Advertisement

Computational Model Verification and Validation in Structural Mechanics

  • E. Stein
  • M. Rüter
  • S. Ohnimus
Part of the Computational Methods in Applied Sciences book series (COMPUTMETHODS, volume 14)

Goal-oriented error control for model verification combined with model validation in Computational Mechanics, here for the Finite Element Method, is presented regarding the safety and reliability requirements of the ASME V&V 10-2006 Guide for Verification and Validation in Computational Solid Mechanics, as well as efficiency aspects.

In particular, model adaptivity with load- and process-depending applications of adequate mathematical models and numerical methods in different subdomains of a complex structure is a challenge for future research and practical applications. Of course, the inclusion of related experimental results for validation, yielding also material and system parameters with the requested accuracy, is required. Experiments with verified measured data for guaranteeing safety requirements of structural designs with respect to damage processes and ultimate load states are of growing importance again, especially in conjunction with the development and application of multi-scale models on macro-scales as well as on meso- and micro-scales.

A deterministic methodology for combined verification and model adaptivity by overall error control of quantities of interest is presented, using a model expansion strategy concerning the dimension and constitutive equations with applications to mostly thin-walled structures. The necessary prolongation and orthogonalization of coarse model solutions into the solution space of a fine model is emphasized.

The plate and shell theories considered here are computationally modeled on macro-scales, i.e. on classic C1-point continua. All 2D plate/shell elements are extended to 3D kinematics with constant strain modes in thickness direction in order to avoid locking and thus the implementation of 2D-3D transition elements.

The presented example shows combined discretization and model adaptivity of a continuous haunched flat slab in an automatized process.

