(Boundary Elements 3) George T. Symm (auth.), Dr. Carlos A. Brebbia (eds.) - Boundary Element Methods_ Proceedings of the Third International Seminar, Irvine, California, July 1981-Springer-Verlag Ber.pdf
(Boundary Elements 3) George T. Symm (auth.), Dr. Carlos A. Brebbia (eds.) - Boundary Element Methods_ Proceedings of the Third International Seminar, Irvine, California, July 1981-Springer-Verlag Ber.pdf
(Boundary Elements 3) George T. Symm (auth.), Dr. Carlos A. Brebbia (eds.) - Boundary Element Methods_ Proceedings of the Third International Seminar, Irvine, California, July 1981-Springer-Verlag Ber.pdf
Element Methods
Proceedings of the Third International Seminar,
Irvine, California, July 1981
Editor: C. A. Brebbia
CML PUBLICATIONS
This work is subjekt to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the material is oonoerned,
specifically those of translation, reprinting, re-use of illustrations, broadQlS!ing. reproduction by photocopying machine
or similar means, and storage in data banks. Under § 54 of the German Cqlyright Law where copies are rrnde for
other than private use a fee is payable to 'Verwertungsgesellschaft Wort', Munich.
The use of registered names, trademarks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific
statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free forge-
neral use.
2061/3020 - 543210
v
CONTENTS
Introductory Remarks IX
C.A. Brebbia
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
C.A. Brebbia
I. HISTORICAL NOTE
advantages of using BEM against FEM are also pointed out and
the use of parabolic BEM for stress concentration problems is
advocated. Patterson and Sheikh lszl propose using non-
conforming BEM other than constants, to avoid the problem of
defining the normal at corner points or having errors propaga-
ting into the system due to a change in the nature of the
boundary conditions. They conclude that interelement continuity
is not necessary with BEM and demonstrate this through several
numerical examples.
Finally, BEM are also well suited for the small computers
mainly microprocessors, which are nowadays being used in many
engineering offices. BEM solutions tend to require less
matrices and data storage than FE solutions whiie having a
large number of repetitive operations such as numerical
integration which can be economically carried out by a micro-
computer. BE appears ideally suited for computer aided design
activities due to the smaller amount of data generally required.
This is an important advantage specially when dealing with
three dimensional problems and more emphasis should be put into
developing efficient CAD systems based on BE.
REFERENCES
25. Chang, Y.P., Kang, C.S. and Chen, D.J., The Use of Funda-
,~entalGreen's Function for the Solution of Problems of
~at Conduction in Anisotropic Media, Int. J. Heat Mass
Tr:msfer, 16, pp.I905-1918 (1973).
26. Wrobel, L.C. and Brebbia, C., The Boundary Element Method
for Steady-State and Transient Heat Conduction, 1st Int.
Conf. Numerical Methods in Thermal Problems, Swansea,
Taylor, C. and Morgan, K. (Eds), Pine ridge Press (1979).
51. Seabra Pereira, M.F., C.A. Mota Soares and L.M. Oliveira
Faria, A Comparative Study of Several Boundary Elements
in Elasticity, in this book.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
K = ~~ J 0'(q)dq, (1)
AB
where 6 satisfies Laplace's equation
(2)
M = b/a (5)
m = a/b, (6)
so that
M = 1/m, (7)
(8)
m = DG(~), (9)
where 6 satisfies Laplace's equation (2) subject to the
boundary conditions
( 11 )
then
~-and
1
0:,
1
i = 1,2, ••• ,N, (16)
N
} 0'.
j=1 J
J( J.) loglq-qildq- N
~ 0.
j=1 J
J( .)
J log'lq-qildq- 11"0.
1
= 0,
EXAMPLES
Problem 1
To compute the capacitance K between opposite sides AB and CD
of a unit square (Figure 1). In this case, it is immediately
evident that M = 1.0 whence it follows from Equation (4) that
K = 0.01756. Indeed, it is obvious from Method 2 that K will
have this value for any quadrilateral with a similar degree of
symmetry, as proved by Lampard (1957), who derived the analytic
formula
D, . . . . - - - - - - - - - , C
G L
A'----------'B ~
Table 1
Capacitance K and Module M for a unit square (Figure 1)
(22)
Problem 2
To compute the capacitance K between opposite sides AB and CD
of a 2 by 1 rectangle (Figure 2). In this case, it is
immediately evident that M = 0.5 whence, from Equation (4),
K = 0.08930.
9
y r
D~----------------------------~c
G L
A'------------------'B~
X
Table 2
Capacitance K and Module M for a rectangle (Figure 2)
Problem 3
To compute the capacitance K between sides AB and CD of the
L-shaped domain, formed by removing a unit square from a square
of side 2, shown in Figure 3. In this case, m 0.577350 =
=
(Gaier, 1972), whence M 1.7321 from Equation (7) and
=
K 0.001756 from Equation (4).
Ar-------------~
'--------------,D
B'-------------------------------'c~
X
Table 3
Capacitance K and Module M for an L-shape (Figure 3)
N
K( 1) M(2) K(2) M(2a) K(2a)
48 0.001534 1. 7224 0.001810 1.7348 0.001741
96 0.001621 1.7295 0.001771 1. 7327 0.001753
128E 0.001764 1.7326 0.001753 1. 7320 0,001756
48 0.001892 1.7278 0.001780 1. 7358 0.001736
96 0.001851 1.7312 0.001761 1.7330 0.001751
128E 0.001763 1. 7333 0.001750 1. 7323 0.001755
128* 0.001757 1. 7321 0.001756 1.7320 0,001756
Problem 4
To compute the capacitance K between sections AB and CD of the
boundary of the L-shaped domain, formed by removing a unit
square from a square of side 2, shown in Figure 4. In this
case, m = 1.279262 (Gaier, 1972), whence M = 0.7817 from
Equation (7) and K = 0.0351 from Equation (4).
y r
r-------------~c
B~-------------,A
~--------------~~--------------~~
D X
Table 4
Capacitance K and Module M for an L-shape (Figure 4)
CONCLUSION
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author wishes to thank his colleague G.F. Miller for some
useful comments on the first draft of this work.
REFERENCES
Symm, G.T. (1980) The Robin problem for Laplace's equation. NPL
Report DNACS 32/80.
14
ABSTRACT
I. Introduction
As manufacturers of electrical equipment strive for higher ef-
ficiency, more effort has been put into obtaining efficient
and accurate numerical means to predict stray losses. A large
class of problems involves a slowly time-varying magnetic field
in a conducting medium. In these problems, the displacement
currents can be ignored when compared with the conduction cur-
rent. There is extensive literature on finite difference
(Roberts (1959) and King (1966)) and Finite Element (Carpenter
(1975), Chari (1973), Carpenter (1977), Sato (1977), Salon
(1979)) solutions to these problems. In this paper, the eddy
current problem is formulated using an electric vector poten-
tial function. Only the two-dimensional case is considered,
so that the eddy currents will have two components, say x and
y, and be constant in the third dimension z. With the restric-
tions that the displacement currents be ignored and that the
material is isotropic and linear, the governing differential
equation is derived in section II. By means of Green's identi-
ty, this differential equation is then transformed into an in-
tegral equation. With certain restrictions placed on the forc-
ing function term, the potential can be written entirely as a
line integral on the boundary. This is shown in section III.
In section IV, a set of s~multaneous equations is obtained and
in section V, a sample problem is worked and the results are
compared to a finite element solution.
15
(10)
Defining
cl = jWj.JO (11)
we"obtain Helmholtz's equation,
(12)
T(x,y) = a. 2(J
J H0 Gdsdn + J(-dn
T~G - GvT
dn)dB (15)
R B
In order to evaluate the Green's function, we return to Equa-
tion (13), which reduces to
2 ~ o(~-x,~-y)
(3 G +
a?" r1 eG
dr -
a.2G
<, 0
I
(16)
where
r = v'(s-x) 2 + <n-y)"- (17)
The solution of Equation (16) , is
G(s,n;x,y) = CI 0 (a.r) + DK (a.r)
0
(18)
where I and K are modified Bessel functions of the first and
0 0
second kinds order zero, respectively. From the behavior of
this function at infinity we deduce that C must equal zero.
1
The constant D is found to be 2n by integrating Equation (16)
aG
over a small disk located at r = o. The term dh in Equation
(15) is evaluated as
ClG ()G Clr
a,1 = ar an (19)
where
ar-
ClG - - £.... K (a.r)
2n 1
(20)
and
ar
dn ~ -cos 1jJ (21)
where K1 is the modified Bessel function of the first kind or-
der one. The terms are defined in Figure 1.
17
T(x,y) = ~; fJ H K
0 0 (ar) d~dn + 2 ~ fTK1 (ar) cosljJ dB
R B
1
- 2 1T Jar 0
~ (ar)dB (22)
B
The surface integral involving the forcing function can be
transformed into a line integral if H is limited to the class
0
of functions which satisfy Laplace's Equation,
\7 2 H
0
=0 (23)
Defining a new function g, such that
17 2 g = K (ar) (24)
0
The first integral in Equation (22) can be written
+ -z 1 JaR
~ (ar)dB (29)
a on o
B
Using this result in Equation (22) gives
+ azf i3
2n TK 1 (ar)cos~dB - -27flfClT
o .... 0
(ar) dB (30)
B B
Thus the potential at any point within the region is complete-
ly expressed in terms of an integral on the boundary. To re-
move the singularities which occur on the boundary, we will al-
low (x,y) to approach the point(x' ,y') on the boundary. The
singularity will be integrated around on a semi-circular path,
~B, as shown in Figure 2.
R
Figure 2 Integrating around singularities
+
1
2n
f Clno-Ko(ar)dB
ClH
+
1
2n
fdH
dnoKo(ar)dB
B-~B ~B
(31)
Any singularities have now been isolated into the three inte-
grals around ~B. Using the asymptotic property of K0 that
K (ar) ~· -in r as r ~ o (32)
0
in the integrals along ~B, the integrals are evaluated as fol-
lows:
For the first integral,
lim
e:~o
~H
21T o
K 1 (ar)cos~dB~fHo ~
on o
(ar)dB
~xB
~B
=1 J
21TH "(-inr)dB
3
~B o olt
=1 f
21T H
1T
0
1
-(e:d8)
e:
- H
0
(33)
0
For the second integral 2
lim
e:~o
1
(aH
Jp
n o
(ar)dB 1 f Oe:.tne:) = 0 (34)
6B M
For the third integral
lim
e:~o 2 ~ f TK1 (ar')cos~dB = 2! {: Tt(e:d8)
~B
T(x' ,y')
2 (35)
And for the fourth integral
lim - _!
e:~o 21T
f~
6B
an
(ar)dB =
0
I
~B
Q<e:tne:)dB 0 (36)
lf()T (ar)dB
- -~
1T on o (37)
aT
of the potential T and its normal derivative, an' are assumed
to be constant on each segment and equal to its value in the
center of the segment. The values of r in Equation(J7) are dis-
tances between the field points and points on the boundary.
Approximating the integral by a summation
N N
T1• -nH -aL H K 1 (arij)cos~i.~s. + ~L T.K1 (ar )
0 j=l 0 J J l~l J ij
j#i j#i
1N dT.
-:;L ..,..JK (ari.)
" on o J
~s .
J
j=l
j#i
- !T0
TiiK (ar)ds.
I- o
(38)
an
i
The two integrals in Equation (38) contain the singularities.
The first of these integrals is zero, since the direction co-
sine is zero. The second integral has been evaluated in Luke,
and shown to be
2 2
!TI IK 0 (ar)ds ~\ d_
= =tt.. a2K+l -
L<~-'
n a\
"'n~--'1.. ck(3 2K+ 1} (39)
ank=o k=o
i
where aMi
6 = -4- (40)
where the ~ and ck values are found in Table I.
Table I
K
0 2.000 0.8456
1 0.6667 0.5041
2 0.100 0.1123
Using Equation (38) at each node on the boundary gives the fol-
lowing matrix equation.
aT
[J][TJ + [Kl[ann] = [F]
where
Jii 1 (41)
(44)
-a. )'
F = -1T ·L H K (a.r .. )coslj! .. LIS. + H (45)
j=l 0 1 ~J ~J J 0
i~j
V. Sample Problem
The formulation was tested on the configuration shown in Figure
3. This is a square conductor 10 mm on each side and extending
to infinity in the z direction. A uniform applied magnetic fi-
eld, H0 is impinging on the conductor in the z direction. Due
to symmetry, only one-fourth of the conductor must be modeled.
For the boundary conditions we set T = 0 on the conductor sur-
face and ~! = 0 on the two lines of symmetry. The resulting
set of equations can be written as
[J] [T] + [K] [ ~!] = [F] (46)
In Equation (46), there would normally be two unknowns at each
boundary element. In this example, either T or ~! is specified
at every point and the system of equations may be solved.
The boundary of the quarter conductor was divided into 72
equal boundary elements. Equation (46) was solved using a
Gaussian elimination technique. The results were compared to
a finite element solution of the same problem and the results
are shown in Figure 4 for both the real and imaginary parts of
the potential. The results are very close, with a small error
occurring at the corner.
VI. Conclusions
A boundary element method has been presented for the slowly
varying magnetic field. The results have been validated by
comparison with a finite element solution of a sample problem.
Very little attempt was made to optimize the number of nodes in
either the finite element or the boundary element problem, but
it seems clear that the boundary element method is capable of
achieving high accuracy with fewer equations than the differen-
tial methods.
22
I
I
I T=O
I
I
II_ _____ _
J.l =J.lo
fJ =5.0xl0 4mho/mm
H = 1. 6 Amps/rom
0
Figure 3
Sample Problem, 10 mm x 10 mm
0 on dotted lines
.----------------·------
~.; ........--... I
r---------·---------·- '~,. _ . . ,\. I
·~, ...
r-------··---·~-,-,. ...,\ \ I
·------------, ---,_\ -\ \ I
\, \ \ !I I I
\
I
•\
\
i
1
iI
I
t
!
I
I
t
'
~
I
I i
I
•, i I 1
: \ ~ ! I i
:............................................~ ...............i ..........! ........L. .... .I
: ' ' • I I
Figure 4-a
Real Part of Electric Vector Potential
23
:---·-· -----·--------,
i-M-·-----·---..--------.. ---..
:! ·-.,.
..... ,
r··-----~------. ~ .. , :
. ·-.. ~--....... ·~
\ '
i
I .... , \
r. ----------------....... "·\. \,
·......... , \
I
'... \
•\
'
' ·-., \ i i
\ '\ i
' \ \ i
i
i
\
\ \·, i '\
l i
.
\
i
\
l I
i
1
l
i..........,..............................i .................l .............~.............i........._i
Figure 4-b
Imaginary Part of Electric Vector Potential
0.5
0.4
T
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
Node Number
Figure 4-c
Real Part of Potential T on the boundary
24
1.0
BIM
FEM
0.8
0.6
T
0.4
0.2
0
Node Number
Figure 4-d
Imaginary Part of Potential T on the Boundary
0.5
0
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
o.oo-~L-~---L--~--L-~---L--~--4-~
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Node Number
Figure 4-e Real Part of Potential T on the Diagonal
25
References
INTRODUCTION
(2)
u 0 (x,t)
1
2/irt J'"' "x• C':;r' ), .,
0
(4)
(8)
r,,,,
u1(£,t) w2 <t>
where
W1(t)
1
wl <t> - 2rrrt exp (- ~~ )dy (9)
w2 <t>
1
w2 <t> - 2/rrt
r,,,,
0
exp (- ~2)
4t dy (10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
Determination of u 1 (x,t)
The solution of u(x,t) leads to the need for an evluation of
u 1 (x,t). For one dimensional problems Smirnov 10 has shown
that
1
ul(x,t)
2rrrt
(14)
_L (£-x)2) dT
+ 2rrrt (£-x) exp (- - --
4(t-T)
where ~(t) and x(t) are the source intensities of two dipoles
situated at x=O and x=£, respectively. These functions may
be determined by the following weakly singular Volterra
integral equations of the second kind,
29
exp(- £ 2 /4(t-1:)}
where the kernel, K(t,1:) (17)
2(il (t-1:) 3 2
r.,,.,, <j>(1:)d1:
n
i~O
A~n)
l. <Pi
0 (18)
r.,,.,,x,,,., n
i~O
A. (n)
l. xi
0
where the interval (o,t) has been divided into n subintervals
(ik,(i+l)k) (i=O, ..... ,n-l,k=constant), A~n) are the series
of integrals involving the kernel K(t,1:) ~nd <j>. = <j>(ik),
Xi= X(ik). Using the above integration formulae, equations
(15) and (16) lead to solutions at time nk for each of the
point intensities as,
n-1 ( )
"
<Pn =Wj(nk) + 9- i~O Aon
1- A(n)
n
(20)
l
h so that xi=ih. Then
x·+1
1
u 0 (x,t) f(y) exp ( - (x-y)2) d
4t y
xi
1 x-x·) +
erf ( 2Ttl. (22)
2
It - (x-x · >2)
+- exp ( ~ -
Tf
where
(23)
(25)
where
(26)
and
A . = erf ' !1, . ) (27)
n-J ( 21(n-J-1)k
n-1 (28)
u 1 (x,t) I:
j=O
where,
A . (x) (29)
n-J
v(O,t) = v(l,t) = 1
whilst the initial condition becomes
v(x,O) = 0
A series of results for this problem are set out in Table 1
where comparisons are shown with the Crank-Nicholson finite
difference method using comparable time steps and a variety
of distance steps.
u(O,t) u(l,t) =0
subject to the initial condition
u(x,O) x(l-x) 0 ~ X ~ 1
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
PROBLEM ONE
PROBLEM THREJ<.:
t = 0.1
X 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
0.01 0.0293 0.0556 0.0765 0.0900 0.0946
0.005 0. 0295 0.0560 0.0771 0.0906 0.0953
0.0025 0. 0296 0.0562 0.0774 0.0910 0.0957
0.001 0.0297 0.0564 0.0776 0.0913 0.0960
PROBLEM FOUR
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
av grad p
-+ (v. grad)v = - (Euler)
at - - p
(2)
bv neratoom
PRESSUR
RELIEF
PRESSURE
RELIEF
bv neratoom
f WATER/STEAM
'V
2
~(~, t) -
1
2 -2
a 2~ = 0 (6)
c at
The pressure is related to the potential by the Bernouilli
equation
(7)
(8)
at 2
c
2
+oo ( 10)
= fdt fdr{y(r,t)G-~(r,t)O(r-r )o(t-t )}
-00 v-- - -~ o
42
I a~ I +oo aR O(t-t )
= fdA 4TIR[an]t -41T fdt fdA~{- 2ret
Q ret -oo Q R
1 a
+ Rc at(o(t-tret)}
,L fdA{.!.[.a!J
R ~n t=t
~ -(~(r,t
aR R
)~(r t ))} (16)
ret R2 an
411
~ a ret c -' ret
43
Boundary conditions
The first consideration concerning the boundary is the choice
of the geometry. A reasonable choice for the boundary is (a
part of) the inner flow shroud enclosing the rod bundle or the
structural limits of the header, depending on the assumed
reaction site. For the moment these structures are assumed to
be rigid, so the corresponding boundary condition is that the
velocity normal to the surface vanishes;
d(j) =0 ( 18)
<ln
In a later stage we hope to replace this condition by a more
realistic condition derived from the elastic-plastic response
of the structure.
The enclosure of the reaction volume is not complete; openings
have to be considered. These openings give entrance to other
parts of the steam generator and the connecting piping system.
The corresponding boundary condition is that of an infinitely
long pipe represented by the radiation condition
(19)
Numerical aspects
Next to the choice of the source function and of the geometry,
the discretisation of the boundary will primarily determine
the success of the BEREPOT calculations. The time-step of the
problem will have to be chosen in accordance with the time-
development of the source function. Subsequently, the element
size has to be equal to or greater than the distance traversed
by a wave in a single time-step.
Numerical problems will arise from the fact that the retarda-
tion within a single element is not a constant and that this
retardation will not be equal to an integer number of time-
steps.
The second problem is solved by linear interpolation between
the two nearest-by values. For the solution of the basic
equation (17) it is necessary to evaluate the time derivative
of the potential at the boundary. This evaluation can be done
by a three-point backward difference formula (Mitzner, 1967)
TEST CASES
0 (22)
46
(r-r ).n
- 0 -
2 (j) (24)
l!.-roj
with ci=+I,O,~ for~ resp. inside V, outside V or on the
boundary rl.
By division of the boundary in constant elements, this integral
equation becomes a matrix equation which can be solved by
standard subroutines . The boundary conditions are determined
by the specific case (fig.4): homogeneous in- and outflow
through openings at the top or the bottom of one wall of a
rectangular (2D) box. We assume that the normal derivative of
the potential at the boundary is zero everywhere except at
the openings where it is assumed to be a finite constant.
The boundary has been discretised into two meshes
I) 4 elements in the x-direction , 24 for y
2) 8 elements in the x-direction , 48 for y.
The results of the simple BE-code for this case are presented
in fig.S. There the values of the potential along the boundary
(four walls) have been plotted. For comparison, results of a
least-squar es finite element method, developed in our group
(De Bruijn,l980 ), for this case, are also given in this figure.
Since the potential is defined apart from an arbitrary constant,
these constants have been chosen in such a way that the curves
are close to each other but do not overlap. Note the nice
agreement between the three results.
(O,q) (p,q)
._j
d\P
a;=+u ---'
s
--+
-.
--.,
p m
q 6 m
s = m
u = m/s
Nx= 8
C!~P_o
C!n ~-o Ny= 48
a = .0625 m
b .0625 m
d\P
~-u
C!n
-
_ _.!
__.! s
--' 2b
..-!
X I >( I
(0,0) (p,O) 2a
box elements
.......
- I I I
""" ._,.a
~\~ :>.
""
elf
--~~ "0
l:l
;::J
"'~
0
.0
"'~ -
00
N l:l
0
......
~
elf
Q)
~
C)
~
.....
~ 0)
•.-l
~""'-""-
-
"0
0
"0"'
'0"-
' ..."-
\\\
I\ I \
!II 00
II 1
If)
II 1
1;1
;//
// /
/ /.
//
///
//
/ /,
/'l
/'i
//
f1{/
//- -:1"0000
N-:1"-:t
//~/ -~ ~ ~
II1 E-t!-1
00
--,,,
P-oP<:>::
I I I ~~~
~~....:1
1/J II II II
I I I
-NM
///
"":!
....
()Q
....::s0 -
/_.'I
... I \~---,-\
"'c0 I X \'
l"j
n
rt>
....::s
Ill
...::r'
l"j
rt>
rt>
I f-j-\ ' \ \
v/ ·\. 'II '._ / '-::.:..1
10 20 30 \ 40 50
time (a.u.)
'>:I
,....
(JQ
.....
rt '"d
::ro
ti rt - - - f--- sm jMrs (E ~CT)
(b (b
(b ::s - - - -BEl ~POT !:J. =2
I rt
0. ,.... ----BEl ~POT !:J. =0,5
a,.... "',. . .
(b
::sC/l 0 ('
,..,.,
,.... I \
::s0 "'
"' '"0
...... 0
r-~-t
,....
<T ::s ,r"\, (\ (\ j \
0 rt
:><
i
C/l ~_!_
0
~ .p~~·--{\-1-\
\./ ·v· \ ~-'-11-'t/-
j . ,
ti
n . I ,
(b
,.... j \./'
::s source funct ·on f ;r"·[\ 1 v'\
'\- !\-:- ,.
"' ~·I " ~ ·' \ 1I \ '1 •~ ' v'
,,_ !-!' ' 1,l - , :~- i'-~-·'- v~ ,-1 I
' ' 11 Ji\ :'9...~ :: : ·vf \j
IIII ' ' 1~·~·"'"''
~ ~-'i-t' ' I-
I I ~ ' ' '-"
r-'-.-i-,':\~--(.-!i-:: \;
I I I. ' ., :: I'
I " i '~;X:f·~ ,_, •:
I' I
1 ,\/t '" I"' I
20 40 60 80 100
time (a.u.)
~
52
REFERENCES
J.M. Williams
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
n
p2 (l _~d ~~)2
1 HE(6) O (4 )
----pz- ,
+a- + (~d ~~)2
where a is an initially unknown parameter.
bed, P=R
crest
where
r;o -i(l/d)ln(T/R), (6)
(7)
i ~ [~ - ,m] v ~ - ( ;2tJ v f
- [
(10)
[~ _ R2m]v-[i _ 1 Jv
For the present work with a singularity at the crest, T = 1, we
take m = A = 1 and v = 2/3 or ~. As the singularity moves away
from the crest, for near-limiting waves, A decreases from 1 and
ultimately to zero, when ~m 0 v degenerates to ~m, defined in
Equation 7. The remaining features of Equation 10 ensure that
~m,A,v satisfies the bed boundary condition, Equation 3, and is
normalised in the same way as ~m' with n = -1 at T = 1.
59
Table 1. Tests with leading terms and second crest node; d=2.5
No. of subsequent 6
Run N s q coefficients, ec 10 Ps
aO,al, •..•
1 15 so - 15 - 5344
2 15 floating - 14 - 5534
3 15 so yes 14 - 84
4 15 floating yes 13 - 400
5 15 so yes 15 1T/420 300
6 15 floating yes 14 1T/420 55
7 15 floating yes 14 1T/l40 55
8 21 floating yes 20 1T/420 18
9 21 floating yes 20 1T/140 >14
10 19 floating yes 18 1T/280 12
(12)
0.2~d~0.5
This constitutes the shallow-water end of the range, which
causes greatest difficulty in most methods and where, for a
given accuracy, N must be largest. Fortunately, however, the
algorithm was well behaved except for the important proviso
that even values of N exceeding about 40 failed to converge.
N was therefore restricted to odd values which gave progress-
ively greater accuracy as they increased. Table 2 illustrates
the typical behaviour of a sequence of solutions at d = 0.2,
the limit of the range computed. It is shown in Williams
(1981) that this wave is, to present computing accuracy,
61
106p
s
for e = kTI/200
App. 106
N k=O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
It'ns Ps
49 12 0 22 31 18 1 -7 -7 -4 0 2 2 1 0 0 -1 32
53 14 0 16 21 9 -1 -5 -4 -1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 23
57 16 0 13 15 4 -2 -4 -2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 18
63 20 0 8 9 1 -2 -2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
79 30 0 3 1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
106
N It'ns k=O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ps
29 8 0 0 3 7 7 5 2 0 -2 -3 -3 -2 -1 0 0 0 1 1 8
30 15 0 -1 1 5 5 4 1 0 -2 -2 -2 -2 -1 0 0 0 0 0 8
31 10 0 -1 0 3 4 3 0 0 -2 -2 -2 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
32 21 0 -1 0 2 3 2 0 -1 -1 -2 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
-
33 11 0 -2 -1 1 2 1 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
s 1. 82517163 q 0.52996266
ao -0.12288679 a 1.06815531
2.5~d::lo.o
Within this deep-water end of the range the general character-
istics of the mi.ddle range remained. However, for even N
convergence became very '"slow or sometimes failed altogether.
