​

This paper shows applications of a recently developed thin shell element adequate for the analysis of membrane and inflatable structures. The element is a three node triangle with only translational degrees of freedom that uses the configuration of the three adjacent elements to evaluate the strains in terms of the nodal displacements only. This allows to compute (constant) bending strains and (linear) membrane strains using a total Lagrangian formulation. Several examples, including inflation and deflation of membranes and some practical applications to the analysis, design and construction of membrane structures formed by low pressure inflatable tubes   are presented.

​

'''Keywords''' shell  elements, rotation free shell triangle, membrane structures,   inflatable structures, low pressure inflatable tubes

​

==1 Introduction==

​

Inflatable structures have unique features. Because of their foldability and air- or helium pneumatic stabilisation they cannot be compared to any classical structural concepts.

​

Inflatable structures have become increasingly popular in recent years for a wide range of applications in architecture, civil engineering, aeronautic  and airspace situations.

​

The use of inflatable structures can be found in temporary and/or foldable structures to cover large spaces or to support other elements, in permanent roofs or shelters with a high degree of transparency, in mobile buildings as temporary housing in civil logistic missions (e.g. environmental disasters and rescue situations), in the construction of tunnels and dams, in antennas for both ground and aerospace applications, as well as in extremely light airship structures among other uses <span id='citeF-1'></span> <span id='citeF-11'></span>[[#cite-1|[1]]-[[#cite-11|11]]].

​

Some efforts have been made in the past years to develop inflated structures formed by assembly of high pressure tubes. The obvious disadvantages of these structures are the design of the joints and their big vulnerability to air losses. In general, high pressure inflated structures are difficult to maintain and repair and have a high cost.

​

Inflatable structures formed by an assembly of self-supported low pressure tubular membrane elements are ideal to cover large space areas. They also adapt easily to any design shape and have minimal maintenance requirements, other than keeping a constant low internal pressure accounting for the air losses through the material pores and the seams.

​

The simulation of the inflation of membrane structures is normally performed with membrane finite elements, i.e. no bending stiffness included.  The formulation of such elements is simple as they only require <math display="inline">C^{0}</math> continuity <span id='citeF-12'></span>[[#cite-12|[12]]], in contrast with elements based on thin shell theory where <math display="inline">C^{1}</math> continuity implies important obstacles <span id='citeF-13'></span>[[#cite-13|[13]]] in the development of conforming elements.  Triangular elements are naturally preferred as they can easily adapt to arbitrary geometries and due to the robustness of the associated mesh generators.

​

Membrane structures components have some, although small, bending stiffness that in most cases is  disregarded. However in many applications it is convenient to include bending energy in the model due to the important regularization effect it introduces. Shell elements are typically more complex and expensive due the increase in degrees of freedom (rotations) and integration points (through the thickness). In the last few years shell elements without rotation degrees of freedom have been developed <span id='citeF-14'></span> <span id='citeF-22'></span>[[#cite-14|[14]]-[[#cite-22|22]]], which make shell elements more efficient for both implicit and explicit integration schemes.

​

When only the final configuration of the membrane is of interest implicit schemes are normally used, including special algorithms due to the lack of stiffness of the membrane when no tensile stresses are yet present.  When the inflation/deflation process is of interest, the explicit integration of the momentum equations is largely preferred.  Modeling of complex deformation with constant strain shell triangles, such as those occuring in the inflation-deflation process of inflatable membranes accounting for frictional contact conditions typically require  fine discretizations. These type of simulations can be time consuming due to the time increment limitations. In this paper a rotation-free triangular shell element with similar convergence properties to the linear strain triangle, but without its drawbacks, is used.

​

The outline of this chapter is as follows. Next two section summarizes the rotation-free shell triangle used. [[#4 Aeroelastic Analysis|Section 4]] summarices the procedure for aeroelastic analysis. [[#5 Examples|Section 5]] presents examples of application to the analysis of inflatable membranes. The paper concludes with practical examples inflatable structures formed by low pressure inflatable tubes designed and analyzed  using the  technology described in the paper. Finally [[#6 Concluding Remarks|Section 6]] summarizes some conclusions.

​

==2 Formulation of the Rotation Free Shell Triangle==

​

===2.1 Shell Kinematics===

​

A summary of the most relevant hypothesis related to the kinematic behaviour of a thin shell are presented. Further details may be found in the wide literature dedicated to this field <span id='citeF-21'></span> <span id='citeF-23'></span>[[#cite-21|[21]]-[[#cite-23|23]]].

​

Consider a shell with undeformed middle surface occupying the domain <math display="inline">\Omega ^{0}</math> in <math display="inline">R^{3}</math> with a boundary <math display="inline">\Gamma ^{0}</math>. At each point of the middle surface a thickness <math display="inline">h^{0}</math> is defined. The positions <math display="inline">\mathbf{x}^{0}</math> and <math display="inline">\mathbf{x}</math> of a point in the undeformed and the deformed configurations can be respectively written as a function of the coordinates of the middle surface <math display="inline">{\boldsymbol \varphi }</math> and the normal <math display="inline">\mathbf{t}_{3}</math> at the point as

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{x}^{0}\left( \xi _{1},\xi _{2},\zeta \right)    ={\boldsymbol \varphi }^{0}\left( \xi _{1},\xi _{2}\right) +\lambda \mathbf{t}_{3}^{0}</math>

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (1)

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math> \mathbf{x}\left( \xi _{1},\xi _{2},\zeta \right)    ={\boldsymbol \varphi }\left( \xi  _{1},\xi _{2}\right) +\zeta \lambda \mathbf{t}_{3}</math>

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (2)

|}

|}

​

where <math display="inline">\xi _{1},\xi _{2}</math> are arc-length curvilinear principal coordinates defined over the middle surface of the shell and <math display="inline">\zeta </math> is the distance from the point to the middle surface in the undeformed configuration. The product <math display="inline">\zeta \lambda </math> is the distance from the point to the middle surface measured on the deformed configuration. The parameter <math display="inline">\lambda </math> relates the thickness at the present and initial configurations as:

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\lambda =\frac{h}{h^{0}}</math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (3)

|}

​

This approach implies a constant strain in the normal direction. Parameter <math display="inline">\lambda </math> will not be considered as an independent variable  and will be computed from purely geometrical considerations (''isochoric'' behaviour) via a staggered iterative update. Besides this, the usual plane stress condition of thin shell theory will be adopted.

