Advertisement

Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering

, Volume 26, Issue 1, pp 163–243 | Cite as

Geometrically Exact Finite Element Formulations for Slender Beams: Kirchhoff–Love Theory Versus Simo–Reissner Theory

  • Christoph MeierEmail author
  • Alexander Popp
  • Wolfgang A. Wall
Original Paper

Abstract

The present work focuses on geometrically exact finite elements for highly slender beams. It aims at the proposal of novel formulations of Kirchhoff–Love type, a detailed review of existing formulations of Kirchhoff–Love and Simo–Reissner type as well as a careful evaluation and comparison of the proposed and existing formulations. Two different rotation interpolation schemes with strong or weak Kirchhoff constraint enforcement, respectively, as well as two different choices of nodal triad parametrizations in terms of rotation or tangent vectors are proposed. The combination of these schemes leads to four novel finite element variants, all of them based on a \(C^1\)-continuous Hermite interpolation of the beam centerline. Essential requirements such as representability of general 3D, large deformation, dynamic problems involving slender beams with arbitrary initial curvatures and anisotropic cross-section shapes, preservation of objectivity and path-independence, consistent convergence orders, avoidance of locking effects as well as conservation of energy and momentum by the employed spatial discretization schemes, but also a range of practically relevant secondary aspects will be investigated analytically and verified numerically for the different formulations. It will be shown that the geometrically exact Kirchhoff–Love beam elements proposed in this work are the first ones of this type that fulfill all these essential requirements. On the contrary, Simo–Reissner type formulations fulfilling these requirements can be found in the literature very well. However, it will be argued that the shear-free Kirchhoff–Love formulations can provide considerable numerical advantages such as lower spatial discretization error levels, improved performance of time integration schemes as well as linear and nonlinear solvers and smooth geometry representation as compared to shear-deformable Simo–Reissner formulations when applied to highly slender beams. Concretely, several representative numerical test cases confirm that the proposed Kirchhoff–Love formulations exhibit a lower discretization error level as well as a considerably improved nonlinear solver performance in the range of high beam slenderness ratios as compared to two representative Simo–Reissner element formulations from the literature.

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Ademir LX (2014) Static Kirchhoff rods under the action of external forces: integration via Runge–Kutta method. J Comput Methods Phys 2014:650365zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Antman SS (1974) Kirchhoff’s problem for nonlinearly elastic rods. Quar Appl Math 32(3):221–240MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Antman SS (1995) Nonlinear problems of elasticity. Springer, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Argyris JH, Balmer H, Doltsinis J St., Dunne PC, Haase M, Kleiber M, Malejannakis GA, Mlejnek H-P, Müller M, Scharpf DW (1979) Finite element method: the natural approach. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 17–18(Part 1):1–106zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Armero F, Valverde J (2012) Invariant Hermitian finite elements for thin Kirchhoff rods. I. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 213–216:427–457zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Armero F, Valverde J (2012) Invariant hermitian finite elements for thin Kirchhoff rods. II. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 213–216:458–485zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Arnold M, Brüls O (2007) Convergence of the generalized-\(\alpha \) scheme for constrained mechanical systems. Multibody Syst Dynam 18(2):185–202MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ashwell DG, Sabir AB (1971) Limitations of certain curved finite elements when applied to arches. Int J Mech Sci 13(2):133–139Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ashwell DG, Sabir AB, Roberts TM (1971) Further studies in the application of curved finite elements to circular arches. Int J Mech Sci 13(6):507–517Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Avello A, de Jaln JG, Bayo E (1991) Dynamics of flexible multibody systems using cartesian co-ordinates and large displacement theory. Int J Numer Methods Eng 32(8):1543–1563zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bathe K-J, Bolourchi S (1979) Large displacement analysis of three-dimensional beam structures. Int J Numer Methods Eng 14(7):961–986zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bathe K-J, Iosilevich A, Chapelle D (2000) An inf-sup test for shell finite elements. Comput Struc 75(5):439–456MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Battini J-M, Pacoste C (2002) Co-rotational beam elements with warping effects in instability problems. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 191(17–18):1755–1789zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bauchau OA, Bottasso CL (1999) On the design of energy preserving and decaying schemes for flexible, nonlinear multi-body systems. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 169(12):61–79MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bauchau OA, Han S, Mikkola A, Matikainen MK (2014) Comparison of the absolute nodal coordinate and geometrically exact formulations for beams. Multibody Syst Dynam 32(1):67–85MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bauer AM, Breitenberger M, Philipp B, Wüchner R, Bletzinger K-U (2016) Nonlinear isogeometric spatial Bernoulli beam. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 303:101–127MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Belytschko T, Hseih BJ (1973) Nonlinear transient finite element analysis with convected coordinates. Int J Numer Methods Eng 7:255–271Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Belytschko T, Lawrence WG (1979) Applications of higher order corotational stretch theories to nonlinear finite element analysis. Comput Struc 10(1):175–182zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bergou M, Wardetzky M, Robinson S, Audoly B, Grinspun E (2008) Discrete elastic rods. ACM Trans Graph 27(3):1–63Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bertails F, Audoly B, Cani M-P, Querleux B, Leroy F, Lévêque J-L (2006) Super-helices for predicting the dynamics of natural hair. ACM Trans Graph 25(3):1180–1187Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Betsch P, Steinmann P (2001) Constrained integration of rigid body dynamics. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 191(35):467–488MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Betsch P, Steinmann P (2002) Frame-indifferent beam finite elements based upon the geometrically exact beam theory. Int J Numer Methods Eng 54(12):1775–1788MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bishop RL (1975) There is more than one way to frame a curve. Am Math Month 82(3):246–251MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Borri M, Bottasso C (1994) An intrinsic beam model based on a helicoidal approximation—Part I: formulation. Int J Numer Methods Eng 37(13):2267–2289zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Borri M, Bottasso C (1994) An intrinsic beam model based on a helicoidal approximation—Part II: linearization and finite element implementation. Int J Numer Methods Eng 37(13):2291–2309zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bottasso CL, Borri M (1998) Integrating finite rotations. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 164(34):307–331MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Boyer F, De Nayer G, Leroyer A, Visonneau M (2011) Geometrically exact Kirchhoff beam theory: application to cable dynamics. J Comput Nonlinear Dynam 6:1–14Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Boyer F, Primault D (2004) Finite element of slender beams in finite transformations: a geometrically exact approach. Int J Numer Methods Eng 59(5):669–702MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Brezzi F (1974) On the existence, uniqueness and approximation of saddle-point problems arising from lagrangian multipliers. ESAIM 8(R2):129–151MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Brezzi F, Fortin M (1991) Mixed and hybrid finite elements. Springer, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Brüls O, Cardona A (2010) On the use of Lie group time integrators in multibody dynamics. J Comput Nonlinear Dynam 5:031002Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Brüls O, Cardona A, Arnold M (2012) Lie group generalized-\(\alpha \) time integration of constrained flexible multibody systems. Mech Mach Theor 48:121–137Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cannarozzi M, Molari L (2008) A mixed stress model for linear elastodynamics of arbitrarily curved beams. Int J Numer Methods Eng 74(1):116–137MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Cardona A, Géradin M (1988) A beam finite element non-linear theory with finite rotations. Int J Numer Methods Eng 26(11):2403–2438zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Cardona A, Géradin M, Doan DB (1991) Rigid and flexible joint modelling in multibody dynamics using finite elements. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 89(1):395–418Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Choit JK, Lim JK (1995) General curved beam elements based on the assumed strain fields. Comput Struc 55(3):379–386zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chung J, Hulbert GM (1993) A time integration algorithm for structural dynamics with improved numerical dissipation: the generalized-\(\alpha \) method. J Appl Mech 60:371–375MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Cosserat E, Cosserat F (1909) Théorie des Corps Déformables, 2nd edn. Traité de Physique, ParisGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Crisfield MA (1990) A consistent co-rotational formulation for non-linear, three-dimensional, beam-elements. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 81(2):131–150zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Crisfield MA (1997) Non-linear finite element analysis of solids and structures: advanced topics. Wiley, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Crisfield MA (2003) Non-linear finite element analysis of solids and structures: essentials. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Crisfield MA, Galvanetto U, Jelenić G (1997) Dynamics of 3-D co-rotational beams. Comput Mech 20(6):507–519zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Crisfield MA, Jeleni G (1999) Objectivity of strain measures in the geometrically exact three-dimensional beam theory and its finite-element implementation. Proc R Soc London 455(1983):1125–1147MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Crivelli LA, Felippa CA (1993) A three-dimensional non-linear Timoshenko beam based on the core-congruential formulation. Int J Numer Methods Eng 36(21):3647–3673zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Cyron CJ, Wall WA (2012) Numerical method for the simulation of the Brownian dynamics of rod-like microstructures with three-dimensional nonlinear beam elements. Int J Numer Methods Eng 90(8):955–987MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Demoures F, Gay-Balmaz F, Leyendecker S, Ober-Blöbaum S, Ratiu TS, Weinand Y (2015) Discrete variational Lie group formulation of geometrically exact beam dynamics. Numer Math 130(1):73–123MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Dill EH (1992) Kirchhoff’s theory of rods. Arch Hist Exact Sci 44(1):1–23MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Dukić EP, Jelenić G, Gaćeša M (2014) Configuration-dependent interpolation in higher-order 2D beam finite elements. Finite Elem Anal Design 78:47–61MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Durville D (2010) Simulation of the mechanical behaviour of woven fabrics at the scale of fibers. Int J Mater Form 3(2):1241–1251Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Dvorkin EN, Oñate E, Oliver J (1988) On a non-linear formulation for curved Timoshenko beam elements considering large displacement/rotation increments. Int J Numer Methods Eng 26(7):1597–1613zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Eugster S (2015) Geometric continuum mechanics and induced beam theories. Springer, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Eugster SR, Hesch C, Betsch P, Glocker Ch (2014) Director-based beam finite elements relying on the geometrically exact beam theory formulated in skew coordinates. Int J Numer Methods Eng 97(2):111–129MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Fan WW, Zhu WD (2016) An accurate singularity-free formulation of a three-dimensional curved Euler–Bernoulli beam for flexible multibody dynamic analysis. J Vibrat Acoust 138(5):051001Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Felippa CA, Haugen B (2005) A unified formulation of small-strain corotational finite elements: I. Theory. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 194(21–24):2285–2335zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Fried I (1973) Shape functions and the accuracy of arch finite elements. Am Inst Aeronaut Astronaut J 11:287–291zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Frischkorn J, Reese S (2013) A solid-beam finite element and non-linear constitutive modelling. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 265:195–212MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Gadot B, Martinez OR, du Roscoat SR, Bouvard D, Rodney D, Orgéas L (2015) Entangled single-wire NiTi material: a porous metal with tunable superelastic and shape memory properties. Acta Mater 96:311–323Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Géradin M, Cardona A (1989) Kinematics and dynamics of rigid and flexible mechanisms using finite elements and quaternion algebra. Comput Mech 4(2):115–135zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Géradin M, Cardona A (2001) Flexible multibody dynamics: a finite element approach. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Gerstmayr J, Shabana AA (2006) Analysis of thin beams and cables using the absolute nodal co-ordinate formulation. Nonlinear Dynam 45(1):109–130zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Gerstmayr J, Sugiyama H, Mikkola A (2013) Review on the absolute nodal coordinate formulation for large deformation analysis of multibody systems. J Comput Nonlinear Dynam 8(3):1–12Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ghosh S, Roy D (2008) Consistent quaternion interpolation for objective finite element approximation of geometrically exact beam. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 198(3–4):555–571MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Ghosh S, Roy D (2009) A frame-invariant scheme for the geometrically exact beam using rotation vector parametrization. Comput Mech 44(1):103–118zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Gonzalez O (1996) Time integration and discrete Hamiltonian systems. J Nonlinear Sci 6(5):449–467MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Goyal S, Perkins NC, Lee CL (2005) Nonlinear dynamics and loop formation in Kirchhoff rods with implications to the mechanics of DNA and cables. J Comput Phys 209(1):371–389MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Greco L, Cuomo M (2013) B-Spline interpolation of Kirchhoff–Love space rods. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 256:251–269MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Greco L, Cuomo M (2016) An isogeometric implicit mixed finite element for Kirchhoff space rods. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 298:325–349MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Gruttmann F, Sauer R, Wagner W (1998) A geometrical nonlinear eccentric 3D-beam element with arbitrary cross-sections. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 160(34):383–400zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Hsiao KM, Lin JY, Lin WY (1999) A consistent co-rotational finite element formulation for geometrically nonlinear dynamic analysis of 3-D beams. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 169(1–2):1–18zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Hsiao KM, Yang RT (1995) A co-rotational formulation for nonlinear dynamic analysis of curved Euler beam. Comput Struc 54(6):1091–1097zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Hsiao KM, Yang RT, Lee AC (1994) A consistent finite element formulation for non-linear dynamic analysis of planar beam. Int J Numer Methods Eng 37(1):75–89zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Hughes TJR (2000) The finite element method: linear static and dynamic finite element analysis. Dover, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Hughes TJR, Taylor RL, Kanoknukulchai W (1977) A simple and efficient finite element for plate bending. Int J Numer Methods Eng 11(10):1529–1543zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Ibrahimbegović A (1995) On finite element implementation of geometrically nonlinear Reissner’s beam theory: three-dimensional curved beam elements. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 122(1–2):11–26zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Ibrahimbegović A (1997) On the choice of finite rotation parameters. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 149(1–4):49–71MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Ibrahimbegović A, Frey F (1993) Finite element analysis of linear and non-linear planar deformations of elastic initially curved beams. Int J Numer Methods Eng 36(19):3239–3258zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Ibrahimbegović A, Frey F, Kozar I (1995) Computational aspects of vector-like parametrization of three-dimensional finite rotations. Int J Numer Methods Eng 38(21):3653–3673MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Ibrahimbegović A, Mamouri S (2002) Energy conserving/decaying implicit time-stepping scheme for nonlinear dynamics of three-dimensional beams undergoing finite rotations. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 191(3738):4241–4258zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Ibrahimbegović A, Taylor RL (2002) On the role of frame-invariance in structural mechanics models at finite rotations. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 191(45):5159–5176MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Iosilevich A, Bathe K-J, Brezzi F (1997) On evaluating the infsup condition for plate bending elements. Int J Numer Methods Eng 40(19):3639–3663zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Iura M, Atluri SN (1988) Dynamic analysis of finitely stretched and rotated three-dimensional space-curved beams. Comput Struc 29:875–889zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Jelenić G, Crisfield MA (1998) Interpolation of rotational variables in nonlinear dynamics of 3D beams. Int J Numer Methods Eng 43(7):1193–1222MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Jelenić G, Crisfield MA (1999) Geometrically exact 3D beam theory: implementation of a strain-invariant finite element for statics and dynamics. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 171(1–2):141–171MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Jelenić G, Saje M (1995) A kinematically exact space finite strain beam model: finite element formulation by generalized virtual work principle. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 120(12):131–161MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Jung P, Leyendecker S, Linn J, Ortiz M (2011) A discrete mechanics approach to the Cosserat rod theory—Part 1: Static equilibria. Int J Numer Methods Eng 85(1):31–60MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Kane C, Marsden JE, Ortiz M, West M (2000) Variational integrators and the Newmark algorithm for conservative and dissipative mechanical systems. Int J Numer Methods Eng 49(10):1295–1325MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Kapania RK, Li J (2003) A formulation and implementation of geometrically exact curved beam elements incorporating finite strains and finite rotations. Comput Mech 30(5):444–459zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Karamanlidis D, Jasti R (1987) Curved mixed beam elements for the analysis of thin-walled free-form arches. Ingenieur Arch 57(5):361–367zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Kirchhoff G (1859) Ueber das Gleichgewicht und die Bewegung eines unendlich dünnen elastischen Stabes. J für die reine und angewandte Math 56:285–313MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Koiter WT (1966) On the nonlinear theory of thin elastic shells. In: Proceedings of the Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, vol 69.