Furthermore, with N now small the process of finding an optimum
N, which had worked successfully in the middle range, no longer
provided a sufficiently fine control. It was then found that
ec could be used instead to achieve the best accuracy and in
this way ec = 1T/280 was determined to be most suitable. This
value was subsequently adopted throughout the range of d since
it had been found elsewhere not to be critical. The solution
chosen ford= 10.0 used N = 19, with Ps = 12 x 10- 6 . As shown
in Williams (1981), this wave is identical, to working accuracy,
with the theoretical extreme of the maximum infinite-depth wave.
63
STUDIES OF CONVERGENCE
I I
III II I
rD
~
L ,
:
: I
:I
i
I /I !
1 I I I ?
tr~ugh line, bed, y = 2 + F2, ljJ = - 2 crest line,
x=~L
<I>=-~ X
x=<I>=O
t
Steady motion - stream lines and equipotentials Wave motion- particle paths
I
I
rP
Steady motion
lWave motion
0)
01
66
CONCLUSIONS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
REFERENCES
M. Pignole
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
Basic equations
The displacement vector u. the strain tensor E and the stress
tensor a are functions of the point. Later on. we shall use
the well known relations.
'V
E = 'V u (I)
'V gradient
'V
'V symmetric gradient
div divergence
A~ ll constant coefficients
73
A
.= A for plane strain
(6)
2 \.1 A
for plane stress
A + 2 \.1
Connected system
In spite of the common use of Equation 5, we prefer consti-
tuting a system with Equation 3 and Equation 4. For a homoge-
neous case, we write
jA~(div u) I+ 2 \.1 ~ u- a 0
(7)
1div a = 0
or
Variational identity
We call w a bounded open set
y its smooth boundary
(~, ~) some couple of a regular vector ~ and a regular
symmetric second order tensor ~
u ~ a (u)
with
A (q,) = ·;.:'f· 'V (tr q,) I + 2 ]..l div q, (12)
(13)
t = cr n (14)
(IS)
(16)
j = 1 '2
[~]
Calculation of ~(j~·)
Substituting for q, J from Equation 16 into Equation 15, we
obtain
N ~(j) = o I(j) (17)
y
where N is the Navier operator
r = lx - Yl (20)
r,i
3r
= ax. = - ar (21)
~
ayi
75
(22)
A."' + u
(23)
Calculation of ~(j)
Using Equations 16 and 19, we obtain
(28)
j, k = 1,2
with
I (II)
[6 ~] "!(12)
[~ 6]
1(21)
[~ ~] i22)
[~ ~]
Calculation of ~(jk)
System 27 28 may be rewritten
= v(jk) (29)
r··. ,
N ~(jk)
].I)
with v(II) = - (30}
'y' ']
:>..*oy'2
with
(35)
(36)
Calculation of ¢(jk)
Using Equations 28 and 34, we obtain everywhere except in y
¢(jk)
(y)H =rz1 [- Dl (oik oj9. + 6l.J
.. oH - ojk oH)
D2
+ (Dl - T) <6ik r,j r, 9. + 0 •• r,k r,.Q.
l.J
+ ok.Q. r' i r' j + 0j 9. r,i r,k)
with
(44)
(45)
T(j)
(y)i
s, - 2 ~ n, ~2 s (48)
0
s3 = ~ (2 n1 - n2) = - A¥ ~ s 0 (SO)
s4 - 4 ~ n, = 2 s, (51)
ss 8 ~ D2 8 ~ (A¥+ ~) s0 (52)
(53)
5o TI (A¥ + 2 ~)
s(jk)
(y)i OH
( ,,(jk)) ni
'~'(y) = ~2 f ~~ [s3 (oik r,j + oij r,k)
S4 8 j k r, i + S5 r, i r, j r, k] (54)
+ s 4 ni r,j r,k
+frr
E
1/J(j) • t dr + ( T(j) • u dr +
JrR rR
1/J(j) • t dr J o (Ss)
u
j
(y) = Jr
( T(j) (x) • [u (x)] dr (x)
(y)
r
+ u (j) (x) • It (x)] dr (x)
Jr (y) L!
(56)
k ~;~
+ U (x) • [!: (x)] dr (x) (59)
= r s(jk)
Jr tyl (x) ~ (y) • [u (x~ dr (x)
= t
ol
EP lulr
tlr
u
t
=
(61)
figure
for EP t lu o (63)
I
2 uj (y) y €f J for IP (64)
f_
ajk (y) y€. Q for IP (68)
Indirect methods
The particular identities contain [uJ and I or [t]. We may
construct an infinite number of indirect formulations, each
according to a complementary problem, using Identities 56 58
59 and 60. First, a system has to be solved on r, then we may
compute u and I or t on r and u and a in the domain. We give
some examples.
[u]r = 0 (70)
u. (y) =(
J Jr U Y(j) (x) • [t (x)] dr (x) (71)
=h D~~~)
I
[t.
~ for IP
+- (y)]
2 J
tj (y) (x) (y) • [t (x)] dr (x) 1 (72)
--z [t.
J
(y)] for EP
Identity 72 => t on r
Identity 73 => o in d~e domain
(74)
t. (y) =
J
i s(jk) (x)
r (yl
~ (y) • ~ (x)] dr (x) (76)
Next,
Identity 75 => u on rt
Identity 76 => t on ru
Identity 77 => u in the domain
Identity 78 => 0 in the domain.
(79)
and
(80)
We obtain, for y6 r
u. (y)
J =lrt
T (j) (x)
(y)
o lii (xj] dr (x) +Jrr u uU>
(y)
[_t (xj] dr (x)
--z 1
[E. (y)]
J
for EP
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
REFERENCES
INTRODUCTION
THEORY
3 aa ..
l: ~J 0 i 1, 21 3 (1)
'1~
J= J
and o .. is the unit tensor known as kronecker delta and A., ]..1
are ~J Lame's constants given as:
A. = E I ( 1 + v) ( 1 - 2v) ; ll
(4)
u.
~
(x)
I
s
u~~,].(x,y)t.(y)ds
J y
-Jt~.(x,y)u.(y)ds
~J
s
J y (5)
-= '\. Mid-node
L/2
Singular Point
~l+x2+y2-yl, xl-x2+yl+y2)
2 2
Fig.l. Location of Singular point for Constant element
N
~
(10)
j=l
Linear Elements
The variation of t and u is assumed to be linear within each
element. For N elements equation (8) can be written as
~
j=l
j u* tds
N
~
j=l (11)
Sj
(12)
N
l:
j=l J [·, •,] u * ds { t1x }
t2x
N
l:
j=l
r [ F 1F 2
Js.
Jt*ds{ :!x}
2x
sj J
(14)
N
l:
j=l JC·,
s.
F,] u * ds {
t
t2y
!y I
f
N
l:
j=l
J [ .,., }·d~
sj
u1y }
u2y
J
Node
'j+l'
Node
'j - 1'
APPLICATIONS
y = 0
t 0 u along AB (i)
X
tX 120 N, ty = 0 along BC (ii)
t ty 0 along CD (iii)
X
u t 0 along DE (iv)
X y
t t 0 along EA (v)
X y
91
!x
~- .X
llOmm
l50mm -------t
Fig.4. Rect.Plate with a circular hole under uniform tension
D "--t =t =0
X y
u =t =0
X y
y
=0 B
Fig.5. Boundary conditions
for Quarter domain
9.
Fig.6C. Linear boundary Element
8. discretization
ax 7.
6.
• • • Finite Element
Solution
5. Conventional
boundary elmt.
Solution
4.
Regular boundary
element solut-
3. ion
2.
1.
o.
15 30 45 60
Distance along ED
Fig.7a. Stress distribution along the edge ED of the domain
using constant boundary elements
93
8.
• • • Finite Element
Solution
7.
Conventional
boundary elmt.
solution
ax ------- Regular boundary
6. element solut-
ion
5.
4.
3.
2.
1.
0.
15 30 45 60
-------<~Distance along
ED
~--------15omm--------~
Fig.B. Rect.Plate with a notched
circular hole under uniform D
t =O
c
tension y
u =t =0
X y t =120N
X
••--~•~--••Finite elmt.solution
Regular boundary
element solution
15 30 45 60
--------~ Distance along
ED
Fig.lla. Stress distribution along the edge ED of the domain
96
24.
21.
0
X
18.
• • • Finite Element
Solution
Conventio nal
boundary element solution
15. ------- Regular boundary
solution
12.
9.
6.
3.
o.
15 30 45 60
------~~istance a1ong
ED
Fig. 14. Nodal Load distribution acting on bore turface at 16,000 lbs.f total pin load
99
..._-+---4----1-""'-·-·-·-·-·-·-J.--·-·-·-·-·-·-'-,......-+--~
!
Fig. lSa. Constant boundary elemant discretization
Compression
I
I II ~x
Fig. 16a. Comparison of surface stress distributio~ calculated by using conventional and
Regular boundary integral method for conttant elements.
Conventional B.I.M. 2 tons/in 2
Regular B.I.M.
I jl •X
Fig. l6b. Comparison of surface stress distribut~on cala1lated by using Conventional and regular
boundary integral methods for linear e~ements
~
102
80.
l
60.
Stress
variation
along
XX' 40.
20.
60.
Stress
variation
alonq XX'
40.
Conventional B.I.M.
1 20.
Regular B.I.M.
REFERENCES
D.J. Danson
I. INTRODUCTION
~(x) J uki(x,y)ti(y)dSY-
s
I
s
Tki(x,y)ui(y)dSY
+ J uk.(x,y)b.(y)dV
:L :L y
(I)
v
Where ~(x) is the displacement at an internal point x in
the k direction
uki(x,y) is the displacement in the i direction at y due
to a unit point load in the k direction at x
Tki(x,y) is the traction in the i direction at y due to
a unit point load in the k direction at x
t.(y) is the traction at y
u:(y) is the displacement at y
b~(y) is the intensity of the body force at y
s:L represents the boundary of body
V represents the domain of the body
The coordinates of the point x are Xj
The coordinates of the point y are yj
The subscript y on dSy, dVy is to indicate that the
coordinates y. and not the coordinates x. are the
integration ~riables. J
J uk.(x,y)
l
b.(y)dV
l y
(3)
v
and for the thermoelastic case
Bk(x) = -1
aE
- 2v
Jr Uk l.,.l (x,y) 8(y)dVy (4)
v
J A.k
J JL ••
. dV
,l y J AjkJI.. • • n. (y)dS
l y
(5)
v s
where n.(y) is the unit outward normal at y.
l
r Gk . . . (x,y))
J lGki,jj (x,y ) -
J 'J ~
2(1-v)
b ( ) dV
i y y (7)
v
Although Eq. (7) looks a lot more complicated than Eq. (3)
it is much easier to arrange Eq. (7) in a form where it can be
transformed to a boundary integral.
Thus b.(y) may be taken outside the integral in Eq. (7) and
so using ~Eq. (5) we get
dS (8)
y
Rotational Inertia
Let us consider a body of uniform mass density p rotating about
some axis with angular velocity wi. We may without loss of
generality consider the axis of rotation as passing through the
origin of our coordinate system. The acceleration at a point
yi is given in vector notation as
f = W X (W X y) (9)
b = - p W X (W X y) (I 0)
(I I)
Defining
(12)
109
.. J
[n ~J = p -WIW2 w~+wf -w2w3 (13)
Gk . (x,y)}
Bk(x) = !1 .. ·J( y. {G_ . (x,y) - m,~ dV (15)
~J J -k~ ,mm 2 (1-v) y
v
which after some manipulation becomes
.. Jr oy
n~J -J-- {Y.J Gk.
~,m
(x,y)} - Gk . . (x,y)
~.J
V m
(16)
dS ( 17)
y
Bk(x) = 2(a!E)
-v I 6(y)G . . . . (x,y)- G . . (x,y) e .. (y)dV
-k~.~JJ ik~,~ ,JJ y
(19)
v
--f-
yj
{ck . . (x,y)
~.~
e . (y)} dV
,j y
(20)
Thus
4. 2D BODY FORCES
where r is the distance between the force point x and the field
point y
and oki is the Kronecker delta.
uki(x,y)
111
where r. is the unit vector from the force point x to the field
point ~ so that----
y. - x.
r. J J
J r
B ( ) )+V J (2 ln (24)
k x = 4nE r r
s
a .. (x)
l.J
s s
*.. (x,y)
s l.J 2 ~" [l(l -ln.!_) {n r (b.r. + b.r. + -1v b r o.. )
r mm L J J l. -v s s l.J
}] (26)
11 •• p w2 o.. (27)
~J ~J
Bk (x,y)
l-2v I }
- 2(1-v) r ln r ~ dSY
(28)
+ (2 ln..!..- I) (
r
3- 2v n y +2r n r
(l-v)(l-2v) m m mm
J)}
ymrm
+ 2n r (y.r. + r.y.) - ---(n.r. + r.n.)
mm ~ J ~ J I -v ~ J ~ J
I I
2 ( 1-v ) (2 ln--
+ ------- 1){(3-2v)(n .y. + n.y.)
J ~
r ~ J
s s
where
a.E
Pk(x,y) -(l-)
= -2 Gk . . . (x,y)n.J
-v ~.~J
(31)
and a.E
Qk(x,y) 2(1-v) Gki,i (x,y)
113
a.( l+v) { }
Pk (x,y) (ln ..!. - ..!.) n. - n r r
4 'It ( 1-v) r 2 k. mmk
(32)
a. (I +v)
Qk(x,y) = 4n(l-v) r
k
r (ln ..!.r - ..!.)
2
+ J s~.(x,y)
~J
e(y)dS
y
- J v~.(x,y)
~J
e
,m
(y) n (y)ds
m y
s s
a.E
- -1 2 e(x)o .. (33)
- v ~J
S~.(x,y)
~J
= 4 n (~E)
-v r mm - v
0
{n r ( 1i 2j - 2r.r.) + n.r. + n.r.}
~ J ~ J J ~
(34)
5. 3D BODY FORCES
where R is the distance between the force point x and the field
point y. The symbol R is used when discussing the 3D case so
that equations involving the 3D case are easily distinguished
from the 2D case where the symbol r is used.
I +v r dS
Bk(x,y) (37)
411E J y
s
S~.(x,y)
1J
= -8-R
11
rn r (b.r.
L mm 1 J
+ b.r.)
J 1
S:j (x,y) 1
= 811 [{nsrs y: + ~(~~v)nJ(Qimrj + Qjmri)
ym ym
+ vo 1J
.. (rks:<km -R n s r s - n s Qsm -R + r s Qsmnm)
ym r:
- 2R (r Q l.!l.r. + n.r.J + D-2v' rn.Q. + nj 11 iml) }]
s sm 1 J J 1 ~ ~1 JID
(40)
115
and (41)
s~.(x,y)
l.J
= aE
B1r( 1-v)R2
{n r (~-
m m 1-2v
3r.r.) + n.r.+r.n.}
1. J 1. J 1. J
(42)
Gravitation al loads
We have that
2
R (46)
,mm R
116
(4 7)
bm f r
m,k - r k,m dVy =0 (50)
v
Thus we have shown that both Eq. (37) and Eq. (48) are valid
integral transformations of the body force domain integral. In
other words the form of the body force kernel is not unique.
(51)
2vb r o.. }
S*
.. (x,y) n r { s s ~J
G + b + b
~J mm l-2v irj jri
Rotational inertia
A similar process of algebraic manipulation enables the body
force kernels to be computed directly without using the Galerkin
tensor. The results are, for the displacement equation
Bk (x,y) 1+v
4nE
J {nmrmstkJ• YJ• - R st
'km m
n
s
(53)
s~.~J = -4
7T
r[1-2\1v {nmr ml(rs st ~-
sq R
2(stss)) + 2._ n st
1-v
ys
1-v m ms R
+ r
s
st n }
sm m
..
o~J +2!Ifn r (r. st. YRs + r. st. YRsJ
2\
m m ~ JS J ~s
ym ym)
- [n.~ st.Jm -R + n.J st.~m -R + r.~ stJ·m nm + r.J st.~m nm
+_II (n st
-\) m ms
YRs
~~~J
ro .. - r.r:]-
~ J.
_21st J:.r.
mmr~ J
+ nJ.rJJ }]
~
(54)
7. EXAMPLES
Inner radius 30 mm
Outer radius 80 mm
Coefficient of Linear Expansion JQ X J0-6 /°C
Young 1 s Modulus 210 kN/mm2
Poisson 1 s Ratio 0.3
100
(IIDII)
0
40 80
-----Analytical solution
-200
6 Boundary results } 3D element
0 Internal results
• AxisJ~~D~~etric element
100
radius (IIDII)
60 80
-200
Analytical solution
6 Boundary results
20
10
0 20 40 60 80
radius (nnn)
20
0
10
0 20 40 60 80
radius (nnn)
Radius 80 nm
Mass Density 7 • 8 tonne s /m 3
Rotation Speed 10,000 r.~.m.
Young's Modulus 210 kN/nm
Poisson's Ratio 0.3
Radius 78.2 nm
Thickness 50 nm
Mass Density 7. 8 tonnes/m3
Rotation Speed 10,000 r.p.m.
Young's Modulus 210 kN/nm 2
Poisson's Ratio 0.3
REFERENCES
ANALYTICAL BACKGROUND
+ fv b . ( q) u.. (P , Q) dV ( q ) ( 1)
J IJ
where P,Q are points of the surface s of the domain V. Uij and
Tij are the fundamental Kelvin solutions, Cij are coefficients
depending on the geometry of the boundary at the point P, and q
is a point in the domain. Tensor notation is used in this
expression and the indices have the range 1 ,2,3. When body forces
124
Element Library
The following boundary elements have been developed:
- constant, 2D element
- linear, 2D element
-parabolic, isoparametric, 2D element
- triangular, constant, 3D element
-quadrilateral, isoparametric, linear, 3D element
- quadrilateral, isoparametric, parabolic, 3D element
APPLICATIONS
The different test cases which have been chosen have, in
general, severe stress gradients either because of the geometry
or due to the type of loading.
Different boundary discretizations have been idealized and
the following criteria were adopted: for each case a number m of
nodal points is specified, yielding m/2 parabolic elements or m
linear elements. Coarser meshes have been defined from the
previous cases by simply supressing every other node.
The corresponding meshes for finite element analysis have
been such that the outside nodes coincide with the boundary
element nodes. In the finite element analysis, the isoparametric
parabolic element for plain strain/stress problems has been
used.
The first three case studies are 2D analyses and the last
case is a 3D example. All the analyses were performed in double
precision on an IBM 360/44 with a core memory of 256 kbytes.
Hole in a flat plate
The geometry of the problem is illustrated in figure 2a.
·In the present case the ratio a/b is 5. A constant stress Oo
is applied to the plate at faces x=±a. Figure 2b represents the
mesh used in the finite element analysis (FEM). Due to symmetry
only one quarter of the structure has been modelled.
In Figure 3 the values of the o stresses along the yaxis
are compared with the analytical sol~~ion of the infinite plate
case. The solution corrected for the finite width of the present
proportionsyields a value of 3.93 for the stress concentration
factor Kt = oxx/o 0 •
In Table 1 a comparison of results is done jointly with an
indication of the computer times involved in all analyses. A
good measure of the accuracy of the various analyses is made on
the basis of the o stresses at the point A near the hole. The
discrepancy of thexx results is evaluated in comparison with
the value Kt = 3.93
128
4--L-~------------~--+
O"o
a l Hole in a square b) FEM mesh
flat plate
Figure 2
1.
•
c
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
y p
p
X
a) Circular disc b) FEM mesh
Figure 4
<JYyD
2P DOF
o - BEM parabolic 120
• - BEM parabolic 60
0.8 c - BEM linear 120
• - BEM linear 60
• - FEM parabolic 344
0.4
[]
0.2 •
Discrepancy CPU
ANALYSIS DOF Kl /Ko % (seconds)
( 1) BEM Parabolic 120 1 '51 0,67 415
( 1) BEM Parabol i c 60 1 ,49 0,67 103
(2) BEM Parabolic 120 1,495 0,33 850
( 1) FEM Parabolic 530 1,48 1 '3 922
K =aliA; a is the applied remote stress.
0
(1) Extrapolation method
(2) Energy Method
The value of the stress intensity factor obtained with the
energy method involves, at the present stage, the execution of
two analyses with two different crack lengths, thus increasing
considerably the computing costs.
CONCLUSIONS
A general purpose Boundary Element program has been deve-
loped using several 2D and 3D boundary elements.
Results for particular elastostatics situations without
body forces have been presented and the usage of different
element types have been considered.
In general, the results show that the parabolic 2D element
is much more efficient than the 2D linear element. The linear
boundary element is particularly sensitive to corner regions
where the stress results tend to degradate considerably.
The relative computing costs for the various analyses
have been shown in the Tables. In situations of severe stress
gradients, particularly in the vicinity of point loads the BEM
method appears to offer a reasonable accuracy, of the order of
5%, for relatively modest computing facilities.
FEM analyses with similar refinement on the boundaries to
the BEM discretizations involve rather larger numbers ofnodes
without any benefit in the accuracy of the results, yet more
information is generally provided about the stress and displa-
cement fields on the domain.
133
O"yy D ;1614 p
2P1
5.
DOF
o BEM parabolic 120
• BEM parabolic 60
c BEM linear 120
• BEM linear 60
10. X
A FEM parabolic 344
-Analytical solution
Timoshenko and
Goodier ( 1970)
5.
w b) linear
REFERENCES
Brebbia, C.A. and Walker,S. 1980, Boundary Element Techniques in
Engineering. Newnes - Butterworths, London.
Cristescu,M. and Loubignac,G. 1978, Gaussian Quadrature Formulas
for Functions with Singularities in 1/R Over Triangles and
Quadrangles. Recent Advances in Boundary Elements Methods,
Editor Brebbia,C.A., Pentech Press, London.
Fairweather,G., Rizzo,F.J. and Shippy,D.J. 1979, On the Numeri-
cal Solution of Two - Dimensional Potential Problems by an
Improved Boundary Integral Equation Method, J.Comp. Phys., Vol.
31 ' pg. 96-112.
Henshell ,R.D. and Shaw,K.G. 1975, Crack Tip Finite Elements Are
Unnecessary. Int. J. Num.Meth. in Engng. Vol. 9, p 495.
Roark, R.J. and Young,W. 1975, Formulas for Stress and Strain,
5th Ed. MacGraw-Hill, Tokyo.
Rooke,D.P. and Cartwright,D.J. 1976, Compendium of Stress
Intensity Factors. Her Majesty Stationery Officer, London.
Saada,A.S. 1974, Elasticity, Theory and Applications. Pergamon
Press, Nel"i York.
Stroud,A.H. and Secrest,D. 1966, Gaussian Quadrature Formulas,
Prentice Hall, Int. Inc., London.
Timoshenko and Goodier 1970, Theory of Elasticity, McGraw-Hill,
Tokyo.
135
~
~ REGION A 2 REGION B
2~o------,
0 2 r
Figure 9. Regions of integration
-1 0 •1 r
If the singularity is located in a corner node or in ami~
-side node, the integration region is transformed in the squares
A orB, respectively, by applying simple linear transformation
techniques to the domain of integration.
The integral (13) can be transformed as follows
136
ff - -1- - 1~ +n
2 2 f(~.n)d~ dn ( 1 4)
~ r
where the function (/~ 2 +n 2 /r) f(Cn) is suitably represented by
polynomials.
The values of ~. and n. have been found by calculating the
common roots of orthbgonal polynomials in ~ and n. Using a least
square technique the corresponding weights Ai have been evalua-
ted. The Gauss point coordinates and the corresponding weights
are indicated in Table 4.
REGION B
~.
I I n.I I A.
I
1 -0.74772761 0.84529169 0.49133682
2 0.0 0.87119449 0.84924859
3 0.74772761 0.84529169 0.49133682
4 -0.77589199 1. 7321786 0.19429025
5 0.0 1.71964092 0.34350839
6 0.77589199 1. 7321786 0.19429025
7 -0.72502542 0.15427398 0.36769444
8 0.0 0.14090886 1.5127182
9 0.72502542 0.15427398 0.36769444
137
INTRODUCTION
THEORY
N
i i
c u + 2: (1)
j=l
i
where c is the unknown coefficient at 'i'
N = Number of boundary elements in which the domain is
divided,
u and t are displacement and traction respectively,
u* is the fundamental solution for two dimensional
elasticity given as,
1 + v (xi-yi) (xfyj)}
u*
87TE(l-\l)r
~l (3-4\1) 6l.J
.. + (2)
r2
t *
(3)
0
u
0
(4)
0
t
0
dS
:,] t'
(5)
Is.
[pl
0
0
dS
J
1 2
u (~) Fl u y + F2 u y
y
1 (7)
t t2
X
(~) = Fl t X + F2 X
1
t t2
y
(~) = F 1 t y + F2 y
where
h
xi,j-1
= JcF 1 t*Jx dS h
X,
~,j
JcF 2 t*Jx dS
s.J- 1 S,
J
g
xi,j-1
JcF 1 u*Jx dS gx.
~,j
f [F 2 u*]x dS
s.J- 1 s.
J (9)
h
yi 1 j -1
J[F 1 t*Jy dS h
y, . = f [F 2 t
*
Jy dS
s.J- 1
~,J
s.
J
g *
: J[F 1 u Jy dS gy, . = J[F 2 u*]y dS
Yi,j-1 ~,J
Sj-1 Sj
141
That is two equations are set up for each node (one for
each direction) taking into account the contributions made by
the adjoining elements. This approach gives rise to problems
mentioned earlier in the 'Introduction' section. Also, the
determination of ci in Equation (8) is cumbersome. To over-
come these problems 'Regular Boundary Integrals for Non-
Conforming Elements' are employed here. In this method, free-
domsof an element are not defined at the geometric nodes
i.e.~= ±1 but at~= ±1/2 (Figure.2). Also, the singular
point is relocated outside the domain and along positive nor-
mal to the boundary (taken as L/2 in the present case study
where Lis the length of the element) at any node 'i'
[Patterson and Sheikh,l981]. The resulting integrals are
then regular over the whole domain and no special treatment is
required for the evaluation of singular integrands (ci = 0) •
I; + 1
N N
L: [h ]u L: [g ]t
X,
j=l xi,2j-l ~ j=l xi,2j-l X.~
N N
L: [h ]u L: [g Jt
j=l Yi,2j-l yi j=l Yi,2j-l yi
N N (11)
L: [h ]u L: [g ]t
j=l xi,2j X.~ j=l xi,2j X,~
N N
L: [h ]u L: [g ]t
j=l Yi,2j yi j=l Yi,2j yi
where
*
h ]X dS h
xi,2j-l J [Flt xi,2j
JcF 2 t*Jx ds
h
*
Yi,2j-l
f [F 1 t ]y dS h
Yi,2j
JcF 2 t*Jy dS
(12)
g *
xi,2j-l f [Flu ]X dS g
xi,2j
JcF 2u*]x dS
*
g
Yi,2j-l J [F 1u ]y dS g
Yi,2j f
*
[F 2 u ]y dS
APPLICATIONS
a = 1 em b = 2 em P = 1000 N/cm 2
Q
p (13)
i
Ia r I I • •
- - - - • Exact Solution
i Conventional
loel Boundary Elmt.
Solution
Solution using
Non-Conforming
Linear Boundary
Elements
r=a r=b
Fig. 4. Comparison of Exact Solution with Solutions obtained
using Conventional and non-conforming linear elements
145
Radial
Disp. 1.1 0.872 00 0.801 0.825
10° 0.802 0.825
30° 0.810 0.828
45° 0.828 0.830
8.
• • • Exact Solution
7. Non-conforming Boundary
Element Solution
6.
5.
4.
3.
2.
0 D c
Distance along the die
-ct- .x
I
D c
u t 0
y y
t (given)
y
t 0
y
A B
Fig.lO . Bounda ry Condit ions for quarte r domain
0
f-'·
Ul
rt Convent ional Linear Elements
§
(l
ro Non-Conf orming Linear Elements
~
1-'
0
::l
LO
ro
£'ro
t>j
0
0
H\
rt
::r
ro
'0
1-'
~
rt
ro =====-":..~=--= =~-::.-=-==,::== =-= ---
=== =-=--------=-= ...=..=.-=~-=-= ~-=--
--------;.~"':.----=-===-~-~..:....:~-= =--=---=---..: -:--::--: "'=-""":;.""::."="=:---- -
... -=-~~-."';;:' '=
= == =~~ ='= -==---..;:::-:=
E
a
y
Fig. 11. Stress distribu tion along edge ED of the plate
151
REFERENCES
ui (l) =fa Jb
-a -b
155
(1)
where
dj(c) =the displacement discontinuity in the lj = cj
direct1on at c corresponding to a mode j displacement dis-
contuity;
nk(c) the kth component of the unit normal vector to the
segment at c;
U~(l,c) =the displacement in the li direction due to a
force 1n the lj direction at c ; i.e., the Green's function
of the medium; and
A,~= Lame's constant and the shear modulus, respectively.
The notation u~·~eans the derivative of U~ with respect to
ck . Expressio~s for U may be found in Love [1944, p. 185],
Mindlin and Cheng [1950] and Press [1965]. The displacement
discontinuity dj is reckoned positive if it acts in the posi-
tive cj direct1on on the side of the segment with the positive
normal n(c) For the planar segment n(c) = n = (1,0,0) .
u = ctu~
where u is the vector of displacements in the global coordi-
nate system and C is the transformation matrix which trans-
forms a vector in the global coordinate system to one in the
local coordinate system. The superscript t denotes thematrix
transpose. Thus, the displacements at any point due to a dis-
placement discontinuity d on a segment may be written
3
u=Ud= L:u .. d. (2)
j=l lJ J
156
FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
The use of the Volterra integral readily allows a number
of developments of the theory which would be useful in appli-
cations. These are discussed below.
1. Extension to semi-infinite media
To derive the fundamental equations for the displacements
and stresses in a semi-infinite medium, the Green's functions
for such a medium would be substituted into eq. (1) and in-
tegrated, assuming a constant displacement discontinuity, as
before. The resulting expresssions, which are additive to
those of the infinite medium, could be incorporated into the
function subroutines of the computer program in a straightfor-
ward manner.
2. Integration over general quadrilaterals
With rectangular segments, it is difficult to model sur-
faces whose boundaries are not at right angles to one another.
An example is a boundary segmenf whose edge lies along the line
bd in Fig. 5. To model such a boundary, it would be necessary
to integrate eq. (1) over a general quadrilateral or a triangle.
By means of suitable transformations, a general quadri-
lateral may be transformed into a square region over which the
integration may be performed. Consider the quadrilateral shown
in Fig. 7 whose area is denoted R~ . The transformation to
R~ from the standard region R is
4
c2 = ~ hi (x2,x3)c2i = p(x2,x3)
1=1
(4)
where c2i and c3i are the local coordinates of the corners
of the quadrilateral and the functions hi are given by
h3 = t(1-x 2) (I-x 3)
[Bathe and Wilson, 1976, p. 131]. An integral of a function
f over R~ is then given by
(5)
162
or
(6)
Kt d = 0 (7)
dw
Eliminating d between eqs. (6) and (7) yields the required
stiffness matrix for the region H :
CONCLUSIONS
The development of the DDM for the analysis of three-
dimensional elastic media is relatively straightforward if the
Volterra integral is used to derive the fundamental solution.
The use of the Volterra integral permits the identification of
the DDM as a boundary integral procedure with a different in-
fluence function. It also allows:
1) a relatively easier means of extending the technique
to semi-infinite media,
2) more flexible representation of boundary surfaces in
three dimensions by means of integration over general
quadrilaterals, and
3) a natural linkage with finite element analysis.
A working computer code has been developed and tested.
Two major difficulties in the computer implementation of the
technique are the large size of the system of equations to be
solved and the definition of the location and geometry of three-
dimensional models. The large size of the system of equations
can be decreased by either the use of symmetry or the elimina-
tion of non-existent modes of displacement discontinuity, or
both. Alternatively, the equations can be solved by an out of
core solution algorithm. The ability to visualize and prepare
the input data for three-dimensional models would be greatly
enhanced by the use of an interactive graphics system.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank Dr. Ken Matthews and
Mr. Byron Stewart of Golder Associates in Vancouver, B.C., for
suggesting the mining problem shown in this paper. The first
author would like to gratefully acknowledge the assistance pro-
vided by Dr. Tom Hughes of Stanford University with regard to
the problem of linking the DDM with finite elements.
REFERENCES
BATHE, K.J. and E.L. WILSON [1976] Numerical Methods in Finite
Element Analysis, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
BERRY, D.S. and T.W. SALES [1962] An Elastic Treatment of
Ground Movement due to Mining- III. Three Dimensional Problem,
Transversely Isotropic Ground, J. Mech. Phys. Solids, lQ, 73-83.
CHEN, W.T. [1964] Displacement Discontinuity Over a Transversely
Isotropic Halfspace, IBM J. Res. and Dev., ~, 435-442.
CHINNERY, M.A. [1961] Deformation of the Ground Around Surface
Faults, Bull. Seis. Soc. Amer., ~, 355-372.
164
g Global Coordinates
Local Coordinates
c Source Coordinates
INPUT
r1odel geometry
Boundary conditions
Compute matrix of
influence coefficients
Solve system of
equations
OUTPUT
Displacements and
stresses
a
r--.....
~
"\
i\ p
\
a
j p
g3 into page
Ana lytica 1
Numerical 91
1.0 93 =r
V1
V1
(!)
s..
....,
V1
0.8
7Sll/P
p
92 =r
"0 0.6
(!)
N
<tJ
E 0.4
s..
0
z
0.2
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
91/a
3.0
V1
V1
g 3 into page
s.. 2.0
(!)
....,
V1
"0
(!)
N
<tJ
E
s.. 1.0
0
z
sll;P
7
0.0
0.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
9/a
~~
I I I I 180m
c
I I I I 11
Detail of pane 1
discretization
shaft/
a : ( 300, 1000, 0)
0 100 m
b: (0, 1000, 0)
c: (-200tan15°, 1000+200tan 215°, 300cosa) a o sin- 1 (zt~n15°)
d: (200tan15°, 1200, 200tan15°)
e: (150, 1000, 150)
1020
1040
1060
1080
..s 1100
....,
..<:::
c.
a
OJ 1120
1140
1160
1180
1200
1020
1040
1060
1080
..5 llOO
...,
.c:
c.
ll20
"'
Cl
ll40
1160
ll80
1200
x3
+1
R
-1 +1
x2
3
-1
FE Mesh
or
Michel Dubois
Research Engineer
CETIM - France
ABSTRACT
NOTATION
+ -+
¥
<VI, v2> 3 =
s
surface of v 3 ; the bilinear application is then defined by :
+ -+ + + j +
V3v1. v2 dV3, < vl ,v2 > S 3= ~v1.v2dS3
-+ (!)
J J
the boundary curve of V2 ; the bilinear application is then
define1 by : + + + -+ -+ +
< VI,Vz > V2 = V2v1.v2dV2, < vl,v2)s 2= S 2v1.v2 dS 2 (2)
where dV 2 is the differential elementary area on the referen-
ce surface and dS 2 is the differential elementary arc on the
boundary curve.
If I= I, v 1 is the reference fibre of a beam, and s 1 repre-
sents the boundary points of v 1 ; the bilinear application
is then defined by :
<~1.~2>v =Jv~1·~2dV1, <~1.~2>s
1 ~1·~2 Is
1 1 ..... 1 .....
where dV 1 is the differential elementary arc and vl .v 2 S1
I
(3)
GENERALIZED MODELIZATIONS
€· • e. . with i, j = I , 2, 3 (6)
~J ~J
-+'
The corresponding symmetrtcal components of 3cr~ reduce
to classical stress cr~J
ij
(} with i, j = 1,2,3 (7)
(9)
(10)
(II)
1"t1 = N (12)
BASIC EQUATIONS
The generalized strains have covariant components I E·.
I l.J
kij in the natural reference frame
I
E• • (13)
l.J
where the generalized strain vectors are defined by compa-
tibility equations :
I+ lit.1. =Cl 1..Ie
E • (14)
1. '
I+ r_,_i I ij + I j +
0 on. 0 nigj 0 n gj
1.
I+ I+ i n· I ij + I j -> (17)
]1 11
1. ]1 nigj ]1 n g·J
Transformation of I + i I -+ i I+ I+
(J ]1 into on ' Jln is
symbolically written
I + I+ l+ i I + i
(J
Jl n
N ( (J ]1 (18)
n '
I +i I+ i
Vectors a and Jl verify equilibrium equations
for the quasistatic case here to be considered :
+ I+ i I+ i I+ (Jg)
+ 0 g. X a +a i Jl + c =O
1
179
(24)
The generalized modelizations defined by the above equa-
tions are called IDGM according to whether~ = 3 2 1.
The generating model is 3DGM while 2DGM and IDGM may be
considered as simplified representations.
The GR2 and GRI are then obtained from GR3 by the same way
as in classical 2MD shells and IMD beams theories [2],[1].
180
FUNCTIONAL FORMULATION
Transformation of basic equations into integral relations is
performed by a former presented method [4], L5], making use
of distributions theory {8/. In a first step, functions
equations are transf~rmed into linear continuous functionals
equations. The Iti, e are prolonged by zero if ~ VI ,t
by using the characteristic function :
.....
if ~ ~ VI
{ 01
if x f. VI (26)
and we apply in distribution sense at (H (VI)Iu,H(VI)Ie)
the composed second order linear differential operator :
L =D o R o C (27)
where D, R, C, are respectively defined by (20), (23),(15),
We use distributions derivation formulas like
v cS (SI )
<li (H (VI) -+v) = H (VI ) <l i v-+ - ni-+ (28)
and :
Clj <li (H (VI) :;j ) = H(VI) <lj <li :;j- <lj (ni:;j o (SI))
INTEGRAL RELATIONS
Let IE (Iu , I H ) be the tempered elementary solution
of L The (6 x 6) Iu and I H matrix has components
I I-+ -+ I H
Uij = ui.gj (34)
ij
where Iu. and I H
are respectively displacements and rot~
tions cofresponding to concentrated forces and couples at
origin in direction
~
Iu.
~
g. :
and I H. are tempered
~
solutions of
I-+ I =t- -+I -+I
L ( Ui , H i) (gi o (0), gi o (O)) (35)
with i o (0) being the I dimensional DIRAC distribution.
The elementary solution IE is obtained by HORMANDER'S
method ru
By convolution product of IE with (33), we obtain then
I I -+ ~ I~ I-+ -+
<( U, H) (x -0, {_..£., _£) (t; )>
vi
I -+ I
-+ I-+ I-+ -+
H)(x- t;),( an, ~n)(t; )>S
+ <( U,
I I -+ -+ I-+ I -+ -+ I
- <(T ( U, H))( x-t;), ( u, 8) (l:)>s
I
(36)
which are integral relations available for any ~ E VI
(I= 3,2,1),! being an integration variable.
REFERENCES
1. INTRODUCTION
TiJ" (x,y) = -
8n;(1-v)r
2 { (1-2v) fn oij + (3)
where
or Yi - xi
r,i = Clyi = r
v and E are elastic constants, r is the distan-
ce between pointe x and y, 5ij is the delta-
-function, ui is a component of the unit outward-
-normal of the surface. The repeaten inrlex in a
procuct is to be understood as a summation over a II
the indices.
where
N1(g) = t <g,+1) (g 2+1) <g,+g2-1)
N5(g) =~ <g,+1} ( 1-g~) etc. [6J
187
~1 ~1
2 4
2
3
MJ(g) = l4 (1 - g,> (1 - g 2)
(6)
The points x, at which the integral equations are
expressed are internal points of the surface ele-
ment not identical with the nodal points in terms
of which the boundary coordinates, the displace-
ments and/or the tractions are expressed. General-
ly the number of the equations after the discreti-
zation of BIE and the number of unknown values of
the nodal displacements and/or tractions are dif-
ferent, i.e. in the matrix form
[ Tij] {uj} - [uij J {tj} = { o} i
j
= 1 ,2 ••• n
= 1,2 ••• p
(7)
J
where [ Tij and [ Uij J
are matrices of the coef-
ficients determined from the numerical solution of
the BIE {1), {uj} and {tj} are the displacement
vector and the traction vector, respectively, of
the nodal points.
I If <
1 1
11 1' 112> d 111 d1]2 = (10)
-1 -1
n1 n2
LL
i==1 j=1
+ E: '
= -
I
s-s0
and when this is used we receive
(14)
=- I
s-s 0
[ uj (y) - uj (x) J ds
where S0 denotes the area of the element with a
singularity point.
- J skij(x,y) uk(y) ds
s
where
Dkij = : 2 { ( 1-2 v) [ Bki r , j + B kj r , i - Bij r, k ] +
skij = rJ~ { 3
2 ar [ (1-2v)
an 5ij r,k +
- nj r ,i + ni r ,j J
where
1 - 2v
K = 8n:(1-v)
We shall assume that region D consists of two
parts mutually complementary to the infinite space.
SC"r
s----------------
Fig. 2. Crack of arbitrary contour in infinite
space
ui (x) • I
s+
tj (y) uij (y,x) de - (17)
ui (x) = -
+
J t. uj (y) T!j (y,x) de (19)
8 cr
where
+
t. uj = uj - uj
The stress components ere obtained frem equation
( 19)
= !J.(u~,J + uj,a.> for a.= 1 ,2
(20)
+
= 21J. [ v u a., a. + (1-v) uJ,J J _L_
1-2v
and by integration by par~ we get
= J t. uj ( y) aT!j(y,x)
'* ds =
s+ oya.
cr
• - ) •uj,a T!j(y,x) ds
or
194
T
ij
,. - !L[ 2
r2 r
Hence, form the preceding relationships and from
equation (20) we receive
0 33 E 2
• 8n:(1-v J
+ )
8 cr
for a., ~,y .. 1, 2
The integrals in equation (21) are understood in
the sense of Cauchy's principal values. Now, we can
take up the numerical solution of the system of
integral equations of first order (21) where dis-
placements on the surface of the crack to which the
known loads o33 and/or oa. 3 are applied. The
crack surface is approximated by meaas of surface
elements. Then, the Cartesian coordinates of any
point of the element are expressed in terms of co-
ordinates of nodal points and shape functions in
terms of local coordinates. For this purpose, we
can use immediately the elements shown in Fig. 1
with the corresponding shape functions. As it will
be shown later for penny-shaped cracks or ellipti-
cal cracks it is advantageous to use a transition
element, Such an element permits matching of one ele-
ment with two elements side-by-side [1]. For the
195
I
A c B
N1 = 41 (1-0 ( 1 -1])
1
- 4 (1-1~1) ( 1 -1])
1
N2 .. 4 (1-~) ( 1+1])
1 1
N3 '"'4 ( 1+ ~) ( 1-1]) -4 (1-1~1) ( 1-1])
1
N4 ""4 (1 + ~) (1+1])
1
N5 =2 (1-l~i> ( 1-1])
'7)
it)
where
[J] .. ( ~t
..Q..z ~
01] 01]
Po = Mh1
-y- (1 - L)
h
1
p1 = M I
I - moment of inertia of the cross-section
area of the beam
112
x1 •010Sm
Q4
....... ......
...,
' ''
''
' ',
'' ' a numerical results [3]
for a/b .. 2; b/h=O
\j)
0.7 L__-----'----~-----:L:-----=-:::------::!::-------;;!=--
30 60 90 120 150 180
Reference s:
[1] D.M. Tracey: 3-D elastic singulari ty element
for evaluatio n of K along an arbitrary crack
front; Int. J. Fracture 9, 1973, 340-343
[2] S.E. Benzley: Represen tation of singulari ties
with isoparame tric finite elements, Int. J.
Num. Meth. Eng. a, 1974, 537-545
[3] T.A. Cruse, G.J. Meyers: Three dimension al
fracture mechanics analysis, Journal of the
structura l division, Proceedin gs of the Ame-
rican Society of Civil Engineers , 103, 1977,
309-320
204
CETIM - France
INTRODUCTION
Seven years ago, CETIM developed a computer program based on
the Boundary Integral Equation method to analyse three dimen-
sional structures under mechanical loading. At that time, the
boundary conditions that could be taken into account by the
program were :
This is the reason why, since 1975, all the analy~s of three
dimensional comjact bodies have been performed by using this
program, I I1. 12 , 121.
I
207
Two examples are given below, the first one concerns elasti-
city problems whose Governing Equation is the Navier's
Equation, (fig.2), the second one concerns steady state heat
transfer problems whose governing equation is the Laplace
Equation (fig.3).
208
Boundary
Integral B.I.E. B. I.E.
Equation
with : i 1,2,3 ; j I ,2 ,3
t tension
with : l£ = Flux
In those equations, the Kernels T .. and Tare varying as
1/R 2 and the Kernels Uij and U ar~Jvarying as 1/R in the
three dimensional case (fig.4).
fig.4
D
triangular element
fig.7
quadrangular element
fig.8
CYCLIC SYMMETRY
When analysing a body whose. geometry is the same from one
sector to another around a given axis, and when the loading
is radial, it is possible to restrain the analysis of the
behaviour of the total structure to the one of only one
sector by imposing a normal displacement equal to zero on
every element of the radial surfaces representing the sector.
But when the loading is not radial (for example, torsion
problem), it is no longer possible to study the behaviour
of a sector alone with the following boundary conditions :
given tension or given displacement on the surface, because
on surfaces "inside the volume" (fig.9), tension and displa-
cements are both unknowns.
211
surfaces
inside the
volume
Fig.12
214
z
on
surface
c
fig.l3
The conclusion of the study was that the stresses were too
important at the basis of the pawn for the force that had to
be transmitted. In order to come back to a reasonable level
of stresses in this area it was decided to increase the
diameter of the pawn,
SLIDING ON INTERFACE
When there is contact between two bodies, three kin~of
contact may exist :
- perfect,
- contact with friction,
- perfect sliding,
When the contact zone is known and when the kind of contact
is perfect sliding, the conditions are (fig.J4).
Subregion a
Subregion b
fig,l4
216
Subregion a
Subregion b
fig. 15
- In the shaft :
_ vpr R2 2-R1 2
u r (r,z)
E
[ --2-
1-v
Rz 1
u z (r,z) .E
E
[ I - v2 Rz 2 -R1 2
Rz 1
(r,z) v p Rz -Rl
2 2
0 rr oee<r,z) =2 Rz
a
zz
(r,z) = p
arz = a ez = a re 0 ue 0
v
arr (r,z) -2 p R1 2 [ R!z - ~J
v
oee<r,z) - 2 p R1 2 ( R> + ~J
I
.!Lj
I
h p_2
r 111
I
r
fig.l6
218
- ....,,,
- - - 1',.......
~
'
'
Sector of 45 degrees
\
\
X
fig.17
ur(r=IOunn) 3.16 10- 3 3.13 10- 3 3.14 10- 3 3.16 10- 3 3.13 10- 3 3.14 10- 3
uz(z=2.5unn) -3.33 10- 3 -3.31 10- 3 -3.33 10- 3 -8.03 10- 5 -7.97 10- 5 -8.41 10- 5
-3
u (z=5unn) -6.66 10- 3 -6.63 10- 3 -6.69 10 -1.61 10- 4 -1.55 10- 4 -1.62 10- 4
z
u (z=7.5unn) -9.99 10- 3 -9.37 10- 3 -1.00 10- 2 -2.41 10- 4 -2.27 10- 4 -2.35 10- 4
z
-2
uz(z=IOunn) -1.33 10- 2 -1.33 10- 2 -1.35 10 -3.21 10- 4 -2.99 10- 4 -3.25 10- 4
Table
~
co
0
"'"'
Shaft (*) Hollow cylinder i
I
Theoretical Numerical result Theoretical Numerical result
Result Result
daN/mm 2 Min Max dan/mm2 Min Max
cr r -3.375 -3.19 -3.47
cre -3.375 -3. 13 -3.63
cr r - 30 -29.7 - 30
crr(r=IOmm) -3.375 -3.15 -3.47
cr 9 (r=l0mm) 5.625 5,53 5.72
crr(r=l5mm) -.875 -1.21 -1.28
cr 9 (r=l5mm) 3. 125 3.07 3. 12
cr (r=20mm) 0 10-9 10-1
r
cr 9 (r=20mm) 2.250 2. 19 2.25
cr z 0 10-3 10- 1
x Results on the axis of the shaft are not taken into account.
Table 2
221
CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BIBLIOGRAPHY
H. Antes
ABSTRACT
BASIC EQUATIONS
(2)
D • N • u = £
- ,...., ,...., -
+ E:Q* (3)
u = g* • (5)
-G • ,....,
R
,....,
(6)
K. £ (7)
~
-1
K £ (8)
~
T -1 Q*
D
- -
• K
- -
• (D • N • u - E
....... .......
) p* = .......
+ ....... 0 (9)
This equation (9), the reduction of the two systems (1) and (4),
can be called the Navier's equation of the linear shell theory.
(10)
n. 11
a ( 11)
n.22
a (22)
n.12
2a ( 12)
m (11)
8 (11)
m(22)
8 (22)
m ( 12)
28 ( 12)
RECIPROCAL THEOREM
( 12)
E = B • E:
- ~
(14)
+ Ir (R-s • E) T •
~
v . (~G • ;J!,l df
-
( 16)
DT · B · E:
- - f"'oJ
= DT · E
- I"Y
= 0 in n
~
(17)
1 T 2 1T 2K*
fr <~s • ~l · v • (R • 1/Jldr-
-G ~
JE •~r
n~
dn . (19)
2 T 1 2T 1K*
= j(R
r -s
·E) · V • (R
~ - -G
·1/i)df-
~
jE
n~
•!:
~
dQ. (20)
Here only modified strains E and stress functions 1/1 are used
to express the unknown quantities. This new formulation of
the reciprocal theorem can be combined with the well known
Betti's reciprocal theorem, for shells in the here introduced
vector-matrix notation given by
1 T T 2 1T 2*
Jr (R-G • u) · V • (R
~ - -s • cr)df +
~
fu · ~p
n~
drl
2 T T 1 2T 1*
= f<R ·ul
r -G ~
·V
-
• <~ 8 -~)dr+J~
n ·,e drl. (21)
JE1T
n~
2
•<Jdrl =
~
j(R-G
r
•U)
~
1 T
•V
-
T
· (R
-s
2
~
1T 2*
·cr)df+}u •p dQ.
n~ ~
(22)
. 2 T 1 2T 1K*
j(R ·E) ·V· (R ·'l')df-jE ·!: drl. (23)
r -s ~ -G ~ n~ ~
229
(25)
u
T (x ) =
f [ (R • 1jJ (y))
T • v T • (~s • ~* (~,x_l)-
~ "'P r -G ~ ~ - "'
(28)
Here III
denotes the Cauchy principal value of the boundary
integral. The characteristic matrices ~ 1 (X) and ~ 2 (il are
calculatedas the limiting values (Hartmann 1980)
I V- T * ,.- -,. . , ) df Y
. , ,y. . , = ,y. . , + pw)
lim · (R · S (y, (30)
-s -
p ~or
p
- -
IQ-G* (y,x) ·I K* (x)dD . (32)
,....,,...., ,...._, ,...., X
3u 3 3E*
T
·az-
~3
dZ
(x )
~p
f[ (~G • _t (x_) ) T ·V <~s (X
"'P~
,y))
r
3cr*
- (R · u(y)) T . v
-G ~ ~
T
<~s . az- ~3
(x ,y)) ]dr
"'P ~ y
3E 3
- J _::_ (x ,x)· rK* (x) dQ (33)
Q dZ "'P~ ~ X
3u 3 3cr*
T ~3
3E 3
- JQ _::_
d\1
<y_,?:_{) • LK* (x) drl
·- ·- ~ ~ X
(34)
l
uk (x ) +
f (R l T
• ~) • vT
2
<~s · f!..ldf (35)
~p r -G
2
becomes substituting thy stress function ~ by equation (6) and
the displacement field ~ by the relation (3)
T l
I (D. N. ~)l T (~ • !? • ~ • ;J:.l d
2
uk(x ) +
n- - ~p
+ f (R • u)
l T
• V
T
• (~S •
2
f!._) df (36)
r -G ~ -
fn[u1,1 <~3,22 +
1
R ~2,2l - u1,2<~3,12 +
1
R ~2,1l
1 1
+ u2,2(~3,11 - R ~1,1) - u2,1 (~3,12 - R ~1,2)
(37)
2
a 1 'l" arctan yX + b(xlnr + c1x (38)
a 2 x · arctan y + biy ln r 2 + c 2 y
.?!.
. (39)
233
1 2 2 2
=-R [a 2 xy • arctan yX + (b 31 x + b 32 y ) ln r ] . (40)
a 1
+ f[R <w 2 , 1 (x,-b)- w2 , 1 (x,b))+ <w 3 , 12 <x,-bl-w 3 , 12 (x,b))]dx=o,
-a
(41)
1
0 (43)
'R a<22l ,1 + 13 <22> ,1 - 13 <12 > ,2
0 (44)
= 0 (45)
(46)
1 T T 2 lT 2
Jr (R-G • u)
~
· v- · (R-s • cr)dr
~
+ fu · ~p*
rl~
drl =
f(R
~ -s
(~~ -EQ*llT
~
· v · (R
-G
• ,T,ldr +
~
+j[EQ*T · f + (EQ*-
n,.....; . -. .; ""-J
~) T
f"oJ
· fK* ]drl
,..._,
(48)
( 3) 1 1 ( 3-v) 2 2 2
1/J
3
=---
R 21l
[xy ·arctan ~ + 1 6 (x - y ) ln r ]
y
(51)
CONCLUSIONS
APPENDIX
1
0 -Vlbl 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
F
-1
K K
0 0
236
2
(1+V) a12
F syrnm.
Et
(1-v) (a12) 2
( a 11 l 2 12 11
a a
11 22
+va a
12 22
-1 Et syrnm. a a
~ =~
1-v 11 22
- 2- a a
0 0 -1 0
b2-b1 0 -1 0 0
2 1
b1 0 0 0
2 2
a
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
1
0 0 0 0
2
0 0 l
N 0
0 0
0
-1
j
237
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
:= 0 0 0 0 0
~s
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 D1 0 D2
0 0 0 0 D2 D1
0 0 )
0 0
R := 0 0
-G
REFERENCES
Torbjorn Andersson
INTRODUCTION
Basic relationship A B
Consider two linearly elastic bodies n and n bounded by cy-
lindrical surfaces. The traces gf the goundary surfaces in the
(x 1 ,x 2 )-plane are the curves f and f respectively. The
geometry and all variable quantities are independent of the
x 3-coordinate. The problem is thus considered as a plane pro-
blem in the (x 1 ,x 2 )-system, Figure 1.
the two bodies are in contact with each other. The contact
region can be separated into two parts. On one part res sliding
occurs i.e. the surfaces in contact move relative to each
other. This part is called the slip region. On the other part
rca' called the adhesion region, no sliding occurs. Thus
rA rA + rA
c ca cs
f Hk.. k
(P,Q)~u.(Q)df(Q) = f Uk.. (P,Q)~t.(Q)dT(Q),
k k=A,B (1)
k l.J J k l.J J
r r"
From the previous load state a normal gap between the contact
boundaries can be calculated, Figure 2. This gap is denoted
u~'n where n is the load step under consideration.
k
Four new displacement components v. (k A,B) in the local
coordinate system can now be definea.
242
(2a)
(2b)
(3)
v b.v (4b)
e e
]1
ve
Figu.e 3 Friction coefficient as a function of
effective slip
,___
+ (,n-1 _ n-2) n-1 (6)
.. ~ tl
t2
slipsurface
::...___
t3
3 2
t2 + !::,tE,3
2 2
t2
2
tl + !::,tE,2
2 2
tl
2
0 tl
Second
_,.,_
First load step 0-1: adhesion
1-2: slip
Third - II - 2-3: slip
(7)
This ensures that after each load step the condition for slip,
t 2 = : ~t 1 is valid, see Figure 4.
r
A B
/1v1 + L'lv1 0, /1tA - L'lt1B 0,
A
t1 < 0, t1B<O (Sa)
c 1
A B L'ltA - MB= 0
r 11v 2 + 11v 2 0, (Sb)
ca 2 2
k + k E: k
r
cs
/1tA - L'ltB=
2 2
o, M2= -l.l11tl + 11t 2 • (k = A,B) (Sc)
f NTA.. o,n df
~ 1J ul +
fA Ui2
A
u
•ts,nar
2 (9a)
fA T
c cs
+ B
f u~. /1t.df +
J
f u~.
1]
M.dr +
J
f B(U~l l.lUi2) M 1dr +
BB J 1
rB
1
r -r r
c ca cs
B o,n
- f (1-a)Til ul df + f Bu~1 2 11l·rar
2 (9b)
rB r
c cs
rk- rk k k
( L'lui' L'lti) (lOa)
c
rk (11v. , /1t.) (lOb)
ca 1 1
rk k +
cs (/1vl, /1tl), (11v2 , l.J/1tl) (lOc)
245
Outside the contact region there is cne relation for one un-
known quantity and inside the contact region there are two
relations for two unknown quantities.
Until now it has been assumed that the adhesion and slip
zones are the correct ones and that the tangential traction in
the slip zone has the right sign. One way to find the correct
solution in each increment is to get a solution for an assumed
contact condition that is not violating itself. In the assumed
adhesion zone the total tangential traction has to satisfy
Jt 2 J < ~Jt 1 J. In the slip zone the friction force should work
against the relativeAdisplHcement increments. The condition
sign (t 2) # sign (~u 2 + ~u 2 ) has thus to be fulfilled.
x.
l.
I'm.
l.
~
m
~u.
l.m
, ~t.
l.m
(12)
From
o,n equations
. (2) and (12) it can be concluded that
l. and
~v.
u1 are l.nterpolated by ~m·
~vlslsvls
[~
0
UB
-TA
0
1
0, 0
UBs -TB
J 0
0
GtA
StB
~v2alsv2a
2s 1
A I
A
o,n ~v2s Sv2s
au 1 0
~ E:,n
~uB !SuB
0
t2
I
M1 St 1
(1--a) u~' n 0 aj a
Mlsj Stls
M2al St2a
B B
~v2sl 8v2s
(14)
n_j~
i&1VV1~V<RkkRxd
\ element limit
(17)
(20)
Computer program
A computer program system for solving elastostatic contact
problems with friction using the Boundary Element Method is
developed. The program system is built up of three programs
and data are transformed between the program by use of disc
store, Figure 8. The programs are written for two-dimensional
plane strain or plane stress problems and linear elastic
material properties. The shape functions for describing dis-
placement and traction variation over each element are assumed
to be constant.
Input
Input
Displacement Displacement
Traction Traction
Stress
APPLICATION
Problem 1
An elastic roller on an elastic foundation is considered. The
BEM model of the two bodies is shown in Figure 9.
50 element
E 4000 [N/mm 2 ]
v = .35
R = 50 mm
tany = .20
50 element
E 4000 [N/mm 2 ]
v = .35
~ 10.0
.a 8. 0
:r:
~ 6 .o
z BEM solution
~ 4 • 0 1------.,,ff--+-
E-< Hertz:
2
~ 2 • 0 1-.c'f----+- p = 'ITEb
~ 32(1- v 2 )R
8 0.0 L-________. _________. _______~
FORCE P [N/mm]
100~---------~---------~---------~----------,
Shear stress
-100L-.--.-----~---------~---------~---------~
-5.0 -2.5 0 2.5 5.0
CONTACT LENGTH x [.nun]
Figure 11 Elastic roller on elastic foundation, contact
pressureandshear stress distribution on the
foundation
253
Load
case CD 0 G) ®
load
step 8 8 9 9 Nr
)1 .05 .01 .25 .30
pl 591 591 0 0 N/mm
p2 0 0 549 549 II
2
pmax 95 95 90 90 N/mm
Pmax 93 93 88 88 II
Hertz
b 8.0 8.0 8.1 8.1 mm
bHertz 8.1 8.1 7.8 7.8 II
Problem 2
A circular disc is placed in a cylindrical cutout of an infinite
plate. The radii of the hole of the plate and the disc are
approximately the same. In the BEM calculations the clearance
is assumed to be ~R/R = 0.003. The BEM oodel is shown in Figure
12.
-'rr"'
.6
I...-..-~ r--·~1
,.....-
/.I
......•\-t•~-
•1• r-:~."."
<3?,\-
3
.4
v~r:~r ~/
Ar•<·~,_iJ- /
l•/
r
0
.2 ~~ ,(
()I
()I
;::l.
........ ........
.o
l IPI@
0 ~
~
@
-e- -e-
d
t-e
.
0
0..
~. ~I
1-'
p:: p::
~
p
Ul
Ul Ul
-.2
~~ ~
~d>
M/~QR
-
l'~o
~
CY
Ul
"' 'o--o
p.. ~ -.4
.0 .0
-
8 Ul
I :}
0 .4 .0
z~ ril~
• Contact pressure
0 Shear stress
G) .4 .5
0 ::r:
0 Ul -.6
-90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90
CONTACT ANGLE ¢0
Problem 3
Load transfer in mechanical assemblage is of practical interest
255
since high stress gradients often occur and the stiffness pro-
perties often determine the load transfer. A problem where a
part K of the load P is transferredbetween the sheets by a steel
rivet is shown in Figure 14.
Steel rivet
Al-sheet
(l-K)P ~
2.5
.-·
I I
~ = 0.0 ~ = 0.2
./
K=l.O y
/
2.0 ~---r-1-~~---+----+---~----,
•
• K = 1.0
•
I 0.8 ·--- ·-·
~-·-.............
ill . . . .-·--·-
• / 0 8
~I \
1.5
r--t.·4~ ·.----·~-·,\-
·-·-
II I ·---......._
·-·-
0. 6
.
__ ......
~
0.6 /.yl·\~
r 'I"
!'{,...
0.4
·-·
./
•
.r·-·~
1.0 -t~·~~\ -·--v·/;-;. . .~
~~·IY
1-
\ ·"·r.._ ·-·
.
0.
\n.z •'•...... /
\
-t---\ •,
/.
0 0
;t:~~8:_tf_~ i
b b
........ ........ 0.5
0.. 1-'
·y
1\
"
I • ·;;-·-·-•c:.;:::~,·
I ·-·-.".J...i:::
- ........ J.....•-
11 l/ ~r·--·1 •
& '• _&'//; -~ .4/
0.0 ~--~-----+----~~~~~~~--~
.-~ ·-~,............
'·-·/ ./. 2
•
Contact pressure
• Shear stress
a0
p
=b = lOO[N/nmh
I I I
-0.5
90 60 30 0 30 60 90
CONTACT ANGLE ¢
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
R. C. Batra
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
p = p0 (1 - u. .), (1)
J.,l.
Ev
(3)
n.o .. n. 0, x1 ~ b (6)
l. l.J J
u2 = 0, (9)
012 = 0, (10)
where
(11)
262
Taking the inner product of both sides of Equation (2) with wi,
integrating the resulting equation over the domain n consisting
of the region occupied by the layer above the plane x 2 = 0 and
using the divergence theorem, we obtain
where
gk Lijkt w1,]
. . nt. (14)
( ) - ~(m)= 0 (15)
Lijkt wi,j 't k
Indentation
Thickness/R 0 Load P/(Gb) Indentation/b Thickness
.2343 2.162 .2784 .2486
.2092 2.182 .2550 .2550
.1883 2.216 .2368 .2631
.1674 2.272 .2190 .2738
.1454 2.303 .1974 .2820
.1172 2.633 .1802 .3218
Remarks
We should emphasize that the results presented above and the
conclusions drawn are applicable only to the geometric config-
uration studied herein. For other values of geometric para-
meters, one will expect similar qualitative and not necessarily
quantitative results.
For the present problem the CPU time and the core require-
266
ment for the finite element solution and the boundary element
solution were virtually the same. In the boundary element
solution of the problem the grid used had 10 elements across
the thickness of the layer and 35 elements across the circum-
ference. The boundary element solution perhaps gave slightly
better values of tractions at the bond surface. The grid data
in both caseswere generated internally in the computer program
and required the same effort.
REFERENCES
IO
g r id
e le m e n t
B o u n d a ry
F ig . 2
268
Qj
<J
"'
.....
"";:J
Ol
'1:1
U) en en
U)
"': 2v 0
1::
,.0
II II II Qj
D .c:
VI ctl;lo .j..J
.j..J
"'
Ol
Qj
Ol
ct~IQ) Ol
Qj
""
.j..J
<ll
<"")
00
..-i
""'
.4 8o =.209
71 =.45
r=
10::: .3
.....
0
0:::
:!:.
~
.....
1.&.1 .2
0:::
::::>
en
en
1.&.1
0:::
Q.
.I
0 .25 .5 .75
e
8o
Fig. 4 Pressure distribution at the contact surface; effect of layer thickness 1\)
!B
2 "'-..s
0
1.5
y
ROBO
UNDEFORMED
DEFORMED SURFACE
(S; =.766)
.5
DEFORMED
SURFACE (S;= .883
,.,
~
Ia:
0
'a:
.6
..!
-C)
..._,
Si= .766
Ql .209
"i .3~
.... Bo=
a.
rv
-..J
272
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
to that used in this paper, but there are differences in both the
formulation and application of the integral equations.
FORMULATION
(1)
Using polar coordinates (r,e) and letting S be the angle from the
radial direction to the outer normal yields
M (w) = D{
- -O+v)'V 2w + 0-v) ~( - aw + -
I - I -a2w - a2w ) cos 2S
n 2 r ar r2 ae2 ar2
- 2 .L
ar
aw )
( .!r ae sin 2aJ t
r (8-a)
FIGURE 1
K
+ ~- L <Mt(w)i>EI- <Mt(E)i> wl 0 (10-a)
k=1 qk Pqk Pqk qk
where
~=lim J
e+O r
b{Vn(E)iwl-
Pq q
Mn(E)i:l
Pq q
+ ~~~
Pq
Mn(w)i- EIVn(w)i}dsl
q Pq q q
E
{10-b)
By placing the ongm of the polar coordinate at point P the
singular function E that satisfies Equation (5) is
( 11)
d = _1_ (12)
2
4-A 1T
276
Making use of Equations (11 ), (8-a) and (8-c) and separating in real
and imaginary parts gives
Ei(Ar) =i c J (Ar)
0
03-a)
~(Ar) = c Y (Ar) + d
0
K0 (Ar) ( 13-b)
i
~ (Ar) = Ni = - i AC J 1 (Ar) cos8 ( 13-c)
J 1 ( Ar)
- c D A (1-v) -r - cos28 } (13-e)
(13-f)
· { [ 3 A3 (1-V)
.
Vn(E) 1 = V 1. = - 1 c D J 1(Ar) A cos8 + 2
(13-i}
_ co~38)}
277
03- j)
E~ = i c J 0 (At.) 05-a)
fQ
= 05-c)
(15-e)
{15-f)
=0 {15-g)
278
( 15-h)
{15- i)
= ic {16-a)
2
' i ' .cAe:
1 lml-2-= 0
lJmNI {16-c)
e:-+o fQ e:+O
2 1
lim r-Jf 1 im - (- c-d) - =0 ( 16-d)
e:+O fQ e:+O n e:
1 im M~ {16-e)
e:+O fQ
lim Mj lim D A2
e:+O
(~ c+d) logAe:
n
(16-f)
e:+O fQ
1 im vj ( 16-g)
e:+O fQ
lim Vj 2 2
= 1 im - D A (- C+d) -
e:+O n
1
e:
{16-h)
e:+O fQ
The results of Eqs. (16) are substituted into Eq. (lO-b) and we have
279
- E~ Vn(w)l} dsl
Pq q q
K
- L [ <Mt(w)l> 0 (18-a)
k=l qk
and
~ { 1 WI - Mf
Pq q Pq q
R
Mn(w)l- El Vn (w)l
Pq q
K
- L[ < Mt(w) I>
R
El - < rr
...R
> wl] -WI = 0 08-b)
k=l qk Pqk Pqk qk p
Again, making use of Eqs. (8a to 8c) and writing the kernals in
imaginary and real parts gives
(20-a)
280
(20-b)
. J1(Ar)
Ny1 (Ar) = i c [A J o (Ar) cos4> cosS - -r - cos(4>+S)] (20-c)
~(Ar)
y
= A(c Y0 (Ar) - d K0 (Ar)) cos4> cosS
(c Y1(Ar) + d K1(Ar))
- r
· cos(4>+S) (20-d)
. A2
M~(Ar) = i c D {J 1(Ar) [~ cos4> (1+V+(1-v) cos2S)
J (Ar)
- 2 ;~-v) cos(4>-2S)] + (1-v) A~ cos(4>-2S)} (20-e)
(21-a)
R
EYI = [c Y 1 (A.e:) + d K 1(A.e:)] cosq, (21-b)
~
i Jl(A.e:)
NY I = - i c ["A J 0 (A.e:) - -e:-1 cosq, (21-c)
Mi
Yl
~
282
TR = DO-v) {~ 2
(c Y0 (A.E:) - d K0 (>..e:)) -2 (c Yl (A.e:)
rl e:
~
+ d K 1 (A. E)) }s i ncj> (21-h)
J 1 (A.e:)
vi A.
= i c D {-J 0 ( A.e:) [A.3 + 0-v) --:zl coscp + - e : - [>..2
rl e:
~
+ 2(1-v)] coscj>} (21-i)
2
e:
1 im E
e:+O y~
l
= 1 im i c
e:+O
~e: coscp = 0 (22-a)
limN
e:+O y~
l
= lim- i c [A.-
e:+O
~~] coscp =- I~A coscp (22-c)
(22-e)
limTil =0 (22-g)
€+0 y
~
limVRI
€+0 y
~
Again, the results of Eqs. (22-a to 22-j) can be substituted in Eq. (10-6)
in order to determine q;. However, we see that the limit does not
10-b) by~ = w - w I r
converge. This can be corrected by replacing w of Eqs. (lO-a and
Note, this assumption does not affect its
derivatives, also note hat along r 8 we have
(23-a)
(23-b)
dw
wl = wl - wl =- £ dnl (24-a)
fQ Q p \.,(
dwl .
Also, -d
np IS
When the results of Eqs. (24-a), (24-b) and (22-a) to (22-j) are
substituted in Eq. (10-b), ¢i is found to be
1 . . dw . .
J5 {\t (wl- wl)- Myt dnl + Nyt Mn(w)l- Eyt Vn(w)l} dsl
r Pq q q Pq q Pq q Pq q q
K
- I [ < Mt (w) I> EYl - < \ l > (wl - wl )] =0 (26-a)
k=l
pk Pqk Pqk qk p
and
Jr D.! {V R
YI w I
(
- wI ) - MR
YI
dw N R M ( )
dn I + YI n w I - EYRI Vn (w )I}d s I
Pq q P Pq q Pq q Pq q q
K R .
I [ < Mt (w) I
-k=1 >E I
y
- < T
y
I >
qk Pqk Pqk
1 aw (26-b)
- 2>.. a~l =o
p
The integral equations (18) and (26) are for a singular point P
inside of the region n. The equations involve only the boundary
unknowns of effective shear, bending moment, normal slope and
displacement.
~~ = f,
p
PVfpq wlq - Mjpq :1q + ~ ~(w) I - El
pq q pq
Vn(w) l}dsl
q q
(27-R)
1 K R
- 5 kL [ <Mt (w) I > EI - <rl
...R
> wl 1
qk pqk pqk qk
Kt" ~~ + K
.. a.,p n ~npI
a
= _Dl
rf{~l
y
(wl-wl )- r.Jyl ddw +
nl
r-f-yl M (w) I
n
pq q p pq q pq q
pq q q
1 K R ...R
--D k=l
L [ <Mt (w)l >E
yl
- q-Y-1 > (wl - wl)
qk pqk pqk qk pk
K . i
- kL [ <Mt (w) I > El - <T I > (wl )] (27-I)
qk pqk pqk qk
and
286
(28-1}
K
I [ <Mt (w) I > Ei - <Ti > (w- w )
k=l yl yl I I
qk pqk pqk qk p
NUMERICAL SOLUTION
COMPUTER PROGRAM
however, requires twice as much computer time. The true and false
roots found from the real parts of Eqs. (27) and (28) are easily
separated, if one looks at corresponding mode shapes.
CONCLUSIONS
The method used in this paper provides a viable and useful means of
determining frequencies and mode shapes of arbitrarily shaped thin
uniform elastic plates. At this time, nothing can be said about the
relative merits of this method as opposed to the finite element method
or the mixed method proposed by Bi!'zine (4). Since all of these
methods produce acceptable results, the criteria for choice must be
computer costs. Comparisons of these methods will be the subject
of future research.
REFERENCES
INTRODUCTION
DYNAMIC STIFFNESS
s 2 u. - su.
1. 1.0
- u.1.0 (4)
295
-
Writing s = iw and defining the body force to be
P.
l. 1.0
K. +
l.
u.1.0 (5) + iw u.
the frequency dependent differential equation of motion takes
the form
2 ,..,_. 2 ,..,_. 2
(c ) u ... + c - c
u. + en u. + P. = 0. (6)
s J,Jl.
p s l.,JJ l. l.
where w is the circular frequency.
The transformed boundary conditions are
- u . = u.
l. l.
(7 a)
0.l.J.
J
n. = T'il:l. = t.l. (7 b)
where T is a differential operator.
i=1
n
l: J
r.
u*dsi ¥
i=1
ft*
I'.
i
ds.L u . ( 14)
L L
where u ri_~* ds ( 16 a)
T (16 b)
rJt*
- ds
T u !::! .t I
( 17 a)
T T + _!_ I (17 b)
2-
Equation ( 17) allows us to establish the dynamic stiff-
ness matrix of one or several foundations. The surface of the
soil represents the boundary of the domain which is discretized
by boundary elements. They may be divided into two parts: One
part, with index i, stems from the foundation, the remaining
297
[i]
tion (17) may be partitioned as follows:
[
~i~ ~ia]
Ta~ Taa ua
=[ !:!i~
Ua~
!:!ia]
Uaa
[!i]
ta
( 18)
- - - - - -
As all boundary elements belong to the same horizontal plane
some of the coefficients become zero because at the surface
~~ = 0 (19 a)
(19 b)
(19 c)
(20)
-u = -a -u •
(22)
dA. M. (23a,d)
~ ~
298
K2 L:
].
f
A.
t2 dA.l ' M2 L:
i
f
A.
t3 r1 dA.l (23b,e)
l l
K3 L:
i
f
A.
t3 dA.l ' M3 L:
i fA.
t2 r1 dA.l
l l (23c,f)
- L:
i
f
A.
t1 r 2dAi.
l
p aT A t (24)
where A is a diagonal matrix and stands for the area of the in-
dividual boundary elements of the foundation.
(25 a)
1 i
2 .!:! (25 b)
299
I a
-u (25 c)
2 -
Equation (25 b) shows that, within the above mentioned assump-
tions, the displacement-traction-relation of the foundation is
not affected by the traction-free part of the surface. It is
therefore sufficient to introduce boundary elements only at the
location of the foundation itself. This simplification results
in considerably reduced numerical effort.
~~=~ (26)
where the complex dynamic stiffness is defined as
(27)
(28)
NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
K (36)
with a = w ·b (37)
0 c
s
where b is the half side-length of the foundation,and KR and KI
are dimensionless stiffness coefficients. Inversion of-~ yields
the flexibility matrix
F = FR + i FI
- - - (38)
again divided into real and imaginary part.
With shear modulus G and side-length b they can be written in
dimensionless form:
for the displacements
fR G b FR (39 a)
G (39 b)
and for the rotations and the torsional degrees of freedom
fR G b 3 FR (39 c)
G (39 d)
.. .
i!
0 8 8
lil
.;
Iii
.;
..
Iii
~
"'
..8 .
8
lil
.:~
~
i
0
~
0
i! i!
0
.8 0
lil
.;
Iii
.;
.Iii
.~
.
8
Tlil
.: d
~
Iii
0
~
0
8
oo·• BL ·o !IG"O 't'O Bl"O 0 o• ·o so ·o 110 ·o 110 ·o- so ·o-
"~">I .ou Z~">l
.8
!i!
"'
.8
8
~
g
~
g
~
g
N
~
N
8
N
g
~
li!
g
0
~
0
8
oe·o st ·o 31 '0 89'0 '19'0 0 OT ·~ 10'l 9b'O Z&'O 98'0
X~\j ZT'>t
8
~
g
..;
g
~
g
N
~
N
8
N
g
~
f\1
g g
0 0
~
0
8
oo·• oo·o oe·o oro os·o 0 oo~-.~~,t~-~.~~~-o~~="-·o~,~•.~o-.+-4 ~
X~\j Z~\j
.
8
oo.7..1~~~·o~=••~.o~=~~.o~=~~·o~-4~
xwx~~
.!l
w
= e = const. (41)
whereas for constant hysteretic damping n becomes
n= w ·e con st. (42)
Figures 3 to 6 show the dependency of stiffness coefficients
on the dimensionless frequency a 0 for various values of the
damping coefficients n and 8. It can be shown that the real
parts of the dynamic stiffness matrix decrease with growing a
which corresponds to a reduction of the stiffness of the sprigg
in the model. Simultaneously damping increases in a way which
depends on the chosen damping model.
!::1 }(
x2
45°
>xi 2
v
:.____j,_:t-0
xf
xl
g g
~ ~
e e
f!i f!i
~ ~
<i <i
8 8
g g
g g
~ ~
0
~ ~
" "
~ ~
~ 0 ~ 0
X X
[;: al
~ ~
fil g
.; .;
g
.
g ci
.g
g g
,.,., ee.·o zo·o zo·o- ci
""''"'
Ol ·~ 'fG"O ci OT '0 90"0 90'0-
Zf\j nRwx~">l
g g
~ ti
e e
.
~
0 .
~
0
<i
<i
8 8
g g
g g
~ ~
~ ~
~
" 0
"~
0
~
.; 0
0
X
X
:il g
~ ~
.g
c
_/ g
.;
.
g
.
g
g b
Ol'l so·• zo·• 96"0 "6"0 ci OT '0 90"0 20'0zc·o- so·o- ci
zp nRWX'f">l
"
8 8
!l !l
~
~
~ ~
~
~
~ ~
!a 5I
g g
iii
'2
~
~ ·~f!
"'
~
~ ~
"'
.; 0
)( t: ~
al ~
ti ti
g
.;
.g
8
0
8 8
!l !l
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
;i ;i
!a !a
g g
g iii
~ !i
~ f!
"' "g
!i!
.; 0 .; 0
)( )(
~ al
ti ti
CONCLUSION
Although our results are given here only for rigid, flat
foundations on homogeneous soil the method can easily be ex-
tended to embedded foundations on layered soil.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
REFERENCES
Cruse, T.A. and Rizzo, F.J. "A Direct Formulation and Numeri-
cal Solution of the General Transient Elastodynamic Problem I"
Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 22, 1968
SYNOPSIS
INTRODUCTION
RAFTS
Uplift
A 30m square, 2m thick raft resting on a clay soil 40m thick
vJith:
Ev = 10 + l.Oz MN/m 2 , Eh/Ev = 2.3, ~vh = 0.1, Vhh = -0.15
and Gvh/Ev = 0.661;
where z is the depth below the underside of the raft, has been
subjected to a uniform uplift pressure of 200kN/m 2 • The raft
material is of unit weight, 25kN/m~ and elastic moduli E =
28GN/m 2 , v = o. 2.
200
a~~--~--~~--~~
a 5 1a (m) 15
a~~~~~~--~--~--_,
'(5
Vl
E
'zE 2
->,
'iii
c
<I>
c
c<I>
E
0
~
a
West
·~~
I
Layout of reactor building
0 10 (m) 20
Silos on Chalk
Settlement observations for a complex of four grain silos
supported on independent 23m diameter, 1.2m thick raft founda-
tions founded on soft chalk have been reported by Burland and
Davidson (1976). The layout of the complex, in which each
silo weighs approx~mately 4lMN and has a storage capacity of
120MN, is shown in Fig. 5.
Measured • West} of r.
• East
E 't.
.s
c
••
50
Q)
E
~
~
Qj
(f)
100
or-----.------.-----,.-----~----~
~
z
~0.2 ------------~~~~--------
~
::J
Ill
Ill
Cll
L.
~0.4
'(5
(f)
-10
Hogging
,"' ---
20 \
\
c '
Cll
E
0
............... ' , ,--
~
30
'''v" " Transverse
,. 68. 230m ~
~
B$6(:)$-
Silo No.1 Silo No.2 Silo No.3 Silo No.4
for both the elastic and for the 11 elasto-plastic 11 analysis are
shown for comparison. Agreement is tolerably good given the
complex behaviour of chalk, which exhibits creep characteris~
tic·s, and is much improved when the "elasto-plastic' 1 nature of
the material is modelled by the imposition of an upper limit
of O.?MN/fi 2 on the soil pressures.
LAWPILE
20 Silo No.2
E
.s •
+-
c
<11
E
...
..9:!
