Measurement 50 (2014) 263–269

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Measurement
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/measurement

An effective quadrilateral membrane finite element based on

the strain approach
Cherif Rebiai b,a,⇑, Lamine Belounar b,1
a
Mechanical Engineering Department, Superior National School of Technology, ENST SNVI National Road N°. 5, ZI, ROUIBA, Algiers, Algeria
b
Numerical Modeling and Instrument in Soil-Structure Interaction Laboratory (MNIISS), University of Biskra, 07000 Biskra, Algeria

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Based on the strain approach, a new simple and efficient four-node quadrilateral mem-
Received 20 July 2013 brane finite element with drilling rotation is developed. It can be used for the elastic and
Received in revised form 11 December 2013 elastoplastic analysis. The displacements field of this element is based on the assumed
Accepted 31 December 2013
functions for the various components of strain which satisfy the compatibility equation
Available online 12 January 2014
and it is developed in some way to improve the element performance in the distorted con-
figurations. This finite element has the three degrees of freedom at each of the four nodes
Keywords:
(the two translations and the in-plane rotation) and the displacement functions of the
Strain approach
Elastoplastic analysis
developed element satisfy the exact representation of the rigid body modes. Numerical
Membrane finite element results show that the proposed strain based element exhibits an excellent behavior for
Drilling rotation both regular and distorted mesh over a set of problems in both analyses.
Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction to form shell element. Indeed in the past several models

Since the appearance of finite elements method, many
researchers have adopted the strain based approach for
the development of new finite elements. The advantages
of these elements have been illustrated on several articles
[1,2] compared with displacement-based ones. The use of
this approach was first applied by Ashwell and Sabir, and
concerned only with curved elements [3,4].This approach
was later extended to plane elasticity problems [5,6],
to three-dimensional elasticity [7], to cylindrical shells
[8–10], and to plate bending [11].
Also recently considerable attention has been given to
the development of simple and efficient rectangular ele-
ments having the in-plane rotation as nodal degrees of
freedom [12]. The main motivation is the improvement
of the accuracy and to provide an ideal membrane element
such as rectangular and triangular plane elasticity ele-
ments were developed, among them the elements of Sabir
[13] which each of them have three degrees of freedom
(DOFs) at each corner node. However these developed
strain based elements with drilling rotation are efficient
only for the regular meshes.
In this context the proposed element in this paper is a
new quadrilateral membrane finite element with drilling
rotation based on the strain approach named SBQE (Strain
Based Quadrilateral Element) able to improve the accuracy
and the computation time in the case of regular and dis-
torted mesh. Both linear and materially nonlinear analyses
are considered. For the purposes of demonstration some
selected numerical problems are solved using this devel-
oped element.

⇑ Corresponding author at: Mechanical Engineering Department, Supe- 2. Formulation of the SBQE element
rior National School of Technology, ENST SNVI National Road N°. 5, ZI,
ROUIBA, Algiers, Algeria. Tel./fax: +213 0776 01 18 50.
E-mail addresses: c_rebiai@yahoo.fr (C. Rebiai), belounarl@yahoo.com
Consider a quadrilateral element SBQE with three de-
(L. Belounar). grees of freedom (Ui, Vi, and in plane rotation hi) at each
1
Tel./fax: +213 0666 25 61 45. of the four nodes which is depicted in Fig. 1.

0263-2241/$ - see front matter Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2013.12.043
264 C. Rebiai, L. Belounar / Measurement 50 (2014) 263–269

U ¼ a1  a3 y þ a4 x þ a5 ðy þ y2 Þ þ a6 xy þ 0:5a7 x2 þ 0:5a8 y2
þ 0:5a9 y2 þ a10 xy2 þ a11 x2 y3
V ¼ a2 þ a3 x þ a5 x þ 0:5a6 x2 þ a7 ðx2 þ yÞ þ a8 xy þ 0:5a9 y2
 a10 x2 y  a11 x3 y2 þ a12 x2
h ¼ a3  2a5 y þ a7 x  a9 y  2a10 xy  3a11 x2 y2 þ a12 x ð6Þ
The displacement functions of the developed element
SBQE given by Eq. (6) can be written in matrix form as:
fUg ¼ ½CfAg ð7Þ
where the U is the nodal displacement vector, A is the con-
stant parameters vector {ai} = 1. . .12 and the 12  12
Fig. 1. SBQE element and coordinate system. transformation matrix [C] is given in appendix.
The stiffness matrix [Ke] can be calculated from the well
known expression:
Z Z 
For general plane elasticity problems, the three compo-
½K e  ¼ ½CT ½Q T ½D½Q dxdy ½C1 ¼ ½CT ½K 0 ½C1
nents of strain in terms of the displacements are given by
@U @V @U @V ð8Þ
ex ¼ ; ey ¼ ; cxy ¼ þ ð1Þ
@x @y @y @x The determinant of the Jacobean matrix must also be
The components of the strain given in Eq. (1) must sat- evaluated because it is used in the transformed integrals
isfy an additional equation called the compatibility equa- as follow:
tion. This equation can be formed by the eliminating U, V Z Z Z þ1 Z þ1
from Eq. (1), hence: dxdy ¼ det jJjdndg ð9Þ
1 1
2
@ ex @ ey @ cxy
2 2
Thus the matrix [K0] is numerically evaluated, and since
þ 2  ¼0 ð2Þ
@y2 @x @x@y the matrix [C] of the developed element is not singular, its
If these strains given by Eq. (1) are equal to zero, the inverse can be also numerically evaluated and the element
integration of these equations allows obtaining the follow- stiffness matrix [Ke] can be obtained by:
ing expressions: Z 1 Z 1 
½K e  ¼ ½CT ½QT ½D½QdetjJjdndg ½C1 ð10Þ
U ¼ a1  a3 y; V ¼ a2 þ a3 x; h ¼ a3 ð3Þ 1 1

The terms in Eq. (3) are those representing the rigid
body modes. The present element possesses four nodes
and three DOFs (U, V, h) per node. Thus the displacement
field must contain twelve independent constants. Three
of them (a1, a2, a3) are already used for the representation
of the rigid body components, thus it remains nine con-
stants (a4, a5. . .a12) for expressing the displacement due
to straining of the element. These are apportioned among
the strains as:
ex ¼ a4 þ a6 y þ a7 x þ a10 y2 þ 2a11 xy3
ey ¼ a7 þ a8 x þ a9 y  a10 x2  2a11 yx3
cxy ¼ 2a5 ðy þ 1Þ þ 2a6 x þ 2a7 x þ 2a8 y þ a9 y þ 2a12 x
The strains given by Eq. (4) satisfy the compatibility
equation given by Eq. (2). Expressions (4) are equated to
the equations in terms of U, V from Eq. (1) and the resulting
equations are integrated, to give
U ¼ a4 x þ a5 ðy þ y2 Þ þ a6 xy þ 0:5a7 x2 þ 0:5a8 y2
þ 0:5a9 y2 þ a10 xy2 þ a11 x2 y3
V ¼ a5 x þ 0:5a6 x2 þ a7 ðx2 þ yÞ þ a8 xy þ 0:5a9 y2  a10 x2 y
 a11 x3 y2 þ a12 x2
h ¼ 2a5 y þ a7 x  a9 y  2a10 xy  3a11 x2 y2 þ a12 x
The final displacement functions are obtained by adding
Eqs. (3) and (5) to obtain the following:
where the strain matrix [Q] and the elasticity matrix [D]
are given in appendix.
3. Linear numerical results from test examples
Before proceeding to the benchmark problems which
are mainly extracted from literature when discussing the
element SBQE with drilling DOFs, a brief notes on the ele-
ments to be compared are given:
 Q8: the eight nodes quadrilateral element with sixteen
ð4Þ degrees of freedom (DOFs).
 Q6: the six node quadrilateral element with twelve
DOFs.
 SBRIEIR and SBTIEIR: the four and three node strain
based rectangular and triangular in-plane elements
with in-plane rotation with twelve DOFs [13].
 SBT2V: The Improved three node strain based triangular
in-plane element with drilling rotation with nine DOFs
[14].
 HQ4-9b: Isostatic quadrilateral membrane finite ele-
ment with drilling rotation [15].
 P5Sb: Pian’s hybrid element with four nodes [16].
 FRQ: Quadrilateral element based on fiber rotation [22].
ð5Þ
 Quadrilateral element with drilling ITW DOFS [18].
 Quadrilateral element with drilling rotation Pimp [19].
 Q4: quadrilateral element with four nodes.
 C. Rebiai, L. Belounar / Measurement 50 (2014) 263–269
3.1. Linear MacNeal beam
To assess the robustness to mesh distortion as well as
the accuracy of the results of the developed element
(SBQE), we consider a slender beam of MacNeal [17]. The
geometrical and materials characteristics of the structure
are shown in Fig. 2. The deflection results are listed in
Table 1. From the linear deflection results we can see that
the developed element is insensitive to mesh distortion.
For the regular mesh all the results are in good agreement
with the exact solution. Compared with the strain based
elements we can see clearly that the developed element
is more accurate in both cases of loads.
3.2. A simple beam: the higher-order patch test
This problem is shown by Ibrahimobigovic et al. [18]
and it is relative to a beam fixed by a minimum number
of constraints. As shown in Fig. 3 the beam is subjected
to a pure bending state. The first load condition is consti-
tuted by a unit couple of forces applied at the free end of
the beam whereas the second load case is still a moment
but it is applied as a concentrated couple at the end. The
geometrical and mechanical characteristics are as follow:
E ¼ 100; v ¼ 0 P ¼ 1; M ¼ 0:5; L ¼ 10; H ¼ 1; t ¼ 1
Both regular and distorted meshes are considered in
this example. The vertical displacement and the rotation
at the point B are computed.
The results presented in Table 2 show the better behav-
ior of the developed element and its relative insensitivity
to distortion. The results in terms of the drilling rotations
show a significant improvement with those of [18,19].
3.3. Cantilever beam modeled by five irregular quadrilateral
elements
This problem has been treated in Ref. [20] in which the
beam as shown in Fig. 4 is subjected to: (a) a pure bending
under moment M; (b) linear bending under transverse
force P, and it is modeled by 5 irregular quadrilateral ele-
ments. The Young’s modulus E = 1500, Poisson’s ratio
v = 0.25. The results of vertical displacement VA at the point
A and the stress rxB at the point B are given in Table 3.
These results show that the developed element gives
Fig. 2. MacNeal and Harder patch tests: geometry, mesh and boundary conditions.
265
almost the analytical solution of deflection and stresses,
and it is more accurate than the other Elements.
3.4. Plane flexure of cantilever beam
The objective of this problem is to calculate the deflec-
tion VA at the free end of a cantilever beam, with uniform
cross-section, subjected to uniform vertical load with
Young’s modulus E = 107, Poison’s ratio v = 0.3 as shown
in Fig. 5.
This problem has been treated in [21]. Table 4 shows
the results obtained for different meshes for this problem.
The results presented in Table 4 show that the present
element gives better results than all the other elements
in case of distorted meshes, whereas for the regular
meshes it is similar to the Q8 element but in terms of com-
puting times it is more economic.
4. Elastoplastic analysis
In this analysis three different yield criteria are em-
ployed. The Tresca and Von Mises laws, which closely
approximate metal plasticity behavior, are considered
and the Mohr Coulomb criterion, which is applicable to
concrete rocks and soils, is used. This analysis employs
two methods for generating body-loads: visco-plastic
(named as initial strain) and initial stress methods to pre-
dict the response to loading of an elastic perfectly plastic
material. Both methods are given in [12].
4.1. Elastoplastic numerical results
We assessed the performance of the proposed element
(SBQE) through two numerical tests and compared the re-
sults with those of the Q8 element and to the analytical
solutions. We selected the test examples so as to evaluate
accuracy and robustness of the developed element in reg-
ular and distorted meshes.
4.1.1. Bearing capacity analysis of purely coherent soil
The elastic properties, Young’s modulus, Poisson’s ratio,
the undrained cohesion and the uniform stress as consis-
tent with [23], were chosen as E = 105 kN/m2, m = 0.3,
Cu = 100 kN/m2, and q = 1 kN/m2 respectively. Fig. 6 shows
the geometrical characteristics and meshing of the flexible
266 C. Rebiai, L. Belounar / Measurement 50 (2014) 263–269

Table 1
MacNeal-Harder cantilever beam: Numerical results of deflection for different load cases and mesh geometry.

