GSA Training Notes

2D Element Analysis

1 Use of 2D elements
When to use them
 slabs (not rafts)
 shear walls
 cores
 stress analysis

When not to use them

 where the stress state is 3D
 plane stress elements tied in to beams
 where beams work more effectively

1.1 2D structure types in GSA

 plane stress
 plane strain
 axisymmetric
 space

1.2 2D element types in GSA

 plane stress (Gss: plane stress & space)
 plane strain (Gss : plane strain)
 axisymmetric (Gss: axisymmetric)
 fabric - in-plane stiffness only – no thickness (Gss: space / GsRelax)
 flat plates - bending stiffness only (Gss: space)
 flat shells - in-plane + bending stiffness (Gss: space)

1.3 2D axes and projected axes

The axis set for a flat 2D element is not as clearly defined as for a beam element. In GSA there are
several ways of defining the axis set. The starting point is the element normal

n   c 3  c1    c 4  c 2 
where c is the coordinates on a point on the element, i.e. the coordinates of the node, cn, plus any
offset, o, at that topology position.

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 1 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
 c i  c n.i  o i
The normal forms the element z direction.
The orientation of element x and y axes depends on the axis defined in the 2D element property. If this
axis is set to local the local x and y axes are based on the topology of the element.
x  c 2  c1
y  nx
zn
The problem with a local axis definition like is that adjacent elements may have completely different x
axis directions making interpretation of results difficult. To overcome this problem the axis can be
defined as a property of the 2D elements. This axis (global or user defined) is then projected onto the
2D elements to give consistent axes from one element to the next.
For Cartesian axes the x axis of the axis set is projected onto the element
v  nx
v n
xp 
v n
yp  nxp
zp n

The exception to this rule is when the x axis of the axis set is close to the element normal in which
case the y or z axis of the axis set is use for projection.
For Cylindrical and Spherical axes the z axis of the axis set is projected on to the element to become
the local y axis.
If an orientation angle is defined these axes are rotated by the orientation angle in a positive direction
about the element z axis.

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 2 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
2 2D Element Theory
For static analysis of 2D elements it comes down to solving the same equations as for a beam analysis:

f  K u

where the load vector f and the stiffness K are known and u are the displacements to be calculated.
Once the displacements are known the forces in individual elements can be calculated from

fe  K e  ue

where the subscript ‘e’ refers to the element.

The stages in a finite element analysis are

 Creating the mesh
 Solving for displacements…

Calculating the element stiffnesses

Assembling the structure stiffness

Assembling the load vectors

Reducing the stiffness matrix

Back-substituting for the displacements

 Solving for forces / stresses

2.1 Isoparametric Elements

2D elements are defined by
 Shape – quad or triangle
 Order – linear (corner nodes only) or parabolic (corner and mid-side nodes) (or higher order)
 Type – plane stress, plate bending, …

Depending on the element type it will have different nodal degrees of freedom
 Plane stress elements – 2 degrees of freedom per node (x,y)
 Fabric elements – 2 degrees of freedom per node (x,y) (like plane stress elements but with no
thickness and properties per unit width)
 Plate elements – 3 degrees of freedom per node (z,xx,yy) – because of the ‘missing’ degrees of
freedom these elements should be used with care.
 Shell elements (bilinear) – 5 degrees of freedom per node (x,y,z,xx,yy)
 Shell elements (Allman-Cook) – 6 degrees of freedom per node (x,y,z,xx,yy,zz) – linear
elements only
2D elements are relatively simple elements and the mesh must be designed so that the elements are
sufficient to model the actual stiffness of the structure. The size and shape of the finite elements will be
determined by:
 The type of element being used

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 3 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
  The shape of the boundary (in regions close to the boundary)
 The loading to be applied
 The experience of the user

Most 2D elements are variants on isoparametric elements. In an isoparametric element the element
displacements are interpolated in the same way as the geometry, eg a plane stress element. In a
superparametric or degenerate isoparametric element the interpolation of geometry is of a higher
order than the interpolation of the displacements, eg a plate element. In a subparametric element the
interpolation of the geometry is of a lower order than the interpolation of the displacements eg an 8
node straight sided quad element, where different interpolation functions are used for the geometry and
the displacements. The term isoparametric is often used to describe any of these types.

2.2 Element stiffness

For a plane stress problem there is a matrix C relating stress and strain (for a linear material). The
displacements in a local coordinate system, the strains and stresses are

 xx   xx 
u     
u    ε   yy  σ   yy 
v     
 xy   xy 

The material matrix C for an isotropic elastic material is

 
1  0 
E 
C  1 0 
1  2  1  
0 0 
 2 

Where E is the Young’s modulus and  the Poisson’s ratio.

Notes: There is an out of plane strain in the zz direction which can be ignored in the element
formulation.

Similar relationship exist for other element types

The strains are defined in terms of the displacements as:

u v u v
 xx   yy   xy  
x y y x

The simplest elements to consider are 4 node and 8 node quadrilateral elements, where the 4 node
quad is a simplification of an 8 node element. A typical 8 node element can have curved edges.

In addition to the ‘local’ coordinate system based there is also a ‘natural’ coordinate system which is
used to map the curvilinear element on to a square.

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 4 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
 y s
s

4 7 3

8 6 r r

1 5 2
x

Natural and local coordinate systems

The interpolation functions for the geometry are:

n n
x   hi xi y   hi y i
i 1 i 1

where the interpolation functions h for a quad 8 are defined as:

h1  14 (1  r )(1  s)  12 [h8  h5 ]
h2  14 (1  r )(1  s)  12 [h5  h6 ]
h3  14 (1  r )(1  s)  12 [h6  h7 ]
h4  14 (1  r )(1  s)  12 [h7  h8 ]
h5  14 (1  r 2 )(1  s)
h6  14 (1  s 2 )(1  r )
h7  14 (1  r 2 )(1  s)
h8  14 (1  s 2 )(1  r )

and the h1 – h4 without the […] terms are the interpolation functions for quad 4 elements. These
interpolation function are chosen so that at node i the interpolation function hi has a value of 1 and all
the other interpolation functions have a value of 0.

As the elements are isoparametric the displacements in the elements are related to the nodal
displacements:

n n
u   hi u i v   hi vi
i 1 i 1

To evaluate the stiffness matrix it is necessary to establish the strains in terms of the displacements –
the strain-displacements transformation matrix. The element strains are obtained in terms of
derivatives of the element displacements with respect to the local coordinate system(x,y). The element
displacements are in the natural coordinate system (r,s) so it is necessary to relate derivatives with
respect to x,y to derivatives with respect to r,s. This is achieved through the Jacobian J

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 5 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
  
J
r x

where

 x y 
 r 
J   r
x y 
 
 s s 

Since x and y are known in terms of the interpolation functions the Jacobian can be easily found and
the derivatives with respect to x and y are then

 
 J 1
x r

This requires that the inverse of the Jacobian exist , which is satisfied if there is a one to one
correspondence between natural and local coordinates. This will be the case provided the element is
not grossly distorted and that it does not fold back on itself.

Constructing the partial derivatives then allows the strains and nodal displacements to be related
through the strain-displacement transformation matrix B:

ε  Buˆ

The element stiffness corresponding to the local element degrees of freedom is then

K  B
T
CBdV
V

The elements of B are functions of the natural coordinate system r,s. Therefore the integration extends
over the natural coordinates volume, so the volume differential has to be written in terms of the natural
coordinates

dV  det Jdrds

The volume integral is not normally amenable to an explicit integration so a numerical technique is
normally used. The integral can be written

K   Fdrds
V

where

F  B T CB det J

and the integral is performed in the natural coordinate system of the element. This is convenient as the
limits of the integration are then ±1. The stiffness can then be calculated

K    ij Fij
i, j

where Fij is the matrix F evaluated at the Gaussian integration points and ij are the Gaussian
weights.

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 6 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
The order of the integration can significantly affect the performance of the element. It is normal
practice to under-integrate some of the shear terms.

In a similar way the mass matrix and the load vectors can be established. Writing the displacement in
terms of the interpolation functions and the nodal displacements

u  Huˆ

gives

M  H HdV
T
V

RB   H f dV T
B
V

  H f dS
T
RS S S
S

RI   B τ dV T
I
V

where the subscripts B, S and I refer to the body forces, surface forces and initial stresses respectively.

2.3 Element variants

GSA allows for linear (3 and 4 node) and parabolic (or quadratic) ( 6 and 8 node) elements. The
parabolic elements perform better than the linear elements, but this is at the expense of extra degrees
of freedom in the structure. The choice is then one of choosing between simpler elements (where
perhaps more will be needed) or better elements.

In the past the out-of-plane performance of the linear elements limited their usefulness, so the obvious
choice was to use the parabolic elements. The problem with the conventional (Mindlin) linear elements
was than the elements were susceptible to locking (so they would be too stiff). One solution to this was
to use reduced integration which reduced the over-stiffness problem, but as there were non-stiff modes
of deformation in the element it was susceptible to hourglassing problems.

With hourglassing there is a loss of accuracy in the results but it is usually very obvious.

From GSA 8.5 on there is also the option of switching from Mindlin elements to MITC (mixed
interpolation of tensorial components) elements. This provides appropriate stiffness for the elements,
removing the hourglassing problem.

In general it is simpler to understand what is happening with linear elements, especially where other
features such as tied interfaces are introduced into the model

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 7 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
3 2D elements in the structure
3.1 The structure stiffness matrix
The structure matrix is constructed by creating the individual element matrices and slotting these into
the appropriate positions for the nodal degrees of freedom giving the connectivity between the
elements in the structure.

Checks are made before assembling the structure matrix so that only the required degrees of freedom
are set up. A pass is made through the elements
 For elements in global planes only degrees of freedom relevant to the element type are set up
 For elements in non-global planes automatic constraints check stiffness in each direction and
set up local constraints if required

The success with which the structure matrix represents the actual structure depends on the individual
elements and the relationship between adjacent elements.

The sources of error are:

Error Occurs in

Discretization Use of finite element interpolation

functions

Numerical integration in space Evaluation of finite element matrices

using numerical integration

Evaluation of constitutive relations Non-linear material behaviour

Round off Setting up equations and their solution

Interpolation Use of Gauss point stresses as basis of

nodal stresses

3.2 Factors affecting the accuracy of the solution

There are a number of factors which will affect the accuracy of the solution. However it is important to
be aware of the following limitations.

An analysis is only as good as the data supplied. Thus the results will depend on the input data –
material properties, loading and representation of the real structure in the finite element model. Given
these limitations there are a number of factors related more directly to the method used to solve for the
displacements which need to be considered.

The shape of the elements is significant in the accuracy of the solution. This is discussed in more detail
below.

Certain assumptions are made about the material of which the element is composed. If an isotropic-
elastic material model is used it will give, at best, approximate results if the material is in fact
orthotropic. If the material may yield or crack, because of local high stresses a non-linear material may
be required. Or if the displacements of the structure are large a geometrically non-linear analysis may
be required.

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 8 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
The method used to solve for the displacements has a bearing on the accuracy of the solution, although
the user will have little control over this factor in many cases.

From these it is obvious that there is no single factor which will lead to errors and it is difficult to
quantify the error resulting from these factors. However there are some general principles which can
be applied.

3.3 Element shape

The accuracy of an element deteriorates the further the shape of the element is from a square. Thus
elements should be square where possible. There are three measures of an elements distortion. The
angles at the corners of the element, the curvature of the element edges and the aspect ratio (the ratio
of length to width of the element), with the ideal element having angles of 90°, straight sides and an
aspect ratio of one. Efforts should be made to keep as close to this as possible.

We make a distinction between flat shell and curved shell elements. With flat shell elements the
formulation assumes that the element is flat so problems may arise with warping of the element. In
general where a flat shell element is used to model a floor slab this will not be a problem unless it is
used to model a spiral ramp or similar feature. Curved shell elements will also have limitations on the
out-of-plane curvature. In particular the element cannot fold back on itself (or the Jacobian becomes
singular), but other factors will limit the degree of out-of-plane curvature the element will allow. In the
case of shell elements the user should consult the user manual or contact the supplier.

Given these constraints, it is still possible to have problems if the assumed displacements in the
elements do not accurately reflect the real displacements in the structure. In most cases this is where
the displacement over a single element varies so much that the assumptions of the element
interpolation functions are no longer valid. In these cases it is necessary either to use higher order
elements, eg move from 4 node quads to 8 node quads, or to refine the mesh.

It is particularly important to use a mesh that is appropriate to the analysis and this will mean that in
areas of high stress gradients a fine mesh of nearly square elements should be used.

3.4 Mesh creation

Where the basic geometry is held in a CAD document the simplest option will often be to import the
mesh from the CAD file (e.g .import dwg file). The drawback with this method arises when
information has to be added to what is in the CAD model in order to produce an analysis model.

The other option is to store the basic geometry in GSA and generate the mesh as required. Provided the
mesh generation is a straightforward (and reliable) process, this allows for a minimum amount of data
to define the structure, with what is required for analysis being added as required.

In GSA the mesh generation is based on regions. Regions exist in the design layer and are defined by
geometric entities:
 Areas – which can be voids
 Lines
 Grid nodes

Each of the geometric entities holds data that control the mesh to be created – mesh density, spacing,
element size, etc. Once the region is defined the mesh can then be generated automatically by GSA.
Because the mesh generation is automatic changes in geometry can be accommodated without a large
amount of manual meshing.

There are a number of sculpting options in GSA to allow mesh refinement. These can be useful to
make some local mesh refinements but should, in general, be avoided as these adjustment will be lost
if re-meshing is required.

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 9 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
3.5 Meshing options
Finite element meshes can be constructed from either triangular or quadrilateral elements, and the
elements may be linear, parabolic or higher order. The choice of element will depend on what the
program offers and the type of analysis to be carried out. Some general guide-lines are
 Avoid triangular (tetra/wedge) elements where quad/brick elements can be used as triangular
(tetra/wedge) elements are generally less efficient and often less accurate.
 Use higher order elements in analyses which involve direct matrix solutions (Gss)
 Use lower order elements in analyses which involve explicit time integration or dynamic
relaxation (GsRelax)
 Lower order elements may be more efficient for highly non-linear problems (GsRelax)

From these guide-lines it is obvious that there is no such thing as an ideal mesh since the type of mesh
needed depends on the analysis to be carried out.

Irrespective of how the mesh is generated there are some rules which can usefully be applied:
 Use fill & edge check to ensure that elements are all facing the same way up and properly
connected
 Use quads in preference to triangles
 For linear analysis use parabolic elements in preference to linear elements
 Avoid linear elements attached to parabolic elements

3.6 Element shape checks

A number of element checks are carried out by GSA prior to a GSS analysis. Other analysis programs
may have different limits but the same principles apply. For GSS the following warnings and severe
warnings are produced

Triangle warning severe warning or error

5 < Rmax < 15 Rmax > 15
15 < qmin < 30 qmin < 15
150 < qmax < 165 qmax > 165

Quad warning severe warning or error

5 < Rmax < 15 Rmax > 15
25 < qmin < 45 qmin < 25
135 < qmax < 155 qmax > 155
0.00001 < Hmax < 0.01 Hmax > 0.01