+-
~ 20 ..--S_ilo_N_o_.4----+----------,
60
Elasto-plastic
- - - Elastic
• Measured
Figure 7 Computed and Observed settlement of silos
Diaphragm Wall
In ordef to illustrate the use of the program in predicting
the behaviour of a diaphragm wall consideration has been given
to the case study reported by Burland and Hancock (1977) of
the basement wall to the underground car park constructed at
the Houses of Parliament, London. The wall has a nominal
thickness of l.Om and an over all height of approximately
28.0m, supporting retained soil to a height of about 17.0m
The car park was constructed from the top, down, after the in-
stallation of the wall, by casting the uppermost floor slab
-and then excavating the material below down to the next slab
level and so on. In this manner the floor slabs act as both
temporary and permanent strutts to support the diaphragm wall.
The soil profile and construction stages are shown in Fig. 8,
together with the assumed soil properties used in the analy-
sis.
u: 0
·~.
_o
0 ·-
• ,"0
2 C'=Im2
<?
-t~ -
.~:
0
. .; 0' = 30°
~ 0
·o t.
.o
oil d.
j_
: o. 'a
-o o· 6
c u'o
0
(f) .,
'.:
~--- 8
-_<s:- E
-.:r.::. -w 0
- _--;.;:: 0 0
:s:
'X'.:::: 0 12
_-_-?t 0.
0
..... 1t.
~-..::::
:s:0
_-_><: Qj
0 0
.0 16 0 0
0
.J::.
_'t.= 15.
-* g 18 0
0
0
>. 0 0
0
u x=
c --~ 20 0
0 0
-o 0
c -~; 0
0
0
_J
22
0
0
)';_-=
21.
---~
__ ,.,.
-:r_- 26
0
0
0 0
-;;r-
-_-_g 28
{mm)
20 30
4 2
6
Floor slobs
8
_ 4_
10
12
g _ 5_
0
~
14
0
a.
0
16
~<I> 18
.D
:Ea. 20
<I> - -- - - S1mpson et ol {1979)
0
22 - - - - - Burland & Hancock {1977)
- - - - Present
24
·:·:·:·:·:·:·:-:·:·:·:·:· Range of recorded
::::::::::::::::::::::::: movements
26
28
200
-- --
- -
.~
.......
Vl
0
ljJ /
-150
z /
~
/
/
Q)
l)
'- 7 - - - - - Observed
.E 100 I
0 I
+-'
c I
0 I
N
I
'-
0 50 I
I
I
I
I
OL-----~----~----~------~--~
0 10 20 30 40 50
Displacement at soil surface (mm)
.....
~
g-2.0
0
2.5
3.0
CONCLUSION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
REFERENCES
M. Predeleanu
INTRODUCTION
GOVERNING EQUATIONS
lJ
t .. = a ..
lJ lJ
+ao .. (2)
a ..
l.]
2N x d E: .. +
l.J
I A X dE: + Q X dG J 0 ij (3)
a Q X dE: + R * dG (4)
where by A X d 1jJ is noted the Stieltjes convolution of
two real valued functions A and 1jJ defined by
( a. .
l.J
+ ao l.J
.. ) , J. + F. =
l.
o (6)
a, i i =
..
and by the fluid flow equation of the Darcy type
s C e- s + q ) (7)
INTEGRAL REPRESENTATION
Reciprocal theorem
If the porous med~um B is subjected to two loading programs
J(a), = 1,2, then governing fields of the corresponding defor-
med configurations verify the following reciprocity relation
1 2 - t (I) • (2)
L12 (J ,¢ )= !ds(x) f P. (x,t-T)u. (x,T) dT
3B o ~ ~
I t (I) (2)
+ 0 f 3s(x) f g (x,t-T)O,i (x,T)nidT
~ 3B o
+ £ dv(x) £ t
Fi
(I)
(x,t-T)ui
• (2)
(x,T)dT
2 I
1 21 (J ' ¢ ) (13)
0 (15)
We obtain
where
k k
A . =A .. n.
nl lJ J
(18)
Fi(x,t) (19)
where
B •
n1
= BlJ
•• n .•
J
J and cp are defined respectively by Equations (17) and (18).
Equations (16) and (20) define a coupled linear integra-
differential equations system for the unknown fields ui anda.
330
From Equations (16) and (20) it is easy to see that the dis-
placement field and the fluid pressure are directly determined
in every interior point of the medium if the boundary and
inside inputs are known
t
f dv(x) f n(t-T) F.(x,T) x.dT +
B o l. l.
• ~ t k .
u(y,t)+; ds(x) f A.(x,y,t-T)u.(x,T)dT-
k dB 0 m. 1
332
.f t k
- f ds(x) f a.(x,y,t-T)t .(x,T) dr +
() B o 1 n1
..!. jds(x) JtCk(x,y,t-T) 0 ,. (x;r:)n.dT
S ()B o • k 1 1
where t .
n1
= t 1J
.. n.
J
It is worth noting the following:
a. For the stress boundary value problem in which surface
tractions and the fluid pressure are prescribed over the
entire boundary () B for all time, the third terms of the
Equations (30) and (31) are known. On the other hand for the
mixed boundary value problem, these theorems contain the
unknownfields on some parts of the boundary.
b. For certain singular Kernels Q (like A.. and B.. for
instance) and regularity conditions for 1 J the 1 J density
wand the boundary () B some additional terms (jumps) of type
nw(y,t) can be separated from the singular integral defined
by Equations (30)-(3l).The calculations of these limits are
performed after eliminating the time convolution integrals
by Laplace transformation. Otherwise, the regularity condi-
tions must be imposed for the time and spatial integral
operations.
c. The analogy between the consolidations theory of porous
media and coupled theory of thermo-viscoelasticity allows the
use of some fundamental solutions (see Nowacki (1962), Derski
(1965)).If supplementary hypothesis concerning the non-cou-
pled interaction between the two phases, is adopted, then
important simplifications may be introduced. On the other
333
FINAL REMARKS
REFERENCES
M. Brunet
INTRODUCTION
PLASTICITY RELATIONS
f(o .. -a .. )-o~=O ( 1)
lJ lJ
Therefore
•p • ()f
E: •• \-- (2)
lJ dO ..
lJ
338
0 ( 3)
8 .. E•p •• -- 0 (4)
lJ lJ
a .. = C f.P .. ( 5)
lJ lJ
alJ.. = ~(o lJ
.. -a .. )
lJ
( 6)
~-.
lJ
= C(sp) f_P .. - d (f:P) f:P Ep..
lJ lJ
(7)
with
X ••
lJ
1
a .. - -3 8 . . a
lJ J.J mm
•
and ~p
~ -- [23 •p ij E•p ij
E
J 1/2 (8)
where c(£P) and d(sp) are two material functions which could be
determined from uniaxial cyclic tests.
-wE;P
~e vanishes in (9) and we get the cyclic steady behaviour
when ~ = w = 0.
In order to complete the constitutive relationships, assume
that the total strain increment can be decomposed into an elas-
tic part and a plastic part :
e
in which Dijkl 1s the elastic material tensor :
D~.kl
lJ
= __ E_
(1+v)
[o.ko.l + o.lo.k + (1:v2 )o .. okl]
1 J 1 J v lJ
(11)
2
A
• =1-[- 3f
-De •
E
a.+S acrij ijkl kl
J ( 12)
with
a + S (13)
and
•p
E •• ( 14)
lJ Gijkl Ekl
ep •
(J ••
Dijkl Ekl ( 15)
lJ
in which
G
ijkl
= _1_[lf_
a+SL3crij
De _lf_J
ijkl 3crk1
( 16)
ep e _ D~. ( 17)
Dijkl = Dijkl lJmn Gmnkl
0
8 0
011 -(811+\1822) 1 ~~ E 11
8
0
E
022 -(822+\1811) 1 ~~ E22
Q
012 8YM.
( 19)
where
R and P
Q = R + 2(1-v 2 ) P
with
* A= 32 [
Bo 2o~ - (~o + ~e
-w£P l
)o 0 Tj
for the complex non-linear hardening rule (9). These cases are
incorporated in the solution procedure analyzed with the boun-
dary element method.
C..
lJ J
rUlJ.. (P,Q)i.(Q)df
~.(P) = Jr' J
-
lr'~1 lJ.. (P,Q)~.(Q)df
J
(20)
+ ~n LlJ. .k(P,q)e:.k(q)
op
J
dn
,1
+ 2 r .r .r k] ( 21 )
'1 ,J '
(22)
where (23)
- L: ijk
and
S1·J·k = G ~ 2 ~r [(1-2\!) o .. r k
2rr( 1-v)r 2 I on 1J •
G
- - - - { 2( 1-v) (oiJ" r.k r.l + okl r . r . )
27T( 1-v)r 2 •1 .J
(25)
NUMERICAL IMPLEMENTATION
(26)
After applying the boundary conditions the system can be
reordered and we obtain
(27)
(28)
in which [c•J represents the independent terms and [n•] stands
for the plastic strain integral. As it was shown in [7], the
343
(30)
(35)
Then we solve
(36)
If
NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
II£Pll~1 -li£PII~
II£PII~1
0.1
~p
o constant BE (40)
• linear BE (20)
E
0.05 E
0
00
40mm
0 E = 70000MPa
0 234 567 8 v = 0.33
Rate of convergence ( step 3 ) t = 1.0 mm
H'= 0.3E
do= 300 MPa
2000
BE Analysis Kinematic
1000 • Hardening. LlP=120 daN
MPa
200
I
I
I
I
I
I
-0.2 I
j
I
I
I
I '
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A
K
I ............. 20 BE Analysis
Cyclic transient behaviour
""'~ -·- Cyclic steady behaviour
do 200 MPa
~ t:J t:22
1<122 y
E 200000 MPa
0.3
E 8 0 = 54666 MPa
E
0
co
f IIJo 0.00513 MPa-1
~ == 0.011 MPa-1
.Q 65.3
1
...-_.....-/ '%
40mm""
Figure 2
347
600
E = 189270 MPa
do= 470 MPa
H' = 0.35 E
Internal cell
or finite element
348
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
INTRODUCTION
BASIC EQUATIONS
b.
I 2(~~- . + _v_ ·p ) - _1_
u + --u ( I)
j, U l-2v t, Q,j ~J,~ l-2v Ekk,j G
a .. ( 3)
~J
in which o~J
.. is the Kronecker delta.
a .. (4)
~J
•p
a .. (5)
~J
( ) * (6)
k c
where ( ) and ( ) stand for Kelvin part and complementary
part respectively.
s load point
q field point
s' omage of s
IP1 1= IP21= 1
R,
s
x,
(
Kdl- [s(l-v) 2 - (3-4v)] ln R +
[0-4v) R~ - 2c xJ
( 7)
Kd { - [}l(I-v) 2 - (3-4v)] ln R +
[0-4v)ri + 2c xJ
----= -----
R2
354
e arctan(Rz'R 1)
r = (r. r.) !
1 1
I
R = (R. R.) ~
1 1
R. =x.(q) -x.(s')
1 1 1
c = x 1 (s) > 0
X = XI (q) > 0
K = I I [81rG( 1-v)]
d
+ 16cx Rf }
R6
2 [R (r 2 +2c 2) - 2cr 2+2xr 2 (1-2v)]
- K
s
{<x + 3c)(l-2v) + I 2 2 2
R2 R4
(9)
355
+ 16ci r~ }
R6
where
Ks = 1/[411(1-v)] ( 10)
c c
p .. (I I)
~J
0 jki "Ilk
and
c =...!_ [crJki - v c
Ejki OR.H ojk] (12)
2G
r h* •p
J d(l ( 13)
+ 0 jki e:jk
(l
where r represents the total boundary of the body, r• the part
of r in which x1 > 0 and n stands for the domain of the body
that has to be always located within the half-plane x1 ~ 0.
Note that the second boundary integral is performed over r•
because the fundamental solution is zero on the surface of the
half-plane and hence the integral vanishes there.
(14)
c .. u.
1J J
* p. dr -
I u1J..
r
J I
r'
p *.. u. dr +
1J J Ju1]*..
(l
b.
J
d(l
* •p
+
I e:jki ojk d(l (16)
(l
357
•p
where ajk was given in expression (5).
.
a ..
~J
(I 7)
f.. ( 18)
1]
358
In addition,
Ac c c
0 ijkQ. = 0 ijU - v 0 ijDml 0U ( 19)
and
c c
G [aakii + aak~J (20)
ax;- ax.
J ~
I
r'
(21)
A*
fn
:P <ill 0 (22)
Eki 0ijki
hence,
-p *
f. • (E )
~J J pijk ~
r'
df (23)
~.
~
= P(~.
~J
- v £'Pkk o~J
.. )n.J (24)
fl2 = 0
G •p •p
2(1-v) (£22 - £11) (25)
(26)
g .. 8
I _ ~-2~p
- _(I-v) •p oij
_ ij + (I-4v)crH J fore> 0 (27)
~J
and
gl2 = 0
I
- 4(1-v) Lcr22 -all
r:P •p J for c = 0 (28)
_ G
f .. - - - - -
r, ·p..
!Jc ·p
+ EH o,. J (29)
~J 4(1-v) ~J ~J
Notice that expressions (25), (27) and (28) still remain valid.
NUMERICAL IMPLEMENTATION
EXAMPLES
Thick cylinder
In the first example the plane strain expansion of a thick
cylinder subjected to internal pressure is studied. Ideal
plasticity under von Mises yield criterion is assumed with the
362
tI
I
I
\
b= 2a
a= 100mm
\"
--y
0.8
0.6
Analytical
0.4 • • • B.E.M.
0.2
E 12000. dN/mm 2
a~
10 00
+
I
I
I
08
!
plast1c elast1c
06
l
04 o/00 =0 755
Analytical !
. . . B.EM !
!
02
I '/a
10 12 14 16 18 20
Figure 4. Circumferencial stress distribution in thick cylinder. Plastic front at r' =1. 6a
Strip footing
In this example, the plane strain analysis of a flexible strip
footing under uniform loading is presented. The finite soil
stratum is discretized taking full advantage of both, symmetry
and free-surface condition, using the reduced number of 14
boundary elements and 42 internal points as shown in figure 5.
E 30000 psi
c = 10 psi (cohesion)
$ 20° (angle of internal friction)
'J = 0.3
3 tan$ r-- 3c
! p + ~J2 0
(9+12tan 2 ~) (9+12tan 2$)!
where p is the hydrostatic component of the stress tensor and
J 2 is the second invariant of the deviatoric stresses.
365
160
FEM ( M-C)
••• BE M (M-C)
12 0 B E.M (0 - P)
a v
80
l-
4.0
12ua/ l
•
.......
4 6 81 12 2 14 2 14 8
I '!1i l D D D
Figure 7 . Spread of plastic zones at different load levels.
Mohr-Coulomb yield criterion .
366
Shallow tunnel
In a recent paper the present authors have applied the elasto-
plastic boundary element technique to solve the problem of a
deep circular excavation of radius r' in an infinite medium.
The great advantages of the technique were then pointed out when
comparing results with different finite element solutions.
Herein, an analogous problem is studied by considering the
tunnel to, be shallow, located within the semi-infinite domain
and with its centre at a depth of 5r'.
E 500 ksi
c = 0.28 ksi
<P 30°
\) = 0.2
av + yh (vertical stress)
0.4o (horizontal stresses)
v
where a is a uniform pressure that may be due to an overburden
of wate¥ or very weak material, y is the unit weight of the rock
and h is the distance from the ground surface.
r
----------- ----~-----
y
.
I
I
I
I
5 r·
I
r----
I
,~,.
2 .25r·
-7.5
,,
I \ deep tunnel
shallow tunnel
-5.0
-2.5
r,
/
/ ~r'
2 3 4 5
Figure 9. Final stresses along the horizontal section through the medium
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
I. INTRODUCTION
i) Equilibrium equations
a'· . . + b.
l.J. J l.
= 0 in n (2. I)
where o .. and b. are the stress and body forces components and
n is th~Jdomain~
ii) Displacement-strain relationships
£ ••
l.J
= -2I (ul.,J
.. + u .. )
J,l.
in n (2.2)
where ui,j and Eij are the displacement derivatives and strain
components respectively.
where G and v are the shear modulus and Poisson's ratio resp-
ectively and oP. ar'e the initial stress componentslO
l.J
iv) Boundary conditions
* * * bk
ui
J pik
r
~ dr +
J uik
r
Pk dr +
J
n
uik dn
+ * crmk dn
Eimk
0
(2.6)
J
n
* uik
pik' * and E*~mk a~e Kelvin's fundamental solutions 4 for
d~splacements, ~ract~ons and strain respectively, and their
values are given by:
(2. 7)
iiK = 6ii
axK
x2
r.K = k = x~-x~
GxK -,-
,,
(PI v,:c;,v ~,
'2
'1
P (load pomt)
,,
Fig.1 Geometric parameters. Fundamental solutions
a
Ol / /
// LINEARLY ELASTIC / ,;:_.LINEARLY ELASTIC CURVE
/
/
/ ///
/
// /LOADING CURVE ...,
e: (compress1on ) £ ( tractaon ) £ {compression) E ( tract•on)
'-UNLOADING CURVE 6E --UNLOADING CURVE
+ J (2. 8)
n
the value cik has been determined by different authors 1 • 2 •
r 0
(J • •
~J I
r
s.~J'k ~ dr
J
r
D.~J'k pk dr +
J Dijk bk
n
drl +
J
n
Fijmk o mk drl
(
0 0
- (Jmk ~mk'. dr 1 - CJ •• (2.9)
J ~J l.J
rl
3r r.
{ 2-;:;-
-
L(I-Zv)o .. r k + v(o.kr . + o.kr .) - 4r.. r .r k]
s.~J'k on ~.J ' ~ ,J J .~ .~ ,J •
(2. 10)
(2. II)
u = 'PT ua.
on r
p 'PT pa.
and
ao ljJT 0 oa. in Q
where Ua., Pa., ba. and ooa. are the nodal values for displacements,
tracti~ns,~body forces and initial stresses respectively. ;pT and
pT are interpolation functions such as those used in finite
elements 7 •
Notice that we need to consider Ua. and Pa. only on the boundary
in order to solve the integral equations, while Ba. and cr 0 a. have
to be defined over the whole domain.
377
NE NE
(J
)
uc + I p * cpT dr. ju I u* cpT dr.) pa.
j=l J - J - j=l - J
r. r.
J J
NCELL
+ N~ELL( J u* lj!T dO.)ba.+ I [J e: * lj!T dQ. )o oa.
J=l J - j=l - J -
0. n.
J J
NP
+ I u* p (3. 2)
~v.
j=l J
cu + h u G P + D b + E a· 0 + V P (3. 3)
- _u
I (3.4)
n.
J
For triangular cells and linear interpolation the follow-
ing function can be used
(3. 5)
with
378
( 3.6 )
(3.9 )
* I
E~mk(p,S,r) = e~mk(p,S),r (3.10)
n
This can be integrated over r remaining only to carry out
the integral over the angle a. The a integral is performed
numerically using a four or six Gauss integration rule. Once
these integrals are computed over cells one obtains the matrix
E.
(3.12)
379
AX (3. 13)
X M + K a0 (3. 14)
where
(3. 15)
a = D P - S U + D + WP
v
+ F a0 - o0 (3.16)
with
F =F - I (3.18)
a = T - S X+ F a (3.19)
- _o
a = N + B cr0 (3.20)
where
N T - S M
(3.21)
B F S K
5. APPLICATIONS
-,
1
40' PARABOLIC CURVE
y =1501b/tt 3
G =1061b/ft2
v = 0 .3
Kill =0.2
~--------------------~~f-f~r-i~~--~
-
I
BOUNDARY NODES
'-BOUNDARY ELEMENTS
CAl
Fig. 7 Steep valley. Elastic solution Fig. 8 Steep valley. No-tension solution ~
384
Semi-circular tunnel
The semi-circular tunnel, fig. 9 is a comparison example pre-
viously solved by Bath 12 , 13 using an isoparametric quadratic
finite elements program. The loading and the boundary conditions
were chosen to make this example an optimum numerical test
rather than try to reproduce an actual tunnel.
Deep tunnel
The tunnel example shown in fig. II was used for a hydro-
electric power station and taken from Valliappan 11 • He analysed
it on a no-tension problem using 500 constant elements and 276
nodes mesh with a finite element program. The fig. 12 and fig.
13 show the discretization of this tunnel for the boundary
element solution, both with and without prestressing forces.
A 48 nodes and 39 elements boundary mesh was used for both cases,
the internal cells for initial stress integration are plotted
in the same figures. For the first case the only applied forces
are those corresponding to the removal of the material. Fig. 14
shows the initial elastic and final no-tension solutions. The
results are very similar to those presented in (II) using the
Finite Element Method.
385
r
Ov=H .Y
------ ----
I• -Ou =H .Y
H = 116 - y
I
I
I
""-V""
~ 28.8 %
~ 40 . 0 %
• 100%
I 8l
*!:m;i~=~=!®!:}.t::!m=~~~=a.W:;mm~mmtW:=w=w.l=~=!~J=i~:Ifl:@imi:;:~ir:l*?:m!:r::!:ill!:~:!*?.i~~!m;®.;;;S}[~
u(lt) I v (It)
y
~ E
,f" <;"
N
#',f"v 6 (Venical displacement at B) II
0 .08 + 0 .4 I
0.06 + 0 .3 u A Horilontal
( displacement at A )
Y.~~~i~~; ;~~~§~;q
:/~... .... : .... :
0 04 + 0 .2 ...... ----
\- ··t
------
-------
-------
0 .02 . ...... ------- X
~~:,....-- ..........
6.o 1 i~~9{¥~:~{;~~:·.~·,.
4% 40% 64 % 100% P(LOAD) . . ~.··r···•·-,..·--.>1'·- ~---'~>
,' \\./,r\ / ' \ ,/ \, ./ \, / '.\:
,/•'! ,'/: ,.,/' 1,',' : ,,•'"' :
t·::-:--'i-.JO.- -+ --JI:,--~- -*·-·---If·--'' :
/~;:~::t~~:~:~~~t!"~,)t.:>
Fig . 11 Displacements at the structure Fig . 12 Boundary discretization and internal cells
grourld surface
~{U<:i?''imii·-·-·
l
·· ,._ RWti¥1U!llh:""'i ·· 'f
E
N
•
:1:
FISSURES DIRECTION
~
388
6. CONCLUSION
This paper also presents, for the first time, the way in
which concentrated prestressing forces can be introduced in the
Boundary Element Method.
389
I. REFERENCES
r *
u. (p) 0
Eimk(p,q)omk(q) dQ(q) (A. I}
~
J
stresses are related to displacement derivatives as follows
(au. (p)
)
2Gv auJI. (p} au. (p)
a •• (p) = - - cS
~J ax (p + G
1-2v ij ai('p') a:tri;T
p
+ J
ax. (p) (A.2)
J J
Notice that the initial stresses are being interpolated on the cell,
one can write
(A.3)
(A.4)
a a a a n
~ =~(e)+ ~ 1 (e)r
o
+ ••• ~
n
(e).r (A.5)
,,,a
"' = .,ra = .,ra( p ) + 2A
I (ba cos e + aa sin8)r (A.6)
(A. 7)
(A. B)
(A. I 0)
with
-2A (A.II)
R(6)
b 1 cose + a 1 sine
( ) = zcv 6 [ Jr a
0 ij p I-2v ij ax~(p)
rl
r a
G[ J ax. (p) (Eimk(p,q))ljl
* a.
drl(q) +
J ax.a(p) *
(Ejmk(p,q))
.ll J 1
After carrying out the necessary steps and performing the last
three integrals the whole expression for the stresses (2.9) can
be written as,
r
cr .. (p)
1J f .. Pk dr
Dk 1J - f 8kij ~ dr +
J
.. b k drl +
Dk 1J
r r n
f
n
0 I
F.1J"mk crmk drl + 8(1-v) [<6-Sv)cr~.
1J - (1-v)cr~k oij J
0
- cr .. (A. 14)
1J
where the term F .. mk was achieved after performing all deriva-
tives of t::*(p,q) 1J indicated in (A.l3). Hence, one can write
+ 4[o kr kr . + v(o
m , ,J nk r , k r , 1. + o.kr
J , 1.r , m + o.1mr , kr , J.
I
ax.(p)
[ f [f.mk(p,a))
r 1
o
omk(q)dn(p) +
1
J <n-n e; )
+ f [ lmkr(p,6))
f.
o~(q)dn(q) (A. IS)
ne;
where n e; is a circular area whose centre is the singular point.
I
f
n-n e;
+ ax .a(p)
J n
f (A. 16)
or
I = 1 Fijmk(p,q)o~(q)dn(q)
n-n e;
The limit when ne; tends to zero can be carried out at the
first integral taking into account that it has to be performed
in the sense of Cauchy principle value.
I I Fijmk(p,q)o~(q)dn(q) + o (p)
0 mk ax.a(p) I *
e:imk(p,q)dn(q)
n J n
e;
Now the integrals for all components of e;.* k must be carried
out, then the derivatives and the limit when lm n e; + 0
395
can be performed. After these steps one can find the same
constant values as those given in (A.I4).
p AP (B .I)
and
u AU (B.2)
where
A
[~:: -cosSl
sinS
(B.3)
0 11 PI PI sinS - P2 cosS
(B.4)
0 12 P2 PI cosS - P2 sinS
..!..
.R,
(;:;2 - ;:il)
2 2 (B.5)
(B. 7)
x,
x,
Fig. B ( 1a) Traction and displacement according
to global system of coordinates
x,
x,
Fig. B ( 1 b) Traction and displacement according
to local system of coordinates
Section V
Numerical Techniques and
Mathematical Principles
399
1. Introduction
Harmonic functions in a domain may be represented as simple-
layer or double-layer potentials, generated by hypothetical
source density distributions on the boundary which satisfy
Fredholm integral equations. An alternative formulation is
via Green's formula, in which the boundary data themselves
function as source density distributions, so yielding
Fredholm integral equations satisfied by the boundary data.
The two approaches are theoretically equivalent, and we show
how the second provides some insight into the first.
Vector potentials analogous to scalar simple-layer and
double-layer potentials were first introduced by Kupradze.
These provide a representation of linear elastostatic
displacement fields analogous to the representation of
harmonic functions by scalar potentials. In consequence,
the fundamental boundary-value problems of linear elasto-
statics may be formulated by vector integral equations analogous
to the Fredholm integral equations. From this point of
view Somigliana's formula is the exact. vector analogue
of Green's formula, and it yields vector integral equations
analogous to those obtained on the basis of Green's
formula. We show how the scalar and vector theories may
be unified by means of a suitable symbolism.
2. Scalar potential theory
A continuous distribution of simpTe sources extending over
a closed Liapunov surface aB, of surface density a(g) at
g e: aB, generates the simple-layer potential
v(.E_) f g (.e_,_g) d.9.) dq (1)
aB
400
-1
at any point£ in space, where g(p,q) = 1£-ql and dq
denotes the area element at g. It Ts sometimes convenient
to refer to g as the source point and Q as t~e f~eld poi~t.
