Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529 www.elsevier.

com/locate/apm

A Galerkin/least-square nite element formulation for nearly incompressible elasticity/stokes ow

Kaiming Xia
a b

a,*

, Haishen Yao

Department of Civil and Materials Engineering, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL 60607, USA Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, QCC, The City University of New York, NY 11364, USA Received 1 May 2005; received in revised form 1 August 2005; accepted 1 November 2005 Available online 27 December 2005

Abstract A Galerkin/least-square nite element formulation (GLS) is used to study mixed displacement-pressure formulation of nearly incompressible elasticity. In order to fully incorporate the eect of the residual-based stabilized term to the weak form, the second derivatives of shape functions were also derived and accounted, which can accurately discretize the residual term and improve the GLS method as well as the PetrovGalerkin method. The numerical studies show that improved stabilized method can eectively remove volumetric locking problem for incompressible elasticity and stabilize the pressure eld for stokes ow. When apply GLS to study material nonlinearity, the derivative of tangent modulus at the integration point will be required. Both advantage and disadvantage of using GLS method for nearly incompressible elasticity/stokes ow were demonstrated. 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Galerkin/least-square; Second derivatives of shape functions; Stabilized term; Incompressible elasticity/stokes ow

1. Introduction It has been a few decades for scientic researchers to try to develop successful nite element formulations for incompressible and nearly incompressible material, which can eectively alleviate or remove the volumetric locking problem. Mixed displacement-pressure formulations are a suitable alternative because the internal constraint can be satised point-wise. However, not every combination of interpolation functions for pressure and displacements is allowed since they have to satisfy BabuskaBrezzi conditions [1,2] or patch test proposed by Ozienkiewicz and Taylor [3]. While using low-order nite elements, the pressure eld might highly oscillate unless the some special stabilization is applied [3], which makes it dicult to use in practical engineering situations. Thus, a lot of eorts have been focused on the development of stabilized nite elements in which the

* Corresponding author. Present address: Machine Research, TC-E 852, P.O. Box 1875, Peoria, IL 61656-1875, USA. Tel.: +1 309 578 4145; fax: +1 309 578 4277. E-mail address: Xia_Kaiming@Cat.com (K. Xia).

0307-904X/$ - see front matter 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.apm.2005.11.009

514

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

violation of the mixed patch test (or BabuskaBrezzi conditions) can be articially compensated. Stabilization methods have been introduced for uid mechanics as tools of stabilizing the uid ow equations [2,47], particularly for advective-diusive model. One of these methods is to introduce nonzero diagonal terms by adding a least-square form to the Galerkin formulation, which was for uid mechanics [4]. The advantage of stabilization methods is to overcome diculties associated with mixed formulations (such as inappropriate combination of interpolation elds), which makes it possible to use low-order nite elements. The Galerkin/least-square (GLS) approach presents itself as a modication to constructing a weak form for the Galerkin form and acted as a means of stabilizing the uid ow equations. It is mainly applied to incompressible Stokes ow problems that coincide with those for incompressible linear elasticity. Additionally, both GLS and the PetrovGalerkin method have been used to alleviate volumetric locking problem in solid mechanics [810]. For both GLS and PetrovGalerkin method, the second derivatives of shape functions, with respect to global Cartesian coordinate system, are required to discretize the residual-based term, which has not been used in previous studies. In this paper, the second derivatives of shape functions are presented so that the residual terms can be accurately accounted. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. A Galerkin mixed form of elasticity is presented in Section 2. In Section 3 we present the Galerkin/least-square method for mixed displacement-pressure formulation and the second derivatives of shape functions. In Section 4 numerical simulations are given. Concluding remarks are presented in Section 5. 2. Mixed displacement-pressure formulation 2.1. Strong form Consider a body X denoted by the open set X & Rndim consisting of material point x 2 Rndim . Its boundary is denoted by C = oX = oXu [ oXt and B = oXu \ oXt. At any point x, the displacement ux 2 Rndim and pressure p(x) is a scalar. For mixed u p formulation, the governing equations are given by r r b 0 Equilibrium equation in body; p r u 0 Volumetric constitutive equation; K u g Dirichlet boundary condition on oXu ; rn t Neumann boundary condition on oXt ; where K is the bulk modulus and dened as K = E/3(1 2m). 2.2. Stress decomposition The stress tensor is also decomposed into two parts: deviatoric stress s and pressure p, and expressed as follows: r s p1 2GIdev p1 Duu e Dup p; 5 1 2 3 4

where G is shear modulus, 1 is the second-order unit tensor, deviatoric modulus Duu is the deviatoric projection of elastic matrix D and dened as Duu = 2GIdev, Idev is given by Idev I 1 1  1, and 3 T Dup 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 . 2.3. Weak form The weak form of the mixed problem can be obtained by using standard weighted residual method. The corresponding spaces for trial functions and weighting functions are dened as follows:

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

515

S u j u 2 H1 0 X j u g; on oXu ; p fp j p 2 L2 Xg; v fw j w 2 H X j w 0; on oXu g. Thus the discretized weighted residual form of the problem can be given as follows: Z Z Z u u rw : r dX w b dX wu t dC.
X X C 1

6 7 8

By substituting Eq. (5), one can further obtain Z Z Z uu up u u rw : D e D p dX w b dX wu t dC.

X X C

10

For volumetric constitutive equation, the weak form is given by Z  p wp r u dX 0 ; K X

11

where wuand wp are weighting functions corresponding to displacement u and pressure p, respectively and can be chosen as follows: wu ddu Nu ; w dP N . 2.4. Matrix form The spatial approximation of the displacement, pressure and strain are written by u N u u; p N P; e symru rs Nu u Bu; where matrix B is given by B rs Nu B1 Bnel . 17
p p p T p T T T

12 13

14 15 16

By applying the weighted residual method (Galerkin procedure and substitution of weighting functions Eqs. (12) and (13)) and appropriately approximating the spatial unknowns into Eqs. (10) and (11), the results will be as follows: " #& ' & ' Kuu Kup u Ru ; 18 KT K P 0 pp pu where Kuu Z
X

BT Duu Bu dX;

19 20 21 22 23

Z Kup BT Dup Np dX; X Z Z T u T Ru N b dX Nu t dC; X C Z p T pu Kpu N D B dX; X Z Kpp Np T Dpp Np dX;

X

where Dpu 1 1

0 0 T , Dpu = 1T = (Dup)T, and Dpp = 1/K.

516

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

Eq. (18) is the general mixed displacement-pressure formulation without consideration any stabilizing techniques. For low-order elements, the use of low-order interpolation functions for both displacement and pressure will give highly oscillated pressure solution. In order to avoid this oscillation, some stabilized techniques are used here as described below. 3. Galerkin/least-square formulations 3.1. General GLS form The Galerkin/least-square (GLS) approach presents a modication for constructing a weak form for Galerkin form, and is as follows [3,4]: Z Z T duT Au dX dAu sAu dX 0; 24 X X 2 3 1 0 0 a0 h2 6 7 25 s 4 0 1 0 5; l 0 0 1 where the rst term represents the general Galerkin form and the appended term represents the residual-based term including an element-dependent stabilized matrix s [4], which is an element-dependent parameter and has to be selected for good performance. dA(u)T is the corresponding weighting part regarded in GLS method. A(u) represents the residual part of the strong form corresponding to the high-order equation. 3.2. Decomposition of least-square part As required for our current mixed displacement-pressure formulation, the corresponding least-square part can be modied as follows: Z Z T T dAu sAu dX r rwu ; wp sr ru; p b dX. 26
X X

From Eqs. (5), (12) and (13), we can obtain that weighting term r rwu ; wp r Duu~ e 1~ p ; where ~ e ddu T rs Nu T ; ~ p dP N . Thus, Eq. (27) can be rewritten as follows:
p T r rwu ; wp ddu r Duu rs Nu dPp r 1Np ddu LT uu dP Lup . T T T T T T T p T p T T T

27

28 29

30

Also, the residual of the strong form can be rewritten as r ru; p b r Duu rs Nu u r 1Np P b Luu u Lup P b; where Luu LDuu rs Nu ; Lup LD N .
up p

31

32 33

When using the GLS scheme, some dicult points should be mentioned. The derivation of matrix Luu and Lup seems very complicated. Detailed derivations are provided below. For isotropic elasticity, deviatoric modulus is a symmetric matrix and can be given as follows:

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

517

1 1 2 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0

0 0 0 3 0 0

0 0

c11

c12 c22 c23 0 0 0 3 ;

c13 c23 c33 0 0 0

0 0 0 c44 0 0

0 0 0 0 c55 0

Duu 2lIdev

6 6 1 6 2l 6 6 1 6 3 6 0 6 6 4 0 0

7 6 0 0 7 6 c12 7 6 6 0 07 7 6 c13 76 6 0 07 7 6 0 7 6 3 05 4 0 0 3 l1;3i3 l2;3i3 l3;3i3 0

7 0 7 7 0 7 7 7. 0 7 7 7 0 5 c66

34

Then we can obtain matrix Luu as follows: 2 l1;3i1 l1;3i2 6 uu u Luu LD rs N 4 l2;3i1 l2;3i2 where l1;3i1 c11 o2 N i o2 N i o2 N i c44 2 c66 2 ; 2 ox oy oz o2 N i ; ox oy l3;3i1 l3;3i2

7 5
33nel

35

36 37 38 39 40 41

l1;3i2 l23i1 c12 c44

l1;3i3 l3;3i1 c13 c66 l2;3i2

o2 N i ; ox oz o2 N i o2 N i o2 N i c44 2 c22 2 c55 2 ; ox oy oz o2 N i ; oy oz

l2;3i3 l3;3i2 c23 c55 l3;3i3 c66

o2 N i o2 N i o2 N i c c . 55 33 ox 2 oy 2 oz 2

For elastoplasticity, consistent tangent modulus will vary from point to point and be updated for each incremental step. The gradients of components of the consistent tangent modulus will be required to accurately compute Lup. This will bring additional diculty to the nonlinear computational solid mechanics. This might be the intrinsic diculty of GLS method. 3 2 oN 1 oN nel ; 6 ox ox 7 7 6 6 o N o N 1 nel 7 up p 6 ;7 . Lup LD N 6 42 oy 7 7 6 oy 5 4 oN oN nel 1 oz oz 3nel 3.3. Mixed displacement-pressure formulations for GLS Then Eq. (26) can be further decomposed into two parts as follows: Z Z   T T p T T d A u s A u d X ddu L T uu dP Lup sLuu u Lup P b dX X X Z Z ddu T LT s L u L P b d X dPp T LT uu up uu up sLuu u Lup P b dX.
X X

43

By substituting Eq. (12) into Eq. (10), we can obtain the general weak form (Galerkin form) for the equilibrium equation as follows:

518

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

Z
X

u uu up p ddu r T s N : D rs Nu D N P dX

Z
X

ddu Nu b dX

Z
C

ddu Nu t dC.

44

Then, by appending the rst part of Eq. (43) to Eq. (44), we can obtain the Galerkin/least-square form for our mixed displacement-pressure formulation Z Z Z Z BT Duu B dXu BT Dup Np dXP LT s L d X u LT uu uu uu sLup dXP X X X X Z Z Z Nu T b dX Nu T t dC LT 45 uu sb dX.
X C X

Eq. (45) can be rewritten as follows:   G G Kuu KG uu u Kup Kup P Ru R ; where KG uu KG up Z Z

X

46

LT uu sLuu dX;

47 48 49

LT uu sLup dX; Z RG LT u uu sb dX.

X X

By taking the same procedure and substitute Eq. (13) into Eq. (11), one will get Z  p dPp T Np T r u dX 0. K X

50

Next, append the second part of Eq. (43) to Eq. (50), and we can obtain the weak form for the volumetric governing equation corresponding to Galerkin/least-square approach Z Z  p dPp T Np T r u 51 dX dPp T LT up sLuu u Lup P b dX 0. K X X Removing dPp on both sides of Eq. (51), and insert Eq. (15), thus we obtain     G G Kup KG up u Kpp Kpp P Rp ; Z LT KG pu up sLuu dX; X Z LT KG up up sLup dX; X Z LT RG p up sb dX.
X

52 53 54 55

Combining Eq. (46) and Eq. (52) together, we rewrite the mixed displacement-pressure formulation in matrix form as follows: 2 3 ) & ' ( Kup KG Kuu KG uu up Ru RG u u 4 5 T . 56 RG P Kup KG Kpp KG p up pp The above Eq. (56) is the Galerkin/least-square formulation for the mixed form of nearly incompressible elasticity/stokes ow.

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

519

3.4. Second derivatives of shape functions As we described earlier, the important part to completely implementing the Galerkin/least-square approach is to use the second derivatives of shape functions. The key formulations for calculation of second derivatives of shape functions are given as follows: 8 2 9 8 2 9 o NI > > o N > > > > I > > > > > 2 > > 2 > > > > > o n > > > > o x > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2 2 > > > > > > > o NI > o N I > > > > > > > > > > > > 2 9 8 > > > > 2 o g > > > > o y > > > > oN I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2 > > > > > > 2 o n > > > > > > o N o N I > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > = = = < of 2 > < oz 2 > < oN > I 1 ; 57 M 2 M 1 J M 2 > > > > og > 2 > > > > > > o2 N I > o N > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > oxoy > > > > > > > oN I > o n o g > > > > > > > > ; > > : > > > > > > > > o f 2 > > > > 2 > > > > o N I > o N > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > oy oz > o g o f > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2 > > o2 N > > > > > > > I o N I > > ; > : ; : oz ox of on where matrix [M2] and [M1] 2 2 j2 j11 12 6 6 j2 j2 6 21 22 6 6 2 j2 6 j31 32 M 2 6 6 6 j11 j21 j12 j22 6 6 6 j21 j31 j22 j32 4 j31 j31 j32 j32 and 2 xI 6 6 on2 6 6 6 P o2 N I 6 xI 6 og2 6 6 6 P o2 N I 6 xI 6 2 6 o f M 1 6 6 6 P o2 N I 6 6 onog x I 6 6 6P 2 6 o NI 6 x 6 ogof I 6 6 4 P o2 N I xI of on P o2 N I P o2 N I on2 yI zI 7 7 7 7 2 P o NI 7 7 z I og2 7 7 7 P o2 N I 7 7 zI 7 of 2 7 7; 7 P o2 N I 7 zI 7 onog 7 7 7 2 P o NI 7 7 zI 7 ogof 7 7 7 P o2 N I 5 zI of on on2 P o2 N I 3 are given by j2 13 j2 23 j2 33 j13 j23 j23 j33 j33 j33 2j11 j12 2j21 j22 2j31 j32 j11 j22 j13 j22 j21 j32 j22 j31 j11 j32 j12 j31 2j12 j13 2j22 j23 2j32 j33 j12 j23 j13 j22 j22 j33 j23 j32 j12 j33 j13 j32 7 7 7 7 7 2j33 j31 ; 7 7 7 j11 j23 j13 j21 ; 7 7 7 j21 j33 j23 j31 ; 7 5 j11 j33 j13 j31 2j23 j21 ; 2j13 j11 ; 3

58

P o2 N I y og2 I P o2 N I of 2 yI

P o2 N I y onog I P o2 N I y ogof I P o2 N I y of on I

59

520

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

ox 6 on 6 6 ox 6 J 6 6 og 6 4 ox of J 1

3 2 3 P oN I P oN i P oN i oz xI y zI 6 2 on 7 on on I on 7 7 6 7 J 11 7 7 6 P oN i P oN i 7 6 oz 7 6 P oN i xI y zI 7 4 J 21 76 og 7 6 og og I og 7 7 6 7 J 31 P oN i P oN i 5 oz 5 4 P oN i xI yI zI of of of of 3 J 22 J 33 J 32 J 23 J 13 J 32 J 12 J 33 J 12 J 23 J 13 J 22 1 6 7 4 J 31 J 23 J 21 J 33 J 11 J 33 J 13 J 31 J 21 J 13 J 23 J 11 5 detJ J 21 J 32 J 31 J 22 J 12 J 31 J 32 J 11 J 11 J 22 J 12 J 21 2 3 j11 j12 j13 6 7 4 j21 j22 j23 5. 2 oy on oy og oy of 2 j31 j32 j33

J 12 J 22 J 32

3 J 13 7 J 23 5; J 33

60

61

4. Numerical examples 4.1. Convergence rate study For convergence study, the developed method is applied to study a widely used cantilever beam with analytical solutions [11]. The beam is of length 10 m, height 2m, and thickness 1 m and subjected to a parabolic shear traction at the free end as shown in Fig. 1. The material properties for Fig. 1 are Youngs modulus E = 7.5E+07 N/m2 and Poissons ratio m = 0.4999. The load is P = 2560 N. Figs. 24 shows the results of the convergence rate study for the 3 node triangle and the 4 node quadrilateral, which was performed using uniform meshes of 10 2, 20 4, 40 8, and 80 8. Totally four dierent

Fig. 1. Diagram of parabolic shear-loaded beam.

-1

Log (error norm of displacement)

-2

-3

-4

-5

GLS, k=1.78 for T3 GLS, k=1.80 for Q4

-6 -0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Log (1/h)

Fig. 2. Convergence rate for the L2 norm of the displacement.

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

1.0

521

Log (error norm of energy)

0.5

0.0

-0.5

GLS, k=0.98 for T3 GLS, k=1.0 for Q4

-1.0 -0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Log (1/h)

Fig. 3. Convergence rate for the energy norm.

Log (error norm of pressure)

GLS, k=1.81 for T3 GLS, k=1.44 for Q4

0 -0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Log (1/h)

Fig. 4. Convergence rate for the L2 norm of the pressure eld.

1.1

Normalized displacement

1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

GLS for T3 GLS for Q4

0.6

0.5 10 100 1000 10000

Number of nodes

Fig. 5. Tip deection convergence for plane stress.

522

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

1.1

1.0

Normalized stress

0.9

0.8

0.7

GLS for T3 GLS for Q4

0.6

0.5

10

100

1000

10000

Number of nodes

Fig. 6. Stress convergence for plane stress.

1.1

Normalized displacement

1.0

0.9

0.8 GLS for T3 GLS for Q4

0.7

0.6 10 100 1000 10000

Number of nodes

Fig. 7. Tip deection convergence for plane strain.

1.1

1.0

Normalized stress

0.9

0.8

0.7

GLS for T3 GLS for Q4

0.6

0.5 10 100 1000 10000

Number of nodes

Fig. 8. Stress convergence for plane strain.

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

523

mesh sizes h were used here. This paper presents the mathematical rate of convergence study for displacements and pressure in the L2(X) norm and the energy norm. As described above, GLS method requires numeric tests to obtain the optimal stabilized parameter. In this paper, we provide all the results corresponding to the parameter a0 in Eq. (25) a0 = 0.05 for 4-node quadrilateral element. For the linear elements of the 3-node triangle and 4-node quadrilateral, the theoretical rate of convergence for the displacement and pressure in the L2(X) norm is 2 and the energy norm is 1. The results of the convergence rate study were carried out for the plane stress problem and shown in Figs. 24. The engineering convergence study was presented for both plane stress and plane strain problems, the normalized tip deection convergence study is given at point (10, 0) while normalized stress convergence is selected at point (0, 10). The engineering convergence studies can be seen in Figs. 58, which show the numerical solutions will converge to exact solutions with rened meshes and convergent elements were obtained. 4.2. Plane strain Cooks membrane problem The Cooks membrane beam problem has been widely used as a benchmarking test to check the performance of developed nite element formulations. Here it was used to demonstrate the performance of the stabilized

Fig. 9. Plane strain Cooks membrane problem.

20

Top corner displacement

16

12

GLS method Displacement-based

0 0 4 8 12 16 20

Elements/side

Fig. 10. Plane strain Cooks membrane problem: convergence for incompressible elasticity.

524

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

nite element formulation on the alleviation of volumetric locking issue. We consider a tapered panel, clamped on one end and subjected to a shearing load at the free end. The geometry of plane strain Cooks membrane beam problem is shown in Fig. 9. The plane strain problem can be considered as a three-dimensional problem with the xed displacement boundary conditions on the front and back surfaces, which provides the most highly constrained problem and has volumetric locking issue in solid mechanics. In order to test the convergence behavior of the GLS formulation, the problem has been discretized into 2 2, 4 4, 8 8, 16 16 nite element meshes. Fig. 10 shows that the displacement will converge quickly to the exact solution for nearly incompressible elasticity (Young modulus E = 250, Poisson ratio m = 0.4999) while element size decreases. Fig. 11 shows that the GLS formulations can eectively remove locking phenomena while the standard displacement-based formulation will exhibit locking eect. Fig. 12 shows that spurious unstablized pressure eld will be obtained if Galerkin method was used. Fig. 13 shows the pressure eld can be stabilized if Galerkin/ least-square formulation was used with distorted mesh. Also, Fig. 14 shows the pressure eld can be stabilized

10

Top corner vertical displacement

6 Displacement-based method GLS method 4

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Poisson ratio

Fig. 11. Plane strain Cooks membrane problem: displacement versus Poisson ratio.

Fig. 12. Unstabilized pressure eld with 4-node Q4 for Galerkin method.

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

525

Fig. 13. Stabilized pressure feld with 4-node Q4 for GLS method.

Fig. 14. Stabilized pressure eld with composite mesh for GLS method.

with distorted composite mesh (3-node triangle and 4-node quadrilateral). Therefore this example demonstrates the stabilization method is very eective in suppressing the oscillation of pressure eld. 4.3. Stokes ow analogy Since the equations of Stokes ow are similar to the equations of isotropic nearly incompressible elasticity. The only dierence is in the interpretation of the variables. For Stokes ow, u will be regarded as the velocity of the uid. Stokes ow governs highly viscous phenomena. Simulations of the incompressible Stokes ow with the classical Galerkin method may suer from spurious oscillations arising from the source, which has

526

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

Fig. 15. Lid-driven cavity ow analogy: geometry and boundary conditions.

Fig. 16. Oscillated pressure eld by Galerkin method.

Fig. 17. Oscillated pressure eld by GLS (a = 0.01).

to do with the mixed formulation character of the equations and is limited by the choice of equal linear order nite element interpolations used to approximate the velocity and pressure elds. A two-dimensional case is

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

527

Fig. 18. Stabilized pressure eld by GLS (a = 0.1).

Fig. 19. Stabilized pressure eld by GLS (a = 0.5).

15 10 5 Pressure 0 -5 -10 -15 0.0

=0.01 =0.1 =0.5

0.2

0.4

0.6 0.8 X-coordinate

1.0

1.2

Fig. 20. Driven cavity ow problem: pressure distribution at y = 0.35, 20 20 mesh.

528

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

considered for a square domain with unit side lengths. The boundary conditions are as specied in Fig. 15. The material properties are the same as those of incompressible elasticity used for the convergence study. Fig. 16 shows that the pressure eld by the Galerkin method will be highly oscillated. Figs. 1719 shows the pressure eld can be gradually stabilized by using an appropriate stabilization parameter a, which is included in the stabilization matrix s . If a is too small, oscillations remain in the pressure eld. In the other extreme, if a is too large, the stabilization will be too strong and the pressure eld will turn out to be too smooth and might fail to capture the correct solution in the corners. Therefore an optimum stabilization parameter has to be obtained when using Galerkin/least-square method as well as PetrovGalerkin method [8,9]. Fig. 20 shows the pressure distribution along the horizontal line (y = 0.25). 5. Concluding remarks In this paper, we have derived the second derivatives of shape functions for the stabilized formulation, which is important for the stabilized Galerkin/least-square method and PetrovGalerkin method. The second derivatives of shape functions were used to revisit the GLS method. The numerical results conrm that the Galerkin/least-square method can eectively stabilize the pressure eld and the volumetric locking can automatically removed. The convergence studies show that GLS method promises convergent elements and allows the use of equal low-order interpolations for both displacement and pressure elds. However, GLS method still has an intrinsic diculty to study material nonlinearity, which has not been veried before. In the past, the residual-based terms involved with second derivatives were always neglected without using the second derivatives of shape functions. For the inelastic problem, accurately accounting for the residual-based term will require the calculations of the derivatives of the tangent modulus at each integral point, which might pose a diculty even though GLS and PetrovGalerkin method have been used in solid mechanics. Hopefully this paper with the second derivatives of shape functions can provide some further insight for the applications of GLS and PetrovGalerkin method in solid mechanics. Appendix A For a three-dimensional problem, one can directly calculate the four modulus Duu, Dup, Dpu and Dpp based on the formulations shown above. For plane stress and plane strain problems, the calculation should be modied based on the assumptions of plane stress and plane strain. The corresponding tangent modulus are derived and provided below. A.1. Plane stress For plane stress problems, based on the assumption that the stresses in third direction are zero and uniform strain along the thickness, the tangent modulus is as follows: 3 2 2m 2m 0 7 6 3 3 7 6 7 6 E 62 m 2 m 7 uu 62 D 7; 6 0 7 1 m2 6 3 3 7 6 4 1 m5 0 0 2 1 1 m Dpp . 63 K 1 2m A.2. Plane strain For plane strain problems, the strains in the third direction are zero, thus we have the corresponding tangent modulus as follows:

K. Xia, H. Yao / Applied Mathematical Modelling 31 (2007) 513529

529

2 4m 6 3 6 6 2m 1 E 6 Duu 1 m 1 2m 6 6 3 4 0 1 D . K
pp

2m 1 3 2 4m 3 0

3 7 7 7 0 7 7; 7 1 2m 5 2 65 0 64

References
[1] I. Babuska, The nite element method with lagrange multipliers, Numer. Math. 20 (1973) 179192. [2] T.J.R. Hughes, L.P. Franca, M.A. Balestra, A new nite element formulation for computational uid dynamics: V. Circumventing the BabuskaBrezzi condition: a stable PetrovGalerkin formulation of the stokes problem accommodating equal-order interpolations, Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng. 59 (1986) 8599. [3] O.C. Ozienkiewicz, R.L. Taylor, The Finite Element Method, vol. 1, fourth ed., McGraw Hill, New York, 1994. [4] T.J.R. Hughes, L.P. Franca, M.A. Balestra, A new nite element formulation for computational uid dynamics: VIII. The Galerkin/ least square methods for advective-diusive equations, Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng. 73 (1989) 173189. [5] F. Brezzi, M.O. Bristeau, L. Franca, M. Mallet, G. Roge, A relationship between stabilized nite element methods and the Galerkin method with bubble functions, Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng. 96 (1992) 117129. [6] C. Baiocchi, F. Brezzi, L. Franca, Virtual bubbles and Galerkin-least-squares type methods (Ga.L.S), Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng. 105 (1993) 125141. [7] E. Onate, Derivation of stabilized equations for numerical solution of advective diusive transport and uid ow problems, Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng. 151 (1998) 233265. [8] O. Klaas, A. Maniatty, M. Shephard, A stabilized mixed nite element method for nite elasticity. Formulation for linear displacement and pressure interpolation, Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng. 180 (1999) 6579. [9] A. Maniatty, Y. Liu, O. Klass, M.S. Shephard, Higher order stabilized nite element method for hyperelastic nite deformation, Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng. 191 (2002) 14911503. [10] S. Commend, A. Truty, T. Zimmermann, Stabilized nite elements applied to elastoplasticity: I. Mixed displacement-pressure formulation, Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng. 193 (2003) 35593586. [11] T.J.R. Hughes, The Finite Element Method: Linear Static and Dynamic Finite Element Analysis, Prentice-Hall, Englewoods Clis, NJ, 1987.