Study of a linear elasticity problem using XFEM

methodology

Gaurav Bhati1
quipe GeM Institut de Recherche en G nie
c Civil et M canique,
c

1,rue de la No, Saint Nazaire, Pays de la loire , 44600

In this report we explain Extended Finite Element Methods and their applica-

tion. First, a brief introduction to XFEM methodology is given. We also present few

examples in 1D with analytical, FEM and XFEM solution to describe the difference

in the methodologies. Further, a 2D linear elasticity problem is solved using XFEM

implementation in MATLAB. The Stress and displacement field are computed using

the same.

I. Introduction

In past decades, Extended Finite Element Methods or Generalized Element Methods have been

extensively studied in simulating phenomenas including non-smooth solutions such as cracks, shear

bands dislocation, solidification and multifield problems. Firstly introduced in 1999 by Ted Belyt-

schko and his collaborators [1], these methods have been greatly successful in modeling accurate

approximation of solutions of problems involving local non-smooth features. The methods involve

locally enriching the classical finite element approximation space and are based on partition of unity

method. Fundamentally, there are two methods to approximate such solution first using polynomial

approximation or classical finite element methods which are mesh based and second polynomial

approximation with enrichment or extended finite element methods which are mesh free. In the first

1. Doctorate Scholar, quipe GeM Institut de Recherche en G nie

c Civil et M canique,
c 1, rue de la No,

and AIAA Member Grade (if any) for first author.

1
case, in order to make accurate resolution of the fields, it is necessary to have mesh sufficiently refined

near discontinuities and singularities as well as conforming to the discontinuities and singularities.

In majority of the cases it is very difficult to have such as mesh. Moreover, such requirement be-

comes more cumbersome when these discontinuities are evolving with such as crack propagation and

interface movement. Hence, mesh has to be continuously modified in order to rightly capture such

phenomena. Therefore, classical finite element methods become really expensive and time consu-

ming due to remeshing requirements for modeling of such complex phenomena. Alternatively, the

polynomial approximation of classical finite element method can be further enriched so as to take

account of non-smoothness caused in the field variables by discontinuities and singularities. Such

a strategy is known as Extended/Generalized Finite Element Method. By enrichment it means to

modifying shape functions associated to solution field. These methods are mesh free methods and

hence same mesh can be used simulate while discontinuities or singularities are evolving.

Generally, Extended finite elements can be classified in three ways as following : 1. Meshbased or

meshfree methods 2. Local or global approach 3. Extrinsic or intrinsic enrichment The classification

based on Meshbased and meshfree methods are as described in above paragraph. Fundamentally,

the solution field can be enriched both locally near discontinuities and globally on the whole domain.

However, as discontinuities are always present locally, it is always preferred to work with a local

approach being less complex and more accurate to approximate the solutions. The enrichment can

be done extrinsically, by adding special shape functions which easily captures the phenomena like

cracks, voids and interfaces or intrinsically, by modifying the existing shape functions to take account

of discontinuities present in the solution field. Alternatively, it can also be achieved by modifying

existing shape functions to take account of enrichment while keeping the number of shape functions

and unknowns same.

II. The Partition of Unity Method

The XFEM or GFEM methods are based on partition of unity method. The partition of unity

method introduced by Babuska et al. [2] for the application in solid mechanics problem where

classical finite element method fails. The partition of unity method takes into account the irregularity

2
 Figure 1 1D Linear Elasticity Problem

present in the solution. In a way instead of having a classical piecewise polynomial functional spaces

we have a set of patches or local approximation spaces to construct global approximation space.

Hence, for any further change in the domain or in the singularity present in the domain, it just need to

change corresponding local approximation spaces. Their work majorly focused on global enrichment

for the problems such as Laplace equation and Helmholtz equation. However, this method was

further extended to linear elastic fracture mechanics problems ( Belytschko and Black [1] and Moes

et al. [2]), where they apply enrichment to a local subset of nodes.

III. Linear Elasticity Problem

Consider a solid domain having a crack placed inside and with boundary composed of

traction free crack faces c+ and c , u on which dispalcement u are imposed and a part t on

which tractions t are imposed.

