic
function of .9. in Bi for any fixed £ C Be : also .p(.9.) is a
 79
harmonic function of q in Bi' and any two harmonic functions
~,~ in Bi satisfy the reciprocal relation

f (~~i f
- ~~i)dq = (~V2~ _~V2~ )dq = 0 (44)
aB Bi
as follows directly from the Gauss divergence theorem. Starting
from (43), and reversing our steps, we successively recover
(42), (43). Of course, this procedure hinges upon the validity
of the boundary jumps (28), which can only be justified by the
same kind of limiting analysis as would be involved in the
direct proof of (41).
Green's formula may be readily adapted to a regular harmonic
function f in Be' which assumes boundary values f(q), and
boundary normal derivatives fe(q), as q runs over -aBo
Corresponding with (41), (42), T43) we-nave

f g('p".9.)~f(9)dq - f g('p".9.)f~(.9.)dq = 41Tf('p') ;'p'CB e , (45)

aB aB
= 21Tf('p');'p' c:..aB, (46)
=0 ;'p'cBi' (47)
respectively, where

f = - d1T 1.p.1- 1 f f~(.9.)dq

as 1.p.1-- •
+ 01.p.1- 2
(48)
aB
All these exterior formulae are important in their own right,
and (47) may be exploited to justify the single-potential
representations (2),(24). Thus superposing (41) and (47) ,
assuming ~ given and f arbitrary, we obtain the generalised
representation

f g('p".9.)i[~(.9.)-f(.9.)Jdq - f g('p".9.)[~i (.9.) + f~(.9.)Jdq

aB aB
= 41T~('p') ; .p. C Bi • (49)
Two natural possibilities for f now arise:
(1) f = ~ on aB, giving the representation
- f g('p".9.)[~i(.9.)
+ f~(.9.)Jdq = 41T~(.E.) ;'p' C Bi' (50)
aB
which may be identified as a simple-layer potential with
source density
1 ["""'i + fe'J.
a = - 41i (51)
80

This possibility hinges upon the existence of a unique regular

f in Be satisfying f = ~ on aB, as is guaranteed by the exterior
Dirichlet existence theorem in three dimensions. However,
a breakdown may occur in two dimensions as will be discussed
later.
(2) f~ = -~i on aB, giving the representation

J g(E'.9)i[~(9)-f(9)]dq = 4rr~(p) ; E. c Bi' (52)

aB
which may be identified as a double-layer potential with
source density
1
)J = 4rr [~-f] (53)
This possibility hinges upon the existence of a unique
regular f in Be satisfying f~ = -~i on aB, as is always guaran-
teed by the exterior Neumann existence theorem.
Accordingly we have recovered the simple-layer potential and
the double-layer potential as specialised versions of Green's
formula.
4. IDENTIFICATION OF SCALAR AND VECTOR SYMBOLISM
Classical linear elastostatics may be formulated by a vector
potential theory which closely parallels scalar potential
theory. It would, indeed, be advantageous to employ the same
symbolism in each theory, its interpretation depending on the
context. Thus the scalar potential ~ becomes the elastostatic
displacement vector. The normal derivative ~' becomes the
traction vector associated with ~. The Newtonian unit-
source potential g(E.'~) becomes the fundamental displacement
dyadic of the medium. More precisely, in this context we
mean that
g(Plq2)
g(P2 q2) (54)
g(P3 q2)
where g(Paqn) signifies the displacement component in the
a-direction at p generated by a unit point-force in the
y-direction at q. Clearly column 1 defines the displacement
vector at p generated by a unit point force acting in the
l-direction at q,etc. By virtue of g(Paqn) = g(qnPa)' we
see that row 1 defines the displacement vector at q generated
by a unit point-force acting in the l-direction at-E., etc.
Corresponding with g'(p,q) we construct the fundamental
traction dyadic of the-medium, i.e.
 81

g' (P1qZ)
g' (P2qZ) (55)
g' (P3 qZ)
where g'(Paqn) signifies the traction component in the a-
direction at p generated by a unit point-force acting in the
n-direction at~. Clearly column 1 defines the traction vector
at p generated oy a unit point-force acting in the l-direction
at S, etc. Finally, corresponding with g(£,~)', we construct
the traction dyadic
g(P1q2) ,
g(pzqz)' (56)
g(P3 qZ)'
where row 1 defines the traction vector at ~ generated by a
unit point-force acting in the l-direction at £, etc. It may
be readily proved that column 1 defines a singular displacement
vector at p, i.e. that generated by a unit traction-source
associateC-with the l-direction at q, etc., in line with the
fact that g(p,q)' may function as a-unit dipole-potential
generated aCq-:- By the same token, row 1 of (55) defines
the singular aisplacement vector at g generated by a unit
traction-source associated with the T-direction at p. Any
individual component of (55) or (56) carries two possible
interpretations : either the traction component generated by
a unit point-force or the displacement component generated
by a unit traction-source. The interpretation will always
be clear from the context. We note that g'(p,q) stands for
ge(£,g~ or gi(£,~) as the case may be, and sTmllarly for
g~£,~J .

The simple-source density 0 now becomes a vector simple-source

density 0= <01,OZ,03> , so allowing us to regard (2) as a
vector simple-layer potential with components
Va (p)
- =
dB
I q )0 (~)dq; a,n = 1,2,3
g(pann (57)

This has properties at dB entirely analogous to those of the

scalar simple-source potential, e.g. formulae (12), (13) may
be read as traction formulae, and it defines an elastostatic
displacement field for any choice of p. These properties have
been proved by Kupradze [2] for the lTnear isotropic elastic
continuum, but we may conjecture that they also hold for the
general linear anisotropic elastic continuum. Similarly, the
double-source density ~ becomes a vector double-source density
~ = <~1'~2'~3> ,so allowing us to regard (24) as a vector
double-layer potential with components
W (£)
N
~
Iq )'~ (q)dq
= g(pann - ; a,n = 1,2,3. (58)
dB
82

This has properties at 3B entirely analogous to those of the

scalar double-source potential, e.g. formulae (28) may be read
as vector formulae, and it defines an elastostatic displacement
field everywhere except at E. Co 3B.
5. SOMIGLIANA'S FORMULA
Green's formula (41) now reads as Somigliana's formula i.e.
it represents an arbitrary displacement vector ~ as the super-
position of a vector simple-layer potential and a vector double-
layer potential, generated respectively by the boundary
tractions and boundary displacements associated with ~ •
Green's boundary formula (42) now reads as Somigliana's
boundary formula, which provides a vector functional relation
between tractions and displacements on 3B. Green's reciprocal
theorem (43) now reads as Betti's reciprocal theorem.
Corresponding exterior formulae hold for a displacement field
which remains regular at infinity, so allowing us to introduce
the generalised Somigliana formula (49). Assuming the
validity of the fundamental existence-uniqueness theorems of
linear elastostatics, we may then readily prove the validity
of the vector representations V,W with a,~ identified by the
vector equations (51), (53) respectively [3].
6. RIGID-BODY DISPLACEMENT FIELD
Corresponding to the scalar harmonic function ~= 1, we
introduce the rigid-body displacement field
~ (E.) = ~ + Q 1\ E. (59)
where a,b are given constant vectors. This has the following
properties in parallel with those of ~= 1 :
(1) ~ = ~ + QA E. on 3B implies ~ = ~ + QA E. in Bi + 3B ;
(2) ~i = °on 3B i.e. no tractions are associated with the
rigid-body displacement field;
°
(3) given ~i = on 3B, we may infer that ~ = a + b A P
on Bi + 3B where ~'Q are arbitrary constant vectors.
It is convenient to break down the field (59) into the six

1
independent vectors
~l <1,0,0> , 11 2 = <0,1,0>, ~3 = <0,0,1>
(60)
~4 <1,0,0>/\ E.'~5= <0,1,0>1\E.,11 6 = <0,0,1> AE.J
which provide the six vector double-layer identities

J g(E,s.)i llS(s.)dq = 41TI1 /e) s = 1,2, .•. 6 (61)

aB E. C. Bi
 83

as may be proved by substituting ~= ~s' ~i = ~~ = 0 into

Somigliana's formula (41). Essentially these are vector
generalisations of the Gauss flux theorem as expressed by
(33). Their physical significance is most readily understood
by envisaging a unit point-force acting in the l-direction at
£, so generating the traction vector g(Plqn){ ;n = 1,2,3 over
aBo In this case the identities (61) yiela component
identities showing that (i) the resultant force of the
tractions balances the pOint-force at p, and that (ii) their
resultant moment about any axis balances its moment about this
axis. Easy deductions from (61) are

J g(£,.9.) i ~s (.9.) dq = 21T~S (£) s = 1,2, ... 6 (62)

aB
£ c aB

=0 £ c Be (63)

in parallel with (34), (35) respectively.

References
1. Jaswon, M. A. &Symm, G. T. (1977) Integral Equation
Methods in Potential Theory and Elastostatics.
Academic Press : London & New York.
2. Kellogg, O. O. (1929) Foundations of Potential Theory.
Springer: Berlin.
3. Kupradze, V. D. (1965) Potential Methods in the Theory
of Elasticity. Israel Program for Scientific Translations
Jerusalem.
 Chapter 5

POTENTIAL PROBLEMS IN TWO DIMENSIONS

George T. Symm
National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, U.K.

1 INTRODUCTION

In this lecture we consider numerical applications of both

direct and indirect ,formulations of boundary value problems for
Laplace's equation in two dimensions:

(1)

in rectangular Cartesian coordinates (x,y). We denote by D the

relevant plane domain and by C its (internal or external)
boundary or boundaries. When the domain D is multiply-connected,
we denote its outer boundary by CO'

We begin by describing an indirect method - an application

of the simple-layer logarithmic potential:

0(p) = Ic a- (q)loglq-pldq, p e D, (2 )

to a Neumann problem from the field of fluid mechanics.

We then discuss the direct boundary element method based
upon Green's boundary formula:

Ic 0'(q)loglq-pldq - Jc 0(q)log' Iq-pldq = 1I0(p), p E C, (3)

where the prime denotes differentiation along the normal to the
boundary C directed into the domain D. A numerical implementation
of this method for general boundary conditions is described and

85
 86

the method is applied to a typical problem of heat conduction. I t

is shown how this method may be adapted to take account of
boundary singularities and of domains comprising more than one
material.

2 FLOW PAST AN OBSTACLE

Here we consider the problem of determining the pressure

coefficient, given in terms of velocity V by

Cp = 1 - (lVI/lUI) 2 , (4)

on an obstacle in a stream of incompressible, inviscid fluid

moving with constant velocity U at infinity. It is assumed that
there is no circulation around the obstacle, and therefore no
lift acting upon it, and that the velocity field is irrotational.

With no loss of generality, we let the velocity potential of

the steady flow be

']t- = - x, (5)

so that

U = - V~ = (1,0), lUI 1. (6)

Then

(7)

where

V = - V(<<I + ~) (8 )

and «I is the "perturbation" potential. In terms of this

potentialj the pressure coefficient (7) becomes

Cp =1 - {(<<Ix - 1)2 + «I;} = 20x - «I~ - 0;, (9)

where 0 x , -0 y denote the first partial derivatives of 0.

Assuming the boundary C of the obstacle to be rigid, the
component'of the fluid velocity V normal to this boundary must be
zero. It follows that the potential 0 satisfies the exterior
Neumann prQblem qefined by

«I'(p) =- ~'(p) = x'(p), p E C. (10)

Seeking the solution of this problem in the form of a

 87

simple-layer logarithmic potential (2), we obtain the integral

equation

Ic o-'(q)1og'lp-qldq + '!T'o-'(p) = x'(p), p E C, (11)

for 0-'. This equation has a unique solution and, integrating the
equation with respect to p, noting that, by virtue of the
Cauchy-Riemann equations (describing the contour C in a clockwise
direction) ,

Ic log' Iq-pldq = - Ic d ar~~q-p) dq = 7\, P ~ c, (12)

we see that this solution satisfies the equation

2'7r Ic 0-' (q)dq = Ic x' (p)dp, (13)

whence

Ic 0-' (q)dq = O. (14)

It follows, since the potential (2) has the asymptotic

behaviour:

~(p) =S loglpl + O(lpl-l) as Ipl -+ 00, (15)

where

S = Ic 0-' (q)dq, (16)

that the perturbation potential ~ has the asymptotic behaviour

which agrees with the physical requirements of the problem.

The corresponding partial derivatives of ~ are given, in

terms of 0-', by

and

~y(p) = Ic o-'(q)1ogylp..qldq + 7ro-'(p)y'(p), p E c. (19)

If we can solve equation (11) for 0-', then we may evaluate these
derivatives and hence obtain the pressure coefficient C from
equation (9). p
 88

3 DISCRETISATION

In general, equation (11) must be solved numerically and for

this purpose we subdivide the boundary C into N intervals (or
elements) I., j = 1,2, .•. ,N, in each of which we introduce an
appropriateJapproximation for 0-. Here, for example, we
approximate 0- in the simplest possible manner by a constant in
each interval, in which case, denoting these constants by

OJ' j = 1,2, ... ,N, (20)

the integral equation (11), applied at one "nodal" point qi in

each boundary interval Ii' is approximated by
N
L J.IOg'lqi-qldq +
j=1 J J
0-. 7rcr.
1
= x'(q.), i
1
1,2, ... ,N, (21)

where J. J
denotes integration over the interval I. of C.
J
Solution of this set of simultaneous linear algebraic
equations leads to the approximations
N
0 x (qi) = L
j=1 J
0-. J.IOg I q. -q I dq +
J x 1
7r °ix ' (qi ) (22)

and N
0 y (qi) L
j=1 J
0-: J.Iog I q. -q I dq +
J Y 1
'7t~y' (qi) (23)

to the derivatives at the nodal points, whence we approximate Cp

by

(24)
In the example which follows, each interval of the boundary
is approximated by a chord and the nodal points are defined as
the mid-points of these chords, so that

X(qi) = (x(qi_) + x(Qi+»/2, }

(25)
y(qi) = (y(qi-) + Y(Qi+»/2,

where Qi- and Qi + are the end-points of the interval Ii and

(26)
 89

where h. is the length of the corresponding chord. The

off-diakonal coefficients in equations (21) are approximated by
the mid-ordinate rule:

(27)

while on the diagonal, i j, we take

N
7r - I
i=1
hi 109'IQi-qjl, (28)

Hj

which is derived from the analytic result (12). Use of the

expression (28), in conjunction with formulae (27), ensures that
the solution of equations (21) satisfies the equation
N N
2 '11' I cr. h. = i=1I x' (Qi) h.~ ,
j=1 J J
(29)

corresponding to the analytic result (13).

To evaluate the integrals in equations (22) and (23), we use

the results of analytic integration along straight lines (Jaswon
and Symm, 1977):

JjlOgxlqi-qldQ; (logIQi-qj_1 - logIQi-Qj+l)y'(Qj) +

(arg(Qj+-qi) - arg(Qj_-qi»x'(Qj) (30)

and

(loglqi-qj_1 - logIQi-q . l)x'(Q.) +

J+ J
(arg(q. -qi) - arg(qj_-qi»Y'(qj) (31)
J+
when i ~ j and take the integrals to be zero when i = j, the
latter result following from the former by considering the
interval I j in two parts and recalling that Qj is its mid-point.

Example 1: Flow past a Joukowski aerofoil obtained from the

circle

Iwl = 0.6 (32)

by the transformation

z =w - 0.1 + 0.25/(w - 0.1). (33)

 90

This problem has the analytic solution defined by the complex

potential
- (w + 0.36/w), (34)

from which it may be shown that C varies between 1.0 and - 0.876
over the surface of the aerofoi1. P

The contour C, representing this surface, is divided into 64

intervals by pOints obtained through the transformation (33) from
points evenly distributed around the circle (32). The "interval"
pOints so obtained are closely packed around the leading and
trailing edges of the aero foil and are symmetric about the
x-axis. Taking this symmetry into account, we need solve only 32
simultaneous linear equations of the form (21) and their solution
yields results which closely resemble the analytiC solution.
Details of these results, and similar results for a more
practical shape of aerofoi1, are given elsewhere (Jaswon and
Symm, 1977). In particular, we note, in the present example, that
when the computed pressure coefficient is compared graphically
with its analytic counterpart, the difference is noticeable only
in the region of the local minimum, where the numerical value is
around - 0.842.

4 GREEN'S BOUNDARY FORMULA

Green's boundary formula (3) relates the boundary values of
a function III, which is harmonic in a domain D, to those of its
derivative III' along the normal to the boundary C directed into
the domain D. Consequently, this formula is immediately
applicable not only to Dirichlet and Neumann problems but also to
problems involving mixed (Dirichlet and Neumann) boundary
conditions and Robin boundary conditions of the form

alii + bill' = c, (35)

where a, band c are functions of x and y in general and each may

be piecewise continuous on C.

For any such problem, either III or III' may be eliminated from
equation (3) at each point q E C by means of the boundary
conditions. This yields, in general, a system of coupled integral
equations for those boundary values of III and III' which are not
eliminated. By solving these integral equations and substituting
their solution, complemented by the boundary conditions, back
into Green's formula:
 91

lII(p) = 2~ Ic III' (q)loglq-pldq - 2~ Ic lII(q)log' Iq-pldq,

P E D, (36)

we may obtain the value of III at any point of the domain.

Without entering into a detailed theoretical analysis, we

note here that for a finite domain D, the general Robin problem
defined by condition (35) has a unique solution (Kellogg, 1929;
Tsuji, 1959) provided that a is not identically equal to zero and
that the product ab is never positive on C. The corresponding
integral equations have a unique solution provided that the
boundary C or, in the case of a multiply-connected domain, the
outer boundary Co is not a so-called r-contour. In this latter
case, the equation

Ic o~(q)loglq-pldq = 0, P ~ CO'

has a non-trivial solution ~, which, as a source density,

generates a logarithmic potential with the constant value zero
everywhere inside Co' In particular, this potential is zero on
any internal boundaries, whence equation (37) is valid not only
on Co but for all p E C. Hence, when solving an interior
Dirichlet problem for example, an arbitrary multiple of ~ (on CO)
may be added to the solution III' of equation (3). In practice,
since there is only one r-contour in any set of geometrically
similar contours (Jaswon, 1963), this case may be completely
avoided by making a simple change of scale. Alternatively the
formulation may be modified slightly as described by Christiansen
(1975) and Wendland (1980).

DISCRETISATION

The method outlined above may be implemented numerically by

dividing the boundary C into N intervals I , j = 1,2, .•• ,N, in
each of which III and III' are approximated byjconstants. Denoting
these constants by

III j and 6~, j = 1,2, ••• ,N, (38)

and applying equation (3) at one nodal point qi in each boundary

interval Ii' we obtain
N N

L6'. J.loglq-q.ldq - L6. f.IOg' Iq-q.ldq -

j= 1 J J ~ j=1 J J ~
i 1,2, ••. ,N. (39)
92

From these equations we may eliminate one of the constants

(38) in each interval by applying the relevant boundary condition
at the corresponding nodal point. In particular, when the Robin
boundary condition (35) is applicable, we set

fl = £a - E.
a fl' (40)
when a is greater in magnitude than b at the nodal point and
fl' = £ - .! fl (41)
b b
otherwise. We thus obtain a system of N simultaneous linear
algebraic equations (in N unknowns) whose solution provides, via
equation (36) and the boundary data, the approximation
N N
-
fl(p)
1
= 2'7t' l/j Jloglq-pldq -
\" 1
2'7t'
\"
j~/j flOg' Iq-pldq (42)

to fl(p) at any point p E D.

In order to evaluate the coefficients in equations (39) and
(42), we approximate each interval of C by the two chords which
join its end-points to the nodal point within it. Then all the
integrations can be carried out analytically (Symm and Pitfield,
1974; Jaswon and Symm,1977).
For example, if AB is one chord of the interval I. of the
boundary C, the contribution from AB to the coefficientJof flj in
expression (42) is
r cos ()( (log r - log s) + h (log s - 1) + r jt.. sinO<., (43)
where h denotes the length of AB, rand s are the lengths of pA
and pB respectively and ()( and ~ are the angles BAp and BpA
respectively (Figure 1). In particular, we thus obtain

Sjloglqj-qldq = Iqj-qj_I(loglqj-qj_1 - 1) +
Iqj-qj+ I (loglqj-qj+1 - 1) (44)
for the case when i = j in equations (39).
 93

Figure 1. Geometry for analytic integration

The contribution to the coefficient of ~ in expression

(42) is simply - ~, from an application of thejCaUChy-Riemann
equations as in equations (12). Correspondingly, in equations
(39), 1( is replaced by the "internal" angle Sl(q ) of an
approximation to the boundary C by a polygon or pblYgOns. (For a
multiply-connected domain with outer boundary Co and m internal
boundaries, there are m + 1 such polygons.)

In the interior Neumann problem, where the solution may be

made unique by imposing an appropriate auxiliary condition such
as

Ic o~(q)dq = 0, (45)

where Co is the outer boundary of the domain as above, equations

(39) are supplemented by the discrete form
N
~6ohj
j=1 J
= 0, (46)

where NO is the number of intervals on the outer boundary C and

each h denotes interval length measured on the correspondiRg
approximating polygon. In this case, the resulting N + 1
equations are solved in the least-squares sense.

In exterior problems, when ~ is required to be bounded at

infinity, equations (39) are modified by the addition of a
constant.k to the left-hand side. In the case of a Neumann
problem the value of this constant is prescribed. Otherwise k is
an extra unknown whose value may be obtained, as part of the
boundary solution, by adding an extra equation
N

I 6 'hJ
j=1
j o =0 (47)
 94

to the system. Correspondingly, for the approximation of 0(p), a

term k/2~ is added to expression (42).
The method of discretisation described here is the basis of
some general-purpose computer programs written at NPL (Symm and
Pitfield, 1974; Symm, 1980). In these programs, the solution of
the simultaneous linear algebraic equations is obtained by means
of library routines which determine the unique solution of the
square non-singular system, in the general case, or the unique
least squares solution of the rectangular system, in the interior
Neumann case, by the method of Peters and Wilkinson (1970). In
the Robin problem, the boundary solution is completed by a
further application, at each nodal point, of equation (40) or
(41) as appropriate. Also the boundary of the domain is scaled
down so that its maximum diameter is not greater than unity, this
being sufficient to ensure that there is no possibility of
non-uniqueness due to C, or CO' being a r-contour.

5 APPLICATIONS
The method described above has been successfully applied to
a variety of practical problems including measurement of crack
lengths via electrical potentials (McCartney et al., 1977),
capaCitance calculations (Symm, 1981) and determination of the
temperature distribution in a turbine blade (Symm, 1982). The
first two of these problems involved mixed Dirichlet and Neumann
boundary conditions, while the third application required the
solution of a Robin problem in a multiply-connected domain.
In the example which follows, the method is applied to a
typical heat conduction problem - a mixed boundary value problem
in a simply-connected domain. This problem is chosen particularly
to illustrate the effect of a boundary singularity.

Example 2: To determine the temperature 0, which satisfies

Laplace's equation, in the rectangular domain, shown in Figure 2,
bounded by the lines
C: x = y, y = 7, x =- 7 and y = 0, (48)

given the boundary conditions

o = 1000' on the side PQ, where x = 7, }

& = 500 on SO, where x < 0, y = 0, (49)
0' = 0 ~n the remainder of C.
 95

R.----------------------------,Q

D c

S'---------I---------'p~
o x
Figure 2. Domain of Example 2

This problem has no simple explicit solution but the

numerical solution of Whiteman and Papamichael (1971), obtained
by conformal transformation methods, is essentially analytic.
This solution has a boundary singularity, in the form of an
infinite discontinuity in the normal derivative 0' at the origin.

Numerical results at three pOints near the origin, for three

uniform subdivisions of the boundary, are shown in Table 1, where
they may be compared with the "analytic" solution.

Table 1 : Temperature 0 in rectangle (h constant)

x y N=12 N=24 N=48 Anal.

-1.0 1.0 580.93 569.06 565.22 561.95

0.0 1.0 641. 33 621. 35 611.86 603.77
1.0 1.0 706.42 685.26 677.40 669.54

It is apparent that these results converge rather slowly as

N increases and this slowness may be attributed to the presence
of the boundary singularity. Since 0'(p) tends to infinity as p
approaches the origin along the negative x-axis (see below), its
approximation by piecewise constant values on equal intervals is
clearly. inaccurate in this region.

One way of overcoming this difficulty, to some extent, is

simply to grade the boundary intervals in an appropriate manner
(Symm, 1980), and the first two columns of Table 2 show (for
N = 48) how effective this can be. The results in column (1)
correspond to only a slight modification of the uniform
96

subdivision, with the 8 equal intervals on the negative x-axis SO

replaced by 8 graded intervals - decreasing in length towards the
singularity at the origin. The results in column (2) correspond
to a similar subdivision with 16 graded intervals on SO, 12 equal
intervals on OP and 4, 8 and 8 equal intervals respectively on
the sides PQ, QR and RS.

Table 2: Temperature ~ in rectangle (N = 48)

x y (1) (2) (3) Anal.

-1.0 1.0 5~.86 562.11 561.93 561.95

0.0 1.0 605.93 604.50 603.16 603.11
1.0 1.0 610.85 669.84 669.54 669.54

Alternatively, the singular behaviour of the solution at the

origin can be incorporated into the integral equation formulation
of the problem (Symm, 1913) as outlined below. This method yields
our most accurate results for this example and these are shown in
column (3) of Table 2.

BOUNDARY SINGULARITIES

In Example 2, it follows from the (local) boundary

conditions that in the immediate neighbourhood of the origin 0:

where r,e are polar coordinates, i.e.

r = Ipl, 9 = arg(p), (51)

and a 1 , a 2 , .•• are constants. Thus, on the negative x-axis SO:

~'(p) = ~ a 1r- 1/2 - t a2r 1/2 + ••• , (52)

whence, unless a 1 = 0, ~'(p) tends to infinity as p approaches

the origin.

Let us now define a function u such that

~(p) = u(p) + a,r 1/2 cos(9/2) + a2r3/2cos(39/2),

p e D = D + C. (53)

Then u satisfies Laplace's equation in D subject to the following

boundary conditions on C:
 97

u' =0 on OP,
u = '000 - a,r'/2cos(9/2) - a2r3/2cos(39/2) on PQ,
u' t
= a,r-'/2 sin (9/2) - i a 2r'/2sin (9/2) on QR, (54)
u' = - ~ a,r-'/2coS(9/2) - i a 2r'/2cos(9/2) on RS,

u = 500 on so.

If we then apply Green's boundary formula (3), in its

discretised form (39), to u instead of to 0, and we introduce
approximations a,
and !2 to a, and a 2 respectively, we obtain N
simultaneous linear equations in N + 2 unknowns, including !,
and !2.
Now, although u satisfies the same boundary conditions as 0
on the x-axis, comparison of equations (50) and (53) shows that u
has no singularity at the origin. Indeed, u is approximately
constant (500) in the neighbourhood of the origin. Thus we may
eliminate two of our N + 2 unknowns by setting

u, = 500, uN = 0, (55)
in the first and last intervals of the boundary C, starting from
the origin and describing the contour in an anti-clockwise
direction. The N equations may then be solved and an
approximation U to u, analogous to the approximation (42) to 0,
obtained at any point of the domain. The required solution 0 is
then approximated by

0(p) = U(p) + !,r

,ncos(9/2) 3n cos(39/2),
+ !2r p ~ D. (56)
The final results in Table 2 were obtained in this way, with a
uniform subdivision of the boundary.

This particular example illustrates a general technique

(Papamichael and Symm, '975) for the treatment of boundary
singularities and discontinuities. To conclude this lecture we
now describe briefly another technique, based upon Green's
boundary formula, for the solution of problems in composite
domains.
98

7 COMPOSITE DOMAINS

We consider first the conduction of heat through two

materials, with thermal resistivities P, and P2 , occupying
domains D, and D2 whose boundaries C, and C2 have a section
C'2 in common. Here the temperature 0 satisfies Laplace's
equation in each of the domains D, and D2 , though not generally
on the interface C'2'
Given either 0 or 0' on the boundary C of the composite
domain D = D, + D2 , we know neither 0 nor 0' on the interface.
However, if 0, and O2 denote the temperatures in D, and D2
respectively, then

(57)
where

(58)

In this case, dividing C, and C2 into N, and N2 intervals

respectively, with the same N'2 intervals on Cl2 in each case, we
apply Green's boundary formula (3), as discret1sed above (39),
to the harmonic functions 0, and O2 in the two doma~ns. We thus
obtain N, + N2 simultaneous linear equations in N, + N2 + N'2
unknowns.

The excess of unknowns over equations is eliminated by

applying the interface conditions (57), at the relevant nodal
points, and the resulting N, + N2 linear algebraic equations are
then solved directly. Finally, the temperature 0 (= 0, or O2 ) may
be computed at any pOint in D by applying equation (42) in D,
or D2 as appropriate.

In general, if there are more than two materials, we proceed

in a similar manner, obtaining and solving a system of linear
algebraic equations whose coefficient matrix has a particular
form of block structure. Corresponding to each material, there is
a block of non-zero coefficients on the diagonal and for any two
adjacent materials there is a non-zero off-diagonal coupling
block of 2M columns, where M is the number of nodal points on the
interface between them. All other coefficients are zero.

This method has been used to compute the internal thermal

resistance of various electricity cables of uniform cross-section
with two or three layers of insulation (Symm, 1977). The same
technique may also be used with advantage in the solution of any
problem in a long thin domain of a single material, by
partitioning such a domain into two or more compact regions.
 99

8 CONCLUSION

In this lecture, we have introduced the simplest form of

indirect boundary element method for the solution of Laplace's
equation in two dimensions, based upon the simple-layer
logarithmic potential representation with a piecewise constant
approximation to the source density. We have applied this method
to a problem of fluid flow for which this representation is
particularly suitable in view of the need to compute first
derivatives of the solution.

We have also illustrated the versatility of the direct

boundary element method based upon Green's boundary formula
through applications to problems of heat conduction. Though again
only the simplest numerical implementation of the method has been
described, we note that more accurate numerical results may be
obtained from the same formulation by using more accurate
representations for 0 and 0' than the piecewise constant
approximations (38). In particular, by introducing shape
functions as used in finite element methods, we may obtain a
hierarchy of boundary element methods (Brebbia, 1978; Brebbia and
Walker, 1980) based upon the integral equation formulation used
above. Methods using linear and quadratic elements are included
in the program package BEASY described by Danson (1982).

REFERENCES

Brebbia, C.A. (1978) The Boundary Element Method for

Engineers. Pentech Press, London.

Brebbia, C.A. and Walker, S. (1980) Boundary Element Techniques

in Engineering. Newnes-Butterworths, London.

Christiansen, S. (1975) Integral equations without a unique

solution can be made useful for solving some plane harmonic
problems. J. Inst. Maths. Applics., ~, pp. 143-159.

Danson, D.J. (1982) BEASY - A boundary element analysis

system. In "Boundary Element Methods in Engineering", edited by
C.A.Brebbia, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 557-575.

Jaswon, M.A. (1963) Integral equation methods in potential

theory. I. Proc. Roy. Soc. (A), 275, pp. 23-32.
Jaswon, M.A. and Symm, G.T. (1977) Integral Equation Methods in
Potential Theory and Elastostatics. Academic Press, London.

Kellogg, O.D. (1929) Foundations of Potential Theory.

Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
100

McCartney, L.N., Irving, P.E., Symm, G.T., Cooper, P.M. and

Kurzfeld, A. (1977) Measurement of crack lengths in compact
tension and single edge notch specimens using a new electrical
potential calibration. NPL Report DMA(B)3.

Papamichael, N. and Symm, G.T. (1975) Numerical techniques for

two-dimensional Laplacian problems. Compo Methods Appl. Mech.
Eng., ~, pp. 175-194.
Peters, G. and Wilkinson, J.H. (1970) The least squares problem
and pseudo-inverses. Computer J., 1}, 3, pp. 309-316.
Symm, G.T. (1973) Treatment of singularities in the solution of
Laplace's equation by an integral equation method. NPL Report
NAC 31.

Symm, G.T. (1977) Practical applications of an integral

equation method for the solution of Laplace's equation. Comput.
Electr. Eng., .!!., pp. 167-170.

Symm, G.T. (1980) The Robin problem for Laplace's equation.

NPL Report DNACS 32/80.

Symm, G.T. (1981) Two methods for computing the capacitance of

a quadrilateral. Appl. Math. Modelling, 2, pp. 428-431.

Symm, G.T. (1982) The Robin problem in a multiply-connected

domain. In "Boundary Element Methods in Engineering", edited by
C.A.Brebbia, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 89-100.

Symm, G.T. and Pit field , R.A. (1974) Solution of Laplace's

equation in two dimensions. NPL Report NAC 44.

Tsuji, M. (1959) Potential Theory in Modern Function Theory.

Maruzen, Tokyo.

Wendland, W.L. (1980) On Galerkin collocation methods for

integral equations of elliptic boundary value problems. In
"Numerical Treatment of Integral Equations", edited by J.Albrecht
and L.Collatz, Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, pp. 244-275.

Whiteman, J.R. and Papamichael, N. (1971) Numerical solution of

two dimensional harmonic boundary problems containing
singularities by conformal transformation methods. Brune!
University Department of Mathematics Report TR/2.
 Chapter 6

THREE-DIMENSIONAL AND AXISYMMETRIC POTENTIAL PROBLEMS

George T. Symm
National Physioal Laboratory, Teddington, U.K.

1 INTRODUCTION

In this leoture we oonsider briefly the solution of

Laplaoe's equation in three dimensions:

(1)

by methods analogous to those applied to two-dimensional problems

in the preoeding leoture. In partioular, we disouss the
applioation of the simple-layer Newtonian potential to the
Diriohlet problem.
Numerioal implementations of the latter formulation are
desoribed in detail for general domains and for axisymmetrio
problems, i.e. problems in whioh both domain and boundary
oonditions have rotational symmetry. Results of example
oaloulations of eleotrostatio oapaoitanoe are presented in eaoh
oase.

2 THE NEWTONIAN POTENTIAL

For equation (1), the "free-spaoe Green's funotion", whioh

oorresponds to loglp-ql in two dimensions, is 1/Ip-ql, whenoe,
oorresponding to the simple-layer logarithmio potential, we have
the Newtonian potential (Kellogg, 1929):

101
 102

!6(p) = Js
cr(q)
- - dq, P E D,
Iq-pl
(2)

where D is now a three-dimensional domain bounded internally or

externally by a surface S.

The potential (2), like its two-dimensional counterpart, is

continuous across the boundary of the domain D, so that

1(]"'
S Iq-pl
(q) dq --
!6(p), pES. (3)

Therefore, if we seek the solution 16 of a Dirichlet problem

(given 16 on S) in the form of a Newtonian potential (2), we
obtain an integral equation of the first kind (3) for the
relevant source densi ty r:r •

For sufficiently smooth Sand 16, this equation has a unique

solution r:r(q), q E S, (Jaswon and Symm, 1977), and substitution
of this solution back into equation (2) yields the unique
solution of the Dirichlet problem at any point p E D.

We note here that there is no three-dimensional equivalent

of the r -contour, which needed special attention in two
dimensions, and that if D is an infinite domain, bounded
internally by the surface S, the solution has the asymptotic
behaviour

!6(p) = [Is cr(q)dq]lpl-1 + 0(lpl-2) as Ipl -+ 00. (4 )

3 DISCRETISATION

In general, equation (3) must be solved numerically and for

this purpose we subdivide the boundary surface S into N sections
(elements) S., j = 1,2, .•• ,N, in each of which we introduce an
appropriate Japproximation for r:r. Here, in particular, we
approximate r:r by a constant in each element, as we did in two
dimensions. Then, if we denote these constants by

OJ, j = 1,2, ... ,N, (5)

the integral equation (3), applied at one "nodal" point qi in
each boundary section Si' is approximated by
N
IOjSjIQ-qil-1dq = !6(Qi)' i = 1,2, ... ,N, (6)
j=~
 103

where Jj denotes integration over the section Sj of S.

Solution of this set of simultaneous linear algebraic
equations leads to the approximation

-
N
e(p) = L~ Jj lq-pl-1 dq , P E D,
j=1 J

to e(p) as given by equation (2).

With regard to the evaluation of the integrals in equations

(6) and (7), we consider first a general domain and then the
particular case of an axisymmetric domain with axisymmetric
boundary conditions.

4 GENERAL DOMAIN

For a general three-dimensional domain D, the boundary

surface S may be divided into, or approximated by, plane
polygonal elements. If S is such an element and if p ~ S., we
approximate the coefficientjof OJ
in equation (7) by meansJof
the centroid rule:

(8)

where Aj is the area and qj is the centroid of the element Sj'

When pES., the coefficient may be evaluated analytically

(Laskar, 1971).J For any particular polygon, the appropriate
formula is derived from the result of integration over a plane
triangle T with vertex at p, i.e.
('
JT 1q - pl
-1
dq = 2 cA log[aa + b + c
+ b _ c], (9)

where A is the area of the triangle and the sides of the triangle
have lengths a, band c, with the latter opposite to the vertex
p. Thus, if P is at the centre of a square element Sj of side h,
for example, it follows that

(10)

Example 1: To determine the electrostatic capacitance of a unit

cube.
The capacitance of a single charged conducting surface S may
be defined as the total charge on that surface when it is at unit
potential. Since the asymptotic behaviour (4) of the Newtonian
104

potential (2) is consistent with that of an electrostatic

potential, the source density 0- may be identified with the
electrostatic charge. The required capacitance is therefore

C= Is 0- (q)dq, ( 11)

where S is the surface of the unit cube and

I
S
0- (q)
- - dq
Iq-pl
= 1, P € S. (12)

To solve this equation numerically, we discretise it as

above (equ~tions (6) with 0 = 1), dividing each face of the
cube into m equal square sections, where m is an odd positive
integer. With this subdivision, the centroid of each face is a 2
nodal pOint and the total"number of surface elements is N = 6m
From the symmetry of the problem, the number of equations and
unknowns is reduced from N to n = (m + l)(m + 3)/8.

The coefficients in equations (6) in this case are

evaluated using formula (8) for p = qi' i ~ j, and formula (10)
with h = 11m when p = qj'
Finally, the solution of these equations yields the
approximation
N
C= L
j=l J
0"'. Aj

to the capacitance C.
Table 1 shows results obtained by Laskar (1974) using this
method, which is essentially the same as the "method of subareas"
of Reitan and Higgins (1951).

Table 1: Capacitance of a unit cube

N n C

150 6 0.6538
294 10 0.6568
486 15 0.6582
726 21 0.6590
1014 28 0.6595
1350 36 0.6598
1734 45 0.6600
2166 55 0.6602
2646 66 0.6603
 105

The results in Table 1 may be compared with the value 0.6607

obtained (Noble, 1971) by dividing each face of the cube into
rectangles of graded sizes and integrating the coefficients in
equations (6) analytically.

Similar results have also been obtained for the capacitance

of various flat plates by Reitan and Higgins (1956), Noble
(1971), Birtles et al. (1973) and Laskar (1974).

5 AXISYMMETRIC PROBLEMS

For an axisymmetric domain with axisymmetric boundary

conditions, the solution ~ of equation (3) must itself be
axisymmetric, i.e. independent of the angular coordinate e of a
system of cylindrical coordinates (r,e,z) in which the z-axis
corresponds to the axis of revolution. It follows that if the
boundary S of the domain cuts the plane e = 0 in a contour C,
then S may be divided into, or approximated by, ring-shaped
elements obtained by rotating chords of C around the z-axis.

In this case, a typical element S. (on which ~ is

approximated by the constant ~.) takesJthe form of a frustum of
a cone. If the generating chordJis parallel to the z-axis, this
cone becomes a cylinder, and if the chord is orthogonal to the
z-axis the element is a circular disc or annulus.

To evaluate the coefficient of OJ in equation (7), viz.

Ij(p) = fjlq-PI-1dq, (14)

for such an element, we let p = (R,O,Z), in our cylindrical

coordinates, with no loss of generality. Then, if h is the length
of the generating chord and s is the distance of Q = (r,e,z) from
one end of this chord, for the relevant value of e, we have

Ij(p) = J:[J:~(Z_Z)2 + (r+R)2 - 4rR cos 2 (e/2)}-1/2rd8 ]dS.

(15)

Defining
k 2 = 4rR/{(z_Z)2 + (r+R)2} (16)

and carrying out the integration with respect to e analytically,

we thus obtain

Ij{P) = 2R- 1/2 I:kr 1/2 K(k)dS, (17)

106

where K is the complete elliptic integral of the first kind:

K(k) = Jro7r/2 (1 - k 2 sin 2u)-1/2 du, 0 ~ k < 1. (18 )

In practice, the latter integral may be approximated, with

sufficient accuracy for our purposes, by

K(k) = P(x) - Q(x) log x; x = 1 _ k2, (19 )

where P(x) and Q(x) are second order polynomials (Hastings,

1955). Then the integral in expression (17) may be evaluated by
numerical quadrature. For example, dividing the generating chord
into m equal intervals and applying the mid-ordinate rule, we
obtain
m
Ij(P) - 2R
-1/2 h
mt~1[kr
'\ 112
K(k)]s=(t_1/2)h/m· (20)

It may be observed from equation (19) that K has a

logarithmic singularity as x -+ 0 (k -+ 1), as a consequence of
which the approximation (20) becomes inaccurate when the field
point p lies close to the element Sj. In this case therefore,
when p lies within the distance h of the nodal point q., at the
mid-point of the generating chord in the plane e = O,J we
evaluate the integral Ij(p) in two parts as follows.

We treat a section - e < e < e of element S. as a plane

rectangle, of dimensions h by 2er(q.), using the Janaly tic result
that the potential at perpendicularJdistance d above a corner of
a rectangle (of uniform unit source density) of dimensions a by b
is

2 2 2 1/2 2 2 2 1/2
a 10g[b+(a +b +d) ] + b 10g[a+(a +b +d) ]
(a 2+d 2 ) 1/2 (b2+d2) 1/2
-1 [ ab ] (21)
- d tan 2 2 2 112 •
d(a +b +d )

In particular, when p = qj' we use the analytic formula

2 2 1/2 2 2 1/2
4{a log[b+(a :b) ] + b log[a+(a ~b) ]} (22)

for the potential at the centre of a rectangle of dimensions 2a

by 2b. This formula, which follows immediately from formula (21),
may also be derived from result (·9).
 107

The integral over the remainder of Sj is obtained by

subtracting the integral

Ie(p) = J
'rr/2

'Tr/2-e
(1 - k
2 2
sin u)-
112
du (23)

from each elliptic integral K in the quadrature formula (20). For

small e,

(24 )

which, for k near unity, may be further approximated by

0.5 log x

- ~ [x/4 + x2 /16] log x; (25)

In the latter case, when I (p) is subtracted from K, the term

- 0.5 log x is cancelled oUt by a corresponding term in
expression (19) for K, and when k = 1 (x = 0) the only other
contribution from (25) is log e from the first term. For k near
zero, equation (24) yields a further approximation:

which is applicable when the field point p lies close to the

z-axis.
This formulation is the basis of a library program (Mautz
and Harrington, 1970) in which the parameter m in the quadrature
rule (20) is varied (between 5 and 30) according to the distance
of the field point p from the nodal point q., while the angle e
is taken to be 1r/40. We now describe an J application of this
program to a capacitance problem involving infinite boundaries.

Example 2: To find the capacitance of a length L, not necessarily

uniform , of an infinite coaxial line, given that the line is
uniform outside L.

Let the outer conductor of this line be earthed (6 = 0) and

let the inner conductor be at unit potential (6 = 1). Then,
assuming that L is sufficiently long, relative to any
non-uniformity within it, the total charge on L will be zero and
the capacitance may be defined as the charge on the inner
conductor L1 , viz.
108

c = fL cr (q)dq, (27)
1

or as the absolute value of the corresponding negative charge on

the outer conductor LO' viz.

c = - fL ~ (q)dq. (28)
o
To obtain the charge distribution ~ on either conductor, we
must consider the potential problem for the infinite line as a
whole. However, for practical reasons, we truncate this line at
some distance T beyond each end of L and let So and S1 denote the
outer and inner conductors of the truncated line of length
L + 2T.

Provided that TIL is sufficiently large, it may be assumed

that the charge distribution on L, corresponding to potential
values 0 and 1 on So and S, respectively, is essentially the
same as that for the infinite line.

Letting S = So + S1' we may then apply the method described

above. Since for an infinite uniform line the charge density on
each conductor is constant, the surface S, outside L, may be
divided into cylinders of rapidly increasing length. In this way
T can be made sufficiently large without necessitating a
particularly large value for N in the discrete equations (6).

From the solution of the latter equations, we obtain two

approximations to the required capacitance C. From equation (27),
we have

C+ = L OJ + Aj' (29)

where the summation extends over the elements of L1 , where 0- is

positive as indicated by the + sign. Similarly, from equation
(28), we have

C- =- L-OJ Aj' (30)

where the summation extends over the elements of LO' where cr is

negative.

The average of these two values provides an approximation C

to the capacitance C in any particular case and the difference
between them gives some indication of its accuracy.

Table 2 shows typical results for a length L = 2 cm of a

line with a stepped inner conductor, with radius dropping from
0.635 cm to 0.413715 cm at the centre of L. The outer conductor
 109

has radius 0.9525 cm throughout and the results are given in

picofarads (practical units obtained by multiplying the
capacitance values 12in the formulation above by 47r~ where
e = 8.85419 x 10 - is the permittivity of air in farad/metre).
Table 2: Capacitance of a stepped line

N NO N1 C+ C- C

30 4 6 2.1134 2.1129 2.113

44 8 12 2.1247 2.1239 2.124
68 16 24 2.1292 2.1282 2.129
94 16 48 2.1307 2.1309 2.131

In this table, NO and N1 represent the numbers of surface

elements on LO and L1 , and hence the numbers of terms in the
series (30) and (29), respectively. Further details of this
example, and others of a similar nature, are presented elsewhere
(Symm, 1978). Another application of the program of Mautz and
Harrington (1970), with further details of the numerical
integration, is described by Jaswon and Symm (1977).

CONCLUSION

In this lecture we have introduced simple boundary element

methods for three-dimensional and axisymmetric boundary value
problems of the Dirichlet type. Examples of the solution of
three-dimensional Neumann problems using constant elements
(piecewise constant approximations) are described by Jaswon and
Symm (1 977 ) .

Higher order elements for three-dimensional potential

problems are discussed by Brebbia and Walker (1980) and by
Banerjee and Butterfield (1981), with particular reference to
potential flow. The latter include a section on axisymmetric
problems and these are also considered in some detail by Wrobel
and Brebbia (1980) and by Yoshikawa and Tanaka (1982).

REFERENCES

Banerjee, P.K. and Butterfield, R. (1981) Boundary Element

Methods in Engineering Science. McGraW-Hill, L?ndon.

Birtles, A.B., Mayo, B.J. and Bennett, A.W. (1973) Computer

techniques for solving 3-dimensional electron-optics and
capacitance problems. Proc. lEE, 20, 2, pp. 213-220.
110

Brebbia, C.A. and Walker, S. (1980) Boundary Element Techniques

in Engineering. Newnes-Butterworths, London.
Hastings, C., Jr. (1955) Approximations for Digital Computers.
Princeton University Press.

Jaswon, M.A. and Symm, G.T. (1977) Integral Equation Methods in

Potential Theory and Elastostatics. Academic Press, London.

Kellogg, O.D. (1929) Foundations of Potential Theory.

Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

Laskar, S.K. (1971) Solutions of certain boundary integral

equations in potential theory. Ph.D. Thesis, The City
University, London.

Laskar, S.K. (1974) A numerical approach to calculate capacity

of conductors. Unpublished report, Department of Mathematics,
Assam Engineering College, Gauhati.

Mautz, J.R. and Harrington, R.F. (1970) Computation of

rotationally symmetric potentials. Proc. lEE, 111, 4,
pp. 850-852.

Noble, B. (1971) Some applications of the numerical solution of

integral equations to boundary value problems. In "Conference on
Applications of Numerical Analysis", edited by J.Ll.Morris,
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 137-154.

Reitan, D.K. and Higgins, T.J. (1951) Calculation of the

capacitance of a cube by the method of subareas. J. Appl. Phys.,
22, pp. 223-226.
Reitan, D.K. and Higgins, T.J. (1956) Accurate determination of
the capacitance of a thin rectangular plate. AlEE Trans., 75, 1,
pp. 761-766.

Symm, G.T. (1978) Capacitance of coaxial lines with steps and

tapers. In "Recent Advances in Boundary Element Methods", edited
by C.A.Brebbia, Pentech Press, London, pp. 59-67.

Wrobel, L.C. and Brebbia, C.A. (1980) Axisymmetric potential

problems. In "New Developments in Boundary Element Methods",
edited by C.A.Brebbia, CML Publications, Southampton, pp. 77-89.

Yoshikawa, F. and Tanaka, M. (1982) Boundary elements in

axisymmetric potential problems. In "Boundary Element Methods in
Engineering", edited by C.A.Brebbia, Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
pp. 101-111.
Chapter 7

HEAT TRANSFER APPLICATIONS

H.L.G. Pina
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior
Tecnico, Lisbon, Portugal

1. INTRODUCTION

Before dealing with the application of the Boundary Element

Method (BEM) to heat transfer problems we shall summarize the
basic theory of heat conduction. It is known from experience
that heat flows from the hotter parts of a body to the cooler.
The mechanisms responsible for this phenomena are conduction,
radiation and convection. Since we are concerned in this paper
exclusively with solid bodies, convection only intervenes
through boundary conditions in solid-fluid interfaces.
Radiation is usually negligible, except eventually when setting
up boundary conditions.

The general theory of conduction in solids can be studied

in the classical reference Carslaw and Jaeger, 1959. The.basic
equations of heat conduction in solids can be obtained through
application of the law of balance of energy: the time rate
increase of internal energy of a body equals the mechanical
power plus the heat power.

In the cases we contemplate in this paper the mechanical

power is negligible when compared with the heat power, there-
fore we simply omit this term.

Denoting by u(x,t) the temperature field, a function of the

spatial coordinates x and the time t, by p(x) the specific
weight and c(x) the specific heat, by q(x,t) the heat flux, and
by r(x,t) the-heat sources term, the energy balance equation is
(see reference above),

pc
au
at = v.g + r (la)

The left-hand side of this equation represents the time

rate increase of internal energy of a unit volume of a rigid
solid. The first term in the right hand side represents the

111
112
heat flow by conduction into the unit volume and the second
term in the right hand side represents the heat generated by
sources in the unit volume. The above equation must be
supplemented with a constitutive relation for the heat flux q,
which in engineering applications is the well known Fourier's
law,

(lb)

where K is the thermal conductivity tensor. This tensor is the

most general linear relation between the heat flux vector and
the temperature gradient. It can in general be a function of
temperature and of the spatial coordinates. Using equation (lb)
in equation (la) we arrive at the general equation for heat
conduction in rigid bodies,

pc
au
at = v. (~ v u) + r. (2)

In this lecture we shall deal exclusively with steady state

problems. This means that the temperature is no longer function
of time and therefore equation (2) shall be replaced by
(3)

The boundary conditions arlslng in connection with heat

conduction problems are of the following types.

a) Prescribed boundary temperature or Dirichlet's boundary

condition:

on rl ' (4)
where u is a function giving the prescribed temperature and r l
denotes the part of the boundary r of the domain n where this
temperature is enforced.

b) Prescribed flux or Neumann's boundary condition.

(5)

where q is a function giving the prescribed flux and r2 is the

part of the boundary r of the domain n where this flux is
applied.

c) Convection on the boundary or Robin's boundary condition.

In practice it is very difficult to impose the flux, except

when this happens to be zero, that is, when we have complete
insulation. A more realistic boundary condition is to assume
some law for the transfer of heat from the surface of the body
to the surroundings. This is achieved by the sometimes called
Newton's law of cooling,
 113

(6a)

In this equation n represents the unit exterior normal to r, h

is the coefficient of surface heat transfer or convection
coefficient as it is also known, and u~ is the temperature of
the fluid surrounding the solid body. We shall replace
equation (6) by

on r3, (6b)

where a/an(.) is the derivative along the unit exterior normal

and where the meaning of a and e is obvious.

Some parts rl,r Z or r3 of r can be empty, but their union

must be r. Equation (3) and the appropriate boundary conditions
should yield a well posed problem.

The BEM can be viewed as cons'is ting fundamentally of two major

steps:
- transformation of the differential equations in the domain 0
into integral equations on the boundary r,
- discretization of these integral equations via finite elements
and subsequent solution by the collocation method.
This transformation is achieved through Green's second identity,

(7)

where V2 (.) represents the laplacian operator.

2. INTEGRAL EQUATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH STEADY HEAT CONDUCTION

PROBLEMS

In this section we shall demonstrate how we can transform the

differential equation (3) governing the steady heat conduction
in rigid solids into an integral equation. In order to simplify
the exposition we shall assume that the body is homogeneous and
isotropic and that the thermal conduc.tivity and the .heat sources
term do not depend on the temperature. These assumptions have
the objective to make equation (3) linear, thus yielding
V 2u+f=O inO. (8)
where we have put f = r/K. Now consider the following associate
equation
(9)

where 6(x) is the Dirac's distribution centered at point x. The

function-u*(~,~') is known as the fundamental solution of
114

Laplace's equation, and it represents the temperature field due

to a unit point source placed at position x. It is not difficult
to show that (see Brebbia, 1978 or Brebbia-and Walker, 1980)

u * (~,~') =- 211
1 tn r, in the two dimensional case, (lOa)

*
u (~,~')
1
411r ' in the three dimensional case, (lOb)

where r = Ix - x' I is the euclidean dis tance between points x and

x'. If we Identify in Green's second identity, equation (7), v
with u* we get

I01. (-u*f+ucS(~,~'»dOl.(~')= I/u *q-uq* )dr(~'), (l1a)

where we have employed q and q* defined by

au * au * (l1b)
q = an and q = an .

By the known properties of Dirac's distribution it. follows from

equation (lla) that (see Brebbia and Walker, 1980)

(12)

Here c(x) = 1 if x is an interior point of the domain 01.. If x

is a poInt on the boundary r c(x) stands for the solid angIe
subtended by r at x, measured in-units of the solid angle of
the shpere. For instance, for a smooth boundary point c = 1/2.
Let us consider equation (12) for interior points. Simplifying
somewhat the notation we can write

I I
u= OI.(u * £)dOl.+ r<u *q-uq * )dr. (13)

This expression, sometimes known as Green's third identity,

yields an integral representation for the temperature, that is,
once the boundary temperature and flux are known, this equation
allows the explicit computation of the temperature at any
interior point of the domain 01.. In order to understand fully
the meaning of this let us consider some special cases.

2.1 Dirichlet's problem

Suppose we want to determine the temperature u in a domain 01.

on the boundary r of which the temperature is prescribed and
given by the function ~. Furthermore admit that these are no
heat sources, as this case will be dealt with separately later
 115

on. Then, the differential equation governing the heat conduc-

tion is Laplace's equation
\7 2u = 0 in 0, (14a)
with the boundary condition
u=u on r. (14b)
The integral representation (13) gives now

u = r (u *q)dr -
J Jr (uq
- *)dr. (15)

Therefore, we could compute u at any interior point of 0 if we

knew the function q on r. The problem is how to find this
function. The answer is to take ~ in equation (12) to the
boundary by a limit process. We have then that, collecting all
known terms on the right hand side,

Jr (u \)dr = cu + Jr (uq *)dr. (16)

This is an integral equation of first kind for q whose Kernel

is u*, hence singular. We note that, this equation is on r,not
on o!