Rmax = longest side / shortest side

qmin = minimum angle

qmax = maximum angle

Hmax = dist of 3rd corner node from plane of element / longest side

Notes: Mid-side node locations not checked - should be approximately 1/2 way along edge

No check on ratio thickness/shortest side

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 10 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
4 Loading & Constraints
4.1 Loading
There are several ways of applying mechanical load in a finite element model
 Point loads – should generally be avoided
 Body forces – gravity
 Pressures
o Face pressures
o Edge pressures
 In-plane (pre-stress) loads
 Thermal loads

The simplest type of loading is the point load. This is a load which is applied directly to a node. The
implicit assumption with a point load is that the stress at the point of application of the load is infinite.
The finite element code will not calculate infinite stresses as the stresses are calculated from the strain
in the whole element. This means that the stresses found in a structure due to a point load at the centre
will be good enough except in the area adjacent to the load.

When details of the stresses around the load point are required, either the mesh should be refined or
some form of distributed load should be applied. A uniform face pressure applied to a quad 8 element
leads to a set of nodal forces which are not intuitive:

Node loads corresponding to constant face pressure

Body forces are those which apply to the body as a whole. In most analyses these will be restricted to
gravity loads. The other body loads which may be encountered are constant accelerations (much like
gravity) and electromagnetic loads. These loads are calculated using the interpolation functions:

RB  V
H T f B dV

and result in a set of forces at the nodes, which are equivalent to the body load.

The face and edge pressures are similar. A face pressure is applied over the face of an element, for
example the load on a floor slab would be a face load, while a distributed load on beam modelled with
plane stress elements would be an edge load. In both cases the definition is

H
T
RS  S f S dS
S

where the surface is determined by the type of loading. As with the body force it is better to allow the
program to calculate the equivalent nodes.

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 11 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
Note: Edge loads are specified as pressure not force per unit length

4.2 Restraints and support conditions

The concept of a restraint is straightforward: a zero displacement condition is applied to the structure
at that point. In reality support conditions require some consideration as zero displacement at supports
is at best an approximation and for flexible supports it may be quite misleading. To take an extreme
case; consider a floor slab or raft modelled with a single plate/shell element and with all the nodes
fully restrained. As the nodes do not displace there is no strain in the elements and consequently no
stress. Increasing the number of elements so that the previous problem is removed and using springs to
support the slab in place of restraints may give a reasonable representation of the overall response of
the slab/soil interaction, however it will not be of much use for a detailed examination of the stresses
in the slab. To examine this in more detail, consider a slab resting on a soil with a uniform contact
pressure. If we consider this pressure as a loading it will be represented by a series of nodal loads and
moments, thus the soil should be modelled with both translational and rotational springs, the stiffness
of these springs being based on the interpolation functions of the plate/shell element, and the soil
stiffness. One solution to this problem is to model the soil explicitly and to ensure that the slab is
modelled using compatible elements.

Another problem is where some of the degrees of freedom of an element are missing. Take for
example a square slab modelled with plate/shell elements. If this is to be loaded with a torsional in-
plane load this could either be loaded with torsion about the z axis or with forces in the x and y
directions. The type of loading which can be used will depend on the type of elements that are
available, as many plate elements do not have a local z rotational degree of freedom. This may also
affect the choice of finite element mesh.

4.3 Modelling problems

If you are unsure of how to model a particular situation, get advice! If you are familiar with the
concepts and how to use them but you are unsure about details of the mesh or loading or restraint
conditions, build a simple model to test your ideas before building a large model.

If you have doubts about your results then consult someone else and / or build a more detailed model
and compare the results of the different models.

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 12 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
5 Stresses and Forces in 2-D Elements
5.1 How the stresses are calculated
Consider, as an example, a plane stress problem, and how to establish the stress in the element.

