A survey of the core-congruential formulation for geometrically nonlinear TL finite elements
Author(s) -
Carlos A. Felippa,
Luis Crivelli,
Bjørn Olav Haugen
Publication year - 1994
Publication title -
archives of computational methods in engineering
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1886-1784
pISSN - 1134-3060
DOI - 10.1007/bf02736179
Subject(s) - degrees of freedom (physics and chemistry) , finite element method , nonlinear system , kinematics , mathematics , displacement (psychology) , core (optical fiber) , element (criminal law) , mathematical analysis , stiffness , physics , classical mechanics , structural engineering , engineering , quantum mechanics , psychology , optics , political science , law , psychotherapist
Summary This article presents a survey of the Core-Congruential Formulation (CCF) for geometrically nonlinear mechanical finite elements based on the Total Lagrangian (TL) kinematic description. Although the key ideas behind the CCF can be traced back to Rajasekaran and Murray in 1973, it has not subsequently received serious attention. The CCF is distinguished by a two-phase development of the finite element stiffness equations. The initial phase develop equations for individual particles. These equations are expressed in terms of displacement gradients as degrees of freedom. The second phase involves congruential-type transformations that eventually binds the element particles of an individual element in terms of its node-displacement degrees of freedom. Two versions of the CCF, labeled Direct and Generalized, are distinguished. The Direct CCF (DCCF) is first described in general form and then applied to the derivation of geometrically nonlinear bar, and plane stress elements using the Green-Lagrange strain measure. The more complex Generalized CCF (GCCF) is described and applied to the derivation of 2D and 3D Timoshenko beam elements. Several advantages of the CCF, notably the physically clean separation of material and geometric stiffnesses, and its independence with respect to the ultimate choice of shape functions and element degrees of freedom, are noted. Application examples involving very large motions solved with the 3D beam element display the range of applicability of this formulation, which transcends the kinematic limitations commonly attributed to the TL description.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom