An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method For Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis of Structures
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method For Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis of Structures
net/publication/366516894
CITATION READS
1 75
3 authors, including:
Yi Ji Yang Wu
Harbin Institute of Technology Institute of Applied Physics and Computational Mathematics
18 PUBLICATIONS 159 CITATIONS 12 PUBLICATIONS 105 CITATIONS
An implicit truly self-starting time integration method for nonlinear structural dynamical
systems is developed in this paper. The proposed method possesses unconditional stability,
second-order accuracy, and controllable dissipation, and it has no overshoots. The well-known
BN-stability theory is employed in the design of algorithmic parameters, ensuring that the
proposed method can stably solve nonlinear structural dynamical systems without restricting
the time step size. The spectral analysis shows that compared to existing second-order accurate
time integration methods, the proposed method enjoys a considerable advantage in low-fre-
quency accuracy. For nonlinear problems where the currently popular Generalized- method
and 1 -Bathe method fail, the proposed method shows strong stability and accuracy. Further,
for nonlinear problems in which all methods' results are convergent, the proposed method has
greater accuracy, e±ciency, and energy-conservation capability.
1. Introduction
Dynamical problems can be solved most e®ectively with time integration methods
(TIMs), which are divided into explicit and implicit methods.1 The computational
e±ciency of explicit methods is higher, but the time step size is limited by their
¶ Corresponding author.
2350138-1
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
intrinsic conditional stability. In contrast, most implicit methods for linear systems
are unconditionally stable, hence they are more stable for solving nonlinear
dynamical systems.
The Newmark method is a widely-used TIM, which includes some well-known
schemes, such as the Trapezoidal Rule (TR) and the central di®erence method
(CDM). For linear dynamical systems, the implicit TR is unconditionally stable and
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
strictly energy-conserving, but for simple nonlinear problems such as the softening
spring equation,2 the TR fails. Due to this phenomenon, in recent decades, TIMs
have emerged constantly with better stability.
In addressing nonlinear dynamical systems, the introduction of numerical dissi-
pation is a straightforward method for improving the stability of TIMs. The New-
mark method containing numerical dissipation is only ¯rst-order accurate,
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
motivating the development of the -type methods.3–7 With the addition of extra
parameters to the equilibrium equation, the -type methods3–6 can obtain second-
order accuracy as well as numerical dissipation. However, due to the discontinuous
external force, the acceleration calculated by the -type methods based on weighted
conception is only ¯rst-order accurate.7 To obtain dissipative TIMs with higher low-
frequency accuracy, linear multistep methods8–13 and composite methods14–21 have
been developed. In the linear multistep methods,8–13 the states of the current time
step are expressed by those of several previous time steps, resulting in the inability to
automatically start the computational process. The composite methods14–21 com-
bined with the TR, and the backward di®erence formula (BDF) or backward in-
terpolation formula (BIF) are self-starting, and since 2005,21 composite methods
have attracted wide attention. The dissipative TIMs,3–23 including -type methods,
linear multistep methods, and composite methods, are more stable when applied to
nonlinear systems, but their accuracy is lower compared to the non-dissipative
methods. Further, numerical dissipation does not prevent divergence but only delays
it, and it cannot guarantee that in simulations, the dissipative TIMs are always
stable.
To provide stable numerical solutions for nonlinear dynamical systems, energy-
conserving methods24–38 based on the Belytschko principle24 have been developed.
Owing to desirable stability for nonlinear problems, this type of method has been
widely employed in structural dynamics,24–33 and has been extended to multibody
dynamics.34,35 As applied to general nonlinear dynamical systems, existing energy-
conserving methods may need additional information, increasing the computations.
Based on the Lagrange multiplier method, the constrain energy method (CEM)36
and the constraint energy momentum algorithm (CEMA)37 were developed, but the
development of this kind of method is limited by the extra computation of discrete
energy and Lagrange multiplier. Simo et al. constructed the energy-momentum
method (EMM)38 based on the modi¯cation of the mid-point rule, and the form
of internal force in the EMM needs to be reevaluated by the modi¯ed algorithmic
strain at the element level, increasing the computational cost. In addition, most
2350138-2
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
energy-conserving methods, such as the Krenk method30 and the Orden method,35
can stably solve dynamical systems with geometric nonlinearity, and for damping
nonlinear systems, few energy-conserving methods26 are applicable. It can be con-
cluded that energy-conserving methods do not lose stability when applied to solve
nonlinear problems, but the e±ciency and feasibility of this kind of method need to
be further improved and developed.
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
the norm of the state vector yn is less than or equal to the norm of yn1 for any time
step number n, the TIM is proven to be unconditionally stable (also called BN-
stable40). In other words, the BN-stability theory in fact reveals a condition that is
su±cient to construct an unconditionally stable TIM for nonlinear, non-autonomous
problems. Based on the theory, the developed BN-stable two-sub-step method39
exhibits superior stability and accuracy in solving nonlinear problems in which
the widely used TR and the 1 -Bathe method19 fail. Owing to their remarkable
performance for nonlinear systems, more accurate BN-stable TIMs deserve further
investigation.
From the above review, one can conclude that the energy-conserving methods and
the BN-stable methods solve the issue that TIMs may lose stability for solving
nonlinear systems, and dissipative methods delay the moment in which TIMs lose
stability. Additionally, it can be found that for general nonlinear dynamics, only BN-
stable methods can obtain unconditional stability without accuracy and e±ciency
loss. However, the two-sub-step method with BN-stability39 does not exhibit
advantages in accuracy and e±ciency compared to the widely-used second-order
TIMs, such as the TR and 1 -Bathe method.19
In this context, for nonlinear structural dynamical systems, we develop a new
TIM consisting of three sub-steps, which have BN-stability, second-order accuracy,
controllable dissipation, zero-order overshoots, and truly self-starting capability. The
newly developed three-sub-step method with BN-stability can stably address non-
linear structural dynamical problems, and it has higher accuracy, higher e±ciency,
and stronger energy-conserving capability than the existing two-sub-step scheme
with BN-stability.39
The main contents of this work are organized as follows. The construction process
of the proposed BN-stable three-sub-step method is presented in Sec. 2. Then, the
spectral radius, low-frequency accuracy, overshoot characteristic, and convergence
rate of the proposed method are analyzed in Sec. 3. Some numerical examples that
can con¯rm the superiorities of the proposed method in solving nonlinear dynamical
systems are carried out in Sec. 4. Lastly, Sec. 5 presents the conclusions of this work.
2350138-3
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
2. Formulation
The need to develop a more accurate BN-stable TIM motivates this work. For
this reason, we construct a BN-stable TIM that consists of three sub-steps.
For convenience, in the rest of this paper, the BN-stable method with multiple
sub-steps and controllable dissipation is referred to as the 1 -multi-sub-step-BN-
stable-n method (1 -MSSBNnÞ, in which 1 and n stand for the amount of high-
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
where M is the mass matrix, F is the vector containing nonlinear internal force and
external load, x is the displacement vector, t is the time, and the superposed dot
indicates di®erentiation with respect to time. For linear systems, F ðx; x; _ tÞ ¼
Kx þ C x_ QðtÞ where K is the sti®ness matrix, C is the damping matrix, and QðtÞ
is the external force vector.
The three-sub-step 1 -MSSBN3 method is used to solve Eq. (1), in which each
time element [t, t þ t] is classi¯ed into three intervals, [t, t þ c1 t], [t þ c1 t,
t þ c2 t] and [t þ c2 t, t þ c3 t] (0 < c1 < c2 < c3 < 1). The updating equations of
the 1 -MSSBN3 method at t þ c1 t have the forms
8 :: :
< Mxtþc1 t þ F ðxtþc1 t ; xtþc1 t ; t þ c1 tÞ ¼ 0;
>
:
xtþc1 t ¼ xt þ c1 txtþc1 t ; ð2Þ
>
: x: : ::
tþc1 t ¼ x t þ c1 tx tþc1 t :
::
The vectors xtþc1 t , x_ tþc1 t , and xtþc1 t at t þ c1 t can be solved from Eq. (2),
and they are known information in the calculations of the second-sub-step [t þ c1 t,
t þ c2 t]. The state vectors at t þ c2 t are updated by
8 :: :
< Mxtþc2 t þ F ðxtþc2 t ; xtþc2 t ; t þ c2 tÞ ¼ 0;
>
: :
xtþc2 t ¼ xt þ c2 t½ð1 Þxtþc1 t þ xtþc2 t ; ð3Þ
>
: x: : :: ::
tþc2 t ¼ x t þ c2 t½ð1 Þx tþc1 t þ x tþc2 t :
2350138-4
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
::
from which we can solve for xtþc2 t , x_ tþc2 t , and xtþc2 t . The updates for the last
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
2350138-5
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
Since the di®erence formulas of displacement and velocity are the same in the
1 -MSSBN3 method, Eqs. (2)–(5) can be reformulated as
:
ztþc1 t ¼ zt þ c1 tztþc1 t ; ð6Þ
: :
ztþc2 t ¼ zt þ c2 t½ð1 Þztþc1 t þ ztþc2 t ; ð7Þ
: : :
ztþc3 t ¼ zt þ c3 t½ð1 Þztþc1 t þ ztþc2 t þ ztþc3 t ; ð8Þ
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
: : :
ztþt ¼ zt þ t½b1 ztþc1 t þ b2 ztþc2 t þ ð1 b1 b2 Þztþc3 t ; ð9Þ
where z T ¼ ½x T , x_ T . One can ¯nd from Eqs. (6)–(9) that the 1 -MSSBN3 method
can be regarded as a special case of the multi-stage Runge–Kutta methods,40
and hence, the 1 -MSSBN3 method's parameters can be written into Butcher's
tableau,40 as follows
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
(10)
2350138-6
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
where is the eigenvalue. Applying the formulations (6)–(9) of the 1 -MSSBN3 method
together with Eqs. (11)–(13) to Eq. (14) can yield the following recursive equation
ztþt ¼ AðÞzt ; ¼ t; ð15Þ
where A represents the ampli¯cation factor, and it can be explicitly written as
3 ð2b1 c2 c2 c3 b1 þ b1 c3 þ c2 c3 c 23 þ c 33 b1 c3
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
2b1 c2 c3 þ b1 c 23 þ b1 c2 c3 þ 1Þ
þ 2 ð3c 23 3c3 þ b1 þ c2 2b1 c2 Þ þ ð3c3 2Þ þ 1
AðÞ ¼ : ð16Þ
3 ðc3 1Þ 3 þ 3 2 ðc3 1Þ 2 þ 3ðc3 1Þ þ 1
To design the convergence order of the 1 -MSSBN3 method, the local truncation
error 1 is considered ¯rst, and its de¯nition is
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
2350138-7
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
2350138-8
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
< S5 ¼ S1 S3 ð1 b1 b2 Þ ½c3 ð1 Þ b1 0;
2 2
S6 ¼ S2 S3 ð1 b1 b2 Þ 2 ðc3 b2 Þ 2 0; ð27Þ
>
> 8 9
>
>
>
>
> < b2 ½c2 ð1 Þ b1 S3
> >
=
>
>
>
> S ¼ S S b ½c ð1 Þ b ðc b Þð1 b b Þ 2
>
>
7 1 6 2 2 1
>
:
3 2 1 2
>
;
>
> ½c ð1 Þ b
>
> 3 1
>
> b ðc b2 Þ½c2 ð1 Þ b1
>
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
: þ ð1 b1 b2 Þ 2 ½c3 ð1 Þ b1 2 3 0
S2 ½c3 ð1 Þ b1
where S1 , S2 and S3 are the diagonal elements of N; S4 , S5 and S6 represent the
second-order principal minor of N; and S7 is the determination of N. In the
1 -MSSBN3 method, we assume that S7 ¼ 0, leading to
2ð2c 23 3c3 þ 1Þð21 þ 41 c3 21 c 23 2c 23 þ 1Þ
¼ ; 1 2 ½0; 1Þ; ð28aÞ
c3 ð41 6c3 þ 121 c3 121 c 23 þ 41 c 33 þ 4c 33 þ 3Þ
2c3 1
¼ ; 1 ¼ 1: ð28bÞ
2c3
When the above relation (28) is adopted, for the dissipative scheme (0 1 < 1), S4 ,
S5 and S6 given in Eq. (27) of the 1 -MSSBN3 method become
S4 ¼ S5 ¼ S6
2 3
21 ð48c 63 272c 53 þ 640c 43 800c 33 þ 560c 23
6 7
6 208c3 þ 32Þ 1 ð96c 63 þ 320c 53 7
6 7
2ð1 1Þðc3 1Þ 6
4
6 312c 3 64c 3 þ 302c 3 188c3 þ 38Þ 7
4 3 2
7
6 7
4 þ ð48c 63 48c 53 72c 43 þ 96c 33 5
þ 2c 23 36c3 þ 11Þ
¼ ð29Þ
ð2c3 1Þ 6
and for the non-dissipative scheme (1 ¼ 1), S4 , S5 and S6 of the 1 -MSSBN3
method become
ð24c 23 38c3 þ 15Þ 2
S4 ¼ ; S5 ¼ S6 ¼ ð6c 23 11c3 þ 5Þ 2 : ð30Þ
4
To determine the last free parameter c3 , we require that S4 = S5 ¼ S6 ¼ 0,
yielding
c3 ¼ fð1 Þ; 1 2 ½0; 1Þ; ð31aÞ
2350138-9
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Fig. 2. The implementation process of the 1 -MSSBN3 method for nonlinear structural dynamical systems.
