Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 130 (2021) 417–428

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enganabound

A fast multipole boundary element method based on higher order elements

for analyzing 2-D elastostatic problems
Hu Bin a, Niu Zhongrong a,∗, Li Cong b,∗, Hu Zongjun a
a
School of Civil Engineering, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei 230009, China
b
School of Civil Engineering, Anhui Jianzhu University, Hefei, 230601, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Keywords: A new fast multipole boundary element method (FM-BEM) is proposed to analyze 2-D elastostatic problems by
2-D elasticity using linear and three-node quadratic elements. The use of higher-order elements in BEM analysis results in more
BEM complex forms of the integrands, in which the direct Gaussian quadrature is difficult to calculate the singular and
Fast multipole
nearly singular integrals. Herein, the complex notation is first introduced to simplify all integral formulations
Higher order element
(including the near-field integrals) in FM-BEM for 2-D elasticity. In direct evaluation of the near-field integrals,
Nearly singular integral
the nearly singular integrals on linear elements are calculated by the analytic scheme, and those on quadratic
elements are evaluated by a robust semi-analytical algorithm. Numerical examples show that the present method
possesses higher accuracy than the FM-BEM with constant elements. The computed efficiency of FM-BEM with
higher order elements for analyzing large scale problems is still O(N), where N is the number of linear system of
equations. In particular, the proposed FM-BEM is available for solving thin structures.

1. Introduction
Boundary element method (BEM) has the advantage of easy mesh-
ing in modeling the structures with complicated geometries, but it had
been limited to solve models with several thousand degrees of freedom
(DOFs) for a long time. This is because the matrices produced by the con-
ventional BEM are dense and non-symmetric. Although the number (N)
of equations of the linear system is small, it requires O(N2 ) operations to
compute the coefficient matrices and O(N3 ) operations to solve the lin-
ear system using direct solvers. Once N becomes larger, the sizes of mem-
ory required for storing and the consumed CPU time can be enormous.
In the late 1980s, Rokhlin [1] and Greengard and Rokhlin [2] proposed
the original fast multipole method (FMM) to accelerate the evaluation of
the potential and force fields in systems involving large numbers of par-
ticles. With the help of FMM, the solution time and memory required in
BEM can be reduced from O(N2 ) to O(N), which makes reality for BEM
to solve large-scale problems. A comprehensive review of applications
of the fast multipole BEM (FM-BEM) was elaborated by Nishimura in
[3] and Liu in [4].
Over two decades, the FM-BEM has been applied for elasticity prob-
lems in many published literatures. Peirce and Napier [5] developed
a spectral multipole method to reduce the cost of the time and mem-
ory required in boundary element analysis for two dimensional (2-D)
elastostaic problem. Nishimura et al. [6] employed FM-BEM to solve
3-D crack problems. Yao et al. [7] presented the simulation of 2-D
elastic solids containing a large number of inclusions by using FM-
BEM. Wang and Yao [8] further simulated the effective mechanical
properties and stress distributions in 3-D particle-reinforced compos-
ites. Liu [9] proposed a new version FM-BEM for 2-D elasticity. In Ref.
[9], very compact and efficient multipole expansions for 2-D elastic-
ity are presented, which are similar to those for 2-D potential prob-
lems [10]. The FMM was also introduced into the dual BEM approaches
to analyze multi-domain problems [11] and multiple crack problems
[12]. More recently, Liu et al. [13] presented the propagation of mul-
tiple crack propagation in 2-D elastic solids by FM-BEM with constant
elements.
In FM-BEM, the evaluations of the integrals on boundary elements
related to a source point are distinguished into two cases. One is the
far-field integrals on elements which are far away from the source point.
The other is the near-field integrals on elements which are close to the
source point. For the former one, the node-to-node interactions in the
conventional BEM are converted to cell-to-cell interactions of far-field
translations by using the fast multipole expansions. For the latter one,
direct evaluation is still needed. Naturally, the singular integrals which
are the main issue of the conventional BEM, still arise in FM-BEM. For
boundary discretization using constant elements, all near-field integrals
including both singular and nearly singular integrals can be analytically
calculated. However, accurate evaluations of the singular and nearly

∗
Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: niu-zr@hfut.edu.cn (N. Zhongrong), licong@ahjzu.edu.cn (L. Cong).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enganabound.2021.06.001
Received 3 March 2021; Received in revised form 2 May 2021; Accepted 2 June 2021
Available online 26 June 2021
0955-7997/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
H. Bin, N. Zhongrong, L. Cong et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 130 (2021) 417–428

{[ ]
1
𝑇𝑖𝑗∗ (𝒙, 𝒚 ) = − 4𝜋(1− 𝜈)𝑟
(1 − 2𝜈)𝛿𝑖𝑗 + 2 𝜕𝜕𝑟𝑥 𝜕𝜕𝑟
𝑥
𝜕𝑟
𝜕𝑛
( )}𝑖 𝑗 (3)
𝜕𝑟 𝜕𝑟
− (1 − 2𝜈) 𝜕 𝑥 𝑛𝑗 − 𝜕 𝑥 𝑛𝑖
𝑖 𝑗

for the plane strain case. 𝜇 is the shear modulus and 𝜈 is the Poisson’s
ratio, 𝛿 ij is the Kronecker 𝛿. For 2-D problems, i, j = 1, 2. ni is the com-
ponent of the outward normal n (Fig. 1) in the direction of xi . r is the
distance between y and x,
√
𝑟 = (𝑥1 − 𝑦1 )2 + (𝑥2 − 𝑦2 )2 . (4)

Fig. 1. A 2-D elastic domain According to the linear elastic theory, the stress components in plane
strain case can be given by
⎧ [ ]
2𝜇 𝜕 𝑢 1 (𝒚 ) 𝜕 𝑢2 (𝒚 )
singular integrals on higher order elements require some special strate- ⎪𝜎11 (𝒚 ) = 1−2𝜈 (1 − 𝜈) 𝜕 𝑦1 + 𝜈 𝜕 𝑦2
gies. ⎪ [ ]
𝜕 𝑢1 (𝒚 ) 𝜕 𝑢 2 (𝒚 )
⎨𝜎12 (𝒚 ) = 𝜎21 (𝒚 ) = 𝜇 𝜕 𝑦2 + 𝜕 𝑦1 , (5)
It is known that the direct Gaussian quadrature fails to calculate
⎪ [ ]
2𝜇 𝜕 𝑢1 (𝒚 ) 𝜕 𝑢2 (𝒚 )
the nearly singular integrals in the conventional BEM. To deal with ⎪𝜎22 (𝒚 ) = 1−2𝜈 𝜈 𝜕 𝑦1 + (1 − 𝜈) 𝜕 𝑦2
⎩
the nearly singular integrals, the researchers have developed some nu-
merical techniques, such as regularization methods [14-16], adaptive where
element subdivision method [17-18], analytic and semi-analytical al- ⎧ 𝜕𝑢𝑖 (𝒚 ) 𝜕𝑈ij∗ (𝒙,𝒚 ) 𝜕𝑇 ∗ (𝒙,𝒚 )
gorithms [19-23], distance transformation [24-25], sinh transforma- ⎪ 𝜕𝑦1 = ∫Γ 𝜕𝑦1
𝑡𝑗 (𝒙)dΓ − ∫Γ ij𝜕𝑦 𝑢𝑗 (𝒙)dΓ
⎨ 𝜕𝑢 (𝒚 ) 𝜕𝑈ij∗ (𝒙,𝒚 )
1
𝜕𝑇ij∗ (𝒙,𝒚 ) , 𝒚 ∈ Ω, 𝒙 ∈ Γ. (6)
tion [26-28] and exponential transformation [29-32]. It is noteworthy
⎪ 𝑖 = ∫Γ 𝑡 𝑗 ( 𝒙) dΓ − ∫ 𝑢𝑗 (𝒙)dΓ
that Granados and Gallego [16] and Dehghan and Hosseinzadeh [22- ⎩ 𝜕𝑦2 𝜕𝑦2 Γ 𝜕𝑦2

23] have treated the singular and nearly singular integrals in the con- For the plane stress cases, 𝜈 is replaced by 𝜈/(1 + 𝜈) in Eqs. (2),
ventional BEM based on the complex space. In the complex space, the (3) and (5).
formulations of computing the nearly singular integrals were simple so Letting the source point y tend to the boundary Γ, the conventional
that less CPU time of implementing the conventional BEM with higher boundary integral equation (BIE) for 2-D elasticity is
order elements was taken. All techniques reviewed above were devel-
oped to address the nearly singular integrals in the conventional BEM. 𝑐ij (𝒚 )𝑢𝑗 (𝒚 ) + 𝑇ij∗ (𝒙, 𝒚 )𝑢𝑗 (𝒙)dΓ = 𝑈ij∗ (𝒙, 𝒚 )𝑡𝑗 (𝒙)dΓ, 𝒚 ∈ Γ, 𝒙 ∈ Γ, (7)
For thin structures, the nearly singular integrals on higher order ele- ∫Γ ∫Γ
ments need to be well addressed. To the author’s best knowledge, very
where cij (y) is a coefficient and 𝑐𝑖𝑗 (𝒚 ) = 12 𝛿𝑖𝑗 if Γ is smooth around the
few available literatures reported that FM-BEM with higher order ele-
source point y.
ments was used to analyze thin structures. At present, constant elements
In this study, both linear elements and three-node quadratic elements
are most frequently employed in FM-BEM because both near-field and
are used for discretization. For the discretized BIEs (1), (6) and (7), the
far-field integrals on constant elements are easily calculated. However,
integrals on a typical boundary element Γe can be written as
the computed efficiency of FM-BEM with constant elements is low for
[ 𝑡 ] [ ∗ ][ ]
∗ (𝒙, 𝒚 ) 𝑡 𝜄
curved boundaries or slender structures in bending, even if a large num-  1 (𝒚 ) 𝑈11 (𝒙, 𝒚 ) 𝑈12 1 𝑁 (𝜉) dΓ,
= (8)
ber of the constant elements are used. To promote the computing effi- 𝑡
 2 (𝒚 ) ∫Γ𝑒 𝑈21 (𝒙, 𝒚 ) 𝑈22 (𝒙, 𝒚 ) 𝑡𝜄2 𝜄
∗ ∗

