Question 1

The weak form for transient linear elasticity in one dimension is as follows:
Strong Form:

A u ( x , t )=

p ( x ,t )
+ b (x , t)
x

p( x ,t)=EA

u ( x ,t )
x

BC :u=u on ; p= p on

D
Introduce w, an arbitrary weight function
and u,N a trial solution such that:

w={ ww H 1 , w ( D ) =0 }
u= {uu H 1 , u ( D ) =u }
Multiplying by w and integrating over the domain

wA u ( x , t ) dx= w
2

wA tu2 dx= w
wA

(
(

( p( xx , t ) +b ( x ,t ) )dx

EA

2 u
+b dx
x2

u
u
dx w EA 2 dx= wb dx
2
t
x

Applying integration by parts on the term

wA

2 u
u
w
u
dxwEA
+
EA
dx= wbdx
2
dx

x
x
t
N

w EA xu2 dx

Dynamics Project 1

wA

2 u
w
u
dx +
EA
dx= wbdx + w p
2

x
x
t

August 2014

Dynamics Project 1

August 2014

Question 2
A Garlerkin approximation was used on the weak form for transient linear elasticity
(shown in Question 1). This was used to discretize the problem in space, therefore
general equations for the relevant matrices for each of the elements is:
e

e e

M = A l

K =

N T Nd e

Ee A e
T
e
B Bd

e
l

F = N Fd

Two different Newmark time schemes were implemented to solve the initial
boundary problem over a period of time. The general expressions for these time
schemes are:
Start from:

M u n+1 +C u n +1+ K un +1=F n+1

Assume equilibrium at n+1

v n =un , an=u n
2

un+ 1=un + t v n +

t (
[ 12 ) a n+2 an+1 ]
2

The results using consistent mass matrices are as follows:

a) Trapezoidal Rule (

1
1
= , =
4
2

Dynamics Project 1

August 2014

The trapezoidal
seems
to be unconditionally
stable.
Though a coarse
Figure 1: t =rule
0.001s
(N_steps
Figure 2: t
= 0.00001s
discretization of time results in a poor value, the numbers are not growing
exponentially nor running away as the refinement decreases. The difference
in the deflection of the bar when decreasing t by 100 is approximately 0.7 x
10-4, which is 20% error in using a coarse discretization.
b) Central difference method (

1
=0 , =
2

Figure 3: t = 0.001s (N_steps

Figure 4: t = 5.88 x 10-6 s (N_steps

In comparison to the trapezoidal rule, the central difference method is

conditionally stable. This means that there is a maximum value for t, where
any larger t value will cause instability in the numerical implementation. At
t = 1.0 x 10-5 s, the graph was still not generating and NAN values were
found in the matrix for the displacement. It is only around t 5.8 x 10 -6 s,
that a valid solution appear.
The mass matrices were then lumped using the row-sum technique.

1
1
=
,

c) Trapezoidal Rule (
4
2

Dynamics Project 1

Figure 5: t = 0.001s (N_steps

August 2014

Figure 6: t = 0.001s (N_steps

The lumped mass matrices and the consistent mass matrices results were
very similar. This shows that there is no difference between using a different
mass matrix whilst using the trapezoidal rule.

1
=0
,

d) Central difference method (

2

Figure 7: t = 1.11 x 10-5 s (N_steps

Figure 8: t = 1.0 x 10-5 s (N_steps

The critical time step for the central difference method had increased when
the mass matrices were lumped. It is more efficient to use a lumped mass
matrix when using CDM since fewer time steps are required to converge to a
good solution.
Overall comments about the shape of the graph of a good solution shows that the
last element (from L = 0.95 1m), the deflection is constant. This is because the
last element has a much greater stiffness than the rest of the bar. Also, only half of
the bar experiences deflection (the half closest to the end subjected to the
concentrated and compressive end load). This can be due to the fact that the bar is
a 1m long and the force is relatively small.

Dynamics Project 1

August 2014

Dynamics Project 1

August 2014

Question 3
The bottom-left quarter of a 1m x 1m square plate that underwent transient thermal
conduction was modelled. The governing equation for transient thermal conduction
and the relevant elemental matrices for this particular are:

M T +KT =F
e

K =k B Bd

M e =e c p N T Nd e
e

F = N sd

The problem is a parabolic equation. Backward Euler was the chosen time scheme
used to model the problem because it is unconditionally stable however the MATLAB
file allows for this to be changed. The general expression for this time scheme is:

M u n+1 + K u n+1=F n+1

un+ 1=un + t v n+

The results are as follows:

Figure 9:

Figure 10:

Dynamics Project 1

Figure11:

August 2014

Figure12:

The heat evolution of the plate that has an initial temperature of 0K and a heat
source of s = foe-t increases to a maximum of approximately 0.43 K at +/-0.8s.
Thereafter, the temperature shown in the graph seems to decay exponentially. This
is to be expected as the heat source is exponentially decaying as time goes by.