The displacements in a local coordinate system, the strains and stresses are

 xx   xx 
u     
u     yy     yy 
v     
 xy   xy 

It was previously noted that we can establish a material matrix which relates stress and strain and for a
plane-stress elastic-isotropic material this is

 
1  0
E  
C  1 0 
1  2  1  
0 0 
 2 

where E is the Young’s modulus and  is the Poisson’s ratio.

The strains are defined in terms of the displacements as

u v u v
 xx   yy   xx  
x y y x

So if we can calculate the strains it is then a straightforward matter to calculate the stresses.

It was noted before that we can evaluate the partial derivatives of the displacements and thus construct
the strain-displacement transformation matrix. The element stresses can then be calculated from

σ  CBu
ˆ

The strain displacement matrix has previously been established in the calculation of the element
stiffness, as has the material matrix so given the nodal displacements we can calculate the stresses.

In principle we could now calculate the stress at any point in the element by calculating the strain-
displacement transformation matrix. In practice this does not lead to very good results.

The stresses are based on the strains, which in turn are based on the displacement gradients in the
element. Thus the strains in an element which has a parabolic displacement field are linear, and in one
with a linear displacement field are constant. In practice we normally want to get as good an
approximation to the stress as possible. So in practice we calculate the stresses at selected points and
extrapolate to the nodal values.

It has been found in practice that the stresses are most accurately calculated at the Gaussian integration
points (for which we have already established the strain displacement relationships). The extrapolation
to the nodal values can be done in several ways such as
 Least squares fit using an assumed shape function

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 13 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
  Extrapolation on a segment by segment basis (eg considering a quad 8 as four quarters and
extrapolating on a linear basis in each quarter)

The second of these methods is used by GSS. The calculation of the stress in the element can be
summarized as follows:
 Calculate the stress at the Gauss points
 Extrapolate the stresses to get the nodal values

This procedure while seeming a cumbersome way of calculating the stress in fact leads to better stress
values at the nodes than by direct calculation at the nodes.

5.2 Limitations of the stress calculation

The stress calculations show more clearly than the displacement calculation the approximate nature of
the finite element method. In particular it should be noted that the stresses are calculated by
interpolation involving an extrapolation from the Gauss points to the nodes. This means that for
element with high stress gradients the interpolated values will be less accurate than for elements with
low stress gradients. It is important to check to see what variation of stress exists over the element and
if it is large it may be necessary to refine the mesh locally to overcome this problem.

The stress is calculated on an element by element basis (unlike the displacement) so it is possible, and
in fact very likely, that the stresses at a node in one element will not match up with the stress at the
same node in an adjacent element. In some cases, where there is a discontinuity in the material
properties or the thickness of the elements, it is correct that there is a local stress discontinuity,
however in other cases this stress difference will be a measure of the error in the solution.

When contour plots of the stresses are required, or when a stress value is required for further
calculation it is better to have a single value. Most post-processors will give the option to calculate an
averaged value at the node. However it should be remembered that the stresses which look smooth and
continuous on the plots are in fact calculated a series of discontinuous stress patches.

5.3 Checking the stress results

The following points should be borne in mind when looking at 2D elements stress results
 Stresses are derived from strains, which in turn are derivatives of displacement so the accuracy
of stresses is less than that of displacements
 The interconnectivity elements at common nodes enforces displacement continuity across the
element boundaries - but stresses will display discontinuities
 The stress discontinuity is a measure of the unsuitability of the mesh
 Stresses are calculated at the Gauss points in the element and extrapolated to the nodes
 Higher mesh densities required where the stress gradients are greatest

It is useful to be able to carry out some quick checks on the stresses to get an idea of the accuracy of
the analysis. There is no simple answer as to how good an analysis is, but a number qualitative rules
can be established
 Check that the stress gradients are low within the elements, particularly if the stresses in the
element are high
 Check that the stress discontinuities between elements are small – look at the stress errors
 Check the results against some simple hand calculations, to establish that the results are in line
with your expectations.

Provided you can satisfy yourself with these checks then your analysis should be OK. If not then look
at how you can refine the mesh to give better results.

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 14 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
5.4 Stress results summary
 Calculated stresses are discontinuous between elements
 Averaging smoothes the results / contours
 Averaging does not take place where there is …
 material discontinuity
 thickness discontinuity
 a fold in the surface (the facet angle can be set in the ‘Preferences | Results’
 Averaging may give ‘better’ stress results
 Averaging can mask poor stress results

5.5 Derived stress results

From the basic stress results it is possible to examine different stress measures those available in GSA
are:

 Stress components xx, yy, zz, xy, yx, zx

 Principal streses max, min
 Maximum shear stress  max shear  12 ( max   min )
 vm  1
2
[( x   y ) 2  ( y   z ) 2  ( z   x ) 2
 von Mises
6( xy2   yz2   zx2 ))] 2
1

 Average  av  13 ( x   y   z )

These stress measures are useful in different circumstances

Principal stress
 Flow of stress in metals, concrete
 Directions of stress relative to reinforcement

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 15 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
von Mises stress
 Measure of distortional stress

 Used in yield functions (yield- vm =0)

Average stress
 Checking if material is in overall compression/tension

5.6 2D element force results

When dealing with elements with no thickness, such as fabrics, or composite materials, such as
reinforced concrete, it is more useful to work with stress resultants than stresses. (The stress values for
concrete are based on the properties of an equivalent isotropic material.) The checks used for stress
results noted above can also be applied to force results. For fabric elements the force resultants are
calculated directly but for elements with thickness they are calculated from the stress results at through
the thickness of the element

 xx  xy  xz 
 
 yx  yy  yz 
 zx  zy  zz 


and the element thickness, t. There are two ways in which these are defined. The preferred method,
used by Timoshenko1 is as follows.

This means that a moment Mx is based on the stress in the x direction. With the Timoshenko
convention if a slab is in compression on the top face in both the x and y directions the moments are
both negative. Consequently starting from the assumption that tensile stress is positive, we have the
following relationships for the forces:

t t t

N x   t  xx dz N y   t  yy dz N xy   t  yx dz
2 2 2

2 2 2

1
Timoshenko & Woinowsky-Krieger, Theory of Plates and Shells, McGraw-Hill

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 16 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012
 t t

Q x   2t  xz dz Q y   2t  yz dz
2 2

and moments:

t t t

M x   2t  xx z dz M y   2t  yy z dz M xy   2t  yx z dz
2 2 2

Following from this a plate which has a positive in-plane stress in x/y will have a positive force
resultant Nx/Ny and a positive bending stress in x/y (i.e. positive stress at the top surface relative to the
bottom surface) will have a positive moment Mx/My.

When the structure is linear these simplify to

N x   xxp t N y   yyp t N xy   xyp t

Q x   xz t Q y   yz t

and

t2 t2 t2
M x   xxb M y   yy
b
M xy   xyb
6 6 6

where the superscript p and b refer to in-plane and bending stress terms.

5.7 Derived force results

In-plane principal forces can be calculated in a similar manner to principal stresses
 principal forces → no in-plane shear force
 principal moments → no in-plane twisting moment

6 Interaction with beam elements

The most common problem arising in modelling support conditions is that of compatibility of
elements. For example a beam element has translational and rotational freedoms, while a plane stress
element has only translational freedoms. Therefore to use a 2 node beam element as a stiffener along
the side of a 4 node plane stress element would be wrong as the translational plus rotational freedoms
on the beam element imply a higher order shape function than the purely translation freedoms of the
plane stress element.
 2D element have ‘missing’ degrees of freedom so the connection to 2D elements may not be
‘stiff’
 Shape functions for 2D elements are different to those for beam elements, which may lead to
errors (parabolic v cubic for example).

GSA Training Notes – 2D Element Analysis 17 of 17

July 2012 © Oasys Ltd, 2012