INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR NUMERICAL METHODS IN ENGINEERING, VOL.

11, 1753-1768 (1977)

AN ADVANCED BOUNDARY INTEGRAL EQUATION

METHOD FOR THREE-DIMENSIONAL
THERMOELASTICITY

F. J. RIZZO AND D. J. SHIPPY

Department of Engineering Mechanics, University ofKentucky, Lexington,Kentucky, U.S.A.

SUMMARY
The features of an advanced numerical solution capability for boundary value problems of linear,
homogeneous, isotropic, steady-state thermoelasticity theory are outlined. The influence on the stress field
of thermal gradient, or comparable mechanical body force, is shown to depend on surface integrals only.
Hence discretization for numerical purposes is confined to body surfaces. Several problems are solved, and
verification of numerical procedures is obtained by comparison with accepted results from the literature.

INTRODUCTION
The Boundary Integral Equation (BIE) method, for numerical solution of boundary value
problems in classical elastostatics, has achieved a considerable level of development since its
beginnings for plane problems in 1967.’ Indeed, advances in sophistication of numerical
procedures in connection with the BIE plus an enlarged sphere of application (cf Reference 2),
are responsible for its being regarded as a companion to, or in some cases, a viable alternative for
more conventional methods of numerical analysis for linear boundary value problems. Principal
among the more conventional methods is, of course, the Finite Element (FE) method.
Reference 2, together with the cited references therein, provides a reasonably up-to-date
indication of some of the important features of the BIE, some aspects of its analytical
foundations, its scope, and some comparisons with other methods, again, principally, with the
FE .
The purpose of the present work is to describe the features of an advanced version of the BIE
for linear, homogeneous, isotropic, steady-state thermoelasticity. Since the BIE for three-
dimensional problems has much in common with the FE for plane or shell problems, as regards
representation of functions and body modelling, it is perhaps no surprise that some of what
makes the present work ‘advanced’ involves certain ideas developed largely for use with the FE.
The first giant step in this regard, for three-dimensional elastostatic problems, was taken by
L a ~ h a twhose
~ ’ ~ numerical methods we broadly follow here. However, the indication of success
in three-dimensions and promise for additional levels of sophistication were firmly established
~ . ~ outstanding feature of the BIE, of course, regardless of numerical
earlier by C r u ~ e . The
methods employed in connection with it, is that the dimension of the problem is reduced by one,
since the boundary (surface) of the relevant body is dealt with exclusively. This is true, as’we
presently demonstrate, even in the presence of thermal gradient and certain common body force
distributions.

Received 9 July 1976

Revised 28 October 1976
01977 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

1753
1754 F. J. RIZZO AND D.J. SHIPPY

Specifically we obtain the stress distribution in the vicinity of the stress-raising irregularity of
two bars in simple (isothermal) tension, and compare results for the ‘stress-concentration’ with
accepted results in the literature. These comparisons give verification of the present capability to
deal with significant spatial stress gradients.
Next, we illustrate how the influence of steady-state temperature in thermo-mechanical
problems is made to depend on surface values only of temperature and heat flux. Verification of
this capability is obtained by obtaining the stress distributions due to radial and thickness
varying temperature in a hollow cylinder and again comparing with accepted solutions.
It is worth noting that the preceding remarks concerning the steady-state temperature are
equally applicable to any harmonic mechanical body force potential, e.g. constant gravitational
potential. More generally, if the Laplacian of the relevant potential is a non-zero constant, such
as occurs in:
1. Centrifugal body force due to fixed-axis rotation, or
2. Unsteady temperature distributions with constant time derivative of temperature through-
out the body, the preceding remarks also apply.
To verify this type of problem we choose the thickness-varying temperature mentioned above to
have this character.

THE FUNDAMENTAL BOUNDARY INTEGRAL EQUATION

Somigliana’s boundary identity (cfi References 6, 3), relating surface traction ti, surface
displacement ui, and body force bi,pertaining to an arbitrary equilibrated stress state for a body
B with surface S,may be written?

cij(P)Ui(P)+ IS
[Ui(Q)Tj(P, Q)-ti(Q)Uj(p, Q)I d s ( Q ) = j bi(q)Uj(P, 4) m(q) (1)
B

in which P, Q E S,q E B; Uiiand Zj are the fundamental Kelvin tensors, displayed in Appendix
I; and cij is a matrix of numbers dependent only upon the local geometry of S at P. In practice, cii
is most expediently calculated by noting that an arbitrary rigid body translation of B is a solution
of (l),so that cii is expressible explicitly as an integral of Zj over S. If S has a unique tangent
plane at P, cij = Sij/2, as
The significanceof equation (1)and the essence of the BIE method of solution for elastostatics
is as follows: Specify bi throughout B plus some portion of the pair ui, ti on S corresponding to a
well posed boundary valve problem, e.g., ui prescribed on S (displacement problem), or ti
prescribed on S (traction problem), or ui prescribed on part of S with ti prescribed on the
remaining part (mixed problem), etc. Following such prescription, solve equation (l), by
numerical means generally, for that portion of the surface pair ui, ti not initially prescribed. Once
this is done, the solution for displacement or stress at any interior point p of B may be obtained,
in terms of the surface pair ui, ti and, of course, bi, by comparatively simple quadrature using an
interior version of Identity (1)(cfiReferences 3,6) and its first derivatives at p.$ However, as is
frequently the case, values of ti on portions of S are directly the quantities of interest and there is

t StandardCartesian Tensor Analysisis used. Latin subscriptshave the range 1,2,3.Conditionsnecessaryand sufficient
for the existenceof improper and/or singular integrals as written are assumed here, et. seq. The reader concernedwith
questions of rigour in connection with multidimensional singular integral equations is referred to the classical
literature.
$ Although data of interest for the present example problems did not require its use, the mentioned interior identity
along with the essential aspectsof the numerical treatment of it and its first derivativesare included,for completeness,
in Appendix 11.
 ADVANCED BOUNDARY INTEGRAL EQUATION METHOD 1755

no need to refer to the interior of B. This is true, for example, if B is defined such that a portion of
its S passes through points where ui is known (e.g. zero, a rigid support) and the ti are identical
with the three components of the stress field of greatest interest at points of greatest interest.
Further, if the problem at hand possesses one or more planes of symmetry which pass through
points of most interest an appropriate portion of B may be dealt with, and suitable mixed
boundary data prescribed, so that the ti on the planes of symmetry are again the desired
quantities. The latter is the case for the example problems to be treated, as will be discussed in
more detail subsequently.
Clearly, however, the presence of body force in equation (1)removes the problem from the
‘boundary only’ category, assuming that the B integral cannot be analytically performed.
+
However, as shown in Reference 7 (cfialso Reference 8), if there exists a scalar such that

bi = -(6.,i with +,ii = ko

ko constant
the B integral in (1) is convertible to an S integral according to

in which xj are Cartesian co-ordinates of point Q; n i ( Q ) are components of the unit normal n at
Q and r = lQ -PI; po is a constant (see Appendix I) involving the shear modulus and Poisson’s
ratio. Thus if (6. can be found (an easy matter for the constant gravitational potential or
centrifugal body-force potential) the problem is indeed in the ‘boundary only’ category. Further,
if a steady-state temperature distribution 8 is present throughout B, the familiar body-force
, ~the present context, reduces to the mere addition of y 8 ( Q ) to +(a)
analogy of G ~ o d i e rin
wherever +(a)appears in equation (3).t
Thus with the above modifications,the fundamental thermoelastic boundary integral formula
becomes

and is amenable to a systematic ‘boundary only’ numerical treatment. Specifically, in two of the
example problems to follow involving a circular cylinder, we choose (6. = 0, i.e. no mechanical
body force; but we choose two 8 distributions, one, steady-state, with radial variation only, and
another, non-steady (ko# 0), with depth variation only (see examples for specific 8’s chosen).
Thus, the important features of the conversion’process indicated in equation (3) and the right
side of (4) are illustrated.

t y is an appropriate thermoelastic constant. See Appendix I.

1756 F. J. RIZZO AND D.J. SHIPPY

NUMERICAL PROCEDURES
To implement the solution strategy outlined above we first discretize the surface S of B into a
total number m of surface elements of either quadrilateral or triangular shape as shown in
Figure l(a) and locate eight or six nodes, respectively, on each element. The Cartesian
co-ordinates xS of each node are specified, and the Cartesian co-ordinates of a non-nodal point
of an element are assumed to be given by (cf. References 3, 4)

I€.

