You are on page 1of 7

Computational Mechanics 24 (2000) 419425 Springer-Verlag 2000

Incompatible mode method for finite deformation

quasi-incompressible elasticity
F. Gharzeddine, A. Ibrahimbegovic

Abstract In this work we develop a geometrically non- However, several works have soon followed drawing
linear version of the method of incompatible modes, attention to a lack of robustness of the enhanced strain
suitable for quasi-incompressible nite deformation method in the large strain problems. Namely, the analysis
hyperelasticity. The proposed method is featuring the presented in Wriggers and Reese (1996) identied the
principal axis representation of the theory, facilitating the appearance of a non-physical zero eigenvalue at a certain
choice of the strain energy function (in terms of the stage of the compression of a single quadrilateral element
principal stretches) and simplifying the stress computa- in a homogeneous state of strain. Several authors (Criseld
tion. The choice of the spatial Cauchy-Green strain mea- et al. 1995; De Souza et al. 1995, among others) have also
sure, leading to a very sparse structure of the strain- reported similar performances. Although the standard
displacement operators, and the operator split solution of displacement model does not present this deciency it is
equilibrium equations, leading to reduced secondary well known that the presence of incompressibility of the
storage requirements, further increase the computational material (e.g. rubber), leads to the so-called locking phe-
efciency. A set of numerical examples is used to illustrate nomenon with such a discretization. A couple of possi-
a robust performance of the constructed plane strain ele- bilities to eliminate hourglass instability effect in
ment with a single incompatible mode in quasi-incom- compression have been presented by Korelc and Wriggers
pressible deformation patterns. (1996) or Wriggers and Korelec (1996) and Glaser and
Armero (1997).
1 In this paper, we present a geometrically nonlinear
Introduction version of the original method of incompatible modes,
The method of incompatible modes was initially proposed geared towards quasi-incompressible large deformation
as an interesting possibility to enhance the performance of problems. The low-order (4-node) nite element inter-
low-order (typically 4-node) element in bending domi- polations are still used for constructing the basis of the
nated deformation patterns (e.g., see Wilson et al. 1973) in element, but the main difference from our previous work
linear elasticity. Keeping such a motivation in mind, the on geometrically nonlinear method of incompatible modes
original method of incompatible modes has been extended (see Ibrahimbegovic and Frey 1993) is in the choice of
to other choices of interpolations (e.g., 9-node element, see incompatible modes. Namely, it is demonstrated by the
Ibrahimbegovic and Wilson 1991) and fully nonlinear results to follow that the incompatible modes which are
problems (e.g., see Ibrahimbegovic and Frey 1993). the most appropriate for bending are less so for quasi-
It was soon noted that the incompatible mode method incompressible deformation patterns and that the latter
also performs quite well and can be used as a successful requires somewhat different choice of the incompatible
alternative to mixed methods (e.g., see Atluri and Reissner modes.
1989) in linear analysis of quasi-incompressible elastic The outline of the paper is as follows. In the next
materials, either in its original version (see Ibrahimbego- section, we briey recall the fundamental ingredients of
vic and Wilson 1991) or in its modied version, currently the nite deformation elasticity in principal axes. In Sects.
referred to as enhanced strain method (e.g., see Simo and 3, 4 and 5 we discuss the numerical implementation
Rifai 1990). The extension of the enhanced strain method details. Section 6 includes some illustrative numerical
to fully nonlinear analysis (e.g., Simo and Armero 1992) simulations that assess the performance of this element
was also shown to inherit a superior performance (with in compression. Finally, the conclusions are drawn in
respect to the standard isoparametric interpolations) in Sect. 7.
quasi-incompressible large deformation patterns.
Received 14 December 1998 Formulation of finite deformation elasticity
Among different possibilities to formulate the nite de-
F. Gharzeddine (&), A. Ibrahimbegovic formation elasticity theory, we choose the one employing
Universite de Technologie de Compiegne, the spatial strain measure, i.e. the strain measure dened
Dept. GSM, Lab. G2MS, CNRS UPRES A 6066,