This equation has a unique solution except for a few

special cases. Christiansen, 1975, shows how to deal with these
cases. Once equation (16) is solved, i.e., q is determined it
can be substituted in equation (15) and the temperature at any
interior point can be evaluated explicitly by integration on
the boundary. The fact that, either in integral equation (16)
or in equation (15), only boundary integrals appear, results
in a reduction of the dimensionality of the problem. That is
one of the major advantages of the BEM. Another, which is also
built in the mentioned equations, is that boundary conditions
are naturally included in the formulation of the problem
requiring no special treatment.

As we have shown, the differential governing equation is

Laplace's equation. Therefore, all the theory developed for
potential problems is applicable. The classic reference for
potential theory is Kellog, 1967. Jaswon and Symm, 1977 stress
the applications and numerical techniques.

2.2 Neumann's problem

Suppose now that the flux is imposed on the boundary. The

governing differential equation and boundary condition are,

(lla)

q= q on r. (17b)
This function q cannot be arbitrary specified. To verify this
116

assertion we note that, by the divergence theorem, or Green's

first identity,

(18)

Then, introducing equation (lla) in the above expression, it

follows that q
must satisfy the relation

(19)

Physically, this means that, in order to have a steady state

solution, the net heat flow through the boundary must vanish.
This places restrictions on q for interior problems. Even so,
the solution u is determined within an arbitrary constant. To
fix the value of this constant it is usual to specify the
temperature at any boundary point or to force the temperature
field to obey

Jf u df = 0 • (20)

Now, coming back to Green's third identity, equation (13) and

a~lying it to a boundary point, we get

J J
cu + f (q *u)df = f (u *-q)df. (21)

This expression is an integral equation of the second kind for

u whose Kernel is q*. Again, the integral equation is on r,not
in n! Also we can see that in this case the Kernel is regular.
In fact, it can be proved with no difficulty that q* tends to
zero as r tends to zero.

2.3 The mixed problem

So far we have treated cases where the boundary conditions are

of one type only, Dirichlet's or Neumann's. Now we shall study
~he case where the temperature is specified in one part of the
boundary, fl and the flux on the other part, f 2 . The
differentia equation and boundary conditions governing the
problem are now,

in n, (22)

u= u on f land q = q on r 2 (23a,b)

Green's third identity, applied to the boundary, equation (12),

allows us to write that
-
cu= J (u * q-uq
- * )df l + J (u *-q-uq * )df 2 • (24)
fl f2
 117

We point out that the unknowns in this equation are the

restriction of u to r2 (since u is known on r l ) and the
restriction of q to rl (since q is known on r2). Introducing
the notation u2 and ql for these restrictions, respectively, and
rearranging terms suitably, equation (24) delivers the following
pair of integral equations,

for ~ € r 1 (25a)

- cu 2 + J (u*ql)dr l - J (q*u 2 )dr 2 = J (Uq*)drl-J (u*Q)dr 2 ,

r1 r2 r1 r2

(25b)

As we see, we have an integral equation of first kind with

singular Kernel when ~ belongs to r 1 and an integral equation
of second kind with regular Kernel when ~ belongs to r 2 • Both
u 2 and q1 are unknowns.

The solution of the mixed problem can present some

difficulties which result from the possible appearance of
singular behaviour of q. It has been observed that in the
neighborhood of the transition from r 1 to r 2' U'" r a with 0<01<1
and therefore q'" ra-1. It is then necessary to prove the
existence of the integrals in equations (25). The related
theory is very technical and we recommend Wendland, 1979, for
its development.

2.4 Robin's problem

Robin's problem requires nothing different from what we have

already said. However, for the sake of completeness we include
it here. As we have already seen, the differential equation and
boundary condition are

in n, (26a)

u + aq = ~ on r. (26b)

It is possible to prove that if a> 0, Robin's problempossesses

a unique solution. Recalling equation (12) again and using the
above boundary condition we have

Cll= J/u*q)dr- f/Uq*)dr= fru*q dr- J/~-a.q)q*dr= (27)

= c (~-a.q) . (28)
118
In this equation the unknown is the heat flux q. Collecting all
terms involving q in the left hand side we get

caq+ J/u*+ca q*)q df=cf3+ JfCf3q*df. (29)

This is an integral equation of the second kind with singular

Kernel.

3. NUMERICAL SOLUTION OF THE ASSOCIATED INTEGRAL EQUATIONS

After establishing the integral equations associated with the

several types of steady heat conduction problems we consider
now how to solve them numerically. For the sake of exemplificat
ion we choose the mixed problem since it contains both types of
boundary conditions, Dirichlet's and Neumann's. To simplify the
notation we introduce the following integral operators and
functions.

- For ~£ f I:

'&u= J (q*U)df 2 , (30a)

f2

~q= J (u*q)df l , (30b)

fl

b = cu+ J (uq *)df I - J (u *q)df 2· (30c)

fI f2

- For ~£ f 2:

1tu=-cu+f (q*U)df 2 , (3Ia)

f2

Cjq- J :(u*q)df l , (3Ib)

fl

b= J (iiq~)dfl- J (U*q)df 2 • (3lc)

rl f2

The operator 1'transforms functions over f2 into functions over

f, and the operator ~ transforms functions over r I into
functions over rw The symbol b stands for a function over f.
With this notation equations (25) can be written in the more
compact form,
(32)
 119

Our objective is now to solve this equation. We begin by

constructing a finite element discretization of the boundary r.
In general r cannot be modelled exactly by finite elements.
(One common exception is when r is made up of straight segments).
This means that we are lead to an approximate domain Q and
boundary r instead of the true domain n and boundary r. Figure
I depicts the situation. One immediate consequence of this fact
is the appearence of an error of geometric nature. Let us
represent the generic boundary element by re such that r is
made up of the union of all these elements. We represent the
total number of elements by E(r) and the total number of nodes
by N(r), or simply by E and N when no ambiguity should arise.
With this mesh we associated the finite element basis functions
~.(~),i=I, ... ,N. These functions are interpolating at the mesh
n6des, i.e., if ~. represents the coordinate of node j, we have
that J

~. (x.) = 0.. , (33)

~ -J ~J

where 0i' is Kronecker's delta. Now, one of the important

propert1~s of the function spaces generated by finite elements
is that they can approximate smooth functions. We then
substitute u2 and ql in equation (32) by finite element functions
belonging to the space generated by the Wi's. That is, we put

(34a)

(34b)

In these equations the symbol EI stands for summation over all

nodes on r l , and E2 for summation over all nodes on r 2 . As a
consequence of the interpolating property of functions ~.,

of u- 2 and -ql' respect1vely.

• a·
equation (33), the parameters U and ql' are the nodal ~alues
~.
To etermlne 1
these parameters we
proceed as follows. Expressions (34) are introduced in equation
u
(32). Since in general 2 and ql are not the exact solutions of
the problem, equation (32) is not satisfied and a residual
remains. The BEM then forces this residual to vanish at a
sufficient number of collocation points, thus obtaining a
system of algebraic linear equations whose unknowns are the
u
parameters 2 . and ql" Therefore the number and the position
of the colloc~tion potnts have to be such that this system is
uniquely solvable. It is usual in the BEM to make the
collocation nodes coincide with the mesh nodes.

After this procedure is completed we end up with a linear

system of algebraic equations which can be written inmatricial
notation as

(35a)
120

Figure 1 - Finite element modelling of domain n

and boundary r.

Figure 2 - Method of subregions

 121
or, using partioned matrices, as

{b} (35b)

We stress the fact that, contrarily to what happens with finite

diferences and conventional finite elements, the matrix of this
system is dense and presents no special structure. If we have
taken care in the selection of collocation nodes, then no
difficulty should arise in solving it and experience confirms
this to be the case.

To obtain the coefficients of matrices [H] and [G] , and

of the vector S we have to perform the integrations indicated
in equations (30) and (31). In these expressions there are two
kinds of integrals, regular and singular ones. In some cases it
is possible to perform these integrations analytically but in
general when curved elements are employed we have to resort to
numerical integration. Thus, the evaluation of integrals is a
critical task in the BEM and we shall have the opportunity to
deal with this topic more thoroughly in another lecture
(Numerical Integration and other Computational Techniques).

Examples of application of the BEM to heat transfer

problems can be found in Wrobel and Brebbia, 1979, Wrobel, 1981
and Heggs, Ingham and Mansoor, 1981.

4. POISSON EQUATION
When heat sources are present the differential equation
governing steady heat conduction is

(36)
The heat sources term f gives rise to an integral in the domain
n, as equation (13) shows. This integral presents a
complication and we now review the methods to deal with this
added complexity.

4.1 Reduction of Poisson's equation to Laplace's equation

This is obviously the best approach, provided it is possible.
Suppose we know a particular solution of equation (36), that
is, we know some function v obeying (36) but not necessarily
the boundary conditions of the problem. Suppose, for the sake
of definiteness, that we are dealing with a Dirichlet's
problem,

o in n, (37a)

u=u in r. (37b)
122
The particular solution v obeys, by definition,

in o. (38)

Making the following change of variables

w=u-v, (39)

equations (37) are transformed into

in 0, (40a)

w=w with w=u-v on r. (40b)

Thus we are back to a Laplace's equation. This approach depends

on being able to find a particular solution v to Poisson's
equation. When f is simple, say, a constant, this is not a
difficult task. However, for complicated f the search for
particular solution is a problem in itself, so this approach
is not a general one.

4.2 The case of harmonic heat sources

A very important case is when the heat source term is harmonic,

i.e., obeys Laplace's equation. We shall see that it is then
possible to transform the domain integral into a boundary one,
thus keeping in line with the spirit of the BEM. If f is
harmonic, then Green's second identity, allows one to write, for
any function v, that

(41)

Now choosing v to satisfy the equation

"{2v m *
u , (42)

we conclude that the domain integral in equation (13) can be

replaced by a boundary one, as follows,

J
-. (u *f)dO=
.0
fr (v -afan - f ~~)dr. (43)

Function v is not difficult to find. We present here the final

expression,

v =-...!:...
8'1[
r2 (R.nr-l) for the two dimensional case, (44a)
1
v -r for the three dimensional case. (44b)
411
Then if the heat sources term happens to be harmonic the
 123

procedure presented transforms the differential problem into a

pure boundary integral problem.

4.3 Domain integrals

In the general case however the domain integral has to be

evaluated numerically. This is done by discretizing the domain
o into finite elements. Since these finite elements are created
for the sole purpose of integrating numerically the domain
integral, they do not add new unknowns to the problem, i.e.,
the unknowns still refer only to the boundary. For this reason
some authors prefer to employ the designation of cells for
these finite elements. Denoting the generic all by 0e we then
have that

10 (fu*)dO= l 10 (fu*)dO e , (45)

e
the summation extending to all cells in which the domain 0 was
divided.

We call attention to the fact that the integrand in

equation (45) contains the fundamental solution u* and has
therefore singularities. This is to be taken indue considerat-
ion in the numerical evaluation of the integral. This matter
will be considered in more detail in another lecture (Numerical
Integration and other Computational Techniques).

5. NONHOMOGENEOUS BODIES. METHOD OF SUBREGIONS

Everything we have said so far applies exclusively to

homogeneous bodies, i.e., bodies having constant thermal
conductivity. However, in many practical applications the
conductivity does change with position in a body. The BEM
depends critically on the knowledge of the fundamental solutions
and these have been deduced only for constant conductivity
media. One way to overcome this difficulty is to divide the
domain in several subdomains or subregions where the
conductivity can be assumed to be uniform. To exemplify we
consider a body divided in two subregions denoted by a 0a and
0b. The boundary is also divided in three parts, r l ,r 2 and
r 3 ,r 2 being the common boundary of the two regions (see Figure
2 for notation). For the sake of exemplification let us suppose
we are solving a Neumann's problem. Then, recalling equation
(32), we have that for subregion 0a'

(46a)

(46b)
124

where the subscript a refers .to subregion 0a' and [Hl2 1. for
instance. is the submatrix obtained by collocations it nodes
of r l • Similarly. for subregion ~ we can write

C~21{~}+ [~3]{~}_ [~21{q~}= {b~} • (47a)

[~2] {~} + [~3] {u~} _ [c~21 {q~} = {b~} (47b)

Now we impose the continuity of temperature and heat flux

across the common boundary r 2 •

and (48a,b)

Note the change of sign in the last equation due to the fact
that the exterior normals at r 2 of the two subregions point to
opposite directions. Introducing equations (48) in (46) and
(47) and rearranging conveniently we can present the final
system of equations in partioned matrix form as follows

Hll H12 _c l2 1 b al
a 0
a ua
a

H2l H22 _c 22 2 b a2
a a 0
a ua

(49)
0 ~2 ~3 Cb23 ub3 b2
b
32 2
0 ~2 ~3 Cb qa bb3

We notice that now the final system (49) exhibits some sparsity
which can be taken into account when programming this method.

6. ANISOTROPIC BODIES

We close this lecture by calling attention to the case of

anisotropic bodies. Fundamental solutions for the equation

'V. (~'Vu) + IS (~) =0 (50)

have been presented by Chang et al., 1973. Defining

R2 =r.Kr with !=~I_~ , (51)

these fundamental solutions are

-1/2
u* = - (det ~) (R.n R) /2Tr for the two dimensional case, (52a)
 125
u*" (det K) -1/2/ (411 R) for the three dimensional case. (52b)

Once in the possession of these formulas then everything

follows as before.

7. REFERENCES

C.A. BREBBIA, The Boundary Element Method for Engineers,

Pentech Press (1978).

C.A. BREBBIA and S. WALKER, Boundary Element Techniques in

Engineering, Newnes-Butterworths (1980).
H.S. CARSLAW and J.C. JAEGER, Conduction of Heat in Solids,
Oxford University Press (1959).

Y.D. CHANG, C.S. KANG and D.J. CHEN, The Use of Fundamental
Green's Functions for the Solution of Problems of Heat
Conduction in Anisotropic Media, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer,
16, 1905-1918 (1973).
S. CHRISTIANSEN, Integral Equation without a Unique Solution
can be made Useful for Solving some Plane Harmonic Problems,
J. Inst. Maths. Applies, ~, 143-159 (1975).

P.J. HEGGS, D.B. INGHAM and M. MANSOOR, Boundary Integral

Equation Analysis of Fin Assembly Heat Transfer, Numerical
Heat Transfer, ~, 285-301, (1981).
M.A. JASWON and G.T. SYMM, Integral Equation Methods in
Potential Theory and E1astostatics, Academic Press (1977).

O.D. KELLOG, Foundations of Potential Theory, Springer-Verlag

(1967) .
W.L. WENDLANDT and E. STEPHAN, Boundary Integral Methods for
Mixed Boundary Problems, Preprint. Nr. 523, Technische
Hochschu1e Darmstadt (1980).

L.C. WROBEL, Potential and Viscous Flow Problems Using the

Boundary Element Method, Ph.D. Thesis, university of
Southampton (1981).

L.C. WROBEL and C.A. BREBBIA, The Boundary Element Method for
Steady State and Transient Heat Conduction, in Numerical
Methods in Thermal Problems, R.W. Lewis & K. Morgan (eds.),
Proceedings of the First Conference, Pineridge Press (1979).
Chapter 8

NUMERICAL INTEGRATION AND OTHER COMPUTATIONAL TECHNIQUES

H.L.G. Pina

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior

Tecnico, Lisbon, Portugal.

1. INTRODUCTION

In this lecture we review the problems related to the computat

ion of the several types of integrals present in the BEM
context. Special emphasis is given to numerical integration
techniques. The main reasons for this approach lie in its
generality and in the fact that this is the only approach
possible with higher order isoparametric elements.

2. ISOPARAMETRIC ELEMENTS

The BEM requires that we are able to construct approximations

to a function u. This approximations are generally written in
the form
N
(1)

where the c.'s are parameters, ~. some basic functions of

simple form~and N is the number 5f such functions. If we chose
the basic functions to have the interpolatory property, i.e.,
if

~. (a.) = 6 •• , (2)
~ -J ~J

where 6ij is Kronecker's delta and §j are the coordinates of

some selected points (nodes) in the domain of interest, then
equation (1) can be replaced by
N
u(x) =L u. ljI.ix), with u.~-1
i=l ~ ~ -
=u(a.). (3)

The advantage of this expression is that the parameters arenow

the nodal values of u.

127
128

In the past, before the advent of finite elements the ~. 's

where usually polynomials or trigonometric functions. In Bne
dimensional problems this kind of functions eventually was
sufficient, but for two or three dimensional problems where
there is a richer variety of geometries such functions present
serious disadvantages. The answer to this difficulty was
provided by the FEM. The Key was to define the basic functions
~i piecewise. The procedure consists in the following major
steps:
- subdivision of the domain g where the functionu is defined
into subdomains of simple form, the finite elements.
- construction of functions ~i in each subdomain. This
functions are usually polynomials of low degree.
- assemblage of such piecewise defined functions into a global
function over the domain g.

One of the most elegant methods to construct those functions is

provided by the isoparametric elements which we now describe
briefly. For a complete treatment we refer to Zienkiewicz, 1971.
One of the major advantages of the isoparametric families of
finite elements is the capacity to model curved boundaries, a
facility of capital importance if we want to model complex
geometries typical of engineering problems.

2.1 One dimensional elements

The constant element - The simplest and historically the first to

be used with the BEM was the constant element. The boundary r
of a domain g was subdivided into E straight line segments and
within each segment u was approximated by a constant value u e •
Mathematically we have that

for xe: r . (4)

- e

The function u obtained by assembly of the u e ' s is discontinuous

as we cross from one element to the next.

As we have remarked the main advantage of this element is

simplicity, thus resulting in simpler programs. However, the
need for greater accuracy imposes the use of elements of higher
order.

The linear element - This element consists on a straight line

segment defined by its two extreme points. In this element we
interpolate linearly the function u using the extreme points
of the element as nodes.

The isoparametric technique consists in mapping each finite

element into a standard finite element and construct the
approximation to u there. The standard finite element in this
case is the segment (1-,1) on the real line on which we define
 129

~~--~----~--x
-1 o

Linear element

U1

Quadratic element

Figure 1 - One dimensional isoparametric elements

130

the interpolating functions

N1 (x) = ~ (l-x) , (Sa)

- =2
N2 (x) 1 (l+x).
- (5b)

The mapping from the isoparametric space to the "physical" space

is acomp1ished by the following coordinate transformation

(6)

where ~1 and ~2 are the coordinates of node 1 and 2 in

"physical" space, respectively. As we see, the functions N1 and
N2 are used simultaneously as interpolating functions and as
coordinate transformation functions. Since the function u is
given locally by

(7)

we have that the number of parameters in equations (6) and (7)

is the same. This justifies the designation of isoparametric
elements. The functions N1 and N2 are also known as shape
functions and their aspect is depicted in Figure 1.

The functions Wi are constructed by assemblage of the shape

functions belonging to the elements joining at node~, and it
is not difficult to conclude that it is possible for these
function to be continuous acress elements, provided we identify
all the common nodes of different elements and assign to them
the same nodal values.

The quadratic element - To model curved boundaries with linear

elements requires an increasingly number of elements for
greater accuracy. It is then convenient to have at our disposal
an element with a capacity to follow the curvature of complex
geometries. The quadratic element makes this possible. This
element is shown in Figure 1. It has three nodes and its shape
functions are

(8a)

N2 = (l-x)(l+x), (8b)

1 -(
N3=2 -) •
x l+x (8c)

The mapping from the isoparametric space to the "physical"

space is, as before, defined by
~=N1 ~1 +N 2 ~2+N3 ~3' (9)
 131
This transformation gives a second order in x parametric
representation of the element in the "physical" space, thus
providing the possibility to model more accurately curved
boundaries.

The function u is given by

and the Wi constructed by assemblage can be continuous on the

domain n, if we follow the procedure explained above.

2.2 Two dimensional elements

Once we have grasped the concepts involved in one dimensional

isoparametric elements there is no difficulty with elements in
spaces of higher dimensions. We limite ourselves to a brief
sketch of this subject.

Two dimensional elements can be used as domain elements or

cells in two dimensional problems or as boundary elements in
three dimensional problems (surface elements), a possibility
that obviously was not present in the one dimensiOnal case.
Since our objective is simply to illustrate the ·technique we
shall treat only triangular elements, the quadrilateral ones
being easily developed from their one dimensional counterparts
by a cartesian product method.

The constante triangle - This is a very simple element in which

the function u is approximated by a constant value. Denoting
by Te the generic triangular element we have that

for x e: T • (11)
- e

The function u obtained by assemblage is discontinuous from

one element to its neighbors.

The linear triangle - The triangle Te in "physical" space is

mapped onto a standard triangle T in the isoparametric plane
as shown in Figure 2. The shape functions are

(12a)

(12b)

(12c)

As we can recognize, the shape function Nl assumes the value 1

at node 1 and is zero on the other two nodes and the same
happens with N2 and N3. The mapping from the isoparametric
132

2
2 )(,
linear triangle

X2
5 5

6 6

, 3
2 3 X,

~
Quadratic triangle

Figure 2 - Isoparametric triangles

 133

plane to the "physical plane" and the representation of u

follow along the same lines as before,
(13)

and

(14)

This element makes it possible to generate continuous 1/1.1

functions.

The quadratic triangle - This element has six nodes and its
shape functions are second order polynomials, as follows,

(15a)

(lSb)

(15c)

(15d)

(lSe)

The coordinate transformation

x'" r
6
i=l
N. a.
~-~
(16)

allows one to map the standard triangle T onto a distorted

triangle Te' In the plane this leads to triangles with curved
sides, but in three dimensions we can obtain also triangles
with curvature. The function u is given by

u= r
6

i"'l
u. N.,
~ ~
(17)

and it is also possible to generate continuous functions 1/1.~

with these element.

3. NUMERICAL INTEGRATION

In this section we shall survey the problem of evaluating the

integrals that arise in connection with the BEM. As we have
134

seen in a previous lecture (Heat Transfer Applications) these

integrals can be separated in two classes: one class consisting
of integrals with regular integrand and the other consisting
of integrals with singular integrand. This second one requires
special treatment so we begin by presenting the first and
simplest case.

3.1 Regular integrals

We start with one dimensional integrals since they are simpler
and contain all the basic ingredients from the pratical point
of view.
One dimensional integrals - Let us consider the evaluation of
the integral

(18)

where f is a bounded function and r is a curve in the plane

representing the boundary or part of the boundary of a two
dimensional domain. If this boundary is subdivided into E
finite elements and representing by re the generic element we
can write that

J
E
1= I
e=l
I
e with I
e
= r f(x)dr •
- e
(19)
e

Therefore the problem is transfered to the computation of

integrals over each one of the elements. To fully profit from
the isop~rametric technique we map re onto the standard
element r. Denoting the coordinate transformation by

x= cP (x). (20)
- -e
equation (19) becomes

I
e
=Jfe
r (x)dr with f e (x) =f(cp e (x»Je (x). (21)

where Je(x) is the J~cobian of the transformation relating

lengths over re and r. i.e ••

dcp 1 2 dCP 2 2 ] 1/2

J (x) = [ (_e_) + (_e_) (22)
e dx dx

Equation (21) shows that we have now to compute an integral

where the integrand contains an additional lerm. the Jacobian.
but for which the domain of integration is r, the same for all
 135

elements r e .

As is well known numerical evaluation of integrals consists in

replacing equation (21) by a summation over a set of pre-
-selected integration points (see Krylov, 1962). This means
that

(23)

In this expression xi denotes the coordinat~s of the

integration points in the standard element r, wi are the
weights assigned to these points and P the number of
integration points.

The choice of integration rule is oriented by two conflicting

criteria: the integration rule must have sufficient accuracy
for the purpose in mind and the number of integration points
should not be large, otherwise, due to the number of
integrations required by a typical practical problem, the whole
scheme may be uneconomical in computer time.

It can be proved (see e.g. Krylov, 1962) that Gauss type rules
give the best accuracy for a given number of integration points.
In fact, a Gauss integration rule with P integration points is
exact for all polynomials of degree up to 2P-l. Experience
shows the following rules to be a good compromise between
accuracy and speed:

- constant elements - 1 or 2 integration points,

- linear elements - 2 or 3 integration points,
-quadratic elements- 3 or 4 integration points.

Two dimensional integrals - Suppose for the sake of definiteness

that we are employing linear triangles. Then, following the
same line of argument explained above, we have that

fT
E
I= I I
e
wit:'h I
e
.. f(x)dT •
- e
(24)
e=l
e

Making the isoparametric transformation of variables given by

equation (13) we can write that

(25)

and thus

I =
e
fT f (g)dT
- with f e (x)
-
= f (41 (x»J (it).
-e - e-
(26)
136

Now Je(x) is the determinant of the Jacobian matrix of the

coordinate transformation given by equation (25), i.e.,

[ a~i
- (g) ] , (27a)
ax.
J

with

(27b)

Stroud, 1971, presents a large collection of integration

formulas for the standard triangle and square with varying
degrees of exacteness from which we can choose the appropriate
ones for the application is mind.

A warning should be made at this point. It refers to the

possibility that the integrand of regular integrals may have
a strong variation within an element which is close to the
collocation point. This happens for instance in thin aerofoils.
The remedy for such a situation is to increase the number of
integration points or to employ adaptive integration schemes.

3.2 Singular integrals

The BEM requires the evaluation of integrals having different

types of integrands. For two dimensional problems the
fundamental solution is

u*(x,x') =-..!... Ron r

- - 211
with r= I~-~'
- -
I (28)

This function and its derivative q* develop a singularity as r

tends to zero. A similar situation arrives for three dimensio-
nal problems where the fundamental solution is
u*(x,x') = _1_ • (29)
- - 411r

When performing integrations in elements in which sits the

collocation point a singular integral appears and the usual
Gauss type formulas deduced for regular integrands loose
accuracy. Then we have to resort to an analytical integration
or, if we wish to keep the full potentiality of isoparametric
elements, specially the higher order ones, we have to make use
of special integration rules that take the singularity into
due account. We shall pursue this later approach.

One dimensional integrals·with Ron r singularity - These

integrals have the form
 137

1= fr R.n r(~) f(~)dr , (30)

in which f is continuous and rex) is the distance from the

collocation point to the current point x. The subdivision of
the boundary into finite elements leads: as before, to
E
1= ~ I e with Ie= Ir R.n r(~) f(~)dre· (31)
e=l
e

The integrals Ie corresponding to elements having the

collocation point as one of its nodes become singular, the
others are regular and therefore can be dealt with as
described above. The isoparametric coordinate transformation
applied to equation (31) yields

I = f
R.n r (x)
ere
f e (x)dr. (32a)

where

r (x) = r(~ (x»

e -e
and f e (x)
-
= f(~ (x»J (x)
-e e
(32b)

We face here a minor difficulty resulting from the fact that

integration rules for integrals with logarithmic singularities
are derived for the integral (0,1) (see, for instance,
Abramowitz and Stegun, 1968 and Mineur, 1966). Moreover, the
distance employed in these formulas is not re(x) but x. We may
solve this problem by the following trick, consisting in
putting

R.n I-=:-
r (x)I Ir I
x = R,n -=:- + R.nlxl.
(x)
(33)
x x
The first term on the right hand side can be seen to be
bounded when x tends to zero. Thus the integral (32a) splits
into a regular part and a singular part written in a form
suitable for application of integration rules with logarithmic
Kernel.

Two dimensional integrals - Integrals in two dimensions arise

when integrating on cells in the plane or on boundary (surface
elements) in three dimensional problems.
In the first case the singularity is removable by changing to
polar coordinates. In fact, the integrals appearing over cells
have the form

Ie = In R.n r(~) f(~)dne' (34a)

e
 138

or

I
e
= fn ~
r\x)
1
f(x)dn •
- e
(34b)
e

Since in polar coordinates we have that

dn rd8 (35)
e
we conclude easily that both singularities in equations (34)
disappear. We can then employ the standard Gauss type
integration rules. Another possibility is to employ the general
technique developed for isoparametric elements in the following
way.

Suppose we wish to evaluate an integral of the type expressed

by equation (34b) in which ne is a boundary (surface) element
in a three dimensional BEM problem. Then making the usual
isoparametric coordinate transformation we can write equation
(34b) as
1 ~ ~ ~
I f f (x)dn, (36a)
e
=
n Ixl
-
e-

where, as before, n represents the standard element in the

isoparametric plane and

r (x) r(ef> (x», (36b)

e - e -
Igl
f e (x)
-
f(ef> (x»J e (x).
e -
(36c)
rex)
We call attention for the appearance of the singularity l/I~I
in equation (36a), a trick used before for logarithmic
integrals, and we also note that the function fe can be shown
to be bounded.

Special formulas for these type of integrals have been

developed by Cristescu and Loubignac, 1978 and Pina, Fernandes
and Brebbia, 1981.

Conclusions - We close this lecture by pointing out that

numerical techniques for evaluation of integrals in a BEM
setting are available and perform satisfatorily. However we
should bear in mind that the different types of integrals
render the programming of BEM less straightforward than the
corresponding FEM programming.
 139

4. REFERENCES

M. Abramowitz and I.A. Stegun, Handbook of Mathematical

Functions, Dover, 1968.

M. Cristescu and G. Loubignac, Gaussian Quadrature Formulas

for Functions with Singularities in l/R Over Triangles and
Quadrangles, in Recent Advantages in Boundary Element Methods,
C.A. Brebbia (ed.), Pentech Press, 1978.

V.I. Krylov, Approximate Calculation of Integrals, MacMillan,

1962.

H. Mineur, Techniques de Calcul Numerique, Dunod, 1966.

H.L.G. Pina, J.L.M. Fernandes and C.A. Brebbia, Some Numerical

Integration Formulas Over Triangles and Squares with a l/R
Singularity, Appl. Math. Modelling, ~, 209-211, 1981.

OJC. Zienkiewicz, The Finite Element Method in Engineering and

Science, McGraw-Hill, 1971.
 Chapter 9

STARTING TO WORK WITH BOUNDARY ELEMENTS

Gero Kuich, Femcad AG, Oberrohrdorf/Switzerland

1 INTRODUCTION
The start of Boundary Element applications in an
environment that was mainly oriented towards the
Finite Element Method is shown on the example of
introducing the BEASY-System at Brown Boveri in
Switzerland.
The CAD-programs and the pre- and postprocessors
used in connection with the Finite-Element-programs
could be adapted with little effort to the genera-
tion of geometry and the plotting of results for
the Boundary Element Method (BEM).
The great advantages of the BEM are shown on seve-
ral practical applications, especially in connection
with an existing program for contact calculations.
Also comparisons with results of Finite Element cal-
culations are presented.

2 THE BOUNDARY ELEMENT METHOD

The application of the Boundary Element Method (BEM) for
temperature and elasticity problems (1) has only in the
very last years come out of the state of research into
a form useabl e by industry.
The main difference to the Finite Element Method (FEM),
which is already well established for many years (2), is
the fact, that only the boundary has to be divided into
elements and the boundary values are assumed to v~ry ac-
cording to the shape function of the elements.

141
142

FINITE-ELEMENT GENERIERUNG

BEA5Y ADINA

FIG. 1
 143

FINITE-ELEMENT AUSWERTUNG

ASKA BEASY ADINA

Finite £I . . .nt.

F1G.2
 144

In steady-state temperature analysis the boundary values are

temperature and heat flux, in stress analysis they are dis-
placements and tractions (pressure) and always one of both
must be prescribed and the other is unknown.
Starting from the conversion of volume integrals into a
boundary integral formulation and a known 'Fundamental So-
lution' (influence of a source point on a field point), the
influence matrices for all the boundary values can be cal-
culated.
Then these matrices are rearranged, so all prescribed va-
lues are on one side and the unknowns on the other, leading
to a set of equations in terms of unknown nodal values,
with the nodes only on the boundary.
These equations can be solved by any standard procedure to
get the unknown boundary values. In addition the results
can be calculated at any internal points, even in restar-
ting the calculation only with the known boundary solution
and the geometry.
It is quite obvious that in this formulation loads may on-
ly act on the boundary, but it is also possible to convert
volume integral formulations of body forces to surface in-
tegrals. So gravitational forces, centrifugal loads and
steady-state temperature distributions can be considered
as load for stress analysis.
In spite of the advantages of the BEM many engineers are
a bit reluctant to use such a new method, especially if
they are used to the Finite Element Method for many years.
This lecture shows that the introduction of the BEM can be
done very easily in an industrial environment oriented main-
ly towards the FEM and all the advantages of the BEM can be
used beside the FEM programs.

3 ADVANTAGES P.ND DISADVANTAGES OF THE BEM COMPJI.RED TO FEM

As seen from the user's point of view one can summarize
the following advantages and disadvantages of the Boun-
dary"Element Method compared to the Finite Element Me-
thod.
 145

BEASY SYSTEM

i SEASYG
Preprocessor

BEASY SYSTEM
BEAXPP BEAXTE
BE2DPP BE2DTE
BE30PP BE.3DTE

BEASYP
ostprocessor

FIG. 3
146

TYPICAL JOB SE~UENCE

STRESS
FILE

_try

Boundary
BEASY6 Boundary

SctIlUiftiiCIIIII Solution

Internol

Solution Solution

FIG. 4
 147

Advantages:
- Only boundary to discretize (1 dim less than FEM)
- Not so much experience necessary as in FEM to decide for
the optimium element size
- Coupling to Computer Aided Design programs much easier
- Accuracy much better with the same computer time. especial-
ly for stress concentrations
- Infinite problems easy to solve
- Numbering of nodes and elements not important
- Simple interpretation of results
- Results at internal points after the main calculation
as requested by the user
Di sadvantages:
- For nonlinear problems the inner region must be discretized
- Not economic if surface/volume large
- Material properties constant in zones
- No internal forces except gravity, centrifugal forces and
steady-state temperature
- No advantages for beams, plates and shells
Conclusions:
The BEM will certainly not replace the FEM for structural
analysis, but it is a valuable supplement for certain types
of problems:
- 20. axisymmetric and 3D. if ratio of volume/surface is
large
- stress concentrations
- contact problems
- infinite problems
4 INTRODUCTION OF BEASY
It is not so easy to introduce a new method in an industri-
al environment which is already oriented towards the FEM.
148

LO
(!)
LL

o
o
o

o
o
o

.,o
~

D~
(OtDlDCDalCDCOOOj

(Im
0::

I
(I
I ~
O~
Ii
S.300E·02 l LRST ~rHa"l
I ---~

S.2S0E1"02 ,1- J 1I
5.200E·02
I I 1...-
5.150E·02 1--- 1----

5.100E·02 I- --
J
-
5.050E·02
/
s.oaOf:tC2 /
/
~.950E·oa _L
1/
~. 900E'02

Il.BSOE+O
10 II 13 I~
I
la 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 KHOTE~

HD-RRRD ....
.j::o
FIG. 6 '"
TEMP RK BESCH
150

But it is not necessary to repeat all work which had to be

done to have a good pre- and postprocessing system for FEM.
As example we can see how the BEASY-System (3), developed
by Computati onal Mechani cs in Southampton \'ras introduced
at Brown Boveri in Switzerland, where a lot of FE-calcula-
tions are made using the FE~programs ASKA and ADINA.
Generation programs can be used to generate boundary ele-
ments instead of finite elements (Fig. 1). The shape of
the elements will be the same only the order one less, so
plane problems can be solved by generating 'FE-beams' a-
round the region. Threedimensional problems can be gene-
rated by using twodimensional mesh generators like for
plate and shell problems.
Also plotting of results can be done using the FE-postpro-
cessors (Fig. 2). At least the most important geometry
check and some result plotting is possible, but not all
BEM-specific types of result plotting.
But it is not necessary to have all this pre- and post-
processors because also the BEASY-System has means of
mesh-generation and results plotting (Fig. 3). It is on-
ly a great help in the first phase of introduction, be-
cause the FEM-user's are accustomed to their programs and
like to use them in the usual way. Also in the first phase
of introducing the BEASY-System not all of the possibili-
ties were already contained in the BEASYP-programm.
A typical job-sequence can be seen in Fig. 4. Usually one
starts \~ith generating the boundary elements and checking
the grid with the plot-program. Then the main job is running,
yielding the boundary solution and perhaps results at some
internal points.
If one wants to know results at more internal points after-
wards one can make an easy restart, specifying only the
coordinates of the desired internal points.
The interpretation of results can than be aided by plotting
with the postprocessor program.
This job sequence is the same for temperature or stress
calculations, only a different file is used. The temp-
file or stress-file can either be the formatted BEASY-
file or the unformatted file as used in the ASKA-database.
 151

"
""

""
"

z
~
%

...."

.."
~
o
'-
<=

'"c
'"

"o
'"
('(")0

"'"

~ __~________~l
152

I
i I I
~
~
0

I
i I
I CO

I I I <.':i
i I I
iL

\\ fr I ~
~
0

\\ I
I
r
I
I
I, r I \~ t
,, I , .~
i
,~ I I
!

\1
V //,
-
I
/ m

! !)
m
.... -....! ~ 0

_/
m
0

,
W
-IJiII N
e l-
./' ,/ir. cr:
I-

-~
/' on
-.l
0
"
:::J
... (f)

~ 0
0 W
a::
: I
I"~ ".
"-
, I
a:
Il- :lC
'" en
; I
i 0
0
cr:
I
(Y)

I m
e
0
 153

For a thermoelastic analysis the temperatures and heat flu-

xes from the temperature calculation are automatically read
from the temp-file and used as input for the stress analysis.

5 EXAMPLES
Three typical examples for the application of the BEM are
shown and comparisons to FEM-calculations are presented:
Temperature calculation for a part of a turbine rotor
The temperature calculation with heat transfer boundary
condition from node 8 to 65 (Fig. 5) showed very good co-
incidence with a FE-calculation. Linear boundary elew~nts
were used and the temperature was also calculated at 14
internal pOints.
Fig. 6 shows the temperature distribution from node 8 to 30.

Rotorshaft with different mesh sizes

The stresses in the notch of a rotors haft were investigated
using finite elements and boundary elements, both with dif-
ferent mesh sizes. This shaft was only used for these test
calculations and does not represent a real design.
Using finite elements a very fine mesh (Fig. 7) was nece-
ssary to get exact values for all stress components (Fig. 8).
The much simpler boundary element discretization of Fig. 9
gave about the same results (Fig. 10) with about half of
the computer costs and much more savings in mantime for
data preparation.

Contact calculation
Fig.ll shows the FE-discretization for a three-dinlensional
contact-calculation of a blade root. This very coarse mesh
could not give the right results at the notches, so addi-
tional calculations for the notches were necessary.
The same contact-program (4) as used with the finite ele-
ments can be used for boundary element calculations, be-
cause this program was already changed before from using
contact forces to using contact pressures as unknowns for
the contact calculation.
154

1
,
;;; ;;I oj
~ ~ d
~
~ ~ ~ 0
~ ~ on
on on
'" on
" '"

i
'f 1 m
1 (!)
LL

:c
u
(J)

I-
a:
4 a:
0
a:
I
1..
~o
0-

1 I

:c"':
u -
0
0
0

1
(J)
~g

1-':
a:-
a:
Cl
0:%

1
~~
o~
N:5
:;:
I-

..:r ~~ =~ 0::z _ ru
= ~
-:;:
lL!

1
,(n'(l't1'To fn' (rT =r :Co
Lo
~'"

'"
lL!

~
1 l.l..o
1

11
0
:;::~
>--
(J)o
1-0
0'"
a:

1"'
]
I
:l:~
a~

1 -:

'"
~ l!! ~ .. .. d
I
iii I ,.
 155

- I
i I I ~

I
N

I Ii
I
I \ I i
I \ I I
iT '"
~

! \ 1 I
I

I \11 I I
~
I
7-
i
. ~
I
U
(f)

t
I

\\
I
I
f-
I a:
I :\l
a:
\ I 0
I ~~\ di ,.. a:
! I '"
::l

i\\
0

I
iI
I I
I r 1\
, \ I
II
I
t In

'"
l \« I
t
u
f ..;i en
'"'"
~

I i
~/~
~
f-

I !
~-
~~
a:
a:
o
~ , ~ a:
~~

, ::l
-~ r o
/'
/"
7( I 1 C\j

-- -~ ::;;\ '-';
".
l(J

, '\~, ,
, , T
I
'..,. r 'W
I i :i!: LL

I I ~' I
T

,
I I t ;;

I "'"
 156

So contact calculations can be made in a much simpler way

with boundary elements (Fig. 12), because the pressures
are already the unknowns in the BEM-formulation.
Also coupling of FEM-meshes with BEM-meshes can be done
with help of this contact program.

6 CONCLUS IONS
The introduction of a Boundary Element program like BEASY
in an industrial environment is most easily done, if the
boundary elements are treated like simple finite elements
and the existing FE pre- and postprocessors can be used.
After the FEM-user's have tried examples and made compa-
risons with FEM-results, they soon will be convinced of
the advantages of the BEM for certain types of problems.
Especially the easy preparation of input data and inter-
pretation of results will help the spreading of the BEM
in the future.
With the steadily increasing use of Computer Aided" Design
programs another great advantage of the BEM will "get more
and more importance. One can use the basic geometry, ge-
nerated by CAD-programs, directly as input to the BEASY-
System and has only to add the boundary conditions for
completing the input data.
In general one can say that the BEM will certainly not
replace the FEM for temperature and stress analysis, but
it will be a valuable supplement for certain types of pro-
blems, like stress concentrations, infinite problems and
contact problems.

REFERENCES
1. Brebbia, C.A. The Boundary Element Method for Engineers.
Pentech Press. 1978
2. Zienkiewicz. O.C •• The Finite Element Method in Engineer-
ing Science. McGraw Hill. 1971
3. BEPSY User's Manual, Computational Mechanics. 1982
German version by FEMCAD AG, Oberrohrdorf. Switzerland
4. Kuich G•• Berechnung allgemeiner Schrumpf- und Kontakt-
probleme, FEM-Kongress Baden-Baden. 1975
 157

Finite-E1ement-ldeaTi,jerung: de, ,clrauf"lfusse'i urn! de.. II@TTennut

: l1og1 iche Kontaktzone

Lastelement

FIG.11
158

2-dim. Boundary

FIG. 12
Chapter 10

EXPERIENCES IN BOUNDARY ELEMENT APPLICATIONS

Gero I<uich

Femcad AG, Oberrohrdorf/Switzerland

1 INTRODUCTION

In the field of steady state heat transfer and

linear static stress analysis the Boundary Ele-
ment Method (BEM) has gained a firm ground be-
sides the Finite Element Method (FEM). This is
mainly due to the fact that data preparation is
much easier and certain types of problems can be
solved much more efficiently.

The paper shows how these advantages can be even

more pronounced by using simple but effective
tools for 2D- and 3D-meshgeneration, coupling to
CAD-programs and postprocessing of results. Exam-
ples for the application of the three-dimensional
mesh-generation, the coupling to CAD-input and
for postprocessing are included.

The second part de~.cribes exper-iences in instal-

lation of the BEASY-programs on different compu-
ter~; and compari sons of the ac:curacy of computed
results. One can see that on some computers the
computation must be made in double precision to
get satisfactory results for certain problems.

Finally recommendations are made concerning the

practical application of the BEM to engineering
problems. The optimum choice of element type and
element subdivision is discussed. It is shown how
one can get very accurate results with little ef-
fort using the BEM.

159
160

2 PRE- AND POSTPROCESSING

The Preprocessor BEASYC.,

Although the BEM-input is much simpler than the

FEM-input, one would loose most of this advantage
if one had to input the coordinates of each mesh-
point and the connectivity of each element sepe-
rately. Therefore a simple but effective prepro-
cessor is required, especially for 3D-meshgenera-
tion.

The best way to see how BEASYG works is to follow

a three-dimensional example:

BE3DPP program name

WELLE title
SX symmetry
SY
SZ
BPl 100 0 0 points
BP2 100 100 0
BP3 100 0 100
BP4 100 0 60
BP5 100 45 45
BP6 100 60 0
BPl1 0 0 0
BP12 0 200 0
BP13 0 0 200
BP21 -250 0 0
BP22 -250 200 0
BP23 -250 0 20(1
BP32 100 200 0
BP33 100 0 200
BCl 2 3 1 2 arcs
BC2 12 13 11 2
BC3 22 23 21 2
BC4 2 12 32 2
BC5 3 13 33 2
BL8 4 5, 1 line combination
BL9 5 6' 1
BKI0 8 9
BRl 1 6 5 4 1 1 patches
BR2 6 2 3 4 1 2
BR3 2 12' 13 3 2 2
BR4 12 22 23 13 1 2
ZC 0.04 conductivity
PU4 100 100 100 100 ambient temperature
PH4 1. 1 1. 1 1. 1 1.1 heat transfer coeff.
END
 161

(!)
......
LL

..
"'><

--
IJ)
m
0
W
..J
w b
..J
3: it
~

~
162

o
 163
After program name and title one defines general
data, in this case the symmetry of the problem
with respect to the planes X=O, Y=O and Z=O by
(SX,SY,SZ). On symmetry-planes no elements .have
to be defined.

Then only those points are input with coordinates,

which are needed to define the geometry (BP ••• ).
This are all endpoints and center points of 5 arcs
and points 4,5 and 6 to divide the front plane by
a line combination (Fig. I).

Then the arcs are defined by number of start point

nLlmber of end point, number of center point and
nLlmber of subdivisions in elements (BC •••• ).

Straight lines (BL ••• ) are only necessary if used

in connection with a line combination (BK ••• ). A
line combination can be used later like a line,
e.g. to define the boundary of a patch.

Finally surface patches are defined (BR ••••• ) by

giving the corner point numbers of each quadrila-
teral patch and the number of elements along the
first and second side (BR •••• ). (Fig. 2)

If one knows the numbers of the lines rather than

the point numbers, which is the case, if the geo-
metry was generated by a CAD-program, one can de-
fine the patches by giving the 4 surrounding lines.

Then the patches are automatically filled with

elements. An important detail is, that the program
interpolates in cylindrical coordinates, if two
opposite lines are defined by two parallel arcs.
Otherwise the transfinite interpolation would not
prodl..lce correct arcs for patch number 3 (Fi g. 3).

In a similar way more complicated geometries can

be generated (Fig.4).

3 CAD-coup I ing

One advantage of the BEM is the easy way to couple

mesh-generation to CAD-programs. If one has defined
the boundary of a structure with CAD the greatest
part of BEM-input is already done and has to be
completed only by the boundary conditions.

Lines, arcs and splines can be read directly from

CAD-file (e.g. IGES-file) by BEASYG. Then one can
oil
plot these lines interactivel,y on a screen (Fig. 5)'.
164

UJ
....J

~ ~
~======-___-----.J~
165
 166
It is further possible to delete lines, change the
direction in which the line is defined and define
the number of elements per line. One can also cre-
ate new points or lines and define the boundary con-
ditions. So just with an CAD-File all necessary data
can be completed interactively and the calculation
may be started with the final geometry (Fig.6).

Although BEASYG can be used interactively, it is

not a graphical interactive mesh-generation pro-
gram. This is clearly the task of a CAD-program,
but with BEASYG one can complete the data inter-
actively or in batch mode.

The Postprocessor BEASYP

Equally important as mesh-generation is also post-

processing to save time in evaluation of the re-
sults. Here it is very desirable to see results
interactively on a screen and then to decide which
one should be sent to the plotter to produce nice
pictures.

BEASYP enables the user to draw part or all of the

mesh and to plot graphs of results. Also combina-
tions of different loading cases, each multiplied
by a factor, can be made. Plots may be obtained
either on a plotter or interactively on a graphics
screen.

BEASYP wilJ. plot the undefoy-med or deformed mesh

(Fig. 7) and the position of the internal points.
Element or mesh point numbers may be optionally
plotted. The facility to select a window so as to
examine a part of the mesh in detail is included.
Potentials, fluxes, diplacements, tractions and
stresses may be plotted over a line of elements,
a line of mesh-points or internal points. Prin-
cipal and deviatoric stresses may also be calcu-
lated and plotted (Fig.B).

4 INSTALLATION ON DIFFERENT COMPUTERS

Pr"eci si on

At the time the program BEASY is installed on IBM,

VAX, CDC, PDP, PRII''IE and APOLLO computers. To test
the accuracy of results on different computers an
example problem(Fig. 9) was run on IBM,VAX,CDC and
PDP cnmputers.
 167

& .J
I In
I
I
I
(!)
....
I LL.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
oJ
• I
I
I
I
I
.... ..
..J
-
(D

....Q..
IT)
I w 0
I
I
"
(J)
I ...... I-

I
w
CD
9a.
I '"I
I
- .1.----------1-
~~
168

1.& 13 12

I to
I
I (!)
.
I .....
I lL.
~
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
N I
I
tI
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
" I
I
. III TI
I
I
I

--
to
I
. I
I
.....
....J CD
I ....
(I)
UJ
.. I a..
d
I
I ....
U)
...
• I
UJ
III
9Go
I ~
I
- ---::---:-- ... --------"1-
~
 169
There was a pressure load applied between points 3
and 5 and zero displacements prescribed between 5
and 7, so the stresses should be zero in the notch.
The following table compares the displacement and
stress in point 19 as calculated on different com-
puters and with different precision.
-----------------_ ..... _-----------------_._------------
I Computer I Precision I Displacement I Stress
_._-------------------------------------------------
I PDP I single I -0.2853 I -12.8~4 I
I VAX I single I -0.2853 I -16.487 I
I CDC I single I -0.2842 I 0.434 I
I IBM I single I -0.2821 I -148.22 I
I IBM I double I -0.2842 I 0.434 I

As one can see it is very desirable to use double

precision on most computers. Only on CDC this is
not necessary because of the 60-bit words.

Computer dependence

It is much easier now to make computer independent

computer programs if one sticks to ANSI Standard
Fortran 77. In spite of this standard there are
certain differences, which should be considered
in programming:

- some systems make automatically REWIND of all

files at the beginning of each step, others not
(make REWIND of all files but input data and list
output inside the program)

- BACKSPACE with variable length records is not

possible on all computers (make it fixed length
or to be chosen by a switch)

- DOUBLE PRECISION is required on some computers

(use C IMPLICIT DOUBLE PRECISION (A-H,O-Z) at
the beginning of each subroutine)

- unit numbers are not standardized (make variables

to be easily changed in the MAIN-program)

- cpu-time, time of day and date are determined by

different subroutines in a different way (use one
subroutine to be exchanged on different computers)

- on some computers it is desirable to use a dif-

ferent region size for small or large problems
(make one large array to be adapted to the region)
 170

r_ -,
I 1
, ".
....
(!)

LL

1-------------- - - --1.- --- •

'I ---

!
I
I I
I
I
, I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I I
I I
I I

(()
I
I I
I I
I I
,
+
I
I
~
•
~ I
I
I
~
I
I I
I I
I

.I I lJJ
I I -l
I I 0
:J:
I I
I I :J:
I
I
I
~
II l-

--
I

1.1 ..... _______ _____ _________ II :.

lJJ
t-
----,... -l
<
0..
lJJ
.
It)

...
10

ct:
<
:::> t-
o(1) 0
~

~~
I
I
--
 171

2
m

..-- ,......
~ ..
,.-- ..--
iG

..
-..--
fa
V
III

(
---
'A

-- ----
II

r--. -!!I •
....

.-
~:. •

=
~
..-- v--- -= ...
W
...J
~

----
0
.- :!
::I:

(
::I:
I-

-- -- --
......
-!!I • :a

- --..-
w
I-
!1 <
...J
r--
-= ..
a... GI
W
I"- ct:
< ....
r-. ::J
2 a(f) 0

I I I I I I., I'#
~

-
01 ... .: II
of
172

5 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BEM USE

Choice of element type

In BEASY one has the possibility to use elements

with constant (LN1), linear (LN2) or quadratic
(LN3) shape function. Solving the same problem
(calculation of the tor-sion constalf1t of a square
cross-section) with different element t.ypes, one
can see, t.hat higher order elements give better
results for the same number of unknowns (Fig. 10).

For problems with curved boundaries the LNI and

LN2 elements give poor results (Fig.11), because
t.hese elements are straight and hence the circular
outline is not being accurately modelled. The re-
sui ts converge fr'om below, because the BEM-geometry
lies inside the true circular geometry.

Therefore one should use always quadratic elements,

unless one wants to get some special effect by u-
sing lower order elements.

Element subdivision

It is much more difficult to give recommendations

for the choice of the element size, because this
is very problem dependent. One can on,ly say that
for circular boundaries one quadratic element
shoul. d not be small er than 30 degrees; to keep
the geometric error (by describing a circle by
parabolic elements) small.

It is also very important to decrease the element

size near a flux- or stress-concentration, but on-
ly in the neighbourhood of this concentrat.ion. In
BEASYG theY-e is a very easy way to do thi s by el e-
ment grading (Fig. 12). For one line, arc or spline
one can define an element grading by giving the
factor of element size on one end of this line com-
pared td the size at the other end.

By inspecting the plot of element results one can

see afterwards, if the element size was reasonable.
If there are large discontinuities in the plot of
element results one has to refine the mesh in this
regi on and make another run b:l get m(:we accurate
results. Making several runs with different element
size is the savest way to get information on the
accuracy of the results. Such local mesh-refine-
ments can be done much easier with the BEM than
with the FEM.
 173

- ::. ::.
01

!!!
....(!)
lL.
~
!!! -+

...
!l

-
~

N ::

51

I-
" (f)

1 --I
w
I-
>-
la an

.
0 Cl)
(l)
I d
a
......
....
t::) t-
o

..
a::: -'
a..

., '" . ~
174

o
I
I (!)
.
I .....
I b...
I
I
I
I
I

I
I
!
..
.g
II

I
I
§
I I:
o
I

,
I ~
I
I§
,,, C0-
o

,,
w fi
~§
:::l I:
0"tl
I (J) 5
I
... / <
:t
3j u.
Of
>.

I
,
I
• I-~
I I
I Z (II
I < ~

j/
/ I 1--
(J) (II
/
/ ~'!;
/ U I:
1.-/ zI ..0
//// 8~
/// §
.
(J)
// 0:: Co-
~ ~
§
01
" Q
X Error

-- - - .- -
-1.0lI0 L LN,-- ----
-- -------
V "...
1-""- LN2 ........--
~~

;'
;'
... -- ",'"
"'~
~~
--------
~~'"
-2.0lI0
/ "'~
....
/ /'
/ .
I ,/ ..'
-1.000
I /
I ,/
I /
I /
-.4.0lI0
/ I
/
I
I /
I / I
-5.000
4 12 111 20
• NuIb. . of> unknowne

TORSION-CONSTANT OF A CYLINDER ......

FIG. I I -..J
08 function of element-type ond number of unknowns on one quorter \.Jl
176

/ '\
rI ~ -

-1.SIlEtII
\
\
2 8 4 5 8 7 • I W U 12 18

FLUX SHEAR STRESS FOR TORS I ON OF A SHAFT

PLOT 0. 17 11

,-18_____
12

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.1 ___________ _

L
I

TORSION OF A SHAFT WITH GRACI NG FIG. I2

x PLOT 0. 18 • 1
 Chapter 11

ELECTROSTATICS PROBLEMS

R.A. Adey

Computational Mechanics, Ashurst, Southampton, UK.

1 INTRODUCTION
The solution of electrostatic problems which obey the Laplace
(Potential) equation has been accomplished over a number of
years using techniques such as finite element, finite differ-
ences etc. However the boundary element method has recently
proven proven itself [1] an extremely powerful technique for
the solution of this type of problem because it can easily and
accurately model the singularities which commonly occur in this
type of problem. Secondly and perhaps most importantly it
easily models infinite regions.

2 THEORETICAL BASIS

The technique of boundary elements is well documented in the

literature so in this section only a brief description of the
governing equation will be given .. [2].

The problem is to model the voltage v and current density

i distribution in a medium of conductivity k. This is
expressed mathematically as a Laplace equation.

kV' 2 v = 0

where
k conductivity
v voltage

From Ohm's law the current density is related to the

voltage

i - kV'v (2)

or expanding

177
 178

i k dv i k av etc. (3)
x dx y ay

Note The analogy to thermal problems is

i heat flux
v temperature

3 BOUNDARY ELEMENTS

Using Green's theorem or similar methods the governing equation

can be manipulated into a boundary integral form.

c(x)v(x) +
J i *(x,y)v(y)df y = Jv *(x,Y)i(y)dfy (4)
f f
where x
source point coordinates
=
field point coordinates
y
c(x) constant depending upon the position of the
source point e.g. on a smooth boundary c(x) .5
*
i*(x,y) = current density fundamental solution
v (x,y) = voltage fundamental solutmn
vex) voltage at the source point
v(y) voltage at the field point
iCy) current density at the field point
df surface area at field point
y
Applying the element approach

J .* (x,y)v(y)df .* (x,y)v(y)df e
i.e.
f
1- = L
Elements J
f
1- (5)

and assuming an interpolation function for the current density

and voltage on the surface element

(6)

where ~n = interpolation function

~n

v (y) = vector of element nodal voltages

~e

the final equation is obtained

.* T
c(x)u(x) + L
elements J 1- (x,y)cp
~
df
y
vn(y)
~e (7)
f
e
L v * (x,y)cp T df
elements Jf ~ y
e
 179

The equation can now be written in matrix form as follows

HU GP (8)

where
U contains the nodal potentials vn
P contains the nodal current densities in

The Hand G matrices in (8) are called influence matrices

as they are calculated by integrating the fundamental solution
to compute the influence coefficient between the source point
and field element.

APPLICATIONS

C Magnet
An interesting example of the application of BE2DPP occurred
in the field of electromagnetism. The author would like to
thank the Rutherford Laboratory for allowing us to publish
details of the problem. Although the actual problem would in
real life be somewhat more complicated it serves to illustrate
the capabilities of the module.

The governing differential equation in three dimensions is

Vx Vx A = J (a)
/J
where /J is the permeability
A is the magnetic vector potential
and J is the current density
In two dimensions A has only one component (the out-of-plane
component) so by making use of the vector identity V x (VxA)
V(V.A)-V'A we have that for the case of constant permeability
/J Eq: (4)-reduces to the scalar potential equation

..!./J V'A =J (b)

While BEASY would not be able to solve Eq. (a), the two
dimensional form, Eq. (b), may be solved using BE2DPP for
constant values of current density J.
The geometry of the problem is shown in Figure la.
The p'roblem was divided into four regions. In region 1 the
permeability was unity and the current density 1257. This region
represents a copper conductor carrying current. Region 3 re-
presents a similar copper conductor carrying a current equal in
magnitude but opposite in sign. Region 2 represents the iron of
the magnet and has a permeability of 10000. Region 4 represents
the air surrounding the magnet and its boundaries are at infin-
ity. Figure lb shows a plot of the flux across the air gap.
180

v
.. , ,
I
I
= I
I
... ++ ... +++++J.
- :

. ., •
. .
(J)
I-
C'<") z:
IJ.J
=f j
lij
...J
IJ.J

- ...z:
l!l

N d
J:
(J)

.. i I-

-:
0

1
11 ...J
l>-
I

t;J
z:
l!l
~
I'
b
u
...
..J

~
 181

/
=

/
~

·
/
·
/ ·
P-
a:

V
l!l
De:
a:
(f)

·
/
(f)

~
u
a:
x
·
/
::J
...J
LL
LL
D
l-
"
I 0
...J
P-
I

· t;j
z:
l!l
I:I
.· U

~
~I
182

Corrosion Protection
A major application area of boundary elements has been in the
field of the analysis of corrosion protection problems. The
method has proved ideal for the analysis of structures or
bodies in the sea where the boundary of the problem is the
surface of the structure in contact with the sea and the con-
ducting medium is the sea itself. To illustrate this point
further the reader is encouraged to think of the task of sub-
dividing the water between the one thousand members of a com-
plex offshore jacket type structure into finite elements.

In this type of application the objective is to ensure

that the voltage on any part of the structure is of sufficient
magnitude to prevent the electrochemical action of corrosion
taking place. The structure is therefore divided into two
parts anodes and cathodes. The anode supplies the source of
current (higher voltage) either by an applied current (impressed
current) or by means of a sacrificial anode (electrochemical).
The cathode is the part of the structure to be protected. In
some cases part of the structure may be shielded (i.e. i = 0).

The boundary conditions are therefore as follows.

Cathode v prescribed voltage

Anode v prescribed voltage
Shield i prescribed current density.
A simple analysis of a shield and anode system is shown
below, Fig . 2 [ 1] •

-_'5t.ETJIO
( b)

Figure 2 Configuration for Typical 2D Analysis

 183

In this case the fine detail possible using boundary

element techniques is also emphasised because the elements on
the anode are approximately 3000 times smaller than the elements
on the cathode, Fig. 3

2 4 6 8 10 12 14

~---------------------------1
I I

I i 10: 1
h
I :

I Enlargement
I .

I----------~----------------
I

200:1
Enlargement

Figure 3 Mesh for typical 2D analysis.

184

Non Linear Boundary Conditions

The problems discussed so far have been linear. However in
practice for this CP type problem the boundary conditions are
in general non linear and time dependent. This can be simply
tackled using boundary elements as follows.

The non linear boundary condition is of the form

on cathode

v = v + a In i (9)
o
where v initial voltage
o
Substituting into the matrix equation

HU = G P ( 10)

H
__U0 + H A G P ( 11)

where U
-0
vector of nodal v
0
[}. vector of nodal a In i
l' vector of nodal i

Rearranging the equation in the usual way to apply the

boundary conditions a simple iteration scheme can be set up •.

This has been applied for an offshore structure as shown

in fig. 4.

II-

------ ""
1':0 =1=
~ ~ r--f-
r--I-
-I-
<:;;: ts :$ ts
D-

Figure 4 3D Mesh for an Oil Platform

 185

The results of the analysis showing the current density

contours are shown in fig . 5 .

Figure 5 Current Density Contour Model

Special Elements
For structures consisting of tubes where the diameter is small
compared with the overall dimension of the structure, special
elements have been developed. These tube elements assume that
the current density and voltage is constant about the circum-
ference of the tube but has constant, linear or quadratic vari-
able along the length of the tube. Fig. 6.

Figure 6 Quadratic Tube Element

Boundary conditions can be applied on the tube element

nodes in exactly the same way as other boundary elements.

Another special type which has been developed for this

type of application is the point and line source. A point or
line source is a point or line of specified current. (This is
equivalent to a heat source in thermal problems). The line
sources can have linear or quadratic variation of current per
unit length.

In the following example the same problem is solved using

line sources and tube elements.
 186

APPLICATION Comparison of Tube Elements and Line Sources

The problem of a cubic block with uniform line sources as

shown in fig. 7 is investigated.

The line sources are IZ

simulated by tube elements 1
with prescribed equivalent
flux on their surface.
/1
/'f
If ~, L, a correspond
to the strength density of
/
the line source, length of
the line source or the I u=o
equivalent tube source and ).1
radius of the tube, then I
the equivalent flux on the
surface of the tube
can be obtained by

~ x L q x 211aL
e

The results are compared (Fig. 9) for both using the actual
line sources and the equivalent tube sources and good agreement
is observed.

d 1- t--I-()-

Figure 8

6 CONCLUSIONS

The boundary element method has been shown to be extremely

successful in solving electrostatic problems, in particular
ones associated with corrosion protection problems. The
ability to create special elements with the boundary element
technique in a similar way to finite elements has also been
demonstrated. The combination of special elements and the
fundamental features of boundary elements will open up new
application areas in the future.
 187

'10
Line Source
~

E-< Tube Source

0
Po<

10

2 4 6 10
X=Y, Z=O
Figure 9
188

I
o

Line Source
Tube Source
12

2 4 6 8 10
X=Y, 2=0
Figure 9 (Conrd)
 189

REFERENCES

1. DANSON, D.J. and WARNE, M.A. "Current Density/Voltage

Calculations using Boundary Element Techniques ". National
Association of Corrosion Engineers, 1983 Conference, Los
Angeles U.S.A.

2. "First, Second, Third, Fourth and Fifth International

Seminars on Boundary Elements in Engineering" CML Publica-
tions, Ashurst, England.

3. "BEASY User's Manual" Computational Mechanics 1982.

4. DANSON, D.J. and BREBBIA, C.A. "Further Engineering Applica-

tions of BEASY" Fifth International Conference on Boundary
Elements. CML Publications 1983.
 Chapter 12

A BOUNDARY ELEMENT SOLUTION OF THE WAVE EQU~TION

D J Danson

Computational Mechanics Centre, Southampton, U.K.

SUMMARY

The Boundary Element Method is applied to the solution of the

3D wave equation. An advantage of the method in this application
is that at no time is it necessary to solve a system of
simultaneous equations. A computer code, BEREPOT, has been
written to apply the method for any geometry. An example
comparing results obtained using BEREPOT with an exact solution
is given.

1 INTRODUCTION

The motive to solve the 3D wave equation using Boundary Elements

came from a commission from Neratoom, Holland, who were inter-
ested in being able to calculate the pressure loads that arise
from sodium-water reactions in a steam generator. Until recently
these loads were calculated by simple one-dimensional methods
such as the characteristic method for water hammer phenomena.
However, for some of the types of steam generator the assumption
of one-dimensional pressure wave propagation became highly
questionable and Neratoom were looking for more realistic
numerical methods. The Boundary Element Method seemed to be
best suited to tackling their problem and after writing an
experimental program using constant boundary elements, Neratoom
asked Computational Mechancs to develop a BEM-computer-code
using quadratic elements and with more possibilities than the
experimental program.

2 THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENT

Governing Equations
The governing equation is the 3D wave equation

V2 u(r,t) - ~2 u + y(r,t) o (1)

191
192

where u is the velocity potential at some point P whose position

vector is r (which shall be referred to later as the
"field point") and at time t.
c is the wave speed
y is a source density term
and differention with respect to time is denoted by a dot.

Equation (1) may be recast in a retarded time boundary

integral form. This formulation is due to Kirchoff and may be
found in references (1) - (5). A fuller derivation is given in
reference (6).

The fundamental solution, or Green's function, of the wave

equation, G(r,t,r
_ _0
,t0 ) is defined as the solution to the equation

- 7;2 G + 6(r-r
_ _ 0 )6 (t-t0 ) o (2)

where 6 is the Dirac Delta function.

Physically G may be interpreted as the potential at r (the field
pOint) at time t due to a point source of unit magnitude located
at a point Q whose position vector is
all time except t=t o .
and which is zero at :0
Multiplication of Equation (1) by G and of Equation (2) by
u and subtracting and integrating over the domain of interest
Q and the time variable t gives

J J G'i/ u - G ~2 2 U - u'i/ 2 G + u ~2 G dr dt
t=-oo Q
(3)

u 6(r-r
_ _ 0 )o(t-t 0 ) - Gy(r,t)dr dt

t=-oo
J J
Q

Using Gauss' Theorem in space and time gives

J J G'i/u.n - u'i/G.n dr dt

t=-oo r

uo(r-r ) o(t-t ) Gy(r,t)dr dt

J
_ _0 o
J
t=-oo Q
 193

r
c, u(r ,t )
1. _0 0 I
t=-co
J
(l
Gy(r,t)dr dt (4)

where c,
1.
, for r_0 inside (l

for r_0 on a smooth part of the boundary r

o for r
_0
outside (l

and n is the unit outward normal at the field point.

Consider that the only source term is a point source y

<;!t a point S whose position vector is rso that we may replace
y in Equation (4) by yo (r-r
_ _s
). _s

The fundamental solution of the 3D wave equation is

G(r,t,r ,t0 ) (5)

_ _0 41fR

where R Ir_ - r_0 I

R
and t =t
ret 0 c

t ret is referred to as the retarded time.

Evaluating VG from Equation (5), and substituting for G

and VG in Equation (4), we find that the integrations in time
may be evaluated analytically and Equation (4) becomes

y(:s,t ret )
c, u(r ,t )
1. _0 0 41fR
s
+
Jr 41fR [:~J t dr
ret

R.n R.n
f
J 41fR2
u(r,t
_ ret )dr_ +
J 41fcR u(:,tret)d: (6)
r r

where R Ir_s -r_0 I

s

r-r
and R .:::....£
R
 194

Equation (6) is the basic equation for BEREPOT. Since the pot-
ential u(r ,t ) is expressed solely in quantities at previous
_0 0
time steps, this method is explicit and requires no matrix
solution. Note furthermore that neither time nor volume-
integration has to be performed. The only integration is over
the boundary r of the problem domain.

3 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

The only unknown in Equation (6) is au/an. This may be elim-

inated by application of the boundary cond.i.tions. BEREPOT allows
for two types of boundary condition.
au
i) Rigid 0 (7)
an

.au au
ii) Radiation + 0 (8)
an c at

4 NUMERICAL IMPLEMENTATION

By dividing the problem boundary into elements we may write

Equation (6) in the following discretized form

c,u(r ,t )
~ _0 0 ~ 4lTR
</>T dr
elements
re

~
R.n
+
elements
f 4lTR2
r
e

R.n
+ L fr 4lTcR
dr (9)
elements
e

where r is the part of the boundary represented by element e

ne
u is the vector of nodal potentials for element e
_e
and </> are the appropriate element interpolation functions

The element used in BEREPOT is a complete bi-quadratic

quadrilateral. Although integrations with respect to time have
been eliminated the solution at any time must be calculated by
time stepping from the initial conditions and it is found that
best results are obtained by calculating t ret using quadratic
interpolation in time.
 195

5 VELOCITIES AND PRESSURES

The velocity v at any point is given by

v = 'i'u (10)

and hence taking the gradient of Equation (6) gives an expression

for velocities.

'i'u(r ,t )
_0 0

3(R.n)R-n r 3(R.n)R-n
+
I
r
41TR 3 u(:,tret)d: +
J
r
41TCR' u(:,tret)d:

I
(R.n)R R
+
Jr 41TC'R
u(r,t
_ ret )dr_ + 41TR' [~~L dr +
r ret

R
+ r ---
} 41TCR [~~t dr (11 )

r ret

r - r
where R ~
_s R
s

Finally, Bernoulli's Equation is used to calculate the

pressure p

au tp v' o
p at + + p (12)

6 IDENTIFICATION OF AREAS IN SHADOW

If during the computation of the potential at a particular node

there is no direct line of sight between the observation point
r and the field<point r then there is no contribution to the
p8tential at r from that part of the boundary. Likewise, if
there is no lige Qf si.gllt between the observation point rand
the source point r then there is no contribution to the 0
potential at r frgm the source term. It is therefore necessary
to check for l~ne of sight between the observation and field/
 196

source points unless it is obvious from the geometry that every

point can see every other point.

7 TEST EXAMPLE

Source function in a rectangular box

The domain of this problem is a rectangular box bounded by

the planes

x = 0 y o z = 0
x = 3 y 4 z =5

The boundary of the box was discretized by dividing it into

32 boundary elements. The discretization is shown in Figure 1.
The wave speed was taken as 0.2 and the mass density of the
medium as 1.0. (see figure 1)

A pulse source was placed at (1,2,3) given mathematically

by

y(t) = 0 t < 0

y(t) J!.)'
-le
0 < t <

y(t) exp {_ (t_;)2 } <t < 8

y(t) 0 8 < t

Note: e is the base of Natural Logarithms (e = 2.718).

An exact solution computed using SOMMIS (Solution Method by

Mirror Sources) is given in (6) for the velocity potential at
(0,1,2)~ The solution obtained using BEREPOT is compared with
this solution in Fig. 2. As can be seen, the agreement between
the two methods is quite good. (see figure 2)
 197

8 CONCLUSIONS

The Boundary Element Method is extremely well suited to the

solution of the wave equation. It's chief advantages are

i) The method produces accurate and stable

results
ii) The solution algorithm is very elegant.
No solution of a set of $imultaneous
equations is required.
iii) Data preparation is simple. Only the
boundary of the problem needs to be ,discretized.

BEREPOT has now been incorporated into the BEASY system

which is a general boundary element package for the solution
of problems in potential theory and stress analysis.

REFERENCES

1. SHAW, P.S. Diffraction of Acoustic Pulses by Obstacles of

Arbitrary Shape with a Robin Boundary Condition. Jnl.
Acoust.Soc. of Am. VOl. 41 No.4 (1967) pp. 855-859.

2. MITZNER, K.M. Numerical Solution for Transient Scattering

from a Hard Surface of Arbitrary Shape - Retarded Potential
Technique Jnl.Acoust.Soc. of Am.Vol.42 No.2 (1967) pp.391
- 397.

3. SHAW, R.P. and ENGLISH, J.A. Transient Acoustic Scattering

by a Free (Pressure Release) Sphere Jnl. Sound and Vibration
Vol. 30 No.3 (1972) pp.321-'331.

4. SHAW, R.P. An Outer Boundary Integral Equation Applied to

Transient Wave Scattering in an Inhomogeneous Medium Jnl.
of Appl. Mech. Vol.42, No.1 March (1975)pp.147-152.

5. GEERS, T.L. Boundary-Element Methods for Transient Response

Analysis in Computational Methods for Transient Response
Analysi,s, North Holland, eds. T. Belytshko and T.J.R. Hughes.

6. GROENENBOOM, P.H.L. The Application of Boundary Elements

to Steady and Unsteady Potential Fluid Flow Problems in TWo
and Three Dimensions in Boundary 'Element Methods, Procs. of
the Third Int. Seminar, Irvine, CA, July 1981 (ed. C.A.
Brebbia) CML Publications and' springer Verlag, Berlin, 1981.
198

2'1 ~o

.).'1 30 3,

31 3?

3l 3~ lit

~J 'l..S

.l.3 ~'t 1$

:LS :l.b

IS I .. 17

;2.'::. :l.1t

'" '"3 IS
, ~ 'I
I' :l.$

'is (" ?:, It 1'6 '20 '22.

\0

.:2.'1
:u 31
I~ ~ S & 1'+ l'l.

0, '1 5 I 2- 1'1 ,q 2.1

b I'i! 10 I 2. ~ 12. 20 ,.II

1\ 12-

10 ,2.
"
1'3 lit

'f ,'I .w

IS I~

2.7

t 1

Fig. 1 Boundary Element Mesh

 0.2 Pulse Source at (1,2,3) Wave Speed c = 0.2
SOMMIS Density 1.0
BEREPOT Time Step ~t 1.0

0.15
...."
.~
..
."
o
'"t- 0.1
....
...."o
<II
>

0.05

-0.05~1--------~------~--------~------~--------4--------r--------~------~-------+------___
o 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time t

Fig.2. Velocity Potential at (0,1,2,)

....
'"''"'
Chapter 13

ELASTICITY PROBLEMS

,D.J. Danson

Computational Mechanics Centre, Southampton, U.K.

1• INTRODUCTION

Probably the commonest type of analysis undertaken by engineers

in practice is linear isotropic stress analysis. Even when
geometric or material non-linearities exist, or when the problem
is anisotropic, linear isotropic stress analysis is undertaken
as a first approximation in order to save the time and effort
which is required when these non-linear properties are taken
into account.

The Boundary Element Method (BEM) is particularly well

suited to this type of problem, since a simple fundamental
solution (The Kelvin solution) is available.

We shall briefly examine the governing equations of

elasticity and then show how the boundary integral formulation
follows directly from Maxwell-Betti's reciprocal theorem. The
2D, 3D and axisymmetric cases are then examined in detail and
the necessary kernel functions derived. Solutions at the
boundary and at internal points are obtained.

2. GOVERNING EQUATIONS

The equilibrium equations in elastostatics are

cr ••• [ul + b.(x) = 0 (1)

1.J,J 1.

where

(1) The indices i and j range from 1 to 3 and refer to

Cartesian coordinate directions x.
1.
(2) bi(x) is the body force/unit volume
(3) cr •• [ul is the stress field corresponding to the
1.J displacements u.(x)
1.

201
202

(4) . means partial differentiation with respect to x.

oJ J
(5) When an index is repeated in any particular term a
summation over that index is implied. This summation
convention is due to Einstein.

The above nO'cation is called 'Cartesian Tensor' notation.

The stress-displacement relationships for an isotropic

elastic material are

a . . (x) AO .. uk k + ~(u . . + u .. ) (2)

~J ~J, ~oJ J,~

where A and ~ are Lame's constants which may be expressed in

terms of the more familiar Young's modulus E and· Poisson's
ratio \) by
\)E
(1+\) (1-2\)
(3)
E
~ = '2[i'+v)

~ is also called the shear modulus. 0 .. is the Kronecker

~J
Delta whose properties are

0 ..
~J
o i " j
0 .. i
~J

The problem is the solution of Equation lover a domain Q

subject to boundary conditions on the boundary r of Q In a
well posed problem at any given point on the boundary either
the displacements u.(x) or the tractions t.[uj will be known.
The tractions are d~fined by ~

a .. [ujn.(x) (4)
~J J

We may also express the strain tensor E •• in terms of dis-

placements ~J

E •• Hu .. + U •• ) (5)
~J ~.J J,~

3. BOUNDARY INTEGRAL FORMULATION

As the name of the formulation implies we wish to derive

relationships involving unknown values of functions at the
boundary only. It seems natural therefore to begin from the
 203

divergence theorem which relates a domain integral to a

surface integral.

J a . . (y)dfl
1,1 y
= J. n.1 (y)a.1 (y)drY (6)
fI r
For the theorem to be valid the vector ai(y) must be contin-
uously differentiable in fI and on r. Let us consider two
arbitrary continuously differentiable displacement fields
ai(y) and ai(y) and their corresponding stress fields aij[a]
and a . . [a].
1J
Applying the divergence theorem to the product ai(y) a .. [a]
gives 1J

J {a. 1.
(y)a .. . [a] + a. . (y)a . • [a]}dfl
1.J,] 1.,J 1.J Y J a.(y)a .. [a]n.(y)dr Y
1. 1.J J
fI r (7)

Now since i and are dummy indices we may interchange them.

Thus

a . . (y)a • • [a] Ha . . (y)a • . [a] + a .• (y)a .. [a])

1.,] 1.J 1.,] 1.J J,1. J1

= Ha 1.,J
.. (y) + . . (y)}a 1.J
aJ,1. . • [a] (8)

From the symmetry of the stress tensor a... From Equation G)

this becomes 1J

a1.,]
.. (y)a 1.J
•• [a] E• •
1J
[a]a • . [a"]
1.J
(9)

so that Equation (7) becomes

J{a.1. (y) a1J.J

.. . [od + E •• [
1.J
a] a .. [a] dfl
1.J Y
a.(y)a .. [a]n.(y)dr
1. 1.J J Y
( 10)

Similarly we may apply the divergence theorem to the

product a.(y)a .. [S) to get
1. 1J

J{a.(y)a
1
. . . [a)
1J , J
+ E
iJ
.[a)a .. [S]}dfl
1J Y
= Ja.(y)a
1
.. [a)n.(y)dr
1J J Y
fI r (11)

Now from Maxwell-Betti'sreciprocal theorem

204

J E 1J
•• [llja .. [ajdQ
1J Y= J E ••
1J
[aja .. [ajdQ
1J Y
Q Q

so that we may subtract Equation (11) from (10) to get

r
oj {a.(y)a .• • [aj - a.(y)a . . . [a]}dQ
1 1J,] 1 1.J,J Y
Q

J {a.(y)a .. [aj
1 1J
- a.(y)a .. [a]}n.(y)dr
1. 1J J Y
(13)
r

We now let the displacement field ai(y) be that corres-

ponding to the actual equilibrium state of the body. Thus

~i(Y) becomes ui(y)

a . . • [aj becomes -b.(y) (from Equation (1»
1J,J 1
o .. [ajn.(y) becomes the tractions acting on the surface
1J J t. [uj (from Equation (4».
1

For displacement field ai we consider a unit point load in

an infinite elastic medium. This is equivalent to putting the
body forces bi equal to the Dirac delta function in each
coordinate direction in turn. since we are now effectively
considering three different load cases we must add another
index to all the terms in Equation (13) that refer to the
equilibrium state a. If k is the direction of the unit point
load then bi becomes 0ik~(xm-ym) where ~(xm-ym) is the Dirac
delta function, whose properties are that

(14)

J6(xm-ym)dQy
a11
space

Hence a valuable property of the Dirac delta function is

f
a11
f(y)6(x -y )dQ
m m y
f(x) ( 15)

space
 205

where f is any function of y.

O •• [(3] becomes Sk' .(x,y)

~J ~J

The solution for (i.e. the displacements at any point du~

to) a unit point load in an infinite elastic medium is known.
It was deduced by Kelvin, and we can use it for 3D elasticity
problems. If we integrate this solution along an infinite
line we get the solution for a line load of unit intensity in
an infinite elastic medium which can be used to solve plane
strain and, hence, by modifying Young's modulus and Poisson's
ratio, plane stress problems. If we integrate the Kelvin
solution around a circle we can solve axisymmetric problems.

A solution also exists for a unit point load in a semi-

infinite elastic medium. This solution was derived by Mindlin
[1] and enables us to solve problems (e.g. soil mechanics
problems) where there is a large flat unstressed surface (e.g.
the surface of the ground) without having t.o model that surface
(since the solution automatically satisfies the boundary
conditions there). Doubtless one could, if one so wished,
integrate this solution along an infinite line or a circle to
solve semi-infinite 2D or axisymmetric problems.

The form of these 'fundamental solutions' as they are

known need not concern us here. For the moment it is sufficient
to know that they exist.

Let us say that the fundamental solution for our particular

problem is

Uki(x,y) = some analytical expression (16)

where Uki(x,y) is the displacement in the i direction at y due

to a unit load applied in the k direction at x. 0ij j[(3)
becomes -oki6(xm-~m) from Equation (1). Thus equatio~ (13)
becomes

- J Uki(x,y)bi(y,)dny u.(y)Ok.6(X -y )dn

~ ~ m m y
n

J Uk·(x,y)t.[u]dry
r
~ ~
- fr u. (y)Sk"
~ ~J
(x,y)n. (y)dr
J Y

Now
206

Ju,(y)ok,6(x
l. l.
-y)dQ
m m y J uk(y)6(xm-ym)dQy (18)

And putting
Sk,,(x,y)n,(y) = Tk,(x,y) (19)
l.J J l.
we have

J Uk,(x,y)t,[u]dr
l. l.
- Tk,(x,y)u, (y)dr
Y J l. l. Y
r r

Uk' (x,y)b, (y)dQ (20)

l. l. Y

Tki(x,y) may be computed from the Kelvin solution Uki(x,y)

USl.ng the stress-displacement relations and Equation (19). Thus

Tki(x,y) = another analytical expression (21)

Equation (20) expresses the displacement at an internal point

in te'rms of boundary values til u] and ui (y) and a domain
integral whose integrand consists entirely of known functions
and can therefore be evaluated numerically.

This domain integral which is necessary to cope with the

body forces bi(y) is a nuisance as in practice it has to be
evaluated numerically which means that the body has to be
divided up into integration cells thus increasing the amount
of data preparation required to run a particular problem.
However, in many practical problems the body forces are not
significant and there is no necessity to evaluate any domain
integrals. Moreover Cruse [2],[31 has shown that for most
of the commonly encountered body forces such as gravity,
rotational inertia or steady state thermal loads the domain
integral in Equation (20) may be reduced to a surface integral
by a further application of the divergence theorem. This
ability to deal with mos't body forces without recourse to
integration cells greatly increases the usefulness of the
boundary element method.

If we now take the point x to the boundary we shall arrive

at an expression involving only boundary unknowns. However,
the left hand side becomes ~i(x)ui(x). We have already seen
that when x is inside the boundary ~i(x) = 0ki' It is also
fairly obvious that Cki(x) = 0 when x is outside the boundary.
The evaluation of Cki{x) is more complicated when x is on the
 207

boundary but it is no surprise to learn that for a smooth

boundary Cki(x) = ~oki' Thus we have for boundary points

Tk , (x,y)u, (y)dr
1. 1. Y
r (22)

= J Uk,(x,y)t,[u]dr Y + J Uk,(x,y)b,(y)dQY
1. 1. 1. 1.
r Q

It is necessary to discretize Equation (22) in some way

in order to set up a system of linear equations which can then
be solved. Ue do this by dividing the boundary into 'elements'
and then making some assumption regarding the distribution of
ui(y) and ti[u] within anyone element. We may decide to keep
these functions constant over one element and thus define one
point, the node, in the middle of the element which has this
value. If we decide thatui(y) and ti[u] should vary linearly
we may define a node at each end of the element (for a one
dimensional element) so that we can interpolate between them.
A quadratic variation of ui(y) and ti[u] would require three
nodes, a cubic variation four nodes and so on. We may define
the value of ui(y) and ti[u] on an element in terms of nodal
values and interpolation functions in an exactly analogous way
to finite elements. Thus for anyone element

(23)

where $ is a vector containing the interpolation functions and

u~(y) contains the nodal values of ui(y). A similar expression
eiists for ti[U].

Substituting of Equation (23) into a discretized form of

(22) will give

Cki (x)! T~i

n (x) + l.<;' J Tk,(x,Y)$ Tdr u,(y)
1.
n
_ y_1.
elements r
e (24)

T n
Uk,(x,y)$ dr y_1.
t,(y) Uk' (x,y)b, (y)dQ
1. _ 1. 1. Y

where re is the eth boundary element. It should be noted that

the nodal values u~(y) and ~i(Y) are taken outside the integrals.

The integrals may be evaluated by any suitable method such

208

as Gaussian Quadrature and we may write Equation (24) in

matrix form as

HU=GP+B (25)

where H contains the results of all the integrations

J Tk·(x,y)~Tdr with Cki(x)~T added when y is on the same
r ~ - y ..
e
element as x.
U is a vector containing all the nodal ui(y) values for
- all the elements.
G contains the results of all the integrations
-
Jr Uk' (x,y)~ Tdr y
~ ~
e
P is a vector containg all the nodal t~(y) values for all
- the elements. ~~
B is a vector containing the results of the domain
integrals J Uk·(x,y)b.(y)dn y
n ~ ~
which may be evaluated

numerically.
This last domain integral may be evaluated numerically by
dividing the body into integration cells. In anyone equation
either the traction or the displacement will be known (assuming
the problem has been correctly formulated). Hence each
equation in (25) contains one and only one unknown and thus
(25) may be rearranged as a system of simultaneous linear
equations,

A x = F (26)

which may be solved by Gauss elimination for the values of the

unknowns x.

Care must be taken when integrating over elements con-

taining the node under consideration as both Uki(x,y) and
Tki (x,y) are singular at x = y. Uki (x,y) e. O(l/r) for 3D
problems and the integral may be performed analytically to
give finite values of Gki for the element containing the node
under consideration. However Tki (x, y) e: O( 1/r 2 ) and
J Tk·(x,y)dr must be interpreted as the Cauchy principal value.
r ~ y

There is a simpler way of computing the diagonal term

which is to observe that Equation (25) must hold when no
traction or body forces are applied so that Equation (25)
reduces to
H U = 0 (27)

By putting U equal to unit rigid body displacements in each

 209

coordinate direction in turn enough equations may be generated

to compute those coefficients of the H matrix that relate a
node to the element containing it in terms of the other
coefficients. However, the author does not recommend using
this method of evaluating the diagonal terms for the following
reasons

1. If there are planes of symmetry in the problem then

the boundary element method can take advantage of
this fact and only part of the problem need be dis-
cretized. Moreover, it is not necessary to place
elements on the plane of symmetry. However, if there
is a plane of symmetry about the plane x = 0, say, then
one cannot apply a rigid body motion in the x
direct~on as this would not be a symmetric displace-
ment field about the plane x = O.

2. In axisymmetric problemsa similar difficulty exists.

The concept of a rigid body motion in the radial
direction is meaningless.

3. One of the advantages of the boundary element method

is that one can easily handle problems in 'which the
boundaries are at infinity (e.g. soil mechanics
problems). However, if a rigid body motion is applied
to a hole, "tractions are introduced at that hole
unless a similar rigid body motion is applied to the
infinite boundary. The contribution from the rigid
body motion is not zero and thus Equation (27) does
not apply.

4. There will always be some slight error when evaluating

the off diagonal terms of the H matrix. If the
diagonal term is calculated by adding together all
the offdiagonal terms then the errors will tend to
accumulate and the diagonal term will be the least
accurately evaluated.

For all these reasons it is recommended that the analytical

and numerical techniques that are available for calculating
Cauchy Principal Values of integrals are used to calculate the
diagonal term directly.

4. TWO DIMENSIONAL ELASTICITY PROBLEMS

The stress-strain relationships for linear 3D isotropic

elasticity are

(28)

These may be inverted to give

210

(29)

In plane strain problems E = Eyz = EZZ = 0 and so Equation

(28), but not Equation (29~! is valid with the indices
running from 1 to 2.

In plane stress problems o~z 0yz = ozz = 0 and so Equation

(29), but not Equation (28) , is valid with the indices
running from 1 to 2. Inverting this two dimensional form of
Equation (29) gives

(30)

Defining two new constants E' and v' such that

E' = 1+2v E and v' --1"+V

v (31)
~

and inverting these relationships to get

E' _ v'
E = 1-v'2 and (32)
- 1-v'

We may write Equation (30) as

(33)

Equation (33) is identical to Equation (28) with E' and

v' replacing E and v. Thus if we can produce a formulation
to solve plane strain problems we can solve plane stress
problems using the same formulation by replacing Young's
modulus and Poisson's ratio with the modified constants E'
and v' defined by Equations (31).

We shall now produce a boundary element formulation for

the solution of 2D plane strain problems.

Fundamental Solution
The stress-displacement relations are (from Equation (2»

O •• (x) = AC .. uk k + jJ(u . . + u . . ) (34)

~J ~J, ~,J J,~

Notice this still holds for 2D only because u 0, which is

true for plane strain but not plane stress. z,z
 211

We need a fundamental solution to plug into Equation (22)

which is our boundary element formulation of all isotropic
linear elasticity problems. Lord Kelvin produced a fundamental
solution for a point load in an infinite three-dimensional
elastic medium viz:

(35)

U~i(x,y) is the displacement at y (the field point) in the i

d1rection due to a unit load applied at x (the force point) in
the k direction in an infinite elastic medium.
(1) R is the distance between y and x
(2) r. are direction cosines defined by
J
y. - x.
r. = J J
J R
We shall integrate Equation (35) along a line to obtain
the plane strain solution. First, without loss of generality,
we may put x on the 3-axis and y in the 1-2 plane (see Fig. 1).
Note that r is the perpendicular distance from y to the 3-axis.

We now integrate Equation (35) along the 3-axis,

+00 00

[Uki (x,y) ]2D 8rr~7~-v) [(3-4V)Oki f ~31 YkYi J

dX3
R3
J (36)

Let us now drop the suffix 2D as we are no longer inter-

ested in the 3D solution. Note that k and i take values of
1 or 2. Put

I' (37)

Unfortunately, if we try and evaluate I' directly we get

an infinite result. The physical meaning of this is that the
deflection of a line load of unit intensity in an infinite
elastic medium is infinite. This is not altogether surprising
as the load is infinitely greater than the point load acting
on the same medium and the supports fnr this medium are
infinitely far away. So it looks as though we cannot find a
fundamental solution for 2D problems •. However, although the
displacements are infinite the strains will be finite and if
we can find the correct strain field then we can satisfy the
virtual displacement considerations on which this boundary
element formulation is based.
212

Let us try and find a pseudo-displacement field which may

be nonsense itself but will give the correct strain field when
differentiated. Differentiate I' with respect to y. before
the integration J

I' .
,J

. x3 Jco _2y.
_J
G r'

Integrating again we get

y.dy. y.dy.
I' = - 2 J~ - 2 J __J ___J = - In r' + A (38)
r' YkYk

where A is an arbitrary constant. We are not particularly

interested in the arbitrary constant which is equivalent only
to a rigid body movement. Thus

I' = 2 In .!.r (39)

The second integral in Equation (36) is much easier to

deal with
dX 3
J """iF -rr2 (40)

Substitution of Equations (39) and (40) into (36) gives

l+v
41TECl-v) {(3-4v)1n r <Ski + rkr i }
1
Uki(x,y) (41)

ri is now defined as (Yi-xi)!r and not (YCxi)!R as we

are now in two dimensions.

Differentiation of Equation (41) and substitution into

the stress-displacement relations (Equation (34» gives the
stress kernels Sk .. (x,y) and forming the inner product of
this with the unL!Jnormal (Equation (19» gives the required
traction kernels
 213

Tki (x,y)

(42)

Boundary Points
We now have all the kernel functions in Equation (22) but we
still need to calculate Cki. We start with Equation (20) which
we know is valid when x is an internal point,

°kiui(x) + f Tki(x,y)ui(y)dfy f Uk,(x,y)t,[u)df

L L Y
f f

Uk' (x,y)b, (y)dn (43)

L L Y

We now take x to the boundary, keeping it as an internal

point by distorting the boundary into a circle in the vicinity
of x. For generality we are not assuming that the boundary is
smooth at x. We split the boundary into two parts - the
circular bit f£ and the rest f - f (Fig. 2). Let us take the
first integral in Equation (43) £

f Tk' (x,y)u, (y)df Y

L L f Tk' (x,y)u, (y)df
L L Y
+rTk , (x,y)u, (y)df
) L L Y
f f-f f
£ £
(44)

We now consider the f£ integral when £ + O. The ui(y)

term may be taken outside the integral since it does not alter
along f£ as £ + O. Thus we are trying to evaluate

lim Tk' (x,y)df (45)

£+0
L Y

The unit vector joining x and y is now identical to the

unit normal vector, hence

n,r. = 1 (46)
J J
rkn i - ri~ = '0 (47)

and r = £
214

--L
dX 3 -:r

Fig. 1 Integration of the 3D fundamental solution

':2

Fig. 2 Boundary Point

 215

so that

(49)

Moreover,
cos 8 and r 2 sin 8 (50)

Hence
82+1T /2

J [(1-2v)oki+ 2rk r i)£ d8} (51)

8 1- 1T /2

x
41T (l-v)

82 +1T /2 82+1T /2 82 +1T /2

(1-2v)
f8 - 1T /2d8+2 I8 -1T/2cos 2 8d8 2
f8 - 1T /2sin8cos8d8
1 __1 __ 1
-8;+;;:/2
- .... 82+1T72- - 82+1T 72- - - -
I
2
I sin8cos8d8
8 1- 1T /2
(1-2v)
J
8 1- 1T /2
d8+2
J
sin 2 8d8
8 1- 1T /2

(52)
And evaluating the integrals gives

4(1-v) (1T+8 2-8 1)

cos28 2 - cos28
+ sin28 1-sin28 2

81T ( l-v)

+sin28 2 - sin28 1

(53)

For a smooth boundary 8 = 1T and I ki simplifies to -!oki.

Consider now the second integral in Equation (43). A

similar argument leads us to consider the integral
216

92+11 /2
l '
l.m
£-+-o
{ l+v
411EU-v) f [(3-4v)ln(f) tiki
9 _11/2
1

(54)

Thus no new term is introduced by the second integral.

For a boundary point we get Equation (22) which is

Ckiui(x) + f Tki(x,y)ui(y)dry f Uk'l. (x,yh,l. (y)dr Y

r r

+ I
Q
Uk'l. (x,y)b,l. (y)dQy (55)

where 1ki = tiki+Iki • (For a smooth boundary Iki -!oki and

thus Cki = itiki ).
To form a set of linear simultaneous equations we have to
discretize the boundary using constant, linear or higher order
elements as discussed previously.

Internal Points
Once the boundary values are known we can calculate the dis-
placements at any internal point from Equation (20). Differ-
entiation of Equation (20) and substitution into the stress
displacement relations (34) enables us to calculate stresses
at internal points. Thus

cr, ,(x) Sk,,(x,y)uk(y)dr

l.J l.J Y
r r

Dk,·(x,y)bk(y)dQ (56)
l.J Y

where
 217

A6 .. Umk,m + p(U· k . + U. k .) (57)

~J ~ oJ J, ~

and
A6 .. Tmk + p(T· k . + T· k .) (58)
~J ,m OIl oJ J, ~

Direct computation of Dkij and Skij is not difficult, All

the necessary mathematical steps are given below, First we
need to differentiate rand r.,
~

r. (59)
~

(Note that we are differentiating with respect to xi')

Also, by definition

y. - x.
~ ~
r. (60)
~ .r

Differentiating

6 ij 1
r .. - - - - r . (y. - x.) (61)
~,J r r2, J ~ ~

Thus from Equation (59)

r.r. - 6 .•
~ J ~J
(62)
r ..
~oJ r

We can now calculate Dkij and Skij'

From Equation (41) we have that

(63)

Differentiating Equation (63) with respect to x. gives

J

U: k .
~ ,J
 218

Interchanging the i and j indices and adding gives

+ 2r.r.rk - rko .. } (65)

1. J 1.J

and putting i = j = m gives

(l+v)Cl-2v)rk
Umk,m = 2wE(1-v)r (66)

Substitution of Equations (65) and (66) into Equation (57)

gives

Dk · • (67)
1.J

A similar process enables the computation of Skij which turns

out to be

- 4r.r.rk + 2vrk (n.r.+n.r.)

1. J 1. J J 1.

+ (1-2v)(2n. r.r.+n.o.k+n.o k .) - (1-4v)n. o .. J (68)

K 1. J 1. J J 1. K 1.J

This completes the formUation for 2D elasticity.

5. THREE-DIMENSIONAL ELASTICITY PROBLEMS

The fomulation for 3D is very similar to 2D. As before the

stress-displacement relations are

cr •• (X) = AO •• U. k + ).l(u •• + u • . ) (69)

1.J 1.J K, 1,] J,1.

The fundamental solution for the 3D case has already

been quoted in Equation (35) and is due to Kelvin:
 219

(70)

U~i(x,y) is the displacement at y (the field point) in the

dLrection due to a unit load applied at x (the force point) in
the k direction in an infinite elastic medium.

(1) R is the distance between y and x

(2) r J· are the direction cosines defined by r. = (y.-x.)/R
J J J
Differentiation of Equation (70) and substitution into
the stress-displacement relations (Equation 69) gives the
stress kernel Skij(x,y) and forming the inner product of this
with the unit normal (Equation (19» gives the required
traction kernel

(70

As before, we have to take special care when we take the force

point x to the boundary and we find that the resulting boundary
integral equation is

Tk . (x,y)u. (y)dr
L L Y f Uk·(x,y)t.(y)dr Y
L L
r

+fUk.(X,Y)b.(Y)dn (72)
L L Y
n
where Cki = 0ki when x is an internal point and Cki = lOki
when x LS on a smooth boundary.

The form of Cki is more complex when x is at a point on

the boundary which is not smooth. When dealing with the 2D
case we actually derived Cki for a non-smooth boundary.
However, in three dimensions there are several types of slope
discontinuities that a domain boundary can have. The most
obvious are an edge type discontinuity and a corner type dis-
continuity and this multiplicity of types of discontinuity
makes it difficult to derive a general form of Cki. The proof
that Cki = lOki for a smooth boundary follows very similar
lines to the 2D case and is given in detail in Brebbia [4].
The general form of Cki is given in [5].

To form a set of linear simultaneous equations we have

220

to discretize the boundary using constant, linear or higher

order elements as discussed in the previous lecture.

Once the boundary values are known we can calculate the

displacements at internal points from Equation (20).
Differentiation of Equation (20) and substitution into the
stress displacement relations (69) enables us to calculate
stresses at internal points. Thus

(J ••
1.J
(x) f Dkij(x,y)~[u]dry - J Skij(x,y)~(y)dry
r r

+ f Dkij(x,y)bk(y)dOy (73)
o

where

~O •• Umk + ~(U·k • + U· k .) (74)

1.J,m 1. oJ J , 1.
and

Sk1.·J· = ~O 1.J,m
.. Tmk + ~(T·k • + T· k .)
1. oJ J ,1.
(75)

Note that the comma denotes differentiation with respect to

the source point x.

Carrying out the differentiations indicated in Equations

(74) and (75) gives

Dkij(x,y)

(76)
and

Sk .. (x,y)
1.J

+ 3v(n.r.+n.r.)rk + (l-2v)(3a r.r.+n.o.k+n.o k .)

1.JJ1. K1.J1.J J1.

- (l-4v)ao .. ] (77)
K 1.J
 221

6. AXISYMMETRIC ELASTICITY PROBLEMS

The formulation reproduced here is due to Cruse, Snow and

Wilson [3]. We start from Equation (20) as usual.

~(x) J Uk. (x,y)t.(y)dfY - J Tk·(x,y)u.(y)dfY

1 1- 1 1
f. f
(78)

Uk. (x,y)b. (y)dn

1 1 Y
The Galerkin Vector
We shall be quoting the Galerkin Vector solution instead of the
displacement solution for our fundamental solution. The
Galerkin vector G for a particular displacement field u is
defined by
V(V.G)
u = V2~ - 2(1-~) (79)

When the Galerkin vector has only one non-zero component then
that non-zero component is known as Love's ~rain function.

Notice that we have dropped tensor notation in Equation

(79) in favour of symbolic notation. This is because in axi-
symmetric problems our coordinate system is no longer Cartesian
and the difficulties in carrying out covariant differentiations
make it easier to use symbolic notation.

The Navier Equations of Elasticity may be written

(~+p)V(V.u) + P V2u + b =0 (80)

where ~,~ are Lame's constants

and b is a body force

Substituting tquation (79) into (80) gives

pV2 {V(V .G)}

-....,2n(..I-:_v~)r- + b =0
(81)

Now three of the operators in this equation are identically

equal, Le.
V2{V(V.G)} _ V{V.(V2G)} - V[V.{V(V.G)}] (82)
222

On simplifying Equation (81) making use of this fact it

transpires that all the terms containing these operators dis-
appear and Equation (81) reduces to
b
(83)

Fundamental Solution
For axisymmetric elasticity analysis the point load x is
generalized to a ring load as shown in Figure 3. Note that the
z total load acting
round the ring is
unity (Le. the
loading is not unity/
unit length). There
are, of course, two
cases: one with the
ring load acting in
the radial (r)
direction and the
other with it acting
in the axial (z)
direction.
r
It turns out
that the Galerkin
vector for the rad-
ial load has no
axial component and
the Galerkin vector
for the axial load
Fig. 3 Axisymmetric Ring Load has no radial com-
ponent. Thus call-
ing these Galerkin vectors Gr and GZ respectively we have that

G e
r ~r

where e and e are unit vectors in the rand z directions

respectively. -z

Substituting Equation (84) into Equation (83) gives

Fr
(85)

and
 223

where Fr and F Z are the body force terms describing the unit
ring loads in~the radial and axial directions respectively.

Since F r has no Z component and FZ has no r component we

may write

F e (86)
Z ~Z

and substituting these relations into Equations (85) enables us

to reduce Equations (85) from vector equations to scalar
equations. Note, however, that care must be taken in evaluating
V2 V2 Gr e r as e r is not a constant vector and makes a contribution
during~the differentiations. Hence we arrive at the scalar
equations
F
r
(V2 -ra- )(V2 -ra-1 G
r )J
(87)
F
Z
and V2V2G
Z )J

where V2 _ 32 +.! ~ + ~2
- 3r2 r dr dZ

The fundamental body force term can be represented

mathematically as before, by using a Dirac delta function.

6(R-r,Z-z)
Thus F F (88)
r Z 21TR

Note that Rand Z are the coordinates of the load point x, and
rand Z are the .coordinates of the field point y.

Fr and F z have the usual Dirac delta function attributes

viz:-

}
F 0
r
R, Z # r, z (89)
F 0
z

J
all
F
r
drl
J
all
F
z
drl

space space

Integral transform methods may be used to obtain solutions

Gr and Gz from Equations (87). The results are given in terms
of Legendre functions of the second kind, as follows
224

IRr" ly2-1 Q~~\Y)

G 81T2jJ
r
(90)
IRr" l y 2-1 Q=!(y)
G 81T2jJ
z

(Z-z) 2 + (R-r) 2
where y 1 +
2Rr

Substituting the first equation of Equations (90) into the

first equation of Equations (84) and then into Equation (79)
gives the terms of the displacement kernel corresponding to
a unit radial load. We call these components Urr and Urz •
Similarly, substituting the second equation of Equations (90)
into the second equation of Equation (84) and then into
Equation (79) gives the terms of the displacement kernel
corresponding to a unit axial load. We call these components
Uzr and UZZ • Substituting Equation (84) into Equation (79)
first gives the displacement kernels in terms of the Galerkin
vector components Gr and Gz •

U 1 {(1-2V)l(V2G _ Gr ) + (l2G r }
rr 2( I-v) r r2 dZ 2

(91)
(l2G r
I dG r
I
U - 2Tf=") -- + ---
rz drdz r dZ

1
a2 Gz
U
zr - ZTT=VT drdz

uzz = ~
1 { (1-2v)V 2 G + d 2 GZ + 1
- aG z }
hI-v) z ar 2 r dr

Legendre Functions are solutions of Legendre's equation

(l-y 2) d 2 w _ 2y dw + {V(V+l)
dy2 dy
-~}
l-y2
w = 0 (92)

This equation has solutions P~(y) and Q~(Y). Q~(Y) is called

a Legendre function of the second kind of degree v and order jJ.
There is a recurrence relation between Legendre functions of
the second kind which may be written
 225

(93)

Putting ~ = 0 this reduces to

dQv(Y)
(y2-1) - - - '"
v(v+1)v' y 2-1 Q-1 (94)
dy . v

And hence

(95)

dQ !(y)
- 4v' y 2-1 ----7"--
dy

Thus we can replace the Legendre function of order -1 in

Equation (90) with expressions involving derivatives of Legendre
functions of order zero. If these new expressions'are sub-
stituted into Equation (91) then we have expressions for the
displacement kernels directly in terms of Legendre functions
of order zero. These are

U = 1 {(3-4V)Q + (Z-Z)2 dQ+! }

rr 1611 2 (1-v)~v'Rr +~ Rr d

U
rz
_ _-'Z=--..::.z'---_ { Q;! _ [Y _ *) d~+y! }
1611 2 (1-v)~rv'Rr
(96)

U = 1 {(3-4V)Q _ (Z-Z)2 dQ_! }

ZZ 161T 2 (1-v)J.11'R'r -! Rr dy

Note that expressions (96) do not contain second or higher

order derivatives of the Legendre functions. This is because
theY'are eliminated as soon as they crop up during the deriva-
tion by remembering that all Legendre functions are solutions
of Legendre's equation, Equation (92).
226

For computational purposes the Legendre functions and their

derivatives are written in terms of elliptic integrals of the
first and second kinds, as follows

Q_~(Y) = kK(k)

kE(k)
- 2(y-1)

ykK(k) - I2(T+y) E(k)

{K(k) _ yE(k)
y-l
}
,fz( l+y)

where K(k) is the elliptic integral of the first kind

E(k) is the elliptic integral of the second kind
k is the modulus of the elliptic integrals and is
given by

k = 11:y (98)

Algorithms are readily available for computation of elliptic

integrals.

Traction Kernels
Traction kernels are computed in the usual way. The displace-
ment kernels are substituted into the stress-displacement
relations and the inner product of the result with the unit
normal at the field point is taken. Expressing the traction
kernels in terms of the displacement kernels and their deri-
vatives gives

au J
T
rz
2 [{ I-v
Il 1-2v az +
rz v
1-2v
r,..E
u au 1~
r + ---E.!".J
ar
1 (au rr
z + zlaz + -ar-J
1
au rz
nr
(99)
1
ilLr{
2 I-v au zr
ar
v zr zz[U
au)} (au
az
nr + .!l~
au 1
2 az + ~J
T 1-2v + 1-2v -r- + n
zr ar zJ
 227

T
zz
2J.l[{~
1-2\1
au zz + _.~ (U zr + aUzrJ)}n + ..!.(aU zr + au zz ) n
az 1-2\1 r ar z 2 az ar r
J

Boundary Formulation
Equation (78) represents the displacement at an interior point
in terms of the displacements and tractions on the boundary.
Since these are not known initially we must take the point x
to the boundary in the usual way in order to set up a system
of simultaneous equations which when solved will give the
complete boundary solution. First, however, we convert the
surface integrals in Equation (7~ to contour integrals by
integrating with respect to e analytically. Since the axi-
symmetric nature of the problem ensures that the integrands
are constant with respect to e this is trivial and yields

~(x) = J 2~r Uk·(x,y)t.(y)dsy - f 2~r Tk · (x,y)u. (y)dsY

~ ~ ~ ~
s s

2~r Uk.(x,y)b.(y)dA ( 100)

~ ~ Y

Now we can take x to the boundary. As before, the

singular nature of the traction kernel introduces an extra
term so that on the boundary Equation (100) becomes

(Oki + Iki)ui(x) + f 2~r Tki(x,y)ui(y)ds

s

2~r Uk.(x,y)b.(y)dA
~ ~ Y
s A
( 101)

This extra term is evaluated as before by distorting the

boundary as shown in Figure 2 so that the point x remains an
internal point and examining the limit of the contribution of
the integration over s£ as £ + 0 gives

£
Lim
+ 0
e2
f 2~r£ Tki de (102)
e1

Since r + R as £ + 0 this may be written

 228

2rrr Lim ( 103)

£ ~ 0

Expanding the Legendre functions for small values of £ leads to

Equation (53). In other words Iki , and hence Cki(= 0ki + Iki) ,
have identical values in the axisymmetric and 2D cases.

Internal Points
After obtaining the boundary solution in the usual way
Equation (78) may be used to obtain the displacements at inter-
nal points. Differentiation of Equation (7S) and substitution
into the stress displacement relations enables stresses at
internal points to be calculated. This generates a quite
unbelievable quantity of algebra but is perfectly possible.

REFERENCES

1. Mindlin, R.D., 'Force at a Point in the Interior of a

Semi-infinite Solid' Physics, 7, pp.145 (1936).

2. Cruse, T.A. 'Boundary-integral Equation Method for Three-

Dimensional Elastic Fracture Mechanics Analysis',
AFOSR-TR-75-0813, May (1975).

3. Cruse, T.A., Snow, D.W. and Wilson, R.B., 'Numerical

Solutions in Axisymmetric Elasticity', Computers and
Structures, pp.445 (1977).

4. Brebbia, C.A. 'The Boundary Element Method for Engineers,

Pentech Press, London (1978).