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Kondoh K, Tanaka K, Atluri SN (1986) An explicit expression for the tangent-stiffness of a finitely deformed 3-D beam and its use in the analysis of space frames. Comput Struc 24(2):253–271zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Koschnick F (2004) Geometrische locking-effekte bei Finiten Elementen und ein allgemeines Konzept zu ihrer Vermeidung. Ph.D thesis, Lehrstuhl für Statik, Technische Universität MünchenGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Kulachenko A, Denoyelle T, Galland S, Lindström SB (2012) Elastic properties of cellulose nanopaper. Cellulose 19(3):793–807Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Kulachenko A, Uesaka T (2012) Direct simulations of fiber network deformation and failure. Mech Mater 51:1–14Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Lang H, Arnold M (2012) Numerical aspects in the dynamic simulation of geometrically exact rods. Appl Numer Math 62(10):1411–1427MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Lang H, Linn J, Arnold M (2010) Multi-body dynamics simulation of geometrically exact Cosserat rods. Multibody Syst Dynam 25(3):285–312MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Langer J, Singer DA (1996) Lagrangian aspects of the Kirchhoff elastic rod. SIAM Rev 38(4):605–618MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Lazarus A, Miller JJT, Reis PM (2013) Continuation of equilibria and stability of slender elastic rods using an asymptotic numerical method. J Mech Phys Solids 61(8):1712–1736MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Le T-N, Battini J-M, Hjiaj M (2014) A consistent 3D corotational beam element for nonlinear dynamic analysis of flexible structures. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 269:538–565MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Lee PG, Sin HC (1993) Locking-free straight beam element based on curvature. Commun Numer Methods Eng 9(12):1005–1011zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Lens EV, Cardona A (2008) A nonlinear beam element formulation in the framework of an energy preserving time integration scheme for constrained multibody systems dynamics. Comput Struc 86(12):47–63Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Linn J (2016) Discrete kinematics of Cosserat rods based on the difference geometry of framed curves. In: The 4th joint international conference on multibody system dynamics, Montréal, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Linn J, Lang H, Tuganov A (2013) Geometrically exact Cosserat rods with Kelvin–Voigt type viscous damping. Mech Sci 4(1):79–96Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Love AEH (1944) A treatise on the mathematical theory of elasticity. Dover, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Lyly M, Stenberg R, Vihinen T (1993) A stable bilinear element for the Reissner–Mindlin plate model. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 110(3–4):343–357MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Maier M, Müller KW, Heussinger C, Köhler S, Wall WA, Bausch AR, Lieleg O (2015) A single charge in the actin binding domain of fascin can independently tune the linear and non-linear response of an actin bundle network. Eur Phys J E 38(5):50Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Marsden JE, Hughes TJR (1994) Mathematical foundations of elasticity. Dover, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Meier C, Grill MJ, Wall WA, Popp A (2016) Geometrically exact beam elements and smooth contact schemes for the modeling of fiber-based materials and structures. arXiv preprint, arXiv:1611.06436
  109. 109.
    Meier C, Popp A, Wall WA (2014) An objective 3D large deformation finite element formulation for geometrically exact curved Kirchhoff rods. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 278:445–478MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Meier C, Popp A, Wall WA (2015) A locking-free finite element formulation and reduced models for geometrically exact Kirchhoff rods. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 290:314–341MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Meier C, Popp A, Wall WA (2016) A finite element approach for the line-to-line contact interaction of thin beams with arbitrary orientation. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 308:377–413MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Meier C, Wall WA, Popp A (2017) A unified approach for beam-to-beam contact. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 315:972–1010MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Müller KW, Bruinsma RF, Lieleg O, Bausch AR, Wall WA, Levine AJ (2014) Rheology of semiflexible bundle networks with transient linkers. Phys Rev Lett 112:238102Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Müller KW, Meier C, Wall WA (2015) Resolution of sub-element length scales in Brownian dynamics simulations of biopolymer networks with geometrically exact beam finite elements. J Comput Phys 303:185–202MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Noor AK, Peters JM (1981) Mixed models and reduced/selective integration displacement models for nonlinear analysis of curved beams. Int J Numer Methods Eng 17(4):615–631zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Petrov E, Géradin M (1998) Finite element theory for curved and twisted beams based on exact solutions for three-dimensional solids Part 1: beam concept and geometrically exact nonlinear formulation. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 165(1–4):43–92zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Prathap G (1985) The curved beam/deep arch/finite ring element revisited. Int J Numer Methods Eng 21(3):389–407zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Prathap G, Naganarayana BP (1990) Analysis of locking and stress oscillations in a general curved beam element. Int J Numer Methods Eng 30(1):177–200Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Quarteroni A, Sacco R, Fausto S (2000) Numerical mathematics. Springer, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Reissner E (1972) On one-dimensional finite-strain beam theory: the plane problem. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Physik (ZAMP) 23(5):795–804zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Reissner E (1981) On finite deformations of space-curved beams. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Physik (ZAMP) 32(6):734–744zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Rodney D, Gadot B, Martinez OR, Roscoat SR, Orgéas L (2016) Reversible dilatancy in entangled single-wire materials. Nat Mater 15:72–77Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Romero I (2004) The interpolation of rotations and its application to finite element models of geometrically exact rods. Comput Mech 34:121–133MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Romero I (2008) A comparison of finite elements for nonlinear beams: the absolute nodal coordinate and geometrically exact formulations. Multibody Syst Dynam 20(1):51–68MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Romero I (2008) Formulation and performance of variational integrators for rotating bodies. Comput Mech 42(6):825–836MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Romero I, Armero F (2002) An objective finite element approximation of the kinematics of geometrically exact rods and its use in the formulation of an energy-momentum conserving scheme in dynamics. Int J Numer Methods Eng 54(12):1683–1716MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Romero I, Urrecha M, Cyron CJ (2014) A torsion-free non-linear beam model. Int J Non-Linear Mech 58:1–10Google Scholar
  128. 128.
    Sander O (2010) Geodesic finite elements for Cosserat rods. Int J Numer Methods Eng 82(13):1645–1670MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Sansour C, Nguyen TL, Hjiaj M (2015) An energy-momentum method for in-plane geometrically exact Euler–Bernoulli beam dynamics. Int J Numer Methods Eng 102(2):99–134MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Sansour C, Wagner W (2003) Multiplicative updating of the rotation tensor in the finite element analysis of rods and shells: a path independent approach. Comput Mech 31(1):153–162MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Santos HAFA, Pimenta PM, Almeida JPM (2011) A hybrid-mixed finite element formulation for the geometrically exact analysis of three-dimensional framed structures. Comput Mech 48(5):591–613MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Schmidt MG, Ismail AE, Sauer RA (2015) A continuum mechanical surrogate model for atomic beam structures. Int J Numer Methods Eng 13(5):413–442Google Scholar
  133. 133.
    Schulz M, Filippou FC (2001) Non-linear spatial Timoshenko beam element with curvature interpolation. Int J Numer Methods Eng 50(4):761–785zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Shabana AA, Hussien HA, Escalona JL (1998) Application of the absolute nodal coordinate formulation to large rotation and large deformation problems. J Mech Design 120(2):188–195Google Scholar
  135. 135.
    Shabana AA, Yakoub RY (2001) Three dimensional absolute nodal coordinate formulation for beam elements: theory. J Mech Design 123(4):606–613Google Scholar
  136. 136.
    Shi Y, Hearst JE (1994) The Kirchhoff elastic rod, the nonlinear Schrödinger equation, and DNA supercoiling. J Chem Phys 101(6):5186–5200Google Scholar
  137. 137.
    Shoemake K (1985) Animating rotation with quaternion curves. ACM SIGGRAPH Comput Graph 19(3):245–254Google Scholar
  138. 138.
    Simo JC (1985) A finite strain beam formulation. The three-dimensional dynamic problem. Part I. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 49:55–70zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Simo JC, Hughes TJR (1986) On the variational foundations of assumed strain methods. J Appl Mech 53:51–54MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Simo JC, Vu-Quoc L (1986) A three-dimensional finite strain rod model. Part II: computational aspects. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 58:79–116zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Simo JC, Vu-Quoc L (1988) On the dynamics in space of rods undergoing large motions: a geometrically exact approach. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 66(2):125–161MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Simo JC, Wong KK (1991) Unconditionally stable algorithms for rigid body dynamics that exactly preserve energy and momentum. Int J Numer Methods Eng 31(1):19–52MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  143. 143.