BP 529, 60206 Compiegne, France in the current conguration. More precisely, our choice
is the Cauchy-Green deformation tensor, b, which repre-
This work was supported by MENERT and CNRS (LG2mS). This sents the corresponding transformation of the metric
support is gratefully acknowledged. tensor in the initial conguration, G
b FG1 FT 1 3
Variational basis of the incompatible mode method
In (1) above, F is the deformation gradient. We assume In this work, we apply the method of incompatible modes
hyperelastic material, which implies the existence of a to the nite strain quasi-incompressible elasticity, fol-
strain energy function w. Invariance requirements im- lowing in the footsteps of the previous works on the
pose that the strain energy function be dened in terms of subject (e.g., see Simo and Armero 1992 or Ibrahimb-
invariants of the tensor b, or in a more convenient form egovic and Frey 1993). To that end, the key assumption to
which is obtained by using the principal stretches ki , i.e. be used is the one on the multiplicative decomposition of
w wki 2 the deformation gradient in which one abandons the
standard deformation gradient, F, in favor of an enhanced
The principal stretches are the solution to the following ~
gradient, F,
420 eigenvalue problem
b k 2 g1 m 0
i i 3 F I aF 10

where g is the metric tensor in the current conguration. In (10) above, I is a unit, two-point tensor, a is the spatial
Standard thermodynamics considerations directly lead displacement gradient, so that I a represents a spatial
to the constitutive equation for energy-conjugate stress deformation gradient superposed on the compatible de-
tensor given in terms of the Kirchhoff stress, s. Namely, formation gradient F. The graphical interpretation of the
in context of purely mechanical theory the latter can be multiplicative decomposition is given in Fig. 1.
dened as The spatial deformation gradient a can formally be
constructed by making use of the material gradient A, i.e.
D : s  d Lv g 4 a AF1 11
where d is the rate-of-deformation tensor and Lv g is the Hence, in the subsequent consideration we use A as one of
Lie derivative of g. Considering that Lv g 2d, from (4) the state variables.
above we get The weak form of the balance equations can now be
rewritten as
ow Z
s2 5 1
og Gu; A; w : s : ru~ wT g gru~ wdB Gext 0
B 2
Isotropy implies that the Kirchhoff stress tensor s shares
the same eigenvectors mi found in the eigenvalue problem
in (3), so that we can write where the spatial gradient of the virtual displacement eld
X w is recomputed with the enhanced deformation gradient
s si g1 mi 0 ) s si g1 mi
g1 mi ; 6 F~ as
ru~ w rwF 13
where si are the principal values of the Kirchhoff stress.
One can readily compute an explicit form of the con- However, in contrast with the standard displacement-
stitutive equation in the principal axis representation. To based interpolation case, we get an additional equation
that end, we rst compute the directional derivative of the associated with the variation of the incompatible mode
eigenvalue problem statement in (3) to get (e.g., see parameters f, which can be written as
Ibrahimbegovic 1994) Z
Gu; A; f : s : ru~ fT g gru~ fdB 0 14
oki ki 1 B 2
g mi
g1 mi 7
og 2 where ru~ f is the spatial form of the variation of the
Next, by using the chain rule and the last result, we can enhanced displacement gradient given as
rewrite (5) in the principal axis representation as ~1
ru~ f rfF 15
X ow 1
s ki g mi
g1 mi 8
Comparing the last result with the one in (6), we conclude
si ki 9
Therefore, the principal axis methodology leads to a very
efcient computational framework, since the tensor cal-
culus can be reduced to manipulation of scalars, i.e. the Fig. 1. Multiplicative decomposition of the deformation gradient
corresponding principal values. into compatible and an enhanced deformation gradient
4 Xnen
Discrete approximation of the incompatible mode method ru
wj Be wa
ru~ Na 22
The crucial simplication introduced in this section is the a1
choice of Euclidean coordinates, which leads to a simple X
n im
coordinate representation of the metric tensor in terms of r fjBe ^b
ru~ M 23
the unit matrix, i.e. b1

g 7! I 16
where wa and fb are, respectively, the virtual displace-
Moreover, in the Euclidean framework the total displace- ments and virtual enhanced gradient interpolation
ment vector, d, is well dened, and so that the position parameters, and
vectors in the current conguration can be constructed as ru~ M
^b F
~T rM ^b 24 421
uxd 17
The symmetric part of the last two expressions can be
where x is the corresponding position vector in the written in a matrix notation as
reference conguration.
In each element, Be , the displacement vector is inter- X
polated in the standard isoparametric manner (e.g., see symr w 7! jBe Ba d; Awa 25
Hughes 1987) as a1

nen and
djBe Na xda 18
symru~ f 7! cjBe Gb d; Afb 26
where da are the nodal displacements and Na x are the b1
element shape functions for a particular choice of element
with nen nodes. The deformation gradient can then be where B and G can be written, respectively, as
constructed as 2 3
eT1 eT1 ru~ Na
nen 6 eT2 eT2 ru~ Na 7
F : rujBe xa da
rNa ; 6 7
6 T T u ~
e3 e3 r Na 7

 19 Ba d; A 6
6 eT eT ru~ Na eT eT ru~ Na 7
7 27
oNa oNa oNa 6 1 2 ~ 2 1 7
r Na ; ; 4 eT eT ru Na eT eT ru~ Na 5
2 3 3 2
ox1 ox2 ox3 eT3 eT1 ru~ Na eT1 eT3 ru~ Na
where `
' denotes the tensor product.
As already noted by Ibrahimbegovic and Frey (1993), and
the enhanced displacement gradient can formally be con- 2 3
eT1 eT1 ru~ M^ b
structed as the gradient of an incompatible displacement 6 ^ b 7
6 eT2 eT2 ru~ M 7
eld, so that we can write 6 T T u ~ ^ 7
  6 e3 e3 r Mb 7
nim ^ b oM
^ b oM
^b Gb d; A 6 T T u~ ^ T T u ~ ^ 7 28
^ b; T^b oM e
6 1 2 e r M b e e
2 1 r M b 7
A ab
rM r M ; ; 4 eT eT ru~ M ^ b 5
^ b eT3 eT2 ru~ M
ox1 ox2 ox3 2 3
eT3 eT1 ru~ M^ b eT1 eT3 ru~ M
^ b
with ei as the unit base vectors which constitute the unit
where M b x are incompatible mode shape functions3 matrix I e1 ; e2 ; e3 . It is apparent from (27) and (28)
and nim is the chosen number of incompatible modes. above that the main advantage of choosing the spatial
As noted by Ibrahimbegovic and Frey (1993), the in- strain measures is resulting sparse structure of the strain-
compatible mode shape functions must be modied to displacement operators B and G, which is essentially the
make them orthogonal in the energy norm to any con- same as the one from the linear theory.
stant stress eld, and thus to ensure the patch test With this matrix notation in hand, the weak form of the
satisfaction. This can be carried out according to (see governing equations in (12) can be restated as
Ibrahimbegovic and Wilson 1991) ( Z )
Z nel X
^ b Mb 1e
M Mb dB 21 Gd; A; w : A wTa BTa d; Asd; A dB f a
B Be a1 Be
" #
Using the isoparametric interpolations for the virtual nel X
displacement eld and the variation of the enhanced dis- : A wTa ra f a 0 29
placement gradient, results with a1

where f a is the external load vector,

In choosing the compatible and incompatible displacement s hs11 ; s22 ; s33 ; s12 ; s23 ; s31 i is the vector containing all
T the components of the Kirchhoff stress tensor in (8), and
shape functions, one must ensure that Na Mb = ;; Typically, nel
functions Mb are polynomials of one degree higher that those in A e1 is the nite element assembly operator (e.g., see
Na . Hughes 1987) over all nel elements in the mesh.
Similarly, incompatible mode based residual in (14) can gj Hj1 hj
be rewritten as j1 j j
Z a a g 34
Gd; A; f : fTb GTb d; Asd; A dB The converged values of incompatible mode parameters,
b1 satisfying the equilibrium equation in (30), are used to
nim construct an element-wise approximation of the incom-
: fTb hb 0; 8 e 2 1; nel 30 patible mode eld, A.  Having obtained the incompatible
b1 mode values, we proceed to the next sweep of the global
The crucial difference between the last two equations iterative procedure in order to provide an improved value
concerns the continuity requirements and the resulting of the total displacement eld. In that respect we make use
422 nite element discretization. The equilibrium equation in of the following linearized forms of the discrete equilib-
(29) is associated with the variation of displacement eld rium equations
with the nodal values of the interpolation parameters, wa , i 
which are shared by all the elements in the neighborhood LinGd ; A; w
of node a. On the other hand, the equilibrium equation in Xnen X
(30) is associated with the variation of the incompatible  w
: Gdi ; A; wTa Ke1;ab Ke2;ab ub
mode eld, constructed for each element independently. a1 b1
Therefore, the former leads to a set of global, whereas the Xnen Xnim
latter to a set of local nonlinear algebraic equations. As wTa Fe1;ab Fe2;ab gb 35
described in the following section, a special solution pro- a1 b1
cedure is proposed in order to take advantage of this and
particular structure of the nonlinear equations on hand.
LinGdi ; A;
5 X
nim X
Operator split in the method of incompatible modes  f
: Gdi ; A; fTa Fe1;ab Fe2;ab ub
The main idea of the operator split (e.g., see Chorin et al. a1 b1
1978) is to separate the solution to the second group of X
nim X
discrete equilibrium equation in (30) (for xed values of fTa He1;ab He2;ab gb 36
the nodal displacements, the best iterative guess), from the a1 b1
subsequent computation of a new iterative value of the
nodal displacement vector from the global equilibrium where
equations in (29). A more detailed discussion is provided
next. Ke1;ab BTa d; ADBb d; AdB 37
To that end, we assume that di is the best (iterative) Z
value provided for the nodal displacement vector. Keeping Ke2;ab pab I3 dB;
this value xed, we proceed to compute the corresponding Be
incompatible mode parameters which will satisfy the X3 38
equilibrium equation in (30). Since the latter is a set of pab sij eTi ru Na eTj ru Nb
nonlinear equations, we need to use an iterative procedure; i;j1
At a typical iterative sweep, j, of such a procedure, we
make use of the linearized form of the equation in (30) and
LinGdi ; Aj ; f Fe1;ab GTa d; ADBb d; AdB 39
nim X
nim Be
: Gdi ; Aj ; f fTa He1;ab He2;ab gb Z X
a1 b1 Fe2;ab rab I3 dB; rab ^ a eTj ru~ Nb
sij eTi ru~ M
31 i;j1

where 40
Z  it
By denition of incompatible mode approximation A
He1;ab GTa d; ADGb d; A dB 32 follows that all element-based residuals vanish, i.e.
and  f 0;
Gdi ; A; 8 e 2 1; nel 41
Hence, (36) can be used to compute the increments in
He2;ab sab I3 dB; sab ^ a eTj ru~ M
sij eTi ru~ M ^ b
incompatible mode parameters in terms of incremental
Be i;j1 displacement.
33 X

A typical iterative step of this element-based procedure g a H1 Fab ub 42

reduces to b1
The result in (42) can then be replaced into the linearized vertical center line. The bottom of the block is restrained
form of the global balance equations in (35), in order to in the vertical direction only, with an imposed vertical
eliminate the incompatible mode parameters displacement at the top. The selected material parameters
nel are K 40000 and l 80:2. The block is compressed to a
A Kd^ r f; K FT H1 F 43 homogeneous state of deformation. As depicted in Fig. 4,
the load deection curves, computed with Q1I2 and Q1I4,
practically coincide. When using Q1I4, with up to 45%
6 compression all eigenvalues remain positive. At this stage
Numerical examples one eigenvalue turns negative. Figure 5 represents the
To test the developed plane strain element formulation for eigenmode at this rst buckling point, exhibiting certain
nite elastic deformations a simple model is considered in amount of hour-glassing, already noted by Wriggers and
terms of a compressible neo-Hookean material, with the Reese (1996). A second negative eigenvalue appears at a 423
strain energy of the form deformation state of 46:2%. The next two bifurcation
1 l points are 46:5% and 47:2% of compression. We note that
W Kln J2 k21 k22 2 l ln J; k3 1 all four bifurcation points are detected at about the same
2 2 compression state. The rst bifurcation point detected by
where J det F, K and l are the Lame material parame- Q1=I2 is at a stage of 86%. The associated eigenvector,
ters. plotted in Fig. 6, exhibits no hour-glassing. It is interesting
We denote by Q1=I4 the resulting nite element with 2 to point out that all bifurcation points always appear at
incompatible modes M1 n 1 n2 and M2 g 1 g2 , about the same stage of compression even when we rene
and by Q1=I2 the one with a single incompatible mode the mesh. The latter is the consequence of the homoge-
Mn; g n2 g2 . It is interesting to note that the latter neous deformation state.
choice also inherits a very robust performance in bending-
dominated problems (e.g., see Arunakirinathar and Reddy 6.3
1995). Non-homogeneous compression test
In this example we perform a simulation of non-homoge-
6.1 neous compression test, as very recently proposed by Reese
Checkerboard pressure mode et al. (1998). The geometry and the loading of the structure
We consider the 4 element mesh shown in Fig. 2. We as-
sume that all the nodes on the boundary of the mesh are
xed (i.e., the displacements are set to zero), apart the
middle node on the right-hand side, which can move
horizontally. A compressive load is imposed at that node
resulting with highly constrained compressive deforma-
tion. The simulation carried out with Q1=I4 produces a
pathological result where the sign of the Jacobian alter-
nates between negative and positive values (see Fig. 3)
which is referred to as the checkerboard pressure mode
(see Hughes 1987). The same analysis repeated with Q1=I2 Fig. 3. Checkerboard pressure mode sign of computed
pressure in each element
shows no presence of this checkerboard mode.

Homogeneous compression test
We investigate here the example discussed previously
by Wriggers and Reese (1996). The right half of a rectan-
gular block is discretized by using 10  10 elements.
Symmetry boundary conditions are imposed along the

Fig. 4. Load-deection curve computed with Q1=I2 and Q1=I4

Fig. 2. Model used for checkerboard pressure mode elements
Fig. 5. Eigenvector associated with the rst bifurcation
detected by Q1=I4

Fig. 8. Non-homogeneous compression test result: convergence

with mesh renement for Q1=I2

Fig. 6. Eigenvector associated with the rst bifurcation

detected by Q1=I2

Fig. 9. Non-homogeneous compression test: Deformed congu-

ration at 48:5%

large strain quasi-incompressible elasticity problems. The

main nding is that the original choice of Wilson-type of
Fig. 7. Non-homogeneous compression test: geometry and incompatible modes, initially proposed for capturing the
loading bending dominated deformation patterns, does not nec-
essarily remain optimal for capturing the quasi-incom-
are plotted in Fig. 7. The material parameters are chosen pressible deformation patterns, and it suffers from the
the same as in the previous example. The boundary con- same kind of sensitivity already noticed for the enhanced
ditions at the top of the structure are chosen in such a waystrain method.
that the nodes cannot move in the horizontal direction. The However, reducing the number of incompatible modes
analysis is performed by imposing a pressure of 600. The to a single one, Mn; g n2 g2 , eliminates the fore-
result convergence with mesh renement is depicted in Fig. mentioned sensitivity, and leads to a robust element per-
8. The percentage of compression quoted in Fig. 8 applies formance. The latter has been conrmed by a conned
to the upper middle node. We can see that by increasing the pressure (checkerboard provoking) test and a couple of
number of elements over the height, we converge to the other examples recently proposed in the literature.
solution obtained by Reese et al. (1998), i.e. 50% of com-
pression of the structure for the applied load level. References
Arunakirinathar K, Reddy BD (1995) Further results for en-
hanced strain methods with isoparametric elements. Comput.
7 Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 127:127143
Conclusion Atluri SN, Reissner E (1989) On the formulation of variational
This works provides an extension of the classical method theorems involving volume constraints. Comput. Mech.
of incompatible modes (e.g., see Wilson et al. 1993) to 5:337344
Chorin A, Hughes TJR, McCracken MF, Marsden JE (1978) Korelc J, Wriggers P (1996) Consistent gradient formulation for a
Product formulas and numerical algorithms. Commun. Pure stable enhanced strain method for large deformations. Eng.
Appl. Math. 31:205256 Comput. 13:103123
Criseld MA, Moita GF, Jelenic G, Lyons LPR, Owen DRJ (1995) Reese S, Kussner M, Reddy BD A new stabilization technique for
Enhanced lower-order element formulation for large strains. nite elements in nonlinear elasticity. Preprint
COMPLAS IV Proceedings, Barcelona, Owen DRJ et al. (eds), Simo JC, Armero F (1992) Geometrically nonlinear enhanced
UK strain mixed methods and the method of incompatible
De Souza Neto EA, Peric D, Huang GC, Owen DRJ (1995) Re- modes. Int. J. Num. Meth. Eng. 33:14131449
marks on the stability enhanced strain elements in nite Simo JC, Rifai MS (1990) A class of mixed assumed strain
elasticity and elastoplasticity. COMPLAS IV Proceedings, methods and the method of incompatible modes. Int. J. Num.
Barcelona, Owen DRJ et al. (eds), UK Meth. Eng. 29:15951638
Glaser S, Armero F (1997) On the formulation of enhanced strain Wilson EL, Taylor RL, Doherty WP, Ghaboussi J (1973) Incom-
nite elements in nite deformations. Eng. Comput. 14:759791 patible displacement models. In: Fenves SJ et al. (eds) Nu- 425
Hughes TJR (1987) The Finite Element Method: Linear Static and merical and Computer Methods in Structural Mechanics, pp
Dynamic Analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 4357
Ibrahimbegovic A, Wilson EL (1991) A modied method of in- Wriggers P, Reese S (1996) A note on enhanced strain methods
compatible modes. Commun. Num. Meth. Eng. 7:187194 for large deformations. Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng.
Ibrahimbegovic A, Frey F (1993) Geometrically nonlinear method 135:201209
of incompatible modes in application to nite elasticity with Wriggers P, Korelec J (1996) On enhanced strain method for
nite rotation eld. Int. J. Num. Meth. Eng. 36:41854200 small and nite deformations of solids. Comput. Mech.
Ibrahimbegovic A (1994) Equivalent Eulerian and Lagrangian 18:413428
formulation of nite deformation elastoplasticity in principal
axes. Int. J. Solids Struct. 31:30273040