×

On the techniques for constructing admissible stress fields in model verification: performances on engineering examples. (English) Zbl 1242.74149

Summary: Robust global/goal-oriented error estimation is used nowadays to control the approximate finite element (FE) solutions obtained from simulation. In the context of computational mechanics, the construction of admissible stress fields (i.e. stress tensors which verify the equilibrium equations) is required to set up strict and guaranteed error bounds (using residual-based error estimators) and plays an important role in the quality of the error estimates. This work focuses on the different procedures used in the calculation of admissible stress fields, which is a crucial and technically complicated point. The three main techniques that currently exist, called the element equilibration technique (EET), the star-patch equilibration technique (SPET), and the element equilibration + star-patch technique (EESPT), are investigated and compared with respect to three different criteria, namely the quality of associated error estimators, computational cost, and easiness of practical implementation into commercial FE codes.
The numerical results that are presented focus on industrial problems; they highlight the main advantages and drawbacks of the different methods and show that the behavior of the three estimators, which have the same convergence rate as the exact global error, is consistent. 2D and 3D experiments have been carried out in order to compare the performance and the computational cost of the three different approaches. The analysis of the results reveals that the SPET is more accurate than EET and EESPT methods, but the corresponding computational cost is higher. Overall, the numerical tests prove the interest of the hybrid method EESPT and show that it is a correct compromise between the quality of the error estimate, practical implementation and computational cost. Furthermore, the influence of the cost function involved in the EET and the EESPT is studied in order to optimize the estimators.

MSC:

74S05 Finite element methods applied to problems in solid mechanics
PDF BibTeX XML Cite
Full Text: DOI arXiv HAL

References:

[1] Ladev èze P Comparaison de mod èles de milieux continus 1975
[2] Ladev èze, Error estimate procedure in the finite element method and application, SIAM Journal of Numerical Analysis 20 (3) pp 485– (1983) · Zbl 0582.65078
[3] Babu ška, A posteriori error estimates for the finite element method, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 12 pp 1597– (1978) · Zbl 0396.65068
[4] Zienkiewicz, A simple error estimator and adaptative procedure for practical engineering analysis, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 24 pp 337– (1987) · Zbl 0602.73063
[5] Verfürth, A review of A Posteriori Error Estimation and Adaptative Mesh-refinement Techniques (1996) · Zbl 0853.65108
[6] Babu ška, The Finite Element Method and its Reliability (2001) · Zbl 0995.65501
[7] Stein, Error-controlled Adaptative Finite Elements in Solid Mechanics (2003)
[8] Ladev èze, Mastering Calculations in Linear and Nonlinear Mechanics (2004) · Zbl 1060.74526
[9] Paraschivoiu, A posteriori finite element bounds for linear functional outputs of elliptic partial differential equations, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 150 pp 351– (1997) · Zbl 0907.65102
[10] Rannacher, A feedback approach to error control in finite element methods: application to linear elasticity, Computational Mechanics 19 pp 434– (1997) · Zbl 0894.73170
[11] Cirak, A posteriori error estimation and adaptivity for linear elasticity using the reciprocal theorem, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 156 pp 351– (1998) · Zbl 0947.74062
[12] Peraire, Advances in Adaptive Computational Methods in Mechanics pp 199– (1998)
[13] Ladev èze, Local error estimators for finite element linear analysis, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 176 pp 231– (1999) · Zbl 0967.74066
[14] Prudhomme, On goal-oriented error estimation for elliptic problems: application to the control of pointwise errors, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 176 pp 313– (1999) · Zbl 0945.65123
[15] Strouboulis, A posteriori estimation and adaptive control of the error in the quantity of interest-part 1: a posteriori estimation of the error in the von mises stress and the stress intensity factors, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 181 pp 261– (2000) · Zbl 0973.74083
[16] Becker, An optimal control approach to shape a posteriori error estimation in finite element methods, Acta Numerica Cambridge University Press 10 pp 1– (2001) · Zbl 1105.65349
[17] Wiberg, Special issue, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 195 pp 4– (2006)
[18] Ladev èze, Strict upper error bounds for calculated outputs of interest in computational structural mechanics, Computational Mechanics 42 (2) pp 271– (2008) · Zbl 1144.74041
[19] Chamoin, Bounds on history-dependent or independent local quantities in viscoelasticity problems solved by approximate methods, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 71 (12) pp 1387– (2007) · Zbl 1194.74028
[20] Chamoin, A non-intrusive method for the calculation of strict and efficient bounds of calculated outputs of interest in linear viscoelasticity problems, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 197 (9-12) pp 994– (2008) · Zbl 1169.74357
[21] Panetier, Strict and effective bounds in goal-oriented error estimation applied to fracture mechanics problems solved with the XFEM, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 81 (6) pp 671– (2010) · Zbl 1183.74303
[22] Fraeijs de Veubeke, Displacement and Equilibrium Models in the Finite Element Method. Stress Analysis (1965) · Zbl 0359.73007
[23] Kempeneers, Mod èleséquilibre pour l’analyse duale, Revue Européenne desélements Finis 12 (6) pp 737– (2003) · Zbl 1171.74444
[24] Ainsworth, A priori error estimators for second-order elliptic systems. Part 2: an optimal order process for calculating self-equilibrating fluxes, Computers and Mathematics with Applications 26 pp 75– (1993) · Zbl 0789.65083
[25] Ladev èze, A general method for recovering equilibrating element tractions, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 137 pp 111– (1996) · Zbl 0886.73065
[26] Ladev èze, New advances on a posteriori error on constitutive relation in finite element analysis, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 150 pp 239– (1997) · Zbl 0906.73064
[27] Florentin, Evaluation of the local quality of stresses in 3D finite element analysis, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 191 pp 4441– (2002) · Zbl 1040.74045
[28] Machiels, A flux-free nodal Neumann subproblem approach to output bounds for partial differential equations, Comptes Rendus Académie des Sciences-Mécanique, Paris 2000 330 (1) pp 249– (2000) · Zbl 0946.65101
[29] Carstensen, Fully reliable localized error control in the FEM, SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing 21 (4) pp 1465– (2000) · Zbl 0956.65099
[30] Morin, Local problems on stars: a posteriori error estimators, convergence, and performance, Mathematics of Computation 72 (243) pp 1067– (2003) · Zbl 1019.65083
[31] Prudhomme, Analysis of a subdomain-based error estimator for finite element approximations of elliptic problems, Numerical Methods for Partial Differential Equations 20 (2) pp 165– (2004) · Zbl 1049.65123
[32] Parés, Subdomain-based flux-free a posteriori error estimators, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 195 (4-6) pp 297– (2006) · Zbl 1193.65191
[33] Parés, Guaranteed energy error bounds for the poisson equation using a flux-free approach: solving the local problems in subdomains, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 79 (10) pp 1203– (2009) · Zbl 1176.65127
[34] Moitinho de Almeida, Recovery of equilibrium on star patches using a partition of unity technique, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 79 (12) pp 1493– (2009) · Zbl 1176.74201
[35] Cottereau, Strict error bounds for linear solid mechanics problems using a subdomain-based flux-free approach, Computational Mechanics 44 (4) pp 533– (2009) · Zbl 1297.74116
[36] Ladev èze P Vérification des calculséléments finis: une nouvelle technique non intrusive pour le calcul des contraintes admissibles 2008
[37] Ladev èze, A new non-intrusive technique for the construction of admissible stress fields in goal-oriented error estimation, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 199 pp 766– (2010) · Zbl 1227.74078
[38] Ladev èze, Accuracy and optimal meshes in finite element computation for nearly incompressible materials, Computational Mechanics 42 (2) pp 271– (2008)
[39] Prager, Approximation in elasticity based on the concept of functions spaces, Quarterly of Applied Mathematics 5 pp 261– (1947) · Zbl 0029.23505
[40] Moitinho de Almeida, Upper bounds of the error in local quantities using equilibrated and compatible finite element solutions for linear elastic problems, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 195 (4-6) pp 279– (2006) · Zbl 1086.74041
[41] Babu ška, Validation of a posteriori error estimators by numerical approach, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 37 pp 1073– (1994) · Zbl 0811.65088
[42] Coorevits, Control of analyses with isoparametric elements in both 2D and 3D, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 46 pp 157– (1999) · Zbl 0958.74061
[43] www.samtech.com
[44] Florentin E Sur l’évaluation de la qualité locale des contrainteséléments finis enélasticité tridimensionnelle 2002
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.