Figure 1. Quadrilateral and triangularsurface elements

in which W(5)are second-order shape functions of intrinsic co-ordinates ([)= (&&) listed in
detail in Appendix 1. We use one set Mg for quadrilateral shapes and another set M$ for
triangular shapes. Next we assume that any of the functions of Q alone in equation (4), i.e.,
+
ui, ti - +ni, + 78, etc. varies over the elements according to

4 (5)= M U(5M" (6)

where 9" is the nodal value of the particular variable at issue and the shape functions are
identical to those used in equation (5). Based on the discretizing assumptions, formula (4)
becomes,

Cii(pv)ui V'v) + uS'

I,
M" (S)Tij(pq,Q(OV(5)d5

-flyu jsuM"(S)Ui(pv,Q(O)J(t)
d5 =F O @ " ~ I su
w(Oar,(pw
an Q(5)V(t)
d5
 ADVANCED BOUNDARY INTEGRAL EQUATION METHOD 1757

in which ai= ti - 4 n i ; 0= 4 + ye; and where the quantities 4auhave the meaning 'the value of
4 at local node a on surface element S,'. Note that (T = 1 , 2 , . . . ,m and 7 = 1 , 2 , . . . ,n where n
is the total number of nodes; summation is implied on all repeated subscripts; J(Q) is simply the
ratio dS(Q)/& which more explicitly is
J(t)
= la1 x 821 (8)
where the components of the vectors a, in the cross product are given by

Note that since a node always lies on at least two surface elements and frequently more, 4", is
the same quantity for several sets of Values of a and (T.This little bookkeeping problem, when
addressed, leads to viewing the system of equations (7) in the following matrix form:
Au-Bll=C@-D@,+E (10)
In equation (lo), the column matrices u and ll are 3n elements long and contain the elements
uf, a?,p = 1,2, . . . ,n, which are, respectively, displacement and 'augmented' traction compo-
nents at global node number p ; 0 and 0 , are n elements long and contain Op,dOP/an,i.e., the
surface contribution of temperature and body force potential and normal derivatives of these
quantities, as indicated above, at the nodes. The square matrices A and B are 3n x 3 n elements
in size and contain the integral coefficients of u and ll as indicated in equation (7). Similar
remarks hold for the n X 3n size matrices C and D. The column, E contains the 3 n values of the
last integral in equation (7) as indicated.
The previously outlined solution strategy when referred to equation (10) above amounts to
the following: Discretize the surface S of B into a number m of surface elements, and form and
store the matrices A, B, C, D, E. Specify the elements 0 and 0 , corresponding to known
temperature, heat flux?, and body force potential and its normal derivative at the nodes and
perform the indicated matrix multiplications to yield a single known vector on the right side of
equation (10). Next, specify a sufficient number of the elements u and t corresponding to a
well-posed elastostatics problem. Perform the remaining indicated matrix multiplications in
(10) involving known or specified quantities at this stage, and solve the system (10) for the
remaining unknowns, certain of which (certain elements of ll and hence t) are the desired
thermoelastic tractions,
Examination of equation (7) reveals that the elements of matrices A, B, C, D (and also E
except for the M" term) are sums of integrals of the type
a -
Iw= I, M a (t)Wq,
Q(t)Y(t)d 5 (11)

in which S, is a square or equilateral triangle as shown in Figure l(b). r is any of the tensor,
vector, or scalar kernel functions indicated in equation (7). Note that under the change of
variables inherent in the introduction of the shape functions (5), the surface elements S, are
mapped to a square or an equilateral triangle. The other ingredient, cij [re equation (l)], proves
also to be a sum of certain of the integrals of the type (11) by appeal to the rigid translation
solution of (1) as previously mentioned (see e.g. References 6 , 3 and equation (14) below). The

t A heat-transfer problem, in practice, may have to be solved separately t o obtain the necessary thermal input data on
the boundary. This, incidently, is readily done via the BIE using similar ideas." Much of the analvsis and the
computation is less formidable, however, due to the scalar character of the heat-transfer problem.
1758 F. J. RIZZO AND D. J. SHIPPY

rigid body motion is introduced prior to representing ui in terms of the shape functions (6),so
that the shape functions are explicitly absent in the integrals involved in the calculation of cifi
This differs slightly from the methods in References 3,4, is simpler, and possibly is a source of
improvement in accuracy.
Thus it is necessary to obtain a sufficiently accurate value for I&, by some numerical
integration scheme, to yield sufficiently accurate coefficient matrices A, B,etc. for an acceptable
solution to the relevant algebraic systems as described earlier. Apart from the numbers and
arrangements of elements m and nodes n,which are somewhat a function of the sophistication of
the representations for x i ( ( ) and 4 ( ( ) (here limited to the explicit quadratic forms (5) and (6))
and of course the character of the problem at hand, the manner of obtaining values for P , is the
crucial item in the whole process.
To deal with this item we broadly follow the methods of L k ~ h a tfor ~ ,elastostatics.
~ However,
in the interest of obtaining working programs for the type of problems illustrated here as a
primary consideration, we sacrifice to a large extent attention to the possible versatility and
efficiency in constructing such programs as is so impressively displayed in References 3, 4.
Rather we have attacked the calculation of the I:, and the manner of programming in a
somewhat more ad hoc manner. Nevertheless our programs work well for the present problems,
form the basis for more efficient and flexible programs, and have some features which we regard
as improvements for elastostatics, in addition, of course, to having the thermoelastic and
body-force capability.
To expand on these matters, note first that two distinct cases in the evaluation of G, arise:
(a) P,,&S, and
(b) p?lE su.
In case (b), note that since certain of the kernel functions are O(l/r2) and others at least O(l/r),
the integrands, while integrable, require special attention.
The first case, (a), is more straightforward. For this case we use a Gaussian quadrature formula
with weight function 1.0 to obtain

I&= Ism P ( P , , , ()d(=

A

p=1
A
f u2= l AE1)AP1)P(P,,, (?1)(?2)) (12)

and A:1), A?' are weight factors corresponding to the order h l , Az of the Gaussian quadrature
formula chosen."
~ ' ~ his choice of hl,h2 upon examination of what he regards as the most
L a ~ h a t bases
important property of P,namely, the l / r 2 behaviour for certain I'. He outlines a scheme
whereby, according to the error criterion proposed in Reference 10 based on the derivatives of
the entire integrand P, he chooses not only h l , A 2 , but how to subdivide his square (Figure l(b))
into subelements. Thus he has the capability of choosing a pair hl, hz for each subelement and in
the process 'bunch his Gauss Points' in the region, he estimates, over which P has the most
variation. We decided to forego this measure of sophistication, not subdivide for case (a), and
determine a suitable pair h l , A 2 by experiment.
On the other hand, L a ~ h a tmaps
~ . ~ both quadrilateral and triangular surface elements to the
same square over which all his integrations are performed. There is an obvious degeneracy in
this process which, in our experience, even though handled effectively enough analytically, leads
to spurious variation in data associated with variations in the way nodes are numbered locally on
the triangle. That is, we found annoying antisymmetries in expected symmetric data attributable
 ADVANCED BOUNDARY INTEGRAL EQUATION METHOD 1759

only to which side of the square was degenerate and mapped to a triangle vertex. To combat this
we simply map quadrilaterals to squares and curvilinear triangles to equilateral triangles (Figure
1) for both cases (a) and (b). This, despite requiring another set of shape functions and type of
region to be integrated over, precludes the need for special transformations (Reference 3 pp.
110-1 13), and avoids preference for local numbering altogether.
For case (b), where P,, E S
, our methods again differ somewhat with References 3,4. The I*,
for this case require special attention analytically due to the singularities of the integrands, but
also one would expect that these elements should be calculated with extra attention to accuracy
since they represent contributions generally of greatest numerical size to the coefficient
matrices. Here we subdivide the square or triangle as shown in Figure 2 according to the location
of the point P,,. Next we introduce a local polar co-ordinate system, p, 4, such that our element
of area d[ in the [ space becomes p dp d4. The extra p in the new integrand, which is O(r)for
sufficiently small r, together with the fact that Ma(()is Ob)for node a # P,, and W ( [ ) ,-a, is
of the same order when node a = P,,, allows the integral to be evaluated using the same type of
Gaussian scheme as previously indicated. Here, however, the Gauss variables are explicitly p
and 4. The limits of integration over each subregion are as dictated by the various boundaries in
Figure 2. Note, W ([)'is replaced by M a(6)- ,a, when node a = P,,. This is dictated by the facts
first that (cfiReferences 6 , 3 )

Cii(P)+ C
JAS
&(P, Q) ds(Q)= - [ Tj(P,Q) dS(Q) e k i j ( P )
JS, .
(14)

Figure 2. Subdivisionof elements for case when P, E S,

where AS represents a portion of S on which P lies and S, is the remaining part of S.Thus
equation (1) may be written (with bi = 0 for illustration) in the form

JAS

+ I, ui(Q)T,(P, Q) dS(Q)-[
S
ti(Q)Uij(P,Q) dS(Q)= 0. (15)

Therefore kij(P),rather than cij(P)directly, is in fact calculated from the S, integral in (14) and
W(i$)-Sa,, replaces W ( ( in) the integral over AS in (15) for a = P,, once the shape functions
are introduced.
1760 F.J. RIZZO AND D. J. SHIPPY

