Finite Element Analysis - Author J.N Reddy Book

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the book "An Introduction to the Finite Element Method" by J.N. Reddy, specifically addressing confusion regarding the assembly of stiffness matrices for linear elements. Users discuss the correct formation of the assembled stiffness matrix when combining two linear elements, highlighting the importance of matrix representation for clarity. The conversation emphasizes the need for explicit notation to avoid misleading interpretations, particularly concerning the presence of terms like ##k_{11}^3## in larger systems. The insights shared by users, particularly AlephZero, enhance understanding of matrix layout in Finite Element Analysis (FEA).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of stiffness matrices in Finite Element Analysis (FEA)
  • Familiarity with matrix algebra and assembly techniques
  • Knowledge of linear elements in structural mechanics
  • Basic concepts of dynamics and equations of motion
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the assembly process of stiffness matrices in FEA using "An Introduction to the Finite Element Method" by J.N. Reddy
  • Learn about matrix representation techniques in FEA for clearer visual understanding
  • Explore advanced topics in matrix algebra relevant to engineering applications
  • Investigate software tools for FEA that utilize matrix assembly methods
USEFUL FOR

Mechanical engineers, students studying Finite Element Analysis, and professionals involved in structural analysis will benefit from this discussion, particularly those seeking to enhance their understanding of stiffness matrix assembly and representation in FEA.

bugatti79
Messages
786
Reaction score
4
Folks,

Is there anyone out there familiar with 'An introduction to the Finite Element Method' by J.N. Reddy?

I am struggling to decipher what is happening on page 129 as shown in the attachment. If some-one is willing to help I will reply with a more specific query on that page. Thanks
 

Attachments

  • IMAG0058.jpg
    IMAG0058.jpg
    20.9 KB · Views: 532
Engineering news on Phys.org
I think this would be easier to understand if you write it in matrix form.
Suppose you have two linear elements joined end to end, so there are 3 nodes.
If the stiffness matrices of the two elements are
$$\begin{bmatrix}
k^1_{11} & k^1_{12} \\
k^1_{21} & k^1_{22}
\end{bmatrix}$$
and $$\begin{bmatrix}
k^2_{11} & k^2_{12} \\
k^2_{21} & k^2_{22}
\end{bmatrix}$$
The assembled stiffness matrix is
$$\begin{bmatrix}
k^1_{11} & k^1_{12} & 0 \\
k^1_{21} & k^1_{22}+k^2_{11} & k^2_{12} \\
0 & k^2_{21} & k^2_{22}
\end{bmatrix}$$
And similarly for the right hand side vectors.

You probably first met this idea in a dynamics course, setting up the equations of motion for mass-and-spring systems.
 
AlephZero said:
I think this would be easier to understand if you write it in matrix form.
Suppose you have two linear elements joined end to end, so there are 3 nodes.
If the stiffness matrices of the two elements are
$$\begin{bmatrix}
k^1_{11} & k^1_{12} \\
k^1_{21} & k^1_{22}
\end{bmatrix}$$
and $$\begin{bmatrix}
k^2_{11} & k^2_{12} \\
k^2_{21} & k^2_{22}
\end{bmatrix}$$
The assembled stiffness matrix is
$$\begin{bmatrix}
k^1_{11} & k^1_{12} & 0 \\
k^1_{21} & k^1_{22}+k^2_{11} & k^2_{12} \\
0 & k^2_{21} & k^2_{22}
\end{bmatrix}$$
And similarly for the right hand side vectors.

You probably first met this idea in a dynamics course, setting up the equations of motion for mass-and-spring systems.

Thanks.Actually further down the page the matrix form is shown (see attached). However, I don't see how the assembled matrix you have shown for 2 linear elements can be derived 'explicitly' from the matrix attached. Ie, the second row of attached contains ##k_{11}^3## which does not exist for a system of 2 elements...? Of course we know it does not exist hence we can simply not write it in but...
 

Attachments

  • IMAG0060.jpg
    IMAG0060.jpg
    16.9 KB · Views: 476
I think the matrix in the book is slightly misleading. There should also be a vertical dotted line showing that some columns are missing, lile
$$\begin{bmatrix}
\color{red}{ k^1_{11}} & \color{red}{k^1_{12}} & & \vdots \\
\color{red}{k^1_{21}} & \color{red}{k^1_{22} + k^2_{11}} & \color{blue}{k^2_{12}} & \vdots \\
& \color{blue}{k^2_{21}} & \color{blue}{k^2_{22} + k^3_{11}} & \vdots \\
\cdots & \cdots & \cdots & \ddots & \cdots & \cdots \\
& & & \vdots & k^{N-1}_{22} + k^N_{11} & \color{red}{K^N_{12}} \\
& & & \vdots & \color{red}{k^N_{21}} & \color{red}{K^N_{22}}
\end{bmatrix}$$

When N = 1, you just have the first and last rows and columns forming a 2x2 matrix.

When N = 2, you have the first second and last rows and columns forming a 3x3 matrix, i.e. the matrix entries shown in red.

When N = 3, you have the entries shown in red and blue.
 
Last edited:
In two elements K11^3 = 0 as there is no U4 either. Its just the notations that are generally written for more than two elements
 
As a mechanical engineer I found it much easier to lay out the matrices as AlephZero has done (i.e. graphically), the reason the author of the book lays them out in equation or linear algebra form is basically that's what you would need if you were writing your own FEA software.

Great posts AlephZero! That's some impressive application of TEX!
 
AlephZero said:
I think the matrix in the book is slightly misleading. There should also be a vertical dotted line showing that some columns are missing, lile
$$\begin{bmatrix}
\color{red}{ k^1_{11}} & \color{red}{k^1_{12}} & & \vdots \\
\color{red}{k^1_{21}} & \color{red}{k^1_{22} + k^2_{11}} & \color{blue}{k^2_{12}} & \vdots \\
& \color{blue}{k^2_{21}} & \color{blue}{k^2_{22} + k^3_{11}} & \vdots \\
\cdots & \cdots & \cdots & \ddots & \cdots & \cdots \\
& & & \vdots & k^{N-1}_{22} + k^N_{11} & \color{red}{K^N_{12}} \\
& & & \vdots & \color{red}{k^N_{21}} & \color{red}{K^N_{22}}
\end{bmatrix}$$

When N = 1, you just have the first and last rows and columns forming a 2x2 matrix.

When N = 2, you have the first second and last rows and columns forming a 3x3 matrix, i.e. the matrix entries shown in red.

When N = 3, you have the entries shown in red and blue.

THanks to all and particularly AlephZero. His matrix notation greatly clarifies things for me.

Appreciated.
Ed
 
Mech_Engineer said:
As a mechanical engineer I found it much easier to lay out the matrices as AlephZero has done (i.e. graphically),

Actually, there's a better technology than TeX for doing this. It's called "some big sheets of paper and a pack of colored pens." :smile:

(But Mech_Engineer probably knew that already.)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
10K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
15K