Advertisement

A progressive cells activation algorithm for physically non-linear BEM analysis

  • Rodrigo G. Peixoto
  • Gabriel O. Ribeiro
  • Roque L. S. Pitangueira
Technical Paper
  • 53 Downloads

Abstract

A drawback of the boundary element method (BEM) to analyse solid non-linear problems is the necessity to discretize, not only the boundaries, but also the domain in internal cells. Such discretization is required to evaluate the domain integrals involving the inelastic (initial) fields and represents a loss of one of the most remarkable features of the BEM, which is the reduction of the problem’s dimension by one order. However, only regions where the dissipative effects take place need to be divided in cells, allowing optimization of the non-linear solution algorithms. In this paper, one of these optimization attempts is present in which the cells are progressively activated, augmenting the corresponding matrices, as the inelastic region develop and grow. In addition, the implicit formulation of the BEM with a unified constitutive modelling framework is used in order that different material behaviours may be addressed by a single numerical structure. Three numerical examples are presented: two involving ductile material behaviour, modelled with the elastoplastic von Mises associative constitutive model, and another to simulate quasi-brittle behaviour by an isotropic damage constitutive model.

Keywords

Inelastic solid mechanics Boundary element method Constitutive modelling Domain division optimization 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support received from the following Brazilian agencies of research funding: CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, Grant nos. 308785/2041-2 and 311109/2013-6) and FAPEMIG (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais, Grant nos. PPM-00669-15 and PPM-00307-13).

References

  1. 1.
    Peixoto RG, Ribeiro GO, Pitangueira RLS, Penna SS (2017) The strong discontinuity approach as a limit case of strain localization in the implicit BEM. Eng Anal with Bound Elem 80:127MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Swedlow JL, Cruse TA (1971) Formulation of boundary integral equations for three dimensional elastoplastic flow. J Solids Struct 7:1673CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mendelson A (1973) Boundary integral methods in elasticity and plasticity. Tech. rep., NASA TN D-7418, NASA, USAGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Riccardella PC (1973) An implementation of the boundary integral technique for planar problems in elasticity and elastoplasticity. Tech. rep., SM-73-10, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USAGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mukherjee S (1977) Some remarks about the formulation of three-dimensional thermoelastoplastic problems by integral equations. Int J Solids Struct 13:331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bui HD (1978) Some remarks about the formulation of three-dimensional thermoelastoplastic problems by integral equations. Int J Solids Struct 14:935CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Telles JCF, Brebbia CA (1979) On the application of the boundary element method to plasticity. Appl Math Model 3:466CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Telles JCF, Carrer JAM (1991) Implicit procedures for the solution of method to plasticity. Math Comput Model 15:303CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lin FB, Yan G, Bažant ZP, Ding F (2002) Non-local strain softening model of quasi-brittle materials using boundary element method. Eng Anal Bound Elem 26:417CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sládek J, Sládek V, Bažant ZP (2003) Non-local boundary integral formulation for softening damage. Int J Numer Methods Eng 57:103CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Benallal A, Fudoli CA, Venturini WS (2002) An implicit BEM formulation for gradient plasticity and localization phenomena. Int J Numer Methods Eng 53:1853CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rajgelj S, Amadio C, Nappi A (1992) Application of damage mechanics concepts to the boundary element methods. In: Brebbia CA, Ingber MS (eds) Boundary Element Technology VII. Springer, Dordrecht. pp 617–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Herding U, Kuhn G (1996) BEM applied to damage models emphasizing localization and associated regularization techniques. Eng Anal Bound Elem 18:137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    García R, Flórez-López J, Cerrolaza M (1999) Some remarks about the formulation of three-dimensional thermoelastoplastic problems by integral equations. Int J Solids Struct 36:3617CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Botta AS, Venturini WS, Benallal A (2005) BEM applied to damage models emphasizing localization and associated regularization techniques. Eng Anal Bound Elem 29:814CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Comi C, Perego U (2001) Fracture energy based bi-dissipative damage model for concrete. Int J Solids Struct 38:6427CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Benallal A, Botta AS, Venturini WS (2006) On the description of localization and failure phenomena by the boundary element method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 195:5833CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Aliabadi MH (2002) The boundary element method, vol 2. Applications in solids and structures. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Brebbia CA, Telles JCF, Wrobel LC (1984) Boundary element techniques–theory and applications in engineering. Springer, BerlinMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gao XW, Davies TG (2000) An effective boundary element algorithm for 2D and 3D elastoplastic problems. Int J Solids Struct 37:4987CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Telles JCF (1983) Boundary element method applied to inelastic problems. Springer, BerlinCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gao XW (2002) A boundary element method without internal cells for two-dimensional and three-dimensional elastoplastic problems. Trans ASME 69:154CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Henry DP, Banerjee PK (1988) Direct computation of Cauchy principal value integrals in advanced boundary elements. Int J Numer Methods Eng 26:2079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ochiai Y, Kobayashi T (1999) A field boundary element formulation for damage mechanics. Eng Anal Bound Elem 23:167CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nardini D, Brebbia CA (1982) A new approach for free vibration analysis using boundary elements. In: Brebbia CA (ed) Boundary element methods in engineering. Springer, Berlin. pp 312–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Partridge PW, Brebbia CA, Wrobel LC (1992) The dual reciprocity boundary element method. Computational Mechanics Publications, SouthamptonMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ingber MS, Mammoli AA, Brown MJ (2001) An implicit BEM formulation for gradient plasticity and localization phenomena. Int J Numer Methods Eng 52:417CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ribeiro TSA, Beer G, Duenser C (2008) Efficient elastoplastic analysis with the boundary element method. Comput Mech 41:715CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Carol I, Rizzi E, Willam K (1994) Some remarks about the formulation of three-dimensional thermoelastoplastic problems by integral equations. Int J Solids Struct 31(20):2835CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Peixoto RG, Anacleto FES, Ribeiro GO, Pitangueira RLS, Penna SS (2016) A field boundary element formulation for damage mechanics. Eng Anal Bound Elem 64:295MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
  32. 32.
    Gao XW, Davies TG (2002) Boundary element programming in mechanics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Huang Q, Cruse TA (1993) Some notes on singular integral techniques in boundary element analysis. Int J Numer Methods Eng 36:2643MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lachat JC, Watson JO (1976) An implicit BEM formulation for gradient plasticity and localization phenomena. Int J Numer Methods Eng 10:991CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Guiggiani M, Casalini P (1987) Direct computation of Cauchy principal value integrals in advanced boundary elements. Int J Numer Methods Eng 24:1711MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Simo JC, Hughes TJR (1998) Computaional inelaticity. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mazars J, Lemaitre J (1984) In: Shah SP (ed) Application of fracture mechanics to cementitious composites. NATO advanced research workshop. Northwestern University. pp 375–378 (Cited by [29]) Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Simo JC, Ju JW (1987) Strain- and stress-based continuum damage models—I. Formulation. Int J Solids Struct 23(7):821CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lemaitre J, Chaboche JL (1990) Mechanics of solid materials. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Theocaris PS, Marketos E (1964) Elastic-plastic analysis of perforated thinstrips of a strain-hardening material. J Mech Phys Solids 12:377 Cited by [18]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hill R (1950) The mathematical theory of plasticity. Oxford University Press, OxfordMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    de Souza Neto EA, Peric D, Owen DRJ (2006) Computational methods for plasticity: theory and application. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Petersson PE (1981) Crack growth and developement of fracture zones in plain concrete and similar materials. Tech. rep., TVBM-1006, Division of Building Materials, Lund Institute of Technology, Lund, SwedenGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rodrigo G. Peixoto
    • 1
  • Gabriel O. Ribeiro
    • 1
  • Roque L. S. Pitangueira
    • 1
  1. 1.Departamento de Engenharia de EstruturasUniversidade Federal de Minas GeraisBelo HorizonteBrazil

Personalised recommendations