Lachat’s counterpart of our polar co-ordinates is the introduction of a linear transformation

(+ j? such that the product of all his Jacobian functions and other elements of his integrand yield
a composite integrand which also admits integration by Gaussian formulas with weight function
1.0. Once again he is more flexible in his subelementing process than we choose to be, although
we feel that our polar system is conceptually more appealing in dealing with the singularities.
Further, we feel that it might be somewhat easier to implement. However, the question of
accuracy of I:u by one method over the other, for a given number of Gauss points, remains open
at this time.
Clearly, based on the foregoing discussion, numerical values of all elements of the coefficient
matrices A, B, etc. can be calculated automatically by a digital computer upon specifying the
Cartesian co-ordinates of all the nodes on the surface S of a body under investigation, the
material parameters, and the Gauss parameters A A*.

THE TRANSVERSE HOLE-THRU-BAR PROBLEM

Consider the problem of a transverse hole in a solid circular bar in tension at infinity. Here, bar
= 5. For this and the
and hole radii are chosen to yield a predicted12stress concentration urnax/(+,-,
following problem the length dimension parallel to the load is truncated to a dimension sufficient
to have negligible effects on the solution near the hole. Actual modelling for the problem is
based on one-eighth of a finite length bar as shown in Figure 3. After some experimenting with
different discretization patterns and numbers of nodes, results are reported for the discretization
as shown in Figure 3 with m = 32 segments and n = 80 nodes. The Gauss parameters A l , A 2 are
chosen such that A X A 2 = 16 on each? element So or subelement of S, (Figures l(b) and 2).
Also, for this and subsequent problems, Young’s modulus is chosen for convenient scaling of
displacement variables. Except for one instance mentioned later, Poisson’s ratio is chosen$ to be
0.25.
The normal traction distribution on the bottom ‘cut’ face of the one-eighth bar was computed,
found to be reasonable insofar as accepted results for this distribution are a~ailable,’~ and was
found to equilibrate the applied load to within 1 per cent. Of most interest is the stress
concentration, the computed value of 5.33 for which is approximately 7 per cent higher than the
accepted’* value of 5.00. This peak occurs at approximately the correct location, i.e., on the
edge of the hole at 0.75R from the axis of the bar. The CPU time for this problem is 3 min 41 sec
on an IBM 370 model 165 computer.§

THE PLATE WITH STRAIGHT-THRU-HOLE

Alblas14 solves the problem of an infinite plate with finite thickness and a circular hole drilled
through the thickness, normal to the front and back surfaces, under uniaxial tension at infinity.
Results for a finite width plate are different, of course, and Peterson (Reference 12, Figure 129)
suggests a correction for finite width. However, this correction is based on a two-dimensional
analysis, i.e., ignoring stress variation through the plate thickness. Nevertheless, using such a
plane correction for this purpose is not at all irrational, yields reasonable corrections, and is
useful in the absence of something better.

t Actually, A , X A 2 = 3 X 3 for each of 3 subelements of a triangle for P,,E S, for a total of 27 Gauss points in such cases.
This is done to provide desired symmetry in the integration scheme.
$ Note that a value for Poisson’s ratio must be chosen in the present computational scheme regardlessof whether results
of interest are known to depend on it.
I Note comments on possible reductions in CPU time in discussion section.
 ADVANCED BOUNDARY INTEGRAL EQUATION METHOD 1761

Figure 3. Discretization pattern for bar with hole; modified boundary conditions: zero normal displacement and zero
shear traction on ‘cut surfaces’

Dimensions in this problem are chosen to check results with Alblas.14 Once again we model
one-eighth of the body as shown in Figure 4.Results for the normal-traction distribution on the
edge of the hole as a function of distance in the thickness direction through the plate are
obtained, corrected for finite width (Reference 12, Figure 129) as mentioned above, and
compared with Alblas’14 solution in Figure 5 . Another solution, using Poisson’s ratio Y = 0,
which corresponds to a ‘plane’problem, yields the (average) value (corrected for finite width) of
3.12 for the stress concentration. This compares favourably with the analytical result of 3-00.
Here, of course, no imperfection is present in the width correction since the problem v = 0 is, in
fact, plane. For both solutions, i.e., Y = 0 and Y = 0.25, rn = 30 segments, n = 78 nodes, hlh2 as
previously given, and CPU times are 3 min 20 sec each.
Another related problem similar in some respects to the reported ones above, i.e. that of a
circularly grooved circular bar in tension at infinity, was also solved. We were able to check the
accepted stress concentration (of about 4.5 for the dimensions chosen) to within 6 per cent using
a discretization pattern comparable to those above. We mention this problem in passing because
though it has axial symmetry, and is simpler, the challenge to our modelling procedure presented
by the intersection of the groove surface with the bar surface is considerable, and is met nicely.