5. Hartmann, F. 'Computing the C-Matrix in Non-smooth

Boundary Points. New Developments in Boundary Element
Methods, C.A. Brebbia (Ed) CML Publications 1980.

6. Danson, D.J. 'A Boundary Element Formulation of Problems

in Linear Isotropic Elasticity with Body Forces',
Boundary Element Methods, C.A. Brebbia (Ed) Springer
Verlag, Berlin (1981).
7. Keramidis, G. 'A Numerical Solution for Axially Symmetrical
Elasticity Problems' Int. J. Solid Struc. 11, 493-500
(1975).
 229

APPENDIX

The amount of algebra required to calculate the kernels for the

displacement equation (78) and, more particularly, the stress
equation which is achieved by differentiating Equation (78)
with respect to Rand Z and substituting them in the stress-
displacement relations, known as the Lame equations in axi-
symmetric elasticity, is considerable.

The Lame equations are

(J
rr (1+v)~7-2v) {(l-V) aR
au +
v
(u
lR: aw)}
+ az

E
(J
zz
m aw
(1+v) U-2v) { (l-v) az
+
v{i + ~~)}

(Jee (1+V;(1-2V) {(l-V) ~+ (au

R v aR + az
aw)}

E
m raw + au)
(Jre = 2Ti"+VT aR az

First we list the Legendre functions and their derivatives in

terms of the elliptic integrals K and E. Note that in the
equations above we have used Em for Young's modulus to avoid
confusion with the elliptic integral of the second kind E.

Q = kK
-~

dQ_~ kE
--cry = - 2TY=1T

23y2 + 9
8(y-D

[K -~)
y-l
230

Next the kernels needed for the displacement equation

U l+v {(3-4V)Q
(Z-Z)2
+--- d Q+ 1}
rr 87T 2 E (l-v)1Rr +! Rr dy
m

+ (Z-Z)2 [d 2Q +! ~ _ 2. d Q+!'}
Rr dy2 ar 2r dy J

d 2Q dQ
+ -Z-z { (Z-z) -- +! -ay - 2 - +!J]
2 -
Rr dy az dy

( l+v)(Z-z)
U
rz

au rz (1+v)(Z-z) {(ER _ y) aaYr d 2 Q+!

-ar- = 87T2E (l-v)rlRr
m
~
 231

_ [ER _Y)dQ+dy ~ - Q+ ~ ]
-2-_

U
zr
(l+v)(Z-z) {[E _ )dQ_~ _ Q_! }
81T'Em(1-v)r,!Rr R y dy 2

au
---ar;
zr (l+v)(Z-z) {[r 2
- - y ) () y d Q_12
81T'E (l-v)r1Rr
m
R ~ ar

l+v { (3-4v)Q_~ (Z-z)' dQ_~ }

uzz ~ dy
81T' Em (l-v) IRr

au
a~z ; l+v
81T'E (l-v)1Rr
{(3-4V) (ir.
ar
dQ_! _
dy
Q_~)
zr
m
232

auzz _ l+v ~ ay dQ_~

-;;;-z - (3-4v) " - d -
o 87T2E (l-v)1Rr" oZ y
m

+ Z-z {2 dQ_! _ (Z-z) oy d 2 Q_! } ]

Rr dy az dy2

Finally, the kernels for the stress equation

au
~rRr =
o
1+v
{" dQ
. (3-4v) ray ~ _
87T 2E (l-v)1Rr" . aR dy
Q
2R
-.:!:i)
m

d2 Q dQ
+ (Z-Z)2 ray ~ _ 2- ~)}
Rr aR dy2 2R dy

aU rr l+v [(3-4V) ~ d Q+!

-az- = 87T 2E (l-v)1Rr"
m
az dy

d 2Q dQ
+! + 2 - +l}
+ -Z-z { (Z-z) -ay - - - ]
Rr az dy2 dy

mrz (l+v) (Z-z) {[E. _ y) ay ~

~Q

---ar- = 87T 2E (1-v)rlRr" R aR dy2

m

-y)--+1
au rz l+v d2Q
[ r ay
az-= 87T 2E (l-v)rlRr"
(Z-z){[-
R az dy'
m
 233

au d2 Q
zr (1+v)(Z-z) {[~ _ )~---=l
--aR =
8TI2E (1-v)rfu
R Y aR d
y
2

+ ..!.[l.
2 R
-3 lr _ 3rJ'" dQ_!
aR R2 dy
+ Q_! }
4R

+ [~-
R
yJd Q-! - Q_! ]
dy 2

a~~z = 1+v {O-4V) ray d Q_! - Q-!J

STI 2 E (1-v)fu aR dy 2R
m

+~-­
(Z-Z)2
Rr

1+v
~0-4v) ay dQ_!
3Z--;r-y
STI 2 E (1-v)fu
m

- ~
Z
Rr
{
(z-z) -
ay d 2 Q_! dQ_~
-- + 2 --
az dy2 dy_
1
}-I

a2 Urr 1+v rO - 4V ) {~~ d 2 Q+! + [~

oRor = STI 2 E (1-v)fu L ar oR dy2 aRar
m

+
[aaRar
2y 3b 1 oy 1 oy~ J
- 2" r aR + R ar
d2 Q
~ +! 9
dQ
+ 4Rr dY }]
+~
234

::~~z = 1+v rCZ-Z){[E. _ )~ ~ d3Q+!

o 8rr2E Cl-v)r1Rr L R Y az aR dy'
m

1+v rCZ -z ) ~ 2.r. {liE. _ J)d3Q+~ _ ~ d2 Q+! }

8rr2E (1-v)rlRr L az az R y dy' 2 dy2
m

+ {CZ-Z) £.:L
3Zaz
+ ~ _~} {[E. _ Jd2Q+~ _.!.
az az R y dy2 2
dQ+!}l
dy J

au rr
[az au rz )
3R + ----ar-
r d2 Q
1+v I (3-4v) {~~ ~ + l(a 2y 1 3Y) dQ+! }
8rr 2 E (l-v)1Rr L 3R 3z dy2 3RdZ - 2R 3z dy
m

d 2 Q+~ )
dY2
 235

3 oy oy 3r oy 5 oy)
- "2 oR ar - 2R2ar - 2R oR

_ 1 02 Y
"2
15 3y )
oRor + 4R2 - 4Rr
+ 3Q+! }
BRr
J

+ Z-z {Z-Z l( oy b:.

r R OZ oz
--.::l
dl Q
dyl
+ ~ --.::l)
oZoz dy2
d2 Q

+ [* - y)
oy oy d l Q+!
az ar ~ + "2 2r az -
1 [3 ay 02y ) dQ+! }
nar dy
236

a~Uzr _ (l+v) (Z-z) [[r ) oy oy d'Q_!

oRor - 81T2E (l-v)r1Rr R - y oR ar
~
m

y [2~ l~)
r ) o2y 5 ay oy
+ {[R - y aRar - "2 aR +"2 r aR ar +
R ar ar
3r ay
- 2R2

lOY} d2 Q
-! {9 ay 3 02 Y
3 oy 3y
- 2R aR ~ + 4r oR - "2 oRar + 4R ar - 4Rr

d'Q
ay oy -!
az ar CiY"'

3
+ -2 [2-lr _~J
2r az azar
d Q_!} +
dy
[E.R _ y) oy
ar
2
d Q_!
dy2

dQ_! + 3Q_! ]
+"21 [3r - 3 ~
ar - ..!.J
Y
R dy 4r

02U
{ay ay d 2 Q_! 1 ay ) d Q_!}
zz
aRaz
1 +v
81T2E (l-v)1Rr
1LO-4V) aR 3z ~y2[a 2 y
+ aR3z - 2R dy az
m

+ z-z{z-z
r R
[r2- ~ _
[zR oz
a2 y
aRaiJ
l -----=l
d2

dy2
Q
_~aR ir -----=lJ
d'
az dy'
Q

+ 1 [2 ~ 2
d Q_! _2 d Q-!1} ]
R aR dy2 R dy)
 237

a2 u d2Q dQ
.zz 1+\1 -i [a 2 y
aRaz = 87T2E (1-\1)&
[
(3-4\1) { aR az
a y ay
CfY2 + aRaz - 2R dy az
1 aY)----=-i}

a2 uzz
azaz

+ ~ dQ_! ]
Rr dy

~ [aU zr au)
zz
ar-
<:J

aR a;- +

rO _4\1){ClY ay --=l + [l:r.... _1- ll)

d2Q dQ
1+\1 ----=-i }
87T 2E (1-\l)1Rr" L aR ar dy2 ClRar 2R ar dy
m

+ 1-2\1 [Q-i _ ay d Q_ i ) + [y 1) Cly d 2Q_! [1 ay y

r 2R aR dy r -i ClR CfY2 + raR - 2Rr

dQ : d'
-! Jaya y la 2 y
3)
+ 2R2 dY + rZ-z {(r
li - y aR az --cryr
Q_! [Er
+ . i - YJ ClRClz

+ z-z
R
[Ila {l r~ aR
ay + 1 ClY} _ a 2 y
i. Clr
ldQ_! _ ay ay d 3 Q_i
ClRClil dy ClR Clr dy'

__9 dQ-']ll
4Rr dy LI
238

3U I
+--
3r
ZZJ

1-2v 3y dQ_!
- -r - -3Z- -
dy+

r
Z-Z {aazy a;
+ -r-
3y [rr l ~Q-!
lJ - YJ~ 5
~Q
-!)
- 2"""'dy2 + dZ3z
32 y [Ir l ~Q-!
lJ: - YJ""'dy2

_ ~
2
d Q_!) + ~
dy R
(~
r
dQ_! _
dy
2.h
3r
d 2Q _!)+
dy2
Z-Z
R
(r3l.3r
3y
az
Chapter 14

ELASTICITY PROBLEMS WITH BODY FORCES

D.J. Danson

Computational Mechanics Centre", Southampton, U.K.

1. INTRODUCTION

The boundary integral equation for elastostatics is

J Uki(x,y)ti(y)df y - J Tki(x,y)u(y)df y
+ Jr Uk' (x,y)b.(y)dn (1)
1. 1. Y
n
For non-zero body forces (b.(y) F 0) Equation (1) contains a
domain integral which must Be evaluated to complete the bound-
ary integral formulation. This appears to be something of a
nuisance if we have to divide the domain into integration cells
in order to evaluate this domain integral since the data pre-
paration necessary to run the problem will be greatly increased.
Fortunately Cruse [1,2] and Danson [3] have indicated how for
some commonly encountered body forces this domain integral may
be replaced by boundary integrals. We shall consider three
commonly encountered body forces, gravitational (i.e. self
weight), rotational inertia and steady state thermal loading.
In all cases we are concerned with reducing the last term of
Equation (1), Bk(x) to boundary integral terms where

r
I
J
Uk' (x,y)b. (y)dQ
1. 1. Y
(2)
n
The Galerkin Tensor
In order to transform the domain integral (2) to an equivalent
boundary integral it is useful to define a tensor ~i(x,y) (the
Galerkin tensor) such that the displacement kernel -(or funda-
mental solution) is given by

239
 240

Gk , ,,(x,y)
Uk' (x,y)
~
= Gk , ,,(x,y) -
~ oJ J
~(r')
-v
(3)

It is worth noting that in the same way that Uki(x,y) may be

regarded as three (in 3D) or two (in 2D) displacement vectors
each corresponding to the direction k in which the unit load is
applied, similarly ~i(x,y) may be regarded as three (in 3D) or
two (in 2D) Galerkin vectors each corresponding to the direction
k in which the unit load is applied. When the Galerkin vector
has only one non-zero component that non-zero component is known
as Love's strain function. We shall see that the Galerkin vector
corresponding to a unit load does in fact have only one component
and that component is parallel to the direction of the unit load.
In other words the Galerkin Tensor Gik(x,y) is zero for i ~ k
(i.e. it is diagonal) and the non-zero coefficients are Love's
strain functions.

Substituting Equation (3) into (2) gives

l(Gk' ,J,,(x,y)
Gk , "CX,y))
C )
J ~ J
J,J~
2(1-v) b i y dQ y (4)

Although Equation (4) looks more complicated thak Equation

(2) it is much easier to arrange Equation (4) in a form that
can be transformed to a boundary integral.

2. TRANSFORMATION TO BOUNDARY INTEGRALS

Gravitational Loads (self weight)

A body of constant mass density bCy) = const., in a constant
gravitational field gi(y) = canst., experiences a constant body
force bi(y) where

(5)

Thus bi(y) roay be taken outside the integral in Equation

(2) and thus using Gauss' theorem

dr y (6)

which is the required boundary integral form.

Rotational Inertia
Let us consider a body of uniform mass density p rotating about
some axis with angular velocity w,. We may without loss of
generali ty consider the axis of r6tation as passing through the
 241

origin of our coordinate system. The acceleration at a point

Yi is given by

fi = c ijk Wj ckpq wp Yq (7)

..
where c ijk is the permutation tensor.

By D'Alembert's principle we may replace this acceleration

by a body force b,and treat the dynamic problem as a static
one - hence

(8)

Expanding Equation (8) using the c-o identity gives

b. p(o. o. - o. o. )w.w yq (9)

~ ~q JP ~p Jq J p

which may be simplified to

b. (10)
~

where g .. ( 11)
~J

Substitution of Equation (10) into (4) gives

d(l (12)
Y

Now ~ {yo Gk . (x,y)} YJ' Gk · (x,y) + 8 . Gk . (x,y)

aYm J ~,m ~,mrn illJ ~,m

y. Gk · (x,y) + Gk . . (x,y) (13)

J 1,mm 1,J

Similarly

i-
Ym
{y. Gk . (x,y)}
J m,l
= y. Gk
J
. (x,y) + Gk . . (x,y)
m,ml J,l
(14)

And using Equations (13) and (14) to eliminate y. Gk . (x,y)

and y. Gk . (x,y) from (12) we get J 1,mm
J m,ml
242

g ..
~J
J -a~ {YoJ
y
Gk · (x,y)} - Gk · .(x,y)
~ ,m ~ oJ
n m (15)

+_I_[G ( ) a 1
.(x,y)}J dn
2(I-v) L:kj,i X,y - ay
m
{Yo Gk
J m,~ Y

Equation (15) is now in a form that can be transformed

to a boundary integral using Gauss' theorem.

Thus Bk(x) = g ..
~J
J y.J Gk · ,m (x,y)nm -
~
Gk · (x,y)n.
~ J
r (16)

Since g .. is symmetric Equation (16) may be simplified slightly

to give~J

( 17)
dr
y

which is the required boundary integral form.

Steady State Thermal Loading

Formulation of the thermoelastic boundary integral equation may
be accomplished by use of an "equivalent body force" approach
or directly from the equations of thermoelasticity. We shall
use the second approach although the equivalent body force
method will yield the same result.

The equilibrium equations in thermoelasticity in the

absence of body forces are

cr •.• [u] = 0 (18)

~J ,J

The stress-displacement relations in isotropic thermo-

elasticity are
vEo .. u E(u . . + U •• )
~J m,m + 1. ,J J ,1. kE8(x)
cr .• (x)
(l+v) (1-2v) - --:r=2V 0 .. ( 19)
~J 2 (1 +v) ~J

where E is Young's modulus

v is Poisson's ratio
 243

k is the coefficient of linear expansion

e(x) is the temperature at x
0" is the Kronecker delta.
1J

Noting that Betti's reciprocal theorem for the thermoelastic

case is

= J c,1J,[Cll{cr,1J,un
kEe[B10"}
+ 1J dn (20)
1-2\1 "y
n
we find that the boundary integral expression is for the thermo-
elastic case

~(x) Jr Uk,(x,y)t,[uldr
1 1 Y
- JTk,(x,y)u,(y)drY
1 1
r r

+ -kE
1
2
- \I
J Uk" 1,1
(x,y)e(y)dnY (21)
n
Differentiating Equation (3) with respect to Yi gives

Gk , .. , (x,y)
(
U ' ,x,y ) () J,J 11
k 1,L = Gk'L,1JJ
'" X,Y - 2(1-\1) (22)

And by changing round dummy indices this becomes

(23)

Thus the domain integral (which we shall call Bk(x) as

before) becomes

Bk(x) = -kE
2
1
- \I
J Uk" 1,1
(x,y)9(y)dflY
n

(24)
 244

For steady state heat conduction e ,,(y) o and we may

write ,JJ

kE
Bk(X) ; 2(1-v) J e(y)Gk , ' "
l.,l.JJ
(x,y) - Gk , ,(x,y) e" (y)dil
1,1. ,JJ Y
(25)
il

which may be transformed to a boundary integral using Green's

second identity,

Thus Bk(x); 2(~:V) f {e(y)Gki,ij(X'Y)

r
- Gk , ,(x,y)e ,(y)}n, dr (26)
1,1 oJ J Y

which is the required boundary integral form.

3, 2D BODY FORCES

The 2D Galerkin Tensor

The Galerkin Tensor corresponding to the 2D Fundamental Solu-
tion is
1+v
Gki ( x,y ) ; 4nE 0ki r 2
in ..!.r (27)

Differentiating Equation (27) twice, performing the

appropriate contractions and substituting into Equation (3)
gives the Fundamental Solution

(28)

We note that Equation (28) differs from the fundamental

solution usually given by a constant, This is not of any great
importance as a constant is equivalent only to rigid body
motion. However, we must be consistent in our choice of
fundamental solution so that when dealing with body force
problems the fundamental s-olution represented by Equation (28)
must be chosen,

Gravitational Loads (2D)

For gravitational loads we differentiate Equation (27) and
substitute into Equation (6) to get

( _ l+v
Bk x) - 4nE (29)
r
 245

Thus the boundary integral equation may be written

~(x) J Uk·(x,y)t.[u]dr
L L Y
- JTk' (x,y)u. (y)dr Y
L L
r r
+ J Pk(x,y)dr y (30)
r

where Pk (x,y) = (1;~)r (2 In ~- 1) [bknmrm - :~~~:)) (31)

The boundary integral equation for stresses becomes

(J ij (x) JDkij(x,y)tk[u]dry - JSkij(x,y)uk(y)dry

r r
S~. (x,y)dr (32)
LJ y
r
*
where Sij(x,y) is obtained by substituting Equation (31) into
the stress displacement relations.

Thus S*.. (x,y) AO •• P (x,y) +)J{P . . (x,y) + P . . (x,y)} (33)

LJ LJ m,m L,] J ,L

where the comma denotes differentiation with respect to the

source point x. Differentiating Equation (31) and substituting
into Equation (33) gives

S~.
LJ
1
= -8
11
rL2nmr m(b.Lr.J + b. r.) +1 11 f \)0 ..(2n r b r
J L '1'=V1. LJ m m s s

+ rL1 ~ 2 In ..!.l b n ) - b r (n. r. + n. r . )

r:Jmm mmLJ JL

+ 1-22~ (1 - 2 In..!.) (b.n. + b.n.)}]

r L J J L
(34)

Rotational Inertia (2D)

For the problem to remain two dimensional the axis of rotation
must be either
a) in the pla~e of the problem
b) at right angles to the plane of the problem.
Case a) implies w3 = 0 and Equation (11) . still holds with the
indices ranging from 1 to 2. Case b) implies W1=Ul 2= 0 and
Equation (11) reduces to
246

g .. = p Ol~ <5 •• (35)

l.J l.J

For both cases we write Equation (15)

Bk(x) = J Pk(x,y)dr y (36)

r
where Pk(x,y) = (l+v)r
411E
T(2 In..!. - 1) {n r y g
L: r m m s sk

(37)

The boundary integral equation for stresses is once again

Equation (32) with stj(x,y) defined by Equation (33) as before.
Differentiation of Equation (37) and substitution into Equation
(33) gives

s~.
l.J
1
= -8 f2n r (y g . r. + y g . r.)
11 L m m s Sl. J S SJ 1.

,-M
+ 1
( va.l.J·l2nmr mr s g sqy q + flL - 2 In ill ry g n -n g r rl J1
-v r ~mms s mms s:J

1-2V[
+ -2- 1 - 2 In -
r
l)l(ymgml..n.+y g .n.-[n g .r.+n g .r.Jr)
J m mJ 1. m ml. J m mJ 1.

- r g y (n.r.+n.r.)ll (38)
m ms s 1. J J 1. fJ

Steady State Thermal Loading (2D)

For steady state thermal loads we write Equation (26) as

J Pk(x,y)e(y)dry - Jn (x,y)e ,m (y)nmy

dr
'k
(39)
r r
where
kE
Pk(x,y) = -2(1
-v ) Gk 1.,l.J
· .. (x,y)n.J
(40)
 247

Differentiating Equation (27) and substituting in Equation

(40) gives

Pk(x,y) k ( 1+v ) ( 1 1) }
41T( I-v) In -r - -2 nk - nmrmrk
(41)

r r(ln..!.-..!.)
k r 2

The boundary integral expression for displacements for

the thermoelastic case Equation (21) may now be written

uk(x) f U .(x,y)t.[u] dr - f Tk . (x,y)u. (y)dr

= k1 1. Y 1. 1. Y
r r
r
J Pk (x,y)6(y)dr y - Qk(x,y)6 ,m (y)nm dr y (42)
+
f
r r

Differentiation of Equation (42) and substitution into

the stress displacement relations gives

°ij(x) = f Dkij(x,y)tk(y)dry - f Skij(x,y)~(y)dry

r r

+ Jr s*1.J
.. (x,y) 6(y)dr y - f V*1J•• (x,y)6 ,m (y)nm(y)dry
r r
kE
- -1
2 6(x)o .. (43)
- v 1.J

where

* (x,y) kE
Sij {nmm
r [Ol iJ2' - 2r.r.) + n.r. + n.r.}
-v 1.J 1.J J1.
(44)

and

4. 3D BODY FORCES

The 3D Galerkin Tensor

The Galerkin Tensor corresponding to the 3D Fundamental
Solution is
248

(l+v)R 0ki
Gki(x,y) = 4'1lE (45)

Differentiating Equation (45) twice, performing the approp-

riate contractions and substituting into Equation (3) gives
the fundamental solution

(46)

which is the 3D Kelvin solution.

Gravitational Loads (3D)

For gravitational loads we differentiate Equation (46) and
substitute into Equation (6) to get

(47)

(48)

The boundary integ~al equation for stress is Equation (32)

where for the 3D case S .. (x,y) is obtained in a similar manner
as in the 2D case, whene~

1
+ -1- {vo .. (n r b r - b n ) (49)
-v ~J m m ssm m

~
- -21 (b r [n.r. + n.r.] + [1-2v][b.n. + b.n']}1
mm~J J~ ~J J~.J

Rotational Inertia (3D)

Differentiation of Equation (45) and substitution into
Equation (17) gives

Bk(x) = J Pk(x,y)dr (50)

r
 249

where

(51)

The boundary integral equation for stresses is once again

Equation (32) with S~.(x,y) defined by Equation (33) as before.
Differentiation of E~6ation (51) and substitution into Equation
(33) gives

S~.(x,y)
1.J
1 [{n
= -8
'IT S
r Ym + 2 1(-1 2V ) n } (g. r. + g. r.)
s R -v m lorn J Jm 1.

- Y2 m
R (r g [n.r. + n.r.] + [1-2v][n.g: + n.g. ])}Jl
s sm 1. J J 1. 1.. Jm J lorn

(52)

Steady State 'Thermal Loading (3D)

For steady state thermal loading Equations (39) and (40) apply
in 3D as in 2D.

Differentiating Equation (45) and substituting in

Equation (40) yields

and (53)

The boundary integral expression for displacements is

Equation (42) and for stresses is Equation (43) where this
time

s *.. (x,y) 8 (kE ) 2 {n r (Oi 2j - 3r.r. 1

J + n.r.
1. J
+ r.n. }
1.J 'IT I-v R m m 1- v 1 J 1 J

*
V •• (x,y)
1J
250

5. AXISYNMETRIC BODY FORCES

As in the 2D and 3D cases we are trying to transform the domain

integral in Equation (1) to a boundary integral. Because of
the difficulties with interpreting covariant differentiation
in a non-Cartesian coordinate system (such as a cylindrical
polar system) it is more convenient to use symbolic notation.
Thus we rewrite Equation (2) as

r r z
B(x) =J u ' (x,y).b(y)dQ (55)
- Y

where Ur,z.b Q [Ur.b

- ~ ] (56)
UZ.b

and U U
rr rz
(57)
U
zr
uzz

We replace Ur,z with its Galerkin Vector Equivalent

V(V.Gr,z)
Ur,z V2 Gr,z (58)
Hi-v)

Thus Equation (55) may be written

B (59)

Gravitational Loads (Axisymmetric)

b = [0 , b 1 = constant (60)

We eliminate V2G r ,Z from Equation (59) by using the vector

identity

v xCV x A) V(V.A) - V2A (61)

to get

B r~
J 2(1-v)
V(V.Gr,z).b - V x (V x Gr,z).b dQ
~ ~
(62)
Q
 251

Now we note from the properties of the operator V that

(63 )
and V.{(V x Gr,z) x b} V x (V x Gr,z).b - (V x Gr,z).(V x b)

Since for a constant body force vector b, V.b o and V x

b 0 we may write Equation (62) as

B = J~
2(1-v)
V.{(V.Gr,z)b}
__
- V.{(V x Gr,z) x b} dQ (64)
Q

which may be transformed to a boundary integral using Gauss'

theorem

B - r
~ (V.Gr,z) (b.n) - {(V x Gr,z) x bLn dr
- J 2 (1-v)
(65)

r
Noting that Gr G 0
r
GZ 0 G (66)
z
b 0 b ]

we may write Equation (65) as

raG GI aG
1-2v
2(1-v) laf + :)
n
z
- -
az
r
- n
r

B = b 1-2v aG z aG dr (67)
z
2(1-v) az nz + -- n
ar r
r

Rotational Inertia

b = P w2 f (68)

where f is the vector [r , 0]

so that V x f = 0, V2f = 0 and V(V.f) = 0 (69)

Substituting Equation (68) into Equation (59) gives

r V(V.G r . z )
B pw 2
J
(V2G r ,z).f -
2(1-v)
.f dQ (70)
n
252

Eliminating V(V.Gr,z) using identity (61) this may be written

B pw 2
_ - 2T'f=V) J (71)
Q

Now

r
- f.{n x (V x Gr,z)}dr
(72)

Proof
The last term on the R.H.S. is a triple scalar product. Thus
we may rewrite the R.H.S. as

R.H.S. = J {f(V.Gr,z) - Gr,z(V.f)}.n - {(V x Gr,z) x f}.n dr

r

Using Gauss' theorem to transform this to a domain integral

gives

R.H.S. J V.{f(V.~r,z) - Gr,z(V.f) - (V x Gr,z) x f}dO

Q

Expanding and making use of Equations (69) gives

R.H.S. J {V(v.~r,z)}.~ - {V xCV x Gr,z)}.f dQ

Q

and using iden~ity (61) this reduces to

(V2G r ,z).f dQ
R.H.S.
J
Q
Q.E.D.

{V x (V x f) }.f dO x (V x Gr,z)}dr
Similarly
J
Q
Jr f.{n (73)

Proof
The last term on the R.H.S. is a triple scalar product. Thus
we may rewrite the R.H.S. as

R.H.S. = J {(V x Gr,z) x f}.n dr

r
 253

Using Gauss' theorem to transform this to a domain integral

gives

"R.H.S. = f \1.{(\1 x ~r,z) x~} dO

Q
Expanding and making use of Equations (69) gives

R.H.S. =f f.{\1 x (\1 x Gr,z)}dO Q.E.D.

Q

Substitution of Equations (72) and (73) into (71) gives

B pw 2 J 21-2v
( 1-v )
{
(~ • ~)(\1 • ~
r,z r z
) - (G ' •n)(\1 • f) }
r

Noting that Gr [G
r o1
GZ = 0 , Gzl

f [ r o1 (7

n [n
r nz 1
\1.f 2

Equation (74) may be written

1-2v (aG ) ClG

+ r --.!. n
2(1-v) tr --.!.
Clr - Gr n r Clz z

B pw 2
j 1-2v
2 (1-v)
aG
[r aGz _ 2G n ] _ r - -zn
Clz z z Clr z
dr (75)

Steady State' Thermal Loading

For steady state thermal loads we write the last term in
Equation (21? as

B =
~
~ Je
4-2v.
\1. ur ,z dO
~
(76)
Q

Replacing Ur,z with the right hand side of expression (58) this
becomes "
254

(77)

and noting the vector identity

V.{V(V.A)} = V.(V2A) (78)

which may be obtained by taking the divergence of Equation

(61) this reduces to

~ = 2(~~V) J aV2(V.G r ,z)dQ (79)

Q

For steady state heat conduction V2 8 a and thus we may

write

(80)

which may be transformed to a boundary integral using Green's

second identity

~
kE
= 2(1-v) f 8V(V.~r,z ).~ - r Z
(V.G ' )(V8.n)dr (81)
r
Writing this equation as

~ =f : 8 dr - f Q V8.n dr (82)
r r
we have that

[aarazGz r a2 G
z]z
2
kE
Pz = 2(1-v) --n + - 2- n
az
(83)
kE [ aGr + Gr )
Qr = zn=vy ar r
kE aG z
Qz = zn=vy az
In order to calculate a corresponding boundary integral term
for calculating the stress equation one simply differentiates
 255

Equations (67), (75) and (82) with respect to Rand Z and sub-
stitute in the Lam~ equations. The necessary expressions for
Gr , Gz and their derivatives are listed in the appendix.

REFERENCES

1. CRUSE, T.A. Boundary-integral Equation Method for Three-

Dimensional Elastic Fracture Mechanics Analysis. AFOSR-
TR-75-0813 May 1975.

2. CRUSE, T.A., SNOW, D.W. and WILSON, R.B. Numerical

Solutions in Axisymmetric Elasticity. Computers and
Structures 1977, pp.445.

3. DANSON, D.J. A Boundary Element Formuation of Problems

in Linear Isotropic Elasticity with Body Forces. Boundary
Element Methods. Ed. C.A. Brebbia, Springer Verlag,
Berlin. (1981).
256

APPENDIX

Gr. Gz and their derivatives needed for calculating displace-

ments are

aG r (l+v)iRr Q+ i
az- = 47T 2 E

G
z

aG z (l+v)~ Q-l ay
az- = 47T 2 E az
 257

Their derivatives needed for calculating stresses are

l(Q+!2
aG
r (l+v)1Rr ay + y2-1 d Q+!)
aR 21[2E aR 3R dy

aG r (l+v)1Rr Q+! ay
az 41[2E az
a2_Gr (l+v)fu nay ay + y2- 1) d Q+!
aRar = 41[2 E UaR ar 3Rr dy

+ n~~r + i {~ ~~ + ~ ~~)} Q+ i ]

1 [rhl
+ 2R Carl
2

-
y2-1]}
Jr'2
dQ
CiY
+1
+
{a 3y
oRClr 2 +
1 Cl2y
raRor
258

~G
r (l+v)..'Rr
aRaraz = 41[2 E
[b:.?r. b:. ~
aR ar az
~Q

dy2
+ {ll ay II ay
aRar az
+
aRaz ar

ay [a 2 y 1 ay ) 1 ay a y } dQ+!
+ aR araz + 2r az
+ 2R ar ~ rz

aG z (l+v)..'Rr Q_! dY
az = 41[2E az

a2 G
__
z =
azar
 259

a' Gz ( 1+v ) IRr" ~ay [ ay ) , ---=l

d' Q + {2 b.. .£::L + b.. ~
aR3z' = 41T' E aR az dy' 3z 3R3z 3R az'

(l+v)/Rr {b:.[3 Y)' d'Q_! [2 3y 3'y

41T'E dZ 3z ~ + az azaz

+ b:. 3' YJ + 3'

-Y-
az dZ' 3Z3z'

{ 3' Y 1 [1 3' Y 1 3' Y 1 3Y'}

+ 3R3 r a z + "2 r aR3z + R ar3z + 2Rr ai) Q_! ]

32y 3y 3 2y 3y
{
dZ3r az + aZ3zar
+ ay [a' y 3Y)'} d _! Q
az ar3z + zr1 az CfY
Chapter 15

TIME DEPENDENT PROBLEMS

C. A. Brebbia

University of Southampton

INTRODUCTION

Important advances have recently been made in the solution of

time dependent problems using boundary elements. Some of the
resulting papers have been published in the proceedings of the
latest Boundary Element Conferences (C.A. Brebbia, 1981, 1982,
1983); while more definite work appeared as chapters in the
Progress on Boundary Element Methods Series (C.A. Brebbia,
1981, 1983, 1984). The present chapter attempts to review
some of the advances and applications of boundary elements for
the solution of time dependent problems, including parabolic
and hyperbolic cases with particular reference to temperat-
ture diffusion, wave propagation and e1astodynamics. The case
of diffusion problems follows the formulation described in more
detail in 'Time Dependent Potential Problems' (Wrobel and
Brebbia, 1981). The scalar wave propagation solution has been
analysed in 'Formulation of the Boundary Element Method for
Transient ProblemS governed by the Scalar Wave Equation'
(Mansur and Brebbia, 1982) and 'Numerical Implementation of the
Boundary Element Method far two dimensional Transient Scalar
Wave Propagation Problems' (Mansur and Brebbia, 1982) while
the case of transient e1astodynamics is discussed in 'Transient
E1astodynamics' (Mansur and Brebbia, 1984).

An original new.procedure for forming dynamic matrices in

boundary elements using only the boundary nodes has been
reported in 'Dynamic Analysis in Solid Mechanics by an alter-
native Boundary Element Procedure' (Brebbia and Nardini, 1983)
and 'Transient Dynamic Analysis by the Boundary Element Method'
(Nardini and Brebbia, 1983). The technique allows for e1asto-
dynamic problems to be treated in a similar way as in finite
elements or finite differences, ie the problem can be
reduced to a set of time-dependent differential equations
expressed in matrix form. The free vibrations problem can
then be reduced to the solution of an algebraic eigenvalue

261
 262
problem. The main advantage of the new procedure is that the
integrals need to be computed only once as they are frequency
independent. Hence the approach is extremely economic for
free vibrations when compared to the ones previously presented.
The technique also allows for the general elastodynamics case
to be solved in time rather than in the transform domain
employing the simple fundamental solution of elastostatics.
The results obtained are very accurate as can be seen in some
of the examples presented in this chapter.

TIME DEPENDENT DIFFUSION

Time dependent diffusion problems are of parabolic character

and can be represented by the following equation.
2 au
aV u + b .. - in n (I)
ilt

with the following boundary conditions:

u =u on rl
q =q on r2 (2)

and initial conditions u known in n at the initial time t •

a is a constant dependen~ upon the material properties. 0

Some of the earlier boundary integral solutions for the

diffusion equation were obtained by removing the time
dependency in Equation (1) using the Laplace's transform. The
boundary integral solution in the transform space was then
solved numerically and an inversion was performed to evaluate
the time dependent solution. The technique is generally only
suitable for well defined problems but difficult to use for
general engineering problems. Other authors have proposed
using finite difference schemes in time (Brebbia and Walker.
1979) applying a step by step procedure to advance the solution
in time. This scheme requires the integration of a domain
term which represents the effect of the initial conditions.
It has the disadv;antage· that no major savings in computer time
can be expected When compared against similar schemes used in
classical domain techniques.

Wrobel and,Brebbia (1981, 1983) have investigated the

case of b«;lundary elements in time and space. The approach
employs a time dependent fundamental solution which will be
called u*. For a complete list of. these solutions
see Brebbia and Walker (1979) ;and Brebbia, Telles and Wrobel
. (1983).

Consider first the time and space weighted residual

expression for Equation (1) with the corresponding boundary
. CQnditions .in Equation (2);,: Je :-
 263

2
a'i/ u

t fI
o

(3)

2
Integrating twice by parts the terms in 'i/ and once with
respect to time, the au/at term, applying the causality
principle and taking into consideration the character of the
fundamental solution, one obtains the following inverse
statement:-

au*
at )udfldt +

(4)

The fundamental solution needed for this problem

:corresponds to the adjoint of the original equation, ie:-
264

(5)

Notice that Dirac delta fUnctions -!J. - are functions of

space and time. u* is an exponential type function on both
variables - for its explicit form, see Brebbia, Telles and
Wrobel (1983). After substituting the fundamental solution of
(5) into (4) one obtains

tF

ci ui +
Jf rUq dr dt
•
t0 r

(6)

For the numerical formulation of (6) the boundary is

discretised into elements with prescribed space and time inter-
polation functions. One can also assume that the domain 0 is
divided into a number of integration cells, althou8h this may
not be needed as we shall see.

To solve the time dependent problem given by Equation (6)

two different procedures can be used. The first and somewhat
more conventional consists of integrating over a sufficiently
small time step !J.t (!J.t = tF - t ) over which the unknowns can
be assumed to vary over time wi~a simple function - usually a
constant, linear or quadratic variation. This procedure
implies that the initial condition integral has to be
calculated at the beginning of each time step. The second
procedure, which is more novel, always starts the time
integration process at the original initial time t and hence
there is no need to compute the ini tial value - do&lin -
integral after each step. Furthermore, if the initial
conditions at the start of the process can be expressed as a
harmonic function the domain integral at t in Equation (6)
can be transformed into an equivalent bounaary integral.
Notice that now the time under consideration can be very large
and the integrals, although on the boundary, will need to be
discretised in time as the interpolation functions for the
variables are not valid from time to to t F • This
 265

200., - - Analytical
• F.D.H.
a Linear F.E.H.
v Parabolic F.E.H.
i>. cubic F.E.H"

100

o 200 400 600

t(sec)
200

o~
::s

100

- Analytical
• Constant B.E.H •.
o Linear B.E.H.

o· 200 400 600

~.C)'

~
.. _.~~c_.1i i ~
.~ hu-kc;FC' . ~

~
Figure 1 Surface Temperature of'Plane Plate
 266
discretisation is simply the decomposition of the total
integral with respect to time into a summation of boundary
integrals.

The two procedures are equivalent regarding accuracy but

their computer efficiency is different. Although the second
procedure does not require domain integrations, thus
effectively reducing the dimensionality of the problem, the
influence coefficients need to be" recalculated for each time
step as they depend, through the fundamental solution, on the
actual final time values. For the first procedure, however,
they depend on the value of the time step and so if ~t is
assumed to be constant throughout the analysis the coefficients
can all be computed only once and stored. From these
arguments one can conclude that the first procedure is
generally computationally more efficient that the second,
excluding the cases of problems extending to infinity. In
spite of this, the second approach is the one favoured by the
author for computer coding as it facilitates the use of boundary
elements and is better suited to interfacing with computer
aided design. systems because it does not require the definition
of any internal points.

Example 1
This example studies a plane plate, initially at OOc,
surrounded by a medium at 1000c. Its cross section is
0.1 x O.lm and the values of the thermal conductivity, heat
capacity and heat transfer coefficients are lBkcal/(hmOc),
912 kcal/(m30c~ and 5000 kcal/(hm20 c), respectively.

The surface temperature of the plate is plotted in

Figure 1. Due to symmetry, one quarter of its cross section
needs to be discretised. The finite element analysis employs
five parabolic or cubic elements in time (Brebbia, 1981).
Results using a central finite difference scheme are also
presented.

The discretisation for the BEM analysis consists of only

eight boundary elements (no elements are needed over the
symmetry axes). The time step adopted for this problem is
extremely large and because of this, the BEM with linear time
variation produced oscillations which are, however, much
smaller than the finite difference and finite element ones.
No oscillation was detected for the BEM with constant time
variation, while the linear time variation introduces an
error during the first time interval which damps out very
quickly.

Example 2
For problems with regions extending to infinity, BEM solutions
are· much more economical than finite element ones. In order
to demonstrate this, the case of a circular opening in an
infinite plane region, initially at zero temperature is
 267

o
........... _*_ ...\1.
I
1

BE Mesh

10.
FE Meshes'

u
h=0.2

u
h=l.O
.
__ Analyt ical
B.E.M •

h=S.O

-10
'0 t 10

Figure 2 Discre tisation and Surface Temper ature of cooling hole

in an infinit e domain
268

(b) ' - - _........_ _--'

(c);L---_ _ _ _ _...J (d)L-_ _ _ _ _....J (e) L..::>---_ _ _.....L......J

Figure 3 Turbine Disc (a) FEM Mesh; (b) BEM Discretisation;

(c - e) Boundary Element results for different times
 269
studied next. The radius of the hole is unity, its ambient
temperature equals -10 and the material properties of the
medium are also taken to be unity, for simplicity.

The variation of the ~urface temperature with time is

presented in Figure 2 for various values of the heat transfer
coefficient, and compared with an analytical solution. The
agreement between the two solutions is very good. A time step
of 0.5 was adopted and the analysis carried out until the sur-
face temperature began to drop significantly. For obvious
reasons, only the second numerical approach described in this.
section was employed in this BEM analysis and, due to symmetry,
only one quarter of the interface between hole and medium was .
divided into six boundary elements.

This problem was also studied using finite elements (for

the appropriate reference see Chapter 6 of Progress in Boundary
Element Methods, Volume 1 (Brebbia, 1981) but since the finite
element method is a domain-type technique, the infinite region
had to be limited by a finite, non-conducting boundary. In
order to achieve the same level of accuracy, a time step ten
times smaller (at + 0.05) was required and the domain discret-
ised into 70 triangular elements or three cubic isoparametric
elements.

Example 3
This example is more practical, the temperature variation of
an actual turbine disc is studied here (Figure 3). The initial
temperature of the turbine disc is 295.l oK and the values of
the thermal conductivity, density and specific heat of the
material are l5W/ (mOK), 8221 kg/m3 and 550 J I (kgOK)·,
respectively. There are 18 different zones along the boundary,
each of which with a different set of prescribed values for the
heat transfer coefficient and the temperature of the surround-
ing gas. The time variation at one of such boundary zones is
shown in Figure 4.

The BEM analysis was performed by discretising the boundary

into 90 elements and using no internal points. In order to
simplify the computation, a constant temperature was subtracted
out so as to make the initial temperature equal to zero, thus
avoiding the domain integration. This value was afterwards
added to the solution.

Isotherms at various times are plotted in Figure 3 and

compared to finite element results obbained with 85 parabolic
isoparametric elements and 348 nodes. The agreement was, in
general, excellent (for further details see Chapter ~ of the
above reference).

THE SCALAR WAVE EQUATION

The scalar wave equation is of hyperbolic type and can also

 270

be analysed using boundary elements. It can be written as,

in fl (7)

where c is the wave celerity. The boundary conditions

are the same as before, ie Equation (2) and the initial
conditions are defined by the function and its velocity at time
to·
One can now write the following weighted residual
statement:

- -q)u"" dr dt -

(8)

where u"" is the time and space dependent fundamental solution

for this problem.

Integrating by parts with respect to time and space and

applying causality produces the following statement,

- -
1 a2 u ",,]
--- udfldt +
c2 at 2
t fl
o
 271

2500' 1000

I II
II II
0';< II I II
II ~ I IL
N

i.c:
I II O~ I II
I II ::- I II
I II II II
I II II II
I II II II
.1 II II II
II II II II
II II II II
0' 0
0 100 900 1000 1100 '2500 0 100 900 1000 1100 2500
t(sec) t(sec)

Figure 4 Time Variation of Heat Transfer Coefficient and Temperature

of surrounding media

~
E H(t-O).
Y'r q=O p

~L IU~
E

bI
q-O x
/1 t
a
PH (t-O) Eq

r~'-~'

Figure 5(a) Boundary Conditions, Geometry Definitions and Boundary

Discretisation for the' rod under a Heaviside Forcing
Function
 272

tF ~

i iU'.dr dt - i i~'dr dt

t r t r
0 0

1
-2
c
j~u*u -~ U*] dO
at at
0

. t
Q 0 (9)

The fundamental solution for this case is given by the

solution of the self-adjoint equation, ie
2 2 *
~ u* -! ~ + ~(;)~(t ) = 0 (10)
c 2 at2 F
Substituting Equation (10) into Equation (9) gives,

'iUi • ~2i[[:~tu -[:l}

Q

- uq * )dr dt (11)

t
o
r

The three-dimensional fundamental solution can be

expressed in terms of a Dirac delta function and gives rise to
the so-called Huyghens principle or wave retarded potential
formulation. A special feature of the three-dimensional
analysis is that no time integration is required. This
simplification does not apply to the two dimensional case
however.

The examples presented here are for two dimensional

applications and follow the solution presented by Mansur and
Brebbia (1982); ie the time origin is always taken at the
initial time to' This procedure is algebraically more complex
 273

Analytical\
BEMfor--S = 0.6\
Eu
Pa

a 4a
ct

Figure 5(b) Displacements at Boundary Points, A (0, b/2),

B (a/2, 0) and C (3a/4, 0) for one-dimensional rod

-- Analytical,
Y1 .' ........... BEM for e= 0.6

fB. bnl D~_

p
/' a
PH (t-O)
I x'
,
2.0
If I
\
'\

I
a 2a:
[\.
3a 4a Sa 6a 7a
1\
Sa
i
ct,

Figure 5(c) Normal derivative of displacements at Point D (a, b/2)

for one-dimensional rod
 274

but has the advantage, from the users point of view that it
does not require any internal points. The examples presented
here are based on a linear, spatial interpolation for the
potentials and constant for the fluxes, to better represent
certain types of shock waves.

Example 4
Results obtained using the two-di~nsional boundary element
program were compared against analytical results for a one-
dimensional rod under a Heaviside type forcing function. The
boundary element solution .considered a rectangular domain with
sides of length a and b (b = a/2) as indicated in Figure Sa.
The u-function represents the displacements which are assumed
to be zero at x = a and their normal derivative q is taken as
null at y = 0 and y = b for any time. At x = 0 and t = 0 a
load Ep is suddenly applied and kept constant until the end of
the analysis -E is the Young's modulus of the material. Due
to the topology and boundary conditions the problem is actually
one-dimensional and its analytical solution can be easily found.

The boundary was discretised into 24 linear elements using

double nodes at the corners. The time was subdivided into
equal intervals such that,
13 = c At = constant
R.

where R. is the length of an element.

Figure 5c shows the BEM and analytical results at internal

and boundary points. The order of accuracy of the BEM results
is excellent. In Figure 5d the normal derivative of u at point
(a,b/2) versus ct is presented. Except for the presence of a
comparatively small amount of noise boundary elements and
analytical solutions are in good agreement.

As expected it was found that care must be taken on the

choice of a in order to avoid noise, which al though usually not
critical for displacements, can be excessive for its
derivatives or tractions. The value of a = 0.6 was found to
be the optimum for this problem.

Example 5
This example analyses a square membrane with an initial
velocity Vo = c prescribed allover the boundary.

The boundary was discretised into 32 elements and n Was

divided into four cells. Analytical and BEM results for
displacements at point (a/2, a/2) and the normal derivative of
displacements at point (a, a/2) were compared.

The values of u.-,and q for a = 0.2 are plotted in

 275
u = 0;

l', --."
, j
t .... t
a' u -= 0" k.'_ '-....
~
5

u = 0:
a

Figure 6(a) Geometry definition. discretisation boundary and

initial conditions for membrane analysis

o.os
t , ----- Analytical
y'
for a = 0.6
,000001) BEM

0.04
\ aIG~
x t---I
,a'

Figure 6(b) Displacements

at Point A (a/2. a/2)

-0.04

-o.osL,-L.--J..-,-J----1---1---1--:-l7::-7.L--L-;2~2::'~
0.4a a ct 1.6a__________________________
"~
• ,a '
O.SO; yl - - Analytical
e=
o
.
18
a
40, 1
IIA B,
'~
a--' x
0.2

Figure 6(c) Normal

- &' ~~---r--~~~~~~~--~~~--~
derivative of displacement
at Point B (a. a/2)
-0.40~
276
Figure 6b and 6c respectively. Although the agreement for
displacements was reasonable for S = 0.6, q was not so well
represented and it was decided to reduce the ~ until the
results converged to the analytical solution.

TRANSIENT ELASTODYNAMICS
The governing equations for transient elastodynamics for a
homogeneous, isotropic linear elastic body can be expressed
in terms of accelerations and velocities by,

in n (12)

where cd and Cs are the dilational and shear wave celerities,

ie,

c d =~3'" (13)
---'"
p

The term f· = b./p where b. are the body force components

A, II are the tame'~ constants~
The boundary conditions corresponding to the above
equations are:

(i) Displacement Conditions: ui (x, t) = ui(x,

t) in r l
(ii) Traction Conditions: Pi (x, t) = Pi (x, t) in r 2
(14)

The traction components Pi can be expressed in function of the

stress components as usual.

The initial conditions are displacement and velocity

components at time to in the 0 domain.

The corresponding weighted residual statement in time

and space can be written as,

-~)u
2
s J,~~
2 . . . +f.
. . . +cu
s ~,JJ J - U'lu~'
~ ~J
dO dt

t 0
o
 277

~
*
- tr. )p .. df! dt
~J

(15)

* are the components of the fundamental solution for this

ui·
pr~blem. This solution to the self-adjoint problem corresponds
to the response of an infini te medium at time t to an impulse
at tF due to a load located at the point~. It can be
expressed as the solution of

2 2 *
(cd - cs)uik,kj + csuij ,kk - Uij
2 * *
= -7 1I(~)II(~)
&••
(16)

0ij is the Kronecker delta.

Integrating by parts (15) in space and time and intro-

ducing the fundamental solution produces the following
expression:

c .. u. +
~J J
jtFjp~.U.drdt j~ju~.p.drdt
~J J
= ~J J

t
o
r t
0
r

(17)

The three-dimensional fundamental solution is written in terms

of Dirac delta functions and the two-dimension varies as
Heaviside functions. The applications presented here are for
two-dimensional cases and follows the theory developed by
Mansur and Brebbia (1984). The time origin is always
taken at the initial time to. This procedure complicates the
solution of the problem but results in a very powerful
technique for solving infinite and semi-infinite domains as it
does not require any internal points. The examples presented
here are based on constant time and space interpolation for
simplici ty.
278

,~
10. TIME t m .ee)

Figure 7(a) Load for the Half-Plane continuous prescribed stress

distribution

A I XI
I

b
~

•
I
~ Il.
I
t
L..
.
. 180 ~ TRANSMITTING
BOUNDARIES
It
Figure 7(b) Finite difference mesh for half-plane
 279

-G

65'
'~l 30'
• ITRIIS OR DIPl.ACrUENT
~PAl'IIEO WITH TUN.

Figure 7(c) Boundary Element discretisation for the half-plane

.!! -6
h
TD 1-,5

-TSENG
••• lEW

O~O~~~40~----~607---~eo~----looL-----I20L-·
tI msecJ

Figure 7(d) Displacement U2 at internal point D (0'. 70')

280

Example 6
The first elastodynamics example is the solution of a half-plane
under a continuous prescribed stress distribution (Mansur and
Brebbia, 1984). In this application the technique discussed
above is compared with the finite-difference model implemented
by Tsenget al (1975), who developed a transmitting boundary
condition together with a generalised lumped parameter model.

The problem to be analysed is depicted in Figure 7a. The

half:-plane is initially at rest and its surface disturbed by a
vertical traction which is continuous in both time and space.

The following numerical values were adopted for the

constants of the problem:

E = 200 ksi, v = 0.15, cd = 3.288 x 10:ips

Cs = 2.112 x 10 ips

The criterion given by Tseng (1975) to choose the finite

difference mesh requires that
> 2l1x
tr cd (a)

where tr is rise or decay time of the applied pressure and lIx

gives the mesh refinement. For tr = 20msec, lIx < 27.4 ft
is obtained and Tseng chose lIx = 10 ft and the discretisation,
as depicted in Figure 7b where the position selected for the
cylindrical wave transmitting boundary can also be seen.

The boundary element discretisation and the cells used in

-the analysis-(for internal stresses) are shown in Figure 7c.
According to Tseng, the time increment lit used in the
finite difference analysis must obey the following equation

lit < 0.433 lIx (b)

cd

and consequently, lit = 1 msec was adopted. For the boundary

element analysis, 13 = cdllt!lIx was taken to be 0.5 which gives
lit = 3.65 msec.

The time history of various displacements such as those

plotted in Figure 7d shows an acceptable agreement for the
time interval considered.

In his research, Tseng carried out another analysis using

a pair of transmitting boundaries which enclosed a smaller
rectangular region whose sides were equal to 90 ft and 150 ft.
The two finite difference analyses showed that the larger the
 281

- TSENG

:E -3

....Z
~ -2
~
..J
CL
on
2i
-I

P WAVE ARRfYES J
OL-__-L____~~~~--~----~--~----~--
o 40 60 eo 100 120 140 160
t (m ••eJ

Figure 7(e) Displacement U2 at the internal point G (150', 10')

] -1.0
,·.s
!II: ~""'l..!.'!'.!.~.~.!'..l'!.!'~'..............,......... • ••••••••••
Ii -0.5 YSENG
. . . . BEM ome SOWTION

40 80 100 120 140 160

tlmsecl

Figure 7(£) Stress a 22 at the internal point A (45', 75')

282
region enclosed by the transmitting boundaries, the closer the
finite difference and boundary element results were.
Therefore, it is quite justified to suppose that the major
proportion of the difference between the displacement
obtained with the two numerical methods under consideration is
caused by errors generated by the transmitting boundary.

Tseng also presented the time history of the vertical

displacements for the point G (150'~ 10') obtained with the
90' x 150' rectangular region (Figure 7e). As G is located
exactly on the transmitting boundary, it can be expected that
the finite difference result will have a low accuracy here.
Figure 7f describes a typical time history for stresses.

Example 7
This application consists of a semi-infinite beam simply
supported along its edge (see Figure 8a) and subjected to a
suddenly applied bending movement,

Mo = M H(t - 0) (a)

The Poisson ratio for this plane stress problem was taken
to be 1/3. The boundary element mesh consisted of 36 equal
elements as shown in Figure 8b and B = Cd ~t/~x was taken to
be 0.5.

A finite element analysis of this problem was carried out

by Fu (1970) who used the mesh depicted in Figure 8c for his
numerical solution. Transverse displacements along the axes
of the beam obtained with both numerical techniques are shown
in Figure 8d. Within the same Figure, results obtained from
the beam theory by Boley (1955) are plotted. The displacements
depicted in Figure 8d refer to a time,

5r
t
c (b)
o

where r is the medium of gyration of the beam cross-section

and Co is the one-dimensional wave propagation speed.

As it was expected, none of the two-dimensional numerical

analyses agreed completely with the analytical solution
obtained from the beam theory. However, the boundary element
results show that the two-dimensional solution appears to be
closer to the beam theory than initially indicated by the
finite element method.

MASS MATRIX REPRESENTATION

Recent work by Nardini and Brebbia (1983) has concentrated on

the re~resentation of dynamic or mass type matrices in function
only of the boundary nodes. This new development allows for
scalar wave equations and e1astodynamic problems to be
 283

·'~~II- i
----x-.
+
Figure 8(a) Geometry and Boundary conditions of the semi-infinite
beam

Figure 8(b) Boundary Element mesh for the semi-infinite beam

 284

Figure 8(c) Finite element mesh for the semi-infinite beam

A
·~Ii
~
+.5

0
~

Figure 8(d) Transverse displacements along a semi-infinite beam

at time t = Sr/co
 285
treated in a similar was as in finite elements or finite
differences, ie the problem is reduced to a set of time
dependent differential equations expressed in matrix form.
The free oscillation or vib'ration problem can then be reduced
to the solution of an algebraic eigenvalue problem. The main
advantage of the new approach is that the boundary integrals
need to be computed only once as they are frequency independent
and .static fundamental solutions can be employed to generate
all matrices. Hence the procedure is extremely economic when
compared to the ones previously presented. If required,the
technique also allows for the general e1astodynamic case to be
solved in the time rather than the transform domain by carrying
out a standard integration in time.

The approach will be described here for the case of

elastodynamics but·it is easy to particularise to potential
cases if required.

The starting weighted residual statement is similar to

Equation (15) but one only carries out the weighting with
respect to space, ie

-u,]u*"
~ ~J dO

- p,)u"* dr - - -u,)p,* ,dr

ICPi ~ ~J ]cUi ~ ~J

r2 rl (18)

Integrating this expression by parts and neglecting body

force terms for simplicity, the following self-adjoint equation
is:

* k'
I[co! - c2s )u'k ~,J
2
+ csuij,kk
* -u~} ~J ~
dll

. jP~.u.
~J J
dr ju~.P .
~J J
dr

r r (19)
286

Using the static fundamental solution, ie

(cd2 - c s2 )u*
.. k. + c s2 u*
~J, J
.. kk = 6~J
~J,
.. 6(0 (20)

Equation (19) becomes,

c .. u. +
~J J
Ip;;u; dr lu~.p.
~J J
dr - Iu~.u.
~J J
dO (21)

r r 0

It is now proposed to transform the domain integral in

the above expression into a boundary integral by using an
approximation for the function u, such that,

u. a~ fk
~ ~

and
u. /j~ fk (22)
~ ~

The inertial term can now be written as,

i u ;;.; dO ki k·
= /ji f u ij dO

0 0 (23)

One can now consider that the functions fk are a source .dist-
ribution and consequently each can be associated. with a pseudo
displacement field Wand ies corresponding stresses Tand
surface tractions nO:; The fk functions can be taken to' be very
simple functions such as the distance between nodes and hence
can be easily integrated to yield the new ps.eudo-state. This

i
means that the mass term can be transformed as. follows,

i u~.u. dO
~J J
+ u*~J
.. n.k~ ..n dr - ip;A, df]
o r r (24)

The new boundary integrals on the right hand side may

appear to add a new complexity to the problem but if the same
type of interpolation functions are used for the pseudo field
as for the actual field, they produce the same H and G matrices
as for the boundary terms in· Equation (21), ie the integrals
in Equation (24) give the following matrix equation,
 287
(25)

To find the a, one can consider the values of the functions

fk at the nodal points and obtain a system of linear independent
equations, ie

therefore,

(26)

Hence, the matrix representation of Equation (21) can be

written using only boUndary integrals, ie

HU - GP -Mil (27)
where
M = (I.!P - ~!}) [~J

To solve an algebraic eigenvalue one needs to substitute U by

- w2 U and rearrange the system of Equation (27) by applying
homogeneous boundary conditions on f1 and f 2 • This finally
gives the following system,
2
(~' - w ti')!:! = 2 (28)

which can be solved in the usual way.

Time dependent problems - for which the system of matrix

equations is a function of the accelerations - can be solved
using a standard time integration scheme starting with,

HU + MU = GP (29)

Experience with finite elements and finite differences have

also demonstrated that the representation of mass matrices
can be approximated using simpler functions than those
required for the stiffness part of the system. The following
examples validate this experience for boundary elements.

Example 8
Figure 9 shows an application of the above technique to find
the eigenvalues of a shear wall with four openings. The
boundary element model consists of 29 quadratic elements with
58 nodes, as shown in the figure. The finite element mesh
comprising of 559 nodes and used for comparison purposes is
shown in the same figure. The results for the free vibration
periods of the first eight natural nodes are given in Table 1.
In spite of the complicated geometry and the rather small
288

o
o
o
r3.0-t- 3.0-+--4.8--1

BE model FE model
58 nodes 559 nodes

Figure 9 Finite and Boundary Element discretisation for a

Shear Wall

pit) A

[f1]
0
N
E/p = 10'
v =0.2

0
N B.E. Model

"'k n
2.0 2.0 2.0
I' -I' 'I' -I

F.E. Model
10.0

_ t
0.1

Filliure lO(a) Transient Analysis example

 289
number of boundary elements used, the agreement of the results
is surprisingly good.

!MODE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
i

BEM 3.022 0.875 0.822 0.531 0.394 0.337 0.310 0.276

BEM 3.029 0.885 0.824 0.526 0.409 0.342 0.316 0.283

Table 1 - Periods of free vibrations for the two models.

Example 9
The application of transient analysis is confined here to the
case of fixed vibrations caused by external, time dependent
tractions, with no support movements. Equation (29) can then
be solved using a direct integration scheme. In this case,
the Houbolt method was chosen because of its unconditional
stability; a number of other stable methods could have been
used as well.

The example (Figure lOa) demonstrates the accuracy of

the proposed transient analysis. The frame-like structure
under the dynamic loading shown in the figure has been
analysed by the present method and using finite elements.
The horizontal displacement at the central point A has been
plotted versus time in Figure lOb where it can be seen that
the curves resulting from the two methods are almost identical.

CONCLUSIONS

Boundary elements have only recently been applied to solve

time dependent problems in a general manner. Previous
solutions of parabolic and hyperbolic cases tended to
concentrate on particular applications. Deeper understanding
of the basic principles arid the approximations involved when
solving boundary integral equations in numerical form was
achieved as a result of their interpretation as a weighted
residual technique (Brebbia, 1980 and Brebbia, Telles and
Wrobel, 1983). It was then a natural development to integrate
parabolic and hyperbolic problems using the concept of
distribution in time and space. This technique, pioneered by
Brebbia, Wrobel and Mansur (Brebbia, Telles and Wrobel, 1983
and Mansur and Brebbia, 1982), produces accurate and stable
results.

Many practical problems, however, may not require

using space and time dependent fundamental solutions. One may,
for instance, be interested in computing the free vibrations
frequencies of the system or in carrying out a step by step
analysis. In these cases one needs to express the problem
290

in function of its mass matrices, which up to now where

difficult and expensive to formulate. Nardini and Brebbia
(1982) proposed a simple and elegant way of using elasto-
statics fundamental solutions to form the mass matrix of the
system. The advantages of their approach consist in that
the integrations have all been taken to the boundary,
considerably reducing the description of a problem and the
subsequent computations. This novel approach has opened up a
whole new range of applications f.r the boundary element
method in wave propagation, problems.

REFERENCES

Boley, B.A. (1955) An Approximate Theory of Lateral Impact in

Beams. Trans. ASME, Journal of Applied Mechanics Series
E, 22, 69 - 76.

Brebbia, C.A. (1978) The Boundary Element Method for Engineers.

Pentech Press, London, Halstead Press, New York, Second
Edition 1980.

Brebbia, C.A. (Ed.) (1981) Boundary Element Methods. Pro-

ceedings of the 3rd International Conference on BEM,
California, 1981. Springer-Verlag, Berlin and New York.

Brebbia, C.A. (Ed.)(198l) Progress in Boundary Element Methods,

Vol. 1, Pentech Press, London, Halstead Press, New York.

Brebbia, C.A. (Ed.) (1982) Boundary Element Methods in

Engineering. Proceedings of the 4th International
Conference on BEM, Southampton 1982. Springer-Verlag,
Berlin and New York.

Brebbia, C.A. (Ed.) (1983) Progress iii. Boundary Element Methods,

Vol. 2. Pentech Press, London, Springer-Verlag, New York.

Brebbia, C.A. (Ed.) (1984) Progress in Boundary Element Methods,

Vol. 3. Springer-Verlag, Berlin and New York.

Brebbia, C.A. (T. Futagami and M. Tanaka, Eds) (1983)

Boundary Element Techniques. Proceedings of the 5th
International Conference on BEM, Hiroshima 1983.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin and New York.

Brebbia, C.A. and Nardini, D. (1983) Dynamic Analysis in Solid

Mechanics by an alternative Boundary Element Procedure.
International Journal of Soil Dynamics and Earthquake
Engineering, Vol. 3.

Brebbia, C.A., Telles, J. and Wrobel, L. (1983) Boundary

Element Methods - Theory and Applications in Engineering.
, Springer-Verlag, Berlin and New York.
 291
Brebbia, C.A. and Walker, S. (1979) Boundary Element Technique
in Engineering. Butterworths, London.

Fu, C.C. (1970) A Method for the Numerical Integration of the

Equations of Motion arising from a Finite-Element
Analysis. Transient ASME, Journal of Applied Mechanics,
Series.E, 37, 599-605.

Mansur, W.J. and Brebbia, C.A. (1982) Formulation of the

Boundary Element Method for Transient Problems governed
by the Scalar Wave Equation. Applied Mathematical
Modelling, Vol. 6, August, pp. 307-311.

Mansur, W.J. and Brebbia, C.A. (1982) Numerical Implementation

of the Boundary Element Method for two Dimensional
Transient Scalar Wave Propagation Problems. Applied
Mathematical Modelling, Vol. 6, August, pp. 299-306.

Mansur, W.J. and Brebbia, C.A. (1984) Transient E1astodynamics,

Progress in Boundary Element Methods, Vol. 4, Chapter 5.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin and New York.

Nardini, D. and Brebbia, C.A. (1983) Transient Dynamic Analysis

by the Boundary Element Method. Boundary Element
Techniques (Ed. C.A. Brebbia et.a1.). Springer-Verlag,
Berlin and New York.

Tseng, M.N. and Robinson, A.R. (1975) A Transmitting Boundary

for Fini te·· Difference Analysis of Wave Propagation in
Solids. Project NONR 064-183, University of Illinois,
Urbana, Illinois.

Wrobel, L. and Brebbia, C.A. (1981) Time Dependent Potential

Problems. Progress in Boundary Element Methods, Vol. 1,
Chapter 6. Pentech Press, London, Halstead Press, New
York.
 N
N
'"

uH(A)
~- present method IHoubolt. Jl.t = 0.005)
-- - - finite element method (Wilson 6. At ;;;; 0.005)

~
'--~
... 'l'/.----"~
-7
-7 ;/ ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
t7
t7 ~
7 17 "
7

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 Iisec)

Figure 10(b) Displacement at Point A for the BE and FE Models

Chapter 16

TIME DEPENDENT POTENTIAL PROBLEMS

H.L.G. Pina
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior
Tecnico, Lisbon, Portugal.

I." INTRODUCTION

The use of singularities to represent instantaneous sources or

sinks of heat for solving time dependent heat conduction
problems is described in Carslaw and Jaeger, 1969, ch.X, where
Kelvin is credited with having made systematic use of this
method to obtain analytical solutions. The integral
representation to be derived below in Section 2 appears in
Boley and Weiner, 1960, but without any numerical treatment.

Rizzo and Shippy, 1970, appears to be the first paper where the
time dependent heat equation is solved by numerical methods
based on integral equations. The differential equations is
transformed via Laplace transformation for the time variable
and the resulting integral equation is solved numerically. The
subsequent inversion"of the Laplace transform is also done
numerically.

In Chang et al., 1973 and Shaw, 1974, the integral

representation is employed to set an integral equation which is
discretized in both space and time using finite elements type
functions. Wrobel and Brebbia, 1981a, presents a comprehensive
review of the solution of parabolic problems using boundary
integral equations. In Wrobel and Brebbia, 1981b, this has been
extended to solve the difficult problem of axisymmetric time-
-dependent heat conduction also via a space and time discreti-
zation.

In this chapter we describe how to solve heat conduction

problems in homogeneous isotropic bodies by the Boundary Element
Method (BEM). The problem is to find the solution of the
following heat equation

(1)

293
294

satisfying the initial condition

(2)

and appropriate boundary conditions. In heat conduction

problems we assume the following forms for the boundary
conditions:
- Dirichlet boundary cond~tion

(3a)

- Neumann boundary condition:

(3b)

- Robin boundary condition:

(3c)

In the expressions above u,q,a

and ~ are given functions of
space and time, with the restriction that a ~ o.rl>r~ and r3
are different parts of the boundary such that the~r union
gives r.

2. INTEGRAL FORMULATION OF HEAT CONDUCTION PROBLEMS

2.1 Integral Representation of the Heat Equation Solutions

The differential equation governing heat conduction in

homogeneous isotropic bodies is, as we have already remarked,

in Ox T. (4)

It is known (Cars1aw and Jaeger, 1959) that the function

u*(x,t;x' ,t') =: .1 exp [- r2 l (5)
- - [4R K(t_t,>]d/2 4R K(t-t'>J

is a particular solution of (4). Notice that x e: Rd and all

t> t' and r represents the euclidean distance between points 35
and 35'" Le.,
(6)

It can be shown~(see.referenceabove) that this function has

the following properties:

tim u*(x,t;x',t') = 6(x_-x_'), (7a)

t~t - -
 295
where 6(.) stands for the Dirac distribution centered at the
origin;

I d u*(~,t;~',t') da(x) =
-
I d
u*(x,t;x' ,t') da(x')
- - -
= 1 (7b)
R R

The function u(x,t;x';t') is called the fundamental solution of

equation (4). -It represents the field of temperature produced
by an instantaneous point source of heat placed at point ~' and
instant t'. Next we demonstrate how this fundamental solution
can be used to obtain an integral representation for the
solution of the heat equation. Consider the following

u= u(x,t') , au .. k V2u, (Sa)

at'
au*
u*= u*(~,t;~' ,t'), .at' =- k V2 u *, (Sb)

from which we see that u and u* are solutions of two adjoint

equations. We also know that:

~ (uu*) = u* au + u au* ... K (u*V2 u- uV2u*) • (9)

at' at' at'
Integrating both sides of this equation over the cylinder
ax (to,t) we obtain

I: Ia ;t' (uu*) da(x') dt' =K I: Ia (u*v2u- uv2u*)da(x')dt'.

o 0
(lOa)

The left hand side of this expression can be modified by

interchanging the order of integration, i.e.,

I: Ia ;t' (uu*)da(~')dt' .. Ia
o
I: ;t' (uu*)dt'da(~')=
0

u*(~,t;~' ,t)da(~') - Ia u(~,to)u*(~,t;x' ,to)da(~').

(lOb)
296
We can now recall (7a) and put for simplicity
(lla)

(llb)

Hence we find the following expression

I: o
In ;t' (uu*)dn(~')dt' = c(~)u(~,t) - Inuou~ dn(x'). (12)

If the point x lies in the interior of n then, by the well

known propertIes of the Dirac distribution. c(!)=l. If ! is on
the boundary r of n then c(x) equals the fraction of solid
angle subtended by r at !. relative to the solid angle of the
sphere in Rd (see Kelog, 1954). For smooth points on r. c(!) =
= 1/2.
Applying Green's second identity to the right hand side of
(10) we find that

In r
au
an
I au*
(u*v 2 u-uV 2 u*)dn(x') = (u* - - u - )dr(x').
an
(13)

Collecting this result and (12) and abbreviating slightly the

notation, we arrive at the expression

cu= InUou~dn+ Ir I: o
(u*q-uq*) dt'dr. (14)

This relation shows that the value of the function u at interior

points (c=l) and for any instants t> to can be explicity
evaluated by integration, once the initial temperature field
and boundary values of temperature and flux are known. Or. to
use other words. (14) gives an integral representation for
the solutions of the heat equation.

We notice that in (14) the fundamental solution for flux is

au* 1
q*:: K an .. - 2(t-t') r.n. u*. (15)

We have two kinds of space integrals in the integral

representation (14), one in 'the domain n and another on the
boundary r. Now we can show that, if Uo is a harmonic function
 297
in g, the space integral can be transformed into a boundary
integral. Indeed, applying Green's second identity to uo arid
another function ~ we have

(16)

But, by definition,

(17)

If ~ is choosen such that it satisfies

(18)

we arrive at the following expression

u u* dg =J (u 21_ ~
JgOO aUo)df. (19)
f 0 an an

The integration of (18) for two and three dimensional

problems brings no special difficulties. For example, for the
two dimensional case employing polar coordinates we have

1 -
-
r dr
d~
d (r-)= 1
dr 4 II I<: (t-t: o )
exp [.- r2
4 I<: (t-t )
1
• (20a)
0

Integrating this second order ordinary differential equation

we obtain

(20b)

where El (.) is the exponential integration function (Abramowitz

and Stegun, 1968). We can choose the integration constants cl
and c2 in order to cancel the logarithmic singularity of El(s)
whe.n s + 0 and thus obtaining a smooth ~. The exponential
integral El can be expanded as shown in the reference above,
ch.5., i.e.,

El (s) = - y -1n s + el(s) , (21)

298

where el(s) is a smooth function. Therefore we can take

and arrive at the expression

(22)

which yields a smooth function $ for two-dimensional problems.

For three~dimensional problems, we have already a smooth
function when r+ 0, i.e.,

(23)

2.2 Integral Equations for Heat Conduction Problems

In this section we show how the integral representation (14)

can be employed to transform the partial differential equation
for the heat conduction problem into an integral equation
formulation. To illustrate this we will consider the case of
the heat equation, i.e.,

au =k V2u in Ox T, (24a)
at

subject to the following two types of boundary conditions,

u =u on r l x T, (24b)

q q on r 2 x T, (24c)

where u is equal to the prescribed temperature values of r l

and represents the prescribed flux at points on the boundary
r2. As before r 1 and r 2 are complementary parts of the boundary
r oi the domain O. We recall expression (14) and, in viewof
(24b, c), rewrite it as
 299

cu = Ir!u 0
u*
0

(25)

where ql represents the values of q on r l and u2 those of u on

r2' NotLce that, if we knew the ql and u2 values, we could
compute explicitly u at an interior point (c=l) by evaluating
the integrals on the right hand side of the above expression.

In order t~simplify the notation we can now introduce the

operators -~and ~ and the function b given by

<j{,u =
2 r
I It 2 to
q*u
2
dt'dr, (26a)

l',ql=II
'17 r t
t
u*qldt'dr, (26b)
o

b=- dt'dr + I
r!
u u* dr!.
0 0
(26c)

We note that the operator ~ transforms functions over r 2 into

functions over r and the operator ~ transforms over r l into
functions over r. Then, the expression (25) can be simply
written as
~

cu = - 'd€,u 2 + ~ ql + b. (27)

Equation (25) or its equivalent (27) is also valid at

points on the boundary. Making lS e; rl we obtain the following
relation
.
'!(,u - ~ q = b - c;:i (28a)
2 "1 '

and making 2 e; r2 we similarly find the following expression

(28b)

Defining a new operator ~ and a new function b such that

(29a)
300

and

b=b-c 1 ii (29b)

with cl and c2 functions on r given

(30)

we arrive at the boundary integral equation

'R,u 2 - a"IT q1 = b (31)

which is valid on the boundary r x T of the domain 0 x T. The

functions u2 and ql are unknown.

3. NUMERICAL SOLUTION OF THE INTEGRAL EQUATIONS

3.1 Discretization of the Integral Equations

The boundary element method solution of equation (31) rests

broadly on two basic features. One is the construction of
finite element approximations u2 and ql to the unknown
functions u2 and ql over r x T. The other consists in
introducing these approximations into equation (31) and by
collocation at a sufficient number of points on r x T to set up
~ system of equations to determine the nodal values of U2 and
ql'
The right hand side b in (31) contains an integral over the
domain 0 which in general cannot be evaluated analytically,
therefore we must resort to numerical integrations over 0. For
domains of arbitrary shape this makes it necessary to discreti
ze 0 into internal finite elements. As this discretization does
not involve additional unknowns, some authors prefer to refer
to these regions in 0 as "cells".

Let us consider the whole process in more detail. The

discretization of the domain 0 and of the boundary r into
"cells" leads to an approximate domain 1'1 and an approximate
boundary r due to the assemblage of elements (see Figure 1 for
details). We denote by Oe the element labelled e in 1'1, by
E(Q) the total number of such elements and by N(1'l) the total
number of nodes. We proceed likewise for r. We assume also that
the discretization of the space-time domain r x T is the direct
product of the discretization of r on the interval T. The
boundary discretization r of r may be determined by the
internal discretization 1'1 of 0, but this is not necessary, i.e.
 301

... --t n-1

- -t1

Figure 1 - Geometry and discretization

302
we do not have to force the mesh on r to be equal to the
boundary mesh of O. If we denote by ~i(~) (i=l ••••• N(r» the
basis functions over r and by ~~(t).~=1.2 •••• the basis
functions over T we end up with the approximations u2 and q1.
i.e. ,

u 2 '" u 2 = 72 1: u2i~ 1/1. (xH (t). (32a)

1 ~
1 - ~

q1'" q1 = 71 ; qli~ 1/1. (xH (t), (32b)

1 1 - 0;

where the symbols 1:1 and 1:2 stand for summation over the
nodes of f1 and of f2' respectively. The parameters U2i~ and
q1i~ represent the nodal values of u2 and q1 at node i on r
and node ~ on T. Since by definition the 1/Ii and ~~ are
interpolating functions, at the nodes ~i and t~ we have that

1/J.(x.)=cS .. and ~N(tO)=cSNO./ (33)

1 -J 1J ~ I> ~I>

Introducing relations (32) into equation (31) we obtain

(34)

To determine the nodal values u2i~ and Q1io; we collocate

equations (34) at points Xj on rand p01nts TS in the
interval T. Defining

(35a)

(35b)

b(x. ,To) '"b. o ' (35c)

-J... J ...

results in the following system of linear algebraic equations.

(36)

which, once solved, yields the nodal values u2ia and q1ia'

3.2 Analytical and Numerical Integration Techniques

The formation of system (36) requires the evaluation of the

 303

coefficients,HjBia',GjBia and bjB,_which in_turn are due to

the computaUon of l.ntegrals on r x T and n. So does the
computation of the temperature u or flux q at internal points.
Therefore it is important to perform these integrations
accurately and efficiently, To 'show how this can be done let
us concentrate on the case of piecewise constant elements in
time and continuous elements on space R2. The interval T is
divided in subintervals (to,tl), (tl,t2)"",(t a -l,ta ),."
such that

ta=to+(a-l)lIt, a=1,2, •• , (37)

where lit is the constant time step (see Figure 2). Therefore
the interpolation function $a is defined by

(38)
o otherwise,
Choosing the colocation points to be coincident with nodes
(x' ,tl) on r x (to,tl) allows one to obtain from (36) the
following system of linear equations in matrix notation

(39)

where

[H~~J
J l. =H'l'l
J l. ' [G~~]
Jl. =G'l'l
J l. and
-1
J
-
{b,} = {b'l}.
J
(AOa)

IHllJ !s a N(r) x N(r 2) matrix, [~11] i~ a N(r) x N(l\) matrix

and {b} a NCr) vector. Since N(r) = N(rl) + N(I'2) we have the
same number of equations as unknowns. We remember that at each
point of r either the temperature or the flux (but not both)
is an unknown.

The integrals involved in matrix [HII] are

IH~~]=H'l'l=
Jl. J l. (~tjJ.$
l. a ) -J l )
(x.,t

=J Jtl q*(x"t ;x' ,t') tjJ. (x') dt'dr(x'). (40b)

- -J I - l. -
r2 to

. '1 ar I y, matrl.X
Sl.ml. , [G11} requl.res
. .
l.ntegra 1s o
f th e f orm
304

I
J---4

~
I
I
I
,I
to t1 t2 to-1 to "t

Figure 2 - Piecewise constant elements in time

 305

=J
-
ft u*(x.,tl;x',t')
-J -
~.(x')
1. -
dt'dr(x')
-
(41)
rl to
-1
To obtain {b } we need to compute boundary integrals that have
the same form as (40,41) plus an integral over the domain.

Recalling expressions (5,15) we can write that

1
r.n ~. u*dt'dr(~'), (42a)
2 (t -t') - - 1.
1

and grouping all the therms depending on the variable t' we

obtain

2
exp[- r ]dt'dr(X')
4K(t l -t') -

(42b)

The integration on time can be done analytically. In fact

making the change of variable

2 2
s=_...;r:...-.__ , r r
t = t 1-- s=--,sl="" (43)
4K(t l -t') 41<:s o 41<:t.t

we are able to write

41<: 41<: 2
=2 exp(-so) =2 exp(- _r_) (44)
r r 4Kllt

Lntroducing this result in (42b) we arrive at

[Hli1 =-~
2IT
f-
r2
~ E'~
r
2
exp(- _r_)1jJ. dr(x')
4ITt.t 1. -
(45)
306
This integral has to be evaluated numerically, ghoosing an
appropriate quadrature rule in each element of r2 and adding
up the contributions from all the elements. It can be shown
that the integrand is regular when r + 0, therefore Gauss-
-Legendre quadrature rules are suitable. These rules however
must be carefully selected. To choose too many integration
points is time consuming but too few may yield poor accuracy.
Also it is important to notice that for elements far away from
the collocation point the integrand on the right hand-side of
(45) varies little so we could use there fewer integration
points than for elements near or conta"ining the collocation
point or singularity. This could lead to adaptive quadrature
but so far nobody seems to have used them, due perhaps to the
increased programming complexity. This subject of numerical
integration was treated in another lecture (Numerical
Integration and Other Computational Techniques).

Coming back to expression (41) and repeating the procedure

described above we have that

[G~~]
J1
0; I
r
I1 t

t
1
4nK(t -t')
1 0 1

(46)

~erforming the same change of variable the integral in time

becomes

.!. exp(-s)ds
s

(47)

r
where

El (5) = .!. exp(-z)dz (48)

s z

is the exponential integral. Approximations suitable for

computer applications can be found in Abramowitz and Stegun,
1968, ch.5. Introducing (47) into (46) we have that
 307

11 _ 1 I r
2 ,
[G··1 -- _ E l ( - ) tjI.dr(x ). (49)
J1 4ITK rl 4Kdt 1 -

To evaluate these integrals we proceed as before, except that

now the integrand develops a singularity of the type In r as
r+ O. This means that numerical integration over the elements
containing the collocation point has to take this into
consideration. According to (21) we can write

El (s) = - 9.n s + e l (s) (50)

where e1(s) is a smooth function. Then the integral in

expression (49) can be split into a regular part and a
singular part with a logarithmic singularity. We can apply the
above considerations for the regular integral. For the singular
one must employ special integration rules such as those due to
Berthod-Zaborowski, Mineur, 1966. The whole procedure is
analogous to that of steady potential problems so we do not
need elaborate any further on this. For details see Brebbia et
al., 1981.

The integral in the domain Q, necessary to compute {bl} is

IQ0
u (x') u*(x.,t ;x',t )dQ(x')
- 0 -J 1 - 0 -

= -1- J_ 2
uo(~') exp(- _r_)dQ(x') (51)
4ITKLlt Q 4KLlt

where the integrand is easily recognized as regular. If the

field uo(~') of initial temperature is harmonic this integral
can be transformed into a boundary one, as was shown in 2,with
the obvious advantages. Otherwise we have to evaluate it by
using numerical integration over each cell in Q and add up all
the contributions. In Stroud, 1971, there are several quadra-
ture formulae for standard triangles and quadrilaterals that
have been used by Wrobel, 1981, Fernandes and Pina, 1982,
namely:
- the seven point quintic rule of Hammer for linear and
quadratic triangles.
- the 2 x 2 Gauss-Legendre rule for linear quadrilaterals,
- the seven point quintic rule of Radon, Albrecht and Collatz
for quadratic quadrilaterals.

The evaluation of integrals to compute the temperature u at

interior points of Q follows along the same lines as above.
308
However, as the point comes close to the boundary r the
integrands vary rapidly and to retain the accuracy an
increasingly greater number of integration points have to be
used. This means that some sort of adaptive integration scheme
must be devised.

3.3 Time-Marching Procedures

In the previous section we have discussed how to evaluate the

various integrals needed to form the system of equations (1. 39).
Leaving for the next section those aspects related to the actual
solution of this system we admit that {u~} and {q~} have been
found, and therefore, that we are able to calculate an
approximation U(lS,tl) to U(!!;,tl) over QUr. The question is
how we progress from instant tl to instant t2,t3,"'? There
are basically two procedures, which we shall designate by I
and II,(Wrobel and Brebbia, 1981).

Procedure I

After obtaining the values of temperature and flux at time tl,

that is, U2(lS,tl) and ql(lS,tl) we can evaluate explicitly
using (1.25) the values of the temperature at any interior
point, which implies to construct an approximation u(X,tl) to
U(lS,tl).Procedure I consists in considering at instant tl as
initial condition li(lS, tl) and taking time t2 = tl + At as the
new collocation point on the time domain. Once the solution is
found at t2 the procedure can be repeated with t2 as the
initial time. Retracing the analysis of section 3. We can
easily arrive at the conclusion that the matrices 1H22i and
[G22] are identical to its counterparts [Hll1 and [G l 1 if At
is allways the same. The evolutionary character of the problem
is carried out on the right hand side {5} which is different
for each time step.

The solution of system (39) can be conveniently done by LU

factorization followed by forward and backward substitutions.
The factorization needs only be done once at the first time-
-step, saved and used in the forward and backward substitutions
required at all later time-steps.

In this procedure we require the computations of domain

integrals Ifi uau~dQ even if the initial temperature field Uo
is zero. To evaluate those integrals two methods can be
employed. One, which we designate by Method A, is to compute
ua at internal points coinciding with the integration points in the
cells. The other, Method B, is to compute ua at the nodes of
the mesh and construct a finite element type approximation. As
the number of integration points usually is greater than the
number of nodes this second variant requires evaluation of the
temperature of a smaller number of internal points, thus being
more rapid and demanding less computer memory. The first method
however tends to be more precise, but if the size of the cells
 309
is too small some integration points can become too close to
the collocation points where the fundamental solutions changes
rapidly and this may offset the greater theoretical accuracy.

Procedure II

This procedure consists in starting all time integrations from

the initial instant to up to the current instant tn. Suppose
the unknown nodal vectors {u~} and {qa have been calculated
at ta,a = 1, ... ,n-1. Equation (36) a lows one to advance the
1}
solution to time tn' Considering that the collocation time ta
in (36) equals tn, we obtain,

(5Z)

Isolating the unknowns {u~} and {ql} on the left hand-side we

have the following system of linear equations
n-l
[Hnn] {u nn } _ [GnnJ {qnn} = {bnn} _ E ([Hna] {u aZ} + [Gna] {qlo.}),
Z 1 0.=1

(1. 53)
which, once solved, delivers {u~} and {q~}. This procedure
requires the formation of a triangular array of matrices that
can be depicted as

0.=1 o.=Z a. = 3 o.=n

a=l [ H111........
a=Z 1HZl] ......... [H ZZ1 . . ......
a=3 [H 3lJ ... ..... [H3Z1 [H33 J
... .... .... ....
a=n [Hnl] [HnZl [Hn3] [Hnl

and similarly for [Ga~. We recall that ta is the collocation

time and the to. are the nodes in the interval T=(t o ' t n ) • It can
be easily shown that the matrices connected by the diagonal
lines in this table are equal. Therefore at step n only the
matrices [Hnl] and [Gnll and the right-hand side vector {bn }
have to be calculated anew.

Albeit this procedure is more elaborate than Procedure I it

presents some advantages. One is that computation of values of
310
temperature at internal points is not required. The other rests
on the fact that to evaluate the domain integral In
uoua dO in
(26c) we need only to discretize the support of the function
u at time to' When n is an unbounded dqmain this can be a major
benefit. Also if the initial temperature field uo(x) is
harmonic in n the above integral can be transformed into a
boundary one, as discussed in section 2. It should be remarked
that the left-hand side of (53) is identical with that
obtained with Procedure I. Therefore the LU factorization needs
to be performed only once and saved. At each time step the
solution of (53) requires only a forward and a backward
substitution phases.
3.4 Solution of Resulting Linear Algebraic System of Equations

It was shown that no matter which Procedure, I or II, we

selected we end up with a linear algebraic system of equations
which can be written as

[H] {u}- [G] {q}= {b}, (54a)

or if we prefer, using partitioned matrices,

lH: - Gl {-~-} .. {b}. (54b)

There is so far no general proof that the above system is

solvable. However the special cases treated by Wrobel and
Brebbia, 1981, and Onishi et al., 1981, and the numerical
experience gained from BEM practice validate this approach.
As we have remarked before, during the time marching process
one system of the type (54) has to be solved for each time
step using the same matrices but with different right-hand
sides. Thus the LU factorization method seems the most adequate.
As soon as the matrices [H i- G] are formed they are factorized
and this factorization saved. At later steps only the forward
and backward pubstitution phases need be performed. The matrix
[H i - G] is a dense matrix, hence the number of operations
(multiplications/divisions) that the factorization involves in
N(!:> 3/3, the forward and backward substitution phases requiring
N(r)2/2 each. (Steward, 1973).

We have been using subroutine SGECO of LINPACK (Dongarra etal.,

1979) to estimate the condition number of the resulting
matrices for several test cases found that in all for them the
condition number was.typically less than 10 2 , indicating good
stability for the system (54b).
4. CONCLUSIONS 311
The BEM can be used to solve unsteady heat problems as we have
described in this lecture. Examples from the literature (Wrobel
and Brebbia, 1981 a,b, Onishi et a1., 1982, Fernandes e Pina,
1982, Pina e Fernandes, 1983/84) show that it can achieve
remarkable accuracy even with time steps large when compared
with finite difference or standard finite element methods. Some
effort however is still needed to develop efficient and robust
computer programs that fully exploit the BEM potentialities.

NOTATION

In this lecture the following general notation has been

adopted.

Rd - the d-dimensional euclidean space.

G - a open connected set of Rd representating the
domain occupied by the body.
r - the boundary of G, which is supposed to be
sufficiently smooth in the sense of Ke11og, 1954.
r l ,r 2 - complementary parts of r.
T=(to,tf) - an interval of time, were to represents the initial
instant and tf the final instant.
x x' - coordinates of points in G or on r.
-'-
t,t' - instants in T.
u(~,t) - a real function over GxT representing the
temperature of the body.
uo (!) - a real function over representing the (initial)
temperature at instant to.
a partial derivative with respect to time t.
1ft (.)
v2 - the laplacian operator.
n(~) - the unit exterior normal to r at point !.
a n.
an (.) - the gradient in the direction of
K - a positive constant representing the thermal
diffusivity.
- the flux associated to u. This flux differs from
the real heat flux by a negative constant factor.
312
REFERENCES

M. ABRAMOWITZ and r. STEGUN, Handbook of Mathematical Functions,

Dover (1968).

B.A. BOLEY and J.H. WEINER, Theory of Thermal Stresses, J.

Wiley (1960).

C.A. BREBBIA, H.L.G. PINA and J.L.M. FERNANDES, The Effect of

Mesh Refinement in the Boundary Element Solution of Laplace's
Equation with Singularities, Third International Seminar on
Recent Advances in Boundary Element Methods, Irvina, Ca., USA
(1981).

H.S. CARSLAWand J.C. JAEGER, ~onduction of Heat in Solids,

Oxford U. Press (1959).

Y.P. CHANG, C.S. KANG and D.J. CHEN, The Use of Fundamental
Green's Functions for the Solution of Problems of Heat
Conduction in Anisotroplc Media, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer,
16, 1905-1918 (1973).

J.J. DONGARRA, C.B. MOLER, J.R. BUNCH and G.W. STEWART,

LINPACK User's Guide, SIAM (1979).

J.L.M. FERNANDES and H.L.G. PINA, Unsteady Heat Conduction

Using the Boundary Element Method, Fourth International
Seminar on BEM, Southampton (1982).

O.D. KELLOG, Foundations of Potential Theory, Dover (1954).

H. MINEUR. Techniques de Ca1cu1 Numerique, Dunod (1966).

K. ONISHI, T. KUROKI, Y. OSHURA. K. OBATA and T. ITO, Boundary

Element Method in Transient Heat Transfer Problems, Bull.
Institute for Advanced Research of Fukuoka University, N9 55
(1981).

H.L.G. PINA and J.L.M. FERNANDES, Three-dimensional Transient

Heat Conduction by the Boundary Element Method, 5th
International Conference on Boundary Element Methods, Hiroshima,
November (1983).

H.L.G. PINA and J.L.M. FERNANDES, Applications in Transient

Heat Conduction, to be published in Recent Advances in
Boundary Element Methods, (1984).

F.J. RIZZO and D.J. SHIPPY, A Method of Solution for Certain

Problems of Transient Heat Conduction, AlAA J., 8, 11,2004-
-2009 (1970).

R.P. SHAW, An Integral Approach to" Difusion, Int. J. Heat Mass

 313

Transfer, 17, 693-699 (1974).

G.W. STEWART, Introduction to Matrix Computations, Academic

Press (1973).

A.H. STROUD, Approximate Calculation of Multiple Integrals,

Prentice-Hall (1971).

L.C. WROBEL, Potential and Viscous Flow Problems Using the

Boundary Element Method, Ph.D. Thesis, University of
Southampton (1981).
L.C. WROBEL and C.A. BREBBIA, Time Dependent Potential
Problems, Chapter 6 in "Progress in Boundary Element
Methods", Vol. 1, (Ed. C.A. Brebbia), Pentech Press, London,
Halstead Press, USA, (198la).

L.C. WROBEL and C.A. BREBBIA, A Formulation of the Boundary

Element Method for Axisymmetric Transient Heat Conduction, Int.
J. Heat and Mass Transfer, 24, 843-850 (198lb).
Chapter 17

PLATE BENDING PROBLEMS

Morris Stern

The University of Texas at Austin, U.S.A.

1 PRELIMINARIES

One of the earliest and most productive applications of linear

elasticity theory has been the analysis of small bending
deformations of thin plates by transverse load. The problem is
traditionally posed as a boundary value problem over the plane
region occupied by the plate's middle surface:--to find the
deflection function whose bilaplacian is proportional. to the
transverse load intensity, and for which, along the boundary of
the plate, the function and certain particular combinations of
derivatives satisfy conditions imposed by the plate's supports.
This problem can also be reformulated in terms of Boundary
Integral Equations in a number of different ways- each with its
own set of advantages and liabilities. We will single out one
such method, the so called direct method, and explore in detail
some considerations which arise here because of the essential
fourth order nature of the underlying boundary value problem.
The treatment follows Stern, 1979 and 1983. Similar treatments
via the direct method are given by Bezine, 1978 and Hartmann,
1982. A brief review of other methods can be found in
Tottenham, 1979.

Some o~ the notation we will use is indicated in Figure 1

where n represents the plane region occupied by the plate's
middle surface and r is its boundary. We suppose that r
consists of K smooth segments and denote the corners ll' ••• ~.
The plate is loaded by a transverse load intensity denoted q,
and w represents the transverse deflection. Without furnishing
details of the derivation of classical thin plate theory (see,
for example, Timoshenko and Woinowsky-Krieger, 1959), we observe
that the plate deflection is governed by the differential
equation

q/D in n (1)

315
 316

~----~L----------4'------X

FIGURE 1

where D = Eh 3 /l2(1-V 2 ) is the plate stiffness, and with suitable

boundary conditions involving the deflection, normal slope,
bending moment, and equivalent shear on r to complete the
specification of a well posed problem. The most convenient
way to identify constitutive equations for the boundary
quantities is through a reciprocal work relation, and this also
forms the basis for our direct boundary integral formulation.

2 RECIPROCAL WORK RELATION

The strain energy density of a thin elastic plate subjected to

the deflection w(x,y) is

!"!{(V 2w)2_2(1-V)(w w -w )2} (2)

2 'xx 'yy 'xy

This suggests that we introduce the symmetric bilinear form

u(u,w) DI
-2 {V 2 uV 2w - (l-v)[u, w,
xx yy
+u w
'yy 'xx
Ii
- 2u, w, l} da {J)
xy xy
 317

which is exactly the strain energy of the plate when both u and
ware identified with the deflection. Now Equation 3 can be
integrated by parts formally twice (say in u), and the resulting
boundary term involving tangential derivatives integrated
between corners. After some tedious algebra the result is:

2U(u,w) Dfuv 4wda + f[V(W)U - M(w):~]ds

n r
K
+ E{[[ T<w)]]u}p (4)
k-l"K

where, in terms of the polar coordinate system indicated in

Figure 1,

d a + sini3 ..l
dn cosi3 ar r ao

a2 1 a 1 a2
t.l 2- r dr 2
(5)
at r ae 2

t.2
1.(1.. _d_)
ar r2 ae

and

D(l-V) + l+v V2 }
M - 2 - {cos2i3t.l + 2sin2i3t.2 I-v

D(l-v)
T - 2 - {sin2i3t.l - 2cosi3t. 2 } (6)

v· -D .!V 2 - {sini3
a _ cosi3 a + (osi3
1 a
dn ar r ae r R)ai3 }T

The expression for V is the result of an integration by parts

along the boundary and involves the boundary curvature l/R, and
IT 0]].; denotes the discontinuity jump across the kth corner.

If we again identify u and w with the deflection of the

plate, this time in Equation 4, and take account of Equation 1,
then recognizing that this is an expression for work, we can
make the identification of V(w) with equivalent shear, M(w) with
bending moment, and [[ T (w)]].; as a concentrated force at the
 318

th
k corner of the plate boundary. The final s·tep is to
recognize that U(w,u) - U(u,w) vanishes identically, which then
leads to the reciprocal work rela~ion

f{y(u)w - M(u)dndw + dnM(w)

du
- uy(w)}ds
r
K
+ E{ITT(u)jjw -ITT(w)jju}! oJ {uV4w -wV 4u}da (7)
k=l k n

3. BOUNDARY INTEGRAL REPRESENTATIONS

Suppose now that the boundary value problem posed by Equation I

together with suitable boundary conditions has a reasonably well
behaved solution w, and let us denote the boundary values of
normal slope, bending moment, and equivalent shear by N,M,V,
respectively. We also use F (k) = [[ T(w)jj! for the
th k
concentrated force at the k corner. The form of Equation 7
suggests that if we can identify the function u with a
concentrated load at some interior point P, "integration" of the
term DwV 4u on the right hand side should produce a constant
times the deflection at that point, wlp. Indeed, if we place
the origin of a polar coordinate system at the interior point P,
such a (unit concentrated force) fundamental solution has the
form

u *f =.-!.../
81T0 lnr (8)

with corresponding boundary terms given by

N*f 1
81TO(l + 21nr)rcosB

* ~(l+lnr) I-v
M
41T BiTcos 2B
f
(9)

V*f ~~![2 + (1-v)cos2B] + !;~COS2B

F
*f(k)

The boundary integral representation is then obtained by

applying the reciprocal work relation, Equation 7, to the region
illustrated in Figure 2, where a circular region in the interior
 319

~-r---L--------~~----x

FIGURE 2

of the plate surrounding the point P has been deleted. The

integrals over r+ and r- 4
cancel each other, and since V u*f =0
in ~ P there is no direct contribution from this term. Then
as p + 0 the*only surviving term of the integration over rp
comes from V f and we arrive at the representation

(10)

It should be noted that in obtaining Equation 10 there are four

new corners intrQduced into the boundary (at the ends of the
r+,r- cut), and one must verify that their contribution vanishes.

Now Equatio~ 10 furnishes the deflection everywhere in the

interior of the plate in terms of the boundary values of the
deflection, normarslope; bending moment, equivalent shear, and
the corner forces. Furtr.ermore, considered as a function of
the point P, Equation 10 can be differentiated as often as we
 320

desire (at least where the load q is reasonably behaved).

The boundary data which accompanies Equation 1 in a well

posed problem is not complete; in general, we require two
additional independent relations among the data. One of these
follows from a development which parallels the work leading to
Equation 10 but now with the singular point on the boundary. We
illustrate this at a corner point as in Figure 3; if indeed the
origin is a regular point with a continuously turning tangent,
the corresponding result is obtained if we simply set the
interior angle crr to rr, i.e. c = 1.

The boundary of the altered region consists of the arc r

in the interior of the original
*
region, and r , the original
p

+ -
boundary less rand r , the portion within the deleted circle.
We have also added two new corners at l+ and l-, and if P is
indeed a corner we should delete any contribution from there.
Now we apply the reciprocal work identity, Equation 7, to the
region indicated in Figure 3, identifying u with the concentrated
load solution, Equations 8 and 9. Again, as p ~ 0 the only
surviving contribution from the integral on rp is the term
~wlp and there is no contribution from the new corners at l+ and
l-. Finally, we note that the integrand can become poorly
behaved near P, but an analysis shows that the sum of the
contributions from r+ and r- goes to zero with p. Thus we
arrive at the boundary integral equation

K * (11)
+ l:: {F f(k)wl
k=l ~

where we use the notation

f
rp
{'}ds = lim f
~O *
{'}ds
r
for the Cauchy Principal Value.

We need another independent boundary integral to augment

the boundary data. This time we use a solution corresponding
to a concentrated couple for the auxiliary function in
Equation 7:
 321

FIGURE 3

1
u* 2lTDr1nrcos¢ (13)
m

where ¢ is the polar argument with respect to an arbitrarily

oriented ~,n - Cartesian coordinate system. Again, u* is
m
biharmonic on n- P and on the boundary we compute

N*m 1
2lTD{cos¢cosS + Inrcos(¢ + S)}

M *m l+v cos¢ + I-v sin¢ sin2S

2lT r 2lT r

v* = _l_{cos(S - ¢)[2 + (1 - v)cos2S])

m 2lTr2
(14)
I-v
+ 2(1 - v)sin¢cosSsin2S} - lTRrsin¢sin2S

*
F m(k) -I-v -
2lT
sin¢rr
r
- cos 2D]]
P j
-K
 322

The calculation of Equation 7 for the region of Figure 3 in

this case is a little more delicate. The first thing to note is
that V*m is so badly behaved that the integral over rp does not
converge. This can be remedied by subtracting wl p from the
solution of the original boundary value problem and using this
in Equation 7. Note that this does not alter any of the other
terms since all of those involve at least one differentiation.
Then on r we compute
p

w - wi (15)
p

Now as p ... 0 we obtain a contribution to the integral over rp

from the first two terms, and there is also a nontrivial
contribution from the corner terms at l+ and l-. The final
result looks like

C s ~~Ip + cn ~~Ip + f{V*m(W-wlp) - M*mN + N*mM - u*mV}ds

rp
(16)

where

C s - c - ~~[sin2Y + sin2(c~ - y)]

\!
c 2 [cos2y - cos2(c~ - y)] (17)
n

depend on the orientation angle y of the s-axis with respect

to the tangent line at the boundary.

If P is a regular boundary point (c = 1) as in Figure 4a,

then we take the s-axis in the direction of the outer normal
~ dW
(y = -2) and note that ~ = Nip' Then, s = -1,
C c
n
= 0 and
the second boundary integral equaltion reduces to

K
• • • }ds + E { • • • } Jum*qda (18)
k=l
n
 323

FIGURE 4

If P is indeed a corner point then there are generally two

normal slopes at P which we denote Nlp+ and Nl p-' and we will
need two independent boundary integral equations for this case.
First, we choose the ~-axis to bisect the exterior normals as
1
indicated in Figure 4b (Y l = 2cn - n) and denote the auxililary
function for this case u*ml' For the second solution we take
1 1
the perpendicular to the first case (Y 2 = 2cn - 2n) and
~-axis

denote this auxiliary function u *m2' Finally we note that

(19)

~ (= aw) = sin £!{NI + -N -}

o~2 anI 2 p. P

so.that Equation 16, for these two cases, results in the

independent (for c ~ 1) boundary integral equations
 324

K *
+ p{U*ml}dS + Z{u I}
~m
rp
(20)
K *
c- {Nlp+ - Nlp-} + p{U*m2}dS + Z{u I}
k=l m
rp
where

+ c+(V/rr)sin cTI c-(V/rr)sin crr

c c (21)
2sin(crr/2) 2cos(crr/2)

The regular boundary point case can be included above if we

observe that as c+l the first of Equations 20 reduces to
Equation 18 while the second becomes indeterminate and can be
ignored.

4 CONCLUDING REMARKS

The boundary integral equations, Equations 11 and 20, augmented

with suitable boundary conditions, can be used as the basis of
a numerical scheme to determine all of the boundary variables
required for the boundary integral representation of the sought-
for deflection, Equation 10. Note that this formulation permits
a treatment, within the framework of the Kirchhoff theory,
including concentrated forces which may arise when the corners
are restrained as in simply supported cases. There are no
approximations inherent in the formulation beyond those of plate
theory except for the tacit assumption that the solutions sought
are well enough behaved that the integrals of Equations 11 and
20 make sense. There are important cases where this might not
hold, as for example at a re-entrant corner or crack tip.
However, even in these cases the analysis can be extended in a
fairly straightforward manner to include such situations in a
direct boundary integral formulation.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The support of the U.S. National Science Foundation during the

course of the investigation is gratefully acknowledged.

REFERENCES

Bezine, G. (1978) Boundary Integral Formulations for Plate

Flexure with Arbitrary Boundary Conditions. Mechanics
Research Communications,S, pp. 197-206.

Hartmann, F. (1981) Elastostatics, in Progress in Boundary

Element Methods, vol. 1, ed. C. A. Breggia, Pentech Press,
London.
 325

Stern, M. (1979) A General Boundary Integral Formulation for

the Numerical Solution of Plate Bending Problems. Int. J.
Solids Structures, 15, pp. 769-782.

Stern, M. (1983) Boundary Integral Equations for Bending of

Thin Plates, in Progress in Boundary Element Methods, vol. 2,
ed. C. A. Brebbia, Pentech Press, London.

Timoshenki, S. and W. Woinowsky-Krieger (1959) Theory of Plates

and Shells, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.

Tottenham, H. (1979) The Boundary Element Method for Plates and

Shells in Developments in Boundary Element Methods, vol. 1, eds.
P. K. Banerjee and R. Butterfield, Applied Science Publishers,
London.
Chapter 18

A CHOICE OF FUNDAMENTAL SOLUTIONS

Morris Stern

The University of Texas at Austin, U.S.A.

1 INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

A key ingredient in the formulation of boundary integral equa-

tions via the direct method is the so called "fundamental solu-
tion". This is generally obtained as the particular singular
solution of an elliptic boundary value problem which corresponds
to a "concentrated load" (Le. the right hand side is a delta
function; see, for example, Chapter 4 of Brebbia and Walker,
1980). Now it turns out that in general, the singular part of
the fundamental solution is not uniquely determined by this
specification, but the indeterminacy is usually eliminated by
requiring that the solution be single valued in a neighborhood
of the singular point. Indeed, single va1uedness is an essen-
tial requirement when generating the boundary integral repre-
sentation for interior points. However, for the boundary
integral equations needed to determine the unspecified boundary
data the singular point is itself on the boundary of the region
and it is therefore not necessary to use the single valued
fundamental solution in the representation.

By using a mu1tiva1ued fundamental solution to generate

the boundary integral equation, we obtain a formulation which
is essentially different from the single valued formulation.
Furthermore, the difference is not merely cosmetic since by
a proper choice of the mu1tiva1ued fundamental solution we
will be able to derive a boundary integral representation for
the "stress concentration factor" in plane elasticity. If one
is restricted to the single valued fundamental solution the
integrals do not converge, even in the principal value sense.

We now proceed to illustrate these remarks in detail with

two examples. The first (plane steady heat conduction) is
relatively uncomplicated, and therefore ideally suited to ex-
plore the implications of this idea, but the conclusions turn
out to be uninteresting in the sense that only the single
valued fundamental solution appears useful. However, in the

327
 328
second example (plane stress), we obtain a very useful alterna-
tive formulation of the boundary integral equations which leads
to a new representation for the normal stress component on the
boundary in the direction tangent to the boundary.

2 A SIMPLE EXAMPLE: 2-D HEAT CONDUCTION

The two-dimensional steady temperature field in a linear therm-

ally isotropic medium in the absence of heat generation satisfies
Lap1aces equation in the interior:

in ~ (1)

and on the boundary a condition of the general form

aT + b dT = f onr=a~ (2)
dn
where a and b cannot both vanish on any measurable part of the
boundary r, and f is specified data. To see what constitutes
a suitable fundamental solution in this case, we sketch the
development of the boundary integral representation.

For functions U and V which are.harmonic in the interior of

a simply connected region ~, and continuously differentiable
on its closure n,
Green's second identity takes the form

f{U dn
dV - V dU}ds = 0
dn
(3)
r d·
where r c a~ is the boundary of ~ and dn denotes the directional
derivative along the outward normal on r. Now suppose P is an
interior point of ~ and T* is a function harmonic in IT-p. We
construct the simply connected region ~ by deleting from ~ a
circular region centered at P and of raaius £ (smaller than the
distance from P to r) and then connecting the circular boundary
r£ to r by a cut with edges labelled r+ and r- as indicated
in Figure 1. Applying Green's second identity, Equation 3, to
the region ~£ and identifying the harmonic functions with the
solution of the boundary value problem T and the. auxiliary
function T*:, produces the result

f{T* dTdn _ dT*

dn
T}ds = 0 (4)
re: + r+ + r- + r

We will call T* a fundamental s.olution of· Laplaces equa-

tion associa~ed wi~h the interior point P if.

in IT - P
 329

FIGURE 1

(ii) lim
e+O
f T*ds = 0 so that the first term of the integrand
r£
in Equation 4 contributes nothing to the integral over re as
e+O.

(iii) lim
e+O
f dT*
dn
d
s
= cp r 0 so that the limiting contribution
re
of the second term onre is a non-zero multiple of Tip (the
value of the function T at the point p).

(iv) Finally, we require that T* be single-valued in n-p so

that the integrals over the cut r+ and r- cancel

(note ~
dn
Ir+ = - ~
dn
I r- ) •
Thus if T* is a fundamental solution for P an interior
point of n, upon taking £+0 in Equation 4, we obtain the
representation
330

I
T pE n=cI
-:-
p
f{T* -dndT - T -}ds
dT*
dn
(5)

r
for values of the solution T in the interior in terms of the
boundary values of T and dT •
dn
As is well known, any constant multiple of In r, where r
is the distance from P to the argument point, is a suitable
fundamental solution for Laplaces equation in the plane; indeed
with this identification for T* Equation 5 is commonly referred
to as Green's third identity:

I I
T pEn = 27f f {T d (In r) - In r dn
dn dT} ds (6)

r
It should be noted that since r is bounded away from zero on r
(for P in the interior of Q) the representation Equation 6,
considered a function of P, is differentiable as often as
desired.

We are still left with the problem of determining the

boundary values of both T and dT/dn. We have one relation
specified by the boundary condition Equation 2. A second may
be obtained in the form of a boundary integral equation by
repeating the argument leading to Equation 5, but now with the
point P on the boundary r rather than in the interior of n.

The situation is slightly, but significantly different.

The region n£ is now as indicated in Figure 2, and since r£
intersects r a cut in the interior of n is not needed. On the
other hand, the part of r lying in the interior of the deleted
region consisting of the arcs r+ and r- is not a part of the
boundary ofn£. Green's second identity for the region Q£ of
Figure 2 takes the form

J {T* dT - T dT* }ds

dn dn
o (7)
r£ + r~

The first three requirements for T* to be a suitable

fundamental solution associated with the.boundary point Pare
the same as for P in the interior of Q:

(i) riT* = 0 in IT-P

(it) lim
£-+-O J T*d S = 0 (note however, that in the present case
r£
r£ is not a complete circle.)
 331

FIGURE 2

lim
(iii) e;+0

The fourth requirement (that T* be single valued) is no longer

needed! Instead, we require only that for T and dT/dn contin-
uous on r at P, the Cauchy Principal Value integral generated
from Equation 7 converge, that is,

(iv') T dT* }ds

dn
- lim
e:+0
I {. }ds exists.
r*e;

The desired boundary integral equation then follows directly

from Equation 7 in the limit as e:+o for T* satisfying the
above four requirements:

CpTlpEr = f {T* .<!!... -

dn
T dT*} ds
dn
(8)

rp
The requirement (iv') is much less restrictive than (iv)"
and yields a larger choice from which to select fundamental
solutions associated with boundary points. In particular, if
 332

we introduce a local polar coordinate system centered at P as

in Figure 2, then for T* = T*(r,8) it ~s apparent that the
second and third requirements imply i:~ r }1.* is bounded for
181 ~ rr and is non zero on at least part ofd£his interval. A
general solution of Laplaces Equation with this property is

T*(r,8) = A In r + B8 ln r (9)

for arbitrary constants A and B.

Than for Q(/ p) a point on the boundary and S the angle

from the extension of PQ to the outward normal nQ at Q as
indicated in Figure 3, we calculate

dT* = !=. cos B + ~ [8 cos S + In r sin Bl (10)

dn Q r r

If P is a regular point of the boundary (continuously turning

tangent) a direct calculation yields

8=rr!2

= f{- ~ - ~ 8}Ed8 -Arr (11)

8=-rr /2
Then with A/O the boundary integral equation, Equation 8, takes
the form

f {[In r + !L
A
8 In r 1 dT
dn Q
rp
[cosS + ~ (8 cos S + In r sin S) IT}ds
r Ar
o (12)

Let us now examine this result in some detail. As the

integration point Q on r approaches the origin point P the in-
tegrand of Equation 12 behaves badly. The following estimates
are apparent from Figure 4 where R is the radius of curvature
of the boundary at P and the + refers to the point Q on either
side of P as indicated: -

(13)

and therefore
 333

FIGURE 3

cos e-+ or cos +

~ ~ 2R
r
+ 0(r)
2

sin e= or sin s= ~ +" 1 + 0(r 2) (14)

With these estimates, it is clear that only the term involving

-.!
Ar
In r sin [3(->- +" B In r + 0(1))
Ar
is not integrable in the normal sense, however, the integral
converges in the principal value sense and the boundary integral
equation, Equation 12, is a valid representation for all values
of the constant B including, of course, B~O.

We have therefore "solved" the boundary value problem posed

by Equations 1 and 2 in the sense that the temperature field T,
as well as all the derivative we wish, are determined in the
interior of ~ by the representation Equation 6 in terms of the
temperature and its normal derivative. These in turn may be
obtained as the solution of the boundary integral equation,
Equation 12, as the origin point P ranges over r, together with
the prescribed boundary data Equation 2, and we expect this
problem to have a computable solution whenever the original
problem posed by Equations 1 and 2 does.
334

Now let us carry the analysis a little further and suppose

we wish to calculate the temperature gradient along the boundary.
Since we already know the normal derivative (as part of the
solution procedure just outlined) we merely need to differentiate
the representation for temperature on the boundary in Equation
12, considered a function of the origin point P. Comparing the
variables at P and the nearby point p* as illustrated in Figure
5, we compute the tangential derivatives

dr
dsp = sin 8

d8 cos 8 1
·dsp = - - r - - R

dS cos 8
(15)
dsp = r

and therefore a formal differentiation of Equation 12 yields

dT 1 ({[ sin 8 + lfB (8sin8 + ln r cos 8) + ABR ln r»)~

ds p = 1T J r A r r dnQ
rp
+ [ sin(8-S) + ~ (8s1n(8-S) + (l-ln r)cos(8-S»
r2 Ar2
+ .J! cos S )T}ds (16)
AR r

FIGURE 4
 335

to Q

FIGURE 5

From Equation 13, we see that for Q in the neighborhood of P,

sin(8-S) = O(r 2 ) hence the two terms involving this factor give
no trouble. The term sin 8 ~ is integrable in the princi-
pal value sense. r dnQ

However, the terms involving

8sin8 (I-In r)cos(8-S)

and
r 2
r
cannot be integrated, even in a principal value sense!

Thus, the formal expression for the tangential derivative

given in Equation 16 is not useful unless B=O. In that case,
the integral of the remaining term converges, although only in
a principal value sense, and the representation can be used to
calculate boundary values of the temperature gradient once
boundary values of the temperature and its normal derivative
are determined.

For this example it turns out that nothing is gained by

considering a more general fundamental solution than the single
valued solution needed for the interior representation, Equation
6. This is not the case in the next example.

3 A MORE SIGNIFICANT EXAMPLE: PLANE ELASTOSTATICS

Denote the cartesian components of the displacement vector

ua (a=l,2) and the symmetric components of the stress tensor
'as(='Sa). The governing equations for plane isotropic linear
 336

elastostatics in the absence of body force are the equilibrium

equations

in iil (17)

where the stress and displacement fields are related by the

constitutive equation (for plane stress)

'NQ
~..,
= ~{ua.,..,0 + u Q + l2V u 8 o}
.."a. -v PoP a..., (18)

We suppose that the boundary of the region can be decomposed

into disjoint parts aiil = r l + r 2 and that on one we specify the
displacement while on the other the traction is prescribed:

(19)

where nS are the cartesian components of the outward normal

and Ga.' ta. are prescribed functions on r l and r 2 respectively.

The analog of Green's second identity in elastostatics is

Betti's reciprocal work relation. Suppose u , , ~ and U*,T*Q
. a. a. a. a...,
are any two d1stinct elastic states, i.e. the str sses T S
and T* satisfy Equation 17 in the interior. of iil, and th~
corre~gonding displacement fields (respectively u and u*)
satisfy Equation 18. Then noting that. as a cons~quencea.of
Equation 18 and the symmetry of the stress tensor, the differ-
ence
,* u - , u*
a.S a.,S a.S a.,S
vanishes identically in the interior of iil. If we integrate by
parts over iil and use Equation 17 to eliminate the area integral
we are left with the reciprocal work identity in the form

f
r
{t*u - t u*} ds
a. a. a. a.
=0 (20)

where·t~ = T~SnS' t = T n are the corresponding tractions on

the boundary of iil, gnd, g~ ~ourse, the elastic states defined
by u , T g ana u*, T*g are supposed to be well behaved in the
inte~iora.of the ~egigfi bounded by r.

For the purposes of identifying suitable fundamental

solutions to use in conjunction with Equation 20 to generate
boundary integral equations it is convenient to reformulate
the problem in terms of an Airy stress function; thus given a
function ~ on IT, Equation 17 will be satisfied by stresses
 337

obtained from

(21)

where e is the two index alternator. A necessary condition

that Eqg~tion 18 have a solution for displacement with the
stresses of Equation 21 is that the stress function be bi-
harmonic:

(22)

Now return to the question of what constitutes a suitable

fundamental solution. Paralleling the work outlined in the
preceeding example, and indeed referring to the same figures
used in that discussion, we see that for P in the interior of
n the reciprocal work identity, Equation 20 becomes the analog
of Equation 4:

f(t~a - tau~)ds o (23)

r£ + r+ + r- + r

We will call ~* (with associated stress T*S from Equation 21

and displacement u* obtained by integrati%g Equation 18) a
fundamental solutign for Airy's stress function associated
with the point P in the interior of n provided

(i) 1]4 ~* 0 in IT-p

lim
(H)
£+0 fr£ ua.... ds 0

(iii)
lim
£+0 f t~ ds c P with (CP )2 + (CP
a 1 2 )2 '" 0
r£

(iv) u~ (and T~S) are single valued in IT-P.

The resulting representation is then

c~ualpEn = f(t~a - tau~) ds (24)

r
If the point P is taken on the boundary as in Figure 2,
then requirement (iv) is no longer relevant, and the integral
over the boundary r is evaluated in the principal value sense,
hence, we replace (iv) with
 338

(iv' ) - tau~) ds (= ~~ J{o}dS) exists.

r*
The resulting representation for P on the boundary then looks
the same as Equation 24 except that the integral is a principal
value.
Now the implication of requirements (ii) and (iii) is that
the stress tensor for a fundamental solution must benave like
l/r in the neighborhood of P. In terms of a local polar coor-
dinate system. centered at P, a general solution of Equation 22
for stress functions with this property is

<p*(r,8) r8 (Al sin8 - A2cos8)

+ r In r (Blcos8 + B2 sin8) (25)

for arbitrary constants A , B. The stress components (re-

ferred to the polar coord~nat~ system) are
2~ + Bl 2A2 + B2
0*
r
-=---=-
r
cos 8 +
r
sin 8

Bl B2
o~ = -r cos 8 + -r sin 8 (26)

BI B2
T*
r8
= -r sin 8 - -r cos 8

and the cartesian components of the displacement vector, de-

termined to within an arbitrary rigid displacement by integrat-
ing Equation 18, are

u~ = ~[2Al + (l-V)Bl]lnr - [(1-V)A2 + 2B 2 ]8

2 .
- (l+v) (AI + Bl)cos 8 - (l+v) (A 2 + B2 )sin8cos8}

(27)

u~ = ~{[2Az + (I-V)B 2]ln r + [(l-V)Al + 2B I ]8

2
- (l+V)(A2 + B2 )sin 9-(l+V)(Al + Bl)Sin9cos9}

An examination of the displacement components reveals that

each contains a constant multiple of the polar angle 9 which
will produce multivaluedness unless the coefficients vanish.
Thus, the only fundamental solutions suitable for fhe repre-
sentation, Equation 24, with P in the interior, are obtained
with the restriction
 339

I-v
B = --A
a
(28)
a 2
This is essentially the plane analog of Kelvin's solution, and is
used as well when P is a boundary point in virtually all conven-
tional representations of plane elastostatic boundary integral
equations derived by the direct method; see for example,
Hartmann, 1981, or Brebbia and Walker, 1980 for a discussion
of the properties of this conventional representation.

If however, the point P is on the boundary, one need not

exclude multivalued solutions, and indeed, a glance at Equation
26 shows that if instead of the Kelvin solution, we take
B = B = 0, then the traction vanishes on any radial line
throug~ Pi in particular, the traction on the tangent plane at
P is zero! We will refer to this case as the traction free
fundamental solution.

Let us now examine in some detail the representation which

results if we use the traction free funamental solution. First,.
it will be convenient to introduce a global cartesian coordinate
system as indicated in Figure 6, and we note in particular, the
notation
1
r'a :: ara = {COS¢ , a (29)
dX sin¢ , a 2
Finally, we select two particular independent fundamental solu-
tions (two distinct choices for the constants Al,A ) so that
the cartesian components of displacement referred Eo the global
coordinate system for the two solutions (p = 1;2) are

2 { I-v
u*(p) - -E 0ap In r + -2- e ap e
a 1f

l+v I (30)
+ --2- eaSe pcr r'Sr,cr
The components of the traction vector at Q then take the form

t*(p) = - ~ cosS r, r,p (31)

a 1fr a

and if P is regular point of the boundary the boundary integral

equations become

u
p IpE r f ft*(p)u
a a
t u*(p)
a a Ids (32)
rp
with n*Cp) and t*(p) given by Equations 30 and 31.
a a
As in the heat conduction example, we can examine the Be-
havior of the integrand of Equation 32 as the integration point
Q approaches the origin point P. The only difficulty arises
 340

FIGURE 6

from the terms involving t*(p) which behav.e, at worst, like

cosB/r. The estimates giv~n in Equation 14 show that these
terms are actually bounded so that the integral in Equation 32
converges in the normal sense and one need not even be concerned
with calculating the principal value: This has important im-
plications with respect to methods for discretizing and numer-
ically solving the integral equations as precautions for evalu-
ating principal value quadratures on boundary elements contain-
ing the origin point are not needed. The boundary integral
equations resulting when the Kelvin fundamental solution is used
makes sense only if the integral is evaluated in the principal
value sense.

Even more important, the representation given in Equation

32 is differentiable along the boundary whereas the correspond-
ing representation using the Kelvin fundamental solution is not,
indeed the resulting integral does not converge in any sense.
To complete this section, we will derive an explicit boundary
integral representation for the normal stress component on the
boundary .in a direction tangent to the boundary.

For convenience, let us suppose that the global coordinate

system coincides with the local cartesian system at the parti-
cular boundary point P as indicated in Figure 7, and observe
that we wish to calculate the stress component On. For plane
stress, we can write

~
Cly
du 2 1:. [0n -
- ds p = E vo1;]
but at the point P
 341
t. Q

n to Q

/ /',s
R

FIGURE 7

so that
dU 2
ern Ip = -E ds p + \! tIl p (33)

and we are left then with formally evaluating

tJ {ca.u a. - t u }ds
a. a.
(34)

Again, with the help of Figure 7, we compute

dr _ sinq, sinS
dsp -

dq, _ dB cosq, cosS

ds p - - ds p = -r- = -r- (35)

de _ dq, 1:. = cose I

ds p - ds p - R r R
342

so that
cos6 1 v
rrEr {(I-v) - (l+v)cos26}- rr;R

sin6 { (I-V)}
2rrEr (1+v)cos26 (36)

1
- - 2 {cosScos36 + cos6cos(26-S)}
rrr

1
- - 2 {2cosScos6sin26 + (1-cos26) sin(S-6)}
rrr

Finally, we note that an analysis of the behavior of the inte-

grand of Equation 34 for Q near P indicates that the principal
value integral converges, although ordinary convergence is
generally not attained because of the term involving fi 2•

4 CONCLUDING REMARKS

We have shown that although single valued fundamental solutions

are needed to generate interior boundary integral representa-
tions, this restriction can be relaxed in deriving the boundary
integral equations characterizing the original boundary value
problem. In the case of plane elastostatics, a new formulation
using a (multivalued) traction free fundamental solution rather
than the conventional (single valued) "Kelvin" fundamental solu-
tion has been shown to have a major advantage in that the kernel
functions in the traction free equations are "less singular"
than those in the Kelvin equations. There are two immediate
consequences of this.

a) The boundary integral equations converge in the or-

dinary sense rather than only in the principal value sense.
This has important implications with regard to discretization
and numerical quadrature.

b) A formal differentiation of the boundary integral

representation leads to a valid representation for the normal
stress component on the boundary in a direction tangent to the
boundary. Such a representation I.does not converge (in any
sense) for the conventional boundary integral equations. This
observation also has important implications with regard to how
fine a mesh is needed for reliable stress calculations in
regions of high concentrations.

Finally, we remark that these ideas are directly applica-

ble to three-dimensional elastostatic problems with similar
advantages. The Kelvin fundamental solution can be replaced
with a traction free fundamental solution (a combination of
the Boussinesq and Cerruti solutions) in the boundary integral
equations with the consequent result that the representation
 343

converges in the ordinary sense and can be differentiated on

the boundary.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The results described in this article were obtained in the

course of an investigation sponsored by the U.S. National
Science Foundation under grant CME-79l9529.

REFERENCES

Brebbia, C.A. and S. Walker (1980) Boundary Element Techniques

in Engineering, Newnes-Butterworths, London.

Hartmann, F. (1981) Elastostatics, in Progress in Boundary El-

ement Methods, Vol. 1, ed. C.A. Brebbia, Pentech Press, London.
Chapter 19

FORMULATION FOR CRACKS IN PLATE BENDING

Morris Stern

The University of Texas at Austin, U. S. A.

1 FUNDAMENTAL SOLUTIONS FOR CRACKS

The derivation of the boundary integral equations for plate

bending (Lecture 22) is based on the presumption that the moment
and shear resultants remain bounded near the boundary origin
point. However, in a number of significant problems the stress
resultants do indeed become unbounded, for example at the base
of a through crack or more generally at a reentrant corner. In
these cases the singular behavior of the stress resultants are
frequently themselves a focus of interest.

As shown by Williams (1951), the asymptotic behavior of

bending solutions in the vicinity of a boundary singularity can
be characterized by the particular nature of the boundary
supports, or lack of them, on the edges adjacent to the singular
point, and by the included angle formed by the edges there.
Following Williams' ideas the asymptotic behavior of the plate
deflection at a corner is inferred from the homogeneous boundary
value problem corresponding to an unloaded plane sector with
appropriate homogeneous boundary conditions on the straight
edges. For example, the behavior of the plate deflection at the
base of a crack with free edges is obtained from a consideration
of

v4w = 0; r > 0, 0 ~ e< 21T (1)

M= V 0 qn e 0 and e '" 21T (2)

as indicated in ~igure l. A separation of variables solution is

of the form

345
 346

FIGURE 1

w(r,S;A)

HI (A) . 0)
r {b 1 s1n(A+l)S+b 2 cos(A+l)S

(3)

with bending moment and shear given by

M(r,S) -DrA-l[(A+l)(l+V)AF(S,A)+F"(S,A)]
(4)
VCr,S) = -Dr A- 2{[(A+l)2+(1-V)A(A-l)]F'(S;A)+F"'(S;A)}

where the "prime" indicates differentiation with respect to S.

The eigen values are determined from the boundary conditions
Equation 2, and can be shown to satisfy

sin2A7r = 0 (5)

We reject negative values of A as leading to unbounded strain

energy in any portion of the plate containing the crack tip,
while 1.=0, 1.=1 or A~2 yields stresses that are bounded every-
where. The remaining singular solutions correspond to 1.=1/2 and
1.=3/2 and upon satisfaction of the homogeneous boundary
conditions can be written
 347

+r 5 / 2 {d [sin 58 _ 5(1-V)]sin ~
1 2 9-v 2

+d2 [cos 528 + 5j!;~) cos ~]} (6)

The constants b l , b 2 , d l , d 2 may be regarded as generalized

stress intensity factors.

A similar analysis can be carried out for other types of

boundary singularities and the asymptotic behavior of the
deflection expressed in terms of generalized stress intensity
factors. The problem then is to find particular fundamental
solutions to use in the reciprocal work identity so that in the
region surrounding the singular boundary point the integrals
continue to make sense and yield nontrivial information. For
this purpose return to the eigenvalue problem characterizing the
singular solution (Equations I and 2 for the crack tip) and note
that whenever \ is an eigenvalue so is -A. Denote the eigen-
solution corresponding to \ by wand to -\ by u*. Then the
products which would appear in the boundary integrals, namely
wV*, NM*, MN*, Vu* all behave like l/r as r ~ 0 and the integral
on a contour surrounding the singular point should remain
bounded as the contour is shrunk to the point.

Thus, for each eigensolution to be used in characterizing

the asymptotic behavior of the deflection at a singular boundary
point there is a corresponding 'complementary' eigensolution
which can be used as an additional independent fundamental
solution in the boundary integral formulation. In the example
case of a crack with free edges, the four parameter fundamental
solution corresponding to the singular deflection Ws of
Equation 6 is

1/2 . 8 I-v
u*(r,8) r {BI[s~n 2 + 5+3v sin 38]
2

+ I-v cos T]
8 38
+B 2 [COS
2 7+v

-1/2 8
+r DI[sin + I-v sin 58
2 3+5V T
8 I-V 5
+D 2 [ -cos 2 + §=\j cos T]} (7)

Boundary values of the normal slope and of the moment and shear
resultants for the asymptotic singular deflection fields,
Equations 6 and 7 associated with the base of a through crack
are calculated from the formulas given in Lecture 22 and are
348

written out explicitly in Stern (1983).

2 AUGMENTED BOUNDARY INTEGRAL EQUATIONS

As indicated earlier, if the moment or shear resultants become

unbounded at a particular point on the plate boundary, then the
validity of the boundary integral equations derived in Lecture
22, with origin at this point, is open to question. Further-
more, if we are also interested in the generalized stress
intensity factors associated with such a case, additional
equations involving these variables will be needed.

Let us first treat the question of augmenting the already

derived boundary integral equations to include the generalized
stress intensity factors. For convenience we repeat here the
basic reciprocal work identity referring to Figure 2:

f {V*W - M*N + N*M - u*V}ds

r p+r*

f u*qda (8)
Q*

where the asterisked variables refer to a fundamental solution

which is biharmonic except at P where it is singular, and the
remaining notation is defined in Lecture 22. Referring to the
notation indicated in Figure 1, suppose now that the origin
point P is at the crack tip. We can decompose the plate
deflection into three parts:

w (9)

where Ws is given in Equation 6 and describes the asymptotic

behavior of the deflection at P explicitly in terms of the
generalized stress intensity factors. Next,

(10)

defines the (rigid) displacement of the tangent plane at P, and

finally wrem is the remainder. Denote by u* the complementary
(to ws ) fundamental solution given in Equation 7 and write the
reciprocal work identity (Equation 8) on Q* with u* as the
auxiliary function. The desired boundary integral equation
results when we take p to· zero. We are then faced with
evaluating
 349

FIGURE 2

lim {Irv*w - M*N + N*M - u*V]ds

~O

+ E {F*u - Fu*} (11)

l+,l-

and verifying that the remaining Cauchy principal value integral

converges. The second task introduces no new difficulties
beyond algebra. The first is greatly simplified by the
following considerations.

Once again consider the eigenvalue problem, Equations 1 and

2, which characterizes the asymptotic behavior of the deflection
at P. Let u*, corresponding to A*, and u', corresponding to A',
be any pair of eigensolutions, and evaluate the reciprocal work
identity for these functions in the region between the two arcs
r l and r 2 bounded by the (straight) edges of the crack, as in
Figure 3. Because the differential equation and the edge
boundary conditions defining the eigensolutions are homogeneous,
the only surviving terms in the reciprocal work identity are
the integrals over the two arcs, and thus
350

---
I
/ /
./ "-
"
\
\j
I .J.:
I );
\
\
""- -

FIGURE 3

r
J(u~',u') J{V*U'-M*N'+N*M'-U*V'}dS + L {F*u'-F'u*}
rl + -
Ll,L l

f[V*U'-M*N'+N*M'-U*V'ldS + L {F"'u'-F'u*}
r2 + -
L2 ,L2

r
J{'}dS + L {.} (12)
r -e+,r
is a path independent integral, where r is any smooth simple arc
connecting the edges and lying inside the plate. (If r has
additional corners the result still holds provided that the jump
terms are correspondingly augmented.)

In particular, from the form of the eigensolutions in

Equation 3, we see that evaluating J(u*,u') on a circular arc of
radius r results in

A*+A'
J(u*,u') Cr
 351

where the constant C may be evaluated explicitly in terms of the

(unknown) coefficients br, b~, ... b4 defining the functions u*
and u' in Equation 3. However, we note that unless A*+A'=O then
C must vanish, and this observation may be used to simplify the
calculation of Equation 11 as well as to assure us that the
limit indeed exists.

If the displacement or rotation of the tangent plane at P

(Le. Wo or a x and a y ) are degrees of freedom, as for example,
in the case of a crack with free edges, then the corresponding
rigid body displacement will necessarily be an eigenfunction
associated with the eigenvalues zero and one. On the other
hand, if the displacement or rotation is restrained, then that
part of w . 0d necessarily vanishes. In either case, when w in
nog~

Equation 11 is decomposed, the terms arising from the product of

u* and Wrigid do not contributed to J p ' Furthermore, the
contribution to J p depends only on the characteristic
functions wand u*. Since these functions are known explicitly
in terms ofSgeneralizedstress intensity factors and a
corresponding set of parameters in the complementary fundamental
solution, J p can be evaluated, either directly or by numerical
quadrature over any convenient contour. With J p thus evaluated
in the reciprocal work identity, a particular choice of the
parameters defining u* produces a boundary integral equation
relating the stress intensity factors to the otfier variables.

In particular, at the base of a through crack with the

functions Ws and u* given by Equations 6 and 7, a tedious but
routine direct calculation based on the considerations of the
preceding two paragraphs yields

I
8=27T
Jp = {v*w -M*N +N*M -u*V }rd8+lim{F*w -F u*}
s s s s 0 s s £+ £-
8=0 p+,

Then four linearly independent choices of the constants Bl ,B 2 ,

D1 ,D 2 yields four additional boundary integral equations for
tne origin at the crack tip; for example, specifying u* by the
choice

(5+3v) U+V)
(14)
247TD(1-v) (3+v)
352

produces the representation

with similar equations for the remaining generalized stress

intensity factors.

Return now to the question of the validity of the regular

boundary integral equations at a singular boundary point. The
auxiliary function in the reciprocal work identity is u f * or
llm*' Again, if the displacement or rotation of the tangent
plane is not restricted by boundary conditions, then that part
of w , 'd must be an eigensolution of the asymptotic problem and
r1g1
therefore the corresponding fundamental solution (u f * or um*)
must also be an eigensolution. Then the corresponding singular
product terms associated with Ws contribute nothing to J p in the
limit and may be dropped. Thus all the integrals converge as
before and, if needed, the regular boundary integral equations
with origin at the singular point can be used to pick out the
values of wo' a and a .
x y

In the example case with P at the base of a crack, c=2, so

that from the deflection boundary integral equation we get

wo+f {w,uf*}ds (16)

rp

From the slope boundary integral equation with y=(c-2)rr!2=0

we find

-2a+J{w-w u * }ds +
x 0' m 1 k=l
~
{w-w,u * }
0 m1
(17)

whereas with y=(c-l)rr!2=rr!2 we ,find

(18)

3 CONCLUDING REMARKS

The techniques described here are not restricted to through

 353

cracks in plates but may be extended directly to other problems

involving geometric singularities in problems modeled with
elliptic equations. What is needed is a "reciprocal work
theorem" (generalized Green's identity) and solutions of the
eigenproblem associated with the geometric singularity.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The support of the U.S. National Science Foundation during the

course of this investigation is gratefully acknowledged. The
author is also indebted to Dr. Jin-Woo Kim who developed and
further extended some of the ideas contained here in his
Doctoral Dissertation entitled Computation of Bending
Singularities in Elastic Plates Using Boundary Integral
Techniques, The University of Texas at Austin, May 1981.

REFERENCES

Stern, M. (1983) Boundary Integral Equations for Bending of Thin

Plates, in Progress in Boundary Element Methods, vol. 2, ed. C.
A. Brebbia, Pentech Press, London.

Williams, M.L. (1951) Surface Stress Singularities Resulting

from Various Boundary Conditions in Angular Corners of Plates
Under Bending, Proceedings First U. S. National Congress
Applied Mechanics, Chicago, pp. 325-329.
 Chapter 20

FRACTURE MECHANICS STRESS ANALYSIS I (BIE FOR CRACK TIP

STRESS ANALYSIS)
C. Atkinson
Schlumberger Cambridge Research Ltd. (on leave from
Mathematics Department, Imperial College, London)

1. INTRODUCTION
There are certain features of the stress analysis of cracked
solids that distinguish these problems from others to which
B.I.E. methods have been applied. The most significant
feature is that for a slit crack in a homogeneous elastic
medium the stress field at such a sharp crack tip may be
singular (the stress going to infinity like r- with r
measured from the crack tip). Accurate boundary element
modelling is required to obtain reliable numerical results.
More complicated stress and displacement fields occur in
composite bodies when cracks meet interfaces between different
materials or lie along such interfaces. Some discussion of
these singularities can be found in the review Atkinson (1979)
where reference to a large literature is also given. A recent
account of B.I.E. and its application to fracture mechanics
can be found in Atkinson (1983).
In addition to the need for accurate element modelling of
crack tip stress and displacement fields there is a difficulty
encountered when applying standard B.I.E. procedures to
fracture models in which a crack is modelled as having a
planform of zero thickness (e.g. a line crack in two dimen-
sions). If the direct B.I.E. formulation of a thin ellipse
is used to represent a crack when the ellipse degenerates to a
line, it has been pointed out (e.g. Cruse (1977)) that the
standard formulation is indeterminate. This difficulty and
ways of overcoming it will be described below. It is also
worth noting that information about 'stress-intensity factors'
(notation to be explained in section 2) can be obtained from
stress and displacement fields far from the crack tip by
judicious use of certain paJh independent integrals so that
a less accurate model of a crack can still be put to good use.
(An account ~f these methods will be given in lecture 2.)
Finally it should be noted that a natural representation for
a crack is by continuous distributions of dislocations.

355
 356

There is a large literature on this representation for cracks

in infinite media and some attempts have been made at combining
this with S.I.E. for finite bodies. Such approaches will be
discussed in Section 3, where direct S.I.E. crack formulations
are also considered.
The plan of the paper is as follows. We begin with a brief
recap of the standard S.I.E. formulation for elastostatics
and outline the difficulty with direct modelling of cracks by
S.I.E. In Section 2 we briefly review Fracture mechanics
terminology and in Section 3 various integral equation form-
ulations are discussed. In the next lecture we will present
some numerical results for a.model problem and 9iscuSS how
various ancillary techniques such as analytic solutions and
invariant integrals can· be used to analyse a practical.problem.

The direct integral formulation of Rizzo (1967) deduces

boundary integral equations via an appropriate reciprocal
theorem, fundamental solution and certain limiting processes
as field points approach the boundary. For an elastic medium,
region R, bounded by a surface ~ this procedure leads to the
result at an interior point p
UJ,(p) =J t.(Q)u .. (p,Q)dS(Q) - J u.(Q)T .. (p,Q)dS(Q) (1)
S 1 J1 S 1 J1

where the tensors U.. and T.. are defined by equation AS of

the appendix and cart1be dedtlted from the fundamental solutions
given there. Note that t. = 0 .. n. is the traction vector
and u. the displacement v~ctor!Jthe integrals being taken
aroun~ the boundary S (boundary co-ordinate Q). The stresses
at any interior point p(x~ may be calculated by differentiation
of the displacements u.(p) with respect to the field point
p(~) with co-ordinatesJx. and use of the appropriate stress
strain relation)the result can then be written

o .. (p) = J tk(Q)D k · .(p,Q)dS(Q) - J uk (Q)Skl'J.(P,Q)dS(Q) (2)

IJ S 1J S

where the tensors Ok" and Sk" are determined from U.. and
T .. respectively, by1differentiation with respect to i~e
pdlnt p(~) and using the stress-strain relations.
The above results give the stress and displacement at an
interior point. The well known boundary integral equation
is obtained by taking the limiting form of equation (1)
(sometimes known as Somigliana's identity for the displace-
ment vector) and letting the interior point p(x~ tend to a
boundary point P(~). Taking due account of the disconti-
nuity of the second integral on the right hand side of
 357

equation (1) as p(x0 ~ P(x~ from the interior leads to the

integral equation - -
u.(P)/2 +
)
f
u.(Q)T •• (P,Q)dS(Q)
S 1.)1.
= Sf t.(Q)U •• (P,Q)dS(Q)
1. )1.
("3)

The difficulty with the application of the standard B.I.E.

formulation to fracture mechanics has been outlined clearly
by Cruse (1975, 77, 78), we follow his derivation here. He
considers ~he two_dimensional situation shown in figure 1
where S, rand r represent the regular, upper and lower
crack surfaces as shown. The Somigliana identity (equation
(1)) for the displacement at an interior point p(x0 is thus
given by -

(4)

The kernels U.. and T.. are defined in equation (A8) and have
the property t~at Jl

T .. (p,Q+) -T .. (p,Q-) (5)

1.) 1.)

and

U .. (p,Q+) = +U .• (p ,Q-) (6)

1.) 1)

for Q+ and Q- lying on the crack faces r+ and r- respectively

except near the small crack tip region. Note that the sign
change in equation (5), is due to the opposite normal direc-
tions of the two crack surfaces. Letting the two crack
s¥rfaces collapse to the plane r (with the same normal as
r ) leads to the equation

u.(p) ~
)
f
s)
U.1..(p,Q)t.(Q)dS(Q) -
1. S)1.
f
T .. (p,Q)u.(Q)dS(Q)
1.

- fr)1.
T .. (p,Q)6u.(Q)dS(Q)
1.
+ f
r
u .. (p,Q)
)1.

where

(8)

(9)
 358

+
p

Figure 1
Definition of crack modelling terms used
in deriving equation (4)
In general, situations are encountered where the crack is
loaded by equal and opposite tractions such that Et .(Q) = O.
The usual next step is to let p(~~ * P(~) a boundaty point in
equation (7) in order to obtain the boundary integral equation.
However, when P(~) is a point on the plane r (not at the edge
of r) the equation becomes
u.(p) - 6u.(P)/2 + f
T .• (P,Q)u.(Q)dS(Q)
J J S J~ ~

+ f T •• {P,Q)llU.(Q)dS(Q) z f U .• (P,Q)ti(Q)dS(Q) (10)

r J~ ~ S J~

where the usual term for the jump in the boundary integral
has been taken and the integral over r is a principal value
integral. Equation (10) is deficient in two critical respects.
In the first place while a single surface r is being treated,
two variables are unknown. These are 6u. and Eu. =2u.(P) -
fiu.(P) . The second deficiency is thatJequatio~ (101 is the
sa~e for any set of equal and opposite crack boundary tractions
(i.e. such that Et.(Q) = 0 where Q lies on r). Thus this
integral equation ~annot deal with situations where the crack
is loaded internally.
As a consequence of the above mentioned deficiencies inherent
 359
in a straightforward application of the boundary integral
equation (10) to flat crack modelling, a variety of methods
have been suggested which each deal with special cases. No
all purpose method applicable to a variety of unsymmetric crack
plan forms seems to be available at the present time. We
indicate a possible method in Section 3 and discuss the
variety of methods which have been suggested for special
situations. Note, however, that the above-mentioned diffi-
culties are all specific to the sharp crack model of fracture
mechanics. Useful numerical results might still be obtained
by modelling the crack as an elliptical hole to give an
accurate stress field far from the crack and then use invariant
integrals to calculate the (sharp) near crack tip stress
field. A discussion of such invariant integrals will be made
in lecture 2.
2. STRESS INTENSITY FACTORS
As discussed in the introduction there are certain features of
the stress analysis of theoretical fracture models that distin-
guish these problems from others to which B.I.E. methods have
been applied. We include here a brief description of notations
and results pertaining to a crack in a homogeneous elastic
body. For situations where cracks meet interfaces between
different elastic media or lie along a bimaterial interface
different singularities are encountered, for a review of some
of these situations see Atkinson (1979).
Fracture modes and stress intensit¥ factors
A key feature 1n the stress analys1s of the crack models
considered here is the singular stress field at the crack tip.
For a crack in a homogeneous medium an eigenvalue analysis
(see for example Williams (1957)) gives a result of the form
-1/2
a ~ KF(S)r + non-singular terms (11 )

where (r,0) are polar-co-ordinates based at the crack tip,

F(0) is a function determined by the eigenvalue analysis and
is independent of the applied load or body shape. Thus, close
to the crack tip the interaction with the applied stress field
is fully characterised by the coefficient K. This coefficient,
which depends on the applied load, the shape of the body,
and the crack length, is called the stress intensity factor
and is a cornerstone of contemporary fracture mechanics. In
general, when the applied stress induces stresses on the
crack which are a combination of pure tension and shear,
there are three stress intensity factors associated with the
different modes of fracture (Figure 2).
 360

2 (0) 2 (b)

Figure 2
Fracture modes. 2(a) opening mode; 2(b) sliding
mode; 2(c) anti-plane shearing mode
A standard notation is to use KI for the opening (mode I), KII
for in-plane sliding (mode II), K for anti-plane sliding
(mode III) modes of relative disp{!tement of the crack surfaces.
The following results are standard for isotropic bodies in
plane strain, plane stress or anti-plane strain. For the pure
opening mode (Figure 2(a)), we have

I - Since!2)SinC3e!z)}
cosCe!Z) { sinCe!Z)cos(3e!Z) (12)
I + sin(e!Z)sinC3e!2)

for the singular near crack tip stress field, and

l Ull
.
Uz
=
K
-.l c..!..) ~
z~ z~
f cos(e!z) [K-I+Z
sinCe!2) [K+I
(13 )

where k = 3-4v (plane strain) k (3-v)!(1+v) (plane stress).

Note 0j1 = v(01j+o22) for plane strain. For the in plane sliding
mode (FTgure 2\tl))

t
-siu(e!2) [2 + COS(O!2)COS(3S!Z)I}
cos(S!2)[1 - sio(0/2)s10(30/2)1 (14 )
sio(O!2)cos(O/2)cos(30!2)
 361

1
and

sin(e/2) (IC + 1 + 2 cos 2Ce/2»)

I-cos(e/2)(1C - 1 - 2 sin 2Ce/2»)
(15)

For anti-plane sliding (Figure 2.(c» we have

j -since/2)l
l cosC e/2)
(16)

and
K
2 -!!!
II
C~)1/2
211'
sinCe/2) (17)

In each of the above v is Poisson's ratio, lJ is the she"ar

modulus, (r,a) are polar co-ordinates based at the crack tip,
and the crack lies on the plane X2 = D, a= tn. (Subscripts
1, 2, 3 refer in the usual way to cartesian co-ordinate axes
x,. x2 , x3 ).
It is obvious from the above formulae that the stress inten-
sity factor K is an important parameter characterising the
singular near crack tip stress field. It connects with
fracture theory through the postulate that fracture will
commence (i.e. a crack will grow) when the stress intensity
factor reaches a critical value K , this value being an
experimentally determined material property assumed independ-
ent of the shape of the body. Such a fracture criterion is
however unambiguous only when a single mode is operative. In
a mixed mode situation which occurs for example when a crack
is aligned at an angle to an applied tensile stress there is
still discussion as to what is the correct fracture criterion
to use. We concern ourselves in this article with accurate
procedures for calculating the near crack tip stress field for
either single or mixed mode situations. The question as to
what fracture criterion is best suited to predicting mixed mode
fracture will not be addressed, however, see e.g. Atkinson
(1979) for a review and discussion of this point.
In addition to the above "critical stress intensity factor"
fracture criterion there is the 'energy release rate' fracture
theory of Griffith. This states that for a pre-existing crack
to grow, the decrease of the total energy (elastic energy plus
potential energy of the loading mechanism) must be equal to or
exceed the surface energy of the two newly created fracture
 362

surfaces. The energy release rate, or crack extension force,

G, can thus be defined as the amount of energy released from
the system (cracked specimen plus loading mechanism) for unit
advance of the crack front. For fracture in either of the
three modes shown in Figure 2, it can be shown that

cr - E

( 18)
where E is Young's ·modulus. The Griffith fracture criterion
then says that fracture occurs when G = 2y (y.being the. surface
energy of each of the newly created surfaces). Thus when a
single mode is operative the criteria of critical stress
intensity factor and critical energy release rate are equiva-
lent. However, in the mixed mode situation for a crack
growing in its own plane the energy release rate is
2 K 2
G "' (Kr 2 + Kr/> (1~\I > + r~~ (19)

and no simple association between the two criteria is possible.

The above discussion applies strictly to elastic media and
brittle solids but nevertheless has had quite widespread
practical success.
The subject of elastic-plastic fracture mechanics is a modi-
fication of the theory described above designed to take into
account plastic deformation at a crack tip. A detailed
description of this subject is outside the scope of the present
article, however the following features are noted (see the
review by Atkinson (1979) or Rice (1978) for a more complete
account.) For problems of small scale yielding the singular
solutions outlined in equations (12) to (17) are useful in
setting an 'outer' approximation to the stress field. In
models where plastic flow occurs by slip bands emanating
from a crack :tip or by superdislocation modelling of plasti-
city. it is important to have some information of higher order
terms in (11) in order to determine the shear stress induced
on the slip band. This information is readily available with
certain kinds of element modelling in the S.I.E. integral
equation.
Another concept much used in elastic-plastic fracture mechanics
is the J-integral introduced by Rice (1968). This integral is
identical to ~ certa~n integral of the energy-momentum tenso~
discussed by Eshelby (1951). in the context of generalised
forces on point defects and inhomogeneities in elastic fields
 363

(see also Atkinson and Eshelby (1968) for a treatment of dynamic

crack propagation by this approach). Under certain circum-
stances integrals based on the energy momentum tensor are invar-
iant and by suitably deforming the contour of the integral,
information about near crack tip stress fields can be deduced
from numerical information obtained on the boundary of a region
removed from the crack tip. A brief derivation of some of
these integrals will be giv.en in the next lecture.

3. INTEGRAL EQUATION METHODS FOR CRACK TIP STRESS ANALYSIS

A variety of integral equation methods have been suggested in
order to overcome the difficulties outlined in the introduction.
However, most of these methods have been designed to treat a
special class of problems and ·are not easily generalised. In
the following subsections these methods are outlined.
We begin by briefly discussing how the integral equation (3)
can be used for the fracture problem. In section (3.1) it is
shown how symmetry can be used, in certain cases, to reduce the
problem to a boundary value problem for which the formulation
discussed in the introduction (equation (3)) is appropriate.
In section 3.2 partitioning, dividing the body into regions,
is used together with continuity conditions along an extension
of the crack boundary to couple the two regions together.
In both these methods integral equations like equation (3)
are used so no special attention is paid to the crack as far
as the integral equation formulation is concerned. In Section
4 we discuss briefly various ways of approximating the integral
equation in order to accurately model the crack.
In sections 3.3 - 3.6 we discuss integral equation formulations
which pay particular attention to the crack geometry. In
section 3.3 a method which uses exact 'source-crack' Green's
functions is outlined. The limitation of this method is that,
except for special crack configurations (e.g. straight cracks
in plane strain or stress), very few of these Green's functions
are known. In section 3.4 straight cracks modelled by
Volterra dislocations are considered, thus an integral equation
is obtained for the crack in terms of a continuous distribution
of (virtual) dislocations. This is coupled to a boundary
integral formulation such as that of equation (3) in order to
deal with finite specimens. The limitation of this approach is
that only plane problems and straight cracks are envisaged.
Nevertheless, it is natural to represent the crack by elements
which represent a jump in displacement and the dislocation is
a fundamental unit of this kind. More fundamental than a
Volterra dislocation, however, is the Somigliana dislocation.
which is an infinitesimal dislocation of area dS with an
associated discontinuity vpctor b. (representing the jump in
displacement u. across dS) which ~s effectively constant over
J
 364

the small area dS. We discuss crack modelling by Somigliana

dislocations in Section 3.5. Finally, in section 3.6 we show
how the dislocation models of sections 3.4 and 3.5 can be derived
naturally from Betti's reciprocal theorem.
3.1 Use of s etr where ossible to re lace crack b
boundary value prob em
For certaln"symmetrlc geometries and loading conditions it is
possible to replace a crack problem by a mixed boundary value
problem and thus apply the standard boundary integral equation
of equation (3). We illustrate this approach by considering
a fracture specimen such as shown in Figure 1 (the specimen
is assumed to be symmetric about the axis x. = 0). If the
applied loading is tensile and symmetric with respect to
x. = 0, it is clear that fracture should occur in the opening
mode and the stress analysis of the configuration will lead
to a mode I stress intensity factor. Using the symmetry of
the specimen it is sufficient to analyse the region x. > O.
For a traction free crack the boundary conditions on x.-= 0
can be written
t
1
=0 on x. = 0
t. 0 on x. = 0, xl' inside the crack (20)
u. =0 on x. = 0, xl external to the crack
The usual notation for stress and displacement has been used,
e.g. (u" u.) are the displacements in the (x 1 ,x.) directions,
and the traction t. = cr .. n., n. being the components of the
outward drawn normAl. w~ ~rit~ the integral equation (3) in
the equivalent form
f
S
[u.(Q) - u.(P»)T .. (P,Q)dS(Q)
1 1 J1
(21)
- J t.(Q)U .. (P,Q)dS(Q)
S 1 J1

where S is the boundary of the body in x.~O, including the

axis x. = 0, i = 1,2, and the integral equation is to be
satisfied for all PES. With either the traction vector t.
or displacement vector u. specified on the boundary, con- 1
sistent with the assummed symmetry, the above integral equation
can be reduced to a system of simultaneous equations. Of
course accurate element modelling is required to obtain good
results for the singular crack tip stresses etc. Note that
the integral equation is required along the whole of the
boundary including that on x2 = 0, whereas the attempt to
directly model the crack boundary discussed in the introduction
would have led (if successful) to an integral equation only
along the crack in addition to the external boundary.
 365

For some early work on applications of this method to fracture

specimens where a symmetry plane allows the problem to be set
up as a boundary value problem see, e.g. Cruse" and Van Buren
(1971).where the thickness of the fracture specimen was taken
into account, the boundary and crack surfaces being divided
into triangles in which the dtsplacements and tractions are
assumed constant. In the n"ext lecture we show, for an anti-plane
elastic problem, how more refined element modelling can be
effective.
3.2 Partitioning (subdividing the body into distinct regions)

,.-:=.0_ '----~~---Xl

Figure 3
A crack positioned unsymmetrically in a body
When there is no symmetry in the cracked specimen it is still
possible to get a formulation like that obtained in the last
section by subdividing the body into regions. We illustrate
this approach by considering the configuration shown in
Figure 3. For convenience we denote the part of the boundary
described by ABCDA as r and the part described by ADEFA as
r 2 . Then applying the lntegral equation (21) to both regions
(1) and (ii) gives the equations

(1) (1)
[u. (Q) - u. (P»)T •• (P,Q)dS(Q)
1 1 J1
(22)
(1)
t. (Q)U •• (P,Q)dS(Q)
1 J1

and
 366

f [u.(2)(Q)
L - u. (2)( P)JT •• (P,Q)dS(Q)
r2 L JL
(23)
(2)
- rJ t.
1
(Q)U •• (p ,Q)dS(Q)
JL
2
Along the common boundary AD we have the boundary conditions:-
(i) Continuity of stress, i.e. t.(1) = _t.(2) for all
points on AD. 1 1

(ii) Traction free crack condition t. = 0 on AD.

(iii) Continuity of displacement on o~, ui (1) = ui (2) on 00.
It is possible to treat the above equations in the usual way
although, of course, accurate modelling is require in order to
obtain reliable results. For an early application of this
approach see, e.g. Rizzo and Shippy (1968) where a formulation
of this kind is given for non-homogeneous (two dimensional)
inclusion problems.
3.3 The use of exact 'source-crack' Green's functions
One way of avoiding the difficulty discussed in the intro-
duction is to avoid the crack altogether by using as a source
function in the integral equation formulation the solution
to the problem of a pOint source, placed anywhere, and a crack
in an infinite medium. This approach thus relies on the
availability of such a solution and requires that the solution
be known at all points of the body, i.e. in particular at
the boundary of the body where the integral equatfon is
applied. These requirements restrict the applicability of
such an approach since solutions are known only for special
crack geqmetries. In three dimensions, for example, a
crack with a flat elliptical planform is about the limit of
cases that can be treated by exact analysis and the stress
field everywhere takes on a very complicated form. Some
applications of this method to problems of plane anisotropic
elasticity have been made by Snyder and Cruse (1975). The
resulting integral equation on the boundary B takes the form
u J.(Zo)/2 + J T~.(zk.zO)u.(zk)dS(zk) =f U~.(zk.zO)t.(zk)dS(z )
B Jl. 1. B J1 1. . k

(24)

where Zo = ~10 + ix?O is a point on the boundary 8,

Z ,= x + l~ ,ano the integrals are to be interpreted in
t~e prl~cipal2~alue sense. The displacements and tractions
U~. and T~. are derived from the fundamental solution for the
Jl Jl
 367
infinite plate with a crack lying on X z = 0 -a < x < a and
with unit loads applied in the Xj direction acting 1at some
point (x ,x ) not lying on the crack. The functions U~.
and T~. lPe ~gecified for orthotropic materials. Note ha*ever
the catrections indicated in the later paper by Cruse (1978).
Thus in their applications only mode I and II stress intensity
factors are found. It should be noted however that for
general anisotropic solids, plane elastic problems can result
in stress intensity factors of modes I, II and III even though
the displacement field does not vary in the three direction.
The method of this section can be extended to this situation
also, see the papers (Stroh (1958), Atkinson (1966), Sinclair
and Hirth (1975)) for information on the necessary fundamental
solutions.
As discussed earlier it is only for certain special problems
that the fundamental solution of the unit load-crack inter-
action is known in a suitably compact form and thus this
method is of limited application. See also Clements and
King (1979) where a somewhat similar situation is considered.
3.4 Integral equations for ideal crack geometries
In the last section the crack problem was treated by using,
as a fundamental solution, the complete stress and displace-
ment field due to a unit force interacting with a crack.
However, as indicated in that section such solutions are known
only for a special class of crack geometries e.g. straight
cracks in plane strain configurations. The next stage in
versatility is perhaps reached by modelling the crack by
extended dislocations (Volterra dislocations). Crack problems
formulated in this way have been reviewed by Bilby and
Eshelby (1969) for the homogeneous medium case, and integral
equations for cracks in bimaterials have been derived and
treated numerically in Atkinson (1972) and Cook and Erdogan
(1972). This approach has been coupled, with the boundary
integral equation method equation 3, by Rudolphi and Ashbaugh
(1978). They treat the two dimensional problem of a finite
length crack in a bounded linearly elastic isotropic medium
subjected to in plane forces. The superposition principle is
used to couple together the B.I.E. method applied to the
unflawed medium with boundary stresses those induced on the
boundary by the 'perturbed problem', that of a crack in an
infinite medium. Since this 'perturbed problem' must
represent a stress free crack, the traction on the crack
surface must be zero thus producing an integral equation along
the crack surface which involves the interior stresses induced
at the crack boundary by the B.I.E. solution, hence coupling
the two problems.
The treatment given by Rudophi and Ashbaugh concentrates on
a mode I problem (hence a certain amount of symmetry is
assumed), although in principle the method can be applied (to
 368

straight cracks) when there are other modes present (such

a situation is considered by Chang and Morgan (1980). The
stress field of a mode I crack in an infinite medium is
expressed in terms of a density of virtual edge dislocations

t
f(t) in the form

u i (2)(1$) - w(IC!15 f(f;)Ki(!,f;)df;

(25)

.!
II
a~~)(x)
1.J -
• _(4
W
I)
IC+
J
-1
f(f;}K •• (x,f;)df;
1.J -

where

2 2 2
(IC-l) In r - 4x2 /r (26)
f;-x 1 4x 2 (f;-x 1 )
-2(1C+l)arctan ( - - ) - 2
x2 r

r2 = (~-x )2 + x 2 and the kernels K.. can be derived from

the K. by1diff~r€ntiation. Note thalJthe dislocation density
can b~ expressed in terms of the u2 displacement by
( ) _ a (2).., a {2} _
f Xl - aX l (u 2 (xI,O») =- aX I [u 2 (xI,O») (27)

where the crack is taken to lie on x2 = 0, -1 < x1 < 1.