ciency and accuracy, it is anticipated to develop FM-BEM with higher

order elements instead of constant elements. [ ] [ ∗ ][ ]
𝑢1 (𝒚 ) 𝑇11 (𝒙, 𝒚 ) ∗ (𝒙, 𝒚 ) 𝑢𝜄
𝑇12 1 𝑁 (𝜉) dΓ,
In this paper, we propose a new fast multipole boundary element = (9)
𝑢
 2 (𝒚 ) ∫Γ𝑒 𝑇21
∗ (𝒙, 𝒚 ) 𝑇22 (𝒙, 𝒚 ) 𝑢𝜄2 𝜄
∗
method with linear and quadratic elements for 2-D elasticity. The re-
mainders of the paper are organized as follows. In section 2, the original
boundary integral equations for 2-D elasticity are reviewed. The formu- [ ] ⎡ 𝜕𝑈11 (𝒙,𝒚 )
∗ 𝜕𝑈12
∗ (𝒙,𝒚 )
⎤[ 𝜄 ]
11𝑡 (𝒚 ) ⎢ 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦 ⎥ 𝑡1 𝑁 (𝜉) dΓ,
lations of evaluating the singular and nearly singular integrals on both = ∗ 1 ∗ (1𝒙,𝒚 ) (10)
21𝑡 (𝒚 ) ∫Γ𝑒 ⎢ 𝜕𝑈21 (𝒙,𝒚 ) 𝜕𝑈22 ⎥ 𝑡𝜄2 𝜄
linear and quadratic elements in FM-BEM are derived in Section 3 and ⎣ 𝜕𝑦1 𝜕𝑦1 ⎦
the scheme to calculate the far-field integrals with FMM is discussed in
Section 4. In Section 5, we focus on the framework of FM-BEM with [ ] ⎡ 𝜕𝑈11 (𝒙,𝒚 ) 𝜕𝑈12
⎤[ 𝜄 ]
∗ ∗ (𝒙,𝒚 )

the higher order elements. In Section 6, several numerical examples are 12𝑡 (𝒚 ) ⎢ ∗𝜕𝑦2 𝜕𝑦 ⎥ 𝑡1 𝑁 (𝜉) dΓ,
= ∗ (2𝒙,𝒚 ) (11)
provided to examine the accuracy and efficiency of FM-BEM with higher 22𝑡 (𝒚 ) ∫Γ𝑒 ⎢ 𝜕𝑈21 (𝒙,𝒚 ) 𝜕𝑈22 ⎥ 𝑡𝜄2 𝜄
⎣ 𝜕𝑦2 𝜕𝑦2 ⎦
order elements. Section 7 gives the conclusions of the present study.

[ ] ⎡ 𝜕𝑇11 (𝒙,𝒚 )
∗ 𝜕𝑇12
∗ (𝒙,𝒚 )
⎤[ 𝜄 ]
2. Boundary integral equations for 2-D elasticity 11𝑢 (𝒚 ) ⎢ 𝑢1
∗ (1𝒙,𝒚 ) ⎥
𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦
= ∗ 1 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉) dΓ, (12)
21𝑢 (𝒚 ) ∫Γ𝑒 ⎢ 𝜕𝑇21 (𝒙,𝒚 ) 𝜕𝑇22 ⎥ 𝑢𝜄
Consider a 2-D elastic domain Ω, as seen in Fig. 1. The integral equa- ⎣ 𝜕𝑦1 𝜕𝑦1 ⎦ 2
tion for any interior point inside Ω can be written as
[ ] ⎡ 𝜕𝑇11 (𝒙,𝒚 )
∗ 𝜕𝑇12
∗ (𝒙,𝒚 )
⎤[ 𝜄 ]
12𝑢 (𝒚 ) ⎢ 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦 ⎥ 𝑢1 𝑁 (𝜉) dΓ,
𝑢 𝑖 (𝒚 ) = 𝑈ij∗ (𝒙, 𝒚 )𝑡𝑗 (𝒙)dΓ − 𝑇ij∗ (𝒙, 𝒚 )𝑢𝑗 (𝒙)dΓ, 𝒚 ∈ Ω, 𝒙 ∈ Γ, (1) = ∗ 2 ∗ (2𝒙,𝒚 ) (13)
∫Γ ∫Γ 22𝑢 (𝒚 ) ∫Γ𝑒 ⎢ 𝜕𝑇21 (𝒙,𝒚 ) 𝜕𝑇22 ⎥ 𝑢𝜄2 𝜄
⎣ 𝜕𝑦2 𝜕𝑦2 ⎦
where Γ is the boundary of domain Ω. ui and ti are the displacement and
traction components, respectively. y is called as the source point and x where 𝑢𝜄𝑖 and 𝑡𝜄𝑖 are the displacement and traction of the 𝜄 − th node on
is the field point. 𝑈𝑖𝑗∗ (𝒙, 𝒚 ) and 𝑇𝑖𝑗∗ (𝒙, 𝒚 ) are the foundational solutions Γe , respectively. 𝜉 is the local coordinate taking a value between −1 and
given by the following expressions [9]: 1, and N𝜄 (𝜉) are the shape functions which can be expressed as below:
{
[ ( ) ] 𝑁1 (𝜉) = 12 (1 − 𝜉)
1 1 𝜕𝑟 𝜕𝑟 1 , (linear element ),
𝑈𝑖𝑗∗ (𝒙, 𝒚 ) = (3 − 4𝜈)𝛿𝑖𝑗 ln + − 𝛿𝑖𝑗 , (2) (14)
8𝜋𝜇(1 − 𝜈) 𝑟 𝜕 𝑥𝑖 𝜕 𝑥𝑗 2 𝑁2 (𝜉) = 12 (1 + 𝜉)

418
H. Bin, N. Zhongrong, L. Cong et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 130 (2021) 417–428

Fig. 2. Real plane and complex plane

⎧𝑁 (𝜉) = 1 𝜉(𝜉 − 1)
⎪ 1 2
⎨𝑁2 (𝜉) = (1 + 𝜉)(1 − 𝜉), (quadratic element ). (15) Fig. 3. A linear element
⎪𝑁 (𝜉) = 1 𝜉(𝜉 + 1)
⎩ 3 2

If y is far away from Γe , the integrals in Eqs. (8-13) can be directly

calculated by the standard Gauss quadrature. If y locates on Γe , the in-
11𝑢 (𝒚 ) + i21𝑢 (𝒚 )
tegrals in Eqs. (8) and (9) occur the singularity. If y is close to, but not
on Γe , the integral kernels in Eqs. (8-13) show the near singularity to ⎧
some extent. Eq. (8) shows the nearly weak singularity (ln r), Eqs. (9), 1 ⎪ 1 ( ) 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 ( )
𝜆( )2 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 + 2 ( 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄
2π(1 + 𝜆) ∫Γ 𝑒 ⎨
=−
)
(10) and (11) show the nearly strong singularity (1/r), Eqs. (12) and ⎪ 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠
3
(13) shows the nearly hyper-singularity (1/r2 ). For the nearly singu- ⎩
[ ( ) ( ) ( )] ⎫
lar integrals, the direct Gauss quadrature is invalid. In the following,
𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 + 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 − 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 ⎪
the singular and nearly singular integrals on both linear and three-node
+
( )2 ⎬𝑁𝜄 (𝜉) dΓ, (19a)
quadratic elements are evaluated based on the complex plane. ⎪
𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 ⎭
3. The calculation of the near-field integrals
( )
 2𝑢 𝑧𝑠 = 12𝑢 (𝒚 ) + i22𝑢 (𝒚 )
In the complex plane, the field point x(x1 ,x2 ) is represented by
⎧
z = x1 + ix2 and the source point y(y1 ,y2 ) is represented by zs = y1 + iy2 ,
√ 1 ⎪ 1 ( ) 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 ( )
=− ⎨𝜆 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 − 2 ( ) 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄
where i = −1, as seen in Fig. 2. ∫
2π(1 + 𝜆) Γ 𝑒 ⎪ ( ) 2 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠
3
Using the complex notation, the integrals in Eqs. (8) and (9) can be ⎩ 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠
rewritten in the following form: [ ( ) ( ) ( )] ⎫
( ) 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 + 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 + 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 ⎪
𝑡 𝑧𝑠 = 𝑡1 (𝒚 ) + i𝑡2 (𝒚 ) − ⎬𝑁𝜄 (𝜉) dΓ.
{ [ }
( )2 (19b)
−1 ( ) ( )] ( ) 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 ( ) 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 ⎪
= 𝜆 ln 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 + ln 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 𝑡 𝑧𝜄 − 𝑡 𝑧𝜄 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉) dΓ, ⎭
4𝜋𝜇(1 + 𝜆) ∫Γ𝑒 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠
(16) Herein, Eqs. (18) and (19) are used to calculate the stress compo-
nents at any interior point. In contrast to the complicate formulations
( ) for calculating the stress components in conventional BEM, Eqs. (18)
𝑢 𝑧𝑠 = 𝑢1 (𝒚 ) + i𝑢2 (𝒚 )
and (19) are more concise.
⎧
−1 ⎪ 1 ( ) 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 ( )
= ⎨ 𝜆 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 + 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 3.1. Linear elements
∫
2𝜋(1 + 𝜆) Γ𝑒 ⎪ 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 ( )2
⎩ 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠
For boundary discretization using the linear elements such as Γe
⎫ (Fig. 3), two nodes are placed at the ends of Γe . The local coordinate
[ ( ) ( )]⎪
1 o𝜉 is used on Γe , we have
+ 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 + 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 ⎬𝑁𝜄 (𝜉) dΓ, (17)
𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 ⎪
⎭ ∑
2
𝑧= 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉)𝑧𝜄 = 𝑧𝑎 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑏 , (20)
where 𝜆 = 3 − 4𝜈, n(z) = n1 + in2 , 𝑢(𝑧𝜄 ) = 𝑢𝜄1 + i𝑢𝜄2 , 𝑡(𝑧𝜄 ) = 𝑡𝜄1 + i𝑡𝜄2 . () indi- 𝜄=1
cates the complex conjugate. To proceed, based on the complex plane, where
we give a new set of formulations of the integrals (10-13): {
𝑧𝑎 = 12 𝑧2 − 12 𝑧1
⎧ [ . (21)
] 𝑧𝑏 = 12 𝑧1 + 12 𝑧2
( ) 1 ⎪ 1 1 ( )
 1𝑡 𝑧𝑠 = 11𝑡 (𝒚 ) + i21𝑡 (𝒚 ) = ⎨ λ + 𝑡 𝑧𝜄
4π𝜇(1 + λ) ∫Γ 𝑒 ⎪ 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 |J(𝜉)| is the Jacobian of the mapping from the global coordinate to
⎩ the local coordinate on Γe .
⎫
( ) | 𝜕𝑧 |
( ) 𝑡 𝑧𝜄
⎪ |𝐽 (𝜉)| = || || = ||𝑧𝑎 ||, (22)
+ 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 𝑁 (𝜉) dΓ, | 𝜕𝜉 |
)2 ⎬ 𝜄
(18a)
(
𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 ⎪ ⎭ where |za | denotes the absolute value or modulus of za . n(z) is the out-
ward normal unit vector on Γe .
{ [ ] 𝑧𝑣 𝑧
( ) ( )
 2𝑡 𝑧𝑠 = 12𝑡 (𝒚 ) + i22𝑡 (𝒚 ) =
1
λ
1
−
1
𝑡 𝑧𝜄 𝑛 (𝑧 ) = = 𝑣 , (23)
4π𝜇(1 + λ) ∫Γ 𝑒 |𝐽 (𝜉)| |𝑧 |
𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 | 𝑎|
( ) }
( ) 𝑡 𝑧𝜄 where
− 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 + 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 ( )2 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉)dΓ, (18b) ( ) ( )
𝑧 − 𝑧𝑠 𝑧𝑣 = Im 𝑧𝑎 − iRe 𝑧𝑎 , (24)

