Search results

In this work we present interrelations between different finite rotation parametrizations for geometrically exact classical shell models (i.e. models without drilling rotation). In these kind of models the finite rotations are unrestricted in size but constrained in the 3‐d space. In the finite element approximation we use interpolation that restricts the treatment of rotations to the finite element nodes. Mutual relationships between different parametrizations are very clearly established and presented by informative commutative diagrams. The pluses and minuses of different parametrizations are discussed and the finite rotation terms arising in the linearization are given in their explicit forms.

Aims to address the issues pertaining to dynamics of constrained finite rotations as a follow‐up from previous considerations in statics.

A conceptual approach is taken.

In this work the corresponding version of the Newmark time‐stepping schemes for the dynamics of smooth shells employing constrained finite rotations is developed. Different possibilities to choose the constrained rotation parameters are discussed, with the special attention given to the preferred choice of the incremental rotation vector.

The pertinent details of consistent linearization, rotation updates and illustrative numerical simulations are supplied.

The purpose of this paper is to address error‐controlled adaptive finite element (FE) method for thin and thick plates. A procedure is presented for determining the most suitable plate model (among available hierarchical plate models) for each particular FE of the selected mesh, that is provided as the final output of the mesh adaptivity procedure.

The model adaptivity procedure can be seen as an appropriate extension to model adaptivity for linear elastic plates of so‐called equilibrated boundary traction approach error estimates, previously proposed for 2D/3D linear elasticity. Model error indicator is based on a posteriori element‐wise computation of improved (continuous) equilibrated boundary stress resultants, and on a set of hierarchical plate models. The paper illustrates the details of proposed model adaptivity procedure for choosing between two most frequently used plate models: the one of Kirchhoff and the other of Reissner‐Mindlin. The implementation details are provided for a particular case of the discrete Kirchhoff quadrilateral four‐node plate FE and the corresponding Reissner‐Mindlin quadrilateral with the same number of nodes. The key feature for those elements that they both provide the same quality of the discretization space (and thus the same discretization error) is the one which justifies uncoupling of the proposed model adaptivity from the mesh adaptivity.

Several numerical examples are presented in order to illustrate a very satisfying performance of the proposed methodology in guiding the final choice of the optimal model and mesh in analysis of complex plate structures.

The paper confirms that one can make an automatic selection of the most appropriate plate model for thin and thick plates on the basis of proposed model adaptivity procedure.