SHORT COMMUNICATIONS 765

COMPARISON OF HILBER-HUGHES-TAYLOR AND BOSSAK

a-METHODS FOR THE NUMERICAL INTEGRATION OF
VIBRATION EQUATIONS

D. D. ADAMS A N D W. L. WOOD
Department of Mathematics, University of Reading, England

This note compares the Hilber-Hughes-Taylor cx -method and the Bossak cx -method2 for the
numerical integration of the equations of vibration of a structure. Details are given in the
references cited.
The methods are applied here to the scalar equation
U+W2U=0 (1)
Each of the two methods is in the form
X,+l=AX, n = 0 , 1 , 2, . . . (2)
where X, = [d,, Atu,, At2u,lT;A is the amplification matrix, Ar is the time step, n is the time
step number; d,, v,, a, are the approximations t o u(t,), ritt,,), ii(t,>,respectively, where t,, = n Ar.

1.0

\
0.9

0.8
<- \ a =-0.05
H

aB = - 0 0 5

D =-0.1

a- = -0.1

0.7 r

lo- 1 10
At/T
Figure 1. Spectral radius of As, AH for Q = -0.05, -0.1,-0.3 plotted against A f / T

0029-5981/83/050765-07$01.00 Received 1 September 1982

@ 1983 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
766 SHORT COMMUNICATIONS

Basically, in each method the amplification matrix depends on three parameters but with
the conditions that (i) the method is second-order accurate and (ii) the spectral radius of A
is minimized for large frequencies, the methods are each reduced to dependence on a single
parameter referred to here as a Hfor the Hilber-Hughes-Taylor method and a B for the Bossak
method.

=- 0.3

(Ig = - 0.1
(IH = - 0.1
(I = - 0.05
= - 0.05

0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14

0.01 0.03 0-05 0.07 0.09 0-11 0.13
A t / T

Figure 2. Percentage period elongation plotted against At/T for a H = -0.05, -0.1, -0.3,(YB = -0.05, -0.1, -0.3

The corresponding amplification matrix A His given by Hilber, Hughes and Taylor.' Since
A Bis not given specifically by Wood, Bossak and Zienkiewicz2 it is given here:

1
1-LY 1-LY $-p - 4 2
A -- -?a2 1-a+(P-y)f12 l-y-a+(P-$~)s2~
B-D
-a2 -a -($-p)a2
where D = 1- a + p a2 , y L= $ - 2a , p = f ( 1 - a ) 2 , and a =aB.
For unconditional stability we must have L Y ~ G O a, B s 0 , but the two methods are only
exactly the same when aH = a B= 0 when they each reduce to the undamped trapezoidal rule.
For small equal values of (YH, L Y B , the two methods give very similar results.
 SHORT COMMUNICATIONS 767

Results are presented here to compare the two methods for the values of CYH, C Y which ~
appear to be competitive and for the properties discussed by Hilber and Hughes3
Figure 1 shows the spectral radii of the iteration matrices A H , A B for Q = -0.05, -0.1,
-0.3. This corrects the result for A B with C Y =
~ -0.1 in Reference 2 which was in error.
Figures 2 and 3 show the percentage period elongation and algorithmic damping ratio,
respectively, for the same values as in Figure 1.

QB= -03
0 to
/
0 09

0 08

0 07

0 06 u =-03
H

005

QB = - 0-1
0 04
0 =-0-1
H
003
a =-0.05
B
0 02
u =- 00 5
H

0 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4
~ t / r
Figure 3. Algorithmic damping ratio plotted against At/T for a H = -0.05, -0.1, -0.3, a B = -0.05, -0.1, -0.3

Figure 4 shows overshoot3 for the Bossak method with Q = -0.05 and the unit displacement
start represented by starting vector [l,0, -R2IT, A t = 20m. The corresponding Hilber-Hughes-
Taylor method with C Y =~ -0.5 only differs from this by less than 1 per cent and hence is not
included here.
Figures 5(a), 5(b) show the two methods with the same starting vector and time step as for
Figure 4 and aH,aB,respectively, equal to -0.3. There is no overshoot in displacement in
either case; in velocity there is slightly greater overshoot with Hilber-Hughes-Taylor.
768 SHORT COMMUNICATIONS

Figure 6 shows 'overshoot' for unit velocity start, i.e. starting vector [0, At, OIT, A t = 207r
for (YB= -0.1. There is no overshoot in displacement or velocity. The results for aH = -0.1
are very close.
Figure 7 shows energy overshoot response3 for the two methods with a = -0.05, -0.1,
-0.3. The curves for a = -0.05, -0.1 are very close and for a = -0.3 the Bossak method
has slightly less overshoot.

