COMPUTER METHODS IN APPLIED MECHANICS AND ENGINEERING 71 (1988) 167-182

NORTH-HOLLAND

A COMPUTATIONAL STRATEGY FOR MAKING COMPLICATED

STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS SIMPLE

Ahmed K. NOOR and Jeanne M. PETERS

George Washington University, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, U.S.A.

Received 17 February 1988

Revised manuscript received 22 June 1988

An effective computational strategy is presented for the analysis of large and complex structures.
The strategy is based on generating the response of the complex structure using large perturbations
from that of a lower-order (simpler) model associated with a simpler structure (or a simpler
mathematical/discrete model of the original structure). The three key elements of the strategy are: (a)
mixed (or primitive variable) formulation with the fundamental unknowns consisting of generalized
displacements and stress parameters; (b) operator splitting, or a reduction method to relate the arrays
and degrees of freedom of the original complex structure to those of the simpler system; and (c)
efficient iterative process for the generation of the response of the complex structure starting from that
of the simpler system. The effectiveness of the proposed strategy is demonstrated by means of two
numerical examples.

Nomenclature

E L, E T elastic moduli of the and normal to it,

individual layers in respectively,
the direction of {H} vector of stress-
fibers and normal to resultant parameters
it, respectively, of the original
[F], If] flexibility matrices of model,
the original and {H) 1, (H} 2 subvectors of {H}
lower-order models associated with the
(see (1) and (2)), two partitions (or
[F11], [F22] partitions of the substructures) of the
flexibility matrix for original structure,
the original model h total thickness of the
(see (A.1)), panel,
[F]o, [F]A partitions of the [K], [k] stiffness matrices of
flexibility matrix the original and
(see (11)), lower-order models
GLT , GTT shear moduli of the (see (3)-(5)),
individual layers in LI, L 2 side lengths of the
the plane of fibers cylindrical panel,
168 A.K. Noor, J.M. Peters, Computational strategy for simplifying structural problems

P0 intensity of uniform two substructures

normal loading, and the interface,
{Q}, { q} external load vectors x, y, z orthogonal coordinate
of the original and system,
lower-order models, [F~], [Fa] diagonal matrices with
{Q}o, {Q}A partitions of the load nonzero (unit)
vector (see (11)), components
{Q} 1, {Q ) 2, {Q }3 partitions of the vector associated with the
{Q}, symmetric and
R radius of curvature of antisymmetric nodal
the cylindrical displacements,
panel, [F,], [FX] interpolation operators
[S], [s] strain-displacement (see (6) and (7)),
matrices of the A tracing parameter
original and lower- identifying all the
order models, correction terms to
[S]0, [S]~ partitions of the strain- the simpler model,
displacement matrix VLT major Poisson's ratio
(see (11)), of the individual
[$11], [$13], partitions of [S] for layers of the panel,
[$22], [$23] the original model {o-} vector of stress-
(see (A. 1)), resultant parameters
[ T x], [ T x] transformation for the lower-order
matrices (see (A.6)- model,
(A.8)), ¢~1,~b2 rotation components of
{X} vector of nodal the middle surface
displacements of the of the panel,
original model, {~} vector of displacement
{X) 1, {X) 2, {X) 3 subvectors of {X) parameters for the
associated with the lower-order model.

Superscript t denotes transposition. Subscripts a and s denote antisymmetric and symmetric

components, respectively.

1. Introduction

Considerable effort has been devoted to reducing the cost and/or time of solving large
structural problems. Most of these efforts can be thought of as applications of multilevel
computational strategies, and include reduction methods, hybrid modeling/analysis techniques,
and partitioning methods. Reduction methods are techniques for reducing the number of
degrees of freedom of the initial discretization and have been successfully applied to a number
of vibration and nonlinear problems of structures (see, for example, [1-5]). Hybrid modeling/
 A.K. Noor, J.M. Peters, Computational strategy for simplifying structural problems 169

analysis techniques can achieve significant reductions in the analysis time by incorporating the
known physical behavior into the computational model of the structure and by using different
analysis methods and/or models in predicting the different response characteristics of the
structure (see, for example, [6-8]). Partitioning methods are based on breaking the large
(and/or complex) problem into a number of smaller (and/or simpler) subproblems. The
solution of the original problem is generated using information provided by the individual
subproblems (see, for example, [9, 10]). The two key advantages of partitioning techniques
are computational efficiency and modular implementation.
In spite of all the aforementioned advances, the full potential of multilevel computational
strategies has not been realized. The detailed stress analysis of complex structures is very time
consuming and, therefore, not economically feasible even on present-day large computers. To
date, most of the realistic structural response simulations that have been obtained involve
either simple structural configurations or components of complicated configurations. Predic-
tion of the response of complex structures such as those of future flight vehicles is likely to
require more sophisticated analysis models than has heretofore been done (see [11]). This is
because of the requirements of high performance, light weight and economy, and the
associated stringent design criteria. Also, analysis is needed to reduce the dependence on
extensive and expensive testing which is frequently component or mission oriented. Therefore,
there is a need for innovative solution methodologies and effective computational strategies
for handling large-scale structural problems. As a step towards achieving this goal the present
research focuses on unifying and realizing the full potential of a number of multilevel
computational strategies. Specifically, the objective of this paper is to present the status of an
effective computational strategy for predicting the response of large and complex structures.
The strategy is based on generating the response of a complex structure using large perturbations
from that of a lower-order model associated with a simpler structure (or a simpler mathematical/
discrete model of the original structure).
To sharpen the focus of the study only linear stress analysis problems are considered.
However, application of the strategy to geometrically nonlinear problems is outlined.

2. Characteristics and key elements of an effective strategy for large-scale problems

An effective computational strategy is defined herein as one which combines the following
three characteristics:
(1) gives physical insight about the response;
(2) helps in assessing the adequacy of the computational model; and
(3) is highly efficient.
The first characteristic is a direct consequence of the basic idea of the strategy; namely,
generating the response of a complex structure using large perturbations from that of a
lower-order (simpler) model associated with a simpler structure (or a simpler mathematical/
discrete model of the original structure). Examples of complex and corresponding simpler
structural systems are given in Table 1. As shown in Table 1, the simpler structure is selected
such that the computational time required for predicting its response is considerably less than
that required for predicting the response of the original structure. This is accomplished by
170 A. K. Noor, J. M. Peters, Computational strategy for simplifying structural problems

Table 1
Examples of complex and corresponding simpler structural systems
Original structure Simpler structure
* structure with complicated geometry * structure with simpler geometry
* anisotropic structure * orthotropic structure
* symmetric structure with unsymmetric . symmetric structure with SYMMETRIZED
boundary conditions boundary conditions
• stiffened shell * unstiffened shell
• coupled systems * uncoupled systems

using a structure with simpler geometry; a structure whose response exhibits more symmetries
(e.g., structure made of orthotropic material instead of the anisotropic material of the original
structure, or a structure with symmetric boundary conditions instead of the unsymmetric
boundary conditions of the original structure); or a structure with uncoupled load-carrying
mechanisms.
The second characteristic is significant because of the importance of assessing the reliability
of response predictions (i.e., the agreement between the response predictions of the computa-
tional model and those of the actual structure). In the absence of reliable and practical error
measures, information about the sensitivity of the response to modeling details can help in
identifying the regions of questionable accuracy, and in the adaptive refinement of the
computational model. Sensitivity information can be obtained by using more than one
mathematical and/or discrete model of the structure. The different arrays of the higher-order
model are written as the sum of the lower-order model arrays plus c~,:rection terms. A
dimensionless tracing parameter is used to identify all the correction terms. Only the
lower-order model equations are solved. The derivatives of the different response quantities
with respect to the tracing parameter measure the sensitivity of the response quantities to
modelling details (not included in the simpler model--see [12]).
~igh computational efficiency can be achieved by reducing the time required for the
accurate numerical simulation of the response which, in turn, requires:
(a) Reducing the number of degrees of freedom used in the initial discretization. The initial
discrete model is, in many cases, dictated by the topology rather than the complexity of
the response.
(b) Exploiting the major features of the new and emerging computing systems (viz., vector,
parallel, and AI capabilities). AI-knowledge-based systems are used in the initial
selection and adaptive refinement of the model, as well as in the selection of the
numerical algorithms.
The three key elements of the proposed strategy are: (1) mixed (or primitive variable)
formulation with the fundamental unknowns consisting of generalized displacements and stress
parameters; (2) operator splitting or a reduction method to relate the arrays and degrees of
freedom of the complex structure to those of the simpler system; (3) an iterative process for
the efficient generation of the response of the complex structure starting from that of the
simpler system.
 A.K. Noor, J.M. Peters, Computational strategy for simplifying structural problems 171

3. Mathematical formulation

The structure is discretized by using a two-field mixed model. The fundamental unknowns
consist of both the generalized displacements and stress resultants. The stress resultants are
allowed to be discontinuous at interelement boundaries. In addition to the discrete model of
the original complex structure, a lower-order (simpler) model with fewer degrees of freedom is
used. The lower-order model is associated with a simpler structure (or a simpler
mathematical/discrete model of the original structure), and is considerably less expensive to
analyze.
The governing equations for the original and lower-order (simpler) models of the structure
can be written in the following formats.
Original model:

Lower-order (simpler) model:

;]{;}-{,0}, (2)

where [F], [f] are the global flexibility matrices; [S], [s] are the strain-displacement matrices;
{Q}, {q} are the external load vectors; {H}, {or} are vectors of stress-resultant (internal
force) parameters; {X}, {$} are vectors of displacement parameters; and superscript t
denotes transposition. Note that the arrays in (2) are considerably smaller than the corre-
sponding arrays in (1).
If the stress resultants (or internal forces) are eliminated from (1) and (2), the following
displacement equations result:

[K]{X} = {Q} , (3)

and
= {q}, (4)
where
[g] ---[sr[rl-t[S], (5)

with a similar expression for [k].

4. Relations between original and simpler models

For a given structure a multitude of choices can be made for the original and simpler
models. For each choice, the relations between the two models can be established and an
efficient computational procedure can be developed for generating the response of the original
model using large perturbations from that of the simpler model. Two general approaches are
described herein for selecting the simpler model and establishing the relations between the
172 A. K. Noor, J. M. Peters, Computational strategy for simplifying structural problems

original and simpler models, namely, hierarchical modeling, and decomposition or partitioning
strategy. The associated computational procedure is outlined in the succeeding section. For
convenience, the original model is assumed to be a detailed finite element model of the
original structure.

4.1. Hierarchical modeling

The simpler model can be selected at different levels as follows:
(a) Mathematical model of lower dimensionality. For example, if the original model is
associated with a two-dimensional plate or shell structure, the simpler model can be
associated with a one-dimensional thin-walled beam (with the effects of flexural-
torsional coupling included).
(b) Global discretization technique. The simpler model can be generated using a direct
variational technique (with a few global approximation functions).
(c) Coarse finite element grid. The simpler model may be a coarse finite element grid of the
structure having considerably fewer degrees of freedom than the original model.
In the aforementioned three cases the displacement and force parameters of the two models
can be related through the interpolation operators [FH] and [Ix] as follows:

{H} - [Fz]{O") , (6)

and
{x} = (7)

where [FH] and [Ix] are transformation matrices (interpolation operators). Note that if the
simpler model is associated with a mathematical model of lower dimensionality, the interpola-
tion operators reflect the basic assumptions used in the dimensionality reduction. For
example, if the original model is associated with a two-dimensional plate or shell, the matrix
[Ix] reflects the basic assumptions of the one-dimensional thin-walled beam, namely, that the
projection of each cross-section on a plane normal to the initial centroidal axes does not
distort during deformation (see [13, 14]).
If (6) and (7) are used, the arrays of the lower-order model equations (2) can be expressed
in the following form:

[fl= [r.l'[Fl[r.l. (s)

[sl ffi [r.l'[SlIrxl . (9)
{q} = [Fxl'{Q}. (10)

4.2. Decomposition or partitioning strategy

In the decomposition strategy, the vectors of the fundamental unknowns {H} and {X} are
partitioned into smaller subvectors. The governing finite element equations (1) are partitioned
accordingly. The simpler model is associated with the uncoupled equations in the partitioned
variables. Among the effective partitioning strategies are the following two:
(a) Uncoupling of load-carrying mechanisms. For example, if the original structure is
 A.K. Noor, J.M. Peters, Computational strategy for simplifying structural problems 173

associated with a two-dimensional shell structure, the simpler structure can be associated with
the corresponding plate structure in which the membrane and bending load-carrying mechan-
isms are uncoupled. The coupling between the two load-carrying mechanisms is accounted for
by means of an iterative procedure (this is outlined in the succeeding section).
(b) Symmetry transformations. For an unsymmetric structure the response can be approxi-
mated by a linear combination of symmetric and antisymmetric modes. Each of these modes is
generated using only a partition of the structure (with a fraction of the degrees of freedom of
the original model). The details of these symmetry transformations are given in Appendix A.
In the aforementioned two cases the operator splitting technique is used and the governing
equations of the original model are expressed in terms of the simpler model arrays plus
correction terms. Equations (1) are embedded into a single-parameter family of equations of
the form

