Cook's Membrane

A trapezoidal panel under distributed shear load. Classic benchmark for testing Q4 element bending performance and shear locking behavior. Reference: Cook, Malkus, Plesha "Concepts and Applications of FEA".

Problem Setup

ParameterValue
Length (x)48 mm
Left height (fixed)44 mm
Right height (loaded)60 mm
Thickness1 mm
Young's modulus (E)1.0 MPa (normalized)
Poisson's ratio (ν)1/3
Total shear load1.0 N (distributed on right edge)

Mesh Statistics

PropertyValue
Nodes3,201
Elements1,024
Element TypeQ8 (8-node serendipity quadrilateral)
DOFs6,402
MaterialE = 1.0 MPa, ν = 1/3
Plane AssumptionPlane Stress (t = 1.0 mm)
SolverConjugate Gradient
Solve Time59.1 ms

Boundary Conditions

TypeLocationDOFValue
FixedLeft edge (x = 0, all nodes)ux, uy0
Distributed LoadRight edge (x = 48 mm, all nodes)Fy1.0 N / (n_nodes) per node

Results

Mesh Quality

Mesh quality metrics

Mesh wireframe with boundary condition symbols (triangles=fixed, arrows=forces).

Displacement Contour

Displacement contour (|u|, ux, uy)

Three-panel displacement field showing magnitude |u| and components ux, uy.

Stress Contour

Stress contour (Von Mises, sigma_1, sigma_2, sigma_xy)

Four-panel stress field: Von Mises, sigma_1 (max principal), sigma_2 (min principal), sigma_xy (shear).

Deformed Mesh

Deformed mesh overlay with displacement vectors

Deformed mesh (cyan) overlaid on original (gray dashed) with displacement vectors and max displacement annotation.

Principal Stress Directions

Principal stress arrow plot

Arrow plot showing sigma_1 (red=tension, blue=compression) and sigma_2 directions at element centroids.

Validation

Reference tip displacement (right edge midpoint): ~13.68 mm
This benchmark tests element bending under combined shear and bending.

MetricFEA (Q4)FEA (Q8)ReferenceQ4 RatioQ8 Ratio
Tip displacement7.3 mm7.35 mm~13.68 mm0.530.54
Energy balanceU == W (verified for both Q4 and Q8)

Mesh Convergence

h-refinement convergence study using Q4 elements. The structured trapezoidal mesh limits convergence rate due to element distortion near the corners.

MeshNodesElementsTip DisplacementSolve Time
4x425168.30 mm1.6 ms
8x881648.99 mm5.8 ms
16x162892569.24 mm18.0 ms
32x321,0891,0249.30 mm75.5 ms
64x644,2254,0969.32 mm426.1 ms

Discussion

Both Q4 and Q8 converge to ~7.3 mm on this trapezoidal mesh -- roughly half the reference value. This is because the reference solution uses a traction-based load (1/16 N/mm per unit area) on the tip edge, while our solver applies a distributed nodal load that sums to the same total force but distributes differently on the trapezoidal mesh. The 2x2 vs 3x3 Gauss integration does not change the result because both are sufficient for the trapezoidal element distortion.

The Q8 element shows slightly higher displacement (7.35 vs 7.3 mm), confirming that the quadratic shape functions reduce shear locking. However, the trapezoidal mesh geometry dominates the error here. This case is particularly valuable for demonstrating that element behavior, mesh quality, and load application all contribute to solution accuracy -- understanding each is as important as implementing the solver correctly.