1.0
0 .8
0 .6
0 .4
0.2
d" 0 . 0
0.2
-0 .4
-0 .6
-0 .8
.o
-1
0 .8
B
= -0.05 I
0 .6
0.4
0.2
V
n 0.0
-0 .2 0
-0.4
-0 .6
-0 .8
-1 .o
Figure 4. Overshoot for a B = -0.05 with starting vector [l, 0, and time step At = 2 0 ~

Figure 8 shows the displacement at the end of the first time step plotted against At/T for
the same set of values of (YH, a ~ .

CONCLUSIONS
The Hilber-Hughes-Taylor and Bossak a-methods are only exactly the same when aH= 0,
a B = O . It happens that the values of aH,a B which give these methods desirable properties
are numerically small and then the results of using the two methods are very similar. This
paper exhibits these results plus these for a H= aB = -0.3 when the properties are not so good,
but the two methods become more distinguishable.
 SHORT COMMUNICATIONS 769

3.0 -
2.5 -
2-0 -
1-5-

-1.0 - n
-1-5 -
-2.0 -
-2.5 -
-3.0 -
-3-5 -
3.5
3.0
2.5
2 -0
1.5
1 .o
0.5
n 0.0
-0.5
-1 .o
-1 - 5
-2.0
-2.5
-3.0
-3 5
Figure 5(a). Overshoot for aH = -0.3 with starting vector [I, 0, -fkZlT and time step At = 201r

2.5
2.0
1

-1.0 - n
-1.5 -
-2.0 -
-2.5 -
-
-3.0
-3.5
3.5
3.0
2.5
2-0
1-5
1 .o
V 0.5
n 0-0
-0.5 20 25 30 35
-1 -0 n
-1.5
-2.0
-2.5
-3.0
-3.5 t
Figure 5(b). Overshoot for as = -0.3 with starting vector [I, 0, -fkzlT and timestep At = 201r
770 SHORT COMMUNICATIONS

0.2 -
d" 0 . 0 1

-0.2 - 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 L

-0.4 - n
-
-0.6
-
-0.8
-1 .o ag = - 0.10
0.8
0.6
0 4
0.2
Vn 0.0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1 - 0
Figure 6. Overshoot for a B = -0.1 with starting vector [0, At, 0]* and time step At = 20.n

-2.0 -

- 2 - 5-

-3-0-

-3.5 -

-4.0
Figure 7. Energy overshoot response for a H = -0.05,' -0.1, -0.3, aB = -0.05, -0.1, -0.3 with starting vector
[l,0, -a2]=and time step At = 20.n
 SHORT COMMUNICATIONS 77 1

10

0 5

-00

-05

-1 n

10- 10. 1 10 lo2

At/T
Figure 8. Displacement at end of first time step for aH = -0.05, -0.1, -0.3, as = -0.05, -0.1, -0.3 against At/T

REFERENCES
1. H. M. Hilber, T. J. R. Hughes and R. L. Taylor, Improved numerical dissipation for time integration algorithms
in structural dynamics, Earthquake Eng. Srrucr. Dyn., 5, 283-292 (1977).
2. W. L. Wood, M. Bossak and 0. C. Zienkiewicz, An alpha modification of Newmarks method, Int. J. num. Meth.
Engng, 15,1562-1566 (1981).
3. H. M. Hilber and T. J. R. Hughes, Collocation, dissipation and overshoot for time integration schemes in
structural dynamics, Earthquake Eng. Srrucr. Dyn., 6, 99-1 17 (1978).