The solutions for the 'unflawed medium' problem (designated by

a superscript (1) in our notation) and the crack in an infinite
medium (designated by superscript (2» are now combinsd to
obtain the solution for the original problem.,tLet C. denote
that portion of C where u. is specified and C. denole that
portion where t. is specified, then 1
1

c '" c. u + c.1 t i = 1,2

1

and

u. (l}(P) + u. (2)(p) P e c.1 u (28)

1
- ui(P),
1

t. (l)(P) + t. (2)(p) = t.
(p), P e c.1 t
1 1 1

where u.(P)
1
and t.(P)
1
are the specified boundary displacements
 369
and tractions of the original problem
Also for IXll < 1, x2 ~ 0

(29)

the last condition is an implied restriction on the symmetry

of the boundary C and loading system such that only one fracture
mode is operative (mode I). [Note of course that

The use of the above conditions leads to a pair of coupled

integral equations, the integral over C being of the usual
S.I.E. type. The integral equation along the crack has a
Cauchy integral part due to the dislocation representation of
the crack. Thus from equation (25) the normal stress on the
crack line reduces to
1
t (2)(x ,0) - a (2)(x ,0) - ~ f f(~)d~ (30)
2 1 22 1 11(11:+1) -1 ~-x1

If the crack is to be closed at both ends, the subsidiary

condition
1
J £(~)d~ • 0 (31)
-1

must be satisfied. A well known inversion formula for the

integral equation (30) then gives

(32)

where d is an arbitrary constant to be determined from

condition (31). Note that the above singular integrals are
to be interpreted as their Cauchy principal values.
Since from the boundary condition (29)
t (2)( )
2 (,0
I E; I < 1 (33)
 370

the(i~tegral equatl~~ (32) contains double integrals

(t (~,O) =·0 (~,O) is given for the unflawed medium
by2an equation lf~e equation (2) of the introduction).
Rudolphi and Ashbaugh overcome this difficulty by changing
the order of integration and evaluating various singular
integrals analytically.
Finally the integral equations (1) and (32) are solved
numerically for the unknown density f(x ), -1 < x < 1 and the
unknown u.(P) and t.(P) on correspondin3 parts of 1the boundary
C. It sh3uld be noted that the efficiency of the procedure
depends to a certain extent on quite a bit of subsidiary
analytical work in reducing various double integrals to single
ones. An alternative to the step from (30) to (32) would be
to solve numerically the integral equation (30) directly with
appropriate modelling of f(~). A procedure similar to that
described above has been applied recently to the plane strain
edge crack problem by Rudolphi (1982). For this situation he
considers as his "perturbed" problem a semi infinite crack in
an infinite medium.
3.5 Crack modelling by Somigliana dislocations

Figure 4
A Somigliana dislocation
A natural extension to the approach of the last section is to
model the crack as a mosaic of infinitesimal dislocations of
area dS 1 , normal nk and a discontinuity vector b. which is
effectively constant allover the small area dS1~ The displace-
ment produced by one of these elementary dislocations can be
written
du.( r) (34)
J -
 371
where p~~)(r - r') is the stress produced at a point r' on Sl
by a polnt rorce of unit magnitude at r parallel to the x.
axis and n is the normal to S at r'. A Somigliana dislJc-
ation at Sk (see Figure 4) is tharacterised by the vector
2 whichis\he displacement on the arrow side of Sl defined
by n, minus the value on the tail side of the arrow. Thus
in an infinite linear elastic medium the displacement field
due to the Somigliana dislocation can be shown to be

(35)
Note that as far as the above formulation is concerned the
surface 51 can take any shape, so in principle a crack of
any shape can be represented in this way. However, the
numerical solution of the integral equation which results
when expression (35) is differentiated to obtain the stress
field requires further investigation. A proof of (35) which
also verified its properties for an anisotropic medium was
given by Burgers (1939). A derivation of (35) by means of
the reciprocal theorem is attributed to Eshelby in the book
by Nabarro (1967). We shall give in the next section a
derivation based on Betti's reciprocal theorem.
In principle the integral equation deduced from (35) by
computing the stresses at r and then lettingr tend to 5 can
be coupled with a boundary integral formulation of the Jxternal
boundary in a similar manner to that of the last section. How-
ever, the numerical implementation of such a procedure has yet
to be made. It should be noted nevertheless that this formu-
lation can be used for any crack profile.
The special case of a flat crack in an infinite medium has been
tackled by Weaver (1977) using a formulation similar to that
discussed above. He reduces the singular nature of the
integral equations by first dOing an integration by parts.
3.6 General formulation
We discuss here a general formulation of the crack problem in
which the crack profile is modelled by a distribution of
Somigliana dislocations. We begin with the formulation of the
situation shown in Figure 1. If in equation (7) the external
boundary 5 is allowed to tend to infinity and the boundary
displacement and stresses are such that the integrals over S
tend to zero, then since Et.(Q) = 0 on r the following result
is obtained:- 1

u . Cp)
] = - fr T .. Cp,Q)4u.CQ)dSCQ)
]1 1
(36)

It is easily seen that this result is f~~ivalent to that of

equation (35) by noting that Tji Pik nk if nk is defined
 372

as in Figure 4. Note that in the formulation of Weaver (1977)

where a crack with a flat three dimensional plan form is con-
sidered, the surface r is associated+with the upper crack
surface and hence has unit normal n. = -6. in his notation,
i.e. it is in the opposite directio~ to th!~ of Figure 4. As
indicated in the last section, the stresses can be computed
from (36) by differentiating with respect to the point p.
In general for an internal crack such as shown in Figure
we have (equation (7»

ui(p) = - f TiJ·(p,Q)U.(Q)dS(Q) + f U.. (p,Q)t.(Q)dS(Q)

S J S 1.J J

(37)
- f T.. (P,Q)du.CQ)dS(Q)
r 1.J J

where du.(Q) +u.(Q+) : u.(Q-) and we have used the fact that
rt~(Q) =Jti(Q ) ~ tj(Q ) J 0 across th~ crack. Differentiating
(31) with respect, to the co-ordinates of p to obtain the
stresses gives

- rf Sk··(P,Q)duk(Q)dS(Q)
1.J
(38)

The functions Ok .. and Sk .. are obtained by differentiation

U.• and T.. respe~tively,lihe latter two functions can be
deduced ft~m equations (A5),(A6) and (A8) of the Appendix.
There is no difficulty with the integral equation (37) as p
tends to a boundary point P of S. The result is an integral
equation like (37) with p replaced by P and u.{p) on the left
hand side of (37) replaced by u.{P)/2 (cf. eq3ation (3) of the
introduction). Thus for P belo~ging to S the usual boundary
integral equation applies with the addition of a non-singular
integral involving the unknown dU.(Q). When p tends to a
point of r, we have already seen ~n the introduction that the
formulation (37) is inadequate. However, there seems nothing
wrong in principle with an integral equation based on (38) for
points p tending to P belonging to r. The traction free (or
stress free) boundary condition for a crack is sufficient to
specify the integral equation for duk(Q), Q E r.
The difficulty, of course, is in the implementation of this
formulation. Nevertheless,we feel it should even be possible
to deal numerically with the improper integrals resulting in
equation (38) when p ~ PEr. Failing this, of course, it
 373
should be possible to integrate by p'arts in the integral overrin
equation (38) before taking the llmit p...,. P £f. This was done by
Weaver (1977) for the case of an infinite medium. Such a procedure
does of course reduce the singular nature of the integrals and for
two dimensional problems it leads to singular tCauchy) integra Is
such as considered in section 3.4. This procedure is analogous to
modelling the crack by extended dlslocations (Volterra ones)·as
opposed to the infinitesimal Somigliana disclocations.
An integral equation formulation somewhat similar to that of equation
(38) for the crack has been formulated and implemented by Montulli
(1975). However, he uses such an integral equation together with a
standard boundary integral equation along the crack surfaces. It
should be stressed that the above formulation is intended as a general
one to deal with any crack shape; the success or otherwise of this
approach depends of course on the implementation. There are other
methods which have been used in two dimensions to deal with notches
and corners e.g. Barone and Robinson (1972).
4. REFERENCES
Atkinson, C. (1979) Stress Singularities and Fracture Mechanics,
Applied Mechs. Reviews, 32, 123-135.
Atkinson, C. (1983) Chapter 8 of Advances in Boundary Elements II
(Pentech Press).
Atklnson, C and EShelby, J.D. (1968) The Energy Flow into the tlp of
a Moving Crack, Intl. In I. of Fracture 4, 308-315.
Atkinson, C. (1966) The interaction between a dislocation and a
crack, Intl. J. Fracture Mechs, 2, 567-575.
Atkinson, C. (1972) On dislocation pile ups and cracks in
inhomogeneous media, Intl. J. Engng. Sci., 10, 45-71
Barone. M.R. and Robinson. A.R. (1972) Determination of elastic
stresses at notches and corners by integral equations. Int. J.
Solid Structures, 8, 1319-1338
Bilby, B.A. and Eshelby, J.D. (1969) Dislocations and the theory of
Fracture, in Fracture, Vol.l, 99-181 (ed H. Liebowitz), Academic
Press, (New York).
Burgers, J.M. (1939) Proc. K. Ned .. Akad.Wet. 42 378-387.
Chang, S.J. and Morgan. R.B. (June 1980} A boundary integral equation
method for fracture problems with mixed mode deformations, ORNL/CSD-57.
Clements, D.L. and King, G.W. (1979) A method for the numerical
solution of problems governed by elliptic systems in the eut plane,
J. Inst. Maths. Applies. 24, 81-93.
 374

Cook, T.S. and Erdogan, F. (1972) Stresses in bonded materials

with a crack perpendicular to the interface, Int. J. Engng. Sci.
11, 745-766.
Cruse, T.A. (1975) Boundary integral equation method for three
dimensional elastic fracture mechanics analysis. Air Force
Office of Scientific Research TR-75-0813.
Cruse, T.A. (1977) Elastic'Singularity Analysis, 1st Internt'l
Symposium on Innovative Numerical Analysis in Applied Engineering
Science, Versailles (France).
Cruse, T.A. (1978) Two dimensional 'B. I.E. Fracture mechanics
analysis, Appl. Math. Modelling 2, 287-293.
Cruse, T.A. and Van Buren, W. (1971) Three dimensional elastic
stress analysis of a fracture specimen with an edge crack, Intl.
Jnl. of Fracture Mechs. 7, 1-15.
Eshelby, J.D. (1951) The force on an elastic singularity, Phil.
Trans. Roy. Soc. A 244, 87-112.
Montulli, L.T. (1975) The development and solution ,of boundary
integral equations for crack problems in fracture mechanics,
Ph.D. Thesis U.C.L.A.
Nabarro, F.R.N. (1967) Theory of Crystal Dislocations, (Oxford)
(p.63).
Rice, J.R. (1978) Elastic Plastic fracture mechanics, in The
Mechanics of Fracture, AMD 19, 23-53 ed. F. Erdogan.
Rice, J.R. (1968) A path independent integral and the approximate
analysis of strain concentration by notches and cracks, J. Appl.
Mech. 35, 379-386.
Rizzo, F.J. (1967) An integral equation approach to boundary
value problems of classical elastostatics, Quart. Appl. Math.
25, 83-95.
Rizzo, F.J. and Shippy, D.J. (1968) A formulation and solution
procedure for the general non-homogeneous elastic inclusion
problem. Int. J. Solids Struct. 4, 1161-1173.
Rudolphi, T.J. and Ashbaugh, N.E. (1978) An integral equation
solution for a bounded elastic body containing a crack: Mode I
deformation. Int. Jour. of Fracture 14, 527-541.
Rudolphi, T. (1982) A boundary element solution of the edge
crack problem, Int. J. Fracture 18, 179-190.
 375
Sinclair, J.E. and Hirth, J.P. (1975) Two dimensional elastic
Green functions for a cracked anisotropic body, J. Physics,
F, 5, 236-246.
Snyder, M.D. and Cruse, T.A. (1975) Boundary-integral equation
analysis of cracked anisotropic plates, Intl. Jnl. of Fracture,
11, 315-328.
Stroh, A.N. (1958) Dislocations and cracks in anisotropic
elasticity, Phil. Mag. 3, 625-646.
Weaver, J. (1977) Three-dimensional crack analysis, Int. J.
Solids Structs. 11, 321-330.
Williams, M.L. (1957) On the stress distribution at the base
of a stationary crack, J. Appl. Mech. 24, 109-114.
APPENDIX
In the derivation of equation (1) of the text use is made of
certain fundamental solutions of Navier's equations which for
isotropic elasticity can be written:-
Fundamental solutions for two dimensional plane strain
(~ 1S the shear modulus, v P01sson's rat10j

u1.*(p,q) - [(3-4v)log(1/r)6 .. + r .r .Je./8w~(1-v) (A1)

1.J ,1.,J J

and
t 1.*(p,q) a - !r {dr [(1-2v)6
dn ij
+ 2r .r .J -
,1 ,J

(A2)
(l-2v)[n.r .-n.r .J}e./4w(1-v)
J,l 1,] J.

where r(p,q) is the distance between points p(~0 with co-ordinates

xi and of q(~,) with co-ordinates Yi' then r,i is defined by

r .
ar (A3)
,~ 3x.
1

the e. are unit vectors. The tractions on an arbitrary surface

surrotlnding the point p(x..) can be computed from u.*(p,q) by
different i at i on of p( x,) and are gi ven in equat i on 1(A2) above
where the normal is taken at q(x). Apart from being a solution
of the equilibrium equation when p 1 q the above solution has
the significant property that on a small disc S of radius
£ centered at the point p(~,) £
 376

lim
e:-+O
f ti*dS - 6 •. e.
lJ J
(M)

Similarly in three dimensions we have:

Fundamental solution in 3 dimensions
u 1.*(p,q) c~) [(3-4v)6 .. + r .r .]e./16wu(1-v) (AS)
r\p,ql lJ ,I ,J J

and
t .*(p,q) - - ~ {~[(1-2v)6 .• + 3r .r .] -
1 r2 dn lJ ,I ,J
(A6)
(1-2v)(n.r .-n.r .)}e./8w(1-v)
J ,I 1 oJ J

where ej are unit vectors in the co-ordinate directions.

A significant property of this solution is that on a small
sphere S of radius £ about the point p(x~
£ -

lim t.* dS =-~ •• e.

1 lJ J (Al)
e:-+O

Thus the fundamental solution corresponds to the well-known

Kelvin problem of a point load in an infinite body. Using
the above one can write
u 1·*(p,q} = UJ1
.. (p,q)e.;
J
t.*(p,q)
1
= TJ1
.. (p,q)e.
J
(AB)

such that the first index in U.. (p,q) and T.. (p,q) corresponds
to the direction of the pOint ~6ad and the ~~cond index refers
to the component of the respective displacements and tractions.
Chapter 21

FRACTURE. MECHANICS STRESS ANALYSIS II (AUXILIARY RESULTS;

A NUMERICAL EXAMPLE, AND PROBLEMS OF DEBONO STRESS ANALYSIS)
C. Atkinson
Schlumberger Cambridge Research Ltd. (on leave from
Mathematics Department, Imperial College, London)

1. INTRODUCTION
In the previous lecture we have outlined the difficulties
associated with developing a B.I.E. formulation for slit cracks
of a general planform and reviewed various methods of circum-
venting these difficulties. In addition to the question of
which integral equation formulation to use in a given situation
there remains the question of appropriate element modelling to
represent stress singularities. In section 4 different methods
for stress singularity modelling will be outlined and compared
on a model problem, that of a crack under longitudinal shear
(anti-plane strain) where the governing equation is Laplace's
equation. The methods suggested there should however be
applicable to more complex situations. In sections 2 and 3
we describe invariant integrals which can be useful in deducing
values of stress intensity factors from numerical information
far from the crack tip. These are used in the model problem
of section 4 also.
Finally in section 5, we describe a problem of debond stress
analysis and indicate how the methods outlined here together
with other analytic information in certain cases could be used
to give an accurate description of a debonding event.
2. INVARIANT INTEGRALS BASED ON THE ENERGY MOMENTUM TENSOR
We have already indicated briefly in the last lecture how
certain invariant integrals can be used as tools for deducing
numerical values of stress intensity factors. Here a simple
deduction of integrals which can be derived from a (perhaps
pseudo) energy momentum tensor is made. The prescription
used is similar to that described by Eshelby (1970) although
equivalent results can be obtained by a formal application of
Noether's theorem (see Knowles and Sternberg (1972) and for
somewhat equivalent earlier work by Gunther (1962).

377
 378

We suppose a Lagrangian (L) is given which has the property that

the conditions of stationarity of the functional fL dv (where v
is the volume of the body) lead to Euler equations which are
themselves the field equations of the continuum being studied.
In order to retain some generality suppose
L • L(X., u., u . • , 4>., 4> •• ) (1)
1 1 1,J 1 1,J

thus L depends on position (cartesian co-ordinates X.) and two

independent vector fi e 1ds U., ~. and thei r gradi ents 1 U. . =
au i /3X j etc. The Euler equAtio~s are thus l,J

_a_ (~) _ ~ .. 0 and _a_ ( 3 L ) aL = 0 (2)

ax. au.. 3u. ax. a4>. . - 34>1'
J l,J 1 J l,J

and the summation convention with respect to repeated indices

(i = 1,2,3) has been used. If we now define the tensor
.. ~u +~4> -LO J.! (3)
au. • it! a4>.. i,!
1,] 1,]

then it can be shown by direct calculation, using the above

Euler equations, that
3P j ! (~) (4)
aX j axR. exp

where (3L/aX t ) means that all variables are held constant

except explicitXBependence on Xl' This last equation is impor-
tant because it means that if we define the integrals
(5)

where S is a specified surface (dS. = N.dS, N. the .th

component of the outward normal toJS), then if the ~urface
integral encloses a volume in which there are no singularities,
use of the divergence theorem and equation (4) reduce the
corresponding volume integral to zero provided L does not
depend expl~citly on Xt . This means that a surface integral
taken around a stress free crack tip can be related to an
integral far from the tip and since under favourable circum-
stances the near tip integral can be calculated directly in
terms ofa.single unknown stress intensity factor, this gives
an independent method of stress intensity factor evaluation.
It should be stressed however that this is only possible
provided the appropriate components of P'2. are zero along the
crack surface. When this last conditionJ,s satisfied the
near tip integral.will be exactly equal to the integral
evaluated far from the crack tip if L does not depend expl~cit­
lyon the spatial co-ordinate X£.
 379
We illustrate the above procedure with the example of coupled
time dependent thermoviscoelasticity. In this case the
integrals hold in the laplace transformed domain. For steady
problems suitable limits as p ~ 0 may give the steady-state
results, i.e. taking 9=0, and p=O will give results for
elastostatics.
2.1 Coupled, time dependent, linear thermoelasticity and
thermoviscoelasticitf
Recently Atkinson and Sme ser (1982) have applied a procedure
similar to that outlined above to the equations of coupled
time dependent thermoviscoelasticity under conditions applic-
able to stationary cracks disturbing time dependent tempera-
ture and stress fields. Initial conditions are considered
in which

B(t) K u1..(t) - , o1.J

.. (t) - 0 for t < 0 (6)

u. and a .. are the usual displacement vector and stress tensor,

elt) den6ies the infinitesimal temperature deviation from the
base temperature To' The formulation begins by laplace-
transforming the equations of motion etc. which become
- 2-
°ij,j = PP ui

1
c •• c -2 (u • • + u •• )
1.J 1.,J J,1.

(7)
0 ....
1.J
p G.• k. &k. - P ~ .•
1.J.'. 1.J
e ( anisotropic)

and for the temperature

(k •• /To)lf .... p m
2- If + p 2-
•.• -c ••
1J ,1J 1J 1J (8)

where the Laplace transform is defined by

...
f(p) c f e- pt f(t)dt . (9)
o
In general for viscoelastic media the coefficients G. 'k! etc.
will be functions of p the transform variable. lJ

The above field equations can be generated from a lagrangian

defined as
 380

+ 1 k 1 --2
2ToP I.J
" e,1.. e,J. + -2 P m e ( 10)

where (11 )

A 'pseudo' energy momentum tensor is then defined as

PR.j = ~u + ~ e,R. - LO oJ' (12 )

a~. . i,R. ae. ..
1.,] ,J

so that we deduce that

k ..
(t .. - pe~
I.J
.. )~.
I.J L, t
+ ~a
TOP • i "
e,. - Lo lj (13 )

and the integrals

p •• dS. (14 )
.. J J

follow as described for equation 5. A useful property of the

integral F1 in this case is t~at provided either the temperature
e is constant or the flux k.?8 . is zero on the crack faces then
P is zero on the crack face for a stress free crack. Thus
i~2this case the integral can be deformed into the far field
as discussed earlier. Also the near field integral, a small
contour round the crack tip can be explicitly evaluated in
terms of the coefficients of singular transformed stresses
a.. and temperature gradients 0.. In favourable circumstances
ekplicit determination of these'coefficients can be made,
see Atkinson and Smelser (1982) for some applications of these
results.
Note that if we take p=O and 8=0 in the above equations we
can write
 381

t 1J
.. u.1, R.. (15)
which is the expression for the Energy momentum tensor for an
elastic medium. In this case for a plane crack, with tip
pointing in the 1 direction, the crack extension force or
energy release rate (G) can be defined as
G = Fl = f Pl' dS. (16)
s J J
where S is a surface enclosing the crack tip dS. = n.dS where
n. is the outward normal (in the plane strain case tHis is a
cylinder with generators parallel to the x axis so the
integral in (16) is effectively a line int~gral in the (xl'
x2 ) plane). For a stress free crack lying on the x, axis
t.? = 0 so P3? = 0 from (15) and the integral (16) lS zero
w~en taken along the face of the crack.
2.2 Land M integrals in elastostatics
In the above we have discussed the integrals F~ associated with
the tensor PR..' paying particular attention to the integral Fl
which can be ~hownto be related to the energy release rate G.
Under certain conditions other invariant integrals can be
derived from P~. and are sometimes useful. We describe these
briefly. In aoaition to the F~ integrals obtained in section
2.1, Gunther (1962) obtained for elastostatics the path-
independent integrals
Li Z Eikt ! (xkP tj + UkP tj ) dS j
(17)

and

MZ ! (xtP tj - i UtP tj ) dS j ( 18)

where R..,j,k take the values 1, 2 and 3 and p . = aW(u )1

aUt . is the Boussinesq or first Piola-Kirch&lf stresW1~ensor
whleH gives the component parallel to the rectangular X
co-ordinate axis of the force on a surface element whichR..was
of unit area and perpendicular to the X. axis before deforma-
tion. The energy momentum tensor is deli ned as in equation (3)
with L = -Wand the energy density W is a function of u
au lax with n = 1, 2 or 3, E" k is the permutation tenWoP.
m n lJ
In section (2.1) it is shown that the integrals Fu. will be
path independent if L = -W does not depend explicltly on X .
The deformation may be non-linear and the material may be R..
non-linear but the energy density must be homogeneous if each
of the F is to be path independent. For the integrals L.
these co~ditions are the same and in addition the material must
be isotropic.
382
In a two dimensional state of plane strain (18) reduces to
H - J x f.
S
P . dS.
f.J J (19)
taken along a plane curve S with normal (n ,n). Summation
over 1 and j is now only over 1 and 2. An1ap~lication of the
F and M integrals to the case of anti-plane strain is made
i~ section 4 to obtain crack tip stress intensity factors
from numerical information far from the crack tip.
3. INVARIANT INTEGRALS DEDUCED FROM BETTI'S RECIPROCAL THEOREM
The integrals discussed in section 2 have the disadvantage that
they give energy release rates or related quantities but
explicit determination of stress intensity factors may not be
possible when mixed mode situations are encountered. It should
be noted however that the general approach of section 2
(equations (2) to (5)) is not restricted to linear stress-strain
laws. An alternative approach has been developed by Stern and
co-workers (1976) to (1979) who derive invariant integrals
for plane linear elastic problems by means of Betti's reciprocal
theorem.
The starting point of their analysis is the reciprocal theorem
written as
f. (!.Q - l.y) ds - 0 (20)
3R

where aR* is the boundary of a plane simply connected bounded

region R*. The states (a .. , u.) and (a .. , u.) are two distinct
equil ibrium states (a .. , 3~) being the Hate lcorresponding to
a given bouudary valueJpro~lem the other state is an auxiliary
one; T'and Tare the boundary tractions associated with these
elastic states. For plane crack problems a contour aR* such
as that shown in Figure 1 is taken.

c.

Figure 1
 383

The idea of the method is to choose the auxiliary state so that

the integral around CE gives the coefficient of the required
stress-singularity as E tends to zero. For a crack problem if
the auxiliary solution also satisfies the stress free boundary
condition along the crack it is possible to relate the integral
around C to the integral around Co by using equation (20).
The resu~t is that
lim f (!.& - !.~)ds - f (!.Q - !.~) ds (21)
c-+() C£ Co

Now the stresses and displacements in the neighbourhood of the

crack tip referred to the natural polar co-ordinate system shown
in Figure 1 are:-
ur-u o 1
r ; ~
[r2n J1 {[(2k-1)Cos2e - Cos:r ]K 1 - 39

[(2k-1)Si~ - 3 Sin ~e ]K rr } + 0(r1)

u -uo
6 t
~ ~
4\.1 (~)~{[-(2K+l)sin~
2n 2 + Sl.n
. T 30]K
1

-[(2K+l) cos 2e - 30 ~
3 cos :r ]K rr } + oCr )

1 ~
{( 3 cos 2
0 + cos :r
30) Kl - ( 3Sl.n
' 2 e + 3 sl.n:r
. 3e)K II }
4(2nr) 1-
+ oCr-'l,

1
--::....-,-~
{('
Sl.n 2e . T
+ Sl.n 30) Kl + ( cos 2e + 3 cos T
30) KII }
4( 2nr) _.1
+ o(r 2) (22)
where
o
u and
0
ue arO the radial and tangential components of
the displacement ~ of the crack tip and

KI = lim (211r)~ooI0=0
r-+{)
(23)
Kn lim ( 211 r) ~o rO I 0 =0
r-+O
384
are the conventional stress intensity factors. The remainder
terms are of the order indicated in distance from the crack
tip.
Thus when C is a small circular contour close to the crack
tip, ds = rae, and the dominant contribution from the traction
T involves the stress intensity factors multiplying spatially
varying terms proportional to r-. Hence if the auxiliary
displacement u ~an be chosen to have dominant behaviour pro-
portional to f-~ as r tends to zero the product of T.u"with ds
will have a n~n-zero finite limit as € tends to ze~~'2 Similarly
the traction T which will now be proportional to r as r
tends to"zero-~ill lead to the required 1/r behaviour in the
product 1.(u-u). The only stipulation is that u and T must
be equilibrium solutions and moreover must satisfy the-stress
free crack boundary conditions. For elastic problems an
exact solution of the field equations satisfying stress free
boundary conditions can be found by an eigenfunction approach.
The auxiliary elastic field required for the above problem
has been given by Stern et al (1976) as:-
ar =
1
~ {[(2K+l)cos :r
36
-3 cos Z6 IC l +
2(211r) (1+1<)

36 6
[(2K-l)cos-
2 - cos zlc 2 } (24)

~
~
2(2~r3)~(1+K)
{(7 cos :r
36
-3 6
cos -Ic +
2 1

7 . 36 .
[ s1n:r - S1n 26 JC 2
}

[cos ~ + cos 0 J e 2 l
2 2
 385
where c, and c2 are arbitrary constants.
Now on the inner circular boundary the evaluation of the
contour integral in terms of the traction and displacement
(relative to that of the crack tip) components takes the form
I ..
L

Upon substitution from (22) and (24), a routine evaluation of

the integral produces
IE = clK I + C2KII .+ 0(1) (25)

where the remainder term goes to zero with E as indicated.

Thus, for arbitrarily small E (21) produces the representation
formula
o· .
clK I + c 2KII .. fc[(~-~ ).~ - ~'~]ds (26)
where it is important to note that the contour C involves only
the outer boundary since both t and t necessarily vanishOon the
crack faces. Furthermore, the-rigid-body displacement u
may be diOcarded in the evaluation of (26) since the contribu-
tion of u 't on any closed contour vancishes even when the
origin is contained in the interior. It remains only to obtain
u and t on the outer boundary from the prescribed data so that
the contour integral may be evaluated as a linear combination
of c1 and c?, the coefficients of which are the desired stress
intensity factors KI and KII ·
The idea of the above method can in principle be extended to a
number of other situations, however a major restriction is that
the auxiliary solution must be a full solution of the equili-
brium equations. Nevertheless, for a variety of elastic problems
such solutions can be found and Stern and co-workers have
applied the method to a number of other problems. An obvious
advantage of the method is of course the computation of near
field crack tip information from an integral evaluated far from
the crack tip.
 386
4. SOME NUMERICAL RESULTS FOR A MODEL PROBLEM
In this section we give a brief account of some numerical
results obtained in recent work (Xanthis, Bernal and Atkinson
(1981» in which attention is given to precise modelling of
the crack tip singularity. The reader is referred to the
original paper for a detailed description of the modelling used.
The problem to be analysed is shown in Figure 2, symmetry is
such that the problem can be considered in the rectangle AOBFEA
and a standard B.I.E. formulation can be made although singular
tractions are to be expected on the boundary OB (AO is the crack).
Mode 3 (.longitudinal shear) deformation is considered so that
the displacement u satisfies the Laplace equation in the
plane V2 u = 0, so the corresponding B.I.E. is Greens third
identity. The resulting integral equation on the boundary
an of the body is
f T(P,Q)[u(Q) - u(P)]dS(Q) = f U(P,Q) ~~ (Q)dS(Q)
for all P e aQ (27)
where
U(P,Q) = (1/2n)1n(1/r) with r = IP-QI
T(P,Q) = VRU(P,Q)'n(Q) where n.(Q) is the outward unit normal
at the poi t Q e a~ and -

~
an = Vu(Q) . _n(Q) .
Hr-____________________-i"G

PI,,;)
/
/
,/
0/(8
A I-------------=L J'__ a

t I'---------'F
Figure 2
Region with a slit AO.
The boundary conditions are taken to be
 387
u = 1000 on AE
u = 500 on BO (28)
~~ = 0 on OA, EF and FB

For this problem it is relatively straightforward to show that

we must have

u(p) c u(o) + r a.f.(r,e) (29)

j ..o J J
in the neighbourhood of 0, and, hence, for P on OB,
1 ar.
.r
J=O
a.
J
raT- (r,O), (30)

where
f j ( r, e) - r
= (2j+l)/2 nn
. { (2j+l)e)
2

and (r,e) are the polar coordinates of P.

In problems of this kind the coefficient, a p' of the leading
term, is of special interest, e.g. in the c ack problem the
corresponding coefficient is proportional to the stress

!~
intensity factor (SIF). Note that, for the model problem we
have

lim r -%[u(r,1T) - u(O,O»), (31 )

a c
o
2.' :: '.,0). (32)

We now consider the problem of computing approximations u and

t to u and t from the integral equation (27) and boundary
conditions (28).
Any particular boundary element method is characterised by:
(a) the choice of the classes of functions used to approximate
u and t, and (b) the way in which the integral equation (27)
is used in the determination of u and t. In Xanthis et al(1981)
u and t are.approxima~ed by(J;near_combinations of ~£~putation­
a~l~ convenlent functl?nS vt .' t - l, .. :,n 1 , and vt ' ,
t - 1, ... ,n 2 , respectlvely, l.e. one wrltes

u
°1
r -
t = (33)
l'.=1
 388
where ~he coefficients ut ~nd ttl are dete~mined so that with u
and t 1n (27) replaced by u and t. respect1vely. the(i~tegral
e~M,tion is satisfied exactly at m boundary points P •...•
P
Thus. one obtains

k • l ••.•• m (34)

vhere

Tkt = f T(p(k).Q)rv~u)(Q) - v~u)(P)ldS(Q)

(35)
Ukt , = f U(p(k).Q)v~~)(Q)dS(Q)
With an appropriate choice of m and the points p(k). by
requiring thr~)the boundary conditions (28) are satisfied
exactly at P • k = 1••••• m and by imposing suitable continuity
conditions one arrives at n~+ng equations for the n3+na unknowns
~~r~n~nt~'~en~~b~~u~~~i~~eOfu~h:s~u~~t~~~sm!tO~da~~ !~~, !~d
they must be chosen so that u and t can be w~ll appro~imated
by linear combinations of them.
The following scheme is adopted for approximating the boundary:
the boundary is subdivided into n 'elements' numbered in anti-
clockwise order around the boundary. 1 •...• n and on each
element. e. there is chosen an internal node. The two element
boundary nodes and the internal node are la~~l~~ in(@n2j-
~~g~~1ise order around the boundary an as P • • P , and

The interelement nodes are chosen so that any point on the

boundary at which the boundary condition type changes· is an
interelement node. At every node internal to an element it
is required that the boundary condition be satisfied. At every
interelement node the boundary conditions associated with each
of the elements having the interelement node in common are to
be satisfied. Thus there is associated with each internal
node two unknowns (one u and one t , coefficient) and two
equations - one associat~d with thetintegral equation and one
with the boundary condition. At an interelement node there
are associated three unknowns (one u~ and two to' coefficients
since t may have discontinuities) ana, in general, three
equations - one associated with the integral equation and two
with the boundary conditions.
 389
The exceptional case arises when the node is an interelement
node between two nodes which are both of Dirichlet type, when
the imposition of the boundary conditions provides only one
equation. If the boundary is smooth at such an interelement
node we require, in addition, that·£ be continuous (and hence
the two t I coefficients associated with the node be equal)
thus provtding one additional equation. If the interelement
node is a corner node, then from the directional derivatives of
u along the two tangents at the node the gradient and hence
normal derivatives of u can be computed. In this case, then,
the boundary conditions determine the values of the three
unknowns associated with the node and we simply exclude from our
final set of equations the integral equation associated with the
node. .
In summary, there are sets of equations associated with
(a) the integral equation,
(b) the boundary conditions, and
(c) the continuity of the normal derivative,
and there are as many of these equations as there are unknowns.
4.1 Numerical results
The baslc·B.I.E Method and modifications have been used to
compute solutions of the model problem given in Figure 2 (Xanthis
et al (1981». Each of the five boundary segments DA, AE, EF,
FB and BO were subdivided into N elements of equal length, and
for N = 2, 3, 4 and 5 the solution of the.model problem was
computed by each of the following modifications of the basic
method described above.
Method 1. Quadratic elements are used, the internal node is
chosen midway between element boundary nodes hence
u will be a quadratic function of r and thus cannot
accurately represent u near the crack tip.
Method 2. Special v(u) functions with rtt~ehaviour are used_in
the first element on OA and v functions with r
behaviour used on DB.
Method 3. Nodes on(~t are chosen so that v(u) has rt behaviour
on OA; v is chosen as in method 2.
Method 4. Subtraction of singularity technique. In this method
the expression (29) with the summation sign taken
from j = 0 to q is subtracted from the problem before
the B.I.E. solution procedure is implemented. Add-
itional equations for the unknown coefficients a;
can be determined by imposing the boundary condition
on u at additional points on DB. For this method
computations were carried out for q = 0, 2, 4.
 390
For each computed solution, the values of u at the points {r,n},
r = 1/4 and r = 3/4, were calculated. These are given in tables
1a and 1b. From these tables it is evident that, for a given
value of N, method 4 with q = 4 gives the most accurate results;
method 2 and method 4 with q = 2 give results which are nearly
as accurate as those obtained from method r with q = 4. However,
this conclusion does not imply that a o' the parameter which is
usually of most importance in the appTications, would also be
given most accurately by method 4.
Table 1a
Values of u at r = 1/4; 'exact' value = 576.41 {SYMM {1973}}
Method 2 3 4
N q =0 q =2 q =4
2 534.17 576.22 574.79 576.51 576.48 576.44
3 540.69 576.31 575.69 576.48 576.42 576.41
4 545.96 576.36 576.06 576.47 576.41 576.41
5 550.38 576.38 576.25 576.42 576.41 576.41

Table 1b
Values of u at r 3/4; 'exact' value = 634.45 (SYMM (1973)}
Method 2 3 4
N q =0 q 2 q =4
2 596.96 634.29 634.15 634.68 634.56 634.50
3 611. 49 634.40 634.77 634.50 634.46 634.45
4 621.29 634.44 634.88 634.43 634.45 634.45
5 627.70 634.45 634.85 634.45 634.45 634.45

Calculation of an approximation a to a
For Method 4, above, we can take ,8 ~ aO. By whatever method u
and t are'computed, one can use thg for~ulae obtained by sub-
stituting u and t into the r.h.s. of (31) and (32), respectively,
to obtain approximations to a O:

• (u) - -1/2 - -
ao = a 0 (u) = lim r [u(r,~) - u(O)] (31)
r->O a
and

• (t) ~ 1/2-
aO =a 0 (t) = lim Zr t(r,O). (32)
a
r->O
Note that if u and f are obtained from
(i) Method 4, then
o(u) (~) = a(t)(£T= -
o 0 laO·
 391
(ii) Method 1, then
d(~)(u1 = a(~)(t) = O.
Nevertheless, in case (ii), one can obtain useful approximations
to aO from u and t using the approximations to (31) and (32):
-(u) - -1/2 -
ao (u,ru ) - ru [u(ru'w) - ~(O)l

and

-et) - 1/2-
a 0 (t,r t ) = 2rt t(r~,O) (32)b
with r ,r sufficiently small. Formulae (31) and (32) can,
of cou~se,tbe used to compute approximations t8 ao howevbr u and
t are calculated. For Method 1, experiments showed that there
exist constants a, v, a*, v* such that, .with
r = a!v
r - a* !v*
u '1 '
i~b,r~ ! 1 -.length of element n = 7/N),
= leng!~t~f_element
a (u,r) and a (t,r ) approxlmate closely a. The attempt
to deterMine such const~nts was prompted by theOobservation of
Schatz and Wahlbin (1978) that, f8~ the ~13ndard finite element
method, a good choice of r for a is h where h is the
maximum diameter of all elements. O The fact that we were able
to find cO~~rants a, v, aft)v* so that ag is closely approxi-
mated by a (u,r) and a (t,r) is pr bably significant.
Additional ~pproxYmations eo a ~an be obtained from formulae
deduced from certain path-indeBendent (invariant) integrals,
the F- and M-integrals, evaluated along a circuit surrounding
the point where the singularity occurs (see section 2). These
integrals are defined by
F (. = f P •• n. dS, (36)
S J .. J

M = f
S
x P. n. dS ,
t Jt J (37)

where S 1s a plane curve with normal n (n 1,n 2 ), Pj ! the energy-

momentum tensor

Pj J1. LOJ1.j - li:.

au .
u
,J1.
,J 1 2 2
and L, the Lagrangian function, L = 2(u , 1 + u, 2)·

containing t~e point

obtains
°-
Taking the x -axis to be along AS and S to be a closed path
the crack tip (see figure 2) - one
392
_ 2
, M - anaO/2. (38)
In particular, taking S to be the square EFGH and using the
symmetry properties of the integrals and the computed u and i
values, one can find approximations ~ and ~ to F and M,
and!(~~nsel appro~lffltt!o~s to 0.0 from 2(38), which 2are denoted
by a 0 (u,t) and a 0 (u,t) respectively.
From the u and i values, computed by the four BIE variants,
Methods 1, 2, 3 and 4, approximations to 0.0 are calculated and
the results given in the following tables.
Table 2
Computed a values by three BIE variants. For Method 4 higher
order coef~icients for a j are also presented. 'Exact' value
of aO = 151.63

N 2 3 4 5

(F)
..... Cl 0 (u,t) 155.52 154.22 153.57 153.18
"tl (a)
o (M)
-!'iCl 0 (u,t) 152.29 152.07 151.96 151.89
'"
:i:

N (u)C) Cl(~)(t) (n - -
Cl 0 (u,u)
(M) - -
Cl 0 (u,t)
Cl 0 u

N 2 151.13 151.74 151. 66 151.57

"tl 3 151.35 151. 65 151. 63 151.62
0
.r::
....
4 151.46 151.63 151. 63 151.62 (b)
5 151.51 151.63 151.63 151.62
:i:'"
(F) - - (M) - -
N Cl 0
(u)C)
u Cl(~)(t) Cl 0 (u,t) Cl 0 (u,t)

2 142.32 151. 72 151.66 151.56

""
"tl 3 145.58 151.64 151. 63 151.61
0
.r:: 4 147.17 IS 1. 63 151.63 151.62 (c)
.... 5 148.11 151. 63 151. 63 151.62
:i:'"
N q Cl O q Cl O Cl 1 Cl 2

~ 2 150.56 151.71 4.68 0.13931

"C 3 150.86 151.63 4.71 0.13838 (d)
0 0 2
.c 4 151.05 151.63 4.72 0.13690
.... 151.17 151.63 4.73 0.13611
OJ 5
:>:
 ~3

Table 2 (continued)
N q ao a1 a2 a3 a4

~ 2 151.70 4.73 0.13069 0.00866 0.00027

3 151.63 4.73 0.13296 0.00883 0.00023
~
0
4 4 151.63 4.73 0.13291 0.00886 0.00023 (c)
~
~
~ 5 151.63 4.73 0.13295 0.00887 0.00022
~

Inspection of table 2b, c, d and e, shows that for the Methods

2, 3 and 4 one can obtain very accurate values for aO' ~~th a
c~f~se grid (N = 2,3,4), using the approximations a'o}(u,t),
a 0 (t) and, for Method 4, ao· (F~r Method 1(M~ give an
approximation to a using & (u,t) or & (u,t), to an
accuracy comparablQ to that obta9ned from MetHods 2, 3 and 4
with a coarse grid (N ~ 5)'(r)much finer grid must(~~ used.
For example, N = 10 gives a (u,t) = 151.41 and a (u,i) =
151.76, values which are notOas accurate as those oBtained by
!~~)o~h~r meth~~~)wi~h_N = 5.. Never~heless, the v~lues
a (u,t) and a (u,t) obtalned uSlngMethod 1 wlth N = 5
arR accurate to gpproXi~f}elY one per cent. Perhaps it is
worth noting that (i) a n (t) is ?~}ained as a ~~ple multiple
of one of the unknowns, whereas a (u,t) and a (u,t) involve
the computation of line integrals,Oand (ii) Meth9d 4 gives a
without any further computations, although it must be remembQred
that the system of equations from which the solution is obtained
°
involves q+1 more equations than fn~ Qther methods. Extra-
polation to zero grid size, for a (u), was carried out by
assuming that
a(~) = aO + A(1/N)B ,
the constants aO' A and B in this formula being determined from
the values of a (u) for three successive values of N. For
method 2, usingON = 2,3,4 and N = 3,4,5, the computed values of
a were 151.78 and 151.64 respectively. For Method 3 the
c9rresponding results were 151.58 and 151.64, respectively.
These results demonstrate clearly the benefits of extrapolation.
These methods have also been applied to problems in media with
spatially varying properties (Atkinson, Bernal and Xanthis
(1981».
5. A PROBLEM OF DEBONO STRESS ANALYSIS
In Atkinson et al (1982) a combined theoretical and experimental
study was made of the rod pullout problem. The experiment
consisted of a glass rod embedded in a transparent polyurethane
matrix. A steadily increasing force is then applied to the
free end of the rod in order to pull it from the polyurethane
matrix (Figure 3). Photographic evidence of the initiation and
 394

and subsequent growth of debond flows showed generally that

initiation occurred first at the base of the rod then propagated
around the sides of the rod and subsequently stopped (Figure 3 (A))

Figure 3
Typical debond pattern observed in the pull
out test (A) Tip debond (B) Surface debond.
At a later stage in the loading process debonding initiated at
the surface and propagated down the sides of the rod (Figure
3 (B)) completing pullout. In order to explain these debonding
events numerical evaluation of the energy release rate for both
surface debond (Figure 4) and rod tip de bond (Figure 5) was made.
The numerical results were obtained by finite elements, the
polyurethane matrix was assumed incompressible and the glass
rod rigid.

-
"~O.30
'.
0.35 • TOTA(ENERdi"
,. MODE I CONtRIBUTION
o MODE II CONTRIBUTION
---- DISPLACEMENT METHOD
~
:§.O.25
....UJ
~ o.zo
UJ·
~
w
0.15
-'
w
a: 0.10
>-
------
"ffiz O.O~
w
0.1 o.z 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 I.Z
• CRACK TIP LOCATION A,/B

Figure 4
Numerical evaluation of the energy release
rate for a surface debond including mode
separation.
 395
0.15 • TOTAl.lNERCY
N: & MODI I CONTRIBUTION
o MODE II CONTRIBUTION
~.. 0.12
- NUMERICAL RESULTS
--_. ANALYTICAL RES&A.TI
:§.
w
!:( 0.09
a:
w
II>

~ 0.06
a:
>-
~ 0.03

~
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
CRACK TIP L99~J;!Q.N··l.Cl(Bt~1

Figure 5
Numerical and analytical energy release
rates for a tip debond including mode
separation.
It is worth noting that even in the absence of debonding, the
stress analysis of the embedded rod has stress singularities
at the rod base and where the rod leaves the free surface.
Thus axially symmetric B.I.E. methods could be used but require
accurate modelling of these stress singularities. Furthermore,
modelling the debonding process itself can lead to difficulties
if the rod is elastic and the matrix compressible. In this
case oscillatory singularities may occur which lead to results
which imply interpenetration of the crack faces near the tip.
Recently contact zone models have been suggested to remove this
anomaly ~ijt the contact zone length can be very small e.g. of
order 10 times the crack length (Comninou (1977) and Atkinson
(1982)). Nevertheless, it ought to be possible to do B.I.E.
analysis of the ordinary crack model (which gives the oscilla-
tory stress and displacement field) and derive the near crack
tip behaviour using a far field integral such as described in
section 3 (Hong and Stern (1978)). Once this 'pseudo' crack
tip behaviour is determined it acts as an 'outer solution',
in the sense of matched expansion, to the problem rescaled on
the contact zone length. this new problem has been solved
analytically by Atkinson (1982 (a), (b)) and the singular
perturbation procedure outlined in the second of those papers.
Some features of the experimental results for the pullout
problem can be explained using the results of Figures 4 and 5.
The reader is referred to Atkinson et al (1982) for more
detailed discussion of the experimental results and the
analytical modelling used to explain them.
 396
REFERENCES
Atkinson, C. and Smelser, R.E., (1982) Invariant integrals of
thermo viscoelasticity. Int. J. Solids Structure 18, 533-549.
Atkinson, C., Xanthis, L.S. and Bernal, M.J.M., (1981) Boundary
integral equation crack-tip analysis and applications to elastic
media with spatially varying elastic properties, Compo Methods
in Appl. Mechs. and Engng. 29, 35-49.
Atkinson, C. (1982) The interface crack with a contact zone.
(An analytical treaement) Int. J. Frac. 18, 161-177.
Atkinson, C. (1982)h The interface crack with a contact zone
(The finite crack problem) Int. J. Frac. 19, 131-138.
Atkinson, C., Avila J., Betz, E. and Smelser, R.E., (1982) The
rod pullout problem, theory and experiment. J. Mech.Phys.Solids
30, 97-120.
Comninou, M. (1977) The interface crack, ASME JAM 44, 631-636.
Eshelby, J.D. (1-970) Energy relations and the energy-momentum
tensor in continuum mechanics, in Inelastic Behaviour of Solids
77-115 (ed. M.F. Kanninen et al.) McGraw-Hill, New York.
Gunther, W. \1962) Uber einige Randintegrale der Elastomechanik,
Abh. Braunschw. wiss. Ges. 14, 54-63.
Hong, C-C. and Stern, M. (1978) The computation of stress
intensity factors in dissimilar materials, J. Elasticity
8 21-34.
Knowles, J.K. and Sternberg, E. (1972) On a class of conservation
laws in linearised and finite elastostatics. Arch. Rat. Mech.
Anal. 44, 187-211.
Schatz, A.H. and Wahlbin, L.B. (1978) Maximum norm estimates
in the finite element method on plane polygonal domains,
part I. Math. Comput. 32 73-109.
Soni, M.L. and Stern, M. (1976) On the computation of stress
intensity factors in fiber composite media using a contour
integral method, Int. J. Frac. 12, 331-344.
Stern, M., Becker, E.B. and Dunham, R.S. (1976) A contour
integral computation of mixed-mode stress intensity factors.
Int. J. Frac. 12 359-368.
Stern, M. and Soni, M.L. (1976) On the computation of stress
intensities at fixed-free corners. Int. J. Solids Structures
331-337.
 ~7

Stern, M, (1979) The numerical calculation of thermally induced

stress intensity factors, J. ELasticity 9 91-95.
Symm, G.. T. (1973) Treatment of singularities in the solution
of Laplace's equation by an integral equation method, NPL
Report NAC.
Xanthis, L.S., Bernal, M.J.M. and Atkinson, C., (1981) The
treatment of singularities in the calculation of stress intensity
factors using the boundary integral equation method, Compo
Methods in Appl. Mechs. and Engng. 26, 285-304.
Chapter 22

B.E.M. IN GEOMECHANICS

R. Butterfield

Head of Department of Civil Engineering, Southampton University

1. INTRODUCTION

These two lectures will concentrate on aspects of B.E.M. which

either are, or may be, particularly relevant to Geotechnical
problems - indeed the name B.E.M. was first coined by
Banerjee and Butterfield (1975) in conjunction with their use
in solving potential flow, classical diffusion and elasticity
problems related to idealised Geotechnical analyses.

It will be assumed that the audience is familiar with the

fundamentals of both direct and indirect B.E.M. and the
relevant integral identities and singular solutions.

Many Geotechnical problrms involve complete semi-infinite

half spaces of material exemplified by the rigid foundation
shown in Fig. l(a~. For prQblems of this general kind B.E.M.
offer two distinct advantages over alternative methods of
analysis,

a) since all fundamental (free-space Greens function) solutions

automaticallY satisfy the constraint conditions on any
infinite boundary, such boundaries do not need to be
modelled by discrete elements in any B.E.M. analysis.

b) by using a half space Green's function as the singular

solution (e.g. Mindlin's solution for a linearelastic half
space) the "traction-free" surface boundary conditions are
also automatically fulfilled.

Consequently, for all problems of this general kind only the

interfaces between the medium and the foundation, flow sources,
etc., have to be discretised and boundary conditions satisfied
on them. (Fig. l(b).

There are, however, a number of features common to many

Geotechnical problems which occur less frequently in other

399
 400

fields and, on which, we shall therefore concentrate. These

:lpclude,

(i) the interaction between specific, deformable structures

and supporting ground. Typical examples of which might
be embedded flexible foundations (piles, piers, etc) and
surface supported plates, rafts, etc. The latter being
distinguished by the fact that singular solutions are
known for plates of infinite extent supported on different
elastic media which might therefore be used as the kernel
generating functions in B.E.M. These two topics will be
amplified in Section 3.

(ii) general anisotropy of the materials involved. Here,

from the point of view of B.E.M., it is clearly necessary
that either a procedure be available for geometrically
transforming the field into an equivalent isotropic one
(as is commonly done in potential flow problems and
certain classes of elastic media) or, usually preferably,
that the relevant singular solution be known for the
anisotropic space. (Incidentally a convenient closed
form solution for a line load within an orthotropic
elastic half space will be found in Tomlin and Butterfield
(1974». This topic will not be discussed further in
the lectures.

(iii) problems of gross inhomogeneity of the materials involved.

Here there are two distinct types of problem -

a) those in which the material properties vary in a

continuous manner throughout the system (for example an
elastic, Gibson, soil model in which the shear modulus
increases linearly with depth below the ground surface).
Here the singular solutions are not generally known
and, although some preliminary studies have been made to
explore the consequences of tackling the inhomogeneous
one, Butterfield Q978, 1979), this does not appear to be
a very promising approach and, in practice, the inhomogen-
eity is likely to be approximated by some form of step
function change in material properties. This will be
especially so in realistic Geotechnical problems where
the geometrical extent and specific properties of the
materials concerned are not usually known with any
precision.

b) those in which discontinuous changes in material

properties occur (i.e. zoned or "piece-wise" discon-
tinuous media - which therefore also include the
approximations to case (iii)a). There B.E.M. are
singularly attractive and there appear to be relatively
unexplored opportunities for dealing efficiently with
idealised stratified media which arise in many Geotechnical
problems. This will be discussed in Section 4.
 401

(iv) body forces, especially gravitational self-weight, are

not negligible in many Geotechnical cases and their
inclusion necessitates internal subdivisions (cells)
within the material regions. However, these cells differ
from the internal discretisations which arise in Finite
Element Methods (F.E.M.) in two important aspects, in that
the internal subdivision,

a) although tedious, does not increase the magnitude of

the matrix reduction problem beyond that for an otherwise
identical system without body forces. Such body force
terms appear on the "right hand side" of the final
equations. In cases where the body forces are generated
by either a steady state temperature field, seepage
gradients or a gravitational field, describable by a
potential function, Rizzo (1977) developed a technique,
utilising the'divergence theorem, for transforming the
volume integrals into surface ones thereby eliminating
the internal cell subdivisions.

b) does not have to match, nodally, etc., the boundary

discretisation scheme, although it will usually be
convenient to do so.

(v) non-linearity in the constitutive equations of the

materials involved. One overriding characteristic of
Geotechnical materials is that, other than in cases
where the stress increment ratios etc., are small, they
can only be described very approximately by linear
material properties. Nevertheless, when all the
inexactitudes inherent in most Geotechnical problems
are appreciated there are many cases in which locally
linearised material properties can form the basis of
entirely adequate practical analyses. Elasto-plastic
models are therefore of considerable interest to the
Geotechnical Engineer and it is again a point in favour
of B.E.M. that the basic algorithm (see Section 5)
which arises has many features in common with the body
force treatment in (iv) above.

2. NOTATION AND SOME BASIC IDEAS

It is an advantage, in a presentation of this kind, to be able

to discuss in general terms the relevance of B.E.M. to a
particular field of study and to leave the more erudite
analytical and numerical discourse to others. In order to
introduce the notation used we write down the standard (direct)
DBE~1 statement for the potential p(1;;) at any point I; within a
two-dimensional region (A), bounded by surface (S) on which
the potential and flux boundary conditions are p(x),.u(x) and
~(x) is the intensity of sources distributed over A, Fig. 2, as
 402

p(O J [p(x) F(x,~) - u(x) G(x,O] dS(x)

S
+ J ~(x) G(x,~) dA(x) (1)
A

where G(x,O = __ 1
21TK
tn 1..£.1
r'
o
is the basic singular solution for the potential generated at
point x. by a point source applied at the point ~. (i = 1,2)
in an 1 infinite two-dimensional region of permehbility K and
if ni (x) defines a unit vector at Xi then,

(2)

is the flux along ni(x) due to G.

An alternative formulation is the (indirect) IBEM state-

ment whic~is also derived and explained in detail in
Banerjee and Butterfield (1981) and shown to be formally
equivalent to equation (1). Many of the early B.E.M. solutions
in Geomechanics used IBEM, which has the attraction of being
more accessible to the less mathematically inclined practitioner.
Indeed the whole initial motivation of B.E.M. was to develop
practical problem solving algorithms distilled from integral
equation methods but shorn of their mathematical sophistication.
The current trend in B.E.M. to return to complexity may well
prove to be misplaced in relation to Geotechnical engineering
where the need is for relatively simpl~ design-aid representa-
tion of complex systems, often of ill-defined geometry, rather
than the : very precise higher order formulations, for machine
components etc. There is probably still considerable scope
for developing relatively primitive B.E.M. solution packages
as design and analysis aids for Geotechnical problems related
to, for example, multiple piled rafts on stratified soils. The
IBEM equations equivalent to (1) ar~formally,

p (x) ~ J G(x,~) H~) dS(~) + J G(x,z) ~(z) dA(z)

-8 A (3)

u(x)
JS F(x,~) ~(~) dS(~) + J F(x,z) ~(z) dA(z)
A (4)

where x is now the point at which the potential and fl~p(x),

u(x),. are to be calculated, cp (0 are the ficd dous potentials
introduced in IBEM as an intermediate step in the solution
 --
lJ: 1 403

( a)

(b)

FIGURE 1
404

X2'~2.Z2 _______

,/'

,
(
I
\,
~'---
FIGURE 2 /

T
/

(a)

FIGURE 3
 405

(~ now being on S) and z defines points inside A. In all these

equations the arguments have been written out fully to emphasise
how, between DBEM and IBEM the roles of x and ~ are interchanged
which affects both the location of the normal n.(x) and the
sign of F (but not G). This point is emphasisea since it can
lead to confusion if the IBEM and DBEM techniques are casually
interchanged.

Another peculiarity of Geotechnical engineering is that

the common field problems span elasticity, plasticity,
potential flow and transient flow (diffusion) in both two and
three-dimensions. It is, therefore, a further attractive
feature of B.E.M. that the basic equations change so little
for all the above problems although, of course, the kernel
functions (G, F) are quite different and, in elasticity,
become second rank tensor functions rather than scalars and
the equations relate vector functions.

For example, in a two-dimensional diffusion problem

where the potential will be a function of time, p(~,t) the
DBEM statement corresponding to (1) can be written as,
Banerjee and Butterfield (1982),

p(~,t) = J (F*p - G*u) dS + J (G*~ + f.G) dA

S A
(5)
in which (apart from omitting, for convenience, the various
arguments and including f(x) = p(x,O), the initial potential
distribution throughout S) only two changes have occurred

(i) the singular solution used is G(x , t·~

, , T) = exp[-r 2 /4(t-T)]
41T(t-T)

and F(X,t;~,T) = - :~ ni (x), K = 1, as before.

1.

(ii) the operations (F*p) etc., are now Riemann convolution

integrals such that, say,

(~*~)(x,t) = ft ~(X,t-T) ~(x,t) dT

o (6)

A closed-form, one-dimensional, solution to a diffusion

problem which amplifies this procedure will be found in,
Banerjee and Butterfield (1981), together with a time marching
IBEM scheme first developed by Tomlin (1972).

3. B.E.M. APPLIED TO THE INTERACTION BETWEEN STRUCTURES AND

THE SUPPORTING GROUND

If the piers/pile shown in Fig. l(b) are assumed to be rigid and

completely bonded to the supporting medium, then the displace-
406

ment boundary conditions for every elemental surface patch used

in the B.E.M. analysis will be identically u l = u 2 = 0, u 3 = 1,
say, and the B.E.M. solution will provide all the surface
traction components on each patch due to unit vertical displace-
ment of the structure the integration of which will provide the
resultant load required. Thus, by considering similarly
horizontal displacements and rotations, a complete stiffness
matrix for the structure can be generated.

However if the structure is not rigid then an iterative

procedure has to be introduced in order to enforce displacement
compatibility at the soil-structure interface. For example the
rigid analysis call be used to initiate a solution; the
resultant tractions then being applied to the deformable pieri
pile to produce displacements of its surface which are then fed,
as revised boundary conditions, into the B.E.M. analysis and
the iteration repeated until acceptable convergence of inter-
face displacements is achieved. A description of this
procedure, applied to pile foundations, will be found in
Banerjee (1964) and Banerjee (1971), which also include an
incremental load iteration procedure coupled to the condition
that the interface shear stress shall not exceed a specific
value (ac, say). This procedure will therefore generate a
non-linear load-displacement plot for the pile up to the con-
ventionally assumed ultimate load capacity at which the inter-
face shear stress is equal to (ac) uniformly along the pile.
In this work a finite difference scheme was used to model the
slender pile elements (it is well known that B.E.M., and
F.E.M. are unsuited to model "slender" structures).

Simplifications of the above procedure result from

a) ignoring radial displacement compatibility at the inter-

face, an acceptable practical assumption, Butterfield and
Banerjee (1971).

b) assuming the load transmission along. the pile shaft is

known (e.g. decreasing linearly from head to toe) which
provides a direct boundary condition input into a
simplified B.E.M. analysis which, in turn, makes the
analysis of extensively piled raft foundations a
practical proposition.

The raft itself is modelled as an elastic plate (often

"thick") but most simply using Kirchhof thin plate theory.
The elastic plate problem, with any of the common edge support
conditions can be solved by B.E.M., Banerjee and Butterfield
(1981), taking as a starting point the solution for a point
loaded thin plate of infinite extent as the basic singular
solution. Thus for such an infinite plate, thickness = h,
Young's modulus = E, Poisson's ratio = v and D = Eh 3 /l2(1-v 2 )
the fundamental solution for the vertical displacement wO(x)
 407

at any point (x) in a plate of infinite extent produced by a

unit load acting at a field point (~) is

wO(x) = GO(x,~) a 8;D r2(t~) (7)

o
r = y.y., y. = (x-~). and r locates an arbitrary circle on
which~ ~ ~
the ~ displgcement is zero. A straightforward
DBEM approach, Banerjee and Butterfield (1981), leads to a
solution in the form

[W]{w} + [X]{8} + [y]nn + [Z]{V}

(8)

in which all of the coefficient matrices (W, x, Y, Z, A) and

the plate loading vector ~ will be known together with half of
the total number of components of the (w, 8, M, V) vectors
which are, respectively, plate boundary displacements, edge
normal rotations, moments and 'resultant' boundary shear
forces. Equation (8) therefore, as usual, provides the
remaining, initially unknown, boundary values. In principle
a plate supported by a mat of axially compressible elastic
springs (of stiffness k per unit area) - a Winkler foundation -
can be solved by an identical procedure by substituting for
equation (7) the corresponding singular solution for an
infinite elastic plate so supported which is,

wO(x) = GO(x,~) I . H (Sr)

.. = 4SZD 0 (9)

where, additionally, S = ~ and H (Sr) represents the real

part of a Hankel function of the fi~st kind with argument
(SIi) .

A further stage of sophistication results if the supporting

half space is an elastic continuum, Young's modulus = E and
Poisson's ratio = vo ' for which the corresponding infin~te plate
unit solution is,
a
t3
wo (x) = G0 (x,~ = 2nD
Jo(ar) da
I +(at) 3
f
o (10)
with t 3 = 2D(I-v 2 )/E 2 and J (ar) a zero order Bessel function.
o 0 0
When it is borne in mind that the DBEM solution requires
functions (Do, EO, yO), say, derived by successive differentia-
tion of GO with respect to (x), as kernel functions for the
DBEM integrals it is clear that the analytical complexity
involved becomes formidable.

Alternatively we can proceed to a solution by the following

much simpler algorithm. If the free plate is augmented by
elastic support, equation (8), becomes,
 408

,~

A, Au Au u,
f-
Bu I -B., Uu
r-
B"
'---
2 ~ Ull
I-

--
A2 A.3 A2' u.

I~~
B.3 3 -B32 Un
t-
B24
L...---
4
~ ..... u••

~-=CI,I-CJI A3 U.

0- Cu - C:u
I-
o 0-~U-CH B•• S -B•• 03
I-
~==CI.. -C.2
P. 0- Cu- C..,
A. u.
0. r-:
D,

Du
D"
-D2'
-D3'
.,
D2

D13 -D32
•• (3-66)

D•• -D.2 .3
DJ

DJ' -D. J
"'.
D.

FIGURE 4
 409

[W] {w} + [X] {0} + [Y] {M} + [Z] {V}

(11)

where for, say, 2n distinct values of each boundary variable the

left hand side of this equation will comprise ~n x 2n)(2n x 1)
matrix and vector pairs, the [A]{o/} terms will be
(2n x t)(t x 1) for t loaded, plate surface cells and the final
[BJ{q} terms will be (2n x m)(m x 1) which represent the
foundation support reaction vector {q} acting over the whole
plate surface (divided into a total of m cells) and the
components of fBJ will be known and calculated identically
to those of [A .

The half space loading is now also {q} over a correspond-

ing distribution of surface cells which will generate a
surface displacement vector {w}, (m x I), where

{q} = [c] {w} (12)

The components of [C] will be known, either from the stiff-

nesses of the individual piles supporting the raft, or (as
a diagonal matrix only) for a Winkler foundation or, a
fully populated matrix if either Boussinesq's solution
(integrated over the cells) for a uniform elastic half space,
or any other of the available solutions for anisotropic, etc.,
half spaces, are used.

The standard DBEM procedure will also provide an

equation for {w} in terms of (w, 0, M, V, 0/, q) and known
matrices [w] etc., in the form,

(13)

elimination of {we} between equation (12) and (13) leads to an

equation relating {q} to (w, 0, M, V, 0/). Substitution for
{q} from this equation into (11) produces 2n equations for the
unknown boundary values. Thereafter equation (12) generates
{q} and (13) {w}. The full possibilities of this procedure in
relation to B.E.M. have still to be explored but two important
features are already apparent from the above,

(i) singular solutions for composite systems of this kind can

become so complex in themselves that their direct use in
B.E.~!., contrary to our expectations, becomes unattractive.

(ii) since, from the B.E.M. viewpoint, the boundary of the plate
is merely its edge the above algorithm illustrates how
coupling can be achieved between the internal cells of
one body with the boundary elements (half space surface)
of another.
 410

4. INHOMOGENEITY, ZONING AND LAYERING

It is quite clear that for a completely inhomogeneous system

for which, almost certainly, the free space Green's function
would be unknown, a B.E.M. discretisation into a very large
number of different, but individually homogeneous, regions
would in essence have degenerated into a very unattractive
form of F.E.M. analysis. Fortunately many problems of
Geotechnical interest can be modelled by a small number of
contiguous zones of different, homogeneous (possibly aniso-
tropic) material for which B.E.M. again offer an attractive
means of solution.

This will be illustrated, in relation to two-dimensional

potential flow. Solved problems in both anisotropic potential
flow and orthotropic zoned elasticity will be found in,
Tomlin (1972). Consider the simple two zone region shown in
Fig. 3(a). For any particular zone the DBEM algorithm will
relate the boundary potentials {p}, the boundary fluxes {u}
and the sources {w} within it by an equation of the form,

(14)

We can separate the peripheral fluxes {ul } and potentials {PI}'

for zone Ij from the interface values {u I2 }, {P12}' partition
[AJ and [D and write,

(15)

Similarly for zone 2

(16)

on the (1, 2) interface the following conditions must hold,

(17)

which enable us to eliminate the interface potentials between

equations (15, 16) leading to

(18)
 411

which will, for example, yield all the fluxes if {PI} and {P2}
are specified or (after re-arrangement) the unknown variables
for a mixed boundary value problem. A further four zone
example is shown in Fig. 3(b) and the corresponding solution
matrix arrays in Fig. 4 from which the general procedure for
assembling matrices for multi-zone problems should be clear.

A related class of problems involves irregularly layered

media in which the layers are extensive, relatively thin and
only abut the adjacent layers immediately above and below
(Fig. 5) .. It is now attractive to partition the DBEM
equations, for layer 2 say, into the traction and displacement
sets (in gn e1~ticity problem) on the top, {t~}, {u~} and
bottom {t 2 }, {u 2 } of the layer - elements on the ends of
layers being allocated to the top (bottom) set if they
lie above (below) the layer centreline. Thus the basic DBEM
statement for, say, layer 2

(19)

can be transposed to

(20)

and, by noting that the layer 2-layt5r 3 int~rfacebequi1igrium

and compatibility conditions are {t 2 } -{t 3 }, {u 2 } : {u 3 } we
have, say

(21)

(22)

For algebraic convenience we shall now drop the body force term
and note that from the recurrence relation established by
equation (22) we can now relate

{S~} ~ {:;} to {S;+l },the top surface of the (N+l) th layer via

(23)

in which the [yJ matrices are all essentially similar apart

from the incorporation of different material properties and
geometries for each layer. The [yJ matrices clearly function
as transfer matrices and allow us again to calculate the
unknown components of {S:+l}' [s~J from those specified as
412

l
11
ICXY"'O I

1-+ 2
l~ 3
~~
l-f N
~\

rr
Q. 0.
t,! u.,
2
L-:\
t 2'
b ~.
a.

FIGURE 5
 413

boundary conditions. The tractions and displacements on

intermediate interfaces if required follow from equations such
as

(24)

It should be noted that to operate the above algorithm

assumptions have to be introduced concerning some of the end
boundary conditions on the top and bottom layers which are
then propagated in an unrealistic manner adjacent to the ends
of intermediate layers.

5. ELASTO-PLASTICITY

There is little doubt that when our understanding of the

properties of Geotechnical materials is improved their deforma-
tion under load will be found to be governed by some form of
work-hardening, non-linear elasto-plastic law. It is again an
attraction of B.E.M. that they can cope, albeit with very
considerable computational complexity, with analyses involving
such materials.

Solutions to linear elasto-plastic problems, with either

isotropic or translational hardening, using B.E.M. were publish-
ed in 1978 (Banerjee & Mustoe) and details of alternative
'initial stress" and "initial strain" algorithms will be found
in Banerjee et al (1979).

Superficially the DBEM algorithm (now expressed in terms

of stress rates, strain rates) appears to be identical to that
for classical elasticity, incorporating the usual singular
solution kernel functions, augmented by a volume integral.
This latter, "body force", integral includes the "ini tial stress"
(or "initial strain") fields by which the plastic yielding is
incorporated. The solution therefore proceeds incrementally
(in time) with increasing numbers of cells yielding plastically.
It is therefore desirable to predict beforehand the optimum
location of such cells to provide an efficient solution. In
B.E.M. they are not required in regions which remain elastic
in contrast to the full-field subdivisions necessary in F.E.M.
414

6. CONCLUDING REMARKS

Problems in Geomechanics have many features which do not often

occur in other fields and which need to be appreciated by the
numerical analyst if output useful to engineers is to be
generated.

In addition to the analytical challenge of flexible

structures interacting with the supporting ground; usually
in a time dependent manner due to consolidation (i.e. the
expulsion of water from fine grained soils under load-
modelled as coupled elasticity and diffusion problems), these
include -

(i) an appreciation that the equations of state of soil and

rock materials are not precisely known - certainly all
of the classical mathematical models (elasticity, plast-
icity, potential flow and diffusion, etc) are strictly
only applicable in a very restricted range of circum-
stances.

(ii) Geotechnical materiaffi are usually bedded/jointed, two

or three phase and occur in zones the precise extent of
which will never be known.

(iii) the imposed loads, seepage force fields, initial

geostatic stresses, etc., and the boundary conditions
are also imprecisely defined in practice.

(iv) any analytic procedures useful to Geotechnical engineers

must therefore be able to generate sets of solutions
(representing, essentially, parametric studies over
a number of credible scenarios) both conveniently and
inexpensively. Extreme precision is irrelevant
(impossible) and should be subordinate to the realistic
inclusion of geological features, anisotropy, inhomo-
geneity and non-linearity, etc.

We have, in my view, made only a few faltering step~ in

this direction so far. Boundary Element Methods may have
still much to contribute here but only if they are focussed
on meeting the needs of the Geotechnical engineer rather than
the intellectual satisfaction of the applied mathematician.
 415

REFERENCES

Banerjee, P. K. (1969) A Contribution to the study of axially

loaded Pile Foundations. Ph.D. Thesis, Southampton University,
U.K.

Banerjee, P. K. (1971) Foundations within a finite elastic

layer - application of the integral equation method, civ.
Engng. November, 1197-1202.

Banerjee, P. K. and Butterfield, R. (1975) Boundary Element

Methods in Geomechanics, in G. Gudehus (ed.), Finite Elements
in Geomechanics, Chap. 16, Wiley, London.

Banerjee, P. K. and Mustoe, G. G. W. (1978) The Boundary

Element Method for Two-dimensional Problems of Elasto-
plasticity. Proc. Int. Conf. Rec. Adv. in Boundary Element
Meth. 283-300, Pentech Press, London.

Banerjee, P. K., Cathie, D. N. and Davies, T. G. (1979)

Two and three-dimensional problems of elasto-plasticity, in
P. K. Banerjee and R. Butterfield (eds), Developments in
Boundary Element Methods. Applied Science Publishers, London.

Banerjee, P. K. and Butterfield, R. (1981) Boundary Element

Methods in Engineering Science. McGraw-Hill, (U.K.).

Banerjee, P. K. and Butterfield, R. (1982) Transient Flow

Through Porous Elastic Media: Chapt. 2 in Developments in
Boundary Element Methods - 2, Ed. Banerjee & Shaw. Applied
Science Publishers, London.

Butterfield, R. and Banerjee, P. K. (1971) The problem of

pile-cap pile-group Interaction, Geotechnique, 21 (2), 135-142.

Butterfield R. (1978) An Application of the Boundary Element

Method to Potential Flow Problems in Generally Inhomogeneous
Bodies, in Recent Advances in Boundary Element Methods. Ed.
C. A. Brebbia, Pentech Press, London.

Butterfield, R. (1979) New Concepts illustrated by Old Problems.

Chapt. 1 in Developments in Boundary Element Methods - 1, Ed.
Banerjee and Butterfield. Applied Science Publishers, London.

Stippes, M.' and Rizzo, F. J. (1977) A Note on the Body Force

Integral of Classical Elastostatics, ZAMP, 28, 339-341.

Tomlin, G. R. (1972) Numerical Analysis of Continuum Problems

in Zoned Anisotropic Media. Ph;D. Thesis, Southampton
University, U.K.
416

Tomlin, G. R. and Butterfield, R. (1974) Elastic Analysis of

Zoned Orthotropic Continua. Proc. ASCE, Engng Mech. Div.,
EM3, 511-529.
Chapter 23

ON ASYMPTOTIC ERROR ANALYSIS AND UNDERLYING MATHEMATICAL

PRINCIPLES FOR BOUNDARY ELEMENT METHODS

W. L. WENDLAND

Fachbereich Mathematik, Technische Hochschule Darmstadt,

D-6100 Darmstadt, Fed. Rep. Germany.

INTRODUCTION

Boundary element methods which can be considered as numerical

or finite element approximations of boundary integral equations
on closed boundary manifolds became very popular during the
last years and, correspondingly, a great variety of boundary
value problems can now be solved numerically with correspon-
ding boundary element programs. Since the reduction of interior
or exterior boundary value problems and also transmission pro-
blems to equivalent boundary integral equations is by no means
a uniquely determined process - even for one specific boundary
value problem - the growing number of applications has led to
an enormous variety of mathematical problems and questions in
connection with the applicability, correctness of formulations,
systematical and computational errors and their estimation,
computing times and expenses and efficiency.

In fact, all these topics yield corresponding mathemati-

cal analysis which already now has grown out of comprehension.
Therefore I think that we should restrict us to only a few
basic principles which might help to formulate and understand
some of the above concepts and show some simple relations bet-
ween them although the simplifications might sometimes perhaps
go too far.

Here I am mainly concerned with the asymptotic error

analysis which gives us the information on how fast accuracy
increases for meshrefinements in terms of orders of the family
of meshwidths. Such asymptotic estimates not only help us to
judge expectations for reliability and accuracy of special
methods but also can be used to decide on the choice of numeri-
cal quadratures in the program which has again influence on the
accuracy and computing time. The asymptotic error analysis is
based on the simple concepts of positive definiteness or co-
ercivity, approximation properties of finite elements in terms

417
 418

of their meshwidth and the variational formulation of Galerkin's

as well as of collocation methods (the latter only for two-'
dimensional boundary value problems). Although these mathemati~
cal concepts are extremely simple, the mathematical theories in-
volved are partly neither so simple nor popular. I try to con-
centrate on the principal aspects. More detailed informations
can be found in the references and a more detailed exposition
in [51].

The four lectures are organized as follows. In Section I

we relate coercivity in form of G~rding inequalities to the
stability and convergence of projection methods in Sobolev
spaces on the boundary manifold. In Section 2 we present a cri-
terion for the validity of coerciveness by using Fourier trans-
formation for the boundary integral equations and explain the
analysis for some special integral equations from plane elasti-
city. Section 3 is devoted to the asymptotic error analysis of
Galerkin's procedure and the corresponding fully discretized
equations involving numerical integration. In Section 4 we give
a brief survey on recent asymptotic error estimates for the most
popular two-dimensional boundary element methods based on collo-
cation.

I. PROJECTION METHODS AND GARnING'S INEQUALITY

The equations to be approximated we shall write in short as

(I. I ) Au =f •

The linear Equation (1.1) can be any of the boundary integral

equations for time independent boundary value problems. For the
boundary element method, the solution u of Equation (1.1) on
the compact boundary manifold r will be approximated by a
finite linear combination
N
(1.2) uh L Y£~£'
£=1
where the basis trial functions ~£ form the N-dimensional
trial space ~ of finite element functions on the boundary r.
hN N-(n-I) denotes the maximal meshwidth per element. We
assume that r is given by local representations r: x = x(t)
such that partitions in the parameter domains are mapped onto
corresponding partitions of r. On the partitions in the para-
meter domains we use a (m+I,m) system of flinite elements [5].
Then the local representation of r transplants these finite
element functions onto r. If n = 2 then r is a regular
closed curve and t € [0,1] can be used as the parameter do-
main. All functions than are I-periodic, and Hh consists of
periodic m-th degree splines. The integrals coming up in the
implementation of the boundary element method then may be evalu-
ated by using only the local coordinates in which the finite
elements appear as simple functions over the parameter domains.
This construction of the elements on r requires that the
 419

parameter representations are 'fully available. For n ~ 3 the

latter may become rather involved. Hence, then the additional
approximation of the representation of r is often used leading
to isoparametric elements besides the approximation of r - as
in shell theory (see e.g. [9,Chap. VIII] and [35]).

If Equation (1.2) is inserted into Equation (1.1) then the

range AHb is only N-dimensional and we need a projection of
A~ into a N-dimensional space to find a NxN system of linear
equations for the coefficients Y~. Clearly, this system should
be uniquely solvable if Equation (1.1) is uniquely solvable, at
least for sufficiently small h. (See e.g. [28, p. 205].) To
ensure this rather strong requirement we need sufficiently many
continuity and convergence properties. For this purpose it is
very useful to introduce the Sobolev spaces HO(r) with

(f,g) = f f(o)(s)g(o)ds + f f(s)g(s)ds

° r r
for integer 0 , their dual spaces with respect to HO for ne-
gative ° and their interpolation spaces for arbitrary ° € lR
(see e.g. [5]) • Moreover, we shall consider the approximation
of Equation (1.1) not only for one fixed meshwidth h but for
a whole family Hh with h + 0 . We further assume ~ c ~
and that for every f € Hm

lim inf II f-X II m = 0

~-+O X€~
Lfi!t E. : HJ+ ~ with any j:S m be a correspGlItding family of
HJ-ortiogonal projections. Then for every g € HJ we have

(I.3) and lim II Phf-f II j = 0

h-+O
since Hmc..H j is densely imbedded.

Now one possibility for the apprQximation of Equation (1.1)

is Galerkin's projection method in HJ, i.e.,

(I. 4)

or, equivalently,
N
(1.5) (A~,1Jk)J' L y~(A1J~,1Jk)'J
R.=I
= (f,llk)'
J
k=I, ... ,N.
This is a quadratia rinea~ system of equations for YI""'YN
and the crucial property for the asymptotic error analysis is
existence and stability of the family of the so called
Gare~kin p~ojeations

. -I
(1.6) Gh(A,J)u := (PhAP h ) PhAu ~

An appropriate property of A to guarantee stability of Gh is

the validity of
420
G~rding's inequality: To A the~e exist a positive constant
K and a compact operator c: HJ +a + Hj-a such that
o
(I. 7) Re (Av,v). ~ K II v II ~ - Re (Cv,v).
J 0 J+a J
for aU v E Hj + a with some fixed a E lR •
Now we are ready to prove a stability theorem for ~ which
can already be used for boundary element methods of Galerkin's
type and also some of the collocation methods.

Theorem 1.1 [8J,[22J: Let A: Hj +a + Hj - a be a continuous

bijective linear mapping satisfying aarding's inequality (1.7)
and let j+a ~ m . Then there exist positive constants ho and
c such that ~(A,j) exists for every 0 < h ~ ho and

(1.8) II Gh(A,j)u II.J+a ~ c Ilull J+a

.

(1.9) II u-uhll . ~ (I+c) inf II u-xll .

J+a XEH J+a
h
Here and in the following c will denote a generic constant,
usually independent of h but of different values at different
places.

Proof: Set D:= A + C from Inequality (1.7) and write for

Equation (1.4),

PhAuh = Ph(D-C)uh = Ph(D-C)u = PhAu

Let wh E ~ be defined by

PhDwh = PhDw •
Then G~rding's inequality and (v,z). ,;; c Ilv II. liz II·
yield J J-a J+a
2
Ko Ilwh IIj(a';; I (Dwh,wh)jI = I (PhDwh,wh)jI = I (Dw,wh)jl

,;; c IIDw II j-a Ilwh II j+a ~ c Ilw II j+a Ilwh II j+a

Therefore Gh(~,j) = (PhDPh)-IPhD always exists and
II wh II j+a = II Gh (D,j)w II j+a ~ K
C
II wll j+a
o
Moreover
II Gh(D,j)w-w 11.+ ,;; (I +....s..) inf II w-x II. + 0 for h+O
~
J a
•
K
0 XE-n
K J+a
since Hm4 Hj +a is densely imbedded.

For Equation (1.4) we now find

. -I -I
PhAPh~ ~ PhDPh [I-Gh(D,J)D CJ~ = PhD [I-D CJu
 421

yielding
-I , -I
[I-Gh(D,j)D CJu h = Gh(D,J)rI-D CJu,
C : HJ' +", + Hj -'" ~s
, compact an d G ( ') ' J ' +'"
h D,J + I ~n H There-
fore
lim sup IIGh(D,j)D-Icv - D-ICv II, = 0
h+O Ilv Ii, =1 J+'"
J+'"
[7, Hilfssatz 3J. Moreover [I-D-ICJ- I = A-ID exists.
Therefore the inverse of

exists for every 0 < h $ ho with some ho > 0 with

sup II A-I D(Gh (D,j)-I)D -I Cv II , < I

II v II, =1 0 J+'"
J+'"
due to the convergence of the Neumann series for { .•• }-I
Thus, for 0 < h $ ho we see that the Galerkin projections
-I
uh = Gh(A,j)u = [I-Gh(D,j)D-ICJ Gh(D,j)[I-D-ICJu
are stable satisfying (1.8) which implies (1.9). o
2. EXAMPLES OF STRONGLY ELLIPTIC BOUNDARY INTEGRAL EQUATIONS

Since the crucial assumption in Theorem I. I is Garding's in-

equality (].7) one is interested in simple criterions for its
validity. At present two possibilities for proving Inequality
(1.7) are available. One criterion for special types of boun-
dary integral operators A is based on the relation between
the bilinear form (Av,v) on r and the bilinear form re-
presenting the total ener~ of the interior and exterior
fields defined by solutions of the original boundary value
problem [10]. Coercivity of the energy then implies Inequality
(1.7). The second criterion uses the concept of strongly ellip-
tic pseudodifferential operators on the boundary r and can
be applied to all operators A of the boundary integral
equations [46J. Let A be given in the form

(2.]) AU(x) = a(x)u(x) + J k(x,t)u(~(t»dt + J c(x,y)u(y)ds

r r y
T
where u(x) = (ul(x), ... ,up(x»
00
, a(x) and c(x,y) are C -
matrices, y = x(t) a given regular local parameter represen-
tation of r ~nd k a distributional kernel, COO for
x ~ x(t) . To A we associate via Fourier transformation the
so called symboZ by
+00

(2.2) R(T,~) = a(~(T» + J ei(t-T)'~k(~(T),t)dt

Now we require that R(T,~) admits an asymptotic expansion
with respect to decreasing degree's of homogeneity in ~
 422
for I~I ~ 1 with a leading term of highest order, the
prinaipa t symbo t
2a
ao("~) = I ~ 1 ao (., 11T)
~
for I~I~I.

All the terms of this formal expansion must also satisfy some
growth conditions. Then A is called a pseudo-differentiat
operator of order 2a (for details see e.g. [47J). Clearly, k
and a depend on the choice of the local representation !(t)
of r ~

We aatt A strongty ettiptia of order 2a if A admits

the above representation and. moreover. there exist a positive
aonstant K 1 and a C'" matrix e(x) suah that
Re ~ T e(!(.»ao("~)~
-
~ KII~ 12 for att I~ I=1 and ~€c p .

Theorem 2.1 [23J,[30]: If A is strongly elliptia of order

2a then Gllrdi1J{J' s inequatity (I. 7) holds for SA with every
j € :m. •
For further explanation we consider the boundary integral
equations for the first two interior and exterior fundamental
problems in elasticity (see [27J). Here we require t~e solutions
of the Navier equations for the displacement field u,

pa~ + (A+p) grad div ~ = 0 in g or gC

respectively, where p and A are the given Lame constants.

'For the Dirichlet problem the boundary conditions are

For the Neumann problem we 'prescribe the boundary stress,

...
T[~Jlr = A div ~~+ 2p ;~ + p~ " curl ~Ir = t a ~
where ~ denotes the exterior normal vector to r .
(In :n,2 set u3 = 0 and \I~ = 0 .) For exterior problems we
append at infinity the condit10n that there exists a rigid
motion

10 -x2
t(x) = M(X)~ where M(x) .. ( 0 1 xl
o 0 0

such that ~(x) - t(x) = 0(1) and a!. (~(x) - t(x» = o(Tir)
for Ixl"'''', (In 112 cancel the lastJ three columns and the
third row.)
 423

Every weak solution of finite energy to the above problems

can be represented with Betti's formula

(2.3) +
u(x) = E J +
{E(x,y)T[u](y) +
- T(x,y)u(y)}ds +
+ M(x)w
r y
where E = I and ~ = 0 for interior and E = -I for ex-
terior problems. The kernels are given by
A + 3lJ A+lJ I + + + + T
E(x,y) = 41f(n-I)(A+2lJ) {y(x,y)I + H3lJ ---n (x-y)(x-y) }
Ix-yl
where y os -log Ix-yl for n = 2 and y = Ix-yl-I for n=3,
lJ n(A+lJ) + + + + T a
T(x,y) = 21f(n-I)(A+2lJ){(I + 2 (x-y)(x-y) )av- y(x,y)
lJlx-yl y
___1_ «;'y>"~T (y) _ «;'y)~T (y» T)} .
Ix_yin

Boundary integral equations [27] :

All the boundary integral equations in the sequel are uniquely
solvable.

2.1 The Dirichlet problems

2.1.1 Direct method [12], [29],[42] Integral equations of the

•
fLrst • for "'tlr
kLnd * and -+
w with side conditions:
...
. JE(x,y)t(y)ds ... =
+ EM(x)w 2£ +~(x) + J T(x,y)~(y)ds
7
,X€r,
(2.4) r T y r y
JM (y)t(Y)ds - 0 .
r y
Order 2a = -I . Principal symbols:
. A + 3lJ I
.ao(x,~) .. 4(A+2lJ) ~ I for n=2

A + 3lJ '-I I (
~ 8(A+2p) N (x) ~ -K~~~2
I ~ 12+K~22,
I
'~:K~l
-K~I ~2
12 2 ,
, 0)0 N(x)

,I ~ 12
for n" 3 ,
(see [13], [34])

where and N(x) , ~(x»

where are orthogonal at x.

 4.24

2.1.2 Normal derivative of Betti's formula [31 • 120]

32, p. 357 S1ngular integral equat10n~ with Cauchy or
Calderon-Zygmund kernels for tlr and a:
-+-
Et(X) - 2 f (T(y,x» T -+-
t(y)ds y
r
= 2 jr T T
T [T [E(x~y)] ](~(x)-~(y»ds + M(x)a ,
x y y
T -+-

(2.5)
fr MT(y) t(y)ds
y
=0 .

For the exterior problem, ~ must be evaluated afterwards.

Order 2y /
0 • Principal symbols:
E , -1 Y
~)
. TIT
(2.6) = ( .
1Y TIT '
~
E for n=2

where 0 < y = _ll_

A+211
< 1
'

(2.7) ao(x,~) = N-1(x) m( EI~I : E~~I =~~:~)

iY~1 ' iY~2 ' E·I~I
: N(x)

for n=3 (see [32, p. 357J).

2.2 The Neumann problems

2.2.1 Direct method [12:1,[29],[32J,[42J Singular integral

equations with Cauchy or Calderon -·Zygmund kernels for it l r
-+-
EU(X) + 2 f -+-
T(x,y)u(y)ds 1 -+-
+ 2(E+I)M(x)w
(2.8) r y
2
. r
f E(x,y)~(y)ds
y
, x € r
with the side condition ·f MT(y)ti(y)ds = 0 for the interior
problem. r y

This integral equation is the adjoint to Equation (2.5),

and the principal symbols are again given by Equations (2.6)
and (2.7) for n=2 and 3 , respectively.
2.2.2 Normal. derivative of Betti's formula [6J,[38] Up to
-+-.4- -+- -+
a rigid motion r(x), u(x)lr = uo(x)lr + r(x)lr ' the boundary
displacement is determined by ti from the hypersingular
equation 0
 425

fr T [T [E(x,y)JTJ(~ (x)-~ (y»ds

x y 0 0 y
= I $(X) - fr (T(y,x»T $(Y)ds
y
+ M(X)~ ,
(2.9)
f MT(y) ~ (y)ds
o y
0 .
->-
Then ~ can be found with the help of (2.3) and W must be de-
termined afterwards. (For details see [27J.)

Order 2a = I .

for n = 2

N(x)

for n =3
Further boundary integral equations with corresponding prin-
cipal symbols can be found for problems in electromagnetic
fields [1],[34J, acoustics [10],[45],[51] , viscous flows [13],
[25] and will be collected in [14].

3. ASYMPTOTIC CONVERGENCE OF GALERKIN TYPE BOUNDARY ELEMENT

METHODS

In this section we consider Galerkin's method for modified

->-
equations as in Section 2, i.e., find uh in the form of
Equation (1.2) and ~h (respectively t h ) by solving t~e
quadratic system of linear equations for Yt and wh'
N
\' ->- ->- ->- + ~+
L Yt(A~t'~k)o + (Mwh'~k)o = (t'~k)o ' k=I, ... ,N ,
0.1) t=1
N
\' T+ -+
L yt(M ~t,l)o =b .
t=1
With very minor modifications in the proof, Theorem 1.1 remains
valid for Equations (3. I), too.

Note that for self-adjoint A, the discrete linear

Equations (3.1) possess a symmetric matrix. This is particular-
ly the case for the first kind Equations (2.4) and the hyper-
singular Equations (2.9) whereas the singular Fredholm Equations
(2.5) and (2.8) yield nonsymmetric Equations (3.1). Moreover,
since for the choice of boundary integral Equations (2.4) for
the Dirichlet problem and Equations (2.9) for the Neumann pro-
blem, the bilinear forms (A~,~) coincide with the energy
(see [II] and for Equations (2.4) also [27], for Equations (2.9)
426
also [6] and [38]), for Equations (2.4) and (2.9) the matrix of
Equations (3.1) becomes positive definite.
m+1 m
In the boundary element methods the S ' system of
finite element spaces ~ provides the a~ximation property
[5] :
Let -~ < r ~ s S m+1 , r ~ m • Then for any ~ € HS(r) there
exists, to each h > 0 a X € ~ such that
(3.2) II ~ - XII ~ ch s - r li~ II
Hr(r) HS(r)
where c is independent of ~ and h.

To simplify our arguments we now consider only the case

with e = I • Then Theorem 1.1 yields for A being strongly
elliptic and uniquely solvable equations the unique solvabili-
ty of Equations (3.1) for every 0 < h Shand also the follow-
ing asymptotic error estimates. 0

Theorem 3.1 [26],[37],[46] Let A be a strongZy eZZiptia

pseUdOdifferentiaZ operator on r of order 2a • Then the
GaZerkin method (3.1) aonverges asymptotiaaZZy with optimaZ
order
(3.3) II ~-~II + l;.j-~I S chs-rll ~II
Hr(r) HS(r)
provided 2a-m-I S r ~ a ~ s S m+1 , a Sm. c is independent
of ~,;.j and h
Proof: For r a, Estimate (3.3) is an immediate consequence
of the Estimates (3.2) and (1.9). For the proof in case
2a-m-l S r < a we apply the Aubin-Nitsche duality argument
[26].

For brevity, let us consider Equations (1.1) without the

~dificati2¥s in Section 2, for the latter see [51]. The spaces
Hand H are dual with respect to the L2-scalar product,
i.e. ,

Set w € H2a-r with

A*w = v, then /I wll 2a-r S c /lvll -r

-r
for every v € H and use Equations (3.1) in the form

for all X € Hh
Then
 427

II u-uh II r S c sup I(u-~ ,A*w) I

n * 0
c sup I.(u-~ ,A (w-X» 0 I
scllu-~II • sup Ilw-xll
Hcx II v II -rs 1 Hcx
-r
for every X E ~ • Hence, fix v E Hand wand choose for
X the best approximation to w with the Estimate (3.2). Then

s chs-rll ull s' sup II vii -r

II vii -rSI
which is the desired estimate. o
For the numerical implementation of the Galerkin Equations
(3. I) defining a boundary element method, the entries of its
influence. matrix and its right hand sides are to be computed
numerically. These are the weights
... ... ...
a~k = (A~~'~k)o ' Mk = (M'~k)o
(3.4)
A~ = (MTt~,I)o and fk = (f,tk)o
Clearly, if one requires the validity of the asymptotic Estimates
(3.3) also for the numerically evaluated solutions then the-
error of numerical integration of the weights given by Equations
(3.4) needs to be small like some appropriate order of h, say

I~~k - a~kl + hl~ - Mkl + hl~~ - A~I S ch P ,

(3.5) p' +..!.(n-I)
11k - fk I S ch 2 II f II I

HP (sUPP(~k»
where ~~k'~' ~ ,fk denote the numerical weights. In order
to combine Inequalities (3.5) with the stability of the inverses
of Equations (3.1) we now require the family of meshes on r
to be regular, i.e., we further require from ~ an inverse
assumption:
(3.6) for all X E ~

provided r S sSm. Then Theorem 3.1 yields the following

corollary [50]

Corollary 3.2: If, in addition to aU assumptions of Theorem

3.1, the inverse assumption (Estimate (3.6») holds then we have
the aonditioning
II iih IlL + IWhl S chmin {2cx,0} IIPhf IlL
2 2
 42'S
The consistency between the Equations (3.1) and the
equations with numerical weights follows by the Schwarz
inequality.
N N
Lennna 3.3 [50]: Let ~ L aJ.i\ t L l3.ii.
j=1
and Zet
j=1 J J
~ ppovide aZso the invepse assumption. Then
N
L
R.,k=1

The consistency in Lennna 3.3 and stability in Corollary

3.2 imply with the Strang lennna the following error estimate.

Theorem 3.4 [50]: Let. in addition to aZZ assumptions of

Theopem 3.1. the invepse assumption Estimate (3.6) be satis-
fied. Then fop p-2(n-l) > max{0,-2a} thepe exists ho > 0
suah that the numepiaaZ equations ape uniqueZy soZvabZe fop any
o < h ~ ho and we find the asymptotia eppop estimate
II~-~IIL + I~h-~hl ~
(3.7) 2
~ chmin {0,2a}. {h P '-(n-I)lIfli t +h P- 2 (n-I)(II;ll +I~hl)}
HP 2

Conclusions: We see from Inequalities (3.3) and (3.7) that the

accuracy of the numerical integrations must satisfy
o < s-r ~ min{0,2a} + min{p'-(n-I), p-2(n-I)}
and, hence, depends on the desired order of asymptotic conver-
gence. This has two consequences for the computation of the
weights given by Equations (3.4) • First note that for the
weights aR.k involving singular double integrals from Equation
(2.1), the corresponding principal parts must be computed
either analytically or by weighted Gaussian quadratur associ-
ated with the exact singularity. Secondly note that the use of
product Gaussian,quadratures in the regular part of the weights
in Equations (3.4) requires very high order formulas since
these are not optimal due to the weights Pk , which are poly-
nomials of degree d ~ m+1 on every boundary patch,
P = 2(n-l) + (degree of precision of Gaussian formula) - d
(see [33, I:ennna 3.3]). For mesh refinements every bisection of
h will change completely all integration nodes where kernel
and function values to be evaluated. Hence, Gaussian quadrature
becomes very costly for reasonable accuracy. The use of special
integration formulas 'with Pk as weights and the finite element
knot points~s integration nodes can be performed much more
efficiently. Such formulas in connection with special treat-
ment of the principal singularities of the boundary integral
equations leads to the so called GaZepkin-aoZZoaation which has
been developed for n=2 in [24],[25],[49] very efficiently
 429

combining high accuracy with the least necessary computing

time for the evaluation of the influence matrix in Equations
(3.1). In [25] one also finds several numerical experiments
confirming the asymptotic error Estimates (3.3) and (3.7).

Boundary element Galerkin methods with isoparametric finite

elements on r for n=2 and 3 have been used in many cases
(see [12],[17],[21],[36],[38],[39],[48]). The corresponding
error analysis can be found in [15],[16],[18J,[35],[37]. A
report on this analysis in connection with the above approach
can be found in [51, Chap. 4] •

4. ASYMTOTIC CONVERGENCE OF COLLOCATION METHODS

For the collocation method let ~ E r be N appropriately

given collocation points forming an unisolvent set /::, with
respect to ~. Here ~ in Equation (1.2) is to be found by
solving the qu~dratic system of linear collocation equations
for Yt and wh '
N ->-
I Yt{A~t)(~) + M(~)~ = f(~) k I, ••• ,N ,
(4. I)
t=1
N T->-
I yt(M ~t,l)o
t=1
In contrary to the Galerkin equations, the coefficient
matrix of Equations (4.1) will never be symmetric. On the other
hand, the computation of the coefficients requires only one
integration (see Equation (2.1». Therefore collocation is
mostly used in practical computations. But in contrary to
Galerkin's procedure, for the collocation Equations (4.1)
asymptotic error estimates are known yet only in the special
case of Fredholm integral equations of the second kind with
smooth kernels (see [19],[41]) and for general equations very
recently for plane problems, i.e., n=2 . For the spacial prob-
lems convergence results for boundary element collocation are
yet to be found.

Therefore we shall restrict us in this section to the case

n=2' • Here recently two more general techniques of analysis have
been introduced, the first in the case of collocation by odd
degree splines at the spline nodal points xk [2], the second in
the case of collocation by even degree splines at the inter-
nodal midpoints ~ [4],[43].

Let x(t) be a I-periodic regular parametrizationlof r

and let ~ = S (6) denote the space of I-periodic Cm- splines
in t of de~ree m (respectively piecewise constants for
m=O) subject to the set 6 of break points.

For odd m let be /::, = 6 and 2~ < m • For even m we

assume that with respect to some regular parametrization
x = ~(T) the break points and collocation points are generated
 430

by a uniform grid, Le. , h=1.

N '

{y = x«k -1. )h)

k:::: 2
I k=I, •.• ,N}

IJ. = {~ = ~(k.h)1 k=I, ••• ,N}

and 2a < m+-} • We say that "i.,IJ. in this case are
smoothly The collocation Equations (4.1) can now be
g~ed.
written as modified Galerkin-Petrov equations. To this end
we introduce the functionals J,JIJ. by

(4.2) Ju:=
... f'"uds, ...
JIJ.u:= I·
N ...
0ku(~)
r k=1
where ok denote the weights of the trapezoidal rule.

Theorem 4.1 [2J: The collocation Equations (4.1) ~e equivalent

to the Gaterkin~Petrov equations to find ~h € ~,~ satis-
fying

(4.3)

for all test fUnctions

S (IJ.) j _ f (m+I)/2 for m odd •
X€ { m
Sm+1 (IJ.)
with
-1 (m+2)/2 for m even .

Proof: w = 0(A(tih-ti) + M(~h-~»

We set
Integrating by parts we find
. 1 (2' I)
(w-Jw+JIJ.W'X)j = (-I)J- f w'(s>x J- (s)ds + JIJ.wJX •

Now, (d/ds)2j-1 maps {X € S2j_1 (IJ.) IJx = O} isomorphically

onto {E € S (IJ.)I JE = O} , the piecewise constants with mean
value zero. 0 Choose

J-h~1 for t € [tJ/._I,tJ/.) where hI. = tJ/.-tR,_1 •

1
-I for where
ER,(t) t € [tR"t HI ) h H1 =t H1 -tR, •
:H1
elsewhere

and the corresponding X· € S2R,_I(IJ.)

JXR, = 0 • Then J
 431

if and only if h~I(w(x~) - w(x~_I)) = K for all ~ .

But our functions are periodic, so

hence, K=O . Therefore

const.

But E S2j-1 (lI) , too and

JlIw = (w - Jw + J lIw, I) j = 0
implies w(x~) = 0 for all ~ and vice versa.

Thus w(x~) 0 for all t if and only if

(w-Jw+JlIW'X)j 0 for all X E S2j_1 (lI) o

For odd m, Equations (4.3) are very similar to Equations
(1.5) and a slight modification of the proofs of Theorem 1.1
and Theorem 3.1 imply with Inequality (1.7) Inequalities
(1.8), (1.9) for the modified Galerkin Equations (4.3). For
details see [2].

For even m up to now such a simple approach is not

available and in [4] and [43] we perform an expli~it complete
Fourier analysis for Equations (4.3) to express uh-~ expli-
citly. The results can partly be collected in the following
theorem.

Theorem 4.2 [2],[4],[43]: Let A be a strongZy eZZiptic

pseudodifferentiaZ operator of order 2a and Zet for the
system
+
Au + Mw
+ +
= f , (MT ii,1)
o
= b
hoZd uniqueness. Then there exists ho > 0 such that the coZZo-
cation Equations (4.1) are uniqueZy soZvabZe for every con-
tinuous f and every 0 < h ~ ho . Moreover we have
(4.4)

I I
p:t>ovided 2a ~ r ~ t ~ m+ 1 , r < m+"2 ' 2a +"2 < t in case of
the smoothZy graded meshes and 2a ~ r ~ a+j ~ t ~ m+1 , 2a < m
in case of odd m and arbit~y famiZies II = b of meshes
Concluding remarks: From the results by Prossdorf and by
Schmidt [40],[44] for uniform meshes it follows that the strong
ellipticity condition for A is not only sufficient but also
necessary for the optimal order convergence of spline collo-
cation on the above a as well as spline Galerkin methods if
n=2 • Schmidt also modifies the choice of collocation points
to approximate a much wider class of operators A.

Based on Estimate (4.4), on the inverse assumption and the

Strang lemma, one can again analyze the numerical integrations
needed for the implementation of Equations (4.1) and reduce the
computational work with grid point quadratures similarly as for
the Galerkin collocation in Section 3 • For details see [3J,
[50J •

REFERENCES

]. Agranovich, M.S. (1977) Spectral properties of diffraction

problems. In: The General Method of Eigen-Vibrations in
Diffraction Theory (ed. N.N. Vojtovich, B.S. Katzenelenbaum,
A.D. Sivov) (Russian) Moscow: Nauka.
2. Arnold, D. and Wendland, W.L. (1983) On the asymptotic
convergence of collocation methods. Mathematics of
Computation 4]: In print.
3. Arnold, D. and Wendland, W.L. (1982) Collocation versus
Galerkin procedures for boundary integral methods.
In: Boundary Element Methods in Engineering (ed. C.A.
Brebbia). Berlin' Heidelberg· New York: Springer Verlag,
1982: 18-33.
4. Arnold, D.N. and Wendland, W.L. (1983) The convergence of
spline collocation for strongly elliptic equations on
curves: In preparation.
5. Babutka, I. and Aziz, K.A. (1972) Survey lectures on the
mathematical foundations of the finite element method.
In: The Mathematical Foundation of the Finite Element
Method with Applications to Partial Differential Equations
(A.K. Aziz ed., Academic Press, New York) : 3-359.
6. Bonnemay, P. (1979) Equations integrales pour l'elasticite
plane. These.de 3eme cycle, Universite de Paris VI.
7. Bruhn, G. and Wendland, W.L; (1967) Uber die naherungsweise
LBsung von linearen Funktionalgleichungen. In: Funktional-
analysis, ·Approximationstheorie, Numerische Mathematik
(ed. L. Collatz and H. Ehrmann) Intern. Sere Num. Math. 7
Birkhauser Basel: 136-]64.
8. Cea, J. (1964) Approximation variationelle des problemes aux
limites. Ann. Inst. Fourier, Grenoble, 14: 345-444.
9. Ciarlet, P.G. (1978) The Finite Element Method for Elliptic
Problems. Amsterdam - New York - Oxford, North 'Holland •
10. Costabel, M. and Stephan, E. (1983) A direct boundary inte-
gral equation method for transmission problems. J. Math.
Anal. Appl. (Preprint 753, FB. Math., Technische Hochschule
Darmstadt, 1983): In print.
 433

II. Cos.tabel, M. and Wendland, W. L. (1983) Strong ellipticity

of boundary integral operators: In preparation.
12. Cruse, T.A. (1973) Application of the boundary integral
equation method to three-dimensional stress analysis.
Compo Struct. 3: 309-369.
13. Fischer, T. (1982) An integral equation procedure for the
exterior three-dimensional viscous flow. Integral
Equations and Operator Theory,S: 490-505.
14. Fischer, T., Stephan, E., Wendland, W.L. (1984) Some
boundary integral operators of mathematical physics and
their pseudodifferential operator properties: In preparation.
15. Giroire, J. (1978) Integral equation methods for exterior
problems for the Helmholtz equation. Centre de mathematiques
appliquees, Ecole Poly technique, Palaiseau, France, Rapport
interne No. 40.
16. Giroire, J. and Nedelec, J.C. (1978) Numerical solution of an
exterior Neumann problem using a double layer potential.
Mathematics of Computation, 32: 973-990.
17. Ha Duong, T. (1979) La methode de Schenck pour la resolution
numerique du probleme de radiation acoustique. E.D.F.,
Bull. Dir. Etudes Recherches, Ser. C., Math., Informatique,
Service Informatique et Mathematiques Appl., 2: 15-50.
18. Ha Duong, T. (1979) A finite element method for the double-
layer potential solutions of the Neumann exterior problem.
Centre de Math. Appl., Ecole Poly techniques, Palaiseau,
France, Rapport interne No. 50 .
19. Hammerlin, G. and Schumaker, L.L. (1980) Procedures for
kernel approximation and solution of Fredholm integral
equations of the second kind. Numer. Math. 34: 125-141.
20. Hess, J.L. and Smith, A.M.O. (1967) Calculation of potential
flow about arbitrary bodies. In: Progress in Aeronautical
Sciences (ed. D. Kuchemann) Pergamon, Oxford 8: ]-138.
21. Hess, J.L. (1968) Calculation of acoustic fields about
arbitrary three-dimensional bodies by a method of surface
source distributions based on certain wave number
expansions. Report DAC 66901, Mc Donnell Douglas.
22. Hildebrandt, St. and Wienholtz, E. (1964) Constructive
proofs of representation theorems in separable Hilbert
space. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 17: 369-373.
23. Hormander, L. (1966) Pseudo-differential operators and
non-elliptic boundary problems. Annals Math. 83: 129-209.
24. Hsiao, G.C., Kopp, P., Wendland, W.L. (1980) A Galerkin
collocation method for some integral equations of the
first kind. Computing, 25: 89-130.
 434
25. Hsiao, G.C., Kopp, P. and Wendland, W.L. (1983) Some
applications of a Galerkin collocation method for integral
equations of the first kind. Math. Meth. Appl. Sc. (Preprint 768,
FB. Math.,Technische Hochschule Darmstadt, 1983): To appear.
26. Hsiao, G.C. and Wendland, W.L. (1981) The Aubin-Nitsche
lemma for integral equations. J. Integral Equations 3:
299-315.
27. Hsiao, G.C. and Wendland, W.L. (1983) On a boundary integral
method for some exterior problems in elasticity. Dokl. Akad.
Nauk SSR. (Preprint 769, FB. Math., Technische Hochschule
Darmstadt, 1983): In print.
28. Ivanov, V.V. (1976) The Theory of Approximate Methods and
their Application to the Numerical Solution of Singular
Integral Equations. Leyden: Noordhoff Int. Publ.
29. Jaswon, M.A. (1981) Some theoretical aspects of boundary
integral equations. In: Boundary Element Methods (ed. C.A.
Brebbia). Berlin· Heidelberg· New York, Springer-Verlag,
1981: 399-411.
30. Kohn, J.J. and Nirenberg, L. (1965) On the algebra of pseudo-
differential operators. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 18: 269-305.
31. Kupradze, V.D. (1965) Potential Methods in the Theory of
Elasticity. Jerusalem: Israel Program Scientific Transl • .
32. Kupradze, V.D., Gegelia, T.G., Basheleishvili, M.O.,
Burchuladze, T.V. (1979) Three-Dimensional Problems of the
Mathematical Theory of Elasticity and Thermoelasticity.
Amsterdam: North Holland.
33. Lamp, U., Schleicher, T., Stephan, E., Wendland, W.L. (1983)
Galerkin collocation for an improved boundary element
method for a plane mixed boundary value problem. Computing.
(Preprint 743, FB. Math., Technische Hochschule Darmstadt,
1983): To appear.
34. MacCamy, R.C. and Stephan, E. (1983) A boundary element
method for an exterior problem for three-dimensional
Maxwell's equations. Applicabel Analysis (Preprint 681,
FB. Math., Technische Hochschule Darmstadt, 1982):
In print.

35. Nedelec, J.C. (1976) Curved finite element methods for the
solution of singular integral equations on surfaces in
R3. - Compo Math. Appl. Mech. Eng., 8: 61-80.
36. Nedelec, J.C. (1977) Approximation par potentiel de double
cuche du probleme de Neumann exterieur. C.R. Acad. Sci.
Paris, Ser. A 286: 616-619.
37. Nedelec, J.C. (1977) Approximation des Equations Integrales
en Mechanique et en Physique. Lecture Notes, Centre de Math.
Appliquees, Ecole Poly technique, Palaiseau, France.
38. Nede1ec, J.C. (1982) Integral equations with nonintegrab1e
kernels. Integral Equations and Operator Theory, 5:
502-572.
39. Nede1ec, J.C. and P1anchard, J. (1973) Une methode
variationne11e d'e1ements finis pour 1a resolution
numerique d'un prob1eme exterieur dans lR 3 • R.A.I.R.O.
7, R3: 105-129.
40. Prossdorf, S. and Schmidt, G. (1981) A finite element
collocation method for singular integral equations.
Math. Nachr. 100: 33-60.
41. Richter, G.R. (1978) Superconvergence of piecewise poly-
nomial Galerkin approximations for Fredholm integral
equations of the second kind. Numer. Math., 3]: 63-70.
42. Rizzo, F.J. (1967) An integral equation approach to
boundary value problems of classical elastostatics.
Quart. Appl. Math.,25: 83-95.
43. Saranen, J. , Wendland, W.L. (]982) On the asymptotic
convergence of collocation methods with spline functions
of even degree. Mathematics of Computation. (Preprint
700, FB. Math., Technische Hochschule Darmstadt, 1982):
To appear.
44. Schmidt, G. (1983) The convergence of Galerkin and collo-
cation methods with splines for pseudodifferential
equations on closed curves. Zeitschrift f. Angew. Analysis:
In print.
45. Stephan, E. (1982) Solution procedures for interface
problems in acoustics and e1ectromagnetics. In: Theoretical
Acoustics and Numerical Techniques (ed. P. Filippi.
Summer School Udine 1982) Springer, Lecture Notes in
Physics: In print.
46. Stephan, E., Wendland, W.L. (1976) Remarks to Galerkin
and least squares methods with finite elements for general
elliptic problems. Springer Lecture Notes Math. 564:
461-471 and Manuscripta Geodaetica J: 93-123.
47. Taylor, M. (1981) Pseudodifferential Operators. Princeton:
University Press.
48. Watson, J.O. (1979) Advanced implementation of the boundary
element method' for two- and three-dimensional 'elastostatics.
In: Developments in Boundary Element Methods] (ed. P.K.
Banerjee and R. Butterfield) London: Appl. Science Pub1.
LTD: 31-63.
49. Wendland, W.L. (1980) On Galerkin methods for integral
equations of elliptic boundary value problems. In: Numerical
Treatment of Integral Equations (ed. J. Albrecht and
L. Collatz), Intern. Ser. Num. Math. 53, Birkh§user Basel:
244-275.
50. Wendland, W.L. (1981) Asymptotic accuracy and convergence.
In: Progress in Boundary Element Methods (ed. C.A. Brebbia),
London • Plymouth, Pentech Press: 289-313:
51. Wendland, W.L. (1982) Bounda~y element methods and their
asymptotic convergence. In: Theoretical Acoustics and
Numerical Techniques. (Ed. P. Filippi, Summer School
Udine 1982), Springer, Lecture Notes in Physics, (Preprint
690, FB. Math., Technische Hochschule Darmstadt, 1982):
In print.
Subject Index

Advantages and disadvantages of BEM 144

Anisotropy 124

Approximate solutions 5

Asymptotic convergence 417, 421

BEASY system 141, 147

Boundary conditions 4, 26
heat transfer 112
non-linear 184
wave equation 194

Boundary singularities 96

CAD coupling 163

Choice of element type 172

Collocation method 9

Composite or subregion domains 98, 123,

365,410

Computer implementation 166, 169

Constant elements 128, 131

Corrosion protection 182

Crack tip stress analysis 363

Debond stress analysis 391

Direct formulations 63, 69, 85

Discretization 41, 88, 91

102, 300

Dislocations 370

Double-layer formulations 61, 75

Elasticity problems
axisymmetric problems 221
body forces 239
thermal loading 242
three dimensional problems 218
two dimensional problems 209

Elastodynamics 276

Elastoplasticity 413
438
Elastostatics problems 177

Element discretization 172

Error analysis 417

Flow problems 86

Fracture mechanics stress analysis 355, 377

Free vibrations 287

Functional analysis 2, 23

Functions, continuity 14

Fundamental solutions
choice of 327
for cracks 345
heat conduction 328
Laplace's equation 37
plane e1astostatics 335
plate bending 318
two dimensional elasticity 210

Galerkin method 10, 419

Garding's inequality 418

Gaussian integration 43, 50

Geomechanics 397

Gravitational loads 240

axisymmetric problems 250
three dimensional problems 248
two dimensional problems 244

Green's formula 26, 77, 90

Heat transfer 111, 293

steady state conduction 113

Heat transfer applications 153, 159

Indirect formulations 66, 85

Inverse problems 19

Isoparametric elements 127

Laplace's equation 177

Linear elements 128, 131

Numerical integration 121, 127, 13.

302, 307
 439
Plate bending problems 315
cracks in 345

Poisson's equation 36, 121

Postprocessing 160

Potential problems 85
axisymmetric 101, 105
three dimensional 101
two dimensional 85

Potential wave equation 193

axisymmetric elasticity 222
three dimensional elasticity 219

Preprocessing 160

Quadratic elements 50, 130, 133

Rigid body fields 82

Rotational inertia 140

axisymmetric problems 251
three dimensional problems 248
two dimensional problems 245

Scalar wave equation

three dimensional case 191
two dimensional case 269

Simple-layer formulations 57, 71

Somig1iana's formula 82

Soil structure interaction 405

Special elements 185

Steady state thermal loading 242

axisymmetric problems 253
three dimensional problems 249
two dimensional problems 246

Stress analysis applications 153

Stress intensity factors 359

Thermoviscoelastic problems 379

Time dependent diffusion 262, 294

Time dependent potential problems 262, 293

Time dependent problems 261

Time marching procedures 308

 440

Variational formulation 28

Velocities and pressures 195

Weak formulations 12
Weighted residual formulations 1, 7, 32