Computational Mechanics

, 44:103 | Cite as

A frame-invariant scheme for the geometrically exact beam using rotation vector parametrization

  • S. Ghosh
  • D. RoyEmail author
Original Paper


While frame-invariant solutions for arbitrarily large rotational deformations have been reported through the orthogonal matrix parametrization, derivation of such solutions purely through a rotation vector parametrization, which uses only three parameters and provides a parsimonious storage of rotations, is novel and constitutes the subject of this paper. In particular, we employ interpolations of relative rotations and a new rotation vector update for a strain-objective finite element formulation in the material framework. We show that the update provides either the desired rotation vector or its complement. This rules out an additive interpolation of total rotation vectors at the nodes. Hence, interpolations of relative rotation vectors are used. Through numerical examples, we show that combining the proposed update with interpolations of relative rotations yields frame-invariant and path-independent numerical solutions. Advantages of the present approach vis-a-vis the updated Lagrangian formulation are also analyzed.


Geometrically exact beam Finite rotation Rotation manifold Tangent space Relative rotation Objective strain Path-independence 


  1. 1.
    Simo JC (1985) A finite strain beam formulation. The three-dimensional dynamic problem. Part I. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 49: 55–70zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Simo JC, Vu-Quoc L (1986) A three-dimensional finite rod model part II: computational aspects. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 58: 79–116zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vu-Quoc L (1986) Dynamics of flexible structures performing large overall motions: a geometrically-nonlinear approach. Ph.D. thesis, UC Berkeley, Dissertation, ERL Memorandum UCB/ERL M86/36Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cardona A, Géradin M (1988) A beam of the finite element nonlinear theory with finite rotations. Int J Numer Methods Eng 26: 2403–2438zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Simo J, Vu-Quoc L (1988) On the dynamics in space of rods undergoing large motions: a geometrically exact approach. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 66: 125–161zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Simo JC, Vu-Quoc L (1991) A geometrically exact rod model incorporating shear and torsion warping deformation. Int J Numer Methods Eng 27: 371–393zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ibrahimbegović A, Frey F, Kozar I (1995) Computational aspects of vector-like parametrization of three-dimensional finite rotations. Int J Numer Methods Eng 38: 3653–3673zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ibrahimbegović A (1995) Finite element implementation of reissner’s geometrically nonlinear beam theory: three dimensional curved beam finite element. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 122: 10–26Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jelenić G, Saje M (1995) A kinematically exact space finite strain beam model finite element formulation by generalized virtual work principle. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 120: 131–161zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Smolenski WM (1999) Statically and kinematically exact nonlinear theory of rods and its numerical verification. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 178: 89–113zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mäkinen J (2007) Total lagrangian reissner’s geometrically exact beam element without singularities. Int J Numer Methods Eng 70: 1009–1048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McRobie F, Lasenby J (1999) Simo-vu quoc rods using clifford algebra. Int J Numer Methods Eng 45(4): 377–398zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pimenta PM, Campello EMB, Wriggers P (2008) An exact conserving algorithm for nonlinear dynamics with rotational DOFs and general hyperelasticity. Part 1: Rods. Comput Mech 42(5): 715–732CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Botasso CL, Borri M (1998) Integrating finite rotations. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 164: 307–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Betsch P, Steinmann P (2002) Frame-indifferent beam element based upon the geometrically exact beam theory. Int J Numer Methods Eng 54: 1775–1788zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Atluri S, Cazzani A (1995) Rotations in computational solid mechanics. Arch Comput Methods Eng 1: 49–138CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pimenta PM, Campello EMB (2001) Geometrically nonlinear analysis of thin-walled space frames. In: Waszczyszyn Z, Stein E (eds) Second European conference on computational mechanics. Cracow, Poland (2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Campello EMB, Pimenta PM, Wriggers P (2003) A triangular finite shell element based on a fully nonlinear shell formulation. Comput Mech 31(6): 505–518zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nikravesh PE (1988) Computer aided analysis of mechanical systems. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Géradin M, Cardona A (2001) Flexible multibody dynamics: a finite element approach. Wiley, New York, ISBN 0-471-48990-5Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Spring K (1986) Euler parameters and the use of quaternion algebra in the manipulation of finite rotations: a review. Mech Mach Theory 21: 365–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Géradin M, Rixen D (1995) Parametrization of finite rotations in computational dynamics: a review. Revue européenne des éléments finis 4: 497–553zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pimenta PM, Yojo T (1993) Geometrically exact analysis of spatial frames. Appl Mech Rev 46(11): 118–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jagan Mohan S (2004) Group theoretic framework for FEM analysis of symmetric structures. Ph.D. thesis, Deptartment of Mechanical Engineerig, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ritto-Corrêa M, Camotim D (2002) On the differentiation of the rodrigues formula and its significance for the vector-like parameterization of reissner-simo beam theory. Int J Numer Methods Eng 55(9): 1005–1032zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ibrahimbegović A (1997) On the choice of finite rotation parameters. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 149: 49–71zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ibrahimbegović A, Taylor RL (2002) On the role of frame invariance in structural mechanics models at finite rotations. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 191: 5159–5176zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Crisfield MA, Jelenić G (1999) Objectivity of strain measures in the geometrically exact three-dimensional beam theory and its finite element implementation. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A, Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences 455: 1125–1147zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jelenić G, Crisfield M (1999) Geometrically exact 3D beam theory: implementation of a strain-invariant finite element for statics and dynamics. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 171: 141–171zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Romero I (2004) The interpolation of rotations and its application to finite element models of geometrically exact rods. Comput Mech 34: 121–133zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Romero I, Armero F (2002) An objective finite element approximation of the kinematics of geometrically exact rods and its use in the formulation of an energy-momentum conserving scheme in dynamics. Int J Numer Methods Eng 54(12): 1683–1716zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ghosh S, Roy D (2008) Consistent quaternion interpolation for objective finite element approximation of geometrically exact beam. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 198(3–4): 555–571CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Reissner E (1972) On one-dimensional finite-strain beam theory: the plane problem. J Appl Math Phys 23: 793–804Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Antman SS (1976) Ordinary differential equations of one-dimensional elasticity: foundations of the theories of nonlinearly elastic rods and shells. Arch Rational Mech Anal 61: 307–351zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Varadarajan VS (1984) Lie Groups, lie algebras and their representation. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol 102. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Jelenić G, Crisfield M (1998) Interpolation of rotational variables in nonlinear dynamics of 3D beams. Int J Numer Methods Eng 43: 1193–1222zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Engø K (2001) On the bch-formula in so(3). BIT Numer Math 41(3): 629–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bathe KJ, Bolourchi S (1979) Large displacement analysis of three-dimensional beam structures. Int J Numer Methods Eng 14: 961–986zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Structures Lab, Department of Civil EngineeringIndian Institute of ScienceBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations