Professional Documents
Culture Documents
) (
) (
(2)
The integration points, weights and the Jacobeans for the each cell are set. W
I
= 2 for the one-point gauss
quadrature.
Figure 3. One-point Gauss quadrature
Step-3 The shape function is constructed by the MLS approximation method. In this method the linear
basis functions in one-dimension:
| | x x p
T
1 ) ( = (3)
and the quartic spline weight function:
+
=
0
, 3 8 6 1
) (
4 3 2
r r r
x x W
i
1
1
>
s
r
r
(4)
is used. In matrix form the shape function is obtained as:
) ( ) ( ) (
1
x B x A p x
i
T
i
= (5)
Step-4 The approximate solution is obtained using the shape function as:
i
n
i
i i
u x u
=
=
1
) ( (6)
Step-5 The nodal discrete equations are obtained using the constrained Galerkin weak form using the
Lagrange multiplier[2]. The weak form is developed from the governing differential [2, 3, 5, and 9]
equation:
0 ) ( = |
.
|
\
|
dx
du
x EA
dx
d
, 0<x<L (7)
Subject to the boundary conditions of the problem at hand are given by:
Approximate
area
Exact area
represented by
circles under the
curve
f
f(x)
-1
1
0
4
u(0) = 0, P
dx
du
x EA
x
=
(
=1
) ( (8)
where
|
.
|
\
|
=
L
x
A x A
2
1 ) (
0
(9)
The weak form of governing equation is solved for the discrete nodal equations as
dx
dx
d
dx
d
EA K
j
L T
i
ij
}
=
0
(10)
i
is the trial function, j is the test function and in the EFG method the trial and test functions are same as
the shape function. A good elaboration on this can be found in the books and papers [1, 2, 3, 4, and 6].
ui
L
k ik
d G
u
I =
}
I
(11)
t i i
d P f
t
I =
}
I
(12)
u i
d u q
u
I =
}
I
(13)
G
ik
,K
ij
, f
i
and q
i
are
the matrices for the boundary conditions, stiffness, force and displacement respectively.
The above equations are solved using the one-point gauss quadrature integration referred in the step-2[4].
Step-6 The above discrete nodal equations are assembled into global matrix:
(
=
(
q
f u
G
G K
T
0
(14)
is the Lagrange multiplier
Step-7 The essential boundary condition is imposed. The specified displacement at fixed end is equal to
zero, hence q=0.
Step-8 The global matrix is solved to obtain the nodal displacement parameters.
Step-9 The curves are plotted and the result is obtained.
The solution code using the MATLAB language is developed and the resulting data and plots are
recorded for further analysis.
Tapered Steel Bar
The Element Free Galerkin method is used for obtaining the displacement parameter at the end of the bar
applying the developed MATLAB code. The problem has been considered from Fundamentals of finite
element analysis by David V Hutton [1]. Fig. 4 depicts the tapered elastic bar subjected to an applied tensile
load P at the free end and attached to a fixed support at the other end. The cross-sectional area varies
linearly from A
0
at the fixed support at x = 0 to A
0
/2 at x = L. Calculation of the displacement parameter at
the end of the bar was performed considering the following:
(a) Exact analytical solution
(b) Using the meshfree methodology
The material property and load data considered are given by:
Length of the bar, L = 1 m
Area of cross-section at fixed end, A
0
= 1 m
2
Area of cross-section at free end, A
1
= 0.5 m
2
Youngs modulus of Elasticity, E = 200*10
9
N/m
2
Point Load, P = 1000*10
3
N
5
The material properties considered in the referred original problem are taken as unity and the plot
obtained are given by the Fig. 5; the figure has been taken directly from the source. The plot obtained by
considering the similar data of unit force and material property and using the MATLAB code for meshfree
method is represented by Fig. 6 and three curve for 21 and 111 nodes along with the exact solution are
plotted to indicate the effect of number of nodes on the accuracy of the solution.
Figure 4. The tapered elastic bar subjected to an applied tensile load P
Figure 5. Displacement solutions plot from the original problem using FEM
Figure 6. Displacement solutions using meshfree method
6
Selection of dimensionless size of support domain
The selection of the dimension of support domain affects the accuracy of the approximate solution. This is
one of the selectable parameters which need to be selected appropriately by the analyst to arrive at the
correct and accurate solution. This has to be different for the different classes or complexities of the
problems, from simple geometry to complex shapes. The selection depends on the intuition and the
experience of the analyst otherwise fresher has to adopt the trial and error methodology and verification
from other methods to arrive at the optimum choice. The other selectable variables for the Element Free
Galerkin method and present study are given in table-1.
Table 1 Selectable variables
Sl No. Selectable variable Value
1 Weighting Function Quartic Spline:
+
=
0
, 3 8 6 1
) (
4 3 2
r r r
x x W
i
1
1
>
s
r
r
2 Basis Function One Dimensional Linear:
| | x x p
T
1 ) ( =
3 Integration One point Gauss-Quadrature
4 Prevention of Singularity of
Moment matrix
Shifting of nodes
5 Construction of
shape function
Moving Least Square Method
6 Number of Nodes 21 and 111
To study the effect of variation of
S,
on the solution for the nodal displacement parameters of the
bar, with the above data, the different values for the
S
were chosen and the plots for the meshfree solution
of the bar obtained which is shown by the Fig. 5 along with the exact solution. It is clearly noticeable that
the value of
S
=2.5 gives a result in the form of rough approximating curve whereas decrease in its value
provides better approximation to the curve of exact solution. The various displacement values of the end of
the bar are tabulated in Table-2. The data obtained is represented by the fig. 6.
Figure 6. Effect of dimensionless size of support domain,
S
CONCLUSION
The variation of the solution for the displacement parameter at the end of the bar with respect to
S
, is
presented by fig.7, it is clear from the given plot that there is an optimum value for the
S
where we can get
the best approximation to the exact solution. In present case it approximates to 2.1. Hence, the judgment,
knowledge, experience and intuition of the analyst plays vital role in the selection of the variable
parameters of the meshfree methods for getting the significantly correct solution for the problem in hand
depending upon the complexity and its nature.
7
Figure 7. Effect of dimensionless size of support domain,
S
Table 2 Displacement Parameter
S. no. Value of Alpha Displacement Parameter at the end of bar
1 1.4 6.80700 microns
2 1.5 6.80700 microns
3 1.6 6.81733 microns
5 1.7 6.83977 microns
6 1.8 6.86420 microns
7 1.9 6.88305 microns
8 2.0 6.89325 microns
9 2.1 6.89540 microns
10 2.2 6.89181 microns
11 2.3 6.88476 microns
12 2.4 6.87596 microns
13 2.5 6.86658 microns
14 Exact Solution 6.93147 microns
REFERENCES
[1] David V. Hutton, Fundamentals of finite element analysis, Mc-Graw Hill, 2004.
[2] G.R. Liu, Mesh Free Methods: Moving beyond the finite element method, CRC Press, 2003.
[3] J. Dolbow and T. Belytschko, An introduction to programming the meshless element- free galerkin
method, Archives in Computational Mechanics, 5 (1998) 207-241.
[4] J.N. Reddy, An introduction to the finite element methods , McGraw-Hill, 2003
[5] J.S. Kushawaha, Mesh free analysis of elastic bar, Master Thesis, Department of mechanical
engineering, HBTI, Kanpur, 2009.
[6] T. Belytscho, Y.Y. Lu, L.Gu, Element-free galerkin methods, International Journal for Numerical
Methods in Engineering, 37(1994) 229-256.
[7] T. Belytscho, Y. Krongauz, D. Organ, M. Fleming, P. Krysl, Meshless methods: An overview and
recent developments, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 139 (1996) 3-47.
[8] T.P. Fries, H.G. Matthies, Classification and overview of meshfree methods, Scientific Computing,
2004.
[9] Vivek Varshney, Element free galerkin method for analysis of reinforced granular beds on soft soil,
Master Thesis, Department of civil engineering, IIT, Kanpur, 2008.