Element Shear P = 1 Bending M = 10

Regular Parallel Trapezoidal Regular Parallel Trapezoidal
P5Sb 0.1081 0.07848 0.00497 0.268 0.170 0.01404
SBTIEIR 0.0050 0.0039 0.000054 0.03186 0.02727 0.00108
SBT2V 0.1072 0.0944 0.0900 0.255 0.254 0.257
HQ4-9b 0.1072 0.1057 0.1058 0.269 0.266 0.266
SBQE 0.1073 0.1057 0.1058 0.268 0.266 0.267
Analytical 0.1081 0.270

Fig. 3. Geometry and mesh of a simple beam.

Table 2
Vertical displacement and rotation at the point B of the simple beam.

Load case Mesh ITW Ref.[18] Pimp [19] SBQE

Vert. Dis. End rot. Vert. Dis. End rot. Vert. Dis. End rot.
Forces Reg. 1.50 0.60 1.50 0.60 1.49 0.59
Forces Dist. 1.14 0.57 1.39 0.54 1.48 0.59
Couple Reg. 1.50 0.62 1.51 1.44 1.50 0.60
Couple Dist. 1.39 0.49 1.39 1.28 1.49 0.59
Analytical 1.50 0.6

strip footing. Bearing failure in this problem occurs when q

reaches the Prandtl load [23] given by:

qultime ¼ ð2 þ pÞCu ð11Þ

It is usual in problems of this type to make the loads
increments smaller as the failure load is approached. At
load levels well below failure, convergence should occur
in relatively little iteration [23]. The number of iterations
to achieve convergence for each load increment is also ob-
tained. The maximum number of iterations that will be al-
Fig. 4. Cantilever beam with five irregular quadrilateral elements.
lowed within any load increment is provided as a data and
this permits the algorithm to stop and no more load incre-
ments are applied.
As shown in Fig. 7 the results, found by the element
Table 3 SBQE have been plotted in the form of a dimensionless
The deflection and stresses at point A et B for bending problem of cantilever
beam.
bearing capacity factor q/cu versus centerline displace-
ment. These Results shows that SBQE with 12 degrees of
Elements Loads M Loads P freedom and the Q8 element with 16 degrees of freedom
VA rxB VA rxB have similar results but the later uses more degrees of
Q6 98.4 2428 100.4 3354 freedom.
SBRIEIR 98.08 2850 98.57 3870 When the Tresca and the VonMises yield criteria are
Q4 45.7 1761 50.7 2448 used the corresponding numerical solutions with both ele-
SBQE 99.19 2970 99.35 3918
ments are given in Table 5. It can be seen that SBQE is ro-
Exact 100 3000 102.6 4050
bust and accurate in elasto-plastic analysis.
 C. Rebiai, L. Belounar / Measurement 50 (2014) 263–269 267

Fig. 5. Cantilever beam in plane flexure.

Table 4
The deflection VA of the beam in plane flexure.
q/cu
Mesh Elements 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
0
FRQ [22] Q8 SBRIEIR SBQE
RI:2  2 EI:3  3 AI EI:4  4 -0.01
(a) 2.76a 3.03 2.75 2.92 -0.02 SBQE
(12)b (16) (12) (12) Q8
Displacement (m)

(b) 3.44 3.70 3.43 3.64 -0.03

(18) (26) (18) (18)
-0.04
(c) 3.56 3.84 3.56 3.80
(24) (36) (24) (24) -0.05
(d) 1.09 0.64 2.84 2.96
(e) 1.61 1.76 2.09 3.043 -0.06
Prandtl load=5.14
Beams theory VA = 4.03. -0.07
a
VA vertical displacement in A; EI: exact integration; AI: analytical
-0.08
integration; HP hammer point.
b
TNDF: Total number of degrees of freedom.
Fig. 7. Bearing stress versus centerline displacement.

Table 5
Vertical displacement under the loaded node of coordinate (0, 0).

Displacement (m) Displacement (m)

Von Mises Tresca
SBQE Q8 SBQE Q8
200 kN 0.006503 0.006592 0.006503 0.06592
300 kN 0.01121 0.01155 0.01098 0.01118
350 kN 0.01594 0.01630 0.01501 0.01587
400 kN 0.02247 0.02316 0.02118 0.02249
450 kN 0.03362 0.03317 0.03261 0.03213
480 kN 0.04370 0.04227 0.04279 0.04100
500 kN 0.05195 0.05084 0.05118 0.04934
510 kN 0.05759 0.05665 0.05596 0.05498
515 kN 0.06263 0.06093 0.06115 0.05862
520 kN 0.07627 0.07459 0.06981 0.06669
Fig. 6. Geometry and irregular mesh of the flexible strip footing.

chosen as the same of those used in [23]. The factor of

4.1.2. Stability of a slope subjected to gravity loading safety (F) of the slope is to be assessed, and this quantity
In order to check the accuracy of the present element is defined as the proportion by which tang u (friction an-
SBQE, in this example Fig. 8, the geometrical characteris- gle) and Cohesion C must be reduced in order to cause
tics, material properties, criterion and conditions were failure.
268 C. Rebiai, L. Belounar / Measurement 50 (2014) 263–269

Fig. 8. Slope subjected to gravity loading (distorted mesh).

2 3
F (Factor of safety) 1 0 y x y þ y2 xy 0:5x2 0:5y2 0:5y2 xy2 x2 y3 0
6 7
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 ½C ¼ 4 0 1 x 0 x x2 =2 y þ x2 xy 0:5  y2 x2 y x3 y2 x2 5
2 2
0 0 1 0 2y 0 x 0 y 2xy 3x y x
-2

-4 where xi and yi are the coordinates of node i (i = 1, 4), the

SBQE
Q8 matrix [C] is given by:
-6
Vmax x10-5

½C ¼ ½½C 1 ½C 2 ½C 3 ½C 4 T

-8
For the case of plane stress problems the elasticity ma-
-10 trix [D] is:
Bishop and Morgenstern 1960 2 3
-12 F=2.505
1 v 0
E 6v
½D ¼ 4 1 0 7
5
ð1  v 2 Þ 1v
-14 0 0 2

Fig. 9. Maximum of displacement versus Factor of safety. For the case of plane strain problems the elasticity ma-
trix [D] is:
Results presented in Fig. 9 in terms of the factor of
2 3
safety and the maximum of displacement at convergence ð1  v Þ v 0
E 6
show that the convergence to the reference solution given ½D ¼ 4 v ð1  v Þ 0 7
5
in [24] with the SBQE element is quite rapid and similar to ð1 þ v Þð1  2v Þ ð12v Þ
0 0 2
the Q8 element. We can see also that the SBQE behaves
better in distortion configurations. The strain matrix is given by:
2 3
0 0 0 1 0 y x 0 0 y2 2xy3 0
5. Conclusions 6 7
½Q  ¼ 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 x y x2 2x3 y 0 5
0 0 0 0 2ðy þ 1Þ 2x 2x 2y y 0 0 2x
This study proposed a new four node membrane quad-
rilateral finite element named SBQE based on the strain ap-
proach for the elastic and elasto-plastic analysis. The
problem typically encountered in strain based elements References
is to ensure that the element behaves equally well for reg-
[1] M. Himeur, M. Guenfoud, Bending triangular finite element with a
ular as well as irregular meshes. The present developed fictious fourth node based on the strain approach, Eur. J. Comput.
element is found to be numerically insensitive to distorted Mech. 20 (2012) 455–485.
meshes. This element is simple and with only twelve de- [2] M.T. Belarbi, T. Maalam, On improved rectangular finite element for
plane linear elasticity analysis, Rev. Eur. des Élém. Finis 40 (2005)
grees of freedom and contains higher order of polynomial 985–997.
terms. In terms of computing times it can be less expensive [3] D.G. Ashwell, A.B. Sabir, T.M. Roberts, Further studies in application
than other displacement elements. It was clearly revealed of curved finite elements to circular arches, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 13
(1971) 507–517.
that the proposed element could offer a significant effi- [4] D.G. Ashwel, A.B. Sabir, A new cylindrical shell finite element based
ciency and accuracy in both elastic and elastoplastic on independent strain functions, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 14 (1972) 171–183.
analysis. [5] A.B. Sabir, H.Y. Salhi, A strain based finite element for general plane
elasticity in polar coordinates, RES 19 (1986) 1–16.
[6] A.B. Sabir, A. Sfendji, Triangular and rectangular plane elasticity
Appendix A finite element, Thin-Walled Struct. 21 (1995) 225–232.
[7] M.T. Belarbi, A. Charif, Développement d’un nouvel élément
hexaédrique simple basé sur le modèle en déformation pour
Components of the matrix [C] of the dimension l’étude des plaques minces et épaisses, Rev. Eur. des Elém. Finis 8
[12  12] for the SBQE are: (1999) 135–157.
 C. Rebiai, L. Belounar / Measurement 50 (2014) 263–269
[8] A.B. Sabir, A.C. Lock, A curved cylindrical shell finite element, IJMS 14
(1972) 125–135.
[9] A.E. Assan, Analysis of multiple stiffened barrel shell structures by
strain-based finite elements, Thin-Walled Struct. 35 (1999) 233–
253.
[10] A.B. Sabir, T.A. Charchafchi, Curved rectangular and quadrilateral
shell element for cylindrical shell, in: J.R. Whiteman (Ed.), The
Mathematics of Finite Elements and Application IV, 1982, pp. 231–
239.
[11] L. Belounar, M. Guenfoud, A new rectangular finite element based on
the strain approach for plate bending, Thin-Walled Struct. 43 (2005)
47–63.
[12] C. Rebiai, L. Belounar, A new strain based rectangular finite element
with drilling rotation for linear and nonlinear analysis, Arch. Civ.
Mech. Eng. 13 (2013) 72–81.
[13] A.B. Sabir, A rectangular and triangular plane elasticity element with
drilling degrees of freedom, in: Chapter 9 in Proceeding of the 2nd
International Conference on Variational Methods in Engineering
Southampton University, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1985, pp. 17–25.
[14] M.T. Belarbi, M. Bourezane, On improved Sabir triangular element
with drilling rotation, Rev. Eur. de Genie-Civ. 9 (2005) 1151–1175.
[15] A. Madeo, G. Zagari, R. Casciaro, An Isostatic quadrilateral membrane
finite element with drilling rotations and no spurious modes, Finite
Elem. Anal. Des. 50 (2012) 21–32.
269
[16] T.H. Pian, K. Sumihara, Rational approach for assumed stress finite
elements, Int. J. Numer. Methods 20 (1984) 1685–1695.
[17] R.H. Mac-Neal, R.L. Harder, A proposed standard set of problems to
test finite element accuracy, Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 11 (1985) 3–20.
[18] A. Ibrahimobigovic, R.L. Taylor, E.L. Wilson, A robust quadrilateral
membrane finite element with drilling degrees of freedom, IJNME 30
(1990) 445–457.
[19] G. Pimpinelli, An assumed strain quadrilateral element with drilling
degrees of freedom, Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 41 (2004) 267–283.
[20] X.M. Chen, S. Cen, Y.Q. Long, Z.H. Yao, Membrane elements
insensitive to distortion using the quadrilateral area coordinate
method, Comput.-Struct. 82 (2004) 35–54.
[21] J.-L. Batoz, G. Dhatt, Modélisation des structures par éléments finis,
vol. 1, Solides élastiques, Edition Hermès, Paris, 1990.
[22] Ayad R., Eléments finis de plaque et coque en formulation mixte avec
projection en cisaillement, Thèse de Doctorat, U.T.C, 1993.
[23] I.M. Smith, D.V. Griffith, Programming the Finite Element Method,
second ed., University of Manchester UK Par John Wiley & Sons,
Hermès, 1988.
[24] A.W. Bishop, N. Morgenstern, Stability coefficients for earth slopes,
Géotechnique 10 (4) (1960) 129–150.