A penalty-based finite element interface technology

Pantano, Antonio; Averill, Ronald C.

doi:10.1016/s0045-7949(02)00056-1

Cited by 40 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the interface frame, a linear interpolation function is employed in each element of the interface frame. The selection and a detailed description on how to choose the penalty value can be found in Pantano and Averill [7] Fig. 5 is for the selection results of the candidate area and PDOFs in each domain from 1 to 8.…”

Section: Non-matched Structure With Eight Sub-domain Platesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sub-domain reduction method in non-matched interface problems

Kim

Cho

2008

J Mech Sci Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A sub-domain scheme combined with a reduced system is proposed for non-matched interface problems. A twolevel condensation scheme (TLCS) is employed for the selection of primary degrees of freedom of each sub-domain. The degrees of freedom of each domain are divided into primary, secondary and interface degrees of freedom. After the reduced system is constructed in subdomain-level, the penalty frame method, which utilizes a conventional FEM solver, is employed for assembling non-matched subdomains. The present method can construct the reduced system of each domain without coupling with adjacent subdomains. Thus it is remarkably efficient in computation time and does not require a full memory of global system. Numerical examples demonstrate that the proposed method saves computational cost effectively and provides a reduced system which predicts the accurate eigenvalues of global system.

show abstract

Section: Non-matched Structure With Eight Sub-domain Platesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…So, we employ the penalty frame method, which is easy to implement. The penalty frame method was proposed by Cho and Kim in order to connect the incompatible interface mesh between non-matched sub-domains [6] The determination of proper penalty parameter values was reported by Pantano and Averill [7,8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sub-domain reduction method in non-matched interface problems

Kim

Cho

2008

J Mech Sci Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After constructing Guyan system of the version 3, transformation matrix considering the eigenvalue term is calculated as shown in Equation (44). Here, k is calculated by (M V 3 G ) −1 K V 3 G obtained from Equation (46).…”

Section: Formulation Of the Versionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improvement of reduction method combined with sub‐domain scheme in large‐scale problem

Kim

Cho

2006

Numerical Meth Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYFor a few decades, various approximate techniques have been developed to calculate the eigenvalues in a reduced manner. In order to construct reliable reduced systems it is essential to select the proper primary degrees of freedom (PDOFs). Unless the PDOFs are selected properly, the selection of PDOFs might be localized and the eigenvalue prediction might emphasize excessively the lower modes or lose the important modes. Moreover, sometimes, it takes considerable amount of computing time to construct a reduced system in large-scale problem. These troubles in constructing reduced system can be avoided by applying reduction scheme in sub-domain level. After dividing global system into a number of subdomains, reduced system which has only the PDOFs is constructed in each sub-domain. This paper presents new algorithms to construct efficient reduction system through three different schemes. They are version 1, version 2 and version 3 systems. The version 3 system is constructed by combining the advantages of the version 1 and the version 2 systems. Numerical examples demonstrate that the proposed version 3 method saves computational cost effectively and provides a reduced system which can predict accurate eigenvalues of global system.

show abstract

“…However, for complex domains undergoing continuous evolution of geometry, it may be difficult to maintain the nodal connectivity and so the interelement compatibility. Many researchers have reported various methodologies [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] to resolve the difficulties; however the issue is not completely resolved.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Subsequently, Lagrange multipliers or penalty function parameters [11][12][13][14]40], including the two or three layer approaches have dealt with nonmatching meshes in the framework of the finite element method. In the aforementioned Lagrange multiplier methods, additional constraints are imposed to meet compatibility at the interfaces.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%