Asymmetric quadrilateral shell elements for finite strains
Very good results in infinitesimal and finite strain analysis of shells are achieved by combining either the enhanced-metric technique or the selective-reduced integration for the in-plane shear energy and an assumed natural strain technique (ANS) in a non-symmetric Petrov–Galerkin arrangement which complies with the patch-test. A recovery of the original Wilson incompatible mode element is shown for the trial functions in the in-plane components. As a beneficial side-effect, Newton–Raphson convergence behavior for non-linear problems is improved with respect to symmetric formulations. Transverse-shear and in-plane patch tests are satisfied while distorted-mesh accuracy is higher than with symmetric formulations. Classical test functions with assumed-metric components are required for compatibility reasons. Verification tests are performed with advantageous comparisons being observed in all of them. Applications to large displacement elasticity and finite strain plasticity are shown with both low sensitivity to mesh distortion and (relatively) high accuracy. A equilibrium-consistent (and consistently linearized) updated-Lagrangian algorithm is proposed and tested. Concerning the time-step dependency, it was found that the consistent updated-Lagrangian algorithm is nearly time-step independent and can replace the multiplicative plasticity approach if only moderate elastic strains are present, as is the case of most metals.
KeywordsShell Plasticity Asymmetric Quadrilateral Petrov–Galerkin
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 4.Areias P. Simplas. https://ssm7.ae.uiuc.edu:80/simplas
- 19.Ciarlet PG (1991) Finite element methods (Part I). In: Ciarlet PG, Lions JL (eds) Handbook of numerical analysis, vol 2. North-Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
- 26.Holzapfel GA (2000) Nonlinear solid mechanics: a continuum approach for engineers. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 27.Hughes TJR (2000) The finite element method. Dover Publications, Mineola. Reprint of Prentice-Hall edition, 1987Google Scholar
- 35.Ogden RW (1997) Non-linear elastic deformations. Dover Publications, MineolaGoogle Scholar
- 40.Rajendran S, Liew KM (2003) A novel unsymmetric 8-node plane element immune to mesh distortion under a quadratic field. Int J Numer Methods Eng 58: 1718–1748Google Scholar
- 41.Ramm E (1982) The Riks/Wempner approach—an extension of the displacement control method in nonlinear analyses. In: Recent advances in non-linear computational mechanics, chap 3. Pineridge Press Limited, Swansea, pp 63–86Google Scholar
- 44.Schoop H, Hornig J, Wenzel T (2002) Remarks on Raasch’s hook. Tech Mech 4(22): 259–270Google Scholar
- 46.Simo JC, Fox DD, Rifai MS (December 1989) Geometrically exact stress resultant shell models: formulation and computational aspects of the nonlinear theory. In: Noor AK, Belytschko T, Simo JC (eds) Analytical and computational models of shells. vol 3 of CED. ASME, San Francisco, pp 161–190Google Scholar
- 47.Simo JC, Hughes TJR (2000) Computational inelasticity. Springer, New York. Corrected second printing editionGoogle Scholar
- 50.Wolfram Research Inc (2007) MathematicaGoogle Scholar
- 52.Wilson EL, Taylor RL, Doherty WP, Ghaboussi J (1973) Incompatible displacement models. In: Fenves SJ, Perrone N, Robinson AR, Schnobrich WC (eds) Numerical and computer models in structural mechanics. Academic Press, New York, pp 43–57Google Scholar