1 / 16

Large-scale Structural Analysis Using General Sparse Matrix Technique

Large-scale Structural Analysis Using General Sparse Matrix Technique. Yuan-Sen Yang, Shang-Hsien Hsieh, Kuang-Wu Chou, and I-Chau Tsai Department of Civil Engineering National Taiwan University Taiwan, R.O.C. Contents. Motivations Introduction SKyline Matrix (SKM) Approach

tiana
Download Presentation

Large-scale Structural Analysis Using General Sparse Matrix Technique

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Large-scale Structural Analysis Using General Sparse Matrix Technique Yuan-Sen Yang, Shang-Hsien Hsieh, Kuang-Wu Chou, and I-Chau Tsai Department of Civil Engineering National Taiwan University Taiwan, R.O.C.

  2. Contents • Motivations • Introduction • SKyline Matrix (SKM) Approach • General Sparse Matrix (GSM) Approach • Different Procedures between SKM and GSM Approaches • Numerical Comparisons on Structural Analyses • Conclusions

  3. Motivations • Large-scale Structural Analyses • Cost lots of time • Require lots of memory storage • SKM Approach • Generally employed by many finite element packages • GSM Approach • Has been proposed for about 20 years • Requires less time and storage • Seldom employed by structural analysis packages

  4. Introductionto SKM and GSM Approaches (I) • SKM Approach • stores and computes items within skyline (still storing a number of zero items) • GSM Approach • only stores items that are required during matrix factorization

  5. Introduction to SKM and GSM Approaches (II) • SKM Approach • Simpler data structures • Usually costs more time and storage • GSM Approach • More complicated data structures • Usually costs less time and storage

  6. Different Procedures between SKM and GSM Approaches (I) • Renumbering Algorithms • SKM: gather nonzero items closer to diagonal • GSM: scatter nonzero items over the matrix • Symbolic Factorization • SKM: Not needed • GSM: Needed (to predict the nonzero pattern of the factorized matrix)

  7. Different Procedures between SKM and GSM Approaches (II) • SKMApproach 24,840 nonzero items 81,504 nonzero items Store as 12-Story Building 612 BC Elements 182 Nodes 1,008 D.O.F’s (Ref: Hsieh,1995) • GSM Approach 66,204 nonzero items 24,840 nonzero items Store as

  8. Numerical Comparisons on Structural Analyses • Testing • Solving the equilibrium equations using direct method (LDLT factorization) • Measurements • Time requirement • Storage requirement • Computing Environment • Software: Windows NT; MS Visual C++ SPARSPAK Library (George and Liu, 1981) • Hardware: Pentium II-233 PC with 128 MB SDRAM

  9. Results of Numerical Comparisons (I) ( R= GSM / SKM * 100%) • Different Mesh Sizes R= 79% R= 67% 960 BC elements 2,160 D.O.F.‘s R= 59% R= 48% 6,820 BC elements 14,520 D.O.F.‘s

  10. Results of Numerical Comparisons (II) • Branched structures ( R= GSM / SKM * 100%) R= 55% R= 51% 3,480 BC elements 7,680 D.O.F.‘s R= 40% R= 43% 5,100 BC elements 11,232 D.O.F.‘s

  11. Results of Numerical Comparisons (III) • Different Aspect Ratio ( R= GSM / SKM * 100%) R= 84% R= 69% 64,000 Truss elements 46,743 D.O.F.‘s R= 63% R= 50% 39,200 Truss elements 28,983 D.O.F.‘s

  12. Results of Numerical Comparisons (IV) • Meshes with High-order Elements ( R= GSM / SKM * 100%) R= 65% R= 61% (Ref: Wawrzynek ,1995) 944 20-node solid elements 18180 D.O.F. ‘s R= 49% R= 32% (Ref: Hsieh and Abel ,1995) 504 20-node solid elements 10044 D.O.F.‘s

  13. Conclusions • General Sparse Matrix Approach reduces time and storage requirements in solving equilibrium equations using direct methods, especially when the finite element model is : • Large-scale • With irregular shapes (e.g., w/ branches) • Not very slender

  14. Future Work • Applying General Sparse Matrix Technique on • Parallel Finite Element Analysis • Matrix Static Condensation of Substructures • Numerical Structural Dynamics • Mode Superposition Method (Eigen-solution Analysis)

  15. Suggestions • Use one of the popular public general sparse matrix packages • For saving time on tedious coding • The results are usually more reliable • Some popular packages • SPARSPAK (George and Liu,1981) • Harwell Subroutine Library (Duff,1996)

  16. Some Popular Packages • SPARSPAK • Book: • George, A. and Liu, J. W. H., Computer Solution of Large Sparse Positive Definite Systems, Prentice- Hall, USA, 1981. • E-mail: jageorge@sparse1.uwaterloo.ca joseph@cs.yorku.ca • Harwell Subroutine Library • Web site: http://www.dci.clrc.ac.uk/Activity/HSL • E-mail: I.S.Duff@rl.ac.uk

More Related