TWO THERMOELASTIC PROBLEMS FOR A HOLLOW CYLINDER

Consider a hollow cylinder with inner and outer radii, a, 6, respectively, with height h. We
subject the cylinder to the steady-state temperature 8 ( p ) = C1+ Cz In p, a Ip Ib, where C1and
1762 F. J. RIZZO AND D. J. SHIPPY

Figure 4. Discretization pattern for plate with hole; modified boundary conditions:zero normal displacementand zero
shear traction on ‘cut surfaces’

o BIE
- Alblas

(A) Distancf (6)

Free surface Mid thickness

Figure 5. Variation of stress alongedge AB of hole in plate

 ADVANCED BOUNDARY INTEGRAL EQUATION METHOD 1763

Cz are conveniently chosen constants, i.e., CI = 1, C2 = -l/ln (0-4). The top and bottom
surfaces of the cylinder are held against normal displacement, while the lateral surfaces, though
not traction free, are subject to zero net force and moment. (See Reference 15, p. 290 for specific
traction distribution and associated analytical thermoelastic stress field with which we compare
results). We model one quarter of the cylinder as shown in Figure 6, with m = 24 segments and

Figure 6. Discretizationpattern for hollow cylinder problems;modified boundary conditions: zero normal displacem r
and zero shear traction on ‘cut surfaces’

n = 74 nodes. Using a = 0-4, b = 1.0, h = 1.0 with convenient values for all other relevant
parameters, numerical results for values of thermal stress and displacement compared with
expected analytical values are as reported in Table I.
Using the same geometrical, physical and discretization parameters and pattern, we now
subject the cylinder to the temperature distribution 8 ( z )= (l/h2)[h2- z 2+ h z ] ,0 5 z 5 h. Here
the top and bottom surfaces of the cylinder are traction free and hence free to warp. The lateral
surfaces, while again not traction free, are subject to a specific traction distribution (see
Reference 15, p. 278) with zero net force and moment. Note V28= d28/dz2 = -2d0/h2 # 0 here,
so that in equation (3) if we let $ = y e and ko= yV28, the E term in equation (10) is suitably
determined. Results for relevant values of thermal stress and displacement are as reported in
Table 11.
Table I. Results for thermoelasticcylinderwith radial temperaturevariation

Radial Transverse Axial

Co-ordinate displacement stress stress

P BIE Exact BIE Exact BIE Exact

0.40 0.325 0.322 0.837 0.857 0-198 0.215
0.55 0.347 0.346 0.262 0.254 -0.237 -0.248
0-70 0.454 0.453 -0.088 -0.082 -0.610 -0.599
0.85 0.615 0.611 -0.302 -0.307 -0.884 -0.882
1.00 0.807 0.806 -0.473 -0.474 -1.116 -1.118
1764 F. J. RIZZO AND D. J. SHIPPY

Table 11. Results for thermoelastic cylinder with axial temperature variation

0.70 0-468 0.467 -0.246 -0.245 -0.452

1.00 0.670 0.667 -0.500 -0.500 -0.439
0.25 0.40 0-368 0-367 0.247 0.248 -0.356 -0.361
0.70 0.643 0.642 0.082 0.083 -0.349
1.00 0.917 0.917 -0.173 -0.172 -0.346
0.50 0.40 0.467 0.467 0.586 0.587 -0.124 -0.111
0.70 0.818 0.817 0.420 0.422 -0.119
1.00 1.170 1.167 0.164 0.167 -0.103
0.75 0.40 0.569 0-567 0.882 0.884 0-319 0.305

1.00
0.70
1.00
0.40
0.993
1.418
0.667
0.992
1.417
0.667
0.717
0.460
1.084
0.719
0.464
1.087
0.319
0.319
0.883
I
0.889
0-70
1.00
1.170
1.672
1.167
1.667
0.920
0.661
0.922
0.667
0.883
0.891 I

For each of the above problems, the Gauss parameters A 1, A2 are chosen as mentioned earlier
and the CPU times are 2 min 31 sec and 2 min 52 sec, respectively. All computations in this
paper are done using single-precision arithmetic.

DISCUSSION
Motivation for the choice of the above illustrative problems is perhaps of interest. The authors
are presently engaged in the analysis of thermal stress in the vicinity of cooling holes in
transpiration-cooled aircraft engine turbine blades where temperature distributions varying
‘radially away’ from a hole and along the axis of a hole are at issue. Mechanical traction and
centrifugal body force are also present. Thus the above problems, though quite idealized, indeed
sufficiently so to have available but non-trivial solutions, provide meaningful tests of and
experience with our working programs in a relevant setting.
Our primary purpose here is to show that the BIE as presently employed leads from
acceptable to good accuracy for a variety of non-trivial problems using relatively crude surface
modelling. Moreover, as indicated, surface discretization only is required for the class of
thermoelastic problems discussed. All indications are that numerical processes are very stable as
regards m and n and Gauss parameters h l , h2.
As regards storage, note that only the matrix of coefficients of the unknowns at the nodes (e.g.,
matrix A) need be formed and stored in a square array. The elements of other matrices of
coefficients to be multiplied by known quantities may be immediately multiplied by such
quantities as they are generated and stored in a column vector and not as separate square arrays
as implied earlier.
Relatively little attention was given in the creation of our working programs to CPU-time-
saving efficiency compared to what we understand can be achieved with proper removal of
 ADVANCED BOUNDARY INTEGRAL EQUATION METHOD 1765

known inefficiencies and with the proper attention to available software. Such attention is
currently being given, and we expect, for example, to achieve a 20 per cent saving in CPU time
with no sacrifice in accuracy by modifying our Gaussian elimination for the solution of our
algebraic equations. Among other possible program improvements are greater selectivity in
accuracy with which various I& are calculated as mentioned earlier. Something like lac hat'^^.^
scheme for deciding how many Gauss points are needed in calculating a given I&, but based on
something more general than just the behaviour of l / r * , is definitely needed. We have found
that often the behaviour of M a ( ( )and/or J ( ( ) in the integrand can dominate for certain I:-.
Indeed, a tentative experiment which reduced the Gauss Point resolution to nominally A X Az =
4 on those segments of the Hole-Thru-Bar problem for which J(5) was known to be relatively
constant, yielded a solution about as good as that reported in less than 2 min CPU time. Perhaps
a selectivity process (based on a connection between errors in certain columns of the coefficient
matrix and errors in most desired elements of the solution vector (cf. Reference 16 pp.
123-125)) is, if applicable, what is needed.
More sophisticated function representations than indicated in equation (6), insofar as cruder
modelling would accrue, would undoubtedly lead to some saving in CPU time. Subdividing the
body under investigation into perhaps two, three or more 'large finite elements' prior to
discretizing for BIE purposes and employing appropriate continuity conditions at the sub-
divided surfaces leads to larger but less-full matrices. Often the CPU time devoted to solving the
final algebraic system may thereby be reduced. L a ~ h a thas ~ ' ~a more complete discussion of
these optimization and time-saving questions. It suffices to remark here that resolution of
efficiency and optimization issues with the BIE are in their infancy, for three-dimensional
problems at any rate, though such issues are quite important for the ultimate competitiveness of
the BIE for such problems.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We gratefully acknowledge the support of this investigation by the Air Force Office of Scientific
Research under Grant No. AFOSR-75-2824. Thanks are due also to Dr. J. C. Lachat of
CETIM, Senlis, France, and Dr. T. A. Cruse of Pratt & Whitney Aircraft, E. Hartford,
Connecticut for a valuable conversation.

APPENDIX I
Fundamental kernel functions

Material parameters
pO=(l-2v)/16rp(1-v); v is Poisson's Ratio
E.L is Shear Modulus
y = 2pa(1+ v)/(l - 2v); a is the Coefficient of Thermal Expansion.
1766 F.J. RIZZO AND D. J. SHIPPY

Shape Functions
(a) Quadrilateral

(b) Triangular

APPENDIX I1
(a) Interior identity for displacement
Somigliana’s Identity for the elastic displacement field u i ( p ) for a body subject to surface
tractions ti(Q)and body force bi(q), p, q E B, Q E S, has the form

Employing the conversion process implied by equation (3) of the text, possible whenever
bi = -(# + with (4 + = ko,the above equation may be written [cf. equation (4)]
 ADVANCED BOUNDARY INTEGRAL EQUATION METHOD 1767

Based on the discretization assumptions in the text, formula (17) may be written (cf.
equation (7))

m r

in which Ri = ti - $ni, 0 = $ + 78 are defined for brevity as in the text. Thus if the displacement uj
is desired at any interior point p E B, it suffices to evaluate the above integrals and perform the
indicated summations upon specifying the co-ordinates of p. It is perhaps worth emphasizing
that all quantities before the integral signs in equation (18) are known following the solution of
the boundary equation (10). Further, p being an interior point, all evaluation of the P , [cf.
equation (ll)] falls under case (a) [cf.equation (12)], i.e. p & S, the more straightforward of the
two cases.