​

A convective system is computed at each point as

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{g}_{i}\left( \mathbf{\xi }\right) =\frac{\partial \mathbf{x}}{\partial \xi _{i}}\qquad i=1,2,3</math>

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (4)

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math> \mathbf{g}_{\alpha }\left( \mathbf{\xi }\right)    =\frac{\partial \left( \mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }\left( \xi _{1},\xi _{2}\right) +\zeta \lambda \mathbf{t}_{3}\right) }{\partial \xi _{\alpha }}={\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }\alpha }+\zeta \left( \lambda \mathbf{t}_{3}\right) _{^{\prime }\alpha }\quad \alpha=1,2</math>

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (5)

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math> \mathbf{g}_{3}\left( \mathbf{\xi }\right)    =\frac{\partial \left( \mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }\left( \xi _{1},\xi _{2}\right) +\zeta \lambda \mathbf{t}_{3}\right) }{\partial \zeta }=\lambda \mathbf{t}_{3}</math>

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (6)

|}

|}

​

This can be particularized for the points on the middle surface as

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{a}_{\alpha }    =\mathbf{g}_{\alpha }\left( \zeta=0\right) ={\boldsymbol \varphi  }_{^{\prime }\alpha }</math>

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (7)

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math> \mathbf{a}_{3}    =\mathbf{g}_{3}\left( \zeta=0\right) =\lambda  \mathbf{t}_{3}</math>

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (8)

|}

|}

​

The covariant (first fundamental form) metric tensor of the middle surface is

​

<span id="eq-9"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>a_{\alpha \beta }=\mathbf{a}_{\alpha }\cdot \mathbf{a}_{\beta } = {\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }\alpha } \cdot  {\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }\beta }  </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (9)

|}

​

The Green-Lagrange strain vector of the middle surface points (membrane strains) is defined as

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>{\boldsymbol \varepsilon }_{m}=[\varepsilon _{m_{11}},\varepsilon _{m_{12}},\varepsilon _{m_{12}}]^{T}</math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (10)

|}

​

with

​

<span id="eq-11"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\varepsilon _{m_{ij}}=\frac{1}{2}(a_{ij}-a_{ij}^{0}) </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (11)

|}

​

The curvatures (second fundamental form) of the middle surface are obtained by

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\kappa _{\alpha \beta }=\frac{1}{2}\left( {\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }\alpha }\cdot \mathbf{t}_{3^{\prime }\beta }+{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }\beta }\cdot  \mathbf{t}_{3^{\prime }\alpha }\right) =- \mathbf{t}_{3}\cdot{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{{\prime }\alpha \beta }\quad , \quad \alpha ,\beta=1,2 </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (12)

|}

​

The deformation gradient tensor is

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{F=} [{\boldsymbol x}_{{\prime }1},{\boldsymbol x}_{{\prime }2},{\boldsymbol x}_{{\prime }3}]=\left[ \begin{array}{ccc}{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }1}+\zeta \left( \lambda \mathbf{t}_{3}\right) _{^{\prime  }1} & {\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }2}+\zeta \left( \lambda \mathbf{t}_{3}\right) _{^{\prime }2} & \lambda \mathbf{t}_{3}\end{array} \right] </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (13)

|}

​

The product <math display="inline">\mathbf{F}^{T}\mathbf{F=U}^{2}=\mathbf{C}</math> (where <math display="inline">\mathbf{U}</math> is the right stretch tensor, and <math display="inline">\mathbf{C}</math> the right Cauchy-Green deformation tensor) can be written as

​

<span id="eq-14"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{U}^{2}=\left[ \begin{array}{ccc}a_{11}+2\kappa _{11}\zeta \lambda & a_{12}+2\kappa _{12}\zeta \lambda & 0\\ a_{12}+2\kappa _{12}\zeta \lambda & a_{22}+2\kappa _{22}\zeta \lambda & 0\\ 0 & 0 & \lambda ^{2}\end{array} \right] </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (14)

|}

​

In the derivation of expression ([[#eq-14|14]]) the derivatives of the thickness ratio <math display="inline">\lambda _{^{\prime }a}</math> and the terms associated to <math display="inline">\zeta ^{2}</math> have been neglected.

​

Equation ([[#eq-14|14]]) shows that <math display="inline">\mathbf{U}^{2}</math> is not a unit tensor at the original configuration for curved surfaces (<math display="inline">\kappa _{ij}^{0}\neq{0}</math>). The changes of curvature of the middle surface are computed by

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\chi _{ij}=\kappa _{ij}-\kappa _{ij}^{0}</math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (15)

|}

​

Note that <math display="inline">\delta \chi _{ij}=\delta \kappa _{ij}</math>.