419
H. Bin, N. Zhongrong, L. Cong et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 130 (2021) 417–428

in which Re[⋅⋅⋅] and Im[⋅⋅⋅] represent the real part and imagine part of
complex functions, respectively.
Using Eq. (22), we can obtain the following transformations on Γe
dΓ = |𝐽 (𝜉)|d𝜉 = ||𝑧𝑎 ||d𝜉. (25)
1) Singular integrals
When the source point zs coincides with one node of Γe , that is zs = z1
or zs = z2 . For 𝑡 (𝑧𝑠 ) in Eq. (16), by making use of Eqs. (20-25), we have

( ) |𝑧 | 1{ [ ( ) ( )] ( )
𝑡 𝑧𝑠 = − | 𝑎| 𝜆 ln 𝑧𝑎 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑏 − 𝑧𝑠 + ln 𝑧𝑎 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑏 − 𝑧𝑠 𝑡 𝑧𝜄 Fig. 4. A three-node quadratic element
4π𝜇(1 + 𝜆) ∫−1
}
𝑧 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑏 − 𝑧𝑠 ( )
− 𝑎 𝑡 𝑧𝜄 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉)d𝜉, (26)
𝑧𝑎 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑏 − 𝑧𝑠 n(z) is the outward normal unit vector,
2𝑧𝑣 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑤
where the weakly singular integrals with ln (za 𝜉 + zb − zs ) and 𝑛 (𝑧 ) = , (34)
|𝐽 (𝜉)|
ln(𝑧𝑎 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑏 − 𝑧𝑠 ) can be analytically calculated with a series of integra-
tion by parts. where
For 𝑡 (𝑧𝑠 ) in Eq. (17), by making use of Eqs. (20-25), we have { ( ) ( )
𝑧𝑣 = 𝐼𝑚 𝑧𝑎 − 𝑖𝑅𝑒 𝑧𝑎
( ) ( ). (35)
⎡ ( ) 𝑧𝑤 = 𝐼𝑚 𝑧𝑏 − 𝑖𝑅𝑒 𝑧𝑏
( ) −1
1 𝑧𝑣 𝑢 𝑧𝜄 𝑧𝑎 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑏 − 𝑧𝑠 ( )
𝑢 𝑧𝑠 = ⎢𝜆 + 𝑧 𝑢 𝑧𝜄
2π(1 + 𝜆) ∫−1 ⎢ 𝑧𝑎 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑏 − 𝑧𝑠 ( )2 𝑣 Using Eq. (33), we can obtain the following coordinate transforma-
⎣ 𝑧𝑎 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑏 − 𝑧𝑠 tions on Γe :
( ) ( )⎤
𝑧𝑣 𝑢 𝑧𝜄 + 𝑧𝑣 𝑢 𝑧𝜄 dΓ = |𝐽 (𝜉)|d𝜉 = ||2𝑧𝑎 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑏 ||d𝜉. (36)
+ ⎥𝑁 (𝜉)d𝜉, (27)
𝜄
𝑧𝑎 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑏 − 𝑧𝑠 ⎥⎦
Note that za may be equal to zero when three-node quadratic ele-
ments are used to model the straight boundary, thus the singular and
where the singular integrals exist in Cauchy principal value (CPV) sense
nearly singular integrals need to be treated according to two cases of za
only when zs = z𝜄 .
≠ 0 and za = 0.
The sum of the CPV integrals plus corresponding cij (y) are indirectly
Case I (za ≠ 0)
evaluated by a rigid-body motion.
5) Singular integrals
2) Nearly singular integrals
When the source point zs coincides with one node of Γe , that is zs = z1
When the source point zs is close to, but not on Γe , the integrals in
or zs = z2 or zs = z3 . For 𝑡 (𝑧𝑠 ) in Eq. (16), by making use of Eqs. (31-36),
Eqs. (16-19) are nearly singular. Using the coordinate transformations
we have
(25) and then making some manipulations, the integrals in Eqs. (16-19)
can be expressed as the following integral types: ( ) 1{ [ ( )
−1
𝑡 𝑧𝑠 = 𝜆 ln 𝑧𝑎 𝜉 2 + 𝑧𝑏 𝜉 + 𝑧2 − 𝑧𝑠
1 4π𝜇(1 + 𝜆) ∫−1
Π1 = 𝜓 (𝜉) ln [𝛼𝜉 + 𝛽]d𝜉, (28) ( )] ( )
∫−1 + ln 𝑧𝑎 𝜉 2 + 𝑧𝑏 𝜉 + 𝑧2 − 𝑧𝑠 𝑡 𝑧𝜄
}
𝑧𝑎 𝜉 2 + 𝑧𝑏 𝜉 + 𝑧2 − 𝑧𝑠 ( ) | |
1 − 𝑡 𝑧𝜄 |2𝑧𝑎 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑏 |𝑁𝜄 (𝜉) d𝜉, (37)
𝜓 (𝜉)
Π2 = d𝜉, (29) 𝑧𝑎 𝜉 2 + 𝑧𝑏 𝜉 + 𝑧2 − 𝑧𝑠
∫−1 [𝛼𝜉 + 𝛽]𝑚

where m = 1, 2, 3. 𝛼 and 𝛽 are the complex constants. For linear el- where the weakly singular integrals with kernels ln (za 𝜉 2 + zb 𝜉 + z2 − zs )
ements, |J(𝜉)| in Eq. (22) is a real constant. 𝜓(𝜉) is the well-behaved and ln(𝑧𝑎 𝜉 2 + 𝑧𝑏 𝜉 + 𝑧2 − 𝑧𝑠 ) can be implemented with the Gauss quadra-
polynomial which can always be written into the following form: ture rule for logarithmic functions.
For 𝑢 (𝑧𝑠 ) in Eq. (17), by making use of Eqs. (31-36), we have
𝜓 (𝜉) = 𝜓0 + 𝜓1 𝜉 + 𝜓2 𝜉 2 + ⋯ + 𝜓𝑘 𝜉 𝑘 + ⋯ , (30)
( ) 1[ 2𝑧𝑣 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑤 ( )
where the coefficient 𝜓 k is the complex constant. The integrals in 𝑢 𝑧𝑠 =
−1
𝜆 𝑢 𝑧𝜄
Eqs. (28) and (29) can be calculated with the analytic formulas given in 2π(1 + 𝜆) ∫−1 𝑧𝑎 𝜉 2 + 𝑧𝑏 𝜉 + 𝑧2 − 𝑧𝑠
Appendix A. 𝑧𝑎 𝜉 2 + 𝑧𝑏 𝜉 + 𝑧2 − 𝑧𝑠 ( ) ( )
+ 2𝑧𝑣 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑤 𝑢 𝑧𝜄
( )2
3.2. Three-node quadratic elements 𝑧𝑎 𝜉 2 + 𝑧𝑏 𝜉 + 𝑧2 − 𝑧𝑠
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
2𝑧𝑣 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑤 𝑢 𝑧𝜄 + 2𝑧𝑣 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑤 𝑢 𝑧𝜄 ⎤
For boundary discretization using three-node quadratic elements + ⎥𝑁 (𝜉) d𝜉. (38)
𝑧𝑎 𝜉 2 + 𝑧𝑏 𝜉 + 𝑧2 − 𝑧𝑠 ⎥ 𝜄
such as Γe in Fig. 4, the local coordinate o𝜉 is used on Γe , we have ⎦
∑
3
As before, the singular integrals exist in Cauchy principal value
𝑧= 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉)𝑧𝜄 = 𝑧𝑎 𝜉 2 + 𝑧𝑏 𝜉 + 𝑧2 , (31)
𝜄=1 (CPV) sense only when zs = z𝜄 . The sum of the CPV integrals plus corre-
sponding cij (y) are indirectly evaluated by a rigid-body motion.
where
{ 2) Nearly singular integrals
𝑧𝑎 = 12 𝑧1 − 𝑧2 + 12 𝑧3 When the source point zs is close to, but not on Γe , the integrals in
. (32)
𝑧𝑏 = 12 𝑧3 − 12 𝑧1 Eqs. (16-19) are nearly singular. Using the coordinate transformations
(36) and then making some manipulations, the integrals in Eqs. (16-19)
|J(𝜉)| is the Jacobian of the mapping from the global coordinate to
can be expressed as the following integral types:
the local coordinate on Γe .
| 𝜕𝑧 | 1 [ ]
|𝐽 (𝜉)| = || || = ||2𝑧𝑎 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑏 ||. (33) Π1 = |𝐽 (𝜉)|𝜓 (𝜉) ln 𝛼𝜉 2 + 𝛽𝜉 + 𝛾 d𝜉, (39)
| 𝜕𝜉 | ∫−1 ∫