(b) Interior stresses

Based on Hooke's Law, the stress field Tjk is related to the displacement gradient field uj,k
according to

so that gradients of u j ( p ) uia equation (18) are required. Explicitly, since only the kernel
functions under the integrals are functions of p, the appropriate expression for the gradient field
uj,k(p) is identical with (18) with Uij,Tj,ar,j/dn,r,j and r replaced, respectively, by
UijJ', ar,,/dn, r,jk, and r,k. Subsequent insertion into equation (19) in a straightforward
manner yields (although we spare the reader the details) the appropriate interior stress field
directly. Once again since p & S, the integrands, in a typical integral, e.g.

Cus JSU M"(t)cj.k(P, Q ( O Y ( t ) d t (20)

are never singular so that the text discussion surrounding the Gaussian integration for case (a)
[cf.equation (12)] is again immediately applicable.
Although no data are reported in this paper based on the formulas in this Appendix, results
are expected to be good since the kernels which account for the body force and/or thermal
distribution, i.e. ar,jk/an,r,ik, and r,k introduce no power of l / r not already present in u i j , k and
z j , k which in turn have been dealt with most satisfactorily by Lachat.
We remark finally that the boundary stress field Tjk(P),P E S is obtainable completely from the
tangential derivatives of the displacement field Ui,s,,(P), 77 = 1 , 2 , the traction field ti(P) and
Hooke's Law in the usual fashion, see e.g. References 3, 17.

REFERENCES
1. F. J. Rizzo, 'An integral equation approach to boundary value problems of classical elastostatics', Quart. Appl.
Math. 25, 83-95 (1967).
1768 F. J. RIZZO AND D.J. SHIPPY

2. T. A. Cruse and F. J. Rizzo (Ed.), ‘Boundary-integral equation method: computational applications in applied
mechanics’, ASME Proc. AMD-Vol. 11 (1975).
3. J. C. Lachat, ‘A further development of the boundary integral technique for elastostatics’, Dissertation, University
of Southampton, England, 1975.
4. J. C. Lachat and J. 0. Watson, ‘Effective numerical treatment of boundary integral equations: a formulation for
three dimensional elastostatics’, Znt. J. num. Meth. Engng 10,991-1005 (1976).
5. T. A. Cruse, ‘Application of the boundary integral equation method to three dimensional stress analysis’, Computers
and Structures, 3, 509-527 (1973).
6. T. A. Cruse, ‘An improved boundary-integral equation method for three-dimensional elastic stress analysis’,
Computers and Structures, 4, 741-754 (1974).
7. M. Stippes and F. J. Rizzo, ‘A note on the body force integral of classical elastostatics’, Zeits. Ang. Math. Physik, to
appear.
8. T. A. Cruse, ‘Boundary-integral equation method for three-dimensional fracture mechanics analysis’, AFOSR-
TR-75-0813 Interim Report, 28 (1975).
9. J. N. Goodier, ‘Integration of thermoelastic equations’, Phil. Mag. 23, 1017-1023 (1937).
10. F. J. Rizzo and D. J. Shippy, ‘Thermomechanical stress analysis of advanced turbine blade cooling configuration’,
US-AFOSR Interim Scientific Report (1976).
11. A. H. Stroud and D. Secrest, Gaussian Quadrature Formulas, Prentice-Hall, New York, 1966.
12. R. E. Peterson, Stress Concentration Factors, Wiley-Interscience, N.Y., London, 1974.
13. M. M. Leven, ‘Quantitative three-dimensional photoelasticity’, Roc. SOC.Experimental Stress Analysis, 12,
157-171 (1955).
14. J. B. Alblas, ‘Theorie van de driedimensionale spanning-stoestand in een doorboordeplaat’, Dissertation,
Technische Hogeschool Delft, H. J. Paris, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (1957).
15. B. A. Boley and J. H. Weiner, Theory of Thermal Stresses, Wiley, New York, 1960.
16. A. S. Householder, The Theory of Matrices in Numerical Analysis, 1st edn., Blaisdell, New York, 1965.
17. T. A. Cruse and W. Vanburen, ‘Three-dimensional elastic stress analysis of a fracture specimen with an edge crack’,
Int. J. Frac. Mech. 7 , 1-15 (1971).