​

For computational convenience the following approximate expression (which is exact for initially flat surfaces) will be adopted

​

<span id="eq-16"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{U}^{2}=\left[ \begin{array}{ccc}a_{11}+2\chi _{11}\zeta \lambda & a_{12}+2\chi _{12}\zeta \lambda & 0\\ a_{12}+2\chi _{12}\zeta \lambda & a_{22}+2\chi _{22}\zeta \lambda & 0\\ 0 & 0 & \lambda ^{2}\end{array} \right]  </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (16)

|}

​

This expression is useful to compute different Lagrangian strain measures. An advantage of these measures is that they are associated to material fibres, what makes it easy to take into account material anisotropy. It is also useful to compute the eigen decomposition of <math display="inline">\mathbf{U}</math> as

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{U=}\sum _{\alpha=1}^{3}\lambda _{\alpha } \mathbf{r}_{\alpha }\otimes \mathbf{r}_{\alpha }</math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (17)

|}

​

where <math display="inline">\lambda _{\alpha }</math> and <math display="inline">\mathbf{r}_{\alpha }</math> are the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of <math display="inline">\mathbf{U}</math>.

​

The resultant stresses  (axial forces and bending moments) are obtained by integrating across the original thickness the second Piola-Kirchhoff stress vector <math display="inline">{ \boldsymbol \sigma }</math> using the actual distance to the middle surface for  evaluating the bending moments. This gives

​

<span id="eq-18"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>{\boldsymbol \sigma }_{m}\equiv \lbrack N_{11},N_{22},N_{12}]^{T}=\int _{h^{0}}{\boldsymbol \sigma }d\zeta </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (18)

|}

​

<span id="eq-19"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>{\boldsymbol \sigma }_{b}\equiv \lbrack M_{11},M_{22},M_{12}]^{T}=\int _{h^{0}}{\boldsymbol \sigma  }\lambda \zeta  d\zeta </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (19)

|}

​

With these values the virtual work can be written as

​

<span id="eq-20"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\iint _{A^{0}}\left[ \delta{\boldsymbol \varepsilon }_{m}^{T}{\boldsymbol \sigma }_{m}+\delta{\boldsymbol \kappa  }^{T}{\boldsymbol \sigma }_{b}\right] dA=\iint _{A^{0}}\delta \mathbf{u}^{T}\mathbf{t}dA </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (20)

|}

​

where <math display="inline">\delta \mathbf{u}</math> are virtual displacements, <math display="inline">\delta{\boldsymbol \varepsilon }_{m}</math> is the virtual Green-Lagrange membrane strain vector, <math display="inline">\delta{\boldsymbol \kappa }</math> are the virtual curvatures and <math display="inline">\mathbf{t}</math> are the surface loads. Other load types can be easily included into ([[#eq-20|20]]).

​

===2.2 Constitutive Models===

​

In order to treat non linear material behaviour at finite strains an adequate stress-strain pair must be used. The Hencky measures will be adopted here. The (logarithmic) strains are defined as

​

<span id="eq-21"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{E}_{\ln }\mathbf{=}\left[ \begin{array}{ccc}\varepsilon _{11} & \varepsilon _{21} & 0\\ \varepsilon _{12} & \varepsilon _{22} & 0\\ 0 & 0 & \varepsilon _{33}\end{array} \right] =\sum _{\alpha=1}^{3}\ln \left( \lambda _{\alpha }\right) \mathbf{r}_{\alpha }\otimes \mathbf{r}_{\alpha } </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (21)

|}

​

The use of a logarithmic strain measure reasonably allows to adopt an additive decomposition of elastic and non-linear (plastic) strain components as

​

<span id="eq-22"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{E}_{\ln }\mathbf{=E}_{\ln }^{e}+\mathbf{E}_{\ln }^{p} </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (22)

|}

​

A constant linear relationship between the (plane) Hencky stresses and the logarithmic elastic strains is  chosen giving

​

<span id="eq-23"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{T}=\mathbf{H} \mathbf{E}_{\ln }^{e} </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (23)

|}

​

where <math display="inline">\boldsymbol H</math> is the constitutive matrix.

​

The constitutive equations are integrated using a standard return algorithm. Details of an specific constitutive model for rubber-type materials can be found in <span id='citeF-21'></span><span id='citeF-22'></span>[[#cite-21|[21]],[[#cite-22|22]]]. The Hencky stress tensor <math display="inline">\mathbf{T}</math> can be easily particularized for the plane stress case.

​

We define the rotated Hencky and second Piola-Kirchhoff stress tensors as

​

<span id="eq-24"></span>

<span id="eq-25"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{T}_{L}    =\mathbf{R}_{L}^{T}\;\mathbf{T\;R}_{L}</math>

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (24)

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math> \mathbf{S}_{L}    =\mathbf{R}_{L}^{T}\;\mathbf{S\;R}_{L}</math>

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (25)

|}

|}

​

where <math display="inline">\mathbf{R}_{L}</math> is the rotation tensor obtained from the eigenvectors of <math display="inline">\mathbf{U}</math> given by

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{R}_{L}=\left[ \begin{array}{ccc}\mathbf{r}_{1}\quad ,& \mathbf{r}_{2} \quad ,& \mathbf{r}_{3}\end{array} \right] </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (26)

|}

​

The relationship between the rotated Hencky and Piola-Kirchhoff stresses is <math display="inline">\left(\alpha , \beta=1,2 \right)</math>

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\left[ S_{L}\right] _{\alpha \alpha }    =\frac{1}{\lambda _{\alpha }^{2}}\left[ T_{L}\right] _{\alpha \alpha }</math>

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math> \left[ S_{L}\right] _{\alpha \beta }    =\frac{\ln \left( \lambda _{\alpha  }/\lambda _{\beta }\right) }{\frac{1}{2}\left( \lambda _{\alpha }^{2}-\lambda _{\beta }^{2}\right) }\left[ T_{L}\right] _{\alpha \beta }</math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (27)

|}

​

The second Piola-Kirchhoff stress tensor can be computed by

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{S=}\sum _{\alpha=1}^{2}\sum _{\beta=1}^{2}\left[ S_{L}\right] _{\alpha \beta } \mathbf{r}_{\alpha }\otimes \mathbf{r}_{\beta }</math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (28)

|}

​

The second Piola-Kirchhoff stress vector <math display="inline">{\boldsymbol \sigma }</math> used in Eqs.([[#eq-18|18]]&#8211;[[#eq-19|19]]) can be readily extracted from the <math display="inline">\mathbf{S}</math> tensor.

​

==3 Enhanced Basic Shell Triangle==

​

The main features of the element formulation (termed EBST for Enhanced Basic Shell Triangle) are the following:

​

<ol>

​

<li>The geometry of the patch formed by an element and the three adjacent elements is ''quadratically interpolated'' from the position of the six nodes in the patch (Fig.[[#img-1|1]]). </li>

​

<li>The membrane strains are assumed to vary ''linearly'' within the central triangle and are expressed in terms of the (continuous) values of the deformation gradient at the mid side points of the triangle. </li>

​

<li>An assumed ''constant curvature'' field within the central triangle is chosen. This is computed in terms of the values of the (continuous) deformation gradient at the mid side points. </li>

​

</ol>

​

Details of the derivation of the EBST element are given below.

​

<div id='img-1a'></div>

<div id='img-1b'></div>

<div id='img-1'></div>

{| class="floating_imageSCP" style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: 100%;max-width: 100%;"

|-

|[[File:Draft_Samper_330523237_7304_1.JPG]]

|[[File:Draft_Samper_330523237_8216_2.JPG]]

|- style="text-align: center; font-size: 75%;"

| (a) 

| (b) 

|- style="text-align: center; font-size: 75%;"

| colspan="2" | '''Figure 1:''' (a) Patch of three node triangular elements including the central   triangle (M) and three adjacent triangles (1, 2 and 3); (b) Patch of elements in the isoparametric space

|}

​

===3.1 Definition of the Element Geometry and Computation of Membrane Strains===

​

A  quadratic approximation of the geometry of the four elements patch is chosen using the position of the six nodes in the patch. It is useful to define the patch in the isoparametric space using the nodal positions given in the Table [[#table-1|1]] (see also Fig.[[#img-1|1]]).

​

​

{|  class="floating_tableSCP wikitable" style="text-align: center; margin: 1em auto;min-width:50%;"

|+ style="font-size: 75%;" |<span id='table-1'></span>Table. 1 Isoparametric coordinates of the six nodes in the patch of Fig.[[#img-1|1]]

|- style="border-top: 2px solid;"

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" |  

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 1 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 2 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 3 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 4 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 5 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 6

|- style="border-top: 2px solid;"

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | <math display="inline">\xi </math> 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 0 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 1 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 0 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 1 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | -1 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 1

|- style="border-top: 2px solid;border-bottom: 2px solid;"

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | <math display="inline">\eta </math> 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 0 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 0 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 1 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 1 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | 1 

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;" | -1

​

|}

​

The quadratic interpolation is defined by

​

<span id="eq-29"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>{\boldsymbol \varphi }=\sum _{i=1}^{6}N_{i}{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{i}</math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (29)

|}

​

with (<math display="inline">\zeta=1-\xi-\eta</math>)

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\begin{array}{ccc}N_{1}=\zeta{+\xi}\eta &  & N_{4}=\displaystyle \frac{\zeta }{2}\left( \zeta{-1}\right) \\[.15cm] N_{2}=\xi{+\eta}\zeta &  & N_{5}=\displaystyle \frac{\xi }{2}\left( \xi{-1}\right) \\[.15cm] N_{3}=\eta{+\zeta}\xi &  & N_{6}=\displaystyle \frac{\eta }{2}\left( \eta{-1}\right) \end{array} </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (30)

|}

​

This interpolation allows to computing the displacement gradients at selected points in order to use an assumed strain approach. The computation of the gradients is performed at the mid side points of the central element of the patch denoted by <math display="inline">G_{1}</math>, <math display="inline">G_{2}</math> and <math display="inline">G_{3}</math> in Fig. [[#img-1|1]]. This choice has the following advantages.

​

* Gradients at the three mid side points depend only on the nodes belonging to the two elements adjacent to each side. This can be easily verified by sampling the derivatives of the shape functions at each mid-side point.

​

* When gradients are computed at the common mid-side point of two adjacent elements, the same values are obtained, as the coordinates of the same four points are used. This in practice means that the gradients at the mid-side points are independent of the element where they are computed. A side-oriented implementation of the finite element will therefore lead to a unique evaluation of the gradients per side.

​

The Cartesian derivatives of the shape functions are computed at the original configuration by the standard expression

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\left[ \begin{array}{c}N_{i,1}\\ N_{i,2}\end{array} \right] =\mathbf{J}^{-1}\left[ \begin{array}{c}N_{i,\xi } \\ N_{i,\eta }\end{array} \right] </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (31)

|}

​

where the Jacobian matrix at the original configuration is

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{J=}\left[ \begin{array}{cc}\mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }\xi }^{0}\cdot \mathbf{t}_{1} & \mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi  }_{^{\prime }\eta }^{0}\cdot \mathbf{t}_{1}\\ \mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }\xi }^{0}\cdot \mathbf{t}_{2} & \mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi  }_{^{\prime }\eta }^{0}\cdot \mathbf{t}_{2}\end{array} \right] </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (32)

|}

​

The deformation gradients on the middle surface, associated to an arbitrary spatial Cartesian system and to the material cartesian system defined on the middle surface are related by

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\left[ {\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }1},\mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }2}\right] =\left[ \mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }\xi },\mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }\eta }\right]  \mathbf{J}^{-1}</math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (33)

|}

​

The membrane strains within the central triangle are obtained using a linear assumed strain field <math display="inline">\hat{\boldsymbol \varepsilon }_{m}</math>, i.e.