Keyword

Finite Elements Verification and Validation Combined Model and Discretization Adaptivity Upper Bound of Model and Discretization Error Estimator Model Adaptivity from Elastic Plate to 3D Theory 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    M. Ainsworth and J.T. Oden. A unified approach to a posteriori error estimation based on element residual methods. Numerische Mathematik, 65:23–50, 1993MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    ASME V&V 10-2006. Guide for Verification and Validation in Computational Solid Mechanics. New York: The American Society of Mechanical EngineersGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    I. Babuška and A. Miller. A feedback finite element method with a posteriori error estimation. Part i: The finite element method and some basic properties of the a posteriori error estimator. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 61:1–40, 1987MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    I. Babuška and W.C. Rheinboldt. A-posteriori error estimates for finite-element method. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 12:1597–1615, 1978MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    I. Babuška and W.C. Rheinboldt. Error estimates for adaptive finite element computations. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 61:1–40, 1978Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    I. Babuška, T. Strouboulis, S.K. Gangaraj, and C.S. Upadhyay. Pollution error in the h-version of the finite element method and the local quality of the recovered derivatives. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 140:1–37, 1997MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    R.E. Bank. Hierarchical bases and the finite element method. Acta Numerica, 5:1–43, 1996CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    R.E. Bank and A. Weiser. Some a posteriori error estimators for elliptic partial differential equations. Mathematics of Computation, 44:283–301, 1985MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    K.J. Bathe and E.N. Dvorkin. A formulation of general shell elements — the use of mixed interpolation of tensorial components. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 22:697–722, 1986MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. Becker and R. Rannacher. A feed-back approach to error control in finite element methods: Basic analysis and examples. East-West Journal of Numerical Mathematics, 4:237–264, 1996MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    P. Betsch, F. Gruttmann, and E. Stein. A 4-node finite shell element for the implementation of general 3d-elasticity at finite strains. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 130:57–79, 1995CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. Bischoff and E. Ramm. Shear deformable shell elements for large strains and rotations. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 40:4427–4449, 1997MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. Bischoff and E. Ramm. On the physical significance of higher order kinematic and static variables in a three-dimensional shell formulation. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 37:6933–6960, 2000MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    S. Bordas and M. Duflot. Derivative recovery and a posteriori error estimate for extended finite elements. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 196:3381–3399, 2007CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    U. Brink and E. Stein. A posteriori error estimation in large-strain elasticity using equilibrated local Neumann problems. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 161:77– 101, 1998MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    C. Carstensen and S.A. Funken. Averaging technique for FE — a posteriori error control in elasticity. Part i: Conforming FEM. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 190:2483–2498, 2001MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    C. Carstensen, O. Scherf, and P. Wriggers. Adaptive finite elements for elastic bodies in contact. SIAM Journal of Scientific Computing, 20:1605–1626, 1999MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    F. Cirak and E. Ramm. A posteriori error estimation and adaptivity for linear elasticity using the reciprocal theorem. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 156:351– 362, 1998MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    A. Düster, A. Niggl, and E. Rank. Applying the hp-d version of the FEM to locally enhance dimensionally reduced models. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 196:3524–3533, 2007CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    A. Düster and E. Rank. A p-version finite element approach for two- and three-dimensional problems of the J 2 flow theory with non-linear isotropic hardening. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 53:49–63, 2002MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    EN (EuroNorm) 1990:2002. Eurocode. Basis of structural design. German version. Berlin: Beuth VerlagGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    K. Eriksson and C. Johnson. An adaptive finite element method for linear elliptic problems. Mathematics of Computation, 50:361–383, 1988MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    C. S. Han and P. Wriggers. On the error indication of shells in unilateral fricionless contact. Computational Mechanics, 28:169–176, 2002MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    T.J.R. Hughes, G.R. Feijo, L. Mazzei, and J.B. Quincy. The variational multiscale method — a paradigm for computational mechanics. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 166:3–24, 1998MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    P. Kettil, T. Ekevid, and N.E. Wiberg. Towards fully mesh adaptive FE-simulations in 3d using multi-grid solver. Computers and Structures, 81:735–746, 2003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    P. Ladevèze and D. Leguillon. Error estimate procedure in the finite element method and applications. SIAM Journal of Numerical Analysis, 20:485–509, 1983MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    F. Larsson and K. Runesson. Consistent time-cycle approximation for cyclic plasticity coupled to damage. In Computational Plasticity VIII, Fundamentals and Application, pages 1102– 1105, 2005Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    F. Larsson and K. Runesson. Adaptive computational meso-macro-scale modeling of elastic composites. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 195:324–338, 2006MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    R. Niekamp and E. Stein. An object-oriented approach for parallel two- and three-dimensional adaptive finite element computations. Computers and Structures, 80:317–328, 2002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    J.T. Oden, T. Belytschko, I. Babuška, and T.J.R. Hughes. Research directions in computational mechanics. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 192:913–922, 2003MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    J.T. Oden and J.R. Cho. Adaptive hpq-finite element methods of hierarchical models for plate-and shell-like structures. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 136:317– 346, 1996MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    J.T. Oden and S. Prudhomme. Estimation of modeling error in computational mechanics. Journal of Computational Physics, 182:496–515, 2002MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    J.T. Oden, S. Prudhomme, D.C. Hammerand, and M.S. Kuczma. Modeling error and adap-tivity in nonlinear continuum mechanics. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 190:6663–6684, 2001MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    J.T. Oden and K. Vemaganti. Estimation of local modeling error and goal-oriented modeling of heterogeneous materials. Part 1: Error estimates and adaptive algorithms. Journal of Computational Physics, 164:22–47, 2000MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    J.T. Oden, K. Vemaganti, and N. Moës. Hierarchical modeling of heterogeneous bodies. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 172:3–25, 1999MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    S. Ohnimus, E. Stein, and E. Walhorn. Local error estimates of FEM for displacements and stresses in linear elasticity by solving local Neumann problems. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 52:727–746, 2001MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    N. Parés, P. Diéz, and A. Huerta. Subdomain-based flux-free a posteriori error estimators. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 195:297–323, 2006MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    S. Prudhomme and J.T. Oden. On goal-oriented error estimates for elliptic problems: application to the control of pointwise errors. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 176:313–331, 1999MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    E. Rank, A. Düster, V. Nübel, K. Preusch, and O. Bruhns. High order finite elements for shells. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 194:2494–2512, 2005MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    A. Rieger and P. Wriggers. Adaptive methods for frictionless contact problems. Computers and Structures, 79:2197–2208, 2001CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    J.J. Ródenas, M. Tur, F.J. Fuenmayor, and A. Vercher. Improvement of the superconvergent patch recovery technique by the use of constraint equations: The spr-c technique. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 70:705–727, 2007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    M. Rüter and E. Stein. Adaptive finite element analysis of crack propagation in elastic fracture mechanics based on averaging techniques. Computational Materials Science, 31:247–257, 2004Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    M. Rüter and E. Stein. Goal-oriented a posteriori error estimates in linear elastic fracture mechanics. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 195:251–278, 2006MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    C. Schwab. A posteriori modeling error estimation for hierarchic plate models. Numerische Mathematik, 74:221–259, 1996MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    J.C. Simo and F. Armero. Geometrically non-linear enhanced strain mixed methods and the method of incompatible modes. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 33:1413–1449, 1992MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    E. Stein and S. Ohnimus. Coupled model- and solution-adaptivity in the finite element method. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 150:327–350, 1997MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    E. Stein and S. Ohnimus. Anisotropic discretization-and model-error estimation in solid mechanics by local Neumann problems. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 176:363–385, 1999MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    E. Stein, W. Rust, and S. Ohnimus. H- and p-adaptive finite element methods for two-dimensional structural problems including postbuckling of shells. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 101:315–354, 1992MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    E. Stein, M. Rüter, and S. Ohnimus. Adaptive finite element analysis and modelling of solids and structures. Findings, problems and trends. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 60:103–138, 2004MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    E. Stein, M. Rüter, and S. Ohnimus. Error-controlled adaptive goal-oriented modeling and finite element approximations in elasticity. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 196:3598–3613, 2007CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    E. Stein and M. Rüter (2007). Finite element methods for elasticity with error-controlled discretization and model adaptivity. In E. Stein, R. de Borst, and T. Hughes, editors, Encyclopedia of Computational Mechanics, first electronic revision, volume 2, pages 1–55. Chichester: WileyGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    E. Stein, M. Rüter, and S. Ohnimus (2007). AM-FEM with model expansion for verification and validation in structural mechanics. In F. Stangenberg et al., editors, 3rd International Conference Lifetime-oriented Design Concepts, Ruhr-Universitôt Bochum, pages 41–65. Freiburg: Aedification PublishersGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    R. Stevenson. Optimality of a standard adaptive finite element method. Foundations of Computational Mathematics, 7(2):245–269, 2007MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    T. Strouboulis, I. Babuška, and S.K. Gangaraj. Guaranteed computable bounds for the exact error in the finite element solution. Part ii: Bounds for the energy norm of the error in two dimensions. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 47:427–475, 2000MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    B. Szabó and G. Sahrmann. Hierarchic plate and shell models based on p-extension. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 26:1855–1881, 1988MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    M. Vogelius and I. Babuška. On a dimensional reduction method. II. Some approximation-theoretic results. Mathematics of Computation, 37:47–48, 1981MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    O.C. Zienkiewicz and J.Z. Zhu. Simple error estimator and adaptive procedure for practical engineering analysis. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 24:337– 357, 1987MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    O.C. Zienkiewicz and J.Z. Zhu. The superconvergent patch recovery (SPR) and adaptive finite element refinements. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanic and Engineering, 101:207–224, 1992MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IBNM, Leibniz Universität HannoverHannoverGermany
  2. 2.INPRO GmbH, Hallerstr. 11Berlin

Personalised recommendations