Equilibrium equations :

. = 0 on (1)

3
 .n = 0 on t (2)

.n = 0 on c+ (3)

.n = 0 on c (4)

where n is the outward normal.

Kinematics Equations

 = (u) = s u on (5)

u = u on u (6)

Constitutive law

= C: (7)

where C is Hookes tensor.

The space of admissible displacement field is denoted U and zero imposed displacement field as

U0 :

U = {V := = u on u } (8)

0 on u }
U = {V := = (9)

u = u on u (10)

4
 Considering crack faces being traction free with no contribution to equilibrium equation. The

weak form of the equilibrium equation is given as :

Z Z
: ()d = t.d U0 (11)

Using constitutive laws and kinematics the linear elasticity problem can be formulated as. find

uU such that

Z Z
(u) : C : (u)d = t.d U0

In finite element methods to solve linear elasticity problem the continuous form is discretized

over the whole domain such that the domain is composed of Ne number of elements e .

PN
= i=1 e

The finite element approximation for displacement at any point in domain is given by sum of

displacements at each node multiplied with corresponding shape of weight function.

P
u(x) = Ui Ni (x)

A. XFEM methodology

In case of some discontinuities present in the domain the XFEM allows us to enrich the solution

locally or in other words to add extra degrees of freedom to the approximation to counter the

non-smoothness produced by discontinuities.

P
u(x) = Ui Ni (x)

u = u1 N1 (x) + u2 N2 (x) + u3 N3 (x)

where Ui is the displacement at each node.

Lets assume a bar being modeled has crack position at a node in 1D

In classical finite element methods such a problem is dealt by introducing two degrees of freedom

at the cracked node, such that the approximation reads :

5
 u = u1 N1 (x) + u + +
2 N2 (x) + u2 N2 (x) + u3 N3 (x)

While in extended finite element method, we define two new terms known as average

displacement,[u] and jump in displacement,< u >, such that the approximation reads

u = u1 N1 (x)+ < u > N2 (x) + [u]N2 H(x) + u3 N3 (x)

u +
2 +u2 u +
2 u2
where [u] = 2 < u >= 2 and H(x) is a heaviside function, having values 1 for x < 0

& -1 for x > 0.

Now, if the crack is located in between two nodes, as shown in the figure. As the support of

nodes 2 and 3 is cut by crack, both of them needs to be enriched. The approximation in this case

reads as :

u = u1 N1 (x) + u2 N2 (x) + u3 N3 (x) + aN2 (x) + bN3 (x) + u4 N4 (x)

6
 Figure 2 1D Linear Elasticity Problem

a. FEM example for a 1D crack problem

Kinematics

u(0) = 0, u(L) = U

,x = 0 over [0,L]

Constitutive model

Hookes law : = E over [0,L]

= c1

 = c1 /E

u = c1 x/E + c2

from equation (1) c2 = 0 and c1 = U/L

hence u = U x/L

2. Variational Principle :

u
R
,x u = 0
RL
0
u,x dx + [u ]L
0 =0 u

u,x dx = 0 u such that u (0) = 0, u (L) = 0

R

find u such that u(0)=0 u(L)=U satisfying

u,x dx = 0 u
R

3. Finite Element Method

u = u1 N1 (x) + u2 N2 (x) + u3 N3 (x)

7
 Find u1 , u2 and u3 such that

RL
0
E(u1 N1,x + u2 N2,x + u3 N3,x + u4 N4,x )(u1 N1,x + u1 N2,x + u1 N3,x )dx = 0

P3
j=1 Kij uj = Fi for i=1,2,3

RL
where Kij = 0
ENi,x Ni,x dx

2 1 0 u1 0

E/h 1 2 1 u2 = 0

0 1 2 u3 U E/h

u1 = U/4; u2 = U/2; u3 = U/4;

b. XFEM solution for a 1D crack problem

RL
0
E(u1 N1,x + u2 N2,x + u3 N3,x + u4 N4,x + aH(x)N2,x + bH(x)N3,x )(u1 N1,x + u1 N2,x + u1 N3,x +

a H(x)N2,x + b H(x)N3,x )dx = 0

2 1 1 0 0 u1 0

1 2 1 0 1 u2 0

E/h 1 1 2 1 0 a = 0

0 0 1 2 1 b U E/h

0 0 0 1 2 u3 U E/h

u1 = U ; u2 = U ; u3 = 0; a = 3U ; b = U

c. Extension to a 2D crack problem Now if we take case of a crack placed arbitrarily on a 2D

mesh.
! !
4 4
h
bli,1 F1l (x) bli,1 F1l (x)
P P P P P P
u (x) = ui Ni (x) + ai Ni (x)H(x) + Ni (x) + Ni (x)
iI iL iK1 l=1 iK2 l=1

where :

I is the set of nodes in the mesh

ul is the classical (vectorial) degree of freedom at node i.

Nl is the scalar shape function associated to node i

8
 L I is the subset of nodes enriched by the Heaviside function. The corresponding (vectorial)

degree of freedom are denoted ai . A node belongs to L is its support is cut in two by the

crack and does not contain the crack tip.

K1 I and K2 I are the set of nodes to enrich to model crack tips numbered 1 and

2 respectively. The corresponding degrees of freedom are bli,1 and bli,2 , l= 1, . . . ,4. A node

belongs to K1 (resp. K2) if its support contains the first (resp. second) crack tip.

IV. Level Set Methods

Level set methods were originally developed by Osher and Sethian in is an innovative tool to

track the evolution of moving fronts, surfaces and discontinuties in the problem domain. Originally,

it was used to track the evolution of closed surfaces and curvatures but later people started to use

it even for open curve segments. First time M. Stolarska introduced level set methods to study the

crack propgation while coupling it with the XFEM methods. In a first stage, Level set methods

were introduced as Fast marching methods. Fast marching methods are based on boundary value

formulation and can only be used to model surfaces and discontinuties moving in single either

positive or negative direction. The formulation is represented as :

|T |F = 1 F ront = (t) = {(x, y)|(x, y) = t}

As mentioned above FMM requires F to be positive. The FMM methods were further extended

to today regarded as Level set methods. The levels set method differs by FMM methods as being

an Initial value formulation and can be applied for any arbitrary F. Their formulation is given by :

t + F || = 0 F ront = (t) = {(x, y)|(x, y, t) = 0}

V. MATLAB example of a 2D linear elasticity problem using XFEM and Level Set

Methods

a. Problem 1 The section follows solution to a 2D linear elasticity problem using XFEM

methodology implemented in Matlab software. We describe a 2D homogeneous domain consisting

an edge crack. We calculate the stress and displacement field using the same. The dimensions of the

domain are 1 unit in each direction. The material properties are taken as Elasticity Modulus, 3800e3

9
 Figure 3 Mesh used for the domain with crack

and Poissons ratio 0.33. For numerical simulation the number of elements are taken as 20 in each

direction and the mesh is crating using gmsh software linked to Matlab software. The mesh consist

of triangular elements. The mesh for the domain is as shown below in the figure. The boundary

conditions applied are as follows. We apply dirichlet boundary condition, U = 0 on lower boundary

and uniform load, 1000 unit on the upper boundary. The crack is placed arbitrarily on the domain

using level set methods.

The stress and displacement field are computed using XFEM methodology as described above.

The figures 4 and 5 represents the stress field and amplified displacemnt field with a factor of 100.

VI. Results

With help of XFEM methodology we are able to compute displacemnt and stress field on a

given domain with a crack arbitrarily placed on it. We see amplified stress and displacement field

around the crack which are highly intensified near the crack tip.

10
 Figure 4 Amplified displacement field computed on the domain

Figure 5 Stress field computed on the domain

References

[1] Belytschko, T., and Black, T., Elastic crack growth in finite elements with minimal remeshing., J.

Numer. Methods Engrg, 45 :601 620, 1999.

[2] Moes, N., and Dolbow, J., and Belytschko, T. Elastic crack growth in finite elements with minimal

remeshing., J. Numer. Methods Engrg, 46 :131 150, 1999.

11