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>{\boldsymbol \varepsilon }_{m}=\hat{\boldsymbol \varepsilon }_{m}</math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (34)

|}

​

with

​

<span id="eq-35"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\hat{\boldsymbol \varepsilon }_{m}=(1-2\zeta ){\boldsymbol \varepsilon }_{m}^{1}+(1-2\xi ){\boldsymbol \varepsilon  }_{m}^{2}+(1-2\eta ){\boldsymbol \varepsilon }_{m}^{3}=\sum _{i=1}^{3}\bar{N}_{i}{\boldsymbol \varepsilon }_{m}^{i}</math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (35)

|}

​

where <math display="inline">{\boldsymbol \varepsilon }_{m}^{i}</math> are the membrane strains computed at the three mid side points <math display="inline">G_{i}</math> (<math display="inline">i=1,2,3</math>  see Fig.[[#img-1|1]]). In Eq.([[#eq-35|35]]) <math display="inline">\bar{N}_{1}=(1-2\zeta )</math>, etc.

​

The gradient at each mid side point is computed from the quadratic interpolation ([[#eq-29|29]]):

​

<span id="eq-36"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\left( {\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }\alpha }\right) _{G_{i}}={\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime  }\alpha }^{i}=\left[ \sum _{j=1}^{3}N_{j,\alpha }^{i}{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{j}\right] +N_{i+3,\alpha }^{i}{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{i+3}\quad ,\quad \alpha=1,2\quad ,\quad  i=1,2,3</math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (36)

|}

​

Substituting Eq.([[#eq-11|11]]) into ([[#eq-35|35]]) and using Eq.([[#eq-9|9]]) gives the membrane strain vector as

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>{\boldsymbol \varepsilon }_{m}=\sum _{i=1}^{3}\frac{1}{2}\bar{N}_{i}\left\{ \begin{array}{c}{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }1}^{i}\cdot \mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }1}^{i}-1\\ {\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }2}^{i}\cdot \mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }2}^{i}-1\\ 2{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }1}^{i}\cdot \mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }2}^{i}\end{array} \right\} </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (37)

|}

​

and the virtual membrane strains as

​

<span id="eq-38"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\delta{\boldsymbol \varepsilon }_{m}=\sum _{i=1}^{3}\bar{N}_{i}\left\{ \begin{array}{c}{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }1}^{i}\cdot \delta \mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }1}^{i}\\ {\boldsymbol \varphi }_{2}^{i}\cdot \delta \mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }2}^{i}\\ \delta{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }1}^{i}\cdot \mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }2}^{i}+{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }1}^{i}\cdot \delta \mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{2}^{i}\end{array} \right\} </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (38)

|}

​

We note that the gradient at each mid side point <math display="inline">G_{i}</math> depends only on the coordinates of the three nodes of the central triangle and on those of an additional node in the patch, associated to the side <math display="inline">i</math> where the gradient is computed.

​

Combining Eqs.([[#eq-38|38]]), ([[#eq-36|36]]) and ([[#eq-29|29]]) gives

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\delta{\boldsymbol \varepsilon }_{m}=\mathbf{B}_{m}\delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}^{p}</math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (39.a)

|}

​

with

​

<span id="eq-39.b"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\underset{18\times 1}{\delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}^p} =[\delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}_{1}^{T},\delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}_{2}^{T},\delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}_{3}^{T},\delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}_{4}^{T},\delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}_{5}^{T},\delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}_{6}^{T}]^{T}</math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (39.b)

|}

​

where <math display="inline">\delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}^{p}</math> is the patch displacement vector, <math display="inline">\delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}_i</math> contains the three virtual displacement of node <math display="inline">i</math> and <math display="inline">\mathbf{B}_{m}</math> is the membrane strain matrix. An explicit form of <math display="inline">\mathbf{B}_{m}</math> is given in <span id='citeF-21'></span><span id='citeF-22'></span>[[#cite-21|[21]],[[#cite-22|22]]].

​

Note that the membrane strains within the EBST element are  a function of the displacements of the six patch nodes.

​

===3.2 Computation of Curvatures===

​

We will assume the following constant curvature field within each element

​

<span id="eq-40"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\kappa _{\alpha \beta }=\hat{\kappa }_{\alpha \beta } </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (40)

|}

​

where <math display="inline">\hat{\kappa }_{\alpha \beta }</math> is the assumed constant curvature field defined by

​

<span id="eq-41"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\hat{\kappa }_{\alpha \beta }=-\frac{1}{A_{M}^{0}}\int _{A_{M}^{0}}\mathbf{t}_{3}\cdot{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }\beta \alpha }\;dA^{0} </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (41)

|}

​

where <math display="inline">A_{M}^{0}</math> is the area (in the original configuration) of the central element in the patch.

​

Substituting Eq.([[#eq-41|41]]) into ([[#eq-40|40]]) and integrating by parts the area integral gives the curvature vector within the element in terms of the following line integral

​

<span id="eq-42"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>{\boldsymbol \kappa }=\left\{ \begin{array}{c}\kappa _{11}\\ \kappa _{22}\\ 2\kappa _{12}\end{array} \right\} =\frac{1}{A_{M}^{0}}{\displaystyle \oint _{\Gamma _{M}^{0}}} \left[ \begin{array}{cc}-n_{1} & 0\\ 0 & -n_{2}\\ -n_{2} & -n_{1}\end{array} \right] \left[ \begin{array}{c}\mathbf{t}_{3}\cdot{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }1}\\ \mathbf{t}_{3}\cdot{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }2}\end{array} \right] d\Gamma </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (42)

|}

​

where <math display="inline">n_{i}</math> are the components (in the local system) of the normals to the element sides in the initial configuration <math display="inline">\Gamma _{M}^{0}</math>. The integration by parts of Eq.([[#eq-41|41]]) is typical in finite volume methods for computing second derivatives over volumes by line integrals of gradient terms <span id='citeF-16'></span> <span id='citeF-17'></span> <span id='citeF-19'></span> <span id='citeF-21'></span> <span id='citeF-22'></span>[[#cite-1|[16]],[[#cite-17|17]],[[#cite-19|19]],[[#cite-21|21]],[[#cite-22|22]]]. For the definition of the normal vector <math display="inline">\mathbf{t}_{3}</math>, the linear interpolation over the central element is used. In this case the tangent plane components are

​

<span id="eq-43.a"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }\alpha } = \sum _{i=1}^{3} L_{i,\alpha }^M {\boldsymbol \varphi }_{i}\quad ,\quad \alpha=1,2 </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (43.a)

|}

​

<span id="eq-43.b"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{t}_{3}=\frac{{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{\prime{1}}\times{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{\prime{2}}}{\left\vert {\boldsymbol \varphi }_{\prime{1}}\times{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{\prime{2}}\right\vert }=\lambda \;{\boldsymbol \varphi  }_{1}\times{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{2} </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (43.b)

|}

​

From these expressions it is also possible to compute in the original configuration the element area <math display="inline">A^{0}_{M}</math>, the outer normals <math display="inline">\left( n_{1},n_{2}\right) ^{i}</math> at each side and the side lengths <math display="inline">l_{i}^{M}</math>. Equation ([[#eq-43.b|43.b]]) also allows to evaluate the thickness ratio <math display="inline">\lambda </math> in the deformed configuration and the actual normal <math display="inline">\mathbf{t}_{3}</math>.

​

The numerical evaluation of the line  integral in Eq.([[#eq-42|42]]) results in a sum over the integration points at the element boundary which are, in fact, the same points used for evaluating the gradients when computing the membrane strains. As one integration point is used over each side, it is not necessary to distinguish between sides (<math display="inline">i</math>) and integration points (<math display="inline">G_{i}</math>). In this way the curvatures can be computed by

​

<span id="eq-44"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>{\boldsymbol \kappa }=\frac{1}{A_{M}^{0}} \sum ^3_{i=1} l_i^M \left[ \begin{array}{cc}-n_{1} & 0\\ 0 & -n_{2}\\ -n_{2} & -n_{1}\end{array} \right] \left[ \begin{array}{c}\mathbf{t}_{3}\cdot{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }1}\\ \mathbf{t}_{3}\cdot{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }2}\end{array} \right] d\Gamma </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (44)

|}

​

Eq.([[#eq-44|44]]) is now expressed in terms  of the shape functions of the 3-noded triangle <math display="inline">L_i^M</math> (which coincide with the area coordinates <span id='citeF-23'></span>[[#cite-23|[23]]]). Noting the property of the area coordinates

​

<span id="eq-45"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\nabla L_{i}^{M}=\left[ \begin{array}{c}L_{i,x}^{M}\\ L_{i,y}^{M}\end{array} \right] =-\frac{l_{i}^{M}}{2A_{M}}\left[ \begin{array}{c}n_{x}^{i}\\ n_{y}^{i}\end{array} \right]  </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (45)

|}

​

the expression for the curvature can be expressed as

​

<span id="eq-46"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>{\boldsymbol \kappa }=2\sum _{i=1}^{3}\left[ \begin{array}{cc}L_{i,1}^M & 0\\ 0         & L_{i,2}^M \\ L_{i,2}^M & L_{i,1}^M \end{array} \right] \left[ \begin{array}{c}\mathbf{t}_{3}\cdot{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }1}^{i}\\ \mathbf{t}_{3}\cdot{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }2}^{i}\end{array} \right]  </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (46)

|}

​

The gradient <math display="inline">\mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi  }_{\prime \alpha }^{i}</math>  is evaluated at each side <math display="inline">G_{i}</math> from the quadratic interpolation

​

<span id="eq-47"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\left[ \begin{array}{c}{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{\prime{1}}^{i}\\ {\boldsymbol \varphi }_{\prime{2}}^{i}\end{array} \right] =\left[ \begin{array}{cccc}N_{1,1}^{i} & N_{2,1}^{i} & N_{3,1}^{i} & N_{i+3,1}^{i}\\ N_{1,2}^{i} & N_{2,2}^{i} & N_{3,2}^{i} & N_{i+3,2}^{i}\end{array} \right] \left[ \begin{array}{c}{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{1}\\ {\boldsymbol \varphi }_{2}\\ {\boldsymbol \varphi }_{3}\\ {\boldsymbol \varphi }_{i+3}\end{array} \right]  </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (47)

|}

​

This is a basic difference with respect of the computation of the curvature field in the original Basic Shell Triangle (BST) where the gradient at the side mid-point is computed as the average value between the values at two adjacent elements <span id='citeF-17'></span><span id='citeF-19'></span><span id='citeF-21'></span><span id='citeF-22'></span>[[#cite-17|[17]],[[#cite-19|19]],[[#cite-21|21]],[[#cite-22|22]]].

​

Note again than at each side the gradients depend only on the positions of the three nodes of the central triangle and of an extra node (<math display="inline">i+3</math>), associated precisely to the side (<math display="inline">G_{i}</math>) where the gradient is computed.

​

Direction '''t'''<math display="inline">_{3}</math> in Eq.([[#eq-46|46]]) can be seen as a reference direction. If a different direction than that given by Eq.([[#eq-43.b|43.b]]) is chosen at an angle <math display="inline">\theta </math> with the former, this has an influence of order <math display="inline">\theta ^{2}</math> in the projection. This justifies Eq.([[#eq-43.b|43.b]]) for the definition of '''t'''<math display="inline">_{3}</math> as a function exclusively of the three nodes of the central triangle, instead of using the 6-node isoparametric interpolation.