    Smolenski WM (1998) Statically and kinematically exact nonlinear theory of rods and its numerical verification. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 178(1–2):89–113MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Sonneville V, Cardona A, Brüls O (2014) Geometric interpretation of a non-linear beam finite element on the Lie group SE(3). Arch Mech Eng 61:305–329zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    Sonneville V, Cardona A, Brüls O (2014) Geometrically exact beam finite element formulated on the special Euclidean group. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 268:451–474MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  146. 146.
    Spurrier RA (1978) Comment on “singularity-free extraction of a quaternion from a direction-cosine matrix”. J Spacecraft Rockets 15:255–255Google Scholar
  147. 147.
    Stolarski H, Belytschko T (1982) Membrane locking and reduced integration for curved elements. J Appl Mech 49:172–176zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  148. 148.
    Strang G, Fix G (2008) An analysis of the finite elment method. Wellesley-Cambrigde Press, CambrigdezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Tessler A, Spiridigliozzi L (1986) Curved beam elements with penalty relaxation. Int J Numer Methods Eng 23(12):2245–2262Google Scholar
  150. 150.
    Timoshenko SP (1921) On the correction for shear of the differential equation for transverse vibrations of prismatic bars. Philos Magn Series 41(245):744–746Google Scholar
  151. 151.
    Češarek P, Saje M, Zupan D (2012) Kinematically exact curved and twisted strain-based beam. Int J Solids Struc 49(13):1802–1817Google Scholar
  152. 152.
    Vu TD, Durville D, Davies P (2015) Finite element simulation of the mechanical behavior of synthetic braided ropes and validation on a tensile test. Int J Solids Struc 58:106–116Google Scholar
  153. 153.
    Wall WA (2017) BACI: a multiphysics simulation environment. Technical report. Technical University of Munich, MunichGoogle Scholar
  154. 154.
    Wang Q, Wang CM (2007) The constitutive relation and small scale parameter of nonlocal continuum mechanics for modelling carbon nanotubes. Nanotechnology 18(7):075702Google Scholar
  155. 155.
    Weeger O, Yeung S-K, Dunn ML (2016) Isogeometric collocation methods for Cosserat rods and rod structures. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 316:100. doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2016.05.009 MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  156. 156.
    Weiss H (2002) Dynamics of geometrically nonlinear rods: I. Mechanical models and equations of motion. Nonlinear Dynam 30(4):357–381MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  157. 157.
    Weiss H (2002) Dynamics of geometrically nonlinear rods: II. Numerical methods and computational examples. Nonlinear Dynam 30(4):383–415MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  158. 158.
    Wempner G (1969) Finite elements, finite rotations and small strains of flexible shells. Int J Solids Struc 5(2):117–153zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  159. 159.
    Yang Y, Tobias I, Olson WK (1993) Finite element analysis of DNA supercoiling. J Chem Phys 98(2):1673–1686Google Scholar
  160. 160.
    Zhang Z, Qi Z, Wu Z, Fang H (2015) A spatial Euler–Bernoulli beam element for rigid-flexible coupling dynamic analysis of flexible structures. Shock Vibrat 2015:208127Google Scholar
  161. 161.
    Zhao Z, Ren G (2012) A quaternion-based formulation of Euler–Bernoulli beam without singularity. Nonlinear Dynam 67(3):1825–1835MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  162. 162.
    Zupan D, Saje M (2003) Finite-element formulation of geometrically exact three-dimensional beam theories based on interpolation of strain measures. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 192(49–50):5209–5248MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  163. 163.
    Zupan D, Saje M (2006) The linearized three-dimensional beam theory of naturally curved and twisted beams: the strain vectors formulation. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 195(33–36):4557–4578zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  164. 164.
    Zupan E, Saje M, Zupan D (2013) On a virtual work consistent three-dimensional Reissner–Simo beam formulation using the quaternion algebra. Acta Mech 224(8):1709–1729MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© CIMNE, Barcelona, Spain 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mechanosynthesis GroupMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA
  2. 2.Institute for Computational MechanicsTechnical University of MunichGarching b. MünchenGermany

Personalised recommendations