An Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian Finite Element Formulation For Dynamics and Finite Strain Plasticity Models

An Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian
Finite Element Formulation

for Dynamics and
Finite Strain Plasticity Models
by Dipl.-Ing. Christian Linder
SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF SCIENCE
AT
UNIVERSITY STUTTGART
D-70569 STUTTGART, PFAFFENWALDRING 7
APRIL 2003
c _ Copyright by Dipl.-Ing. Christian Linder, 2003
DEPARTMENT OF
STRUCTURAL MECHANICS
The undersigned hereby certify that they have read and recommend
to the Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering for acceptance a
thesis entitled An Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian Finite Element
Formulation for Dynamics and Finite Strain Plasticity Models
by Dipl.-Ing. Christian Linder in partial fulllment of the requirements
for the degree of Master of Science.
Dated: April 2003
Supervisor:
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Ekkehard Ramm
Readers:
Dr.-Ing. Wolfgang Wall
Dipl.-Ing. Tobias Erhart
ii
Date: April 2003
Author: Dipl.-Ing. Christian Linder
Title: An Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian Finite Element
Formulation for Dynamics and Finite Strain
Plasticity Models
Department: Structural Mechanics
Degree: M.Sc.
Permission is herewith granted to University Stuttgart to circulate and to
have copied for non-commercial purposes, at its discretion, the above title upon
the request of individuals or institutions.
Signature of Author
THE AUTHOR ASSURES THAT THE WORK WAS PRODUCED
INDEPENDENTLY AND NO SOURCES OR ASSISTANCE OTHER THAN THOSE
INDICATED WERE USED.
THE AUTHOR RESERVES OTHER PUBLICATION RIGHTS, AND
NEITHER THE THESIS NOR EXTENSIVE EXTRACTS FROM IT MAY
BE PRINTED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT THE AUTHORS
WRITTEN PERMISSION.
THE AUTHOR ATTESTS THAT PERMISSION HAS BEEN OBTAINED
FOR THE USE OF ANY COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL APPEARING IN THIS
THESIS (OTHER THAN BRIEF EXCERPTS REQUIRING ONLY PROPER
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IN SCHOLARLY WRITING) AND THAT ALL SUCH USE
IS CLEARLY ACKNOWLEDGED.
iii
University Stuttgart
Institute of Structural Mechanics
Prof. Dr.-Ing. E. Ramm
Masters Thesis
An Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian
Finite Element Formulation for Dynamics
and Finite Strain Plasticity Models
The Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) formulation was developed to overcome
the limitations of pure Lagrangian and pure Eulerian formulations. Recently, the ALE
technique has been extended from uid dynamics to non-linear solid mechanics, where
nite strain plasticity based material models are involved. One major aspect for imple-
mentation is the correct treatment of the convective terms in the constitutive equations
by adequate stress update procedures.
PSfrag replacements
X
x
B
o
m
B
t
o
t
/
R
3
t
t
material
conguration
spatial
conguration
reference conguration
X
X
x
C
p1
b
e
G
F
F
T
F
p
F
e
F
pT
F
eT
T
X
B
T
X
B
T
X
B
T
B
T
x
o
T
x
o
PSfrag replacements
X
x
B
o
m
B
t
o
t
/
R
3
t
material
conguration
spatial
conguration
X
X
X
x
x
C
p1
b
e
G
F
F
T
F
p
F
e
F
pT
F
eT
T
X
B
T
X
B
T
X
B
T
B
T
x
o
T
x
o
ALE-kinematics
Multiplicative Decomposition of F
PSfrag replacements
X
x
B
o
m
Bt
ot
/
R
3
t
material
conguration
spatial
conguration
X
X
x
C
p1
b
e
G
F
F
T
F
p
F
e
F
pT
F
eT
TXB
T
X
B
T X
B
T
B
Tx o
T
x
o
Lagrange ALE
Numerical Simulation - Coining Test
iv
To my late grandfather.
v
Table of Contents
Table of Contents vi
Abstract ix
Acknowledgements x
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.1 Motion of a Material Body . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1.2 Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian description . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1.3 Lagrangian description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1.4 Eulerian description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.1.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2 Development of ALE formulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.3 Overview of the work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2 Basics of Continuum Mechanics 12
2.1 Basic Kinematics of Finite Strain Deformations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.1.1 Material Body, Congurations and Motion of the Body . . . . . 13
2.1.2 Displacement-, Velocity- and Acceleration Fields . . . . . . . . . 16
2.1.3 The Deformation Gradient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.1.4 Metric- and Strain Tensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.2 The Concept of Stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.2.1 Eulers Cut Principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.2.2 Stress Tensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2.3 Balance Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.3.1 Master Balance Principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.3.2 Balance of Mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.3.3 Balance of Linear Momentum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
2.3.4 Balance of Angular Momentum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
2.3.5 Balance of Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.3.6 Balance of Entropy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
2.3.7 Inuence of the ALE formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
vi
Table of Contents vii
3 Constitutive Model: Finite Strain Plasticity 37
3.1 Kinematic relations for the Multiplicative Decomposition . . . . . . . . 37
3.2 Free Energy and Local Dissipation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.3 Principle of Maximum Dissipation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
3.4 Summary: Finite Strain Plasticity in Tensor Notation . . . . . . . . . . 42
3.5 Numerical Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
3.5.1 Integration of the Flow Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
3.5.2 The Elastic Predictor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.5.3 The Plastic Corrector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
3.6 Spectral Decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
3.7 Summary: Finite Strain Plasticity in Spectral Decomposition . . . . . . 48
3.8 Inuence of the ALE formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4 Initial Boundary Value Problem 51
4.1 Problem Denition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.2 Strong Form of the IBVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
4.3 Weak Form of the IBVP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.3.1 Weak Form of the balance of mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.3.2 Weak Form of the balance of linear momentum . . . . . . . . . 53
4.3.3 Weak Form of the constitutive equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.4 Finite Element Discretization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.4.1 FE-matrix equations for the balance of mass . . . . . . . . . . . 57
4.4.2 FE-matrix equations for the balance of linear momentum . . . . 57
4.4.3 FE-matrix equations for the constitutive equation . . . . . . . . 57
4.4.4 Summary of the ALE-matrix equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
4.4.5 Special Case: Eulerian Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
4.4.6 Special Case: Lagrangian Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
4.5 Solution Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
4.5.1 Fully Coupled Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
4.5.2 Uncoupled Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
5 Uncoupled ALE Formulation 64
5.1 The Operator Split . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
5.1.1 Lagrangian Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
5.1.2 Smoothing Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
5.1.3 Eulerian Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
5.1.4 Application to the ALE formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
5.2 The Lagrangian Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
5.2.1 Lagrangian solution of the velocities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
5.2.2 Lagrangian solution of the internal variables . . . . . . . . . . . 72
5.2.3 Summary of the Lagrangian Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Table of Contents viii
5.3 The Smoothing Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
5.3.1 Laplacian Based Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
5.3.2 Element Area Based Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
5.3.3 Application to the ALE formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
5.4 The Eulerian Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
5.4.1 Final solution of the velocities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
5.4.2 Final solution of the internal variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
5.5 Numerical Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
5.5.1 Flowchart of the Numerical Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . 87
5.5.2 Additional Remarks on the Numerical Implementation . . . . . 91
6 Numerical Simulations 92
6.1 Impact of a Circular Bar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
6.2 Necking of a Circular Bar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
6.3 Coining Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
7 Closure 106
7.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
7.2 Future Directions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
Bibliography 107
Abstract
Non-linear nite element analysis is an essential component of todays computational
mechanics. Whereas no dierence between the material and the spatial congurati-
on of a solid must be considered in a small deformation analysis the selection of an
appropriate conguration for the nite element mesh is important for many of the
large deformation problems. The conguration where the nite element mesh is loca-
ted will be denoted as reference conguration throughout this work. The choice of the
material-, spatial- or any arbitrary conguration as this reference conguration then
yields to a Lagrangian, Eulerian or Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) description,
respectively.
Since mesh points are attached to material points in the Lagrangian description,
elements deform with the material and therefore can become severely distorted. This
is commonly observed in plastic models where large plastic strains appear. On the
other hand boundary nodes remain on the boundary which simplies the imposition of
boundary conditions. In the Eulerian description boundary nodes do not remain coinci-
dent with the boundary which engenders signicant complications in multi-dimensional
problems. This work pays attention on the ALE description, which combines the ad-
vantages of both, Lagrangian and Eulerian descriptions.
The ALE description in non-linear solid mechanics is nowadays standard for hypo-
elastic-plastic models. Extensions to hyperelastic-plastic models were presented by Ar-
mero & Love [1, 2] and Rodr
iguez-Ferran et al [74]. An extension to solid

dynamics and hyperelastic material models is also presented in this work.
Two dierent approaches to solve the resulting equations of the ALE method are
possible. Consideration is given to the so called Uncoupled ALE formulation in this
work, where the relevant equations are decoupled into its Lagrangian and Eulerian
counterparts based on an operator splitting technique. This uncoupled approach makes
the extension of a pure Lagrangian nite element programme to the ALE case easy and
allows the use of the original programme to solve the relevant Lagrangian equations.
After a smoothing phase only the Eulerian equations must be solved additionally.
In this work it will be shown how a Lagrangian nite element programme can be
upgraded to the ALE case. The fully transient dynamic range will be considered based
on an explicit time integration scheme and the inuence of the ALE formulation on
the nite strain plasticity model will be outlined.
ix
Acknowledgements
First of all I would like to thank Professor Ekkehard Ramm. From the early days of the
COMMAS course on he supported me. The many interesting talks on computational
mechanics and especially on our favorite kind of structures, namely shell structures,
motivated me in a very strong format. He expressed his interest also in my work on the
Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian nite element formulation and gave me the opportunity
to work at his institute during the last year. Additionally I thank Professor Ramm for
oering me support concerning the application for my further graduate studies.
I would like to thank Dr.-Ing. Wolfgang Wall for his constant support and guidance
during this interesting research. I am also thankful to Dipl.-Ing. Tobias Erhart and
Dipl.-Ing. Michael Gee for the introduction to the nite element programs used at the
Institute of Structural Mechanics. Thanks also to all other colleagues at the institute
for the pleasant working atmosphere.
Furthermore I would like to thank Professor Werner Guggenberger. He gave me the
opportunity to take part on the Euromech Colloquium 444 at Bremen. Together with
Professor Gerhard A. Holzapfel, to whom I am also very grateful, he made my parti-
cipation in the COMMAS-programme possible. I am thankful to Professor Francisco
Armero for providing me with his actual research paper on the ALE formulation before
it was published - see Armero & Love [2].
I should also mention that my studies in Germany were supported in part by
the German Academic Exchange Service (Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst
- DAAD).
Of course, I am thankful to my family in Austria for their patience and love. Without
them this work would never have come into existence. Grandpa I wish you all the best
on your last journey.
Finally, I wish to thank Sandra for her unconditionally source of motivation and
support during the last three semesters. Thank you for all the good times and the many
beautiful days we spent here together in Stuttgart.
Stuttgart
April, 2003 Christian Linder
x
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Motivation
Two dierent approaches to describe the motion of a continuum are common. The La-
grangian or material description is faced with the Eulerian or spatial one. To overcome
the drawbacks of pure Lagrangian and pure Eulerian descriptions a third approach has
been proposed, namely the Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) description. Since
mesh points remain coincident with material points in the Lagrangian description, ele-
ments deform with the material and therefore can become severely distorted, which is
commonly observed in plastic models where large plastic strains appear. On the other
hand boundary nodes remain on the boundary which simplies the imposition of boun-
dary conditions. In the Eulerian description boundary nodes do not remain coincident
with the boundary which engenders signicant complications in multi-dimensional pro-
blems. The ALE description combines the advantages of both, Lagrangian and Eulerian
descriptions. It will be shown that they only dier from each other by the location of
the nite element mesh used to describe the motion of the material body.
Irrespectively of the description of the motion of a material body we shall distin-
guish between dierent congurations of this material body. In the following we will
distinguish between a material- and a spatial conguration. All of the above mentioned
descriptions (Lagrangian, Eulerian and ALE) can now be described in terms of these
congurations. This means that the related measures of strains and stresses are used.
Furthermore derivatives are taken with respect to the related congurations and the
weak form involves integrals over the related domains.
Because of the same notation of the description of the motion and the conguration
of a material body confusion is articially introduced in the literature. Always remem-
ber that the description itself has nothing to do with the conguration in which it is
described. In Steinmann [84] the author established a formalistic framework that hel-
ps to eliminate this confusion for the Lagrangian and Eulerian description, highlights
the intriguing duality and provides the necessary tools for an elegant transition bet-
ween them. More background on geometrically nonlinear kinematics, especially of the
Lagrangian description, may be found in Marsden & Hughes [59] or Hughes [44].
1
Chapter 1 Introduction 2
1.1.1 Motion of a Material Body
To outline the dierences between the dierent formulations we have to introduce the
motion of a material body. This chapter serves only as an introduction and will be
treated more precisely in Chapter 2.
A material body is a physical object equipped with some physical properties, like
texture, color, density and so on. Mathematically the body

B is dened as an open set
of innitely many material points T

B. The placement of the body

B in R
3
will be
denoted as a conguration of the body and can be mathematically described with the
relationship :

B B R
3
. The motion of the material body is a one parameter
family of congurations indexed by time. Then for each t [0, T], where [0, T]
R
+
is the time interval of interest, the mapping
t
:

B B
t
R
3
is a mapping
which maps

B onto B
t
R
3
at time t. In a motion the body occupies a sequence
of congurations B
t
in space. From this sequence we pick out two congurations at
time t
n
and t
n+1
:= t
n
+ t. We denote the rst one as material conguration B,
the second one as spatial conguration o and the related mappings of the body

B
into R
3
as
n
and
n+1
, respectively. These relationships are shown in Figure (1.1).
It is now convenient to label the material point T by its position X in the material
conguration. Its spatial position is then denoted as x. It is important to realize that
we picked out two arbitrary congurations of the motion of the material body. We do
not demand the material conguration to be identical to the initial conguration at
time t = t
0
of the material body, although this is often used, since it is the real initial
stress free conguration at time t = 0.
PSfrag replacements
T
X B x o
B
B
o
R
3
n

n+1
material conguration
spatial conguration
Figure 1.1: Motion of a material body
With these denitions in hand and by the use of the illustration in Figure (1.1) it
is now possible to describe the physical motion of the material point T between the
material conguration B and the spatial conguration o of the material body by the
mapping
t
:
_
B o
X x =
t
(X) = (X, t).
We can now describe this physical motion of the continuum body with the above
mentioned Lagrangian, Eulerian and ALE descriptions. For this purpose we introduce
additionally to the material and spatial conguration a third one, namely the reference
conguration /, where our nite element mesh with the position of the node m is
located. The physical motion of the body from its material to its spatial conguration
is now described proceeding from this introduced domain /.
The location of this reference conguration makes now the dierence between the
above mentioned descriptions, namely the Lagrangian, Eulerian and ALE description.
To outline these dierences a brief introduction follows now.
1.1.2 Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian description
We start with the ALE description since this is the most general case and the Lagran-
gian as well as the Eulerian descriptions can be dened as special cases of the ALE
description.
In the ALE description the introduced xed reference conguration / is, as the
name of the description suggests, completely arbitrary. It is neither labelled with the
material nor with the spatial conguration of the material body. We are now interested
in describing the physical motion between the material conguration B and the spatial
conguration o of the body. That means we want to solve for the deformation mapping
t
: B o (physical motion) for each time t [0, T]. To this purpose we consider
the two additional mappings
t
: / B
t
(material motion) and
t
: / o
t
(mesh motion), which relate the material and spatial parameterization B
t
and o
t
of
the material and spatial conguration B and o of the material body to the reference
domain, respectively. We have then
t
=
t
1
t
by construction. These relationships
are shown in Figure (1.2).
Since the choice of the reference conguration is arbitrary one tries to capture
the advantages of both Lagrangian and Eulerian descriptions while minimizing their
disadvantages. Of course a judicious choice of the reference domain is required if severe
mesh distortions should be eliminated, which often imposes a substantial burden on
the user.
PSfrag replacements
X
x
B
o
m
B
t
o
t
/
R
3
t
t
material
conguration
spatial
conguration
Figure 1.2: The ALE-kinematics
In Figure (1.2) the physical motion
t
does not coincide with the mesh motion
t
.
So material convects through the nite element mesh dened by the material motion
t
.
One could imagine that diculties arise when dealing with history dependent materials.
Consider all history variables are stored at the position of the material point T in the
material conguration X, which is equal to the position of the mesh point m at the
beginning of the time step. During the computation material convects through the
nite element mesh and the position of the material point X no longer coincides with
the position of the mesh point m. Thus these history variables must be convected
in the ALE formulation, which makes the handling of history dependent materials
challenging. These types of material models will be considered in this work.
1.1.3 Lagrangian description
The Lagrangian description can be dened as a special case of the ALE description
by setting the reference conguration / equal to the material conguration B, which
then yields to a material parameterization B
t
independent in time t. Mathematically
this can be obtained by the particular choice
t
= id, so that the physical motion
is equal to the mesh motion, that means
t
=
t
. These relationships are shown in
Figure (1.3).
PSfrag replacements
X=m
x
B
o
B
t
= /
o
t
R
3
t
=
t
(=reference conguration)
spatial conguration
Figure 1.3: The Lagrangian-kinematics
Since the physical motion
t
is equal to the mesh motion
t
no material convects
through the nite element mesh dened by
t
= id. Therefore the diculties of the
ALE formulation when dealing with history dependent materials do not occur in the
Lagrangian description. The mesh point m coincides with the position of the material
point T in the material conguration denoted by X, where the history variables are
stored. Thus no convective eects must be considered here.
In solid mechanics the Lagrangian description is most popular. Its attractiveness
stems from the ease with which it handles complicated boundaries and its ability to
follow material points, so that history dependent materials can be treated accurately.
The disadvantage stems from the fact that the material points remain coincident with
mesh points, elements deform with the material and can become severely distorted,
which is commonly observed in plastic models where large plastic strains appear. The
approximation accuracy of the elements then deteriorates, particularly for higher order
elements.
1.1.4 Eulerian description
Also the Eulerian description can be dened as a special case of the ALE description.
By setting the reference conguration /equal to the spatial conguration o we obtain
the Eulerian description, which then yields a spatial parameterization o
t
independent
in time t. Mathematically this can be described by setting
t
= id, which leads to
t
=
1
t
. These relationships are shown in Figure (1.4).
Since the mesh is labelled with the spatial conguration of the body during the
whole deformation, the mesh motion
t
= id. Thus the physical motion
t
and the
mesh motion
t
do not coincide. The same diculties as in the ALE formulation
arise when dealing with history dependent material models. History variables must be
again convected, since the position of the material point X does not coincide with the
position of the mesh point m.
PSfrag replacements
X
x = m
B
o
B
t
o
t
= /
R
3
t
=
1
t
spatial conguration
(=reference conguration)
Figure 1.4: The Eulerian-kinematics
Since the Eulerian description is mostly used in uid mechanics where often no
history dependent materials are used, these diculties are circumvented. Until recently
Eulerian meshes have not been used much in solid mechanics. Eulerian meshes are
most appealing in problems with very large deformations. Their advantage in these
problems is a consequence of the fact that Eulerian elements do not deform with the
material. Therefore, regardless of the magnitudes of the deformation in a process,
Eulerian elements retain their original shape. Eulerian elements are particularly useful
in modelling many manufacturing processes, where very large deformations are often
encountered.
1.1.5 Summary
In the previous chapters we have shown the connection between the Lagrangian, Eu-
lerian and ALE description of the motion of a material body. We have seen that the
dierence lies in the location of the reference conguration /, from where the physical
motion of the material body is described. In the Lagrangian approach / is labelled
with the material conguration B, whereas in the Eulerian approach it is identical to
the spatial conguration o. Only in the ALE approach the reference conguration is
chosen arbitrary, that means it diers from the material conguration as well as from
the spatial conguration.
Finally an example is presented in Figure (1.5) to illustrate the dierences between
these descriptions. A circular plate is pulled horizontally, which then becomes elliptical.
This deformation is now described with the Lagrangian, Eulerian and ALE description.
In the Lagrangian description, shown in Figure (1.5a), the reference conguration
is equal to the material conguration. The nite element mesh (contiguous lines in
Figure (1.5)) is therefore located in the material conguration and the mesh point m
is identical to the position of the material point T in the material conguration, denoted
by X. Now lets assume to draw material lines (dashed lines in Figure (1.5)) onto the
material body, which are identical to the nite element mesh located in the material
PSfrag replacements
X
X
x
x
m
B
t
B
t
o
t
o
t
/
t
t
X = m
x = m
B
t
= /
o
t
= /
t
=
t
t
=
1
t
a) Lagrangian description
b) Eulerian description
c) ALE description
Figure 1.5: An illustrative example to show the dierence between the
a) Lagrangian description, b) Eulerian description and the c) ALE des-
cription
conguration. Since the circular plate deforms into an elliptical one, also these material
lines deform and the spatial position x of the material point is obtained. It can be seen
that large deformations of the material lines occur. Since the mesh motion is identical to
the physical motion, which leads to the deformed material lines, also distorted elements
occur. This is the main drawback of the Lagrangian formulation. It should be noted
that of course the center of the circular plate in the material conguration and the
center of the elliptical plate in the spatial conguration lie above each other. They are
only drawn apart from each other to make the example more illustrative.
On the other hand in the Eulerian description, shown in Figure (1.5b), the reference
conguration is labelled with the spatial conguration. So the nite element mesh is
located in the spatial conguration and the mesh point m is equal to the position of the
material point T in the spatial conguration, denoted by x. Again we draw material
lines onto the material body, but now in the spatial conguration. These material lines
coincide with the nite element mesh in the spatial conguration. To obtain exactly
these lines in the spatial conguration one can expect that these lines must be located
in the material conguration as it is shown in the left hand side of Figure (1.5b). One
could observe that the well distributed elements chosen as our reference conguration
remain in its position since the nite element mesh is xed in space. The drawback lies
in the fact that boundary nodes will not remain on the boundary if the plate is further
pulled, since for the next time step the same reference conguration is used, whereas
the plate deforms and becomes more elliptical.
In the ALE description, shown in Figure (1.5c), the reference conguration is neit-
her labelled with the material nor with the spatial one. It could be observed that the
motion of the nite element mesh
t
diers now from the physical motion
t
. As one
could recognize in Figure (1.5c) a good choice of the reference conguration leads to
less distorted elements in the spatial conguration as compared to the Lagrangian de-
scription. So the ALE formulation minimizes the disadvantages of both, Lagrangian
and Eulerian descriptions, while capturing their advantages, which are that boundary
nodes remain on the boundary like in the Lagrangian description and that the elements
are better distributed in the spatial conguration like this is the case in the Eulerian
description.
1.2 Development of ALE formulations
The formulation of ALE methods closely parallels that of Eulerian methods. Within
the context of nite dierence methods Noh [65] and Hirt et al [35] talked about
Quasi-Eulerian and Coupled Eulerian-Lagrangian methods. First ALE formulations
date from Donea et al [21], Belytschko & Kennedy [7], Belytschko et al [8]
and Hughes et al [47]. In Hughes et al [47] the rst ALE nite element formulation
for incompressible, viscous ow was presented. Further research on the ALE approach
within the context of uid mechanics was done by Huerta & Liu [41], Chippada
et al [17] and Venkatasubban [94]. Nomura & Hughes [67], Nomura [66] and
Sarrate et al [76] worked on uid structure interaction. The ALE formulation has
obvious appeal in these classes of problems. Two review papers which discuss the
general notion of ALE formulations are Benson [10, 11].
Within the context of non-linear solid mechanics considerable amount of work has
been done by Liu et al [54, 55, 56], Hu & Liu [37, 38], Gosh & Kikuchi [30, 31],
Gosh [29] and Pijaudier-Cabot et al [69]. A good review of ALE formulations
in solid mechanics is given in the papers of Huerta & Casadei [39] and Wang
& Gadala [98]. The main diculty in extending the ALE formulation from uid
to solid mechanics was the path dependent behavior of material models used in solid
mechanics. It will be shown in this work that the constitutive equation of ALE nonlinear
mechanics contains a convective term which reects the relative motion between the
physical motion and the mesh motion. In uid mechanics these convective eects only
occur in the mass balance, momentum balance and energy balance, but not in the
constitutive equation. The correct treatment of this convective term in the constitutive
equation is the key point in ALE nonlinear solid mechanics. The most popular approach
to deal with this convective term is the use of an operator-split method. Each time-step
is divided into a Lagrangian phase and an Eulerian phase. Convection is neglected in
the Lagrangian phase, which is thus identical to a time-step in a standard Lagrangian
analysis. After that the solution of the Lagrangian phase is transported to account for
the relative mesh-material motion in the Eulerian phase.
An example for a path dependent material model is the hypoelastic-plastic mo-
del described in Simo & Hughes [82], Bonet & Wood [12], Stoker [85] or Be-
lytschko et al [9]. In this material model the evolution of stresses is expressed in
rate format relating an objective stress rate with a rate of deformation. Various formu-
lations for large strain solid mechanics which combine an ALE kinematic description
and hypoelastic-plastic models can be found in the literature, e.g. Liu et al [54],
Benson [10], Huetnik et al [43], Gosh & Kikuchi [31], Huerta & Casadei [39]
or Rodr
iguez-Ferran et al [72].
An extension of the hypoelastic-plastic model to nite strain plasticity models ba-
sed on the multiplicative decomposition of the deformation gradient in an elastic and a
plastic part (F = F
e
F
p
) with the stresses given by a hyperelastic relation was develo-
ped by Simo [78, 79, 80, 81], Simo & Hughes [82], Simo & Miehe [83], Miehe [61],
Bonet & Wood [12] or Belytschko et al [9]. This plasticity model is nowadays
standard in Lagrangian formulations but not in ALE formulations. Instead of com-
puting the stresses by its rate equation as in the hypoelastic-plastic model, here the
deformation gradient in combination with the free energy is used. However the plastic
response is still described in rate form involving the Lie derivative.
In the work of Rodr
iguez-Ferran et al [74] an ALE formulation for this hy-