​

The variation of the curvatures can be expressed as

​

<span id="eq-48"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\delta{\boldsymbol \kappa }   =2\sum _{i=1}^{3}\left[ \begin{array}{cc}L_{i,1}^M & 0\\ 0         & L_{i,2}^M\\ L_{i,2}^M & L_{i,1}^M\end{array} \right] \left\{ \sum _{i=1}^{3}\left[ \begin{array}{c}N_{j,1}^{i}(\mathbf{t}_{3}\cdot \delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}_{j})\\ N_{j,2}^{i}(\mathbf{t}_{3}\cdot \delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}_{j}) \end{array} \right] +\left[ \begin{array}{c}N_{i+3,1}^{i}(\mathbf{t}_{3}\cdot \delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}^{i+3})\\ N_{i+3,2}^{i}(\mathbf{t}_{3}\cdot \delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}^{i+3}) \end{array} \right] \right\} -</math>

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>   -\sum _{i=1}^{3}\left[ \begin{array}{c}(L_{i,1}^M\rho _{11}^{1}+L_{i,2}^M\rho _{11}^{2})\\ (L_{i,1}^M\rho _{22}^{1}+L_{i,2}^M\rho _{22}^{2})\\ (L_{i,1}^M\rho _{12}^{1}+L_{i,2}^M\rho _{12}^{2}) \end{array} \right] (\mathbf{t}_{3}\cdot \delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}_{i})=\mathbf{B}_{b}\delta \bar{\boldsymbol u}^{p}</math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (48)

|}

​

In Eq.([[#eq-48|48]])

​

<span id="eq-49"></span>

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{B}_{b}=[\mathbf{B}_{b_{1}},\mathbf{B}_{b_{2}},\cdots ,\mathbf{B}_{b_{6}}]</math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (49)

|}

​

Details of the derivation of the curvature matrix <math display="inline">\mathbf{B}_b</math> are given in <span id='citeF-21'></span><span id='citeF-22'></span><span id='citeF-26'></span>[[#cite-21|[21]],[[#cite-21|22]],[[#cite-26|26]]].

​

===3.3 The EBST1 Element===

​

A simplified and yet very effective version of the EBST element can be obtained by using ''one point quadrature'' for the computation of all the element integrals. This element is termed EBST1. Note that this only affects the membrane stiffness matrices and it is equivalent to using a assumed constant membrane strain field defined by an average of the metric tensors computed at each side <span id='citeF-21'></span><span id='citeF-22'></span>[[#cite-21|[21]],[[#cite-22|22]]].

​

Numerical experiments have shown that both the EBST and the EBST1 elements are free of spurious energy modes <span id='citeF-21'></span><span id='citeF-22'></span>[[#cite-21|[21]],[[#cite-22|22]]].

​

===3.4 Boundary Conditions===

​

Elements at the domain boundary, where an adjacent element does not exist, deserve a special attention. The treatment of essential boundary conditions associated to translational constraints is straightforward, as they are the natural degrees of freedom of the element. The conditions associated to the normal vector are crucial in the bending  formulation. For clamped sides or symmetry planes, the normal vector <math display="inline">\mathbf{t}_{3}</math> must be kept fixed (clamped case), or constrained to move in the plane of symmetry (symmetry case). The former case can be seen as a special case of the latter, so we will consider symmetry planes only. This restriction can be imposed through the definition of the tangent plane at the boundary, including the normal to the plane of symmetry <math display="inline">\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }n}^{0}</math> that does not change during the process.

​

<div id='img-2'></div>

{| class="floating_imageSCP" style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: 100%;max-width: 100%;"

|-

|[[File:Draft_Samper_330523237_7907_3.JPG]]

|

|- style="text-align: center; font-size: 75%;"

| colspan="1" | '''Figure 2:''' Local Cartesian system for the treatment of symmetry boundary conditions

|}

​

The tangent plane at the boundary (mid-side point) is expressed in terms of two orthogonal unit vectors referred to a local-to-the-boundary Cartesian system (see Fig.[[#img-2|2]]) defined as

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\left[\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }n}^{0},\;\bar{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }s}\right] </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (50)

|}

​

where vector <math display="inline">\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }n}^{0}</math> is fixed during the process while direction <math display="inline">\bar{\boldsymbol \varphi }_{^{\prime }s}</math> emerges from the intersection of the symmetry plane with the plane defined by the central element (<math display="inline">M</math>). The plane (gradient) defined by the central element in the selected original  convective Cartesian system (<math display="inline">\mathbf{t}_{1},\mathbf{t}_{2} </math>) is

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\left[\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }1}^{M},\;\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime  }2}^{M}\right] </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (51)

|}

​

the intersection line (side <math display="inline">i</math>) of this plane with the plane of symmetry can be written in terms of the position of the nodes that define the side (<math display="inline">j </math> and <math display="inline">k</math>) and the original length of the side <math display="inline">l_{i}^{M}</math>, i.e.

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }s}^{i}=\frac{1}{l_{i}^{M}}\left(\boldsymbol \varphi _{k}-\boldsymbol \varphi _{j}\right) </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (52)

|}

​

That together with the outer normal to the side <math display="inline">\mathbf{n}^{i} =\left[n_{1},n_{2}\right]^{T}=\left[\mathbf{n\cdot t}_{1},\mathbf{n\cdot t}_{2}\right]^{T}</math> (resolved in the selected original convective Cartesian system) leads to

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\left[ \begin{array}{c}\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }1}^{iT} \\ \boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }2}^{iT}\end{array}\right]=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}n_{1} & -n_{2} \\ n_{2} & n_{1}\end{array}\right]\left[ \begin{array}{c}\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }n}^{iT} \\ \boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }s}^{iT}\end{array}\right] </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (53)

|}

​

where, noting  that <math display="inline">\lambda </math> is the determinant of the gradient, the normal component of the gradient <math display="inline">\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }n}^{i}</math> can be approximated by

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }n}^{i}=\frac{\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }n}^{0}}{\lambda |\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }s}^{i}|} </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (54)

|}

​

For a simple supported (hinged) side, the problem is not completely defined. The simplest choice is to neglect the contribution to the side rotations from the adjacent element missing in the patch in the evaluation of the curvatures via Eq.([[#eq-42|42]]) [<span id='citeF-17'></span><span id='citeF-19'></span><span id='citeF-21'></span><span id='citeF-22'></span>[[#cite-17|17]],[[#cite-19|19]],[[#cite-21|21]],[[#cite-22|22]]]. This is equivalent to assume that the gradient at the side is equal to the gradient in the central element, i.e.

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\left[\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }1}^{i},\;\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }2}^{i}\right]=\left[\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }1}^{M},\;\boldsymbol \varphi _{^{\prime }2}^{M}\right] </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (55)

|}

​

More precise changes can be however introduced to account for the different natural boundary conditions. One may assume that the curvature normal to the side is zero, and consider a contribution of the missing side to introduce this constraint. As the change of curvature parallel to the side is also zero along the hinged side, this obviously leads to zero curvatures in both directions.

​

We note finally that for the membrane formulation of the EBST element, the gradient at the mid-side point of the boundary is assumed equal to the gradient of the main triangle.

​

More details on the specification of the boundary conditions on the EBST element can be found in <span id='citeF-21'></span><span id='citeF-22'></span>[[#cite-21|[21]],[[#cite-21|22]]].

​

===3.5 Explicit Solution Scheme===

​

For simulations presenting large geometrical and/or material non-linearities, involving frictional contact conditions on complex geometries, convergence is difficult to achieve with implicit schemes. In these cases an explicit solution algorithm is typically most advantageous. The explicit  scheme provides the solution for dynamic problems and also for quasi-static problems if an adequate damping is chosen.

​

The dynamic equations of motion to solve are of the form

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>\mathbf{r}(\bar{\boldsymbol u}) + \mathbf{D} \dot{\bar{\mathbf u}} + \mathbf{M}  \ddot{\bar{\mathbf u}} = 0 </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (56)

|}

​

where <math display="inline">\bar{\boldsymbol u}</math> is the nodal displacement vector for the whole mesh, <math display="inline">\mathbf{M}</math> is the mass matrix, <math display="inline">\mathbf{D}</math> is the damping matrix and the dot means the time derivative. The solution is performed using the ''central difference method''. To make the method competitive a diagonal (lumped) <math display="inline">\mathbf{M}</math> matrix is typically used and <math display="inline">\mathbf{D}</math> is taken proportional to <math display="inline">\mathbf{M}</math>. As usual, mass lumping is performed by assigning one third of the triangular element mass to each node in the central element.

​

The explicit solution scheme can be summarized as follows. At each time step <math display="inline">n</math> where the displacements '''u''' have been computed:

​

<ol>

​

<li>Compute the residual forces <math display="inline">\mathbf{r}^{n}</math>. This follows the  steps described in Box 1. </li>

​

<li>Compute the accelerations at time <math display="inline">t_{n}</math>

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>

​

\ddot{\bar{\boldsymbol u}}^{n} = {\boldsymbol M}_d^{-1} [ \mathbf{r}^{n} - \mathbf{D} \dot{\bar{\mathbf u}}^{n-1/2} ] </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (57)

|}</li>

​

where <math display="inline">{\boldsymbol M}_d</math> is the diagonal (lumped) mass matrix.

​

<li>Compute the velocities at time <math display="inline">t_{n+1/2}</math>

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>

​

\dot{\bar{\boldsymbol u}}^{n+1/2} = \dot{\bar{\boldsymbol u}}^{n-1/2}+ \ddot{\bar{\boldsymbol u}}^{n} \delta t </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (58)

|}</li>

​

<li>Compute the displacements at  time <math display="inline">t_{n+1}</math>

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math>

​

\bar{\boldsymbol u}^{n+1} = \bar{\mathbf{u}}^{n} +\dot{\bar{\mathbf u}}^{n+1/2} \delta t </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (59)

|}</li>

<li>Update the shell geometry </li>

<li>Check frictional contact conditions </li>

​

</ol>

​

​

​

{|  class="floating_tableSCP wikitable" style="text-align: left; margin: 1em auto;min-width:50%;"

|-

| style="border-left: 2px solid;border-right: 2px solid;border-top: 2px solid;" | 

​

Generate the actual configuration <math display="inline">\mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }^{n+1}=\mathbf{\boldsymbol \varphi }^{n}+\Delta \bar{\mathbf u}^{n}</math>

Compute the metric tensor <math display="inline">a_{\alpha \beta }^{n+1}\mathbf{ }</math>and the curvatures <math display="inline">\kappa _{\alpha \beta }^{n+1}</math>. Then at each layer <math display="inline">k</math> compute the (approximate) right Cauchy-Green tensor. From [[#Eq-14|(14)]]

​

{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;" 

|-

| 

{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;" 

|-

| style="text-align: center;" | <math> \mathbf{C}_{k}^{n+1}=\mathbf{a}^{n+1}+z_{k}{\boldsymbol \chi }^{n+1} </math>

|}

| style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;" | (60)

|}

Compute the total (21) and elastic (22) deformations at each layer <math display="inline">k</math>

​

<span id="eq-61"></span>