G.R. Liu MESH FREE METHODS Moving beyond the Finite Element Method CRC PRESS Bova Rawou Loudon New York Washington, D.C. (© 2008 by CRC Press LLC1, Gui Rong. "Mesh fee methods = moving beyond te finite element method / by Gui-Rong Liv pom Includes bibliographical references and inde. ISBN 0-8493-1238-8 (alk paper) 4: knginesring mainematies 2 Sumencat analysts. He raaes 1587007 620°001's1—de21 2onm3347 cr ‘This book consi information obtained for auhonie and highly regarded coreee Reprinted mata ie quoted with pmision, and sources ae indicated. A wide variety of references ar listed. Reasonable eforts have bees made publish reliable dats and infomation, but the authors and the publisher cannot assume responsibilty fr the validity ofall materials ‘or for the consequences oftheir use Including photocopying, microfiming, and recording, ce by any infamation storage or retieval sytem, without prior pension in writing from the publisher All ight reserved, Authorization photocopy items fr iternal a personal ue, othe personal internal use of specific liens may he erante yy CRC Pes LL pve ht St per pape phntarapin epi ety ta Ceptaht Cleaeance ‘Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 USA The fe ce for users ofthe Transitional Reprting Service is ISBN 0-8493-12388/020.004S1.50. Te fe is subject to change without noice. For organizations hat have been granted photocopy lcease by the CCC, separate system of payment tas been aanged “The onsen of CRC Press LLC does os extend to copying for general dsubution, for promotion, fr eeaing new Works, ‘or for esl. Specie pexmisson must be obained in walling from CRC Press LLC for such copying, iret ll inguisie (CBC Press LLC, 2000 NW Corporate Blvd, Boos Bato, Plaida 23431 ‘Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be uademasks or registred tademarks, and are used only for ‘euteation ad explanation, wig inten iin Visit the CRC Press Web site at www.crepress.com, (© 2005 by CRC Press LLE {No claim wo orginal US. Government wosks Imernarional Standard Hook Numner 0849312588 Liar of Congress Card Number 2002028347 Pinel inthe United Stites of Amares 173-1867 88.0 Printed on acre paper (© 2008 by CRC Press LLCDedication Te Zuona yun, Kun, Run, ‘and my family {or the time and support they gave ta me (© 2008 by CRC Press LLCPreface Topics related to modeling and simulation play an increasingly important role in building, an advanced engineering system in rapid and costeffective ways. For centuries, people have been using the finite difference method (FDM) to perform the task of modeling and simulation of engineering systems, in particular to solve partial differential equation systems. It works very well for problems of simple geometry. For decades, we have used techniques of finite clement methods (FEM) to perform more challenging tasks arising, from increasing demands on flexibility, effectiveness, and accuracy in challenging prob- Jems with complex geometry. I still remember, during my university years, doing a home- work assignment using FDM to calculate the temperature distribution in a rectangular plate. This simple problem demonstrated the power of numerical methods. About a year later, I created an FEM program to solve a nonlinear mechanics problem for a frame structural system, as my final year project. Since then, FEM has been one of my major tools in dealing with many engineering and academic problems. In the past two decades Thaye participated in and directed many engineering problems of very large scale with millions of degrees of freedom (DOFs).I thought, and many of my colleagues agreed, that with the advances of FEM and the computer, there were very few probleis left to solve, Soon, I realized that I was wrong and for very simple reasons. When a class of problems is solved, peuple simply move on to solve a class of problems that are more complex ad to demand results that are more accurate. In reality, problems can be as complex as we want them to be; hence, we can never ciaim that probiems are soived. We solve probiems that are idealized and simplified by us. Once the simplification is relaxed, new challenges arise. The older methods often cannot meet the demands of new problems of increasing, complexity, and newer and more advanced methods are constantly born, heard about meshless methods in about 1993, while I was working at Northwestern University, but somehow T was reluctant to move into this new research area probably because I was quite happy with what | was doing using techniques of FEM. It was also partially because I was concentrating on the development of my strip element method (see the monograph by G. K. Liu and Xi, 2001). During 1995-19%, | handled a number of practical engineering problems for the defense industry using FEM packages, and encoun- tered difficulties in solving mesh distortion-related problems. I struggled to use re-meshing, techniques, but the solution was far from satisfactory. I then began to look for methods that can solve the mesh distortion problems encountered in my industrial research work. Timmediately started to learn more about meshless methods. Tworked alone for about a year feeling as if I was walking in a maze of this new research area. I wished that I had a book on mesh free methods to guide me. T was excited for a time about the small progress I made, which motivated me to work day and night to write a proposal for a research grant from NSTB (a research funding agency of the Singapore government). [ was lucky enough to secure the grant, which quickly enabled me to form. a research team at the Centre for Advanced Computations in Engineering Science (ACES) working on element free methods. The research team at ACES is still working very hard in the area of mesh free methods. This book will cover many of the research outcomes from this research group. This book provides systematic steps that lead the reader to understand mesh free methods; how they work; how to use and develop a mesh free method, as well as the problems associated! with the element free methods. experienced difficulties in the process, of learning mesh free methods, because no single book was thus far available dedicated (© 2003 by CRC Press LLCto the topic. I therefore hope my effort in writing this monograph can help researchers, engineers, and students who are interested in exploring mesh free methods. My work in the area of mesh free methods has been profoundly influenced by the works of Professors Belytschko, Atluri, W. K, Liu, and many others working in this area. Without their significant contributions to this arca, this book would not exist In preparing this book, a number of my colleagues and students have supported and contributed to its writing. I express my sincere thanks to all of them. Special thanks to ¥.T.Gu, X. L. Chen, L. Liu, V. Tan, L. Yan, K. ¥. Yang, M. B. Liu, Y. L. Wu, Z. H. Ta, J.G. Wang, XM. Huang, YG. Wu, Z. P. Wu, KY. Dai, andl X. Han, Many of these individuals have contributed examples to this book in addition to their hard work in carrying out a umber of projects related to the mest free metods covered int this buvk G.R.Liu (© 2003 by CRC Press LLCThe Author G.R Liu received his Ph.D. from Tohoku University, Japan in 1991 He was a postdoctoral fellow at Northwestem University, US A. He is currently the Director of the Centre for Advanced Computations P in Engincering Science (ACES), National University of Singapore. He is also an associate professor at the Department of Mechanical Engi- neering, National University of Singapore, He has authored more A than 250 technical publications including, four books and 150 inter- national journal papers. He is the recipient of the Outstanding Uni- clement method. Ie is also a recipient of the Defence Technology Prize (national award, 1999) for his contribution to development of underwater shock technology at Singapore. He won the Silver Avward at CrayQuest 2000 (nationvride com- petition in 2000) for his development of mesh free methods. His research interests include Computational mechanics, element free methods, nano-scale computation, vibration and wave propagation in composites, mechanics of composites and smart materials, inverse problent, and numerical analysis, (© 2003 by CRC Press LLCContents 1 Introduction 1.1 Defining Mesh Free Methods 12 Need for MFree Methods 12 The Idea of MP'ree Methods 14 Outline of the Book 2 Mesh Free Methods for Engineering Problems 21 Physical Phenomena in Engineering, 22 Solution Procedure 23. Modeling the Geometry 24 Node Generation 25 Shape Function Creation 2.6 Property of Material or Media 27 Boundary, Initial, and Loading Conditions 28 Simulation 28.1 Discrete System Equations 2.8.2 Equation Solvers 29 Visualization 210 MPiee Method Pruvedure 2.10.1 Basic Steps 2102 Determination of the Dimension of a Support Domain 2.103 Determination of the Average Nodal Spacing 2.104 Concept of the Influence Domain 2.105 Property of MFree Shape Functions 2.1L Remarks 3 Mechanics of Solids and Structures 31 Basic 3.2 Equations for Three-Dimensional Solids 32.1 Suess and Strain 322 — Constitutive Equations 323 Dynamic Equilibrium Equations 33 Equations for Two-Dimensional Solids 33.1 Stress and Strain 332 Constitutive Equations 333 Dynamic Equilibrium Equations 34 — Equations for Truss Members 34.1 Stress and Strain 34.2 — Constitutive Equations 34.3 Dynamuc Equilibrium Equations 35 Equations for Beams 35.1 Stress and Strain 35.2 Constitutive Equations 35.3 Moments and Shear Forces (© 2003 by CRC Press LLC37 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 410 51 354 Dynamic Equilibrium Equations 355 Equations for Thick Beams Equations for Plates 3.61 Thin Plates 3.62 Mindllin Plates 3.63. Third-Order Theory of Plates Remarks Principles for Weak Forms Strong Forms vs. Weak Forms Hamilton's Principle Constrained Hamilton's Principle 43.1 Method of Lagrange Multipliers 43.2 Penalty Method 433 _ Determination of Penalty Factor Galerkin Weak Form Constrained Galerkin Weak Form 45.1 Galerkin Weak Form with Lagrange Multipliers 45.2 — Galerkin Weak Form with Penalty Factors Minimum Total Potential Fnergy Principle Weighted Residual Method Weighted Residual Method with Constraints Points to Note Remarks MFree Shape Function Construction Overview ‘Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics Approach 521 Choice of Weight Function 522 Consistency Reproducing Kernel Particle Method Moving, Least Squares Approximation 541 “MLS Procedure 542 Consistency 5.43 _ Continuous Moving Least Square Approximation Point Interpolation Method 55.1 Polynomial PIM 552 Consistency 3. Properties of PIM Shape Functions 554 Difference between PIM Interpolation and MLS Approximation 555 Methods to Avoid Singular Moment Matrix. Radial PIM 5.6.1 _ Rationale for Radial Basis Functions 2 PIM Formation Using Radial Basis Functions 3 Nonsingular Moment Matrix 5.64 Consistency 5 _ Radial Functions with Dimensionless Shape Parameters Radial PIM with Polynomial Reproduction 57.1 _ Rationale for Polynomials (© 2003 by CRC Press LLC2 Formulation Using Radial Polynomial Basis 5.73 Singularity Issue of the Transformed Moment Matrix Example 5.1 Sample RPIM Shape Functions Example 5.2 _ Effects of Shape Parameters of RBFs ‘on Shape Punction 58 Polynomial PIM with Coordinate Transformation 1 Coordinate Transformation 2 Choice of Rotation Angle 59 Matrix Triangularizati 1 Algorithus 59.1 MTAProcedure 59.2 Normalization of the Support Domain 3 MTA Flowchart 594 Test Examples Example 53. Interpolation Using 6 Nodes in Parallel Lines Example 54 Interpolation Using 12 Nodes in Parallel Lines 5.10 Comparison Study via Examples Example 5.5 Comparison ot Shape Functions Obtained Using Different Methods (ID Case) Example 5.6 Comparison of Shape Functions Obtained Using, Different Methods (2D Case) Example 5.7 Curve Fitting Using MFree Shape Functions Example 5.8 Effects of Shape Parameters on the Condition Number ‘of Moment Matrices and Curve Fitting Example 5:9 Surface Fitting Using MFree Shape Functions (Effects of Parameters) Example 5.10 Surface Fitting Using MFree Shape Functions (Accuracy in Derivatives of the Fitted Surface) Example 5.11 Surface Fitting Using MFree Shape Functions (Effects of the Support Domain) 5.11 Compatibility of MFree Function Approximation, 5.12. On the Concept of Reproduction 5.13 Other Methods 5.4 Remarks 6 Element Free Galerkin Method 6.1 EFG Formulation with Lagrange Multipliers 6a. Formulation 6.12 EEG Procedure 61.3 Background Integration 6.14 Numerical Examples Example 6.1 Patch Test Example 62 Cantilever Beam (Numerical Integration) 6.19) Remarks 62 EFG with Penalty Method. 621 Formulation 622 Penalty Method for Essential Boundary Conditions 623 Penalty Method for Continuity Conditions 624 Numerical Examples Example 6.3 Patch Test (© 2008 by GRC Press LLCExample 61 Timoshenko Beam Example 6.5 Cantilever Beam of Bi-Material Example 66 Sandwich Composite Beam 625 Remarks 63 Constrained Moving Least Square Method for EG 63.1 Formulation 63.2 Constrained Surfaces Generated by CMLS Example 67 Linear Constraint Example 68 Parabolic Constraint 633 Weak Form and Discrete Equations G34 Exanuples for Mechanics Probleins Example 69 Patch Test Example 610 Cantilever Bear Example 6.11 Hole in an Infinite Plate 635 Computational Time 636 Remarks 64 EFG for Nonlinear Elastic Problems 64.1 Basic Equations for Nonlinear Mechanies Problems 642 Weak Form for Nonlinear Elastic Problems 643 _ Discretization and Numerical Strategy 44 Numerical Procedure 645 Numerical Example Example 6.12 Soil Foundation 646 Remarks 65 Summary 7 Meshless Local Petrov-Galerkin Method 7.1 MLPG Formulation 7A. The Idea of MLPG 712 Formulation af MIPC 7.1.3 Types of Domains 71.4 Procedures for Fssential Roundary Conditions 7.15 Numerical Investigation 716 Examples Example 7.1 Patch Test Example 72. High-Order Patch Test Example 73 Cantilever Beam Example 74 Infinite Plate with a Circular Hole Example 75 HalfPlane Problem MLPG for Dynamic Problems 721 Statement of the Problem 722 Free-Vibration Analysis 723 Imposition of Essential Boundary Conditions for Tree Vibration 724 Numerical Examples Example 7.6 Cantilever Beam Example 7.7 Cantilever Beam with Variable Cross Section Example 7.8 Shear Wall 725 — Forced Vibration Analysis 7.26 Direct Analysis of Forced Vibration (© 2008 by CRC Press LLC727 Numerical Examples Example 7.9 Cantilever Beam Example 79a Simple Harmonic Loading Example 79b Transient Loading, 73 Remarks 8 Point Interpolation Methods 81 Polynwumial Point interpolation Method 8.1.1 Domain Discretization 8.12 Enclosure of Nodes 8.13 Variational Form of Galerkin PIM 8.14 Comparison of PIM, EFG, and FEM 8.1.5 Numerical Examples Example 8.1 atch Lest Example 82. Cantilever Beam Example 83. Hole in an Infinite Plate Example 84 Bridge Pier 8.16 Remarks 82 Application of PIM to Foundation Consolidation Problem 82.1 Biot’s Consolidation Theory and Its Weak Form 822. Discretization of Weak Form 823 Numerical Examples Example 85 One-Dimensional Consolidation Problem Example 86 Two-Dimensional Consolidation Problem, 83 Radial Point Interpolation Method 83.1 Key Considerations 832 Numerical Examples Example 87 Patch Test Fxample 88 Cantilever Roam Example 89 Infinite Plate with a Hole Example 8 10 Parallel Tunnel 833 Remarks 84 Local Point Interpolation Method (LPIM) 84.1 — LPIM Formulation 842 Weight Function 843 Numerical Examples Example 8.11 Standard Patch Test (LPIM | MTA) Example 8.12. Higher-Order Patch Test Eaample 8.13 Cantilever Beam Example 8.14 Infinite Plate with a Hole Example 8.15 Suess Distribution in a Dam 844 Remarks 85 Local Radial Point interpolation Method 85.1 Examples of Static Problems Example 8.16 Patch Test Example 8.17 High-Order Patch Test Example 8.18 Cantilever Beam Example 8.19 Infinite Plate with a Circular Hole Example 8:20 Halt-Plane Problem (© 2008 by CRC Press LLC852 Examples of Dynamic Problems, Example 821 Cantilever Beam Example 822 Free Vibration Analysis of a Shear Wall 853. Remarks 8.6 Application of LRTIM to Diffusion Equations 86.1 Terzaghi’s Consolidation Theory 862 — Discretized System Equation in the Time Domain 863 Numerical Example Example §.23 Two-Dimensional Foundation 87 Comparison Study 8/1 Convergence Comparison Example 824 Cantilever Beam (Convergence of LPIM-MTA, MQ-LRPIM, and MLPG) 87.2. Bificiency Comparison Example 825 Cantilever Beam (Eificiency of LPIM-MTA, MQ-LRPIM, and MLPG) 88 Summary 9° Mesh Free Methods for Fluid Dynamics Problems 9.1 Introduction 92. Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics Method. 921 SPH Basics 929 SPH Form 923 Major Numerical Implementation Issues 924 SPH Code Structure 925 Applications Example 9.1 Poiscuille Flow Example 9.2 Couette Flow Example 92. Sheat-Driven Cavity Problem Example 94 Free Surface Flows Example 9.5 Explosion in Vacuum Example 9.6 Simulation of Explosion Mitigated by Water 9.26 Remarks 93. Local Petrov-Galerkin Method 93.1 MLPG Formulation 932 Numerical Integration in MLPG 933 Governing Equations and Their Discretized Form 934 Boundary Condition for Vorticity 935 Numerical Results and Discussion Example 9.7 Natural Convection in a Square Cavity Problem 93.6 Remarks 94 Local Radial Point Interpolation Method 94.1 LRPIM Formulation 942 Implementation Issue in LRPIM for CFD Problems 943 Numerical Results and Discussion Example 98 Natural Convection in a Square Cavity Example 99 Natural Convection in a Concentric Annulus 944 Remarks lations for Navier-Stokes Fquation (© 2008 by GRC Press LLC10 Mesh Tree Methods for Beams 10.1 102 103 104 105 106 107 PIM Shape Function for Thin Beams 10.1.1 Formulation 10.12 Example Example 10.1 PIM Shape Functions for Thin Beans Elastostatic Analysis of Thin Beams 102.1 Local Weighted Residual Weak Form 10.22 _Discretized System Equations 1023 Numerical Example for Statie Problems Example 102 Simply-Simply Supported Beams under Various Loads Example 10.3 Beams under Uniformly Distributed Load with Different Boundary Conditions Buckling Analysis of Thin Beams (Eigenvalue Problem) 103.1 Local Weak Form 1032 Discretized System Equations 1033 Numerical Example Example 104 Bulking Analysis of Thin Beams Free-Vibration Analysis of Thin Beams (Eigenvalue Problem) 14.1 Local Weak Form. 1042. Discretized System Equations 1043 Numerical Results Example 10.5 Free-Vibration Analysis of Thin Beams Forced Vibration Analysis of Thin Beams (Time-Dependent Problem) 105.1 Local Weak Form. 1052. Discretized System Equations 1053 Numerical Results Example 10.6 Vibration of a Pinned-Pinned Thin Uniform Beam Subject to Harmonic Loading Example 10.7 Vibration of a Pinned-Pinned Thin Uniform Beam Subject to Transient Loading Timoshenko Beams 106.1 Local Weak Form 10.62. Discretized System Equations 1063 Numerical Example Example 108. Static Deflection of Timoshenko Beams Remarks 11 Mesh Free Methods for Plates 1 EFG Method for Thin Plates HAA Appronimation of Deflection 11.12 Variational Forms 11.13 Discrete Equations 1114 Eigenvalue Problem 1115 Numerical Examples Example 11.1 Static Deflection of Rectangular Thin Plates Example 11.2 Natural Frequency Analysis of Thin Square Plates Example 113 Natural Frequency Analysis of Elliptical Plates Example 114 Natural Frequency Analysis of Folygonal Plates Example 115 Natural Frequency Analysis of a Plate of Complex Shape ©2003 by CRC Prose LLC11.2 EFC Method for Thin Composite Laminates 11.21 Governing Equation for Buckling. 11.22 Diseretized Equation for Buckling Analysis 11.23. Discretized Equation for Free-Vibration Analysis, 1124 Numerical Examples for Buckling Analysis Example 11.6. Static Buckling of Rectangular Plates (Validation) Example 1.7 Static Buckling of a Square Plate (Efficiency) Example 11.8. Static Buckling of a Plate with Complicated. Shape (Application) Example 11.9 Static Buckling of a Laminated Plate (Application) T1.25° Numerieal Exaniples for Free-Vibration Analysis Example 11.10 Frequency Analysis of Free Vibration ‘of Orthotopic Square Plates Example 11.11 Natural Frequency Analysis of Composite Laminated Piates 113 EFG Method for Thick Plates 11341 Fleld Variables for Thick Plates Approximation of Field Variables ‘Variational Forms of System Equations Discrete System Equations 11.35 Discrete Form of Essential Boundary Conditions 1136 Equations for Statie Deformation Analysis 11.37 Numerical Examples of Static Detlection Analyses Example 11.12 Comparison of Deflection of Thin and Thick Square Plates with Different Types of Boundary Conditions Example 11.13 Convergence of Deflection of a Thin Square Plate Example 114 Convergence of Deflection of a Thick Square Plate Example 11.15 Maximum Deflections of Thick Plates under Several Kinds of Boundaries Example 11.16 Elimination of Shear Locking 1138 Numerical Examples of Vibration Analyses Example 11.17 Frequency Analysis of Thick Plates (FSDT) Example 11.18 Frequency Analysis of Thick Plates (FSDT and TSDT) 1139 Numerical Examples of Vibration Analyses Example 11.19 Buckling Analysis of Thick Plates (FSDT and TSDT) Example 1.20 Buckling Loads of a Square Plate Based on FSDT and TSDT with Different Loads and Boundaries Example 11.21 Buckling Loads of a Square Plate with a Circular Hole Based on FSDT and TSDT 114 RPIM for Thick Plates 11.41 Formulation 1142 Numerical Examples Fxamplo 11.29 Deflection of a Thick Square Plate (Effects of the EXP Shape Parameters) Fxample 11.23 Deflection af a Thick Square Plate Effects of the MQ Shape Parameters) Example 11.24 Deflection of a Thick Square Plate Effects of Polynomial Terms) Example 11.25 Deflection of a Thick Square Plate (Convergence of Maximum Deflections) (© 2008 by CRC Press LLCExample 11.25 Deflection of a Thick Square Plate (Effects of Irregularly Distributed Nodes) Example 11.27 Deflection of a Thick Square Plate (Effects of Shear Locking) 115 MLPG for Thin Plates, 115 Governing Equations Local Weak Form of MLPG Discretized System Equations M54 Weight Function 1155 Numerical Integration 6 Numetival Exaniples Example 11.28. Static Analysis of Thin Square Plates Example 11.29 Square Plate under Different Load with Different Support Example 11.30 Static Analysis of Thin Rectangular Plates Example 11.31 Static Deflection Analysis of a Circular Plate Example 11.32 Free-Vibration Analysis of Thin Plates 1.6 Remarks 12 Mesh Free Methods for Shells 121 EFG Method for Spatial Thin Shells 12.11 Moving Least Squares Approximation 12.12 Governing Equation for Thin Shell 1213. Strain-Displacement Relations 12.14 Principle of Virtual Work 12.15. Surface Approximation 12.16 Discretized Equations 12.17 Static Analysis 12.18 Free Vibration 12.19 Forced (Transient) Vibration 121.10 Numerical Example for Static Problems Example 12.1 Static Deflection of a Barrel Vault Roof under Gravity Force 121.11 Numerical Examples for Free Vibration of Thin Shells Example 122 Free Vibration of a Clamped Cylindrical Shell Panel Example 123 Free Vibration of a Hyperbolical Shell Example 124 Free Vibration of a Cylindrical Shell 121.12 Numerical Examples for Forced Vibration of Thin Shells, Example 12.5. Clamped Circular Plate Subject to an Impulsive Load Example 12.6 Clamped Cylindrical Shell Subject to a Sine Load Example 127 Clamped Spherical Shell Subject toa Sine Curve Toad 121.13 Remarks 122 EFG Method for Thick Shells 122.1 Fundamental Relations 1222 Principle of Virtual Work 1223 Numerical Examples Fxample 128. Static Deflection of « Barrel Vault Roof under Gravity Force (© 2003 by CRC Press LLC13 vy Example 129 Pinched Cylindrical Shell Example 12.10 Pinched Hemispherical Shell 1224" Remarks 123 RPIM for Thick Shells 3.1 Formulation Procedure 1232 Numerical Examples Example 12.11 Barrel Vault Roof Example 12.12 Pinched Cylindrical Shell Example 1213 Pinched Tiemisphetical Shell 1233, Remarks 124 Sunumary Boundary Mesh Free Methods 131 BPIM Using Polynomial Basi 13.11 Point Interpolation on Curves 13.1.2 Discrete Equations of BPIM 13.13 Implementation Issues in BPIM 13.14 Numerical Examples Example 13.1 Cantilever Beam Example 19.2 Plate with 4 Tole Example 13.3 A Rigid Flat Punch on a Semi-Infinite Foundation 192 BPIM Using Radial Function Basis 132.1 Radial Basis Point Interpolation 1322 BRPIM Formulation 13.23 Comparison of BPIM, BNM, and BEM 13.24 Numerical Examples Example 13.4 Cantilever Beam Example 135. Plate with a Hole Example 13.6 Internally Pressurized Hollow Cylinder 133 Remarks Mesh Free Methods Coupled with Other Methods Ai Coupled EFG/BEM Basic Equations of Elastostatics 1.2 Discrete Equations of EFG 14.13 BE Formulation 14.14 Coupling of EFG and BE System Equations 14.1.5 Numerical Results Example 14.1 Cantilever Beam Example 14.2 Hole in an Infinite Plate Example 14.3 A Structure on a Semi-Infinite Soil Foundation 142 Coupled EFG and Hybrid BEM 14.2.1 ERG Formulation 14.2.2 Hybrid Displacement BE Formulation 14.23 Coupling of ERG and HBE 14.24 Numerical Results Example 144 Cantilever Beam Example 14.5 Hole in an Infinite Plate Example 14.6 Structure on a Semi-Infinite Foundation (© 2003 by CRC Press LLCus Ma Coupled MLPC/FE/BE Methods 143.1 MLPG Formulation 143.2. FE Formulation 1433 Coupling of MLPG and FE or BE M34 Numerical Results Example 14.7 Cantilever Beam Example 148 Hole in an Infinite Plate Example 149 Internal Pressurized Hollow Cylinder Ehample 4.10 A Suuctute on a Semi-lafinite Founnlation Remarks 15 Implementation Issues 151 152 153 154 155 156 187 158 Definition of the Support Domain or Influence Domain Triangular Mesh and Size of the Influence Domain Node Numbering and Bandwidth of the Stiffness Matrix Bucket Algorithm for Node Searching, Relay Model for Domains with Irregular Boundaries 155.1 Problem Statement 1552. Visibility Method 1553. Diffraction Method 1554 Transparency Method 1555. The Relay Model Adaptive Procedure Based on Background Cells 15.6.1 Issues of Adaptive Analysis 1562. Existing Error Estimates 1563. Cell Energy Error Estimate 1564 Numerical Examples Example 15.1 Cantilever Beam (Error Estimation) Example 152 Infinite Plate with a Circular Hole (ror Fstimation) Example 153 A Square Plate Containing a Crack Strategy for local Adaptive Refinement 157.1 Update of the Density Factor 1872 Local Delaunay Triangulation Algorithm, Example 154 Infinite Plate with a Circular Hole (Adaptive Analysis) Example 15.5 Square Plate with a Square Hole (Adaptive Analysis) Example 15.6 Square Plate with a Crack (Adaptive Analysis) Example 15.7 Square Plate with Two Parallel Cracks (Adaptive Analysis) Example 15.8 Arbitrary Complex Domain (Adaptive Analysis) Remarks 16 MFree2D° 16.1 162 163 Overview ‘Techniques Used in MFree2D Preprocessing in MFree2D 163.1 Main Windows 1632 Geometry Creation (© 2003 by CRC Press LLC1633 1634 16.35 1636 16.3.7 Boundary Conditions and Loads Modify and Delete Boundary Conditions and Loads Node Generation Materials Property Input Miscellaneous 164 Postprocessing in MFree2D 1641 164.2 References Start of MFrecPost Window of MFreePost (© 2003 by CRC Press LLC1 Introduction 1.1 Defining Mesh Free Methods Designing advanced engineering systems requires the use of computer-aided design (CAD) tools. In Such tools, computational simulation techniques are often used to model and investigate physical phenomena in an engineering system. The simulation requires solving, the complex differential or partial differential equations that govern these phenomena. Traditionally, such complex partial differential equations are largely solved using numer- ical methods, such as the finite element method (FEM) and the finite difference method (FDM). In these methods, the spatial domain where the partial differential governing equations are defined is often discretized into meshes ‘A mesh is defined as any of the open spaces or interstices between the strands of a net that is formed by connecting nodes in a predefined manner. In FDM, the meshes used are also often called grids; in the finite volume method (FVM), the meshes are called volumes or cells; and in FEM, the meshes are called elements. The terminologies of grids, volumes, cells, and elements carry certain physical meaningsas they are defined for different physical problems. However, all these grids, volumes, cells, and elements can be termed meshes according to the above definition of mesh. The key here is that a mesh must be predefined to provide a certain relationship between the nodes, which is the base of the formulation of these conventional numerical methods. By using a properly predefined mesh and by applying a proper principle, complex differential or partial differential governing equations can be approximated by a set of algebraic equations for the mesh. The system of algebraic equations for the whole problem. domain ean he formed hy assembling, sets af algebraic equiations for all the meshes The mesh free method, abbreviated MFree method in this book, is used to establish a system of algebraic equations for the whole prablem domain without the use of a pre- defined mesh. MFree methods use a set of nodes scattered within the problem domain as well as sets of nodes scattered on the boundaries of the domain to represent (not discretize) the problem domain and its boundaries. These sets of scattered nodes do not form a mesh, which means that no information on the relationship between the nodes is required, at least for field variable interpolation. There are a number of MFroe methods, such as the element free Galerkin (EEG) method (Belytschko et al., 1994b), the meshiless local Petrov-Galerkin (MLPG) method (Aturi and Zhu, 1998), the point interpolation method (PIM) (Liu, G. Rand Gu, 1999), the point assembly method (PAM) (Liu, G. R., 1999), the finite point method (Onate et al., 1996), the finite difference method with arbitrary irregular grids (Liseka and Orkise, 1980; Jensen, 1980), smooth particle hydrodynamics (SPH) (Lucy, 1977; Gingold and Monaghan, 1977), reproducing kernel particle methox (Liu, W. Ket a, 1999), which is an improved version of SPH, and so forth. They all share the same feature that predefined meshes are not used, © 2003 by CRC Press LLCatleast for field variable interpolation. The names for the various MFree methods are still being debated. Because the methodology is still in a rapid development stage, new names of methods are constantly proposed. It may take some time before all the methods are properly categorized and unified to avoid confusion in the community. In contrast to FEM, the term clomicit free method is preferred, and in contrast to FDM, the term finite difference method using arbitrary or irregular grids is preferred. Some of the MFree methods have been assembled and termed meshless tcthods (see the excellent review paper by Belytschko et al,, 1996b). The term mesh free method has also appeared in the Titerature in recent years. This book uses the te1m mesh fice method! ot MFtee methox! for the collection of all the different mesh free methods because the term carries more a positive sense than meshes sella A reason to prefer the abbreviation Meee is because the M can also stand for manpower and money. Mesh free methods free Manpower from. the chore of meshing aud free substantial Money for computer-aided engineering, (CAE) projects. The question now is what qualifies as an MFree method? The minimum requirement for an MFree method: + That a predefined mesh is not necessary, al least in field variable interpolation. The ideal requirement for an MTree method: + That no mesh is necessary at all throughout the process of solving the problem of given arbitrary geometry governed by partial differential system equations subject to all kinds of boundlary conditions. The reality is that the MTree methods developed so far are not really ideal, ant fail in one of the following categories: ‘+ Methods that require background cells for the integration of system matrices derived {rom the weak form over the problem domain. These methods ate not truly mesh free. EFG methods belong in this category. These methods are prac- tical in many ways, as the creation of a background mesh is generally feasible and can always be automated using a triangular mesh for two-dimensional (2D) domains and a tetrahedral mesh for three-dimensional (3D) domains, ‘* Methods that require background cells locally for the integration of system matrices over the problem domain. MLPG methods belong in this category. These methods are said to be essentially mesh free because creating a local mesh is, easier than creating a mesh for the entire problem domain; it is a simpler task that can be performed automatically without any predefinition for the local mesh. + Methods that do not require 2 mesh at all, but that are less stable and less accurate, Collocation methods and finite difference methods using irregular grids belong to this category. Selection of nodes based on the type of a physical problem is still important for obtaining stable and accurate results (Song et al, 1999; Xu and Liu, 1999; Cheng and Liu, 1999). Automation of nodal selection and improv ing the stability of the solution are some of the challenges in these kinds of methods. This type of method has a very significant advantage: it is very easy to implement, because no integration is required. * Particle methods that require a predefinition of particles for their volumes or masses. The algorithm will then carry out the analyses even if the problem domain unclergoes extremely large detormation and separation. SPH methods © 2003 by CRC Press LLCbolong to this category. This type of method suffers from problems in the impo sition of boundary conditions. In addition, predefining the particles still techni- cally requires some kind of mesh. 1.2 Need tor MEree Methods TEM is robust and has been thoroughly developed for static and dynamic, linear or nonlinear stress analysis of solids, structures, as well as fluid flows. Most practical engi- neering problems related to solids and structures are currently solved using a large number of well-developed FEM packages that are commercially available. However, the following Tuuilations of TEM ave bevoutiig ineveasingly evident 4 Creation of a mesh for the problem domain is a prerequisite in using FEM packages. Usually the analyst spends the majority of his or her time in creating the mesh, and it becomes a major component of the cost of a simulation project because the cost of CPU (central processing unit) time is drastically decreasing, ‘The concem is more the manpower time, and less the computer time. Therefore, ideally the meshing process would be fully performed by the computer without human intervention, In stress calculations, the stresses obtained using FEM packages are discontinuous and less accurate, When handling large deformation, considerable accuracy is last hecause of the element distortions. It is very dilficull to simulate both crack growth with arbitrary andl complex paths and phase transformations due to discontinuities that do not coincide with Ute origintal nda Lines. It is very difficult to simulate the breakage of material into a large number of fragments as FEM is essentially based on continuum mechanics, in which the elements formulated cannot be broken. The elements can either be totally “eroded” or stay as a whole piece. This usually leads to a misrepresentation of the breakage path, Serious error can occur because the nature of the problem is nonlinear, and therefore the results are highly path dependent. Re-mesh approaches have heen proposed for handling these types of problems in FEM. In the re-mesh approach, the problem domain is re-meshed at steps luring the simulation process to provent the severe distortion of meshes and to allow the nodal lines to remain coincident with the discontinuity boundaries. For this purpose, complex, robust, and adaptive mesh generation processors have to be developed. However, these processors are only workable for 2D problems. ‘There are no reliable processors available for ereating hexahedral meshes for 3D problems due to the technical difficulty. Adaptive processors require “mappings” of fleld variables between meshes in successive stages in solving the problem. This mapping process often leads to addi- tional computation as well as a degradation of accuracy. In addition, for lange 3D problems, the computational cost of re-meshing at each step becomes very hugh, even if an adaptive scheme 1s available. © 2003 by CRC Press LLC8. FDM works very well for a large number of problems, especially for solving fluid dynamics problems. It suffers from a major disadvantage in that it relies on regularly distributed nodes. Therefore, studies have been conducted for a long time to develop methods using irregular grids, Efforts in this direction are sill ongoing, 1.3. The Idea of MFree Methods A close examination of these difficulties associated with FEM reveals the root of the problem: the need to use elements, which are the building block of FEM. A mesh with predefined “connectivity” is required to form the elements. As long as elements must be used, the problems mentioned above will not be easy to solve. Therefore, the idea of eliminating the elements and hence the mesh has evolved naturally. The concept of element free or mesh free methods has been proposed, in which the domain of the problem is represented by a set of arbitrarily distributed nodes, The MFree method! has great potential for solving the slifficult problems mentioned above. Adaptive schemes can be easily developed, as there is no mesh, and hence no connettivity concept involved. Thuy, there is no need tw provide w priori any information about the relationship of the nodes. This provides flexibility in adding or deleting points/ nodes whenever and wherever needed. For stress analysis of a solid domain, for example, there are often areas of stress concentration, even singularity. One can relatively freely add points in the stress concentration area without worrying about their relationship with, the other existing nodes. In crack growth problems, nodes can be easily added around the crack tip to capture the stress concentration with desired accuracy. This nodal refine- ment can be moved with a propagation crack through a background arrangement of nodes, associated with the global geometry. Adaptive meshing for a large variety of problems, 2D or 3D, including linear and nonlinear, static and dynamic stress analysis, can be very ettectively treated in MEree methods in a relatively simple manner, Because there is no need to create a mesh, and the nodes can be created by a computer in a fully automated manner, the time an engineer would spend on conventional mesh. generation can be saved. This can translate to substantial cost and time savings in modeling and simulation projects. There have been a number of MFree methods developed thus far. The major features of these methods are listed in Table 1.1. A software package MFree2D" with its own pre- and postprocessor has also been developed by G. R. Liu and co-workers (Liu, G. R. and Tu, 2001), 1.4 Qutline of the Book This book provides an introduction to MFree methods, and their application to various mechanies problems. This book covers the following types of problems: ‘+ Mechanics for solids (2D solids) ‘¢ Mechanies far structures (beams, plates, and shells) ‘* Fluid mechanics (fluid flow, convection flow, and hydrodynamics) © 2003 by CRC Press LLCTapte 1.1 ‘Some MFree Methods Developed Thus Far and Their Features Chapter System Equation MethodofFunction Covering the Method Ret. Hobe Solved Approximation Method Diffuse element Nayroles etal, 1982 Weak form Mis; 56 smethed ‘approximation, Galerkin method Element fee Belytschko eral, 19940 Weak form Ms) Dee, ls 12 Galerkin (EF) ‘approximation, M46 rmethest Clerbin method Meshless local Aur and Zhu, 1998 Local weak form MLS 57,9: Petrov Galerkin ‘approximation, (LPG) method Petrov Galerkin method Fie iat nate etal 1990; Stn foes Fite differential 5 ete only) method Listka and Orkis, representation 1860; Jensen, 1980 (yor serie). MIs _appronimation ‘Smooth particle Lucy, 1977; Gingold Strong form Integral 59 hydrodynamics anal Monaghan, 1977 representation Repron Li Weel a 1993 Sang Ce or 5 det only) erel particle ‘weak: form method prctouds (Oden and Abani, 1984; Weak form Partition of unity, 5 (introduction ‘Armando and Oden, MIS only) 1995 Partition of unity Babuska and Melenk, Weak form Partition of unity, 5 (introduction FEM 1995 Ms: only) Point Lis, G.RandGs, Weak form and Poi interpolation 5.848 interpolation 1999, 20006, local weak form method 20labed Boundary node Mukherie and Weak form and MLS 13 foriet only) methods Mukhenee, 9/2. local weak form Boundary point Liu, G.R and Gu, Weak form and Point interpolation BM Tmtcrpolation ——-20004)GuandLiu,G. oval woal form metheds R,2001a¢ ‘The bulk of the material in the book is the result of the intensive research work by G. R. Liu and his research team in the past 6 years. Works of other researchers are also intro- duced. The significance of this book is as follows: 1. This is the first book published that comprehensively covers MFree methods, 2. The book covers, in a systematic manner, basic theories, principles, techniques, and procedures in solving mechanics problems using MFtee methods. It will be very useful for researchers entering this new area of research on MFree methods, and for professionals and engineers developing computer codes for the next generation of computational mechanics. 3. Readers will benefit from the research outcome of G. R. Liu’s research team and their work on an award-winning project on MFree methods founded by the Singapore government. Many materials in this book are the results of ongoing projects, and have not been previously published. © 2003 by CRC Press LLC4. A software package named MFrec2D® with its own pre- and postprocessor, which has been developed by G. R. Liu’s team, is also introduced. 5. Alange number of examples with illustrations are provided for validating, bench marking, and demonstrating MFree methods. These examples can be useful reference materials for other researchers. The book is written for senior university students, graduate students, researchers, and professionals in engineering and science. Mechanical engineers and practitioners and structural engineers and practitioners will also find the book useful. Knowledge of FEM is not required but would help a great deal in understanding many concepts and proce- dures of MPree methods. Basic knowledge of mechanics is also helpful in reading this, book smoothly. A very brief introduction on mechanics is provided to prepare readers who are not familiar with the basies of mechanics. The MFree method isa very new area of research. There exist many problems, problems that offer aniple opportunities for researel tw develop the next generation of nunvetival methods. The method is also in a rapidly developing and growing stage. Different tech- niques are developed every day. This book addresses some of the current important issues, both positive and negative, related to MFree methods, which should prove beneficial to researchers, engineers, and students who are interested in venturing, into this area of research, The chapter-by-chapter description of this book is as follows: Chapter 1: Provides a brief introduction to MFree methods inclucling background and motivations that have led to the development of MFree methods, as well as this book. Chapter 2: Describes MFree procedures by comparing them with conventional FEM. The basic steps involved in using MFree methods for solving engineering prob- lems are listed. Some important common terms frequently used in MFree meth- ods are defined. Chapter 3: Presents a brief introduction to the basics of mechanics for solids, beams, and plates. Readers who are familiar with mechanics may skip this chapter. Chapter 4: Briefly introduces some principles and weak forms that will be used for creating discretized system equations. Constrained weak forms that are useful for MFfec formulation are also presented. Readers who are familiar with varia tional, energy, and weighted residual methods may skip this chapter. Chapter 5: Provides a detailed description of the methods for constructing MFree shape functions. This is one of the core chapters of this book discussing one of the most important issues of MFree methods. A new classification of theories of function approximation methods is presented, Methods of approximation of fune- tions are then systematically introduced. Issues related to constancy, reproduction, representation, compatibility, and convergence of an approximation are dis- cussed. ‘raditional methods, SP’H and MLS, and new methods of point interpo- lation are formulated in detail for the construction of MFree shape functions. Chapter 6: Introduces the element free Galerkin method (ERG), one of the MFree methods that has created a great difference. Very detailed formulation based on the constrained Galerkin weak form is presented, and a number of techniques that are used for handling essential boundary conditions are discussed in detail, Issues related to the background integration are also examined. Chapter 7: Introduces the meshless local Petrov Galerkin (MLPG) method, which requires only local cells of a background mesh for integration and which is a © 2003 by CRC Press LLCsignificant advanco. The constrained local Petrov-Calerkin method is used to formulate the MLPG method for both static and dynamic problems. Issues on types of local domains, effects of the dimension of these domains, handling local integration, and procedures in dealing with essential boundary conditions are discussed. Chapter 8; Introduces the point interpolation methods (PIM), which are formulated ‘based on both the Galerkin formulation and the local Petrov-Galerkin formula- tion. Different methods of PIM, both conforming and nonconforming, are for- mulated, examined, and benchmarked, issues related to the selection ot parameters are discussed, and a lange number of examples are provided. Chapter 9: Introduces MFree methods for computational fluid dynamics problems. SPH, MLPG, and PIM are formulated and applied to solve a number of bench- ‘marking and application problems. Issues related to iterative solution procedures for MFree methods in solving fluid flow problems are discussed, Chapter 10: Introduces PIM methods developed for analysis of beams. Both thin ‘beams governed by the Euler-Bernoulli beam theory and thick beams governed by the Timoshenko beam theory are used in the formulations. Shear-locking issues for beams in using MFree methods based on shear deformable beams are also discussed. Chapter 11: Introduces Mbree methods developed tor analysis ot plates. Both thin plates governed by the Mindlin plate theory and thick plates governed by the third-order shear deformation theory are used to develop the Mire methods. ‘Three methods—EFG, PIM, and MLPG—are formulated. Shear-locking issues for plates are also discussed in great detail Chapter 12; Introduces MFree methods developed for analysis of shells. Both thin shells governed by the Kirchhoff-Love theory and thick shells are used to formu- late the MFree methods. Two methods—ERG and PIM—are formulated for static and dynamic problems. Advantages of using MFree methods for shells are dis- eusced. Shear-and membrane-locking issues for shells are also briefly discussed Chapter 13: Formulates two boundary-type MFree methods—BPIM and radial BPIM. Procedures of using the MFree concept for solving boundary integral equations are provided. A number of examples are presented to demonstrate the advantages of these atetlods in solving problems of infinite domain, Chapter 14: Introduces methods that are formulated by coupling domain and bound- aty types of MEree methods. Mrree methods that couple with the traditional FEM and boundary element method (BEM) are also formulated and benchmarked Chapter 15: Discusses a number of implementation issues in coding with MFree methods. including node generation, hackground cell generation. determination of nodal influence domain, node selection, error estimations, and adaptive procedures. Chapter 16: Presents MFree2D®, which has been developed by G. R. Liu and co workers with pre-and postprocessors for adaptive analysis of 2D solids. Its functions and usage are introduced. © 2003 by CRC Press LLC2 Mesh Free Methods for Engineering Problems In building a moder and advanced engineering system, engineers must undertake a very sophisticated provess of modeling, sismulation, visualization, analysis, designing, proto- typing, testing, fabrication, and construction. The process is illustrated in the flowchart shown in Figure 2.1, The process is very often iterative in nature; that is, some of the procedures are repeated based on the results obtained at the current stage to achieve optimal performance for the system under construction. This book deals with topics related mainly to modeling and simulation, as well as some issues related to visualization, which are underlined in Figure 2.1. Under these topics, we address the computational aspects, which are also underlined in Figure 2.1. The focus will be on physical, mathematical, and computational modeling and computational simulation. These topics play an increasingly important role in building an advanced engineering system in a rapid and. costeltective way. Many methods and computational techniques can be employed to deal with these topics. The book mainly focuses on the development and use of the mesh free (MFree) methods. This chapter addresses the overall procedures of modeling and simulation using MFree methods and the differences between the MFree method and other existing methods, especially the widely used finite element method (FEM, see Liu and Quek, 2002) 2.1 Physical Phenomena in Engineering There are a large number of different physical phenomena in engineering systems, so many that it isnot possible to model and simulate them all. Infact, only major phenomena, which significantly attect the performance of the system, need be modeled and simulated to provide a necessary and sufficient in-depth understanding of the system. The physical problems covered in this book are in the areas of mechanics for solids, structures, and fluid flows, and mathematic models have been developed for the phenom ena in these areas. Different types of differential or partial differential governing equations have also been derived for these phenomena. These phenomena can be simulated if a proper tool can be found to solve these equations. Similar to conventional FEM, the finite difference method, and finite volume methods, the MFree method is actually a tool for solving partial differential equations that govern different physical phenomena. 2.2 Solution Procedure The procedure in FEM and the MFree method for solving engineering problems can in principle be outlined using the chart given in Figure 2.2. These two methods diverge at the stage of mesh creation, The fundamental difference between these two methods is the con- struction of the shape functions. In FEM, the shape functions are constructed using elements, © 2003 by CRC Press LLC‘Conceptual design }¢ | ¥ ‘Modeling (Physical, mathematical, computational, operational, economical) [* i simulation (Experimental, analytical, and computational) ¥ ‘Analvsis (Photography, visual-tape, and computer graphies, visual reality + Design’ ¥ Prototyping ¥ Testing ¥ Fabrication FIGURE 2.1 Processes that lead to building an engineered system, and the shape functions will be the same for the element. In fact, if the natural coordinate systems are used, the shape tunctions in the natural coordinates are the same tor all the elements of the same type. These shape functions are usually predetermined for different types of elements before the finite element analysis starts. In MFtee methods, however, the shape functions constructed are usually only for a particular point of interest. The shape function changes as the location of the point of interest changes. The construction of the element free shape function is performed during the analysis, not before the analysis. Once the global discretized system equation is established, the MFree method follows a procedure similar to FEM, except for some minor differences in the details of implemen- tation. Therefore, many techniques developed over the past decades in FEM can be utilized in MFree methods with or without modifications The following sections present the basic procedures in MFree methods, by discussing the differences between FEM and the MFree method at major stages of analysis. 2.3 Modeling the Geometry Real structures, components, or domains are in general very complex ane have to be reduced toa manageable geometry. In FEM, curved parts of the geometry and its boundary can be modeled using curves and curved surfaces using high-order elements. However, it should be noted that the geometry is eventually represented by a collection of elements, © 2003 by CRC Press LLCGEOMETRY GENERATION @ at 2 & TLEMENT MESH GENERATION NODAL-MESH GENERATION 1 1 BASED ON ELEMENT PREDEFINED SONNODISTNALOCALDOMAIN. | | SYSTEM EQUATION FOR ELEMENTS SISTA FQUATIONFORNODIS| J Q “GLOBAL MATRIN ASSEMBLY ESSENTIAL BOUNDARY | mox | MPO) I RESULTS ASSESSMENT. Flowchart for FEM and MFree method procedures Nodes Triangular elements FIGURE 2.3, Smoothed boundary is represented in FEM by straight lines of the edges of triangular elements and the curves and curved surfaces are approximated by piecewise curves and surfaces, of the elements. If linear elements are used, which is often the case in practical situations, these curves and surfaces are straight lines or flat surfaces. Figure 23 shows an example of a smooth boundary represented in the finite element model by straight lines of the edges of triangular elements. The accuracy of representation of the curved parts is controlled. © 2003 by CRC Press LLCNodes FIGURE 2.4 Smoathed boundary is represented in the mesh free method by nodes, by the number of the elements and the order of the elements used. A finer mesliof elements can generally lead to more accurate results. However, because of the constraints on time and computational resources including hardware and software, it is always required to limit the number of elements. Therefore, fine details of the geometry need to be modeled only if very accurate results are required for those regions. The results of simulation have to be interpreted with these geometric approximations in mind. The analyst has to deter- mune the distribution of the density of the mesh required to achieve a destred accuracy at important areas and regions of the problem domain. In MFree methods, however, the boundary is represented (not discretized) by nodes, as shown in Figure 24, At any point between two nodes on the boundary, one can interpolate using Mbree shape functions. Because the Mkree shape functions are created using nodes in a moving local domain, the curved boundary can be approximated very accurately even if linear polynomial bases are used. It is common in MFree methods to use higher-order polynomials. Note that this geometric interpolation can be performed using the same technique for field variable interpolation in MFree methods. Depending on the software used, there are many ways to create a properly simplified geometry in the computer. Points can be created simply by keying in the coordinates of the point. Lines/curves can be created by simply connecting, points/nodes. Surfaces can be created by connecting/rotating/translating, the existing lines/curves. Solids can be created by connecting/rotating/ translating the existing surfaces. Points, lines/curves, surfaces, and solids can be translated/rotated/reflected to form new ones. Graphic interfaces are used for assisting the creation and manipulation of the objects. There are a number of CAD (computer-aided design) software packages used in engineering, design that can produce files containing the geometry of the designed engineering system. These files can often be read by modeling software packages. Making use of the CAD files can save significant time in creating the geometry of the models, However. in many cases, the objects read directly from a CAD file may need to be modified and simplified before performing meshing. These tools for creating the geometry of the problem domain can be used for both the FEM and the MFree method. Knowledge. experience. and engineering judgment are very important in modeling the geometry ofa system. In many cases, finely detailed geometric features play only an aesthetic role, and will not affect the functionality or the performance of the engineering, systom very much, These features can be simply deleted, ignored, or simplified. This, however, © 2003 by CRC Press LLCmay not be truc for some cases, where a fine geometric change can give rise o.a significant difference in the simulation results. Adaptive analysis is ideal for solving this problem. objectively and independently of the judgment of the analyst. MFree methods provide more flexible ways for adaptive analyses. ‘Another very important issue is the simplification required by mathematic modeling. For example, a plate has three dimensions geometrically, but the plate in the plate theory of mechanics is represented mathematically only in two dimensions (the reason will Be examined in the next chapter). Therefore, the geometry of a “mechanics” plate is a two- dimensional @D) flat sutface vepresented usually by the sieulral surface. In TEM, plate clements are used in meshing the plate surfaces. A similar situation occurs in shells. A bean has also thtee dimensions yeoutettivally. The beaut in te beau heury of mechanics is represented mathematically only in one dimension, Therefore, the geometry of a “mechanics” beam is a one-dimensional (1D) straight or curved line. In FEM, bear elements have to be used to model the lines. A similar situation occurs in truss structures. In MFree methods, beams, plates, and shells can ali be represented using sets of arbi- trarily distributed nodes. In the formulation of the MFree methods, corresponding theories used in the FEM must be used. The difference, again, lles mainly in the creation of the shape functions, This book presents these formulations in Chapter 5, ——— i 2.4 Node Generation In FEM, meshing is performed to discretize the geometry created into small meshes called elements or cells, and many types of elements have been developed for different problems. The rationale behind domain discretization can be explained in a very rough and straight- forward manner, We can expect that the solution for an engineering problem will be very complex, and will vary in a way that is usually unpredictable using functions defined globally across the whole problem domain. However, if the problem domain can be divided (meshed) into small elements using a set of nodes that are connected in a predefined manner using nodal lines, the solution within each element can be approximated very easily using simple functions such as polynomials, which are termed shape functions, The solutions for all the individual elements form the solution for the whole problem domain. Mesh generation is a very important part of the preprocess in FEM, and it can be a very time-consuming task for the analyst. The domain has to be meshed properly into elements, of specific shapes such as triangles and quadrilaterals. No overlapping and gaps are allowed. Information, such as the element connectivity, must also be created during the meshing for later simulation. It is ideal to have an entirely automated mesh generator; unfortunately, one is not available on the market. Semiautomatic preprocessors are avail- able for most commercially available application software packages. There also exist packages designed mainly for meshing, Such packages can generate files of a mesh, which, can be read by other modeling and simulation packages. Triangulation is the most flexible way to create meshes of triangular elements. The process can be almost fully automated for 2D planes and even three-dimensional (3D) spaces. Therefore, itis used in most commercial preprocessors. The additional advantage of using triangles is the flexibility of modeling a complex geometry and its boundaries. The disadvantage is that the accuracy of the simulation results based on triangular elements is often much lower than that oblained using quadrilateral elements for the same density. of nodes, Quadrilateral elements, however, are more difficult to generate automatically. © 2003 by CRC Press LLCFIGURE 2.5 Mesh of triangular elements for a 2D problem domain ‘An example of triangular meshes is shown in Figure 2.5, which is generated using Mbree2U" (Liu, G. Ket al, 2000; Liu, G. K. and. tu, 2001). In MFree methods, the problem domain is represented by a set of arbitrarily distributed nodes, as schematically illustrated in Figure 2.4. There 1s no need to use meshes or elements, for field variable interpolation. Hence, there is no need to prescribe the relationship between the nodes. ‘The nodes can be generated simply using triangulation algorithms that are routinely available for both 2D and 3D domains. The significance of MFree methods in terms of meshing is that the process of node generation can be fully automated without human intervention. The analysis can be performed in a fully adaptive manner, 5 in MFree2D. This can significantly save time for an analyst when creating a mesh for the problem domain. All the MFree methods do not need a mesh of elements for field variable interpolation. However, some meshless methods require a background mesh of cells for integration of the system matrices, such as the element free Galerkin (EFG) methods (Belytschko etal, 1994b). Because the mesh is needed only for integration, any form of cells is acceptable as long as it provides sufficient accuracy in the integrations. The most con- venient mesh to use is a mesh of triangular cells that can be generated automatically in ‘MFree2D. There are MFree methods, such as the meshless local Petrov-Galerkin (MLPG) method, originally developed by Atluri and Zhu (1998), that require no mesh of elements for both field variable interpolation and background integration. These types of MFree methods are called essentially MFree methods. in that they require only a simple form, ‘of local mesh for integration of the system equations, which can be generated automat- ically with relative ease. ‘The procedure is often called stode generation, which is usually performed using prepro- cossors. The prepmoessor generates unique numbers for all the nodes for the solid or structure automatically. There are very few dedicated node generators available commer cially; thus, we have to use preprocessors that have been developed for FFM. These processors are usually very sophisticated, and MFree node generation uses a very small portion of their capacity All that is needed for MFree node generation is a small processor to generate triangular elements. We often use just the nodes of the triangular element mesh and diseard the elements. In some MFree methods, we may also use the element mesh for background integration. © 2003 by CRC Press LLC2.5 Shape Function Creation In FEM, shape functions are created based on elements, and therefore, the computation of shape functions has been straightforward. In the early years of the development of FEM, much of the work involved the formulation of all different types of elements. All the shape functions of finite elements satisfy the Kronecker delta function property In MFree methods, however, the construction of shape functions has been and still is the central issue. This is because shape functions have to be computed with the use of predefined knowledge about the relationship of the nodes, This has posed the major challenge for MFree methods. The currently most widely used method for constructing Mfree shape functions is the method of moving least squares (MLS) approximation. The application of MLS approximation has led to the development of many MFree methods and techniques. The major problem in MIS approximation is that the shape functions constructed do not possess the Kronecker delta function property. The new promising, method for constructing, shape functions is the point interpolation method (PIM) originated by G. R. Liu and Gu (1999), because it produces shape functions that always have the Kronecker della function properly Hence, PIM eliminates a number of difficult issues that have concerned many researchers in the area of MFree methods. ——— 2.6 Property of Material or Media In FEM, material properties can be defined for a group of elements or for each individual element {f needed. For different phenomena to be simulated, different material properties, are required. Inputting a material property into a preprocessor in both FEM and the MFree method is usually straightforward. All the analyst need do is key in the material property data and specify to which region of the geometry or which elements the data apply. Ubtaining these properties, however, 1s not always simple. ‘There are materials databases commercially available to choose from. Experiments are usually required to determine accurately the material properties to be used in the system. Ihis is, however, beyond the scope of this text. In this book, we usually assume that the material property is known. In MFree methods, material properties can be defined for subdomains of the problem. There are, however, some implementation issues related to the handling of the interfaces, of different types of materials. There are challenging problems to be resolved, such as the method of field variable interpolation near the interface of different materials and the calculation of the stresses effectively and accurately near the interfaces without the use of a mesh, Some methods for dealing, with interfaces of different materials are discussed in Chapter 6. === 2.7. Boundary, Initial, and Loading Conditions Boundary, initial, and loading conditions play a decisive role in the solution of a simula- tion. In FEM, inputting these conditions is not very difficult in most commercial propro- cessors, and it is often interfaced with graphics. Users can specify these conditions either to the geometric identities (points, lines /curves, surfaces, and solids) or to the elements or grids. Again, to simulate this condition accurately for actual engineering systems © 2003 by CRC Press LLCrequires experience, knowledge, and proper engineoring judgment. There are standard procedures or techniques for the implementation of the boundary conditions, in the form. of either single point or multipoint constraints. All the techniques developed in FEM are applicable (with some modification) to MFree methods. Tn MFree methods using MLS approximations for constructing shape functions, special techniques are required to impose essential (displacement) boundary conditions, because the shape functions created do not satisfy the Kronecker delta conditions. MFree methods using shape functions created using PIM possess the Kronecker delta property. The impo- sitiott of the essential bournlaty conditions is the same as that in. FEM. In MFree methods, the shape functions are constructed concurrently with the process of assembling the global systei equations. This provides att alletnative way ty implement essential boundary conditions by imposing these boundary conditions in the stage of shape function creation or stiffness mattix calculation. Ta this way, the final discretized system equation will not contain the degrees of freedom for the nodes with specified boundary conditions. Much work is still required in this direction of development 2.8 Simulation 2.8.1 Discrete System Equations Proper principles must be followed for discretizing the governing differential equations based on discretized domains. These principles differ from probiem to probiem. Both FEM and MFree methods use these principles; however, the procedure and preference of apply- ing these principles can be different due to the different nature of these two methods, In FEM, a set of discrete simultaneous system equations can be formulated using prin- ciples and shape functions created based on the element mesh generated. There are basically four principles used for establishing the simultaneous equations. The first is based on the principle ot virtual work, such as Hamulton’s principle, the minimum total potential energy principle, and so on. Traditional FEM is founded on these principles. The second is based on the residual methods, and is, in fact, a more general form ot principle that can be used for deriving FEM equations both for solids and structures and for fluid flows, as long as the partial differential governing equations are provided. The third is based on the Taylor series, which has led to the formation of the traditional finite difference method (FDM). The fourth is based on the control of conservation laws on each finite volume (clement) in the domain. The finite volume method (FVM) was established using, this approach, The engineering practice so far shows that the first two principles are more often used for solid and structures, and the other two principles are more oftew used for fluid flow and heat transfer simulations. However, FEM has also been used to develop commercial packages for fluid flow and heat transfer problems, and FDM can be used for solids and structures. Itmay be mentioned here without detailed illustration that the mathematical foundation of all these approaches is the residual method. A proper choice of the test and trial functions in the residual method can lead to FEM, FDM, or FVM formulation. Many MFree methods can be formulated using the first three principles. In spatial discretization, the first two principles are used more often. Formulations based on the first two principles are termed weak form, and that based on the third principle is termed strong form. The discretized equation systems derived hased on the weak form are more stable and can give much more accurate results, Therefore, this book mainly covers MFree © 2003 by CRC Press LLCmethods of weak formulation. Some MFree methods favor a residual method of local form, especially in developing so-called truly meshless methods, This book covers methods using the local weak form in great detail. For the discretization of time, the third principle of Taylor series is often used. In summary, the use of the principles in MFree methods is, very much the same as that in FEM. 2.8.2 Equation Solvers AA sot af discretized system equations of a computation model is created and then fed to a solver to solve for the field variables. The process for FEM and the MFree methods is, basically the same and places great demand on computer hardware. Different saftware packages use different algorithms according to the physical phenomenon to be simulated. There are two very important considerations when choosing algorithms for solving system. equations. One is the storage required, and another is the central processing unit (CPU) time needed. Similar to FEM, MFroe methods produce banded system matrices that can, be handled in the same manner to reduce the storage and to maximize the efficiency of computation. In general, the bandwidth of these matrices produced by MFree methods is slightly larger than that of FEM. Techniques developed in FEM for reducing the bandwidth, of the system matrices by optimizing the nodal arrangement are alzo applicable to MFree methods. There are, in general, two calegories of methods for solving, simultaneous equations: direct methods and iterative methods. Often-used direct methods are the Gauss elimina- tion method and the matrix decomposition method. These methods work well for relatively smaller systems. Direct methods operate on fully assembled system equations, and there- fore demand langer storage. They catt also be coxted int sucli @ way that the assembling is done only for those elements that are involved in the current stage of equation solving, This can significantly reduce the requirements for storage. All these techniques, which were developed for FEM, are applicable to MFree methods, Iterative methods include the Gauss-Jacobi method, the Gauss-Seidel method, the suc- cessive overrelaxation method (SOR), generalized conjugate residual methods, the line relaxation metitod, and so on, These methods work well for relatively larger systems, Iterative methods are often coded in such a way to avoid full assembly of the system. matrices to save significantly on storage. The performance in terms of the rate of conver- sgence of these methods is usually very much problem dependent. In general, they perform better for lange systems, especially for 3D problems. For nonlinear problems, another iterative loop is needed. The nonlinear equation has to be properly formulated into a linear equation in the iteration. For time-dependent problems, time stepping is additionally required. There are generally two approaches to time stepping: implicit and explicit. Implicit approaches are usually more stable numeri- cally but less efficient computationally than explicit approaches. Moreover, contact algo- rithms can be much more easily developed using explicit FEM. Again, these techniques developed in FEM are applicable to MFree methods with some modifications. MFree methods usually demand additional CPU time, as the creation of the shape functions is more time-consuming and is performed during the computation. For meshes methods based on the MLS method, the less efficient use of CPU time is also caused by the extra effort needed in imposing essential boundary conditions. For meshless methods based on the local Petrov-Galerkin method, the lower efficiency is also attributed to the asymmetry of the stiffness matrix created. These issues are covered in great detail in relevant chapters. Note that. today. people are more concerned about the time engineers spend on a project. and much less concerned about the CPU time, because the CPU time has become cheaper © 2003 by CRC Press LLCand cheaper, while the cost for well-trained engineers has become more and more expen sive. Therefore, the small extra demand on CPU time does not disadvantage MFree methods significantly. In addition, the results obtained using MFree methods are usually more accurate than those obtained using FEM, as there are no stress discontinuity problems existing on the interfaces between the finite clements. In terms of the ratio of accuracy to CPU cost, MFree methods are in general superior to FEM (Belytschko et al., 1996). 2.9 Visualization The results generated by FEM and the MFree method after solving the system equation are usually in the form of a vast volume of digital data. The results have to be visualized in such a way that they can he easily interpolated, analyzed, and presented. The vi ization is performed by the postprocessor that comes with the software package. Most of these processors allow users to display 3D objects in many convenient and colorful ways on the screen. The object can be displayed in the form of wire frames, collections of elements, and collections of nodes. The user can rotate, translate, and zoom in/out on the objects. Field variables can be plotted on the object in the form of contours, fringes, wire frames, and deformations. There are usually tools available for users to produce isosur faces and vector fields of variables. Tools to enhance the visual effects are also available, such as shading, lighting, and shrinking. Animation and movies ean also be produced to simulate dynamic aspects. Output in the form of tables, text files, x-y plots are also routinely available, ‘Advanced visualization tools, such as visual reality, are available today. These advanced tools allow users to display objects and results in a much more realistic 3D way. The platform can be a goggle, immersive desk, or even an immersive room. When the object is immersed in a room, analysts can walk through the object, go to the exact location, ane view and analyze the result. The visualization techniques used int FEM are applicable to visualizing Une results obtained using MFree methods. However, major modification may be needed because there is no element-related information in MFree output files, There are also differences in the retrieval of the results from the nodal values. In FEM, there are ways to calculate strains and stresses cue to the discontinuity of the stresses on the interfaces ofthe elements. In MFree methods, in contrast, one needs to recreate MFree shape functions for the point of interest to calculate the results required. The shape functions and the interpolating, process for retrieving the results can be the same for creating the system equations in ree methods. In FEM, however, they ean be different. Note that the MFree techniques may also be useful in developing visualization tools, where interpolation is often used. ———— 2.10 MFree Method Procedure Now that the role of MFree methods in simulating engineering systems and the differ- ences between MFree methods and FEM in treating various issues have been described, we here summarize the general procedure for MFree methods in solving mechanics prob- Jems. We use mechanics problems of solids and structures as an example to describe these basic steps. Some important terminology frequently used in the MFree methods is defined. © 2003 by CRC Press LLCFIGURE 2.6 Example of an MTree model for 2D solids generated sing MFree2D. 2.10.1 Basie Steps STEP 1: DOMAIN REPRESENTATION The solid body of the structure is first modeled, and is represented using sets of nodes scattered in the problem camain and its houndary Boundary conditions and loading conditions are then specified in the MFree model, as shown in Figure 2.6. The density of the nodes depends on the accuracy requirement of the analysis and the resources available. The nodal distribution is usually not uniform, and a denser distribution of nodes is often used in the aroa where the displacement gradient is larger. Because adoptive algorithms can be used in MFree methods, the density is eventually controlled automatically and adaptively in the code of the MFree methods. Therefore, we do not worry much about the distribution quality of the initial nodes used. In addition, as.an MFree method, it should not demand too much for the pattern of nodal distribution. It should be workable within reason for arbitrarity distributed nodes. Because the nodes will carry the value of the field variables in an MFree formulation, they are often called field nodes. STEP 2: DISPLACEMENT INTERPOLATION Because a mesh of elements is not used in MFree methods, the field variable (say, a component of the displacement) « at any point at x = (x, v2) within the problem domain is interpolated using the displacements at its nodes within the support domain of the point at x, ie., wa) = Soca = eu, en where 1 is the number of nodes included in a “small local domain” of the point atx, 1 is the nodal field variahle at the ith node in the small local domain, U. isthe vector that collects all the field variables at these nodes, and d(x) is the shape function of the ith node determined. using the nodes that are included in the small domain of x. This small local domain is termed. in this book as the support domain of x. A support domain of a point x determines the number of nodes to he used to support or approximate the function value atx. A support domain can be (but does not have to be) weighted using a weighted function, as shown in Figure 27, It-can have different shapes and its dimension and shape can be different for different points of interest x, as shown in Figure 28. The shapes most often used are circular or rectangular, © 2003 by CRC Press LLCFIGURE 2.7 Domain representation of a 20 structure and nodes in a local weighted support domain. Support domain FIGURE 2.8 ‘support comain determines nodes (marked by ) that are used for approximation or interpolation ot hel variable st point x. support domain can have different shapes and can be diferent fram point to point. Most often tue shapes are oreuar or rectangular. ‘The concept of support domain works well if the nodal density does not vary too drastically in the problem domain. However, in solving practical problems, such as prob- loms with stress singularity, the nodal density can vary drastically. The use of a support domain based on the current point of interest can lead to an unbalanced selection of nodes for the construction of shape functions. In extreme situations, all the nodes used could be located on one side only, and the shape functions so constructed can result in serious error, due W extrapolation. To prevent this hind of problem, the concepl of influence domaiss of anode should be used. MFree2D, introduced in Chapter 16, uses the approach of influence domain to select nodes for constructing shape functions, The concept of influence domain is explained in Section 2.10.4 Here, we always use the concept of support domain to select the nodes for constructing, shape functions, unless specifically noted otherwise, although we have different ways of selecting nodes for constructing shape functions. Section 2.10.2 presents a simple way to determine the dimension of the support domain. © 2003 by CRC Press LLCNote also that this interpolation, defined in Equation 2.1, is performed for all the components of all the field variables in the same support domain. By taking a 3D solid mechanics problem as an example, the displacement is usually chosen as the field variable, and the displacement should have three components: displacements in the x, y, and 2 dircetions. The same shape function is used for all three displacement components in the support domain of the same point. STEP 3: FORMATION OF SYSTEM EQUATIONS The discrete equations of an MFree method can be formulated using the shape functions and a strong or weak form system. equation. These equations are often written in nodal matrix form and are assembled into the global system matrices for the entire problem domain. The global system equations are a set of algebntic equations for static analysis, eigenalue equations for free-vibration analysis, and differential equations with respect to time for general dynamic problems. The procedures for forming system equations are slightly different for different MFree methods. Hence, we discuss them in later chapters. STEP 4: SOLVING THE GLOBAL MFree EQUATIONS Solving the set of global MFree equations, we obtain solutions for different types of problems. 1. For static problems, the displacements (or their parameters) at all the nodes in the entire problem domain are first obtained. The strain and stress in any element van then be retiieved. A slandanl linear algebraic equation sulver, sucht as a Gauss elimination method, LU decomposition method, and iterative methods, can be used. 2. For free-vibration and buckling problems, eigenvalues and corresponding eigenvectors can be obtained using the standard eigenvalue equation solvers. ‘The commonly used methods are the following: + Jacobi’s method ‘+ Given’s method and Houscholder’s method. ‘+ The bisection method (using Sturm sequences) + Inverse iteration © QR method © Subspace iteration + Lanczos’ method 3. For dynamics problems, the time history of displacement, velocity, and acceler- ation are to be obtained. The following standard methods of solving dynamics equation systems can be used: ‘+ The modal superposition method may be a good choice for vibration types of problems and problems of far ficld response to low speed impact with many load cases. ‘+ For problems with a single load or few loads, the direct integration method can be used, which uses the FDM for time stepping with implicit and explicit approaches. ‘+The implicit method is more efficient for relatively slow phenomena of vibration types of problems. ‘+ The explicit method is more efficient for very fast phenomena, such as impact and explosion. For computational fluid dynamics problems, the discretized system equations are basically nonlinear, and oneneeds an additional iteration loop to obtain the results. © 2003 by CRC Press LLC2.10.2 Determination of the Dimension of a Support Dom: The accuracy of interpolation depends on the nodes in the support domain of the point of interest (which is often a quadrature point xq or the center of integration cells). Therefore, a suitable support domain should be chosen to ensure a proper area of coverage for interpolation. To define the support domain for a point Xa, the dimension of the support domain d, is determined by d= ad, (22) where a. is the dimensionless size of the support domain and d. is a characteristic length that relates to the nodal spacing near the point at xg. If the nodes are uniformly distributed, dis simply the distance between two neighboring nodes. In the case where the nodes are non-uniformly distributed, d, can be defined as an “average” nodal spacing in the support domain of Xo The physical meaning of the dimensionless size of the support domain a, is very clear. It is simply the factor of the average nodal spacing, For example, @, =2.1 means.a support domain whose radius is 2.1 times the average nodal spacing, The actual number of nodes, 1, can he determined by counting all the nodes in the support domain. The dimensionless size of the support domain a, should be predetermined by the analyst, usually by carrying, out numerical experiments for the same class of problems for which solutions already exist. Generally, an a, = 2.0 to 3.0 leads to good results. Noto that, if background cells aro provided, support domains can also be defined based on the background cells. 2.10.3 Determinatis \n of the Average Nodal Spacing For 1D cases, a simple method of defining an “average” nodal spacing is D, 23) @-D where D. isan estimated d, (the estimate does not have to be very accurate but should he known and a reasonably good estimate of d_) and rp, is the number of nodes that are covered by a known domain with the dimension of D.. By using Equation 2.3. it is very easy to determine the dimension of the support domain d, for a point at x9 in a domain with non-unifermly distributed nodes. The procedure iss follows: Fstimate d, for the point at x, which gives D, Count nodes that are covered by D. Use Equation 23 to calculate 4. Finally, calculate d. using Equation 2.2 for a given (desired) dimensionless size of support domain ¢., For 2D cases, a simple method of defining an “average” nodal spacing is 24) © 2003 by CRC Press LLCwhore 4, is an estimated area that is covered by the support domain of dimension d, (Uhe estimate does not have to be very accurate but should be known and a reasonably good estimate), and #1, is the number of nodes that are covered by the estimated domain with the area of A,. By using Equation 2.4 and the same procedure described for the 1D case, it is very easy to determine the dimension of the support domain d, for a point at xy in a 2D domain with nonuniformly distributed nodes. Similarly, for 3D cases, a simple method of defining an “average” nodal spacing is ean: (25) where V, is an estimated volume that is covered by the support domain of dimension d,, and ny, is the number of nodes that are covered by the estimated domain with the volume of V.. By using Equation 25, and the same procedure described for the 1D case. we can determine the dimension of the support domain d, for a point at xg in a 3D domain with. non-uniformly distributed nodes 2.10.4 Concept of the Influence Dom: Note that this book distinguishes between cuipport domain and influence domain, termes that are often used in the MFree community to carry the same meaning as the support domain defined here. The influence domain in this book is defined as a domain that a node exerts an influence upon. It goes with a node, in contrast to the support domain, which goes with a poitt of interest x that can be, but does not necessarily have to be, at a node. The following explains in detail the concept of the influence domain, Use of an influence domain is an alternative way to select nodes for interpolation, and it works well for domains with highly nonregularly distributed nodes. The influence lomain is defined for each node in the problem domain, and it can be different from node to node to represent the area of influence of the node, as shown in Figure 2.9. Node 1 has FIGURE 2.9 Influence domains of nodes. In constructing shape functions for point marked with x at paint Xo, nodes whose inisence domains covers x are to be wed for cmatracon oF shape Functions. For example, neades | ad 2 are included, but node 3 is not induded. © 2003 by CRC Press LLCan influence radius of r,, and node 2 has an influence radius of r ete. The node will be involved in the shape function construction for any point that is within its influence domain, For example, in constructing the shape functions for the point marked with x at point xq (see Figure 29), nodes 1 and 2 will be used, but node 3 will not be used. The fact that the dimension of the influence domain can be different from node to node allows some nodes to have further influence than others and prevents unbalanced nodal distri- bution for constructing shape functions. As shown in Figure 29, node 1 is included for constructing shape functions for the point marked with X at point xg, but node 3 is not included, even though node 3 is closer to X compared with wode 1. ‘The dimensions of the influence domain can be determined using a procedure similar tw that desctibea in Sevtion 2.10.2. If background eells are provieed, the iniTuenwe donnain can also be defined based on the background cells. MFree2D defines influence domains using information from triangular background cells 2.10.5 Property of MFree Shape Functions A compulsory condition that a shape function must satisfy is the partition of unity that is, 26) Soe This isa necescary candition for the shape function to he able to produce any rigid mation of the problem domain. ‘Thore are also conditions that a shape function preferably satisfies. The first preferable condition is the linear field reproduction condition, that is, Deon = « en This condition is required for the shape function to pass the standard patch: test, which has been used very often in testing finite elements. This condition is not compulsory because shape functions that fail to pass the patch test can still be used as long, as a converged solution is produced. Many finite elements cannot pass the patch test but are widely used in FEM packages. Another preferable condition is the Kronecker delta function property, that is, ee sony {| ea 28) 0 ttf, iL F=1 Que This condition is preferred because a shape function that possesses this property permits use of a simple procedure to impose essential boundary conditions. In element free methods, however, the shape functions created may or may not satisfy condition 28, depending on the method used for creating the shape functions. The methods of shape function creation are discussed in Chapter 5 in great detail, as they are the central issue for MFree methods. © 2003 by CRC Press LLC2.11 Remarks ‘The similarities and differences between FEM and MFree methods are listed in Table 2.1 TABLE 2.1 Differences between FEM and MFree Methods FEM Mree Method 7 Ye Ne 2 Difficult de to the need for Relatively easy and no ‘automation clement connectivity ‘connectivity is requited 3 Meshautomation and Difficult for 3D cases (Can always be done ‘adaptive analysis 4 shape unceon creation Element based Nowe base 5 Shape function property Satisfy Kronecker delta May or may not satisfy Kronecker ‘conditions walla forall dlls conitions depending 09 clements ofthe same type the method used diferent Irom Polat to point 6 Discretized system stifiness Bonded, symmetrical Bonded, may or may not be ‘matrix symmetrical depending on the eth snes 7 Imposition of essential Easy and standard ‘Special methods may be required: Thaandary eon ‘epensis on the mothe ised 8 Computation speed Fast 111 to 50 times slower compared to the FEM depending on the ‘method used 9 Retrieval of results ‘Special technique required Standard routine 30 Accuracy “Accurate compare with TDM. Can be move accurate compaved with FEM, AL Stage of development ‘Very well developed Infancy: with many challenging problems 12 Commercial software package Many Very few and close to none availability © 2003 by CRC Press LLC3 Mechanics of Solids and Structures The basies of mechanics for solids and structural components are outlined in a concise and general manner in this chapter. Readers with experience in mechanics may skip the chapter, but it may prove helpful to skim the chapter to become familiar with the termi nology conventions used in the book. Readers with less experience in mechanics may have difficulty fully understanding the details of all the concepts and equations presented here, but a global view of the basics of mechanics will help in the following chapters. We recommend such readers study this chapter without delving too deeply into the equations. Readers who are not interested in mechanics at all may simply skip this chapter, and read the chapters on MFree methods merely as a means to solve partial differential equations. 3.1. Basics Solids and structures made of solids are stressed when they are subjected to loads or forces The stresses are, in general, not uniform as the forces usually vary with coordinates. The stresses lead to stntis, which can be observed as deformiation or displacement. Solid mechanics and structural mechanics deal with the relationships between stresses and strains, displace- ments and forces, stresses (strains) and forces for given boundary conditions of solids and structures, These relationships are critical in modeling, simulating, and designing engi- neered structural systems. Forces can be static and/or dynamic. Statics deals with mechanics of solids and struc- tures subject to static loads. Solids and structures will experience vibration under the action of dynamic forces, which vary with time. In this case, the stress, strain, and dis- placement will be functions of time, and the principles and theories of dynamics apply. As statics is a special case of dynamics, the equations for statics can be derived by simply dropping out the dynamic terms in the dynamic equations. This book adopts the approach of deriving the dynamic equations first and obtaining the static equations directly from, the derived dynamic equations. Depending on the material property, solids can be elastic, that is, the deformation in the solids disappears fully if itis unloaded. There are also solids that are plastic, that is, the deformation in the solids cannot be fully recovered when it is unloaded. Elasticity deals, with solids and structures of elastic materials and plasticity deals with those of plastic materials. This chapter is concerned mainly with the solids and structures of elastic materials. Methods to deal with plastic materials are treated as advanced topics and are covered in later relevant chapters. Materials can be anisotropic, that is, the material property varies with direction. Defor- ‘mation in an anisotropic material caused by a force applied in one direction may be different from that caused by the same force applied in another direction. Composite materials are aften anisotropic: Many material constants have to he used to define the material properties, © 2003 by CRC Press LLCof anisotropic materials. Many engincering materials are, however, isotropic, that is, their material properties are not direction dependent. Isotropic materials are a special case of anisotropic material. There are only two independent material constants for isotropic mate- rial, often known as Young's modulus and Poisson’s ratio, This chapter is concerned mainly with solids and structures of isotropic materials. Topies related to solids and structures of anisotropic materials are covered in later chapters on a case-by-case basis. Boundary conditions are anather important consideration in mechanics. There are dis placement (essential) and force (natura!) boundary conditions for solids and structures. These terms of essential and natusal boundary conditions ate related to the use of weak forms to solve mechanics problems, and may be a little bit too difficult to understand at this stage. If we put it ina very simple way, the essential boundary conditions are Une conditions that have to be satisfied by the trial functions before they are substituted into the weak form. Tis essential because we have to consider them during the very first stage of constructing the trial functions. The natural boundary conditions are the conditions that will be nufuruffy derived from the weak form procedure. in the stage of constructing, the trial functions, one does not have to consider any of these natural conditions, because they will come out later naturally. For mechanics problems of solids and structures, the displacement boundary conditions are essential conditions, and the force boundary con- ditions are natural conditions. Treatment of the essential boundary conditions is a very important topic in some MFree ‘methods, as the essential boundary conditions may be satistied when the trial function 1s constructed. Therefore, special treatments are required. We cover this in detail in Chapter 6, For now, we focus on the concepts of displacement, force, strain, and stress, as well as their relationships. Structures are made of structural components, which are in tur made of solids. There are basically four types of structural components most often used: truss, beam, plate, and shell, as shown in Figure 3.1. The major purpose of using these structural components isto utilize material effectively to reduce the weight of the structure and the costs for building the structure. A practical structure can consist of different types of structural components includ ing solid blocks. Theoretically the principles and methodologies in solid mechanics can be applied to solve mechanics problems for all the structural components, However, itis often not efficient. Theories and formulations for taking geometric advantage of the structural components have, therefore, been developed. Formulations in MFree methods for trusses are very much the same as those in the finite element method (FEM), as a mesh is not necessary for trusses in FEM. All one needs is the geometric skeleton structure of the truss. The nodes for the FEM formulation are the same as the nodes of the skeleton structure. This book discusses in detail the formulation of MFree methods for beams, 2D solids, plates, and shells. Mechanics for solids and structures is by itself a huge topic that needs more than a book to cover in detail. To provide a fairly clear and systematic discussion of this topic, we start with the formulation of 3D solids. Formulations for other types of structural components, beams, plates, shells, are then deduced from these general equations of 3D solids. 3.2. Equations for Three-Dimensional Solids 3.2.1 Stress and Strain Consider a continuum of 3D elastic solids with a volume @ and a surface boundary I, as shown in Figure 3.2. The surface of the solid is further divided into two types of surfaces. The surface on which the external forces are prescribed is denoted as T,, and the surface © 2003 by CRC Press LLCes = te Atos member AA beam member ‘Neutral surface Neutal surface FIGURE 3.1 ‘Types of structural components on which the displacements are prescribed is denoted I, The solid can also be loaded by body force b and surface traction (force) t in any distributed fashion in the volume of the solid At any point in the solid, there are, in general, six components of stress, as indicated on the surface of an “infinite”