2010
DOI: 10.1109/tmag.2010.2043513
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improving the Mixed Formulation for Meshless Local Petrov–Galerkin Method

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The radial point interpolation method with polynomial terms (RPIMp) will lead to a shape function that indeed obeys the Kronecker delta property. Hence, this paper uses the MLS method for interior nodes and the RPIMp method to impose the essential boundary conditions directly [2].…”
Section: Improvements To the Mlpg Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The radial point interpolation method with polynomial terms (RPIMp) will lead to a shape function that indeed obeys the Kronecker delta property. Hence, this paper uses the MLS method for interior nodes and the RPIMp method to impose the essential boundary conditions directly [2].…”
Section: Improvements To the Mlpg Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The FEM requires the solution domain to be meshed, and the accuracy of the FEM depends on the quality of the mesh. The meshless methods have received a lot of attention in recent years; this is mainly because the meshless methods do not need any connectivity structure among nodes [2,3].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are many types of test functions that can be chosen [12]. The Heaviside function is adopted in this paper [9]:…”
Section: The Mlpg Formulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since some of the shape functions used in the conventional meshless methods do not satisfy the Kronecker delta property (Belytschko et al, 1996), the imposition of essential boundary conditions is another problem in these methods. A mixed formulation has been presented in Fonseca et al (2010) which combines Shepard's shape functions for inner nodes to reduce the computational time and RPIM shape functions for boundary nodes to impose the essential boundary conditions. But, it is interesting to note that for the suggested direct shape function, smaller the overhang radius of the shape function using correct set of a, closer to zero the value of the shape COMPEL 33,1/2 function in the other nodes.…”
Section: Direct Shape Functionmentioning
confidence: 99%