Advertisement

Computational Mechanics

, Volume 63, Issue 1, pp 69–98 | Cite as

Numerical procedure to couple shell to solid elements by using Nitsche’s method

  • Takeki YamamotoEmail author
  • Takahiro Yamada
  • Kazumi Matsui
Original Paper
  • 304 Downloads

Abstract

This paper presents a numerical procedure to couple shell to solid elements by using the Nitsche’s method. The continuity of displacements can be satisfied approximately with the penalty method, which is effective in setting the penalty parameter to a sufficiently large value. When the continuity of only displacements on the interface is applied between shell and solid elements, an unreasonable deformation may be observed near the interface. In this work, the continuity of the stress vector on the interface is considered by employing the Nitsche’s method, and hence a reasonable deformation can be obtained on the interface. The authors propose two types of shell elements coupled with solid elements in this paper. One of them is the conventional MITC4 shell element, which is one of the most popular elements in engineering applications. This approach shows the capability of discretizing the domain of the structure with the different types of elements. The other is the shell element with additional degrees of freedom to represent thickness–stretch developed by the authors. In this approach, the continuity of displacements including the deformation in the thickness direction on the interface can be considered. Several numerical examples are presented to examine the fundamental performance of the proposed procedure. The behavior of the proposed simulation model is compared with that of the whole domain discretized with only solid elements.

Keywords

Nitsche’s method Combined modeling Shell element Solid element 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Surana KS (1979) Isoparametric elements for cross-sectional properties and stress analysis of beams. Int J Numer Methods Eng 14:475–497CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Surana KS (1980) Transition finite elements for axisymmetric stress analysis. Int J Numer Methods Eng 15:809–832CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Surana KS (1980) Transition finite elements for three-dimensional stress analysis. Int J Numer Methods Eng 15:991–1020CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bathe KJ, Ho LW (1981) Some results in the analysis of thin shell structures. In: Wunderlich W, Stein E, Bathe KJ (eds) Nonlinear finite element analysis in structural mechanics. Springer, Berlin, pp 122–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Surana KS (1982) Geometrically nonlinear formulation for the three dimensional solid-shell transition finite elements. Comput Struct 15:549–566CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Surana KS (1983) Geometrically non-linear formulation for the axi-symmetric transition finite elements. Comput Struct 17:243–255CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cofer WF, Will KM (1991) A three-dimensional, shell-solid transition element for general nonlinear analysis. Comput Struct 38:449–462CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gmür TC, Schorderet AM (1993) A set of three-dimensional solid to shell transition elements for structural dynamics. Comput Struct 46:583–591CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chavan KS, Wriggers P (2004) Consistent coupling of beam and shell models for thermo-elastic analysis. Int J Numer Methods Eng 59:1861–1878CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gmür TC, Kauten RH (1993) Three-dimensional solid to beam transition elements for structural dynamics analysis. Int J Numer Methods Eng 36:1429–1444CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dohrmann CR, Key SW (1999) A transition element for uniform strain hexahedral and tetrahedral finite elements. Int J Numer Methods Eng 44:1933–1950MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dohrmann CR, Key SW, Heinstein MW (2000) Methods for connecting dissimilar three-dimensional finite element meshes. Int J Numer Methods Eng 47:1057–1080CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Garusi E, Tralli A (2002) A hybrid stress-assumed transition element for solid-to-beam and plate-to-beam connections. Comput Struct 80:105–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ahn JS, Basu PK, Woo KS (2010) Analysis of cracked aluminum plates with one-sided patch repair using p-convergent layered model. Finite Elem Anal Des 46:438–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ahn JS, Basu PK (2011) Locally refined p-FEM modeling of patch repaired plates. Compos Struct 93:1704–1716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ahn JS, Woo KS (2011) Analysis of Cantilever plates with stepped section using p-convergent transition element for solid-to-shell connections. Adv Struct Eng 14:1167–1183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liu GR, Quek SS (2013) The finite element method: a practical course, 2nd edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, OxfordzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Curiskis JI, Valliappan S (1978) A solution algorithm for linear constraint equations in finite element analysis. Comput Struct 8:117–124CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Abel JF, Shephard MS (1979) An algorithm for multipoint constraints in finite element analysis. Int J Numer Methods Eng 14:464–467CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shephard MS (1984) Linear multipoint constraints applied via transformation as part of a direct stiffness assembly process. Int J Numer Methods Eng 20:2107–2112CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bournival S, Cuilliere JC, Francois V (2010) A meshgeometry based method for coupling 1D and 3D elements. Adv Eng Softw 41:838–858CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jialin W, Zhiwen L, Xing M, Jianzheng Z (1996) A DOF expanding method for connecting solid and shell element. Commun Numer Methods Eng 12:321–330CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bathe KJ (1996) Finite element procedure. Prentice-Hall Inc, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Monaghan DJ, Doherty IW, Court DM, Armstrong CG (1998) Coupling 1D beams to 3D bodies. In: 7th International meshing roundtable. Sandia National Laboratories, Dearborn, Michigan, pp 285–293Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    McCune RW, Armstrong CG, Robinson DJ (2000) Mixed-dimensional coupling in finite element models. Int J Numer Methods Eng 49:725–750CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shim KW, Monaghan DJ, Armstrong CG (2002) Mixed dimensional coupling in finite element stress analysis. Eng Comput 18:241–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Robinson TT, Armstrong CG, Fairey R (2011) Automated mixed dimensional modelling from 2D and 3D cad models. Finite Elem Anal Des 47:151–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Aminpour MA, Krishnamurthy T (1997) A two-dimensional interface element for multi-domain analysis of independently modeled three-dimensional finite element meshes. AIAA, No.97-1297, 1853–1861Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Aminpour MA, Krishnamurthy T, Fadale TD (1998) Coupling of independently modeled three-dimensional finite element meshes with arbitrary shape interface boundaries. AIAA, No.98-2060, 3014–3024Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Osawa N, Hashimoto K, Sawamura J, Nakai T, Suzuki S (2007) Study on shell-solid coupling FE analysis for fatigue assessment of ship structure. Mar Struct 20:143–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mata P, Barbat AH, Oller S (2008) Two-scale approach for the nonlinear dynamic analysis of RC structures with local non-prismatic parts. Eng Struct 30:3667–3680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nitsche J (1971) Über ein Variationsprinzip zur Lösung von Dirichlet-Problemen bei Verwendung von Teilräumen, die keinen Randbedingungen unterworfen sind. Abhandlungen aus dem Mathematischen Seminar der Universitat Hamburg 36:9–15MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hansbo A, Hansbo P (2002) An unfitted finite element method, based on Nitsche’s method, for elliptic interface problems. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 191:5537–5552MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hansbo P (2005) Nitsche’s method for interface problems in computational mechanics. GAMM-Mitt 28:183–206MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sanders JD, Puso MA (2012) An embedded mesh method for treating overlapping finite element meshes. Int J Numer Methods Eng 91:289–305MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sanders JD, Laursen TA, Puso MA (2012) A Nitsche embedded mesh method. Comput Mech 49:243–257MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Fritz A, Hüeber S, Wohlmuth BI (2004) A comparison of mortar and Nitsche techniques. CALCOLO 41:115–137MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Apostolatos A, Schmidt R, Wüchner R, Bletzinger KU (2014) A Nitsche-type formulation and comparison of the most common domain decomposition methods in isogeometric analysis. Int J Numer Methods Eng 97:473–504MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Nguyen VP, Kerfriden P, Brino M, Bordas SPA, Bonisoli E (2014) Nitsche’s method for two and three dimensional NURBS patch coupling. Comput Mech 53:1163–1182MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Costa JC, Pimenta PM, Wriggers P (2016) Meshless analysis of shear deformable shells: boundary and interface constraints. Comput Mech 57:679–700MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Arnold DN, Brezzi F, Cockburn B, Marini LD (2002) Unified analysis of discontinuous galerkin methods for elliptic problems. SIAM J Numer Anal 39:1749–1779MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mergheim J, Steinmann P (2006) A geometrically nonlinear FE approach for the simulation of strong and weak discontinuities. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 195:5037–5052MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wriggers P, Zavarise G (2008) A formulation for frictionless contact problems using a weak form introduced by Nitsche. Comput Mech 41:407–420CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Guo Y, Ruess M (2015) Nitsche’s method for a coupling of isogeometric thin shells and blended shell structures. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 284:881–905MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Dvorkin EN, Bathe KJ (1984) A continuum mechanics based four node shell element for general non-linear analysis. Eng Comput 1:77–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Yamamoto T, Yamada T, Matsui K (2017) A quadrilateral shell element with degree of freedom to represent thickness–stretch. Comput Mech 59:625–646MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Zienkiewicz OC, Taylor RL, Too JM (1971) Reduced integration techniques in general analysis of plates and shells. Int J Numer Methods Eng 3:275–290CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kikuchi N (1982) A smoothing technique for reduced integration penalty methods in contact problems. Int J Numer Methods Eng 18:343–350MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Oden JT, Kikuchi N (1982) Finite element methods for constrained problems in elasticity. Int J Numer Methods Eng 18:701–725MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringTohoku UniversitySendaiJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of Environment and Information ScienceYokohama National UniversityYokohamaJapan

Personalised recommendations