5
c3 ¼ ; ¼ 1; ð31bÞ
6 1
where fð1 Þ is the function about 1 . All algorithmic parameters of the
1 -MSSBN3 method are clear. The values of Si and bj ði ¼ 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; j ¼ 1; 2)
of the 1 -MSSBN3 method are provided in Table 1. It follows that the values of
Si ði ¼ 1; 2; 3) are more than or equal to zero; the values of Si ði ¼ 4; 5; 6; 7) are equal
1 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 b1 b2
0 0.004361 0.017445 0.004361 0 0 0 0 0.348330 0.303340
0.1 0.003818 0.015274 0.003818 0 0 0 0 0.346210 0.307581
0.2 0.003306 0.013225 0.003306 0 0 0 0 0.344288 0.311424
0.3 0.002822 0.011287 0.002822 0 0 0 0 0.342533 0.314933
0.4 0.002361 0.009447 0.002361 0 0 0 0 0.340921 0.318159
0.5 0.001923 0.007693 0.001923 0 0 0 0 0.339430 0.321140
0.6 0.001505 0.006020 0.001505 0 0 0 0 0.338045 0.323910
0.7 0.001105 0.004421 0.001105 0 0 0 0 0.336753 0.326495
0.8 0.000722 0.002888 0.000722 0 0 0 0 0.335543 0.328915
0.9 0.000354 0.001416 0.000354 0 0 0 0 0.334405 0.331190
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/3 1/3
2350138-10
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
1 c3 b1 c2 c1 b2
0 0.819575 2ð2c 23 3c3 þ 1Þð21 ðc3 1Þð21 1/2 1 c3 c1 =c2 c1 =c3 1–2 b1
þ 41 c3 21 c 23 þ 41 c3 21 c 23
2c 23 þ 1Þ 2c 23 þ 1Þ
c3 ð41 6c3 c3 ð2c3 1Þ
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
þ 121 c3 121 c 23
þ 41 c 33 þ 4c 33 þ 3Þ
0.1 0.821381
0.2 0.823054
0.3 0.824614
0.4 0.826076
0.5 0.827452
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
0.6 0.828751
0.7 0.829983
0.8 0.831153
0.9 0.832268
1 5/6 (2 c3 1Þ=ð2c3 Þ ð2c 23 3c3 þ 1Þ=ðc3 Þ
to zero; and the values of bj ðj ¼ 1,2) are more than zero. Therefore, when relations
(28) and (31) are employed, the 1 -MSSBN3 method is algebraically stable as well as
BN-stable. By using Eqs. (11), (12), (13), (21), (24), (28) and (31), the values of c1 ,
c2 , c3 , b1 , b2 , , , and are completely determined, referring to Table 2.
The designed parameters can ensure that the 1 -MSSBN3 method is second-
order accurate, controllably dissipative, and BN-stable, in which all sub-steps have
the same e®ective sti®ness matrices, refer to Appendix. In Fig. 2, we provide the
implementation process of the 1 -MSSBN3 method for general nonlinear structural
dynamical systems (1).
3. Numerical Properties
The spectral characteristics, overshoot characteristics, and convergence rate of the
1 -MSSBN3 method are analyzed in this section. In the discussion of spectral
characteristics, the 1 -MSSBN3 method's stability behavior, low-frequency accu-
racy, and high-frequency dissipation are deliberately investigated.
2350138-11
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
which ! represents the natural frequency, the compact recursive scheme of the
1 -MSSBN3 method has the form
xtþt A11 A12 xt xt
: ¼ : ¼A : ð ¼ !tÞ; ð32Þ
txtþt 2 A12 A11 txt txt
where
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
and
4 ð6c 43 22c 33 þ 30c 23 18c3 þ 6b1 c 43 15b1 c 33 þ 12b1 c 23 3b1 c3 þ 4Þ
þ 2 ð8c 23 14c3 2b1 c 23 þ b1 c3 þ 6Þ þ 2
A12 ¼ 2 2 :
2½ ðc3 1Þ þ 1 3
ð33bÞ
¼ lnðÞ ; ð36Þ
2
T T
PE ¼ ¼ 1; ð37Þ
T
where ¼ arctanðb=aÞ; a and b represent the real and imaginary parts of the
eigenvalues (34), respectively. The spectral radius versus of the 1 -MSSBN3
method is plotted in Fig. 3, and one can see that it is unconditionally stable, satis-
fying 0 ðÞ 1, and the degree of the numerical dissipation can be smoothly
adjusted by 1 . Hence, it can be concluded from Fig. 3 that the 1 -MSSBN3 method
has AN-stability, meaning it is unconditionally stable for linear, non-autonomous
dynamic systems.40 If a time integration method is BN-stable for nonlinear dynamical
2350138-12
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
problems, then it is AN-stable for linear ones,40 meaning that time integration
methods adopting the algorithmic parameters designed according to BN-stability
theory are unconditionally stable both for linear and nonlinear dynamical systems.
Since the 1 -MSSBN2 method's spectral characteristics are the same as those of
the currently popular 1 -Bathe method,39 this section compares only the di®erences
between the 1 -MSSBN2 method and the 1 -MSSBN3 method in the low-frequency
accuracy. The two BN-stable methods' amplitude and phase errors versus are
drawn in Fig. 4, respectively, wherein ¼ /n (n is the number of sub-steps) can
ensure that the two methods have the same computations. It follows that the
1 -MSSBN2 method and 1 -MSSBN3 method share the same accuracy perfor-
mances when 1 ¼ 1, while for the dissipative scheme (0 1 < 1), the
1 -MSSBN3 method enjoys a considerable accuracy advantage. Additionally, one
can observe that as 1 increases, the two BN-stable methods' low-frequency accu-
racy, including amplitude and phase, are both simultaneously enhanced.
3.2. Overshoot
In the ¯rst several time steps, the overshooting phenomenon39 may occur for un-
conditionally stable methods. Generally, only the case of ! 1 needs to be con-
sidered for convergent methods, considering that they have no overshoots as ! 0.
For the case of ! 1, the recursive scheme (32) of the 1 -MSSBN3 method at the
¯rst time step becomes
x1 ¼ d 1 x0 ;
: : ð38Þ
tx1 ¼ d2 x0 þ d1 tx0 ;
2350138-13
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Fig. 4. Amplitude decays and period errors versus of the 1 -MSSBN n method (n ¼ 2: open; n ¼ 3:
solid).
where
2c 63 8c 53 þ 11c 43 4c 33 4c 23 þ 4c3 þ 2b1 c 53 7b1 c 43
þ 9b1 c 33 5b1 c 23 þ b1 c3 1
d1 ¼ ð39aÞ
2ðc3 1Þ 6
and
6c 43 22c 33 þ 30c 23 18c3 þ 6b1 c 43 15b1 c 33 þ 12b1 c 23 3b1 c3 þ 4
d2 ¼ :
2ðc3 1Þ 6
ð39bÞ
2350138-14
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Fig. 5. Displacement at the ¯rst time step of the 1 -MSSBN3 method versus t=T .
Fig. 6. Velocity at the ¯rst time step of the 1 -MSSBN3 method versus t=T .
From Eqs. (39a) and (39b), one can ¯nd that when ! 1, the displacement and
velocity both have zero-order overshoots with a large time step size.
To test the overshoot behavior of the 1 -MSSBN3 method, the case x€ þ ! 2 x ¼ 0
(x0 ¼ 1 and x_ 0 ¼ 0) is employed. Figures 5 and 6 plot the displacement and
velocity at the ¯rst time step of the 1 -MSSBN3 method versus t=T , respectively.
It follows that the 1 -MSSBN3 method does not have overshoots both in displace-
ment and velocity, and the displacement and velocity tend to be constant when
t=T ! 1.
2350138-15
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
4. Numerical Experiments
The theoretical analysis given in Sec. 3 showed the 1 -MSSBN3 method's perfor-
mances for linear structural dynamical problems, therefore, this section only
considers the 1 -MSSBN3 method's performance in solving nonlinear systems.
2350138-16
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
4.1. The SDOF equation with the internal force of the fractional function
To perform the advantages of the BN-stable methods in terms of accuracy and
stability, a simple nonlinear SDOF equation26 is ¯rst considered, which has the form
:: x :
xþ ¼ 0; xð0Þ ¼ 0; xð0Þ ¼ 1 ð43Þ
1 þ x2
and its total energy is
1 :2 1
E¼ x þ logð1 þ x 2 Þ: ð44Þ
2 2
With the initial conditions, the system's total energy should hold at 0.5 in theory,
that is, the energy E0 at the initial moment.
For this conservative system, the non-dissipative scheme (1 ¼ 1) is suggested for
the Generalized- method, 1 -Bathe method, 1 -MSSBN2 method, and 1 -MSSBN3
method to avoid energy loss. The results for the case of t(Generalized-Þ ¼ 0.5 are
shown in Fig. 9, in which one can see that all methods give convergent results, but the
2350138-17
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Fig. 9. Numerical results in Sec. 4.1 for the case of t (Generalized-Þ ¼ 0:5.
Fig. 10. Numerical results in Sec. 4.1 for the case of t (Generalized-Þ ¼ 2.
two BN-stable methods have higher phase accuracy for all state variables, including
displacement, velocity and acceleration, and smaller energy errors. With the increase
in the time step size, one can ¯nd from Fig. 10 that the Generalized- method and
the 1 -Bathe method both give incorrect predictions, while the results calculated by
the two BN-stable methods are stable. Then, it can be concluded that for the BN-
stable methods, the time step size is selected based on accuracy requirement rather
than stability requirement. For the case of t (Generalized-Þ ¼ 2, the energy of the
Generalized- method, the 1 -Bathe method and the two BN-stable methods
2350138-18
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Fig. 11. Energy of the Generalized- method (G-), 1 -Bathe method and the 1 -MSSBN n method for
the case of 1 < 1.
involving numerical dissipation is presented in Fig. 11, from which one can ¯nd that as
the amount of numerical dissipation increases, the 1 -Bathe method and Generalized-
method can provide convergent predictions, and the corresponding energy quickly
declines to zero. Besides, one can observe that the 1 -MSSBN2 method with 1 ¼ 0.99
can keep the energy of the system. Therefore, it can be concluded from Fig. 11 that the
introduction of numerical dissipation can improve the stability of a TIM in dealing with
nonlinear problems, but it cannot ensure globally stable solutions.