420
H. Bin, N. Zhongrong, L. Cong et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 130 (2021) 417–428

Fig. 6. Multipole expansions

Fig. 5. A three-node quadratic element modelling the straight boundary

As a result, the coordinate transformations on Γe with za = 0 are
given by
dΓ = |𝐽 (𝜉)|d𝜉 = ||𝑧𝑏 ||d𝜉. (50)
1
𝜓 (𝜉) It is easily found that three-node quadratic elements with za = 0
Π2 = |𝐽 (𝜉)| [ ]𝑚 d𝜉, (40)
∫−1 𝛼𝜉 2 + 𝛽𝜉 + 𝛾 are similar to linear elements. The analytic scheme for linear elements
can be directly applied in calculating the singular and nearly singular
where m = 1, 2, 3. 𝛼, 𝛽 and 𝛾 are the complex constants. 𝜓(𝜉) is the
integrals on three-node quadratic elements with za = 0 without any dif-
well-behaved polynomial.
ficulty.
𝜓 (𝜉) = 𝜓0 + 𝜓1 𝜉 + 𝜓2 𝜉 2 + ⋯ + 𝜓𝑘 𝜉 𝑘 + ⋯ , (41)
4. The calculation of the far-field integrals using FMM
where the coefficient 𝜓 k is the complex constant.
For three-node quadratic elements with za = 0, |J(𝜉)| in Eq. (33) is The far-field integrals in FM-BEM are calculated by the fast mul-
no
√ longer a real constant but a non-rational function with the form of tipole expansions. For facilitating discussion, we rewrite the integrals
𝜌1 𝜉 2 + 𝜌2 𝜉 + 𝜌3 , where 𝜌1 , 𝜌2 and 𝜌3 are real constants. We use Taylor 𝑡 (𝑧𝑠 ) and 𝑢 (𝑧𝑠 ) as below [9]:
series to expand |J(𝜉)| as below
( ) { [ ( ) ( )] ( )
1
1 𝑡 𝑧𝑠 = 𝜆 𝐺 𝑧, 𝑧𝑠 + 𝐺 𝑧, 𝑧𝑠 𝑡 𝑧𝜄
|𝐽 (𝜉)| = |𝐽 (0)| + |𝐽 (0)| 𝜉 + |𝐽 (0)|′′ 𝜉 2 ,
∗ ′
(42) 2𝜇(1 + 𝜆) ∫Γ 𝑒
2
( ) ( ) ( )}
𝜕(⋯) 𝜕 2 (⋯) − 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧 𝐺′ 𝑧, 𝑧𝑠 𝑡 𝑧𝜄 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉)dΓ (51)
in which (⋯)′ = 𝜕𝜉
and (⋯)′′ = 𝜕𝜉2
. We introduce a new expression
of |J(𝜉)| as follows:
( ) { ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
|𝐽 (𝜉)| = 𝑅(𝜉) + |𝐽 (𝜉)|∗ , (43) 𝑢 𝑧𝑠 = −
1
𝜆𝐺′ 𝑧, 𝑧𝑠 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 − 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧 𝐺′′ 𝑧, 𝑧𝑠 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄
1 + 𝜆 ∫Γ 𝑒
where ( )[ ( ) ( )]}
1 +𝐺′ 𝑧, 𝑧𝑠 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 + 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉)dΓ (52)
𝑅(𝜉) = ||2𝑧𝑎 𝜉 + 𝑧𝑏 || − |𝐽 (0)| − |𝐽 (0)|′ 𝜉 − |𝐽 (0)|′′ 𝜉 2 . (44)
2
where
Using |J(𝜉)| in Eq. (43) and the integrals in Eqs. (39) and (40) be-
⎧ ( ) 1 ( )
come
⎪𝐺 𝑧, 𝑧𝑠 = − 2π ln 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧
⎪𝐺′ (𝑧, 𝑧 ) = 𝜕𝐺(𝑧,𝑧𝑠 ) = − 1 1
1 [ ] ⎨ 𝑠 𝜕 𝑧𝑠 2π 𝑧𝑠 −𝑧 (53)
𝑅(𝜉)𝜓 (𝜉) ln 𝛼𝜉 2 + 𝛽𝜉 + 𝛾 d𝜉
⎪𝐺′′ (𝑧, 𝑧 ) = 𝜕𝐺′ (𝑧,𝑧𝑠 ) = 1 1
Π1 =
∫−1
⎪ 𝑠 𝜕 𝑧𝑠 2π (𝑧𝑠 −𝑧)2
1 [ ] ⎩
+ |𝐽 (𝜉)|∗ 𝜓 (𝜉) ln 𝛼𝜉 2 + 𝛽𝜉 + 𝛾 d𝜉, (45)
∫−1 An expansion point zc (Fig. 6) close to the field point z is introduced,
which means that |z − zc | < <|zs − zc |, then we have
[ ( )]
1 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑐
𝑅(𝜉)𝜓 (𝜉) |𝐽 (𝜉)|∗ 𝜓 (𝜉) 𝐺 𝑧, 𝑧𝑠 = − ln 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧 = − ln 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝑐 + ln 1 − . (54)
Π2 = [ ] d𝜉 + [ ] d𝜉. (46) 2π 2π 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝑐
∫−1 𝛼𝜉 2 + 𝛽𝜉 + 𝛾 𝑚 ∫−1 𝛼𝜉 2 + 𝛽𝜉 + 𝛾 𝑚
Applying the following Taylor series expansion and two auxiliary
The first terms in the right-hand side of Eqs. (45) and (46) are reg- functions
ular since the near singularities are removed out by using the subtrac- ∑∞
𝜁𝑘
tion technique, which can be directly calculated by the standard Gauss ln (1 − 𝜁) = − for |𝜁 | < 1, (55)
𝑘=1
𝑘
quadrature. The second terms in the right-hand side of Eqs. (45) and
(46) can be calculated with the analytic formulas given in Appendix A. { 𝑘
𝐼𝑘 (𝜁 ) = 𝜁𝑘! for 𝑘 ≥ 0,
As a result, the nearly singular integrals on three-node quadratic ele- (56)
𝑂𝑘 (𝜁 ) = (𝑘𝜁−1
𝑘
)!
for 𝑘 ≥ 1, and 𝑂0 (𝜁 ) = ln 𝜁1 ,
ments are evaluated with the above semi-analytic algorithm.
Case II (za = 0) We can obtain
If the geometry of Γe is straight (Fig. 5), which means that za = 0.
1 ∑ (
∞
( ) ) ( )
Therefore, z in Eq. (31), |J(𝜉)| in Eq. (33) and n(z) in Eq. (34) become 𝐺 𝑧, 𝑧𝑠 = 𝑂 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑐 𝐼𝑘 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑐 . (57)
2π 𝑘=0 𝑘 𝑠
𝑧 = 𝑧𝑏 𝜉 + 𝑧2 , (47)
The derivatives of Ok (𝜁 ) and Ik (𝜁 ) satisfy
′ ′
| 𝜕𝑧 | 𝑂𝑘 (𝜁 ) = −𝑂𝑘+1 (𝜁 ) for 𝑘 ≥ 0, 𝐼𝑘 (𝜁 ) = 𝐼𝑘−1 (𝜁 ) for 𝑘 ≥ 1. (58)
|𝐽 (𝜉)| = || || = ||𝑧𝑏 ||, (48)
| 𝜕𝜉 | Using Eqs. (57) and (58), we can obtain
𝑧𝑤 ( ) 1 ∑
∞ ( ) ( )
𝑛 (𝑧 ) = . (49) 𝐺′ 𝑧, 𝑧𝑠 = − 2π 𝑂𝑘 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝑐 𝐼𝑘−1 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑐 (59)
|𝐽 (𝜉)| 𝑘=1

421
H. Bin, N. Zhongrong, L. Cong et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 130 (2021) 417–428

Fig. 7. Local expansions

Fig. 8. Translations in FMM

)
( ) 1 ∑
∞
( )
𝐺
′′
𝑧, 𝑧𝑠 = 𝑂𝑘+1 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝑐 𝐼𝑘−1 (𝑧− 𝑧𝑐 (60) [
2𝜋 ( ) ∑
∞( ) ( ) ∑∞ ( ) ( )
𝑘=1 𝑡 𝑧𝑠 = 1
2π(1+𝜆)
𝜆 𝐼𝑙 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝐿 𝐿𝑡𝑙 𝑧𝐿 − 𝑧𝑠 𝐼𝑙−1 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝐿 𝐿𝑡𝑙 𝑧𝐿
𝑙=0 ] 𝑙=1
∑∞ ( ) ( )
Inserting Eqs. (57), (59) and (60) into the integrals in Eqs. (51) and + 𝐼𝑙 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝐿 𝐿̂ 𝑡𝑙 𝑧𝐿
(52), respectively. We can obtain 𝑙=0
[ ∞ (67)
( ) ∑ ( ) ( )
𝑡 𝑧𝑠 = 2π(1+
1
𝜆)
𝜆 𝑂𝑘 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝑐 𝑀𝑘𝑡 𝑧𝑐
𝑘=0
∑
∞ ( ) ( ) [ ∞
+𝑧𝑠 𝑂𝑘+1 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝑐 𝑀𝑘𝑡 𝑧𝑐 (61) ( ) ∑ ( ) ( ) ∑∞ ( ) ( )
𝑘=0 ] 𝑢 𝑧𝑠 = 1
2π(1+𝜆)
𝜆 𝐼𝑙 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝐿 𝐿𝑢𝑙 𝑧𝐿 − 𝑧𝑠 𝐼𝑙−1 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝐿 𝐿𝑢𝑙 𝑧𝐿
∑
∞ ( ) 𝑡( ) 𝑙=0 ] 𝑙=1
+ 𝑂𝑘 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝑐 𝑀 ̂ 𝑧𝑐 , ∑
∞ ( ) ( )
𝑘
𝑘=0 + 𝐼𝑙 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝐿 𝐿̂ 𝑢𝑙 𝑧𝐿
𝑙=0
[
( ) ∑
∞ ( ) ( ) (68)
𝑢 𝑧𝑠 = 1
2π(1+𝜆)
𝜆 𝑂𝑘 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝑐 𝑀𝑘𝑢 𝑧𝑐
𝑘=1 ] (62) where the local expansion coefficients 𝐿̂ 𝑡𝑙 (𝑧𝐿 ), 𝐿𝑢𝑙 (𝑧𝐿 ) and 𝐿̂ 𝑢𝑙 (𝑧𝐿 )
𝐿𝑡𝑙 (𝑧𝐿 ),
∑
∞ ( ) ( ) ∑ ∞ ( ) 𝑢( )
+𝑧𝑠 𝑂𝑘+1 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝑐 𝑀𝑘𝑢 𝑧𝑐 + ̂ 𝑧𝑐 ,
𝑂𝑘 𝑧𝑠 − 𝑧𝑐 𝑀 are described by moment-to-local translations (M2L):
𝑘
𝑘=1 𝑘=1

where ⎧ 𝐿𝑡 (𝑧 ) = ∑∞ (−1)𝑙 𝑂 (𝑧 − 𝑧 )𝑀 𝑡 (𝑧 )
⎪ 𝑙 ( 𝐿 ) ∑∞ 𝑘=0 𝑘+𝑙 𝐿
(
𝑐 𝑐
) 𝑘𝑡 ( )
( ) ( )( ) ⎪ 𝐿̂ 𝑡𝑙 𝑧𝐿 = 𝑘=0 (−1)𝑙 𝑂𝑘+𝑙 𝑧𝐿 − 𝑧𝑐 𝑀 ̂ 𝑧𝑐
𝑀𝑘𝑡 𝑧𝑐 =
1
𝐼 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑐 𝑡 𝑧𝜄 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉)dΓ for 𝑘 ≥ 0, (63) ⎨𝐿𝑢 (𝑧 ) = ∑∞ (−1)𝑙 𝑂 (𝑧 − 𝑧 )𝑀𝑘𝑢 (𝑧 ) , (M2L). (69)
2𝜇 ∫Γ 𝑒 𝑘 ⎪ 𝑙 ( 𝐿 ) ∑𝑘=0 𝑘+𝑙 𝐿
(
𝑐 𝑐
) 𝑘𝑢 ( )
⎪𝐿̂ 𝑢 𝑧 = ∞ (−1)𝑙 𝑂 𝑧 − 𝑧 ̂ 𝑧𝑐
𝑀
⎩ 𝑙 𝐿 𝑘 =0 𝑘 + 𝑙 𝐿 𝑐 𝑘