([ -F°S
O S0°] +A[-F*s, SOA]){H}={~o}+A{~,}, (11)

where A is a dimensionless tracing parameter which identifies all the correction terms needed in
going from the simpler model to the original model (the terms with subscript A in (11)). The
original model equations correspond to A = 1, and the simpler model equations correspond to
A =0. The simpler model equations correspond to the case where the symmetric and
antisymmetric components of the response vector are uncoupled (i.e., symmetrized structure).
Again, the coupling terms are accounted for by using an iterative procedure.

$. Computational procedure

The application of the proposed strategy can be divided into two distinct phases, as follow~,:
(a) Preprocessing phase. The major steps in this phase are:
(i) Generation of the original model arrays.
(ii) Establishing the relations between the original and simpler models. This includes
generation of either the interpolation operators [FH], [Ix], (~,i) and (7), or the arrays
[F]o, [S]o, {Q}o,
(iii) Generation of the simpler model equations and obtainitlg ~he response vectors {or}
and {~}.
(b) Multimodel cycling process in which the response of the simpler model is used as a
predictor and an iterative process (e.g., based on the preconditioned conjugate gradient
technique or the multigrid method) is used to generate the response of the original
model. For a description of the preconditioned conjugate gradient technique and the
multigrid methods see, for example, [13-16].

6. Comments on the computational strategy

The following comments regarding the proposed strategy seem to be in order.

(1) The foregoing strategy enhances the effectiveness of three techniques which have
174 A.K, Noor, J.M. Peters, Computational stratesy for simplifying structural problems

gained popularity in recent years, namely, multigrid methods, operator splitting, and pre-
conditioned conjugate gradient technique. The mathematical operators in these techniques are
now selected on physical grounds, as follows.
(i) The interpolation operators in the multigrid cycling scheme are based on the physical
relations between the simpler and ov:ginal models (the restriction operators used in transfer-
ring the residuals from the original model to the lower-order model are selected to be the
transposes of the corresponding interpolation operators).
(ii) The preconditioning matrix in the preconditioned conjugate gradient technique is
selected to be the matrix associated with the simpler model.
(iii) The operator splitting is used to uncouple the equations associated with the partitioned
fundamental unknowns (e.g., uncouple the symmetric and antisymmetric modes constituting
the response, or the different load-carrying mechanisms of the structure).
(2) The correction vectors of the iterative process used in generating the response of the
original model provide a direct measure of the sensitivity of the response quantities to the
complicating factors (higher-order deformation modes, coupling of the various load-carrying
mechanisms, and unsymmetry of the structure).
(3) The foregoing strategy can be applied in a recursive manner by selecting a hierarchy of
simpler models instead of a single one. The iterative process used in generating the response
of the original model is analogous to that used in multigrid methods. The hierarchy of models
can be used to provide quantitative information about the sensitivity of the response to the
additional modeling details between each two successive models.
(4) The foregoing strategy can be used in conjunction with reduction methods to signific-
antly reduce the cost of geometrically nonlinear analysis of complex structures. Because the
analysis time in reduction methods, to a first approximation, equals the time required to
evaluate the global approximation vectors (basis vectors), this time can be substantially
reduced by using the foregoing strategy in generating the global approximation vectors.

7. Numerical studies

To assess the effectiveness of ~he foregoing strategy, a number of stress analysis problems
have been solved by this strategy. For each problem a simpler structure (or a simpler model of
the original structure) was selected and the solutions obtained by the foregoing strategy were
compared with those obtained by the direct analysis of the original (complex) structure. Also,
an examination was made of the sensitivity of the various response quantities to the
complicating factors in the original structure (such as the coupling of various load-carrying
mechanisms, and the unsymmetry of the structure). Herein, the results of two generic
problems are presented: (a) cantilevered composite cylindrical panel; and (b) cylindrical panel
with an off-center circular cutout. The first problem was used to test the partitioning strategy
based on uncoupling of load-carrying mechanisms. The second problem was selected to test
the effectiveness of the partitioning strategy based on symmetry transformations.
The panels in both problem sets have 16 layers and are made of a graphite-epoxy composite
material. The fiber orientation is assumed to be [ +-45 / 90/02/90 / ~-45]s. The original models in
both problems were selected to be shear-flexible mixed finite element models. Biquadratic
shape functions were used for approximating each of the stress resultants. A 3 x 3 Gauss-
 A.K. Noor, J.M. Peters, Computational strategy for simplifying structural problems 175

Legendre numerical quadrature fornmla was used in evaluating the element characteristics.
The element characteristics are given in [17].
For both problems a factor of four reduction in computer time was achieved by using the
proposed procedure. The exact timing informatie,- is not given since the programs used were
not optimized.

7.1. Cantilevered composite panels

The first problem considered is that of the composite panel s|i~wn in Fig. 1. The loading is
assumed to be uniform and normal to the surface of the panel, The original model was
selected to be a 12 x 6 grid of mixed elements (a total of 1560 nonzero displacement degrees
of freedom, and 2304 stress-resultant parameters).
To assess the effectiveness of the partitioning strategy, the simpler model was associated
with the corresponding laminated plate with the same dimensions. The bending and mem-
brane degrees of freedom were uncoupled, and because of the absence of in-plane external
loading the membrane stress resultants and displacements were all zero. To further reduce the
number of degrees of .freedom in the simpler model the bending-twisting coupling stiffnesses
were neglected, resulting in a symmetric response with respect to the centerline of the panel.
The total number of nonzero displacement degrees of freedom was thereby reduced to 480,
and the number of stress-resultant parameters was reduced to 720. A preconditioned
conjugate gradient technique was used in conjunction with operator splitting to generate the
response of the original model. The preconditioning matrix was selected to be the matrix
associated with the simpler model. The total number of iterations required to achieve
convergence to four significant digits for the different response quantities was 26. Normalized
contour plots for the generalized displacements in the original and simpler models are shown
in Fig. 2. Each generalized displacement is normalized by dividing by its maximum absolute

Simpler structure Original structure

(Uncoupled bending and membrane actions) z
z

I Y
L, Z L ' . 7

EL = 13.1 x 1010 Pa L2= 0.8 m

ET = 1.303 x 1010 Pa R = 2.4 m
GLT = 6.412 x 10 9 Pa h = 2.276 x 10"3 m
GTT = 5.102 x 10 9 Pa $ 2 ~ 1
VLT = 0.392 ~ Boundary conditions:
Fiber orientation e : ~ At x = 0: u = v = w = $1 = $2 = 0
[ ± 451901021901~ 45] s

Fig. 1. Cantilever composite panels used in the present study.

176 A.K. Noor, J.M. Peters, Computational strategy for simplifying structural problems

i
- --...
0.0 v/IVImax

0.4 0B 0.4

, , -o.8 I
, -o.4 ,, ...... j
,, ::: 1
"'-'-': _ _ ~2/1~ 21max

. f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -0,2 . . . . . u 0.6
i S .. . . . . . . " ,, ,,,

" " d" "ii l I r

a) lower-order model b) original model

Fig. 2. Normalized contour plots for the generalized displacements in the original and simpler models. Cantilever
composite panels shown in Fig. 1. Dashed lines represent negative contours.

Table 2
Maximum absolute values of the generalized displacements in the lower-order
and original models, cantilever composite panels shown in Fig. 1
Lower-order model Original model
10-' × vETl(poh) -- 2.880
10 .9 × wETl(poh) 29.16 2.825
10 .6 x dp2ET/po 7.799 1.398

value given in Table 2. Note the significant differences between the responses of the two
models. These differences are primarily due to the coupling between bending and membrane
load-carrying mechanisms in the original cylindrical panel.

7.2. Laminated anisotropic cylindrical panel with an off-center circular cutout

The second problem considered is that of the laminated anisotropic cylindrical panel with
an off-center circular cutout. The loading consists of uniform normal loading and a normal line
load in the y-direction. The panel is made of graphite-epoxy material. The geometric
 A. K. Noor, J. M. Peters, Computational strategy for simplifying structural problems 177

L 1 = L2= 0.3556 m
R = 0.381 m
x h = 2.276 x 10 -3 m
Hole radius = 0.0254 m
u Hole center at 0.1524, 0.2032
v ~ Loading
w Uniformnormal loading with
Lin~ ~~ intensityPo and line loading
~l at x = 0.0762 m with intensity
10 Po
Boundary condition~
Atx =0, L 1 •
u=v=w=$1 =~2=0
Material properties: Same as for panel At y = 0, L 2 :
shown in Fig 1 w = ~! = 0

Fig. 3. Composite cylindrical panel with an off-center circular cutout and finite element model used in the present
study.

characteristics of the panel are given in Fig. 3. A total of 192 mixed elements were used for
the spatial discretization of the panel (a total of 6144 stress-resultant parameters, and 3818
nonzero displacement degrees of freedom).
The panel was divided into four substructures, and symmetry transformations were used to
reduce the size of the analysis model to that of the corresponding doubly symmetric structure.
The stress-resultant parameters and displacement degrees of freedom were reduced to 1536
and 971, respectively. Reflection symmetry (and antisymmetry) was assumed with respect to
each of the interfaces between the different ~ubstructures. These symmetries and antisymmet-
ries are typically exhibited by the response of orthotropic panels with symmetric geometry and
symmetric boundary conditions when subjected to symmetric (and antisymmetric) loading.
The simpler model was selected to be associated with the uncoupled symmetric/antisymmetric
modes. The response of the original model was obtained by using the preconditioned
conjugate gradient technique in conjunction with operator splitting. A total of just 9 iterations
was required to achieve convergence of the response quantities to at least four-significant
digits. Typical results are presented in Table 3, and in Figs. 4 and 5.

Table 3
Maximum absolute values of the
generalized displacements in the
composite cylindrical panel with
an off-center cir,'~lar cutout (see
Fig. 3)
10 -s x uET/(poh) 2.151
10 -s × uET/(poh) 8.116
10 -e × wETl(poh ) 4.887
10 -5 x 4JIET/Po 2.073
10 -5 × 4J2ET/Po 3.899
178 A.K. Noor, J.M. Peters, Computational strategy for simplifying structural problems

~,',
t /
!
:,
a --.o.~
•
'1 o.o o.~
d u ,, •
,,,
!~,,
w : ",\}
Line ~ ¢2 /; "" "" \ ~ '

C ~
h u/lulmax v4vlmax
° / 0.0
\
°° ] °°
0.4 04 / ~ .2 (""" "",..~~, ,i"
,,,,
,,,
,,,
'"","'~
,.

I J" " "~ -- "" ~." " . . . . . . . "s " " % ~ " - "%'" ~ ' "0.2 Itlt~
jill -" "~q" I " I ~1 ~ t I.%% •

_ ,; .....:.:.;.' . : ."..., ,.
~ . , .:_-.-.-' ,: ,,
. ,-.

C
b w4wlmax ¢ 1/I $11max ¢2/l¢21max
Fig. 4. Normalized contour plots for generalized displacements. Composite cylindrical panel with an off-center
circular cutout shown in Fig. 3. Dashed lines represent negative contours.

nnm nlal ~ ' ~

1.3 3.51 . - - . ~,

1.2 3.0 -- a-~ ,_ ,-~

Y~, E ~ ~~ Line
,~ ~ ~ load
umi lul

Wa Uc
1.0 2.0
WaIdirect Uc idirect
0.9 1.5

0.7 0.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
PCG Iteration PCG Iteration
Fig. 5. Convergence of maximum displacements w= and total complementary strain energy U = obtained by
proposed strategy. Composite cylindrical panel with an off-center circular cutout shown in Fig. 3.
 A.K. Noor, J.M. Peters, Computational strategy for simplifying structural problems 179

Contour plots for the five generalized displacements are shown in Fig. 4. The contour plots
are drawn on the unfolded cylinder and are each normalized by dividing by the maximum
absolute values given in Table 3. Figure 5 gives an indication of the convergence of the
maximum normal displacement wo and the total complementary strain energy U c predicted by
the foregoing strategy.

8. Concluding remarks

An effective computational strategy is presented for the analysis of large and complex
structures. The strategy is based on generating the response of the complex structure using
large perturbations from that of a lower-order (simpler) model associated with a simpler
structure (or a simpler mathematical/discrete model of the original structure). The simpler
model has considerably fewer degrees of freedom than the original model. The three key
elements of the strategy are: (a) mixed (or primitive variable) formulation with the fundamen-
tal unknowns consisting of generalized displacements and stress parameters; (b) operator
splitting, or a reduction method to relate the arrays and degrees of freedom of the original
complex structure to those of the simpler system; and (c) efficient iterative process for the
generation of the response of the complex structure from that of the simpler system.
The finite element method is used for generating the discrete model of the original complex
structure. Two general approaches are described herein for selecting the simpler model and
establishing the relations between the original and simpler models, namely, hierarchical
modeling, and decomposition or partitioning strategy. In the first approach the simpler model
is associated with a mathematical model of lower dimensionality; a global discretization
technique (e.g., Rayleigh-Ritz technique); or a coarse finite element grid. The second
approach includes the uncoupling of load carrying mechanisms and symmetry transformations.
The effectiveness of the proposed strategy is demonstrated by means of two numerical
examples of composite cylindrical panels.

Appendix A. Symmetry transformations

For the application of symmetry transformations the structure is divided into two partitions
(or substructures). Each of the two substructures is assumed to have the same number of
elements, and the same number of nodal displacements. For convenience, the interface
between the two substructures is assumed to be along the displacement nodes, and no stress
parameters are associated with the other interface. The stress parameters, nodal displacements

'~,-._-1 mm~ m e . m~'J

Fig. A.1. O: {X}~ nodes; A: {X}2 nodes; D: {X}3 nodes.

180 A.K. Noor, J.M. Peters, Computational strategy for simplifying structural problems

and external lo~ds, {H}, {X}, and { Q}, are partitioned into the following subvectors: {H}I,
{H)2; {X} t, {X}2, {X} 3; and { Q ) 1, { Q} 2. The subvectors with subscript 1 are associated
with one of the substructures, the subvectors with subscript 2 are associated with the other
substructure, and the subvectors with subscript 3 are associated with the interface between the
two substructures (see Fig. A.1).
The governing equations of the original model (1) are partitioned as follows:

I" si !12. lil:

[Symm
..... ~,-X~-=
•
o X3
X2
, (A.1)

where a dot refers to a zero submatrix (or subvector). The symmetric and antisymmetric
partitions of the vectors {H} and {X} are defined as follows:

( H ) , = ½({n}t + {H}2 ) , (A.2)

{H}a-- ½({H)I- {H}2), (A.3)
{ X } , - ½({X}, + {X)2 ) , (A.4)
(x}. = ½({x},- (x},), (A.5)

where subscripts s and a refer to the symmetric and antisymmetric components, respectively.
Note that {H}2 and {X}2 account for the change in sign of the antisymmetric components
associated with the symmetric response (e.g., transverse shear stress resultants, in-plane
displacements, and rotation components in a shell structure, see [20]). For symmetric
structures subjected to symmetric loading {H} 2 = {H} t and {X} 2 = {X} t.
The following relations follow from (A.2)-(A.5):

x, IrA , (A3)
. ° ~
tx .j
where

[0, ]
[r,] IrA
The vectors {X} 3, and {X} 3, refer to the symmetric and antisymmetric components of {X} 3;
the matrix [l] is the identity submatrix; [F~] and [F~] are diagonal submatrices with nonzero
 A.K. Noor, J.M. Peters, Computationalstrategyfor simplifyingstructuralproblems 181

(unit) entries corresponding to the symmetric and antisymmetric displacements, such that

[I'~] + [F.] = [I] . (A.9)

If (A.6) and (A.7) are used, the partitioned equations, (A.1), can be cast in the format of
(11), where

[F]o=[ F" + F22 * ]

• F11 -~- F22 , (A.10)

[ Ell - F22] (A.11)

"F2 . 9

~--" . Sll 4- $22 (S13- s )[Kl '

[ " .
[S]A ----" S11 - S22 (S13- S23)[~s]
S l l - $22
•
(S13+ ~23)[F~1] , (A.13)

{Q}0 : [rs]t Q}3 ,

{ : j1
{Q}A ~- { Q } I - {Q}2 " (A.14)

Note that the presence of nonzero terms in the matrices [F]A and [S]A signifies the coupling
between the symmetric and antisymmetric modes constituting the unsymmetric response. The
simpler model corresponds to the case [F]A = 0 and [S]~ =0 (symmetrized structure with
identical substructures, in which the equations associated with the symmetric and antisymmet-
ric partitions of the response vectors uncouple). The response of the original model is
obtained by using an iterative process to account for the coupling terms [F]A and [S]^.
The uncoupled equations of the simpler model associated with the symmetric and antisym-
metric response quantities are identical except for the terms associated with the interface
unknowns {X}3, and {X}3,. The efficient generation of the symmetric and antisymmetric
response quantities, (A.6) and (A.7) can be accomplished by:
(a) partial decomposition once of one set of equations (e.g., the equations associated with
{H}, and {X}~) which does not include the symmetry and antisymmetry conditions along the
interface; then
(b) incorporating the symmetry (and antisymmetry) conditions, completing the decomposi-
tion, evaluating the fight-hand sides and successively generating the symmetric and antisym-
metric response vectors.
The symmetry transformations can be applied in a recursive manner to effect further
reduction in the size of the partitions (or substructures). The use of recursive symmetry
transformations can be particularly effective on multiprocessor computers since the equations
of the simpler model, associated with the different symmetric/antisymmetric response quan-
tities, can be solved in parallel on different processors.
182 A.K. Noor, J.M. Peters, Computational strategy for simplifying structural problems

Acknowledgment

The present research is supported by an Air Force Office of Scientific Research Grant No.
AFOSR-87-0115. The authors acknowledge useful discussions with Anthony K. Amos of
AFOSR. The numerical results were conducted on the CRAY X-MP/48 of the San Diego
Supercomputer Center.

References

[1] R.H. MacNeal, The solution of large structural dynamic problems, in: Proceedings of the Symposium on
Applications of Computer Methods in Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
(1977) 77-86.
[2] M. Paz, Practical reduction of structural eigenproblems, J. Structural Engrg. 109 (11) (1983) 2591-2599.
[3] E.L. Wilson and T. ltoh, An eigensolution strategy for large systems, Comput. & Structures 6 (1983)
259-265.
[4] A.K. Noor, On making large nonlinear problems small, Comput. Meths. Appl. Mech. Engrg. 34 (1982)
955-985.
[5] A.K. Noor and J.M. Peters, Recent advances in reduction methods for instability analysis of structures,
Comput. & Structures 16 (1-4) (1983) 67-80.
[6] A.K. Noor, Global-local methodologies and their application to nonlinear analysis, Finite Elements in
Analysis and Design 2 (4) (1986) 333-346.
[7] S.N. Atluri and T. Nishioka, Hybrid methods of analysis, in: H. Kardestuncer, ed., Unification of Finite
Element Methods (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1984) 65-95.
[8] A.S. Kobayashi, Hybrid experimental-numerical stress analysis, Experimental Mech. 23 (3) (1983) 338-347.
[9] K.C. Park and C.A. Felippa, Partitioned analysis of coupled systems, in: T. Belytschko and T.J.R. Hughes,
eds., Computational Methods for Transient Analysis (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1983) 157-219.
[10] R.R. Craig, A review of time-domain and frequency-domain component-mode synthesis methods, presented
at the Joint ASME/ASCE Applied Mechanics Conference, Albuquerque, NM, 1985.
[11] A.K. Noor and S.N. Atluri, Advances and trends in computational structural mechanics, AIAA. J. 25 (7)
(1987) 977-995.
[12] A.K. Noor and J.M. Peters, Error indicators and accuracy improvement of finite element solutions, Engrg.
Comput. 5 (1) (1988) 39-49.
[13] V.Z. Vlasov, Thin-walled elastic beams (Moscow, second ed., 1959); translated from Russian and published
for the National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C., 1961.
[14] A. Gjelsvik, The Theory of Thin Walled Beams (Wiley, New York, 1981).
[15] P. Concus, G. Golub and D. O'Leary, A generalized conjugate gradient method for the numerical solution of
elliptic partial differential equations, in: J. Bunch and D. Rose, eds., Sparse Matrix Computations (Academic
Press, New York, 1976) 309-322.
[16] A.K. Noor and J.M. Peters, Preconditioned conjugate gradient technique for the analysis of symmetric
anisotropic structures, lnternat. J. Numer. Meths. Engrg. 24 (1987) 2057-2070.
[17] D.J. Paddon and H. Holstein, eds., Muitigrid Methods for Integral and Differential Equations (Clarendon
Press, Oxford, 1985).
[18] D. Braess, On the combination of the multigrid method and conjugate gradients, in: W. Hackbusch and U.
Tottenberg, eds., Multigrid Methods II (Springer, Berlin, 1985) 52-64.
[19] A.K. Noor and C.M. Andersen, Mixed models and reduced/selective integration displacement models for
nonlinear shell analysis, Internat. J. Numer. Meths. Engrg. 18 (1982) 1429-1454.
[20] A.K. Noor and J.M. Peters, Model-size reduction for the nonlinear dynamic analysis of quasi-symmetric
structures, Engrg. Comput. 4 (1987) 178-189.