2350138-19
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
Fig. 13. Numerical results in Sec. 4.2 for the case of v0 ¼ 20 m/s.
Fig. 14. Numerical results in Sec. 4.2 for the case of v0 ¼ 40 m/s.
2350138-20
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
Table 3. CPU time and number of iterations in Sec. 4.2 (Tolerance error " ¼ 10e-12).
v0 ¼ 20 m/s, 1 ¼ 1, v0 ¼ 40 m/s, 1 ¼ 1,
Time step total time ¼ 0:5 s total time ¼ 0:5 s
Method size (s) Number of iterations CPU (s) Number of iterations CPU(s)
Generalized- 0.002 24 276 139.1286 25 179 170.6578
1 -Bathe 0.004 24 278 122.3186 — —
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
that among these methods, the computational cost of the 1 -MSSBN3 method is
the lowest.
From the above two nonlinear numerical experiments, one can ¯nd that compared
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
with the currently popular Generalized- method and 1 -Bathe method, the
1 -MSSBNn methods (n ¼ 2; 3) have a considerable stability advantage in
solving nonlinear structural dynamical problems. It can be seen that for the
geometric nonlinearity problems, the accuracy of the 1 -MSSBN2 method and the
1 -MSSBN3 method are the same for the non-dissipative scheme (1 ¼ 1). In ad-
dition, the newly developed 1 -MSSBN3 method enjoys a slight e±ciency advantage
compared with the 1 -MSSBN2 method in solving nonlinear problems.
2350138-21
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
In this model, the initial radial and circumferential displacements are assumed to
be rð0Þ ¼ 0:25 m and ð0Þ ¼ 2 /9, and the initial velocities are equal to zero. The
parameters of this model are chosen as m ¼ 1 kg, g ¼ 9:81 m/s2, L0 ¼ 0:5 m, and
k ¼ 98:1 N/m.
The displacements, velocities, and accelerations within [0, 10]s are plotted in Figs.
16–18, in which t(Generalized-Þ ¼ 0.01 s. It follows that all methods have no
considerable numerical errors at the beginning, while with the increase in time their
accuracy decreases. It can also be found that the accuracy of the non-dissipative
scheme (1 ¼ 1) is higher than that of the dissipative scheme (1 ¼ 0). To distin-
guish the di®erences between these methods, the absolute errors of these methods are
provided in Table 4, wherein one can ¯nd that the accuracy of the 1 -MSSBN3
(a) 1 ¼ 1
2350138-22
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
(b) 1 ¼ 0
method is the highest, followed by the 1 -MSSBN2 method. This example illustrates
that the 1 -MSSBN3 method enjoys accuracy advantages in solving nonlinear
systems, including physical damping. Considering that physical damping is helpful
to improve the stabilities of time integration methods, the non-dissipative scheme
(1 ¼ 1) is used to obtain higher accuracy for the dynamical problems containing
nonlinear damping.
(a) 1 ¼ 1
2350138-23
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
(b) 1 ¼ 0
(a) 1 ¼ 1
2350138-24
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
(b) 1 ¼ 0
2350138-25
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
while other methods' energy loss becomes larger. For this nonlinear system in
which the Jacobian matrix is not positive, the conclusion obtained from spectral
characteristics39 that with the increase in 1 , the amplitude errors get lower does not
hold. Therefore, the 1 -MSSBN2 method and the 1 -Bathe method both perform
considerable energy loss for the case of 1 ¼ 0.8. It can be concluded from this
example that among these dissipative schemes (1 < 1), the 1 -MSSBN3 method
enjoys superiority in accuracy and energy conservation.
2350138-26
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
2350138-27
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Fig. 24. Clamped plate model: (a) model information; (b) load information.
ratio ¼ 0:3, the density ¼ 7000 kg/m3, the elastoplastic tangent modulus Et = 50
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
GPa, and the initial yield stress y0 ¼ 200 MPa. The geometric parameters are as-
sumed to be a ¼ 3 m, b ¼ 1 m, and h ¼ 0:055 m. The impact forces are applied at each
node at the end of the plate, and the impact load curve is described in Fig. 24(b), in
which one can see that the external force rapidly increases from 0 N to the maximum
value of 50 000 N at a very short time of 0.1 s and is removed soon after. This structure
has 1 296 elements, as shown in Fig. 24(a), and 5 772 degrees of freedom.
The deformed con¯gurations of the elastoplastic plate at di®erent moments are
drawn in Fig. 25, in which one can see that the plate produces the irreversible
deformation. In the calculation, the Generalized- method's step size is chosen to be
0.01 s. Figures 26 and 27 show the displacements in the x and z direction of point A
(the central point of the free end), respectively, in which one can ¯nd that at the
2350138-28
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Fig. 26. Displacements of point A in the x direction in Sec. 4.5 (1 ¼ 1).
Fig. 27. Displacements of point A in the z direction in Sec. 4.5 (1 ¼ 1).
beginning, all methods provide accurate results, while they perform the phase errors
with the increase in time. Additionally, one can ¯nd that after the external force is
removed, the responses tend to be constant (the plastic deformations) due to the
presence of physical damping. It can be concluded from Figs. 26 and 27 that among
these methods, the 1 -MSSBN3 method achieves a considerable accuracy advantage.
2350138-29
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Fig. 29. Variation of acceleration versus time in Sec. 4.6 (1 ¼ 1).
2350138-30
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
equals to (! 20 þ "x 2 Þ.41 It can be seen from Fig. 28 that (1) for the case of " ¼ 0:4, the
system sti®ness increases with the increase of jxj; (2) for the case of " ¼ 0:4, the
system sti®ness decreases with the increase of jxj. For the weak nonlinear sti®ness
problems, we also provide the acceleration results as shown in Fig. 29. One can ¯nd
that their accuracy is very close, and among them, the accuracy of the 1 -Bathe
method is slightly lower.
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
5. Conclusions
For structural dynamical systems, we construct a second-order accurate and °exibly
dissipative TIM with BN-stability, called the 1 -MSSBN3 method. In addition, the
1 -MSSBN3 method has no overshoots in displacement and velocity. Unlike most
existing self-starting time integration methods, the information of initial acceleration is
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
not necessary for the 1 -MSSBN3 method, meaning that it is a truly self-starting TIM.
The theoretical analysis given in Sec. 3 con¯rmed that the newly developed
1 -MSSBN3 method achieves higher low-frequency accuracy than the existing
1 -MSSBN2 method.39 In other words, as the number of sub-steps increases, the
accurate low-frequency range can be widened. The superiority of the 1 -MSSBN3
method as applied to nonlinear systems has been validated by nonlinear numerical
examples, from which it can be concluded that (1) the 1 -MSSBNn methods
(n ¼ 2; 3) are unconditionally stable for nonlinear structural dynamical systems, and
they can provide stable predictions for nonlinear problems wherein the 1 -Bathe
method and Generalized- method fail, seeing Secs. 4.1 and 4.2; (2) for nonlinear
systems containing physical damping, the 1 -MSSBN3 method achieves higher ac-
curacy than the currently popular second-order methods, referring to Secs. 4.3
and 4.5; (3) for the case of 0 1 < 1, compared to some advanced methods, the
1 -MSSBN3 method enjoys considerable advantages in low-frequency accuracy and
energy conservation, referring to Secs. 4.3 and 4.4; (4) the 1 -MSSBN3 method has
slight advantage in computational e±ciency, and it has less CPU time and number of
iterations, refer to Sec. 4.2.
By increasing the number of sub-steps, a more desirable BN-stable method con-
sisting of three sub-steps was developed in this work. The theoretical analysis and the
limited numerical experiments illustrate that the 1 -MSSBN3 method is a good
candidate for solving structural dynamical systems, especially for nonlinear pro-
blems. On this basis, it is expected to further increase the computational e±ciency of
the 1 -MSSBN3 method. Therefore, the solution strategy based on this work and
domain decomposition technology for large-scale complex dynamics problems will be
studied in the future.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China
(12202058, 12172023, 11872090), the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation
2350138-31
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing ¯nancial interests or
personal relationships that could have appeared to in°uence the work reported in
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
this paper.
8
> b b
< K 1 xtþc1 t ¼ R1 ;
>
Kb 2 xtþc t ¼ R
b 2; ðA:1Þ
>
>
2
:b b
K 3 xtþc t ¼ R3 ; 3
b1 ¼ 1 1
K Mþ C þ K; ðA:2Þ
c 21 t 2 c1 t
b2 ¼ 1 1
K Mþ C þ K; ðA:3Þ
c 22 2 t 2 c2 t
b3 ¼ 1 1
K Mþ CþK ðA:4Þ
c 23 2 t 2 c3 t
and the load vectors have the forms as
b 1 ¼ Qðt þ c1 tÞ þ M 1 1 : 1
R x þ x þ Cxt ; ðA:5Þ
c 21 t 2 t c1 t t c1 t
b 1 1 : 1 :
R2 ¼ Qðt þ c2 tÞ þ M 2 2 2 xt þ xt þ ð1 Þxtþc1 t
c 2 t c2 t c2 2 t
1 :: 1 1 :
þ ð1 Þxtþc1 t þ C x þ ð1 Þxtþc1 t ; ðA:6Þ
c2 t t
b 3 ¼ Qðt þ c3 tÞ þ M 1 1 : ð1 Þ :
R xt þ x þ xtþc1 t
c 23 2 t 2 c3 t t c3 2 t
: ð1 Þ :: ::
þ x þ x þ x
c3 2 t tþc2 t tþc1 t
tþc2 t
1 ð1 Þ : :
þC xt þ xtþc1 t þ xtþc2 t : ðA:7Þ
c3 t
2350138-32
An Accurate, Controllably Dissipative, Unconditionally Stable Three-Sub-Step Method
References
1. T. J. R. Hughes, The Finite Element Method: Linear Static and Dynamic Finite Element
Analysis (Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1987).
2. K. C. Park, An improved sti®ly stable method for direct integration of nonlinear
structural dynamic equations, J. Appl. Mech.-Trans. ASME 42 (1975) 464–470.
3. H. M. Hilber, T. J. R. Hughes and R. L. Taylor, Improved numerical dissipation for
time integration algorithms in structural dynamics, Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 5 (1977)
by 114.246.204.185 on 03/01/23. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
283–292.
4. W. L. Wood, M. Bossak and O. C. Zienkiewicz, An alpha modi¯cation of Newmark's
method, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 15 (1980) 1562–1566.
5. H. P. Shao and C. W. Cai, A three parameters algorithm for numerical integration of
structural dynamic equations, Chin. J. Appl. Mech. 5 (1988) 76–81, (In Chinese).
6. J. Chung and G. M. Hulbert, A time integration algorithm for structural dynamics with
improved numerical dissipation: The generalized- method, J. Appl. Mech.-Trans.
Int. J. Str. Stab. Dyn. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
2350138-33
Y. Ji, Y. Wu & Y. Xing
method and its application to hybrid testing, Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 49 (2020) 415–433.
29. R. Zhang and H. Z. Zhong, A quadrature element formulation of an energy-momentum
conserving algorithm for dynamic analysis of geometrically exact beams, Comput. Struct.
165 (2016) 96–106.
30. S. Krenk, Global format for energy–momentum based time integration in nonlinear
dynamics, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 100 (2014) 458–476.
31. O. Gonzalez, Exact energy and momentum conserving algorithms for general models in
nonlinear elasticity, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 190 (2000) 1763–1783.
32. S. Mamouri, F. Hammadi and A. Ibrahimbegovic, Decaying/conserving implicit scheme
and non-linear instability analysis of 2D frame structures, Int. J. Non-Linear Mech. 67
(2014) 144–152.
33. H. Jahromi and B. A. Izzuddin, Energy conserving algorithms for dynamic contact
analysis using Newmark methods, Comput. Struct. 118 (2013) 74–89.
34. J. H. Luo, X. G. Feng, X. M. Xu, H. J. Peng and Z. G. Wu, A parameter-preadjusted
energy-conserving integration for rigid body dynamics in terms of convected base vectors,
Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 121 (2020) 4921–4943.
35. J. C. Orden, Energy and symmetry-preserving formulation of nonlinear constraints and
potential forces in multibody dynamics, Nonlinear Dyn. 95 (2019) 823–837.
36. T. J. R. Hughes, T. K. Caughey and W. K. Liu, Finite-element methods for nonlinear
elastodynamics with conserve energy, J. Appl. Mech. - Trans. ASME 45 (1978) 366–370.
37. D. Kuhl and E. Ramm, Constraint energy momentum algorithm and its application to
non-linear dynamics of shells, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 136 (1996) 293–315.
38. J. C. Simo and K. K. Wong, Unconditionally stable algorithms for rigid body dynamics
that exactly preserve energy and momentum, Int. J. Numer. Methods. Eng. 31 (1991) 19–52.
39. Y. Ji, Y. F. Xing and M. Wiercigroch, An unconditionally stable time integration method
with controllable dissipation for second-order nonlinear dynamics, Nonlinear Dyn. 105
(2021) 3341–3358.
40. J. C. Butcher, Numerical Methods for Ordinary Di®erential Equations (John Wiley &
Sons, Ltd, Chichester, 2016).
41. S. Y. Chang, An explicit method with improved stability property, Int. J. Numer. Meth.
Engng. 77 (2009) 1100–1120.
2350138-34