( ) ( )
̂ 𝑡 𝑧𝑐 = 𝜆
𝑀 𝑡 𝑧𝜄 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉)dΓ,
The moment-to-moment (M2M) and local-to-local (L2L) translations
0 2𝜇 ∫ are given by
Γ𝑒
( ) [ ( )( ) ( ) ( )] ⎧ 𝑘
̂ 𝑡 𝑧𝑐 = 1
𝑀 𝑘 𝜆𝐼𝑘 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑐 𝑡 𝑧𝜄 − 𝑧𝐼𝑘−1 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑐 𝑡 𝑧𝜄 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉)dΓ ⎪𝑀 𝑡 (𝑧 ′ ) = ∑ 𝐼 (𝑧 − 𝑧 ′ )𝑀 𝑡 (𝑧 )
2𝜇 ∫ ⎪ 𝑘 𝑐 𝑘−𝑙 𝑐 𝑐 𝑙 𝑐
𝑙=0
Γ𝑒 ⎪ ( ) 𝑘 ( ) ( )
⎪𝑀̂𝑡 𝑧′ = ∑ ̂ 𝑡 𝑧𝑐
for 𝑘 ≥ 1, 𝐼𝑘−𝑙 𝑧𝑐 − 𝑧𝑐 ′ 𝑀
⎪ 𝑘 𝑐 𝑙=0
𝑙
⎨ 𝑘 , (M2M), (70)
⎪𝑀 𝑢 (𝑧 ′ ) = ∑ 𝐼 (𝑧 − 𝑧 ′ )𝑀 𝑢 (𝑧 )
( ) ( ) ⎪ 𝑘 𝑐 𝑘 − 𝑙 𝑐 𝑐 𝑙 𝑐
̂ 𝑡 𝑧𝑐 = 𝜆 𝑙=0
𝑀 𝑡 𝑧𝜄 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉)dΓ, ⎪ ( ) 𝑘 ( ) ( )
0 2𝜇 ∫Γ 𝑒 ⎪𝑀̂𝑢 𝑧′ = ∑ ̂ 𝑢 𝑧𝑐
( ) [ ( )( ) 𝐼𝑘−𝑙 𝑧𝑐 − 𝑧𝑐 ′ 𝑀
̂ 𝑡 𝑧𝑐 = 1 ⎪ 𝑘 𝑐 𝑙=0
𝑙
𝑀 𝑘 2𝜇 ∫
𝜆𝐼𝑘 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑐 𝑡 𝑧𝜄 (64) ⎩
) ( )]
Γ𝑒
(
−𝑧𝐼𝑘−1 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑐 𝑡 𝑧𝜄 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉)dΓ 𝐟 𝐨𝐫 𝑘 ≥ 1, ⎧ 𝑡( ) ∑ ∞ ( ) ( )
⎪𝐿 𝑙 𝑧 𝐿 ′ = 𝐼𝑚−𝑙 𝑧𝐿′ − 𝑧𝐿 𝐿𝑡𝑚 𝑧𝐿
⎪ ( ) 𝑚 = 𝑙
⎪𝐿̂ 𝑡 𝑧 ′ = ∑ 𝐼 (𝑧 ′ − 𝑧 )𝐿̂ 𝑡 (𝑧 )
∞
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ⎪ 𝑙 𝐿 𝑚−𝑙 𝐿 𝐿 𝑚 𝐿
𝑀0𝑢 𝑧𝑐 = 0, 𝑀𝑘𝑢 𝑧𝑐 = 𝐼𝑘−1 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑐 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉)dΓ for 𝑘 ≥ 1, (65) 𝑚=𝑙
∫Γ 𝑒 ⎨ ( ) ∑ ∞ ( ) ( ) , (L2L), (71)
⎪𝐿 𝑢 𝑧 𝐿 ′ = 𝐼𝑚−𝑙 𝑧𝐿′ − 𝑧𝐿 𝐿𝑢𝑚 𝑧𝐿
⎪ 𝑙
𝑚=𝑙
( ) ( ) [ ( ) ( )] ( ) ⎪ 𝑢( ) ∑ ∞ ( ) ( )
̂ 𝑢 𝑧𝑐 = 0, 𝑀
̂ 𝑢 𝑧𝑐 = ̂ 𝑢 𝑧𝑐 ̂
⎪𝐿 𝑙 𝑧 𝐿 ′ = 𝐼𝑚−𝑙 𝑧𝐿′ − 𝑧𝐿 𝐿̂ 𝑢𝑚 𝑧𝐿
𝑀 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 + 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉)dΓ, 𝑀 𝑘 ⎩
0 1 ∫Γ 𝑒 𝑚=𝑙
{ ( )[ ( ) ( )]
= ∫Γ 𝐼𝑘−1 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑐 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 + 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 (66) where zc′ is another expansion point which is close to z, zL and zL′ are
𝑒
( ) ( ) }
− 𝑧𝐼𝑘−2 𝑧 − 𝑧𝑐 𝑛(𝑧)𝑢 𝑧𝜄 𝑁𝜄 (𝜉)dΓ 𝐟 𝐨𝐫 𝑘 ≥ 2. local expansion points which are close to zs , as shown in Fig. 8. The de-
tails about these translations are the same as the FM-BEM with constant
The standard Gauss quadrature is accurate enough to calculate the elements referred to [4, 9].
integrals in Eqs. (63-66) on both linear and three-node quadratic ele-
ments. Next, we introduce another expansion point zL , which is close to 5. The framework of FM-BEM with higher order elements
the source point zs Fig. 7), that means |zs − zL | < <|zL − zc |. From the
multipole expansions in Eqs. (61) and ((62), we can obtain the following The main computational procedures of FM-BEM with higher order
local expansions: elements are outlined as follows:

422
H. Bin, N. Zhongrong, L. Cong et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 130 (2021) 417–428

Step 1: Discretization with linear and three-node quadratic ele-

ments. For a given 2-D problem, the boundary Γ is discretized with
linear or three-node quadratic elements same as those employed in the
conventional BEM.
Step 2: Determination of the quad-tree structure of the mesh. For
2-D problems, a square called the cell of level 0 covering the entire
boundary Γ is considered firstly. Secondly, this parent cell is divided into
four equal child cells of level 1. Thirdly, each cell of level 1 is divided
into four equal child cells of level 2. Next, the cell of level l (≥ 2) that Fig. 9. A slender beam in pure bending
contains boundary nodes would not stop dividing until the number of
boundary nodes in that cell is less than a pre-specified number. A cell
having no child cells is called a leaf. Finally, a quad-tree structure of the
cells covering all discretized boundary nodes is formed by using above
procedure.
Step 3. Upward pass. Calculating the multipole moments of each cell
starting from a leaf cell and tracing the tree structure upward to level
2. The moments for a leaf cell are directly calculated by Eqs. (63-66), in
which zc is the centroid of the leaf cell. For a parent cell, the moment
is calculated by summing the moments on its four child cells using the
M2M translation (70), in which zc′ is the centroid of the parent cell and
zc is the centroid of a child cell.
Step 4. Downward pass. Computing the local expansion coefficients
on all cells starting from level 2 and tracing the tree structure downward
to all the leaves. For a cell C at level 2, only M2L translation is used to
compute the coefficients of the local expansion. The local expansion
coefficients of a cell C at level l (>2) consist of the contributions from
all cells in the interaction list of C by using the M2L translation (69) and
from all the far cells of C by using the L2L translation (71), in which the Fig. 10. The results of u2 computed by FM-BEM-C
definition of adjacent cells and interaction list of cells can be found in
the literatures [4, 9, 10].
Step 5. Evaluations of integrals in BIEs. For a source point zs in a leaf
cell C, evaluation of the boundary integrals consists of two parts. One
is the far-field integrals from all cells in the interaction list and far cells
of C, which are calculated by shifting the local expansion coefficients
from the centroid of C to the source point zs using Eqs. (67) and (68).
The other is the near-field integrals from the elements in leaf C and its
adjacent cells, which are directly calculated by using the present method
established in Section 3.
Step 6. Iterations of the solution. Updating the unknown vector in
the linear system corresponding to BIE (7), and continuing Step 3 for the
matrix and unknown vector multiplication until the solution converges
within a given tolerance. The iterative solver GMRES (General Mini-
mum Residual Method) is adopted for the solution of resulting linear
system. To accelerate the iterative solution process, the block diagonal
pre-conditioners early proposed by Nishida and Hayami [36] is used in
this study.
Step 7. Evaluations of the physical quantities inside the domain. Fig. 11. The results of u2 computed by FM-BEM-LA
Once the unknown boundary variables are obtained, the physical quan-
tities at any point inside the domain can be evaluated by direct boundary
integrals (1) and (5). 6.1. A slender beam in pure bending

6. Numerical examples
Based on the above framework of FM-BEM with higher order ele-
ments, we have developed a Fortran code. In this section, three nu-
merical examples are given to investigate the performance of FM-BEM
with constant, linear and three-node quadratic elements. Herein, the
near-field integrals on linear elements are calculated by using the an-
alytical scheme in Section 3.1, which we referred to as FM-BEM-LA.
The near-field integrals on three-node quadratic elements are evaluated
by a semi-analytical algorithm in Section 3.2, which we referred to as
FM-BEM-QSA. Unknown boundary variables and physical quantities in-
side the domain are calculated with FM-BEM-LA and FM-BEM-QSA, and
these results are compared with that calculated by FM-BEM with con-
stant elements (FM-BEM-C). All the computations were done on Intel
Xeon E5-2670 desktop with 2.60 GHz CPU and 16 GB RAM.
We first consider a slender beam under pure bending (Fig. 9). l and h
are the length and height of the slender beam, respectively. l = 100 mm
and h = 10 mm. Young’s modulus E = 200 GPa and Poisson’s ratio
𝜈 = 0.3. Two ends (x1 = ± 50 mm) of the slender beam are subjected to
pressure p varied linearly from 100 MPa to − 100 MPa along the height.
Fig.s 10-12 show the vertical displacement u2 on the horizontal axis
(x2 = 0) in the beam computed by FM-BEM-C, FM-BEM-LA and FM-
BEM-QSA, respectively. nb is the number of elements for the mesh of
the slender beam. The numbers of terms for multipole and local ex-
pansions were set to 20, the maximum number of boundary nodes in a
leaf to 20, and the tolerance for convergence to 10−8 . A comparison of
data in Figs. 10-12 shows that using higher order elements (linear and
quadratic elements) are more beneficial for the slender beam in bend-
ing than constant elements. From Fig. 11, we can see that the results
for FM-BEM-LA converge quickly with the increase of the number of

423
H. Bin, N. Zhongrong, L. Cong et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 130 (2021) 417–428

Fig. 12. The results of u2 computed by FM-BEM-QSA

Fig. 15. 2-D elastic sub-structure and periodical structure

Fig. 13. A square plate with an elliptic hole

Fig. 16. A square plate with many randomly distributed elliptic holes

Fig. 14. Three cases of the circular holes near the elliptic hole in a square plate

linear elements. When the number of linear elements increases to 220,

the computed results agree well with the analytic solutions. The accu-
racy of the developed FM-BEM can further be improved with quadratic
elements. As shown in Fig. 12, with only 22 three-node quadratic ele-
ments, the results for FM-BEM-QSA are in excellent agreement with the
analytic solutions. Compared with FM-BEM-LA and FM-BEM-QSA, the
use of FM-BEM-C is less efficient and requires a large number of constant
elements.
Fig. 17. The CPU time for analyzing the plate with many elliptic holes by FM-
Table 1 presents the computed results of the stress 𝜎 11 and displace-
BEM-LA and FM-BEM-QSA
ment u2 near the corner point A (50 mm, 5 mm). The calculations of
𝜎 11 and u2 at the interior point near the boundary involve nearly hyper-
singular and nearly strong-singular integrals, respectively. The conven-
BEM solution−analyt ic solut ion
tional BEM which directly uses the standard Gauss quadrature fails to largest relative error (| analyt ic solut ion
|× 100%) is still less than
evaluate the nearly singular integrals. Fortunately, the present method 4%. For this case, the use of quadratic elements is more superior. The re-
can address these integrals very well. It can be seen from Table 1 that, sults of 𝜎 11 and u2 calculated by FM-BEM-QSA with only 44 three-node
compared with the analytic solutions, the results of 𝜎 11 and u2 calcu- quadratic elements are in good agreement with the analytic solutions
lated by FM-BEM-LA with 440 linear elements are acceptable and the even if the interior points are very close to the boundary.

424
H. Bin, N. Zhongrong, L. Cong et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 130 (2021) 417–428

Table 1
The computed results of 𝜎 11 and u2 near the corner point A (50 mm, 5 mm)

Coordinates of the interior point 𝜎 11 (× 102 MPa) u2 (× 10−3 mm)

FM-BEM Analytic FM-BEM Analytic

x1 (mm) x2 (mm) LA (440) QSA (44) LA (440) QSA (44)

49.0 4.0 -0.80010 -0.79999 -0.80000 -4.70908 -4.70997 -4.71000

49.5 4.5 -0.89996 -0.89999 -0.90000 -2.18415 -2.18373 -2.18375
49.9 4.9 -0.97798 -0.98000 -0.98000 -1.42025 -1.39332 -1.39350
49.99 4.99 -1.00045 -0.99800 -0.99800 0.31906 0.32352 0.32351
49.999 4.999 -1.01086 -0.99980 -0.99980 0.36508 0.36986 0.36985
49.9999 4.9999 -1.01991 -0.99998 -0.99998 0.36967 0.37450 0.37449
49.99999 4.99999 -1.02871 -1.00000 -1.00000 0.37012 0.37495 0.37595
49.999999 4.999999 -1.03696 -1.00009 -1.00000 0.37018 0.37501 0.37500

ber of elements for meshing the elliptic hole. The numbers of terms for
multipole and local expansions were set to 20, the maximum number
of boundary nodes in a leaf to 20, and the tolerance for convergence
to 10−8 . CPS8R elements (quadratic elements in software ABAQUS) are
used to discretize the whole domain in the FEM models. For the infinity
plate with an elliptic hole (a = 2, b = 4) under uniform tensile load
p, the analytic solution of the hoop stress at boundary node A is − p,
while one at boundary node B is 5p. It can be seen from the Tables 2-3,
the computed hoop stresses converge to around − 1.01p at node A and
5.04p at node B, respectively. The hoop stresses in finite plate should be
slightly larger than ones in infinite plate. Tables 2 and 3 show that us-
ing a few hundred elements in FM-BEM-LA and FM-BEM-QSA can obtain
more accurate results than using a few thousand elements in FM-BEM-C.
Next, we study the above square plate with the same elliptic hole and
several circular holes. There are three cases about the numbers and geo-
metric positions of the circular holes with the same radii (r = 1) near the
elliptic hole (a = 2, b = 4), as shown in Fig. 14. Due to the existence of
Fig. 18. Thin coating on a shaft the circular holes near the elliptic hole, generating high quality meshes
is not easy work in the FEM analysis, whereas only the edges of circular
holes are required for discretization in the BEM analysis. Table 4 shows
the results of 𝜎 𝜃 at point A, B, C and D on the edge of the elliptic hole
in finite square with l = 100. The elliptic hole is discretized with 360
linear elements and 180 three-node quadratic elements in implement-
ing FM-BEM-LA and FM-BEM-QSA, respectively. Each circular hole with
the same radii is discretized with 90 linear elements or 45 three-node
quadratic elements. Zhang et al. [33] ever presented an iterative algo-
rithm for the calculation of the stresses in an infinite plate with multiple
elliptic holes. The results calculated by FM-BEM-LA and FM-BEM-QSA
are slightly larger than ones from Ref. [33]. As mentioned above, for
the finite sized plate with some holes, the hoop stresses along the hole
edges should be slightly larger than ones in infinite body, which demon-
strates that the results calculated by FM-BEM-LA and FM-BEM-QSA are
accurate.

6.3. Square plates with a large number of holes

To investigate the accuracy of the present fast multipole BEM with

Fig. 19. Normalized radial stress 𝜎 r at node A
6.2. A plate with elliptical and circular holes
A square plate with a central elliptical hole is first considered, as
shown in Fig. 13. l is the edge length of the square plate. a and b are the
minor and major axes of the elliptical hole. Here, a = 2, b = 4, l = 100. E
is Young’s modulus and 𝜈 is Poisson’s ratio. The right edge of the plate
is subjected to tension pressure p.
Tables 2-3 present the results of hoop stresses 𝜎 𝜃 at nodes A and B
obtained by FM-BEM and FEM. For the BEM models, ns is the number
of elements for meshing the edge of the square plate and ne is the num-
higher order elements in solving large scale problems, four periodical
structures [7] subjected to given boundary normal displacements are
studied. The sub-structure of the periodical structures is a square sheet
of 1 mm × 1 mm with a circular hole of radius 0.3 mm in the center, as
shown in Fig. 15a. Four periodical structures consist of 2 × 2, 10 × 10,
20 × 20, 40 × 40 sub-structures, respectively. Traction-free boundary
conditions are applied on all edges of circular holes. The outer bound-
aries of these square sheets are subjected with normal displacement 𝑢̄ 𝑛
proportional to their edge length and tangent traction 𝑡̄𝜏 = 0 (Fig. 15b).
Each circular hole is discretized with 120 linear elements in FM-BEM-
LA or 60 quadratic elements in FM-BEM-QSA. Some parameters of four
periodical structures are given in Table 5. The numbers of terms for
multipole and local expansions were set to 20, the maximum number
of boundary nodes in a leaf to 50, and the tolerance for convergence to
10−6 .

425
H. Bin, N. Zhongrong, L. Cong et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 130 (2021) 417–428

Table 2
The hoop stress 𝜎 𝜃 ( × p) at nodes A and B calculated by FM-BEM-C and FM-BEM-LA

FM-BEM-C FM-BEM-LA

Mesh (ns × 4+ne) Node A Node B Mesh (ns × 4+ne) Node A Node B

50 × 4+360 -1.0147 5.0864 50 × 4+72 -1.0107 4.9533

50 × 4+720 -1.0157 5.0656 50 × 4+144 -1.0142 5.0199
50 × 4+1440 -1.0164 5.0564 50 × 4+360 -1.0146 5.0390
50 × 4+2400 -1.0160 5.0513 50 × 4+480 -1.0140 5.0417
100 × 4+3600 -1.0159 5.0480 50 × 4+720 -1.0145 5.0420
100 × 4+4800 -1.0158 5.0481 50 × 4+1440 -1.0155 5.0400

Table 3
The hoop stress 𝜎 𝜃 ( × p) at nodes A and B calculated by FM-BEM-QSA and FEM

FM-BEM-QSA FEM

Mesh (ns × 4+ne) Node A Node B Mesh (CPS8R) Node A Node B

25 × 4+36 -1.0150 4.9851 7960 -1.0221 5.0040

25 × 4+72 -1.0156 5.0340 14444 -1.0183 5.0342
25 × 4+180 -1.0154 5.0402 30300 -1.0164 5.0393
25 × 4+240 -1.0156 5.0394 57004 -1.0160 5.0401
25 × 4+360 -1.0151 5.0411 77764 -1.0154 5.0402

Table 4
The computed results of 𝜎 𝜃 ( × p) at point A, B, C and D

Cases Methods A B C D

I FM-BEM-LA (650) -1.005 4.595 -1.019 5.139

FM-BEM-QSA (325) -1.002 4.599 -1.019 5.140
Zhang et al. [33] -0.985 4.556 -1.005 5.091
II FM-BEM-LA (740) -1.059 6.766 -1.058 6.766
FM-BEM-QSA (370) -1.059 6.774 -1.060 6.774
Zhang et al. [33] -1.020 6.557 -1.020 6.557
III FM-BEM-LA (920) -1.000 4.374 -0.996 4.373
FM-BEM-QSA (460) -1.001 4.375 -0.999 4.376
Zhang et al. [33] -0.978 4.322 -0.978 4.322 Fig. 20. The stress contour of 𝜎 11 for the coating with ec = 0.9 by using FM-
BEM-QSA

Table 5
Some parameters of four periodical structures sions were set to 20, the maximum number of boundary nodes in a leaf
Structures Young’s modulus Poisson’ ratio 𝑢̄ 𝑛 DOFs to 50, and the tolerance for convergence to 10−6 . The numbers of itera-
tions, required memory and CPU time of FM-BEM-LA and FM-BEM-QSA
2×2 20.0 GPa 0.3 0.01 mm 1760
are listed in Table 7. The largest model with 720000 DOFs is solved in
10 × 10 20.0 GPa 0.3 0.05 mm 28000
20 × 20 20.0 GPa 0.3 0.10 mm 104000 2 hours. For this case, all near-field integrals including singular, nearly-
40 × 40 20.0 GPa 0.3 0.20 mm 400000 singular and regular parts are calculated by the formulas in Section 3. If
using the numerical quadrature to calculate the regular parts in the near-
field integrals, the CPU time can be further reduced. Fig. 17 provides the
CPU times of FM-BEM-LA and FM-BEM-QSA in analyzing these models.
The normal displacements un at point A, B and C (Fig. 15b) are shown
As expected, the CPU times consumed by FM-BEM-LA and FM-BEM-QSA
in Table 6, where point A, B and C is located on the edge of hole 1 in
increases almost linearly with increase of DOFs, which indicates that the
the center of 2 × 2, 10 × 10, 20 × 20 and 40 × 40 sheets. Theoretically
efficiency of FM-BEM with higher order elements is still O(N), where N
speaking, the normal displacement at corresponding position for these
is the number of DOFs.
four structures should be identical. The results among these four struc-
tures in Table 6 are in good agreement with theoretical predictions. The
difference of the computed results between 2 × 2 sheet with 1760 DOFs 6.4. Thin coating on a shaft
and 40 × 40 sheet with 400000 DOFs is with 0.1e-7, which shows that
the present method is capable of solving large scale problems without In the last example, we study the nonuniform thickness coating on a
losing precision. shaft (plane stain), as shown in Fig. 18. Both the shaft and coating pro-
Next, m randomly distributed elliptic holes (Fig. 16) in the square files remain circular, but their centers are misaligned, producing some
plate with edge length of 100 mm are given to examine the efficiency normalized eccentricity ec = hc /(rb − ra ), where hc is the center off-
of FM-BEM-LA and FM-BEM-QSA, where m=100, 200, 400, 600, 800, set. The outer radius of the shaft ra = 10 mm and the outer radius of
1000. Two axes a and b of each elliptic hole are selected randomly from the coating rb = 11 mm. Young’s modulus E = 80GPa and Poisson’s ra-
0.5 mm to 1.0 mm. The same boundary conditions as used in Exam- tio 𝜈 = 0.2. The outer pressure p = 100MPa. The shaft was assumed to
ple 6.2 (Fig. 13), are applied in this case (traction-free boundary con- be a rigid body, so the boundary conditions for the coating on Γa are
ditions are applied on all edges of the holes). For the square plate with u1 = u2 = 0. For this case, the outer and inner boundaries of the coating
m randomly distributed elliptic holes, each edge of the square is dis- are discretized with 360 linear elements in FM-BEM-LA and 180 three-
cretized with 5000 linear elements in FM-BEM-LA and 2500 three-node node quadratic elements in FM-BEM-QSA, respectively. The numbers of
quadratic elements in FM-BEM-QSA, and each elliptic hole is discretized terms for multipole and local expansions were set to 20, the maximum
with 360 linear elements in FM-BEM-LA and 180 three-node quadratic number of boundary nodes in a leaf to 20, and the tolerance for conver-
elements in FM-BEM-QSA. Herein, the numbers of terms for both expan- gence to 10−8 .

426
H. Bin, N. Zhongrong, L. Cong et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 130 (2021) 417–428

Table 6
Normal displacement un (unit: mm) at point A, B and C

Structure A B C

FM-BEM FM-BEM FM-BEM

LA QSA LA QSA LA QSA

2×2 -0.00088684 -0.00088673 0.00063574 0.00063549 -0.00088684 -0.00088673

10 × 10 -0.00088683 -0.00088673 0.00063574 0.00063549 -0.00088683 -0.00088673
20 × 20 -0.00088683 -0.00088673 0.00063574 0.00063549 -0.00088683 -0.00088673
40 × 40 -0.00088683 -0.00088673 0.00063574 0.00063549 -0.00088683 -0.00088673

Table 7
Number of iterations and required memory

DOFs Number of iterations Required memory (MB) CPU time (s)

FM-BEM FM-BEM FM-BEM

LA QSA LA QSA LA QSA

112000 45 44 200 201 517 731

184000 45 44 299 300 893 1393
328000 46 45 466 468 1707 2646
472000 47 46 673 676 2620 3758
616000 47 47 840 843 3551 4716
760000 49 48 1007 1010 4597 6398

Luo et al. [34] and Zhang et al. [31] analyzed the coating structure
with the conventional BEM. Fig. 19 shows the normalized radial stress
𝜎 r at boundary node A. When ec = 0, the results of 𝜎 r calculated by FM-
BEM-LA and FM-BEM-QSA are in good agreement with the analytical
solution (1.0696) given by Boresi and Chong [35]. For the case of ec ≠
0, no analytical solution for the stress field exists. As ec → 1, the section
around node A becomes thinner. If using FEM, enormous elements are
required in the thinnest section in order to maintain reasonable element
aspect ratio, as reported in Ref. [34]. If using BEM, the nearly singular
integrals become the obstacle for analyzing so thin structures. In the
present FM-BEM with high order elements, the nearly singular integrals
are accurately evaluated in Section 3. Thus, the present FM-BEM can
deal with very thin structures even if ec increases to 0.999999. The re-
sults of 𝜎 r calculated by FM-BEM-LA and FM-BEM-QSA are in agreement
with those calculated by the conventional BEM from Zhang et al. [31],
as shown in Fig. 19. In addition, the results of radial and hoop stresses
𝑟 +𝑟
at interior point ( 𝑎 2 𝑏 , 𝜃) for ec = 0.99999 are given in Table 8. The
present results are also very accurate compared with ones from Zhang
et al. [31].
Figs. 20 and 21 show the distributions for 𝜎 11 and u2 in the coat-
ing with ec = 0.9 obtained by FM-BEM-QSA, respectively. In fact, it is
not easy to draw the stress and displacement contours for the whole do-
main in BEM analysis, because it involves the nearly strong- and hyper-
singular integrals in determining physical quantities near the boundary.
7. Conclusions
In the paper, a novel fast multipole boundary element method (FM-
BEM) with higher order elements for 2-D elasticity is proposed. The
present method has several important advantages. First, linear and
three-node quadratic elements are employed for discretization, which
Fig. 21. The displacement contour of u2 for the coating with ec = 0.9 by using
FM-BEM-QSA
can provide more exact geometric representations. Numerical exam-
ples show that the present method possesses higher accuracy than the
FM-BEM with constant elements. For slender structures in bending,
quadratic elements are very beneficial. Second, based on the complex
space, the near-field integrals on both linear and quadratic elements
are successfully evaluated by analytical and semi-analytical algorithm,
respectively. As a result, the present method can evaluate accurately
physical quantities in interior regions near the boundary. In addition,
the present method can also be applied in thin structures. Third, the
present method achieves better balance between accuracy and efficiency
for analyzing 2-D elastic problems. Besides the help of the FMM, the
complex notation is used to simplify the computational formulations in
BIEs, which also helps to save CPU time in direct evaluations. It should
be stressed that, the efficiency of the proposed FM-BEM with higher or-
der elements still retains O(N) in solving large scale problems.
To broaden the application of FM-BEM with higher order elements,
the developed FM-BEM can be applied in 2-D multiple domains. Higher
order elements also can further be extended to the dual FM-BEM using
a linear combination of the conventional BIE for the displacement and
the hypersingular BIE for the traction.

Table 8
𝑟 +𝑟
Radial stress 𝜎 r and hoop stress 𝜎 𝜃 at interior point ( 𝑎 2 𝑏 , 𝜃) for ec = 0.99999

𝜃 𝜎r 𝜎𝜃

FM-BEM-LA FM-BEM-QSA Zhang [31] FM-BEM-LA FM-BEM-QSA Zhang [31]

0 0.99974 0.99982 1.00000 0.24982 0.24993 0.25048

𝜋/6 1.00382 1.00418 1.00498 0.25494 0.25497 0.25495
𝜋/3 1.01511 1.01509 1.01807 0.27108 0.27111 0.27112
𝜋/2 1.03061 1.03058 1.03417 0.30005 0.30005 0.30105
2𝜋/3 1.04543 1.04551 1.04775 0.33468 0.33467 0.33589
𝜋 1.05879 1.05882 1.05881 0.37173 0.37173 0.37173

427
H. Bin, N. Zhongrong, L. Cong et al. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements 130 (2021) 417–428

Declaration of Competing Interest [4] Liu Y J. Fast multipole boundary element method. Cambridge University Press; 2009.
[5] Peirce A P, Napier JAL. A spectral multipole method for efficient solutions of
large-scale boundary element models in elastostatics. Int J Numer Methods Eng
The authors declare that they have no competing financial interests. 1995;38:4009–34.
[6] Nishimura N, Yoshida E I, Kobayashi S. A fast multiple boundary integral equation
Acknowledgements method for crack problems in 3D. Eng Anal Boundary Elem 1999;23(1):97–105.
[7] Yao Z H, Kong F Z, Wang H T, Wang P B. 2D simulation of composite materials using
BEM. Eng Anal Boundary Elem 2004;28(8):927–35.
We wish to acknowledge the support by the National Natural Science [8] Wang H T, Yao ZH. A new fast multipole boundary element method for large scale
Foundation of China [Grant No.: 11272111]. analysis of mechanical properties in 3D particle-reinforced composites. Comput
Model Eng Sci 2005;7(1):85–95.
[9] Liu Y J. A new fast multipole boundary element method for solving
Appendix A. Analytical integral formulas large-scale two-dimensional elastostatic problems. Int J Numer Methods Eng
2006;65(6):863–81.
[10] Liu Y J, Nishimura N. The fast multipole boundary element method for potential
Consider 𝜔(𝜉) is a linear polynomial
problems: A tutorial. Eng Anal Boundary Elem 2006;30(5):371–81.
[11] Liu Y J. A fast multipole boundary element method for 2-D multi-domain elastostatic
𝜔(𝜉) = 𝛼𝜉 + 𝛽, (A.1)
problems based on a dual BIE formulation. Comput Mech 2008;42(5):761–73.
where both 𝛼 and 𝛽 are the complex constant. Then we have [12] Guo Z, Liu Y J, Ma H, Huang S. A fast multipole boundary element method for
modeling 2-D multiple crack problems with constant elements. Eng Anal Boundary
⎧ 1 [ 𝜔(1) ] Elem 2014;47:1–9.
1
𝜉𝑘 ⎪ ln , for 𝑘 = 0; [13] Liu Y J, Li Y X, Xie W. Modeling of multiple crack propagation in 2-D elastic solids
1𝑘 = d𝜉 = ⎨ 𝛼 𝑘 𝜔(−1) (A.2) by the fast multipole boundary element method. Eng Fract Mech 2017;172:1–16.
∫−1 𝜔(𝜉) 1−(−1) 𝛽
⎪ 𝛼𝑘 − 𝛼 1𝑘−1 , for 𝑘 ≥ 1. [14] Sladek V, Sladek J, Tanaka M. Regularization of hypersingular and nearly sin-
⎩ gular integrals in the potential theory and elasticity. Int J Numer Methods Eng
{1[ 1 ] 1993;36(10):1609–28.
1
𝜉𝑘 𝛼 𝜔
− 𝜔(1−1) , for 𝑘 = 0, [15] Tanaka M, Sladek V, Sladek J. Regularization techniques applied to boundary ele-
2𝑘 = d𝜉 = (1 ) (A.3) ment methods. Appl Mech Rev 1994;47(10):457.
∫−1 [𝜔(𝜉)]2 1 1
 − 𝛼𝛽 2𝑘−1 , for 𝑘 ≥ 1.
𝛼 𝑘−1 [16] Gallego J J, Gallego R. Regularization of nearly hypersingular integrals in the bound-
{ −1 ary element method. Eng Anal Boundary Elem 2001;25:165–84.
1 1
1
𝜉𝑘 2𝛼
⟨ − ⟩, for 𝑘 = 0; [17] Telles JCF. A self-adaptive coordinate transformation for efficient numerical
3𝑘 = d𝜉 = [𝜔(1)]2 [𝜔(−1)]2 (A.4) evaluation of general boundary element integrals. Int J Numer Methods Eng
∫−1 [𝜔(𝜉)] 1 2 𝛽 3
3 
𝛼 𝑘−1
− 
𝛼 𝑘−1
, for 𝑘 ≥ 1. 1987;24(5):959–73.
[18] Gao XW, Yang K, Wang J. An adaptive element subdivision technique for eval-
1 uation of various 2D singular boundary integrals. Eng Anal Boundary Elem
0𝑘 = 𝜉 𝑘 ln [𝜔(𝜉)]d𝜉 2008;32(8):692–6.
∫{−1 } (A.5) [19] Niu Z R, Cheng C Z, Zhou H L, Hu ZJ. Analytic formulations for calculat-
1
= 𝑘+1 ln [𝜔(1)] − (−1)𝑘+1 ln [𝜔(−1)] − 𝛼1𝑘+1 , for 𝑘 ≥ 0. ing nearly singular integrals in two-dimensional BEM. Eng Anal Boundary Elem
2007;31(12):949–64.
[20] Zhou H L, Niu Z R, Cheng C Z, Guan ZW. Analytical integral algorithm applied to
Consider 𝜔(𝜉) is a quadratic polynomial
boundary layer effect and thin body effect in BEM for anisotropic potential problems.
Comput Struct 2008;86(15):1656–71.
𝜔(𝜉) = 𝛼𝜉 2 + 𝛽𝜉 + 𝛾, (A.6)
[21] Niu Z R, Cheng C Z, Zhou H L, Hu ZJ. A novel semi-analytical algorithm of nearly sin-
where 𝛼, 𝛽 and 𝛾 are the complex constant. Letting gular integrals on higher order elements in two dimensional BEM. Eng Anal Bound-
ary Elem 2015;61(1):42–51.
√ [22] Dehghan M, Hosseinzadeh H. Calculation of 2D singular and near singular in-
𝛽 𝛽 2 − 4𝛼𝛾 tegrals of boundary elements method on complex space C. Appl Math Modell
∈= , 𝜑= , (A.7)
2𝛼 4𝛼 2 2012;36:545–60.
[23] Hosseinzadeh H, Dehghan M. A simple and accurate scheme based on complex space
we have C to calculate boundary integrals of 2D boundary elements method. Comput Math
[ 2 ] Appl 2014;68:531–42.
⎧ 1 ∈ −(𝜑−1)2 [24] Ma H, Kamiya N. A general algorithm for the numerical evaluation of nearly singu-
⎪ 2𝛼𝜑 ln ∈2 −(𝜑+1)2 , for 𝑘 = 0;
1
𝜉𝑘 ⎪ [ ] lar boundary integrals of various orders for two- and three-dimensional elasticity.
1𝑘 = d𝜉 = ⎨ 1 ln 𝜔(1) − 𝛽 10 , for 𝑘 = 1; (A.8) Comput Mech 2002;29(4-5):277–88.
∫−1 𝜔(𝜉) 2𝛼 𝜔(−1)
⎪ 1−(−1)𝑘−1 𝛽 1
2𝛼 [25] Ma H, Kamiya N. Distance transformation for the numerical evaluation of near sin-
𝛾
⎪ 𝛼(𝑘−1) − 𝛼 𝑘−1 − 𝛼 1𝑘−2 , for 𝑘 ≥ 2. gular boundary integrals with various kernels in boundary element method. Eng
⎩ Anal Boundary Elem 2002;26(4):329–39.
[26] Johnston B M, Johnston P R, Elliott D. A sinh transformation for evaluating two-di-
⎧ −1 [ 1+∈ −1+∈ ] mensional nearly singular boundary element integrals. Int J Numer Methods Eng
⎪ 2𝛼𝜑2 𝜔(1) − 𝜔(−1) − 10 , for 𝑘 = 0, 2007;69(7):1460–79.
1
𝜉𝑘 ⎪ [ ] [27] Elliott D, Johnston PR. The iterated sinh transformation. Int J Numer Methods Eng
2𝑘 = d𝜉 = ⎨ 1 − 1 + 1 − 𝛽2 , for 𝑘 = 1, (A.9)
∫−1 [𝜔(𝜉)]2 2𝛼
⎪1 1 𝜔 (1 ) 𝜔(−1) 0 2008;75(1):43–57.
𝛽 2 𝛾 2 [28] Gu Y, He X, Chen W, Zhang C Z. Analysis of three-dimensional anisotropic heat
⎪ 𝛼 𝑘−2 − 𝛼 𝑘−1 − 𝛼 𝑘−2 , for 𝑘 ≥ 2. conduction problems on thin domains using an advanced boundary element method.
⎩
Comput Math Appl 2018;75(1):33–44.
−1 1+∈ [29] Zhang Y M, Gu Y, Chen J T. Boundary element analysis of the thermal behavior in
⎧ 4𝛼𝜑2 − −1+∈ 2 + 320 , for 𝑘 = 0, thin-coated cutting tools. Eng Anal Boundary Elem 2010;34(9):775–84.
[𝜔(1)]2 [𝜔(−1)]
1
𝜉𝑘 ⎪ 1 −1 1 [30] Xie G Z, Zhang JM, Qin XY, Li GY. New variable transformations for evaluating
3𝑘 = d𝜉 = ⎨ 4𝛼 + − 2𝛽20 , for 𝑘 = 1, (A.10)
∫−1 [𝜔(𝜉)]3 ⎪1 2
[𝜔(1)]2 [𝜔(1)]2 nearly singular integrals in 2D boundary element method. Eng Anal Boundary Elem
𝛽 3 𝛾
⎩ 𝛼 𝑘−2 − 𝛼 𝑘−1 − 𝛼 3𝑘−2 , for 𝑘 ≥ 2. 2011;35:811–17.
[31] Zhang Y M, Gu Y, Chen J T. Boundary element analysis of 2D thin walled structures
1 with high-order geometry elements using transformation. Eng Anal Boundary Elem
0𝑘 = 𝜉 𝑘 ln [𝜔(𝜉)]d𝜉 2011;35(3):581–6.
∫−1 { } (A.11) [32] Gu Y, Hua Q, Chen W, Zhang C Z. Numerical evaluation of nearly hyper-singular
= 𝑘+1 ln [𝜔(1)] − (−1)𝑘+1 ln [𝜔(−1)] − 2𝛼1𝑘+2 − 𝛽1𝑘+1 ,
1
for 𝑘 ≥ 0. integrals in the boundary element analysis. Comput Struct 2016;167:15–23.
[33] Zhang LQ, Yue Z Q, Lee CF, Tham L G, Yang ZF. Stress solution of multipole elliptic
References hole problem in plane elasticity. J Eng Mech 2003;129:1394–407.
[34] Luo J F, Liu Y J, Berger EJ. Analysis of two-dimensional thin structures (from
[1] Rokhlina V. Rapid solution of integral equations of classical potential theory. J Com- micro- to nano-scales) using the boundary element method. Comput Mech
put Phys 1985;60(2):187–207. 1998;22(5):404–12.
[2] Greengard L, Rokhlin V. A fast algorithm for particle simulations. J Comput Phys [35] Boresi A P, Chong KP. Elasticity in Engineering Mechanics. Elsevier; 1987.
1987;73(2):325–48. [36] Nishida T, Hayami K. Application of the fast multipole method to the 3-D BEM anal-
[3] Nishimura N. Fast multipole accelerated boundary integral equation methods. Appl ysis of electron guns. Boundary elements XIX. WIT Press; 1997.
Mech Rev 2002;55(4):299.

428