perelastoplastic material model was developed. It is very similar to the formulations
which are standard for hypoelastic-plastic models. The hyperelastic part of the response
is described as in standard hyperelastic-plastic algorithms by means of the incremen-
tal deformation gradient, where the material conguration is set equal to the spatial
conguration of the last time step, rather than the initial undeformed conguration is
used as the material conguration during the whole deformation process. In the ALE
formulation the parameterization of the spatial conguration of the last time step is
smoothed during a smoothing phase which then yields to a well distributed spatial
parameterization which is nally used as the material conguration in the next time
step. This approach let us forget about any distortions before the actual time step.
Thus the full potential of the ALE formulation as an r-adaptive technique (that is an
adaptive technique based on relocating the nodes of a given mesh without changing its
topology, see Huerta et al [42]) can be exploited.
A dierent ALE formulation for hyperelastoplasticity was developed in Love [57]
and Armero & Love [1, 2]. This work is an extension of the work of Yamada &
Kikuchi [102], where a fully coupled solution for an ALE formulation for elasticity
was developed. In Love [57] and Armero & Love [1, 2] the material model was
extended for hyperelastoplasticity and an uncoupled solution procedure was derived
for the fully dynamic range. Instead of the incremental deformation gradient, used in
Rodr
iguez-Ferran et al [74], the total deformation gradient is used. This leads

to a formulation where no elastic variables must be convected, since the strains can be
computed by the use of the total deformation gradient and the plastic metric of the last
time step which of course only occurs if the material becomes plastic. In Rodr
iguez-
Ferran et al [74] the strains are computed by the use of the incremental deformation
gradient and the elastic metric of the last time step which leads to a formulation where
the elastic metric must be stored from the very rst time step on, no matter if the
material is still elastic or already plastic. However convection of plastic variables is
still needed in Armero & Love [1, 2]. The proposed method is based on a direct
interpolation of the material and mesh motion, separate of the physical motion of the
material body compared to typical ALE formulations of nite strain plasticity based
on the solution of the spatial domain together with the mesh velocity.
In this work we will follow the work of Rodr
iguez-Ferran et al [74] and will

show the relevant steps to upgrade a standard Lagrangian Finite Element programme
into an ALE formulation for solid dynamics using the nite strain plasticity models
based on the multiplicative decomposition of the deformation gradient.
1.3 Overview of the work
The outline of the work is as follows:
Chapter 2: Basics of Continuum Mechanics. A presentation of the funda-
mental continuum equations is given. Due to the formalistic framework used in this
chapter, the theory of the ALE formulation can be embedded easily. The kinematics
and denitions of stresses and strains are presented. Finally the fundamental balance
principles are discussed. The discussion here is fundamental to the understanding of
the ALE formulation presented in the subsequent chapters.
Chapter 3: Constitutive Model: Finite Strain Plasticity. In this chapter a
formulation for isotropic plasticity at nite strains based on the multiplicative decompo-
sition of the deformation gradient into its elastic and plastic contribution is presented.
The numerical implementation as well as the inuence of the ALE formulation on this
material model is shown.
Chapter 4: Initial Boundary Value Problem. The Initial Boundary Value
Problem (IBVP) which we want to solve by the use of the ALE formulation is presented
in this chapter. The relevant nite element matrix equations are computed based on
the strong and the weak form of the problem. Two solution procedures are shown,
where we will restrict ourself to the so called uncoupled solution strategy, where the
whole problem is decoupled based on an operator splitting technique.
Chapter 5: Uncoupled ALE formulation. This chapter presents the Uncoupled
ALE formulation for nite strain plasticity. The relevant equations will be decoupled
based on an operator splitting technique, which breaks the whole problem into a Lag-
rangian phase and an Eulerian phase combined with a smoothing phase. These phases
are described in detail. For the update of the internal variables in the Eulerian phase
the Lax Wendro scheme and the Godunov scheme are presented. Finally the numerical
implementation of the ALE formulation for nite strain plasticity in the fully transient
dynamic range is shown.
Chapter 6: Numerical Simulations. Three representative numerical simulations
are shown to illustrate the performance of the proposed Uncoupled ALE formulation
for nite strain plasticity. The Impact of a Circular Bar, the Necking of a Circular
Bar and a Coining Test are shown. By the use of these examples the ALE method
is compared with the Lagrangian method. Furthermore the dierences between the
Lax Wendro- and the Godunov scheme for the update of the internal variables are
presented.
Chapter 7: Closure. The nal chapter summarizes the work and addresses areas
of future research concerning the Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian Finite Element for-
mulation.
Chapter 2
Basics of Continuum Mechanics
This chapter reviews some basic results of continuum mechanics needed for the subse-
quent development and understanding of the ALE formulation. It is a brief overview
of the relevant aspects of the theory and should, by no means, be considered exhau-
stive. The notation of modern dierential-geometry used in the following chapter is
based on lectures of Miehe [62] and subsequent applications in Lambrecht [50] or
Velasco [93]. Detailed expositions of the subject are found in the classical treatise
of Trusdell & Noll [90], Gurtin [32], Marsden & Hughes [59], Ogden [68],
Hughes [44], Holzapfel [36] or Belytschko et al [9].
The method of continuum mechanics is a powerful and eective tool to explain
various physical phenomena without detailed knowledge of the complexity of their in-
ternal microstructure. In an approximation the distribution of a few physical quantities
as the density, temperature, velocity and so on are considered as continuous and smooth
over the whole domain. This approximation ignores inhomogeneities and replaces the
very large number of particles with independent and smooth elds of these quantities.
First the basic kinematics of nite strain deformations is presented. Then the con-
cept of stress is dened and nally the mathematical description of the fundamental
balance laws of physics governing the motion of a continuum are discussed in this
chapter.
2.1 Basic Kinematics of Finite Strain Deformations
In continuum mechanics, kinematics refer to the mathematical description of the de-
formation and motion of a material body, which can be either a solid, a uid or a gas.
The dierent congurations will be shown, and their inuence on the description of
the motion and the dierent strain- and stress measures will be outlined. Due to the
formalistic framework used here, the theory of the ALE formulation can be embedded
easily.
12
Chapter 2 Basics of Continuum Mechanics 13
2.1.1 Material Body, Congurations and Motion of the Body
This chapter concerns the description of material bodies, their motions, and their
congurations within the continuum theory. Such a material body is a physical object
equipped with some physical properties, like texture, density, color and so on, which
are assumed to be contiguous. The body

B takes a place B in the Euclidean space R
3
,
which can be denoted as the placement of

B in R
3
. Mathematically the body

B is an
open set of innitely many material points T

B, which is a one-to-one relationship
to a subset B R
3
of the Euclidean space. This context is shown in Figure (2.1).
PSfrag replacements
T

B
x B
B
B
R
3
Figure 2.1: Placement of

B in R
3
The placement of the body

B in R
3
, which will be denoted as a conguration of the
body, can be mathematically described with the bijective relationship
:
_

B B R
3
T x = (T) B.
(2.1)
The place x B is the place, which the material point T occupies in space. The
motion of a material body is a one-parameter family of congurations indexed by time.
Explicitly, let [0, T] R
+
be the time interval of interest. Then, for each t [0, T], the
mapping
t
:
_

B B
t
R
3
T x =
t
(T) = (T, t) B
t
(2.2)
is a mapping which maps

B onto B
t
R
3
at time t. In a motion the particle T
occupies a sequence of places in space, which is shown in Figure (2.2). This sequence
of congurations will be denoted as path L of the material point T in the Euclidean
space R
3
.
PSfrag replacements
T
B
x
x
x
x
B
t
1
B
t
2
B
t
3
B
t
4
R
3
t
1
t
2

t
3
t
4
L
Figure 2.2: Family of congurations of the material body
From this sequence we pick out two neighboring congurations. We denote the rst
one as material conguration B and the second one as spatial conguration o. It is now
convenient to label the material point T by its position X in the material conguration
B, i.e.
0
:
_

B B R
3
T X =
0
(T) = (T, t
0
) B.
(2.3)
Inversion of Equation (2.3)
2
and insertion into Equation (2.2)
2
leads to the map-
ping
t
, which states the current position x of the material point T in the spatial
conguration o, relating to its position X in the material conguration B.
x =
t
(T) =
t
(
1
0
(X))
=
t

1
0
=:
t
(X) (2.4)
Then the mapping
t
between the material conguration B and the spatial con-
guration o takes the form
t
:
_
B o
X x =
t
(X) = (X, t).
(2.5)
PSfrag replacements
T

B
0
X B
B
x o
o
t
spatial conguration
R
3
Figure 2.3: Motion of a material body
The motion
t
is assumed to be uniquely invertible. With the inverse motion,
denoted by
1
t
, the position X in the material conguration B can be dened by
X =
1
t
(x) =
1
(x, t). (2.6)
The aim is now to describe the motion
t
of the material body between these two
congurations. That is, we want to solve for the deformation mapping
t
, for each time
t [0, T]. Therefore we introduce a xed reference conguration /, independent of
any placement of the material body. Furthermore we consider two additional mappings
t
and
t
, which relate the material and spatial parameterizations B
t
and o
t
of the
material and spatial congurations B and o of the material body to the reference
conguration, respectively, i.e
t
:
_
/ B
t
m X =
t
(m) = (m, t)
t
:
_
/ o
t
m x =
t
(m) = (m, t).
(2.7)
Here we have denoted the reference points by m /, the material points by
X B
t
and their spatial position with x o
t
. We have then
t
=
t

1
t
by
construction, where stands for a composition of mappings. Figure (2.4) depicts these
considerations. We will call it the reference description of the motion of a material body.
In particular, the reference conguration is understood as dened by a xed mesh in
the context of the nite element formulation to be developed in this work. In this nite
element context the material and the spatial domains B and o of the material body are
parameterized in time t. Contrary to the time independent physical conguration B its
parameterization B
t
is now time-dependent. It could be observed that the particular
choice of
t
= id, so that
t
=
t
, leads to the Lagrangian description, whereas the
choice
t
= id, so that
t
=
1
t
reduces the problem to its Eulerian form.
PSfrag replacements
X
x
B
o
m
B
t
o
t
/
R
3
t
t
material
conguration
spatial
conguration
Figure 2.4: Reference description of the motion of a material body
2.1.2 Displacement-, Velocity- and Acceleration Fields
With the basic denitions of the motion of a material body it is now possible to dene
displacement-, velocity and acceleration elds of a typical material point X and a mesh
point m.
Displacement Fields
In particular, we have the physical displacement u of a particle, which relates the
position of a material point X in the material conguration and its spatial position x.
This is illustrated in Figure (2.5) . Since we introduced the reference conguration to
describe the motion of the material body, we can compute this physical displacement
in terms of this reference conguration, i.e.
u(m, t) := (m, t) (m, t) = x(m, t) X(m, t). (2.8)
PSfrag replacements
u, v
u
m
, v
m
X
x
m
B
o
/
R
3

material
configuration
spatial
configuration
reference configuration
Figure 2.5: Displacement- and Velocity Fields
Again it could be observed that the particular choice of = id, so that m = X,
leads to the physical displacement in terms of the material conguration, known as
material displacement U(X, t) whereas the choice = id, so that m = x leads
to the physical displacement in terms of the spatial conguration, known as spatial
displacement u(x, t), i.e.
U(X, t) := x(X, t) X(X, t) = x(X, t) X
u(x, t) := x(x, t) X(x, t) = x X(x, t).
(2.9)
In the mathematics and continuum mechanics literature, see e.g. Marsden &
Hughes [59], dierent symbols are often used for the same eld when it is expressed
in terms of dierent congurations. A common notation uses capital letters for a eld
described in the material conguration, like U(X, t), and small letters for a eld de-
scribed in the spatial conguration, like u(x, t). Since the referential conguration is
either identical to the material or spatial one in a Lagrangian or Eulerian formulation,
respectively, no further notation is used for elds described in the referential congu-
ration. To avoid further confusion we will not introduce a further notation here in the
development of the ALE formulation. We will use small letters for a eld when it is
expressed in terms of the referential conguration, like u(m, t).
Similarly to the physical displacement we can dene the displacement of the mesh
point m, which relates its position in the reference conguration m to its spatial
position x as
u
m
(m, t) := (m, t) m(m, t) = x(m, t) m. (2.10)
Velocity Fields
Similar to the displacement elds, we have now the physical velocity v(m, t) of a
particle in terms of the reference conguration, given by
v(m, t) :=
d(
1
(X, t), t)
dt
=
(m, t)
t
+
(m, t)
1
(X, t)
1
(X, t)
t
=
x(m, t)
t
+
x(m, t)
m(X, t)
m(X, t)
t
=
x
t
m
+ grad
m
x
m
t
X
,
(2.11)
where [ ][
m
and [ ][
X
means holding m and X xed, respectively. The abbreviation
grad
m
[ ] stands for [ ]/m. Again it could be observed that the particular choice
of = id, so that m = X, leads to the physical velocity in terms of the material
conguration, known as material velocity V(X, t) whereas the choice = id, so that
m = x leads to the physical velocity in terms of the spatial conguration, known as
spatial velocity v(x, t), i.e.
V(X, t) :=
(X, t)
t
=
x(X, t)
t
=
x
t
X
v(x, t) :=
1
(X, t)
t
=
1
V(X, t).
(2.12)
Similarly to the physical velocity v(m, t) we can dene the velocity of the mesh
point v
m
(m, t) in terms of the reference conguration as
v
m
(m, t) :=
(m, t)
t
=
x(m, t)
t
=
x
t
m
. (2.13)
With these denitions in hand we can now introduce the so called convective ve-
locity c(m, t) as the dierence of the physical velocity v(m, t) and the mesh velocity
v
m
(m, t). Insertion of Equation (2.13) into Equation (2.11)
4
yields
c(m, t) := v(m, t) v
m
(m, t) = grad
m
x
m
t
X
. (2.14)
Acceleration Fields
Similar to the velocity elds, we have now the physical acceleration a(m, t) of a particle
in terms of the reference conguration, given by
a(m, t) :=
d
2
(
1
(X, t), t)
dt
2
=

2
x
t
2
m
+ grad
m
x
2
m
t
2
X
. (2.15)
Again it could be observed that the particular choice of = id, so that m = X,
leads to the physical acceleration in terms of the material conguration, known as
material acceleration A(X, t) whereas the choice = id, so that m = x leads to the
physical acceleration in terms of the spatial conguration, known as spatial acceleration
a(x, t), i.e.
A(X, t) :=

2
(X, t)
t
2
=

2
x(X, t)
t
2
=

2
x
t
2
X
a(x, t) :=
1
2
(X, t)
t
2
=
1
A(X, t).
(2.16)
Similarly to the physical acceleration a(m, t) we can dene the acceleration of the
mesh point a
m
(m, t) in terms of the reference conguration as
a
m
(m, t) :=

2
(m, t)
t
2
=

2
x(m, t)
t
2
=

2
x
t
2
m
. (2.17)
On the other hand it is also possible to compute the physical acceleration a(m, t),
given in Equation (2.15), from the derivative of the physical velocity v(m, t) with
respect to time without any knowledge of the material conguration by the use of the
referential gradient grad
m
[ ]. This is denoted as the material (total) time derivative of
the referential velocity eld v(m, t) and looks like
a(m, t) :=
dv(m, t)
dt
=
v(m, t)
t
+
v(m, t)
m(X, t)
m(X, t)
t
=
v
t
m
+ grad
m
v
m
t
X
.
(2.18)
It is also possible to use the spatial gradient grad
x
[ ] = [ ]/x instead of the
referential gradient grad
m
[ ], which will become important for the development of the
ALE formulation. By the use of the chain rule in Equation (2.18)
2
and insertion of the
convective velocity from Equation (2.14) we obtain
a(m, t) :=
v(m, t)
t
+
v(m, t)
x(m, t)
x(m, t)
m(X, t)
m(X, t)
t
=
v
t
m
+ grad
x
v c =: v(m, t).
(2.19)
The rst term in the middle of Equation (2.19)
2
, namely v/t, describes the
local acceleration (local rate of change of the velocity eld). The second term, namely
grad
x
v c is quadratically nonlinear in the velocity eld and describes the convective
acceleration eld (convective rate of change of the velocity eld).
For the development of the ALE formulation this equation will become very import-
ant, since it describes the material time derivative in terms of the local time derivative
in the referential conguration and the spatial gradient. Since this relationship holds
for all functions f(m, t) we can write
f(m, t) :=
f
t
m
+ grad
x
f c. (2.20)
2.1.3 The Deformation Gradient
The deformation gradient plays a fundamental role in the theory of continuum me-
chanics. It is used to study the deformation (i.e. the changes of size and shape) of a
continuum body occurring when moved from the material conguration B to the spa-
tial conguration o. Places X and x in these congurations contain tangent spaces
T
X
B, T
x
o and cotangent spaces T
X
B, T
x
o. Contravariant vectors are elements of the
tangent spaces and covariant vectors are elements of the cotangent spaces. In the fol-
lowing, based on the notation of Miehe [62], three fundamental maps, namely the
Tangent Map, the Normal Map and the Jacobian Map are derived.
The Tangent Map
In the last chapter we have shown that the position of a material point T in the material
conguration B is labelled by X. This position is mapped into the spatial conguration
o by the mapping
t
, shown in Equation (2.5). The spatial position is then labelled by
x. The deformation gradient F can be dened as the Frechet-derivative of the mapping
t
(X), resulting in
F :=

t
X
. (2.21)
A graphical interpretation of what the deformation gradient is doing can be done
by considering a material curve C() in the material conguration. This curve, where
denotes a parameterization, transforms into the spatial curve c() in the spatial
conguration, when the physical mapping
t
is applied to B. This is illustrated in
Figure (2.6).
c() =
t
(C()) (2.22)
PSfrag replacements
X
dX
dA
C()
B
x
dx
da
c()
o
F
T
X
B
T
x
o
Figure 2.6: Mapping of points, tangent vectors and normal vectors
The tangent vector dx to the spatial curve c() is obtained by deriving c() with
respect to its parameter , resulting in the expression
dx =
dc()
d
=

t
X
C()
. (2.23)
Insertion of Equation (2.21) into the last expression leads to the following relation-
ship between the tangent vector dx to the curve c() in the spatial conguration and
the tangent vector dX to the curve C() in the material conguration:
dx = FdX (2.24)
Therefore F can be interpreted as a linear mapping of contravariant vectors of the
tangent space in the material conguration T
X
B to the tangent space in the spatial
conguration T
x
o, i.e.
F :
_
T
X
B T
x
o
dX dx = FdX.
(2.25)
In the same way we can introduce the tangent maps F
and F
used for the

derivation of the ALE formulation by
F
:=

t
m
and F
:=

t
m
(2.26)
as a linear mapping of contravariant vectors of the tangent space in the reference
conguration T
m
/ to the tangent space in the spatial conguration T
x
o and to the
tangent space in the material conguration T
X
B, i.e.
F
:
_
_
_
T
m
/ T
x
o
dm dx = F
dm
and F
:
_
T
m
/ T
X
B
dm dX = F
dm.
(2.27)
The Normal Map
In analogy to the mapping of tangent vectors through F, the tensor cof[F] = det[F]F
T
maps the normals dA and da to the curve C() and c() at the place X and x, shown
in Figure (2.6), from the cotangent spaces of the material T

X
B to the cotangent spaces
of the spatial conguration T
x
o, i.e.
cof[F] :
_
T
X
B T
x
o
dA da = cof[F]dA.
(2.28)
Since the normal vectors dA and da are dened as a cross product of two tangent
vectors dX
1
, dX
2
and dx
1
, dx
2
, and since the length of the normals are equal to
the area spanned by the related tangent vectors, this normal map is also called area
mapping.
The Jacobi Map
The relationship between the volume dV and dv of the material and the spatial con-
guration can be dened by the Jacobi map, also denoted as volume mapping,
J :
_
1 1
dV dv = JdV,
(2.29)
where J is equal to the determinant of the deformation gradient F. Since the
mapping
t
has to be bijective and no penetration of material is allowed a Jacobian
greater than zero is implied, reading
J := detF > 0. (2.30)
2.1.4 Metric- and Strain Tensors
The aim of this chapter is to derive strain measures to measure the relative change of
the length of the tangent vectors dX and dx. To this end, we need to introduce an inner
product associated with spaces (T
X
B, T
X
B) and (T
x
o, T
x
o). This is done by dening
natural metric tensors on the material and the spatial conguration, respectively.
Metric Tensors
To compute the length of a vector we introduce vector norms with the help of the
material or spatial metric tensor G and g. These metric tensors describe the mapping
from the contravariant vectors dX and dx of the tangent spaces to the dual covariant
vectors dA and da of the cotangent spaces. The inner product [ a ] [ b ] is only dened
as an operation between dierent spaces, i.e. [ a ] T
X
B and [ b ] T
X
B or [ a ] T
x
o
and [ b ] T
x
o. It is obvious that the pairs (dX, dA) and (dx, da) dene dierent
geometrical objects. But in classical terminologies they are dened as the contravariant
and covariant representation of the same vector.
G:
_
T
X
B T
X
B
dX dA = GdX
and g :
_
T
x
o T
x
o
dx da = gdx
(2.31)
The metric tensors G and g are positive denite symmetric second order tensors.
With these denitions it is now possible to measure the length dS and ds of the tangent
vectors dX and dx, respectively.
dS =
dX
G
=
_
dX (GdX) and ds =
dx
g
=
_
dx (gdx) (2.32)
The index shows, which metric tensor was used to determine the length of the
vector. Insertion of Equation (2.24) yields
dS =
dx
c
=
_
dx (cdx) and ds =
dX
C
=
_
dX (CdX). (2.33)
In Equation (2.33) the positive denite symmetric right Cauchy-Green tensor C
and the inverse left Cauchy-Green tensor or inverse nger tensor c (do not confuse
yourself by the same notation as the convective velocity) have been introduced:
C := F
T
gF and c := F
T
GF
1
(2.34)
These deformation dependent metric tensors allow the computation of the spatial
length ds proceeding from the material tangent vector dX and the computation of
the material length dS proceeding from the spatial tangent vector dx. The related
mappings are shown in Figure (2.7) and can be dened as
C :
_
T
X
B T
X
B
dX d
A = CdX
and c :
_
T
x
o T
x
o
dx d a = cdx.
(2.35)
It is obvious, that the inversion of the inverse nger tensor c results in the so called
nger tensor, sometimes referred as left Cauchy-Green tensor, which will be denoted
by b, i.e.
b := c
1
= FG
1
F
T
. (2.36)
Strain Tensors
Unlike displacements, which are measurable quantities, strains are based on a concept
that is introduced to simplify analysis. Therefore numerous denitions and names of
strain tensors have been proposed in the literature. All of them have in common, that
strain measures always compare the two metric tensors in a chosen geometrical setting,
e.g.
E = f (C, G) and e = f (c, g) . (2.37)
PSfrag replacements
X
X
x
x
G c C g
F
F
T
T
X
B
T
X
B
T
x
o
T
x
o
Figure 2.7: Metric Tensors
E.g. the well known Green-Lagrange strain tensor E and the Almansi strain tensor
e are dened by
E :=
1
2
(C G) and e :=
1
2
(g c) . (2.38)
2.2 The Concept of Stress
In the previous chapter some kinematic aspects of the motion and deformation of a
continuum body have been discussed. The deformation causes interactions between the
material and the neighboring material in the interior part of the body. One consequence
of these interactions is stress. The concept of stress will be discussed in this chapter.
2.2.1 Eulers Cut Principle
The mapping
t
maps the material conguration B to the spatial conguration o. Lets
now cut out a part of the body. This remaining part is denoted by B
P
and o
P
in the
material and the spatial conguration, respectively. The quantities x, da and n which
are associated with the part of the body in the spatial conguration are denoted by X,
dA and N when they are referred to the part of the body in the material conguration,
which is shown in Figure (2.8).
To describe the relationship between the two parts of the body the Cauchy (or
true) traction vector t(x, t, n) is introduced in the spatial conguration. A physical
interpretation of this traction vector could be observed by the example of a necking
bar. Here t represents the stress vector which can be computed by dividing the force df
acting on the bar by the deformed area da. In reality often the actual force is divided by
PSfrag replacements
x
X
T
N
t
dA
B
B
P
t
n
da
o
o
P
F
Figure 2.8: Eulers Cut Principle

the initial area dA, which would lead to the rst Piola-Kirchho (or nominal) traction
vector

t(X, t, N), which lives in the spatial conguration and points in the same
direction as the true traction vector t. For every surface element the innitesimal force
vector can be dened as
df = t da =
t dA. (2.39)
2.2.2 Stress Tensors
Cauchys stress theorem denes the Cauchy stress tensor and postulates the linear
dependency between the traction vector t and the normal n in the spatial conguration
by
t(x, t, n) =: (x, t)n. (2.40)
The symmetric Cauchy stress tensor maps the spatial covariant normal vector n
from the cotangent space T
x
o to the tangent space T
x
o:
:
_
T
x
o T
x
o
n t = n
(2.41)
The Cauchy stress tensor relates the local force df in the cut plane to the de-
formed area da. That is why this stress is also called true stress. On the other hand
the Kirchho stress tensor is dened by multiplying the Cauchy stress tensor by the
Jacobian J:
= J:
_
T
x
o T
x
o
n Jt = n
(2.42)
Applying Cauchys stress theorem onto the traction vector

t, which can be derived
by the relationship

t = t da/dA observed from Equation (2.39), and onto the normal
N in the material conguration B leads to the non-symmetric rst Piola Kirchho
stress tensor P, i.e.
t(X, t, N) =: P(X, t)N. (2.43)

The rst Piola Kirchho stress tensor P, a two-eld tensor, maps the material
covariant normal vector N from the cotangent space T
X
B to the tangent space T
x
o in
the spatial conguration:
P:
_
T
X
B T
x
o
N
t = PN
(2.44)
The rst Piola Kirchho stress tensor relates the local force df in the spatial cut
plane to the undeformed area dA. P can be related to the Cauchy stress tensor by
P = JF
T
. (2.45)
In the last step we construct a pure material stress tensor, the so called second
Piola Kirchho stress tensor, denoted by S. Therefore the nominal traction vector

t
is transformed back to the material conguration, i.e.
T = F
1
t. (2.46)
In analogy to Equations (2.40) and (2.43) this leads to the pure material stress
tensor S, i.e.
T(X, t, N) =: S(X, t)N. (2.47)
The symmetric second Piola Kirchho stress tensor maps the material covariant
normal vector N from the cotangent space T
X
B to the tangent space T
X
B in the
material conguration:
S :
_
T
X
B T
X
B
N T = SN
(2.48)
The second Piola Kirchho stress tensor can be related to the Cauchy stress tensor
, the Kirchho stress tensor and the rst Piola Kirchho stress tensor P by
S = JF
1
F
T
= F
1
F
T
= F
1
P. (2.49)
In Figure (2.9) a graphical interpretation of the relationship between all these stress
tensors is given.
PSfrag replacements
X
X
x
x
S = J
P
P
T
F
F
T
T
X
B
T
X
B
T
x
o
T
x
o
Figure 2.9: Stress Tensors
2.3 Balance Principles
The fundamental balance principles, i.e. conservation of mass, the momentum balance
principles and the balance of energy and entropy are discussed in this chapter. They
are applicable to any particular material and must be satised for all times. The phy-
sical balance principles are dened global as integrals over the whole material body.
These global balance laws can be transformed into local balance laws. In general, lo-
cal forms are ideally suited for approximation techniques such as the nite dierence
method while global forms are the best to start with when the nite element method
is employed.
2.3.1 Master Balance Principle
The master balance principle provides the frame of all balances in continuum mecha-
nics. The present status of a set of material points T occupying an arbitrary region o
P
,
obtained by application of Eulers cut principle, with boundary surface o
P
at time
t may be characterized by a tensor valued function I(t) =
_
S
P
f dv. In the following
let f = f(x, t) be a smooth spatial tensor eld per unit current volume, which may
characterize some physical scalar, vector or tensor quantity, like density, linear- and
angular momentum, total energy or entropy, which has to be balanced.
A change of these quantities may now be expressed as the following master balance
principle here presented in the global spatial form, i.e.
d
dt
_
S
P
f(x, t) dv =
_
S
P
(x, t, n) da +
_
S
P
(x, t) dv +
_
S
P
f(x, t) dv. (2.50)

As stated above f = f(x, t) is the volume specic mechanical quantity which has to
be balanced. The eld function = (x, t, n) is the eux of the mechanical quantity
through the surface o
P
. Note that depends not only on the position x and time
t, but also on the orientation of the innitesimal spatial surface element ds o
P
characterized by the unit vector eld n normal to o
P
at x. = (x, t) is the supply
of the mechanical quantity and

f =

f(x, t) represents the production of the mechanical
quantity.
The goal is now to transform the global master balance principle of Equation (2.50),
valid in the domain o
P
to a local form valid for each material point T. This can be done
by insertion of Cauchys stress theorem in a more general setting leading to (x, t, n) =
(x, t)n. Then the surface integral is transformed into a volume integral by Gauss-type
theorem, i.e.
_
S
P
[ ]n da =
_
S
P
div[ ] dv. Finally the localization theorem is applied
since the domain o
P
is arbitrary. This leads to the result, that an expression in the
form
_
S
P
[ ] dv states the same as [ ] = 0, which then leads to the local representation
of the master balance law, i.e.
f + fdiv
x
x = div
x
+ +

f. (2.51)
All specic balance relations of mechanics have to be introduced as an axiom and
t into the global master balance principle, shown in Equation (2.50). Then it is easy
to obtain the local balance law from the local master balance law, shown in Equation
(2.51).
2.3.2 Balance of Mass
A closed system consists of a xed amount of mass M. No mass can enter or leave the
boundary of the system. The mass is a fundamental scalar property independent of the
motion. It is a measure of material in the body B. We consider a closed system with
a given motion x = (X, t), the material mass density
0
(X) and the spatial mass
density (x, t).
Axiom 2.1. In a closed system, the mass M of a body is constant.
Thus,
M =
_
S
P
(x, t) dv = const
d
dt
M = 0.
In comparison with the global master balance principle, see Equation (2.50), one
concludes to
f = , = 0, = 0,

f = 0. (2.52)
Thus in comparison with the local master balance principle, see Equation (2.51),
the local mass balance in the spatial framework has the form
(x, t) + (x, t)div
x
x(x, t) = 0. (2.53)
Transferring the axiom of mass balance into the framework of the material con-
guration and comparing it with the local master balance principle leads to the local
balance of mass in the material framework, which has the obvious form

0
(X) = 0. (2.54)
2.3.3 Balance of Linear Momentum
Again we consider a closed system with a given motion x = (X, t), the material mass
density
0
(X), the spatial mass density (x, t) and the spatial velocity eld v(x, t).
We dene the total linear momentum L by the vector valued function
L(t) =
_
S
P
(x, t)v(x, t) dv. (2.55)
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
Figure 2.10: Forces acting on a continuum body
To dene the balance of linear momentum we need to dene the structure of forces
acting on a continuum body, shown in Figure (2.10). Consider a boundary surface
o
P
, subdivided into a part o
P
t
, which is subjected to the Cauchy traction vector
t(x, t, n) =

t, dened in Equation (2.40), and into a part o
P
u
, where the displacement
u(x, t) = u is prescribed, with o
P
t
o
P
u
= o
P
and o
P
t
o
P
u
= 0. The unit
vector eld n is the outward normal to the innitesimal surface element da o
P
.
Furthermore let b = b(x, t) denote a spatial vector eld, called body force dened per
unit spatial mass.
Axiom 2.2. The temporal change of the linear momentum L equals
the sum of the forces acting on o
P
. Thus,
d
dt
_
S
P
(x, t)v(x, t) dv =
_
S
P
t(x, t, n) da +
_
S
P
(x, t)b(x, t) dv.
concludes to
f = v, = t = n, = b,

f = 0. (2.56)
Thus in comparison with the local master balance principle, see Equation (2.51), and
after some calculations, the local balance of linear momentum in the spatial framework
has the form
(x, t) v(x, t) = div
x
(x, t) + (x, t)b(x, t). (2.57)
Transferring the axiom of the balance of linear momentum into the framework of
the material conguration and comparing it with the local master balance principle
leads to the local balance of linear momentum in the material framework, which has
the form
0
(X)

V(X, t) = div
X
P(X, t) +
0
(X)B(X, t). (2.58)
2.3.4 Balance of Angular Momentum
In addition to the linear momentum, we dene the total angular momentum J by the
vector valued function
J(t) =
_
S
P
x (x, t)v(x, t) dv. (2.59)
Axiom 2.3. The temporal change of the angular momentum J
equals the sum of the moments of all forces acting on o
P
. Thus,
d
dt
_
S
P
x (x, t)v(x, t) dv =
_
S
P
x t(x, t, n) da +
_
S
P
x (x, t)b(x, t) dv.
concludes to
f = x (v), = x t, = x (b),

f = 0. (2.60)
and after some calculations, the local balance of angular momentum in the spatial
framework states the symmetry of the Cauchy stress tensor, i.e.
=
T
. (2.61)
From this result the symmetry conditions for all other stress tensors which have
been determined in Chapter (2.2) follow as
=
T
, PF
T
= FP
T
and S = S
T
. (2.62)
2.3.5 Balance of Energy
To determine the balance of energy we have to introduce the kinetic energy K(o
P
, t)
of the body and the internal energy U(o
P
, t). The internal energy depends on the mass
specic scalar eld u(x, t), which describes the locally stored energy at the spatial point
x o
P
.
K :=
_
S
P
1
2
v (gv) dv and U :=
_
S
P
udv (2.63)
We used the spatial metric g to determine the scalar product. Furthermore the
mechanical power P
ext
(o
P
, t) and the thermal power Q(o
P
, t) must be introduced. The
thermal power depends on a heat inux h(x, t, n) = q(x, t) n and a volume specic
external heat supply r(x, t).
P
ext
=
_
S
P
v (gb) dv +
_
S
P
v (gt) da and Q =
_
S
P
r dv
_
S
P
hda (2.64)
Axiom 2.4. The sum of the temporal changes of kinetic and in-
ternal energy equals the sum of the mechanical and thermal power.
Thus,
d
dt
[K + U] = P
ext
+ Q.
Insertion of the specic terms into the global balance of energy equation and in
comparison with the global master balance principle, see Equation (2.50), one concludes
to
f = [u +
1
2
v (gv)], = v (gt) h = [
T
(g
T
v) q] n = [(gv) q] n,
= [(gb) v + r],

f = 0.
(2.65)
and after some calculations, the local balance of energy in the spatial framework has
the form
u = : d div
x
q + r. (2.66)
Here we introduced the rate of deformation tensor d = 1/2 (gl +l
T
g), which is the
symmetric part of the spatial velocity gradient l := v/x =

FF
1
. Since the Cauchy
stress tensor is symmetric, the multiplication of with the skewsymmetric part of l
vanishes, which yield the equivalence : (gl ) = : d used in Equation (2.66). After
some manipulations we obtain the local balance of energy in the material framework
as
0
u = gP :

F div
X
Q +
0
R. (2.67)
With these denitions in hand we can now dene the stress power T
int
as the
integration of the local stress power T over the domain B
P
. Since B
P
is arbitrary, the
following work conjugate pairs can be observed.
T
int
:=
_
B
P
T dV with T = : d = gP :

F = S :

E (2.68)
The last expression, namely S :

E can be obtained from gP :

F by the use of
Equation (2.49). These work conjugate pairs will play an important role in the formu-
lation of material models. We will see that in the hyperelastic nite strain plasticity
model, which will be derived in Chapter 3, the stresses can be computed by dividing
the free energy , which will be introduced in the next chapter, with respect to its
work conjugate strain measure.
2.3.6 Balance of Entropy
Entropy is an articial word steaming from the Greek word , describing the
transformation of mechanical power into non-mechanical power. Clausius choose to
describe these process by the term entropy. To determine the balance of entropy we have
to introduce the entropy H(o
P
, t) of the body and the entropy-production (o
P
, t). The
entropy depends on the mass specic local entropy (x, t), and the entropy-production
on the mass specic local entropy-production (x, t), i.e.
H :=
_
S
P
dv and :=
_
S
P
dv. (2.69)
Axiom 2.5. The temporal change of entropy must be greater than
or equal to the quotient of the thermal power and the absolute tem-
perature > 0. Thus,
d
dt
H
Q
.
We can conclude from this equation, that the entropy-production cannot become
negative
:=
d
dt
H
Q
0. (2.70)
Insertion of the specic terms into the global entropy-inequality and in comparison
with the global master balance principle, see Equation (2.50), one concludes to
f = , =
1
q n, =
r
,

f = . (2.71)
and after some calculations, the local entropy-inequality in the spatial framework has
the form
= + div
x
_
q
0. (2.72)
Multiplying Equation (2.72), known as the local form of the Clausius-Duhem-
inequality, by the absolute temperature , inserting the balance of energy and replacing
the internal energy u via Legendre-transformation by u = , where is the mass
specic free Helmholtz energy, yields an alternative form of this inequality, where the
dissipation T = is introduced, as
T = : d (

+

)
1
q grad
x
0. (2.73)
A stronger formulation can be stated by dividing this inequality into the Clausius-
Planck-inequality, which describes the local dissipation T
loc
, and into the Fourier-
inequality, which describes the conductive dissipation T
con
, i.e.
T
loc
= : d (

+

) 0 and T
con
=
1
q grad
x
0. (2.74)
After some manipulations we obtain the Clausius-Planck-inequality and the Fourier-
inequality in the material framework as
T
loc
= gP :

F
0
(

+

) 0 and T
con
=
1
Q grad
X
0. (2.75)
2.3.7 Inuence of the ALE formulation
Finally we will derive the local balance laws in the referential framework. This will
be done by replacing the material time derivative in Equations (2.53), (2.57), (2.66)
and (2.74) by the time derivative in terms of the referential conguration, given in
Equation (2.20). These are the typical forms of the balance laws, when written in an
ALE-context:
mass balance:
_
m
+ grad
x
c
_
+ div
x
x = 0
balance of linear momentum:
_
v
t
m
+ grad
x
v c
_
= div
x
+ b
balance of energy:
_
u
t
m
+ grad
x
u c
_
= : d div
x
q + r
Clausius Planck inequality:
T
loc
= : d
_
m
+ grad
x
c +
_
m
+ grad
x
c
_
_
0
(2.76)
We must remark, that only by replacing the material time derivatives we do not
obtain a conservative form of the balance laws. To bring them into such an conservative
form they have to be written completely with respect to the referential domain /,
shown e.g. in Benson [10, 11], Gosh & Kikuchi [30], Wall [95] or Belytschko
et al [9].
But since we will later use an operator splitting technique to solve the problem, see
Chapter 5.1, the whole deformation is split into a Lagrangian and an Eulerian phase.
Then we will make use of exactly these balance equations given in Equation (2.76).
Chapter 3
Constitutive Model: Finite Strain
Plasticity
In this chapter we want to introduce a formulation for isotropic plasticity at nite
strains based on the multiplicative decomposition of the deformation gradient into its
elastic and plastic contribution. The discussion follows the presentations in Simo [80],
Simo & Miehe [83], Miehe [61], Simo & Hughes [82] and its applications, e.g. de
Souza Neto et al [18, 19], Most [63] or Most et al [64].
The elastic domain E is specied by means of a yield criterion expressed in terms
of the stress dened in the spatial conguration of the body as
E :=
_
(, ) R
7
: (, ) 0
_
. (3.1)
Here is the Kirchho stress and is a scalar stress-like isotropic hardening va-
riable. The scalar valued function is assumed to be convex and is commonly referred
to as the yield function.
The principle of invariance under superimposed rigid body motion restricts the yield
function to be an isotropic function of the Kirchho stress
(QQ
T
, ) = (, ) Q SO(3). (3.2)
3.1 Kinematic relations for the Multiplicative De-
composition
The proper generalization of the additive decomposition of the innitesimal theory to
nite strains is motivated by the structure of the single crystal metal plasticity models,
and takes the form of the local multiplicative decomposition
F(X, t) = F
e
(X, t)F
p
(X, t), (3.3)
37
Chapter 3 Constitutive Model: Finite Strain Plasticity 38
where X is the placement of a material point in the material conguration B.
From a micromechanical point of view F
p
is an internal variable related to the amount
of dislocation ow through the crystal lattice and F
e1
is from a phenomenological
standpoint the stress-free unloaded conguration. As shown in Figure (3.1), the plastic
deformation gradient F
p
and its plastic counterpart F
e
are dened by
F
p
:
_
T
X
B T
B
dX d

X = F
p
dX
and F
e
:
_
T
B T
x
o
d

X dx = F
e
d

X.
(3.4)
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
X
X
X
x
x
C
p1
b
e
G
F
F
T
F
p
F
e
F
pT
F
eT
T
X
B
T
X
B
T
B
T
B
T
x
o
T
x
o
Figure 3.1: Representation of the multiplicative decomposition of the
deformation gradient into its plastic and elastic contribution
For our subsequent development it will be sucient to consider the two strain
measures
C
p1
:= F
p1
G
1
F
pT
and b
e
:= F
e
G
1
F
eT
, (3.5)
where we have introduced the metric

G of the intermediate conguration

B. From
Figure (3.1) one observes, that the plastic metric C
p
is the pull back of the metric

G
from the intermediate conguration to the material conguration, whereas the elastic
nger tensor b
e
is the inverse of the push forward of

G from the intermediate congu-
ration to the spatial conguration. It is also obvious, that the elastic nger tensor b
e
can be expressed in terms of the plastic metric C
p
. That can be interpreted, that b
e
is
the push forward of the inverse of the plastic metric, namely C
p1
, from the material
conguration to the spatial conguration., i.e.
b
e
:= FC
p1
F
T
. (3.6)
The Jacobian map, see Chapter 2.1.3, provides us with the relationship of the size
of the volume elements in the dierent congurations. We set
J
p
:= det [F
p
] =
_
det
_
C
p1
_
1/2
and J
e
:= det [F
e
] = (det [b
e
])
1/2
, (3.7)
where we have introduced the plastic Jacobian J
p
and the elastic Jacobian J
e
.
With these denitions the total Jacobian J can be expressed in terms of J
p
and J
e
as
J = J
e
J
p
.
Finally, the following relations will play a central role in our subsequent develop-
ment. Time dierentiation of Equation (3.6) gives
b
e
= l b
e
+b
e
l
T
+L
v
b
e
with L
v
b
e
:= F

C
p1
F
T
, (3.8)
where l =

FF
1
is the velocity gradient and L
v
b
e
is denoted as the Lie-derivative
(or Oldroyd rate) of the elastic nger tenser b
e
.
3.2 Free Energy and Local Dissipation
In the present context, consistent with the restrictions to isotropy implied by the elastic
domain, it will be further assumed that the free energy is independent of the orien-
tation of the intermediate conguration. The restriction imposed by frame invariance
along with the isotropy assumption implies the following functional form for the free
energy
=

(b
e
, ), (3.9)
where is denoted as scalar internal variable describing the isotropic hardening.
Constitutive equations consistent with this assumed form for the free energy are derived
by exploiting the second law of thermodynamics.
From Equation (2.75) we obtain the dissipation inequality for the isothermal case
T = : d

0, (3.10)
where we have used the equivalence of gP :

F and : d, which was shown in
Equation (2.68). Furthermore we changed the mass specic free energy of Equation
(2.75) into a volume specic one. Time dierentiation of the free energy, given in
Equation (3.9), yields
=

b
e
:

b
e
+

=

b
e
:
_
l b
e
+b
e
l
T
+L
v
b
e

=

b
e
b
e
:
_
2d + (L
v
b
e
) b
e1
,
(3.11)
where we have used 2d = l +l
T
, the symmetry of /b
e
and the fact that /b
e
and b
e
commute due to the assumption of isotropy. Insertion of

into Equation (3.10)
yields
T =
_
2

b
e
b
e
_
: d +
_
2

b
e
b
e
_
:
_
1
2
(L
v
b
e
) b
e1
_
0. (3.12)
Since Equation (3.12) must hold for all admissible processes, in particular for any
choice of d, we obtain the expression for the Kirchho stress
:= 2

b
e
b
e
. (3.13)
Furthermore setting :=
, where we have introduced per denition the internal

hardening force variable dual to the internal hardening variable , the dissipation
inequality, see Equation (3.12), takes the form
T = :
_
1
2
(L
v
b
e
) b
e1
_
+ 0. (3.14)
3.3 Principle of Maximum Dissipation
Now we will dene suitable evolution equations for the internal variables to comple-
te the constitutive theory of nite strain plasticity. We make use of the principle of
maximum dissipation, which states that the total dissipation in the material attains a
maximum. Under the assumption that (, ) E is the actual distribution of Kirchho
stress and internal variables in a plastically deformed body, we generalize the princi-
ple of maximum dissipation by requiring that the actual state (, ) E renders a
maximum of the dissipation function in Equation (3.14). Equivalently, the inequality
[
] :
_
1
2
(L
v
b
e
) b
e1
_
+ [
] 0 (3.15)
is assumed to hold for all admissible (
) E. Equation (3.15) denes a cons-

trained optimization problem with inequality constraints. Maximizing the dissipation
can be obtained by minimizing the negative dissipation subjected to the constrained
0. To this end we dene a Lagrange function
L := T + = :
_
1
2
(L
v
b
e
) b
e1
_
+ stat. (3.16)
Here is the Lagrange multiplier which enforces the constraint 0. Then the
ow rules can be obtained by
L
= 0
1
2
(L
v
b
e
) =
_
_
b
e
L
= 0 =
,
(3.17)
along with the Kuhn-Tucker loading/unloading conditions, given by
0, (, ) 0 and (, ) = 0. (3.18)
Insertion of Equation (3.8) into Equation (3.17)
1
yields the following form of the ow
rule, which will be used in the subsequent development of the numerical implementation
of the nite strain plasticity model
C
p1
= 2 F
1
_
_
b
e
F
T
= 2
_
F
1
_
_
F
_
C
p1
,
(3.19)
where we have used Equation (3.6) to proceed from Equation (3.19)
1
to Equation
(3.19)
2
.
3.4 Summary: Finite Strain Plasticity in Tensor No-
tation
We summarize the constitutive equations for the material model of nite strain plasti-
city, which was derived in the previous chapters, in Table (3.1).
Table 3.1: Finite strain plasticity in tensor notation
Free energy: =

(b
e
, )
Elastic strain measure: b
e
= F
e
G
1
F
eT
= FC
p1
F
T
Stresses: = 2

b
e
b
e
Isotropic hardening force: =
Yield function: =

(, )
Evolution equation:

C
p1
= 2
_
F
1
_
F
_
C
p1
=
Loading/unloading conditions: 0, (, ) 0 and (, ) = 0

Dissipation: T = :
_
1
2
(L
v
b
e
) b
e1
+ 0
3.5 Numerical Implementation
In this section we examine the numerical implementation of the model problem by the
use of an operator split procedure. Let t 0 be the numerical time step. Then [ ]
n
represents a quantity at time t
n
and [ ]
n+1
represents a quantity at time t
n+1
:= t
n
+t.
Assume that the variables F
n
, b
e
n
,
n
, which dene the constitutive response of the
material, are known at time t
n
.
3.5.1 Integration of the Flow Rules
The goal is now to discretely integrate the plasticity evolution equations, producing
stresses and internal variables at time t
n+1
from the initial conditions at time t
n
.
We choose an exponential approximation for the evolution of the plastic metric
C
p1
of Equation (3.19). This choice is motivated by the solution of the rst order
linear problem
z(t) = Az(t) in [t
n
, t
n+1
], (3.20)
given by z(t
n+1
) = exp[t A
n+1
] z(t
n
), where z(t
n
) = z(t)[
t=t
n
and z(t
n+1
) =
z(t)[
t=t
n+1
with t
n+1
:= t
n
+ t, where an implicit scheme was used since A is de-
termined at t = t
n+1
. Based on this solution the exponential approximation in time for
C
p1
yields
C
p1
n+1
= exp
_
2
n+1
tF
1
n+1
_
n+1
n+1
_
F
n+1
_
C
p1
n
= F
1
n+1
exp
_
2
n+1
_
n+1
n+1
__
F
n+1
C
p1
n
.
(3.21)
Insertion of Equation (3.21), where we set
n+1
t =:
n+1
, into Equation (3.6)
yields the elastic nger tensor
b
e
n+1
= exp
_
2
n+1
_
n+1
n+1
__
F
n+1
C
p1
n
F
T
n+1
. (3.22)
For the evolution of the hardening variable of Equation (3.17)
2
, we choose a
backward Euler dierence scheme, which yields
n+1
=
n
+
n+1
n+1
n+1
. (3.23)
3.5.2 The Elastic Predictor
From a physical standpoint this problem is obtained by freezing the plastic ow, which
means
n+1
= 0, and taking an incremental elastic step, which ignores the constraint
placed on the stress by the yield criterion. So the elastic predictor leads to the elastic
trial state, which is summarized in Table (3.2).
Observe that we used the total deformation gradient F
n+1
to compute the trial-
state of the elastic nger tensor b
e,trial
n+1
. In Figure (3.2) we can see, that F
n+1
can
be expressed in terms of the incremental deformation gradient f
n+1
which relates the
conguration o
n
at time t = t
n
with the conguration o
n+1
at time t = t
n+1
.
F
n+1
= f
n+1
F
n
(3.24)
Insertion of this expression of the total deformation gradient into the second Equa-
tion of Table (3.2) yields an expression for the trial state of the elastic nger tensor
b
e,trial
n+1
in terms of the incremental deformation gradient f
n+1
as
b
e,trial
n+1
= f
n+1
F
n
C
p1
n
F
T
n
f
T
n+1
= f
n+1
b
e
n
f
T
n+1
,
(3.25)
Table 3.2: The Elastic Predictor
C
p1,trial
n+1
= C
p1
n
b
e,trial
n+1
= F
n+1
C
p1
n
F
T
n+1
trial
n+1
= 2

n+1
b
e,trial
n+1
b
e,trial
n+1
trial
n+1
=
n
trial
n+1
=
n+1
trial
n+1
trial
n+1
=
_
trial
n+1
,
trial
n+1
_
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
X
x
n
x
n+1
B
o
n
o
n+1
F
n
F
n+1
f
n+1
b
e
n
,
n
, detF
n
b
e
n+1
,
n+1
, detF
n+1
Figure 3.2: Total and incremental deformation gradient

where we introduced the elastic nger tensor b
e
n
at time t = t
n
as
b
e
n
= F
n
C
p1
n
F
T
n
. (3.26)
We can see that in an Total Lagrange computation F
n+1
and C
p1
n
are used to
compute b
e,trial
n+1
. So from the rst plastic step on, the plastic metric must be stored.
On the other hand in an Updated Lagrange formulation the incremental deformation
gradient f
n+1
and the elastic nger b
e
n
are used to compute b
e,trial
n+1
. The drawback of
this formulation is the necessity of the storage of b
e
from the very rst step on. So in an
elastic computation b
e
must be stored in every step, whereas no plastic metric occurs
and so no storage of C
p1
n
has to be carried out in an Total Lagrange formulation.
Finally the discrete version of the model is completed by appending the discrete
version of the Kuhn-Tucker complementary conditions given by
n+1
0,
n+1
(
n+1
,
n+1
) 0 and
n+1
n+1
(
n+1
,
n+1
) = 0. (3.27)
As in the linear theory, the systematic exploitation of these unilateral constraint
conditions produce the appropriate return-mapping algorithm. Two alternative situa-
tions may arise:
Elastic Step:
First consider the case for which
n+1
0. Then the trial elastic state with
n+1
= 0 satises the Kuhn-Tucker conditions. Thus the trial elastic step is the
solution at time t
n+1
.
n+1
=
trial
n+1
n+1
=
trial
n+1
(3.28)
Plastic Step:
Alternatively, consider the case for which
n+1
> 0. It follows that
trial
n+1
is non
admissible and therefore cannot be the solution at time t
n+1
. It can be concluded
solely on the basis of the trial elastic state according to the conditions
trial
n+1
:
_
0 elastic step =
n+1
= 0
> 0 plastic step =
n+1
> 0,
(3.29)
whether the trial state is elastic or plastic. So if the yield function
trial
n+1
> 0 the
trial state must be corrected. This correction is the second step in the operator
splitting procedure, which will be done by the plastic corrector.
3.5.3 The Plastic Corrector
The plastic ow
n+1
can be computed by demanding that the yield criterion at time
t
n+1
must be equal to zero (
n+1
= 0), which implies a state of the material point
on the yield surface. Then the corrected values can be computed by insertion of the
computed plastic ow
n+1
into the equations summarized in Table (3.3). The solution
is obtained by solving a nonlinear system of equations with a linearized Newton scheme.
Table 3.3: The Plastic Corrector
C
p1
n+1
= F
1
n+1
exp
_
2
n+1
_
n+1
n+1
__
F
n+1
C
p1,trial
n+1
b
e
n+1
= exp
_
2
n+1
_
n+1
n+1
__
b
e,trial
n+1
n+1
= 2
n+1
b
e
n+1
b
e
n+1
n+1
=
trial
n+1
+
n+1
n+1
n+1
n+1
=
n+1
n+1
3.6 Spectral Decomposition
As a result of the restriction to isotropy, the principle directions of the Kirchho stress
tensor and the elastic nger tensor b
e
coincide and their respective spectral decom-
position take the form
b
e
=
3
A=1
(
e
A
)
2
m
A
m
A
=
3
A=1
(
A
)
2
m
A
m
A
,
(3.30)
where (
e
A
)
2
, m
A
and (
A
)
2
, m
A
are the eigenpairs of b
e
and , respectively.
Since the yield function is an isotropic function of the Kirchho stress the following
relationship also holds:
=
3
A=1
A
m
A
m
A
(3.31)
Insertion of these terms into the second equation of Table (3.3) yields, after swit-
ching the exponential term onto the left hand side,
3
A=1
exp
_
2

A
_
(
e
A
)
2
m
A
m
A
=
3
A=1
_
e,trial
A
_
2
m
e,trial
A
m
e,trial
A
. (3.32)
From the uniqueness of the spectral decomposition one concludes
m
A
= m
e,trial
A
and exp
_
2

A
_
(
e
A
)
2
=
_
e,trial
A
_
2
. (3.33)
Therefore the principle directions m
A
associated with the nal state coincide with
the directions m
e,trial
A
dened by the trial elastic state and the return mapping al-
gorithm takes place at xed principal axis dened by the trial state. Now we can
reformulate this last expression, leading to a formal structure identical to the return
mapping algorithms of the innitesimal theory, now formulated in the principle stress
space. The principal elastic logarithmic stretches are dened by
e
A
:= log (
e
A
) and
e,trial
A
:= log
_
e,trial
A
_
. (3.34)
Insertion of Equation (3.34) into Equation (3.33) leads to the identical structure of
small strain backward Euler plasticity update. The hardening parameter computed by
the fourth equation given in Table (3.3) is mentioned due to completeness.
e
A
=
e,trial
A

A
and =
trial
+
(3.35)
Due to the assumption of isotropy, the free energy is simply a function of the
three principal logarithmic elastic stretches
e
A
. The relationship = 2(/b
e
)b
e
may
be written in principal values as
3
A=1
A
m
A
m
A
=
3
A=1
2

(
e
A
)
2
(
e
A
)
2
m
A
m
A
. (3.36)
Since the principal directions are identical on both sides, this implies
A
= 2

(
e
A
)
2
(
e
A
)
2
. (3.37)
Using the chain rule and insertion of Equation (3.34) leads to the expression for the
principal Kirchho stresses
A
=

e
A
. (3.38)
Thus the principal values of the Kirchho stress may be viewed as functions of the
principal logarithmic elastic stretches.
3.7 Summary: Finite Strain Plasticity in Spectral
Decomposition
Finally we summarize the constitutive equations for the material model of nite strain
plasticity dened in terms of its spectral decomposition, which will be the basis for
an extension of a small strain nite element programme to nite strain plasticity. The
summary is given in Table (3.4).
Table 3.4: Finite strain plasticity in spectral decomposition
Free energy: =

(
e
A
, )
Elastic logarithmic strain:
e
A
= log (
e
A
)
Stresses:
A
=

e
A
Isotropic hardening force: =
Yield function: =

(
A
, )
Evolution equation:
e
A
=

A
=
Loading/unloading conditions: 0, (
A
, ) 0 and (
A
, ) = 0
Dissipation: T =
A

e
A
+ 0
An example for the free energy function

and the yield criterion

is given in Table
(3.5), where > 0 and > 0 are the Lame constants and H() is a function which
characterizes isotropic hardening.
dev
A
is the so called deviatoric part of the principal
Kirchho stress
A
, dened by
dev
A
=
A
1
3
(
1
+
2
+
3
) , (3.39)
and y
0
is the yield stress.
Table 3.5: An Example for the free energy function and the yield criterion
(
e
A
, ) =
1
2
[
e
1
+
e
2
+
e
3
]
2
+
_
(
e
1
)
2
+ (
e
2
)
2
+ (
e
3
)
2
+ H ()
(
A
, ) =
_
_
dev
1
_
2
+
_
dev
2
_
2
+
_
dev
3
_
2
_
2
3
(y
0
)
3.8 Inuence of the ALE formulation
Until now nothing has been said about the inuence of the ALE formulation on the
material model under consideration.
We will proceed like in Chapter 2.3.7, where we derived the balance laws in the
framework of the referential conguration starting from the balance laws in the frame-
work of the material or spatial conguration. Going through the algorithm of Chapter
3 reveals that time derivatives only occur in the ow rules, which have the form
L
v
b
e
=

b
e
l b
e
b
e
l
T
= 2
_
_
b
e
=
.
(3.40)
Since these ow rules are only used in the Corrector step, only this step is inuenced
by changing to the framework of the referential conguration. Like in Chapter 2.3.7 we
replace the material time derivatives in Equation (3.40) by the derivatives in terms of
the referential conguration, given in Equation (2.20), which yields
b
e
t
m
+ grad
x
b
e
c = l b
e
+b
e
l
T
2
b
e
m
+ grad
x
c =
.
(3.41)
With these ow rules, now dened in terms of the referential conguration, the
Kirchho stress tensor can be computed. To obtain the Cauchy stress tensor ,
the Kirchho stresses must be divided by the determinant of the deformation gradient
detF, which gives us information about the volume change between the material and
the spatial conguration, which is shown in Chapter 2.1.3, where this volume map was
derived. Since our computational domain is the reference conguration, special care
has to be taken by computing this volume map.
This is the reason why detF is computed via numerical time integration of the well
known relationship
(detF)
= detF div
x
v. (3.42)
Insertion of the time derivative in terms of the referential conguration accounts
now for the convective eects
(detF)
t
m
+ grad
x
(detF) c = (detF) div
x
v. (3.43)
Numerical time integration, which introduces errors of the order of those done in
the plastic corrector, nally yields to the corrected value of the determinant of the
deformation gradient in terms of the referential conguration.
One observes the identical structure of Equations (3.41) and (3.43). If Equation
(3.41)
1
is written for each component of the elastic nger tensor b
e
, we can combine
Equations (3.41) and (3.43) in the form of one common scalar dierential equation
1
t
m
+ grad
x
1 c = q, (3.44)
where 1 is from now on a reference to all components of the elastic nger tensor
b
e
, to the internal hardening variable and to the volume map detF. We will denote
1 as a stress like internal history variable. The right hand side of Equation (3.44) can
be computed for each internal variable solely on the basis of the right hand side of
Equations (3.41) and (3.43), respectively.
Chapter 4
Initial Boundary Value Problem
It is now everything prepared to dene the Initial Boundary Value Problem (IBVP)
which we want to solve by the use of the ALE formulation. After dening the strong
form of the problem its weak form is derived by multiplying it with test functions and
integrating it over the spatial domain o. Then all dependent variables in the weak
form are approximated as functions of the element coordinates and the relevant nite
element matrix equations are derived. Two solution procedures will be shown where
we will restrict ourself to the uncoupled solution strategy.
4.1 Problem Denition
The basis of any mechanical IBVP in the framework of the material description is the
balance of linear momentum. In the framework of the referential conguration we also
have to consider the mass balance and the constitutive equations, which are dened as
partial dierential equations in the case of the referential description.
mass balance:
_
m
+ grad
x
c
_
= div
x
v
balance of linear momentum:
_
v
t
m
+ grad
x
v c
_
= div
x
+ b
constitutive equation:
_
1
t
m
+ grad
x
1 c
_
= q 1
(4.1)
51
Chapter 4 Initial Boundary Value Problem 52
4.2 Strong Form of the IBVP
Our goal is to nd functions (m, t), v(m, t), v
m
(m, t), (m, t) and 1(m, t) fullling
the mass- and linear momentum balance in the spatial domain o and satisfying the
constitutive equations as well as the boundary- and initial conditions of the problem.
We choose here the velocity v as primary unknown variable in the balance of linear
momentum. This will later yield to a weak form of the problem denoted as principle
of virtual power. It would be also possible to dene the displacements u as primary
unknown variables, which would lead to a weak form known as principle of virtual
work. Whether the displacement or the velocity is considered to be used as unknown
variable is a matter of taste since the displacement eld can be obtained by the time
integral of the velocity. The strong form of the IBVP is summarized in Table (4.1).
Table 4.1: Strong form of the IBVP
Find functions (m, t), v(m, t), v
m
(m, t), (m, t) and 1(m, t) such that the
balance laws
_
m
+ grad
x
c
_
= div
x
v,
_
v
t
m
+ grad
x
v c
_
= div
x
+ b
and the constitutive equations
_
1
t
m
+ grad
x
1 c
_
= q 1
are fullled, and such that the boundary conditions
t = n =

t on o
t
and v = v on o
v
,
where o
t
o
v
= o and o
t
o
v
= 0, and the initial conditions
(X, 0) =
0
(X) and v (X, 0) = v
0
(X)
are satised!
In the general case boundary conditions are required for the density , velocities
v and the stresses . The boundary conditions for the density and the stresses in
the referential description depend on whether the material is owing in or out at the
boundary. Since we only consider boundaries where there is no ow, there is no need
for boundary conditions for the density and the stresses.
4.3 Weak Form of the IBVP
In the weak form one does not investigate the mass balance and the balance of linear
momentum itself, but the integral of these balance laws over the spatial domain o
multiplied with test functions , v and 1. Clearly, there must be some relationship
between the strong and weak version of the problem, or else there would be no point
in introducing the weak form. It turns out that the weak and strong solutions are
identical, which is shown e.g. in Washizu [99], Hughes [44] or Linder [52].
4.3.1 Weak Form of the balance of mass
Since mass conservation is enforced in the referential description as a partial dierential
equation, a weak form needs to be developed. Let the trial solution be C
0
, then
the weak form of the balance of mass can be obtained by integrating the strong form
of the mass balance, given in Table (4.1), over the spatial domain o and multiplying
it with a test function C
0
. This yields
_
S