This potential is continuous everywhere and 1s d1fferent1able
everywhere except at aB. Also it satisfies Laplace's
equation everywhere except at aB, and it is therefore a
harmonic function everywhere except at aB. Its normal
derivative at£ £ aB is given by
av
ane
aB
I
g~{£,g)0(g)dq - 2110(£) ; £€ aB (4)
{6}
$(£} I
aB
g(£.g)o(g)dq p £B.1
-
(7)
0 =
aB
I
gi(~.~)A(g_)dq - 2'ITA(£) ; E_£ aB . (16)
I A(~)dq
aB
ls
$ (£) = g(E_.~)i )J {~) dq ; E.£ Be . (18)
¢{£) = I g(E_.~)i
aB
)J (~) dq+ 2'IT)J (£) ; E.£ aB (19)
¢{£) I ll(~)dq-
aB
g(E_d)i 2'IT)J(E_) ££ aB {20)
403
J ~(£)A(£)dp = 0. (21 )
aB
in which case
~ =~ + k
0
(22)
where ~ 0 is a particular solution and h is an arbitrary
constant. Condition (21) essentially arises from the fact
that the representation (18) implies
~ = Oi£1- 2 as (£) + oo • (23)
whereas the classical existence theorem envisages the more
general behaviour (10). Bearing in mind that
(26)
3. Green's formula
All the above formulations are indirect in that they
introduce hypothetical source densities on the boundary.
However, there also exist direct formulations in which the
boundary data themselves function as source densities. Thus,
given a harmonic function ~ in B. which assumes continuous
values~ (3_) and normal derivativ~s ~'(g) at each .9.£ aB, we
have identically
404
aB
I
g(.e_,_g)i<P(g)dq -
aB
I
g(.e_,~)<Pi(_g_)dq=2TI<P{E.) ;E_£ aB (28)
This differs fundamentally from {27) in that it provides
a functional relation between <P, .p! on aB which ensures
their compatibility as boundary data. If, for instance,
values of <P and .p! are separately prescribed on aB, they
could not be util~sed in (27) unless {28) were satisfied.
Well posed boundary conditions provide partial information
which may be extended by coupling it with (28). Some
examples will now be outlined.
Given <P on aB (Dirichlet problem), relation {28)
becomes a Fredholm integral equation of the first kind for
<Pi in terms of .p • This has a unique solution, which
automatically satisfies the Gauss condition (14). Conversely,
given .p! on aB (Neumann problem), relation {28) becomes
an inte~ral equation of the second kind for .p in terms of .p!
~~!!only has a solution if <Pi satisfies (14), in which 1
<P = .p 0 + k {29)
as in {22). The Dirichlet and Neumann conditions are
examples of a prescribed linear relation
a<j> + S<P!1 y (30)
l g(_E_,_g_)~~(_g_)dq
aB aB
- f g(_p_,_g_)~~(_g_)dq = 4n~(_p_) _p_s Be, {33)
- h
aB
I
g (.E_,_g_) [~i (_g_) + f ~ (g_)] dq = ~ (.E_) ; .E. E: Bi ' ( 38)
in I
aB
g(.e_,g_)' [~(_g_) - f(_g_)]dq = ~(£) ; p E Bi (40)
rg(Qdl)
g(Qz~l)
g(Qdz)
g(Qz~z)
g(Ql9:.3)]
g(Q2~3) (42)
~(p_,_g)* g(p_l_g)*
g (£2.9.2) * (44)
g (£3.9.2) *
= - !rr (~*·
1
+ f*)
-e
( 47)
0 = f p E aB
j(p_,g)i. ~s(g_)dq- 2TI.H.s(p_) ; ~ = 1,2, ... ,6 {58)
aB
are essentially vector generalisations of the Gauss flux
theorem, alternatively expressed by
5. Somigliana's formula
Corresponding to Green's formula (27), we have
Somigliana's formula
List of References
W. L. WENDLAND
TEClilliSCHE HOCHSCHULE DARMSTADT, GERMANY
and UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE, NEWARK, DEL. 19711 U.S.A.
INTRODUCTION
Here we present such estimates for the two most popular methods
of discretization, the Galerkin procedure and the standard
collocation together with corresponding discrete versions due
413
to numerical integrations.
The Neumann problem for the Laplacian can also be solved with
everyone of the above types of boundary integral equations. In
addition, one can even formulate a corresponding integra-dif-
ferential equation with nonintegrable kernel [12].
Au =f on r . (I • I)
r : x = x ( t) , t € [ o, 1J (I • 3)
.!:.!;!. -m-1
~t ~ s ~ m+l , -m ~ s, t ~ m • ~ .!2_ any given
u E Hs (r) and any Hh of ~ family there exists ~ ~
element function uh E % such that C'J'T-
(2.6)
m= 0 m= I m=2 for
I I 2 0 n I
n zn $ <
0 0 0 elsewhere
~j(t):= ~(~- j) for hj:>t:>l+hj, j=O, ••• ,N, h=I/(N+I) (2. 12)
m+l m+l
+ log h f p.v. f p 2 (t'-T'+(j-k))~(t')~(T')dt'dT'} ,
T'=O t'=O
420
2+fl
djk = h {Wlp + w2P log h} with p j-k E l • (2. 14)
m= 0 m= I m= 2
b b) b b) b b)
0 0 0
I
M= 0 : I 0 I 0 0
3
II I 5 I 3 I
M= I :
12 24 6 12 4 8
I
For yl = 2 and M = 2 one has
m=l m= 2
b b) b2 b0 b) b2
0
13 4 I 2 7 I
30 TI 6o 5 30 T5
421
as mappings in If
~·
N
wh I a.lJ.
J J
(2.24)
j=O
(2.25)
(2.29)
(2.34)
Following Hsiao and Mac Carny [14] we computed the first two
terms of the Stokes expansion
424
+ + + + -1 + + -2
q(x) ~ q 1 (x)(log R) + q 2 (x)(log R) (2.37)
Ji J.pdt
r
=
+
A.
J
j I, 2 .
+ I 3
Here X = {x 1,x 2 } and ~ = 2(2 + log 4-y) with y Euler's
constant,
:A, =-{1,0} and
+
A2 {wl2' -wll} .
Then the velocity terms in the expansion (2.37) are given by
+
q. (x)
J
+
+ c-}- 20) Jdt
(2.39)
{I • 5; O} {I • 5; 0,5} {3;0}
(3.5)
I (hi+B{~
j=O lp
+ ~
2p
log h}
M J
+ h L biL(zk,z.i))y~ f(zk) , (3.8)
i=-M J J
k O, ••• ,N •
X X
Here the weights w 1P, w2P with p j-k also can be com-
puted once for all independently of h and r by the vectors
of weights
m+l m+l
wx = p.v.
lp J
t'=O
)..l(t')[pl (t' - -2- + p)
(3. 9)
m+l
+ P2 loglt' --2- + PIJdt',
m+l
wx
2p
p.v. J m+l
)..l(t')[p2(t' - -2- + p) ]dt I . (3. 10)
t'=O
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author wants to thank Dr. P. Kopp who made the numerical
computations.
REFERENCES
ABSTRACT
1. INTRODUCTION
(2.1)
This equation must be satisfied in the sense of distributions
by elements of some spaces of functions. In general, we ask
u to be in a linear subspace DSH 2 (n)~ so that the equation
(2.1) is between elements of H 2 (n).T
fluE H0 (an)
Define
1 1 = Ker(B + B') and r 2 = Ker(B* + B'*) (2.10)
Then it can easily be shown that {r 1 ,r 2} is a canonical decom-
position of D, in the sense defined in [Herrera, 1980b]; i.e.,
1 1 ,1 2 are completely regular:
<Au,v> 0 V v E r 1 ~ u E 11 (2.11)
<Au,v> 0 V v E r2 ~ u E 12 (2.12)
and
with
u
a
=u u
c
= flu (2.14)
so if u E D/Ker A 3 {u 1 ,u 2 }~ u = u1 + u2
<Au,v> (u 2 , v 1 ) - (u 1 , v 2)
= (2.17)
where it is understood that if [a,b], [ c , d] E [ H ( (lQ) 12
0
([a,b] , [cd1) = f (ac + bd)dx (2.18)
(lQ
(2.20)
<Au,v> = 0 V v E 1p ~ u E 1p (2.22)
B = {wa }a=1,... C N
P
and a canonical decomposition {I 1 ,I 2 }. Consider the problem;
find uED such that
'V 4 u 0 in n
u1 uB given on the boundary
Then N
N
u r. (2.25)
1
is the biharmonic function in n, such that the boundary value
u~ approximates the data. Therefore, uN is an approximation
to a solution of the problem and as N + oo one has uN + u in the
sense (at least) of H1 12 (r.!) [Lions and Magenes, 1972].
(2.27)
437
acpa
~= l)Ja a=1,2, ... (3.1)
Then :the ~y~:tem {l)J 1 ,_~ 2 , ••• } u {xcp 1 ,xcp 2 , ••• } Me b..thanmoniQ and
Q-Qompiete 6ott eq~n (2.1).
(3.2)
on an (3. 3a)
on an (3.3b)
~p 0 in n (3.4a)
p f2 on an (3.4b)
and
~u p in n (3.5a)
u = fl on an (3.5b)
N
u = (3. 7)
438
Define
N N
N
p E bN llxcj>N = 2 E bN l)Ja (3.8)
a a a
a= 1 a=1
and choose bN so that (as N-+oo)
a'
(3.9)
(3. 13)
The.rt {1)! 1 , 1)! 2 '.••• } U {xcj> 1 , x¢ 2 , .•. } ,U., c.-c.ompf.e.te. fian :.the. bihM-
mortic. e.q~ort, irt arty bourtde.d ne.giort n.
Proof. It has been shown [Herrera and Sabina, 1978], that
{1)! 1 ,1)! 2 , •.• } is c-complete for Laplace's equation in any
bounded region. In addition, it is easy to see that equation
(3.1) is satisfied.
REFERENCES
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
It has been well known for some time that potential problems
in a domain ncRn can be formulated via integral equations on
the boundary r of n. Since 1 this reduces the dimensionality of
the problem from Rn to Rn- , it is expected that the numerical
solution of this class of problems will become easier. The
application of finite element concepts to the discretization of
the boundary integral equations has brought renewed interest in
this field leading to the Boundary Element Method (BEM).
A description of the BEM can be found in [s] where nume-
rous references are given. Brebbia (41 shows how to implement
the BEM for several classes of problems found in elasticity and
fluid flow. The paper by Zienkiewicz et al. (1s] discusses the
relative merits of the Finite Element Method (FEM) and BEM and
develops ways of taking advantage of both techniques. In [2,7]
we can find theoretical analysis of the BEM in the context of
singular Fredholm integral equations.
In this paper we examine the performance of the BEM as
443
G(~,~) = in ln
1
l-x-yl
_I
(5)
(7)
2:
i=l
for :5j 6 r 1 • (llb)
Problem 1
lap u = 0 inn= { (x,y) : xE(0,7!), yE.(0,7!) }, (13a)
av u = 0 on rz = { (x,y) : x = 0 or x = 1f and
Y'-[o,1f] }, (13d)
Problem 2
lap u 0 in n = { .. (x,y) : x'(0,7T), yE.(0,1f) } ' (14a)
u Oonri={ (x,y) : x=O or x = 1f
and Y '(o,1fj) (14b)
BEM is about half of that obtained with the FDM of Schultz [10].
When grading with r = 0.8 is used the order of convergence
improves significantly to o(h2) which is the optimal for line-
ar elements. The magnitude of the error decreases also at all
points shown except for the point(~ ,0) and meshes h =-¥-
and h = ~· This we attribute to the fact that this point is
no longer a node when mesh grading is employed and the respec-
tive values of the unknown have to be obtained by interpola-
tion. For meshes with a large mesh size h this may offset the
benefit from the grading.
The results for grading with r = 0.6 show a similar behav-
iour convergence of o(h2) everywhere except-at a point ( ~ ,0)
where the values obtained do not seem conclusive. We remark
that mesh h = : 2 is strongly non-uniform and ill-conditioning
prevented us from obtaining the respective results.
That pattern is even more evident in the case of r = 0.4.
Now even the convergence order seems to be less than O(h2). As
ill-conditioning must be even greater than before we suspect
that round-off errors now play an important part.
than optimal.
!
over ra of a bounded function $. Then
I($) J $(~) dr =
1
¢<;> J(;) d; J Jl ¢(;) d;, (A.4a)
ra -1 -1
with
¢(;) $(x) = $ (N(;)) (A.4b)
The integral on the right hand side of expression (A.4a) can
be evaluated numerically. We employed a two-point Gauss-Lege~
dre quadrature rule [1] to form the linear system of equations
(12). Later to compute values at interior points and in order
to overcome the difficulties already mentioned we resorted to
an adaptive integration scheme based on the following heuris
tic approach. Let ha be length of element a and define oa(~)
by
(A.5)
where x are the coordinates of the interior point under consi
deration and ~l and ~2 are the coordinates of nodes 1 and 2
of element a. In a sense oa(x) measures the mean distance from
point ~ to element a. We compare this distance oa(~) with ha
and determine the number na(x) of Gauss-Legendre points to use
to integrate on ra by the formula
oa(~)
na(~) =min (2 + 5ka(~), 5) with ka(~) = h (A.6)
This criteria resembles that employed by Hess [6J. Remembering
the well known properties of the ellipse it can be easily
shown that the points'satisfying
oa(x)<kha (A.7)
lie within an ellipse with focii on the nodes 1 and 2 of ele-
ment a and semi-axes k ha and (k2 - 1/4)1/2 ha.
Ia(¢) = ! 1
-1
ln 2 1 r~s~ ~(s) J(s) ds- !1
-1
ln( 1 ;s) •
s = l + s (A,ll)
2
it can be put in the form
!1
-1
ln( 1 ; s ) iP<s> J(s) ds = 2!0
1
ln ~ ¢<s> J(~) ds •
AKNOWLEDGEMENT
REFERENCES
m
456
+ (11/2,311/4)
+ (11/2,11/2)
+ (11/2,11/4)
+ (11/2,11/8)
(0 ,0) ( 11 '0)
(0,11) (11,11)
+ (11/2,311/4)
+ (11/2,11/2)
+ (11/2,11/4)
+ (11/2,11/8)
(0,0) ( 1r '0)
b) Mesh (h=11/8) with grading r=0.6
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
¢ )=0
D. E.: Governing Equation
0 e Boundary Condition
II
r Constraint
Q:
f Objective Function
Z=Opt.f({¢},{8})
n=N-1
~~
D • E • ( x, y, <jJ '"axay
," ,
.. a~ - '" n '" Th 8 ) -0
<P
e
State Variable
Decision Variable
-- '
oX'ay
c 13 r- +
32<P ~ 32¢ .21
c 23 x<ly + c 3 3y2- + c 4 3x + c 5 3y + c 6 ¢ +
~
e + b = o ( 2)~
The examples of the boundary conditions are as follows:
t:
~.!
.! ~ <P ~ ¢, or,
~"¢"
(4)~
~~
~~e ~ e, or,
{: ~e
in which ¢ = the lower limit of the state variable; "¢" = the
upper limit of of the state variable; 8 = the lower limit of
the decision variable; and e
= the upper limit of the decision
variable.
subject to:
Equilibrium Equations (N-Eqs.)
[H){<f> _} = [G]{q } + [D){8.} + {p } , or, [A){x } - [D){8.} = {b }(6)
NxN n NxN n NXI 1 n NXN n NXI 1 n
Constraints (L-Eqs.)
KV 2 <f> + 8 + Q= 0 in n (9)
461
Boundary Conditions
<P = $ on r 1 (10)
q = - K~ = q on r 2 (11)
Constraints
8~8 in r{ (14)
2
Non-negative Conditions
<P ,;:,o in rl1 and onr 2 + r3 (15)
8 ~0 in rl2 (16)
{¢ - $}K~ di'
an
(19)
(20)
( 22)
463
- TIK~
n ~r r.n
+ 'f'J·r K - a + ~
fr r.n f
K--::T df + ~ r
r.n - yln-
( K--::T 1) df
1 r2 2 r 3 r r
( 23)
where
f Kr·n df (for 'j' on r 1 + r2)
finj r r2
e
B. .
r·n 1
fr ( K-=z - yln-) df (for 'j' on r 3)
nJ e r r
d . ln-L
r1
n1
!1
s ln.l.. -y~s fr ln! ar
Pn sh Qs rs
n 3 r
464
= nnJ. (n F j)
(30)
subject to:
465
[A]{x } - [D]{e.} = {b } ( 31 )~
NxN n Nxi ~ n
Constraints ( (L=L~+I)-Eqs.)
(34)
Non-negative Conditions
~n ~. 0 (n =1 ~ N), e.
~
>
=
o (i = 1 ~I) ( 35)
Objective Function
2
Z = Min. i~l 6i = Min. (6 1 + 62 ) (36)
{ei}
subject to:
!, or,
466
Constraints (4-Eqs.)
[~ :] 1m ( 38)
[ ~ R8 ~ J {~~} (39)
Non-negative Conditions
cj> > 0 (n = l ~ 4), 8. > 0 (i =l ~ 2) (40)
n= l =
Computed results for the boundary temperatures (¢>1, cj>2, cj>3, <Jl4),
the heat flux (q,), the controllable loads (8 1 , 8 2 ) and the
optimal objectiv~ (Z) are shown in Figs. 5(a) and 5(b). It
should be noted that the distribution patterns of boundary
temperatures {cj>n} in Figs. 5(a) and 5(b) arise from the
resultant loads composed of the obtained controllable loads
{8i} and the given uncontrollable load Q1 .
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
Fig. 2. The Boundary Element & Linear Programming Method in Heat Conduction Control
Planning Heat
Generator r-6m
0
K = 1.0 W/m°C
0 ov2 0
I I I y = 1.0 W/m 2 °C
6m I r -,--1 0 I o e, I 0 0 I
Q1 = 5.0 W/m
I I
• •"1 . • • cp = 0.0 °C
s
Fig. 3. Simple Model of Heat Conduction Control by Boundary Element & Linear
Programming Method
m
470
n=3
8~8 2 (=20.0W/m)
0 i=I=2
n=N=4
Q1 =5 .0 W/m
•s=S=1
Unknowns: ~ 1 .~ 2 .~ 3 .~ 4 ,q 3 ,e 1 ,e 2 and Z
e~02(=20.0W/m)
0 i=I=2
• s=>S=1
q1 =o ~ 1 ~${;!_0.0°C)
Unknowns: ~ 1 .~ 2 .~ 3 .~ 4 ,q 3 ,e 1 ,e 2 and z
Fig. 4(b). Input Data and Unknowns in Run 2
471
e1 =20.00W/m (=81 )
0
<Pl =16. 82 °C
z = e1 + e2 = 20.00 + 8.51 = 28.51 (w/m)
¢1= 12.01 °C
z = e1 + e2 = o.oo + 15.16 = 15.16 (W/m)
S Walker
ABSTRACT
1 INTRODUCTION
(1)
From (4):
*
u <~. I> dK (8)
2 REFERENCE POINTS
f
9,
Gii = u(~, .f> ds (9)
-9,
and 9,
Hii f au<_!, I> ds (10)
-~-::-an--
where the coefficients a', b', c', d', e', f' and g' are
functions of x and y only, and the subscripts x and y denote
differentiation w.r.t. these variables.
475
~ = (x,y)
Observation point
field= u*(x,yj~,n)
r = f2. -
II
Origin
2
If b -ac > 0 then the equation is elliptic, we shall consider
this case. Equation (11) may always be reduced to the
canonical form (see reference 6 t Chapter 3)
/.. (u) = u
XX
+ u
yy
+ au
X
+ bu
y
+ cu (12)
/...+ (v) = v XX + v
yy
-av
X
-bv
y
+ (c-a -b )v
X y
(13)
n
= .![~
r an
av
- u-
3n
+ (a a;
ax + b an) uv ~ JdS (14)
cu(x) =
-
p
S[ au - u -au*]
u* --
3n
-
3n
+ Ia ax + b
[ 3n 3n
~] uu* dS(_O (16)
c =0 ~~ n
c =i ~ £ r
c = 1 ~
€. n
r
j fj
If we discretise into boundary elements then we can now
choose n such reference points. We have now constructed n
equations for the n unknown u values on the boundary.
a2 u a2 u = V2u =0 (20)
~ + ay2
-. l
X .. (21)
and
1
u* (S_,xi) (22)
2TT
where
(23)
o n p o in ts
In te g ra ti
e le m e n t j
......t-r-........- ·
e le m e n t i
p o in t
re 1 'e re n c e
te rm s
D ia g o n a l
o n P o in ts
In te g ra ti
UNDARY
RENCE POINTS IN BO
F REFE
THE USETS O
FIGURE 2 ELEMEN
479
(25)
i.e.
where r = I~ -I l
and H( 2 ) is a Hankel function of order zero of the second
kind ...
Gii =- ___!_
4i
~
-£,
H( 2 )
0
(Kr) dS (27)
Example
au (28)
an
480
flow 6cm to
au
q = an
q =0
(~,6) (4,6) • Node
(0,6) (6,6) x Element
~
9 8 7 number
10 6
(2,4) (4.4)
(0,4) ~
1t! •
15
1-(6,4)
u = 30 (3,3) u =0
11 1' 5
(2,2) (4,2) (6,2)
(0 '2) • 1:! 1\
12 4
1 . 2
(6,0)
3
(0,0) (2,0)
<'4,0)
q = 0
Discretisation and Boundary Conditions
(x) u value
(25.2)
--
X q value
' ~
,p5.0)
~
'-~!_4.7)
I
.
' ~
~
I
I
I
I 5.2 5.2 I
I I
I
I (20.0) (9.9) I
I
• • I
I
I (15.0)
•
4.8 I
I 4.8 I
'
I
l
(,0. 0) ~9 .9) '
I
I
I I
! I
'
I 5.2 5.2 I
I
I
-
I
__ -r <4. 7)
-- --- - (15. 0)
(25.2) - ____ Exact Solution
TABLE 1
483
e i(wt-kx)
~ \
?1
I
I \
l /..---Sca ttered field
' \
\
I
u =su
u
+ u
~ I S
;t. . . . . . __ ./
2S. 2!\,
18• 19.
27• 3(1
17.
2cf
L}
9
26 • •
16 i"l ~1
~
1~ f2
15 22 •
•
14 !3
~4 l3
DIFFRACTION PROBLEM AND BOUNDARY
FIGURE 5
ELEMENT DISCRETISATION
484
where u = Us + u1
2
+ K U 0 (29)
(30)
I"'
then the fundamental solution may be written
eik 1 (~-x)
u* (xyjt;,n) =( 2~)2J
2 2
00 "' (k - Kl
u* (x Yl t;,n) =- ~
41
H(~) (Kix-
-
t;l)
-~
(32)
Wavelength =2
Radius of cylinder = 1
The omitted nodes have symmetric values 5+10 = 1+5 etc
TABLE 2
486
J
00
ik 1 , and (34)
Small Kr Large Kr
1
- 2 1'l log Kr --1-
1 ("")
4 i H0 <Kr>"' ___!__
4i
j2
1Tkr
e
-i(kr- 11:.
4
(37)
-£
J u* dS
4 CONCLUSIONS
5 REFERENCES
Lecturer, Chairman
Department of Metallurgy, Mechanics and Materials Science
Michigan State University
ABSTRACT
H
xx;k
f
k
=
(2a)
+ r (a 3r 2 - a 2 r 2 )f ]
y X y y
491
y
+ + +
f=f i+f j
X y
+ + -t
p=p i+p J
X y
B=B +B
t u
Usual Boundary
m+l
Boundary
2 2
H f 1 [r (a 3r a2rx )fx
yy;k k 4TTr4 X y
(2b)
2 2
+ r y (a 1 r y + a 2 r ) f 1
X y
1 2 2
H f ---4 [r (a 1 r + a 2 r y )f X
xy;k k y X
4TTr
(2c)
2 2
+ r X (a 2 r X + a 1 r y )f y 1
1
I
x;k fk = -
4 TTr 2
1
4TTr 2
+
rx, r are the components of the radius vector r drawn from
pB· toYQ. The ai's are,
3-2v (3-4 v) (l+v)
al 1-v E(l-v)
l-2v l+v
a2 1-v E(l- v)
ui(P) P on B (Sb)
u
where nj(P) are the direction cosines of the normal at the
point P on B and Pi(P), Oi(P) are the specified traction
and displacement components, respectively. Note that Bt, Bu
of Figure 1 are not mutually exclusive portions of the boundary,
i.e., at a given point of B the mixed condition of specified
traction in one direction and specified displacement in the
other is possible.
Sm = value of s at m,
d (m) unknown constant (nodal value for linear
k
approximation only).
Continuity requires that
d (M+l) d (1)
(7)
k k
M Nm d (m+l)_ d (m)
k k
(Jij(Q) 2: 2:
m=l n=l
{d (m) - S
k m sm+l - sm
(8)
d (m+l)_ d (m)
k k (2)
:\S~~(Q,Sn) +
sm+1 - sm Mij ;k (Q,Sn)
where Ql, Qz are the number of retained cosine and sine terms
respectively and S is the total subdivided boundary length.
The boundary is now divided exactly as in the linear approxima-
tion case, i.e., into m intervals with further Nm subinter-
vals. fk, equation (9) is now substituted into equation (la)
for <Jij· This results in a series of integrals which the
authors could not obtain in closed form. To overcome this,
the Fourier components are individually expanded in a Taylor
series about the midpoint of each subinterval. Retaining the
first two terms fk can be written as
where
Ql Znqs Q2 Znqs
n n
~n ako + 2:
q=l
akq cos s + 2: bkq sin - -
5- (lOb)
q=l
495
Ql Q2 2nqs
n
2:
q=l
)b ~
...... kq s cos
q=l
s
(lOc)
s (Sn + Sn+l)/2 n = 1,2, .•.. ,Nm
n
m 1,2, •... ,M
Let
f = f (l) f (2) (12)
k k +
k
d(m+l) - d(m)
(1) k k (13)
Mij ;k(Q,Sn) + {Bkn + -s=----s=---}
m+l- m
{M(2) ) (1) ( )}
ij;k (Q,Sn - sn Mij;k Q,Sn )
496
l
0 for r = 1
p (14a)
X
cos e for r = 10
l
0 for r 1
p (14b)
y
sin e for r = 10
/
/
r e = 0° e = 22.5° e = oo e = 22.5°
Table 1. Error in Linear and Fourier Approximations for the Lame' Problem
(minus indicates approximation is less than the exact)
499
Linear Fourier
Matrix Generation
8,950 10,118
(milliseconds)
Solution Procedure
21,408 938
(milliseconds)
7 5.0 2.1 2
8 5.0 3.1 2
9 5.0 4.1 3
10 5.0 4.9 2
11 4.9 5.0 3
B. Pure Shear
Problem geometry and loading are shown in Figure 4. The
applied boundary traction is:
-1 X = 5 -5 ~y~ 5
p 1 X -5 -5 ~y~S (15a)
X
Percentage Error
X = y
Linear Combination
0 1.87 2.18
Linear Fourier
REFERENCES
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
Much work has already been carried out on the solution of two
and three dimensional magnetic field problems. Substantial
effort has been devoted to the computerised calculation of
two and three dimensional magnetic fields which involves the
numerical solution of Laplace's equation. As a result relevant
computerised methods have been devised by Perin and
VanderMeer (1967), Halacsy (1968), Halacsy et al. (1967),
Nelson et al. (1969), Erdelyi et al.(l968), Winslow (1964),
Colonias (1967), Trowbridge (1972) and others.
