Week - 2 - Explicit and Implicit Analysis
AIM :
To solve a non linear static problem by both explicit and implicit analysis.
Given Parameters :
A simple bar in tension as shown in Figure 1. Suppose that the force in the bar is a nonlinear function of the displacement F(u) = u3+9u2+4u
Three equal load increments (or steps) of ∆F = 1 unit each are used to load the tension bar. The variables used are u for displacement, f for internal force in the bar, F for external force applied to the bar and k for stiffness. Increemental displacements or incremental externally applied forces are represented as ∆u or ∆F, respectively. Use is made of the relationship ∆F = k∆u.
⇒k(u) = df/du = 3u2+18u+4
Explicit analysis :
Step 1 :
u0 = 0, ⇒ k(u0) = 4, ∆F = 1, ∆u1 = ∆F/k(u0) = 0.25, u1 = u0 + ∆u1 = 0.25
Step 2 :
⇒ k(u1) = 3*(0.25)2 + 18*0.25+4 = 0.1875+4.5+4 = 8.6875, ∆F = 1, ∆u2 = ∆F/k(u1) = 0.1151, u2 = u1 + ∆u2 = 0.3651
Step 3 :
⇒ k(u2) = 3*(0.3651)2+18*0.3651+4 = 10.7178, ∆F = 1, ∆u3 = ∆F/k(u2) = 1/10.7178, u3 = u2+∆u3= 0.4584
Finally, from the three steps the following results are obtained.
(Fint)1 = u13+9u12+4*u1 = 0.253+9*0.252+4*0.25 = 1.5781
(Fint)2 = u23+9u22+4*u2 = 0.36513+9*0.0.36512+4*0.3651 = 2.7087
(Fint)3 = u33+9u32+4*u3 = 0.45843+9*0.45842+4*0.4584 = 3.821
| Step i | ∆Fi | ∆ui | ui | (Fext)i | (fint)i | fint − Fext = R |
| 1 | 1 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 1 | 1.5781 | 0.5781 |
| 2 | 1 | 0.1151 | 0.3651 | 2 | 2.7087 | 0.7087 |
| 3 | 1 | 0.0933 | 0.4584 | 3 | 3.821 | 0.821 |
It is evident from the results that external and internal forces are NOT in equilibrium because
Fext ≠ fint.
Implicit Analysis :
An implicit analysis is the same as the explicit analysis, except that at the end of each step Newton-Raphson iterations are used to enforce equilibrium before moving to the next step. Basically, an incremental force is applied to advance the solution forward at the beginning of a step. However, internal forces and external forces will not be in equilibrium unless the stiffness is linear for the given step. Hence, in order to achieve equilibrium, corrections must be made to the displacement. This is accomplished by using Newton-Raphson iterations to minimize the residual, R(u) = fint − Fext. Expanding the residual as a Taylor series about the current displacement uj gives
Rj+1 = Rj(uj) + dR(uj)/du *δuj+1 + ... = Rj + k(uj)δuj+1 + ...
By neglecting higher order terms in the series, setting Rj+1 = 0 and solving for δuj+1 the
following correction is obtained
δuj+1 = −[k(uj)]−1Rj
Notice that the iteration variable is j and it may take several iterations for the norm of the residual, ||R||, to be reduced below the chosen tolerance criteria (for the example below a tolerance of 10−2 is chosen).
Step 1 :
u0 = 0, ⇒ k(u0) = 4, ∆F = 1, ∆u1 = ∆F/k(u0) = 0.25, u1 = u0 + ∆u1 = 0.25
(Fint)1 = u13+9u12+4*u1 = 0.253+9*0.252+4*0.25 = 1.5781
R(0) = fint − Fext = 1.5781 – 1 = 0.5781
||R(0)|| > 10−2 ⇒ Newton-Raphson iterations is necessary.
the correction is δu(1) = −[k(u1(0))]−1 * R(0) = -[ 3*0.252+18*0.25+4 ]-1 * 0.5781 = -0.0665
⇒u11=u10+∂u1 = 0.25-0.0665 =0.1835
(Fint)1 = u13+9u12+4*u1 = 1.0432 > 10-2 ⇒ Newton-Raphson iterations is necessary.
the correction is δu(2) = −[k(u1(1))]−1 * R(1) = -[3*0.18352+18*0.1835+4]-1 * 0.0432 = -0.0058
u12=u10+u11+∂u2 = 0.25-0.0665-0.0058 =0.1777
(Fint)12 = u13+9*u12+4*u1 = 0.17773 + 9*0.17772+4*0.1777=1.0006
R(2) = fint − Fext = 1.0006 – 1 = 0.0006 < 10−2
So, (Fint)1 = 1.0006
Step 2 :
(Fint)2 = u23+9u22+4*u2 = 0.36513+9*0.0.36512+4*0.3651 = 2.7087
R(0) = fint − Fext = 2.7087 – 2 = 0.7087
||R(0)|| > 10−2 ⇒ Newton-Raphson iterations are necessary.
the correction is
δu(1) = −[k(u2(0))]−1 * R(0) = -[ 3*0.36512+18*0.3651+4 ]-1 * 0.5781 = -0.0646
u21=u20+∂u1 = 0.3651-0.0646 =0.3005
(Fint)21 = u23+9*u22+4*u2 = 0.30053 + 9*0.30052+4*0.3005=2.037
R(1) = fint − Fext = 2.037 – 2 = 0.037> 10-2
the correction δu(2) = −[k(u2(1))]−1 * R(1) = -[3*0.30052+18*0.3005+4]-1 * 0.037 = -0.0038
u22=u20+u21+∂u2 = 0.3651-0.0646-0.0038 =0.2967
(Fint)12 = u13+9*u12+4*u1 = 0.29673 + 9*0.29672+4*0.2967=2.0052
R(2) = fint − Fext = 2.0052 – 2 = 0.0052 < 10−2
So, (Fint)2 = 2.0052
Step 3 :
(Fint)3 = u33+9u32+4*u3 = 0.45843+9*0.45842+4*0.4584 = 3.821
R(0) = fint − Fext = 3.821– 3 = 0.821
||R(0)|| > 10−2 ⇒ Newton-Raphson iterations are necessary.
the correction is
δu(1) = −[k(u3(0))]−1 * R(0) = -[ 3*0.45842+18*0.4584+4 ]-1 * 0.821 = -0.0637
u31=u30+∂u1 = 0.4584-0.0637 =0.3947
(Fint)31 = u33+9*u32+4*u3 = 0.39473 + 9*0.39472+4*0.3947=3.0424
R(1) = fint − Fext = 3.0424 – 3 = 0.0424> 10-2
the correction δu(2) = −[k(u3(1))]−1 * R(1) = -[3*0.39472+18*0.3947+4]-1 * 0.0424 = -0.0037
u22=u20+u21+∂u2 = 0.4584-0.0637-0.0037 =0.3911
(Fint)12 = u13+9*u12+4*u1 = 0.39113 + 9*0.39112+4*0.3911=3.0009
R(3) = fint − Fext = 3.0009 – 2 = 0.0009< 10−2
So, (Fint)3 = 3.0009
| Step i | ∆Fi | ui | (Fext)i | (fint)i | fint − Fext = R |
| 1 | 1 | 0.1777 | 1 | 1.0006 | 0.0006 |
| 2 | 1 | 0.2967 | 2 | 2.0052 | 0.0052 |
| 3 | 1 | 0.3911 | 3 | 3.0009 | 0.0009 |
RESULT :
The drift from the exact solution illustrates the lack of equilibrium between the internal and external forces. To correct for this problem an implicit analysis is required.