_
m
+ grad
x
c + div
x
v
_
dv = 0
_
S

t
m
dv +
_
S
c grad
x
dv +
_
S
div
x
v dv = 0.
(4.2)
In this equation only rst derivatives with respect to the mass density and the
velocity v appear. So there is no need for integration by parts.
4.3.2 Weak Form of the balance of linear momentum
The weak form of the linear momentum balance is obtained by multiplying the strong
form, given in Table (4.1), by the test function v U
0
, where U
0
= v [ v
C
0
(m), v = 0 on o
v
with o
v
as the boundary, where the velocities are prescribed.
Let the trial solution be v U, where U = v [ v C
0
(m), v = v on o
v
. Integration
over the spatial domain o then yields
_
S
v
_
v
t
m
+ grad
x
v c
_
dv =
_
S
v (div
x
+ b) dv
_
S
v
v
t
m
dv +
_
S
v c grad
x
v dv =
_
S
v div
x
dv +
_
S
v b dv.
(4.3)
Contrary to the derivation of the weak form of the mass balance, here we have to
integrate the rst term on the right hand side by parts, since we want to eliminate the
derivatives of the stresses. This step is crucial since, as a result, the stresses can be
C
1
functions. As a consequence, if the constitutive equation is smooth, the velocities
need only be C
0
. This yields to the weak form of the balance of linear momentum in
the form
_
S
v
v
t
m
dv +
_
S
v c grad
x
v dv =
_
S
grad
x
v dv +
_
S
v b dv +
_
S
t
v
t da.
(4.4)
4.3.3 Weak Form of the constitutive equation
In the same way as for the balance laws, the weak form of the constitutive equation can
be derived by multiplying the strong form, given in Table (4.1), with test functions 1
and multiplying it over the spatial domain o.
_
S
1
_
1
t
m
+ grad
x
1 c
_
dv =
_
S
1 q dv 1
_
S
1
1
t
m
dv +
_
S
1 grad
x
1 c dv =
_
S
1 q dv 1
(4.5)
4.4 Finite Element Discretization
The nite element discretization transforms a contiguous IBVP into an algebraic sy-
stem of equations for the discrete nodal values of a given nite element mesh. We
will approximate all dependent variables in the weak form of the mass- and linear
momentum balance as functions of the element coordinates. The referential domain
is subdivided into elements and for each element e the referential coordinates m are
given by
m (
e
) =
e
(
e
) =
n
e
node
I=1
N
I
(
e
) m
I
, (4.6)
where
e
are the parent element coordinates of element e, I stands for the node I
and N are the shape functions for the referential coordinates. We assume, that these
coordinates are known throughout the deformation process. In Chapter 5.3 it will be
shown, how they are computed. From Equation (2.7)
2
the spatial position x(m, t) of
the mesh point m can be computed by
x (m, t) = x (m (
e
) , t) = x (
e
, t) =
n
e
node
I=1
N
I
(
e
) x
I
(t) , (4.7)
where x
I
describes the spatial position of the nodes I. This represents a compo-
sition of two mappings, namely the mapping of the parent element to the referential
conguration and the mapping of the referential conguration to the spatial one, which
can be observed from Figure (4.1).
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
X
B
B
e
t
x
o
o
e
t
m
/
/
e
material
conguration
spatial
conguration
parent element
e
Figure 4.1: Finite Element Discretization
The velocity of the mesh point v
m
(m, t) is given by
v
m
=
(m, t)
t
=
x(m, t)
t
=
n
e
node
I=1
N
I
(
e
) x
I
(t) =
n
e
node
I=1
N
I
(
e
) v
I
m
(t). (4.8)
In the framework of the referential conguration also the density, the stresses and
the stress like internal history variables are dependent variables. Thus they are appro-
ximated by
(
e
, t) =
n
e
node
I=1
N
I
(
e
)
I
(t)
(
e
, t) =
n
e
node
I=1
N
I
(
e
)
I
(t)
1 (
e
, t) =
n
e
node
I=1
N
I
I
(
e
) 1
I
(t),
(4.9)
where N
I
, N
I
and N
I
I
are the shape functions for the density, stresses and internal
variables, which may dier from the shape functions for the velocity N
I
. It is noted,
that because convective terms appear in the balance of mass and balance of linear
momentum and the constitutive equation, a Galerkin nite element formulation will
encounter numerical instabilities. One approach to overcoming these instabilities is the
Petrov-Galerkin formulation, where the test-shape functions of the density, stresses and
internal variables dier from the shape functions of the density, stresses and internal
variables itself.
In Equation (2.19)
2
we derived the physical acceleration
a(m, t) =
v
t
m
+ grad
x
v c (4.10)
in terms of the referential conguration combined with a spatial gradient. Once
v/ t[
m
is known, the physical acceleration can be obtained by Equation (4.10). Inte-
gration in time gives the physical velocity v(m, t)and in a similar way the convective
velocity c(m, t) can be obtain by
v(m, t) = v (m (
e
) , t) = v (
e
, t) =
n
e
node
I=1
N
I
(
e
) v
I
(t)
c(m, t) = c (m (
e
) , t) = c (
e
, t) =
n
e
node
I=1
N
I
(
e
) c
I
(t).
(4.11)
Applying Equation (2.14) to the above approximation for the physical velocity v,
the mesh velocity v
m
and the convective velocity c yields
c (
e
, t) =
n
e
node
I=1
N
I
(
e
)
_
v
I
(t) v
I
m
(t)
_
. (4.12)
With all these denitions in hand we can now derive the nite element matrix equa-
tions - see e.g. Bartsch [5] or Luenberger [58] for an introduction and application
of such matrix equations - for the balance of mass, the balance of linear momentum
and the constitutive equations.
4.4.1 FE-matrix equations for the balance of mass
Insertion of the approximation of the physical velocity v, given in Equation (4.11)
1
,
and the density , given in Equation (4.9)
1
, into the weak form of the mass balance,
given in Equation (4.2), yield the so called continuity equation
M
d
dt
+L
+K
= 0,
with M
=
_
S
N
T
N
dv, L
=
_
S
N
T
c
dN
dx
dv, K
=
_
S
N
T
div
x
vN
dv.
(4.13)
4.4.2 FE-matrix equations for the balance of linear momen-
tum
Insertion of the approximation of the physical and the convective velocity v and c,
given in Equation (4.11), and the density and the stresses , given in Equation
(4.9)
1,2
, into the weak form of the balance of linear momentum, given in Equation
(4.4), yields
M
dv
dt
+Lv +f
int
= f
ext
,
with
M =
_
S
N
T
Ndv,
L =
_
S
N
T
c
dN
dx
dv,
f
int
=
_
S
dN
T
dx
dv,
f
ext
=
_
S
N
T
bdv +
_
S
N
T
t da.
(4.14)
4.4.3 FE-matrix equations for the constitutive equation
In the same way we obtain by insertion of the convective velocity c from Equation
(4.11)
2
, the stresses and the internal variables 1 from Equation (4.9)
2,3
the nite
element matrix equations for the constitutive equations from the weak form given in
Equation (4.5) as
M
I
dI
dt
+L
I
I = q I,
with M
I
=
_
S
N
I
T
N
I
dv, L
I
=
_
S
N
I
T
c
dN
I
dx
dv.
(4.15)
4.4.4 Summary of the ALE-matrix equations
The relevant equations of the previous Chapters 4.4.1-4.4.3 can be summarized and
are shown in Table (4.2).
Table 4.2: Finite element matrix equations in the ALE description
Balance of Mass:
M
d
dt
+L
+K
= 0,
with M
=
_
S
N
T
N
dv, L
=
_
S
N
T
c
dN
dx
dv, K
=
_
S
N
T
div
x
vN
dv.
Balance of Linear Momentum:
M
dv
dt
+Lv +f
int
= f
ext
,
with
M =
_
S
N
T
Ndv,
L =
_
S
N
T
c
dN
dx
dv,
f
int
=
_
S
dN
T
dx
dv,
f
ext
=
_
S
N
T
bdv +
_
S
N
T
t da.
Constitutive Equations:
M
I
dI
dt
+L
I
I = q I,
with M
I
=
_
S
N
I
T
N
I
dv, L
I
=
_
S
N
I
T
c
dN
I
dx
dv.
4.4.5 Special Case: Eulerian Formulation
Since we have derived the nite element matrix equations in the framework of the
referential conguration, the Eulerian case is included in this formulation by setting
= id, which yields to m = x. The only dierence in the derived matrix equations
summarized in Table (4.2) are related to the convective velocity, since c = v in the Eu-
lerian case. This yields the coupled equations for the Eulerian formulation summarized
in Table (4.3).
Table 4.3: Finite element matrix equations in the Eulerian description
Balance of Mass:
M
d
dt
+L
+K
= 0,
with M
=
_
S
N
T
N
dv, L
=
_
S
N
T
v
dN
dx
dv, K
=
_
S
N
T
div
x
vN
dv.
M
dv
dt
+Lv +f
int
= f
ext
,
with
M =
_
S
N
T
Ndv,
L =
_
S
N
T
v
dN
dx
dv,
f
int
=
_
S
dN
T
dx
dv,
f
ext
=
_
S
N
T
bdv +
_
S
N
T
t da.
M
I
dI
dt
+L
I
I = q I,
with M
I
=
_
S
N
I
T
N
I
dv, L
I
=
_
S
N
I
T
v
dN
I
dx
dv.
4.4.6 Special Case: Lagrangian Formulation
The Lagrangian Formulation is of course also embedded in the referential description,
namely by setting = id, which yields m = X and c = 0. Thus the coupled equati-
ons become uncoupled, since the mass balance in the Lagrangian case is given by an
algebraic equation. The mass matrix M is therefore constant throughout the whole
computation, since
M =
_
S
N
T
Ndv =
_
B
0
N
T
0
N
0
dV. (4.16)
So the remaining nite element matrix equations deal with the balance of linear
momentum and the constitutive equation which are shown in Table (4.4).
Table 4.4: Finite element matrix equations in the Lagrangian description
M
dv
dt
+f
int
= f
ext
,
with M =
_
S
N
T
Ndv,
f
int
=
_
S
dN
T
dx
dv,
f
ext
=
_
S
N
T
bdv +
_
S
N
T
t da.
M
I
dI
dt
= q I,
with M
I
=
_
S
N
I
T
N
I
dv.
4.5 Solution Procedures
In Chapter 4.4 we derived the coupled nite element matrix equations for the balance
of mass and the balance of linear momentum. We also derived the equations describing
the coupling with the constitutive equations. There are now two dierent possibilities
to solve these equations:
4.5.1 Fully Coupled Solution
In this type of solution of the problem no further simplications are considered. The
fully coupled equations are solved in common. Such an approach was used in the work
of Belytschko & Kennedy [7], Liu [53], Hughes et al [47], Huerta & Liu [41],
Nomura & Hughes [67], Yamada & Kikuchi [102], Wall & Ramm [96, 97] and
Wall [95]. In this work we will not use this fully coupled approach since its accuracy
advantage over the uncoupled solution, which will be derived next, remains largely
theoretical. Furthermore we want to upgrade a standard Lagrangian Finite Element
programme to the ALE case with as little expenditure as possible. That means we want
to include the Lagrangian computation as a substep of the new ALE computation which
will be possible by the application of an uncoupled solution which will be described
next.
4.5.2 Uncoupled Solution
As the name suggests, we do not consider the fully coupled equations in this approach.
We decouple the whole process based on an operator split, see e.g Benson [10, 11].
As a result the deformation process is split into a Lagrangian phase and an Eulerian
phase combined with a Smoothing phase. In the Lagrangian phase convective eects are
neglected. The material body deforms from its material conguration to its spatial one.
Nodes and quadrature points correspond to material points in this framework which
may lead eventually to a high distortion of the spatial discretization after the Lagran-
gian step and the breakdown of the computation. Especially in large strain plasticity
models this situation is commonly observed. To reduce this distortion a smoothing
phase is applied next, which leads to the nal spatial discretization. This allows the
computation of the mesh velocity which then leads to the convective velocity by the use
of Equation (2.14). This convective velocity serves as the basis for the third step, the
so called Eulerian phase. Contrary to the Lagrangian phase here all convective eects,
caused by the smoothing phase due to the dierence of the physical velocity and the
mesh velocity, are considered.
Based on this operator split procedure a decoupling of the deformation process
occurs. Standard time integration schemes can now be used to handle the relevant
equations. In this work we will only use explicit time integration schemes. An extensi-
ve journey on explicit and implicit time integration schemes is given e.g. in Kuhl [49],
Hughes [44] or Zienkiewicz & Taylor [103]. E.g. we can use the so called predictor-
corrector method derived by Hughes & Liu [46, 45], for the Lagrangian phase, which
is also used in Hughes et al [47], Donea et al [22], Liu et al [54], Baaijens [4],
Pijaudier et al [69] and Belytschko et al [9]. This kind of predictor corrector
method is similar to the Newmark algorithm. The major dierence is that the former
algorithm is explicit, while the Newmark algorithm is implicit. The time integration
of the Eulerian phase will be done by the use of a Taylor-Galerkin method, see Do-
nea [20], Donea & Quartapelle [23] or Zienkiewicz & Taylor [104], which is
the nite element equivalent of the Lax Wendro scheme developed in the nite die-
rence context. Also dierent approaches to handle the Eulerian phase are common, see
e.g. Tamamidis [86], Helm et al [91] or Haaren [92].
Special care has to be taken with respect to the time integration of the constitutive
equations, often denoted as stress update, since the stress eld is usually discontinuous
across the elements due to the fact that stress values are only evaluated at discrete
integration points, which normally lie inside the element. To handle this diculty ad-
ditionally to the Lax-Wendro scheme a second approach, namely the Godunov scheme,
will be used for the stress update.
A standard procedure in nonlinear solid mechanics consists of dropping the equation
of mass balance, thus solving only the momentum balance, see Pijaudier et al [69],
Huerta & Casadei [39], Huerta et al [40], Rodr
iguez-Ferran et al [72] and

Rodr
iguez-Ferran et al [74]. By the use of this simplication the coupling bet-

ween the balance of mass and balance of linear momentum is circumvented. Following
the arguments of Rodr
iguez-Ferran et al [74] rst assume that the density is

constant. The mass balance, shown in Table (4.1), then becomes
div
x
v = 0, (4.17)
which is the well known incompressibility condition. This simplied version of the
mass balance is also commonly neglected in solid mechanics, since
elastic deformations typically induce very small changes in volume and
plastic deformations are isochoric or volume preserving.
Thus changes in density are negligible and Equation (4.17) automatically holds to a
sucient approximation without the need of adding it to the set of governing equations.
So the only balance law that needs to be solved is the linear momentum balance
M
dv
dt
+Lv +f
int
= f
ext
, (4.18)
where the mass matrix M is now constant throughout the whole deformation pro-
cess.
By further restricting ourself to the quasistatic case, where inertia forces v are
negligible with respect to the other forces in the linear momentum equation ( v
div
x
+b), a further simplication can be introduced. As a consequence the dierent
descriptions for the material time derivative of v, shown in Chapter (2.1.2) do not
inuence the balance of linear momentum and so there is no inuence of the arbitrarily
chosen mesh velocity v
m
and thus of the convective velocity c. With this simplication
the linear momentum of Equation (4.18) reduces to
f
int
= f
ext
, (4.19)
where f
int
will be again correctly treated by the stress update procedure. As a conse-
quence a quasistatic analysis can be upgraded from an Updated Lagrange formulation
to an ALE description at near zero computational cost because the additional features
of the ALE computation with respect to the Updated Lagrange computation can be
performed by means of explicit algorithms, which have a negligible computational cost
in the context of implicit time stepping. The implementation of the ALE-method for
quasistatic processes was shown in Rodr
iguez-Ferran & Huerta [73], Gadala &

Wang [26], Martinet & Chabrand [60] or Velasco [93].
In our subsequent development of the ALE formulation which follows in Chapter
5 we will make use of the simplication which yields to the uncoupling between the
balance of mass and the balance of linear momentum, but we will not make use of the
simplication which yields to the quasistatic case. We will discuss the fully transient
dynamic analysis, where the extra computational cost per time step of an ALE compu-
tation is no longer negligible. But one should keep in mind that the ALE formulation
allows for larger time steps than the purely Lagrangian formulation since the nite
elements do not become as distorted as in a Lagrangian computation.
Chapter 5
Uncoupled ALE Formulation
In the previous chapters we derived everything needed for the subsequent development
of the ALE description. We will restrict ourself to the solution of the uncoupled ALE
formulation, using the simplication where we assume the mass density to be con-
stant. This results in the uncoupling of the mass balance and the balance of linear
momentum as described in Chapter 4.5.2. First we will illustrate how the operator
split is used to uncouple the relevant equations. Then the three phases, which follow
from the operator split procedure, namely the Lagrangian phase, the Smoothing phase
and the Eulerian phase, are presented. Finally it will be shown, how the whole process
of the ALE formulation can be implemented into a standard Lagrangian nite element
code.
5.1 The Operator Split
Operator splitting is a convenient method for breaking complicated problems into a
series of less complicated problems, see Benson [10, 11]. An operator split decouples
the various physical phenomena in the governing equations to obtain simpler equati-
ons which are solved more easily. Applications of the operator splitting technique are
common in mathematics and continuum mechanics. E.g. we already used this method
for the derivation of our nite strain plasticity model in Chapter 3, where we divided
the whole problem into an elastic predictor and a plastic corrector. So we will also
make use of this technique in the development of the uncoupled ALE formulation. In
exchange for a certain loss of accuracy, the operator split oers a generic advantage,
namely simpler equations, which lead to simpler and stable algorithms designed for
each decoupled equation according to the dierent physical characteristics.
The linear advection equation with a source term provides a convenient way to
illustrate how the operator split is used in ALE formulations, since all our relevant
equations, see Equation (4.1), have been prepared to hold the identical structure. The
linear advection equation
64
Chapter 5 Uncoupled ALE Formulation 65
t
+ c
x
= f with (x, 0) =
0
(x), (5.1)
contains the eld variable , the constant ow velocity c and the source term f. The
operator split breaks this equation into two equations which can be solved sequential:
t
= f and

t
+ c
x
= 0 (5.2)
The rst equation, denoted as the Lagrangian equation, contains the source term
f and the second one, denoted as the Eulerian equation, takes into consideration the
constant ow velocity c. Based on the results of this operator splitting the solution of
this linear advection equation proceed in the following phases:
5.1.1 Lagrangian Phase
We obtain the solution of the Lagrangian phase by the use of Taylor-series expansion
of the eld variable in the domain, where we start our calculation.
L
n+1
=
n
+

n
t
X
t with

n
t
X
= f (5.3)
The derivative of the eld variable at time t
n
with respect to time t was set equal
to the source term f on the basis of the Lagrangian equation of the operator split, see
Equation (5.2)
1
.
In Equation (5.3) we can see the explicit structure of the Lagrangian time inte-
gration. Instead of the one step method in Equation (5.3) more accurate integration
schemes like the predictor-corrector method derived by Hughes & Liu [46, 45], which
was described in Chapter 4.5.2 or the so called central dierence method e.g described
in Belytschko et al [9], can be applied. For the implementation of the ALE for-
mulation into a standard Lagrangian Finite Element programme one will use the time
integration scheme which is already implemented - either it is an explicit or implicit
scheme - since no dierence to a standard Lagrangian code occurs in the Lagrangian
phase of the ALE formulation. Since our aim is to describe the ALE formulation and
not to give a journey on time integration schemes, we use this simple one step method
to hold the equations clear.
5.1.2 Smoothing Phase
Between the Lagrangian and the Eulerian phase there is a rezoning procedure in order
to reduce distortions in the spatial conguration. The algorithm should produce smoo-
ther meshes without redening the element connectivity. Simple methods are briey
introduced in Chapter 5.3. The basic common features of these methods are:
Boundary nodes are required to remain on the boundary, since this is the main
advantage of the ALE formulation compared to the Eulerian one. This can be
obtained by allowing only a tangential movement to the boundary of these nodes.
Mesh distortion is controlled by moving inner nodes in an appropriate way.
As a result we obtain the mesh velocity v
m
or the mesh displacement u
m
, which can
be used to compute the convective velocity c as given in Equation (2.14). This convec-
tive velocity will be used in the next step. For a transient analysis it can be directly
computed as the dierence of the physical velocity v
L
n+1
computed in the Lagrangian
phase and the mesh velocity v
m,n+1
computed in the Eulerian phase
c
n+1
= v
L
n+1
v
m,n+1
. (5.4)
On the other hand for a quasistatic analysis the convective velocity, which is assu-
med to be constant within the time step, is computed as
c
n+1
=
_
u
L
n+1
u
m,n+1
_
/t. (5.5)
5.1.3 Eulerian Phase
The last step in our operator splitting technique maps the solution of the Lagrangian
phase onto the new mesh, which was developed through the smoothing phase. A taylor-
series expansion around the Lagrangian state provides us with the nal solution of the
problem
n+1
=
L
n+1
+

L
n+1
t
m
t +
1
2
L
n+1
t
2
m
t
2
. (5.6)
The computation of the derivative of the Lagrangian solution of the eld variable
with respect to time can now be determined by the use of the Eulerian equation (5.2)
2
.
A well known method for solving this problem is the Taylor-Galerkin method, the
nite element equivalent of the Lax-Wendro scheme, which was developed in the
nite dierence context and is discussed e.g. in LeVeque [51].
Information about the Taylor-Galerkin method can be found e.g. in Donea [20],
Donea & Quartapelle [23] or Zienkiewicz & Taylor [104]. Since this scheme
is often simply denoted as Lax-Wendro scheme in the ALE nite element community,
we will also do so throughout the further work, although it should be denoted as a
Taylor-Galerkin method in this context.
In this method the original problem, see Equation (5.2)
2
is substituted into the
Taylor-series expansion, shown in Equation (5.6). Then, based on Equation (5.2)
2
, the
time derivative of the Lagrangian solution of the eld variable can be expressed as
L
n+1
t
m
= c
i
L
n+1
x
i
and

2
L
n+1
t
2
m
= c
i
c
j
L
n+1
x
i
x
j
. (5.7)
5.1.4 Application to the ALE formulation
From Chapter 1.1.2 we know that we want to solve the physical motion
t
of the mate-
rial body from its material conguration B to its spatial conguration o by introducing
a so called reference conguration /. This reference conguration is understood to be
dened by a xed mesh in the context of the nite element formulation. In this nite
element context the material and the spatial domain B and o of the material body are
parameterized in time t. In this way we introduce the notation
B
t
:=
t
(/) and o
t
:=
t
(/) (5.8)
for the parameterized material and spatial domains, respectively. Again it should be
noted that in contrast to the time independent physical domain B, dening the material
conguration of the material body, its parameterization B
t
is now time dependent. This
context is illustrated in Figure (5.1).
We now want to make use of the operator splitting technique described in the
previous chapters to obtain the Uncoupled ALE formulation. Like in Chapter 1.1.5 we
consider the example where a circular plate is pulled horizontally which then becomes
elliptical to illustrate the uncoupling. We subsequently go through the three mentioned
phases, namely the Lagrangian-, the smoothing- and the Eulerian phase, which are
shown in Figure (5.2).
In the Lagrangian phase no convective eects are considered, which means that the
parameterization of the material domain in the Lagrangian phase B
L
t
is set equal to
the reference domain / at the beginning of the time step under consideration. Due
to the physical motion
L
t
, which is identical to the mesh motion
L
t
in this phase, we
obtain the parameterization of the spatial domain of the solid in the Lagrangian phase
o
L
t
. This context is illustrated in Figure (5.2a).
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
X
x
B
o
m
B
t
o
t
/
R
3
t
t
material
conguration
spatial
conguration
Figure 5.1: The ALE-kinematics
It can be observed that high distorted nite elements may occur in the spatial do-
main after the Lagrangian phase. These deformed elements are now improved during
the Smoothing phase, while keeping the physical motion constant, e.g.
t
=
L
t
. Re-
member that boundary nodes should remain on the boundary while the inner nodes
are moved in order to reduce these element deformations. After the smoothing phase
we obtain the nal parameterization of the spatial domain o
t
, which is illustrated in
Figure (5.2b), and is clearly an improvement compared to the parameterization of the
spatial domain o
L
t
after the Lagrangian phase.
It should be clear that the mesh motion
t
is now no longer equal to the physical
motion
t
, since we moved the spatial position x
L
of the material point X
L
to its
nal spatial position x, which now corresponds to the material point X dierent from
X
L
and m. So by changing the spatial parameterization from o
L
t
to o
t
we also create
a new material parameterization B
t
, which now diers from B
L
t
and /. Actually the
problem shown in Figure (5.2c) is now solved, when embedding the operator splitting
technique to the ALE formulation.
In the third step, the so called Eulerian phase, the convective eects introduced due
to the movement of the spatial position x
L
to x must be considered. All velocities v
L
n+1
and internal variables 1
L
n+1
computed during the Lagrangian phase must be convected
from the Lagrangian position x
L
to the nal position x of the spatial parameterizati-
on. This will be done by computing the convective velocity c
n+1
as the dierence of
the physical velocity v
L
n+1
, computed in the Lagrangian phase, and the mesh velocity
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
Pu
o
Pt
m = X
L
/ = B
L
t
x
L
o
L
t
m
m
/
/
x
x
o
t
o
t
X
B
t
L
t
=
L
t
t
t
t
a) Lagrangian Phase b) Smoothing Phase
c) Solved Problem
Figure 5.2: Application of the Operator Splitting Technique on the ALE
formulation a) Lagrangian Phase, b) Smoothing Phase and c) Actual
Problem, which is solved in the Uncoupled ALE formulation
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
Pu
o
Pt
m
/
x
L
o
L
x
o
L
a
g
r
a
n
g
i
a
n
P
h
a
s
e
E
u
l
e
r
i
a
n
-
a
n
d
S
m
o
o
t
h
i
n
g
P
h
a
s
e
ALE Step
v
n
, 1
n
v
L
n+1
, 1
L
n+1
v
n+1
, 1
n+1
Figure 5.3: Decomposition of the ALE-step into a Lagrangian Pha-

se and an Eulerian Phase combined with a Smoothing Phase without
considering the nal material parameterization
v
m,n+1
, computed in the smoothing phase, without explicitly computing the nal ma-
terial parameterization B
t
. So the nal solution is the spatial parameterization o
t
of
the material body where all relevant variables have been convected from the spatial
parameterization of the Lagrangian phase to the nal one. Figure (5.3) shows that the
whole ALE-step can be divided into the Lagrangian- and the Eulerian phase combined
with a smoothing phase and comes along without the computation of B
t
.
A dierent approach has been used in Armero & Love [1, 2]. They used a direct
interpolation of the motion of the material with respect to the reference conguration
together with the motion of the spatial mesh with respect to the same reference con-
guration. The nal material parameterization is obtained exactly through a particle
tracking strategy in the reference mesh after the smoothing phase has been applied.
Due to this approach the material parameterization is known throughout the whole
computation and therefore the total deformation gradient can be used which yields to
a Total Lagrange formulation in the Lagrangian phase.
We will proceed in our further development of the Uncoupled ALE formulation
like it is illustrated in Table (5.1). We will describe the three mentioned phases which
result from the operator splitting technique in the following chapters.
5.2 The Lagrangian Phase
In Chapter 4.3 we derived the weak form of the IBVP. Since all integrations are carried
out over the spatial conguration o of the material body, the choice of the material
conguration B for the next time step is arbitrary. That means it could be either
the conguration at the beginning of the whole deformation process, often denoted
as initial conguration, or any intermediate conguration. If we choose the spatial
conguration of the last time step as the material conguration for the current time
step, this approach is denoted as Updated-Lagrange formulation, whereas the use of
the initial conguration as the current material conguration is referred to as Total-
Lagrange formulation. It should be clear, that a weak form of the IBVP derived in
the material description restrict the presentation to a total Lagrangian one, since all
integrations are carried out over the initial conguration, which of course has the benet
that no update has to be performed.
Since we prepared everything needed for such an Updated-Lagrange formulation
we will always use the nal equilibrium reached in the last spatial conguration as
the material conguration for the next time step. In the Uncoupled ALE formulation
the parameterization of the spatial conguration of the last time step is smoothed
during the smoothing phase which then yields to a well distributed parameterization
of the material conguration, which is of course equal to the reference conguration
in the beginning of the next time step. An illustration is given in Figure (5.4), where
we again do not consider the nal material parameterization at the end of each time
step, since we use the Updated Lagrange formulation and only need the nal spatial
parameterization of the last time step to proceed.
Table 5.1: Flowchart of the Uncoupled ALE formulation
Eulerian Phase (see Chapter 5.4)
Determine the nal solution for v and 1:
v
n+1
= v
L
n+1
+
d v
L
n+1
d t
m
t
I
n+1
= I
L
n+1
+
I
L
n+1
t
m
t I
Smoothing Phase (see Chapter 5.3)
Determine the mesh velocity v
m
via a smoothing
algorithm to obtain the convective velocity c:
c
n+1
= v
L
n+1
v
m,n+1
Lagrangian Phase (see Chapter 5.2)
Determine the Lagrangian solution for v and 1:
v
L
n+1
= v
n
+
d v
n
d t
X
t
I
L
n+1
= I
n
+
I
n
t
X
t I
?
Time
Update
v
n
v
n+1
I
n
I
n+1
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
Pu
o
Pt
m
n
/
n
x
L
n
o
L
n
x
n
=: m
n+1
o
n
=: /
n+1
x
L
n+1
o
L
n+1
x
n+1
o
n+1
L
a
g
r
a
n
g
i
a
n
P
h
a
s
e
n
E
u
l
e
r
i
a
n
-
a
n
d
S
m
o
o
t
h
i
n
g
P
h
a
s
e
n
ALE Step n
ALE Step n + 1
L
a
g
r
a
n
g
i
a
n
P
h
a
s
e
n
+
1
E
u
l
e
r
i
a
n
-
a
n
d
S
m
o
o
t
h
i
n
g
P
h
a
s
e
n
+
1
ALE Step n ALE Step n + 1
Figure 5.4: Illustration of the Updated Lagrange Formulation used in
the Lagrangian Phase of the ALE formulation
As we know from Chapter 5.1, convective eects are completely neglected in the
Lagrangian phase, which implies c = 0. Due to the physical motion
t
, which is
therefore equal to the mesh motion
t
, we obtain the parameterization of the spatial
conguration of the material body o
L
t
. Based on Equation (5.3) we will now develop
the Lagrangian solution of the velocities v
L
n+1
and the stress related internal variables
1
L
n+1
.
5.2.1 Lagrangian solution of the velocities
By the use of Equations (4.14) and (5.3) we obtain the Lagrangian solution of the
velocities in terms of a discrete matrix formulation as
v
L
n+1
= v
n
+
d v
n
d t
X
t with
d v
n
d t
X
= M
1
n
_
f
ext
n
f
int
n
_
.
(5.9)
5.2.2 Lagrangian solution of the internal variables
The components of the elastic nger tensor b
e
, the hardening variable and the deter-
minant of the deformation gradient det F, must be considered if we talk about internal
variables 1. By the use of Equations (4.15) and (5.3) we obtain
1
L
n+1
= 1
n
+
1
n
t
X
t with
1
n
t
X
= q. (5.10)
5.2.3 Summary of the Lagrangian Phase
Finally, by the use of Table (4.4), the discrete equations and internal force algorithm
for the Lagrangian phase is summarized in Table (5.2). Again it has to be remarked
that the weak form was obtained by an integration over the spatial domain and that
we will use the smoothed spatial conguration of the last time step as the material
conguration for the time step under consideration. So we will use the incremental
deformation gradient, often denoted as f to compute the elastic nger tensor b
e
which
is then used to compute the Kirchho stress , which further yields to the Cauchy
stress tensor , which is nally used to compute the internal force vector f
int
.
Table 5.2: Discrete Equations of the Updated Lagrange formulation
M
dv
d t
+f
int
= f
ext
Mass Matrix:
M =
_
S
N
T
Ndv =
_
B
0
N
T
0
N
0
dV
Internal Nodal Forces:
f
int
=
_
S
dN
T
dx
dv =
_
S
B
T
dv with B
T
=
dN
T
dx
External Nodal Forces:
f
ext
=
_
S
N
T
bdv +
_
S
N
T
t da
Internal nodal force computation for one element:
1. set f
int
= 0
2. for all integration points i of the element:
(a) compute B
T
=
dN
T
dx
(b) compute f = B
T
u
(c) compute = ( (b
e
(f ))) by the constitutive law
(d) compute f
int
+ =
_
S
B
T
dv
5.3 The Smoothing Phase
Between the Lagrangian and the Eulerian phase there is a rezoning procedure in order
to reduce distortions in the spatial conguration. Various methods can be found in lite-
rature. See e.g. Winslow [101], Thompson et al [88, 89], Cavendish [16], Herr-
mann [34], Brackbill & Saltzman [13], Benson [10, 11], Rehle [71], Knupp [48]
or Sarrate & Huerta [75] for common smoothing procedures.
In the following we will restrict ourself to very simple methods, namely the Laplacian
Based Approach and the Element Area Based Approach:
5.3.1 Laplacian Based Approach
This is one of the most popular and simple smoothing strategy, described e.g. in Ca-
vendish [16], Herrmann [34] or Rehle [71].
Since we do not want to go into detail about these smoothing procedures we already
present here the nal equation, with which the Laplacian smoothing ends up for each
node i:
x
i
=
1
(2 w)N
N
e=1
(x
e1
+x
e2
wx
e3
) (5.11)
x
i
stands for the spatial position of node i. N > 0 is the number of four-node
elements connecting the node under consideration, where typically N = 4. For each
element 1 e N, let x
e1
and x
e2
be the coordinates of the nodes of element e
connected to x
i
by an edge. On the other hand x
e3
is the coordinate of the node of
element e at the opposite corner of x
i
. Figure (5.5) depicts this context, where the
spatial position after the Lagrangian phase x
L
i
is smoothed and nally ends up with
the spatial position x
i
.
P
P
P
P
P
B
B
B
B
B
s s s
s s
s s s
s
x
e3
x
e2
x
e1
x
L
i
e = 1 e = 2
e = 4 e = 3
-
Smoothing
Phase
s s s
s s s
s s s
x
i
Figure 5.5: Denitions of the Laplacian Based Approach
Setting w = 0 yields the commonly used Laplacian scheme. Then for each node of
the nite element mesh Equation (5.11) must be satised. It should be noticed, that
the remeshing of the free surface nodes only allows a tangential sliding of the boundary
nodes along material surfaces. The weighting factor 0 w 1 was introduced by
Herrmann [34].
5.3.2 Element Area Based Approach
In this approach, which was published by e.g. Bremer [14] or Sezer & Zeid [77],
a modication of the Laplace Smoothing is applied. The node under consideration
becomes now the centroid of all connected elements. Additionally the dierent element
areas are taken into consideration. Thus the iteration produces elements with similar
element areas.
We also do not go into detail for the Element Area Based Approach and present
the nal equation, which has to be fullled for each node i:
x
i
=
N
e=1
A
e
x
S,e
N
e=1
A
e
(5.12)
x
S,e
is the location of the centroid of element e. A
e
is the area of this same element
and N > 0 is again the number of four-node elements connecting the node under
consideration. Figure (5.6) depicts this context.
P
P
P
P
P
B
B
B
B
B
s s s
s s
s s s
s
x
L
i
c c
c c
x
S,1
x
S,2
x
S,4
x
S,3
-
Smoothing
Phase
s s s
s s s
s s s
x
i
Figure 5.6: Denitions of the Area Based Approach
5.3.3 Application to the ALE formulation
Finally all mesh smoothing procedures provide us with the smoothed spatial position
x
n+1
of the nodes. This position can then be used to compute the mesh displacement
u
m,n+1
and the mesh velocity v
m,n+1
as
u
m,n+1
= x
n+1
x
n
and v
m,n+1
= (x
n+1
x
n
) /t.
The result can then be used to compute the convective velocity c
n+1
as given in
Equation (2.14). For a transient analysis it can be directly computed as the dierence
of the material and the mesh velocity
c
n+1
= v
L
n+1
v
m,n+1
. (5.13)
On the other hand for a quasistatic analysis the convective velocity, which is assu-
med to be constant within the time step, is computed as
c
n+1
=
_
u
L
n+1
u
m,n+1
_
/t. (5.14)
5.4 The Eulerian Phase
The last part of the operator splitting technique includes the remap of the solution
of the Lagrangian phase onto the new mesh, which was developed through the mesh
smoothing algorithms, shown in Chapter 5.3. In this Eulerian phase all convective
eects are considered. Based on Equations (5.6) and (5.7), we will compute the nal
solution of the velocities v
n+1
and the stress related internal variables 1
n+1
from the
solution of the Lagrangian phase v
L
n+1
and 1
L
n+1
, respectively. Additionally to the Lax-
Wendro scheme, which was introduced in Chapter 5.1.3, we will consider a second
approach for the update of the stress related internal variables, namely the so called
Godunov approach, which will be presented in Chapter 5.4.2.
5.4.1 Final solution of the velocities
By the use of Equations (4.14), (5.6), (5.7) and (5.9) and omitting terms of order
O(t
2
) in Equation (5.6) we obtain the nal solution of the velocities in terms of a
discrete matrix formulation as
v
n+1
= v
L
n+1
+
d v
L
n+1
d t
m
t with
d v
L
n+1
d t
m
=
_
M
L
n+1
_
1
L
L
n+1
v
L
n+1
.
(5.15)
5.4.2 Final solution of the internal variables
In order to complete the problem, in addition to the velocities all stress-related internal
variables must be updated. Since we are dealing here with history- or path-dependent
materials and due to the fact that dierent material points have dierent histories,
these quantities must be updated in order to compute the stress-state in the next time
step. Compared to the Lax-Wendro-update of velocities these history variables are
computed at discrete integration points, which normally lie inside the element. This
yields a discontinuous stress eld, which produces troubles, since spatial gradients of
these variables are required, as we have seen in Chapter 5.1.3.
To overcome these diculties, a smooth gradient eld is obtained by a least square
projection to successfully apply the Lax-Wendro scheme. Additionally we will consider
a second possibility for the time integration of the stress update, namely the Godunov
scheme. In the Godunov scheme there is no need to compute history variable gradients,
and so the problems, which occur for the Lax-Wendro scheme are not present in this
approach.
As for the update of the velocities in Chapter 5.4.1 a Taylor-series expansion around
the Lagrangian state provides us with the nal solution of the stress related internal
history variables
1
n+1
= 1
L
n+1
+
1
L
n+1
t
m
t +
1
2
2
1
L
n+1
t
2
m
t
2
. (5.16)
It is now our task to compute the derivatives of the Lagrangian solution of the
internal variable with respect to time by the use of the two mentioned methods, namely
the Lax-Wendro- and the Godunov-scheme:
Lax-Wendro Scheme
As for the velocities we insert the original problem, see Equation (5.2)
2
, into the Taylor-
series expansion of Equation (5.16) to exchange the derivatives with respect to time
into derivatives with respect to the spatial coordinate. Contrary to the update of the
velocities we consider here also terms of order t
2
. From Equation (5.7) we obtain
1
L
n+1
t
m
= c
i
1
L
n+1
x
i
and

2
1
L
n+1
t
2
m
= c
i
c
j
2
1
L
n+1
x
i
x
j
. (5.17)
Insertion of these derivatives into Equation (5.16) yields
1
n+1
= 1
L
n+1
c
i
1
L
n+1
x
i
t +
1
2
c
i
c
j
2
1
L
n+1
x
i
x
j
t
2
. (5.18)
In this equation, both the spatial gradient of the internal variable and the derivatives
of this gradient are required to solve the problem. Since the internal variables are
computed at discrete integration points inside the elements we do not have a smoothed
eld of this spatial gradient of the internal variable.
To obtain a smoothed eld an explicit interpolation procedure, based originally in
a classical least squares projection of minimizing the square of the distances between
the discontinuous gradients of the internal variables 1
L
n+1
/ x
i
and a new introduced
smoothed gradient eld is employed. See e.g. Faires [25] for a devise on least square
projections. The relationship between these variables is shown in Figure (5.7b). The
minimizing problem has the form
L :=
_
S
L
_
grad
x
1
L
n+1
_
2
dv Min. (5.19)
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
t c
1
L
n+1
1
L
n+1
1
n+1
I
L
n+1
x
L
n+1
a) solution of the Lagrangian phase c) nal Solution

b) smoothed gradient
1
n+1
= 1
L
n+1
t c +
+
1
2
t
2
c
2

x
Figure 5.7: Illustration of the Lax Wendro scheme for 1D, a) soluti-
on of the Lagrangian Phase, b) dierence between the gradient of the
internal variable I
L
n+1
/ x
L
n+1
and the smoothed gradient eld and
c) nal solution of the internal variable
By the use of standard nite element shape functions for the introduced smoothed
gradient eld and since the necessary condition L/ = 0 must hold we obtain the
expression
L
= 0
_
S
L
N
I
_
N
J

J
grad
x
1
L
n+1
_
dv = 0
_
S
L
N
I
N
J
dv
J
=
_
S
L
N
I
grad
x
1
L
n+1
dv.
(5.20)
Finally, letting o
L
= o
e
L
, we specialize Equation (5.20) to the spatial domain of
one element e. Then by the use of partial integration and the integral theorem at the
right hand side of Equation (5.20)
2
we obtain
_
S
e
L
N
I
N
J
dv
J
=
_
S
e
L
1
L
n+1
(grad
x
N
I
) dv +
_
S
e
L
N
I
1
L
n+1
n
e
da, (5.21)
where o
e
L
is the boundary of o
e
L
and n
e
is the outward normal to the boundary
of element e. The assembly of the last equation results in the linear set of equations
M = , (5.22)
where M is a consistent mass matrix, is a vector of nodal smoothed values of the
stress gradient and the independent vector is dened as
=
e
_
_
S
e
L
1
L
n+1
(grad
x
N
I
) dv +
_
S
e
L
N
I
1
L
n+1
n
e
da
_
. (5.23)
To compute the integrals along element boundaries, the scalar eld 1
L
n+1
is extra-
polated from the quadrature points to the nodes using quadrature point based shape
functions, see e.g. Gee [27].
Since an explicit procedure is sought, the consistent matrix M of Equation (5.22)
is substituted by a lumped matrix, which has the form
M =
_
S
e
L
N
I
N
J
dv M
lump
:=
e
_
S
e
L
N
I
dv. (5.24)
A devise for a systematic and mathematically acceptable procedure for such lumping
can be found in Zienkiewicz & Taylor [103]. After this modication can be
computed by solving a trivial system of equations with a diagonal system matrix.
Having solved for , the quadrature point values of and grad
x
are computed by
nodal interpolation in standard nite element fashion as
i
() =
n
e
node
I=1
N
I
()
I
i
and

j
x
i
() =
n
e
node
I=1
N
I
x
i
()
I
j
. (5.25)
Since 1
L
n+1
is required at the quadrature points, a collocation technique is used to
handle the weak form of Equation (5.18). This results for each quadrature point in
1
n+1
() = 1
L
n+1
() t c
i
()
i
() +
1
2
t
2
c
i
() c
j
()

j
()
x
i
. (5.26)
Like in Huerta et al [40] or Rodr
guez-Ferran et al [72] a special mention

must be made relative to planes or axes of symmetry. Since the stress related component
1
L
n+1
is symmetric relative to an axis or plane of symmetry, the normal component of
the gradient must be set to zero. This can be easily done since the gradient is a nodal-
based variable. The symmetry condition simply imposes a boundary condition of the
computation of this gradient. In the same way if the node is on an external material
surface with prescribed displacements impose zero gradients along the direction of the
prescribed displacements. Finally if the node is on an external material surface with
prescribed stress, evaluate correctly the surface integral in Equation (5.23) but zero
out the gradients of the stress related component.
Finally a owchart of the Lax-Wendro update technique for the internal variables
is presented in Table (5.3).
Table 5.3: Flowchart of the Lax-Wendro update technique
1. Starting point is the solution of the internal variables 1
L
n+1
after the Lagrangian
phase. Furthermore the convective velocity c
n+1
has been determined in the
smoothing phase according to c
n+1
= v
L
n+1
v
m,n+1
.
2. Compute the lumped mass matrix M
lump
by the use of Equation (5.24).
3. Loop over all stress related internal history variables 1:
(a) Compute the independent vector by the use of Equation (5.23).
(b) Take into consideration the boundary conditions and change the
independent vector in a suitable way.
(c) Solve the linear set M = to obtain the vector of smoothed
nodal gradients .
(d) Interpolate stress gradient and its spatial derivative from nodes to
quadrature points with the aid of shape functions by the use of Equation
(5.25).
(e) Employ the one step Lax-Wendro method, which was derived in
Equation (5.26) to nd the nal solution of the internal variables 1
n+1
.
Godunov Scheme
The Godunov approach will come along without the computation of a spatial gradient,
which causes diculties in the Lax-Wendro scheme. Here we will develop a direct
expression for the derivatives of the Lagrangian solution of the internal variable with
respect to time. This will lead to a considerably simpler and more ecient implemen-
tation in the code.
We start by transforming Equation (5.2)
2
into conservative form using the denition
of the stress-like velocity product Y := 1
L
n+1
c
n+1
for a component of 1
L
n+1
, which yields
1
L
n+1
t
+ div
x
Y = 1
L
n+1
div
x
c
n+1
,
since div
x
Y = div
x
_
1
L
n+1
c
n+1
_
= grad
x
1
L
n+1
c
n+1
+1
L
n+1
div
x
c
n+1
.
(5.27)
One-point-quadrature
Godunovs method, which was developed in the context of nite volumes, assumes a
piecewise constant eld of the solution of the internal variable 1
L
n+1
after the Lagrangian
phase. In the nite element framework, this is the situation if one-point quadratures
are employed. Godunovs method is then directly applicable. With the use of piecewise
constant stress weighting functions the weak form of Equation (5.27)
1
reads by the
use of the integral theorem on the term div
x
Y
_
S
e
L
1
L
n+1
t
dv =
_
S
e
L
1
L
n+1
div
x
c
n+1
dv
_
S
e
L
(Y n
e
) da. (5.28)
Since is arbitrary and 1
L
n+1
is assumed to be constant throughout the element,
which implies also a constant derivative of 1
L
n+1
with respect to time, we obtain by
re-inserting Y = 1
L
n+1
c
n+1
and by the use of the integral theorem on the rst term on
the right hand side of Equation (5.28)
1
L
n+1
t
_
S
e
L
dv = 1
L
n+1
_
S
e
L
c
n+1
n
e
da
_
S
e
L
_
1
L
n+1
c
n+1
_
n
e
da. (5.29)
By splitting the boundary integrals in Equation (5.29) into its element sides and
by the use of the obvious result
_
S
e
L dv = v we obtain
1
L
n+1
t
=
1
v
N
s
s=1
___
S
e
L
c
n+1
n
e
da
_
_
1
L
s,n+1
1
L
n+1
_
_
, (5.30)
where 1
L
s,n+1
is the internal variable component along the side s of the element
under consideration, N
s
stands for the total number of sides of the element and v is
the volume of the element. Now we will introduce the ux of convective velocity
f
s
:=
_
S
e
L
c
n+1
n
e
da. (5.31)
Since the internal variable 1
L
n+1
is constant inside the element, 1
L
s,n+1
is constant
along each side s of the element. Now the total ux along one side can be introduced
as
F
s
:= 1
L
s,n+1
f
s
. (5.32)
For the computation of 1
L
s,n+1
we take into account the incoming and outgoing
information, thus we also need - additionally to the value of the internal variable in the
element under consideration, namely 1
L
n+1
- an information about the constant value
of the internal variable in the element contiguous to the present one across the side s
under consideration, namely 1
cL
n+1
, which is illustrated in Figure (5.8). Then 1
L
s,n+1
can
be computed by
1
L
s,n+1
:=
1
2
_
_
1 +
0
sign(f
s
)
_
1
L
n+1
+
_
1
0
sign(f
s
)
_
1
cL
n+1
_
, (5.33)
where we have introduced an upwind parameter
0
with the range 0
0
1.
The case
0
= 1 corresponds to a full-donor approximation, while
0
= 0 is a centered
approximation.
Insertion of Equations (5.33) and (5.31) into Equation (5.30) yields the generalized
time integration scheme for each element
1
L
n+1
t
=
1
v
N
s
s=1
_
f
s
_
1
2
_
_
1 +
0
sign(f
s
)
_
1
L
n+1
+
_
1
0
sign(f
s
)
_
1
cL
n+1
_
1
L
n+1
__
=
1
2 v
N
s
s=1
_
f
s
_
1
cL
n+1
1
L
n+1
_
_
1
0
sign(f
s
)
_
_
.
(5.34)
This result for the derivative of the internal variable with respect to time can now
be directly inserted into Equation (5.16), where we will, contrary to the Lax-Wendro
scheme, only consider the rst derivative. This yields the nal solution for the update
of the stress-like internal variable 1
L
n+1
by the use of the Godunov scheme
1
n+1
= 1
L
n+1
t
2 v
N
s
s=1
_
f
s
_
1
cL
n+1
1
L
n+1
_
_
1
0
sign(f
s
)
_
_
. (5.35)
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
1
L
n+1
1
cL
1,n+1
1
cL
2,n+1
1
cL
3,n+1
1
cL
4,n+1
s
1 s
2
s
3
s
4
Figure 5.8: Illustration of the dierent internal variables
For two dimensional problems we can introduce per denition the ux of convective
velocity over the line-boundary f
:=
_
e
c
n+1
n
e
dl and use this term in Equation
(5.35) which then yields by the use of a as the area of the element under consideration
1
n+1
= 1
L
n+1
t
2 a
N
=1
_
f
_
1
cL
n+1
1
L
n+1
_
_
1
0
sign(f
)
_
_
. (5.36)
Contrary to the Lax-Wendro scheme in the Godunov approach no averaging is
needed. As a consequence, the computational eciency is clearly improved. There is
actually also an important reduction in computer storage, since no extra variables or
matrices are needed. Only one loop over each internal variable after obtaining the
Lagrangian solution is necessary to update them by the use of the Godunov scheme.
Contrary to the Lax-Wendro scheme also no particular treatments along the bounda-
ries are needed.
The drawback of this method lies in the fact, that until now only constant internal
variable elds can be considered. But an extension to multiple-point-structures follows
in the next chapter.
Multiple-point-quadrature
An extension of the Godunov scheme for multiple-point-quadrature was developed in
Rodr
guez-Ferran [72] as an engineering-like extension of the one-point-quadrature

scheme.
The basic idea is to divide every nite element into various subelements, each of
them corresponding to the inuence domain of one quadrature point. If for instance
quadrilaterals with 22 integration points are employed, every element is divided into
4 subelements, which is shown in Figure (5.9).
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
node
quadrature point
1
L
n+1
Figure 5.9: Illustration of the Godunov scheme for Multiple-point-
quadrature
In every subelement 1
L
n+1
is assumed to be constant and represented by the quadra-
ture point value. By considering now a loop over all subelements the method derived
in the previous chapter can be directly applied and an improvement was obtained since
now the internal variable is no longer constant over the whole nite element.
The owchart of the ecient Godunov algorithm for multiple-point-quadrature is
given in Table (5.4).
Table 5.4: Flowchart of the Godunov update technique for Multiple-
Point-Quadrature
1. Starting point is the solution of the internal variable 1
L
n+1
after the
Lagrangian phase. Furthermore the convective velocity c
n+1
has been
determined in the smoothing phase according to c
n+1
= v
L
n+1
v
m,n+1
.
2. Loop over all subelements:
(a) Compute the volume v.
(b) Loop on sides of the subelement s:
i. Compute the ux of convective velocity across side f
s
according
to Equation (5.31).
ii. Loop over all stress related internal variables 1:
A. Compute jump across side
_
1
cL
n+1
1
L
n+1
_
for the internal
variable under consideration.
B. Add up the value of 1
L
n+1
/ t given in Equation (5.34)
2
by
the use of the volume, the ux of convective velocity and
the jump across side.
(c) Employ Godunovs method which was derived in Equation (5.35),
to nd the nal solution of the internal variables 1
n+1
.
5.5 Numerical Implementation of the Uncoupled
ALE formulation for Finite Strain Plasticity
The main purpose of this work is to show how a standard Lagrangian Finite Element
programme can be upgraded to the ALE-case for nite strain plasticity.
In Chapter 3 we derived everything needed for the implementation of the nite
strain plasticity model. The inuence of the ALE formulation on this material model
was shown in Chapter 3.8. After dening the initial boundary value problem in Chapter
4 we have chosen the so called Uncoupled ALE formulation to solve this problem. The
fully transient dynamic range has been considered based on an explicit time integration
scheme. The only simplication was introduced by demanding the mass density to
be constant, which further leads to an uncoupling between the balance of mass and the
balance of linear momentum as it was shown in Chapter 4.5.2.
This Uncoupled Solution is based on an operator split which was shown in Chapter
5.1. The application of this splitting technique on to the ALE formulation was shown
in Chapter 5.1.4, where the whole problem was subdivided into three phases, namely
the Lagrangian phase, the smoothing phase and the Eulerian phase. In the Lagrangian
phase the Lagrangian nite element programme, where the ALE-upgrade should be
performed can be used. Again it is noted here, that the proposed ALE formulation
uses a so called Updated Lagrange formulation in the Lagrangian phase. Because of this
eventually the Lagrangian programme must be changed from a Total- to an Updated
Lagrange formulation before implementing further ALE steps. Information concerning
the dierence between the Total- and Updated Lagrange formulation can be observed
from e.g. Bathe [6] or Belytschko et al [9].
This ALE-upgrade of course also diers due to the fact that dierent Lagrangi-
an codes with dierent time integration schemes serve as a basis. Nevertheless one
should use the time integration scheme already used in the Lagrangian nite element
programme where the upgrade is performed.
In this work the proposed method has been implemented in a nite element pro-
gramme used at the Institute of Structural Mechanics. This nite element code uses an
explicit one-step time integration. A detailed description can be found in Heidusch-
ke [33]. This simplied version of the time integration will help us to hold the equations
clear.
It is now everything prepared to start the numerical implementation of the ALE
formulation for nite strain plasticity. A owchart of the implementation is given in
Chapter 5.5.1 and further remarks on this owchart are made in 5.5.2. The owchart
subdivides the whole implementation into a Lagrangian phase, a smoothing phase, an
Eulerian phase and a second Lagrangian phase. This structure is identical the structure
used in Chapter 5.1.4. All equations used in the following owchart have already been
presented in this work. If additional information is required one should look for the
additional descriptions given in the previous chapters.
5.5.1 Flowchart of the Numerical Implementation
Lagrangian Phase (Part 1)
1. Time Update:
t
n+1
= t
n
+ t
2. Update nodal velocities:
v
L
n+1
= v
n
+ t a
n
3. Update nodal displacements:
x
L
n+1
= x
n
+ t v
L
n+1
4. Loop over all quadrature points:
(a) Compute the incremental deformation gradient:
f
L
n+1
= B
T
n
x
L
n+1
with B
T
n
=
dN
T
dx
n
(b) Compute the determinant of the incremental deformation gradient detf
L
n+1
.
(c) Compute the determinant of the total deformation gradient:
detF
L
n+1
= detF
n
detf
L
n+1
(d) Compute the elastic nger tensor and the hardening variable due to the
nite strain plasticity model:
i. Compute the trial state of the elastic nger tensor and the hardening
variable:
b
e,trial
L
n+1
= f
L
n+1
b
e
n
f
T
L
n+1
and
trial
L
n+1
=
n
ii. Compute the eigenvalues of the elastic nger tensor, namely
e,trial
L
A,n+1
.
iii. Compute the principal elastic logarithmic stretches:
e,trial
L
A,n+1
= log
_
e,trial
L
A,n+1
_
iv. Compute the eigenvalues of the Kirchho stresses and the internal har-
dening force in the trial state:
trial
A,n+1
=

n+1
e,trial
L
A,n+1
and
trial
n+1
=

n+1
trial
L
n+1
v. Check the yield criterion:
A. If
trial
n+1
0 Elastic Step:
e
L
A,n+1
=
e,trial
L
A,n+1
and
L
n+1
=
trial
L
n+1
B. If
trial
n+1
> 0 Plastic Step:
Solve the following nonlinear system of equations with an impli-
cit integration algorithm based on a linearized Newton-scheme by
enforcing the constraint
n+1
= 0:
e
L
A,n+1
e,trial
L
A,n+1
+
n+1
n+1
A,n+1
= 0
L
n+1
trial
L
n+1

n+1
n+1
n+1
= 0
_
_

e
L
A,n+1
,
L
n+1
vi. Compute the components of the elastic nger tensor:
e
L
A,n+1

e
L
A,n+1
b
e
L
n+1
Smoothing Phase
5. Compute the nal position of the nodes x
n+1
due to an arbitrary mesh smoothing
procedure.
6. Compute the mesh velocity:
v
m,n+1
= (x
n+1
x
n
) /t
7. Compute the convective velocity:
c
n+1
= v
L
n+1
v
m,n+1
Eulerian Phase
8. Update the internal variables 1 from their Lagrangian solution 1
L
n+1
to their nal
one 1
n+1
. The abbreviation 1 stands for the components of the elastic nger
tensor b
e
n+1
, the hardening variable
n+1
and the determinant of the deformation
gradient detF
n+1
. The update is performed with either the Lax Wendro- or the
Godunov-scheme.
(a) Lax Wendro-scheme:
i. Compute the lumped mass matrix:
M
lump
=
e
_
S
e
L
N
I
dv
ii. Loop over all internal variables 1:
A. Compute the independent vector:
=
e
_
_
S
e
L
1
L
n+1
(grad
x
N
I
) dv +
_
S
e
L
N
I
1
L
n+1
n
e
da
_
B. Take into consideration the boundary conditions and change the
independent vector in a suitable way.
C. Solve the linear set M
lump
= to obtain the vector of smoothed
nodal gradients .
D. Interpolate stress gradient and its spatial derivative from nodes
to quadrature points with the aid of shape functions:
i
() =
n
e
node
I=1
N
I
()
I
i
and

j
x
i
() =
n
e
node
I=1
N
I
x
i
()
I
j
E. Employ the one step Lax-Wendro method to nd the nal solution:
1
n+1
() = 1
L
n+1
() t c
i
()
i
() +
1
2
t
2
c
i
() c
j
()

j
()
x
i
(b) Godunov-scheme:
i. Loop over all subelements:
A. Compute the volume v.
B. Loop on sides of the subelement s.
Compute the ux of convective velocity:
f
s
=
_
S
e
L
c
n+1
n
e
da
Loop over all stress related internal variables 1:
Compute jump across side
_
1
cL
n+1
1
L
n+1
_
.
Add up the value of 1
L
n+1
/ t:
1
L
n+1
t
=
1
2 v
N
s
s=1
_
f
s
_
1
cL
n+1
1
L
n+1
_
_
1
0
sign(f
s
)
_
_
C. Employ Godunovs method to nd the nal solution of the internal
variable:
1
n+1
= 1
L
n+1
t
2 v
N
s
s=1
_
f
s
_
1
cL
n+1
1
L
n+1
_
_
1
0
sign(f
s
)
_
_
9. Update the velocity from its Lagrangian solution v
L
n+1
to its nal solution v
n+1
:
(a) Compute the convective matrix:
L
L
n+1
=
_
S
L
N
T
c
n+1
dN
dx
L
n+1
dv
(b) Compute the nal solution of the velocity:
v
n+1
= v
L
n+1
M
1
L
L
n+1
v
L
n+1
Lagrangian Phase (Part 2)
10. Loop over all quadrature points:
(a) Compute the eigenvalues of the convected elastic nger tensor, namely
e
A,n+1
.
(b) Compute the principal elastic logarithmic stretches:
e
A,n+1
= log
_
e
A,n+1
_
(c) Compute the eigenvalues of the Kirchho stresses and the Kirchho stress
tensor itself:
A,n+1
=

n+1
e
A,n+1

n+1
(d) Compute the Cauchy stresses:
n+1
=

n+1
detF
n+1
(e) Compute the internal force vector:
f
int
n
+ =
_
S
B
n+1
n+1
dv with B
T
n+1
=
dN
T
dx
n+1
11. Update nodal accelerations:
a
n+1
= M
1
_
f
ext
n
f
int
n
with M =
_
S
N
T
Ndv = const.
12. Update counter n n + 1 and go to 1.
5.5.2 Additional Remarks on the Numerical Implementation
The following observations are noted regarding the numerical implementation of the
ALE formulation for nite strain plasticity described in the previous Chapter 5.5.1:
1. The explicit one-step time integration used in this work can be easily improved
to the so called central dierence method. This method is e.g described in Be-
lytschko et al [9].
Step 1,2 and 3 in the owchart must be changed according to:
t
n+1
= t
n
+ t
n+1/2
, t
n+1/2
=
1
2
(t
n
+ t
n+1
)
v
L
n+1/2
= v
n
+
_
t
n+1/2
t
n
_
a
n
x
L
n+1
= x
n
+ t
n+1/2
v
L
n+1/2
Additionally after computing a
n+1
in Step 11 of the owchart the velocities must
be updated according to:
v
n+1
= v
n+1/2
+
_
t
n+1
t
n+1/2
_
a
n+1
2. If one directly goes from Step 4.(d)vi. to Step 10.(c) a standard Updated Lagrange
formulation is obtained. Therefore it is not necessary to apply the ALE formulati-
on in every time step. Only if the spatial parameterization becomes too distorted
these steps are considered and the solution is improved. So the computational
cost of the overall procedure can be reduced.
3. In Step 9 the velocities are updated from its Lagrangian solution v
L
n+1
to its
nal solution v
n+1
. The convective matrix L
L
n+1
computed in Step 9(a) introdu-
ces numerical instabilities due to the appearance of the convective velocity c
n+1
.
Furthermore this matrix is a consistent matrix and therefore the necessary com-
putational time increases. Therefore in this work a dierent solution was derived:
First the velocities are interpolated from nodes to quadrature points by the aid
of shape functions. Then each direction of the velocity is used as a scalar variable
and the update from its Lagrangian solution to the nal solution can be done
by the use of the Lax Wendro scheme also used for the internal variables. After
the computation of its gradients at the nodes an interpolation from the nodes to
the quadrature points, like it is done in Step 8.(a)ii.D. for the internal variables,
is of course not necessary. The update can then be directly computed by the
same formula as used for the internal variables in Step 8.(a)ii.E. omitting terms
of order O(t
2
).
4. The mass matrix used in Step 11 is constant due to the assumption of constant
density , which further leads to the uncoupling of the mass balance and the
balance of linear momentum.
Chapter 6
Numerical Simulations
In this chapter three representative numerical simulations are shown to illustrate the
performance of the proposed Uncoupled ALE formulation for nite strain plasticity.
First we consider the impact of a circular bar. This classical problem will illustrate
one advantage of the ALE formulation, namely the fact that larger time steps can be
chosen in a dynamic computation. As a second example the necking of a circular bar
is shown to illustrate the distorted elements of the Lagrangian formulation compared
to the well distributed elements of the ALE formulation. The last example shows a
coining process which is dicult to handle with the Lagrangian formulation. However
it does not present any diculty in the ALE description.
6.1 Impact of a Circular Bar
This classical benchmark problem for transient dynamic computer codes, see e.g Ar-
mero & Simo [3], Camacho & Ortiz [15], Simo [81] or Erhart [24] for Lagrangian
simulations and Liu et al [55], Huerta & Casadei [39] or Armero & Love [2] for
ALE simulations, was originally studied in Taylor [87], where experimental results
were compared with a theoretical analysis. Wilkins & Guinan [100] extended this
work with additional experiments and numerical simulations.
The problem is dened in Figure (6.6a). Due to symmetry in the problem only
half the bar, which impacts a rigid wall with an initial velocity v
0
in vertical direction,
is discretized. The contact between the wall and the bar is assumed frictionless. The
chosen material parameters, the geometry and all reference values are given in Table
(6.1) and (6.2), respectively. A von Mises model with isotropic hardening has been
used in the computation.
In Figure (6.1b) the discretization of half the bar is shown. We distinguish two
domains of the discretization, namely the lower domain ABCD at the impact zone,
where 20 6 nite elements are located, and the upper domain CDEF, where 14
6 elements discretize the bar. The smoothing strategy for the ALE computation in
this example enforces equidistantly distributed nite elements in horizontal (radial)
direction.
92
Chapter 6 Numerical Simulations 93
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
A B
C D
E F
l
0
2 r
0
v
0
2
0
6
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
1
4
6
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
a) Problem Denition
b) Discretization
Figure 6.1: Impact of a circular bar a) Problem Denition and
b) Discretization
Table 6.1: Material parameters (Copper)
Youngs Modulus 117.000 GPa
Shear Modulus 43.333 GPa
Initial Flow Stress 0.400 GPa
Linear Hardening Coefficient 0.100 GPa
Mass density 8930 kg/m
3
Table 6.2: Geometry and Reference Values
Initial Length l
0
32.4 mm
Initial Radius r
0
3.2 mm
Initial Velocity v
0
0.227 mm/s
P S f r a g r e p l a c e m e n t s
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
t = 20s t = 40s t = 60s t = 80s
Figure 6.2: Spatial Lagrangian-Meshes at dierent time instances
In Figures (6.2) and (6.3) a comparison of the spatial meshes between the Lagrangian-
and the ALE formulation at t = 20s, t = 40s, t = 60s and t = 80s is presented.
Only the resultant spatial mesh of the ALE formulation using the Godunov update of
the internal variables is shown because negligible dierences are found comparing the
Lax Wendro scheme. A comparison of the two schemes for the update of the internal
variables will be shown in Figure (6.5). The dierence between the Lagrangian- and
the ALE formulation for the radius and the nal length of the bar are small.
But important dierences are observed in the time step t of the explicit dynamic
computation. In the ALE formulation four times larger time steps, namely t =
0.008s, have been used in comparison with the Lagrangian formulation, where a time
step size of t = 0.002s was used. This nally makes the ALE formulation faster than
the Lagrangian formulation although in every time step in addition to the Lagrangian
phase also a smoothing phase and an Eulerian phase must be considered. In Huerta
& Casadei [39] they even increased the time step size from t = 0.0015s for the
Lagrangian formulation to t = 0.04s for the ALE formulation. Therefore the ALE
computation was eight times faster as the Lagrangian one although the results did not
become worse.
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
t = 20s t = 40s t = 60s t = 80s
Figure 6.3: Spatial ALE-Meshes at dierent time instances

P
S
f
r
a
g
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
x b u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
v
[GPa]

PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
oPu
oPt
0.45
0.05

P
S
f
r
a
g
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
x b u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
Lagrange ALE
Figure 6.4: von Mises Stress distribution in the impact zone at t = 80s
Figure (6.4) shows the dierent behavior of the von Mises stress in the impact
zone. As said before only small dierences can be observed comparing the Lagrangian-
and the ALE formulation, where again the result of the ALE formulation using the
Godunov update of the internal variables is presented.
Finally in Figure (6.5) a plot of the dimensionless radius r/r
0
at the impact zone
over time t is shown. Therein the Lagrangian solution is compared with the ALE
solution, where the Lax Wendro scheme as well as the Godunov scheme for the update
of the internal variables were used to compare the proposed schemes. Although four
times larger time steps were used in the ALE computation the results are excellent
compared to the Lagrangian case. The dierence between the Lax Wendro scheme
and the Godunov scheme for the update of the internal variables is negligible in this
example.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Time t[s]
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.4
D
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s
R
a
d
i
u
s
r
r
0
[
]
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... ................. .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. .............
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
......................................................
Lagrange
............... .. ............... ..
ALE Godunov
. . . . .
ALE Lax-Wendro
70 80
2.20
2.25
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................
............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. .....
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Figure 6.5: Dimensionless Radius r/r
0
vs. Time t
The bar impact problem has demonstrated the general applicability of the Uncou-
pled ALE formulation for dynamic problems. Both update algorithms for the internal
variables, namely the Lax Wendro scheme and the Godunov scheme, show excellent
results when compared to the Lagrangian computation. The possibility of using larger
time steps makes the ALE formulation able to compete with the Lagrangian formula-
tion, since the overall computational time can be reduced although additionally to the
Lagrangian phase in every time step a smoothing phase and an Eulerian phase must
be considered.
6.2 Necking of a Circular Bar
The classical benchmark problem of the necking of a circular bar is presented in Simo &
Hughes [82] for a quasistatic Lagrangian computation and in Armero & Love [2] for
a quasistatic ALE computation. In Huerta & Casadei [39] the problem of the necking
of a circular bar was simulated by a simple extension of the previous example and
solved for a transient ALE computation. We will demonstrate the dierences between
the Lagrangian- and the ALE formulation by the use of this simulation.
The same geometry and material are taken, even the same initial velocity is pre-
scribed but now in opposite direction. Thus the present example simulates a sort of
pulling test. Although the results of Simo & Hughes [82] cannot be compared to the
solution of this computation it presents a further advantage of the ALE formulation
when compared to the Lagrangian one. In the Lagrangian formulation excessive ele-
ment distortions, precisely where the necking occurs, worsen the result of the whole
computation. On the other hand in the ALE formulation a regular element distribution
improves the result in this zone.
The problem is dened in Figure (6.6a). Due to symmetry in the problem only a
quarter of the bar, which is now pulled with an initial velocity v
0
in vertical direction,
is discretized. The coarse discretization shown in Figure (6.6b) has been used for the
Lagrangian computation as well as for the ALE computation, whereas the ne discreti-
zation, shown in Figure (6.6c), serves as the reference solution for this simulation. The
chosen material parameters, the geometry and all reference values are given in Table
(6.3) and (6.4), respectively. Again a von Mises model with isotropic hardening has
been used in the computation.
The coarse discretization of a quarter of the bar is equal to the discretization used in
the previous example. In the ne discretization the domain ABCD is rened by 30 6
nite elements in the domain ABGH and 14 6 elements in the domain GHCD. Alt-
hough the coarse mesh is already ne at the necking zone excessive distorted elements
will occur in the Lagrangian computation. Therefore the following smoothing strategy
for the ALE computation has been implemented:
The vertical position of the nodes in the lower domain ABCD are xed during the
ALE computation. In horizontal (radial) direction equidistantly distributed elements
are enforced. It should be noticed, that the remeshing of the free surface nodes only
allows a tangential sliding of the boundary nodes along material surfaces. In the upper
domain the elements are enforced to be equidistantly distributed in vertical as well as
in horizontal direction.
In Figure (6.7) and Figure (6.8) a comparison of the spatial meshes between the
Lagrangian- and the ALE formulation is presented. One could observe the large defor-
med elements of the Lagrangian formulation in the necking zone due to the fact that
mesh points follow the material points throughout the computation, whereas in the
ALE formulation the elements are well distributed due to the user-dened movement
of the ALE-mesh as described before.
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
A A B B
C C D D
E E F F
G H
l
0
l
0
2 r
0
v
0
v
0
2
0
6
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
3
0
6
1
4
6
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
1
4
6
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
1
4
6
a) Problem Denition b) Coarse- and c) Fine Discretization
Figure 6.6: Pulling of a circular bar a) Problem Denition, b) Coarse
Discretization and c) Fine Discretization
Table 6.3: Material parameters (Copper)
Linear Hardening Coefficient 0.100 GPa
3
Initial Length l
0
32.4 mm
Initial Radius r
0
3.2 mm
Initial Velocity v
0
0.227 mm/s
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
t = 5s 10s 15s 20s 25s 30s
Figure 6.7: Spatial Lagrangian-Meshes at dierent time instances
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
t = 5s 10s 15s 20s 25s 30s
Figure 6.8: Spatial ALE-Meshes at dierent time instances

P
S
f
r
a
g
r
e
p
la
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
x b u t o
o
P
u
o
P
t
v
[GPa]

PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
oPu
oPt
0.60
0.20

P
S
f
r
a
g
r
e
p
la
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
x b u t o
o
P
u
o
P
t
Lagrange ALE
Figure 6.9: von Mises Stress Distribution in the necking zone at t = 20s
Figure (6.9) shows the dierent behavior of the von Mises stress in the necking zone.
The smoother elements in the ALE computation are accompanied with an increase of
the plastic ow which yields to an increase of the von Mises stress as depicted in Figure
(6.9). From Goicolea [28] we know that the von Mises stress should be constant
in horizontal direction in the necking zone. Contrary to the ALE computation the
Lagrangian computation does not provide this constant distribution.
Finally in Figure (6.10) a plot of the dimensionless radius r/r
0
at the necking
zone over time t is shown. Therein the Lagrangian solution is compared with the
ALE solution, where the Lax Wendro scheme as well as the Godunov scheme for
the update of the internal variables were used to compare the proposed schemes. The
Lagrangian computation using the ne discretization as shown in Figure (6.6c) serves
as the reference solution.
0 10 20 30
Time t[s]
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
D
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
l
e
s
s
R
a
d
i
u
s
r
r
0
[
]
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ............................................................ ............................................................ ............................................................ ............................................................ ........................................................... ..........................................................
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
..........................
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
...............
..
............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ...............
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.........................................................
Lagrange-ne
............. ............. .......
Lagrange-coarse
............... .. ............... ..
ALE Godunov
. . . . .
ALE Lax-Wendro
25 30
0.0
0.2
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ............... .. ...............
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Figure 6.10: Dimensionless Radius r/r
0
vs. Time t
One could observe that the Lagrangian solution captures the reference solution in a
better way than the ALE solution up to a certain time t. But as the elements become
more and more distorted in the necking zone the ALE formulation becomes better and
better and nally reaches the reference solution up to an error of 5% at least when the
Godunov method is used for the update of the internal variables. The error increases up
to 30% when the Lax Wendro update is used in the ALE formulation and it increases
up to > 50% in the Lagrangian computation. To sum it up, the ALE computation
leads to a more accentuated and smoother necking of the bar. As a consequence a
softer response of the bar when compared to the Lagrangian computation is observed
as it can be veried in the evolution of the radius of the bar up to a time t of about
t = 20s. The nal radius of the reference solution at t = 30s can only be observed
with the ALE formulation whereas the error of the Lagrangian solution increases due
to the strong element distortions.
6.3 Coining Test
In this engineering problem a coining test is simulated. A similar example is presented in
Ponthot [70] for a quasistatic plane-strain computation, in Huerta & Casadei [39]
for a transient dynamic plane-strain computation, in Rodr
iguez-Ferran et al [72]
for a transient axialsymmetric computation or in Rodr
iguez-Ferran et al [74] for

a quasistatic axialsymmetric computation.
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
A
B
C
D
E
F
r
0
r
1
h
Figure 6.11: Coining Test - Problem Denition and Discretization
The problem is dened in Figure (6.11). Due to symmetry only half the problem is
discretized. The body is deformed by a punch with a prescribed velocity v in vertical
direction. Both the punch and the die are assumed to be rigid. An axialsymmetric
analysis is performed to model a 60% height reduction with a mesh of 20 8 nite
elements. The chosen material parameters, the geometry and all reference values are
given in Table (6.5) and (6.6), respectively. Again a von Mises model with isotropic
hardening has been used in the computation.
Table 6.5: Material parameters
Linear Hardening Coecient 1.000 GPa
3
Initial Height h 10 mm
Initial Radius r
0
30 mm
Punch Radius r
1
12 mm
Punch Velocity v 3 m/s
In Figures (6.12) and (6.13) a comparison between the Lagrangian and the ALE
computation is carried out, where the Godunov update for the internal variables was
used. The spatial meshes and the von Mises stresses are shown for height reductions
of 15%, 30%, 45% and 60%. Due to the large deformation of the nite elements the
Lagrangian computation breaks o at a height reduction of about 30%. On the other
hand the ALE formulation handles these diculties with ease since the large mesh
distortion, especially below the corner of the punch, are smoothed out in the smoothing
phase. Equal height of elements and parabolic proles of horizontal mesh displacements
are prescribed.
In Rodr
iguez-Ferran et al [72] the inuence of dynamic eects is observed.

Various ALE transient simulations of this coining process have been performed with
punch velocities ranging from v = 0.15m/s to v = 300m/s. The fast velocity cases
induce a larger back extrusion while the dynamic eects are negligible for a punch
velocity of v = 0.15m/s. In this case similar results in terms of the deformed shape,
which clearly depends on the dynamic eects, and the von Mises stress distribution are
observed as in the quasistatic computation.
This last example shows the applicability of the Uncoupled ALE formulation to
nonlinear solid mechanics and in particular to coining- or forming analysis. These ty-
pe of problems are dicult to handle with a pure Lagrangian computation. Several
remeshing steps are needed to overcome the large element distortions. Compared to a
remeshing step in the Lagrangian computation the mesh smoothing phase in the Uncou-
pled ALE formulation can be performed easily since the mesh topology and therefore
the connectivity of the nite elements remain equal during the whole computation,
which is not the case in a complete remeshing used in the Lagrangian computation.
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
Pu
o
Pt
15%
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
o
Pu
o
Pt
30%
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
45%
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
60%
x
b
u
t
o
o
P u
o
P t
Lagrange ALE
Figure 6.12: Spatial Meshes at dierent height reductions

P
S
f
r
a
g
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
xbu
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
15%

P
S
f
r
a
g
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
x b u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t

P
S
f
r
a
g
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
xbu
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
30%

P
S
f
r
a
g
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
x b u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
45%

P
S
f
r
a
g
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
x b u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
60%

P
S
f
r
a
g
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
x b u
t
o
o
P
u
o
P
t
v
[GPa]

PSfrag replacements
x
b
u
t
o
oPu
oPt
2.0
0.2
Lagrange ALE
Figure 6.13: von Mises Stresses at dierent height reductions
Chapter 7
Closure
7.1 Summary
An Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian nite element method for dynamics and nite strain
plasticity was presented. An uncoupled solution strategy based on an operator split-
ting technique was used to solve the Initial Boundary Value Problem. This uncoupled
approach which divides the whole computation into a Lagrangian phase, a smoothing
phase and an Eulerian phase makes the extension of a pure Lagrangian nite element
programme to the ALE case easy and allows the use of the original programme to solve
the relevant Lagrangian equations. The inuence of the ALE formulation on the nite
strain plasticity model was outlined and the numerical implementation of the proposed
method was shown.
Various numerical simulations have shown the applicability of the ALE formulation
on impact-, necking- and coining problems. The comparison of the Lagrangian and ALE
analysis clearly show that the ALE formulation is an essential tool to keep distortions
of the spatial mesh under control to ensure the quality of the numerical simulation. The
dierences between the two proposed schemes for the update of the internal variables,
namely the Lax-Wendro scheme and the Godunov scheme are negligible in most
examples. Due to the fact that the Godunov method is easier to implement and its
computational eort is not so high and furthermore no additional consideration of
boundary conditions come into play this method should be preferred.
7.2 Future Directions
Future research directions should include the extension of the ALE formulation using
implicit time integration schemes. Furthermore it should be tried to drop the simpli-
cation of assuming that the density is constant throughout the computation. Also the
dicult issue of the stability of the ALE nite element methods should be thoroughly
investigated. Finally the proposed method should be compared to the method develo-
ped in Armero & Love [1, 2] based on the direct interpolation of the motion of the
material with respect to the reference mesh together with the motion of the spatial
mesh with respect to the same reference mesh.
106
Bibliography
[1] F. Armero and E. Love, An ALE nite element method for nite strain plasticity,
European Conference on Computational Mechanics, 2001.
[2] F. Armero and E. Love, An Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian Finite Element Me-
thod for Finite Strain Plasticity, To appear in International Journal for Numerical
Methods in Engineering, 2003.
[3] F. Armero and J. C. Simo, A Priori Stability Estimates and Unconditionally
Stable Product Formula Algorithms for Nonlinear Coupled Thermoplasticity, In-
ternational Journal of Plasticity 9 (1993), 749782.
[4] F. P. T. Baaijens, An U-ALE formulation of 3-D unsteady viscoelastic ow, In-
ternational Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 36 (1993), 11151143.
[5] H. J. Bartsch, Taschenbuch mathematischer Formeln, Carl Hanser Verlag, Vien-
na, 1997.
[6] K.-J. Bathe, Finite Element Procedures, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1996.
[7] T. Belytschko and J. M. Kennedy, Computer Modells for Subassembly Simulation,
Nuclear Engineering and Design 49 (1978), 1738.
[8] T. Belytschko, J. M. Kennedy, and D. F. Schoeberle, Quasi-Eulerian Finite Ele-
ment Formulations for Fluid Structure Interaction, Journal of Pressure Vessel
Technology 102 (1980), 6269.
[9] T. Belytschko, W. K. Liu, and B. Moran, Nonlinear Finite Elements for Continua
and Structures, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2000.
[10] D. J. Benson, An ecient, accurate, simple ALE method for nonlinear nite
element programs, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 72
(1989), 305350.
[11] D. J. Benson, Computational methods in Lagrangian and Eulerian hydrocodes,
Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 99 (1992), 235394.
[12] J. Bonet and R. D. Wood, Nonlinear Continuum Mechanics for Finite Element
Analysis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997.
107
Bibliography 108
[13] J. U. Brackbill and J. S. Saltzman, Adaptive Zoning for Singular Problems in
Two Dimensions, Journal of Computational Physics 46 (1982), 342368.
[14] C. Bremer, Algorithmen zum ezienten Einsatz der Finite-Elemente-Methode,
Tech. Report Nr. 86-48, University Braunschweig, Institute of Structural Mecha-
nics, 1986.
[15] G. T. Camacho and M. Ortiz, Adaptive Lagrangian modelling of ballistic pene-
tration of metallic targets, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engi-
neering 142 (1997), 269301.
[16] J. C. Cavendish, Automatic Triangulation of Arbitrary Planar Domains for
the FE-Method, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 8
(1974), 679696.
[17] S. Chippada, B. Ramaswamy, and M. F. Wheeler, Numerical simulation of hy-
draulic jump, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 37
(1994), 13811397.
[18] E. A. de Souza Neto, D. Peric, M. Dutko, and D. R. J. Owen, Design of simple
low order nite elements for large strain analysis of nearly incompressible solids,
International Journal of Solids and Structures 33 (1996), 32773296.
[19] E. A. de Souza Neto, D. Peric, and D. R. J. Owen, Notes on Finite Element
Technology for Finite Strain Incompressibility, Summer school of COMMAS-
programme, Stuttgart, 2002.
[20] J. Donea, A Taylor-Galerkin method for convective transport problems, Interna-
tional Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 20 (1984), 101119.
[21] J. Donea, P. Fasoli-Stella, and S. Giuliani, Lagrangian and Eulerian Finite Ele-
ment Techniques for Transient Fluid-Structure Interaction Problems, Transacti-
ons of the 4
th
International Conference on SMIRT, San Francisco, 1977.
[22] J. Donea, S. Giuliani, and J. P. Halleux, An Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian Finite
Element Method for Transient Dynamic Fluid-Structure Interactions, Computer
Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 33 (1982), 689723.
[23] J. Donea and L. Quartapelle, An introduction to nite element methods for tran-
sient advection problems, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engi-
neering 95 (1992), 169203.
[24] T. Erhart, Zur gradientenbasierten Adaptivitat f ur transiente Finite Elemente
Berechnungen mit groen Deformationen, Diplomarbeit, University Stuttgart,
Institute of Structural Mechanics, 1999.
[25] J. D. Faires and R. L. Burden, Numerische Methoden, Spektrum Akademischer
Verlag, Heidelberg, 1994.
Bibliography 109
[26] M. S. Gadala and T. Wang, ALE formulation and its application in solid me-
chanics, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 167 (1998),
3355.
[27] M. Gee, Remeshing f ur Finite Elemente Berechnungen mit groen Deformatio-
nen, Diplomarbeit, University Stuttgart, Institute of Structural Mechanics, 1999.
[28] J. M. Goicolea, Numerical modelling in large strain plasticity with application to
tube collapse analysis, Ph.D. thesis, University of London, 1985.
[29] S. Gosh, Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian nite element analysis of large deforma-
tion in contacting bodies, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engi-
neering 33 (1992), 18911925.
[30] S. Gosh and N. Kikuchi, Finite element formulation for the simulation of hot
steel metal forming processes, International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering 26 (1988), 143161.
[31] S. Gosh and N. Kikuchi, An arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian nite element method
for large deformation analysis of elastic-viscoplastic solids, Computer Methods
in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 86 (1991), 127188.
[32] M. E. Gurtin, An Introduction to Continuum Mechanics, Academic Press, New
York, 1981.
[33] K. Heiduschke, Rotationssymmetrische Wellenausbreitung in Metallstaben jen-
seits der Elastizitatsgrenze, Tech. Report Nr. 77, ETH Z urich, Institute of Me-
chanics, 1990.
[34] L. R. Herrmann, Laplacian-isoparametric Grid Generation Scheme, Journal of
the Engineering Mechanics Division 102 (1976), 749756.
[35] C. W. Hirt, A. A. Amsden, and J. L. Cook, An Arbitrary-Lagrangian-Eulerian
Computing Method for all Flow Speeds, Journal of Computational Physics 14
(1974), 227253.
[36] G. A. Holzapfel, Nonlinear Solid Mechanics, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2000.
[37] Y. K. Hu and W. K. Liu, ALE nite element formulation for ring rolling analysis,
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 33 (1992), 1217
1236.
[38] Y. K. Hu and W. K. Liu, An ALE hydrodynamic lubrication nite element method
with application to strip rolling, International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering 36 (1993), 855880.
[39] A. Huerta and F. Casadei, New ALE applications in non-linear fast-transient
solid dynamics, Engineering Computations 11 (1994), 317345.
Bibliography 110
[40] A. Huerta, F. Casadei, and J. Donea, ALE Stress Update in Transient Plasticity
Problems, Computational Plasticity: Fundamentals & Applications, Barcelona
Spain, 1995.
[41] A. Huerta and W. K. Liu, Viscous Flow with Large Free Surface Motion, Com-
puter Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 69 (1988), 277324.
[42] A. Huerta, A. Rodrguez-Ferran, P. Dez, and J. Sarrate, Adaptive nite ele-
ment strategies based on error assessment, International Journal for Numerical
Methods in Engineering 46 (1999), 18031818.
[43] J. Huetnik, P. T. Vreede, and J. van der Lugt, Progress in mixed Eulerian-
Lagrangian nite element simulation of forming processes, International Journal
for Numerical Methods in Engineering 30 (1990), 14411457.
[44] T. J. R. Hughes, The Finite Element Method: Linear Static and Dynamic Finite
Element Analysis, Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 2000.
[45] T. J. R. Hughes and W. K. Liu, Implicit-Explicit Finite Elements in Transient
Analysis: Implementation and Numerical Examples, Journal of Applied mecha-
nics 45 (1978), 375378.
[46] T. J. R. Hughes and W. K. Liu, Implicit-Explicit Finite Elements in Transient
Analysis: Stability Theory, Journal of Applied mechanics 45 (1978), 371375.
[47] T. J. R. Hughes, W. K. Liu, and T. K. Zimmermann, Lagrangian-Eulerian Fini-
te Element Formulation for incompressible viscous ows, Computer Methods in
Applied Mechanics and Engineering 29 (1981), 329349.
[48] P. M. Knupp, Winslow Smoothing on Two-Dimensional Unstructured Meshes,
Engineering with Computers 15 (1999), 263268.
[49] D. Kuhl, Stabile Zeitintegrationsalgorithmen in der nichtlinearen Elastodynamik
d unnwandiger Tragwerke, Tech. Report Nr. 22, University Stuttgart, Institute of
Structural Mechanics, 1996.
[50] M. Lambrecht, Theorie und Numerik von Materialinstabilitaten elastoplastischer
Festkorper auf der Grundlage inkrementeller Variationsformulierungen, Tech.
Report Nr. I-8, University Stuttgart, Institute of Applied Mechanics, 2002.
[51] R. J. LeVeque, Numerical Methods for Conservation Laws, Birkhauser Verlag,
Boston, 1992.
[52] C. Linder, Theorie der allgemeinen Rotationsschale und Entwicklung eines Kreis-
ringtrager-Analogiemodells zur Berechnung axialsymmetrischer Biegerandstorun-
gen, Diplomarbeit, Graz University of Technology, Institute of Steel Timber and
Shell-Structures, 2001.
Bibliography 111
[53] W. K. Liu, Finite Element Procedures for Fluid-Structure Interaction and Ap-
plication to Liquid Storage Tanks, Nuclear Engineering and Design 65 (1981),
221238.
[54] W. K. Liu, T. Belytschko, and H. Chang, An arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian nite
element method for path dependent materials, Computer Methods in Applied
Mechanics and Engineering 58 (1986), 227245.
[55] W. K. Liu, H. Chang, J. S. Chen, and T. Belytschko, Arbitrary Lagrangian-
Eulerian Petrov-Galerkin nite elements for nonlinear continua, Computer Me-
thods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 68 (1988), 259310.
[56] W. K. Liu, J. S. Chen, T. Belytschko, and Y. F. Zhang, Adaptive ALE nite
elements with particular reference to external work rate on frictional interface,
Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 93 (1991), 189216.
[57] E. Love, Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) Finite Element Formulations in
Finite Strain Elasto-Plasticity, Ph.D. thesis, University of California at Berkeley,
Department of Civil Engineering, 2000.
[58] D. G. Luenberger, Linear and Non-Linear Programming, Addison-Wesley Publis-
hing Company, Reading, Massachusetts, 1984.
[59] J. E. Marsden and T. J. R. Hughes, Mathematical foundations of elasticity, Dover
Publications, Inc., New York, 1994.
[60] F. Martinet and P. Chabrand, Applications of ALE nite elements method to a
lubricated friction model in sheet metal forming, International Journal of Solids
and Structures 37 (2000), 40054031.
[61] C. Miehe, A formulation of nite elastoplasticity based on dual co- and contra-
variant eigenvector triads normalized with respect to a plastic metric, Computer
[62] C. Miehe, Geometrical Methods of Nonlinear Continuum Mechanics, Lecture No-
tes, University Stuttgart, Institute of Applied Mechanics, 2001.
[63] T. Most, Viskoplastizitat f ur isotropes Material und nite Deformationen zur
Simulation von schnell ablaufenden Umformungsvorgangen, Diplomarbeit, Uni-
versity Weimar, Institute of Structural Mechanics, 2000.
[64] T. Most, C. Bucher, and H. P. Ganser, Algorithms to model a plane stress state
at large plastic strains in a strain controlled FE-formulation, To appear in Inter-
national Journal of Solids and Structures, 2002.
[65] W. F. Noh, CEL: A Time-Dependent Two-Space-Dimensional Coupled Eulerian-
Lagrangian Code, Methods in Computational Physics 3 (1964), 117179.
Bibliography 112
[66] T. Nomura, ALE nite element computations of uid-structure interaction pro-
blems, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 112 (1994),
291308.
[67] T. Nomura and T. J. R. Hughes, An arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian nite element
method for interaction of uid and a rigid body, Computer Methods in Applied
Mechanics and Engineering 95 (1992), 115138.
[68] R. W. Ogden, Non-linear Elastic Deformations, Dover Publications Inc., New
York, 1997.
[69] G. Pijaudier-Cabot, L. Bode, and A. Huerta, Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian nite
element analysis of strain localization in transient problems, International Journal
for Numerical Methods in Engineering 38 (1995), 41714191.
[70] J. P. Ponthot, A method to reduce cost of mesh deformation in Eulerian-
Lagrangian formulation, Modelling of Metal Forming Processes, 1988.
[71] N. Rehle, Adaptive Finite Elemente Verfahren bei der Analyse von Flachentrag-
werken, Tech. Report Nr. 20, University Stuttgart, Institute of Structural Me-
chanics, 1996.
[72] A. Rodrguez-Ferran, F. Casadei, and A. Huerta, ALE stress update for tran-
sient and quasistatic processes, International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering 43 (1998), 241262.
[73] A. Rodrguez-Ferran and A. Huerta, ALE Quasistatic Analysis in an Object-
Oriented Code, Computational Plasticity: Fundamentals & Applications, Barce-
lona Spain, 1995.
[74] A. Rodrguez-Ferran, A. Perez-Foguet, and A. Huerta, Arbitrary Lagrangian-
Eulerian (ALE) formulation for hyperelastoplasticity, International Journal for
Numerical Methods in Engineering 53 (2002), 18311851.
[75] J. Sarrate and A. Huerta, An improved algorithm to smooth graded quadrilate-
ral meshes preserving the prescribed element size, Communications in Numerical
Methods in Engineering 17 (2001), 8999.
[76] J. Sarrate, A. Huerta, and J. Donea, Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian formulation
for uid-rigid body interaction, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and
Engineering 190 (2001), 31713188.
[77] L. Sezer and I. Zeid, Automatic quadrilaterial/triangular freeform mesh Genera-
tion for planar Regions, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engi-
neering 32 (1991), 14411483.
Bibliography 113
[78] J. C. Simo, A framework for nite strain elastoplasticity based on maximum
plastic dissipation and the multiplicative decomposition: Part I. continuum for-
mulation, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 66 (1988),
199219.
[79] J. C. Simo, A framework for nite strain elastoplasticity based on maximum
plastic dissipation and the multiplicative decomposition: Part II. computational
aspects, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 68 (1988),
131.
[80] J. C. Simo, Algorithms for static and dynamic multiplicative plasticity that pre-
serve the classical return mapping schemes of the innitesimal theory, Computer
[81] J. C. Simo, Numerical analysis and simulation of plasticity, pp. 179499, Elsevier,
Amsterdam, 1998.
[82] J. C. Simo and T. J. R. Hughes, Computational Inelasticity, Springer-Verlag,
New York, 1998.
[83] J. C. Simo and C. Miehe, Associative coupled thermoplasticity at nite strains:
Formulation, numerical analysis and implementation, Computer Methods in Ap-
plied Mechanics and Engineering 98 (1992), 41104.
[84] P. Steinmann, On spatial and material settings of hyperelastodynamics, Acta Me-
chanica 156 (2002), 193218.
[85] C. Stoker, Developments of the Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian Method in non-
linear Solid Mechanics. Applications to Forming Processes, Ph.D. thesis, Univer-
sity Twente, 1999.
[86] P. Tamamidis, A new upwind scheme on triangular meshes using the nite volume
method, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 124 (1995),
1531.
[87] G. I. Taylor, The Use of Flat-Ended Projectiles for Determining Dynamic Yield
Stress I. Theoretical Considerations, Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series A
194 (1948), 289299.
[88] J. F. Thompson, F. C. Thames, and C. W. Mastin, Automatic Numerical Gene-
ration of Body-Fitted Curvilinear Coordinate System for Field Containing Any
Number of Arbitrary Two-Dimensional Bodies, Journal of Computational Physics
15 (1974), 299319.
[89] J. F. Thompson, Z. U. A. Warsi, and C. W. Mastin, Boundary-Fitted Coordinate
Systems for Numerical Solution of Partial Dierential Equations - A Review,
Journal of Computational Physics 47 (1982), 1108.
Bibliography 114
[90] C. Trusdell and W. Noll, The nonlinear eld theories, pp. in Handbuch der Phy-
sik, Band III/3, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1965.
[91] P. N. van der Helm, J. Hu`etnik, and R. Akkerman, Comparison of Articial
Dissipation and Limited Flux Schemes in Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian Finite
Element Formulations, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Enginee-
ring 41 (1998), 10571076.
[92] M. J. van Haaren, C. Stoker, A. H. van den Boogard, and J. Hu`etnik, The ALE-
method with triangular elements: direct convection of integration point values,
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 49 (2000), 697720.
[93] C. Velasco, Arbitrary Lagrangean-Eulerian Finite Element Formulations at Large
Strains, Masters thesis, University Stuttgart, Institute of Applied Mechanics,
2002.
[94] C. S. Venkatasubban, A new nite element formulation for ALE (arbitrary Lag-
rangian Eulerian) uid mechanics, International Journal of Engineering Science
33 (1995), 17431762.
[95] W. A. Wall, Fluid-Struktur-Interaktion mit stabilisierten Finiten Elementen,
Tech. Report Nr. 31, University Stuttgart, Institute of Structural Mechanics,
1999.
[96] W. A. Wall and E. Ramm, A Stabilized Finite Element Method for Incompres-
sible Navier-Stokes on Time-Dependent Domains, Abstracts of the Fourth U.S.
National Congress on Computational Mechanics, San Francisco, 1997.
[97] W. A. Wall and E. Ramm, Fluid-Structure Interaction based upon a Stabilized
ALE Finite Element Method, Computational Mechanics - New Trends and App-
lications, Proc. 4
th
World Congress on Computational Mechanics, Buenos Aires,
1998.
[98] T. Wang and M. S. Gadala, Formulation and survey of ALE method in nonlinear
solid mechanics, Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 24 (1997), 253269.
[99] K. Washizu, Variational Methods in Elasticity and Plasticity, Pergamon Press,
New York, 1968.
[100] M. L. Wilkins and M. W. Guinan, Impact of Cylinders on a Rigid Boundary,
Journal of Applied Physics 44 (1973), 12001206.
[101] A. M. Winslow, Numerical Solution of the Quasilinear Poisson Equation in a
Nonuniform Triangle Mesh, Journal of Computational Physics 2 (1967), 149
172.
Bibliography 115
[102] T. Yamada and F. Kikuchi, An arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian nite element me-
thod for incompressible hyperelasticity, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics
and Engineering 102 (1993), 149177.
[103] O. C. Zienkiewicz and R. L. Taylor, The Finite Element Method, Fifth Edition,
Volume 1: The Basis, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 2000.
[104] O. C. Zienkiewicz and R. L. Taylor, The Finite Element Method, Fifth Edition,
Volume 3: Fluid Dynamics, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 2000.

An Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian Finite Element Formulation For Dynamics and Finite Strain Plasticity Models

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian Finite Element Formulation For Dynamics and Finite Strain Plasticity Models

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian

Finite Element Formulation

iguez-Ferran et al [74]. An extension to solid

iguez-Ferran et al [74] an ALE formulation for this hy-

iguez-Ferran et al [74], the total deformation gradient is used. This leads

iguez-Ferran et al [74] and will

Figure 2.1: Placement of

used for the

Figure 2.8: Eulers Cut Principle

t(X, t, N) =: P(X, t)N. (2.43)

f(x, t) dv. (2.50)

, where we have introduced per denition the internal

) E. Equation (3.15) denes a cons-

Loading/unloading conditions: 0, (, ) 0 and (, ) = 0

Figure 3.2: Total and incremental deformation gradient

iguez-Ferran et al [72] and

iguez-Ferran et al [74]. By the use of this simplication the coupling bet-

iguez-Ferran et al [74] rst assume that the density is

iguez-Ferran & Huerta [73], Gadala &

Figure 5.3: Decomposition of the ALE-step into a Lagrangian Pha-

a) solution of the Lagrangian phase c) nal Solution

guez-Ferran et al [72] a special mention

guez-Ferran [72] as an engineering-like extension of the one-point-quadrature

iguez-Ferran et al [74] for

iguez-Ferran et al [72] the inuence of dynamic eects is observed.

You might also like