(1)
in some closed volume V with the condition
(2)
on the boundary surfaceS, ~p being prescribed (see Figure 1).
~dS'
j I~-~· I
(3)
s
where the surface charge density is
41T£0 (~) +
!,"'""'{1-~-,----=~'----E-.!!I+ Irs-~+ Enl} ds'
= 2 ~p(~) + 0(£). (6)
This is a Fredholm integral equation of the second kind and we
are interested in solutions of this equation in the limit as
£ + 0. Proceeding to this limit we obtain
jls ~<-:-S> I
~ ~
dS' = ~p(~) (7)
507
0
and the corresponding eigenvalue problem
l
In Equation (8) the function g(x) and the kernel K(x~y) are
prescribed and f(y) is the unknown. When we consider
Equation (9) we find that it possesses a set of eigenfunctions
fi and corresponding eigenvalues Ai which have a limit point
at zero, that is
Ai ~ 0 as i ~ oo.
3 wj Kijfj = gi (10)
a
as E -+ 0.
rF·,
and so Equation (6) becomes
0 0 (13)
k(-E,8,8',¢,¢')} d8' d¢'
where
k(E,8,8',¢,¢') = [1 + (1-E) 2 - 2(1+E) {cos8cos6' -
(14)
sin8sin8' cos(¢- ¢'>}]-!.
If we now introduce a scheme based on N quadrature points and
associated weights wi(i = 1,2, ..... N) we find, in an obvious
notation, that
(15)
(i,j = 1,2, ....... ,N)
509
oii 1.
Note that the matrix equation (17) is of order~ 2 xN 2 ) and thus
to solve problems involving 8 quadrature points in each
direction involves inversion of matrices of order (64 x 64).
'''''''' •f' 0
l''o(Oj)'inOj f(c,e,,e,,j) dOj dj
0
(18)
2<!>p(9i)
where
(19)
0
and is therefore independent of ¢ . We now have a one
dimensional integral equation which may be solved in the usual
way by a direct method. The kernel may be written as an
elliptic integral but this would not appear to be useful and
so it is best to use direct quadrature. Hence by introducing
Gaussian quadrature Equation (20) becomes
N
K(8i,8j) = 11 kJ; 1 wk f{£,9i,ej, rr(1+rk)} (21)
•••• ' ' • ' + /"·····'•' • ,,,, •••,, .,, - 2 ••• ,.~ (22)
0
Again using Gaussian quadrature to evaluate the integral in
Equation (22) we then have a set of N linear equations in N
unknowns, namely
A a = _!!, (23)
where
i 1,2, . . . . . . . . . ,N (25)
I TI
0
2
J :(8')sin8' d8' dp
0
(l+r 2 -2r cos6');
(27)
_ 2 TI Jna(6')sin6' d6' !
- (1+r 2 -2r cos6')
0
which may be evaluated at the points r = 0(0.1)0.9 by Gaussian
quadrature to give
TI
~(r) = n2 ~ w;CJ(6;)sin7 · (1+r;) (28)
i=1 {l+r 2 -2r co~· (1+ri) }i
A useful check on accuracy of the above method can be obtained
by considering the problem in which the potential on the
surface of the sphere r = 1 is given by
~P(6) = case on r 1
H0.2)
N
E = 0.1 E = 0.2 E = 0.3 E = 0.4
2 .4209 .3629 .3219 .2920
4 .2745 .2329 .2065 .1872
6 .2341 .2079 .1904 .1769
8 .2205 .2004 .1865 .1748
10 .2128 .1965 .1845 .1739
12 .2083 .1944 .1836 .1735
14 .2052 .1931 .1831 .1733
16 .2032 .1923 .1828 .1732
~0 = ~i + AEi + Be 2 i + Ce3i
for i = 1,2,3,4. This gives
(31)
The extrapolated results for the cases r = 0.2, 0.5 and 0.8
are presented in Table 2. Similar results apply for other
values of r. Note ~nat as N increases the extrapolated
results tend to some fixed value which is encouraging. This
suggests that we can continue the calculations with larger N
and then try to obtain the results for N = oo by extra-
polating inN.
512
<l>o
N
r = 0.2 r = 0.5 r = 0.8
2 .5018 1.2250 1.6464
4 .3394 .7382 .9772
6 .2737 .6477 .9098
8 .2508 .5986 .8732
10 .2363 .5708 .8494
12 .2277 .5536 .8375
14 .2213 .5404 .8281
16 .2170 .5320 .8221
r <l>(r)
0 .0000
0.1 .1004
0.2 .2007
0.3 .3007
0.4 .4004
0.5 .4995
0.6 .5981
0.7 .6960
0.8 .7934
0.9 .8903
In exactly the same way results can be obtained for the cases
<l>p= rnPn(cos8) for higher values of n.
EXTRAPOLATION IN N
<!> A + B(N+2)p
(N+2)/2
<!> A + B(N+4)p
(N+4)f2
This gives
Np - (N+2)p
k
(N+2)P - (N+4)P
and hence
f(p) = k(N+4)p- (1+k)(N+2)p + Np = 0. (34)
k(N+4)Pi_(1+k)(N+2)Pi + NPi
Pi- k(n+4)Pi~n(N+4)-(1+k)~(N~+-2~)~pn1~-~~n~(N~+-2~)+_N_P~i~-n-N- ( 35 )
(i = 0,1,2, 0 0 0 0 0 ,)
514
¢N; 2 - ¢(N+2)/2
B (36)
NP - (N+2)P
E A = ¢o B p
4nEa(Es> + a<Eg> Is
g<Es· ES , E~)dS'
(38)
(39)
(40)
I.
where
= 0,1,2, ...... )
I E~)dS'
(M
and
CONCLUDING REMARKS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
REFERENCES
Bakushinskii, A.B. (1965) A Numerical Method for Solving
Fredholm Integral Equations of the First Kind. Zh. vychisl.
Mat. Fiz., ~. 4 : 744-749.
Caldwell, J. (1980) An Application of Extrapolation to the
Limit. BIT, Sweden, 20, : 251-253.
Colonias, J. (1967) Calculation of Two Dimensional Magnetic
Fields by Digital Display Techniques. Report No UCRL-17340,
LRL Berkeley, U.S.A.
Erdelyi, E.A., Fuchs, E.F. and Ratti, U. (1968) Acceleration
of Convergence Techniques for the Relaxation Solution of
Nonlinear Laplace's,Poisson's and Diffusion Equations. Proc.
of Discussion on Analysis of Magnetic Fields, University of
Nevada, U.S.A.
517
ABSTRACT
A new type of boundary element program is presented. The equations are derived by
use of integral operators. A natural way of deducing element matrices in BEM is
shown, which leads to a new technique for establishing the· system of equations. A
simple subsidiary condition technique, which makes it possible to take discontinous
tractions into account, is presented. Guidelines are given for the BE-discretization and
the numerical integration. Formulas for the analytical integration of the singular terms
are shown. A non-conventional method for coupling BEM and FEM is proposed.
Numerical studies have been made in order to investigate the performance of different
elements.
INTRODUCTION
The numerical techniques for integral equations are developing rapidly and many
articles have been written on the subject during the last decade, for references, see
Banerjee and Butterfield (1979) and Brebbia and Walker (1980). The collocation
method is commonly used for the numerical solution (Jaswon and Symm, 1977), but
also variational methods have been presented (Nedelec, 1977; Wendland et at, 1979;
Jeng and Wexler, 1977).
In this paper, the two-dimensional mixed boundary value problem of elastostatics is for-
mulated with the direct integral equations. To the authors' knowledge, no variational
solution exists for these equations. Hence, the collocation method is here used for the
numerical solution. The purpose of this paper is to report on BEMSTAT, a new type of
boundary element program for two-dimensional eleasticity problems. The program in-
cludes a new technique for establishing the system of simultaneous equations, a simple
method for handling discontinuous tractions, and a method for coupling BEM and
FEM. In addition, guidelines for the numerical integration and the element discretizati-
on are given. Several numerical examples are calculated in order to investigate the beha-
viour of different elements.
519
t [tx t )T (3)
y
are the physical displacement and stress vector (or traction) components in a
Cartesian coordinate system Oxy and the body under consideration is occupying the
domain shown in Figure I.
U(x,O is the fundamenfal solution matrix, which represents the displacement field due to
a unit pointload in ~ with the direction vector e(~).
u(x) = U(x,C)e(~)
(4)
and T is a matrix which gives the corresponding traction field (for a given normal direc-
tion),
T can be deduced from the fundamental matrix U. (See Appendix A.) The representation
formula, Equation I, can conveniently be written with integral operators:
£ = Vu (9)
(10)
520
where
(14)
The subscript x indicates on which argument the gradient matrix operates, and as can
be seen, it only operates on the fundamental matrices. These C.(ln be calculated analyti-
cally. Hence, no approximations are involved in Equation 12. VU and VT can be found
in Appendix A. When the strains have been calculated, the stresses can be found by the
generalized Hooke's law
(15)
The stress components in the Cartesian coordinate system are represented by the matrix
a = [a
x
a
y
T
xy
lT (16)
The preceding formulas have been formulated for points in the domain. By a limiting
procedure, the point can be taken to the boundary. The general boundary integral
equation can then be written as
(E+L)u(x) - Kt(x) = 0 xEr (17)
where the first subscript indicates on which part of the boundary the pole is located,
and the second over which part the integration is performed. The bar indicates
prescribed function. Reordering of Equation 20 gives the final system of boundary
integral equations to be solved
xEr 1 (21)
[ K11
-K21
- (E+L) 12J [t1J
(E+L) 22 u2
= [:~] xEr 2
where
f1 (E+L) 11 u 1 - K12t2
(22)
f2 -(E+L)21u1 - K22t2
To the authors' knowledge, the different operators in Equation 21 have not yet been
mathematically investigated, which implies that a correct variational formulation
cannot be performed.
Numerical method
To achieve a numerical solution, the collocation method is used. This can be looked
upon as a weighted residual method with a special choice of weight functions, namely
the Dirac function with origins in the collocation points. Thus the boundary integral
equation will be forced to zero in the collocation points. For convenience, Equation 17
will now be used, and the boundary conditions will be introduced later. Thus,
I ;: : : 1 I 2, ... ,N (23)
where N is the number of collocation points and 1 the coordinates for node I. The x
boundary is now discretized with boundary elements over which displacements and
tractions are approximated. The approximation is of a polynomial shape. In
BEMSTAT, the shape functions can be of constant, linear, or quadratic forms, and the
collocation points are placed in the element function nodes. Thus, the approximation
can be written as
(25)
:r
where the shape function matrix is defined by
<P (x)
2 (26)
<P 1 (X) 0 <P (x)
2
and where the shape functions are defined as having only local support
- {=1ifi=J (27)
<PI(XJ) = 0 IJ = 0 if I~ J
The same is valid fort. As shown in Equations 24 and 25, the same shape functions are
used for displacements and tractions. In a consistent formulation, tractions should be
approximated by functions of one order less than the displacements. However, this can
be handled in the program since different shape functions can be mixed. A more severe
error in Equation 25 is the continuity requirements for the tractions. This problem is
circumvented in the program by an efficient subsidiary condition technique, which
makes possible discontinuous tractions. Whenever this occurs, two nodes are placed in
522
the discontinuity point. No element is defined between the nodes. The nodal
displacements are forced to be equal, i.e., one of the nodes is considered to be slave of
the other. The row associated with the slave is deleted in both H and G, and the
associated column in His added to the column associated with the master. Notice that
the column in G associated with the slave is kept. This method is easier to use than the
one proposed by Alarcon et al. (1979), since they define the tractions as discontinuous,
a priori, and then generate the correct continuity requirements by a code system.
The approximation in Equations 24 and 25 is now inserted in Equation 23, which gives
Hu-dt=O (29)
where the elements in the matrices are
Av = E" (32)
where A is a mix of H and G, which implies that it is dense and assymmetric, vis the
unknowns on the boundary, and b includes all known boundary data.
When the boundary variables are known, requested quantities in the domain can be
calculated. Interior displacements can be found by
u(x) = K~ T (x)t- - L~ T -
(x)u (33)
and strains by
e(x) = VK~T<x>t- VL~T<x>u (34)
(36)
0 ]'r (37)
0 l()e(x)
2
523
I 2
The displacements have to be continuous over the element boundaries; thus, one can
define a topological incident matrix c• for each element, which connects local and
global variables
(39)
or
a = 1 to 2 (3 or more) (40)
I 1 ,N
where a is an index running from I to 2 for linear shape functions, 3 for quadratic, and
so on. Introducing Equation 40 in Equation 38 and comparing this with Equation 35,
yields
(41)
(43)
Hence, element matrices for the collocation boundary element method have been
derived
(44)
(45)
The matrices have the size Nx2 for linear shape functions and Nx3 for quadratic ones
(block matrix formulation). By introducing the boundary conditions for the element,
the final element matrices A• and \J•, can be formed. These can then be assembled into
the global system matrices, in the same manner as in FEM. Formally, this can be
written
A = l:Ae; b = Ebe
e e (46)
where A• is a mixture of H•·and o• and \J• includes the known boundary element data.
By this method, element data (integration point data) are calculated only once. This is
in contrast to a traditional HEM-program, where these calculations are repeated for
each collocation point. Thus, the proposed method is less time consuming.
524
The element matrices are integrated numerically when the collocation point is located
outside the element. This is here called exterior integration. When the collocation point
is inside the element, the integration is performed analytically or with some special
numerical scheme, since the integrands tends to infinity. This situation is here called
interior integration.
Exterior integration
The exterior integrals in the element matrices are numerically integrated with a Gauss
quadrature formula with unit weight function. Since the construction of the
simultaneous equations may take longer than it does to solve them, an optimal
integration scheme should be developed and used. In this section an integration scheme
is recommended and guidelines for the discretization are given (see also Watson 1980.)
The integration is most conveniently done on a canonical element (-1,1). Hence, both
geometry and functions are represented on this element, and then the geometry is
mapped to the global system. Thus,
(47)
where ~ is the global coordinate vector, 11 the intrinsic coordinate, <I> the shape function
matrix, and x• the nodal coordinate matrix for the element. Hence, the element
matrices can be evaluated as
fTT(x,x)$eT(n)Je(n)dn (48)
-1
1 -
Ju(x,x)$ eT
(n)J e (n)dn
(49)
-1
where the superbar on fi• indicates that the D-matrix is left out, »g.» stands for
integration point, and w is the integration weight. 16 is the Jacobian:
e d~eT_e 2 d~eT_e 2) 1/2 (50)
J (n) = ( (Clilx ) + (Clily )
The element matrices in Equations 48 and 49 are established in the following manner;
I) Calculate necessary data for the current integration point, 2) Calculate contributions
from all collocation points, 3) Take the next integration point.
Gaussian integration is exact for polynomials. However, the integrands consist not
only of polynomials. Present are also functions like 1/r and ln(r), multiplied by
complicated trigonometric functions. These functions become predominant, when the
pole is close to the element considered. This implies that the Gaussian integration no lon-
ger is exact. Therefore, an empirical study has been made here, in order to investigate the
optimal number of integration points necessary. In Table I the performance of the
Gauss qu!!_drature with 2 and 4 integration points has been studied for a characteristic in-
tegral in H 6 (see also Figure 3).
525
The »exact» values in Tables I and 2 have been calculated using the trapezoidal rule
with 20,000 subintervals. Table I shows that the 2-point formula gives less than 5
correct decimals when 1/L < 4. The 4-point formula is accurate for alli/L > 2, but for
distance ratios less than 2, more integration points are needed. This is shown in Table 2
(see also Figure 3).
Table 2 shows that the 4-point formula gives less than 5 correct decimals when
IlL< !.The 10-point formula gives accurate results for distance ratios greater than 0.25.
Two important questions can now be answered:
• What is the optimal number of integration points for a specific case? (The
program should be able to make this choice automatically.)
• How should the BE-discretization be performed? (Since the program puts
the collocation points at the boundaries or at the middle of the element, one
can give guidelines concerning the element lengths.)
If the above integration rules are applied, the following guidelines for the BE-
discretization can be given:
Interior integration
When the collocation point is located in the element under consideration, both !f• and
a• become singular. The a• matrix is, however, only weakly singular and C3J! be
integrated numerically by a Gauss quadrature with logarithmic weight function. He is
strongly singuhr, and the integral exists only in the sense of a Cauchy principle value
and cannot be integrated numerically. In a finite domain with a closed boundary, this is
overcome by the well-known rigid body motion trick. However, when studying
problems with infinite or semi-infinite domains with an open element model, this trick
does not work and the terms must be integrated analytically. This is possible when the
geometry is approximated with straight line elements, and has been done by the
authors' for linear and quadratic shape functions in BEMST AT. Hence, infinite and
semi-infinite domains can be treated in the program by using open element models. The
contribution from the singular integrals to the element matrices for linear shape
functions is shown in Appendix A.
The structure in Figure 4 is divided into two regions, A and B. A is dicretized with finite
elements and contains N +I number of nodes; B is discretized with boundary elements
and contains M +I nodes; I is the number of interface nodes
QA .-- rl nB .-- r B
------
A B
Figure 4. Structure discretized with finite elements,
region A, and boundary elements, region B
where <I> is the finite element shape function matrix for displacements on the interface
and tt the traction acting when A and Bare uncoupled. The system in Equation 51 can
be condensed to the interface variables by static condensation, which gives
s~ 1 u 1 = I* + I 1 (53)
(Ixi)
where formally
5 ir = 5 11 - 5 rA 5 ~ 5 AI (54)
f* = -S 1 AS~~fA
For region B the boundary element equation can be written as
(55)
(M+I) X (M+I)
When the boundary conditions on region B are introduced in Equation 55, a non-
square system is obtained
(M+I)x(M+2I) u1 (M+I)
v r
where B is a mix of H 8 and 0 8 and 8 is the unknowns on 8 . There are too many
unknowns in this system, and the missing equations have to come from region A. Up to
now, A and B have been looked upon as two uncoupled structures. They are now
coupled together by forcing the displacements at the interface to be equal and the
tractions to be equal in magnitude but with opposite signs, i.e.,
t~ = -t~ (57)
If the same shape functions are used in A and B, this implies that
(58)
t~ = ~Ttl (59)
(60)
(61)
Equations 56 and 61 can now be added together to form a square, almost dense, and
non-symmetric system of equations which is solvable:
(63)
(M+2I)X(M+2I)
NUMERICAL STUDIES
BEMST AT is divided into four separate modules, and the user can choose which
module should be executed, by including the proper subgroup(s) of data, as illustrated
in Figure 5. A short description of the modules is given below:
Shear wall
The plane stress problem shown in Figure 5 is studied.
...........1
SHEAR WALL - 16 QUADRATIC ELEMENTS
0.3333 GENERAL
..:.....:.. 1 9
GEOMETRY
16 ALL 2
1TO 2 0 J 3 0
3TO 83039
9 TO 10 3 9 0 9
11TQ160900
TOPOLOGY Module l
E-modulu., I 1T0231T05
Poi..,,.on'-. rat10 0.3 3 TO 8 3 6 TO 18
thilkm•o;;, I 9 TO 1Q 3 19 TO 23
11 TO 16 3 24 TO 36
SUBSTRUCTURE DATA
3 1 1 •3 1
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
1TO 2X3Y2
3 X 1 Y 2
4TO 5X3Y2
6T036X3Y4
19 TO 23 X .333333 END
SUBSIDIARY CONDITIONS
5 6
18 19
,'/,
23 24
1 36
PLOT
GEOMETRY NODES
BOUNDARY DISP 0. 1 r:f 1
Typical for the problem is the large rigid body motions, i.e., 1t 1s in principle a
deflection problem. Different types of discretizations have been used, and the results
are compared by studying the horizontal deflection at point A (Figure 5). Subsidiary
529
conditions are used to couple the nodes in the corners. Table 3 shows the results; listed
is also the CPU-time on an IBM 3033N required for the establishment and solution of
the system of equations.
horizontal CPU-time(sec)
deflection establ. solution
at A
The finite element calculation was made using 48 (4xl2) 8-noded isoparametric
elements, and the time given is for both the establishment and solution. Two conclusions
can be drawn from this study, namely: I) Quadratic elements give better results, and 2)
They also require much less time for the establishment. Constant elements cannot descri-
be this problem, since they are subparametric. Figure 6 shows plots of node numbers,
displacements, and tractions for 16 quadratic elements.
23 2o€'2 18 19
"
28
29 13
3S t 2 3 4
The stress concentration near a circular hole in a rectangular plate is studied. Due to
symmetry, the problem can be reduced to that shown in Figure 7.
Table 4 shows the calculated results, horizontal stress at A (Figure 7), and vertical stress
at B.
Both linear and quadratic elements gave good results in this typical stress concentration
problem. Also for constant elements the result converged, but many more elements
were needed. However, the quadratic elements are still more attractive, since they
require less time for the establishment. During the study of this example, it became
obvious that the representation of the geometry of the hole was important (as reported
by Wennerstrom and Petersson). The difference in the results between a polygonial
and curved boundary was about 5 O!o. Horizontal tractions are plotted in Figure 8.
traction• X
Figure 8.
:'--'--:
Horizontal tractions
_)-
531
~<Ar•M>..,.JAr}M£
~
j E·modulus
I Poisson's ratio 0 , 0. 5 2.0
I
I
lx /-8
Figure 9. Strip load on a finite layer
Figure 10 shows the discretization with 18 elements and Table 5 calculated and
analytical results.
element numbers
u:m.
•11 +10+9+8 +•+•+ + +• +
'12 7 s 5 .. 3
6.0
v = 0.5 v = 0
analytical calculated analytical calculated
vertical stress at 8 0.35 0.348 0.35 0.350
vertical displ. at A -0.84 -0.866 -0.38 -0.378
horizontal displ. at A -0.38 -0.370 0.06 0.070
532
The analytical results are given with two decimals only, due to the accuracy of the
diagrams in Poulos and Davis (1974). In Figure II the vertical stress distribution at the
bottom surface and the displacements of the upper surface are shown. Two conclusions
can be drawn from this example, namely: I) Incompressible materials can be treated,
and 2) Semi-infinite domains can be approximated with open element models. The
CPU-time required for the establishment and solution of the system of equations was
0.62 and 0.23 seconds, respectively.
displacements tractions Y
llilJ
Figure 11. Vertical stress and displacements
t:t m:~•$~$~~£M~$~~;~~~~'
I b - ~
f '
Figure 12. Strip foundation on a semi-infinite mass
Two calculations, with different relative stiffnesses, have been made. The relative
stiffness is defined below. Figure 13 shows plots of the displacement profile and the
contact pressure distribution for the two calculations. Borowicka (1939) has presented
solutions for the distribution of contact pressure p beneath a strip subjected to a
uniform pressure q, and some of his results are indicated in the plots. No difference
between the plots below and plots of Borowicka' s result can be observed. All
calculations were performed assuming plane strain conditions.
533
K= iJ
-I xfb I ·I xfb
~ ; ~
0.5
1.0
1.5
K= '73 K= "'
/30
2.0
2.5
x Borowicka (1939}
%
Figure 13. Displacements and contact pressure beneath
uniformly loaded smooth strip
where EP is the elastic modulus of the strip, vll. Poisson's ratio of the strip, E5 the elastic
modulus of the mass, v5 Poisson's ratio of ot the mass, t the strip thickness, and b the
half width of the strip. This example demonstrates one of the features of coupling BEM
and FEM, namely, the possibility to treat soil-structure interaction problems.
CONCLUSIONS
The examples studied show that typical deflection problems are best solved with
quadratic elements, and few elements are needed. Constant elements cannot describe
these types of problems. In stress concentration problems, quadratic elements are still
superior to the linear ones, but not as much as for the deflection problems. Constant
elements can describe stress concentration problems if a large number of elements are
used.
534
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The support received from IBM Sweden, in the form of computer time, is greatly
appreciated.
REFERENCES
Alarcon, E., Martin, A., and Paris, F. (1979), Boundary elements in potential and
elasticity theory, Computers and Structures, 10, pp. 351-362.
Banerjee, R.K. and Butterfield, R. (1979), Developments in Boundary Element
Methods, Appl. Science Publishers Ltd, London.
Borowicka, H. (1939), Druckverteilung unter elastischen Platten, lngenieur Archiv,
vol. X, No. 2, pp. 113-125.
Brebbia, C.A. and Walker, S. (1980), Boundary element techniques in engineering,
Newnes-Butterworths, London.
Hartmann, F. (1980), Computing the C-matrix in non-smooth boundary points, Proc.
of the Second Int. Sem. on Recent Advances in Boundary Element Methods, held
at Univ. of Sothampton, March 1980.
Jaswon, M.A. and Symm, G.T. (1977), Integral Equation Methods in Potential Theory
and Elastostatics, Academic Press, New York.
Jeng, G and Wexler A (1977), Isoparametric, finite element variational solution of
integral equations for three-dimensional fields, Int. J. for Numerical Methods in
Eng., II, pp. 1455-1471.
Kelly, D.W., Mustoe, G.W, and Zienkiewicz, O.C. (1979), Coupling Boundary
Element Methods with Other Numerical Methods, Developments in Boundary
Element Methods - I (editors: Banerjee and Butterfield), Appl. Science Publishers
Ltd, London.
Nedelec, J.C. (1977), Cours de !'Ecole d'Ete' d' Analyse Numerique, C.E.A.,
I.R.I.A., E.P.F ..
Poulos and Davis (1974), Elastic solutions for soil and rock mechanics, John Wiley &
Sons, New York.
Roark, R.S. (1965), Formulas for stress and strain, McGraw Hill, New York.
Watson, J .0. (1980), Advanced implementation of the boundary element method for
two- and three-dimensional elastostatics, Developments in Boundary Element
Methods - I (editors: Banerjee and Butterfield), Appl. Science Publishers Ltd,
London.
Wendland, W.L., Stephan, E., and Hsiao, G.C. (1979), On the integral equation
method for the plane mixed boundary value problem of the Laplacian, Math.
Meth. in Appl. Sci., I, pp. 265-321.
Wennerstrom and Petersson (1979), GENFEM-3, Verification Manual, Pub!. 79:5,
Dept of Structural Mechanics, Chalmers University of Technology, Goteborg,
Sweden.
535
A. I Fundamental matrices
The fundamental matrices for two-dimensional plane strain elasticity are defined as
1+v-v) [ (3-4v)ln;::1
U(x,~) = 4 1TE( 1 +rx2 rxry ] ( 6 S)
SYM (3-4v)lnl+r 2
r y
(67)
The fundamental matrix for the tractions can be derived in the following manner:
(69)
When the strains and stresses are to be calculated the gradients of U and T must be
derived. It should be noted that the gradient operator worked on the free argument, not
the pole coordinate, when the T-matrix was derived. Here, the gradient operators
operate on the pole-argument. By using the following identities:
l
'J
X
= -'J
~
(71)
the old definitions of gradients of r, Equation 67, can be kept, so(~ is the pole)
.,
v U
~ -A[
=--
r
r
X
(2(1-r )-B) 2
X
2
r y (1-2r X ) (72)
r
X
(1-2r 2 )
y ry(2(1-r~)-B)
r (1-B-4r 2 ) r ( 1-B-4r 2 )
y X X y
where
A = 1+v B 3-4v (73)
4nE(1-v)
536
and
2 2 ar
(2r -1)0n +2(1-0)r r n + (1-4r )2-ary
X y y X X X n (74)
2 ar 2
(2ry+O)ny + (2-0-4ry)2anry
2 2 ar
(20+ ( 1-0) 2ry) nx + 2 (0+1) ryrxny + ( 1-0-Sry) 2anrx
where
0 1-2v (75)
A.3 Exact calculation of the free term matrix for non-smooth boundaries
The exact calculation of the free term matrix for two-dimensional elastostatics was
shown by Hartman (1980). With the definitions in Figure 14, the matrix is
O(x) = 41r(~-v) [(4rr-2 (a 1 -a 2 )) (1-v) +1(sin2a 1 -sin2a 2 ).
SYM
A.4 Exact integration of the singular integrals for straight line elements
OXOY
7
537
lie = C[ 0 1-!+(2-I)lnL 0
(78)
-(1-!+(2-I)lnL) -(2-!+(1-I)lnL)
where
A = 1+v L B 3-4v
-1
C = 4n(1-v)(1-2v) (79)
4nE(1-v) 2
(80)
and L is the element length. Notice that the contribution from the free term matrix is
not included in H 6 •
Section VI
Coupling of Boundary and
Finite Element Methods
541
INTRODUCTION
This paper reviews critically various implementation
methods for coupling a mechanical finite element model
to an infinite external acoustic domain discretized
through boundary-element techniques. The associated
physical problem is that of a three-dimensional
structure submerged in an acoustic fluid, and impinged
by a pressure shock wave.
Three coupling methods for advancing the dynamic
calculations are described: field elimination,
simultaneous integration, and partitioned integration.
variants of these techniques have been tried on the
case problem over the past seven years.
The three methods are assessed from gained experience,
and their advantages and disadvantages noted. some
generalizations to more general FE/BE coupling
scenarios are then offered.
THE PROBLEM
The specific problem used as case study in this paper
is illustrated in Figure 1. A linear or nonlinear
three-dimensional structure is submerged in an
infinite acoustic fluid. A pressure shock wave
propagates through the fluid and impinges on the
structure. The structure and fluid are discretized
through finite-element (FE) and boundary-element (BE)
methods, respectively.
542
Magic Membrane 11 ,
11
Boundary -Element
Representation of
Infinite Fluid
Linear or
Nonlinear
Structure
Figure 1 Structure submerged in an acoustic fluid
Figure 2
c•
Layout of BE and FE meshes on wet surface
= BE control points; • = FE node points)
543
~s ! + ~3 ! + ~s x = f + N (l)
Fluid equations
Interaction Equations
The introduction of Equation (2) into (1) and (4) into
(3) yields the interaction equations
Simultanous integration
8d~r~
Mf Y.r
• • • ( 7)
547
FINAL REMARKS
It is time now to summarize some lessons gained from
this case study of FE/BE interfacing, and to venture
various generalizations. This will be done following
a question-and-answer style.
ACKNOWLEDGEHENT
Preparation of this paper was supported by the
Independent Research Program of Lockheed Missiles and
Space Co., Inc.
REFERENCES
Friedel Hartmann
Introduction
Besides Finite Elements in the domain we apply today also in-
tegral equation methods on the boundary to problems in elasticity.
This boundary element method (B.E.M.), as it is called, leads to
non-symmetric and fully populated matrices and it is not easy to
convince engineers, that anything good can come out of such
strange matrices.
Immagine these same engineers when they discover that the
stiffness matrices which they derive from these linear systems
turn out to be non-symmetric •••• God knows there is not much
engineers believe in, but they certainly believe that stiffness
matrices have to be symmetric and they are therefore deeply
irritated, finding themselves in a situation where two funda-
mental beliefs clash (Mathematics and Mechanics) and either one
is equally convincing.
But naturally the situation is not that dramatic and we will
see, as you might have guessed, that also B.E.M. lead to sym-
metric stiffness matrices, though not so easily as F.E.M. To see
how this is achieved and to justify the modifications we must
necessarily bring about, we make a small detour by studying in-
stead of th~ 1 original equatio~ 1 Hu = Gt the equivalent integral
equation G Hu_l t, where G H is a self-adjoint operator. If
the equation G Hu = t is solved with Galerkin's method or by
minimizing a potential IT (u), we obtain*indeed a stiffness ma-
tr~x, which has all three*properties Pl (Rigid body movement),
P2 (Equilibrium) and P3 (Symmetry), commonly associated with
such a matrix. So there is nothing wrong with integral equation
methods.
But solving the equation G- 1Hu = t on a finite set o~ 1 boun
dary elements amounts_£o substituting for the operator G H a
modified operator PG HP, where P stands for a collocation or
an orthogonal L2 -projecti£j onto the set of nodal shape functions.
While the 1 2 -operator PG HP (i.e. if P is the L2 -projection)
preserves the properties, which guar~jtee a correct stiffness
matrix, the collocation operator PG HP is no longer self-adjoint
553
and looses also the feature that guarantees the property P2 * (Eq.)
in its stiffness matrix.
These remarks are first hints at the problems we encounter if
we do numerical computations. But prior to computations, we h~ye
to cope with the fact that an expression for the operator G H
is unknown and we therefore have to return to the original equa-
tion Hu = Gt and use the matrices PHP, PGP (the operators P~l'
PGP etc. coincide wit~ 1matrices) to approximate the matrix PG HP
with the product PGP PHP. Using in practical computations nu-
merical i~Iegration amounts furthermore ~~ approximating the pro-
duct PGP PHP with the product P'G'P' P'H'P', where the primes
denote the modified operators. So we end up with the chain:
The only opeE!tor at hand is the one last in line, i.e. the ma-
trix P'G'P' P'H'P' and neither the collocation nor the L2 -
version of it preserves the thEre properties_ 1Pl, P2, P3 (see
below), which originally in G H or in PG HP (if P is the
L2 -projection) guaranteed a correct stiffness matrix.
Being confronted with the task to obtain a correct stiffness
matrix from P'G'P' and P'H'P' we can now, on going back-
wards, analyze where we loose the single properties needed for
a corr~It stiffness matrix and modify the approximation
P'G'P' P'H'P' accordingly.
---our main concern is the symmetry of the stiffness matrix and
this is automatically achieved, if we calculate the stiffness
matrix by minimizing the pote~£ial IT(u), but we could also
ma~I the L2 -operator P'G'P' P'H'P' self-adjoint, (because
PG HP has this property) and then u~e Galerkin's method.
With*respect to the properties Pl (Rigid body movement)
and P2 (Eq.) we must either modify the matrices to ensure these
properties or hope that the defect is negligible. This should
occur rather in the L7 -matrices than in the collocation matrices.
In the following we wiil discuss all this in more detail.
554
T( ) 2 11 _L +
<ln ·
~
1 - 2v
n div + 11 (n 1\ rot)
Pu Lu r cp (x) =
r
~T u
r
and the traction t by the function
Ku F t f (5)
=- =-
with
f E(¢.)·C·E(¢.) dv
]. J
B
or we choose as solution the approximation Pu
minimizes the functional
Il(u)
1
2
f E(u)·C·E(u) dv- f Pt·u ds (7)
B s
which yields again Eq.(S). The vector f in Eq. (5) represents
the so called "equivalent nodal forces":
C(x)u(x) + f T(y,x)u(y)ds
y
= f
s
U(y,x)t(y)ds
y
(8)
s
or shortly
Hu G t
PGP t PHP u =
=-
where u and t are the vectors of (generalized) nodal values
with respect to-a projection p
u + Pu t + Pt cj>T t (10)
F PGP- 1 PHP
===
~ F t f (11)
-1
where the (usually) non-symmetric matrix E PGP PHP appears in
the role of a stiffness matrix which irritates engineers.
In the following we want to discuss what the transition from
Eq,(9) to Eq.(ll) means and show how we can use Eq.(9) to derive
a symmetric stiffness matrix.
H u G t (12)
the problem
t (13)
2 -1
2
u · Lu ] dv
1
J [T(u 1 )•u-2 - T(u )·u ] ds (15)
s
and the fact, that for any pair of functions ~i £ c1 •Y(s),
£1 E c0 'Y (S), which stand in the relation
H ~i = G ~i (16)
i 2( ) 1(-) i . h
t ~ereiexisis aandf~?c1 t1.mion u. I: C l3 f'\ C B , Lu = 0, wlt
1
.. J.mu =u T(u 1 ) £1 ,seeref.[2],theorem8.land
i i
see Kupradze's (et alia) result on the regularity of elastic
potentials, ref.[3], theorem 5.2, p. 313 and theorem 6.2, p.315.
il(u) = ~ JT(u) u ds J t u ds
1 - sf t u ds (17)
2
namely
Ku = F t (20)
=-
with -1
Kij = (G H cjlj' cjli) (21)
3. A modification
i=l,2 ••• N
tWe delete in the following text the upper tilde, which we used
to designate the trace.
558
and the same holds for the functional IT where we solve instead
of Eq.(l9) the problem
1
IT(Pu) = 2 f PG -1HPu·Pu ds f Pt·Pu ds
s s
f ¢T t · ~T u ds + Min (23)
s
i.e. we restrict the procedures to the projections of G- 1H Pu
onto the space ~ spanned by the functions¢ ..
We use either a collocation projection (we kssume ¢i(xj) oij)
i
p = p with (u, o(x-x ))
c
T
or an orthogonal L2 - projection (i.e. (u ~u,¢.)=0)
- - l.
-1
u + with u = F w(u) and wi (u)=(u,¢i)
= -
-1
On the operator u + PG HPu is defined by
a matrix,
u ~T PG- 1HP u
+ (24)
-1 i
=- - i
with PG HP ij (o(x-x ), G-lH¢.) = T(u(¢j))(x ) if p p
J c
or
-1 N -1 -1
PG HP ..
l.J l.
k
Fik (G H\,¢j)
if P = PL2.
Method Projection
Galer kin
II - Min Collocation
(it is ,E = l>
Both vect2rs coincide, if PG-1 HP = M is symmetric, i.e. if p
is the L -projection and it easily follows, then that the
stiffness matrix 1 = F M has the properties
* T T
K s = P2 * \j
Pl :
*
=-
T
0
fT
s
i
f = s
- Ku = 0
=-
u, s
P3 : ~1 ~2 -2 ~1
if Ku
=-
= fi i = 1, 2
-1
because PG HP has the properties (Pl), (P2) and (P3) or, what
is equivalent, the matrix ~ = PG-lHP satisfies the Eqs.(33) -
(35), see below. Analogously the stiffness matrix
1 = t <r tl + tlT.V
-1
with ~+ ~T has the properties PI*, P2* and P3* if PG HP has
the properties (Pl) and (P2).
4. A substitution
PHP u + <t>TPHP u
..... = ...
<t>TPGP t
PGP t +
-=-
560
M (29)
0 - 0 = lim
i
Te(u) - lim Te(u) =
e
!2 t +
S'
r T*tds y - (- !2 t +
s
fT*tds )
y
t
~
5. Some corrections
-1
!~ practical computations we do not approximate PG HP with
PGP PHP, but,due,~o numerical quadratu~;rather with the product
P'G'P'-lP'H'P' =
= =
~'
=
(32)
or equivalently
(34a)
(36)
L u = 0 limTi(u)=t (37)
e
and call u 1 solution, if u satisfies the equations above and
belongs to H (B).
We know, that e if "'t is smo2th enou¥h~ then £here exists a
unique regular solution u E C (B )n C (B ) n H (B ) ,
e e e
562
Ce(x)u(x) + J T.(y,x)u(y)ds
s ]. y
J U(y,x)t(y)ds (38)
s y
or shortly
J Te (y,x)u(y)dsY
S
(40)
ci (x)s(x) + J Te (y,x)s(y)ds y
S
0 v s = a + b 1\ x (41)
and
I - C (x) (42)
e
that
0 s (43)
or equivalently
s (44)
Gt = J U(y,x)t(y)ds y
s
(45)
G-lH s
E
= G-ls = lim
.
T (s) - lim T (s)
e e
=0 - 0 0 (47)
-1 l. e
i.e. the operator G HE has the property (Pl,Ker).
Exterior regular solutions satisfy furthermore the Betti
equation in unbounded reg~~ns and with theorem 8.2 in ref.[2] it
follows as above, that G HE_ 1has the property (P3,Adj.). Only
(P2,Eq.) is no property of G HE • Exterior solutions must not
satisfy the equilibrium conditionson the surface S. (This is no
longer true for regular exterior solutions in the plane. The
equilibrium condition is a necessary condition in the plane. Other-
wise the solution would not satisfy a radiation condition.)
*Consequ*ntly have exterior stiffness matrices the properties
Pl and P3 , (in 3-D), which should make the approximation of these
matrices perhaps a little bit easier.
563
7. Practical computations
i -1 . i i . i
H.. = C(x )oijwij
1J
+ T(z.J ,x ) Gij= U(x ,yj) U(xJ,y)
and c
=(LxL)
and H
=(LxL)
H.. =
1J
i -1
c(:J:£ )oij wij + T(~j •.~h 'G1J
.. = U(~
i
,z.j) U(~ ,i) t
PHP = H W VT
So, while the L2 -method (or Galerkin method) calls for a higher
resolution of G ~ [(L L and H ~ !(LxL) and involves two
more matrix multiplicat!o6s
-1
(Q£ .. ) Q~
8. Conclusion
APPENDIX
Proof of Eq.(30)
f
R3
E(u)·C·E(u) dv < 00 (a)
(~i + ~e
'
u) = f E(u)· C· E(u) dv (d)
R3
where -i
z-t + J T*t ds y
1
t lim Te(u) (e)
-e
t
i
lim T. (u)
1
(- 21 t + f T*t ds y ) (f)
e
R3
566
References
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This work was completed while the author was visiting the
School of Engineering at the University of California,
Irvine. The financial support of the NATO Science Committee
(Grant 490/420/585/0) is gratefully acknowledged.
567
F. Volait
CETIM - France
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
For an homogeneous isotropic medium V of boundary S, a
linear elasticity problem can be formulated by using
Navier's equation :
for x E v
with boundary conditions u. (y) = u. (y) on S
l l u
t. (y)
l
IT (u)
2
I
jv a ij
e: •• dV -
lJ fv u.f.dV
l l
- Js u.t.ds l l
(6)
t
with u. u. (7)
l l
569
1s
the expression of the functional (6) becomes :
IT (u) = .!.
2
1s u. t. dS -
1 1
u. t.dS + -2I
1 1
{ u.f. dV
lv 1 1
(9)
Jv
(I I)
fs t o u.
l.
t.
l.
ds + -2I o u. f. dV
l. l.
0
NUMERICAL TREATMENT
?
tn
Traction nodal
• '
~ . Geometric nodes and
displacement nodal values
'
values and '-----·- -?>
I;;
collocation
positions •
• •
{t} { u} (I 3)
with [ C]
and {F}
1
2< ou >[(Ej + [E] T 1 {u} < oU> {F} 0
(15)
u} - { F } = 0 (16)
NUMERICAL INTEGRATION
I (x) = j J
+I +I
K (x,ye (t; ,n) Nc (t;,n) Je (t;, n)dt; dn
-1 -1
(17)
Collocation position
./
• •
Figure 3 - Position of the displacement nodal values
CONCLUSION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
BIBLIOGRAPHY
/5/ Volait, F., Calcul d'un super element par une methode
d'equation integrale. These de 3eme cycle - Universite
de Technologie de Compiegne. 1980.
/6/ Zienkiewicz, O.C., Kelly, D.W. and Bettess, P.
Marriage a la mode - The best of both worlds (finite
elements and boundary integra~ - Int. Symp. on inno-
vative Numerical analysis in applied engineering Scien-
ce, Versailles France. (1977)
/7/ Lachat, J.C. and Watson, J.O. Effective numerical treat-
ment of boundary integral equations : A formulation
for three - dimensional elastostatics.
Int. J. for num. meth. in eng., Vol 10, 1976.
575
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
1
shown that a decay of R gives good results for underground
excavation problems. In contrast with the Boundary Elements,
these Elemen~still require a volume integration which is
carried out numerically in a finite mapped region of the
infinite domain.
c .. (x)u.(x)
~J J
+
s
I T .. (x,y)u.(y) dSy
~J J
=I
s
u .. (x,y)t.(y)
~J J
dSy (1)
where
INFINITE DOMAIN
t.
x2
S(X,E)
L x1
and
~~
(x. - y .)
c • J J
Tij (x,y) 3 c4 Ei (y) nj (y)
r
(xi-yi)J
r
+ [ c 4 oij + 2
(xi - Yi) (xj - yjj
r2
. n s (y)
(x
s
- y )
s 1 (4)
r {
where
( l+v)
c1 4TIE (1-\!)
c2 3 - 4\!
1
c3 4TI( 1-\!)
c4 1 - 2\!
(5)
and
(6)
578
t 0 (!;) ( 7)
]_
k
In the above, N (!;) are suitable shape functions of the local
(element) coordinate !;, and the superscript refers to the kth
node of an Element.
1 (/; + 1) ( 11)
2
1 (!; - 1) (12)
2
sb
p n(b)
a
Nc(O J(!;) d!; I I t. (xd(b ,c))
J J
uij(x ,y(i;))
b=l c=1
sb
(13)
J c1 <t
sb
rc 1
21n<-;> +
(x. - y .)
1.
r2
1.
2
The integral
f
sb
C Nc(!;) ln (f~) J(!;) ds
1
J c Nc(t;(r)) 1n (.!.)
r
at;
()f
-1
where matrices [A] and [B] contain the integrals of the kernel
functions and the vectors {a} and {b} list the displacements
and tractions at all nodes.
df (19)
where {o} and {E} are the stress and strain vectors and {t} are
tractions applied at the boundary. The strain energy term may
be transformed into a boundary integral and the total potential
energy can be written as
r
Upon substitution of equation 6 and 7 the discrete form of
equation 20 is:
r
J N 1 (~)N 2 (~) J(~) d~ etc. (22)
sl
The vector {F} contains integrals of the product of shape
functions and traction values, for example:
sl
1
7T = 2 {a}T [M] [C] {a} (24)
1
2
[ [M] [C] + ([M] [C]) T] {a} -{F} 0 (25)
where
1,6
0
0 BEM MESH 1
,. D
X SYM [K]
+ BEM MESH 2
o SYM [K]
1.5
Ill
1-
z
w
::E
w
~ 0 BEM MEStj 1
it 1. X SYM [K]
c
1/)
+ BEM MESH 2
0 SYM [K]
"/a '"/a
LOCATION ANGLE
1,5
VERTICAL
,_
z
w
:;;
......
w
u
Q,
"'0 0,5
0 Fl NITE & BOUNDARY ELEM.
HORIZONTAL
INFINITE ELEMENTS
(29)
where "'k
N are singular shape functions of the local coordinate
~2 • The variation of the displacement within the Element is
(30)
TABLE 1
Theory 1.632
Finite Elements and
Boundary Elements 1.6007 6:05
Finite Elements and
Infinite Elements 1.6077 3:19
I
+
Figure 5. Region of plasticity for angle of friction
40° and cohesion of 0.5
Another applicatio n of the coupled analysis which occurs
in undergrou nd mining is the study of pillar behaviour . Figure
6 shows a typical cross-sec tion of a mine opening. The aim of
the study is to observe the non-linea r behaviour in the pillar.
This is essential ly a parameter study and may have to be
carried out a large number of times with different material
propertie s, failure criteria and geometry.
PILLAR
F.E. MESH
EXCAVATION
rMESH
{a2} J lb2}r
and rearranged:
[B]~
J {a 1 l }
E•Jl [All[-
r {b'}}
EA]1
l- {b2}
{a2}
(32)
(34)
7T (35)
589
K Z1 [[M][E]22
- (36)
{F} (37)
CONCLUSIONS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
REFERENCES
Chen, H.S. and Mei, C.C. (1974) Oscillations and Wave Forces in
a Man-made Harbour. lOth Naval Hydro Symp., Dept. of Civil Eng.,
M.I.T., Cambridge, U.S.A.
INTRODUCTION
u (1)
~E = ~RG - ~I (2)
594
where ~RG is the load vector for a completely rigid liner, and
~I is the correction vector that accounts for the rock/liner
interaction. This vector is defined as:
T (3)
~I =! ~R X~
(~ + !
T
JSR :v ~ = !!,s + ~RG (4)
(5)
s s
where u. and t. are respectively the displacement and traction
on bounaary s. 1
t.*
1
1
2
~ar
an
~~ J
[cl-2\!l 0ij + 3 ax. ax.
B7r(l-\!)r 1 J
ar
+ (1-2\! l <n.
J ax.1
- ni k)
ax. } ej
(7)
J
595
H u
~- --
=G t
In the present implementation the displacement and traction
(8)
(10)
(11)
596
(12)
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Goodman, R.E.; Taylor, R.L.; and Brekke, T.L. (1968) "A Model
for the Mechanics of Jointed Rock," J. Soil Mechanics and
Foundations Div., ASCE, Vol. 94, No. SM3.
Given Given
Given
*
Numbers of steel ribs are given in Figure 5.
Table 4. Stresses in Shotcrete at Four Gaussian Points (in psi) for Panel A Shown in Figure 5
Principal Stresses
Gauss
(J (J T (Jl (J2
Point X y xy
Final
Excavation 1 -666.0 -327. 895. -1407.0 419.0
2 -1130.0 -316. 666. -1504.0 58.0
3 -444.0 -340. 190. -1099.0 345.0
4 -471.0 -353. 283. -918.0 94.0
m
0
w
604
MATERIAL PROPERTIES
E = 500 KSI
NU = .1
1110 PSI
]0 PSI
20 PSI I NITI AL
STRESS
10 PSI
FI El D
Ill AOU
K£01UII'I
0 PSI
Q2
~ r I 0
~ ~
(a) Disp lacements at excavation stage 13 (b) Displacements due to rock fallout
INTRODUCTION
J
the problem which is for an interior problem
TI = ~ ¢ (zo). (4)
lo€ ro
we obtain
'IT =- 1
-
2
f cjl(z 0 ) • JI a 2 G(zo,z)
· cjl(z) ds ds 0 (5)
anan
z 0e.r., zer o
and using the interpolation trial functions as usual for
¢
611
a .. =- p§N. (z ) •
2
d G(zo,z) N]. (z) ds ds 0 (7)
l] r r l 0 anan
0 0
Margulies has calculated the stiffness matrix for the
cases when r is a circle or a sphere and for constant or
linear trial functions. However, the integration of the
diagonal coefficients has to be performed analytically
or by some additional constraints. In the following I
restrict myself to the potential problem. The extension
to elastic problems will be touched on shortly afterwards
and will be reported in detail elsewhere.
n II'~ _J
·-
_/'\
ki
__ I
\- ~ ·-I
~
II
1-·
l\i
~
\
LI I
I
-\ L-\'
I I! 1
Figure I Conformal mapping of the unit square (15)
using 4 coefficients
This function is used to calculate the Green's function
for the unit square. The following figure gives the lines
613
2 . az
ClG ClG
ax - i
ClG
ay ( 1 6)
2 . aG aG + i
aG ( 1 7)
az ax ay
when the normal and tangent of the boundary are given by
( 1 9)
an az az
i aG e
-ie aG e
i8 aG ( 20)
as az az
and from equation (19) follows
a2G e
i8
e
i8o a2G + e
-i8 -i8o
e
a2G
C:lnC:ln 0 az 0 az az0 az
<P =1
,_ ,
// I I
... ~
,' ,I
'
'
' ....
- JoG
-
Cln
ds•cj>(z) +f • asClcj>(z). J~~ ds ds (22)
r
= f
r
a cJ> <z >
Cls
• G* ds - cj> ( z 1 ) 1
I"'
G* ds
If:J ClNi
as
*
G ds • cj>i + cj>o (24)
...
a ..
l.J
tf ClNi • G**<z,zb) • -
Clsi
ClNi
- ds. dsJ.
Clsj l.
( 2 5)
rr
in which
G**(z,z )
o
= JJ ~ n ()G(z,zo)ds
2
n 0
ds
o
(26)
( 2 7)
<lG
e
-18 (~ + a!) + e18 (~ + .£.1) (28)
an az az az az
and
·
e-~ 8 e-~ 8 o
· a2 i + e18e18 0 ~2,."'
a
G*= 1
~
I<I>(z,z 0 )-i(i,i 0 ) + 1/J(z,i 0 ) - ~(i,z 0 ) I (30)
1/J(z,i 0 ) + ~(i,z
0
)I ( 31 )
617
and
**-If
G- - 2 - dsds + Canst
aan G
ana
a ~
a 2 G**
asasa
ri 2 G
anan a
(33)
.2 32G** 2 2
l eieei8a a G** + e -ie e -ie a a G**
as a sa ~ az a a~
a
(35)
- e
ie e-iea a 2 G**
- e-ieeiea a 2 G**
azaza a~aza
Looking at (30) and (31) closer one can see that the
Green's function of the second kind is nothing else but
the imaginary part of the complex Green's function or,
if one prefers, the so called stream function. Greenis
function of the third kind can be interpreted as comple-
ment function to the one of the first kind because the
two singularities now have the same sign.
l {
For the unit circle it will be
z-z
1_ • Im [ ln ~ = 2~ z-z ~
~ (36)
G* = __ • arctan
2rr 1-zz 1-zz
a a
when going round about the circle, this function will
jump by the value 1. So¢ in equation (24) has the
value of the potential wh~re the jump occurs. It is con-
venient to shift this jump to a node to avoid difficult
interpolations. Normally the function will jump when the
argument is - a. (This is dependent on the computer).
This will be when
618
z-z 0 z-z 0
< 0 (37)
1-zz 0 1-zz 0
Noting that z is on the unit circle and
z = o = 1;-cr (38)
one gets a quadratic equation with the following solut-
ions 1-z
0 1+z
01 = - --_- 0
(39)
1-zo 1+z0
where o1 is the right one.
The evaluation of the integral (24) starts at the chosen
node counterclockwise. When position o1 is passed the
value 1 has to be added to G*.
To calculate the fluxes in some point z equation (24) is
differentiated with respect to -z 0 which gives
0
f
zer
cp.
1
aNi
as
(;j"'i'(Z ) d s
0
(40)
NL
r.
* * *
1 f·t
* * *
* * *
t-+r ,.......v
~j
Figure v Integration schemes
619
rr = i [r (1-r 0 ) - (1 + r 0 )]
ss = !1 [r (1-r 0 ) + (1 + r 0 l] ( 41 )
NUMERICAL EXAMPLE
<P=O
<1>=300 +4 +1
+5 +2
t-6 +3
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES