Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Mechanics Research Communications

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/mechrescom

Flexural-torsional buckling analysis of composite beams by BEM

including shear deformation effect
E.J. Sapountzakis *, J.A. Dourakopoulos
Institute of Structural Analysis and Seismic Research, School of Civil Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Zografou Campus,
GR-157 80 Athens, Greece

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 30 November 2007
Received in revised form 6 June 2008
Available online 18 June 2008

Keywords:
Flexural-torsional buckling
Timoshenko beam
Nonuniform torsion
Warping
Flexural
Bar
Composite beam
Twist
Boundary element method
Shear deformation

a b s t r a c t
In this paper, a boundary element method is developed for the general exural-torsional
linear buckling analysis of Timoshenko beams of arbitrarily shaped composite cross-section. The composite beam consists of materials in contact, each of which can surround a
nite number of inclusions. The materials have different elasticity and shear moduli with
same Poissons ratio and are rmly bonded together. The beam is subjected to a compressive centrally applied load together with arbitrarily axial, transverse and/or torsional distributed loading, while its edges are restrained by the most general linear boundary
conditions. The resulting boundary value problem, described by three coupled ordinary differential equations, is solved employing a boundary integral equation approach. Besides
the effectiveness and accuracy of the developed method, a signicant advantage is that
the method can treat composite beams of both thin and thick walled cross-sections taking
into account the warping along the thickness of the walls, while the displacements as well
as the stress resultants are computed at any cross-section of the beam using the respective
integral representations as mathematical formulae. All basic equations are formulated with
respect to the principal shear axes coordinate system, which does not coincide with the
principal bending one in a nonsymmetric cross-section. To account for shear deformations,
the concept of shear deformation coefcients is used. Six coupled boundary value problems
are formulated with respect to the transverse displacements, to the angle of twist, to the
primary warping function and to two stress functions and solved using the analog equation
method, a BEM based method. Several beams are analysed to illustrate the method and
demonstrate its efciency. The signicant inuence of the boundary conditions and the
shear deformation effect on the buckling load are investigated through examples with
great practical interest.
2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Elastic stability of beams is one of the most important criteria in the design of structures subjected to compressive loads.
This beam buckling analysis becomes much more complicated in the case the cross-sections centroid does not coincide with
its shear center (asymmetric beams), leading to the formulation of the exural-torsional buckling problem. Also, composite
structural elements consisting of a relatively weak matrix material reinforced by stronger inclusions or of materials in contact are of increasing technological importance. Steel beams or columns totally encased in concrete, ber-reinforced materials or concrete plates stiffened by steel beams are most common examples. Moreover, unless the beam is very thin the
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +30 2107721718; fax: +30 2107721720.
E-mail addresses: cvsapoun@central.ntua.gr (E.J. Sapountzakis), jdour@mail.ntua.gr (J.A. Dourakopoulos).
0093-6413/$ - see front matter 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.mechrescom.2008.06.007

498

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

error incurred from the ignorance of the effect of shear deformation is substantial, and an accurate analysis requires its inclusion in it.
The rst published work on exural-torsional buckling appeared in 1899 by Michell (1899) and Prandtl (1899) for thin,
rectangular, solid beams. Since then, the exural-torsional buckling problem of thin-walled homogeneous beams (based on
the assumptions of the thin tube theory) (Vlasov, 1961; Timoshenko and Gere, 1961; Rao and Carnegie, 1970; Mei, 1970;
Hodges and Peters, 1975; Reissner, 1979; Milisavljevic, 1995; Hodges, 2001) or of symmetrical cross-section beams ignoring
warping (Orloske et al., 2006) has been studied by many researchers noting that Reissner (1979) was the rst who included
transverse shear in his analysis. Moreover, the exural-torsional buckling problem in the case of composite beams of thinwalled or laminated cross-sections has also been examined ignoring (Lee and Kim, 2001; Sapks and Kollr, 2002) or taking
into account (Kollr, 2001; Machado and Cortnez, 2005; Yu et al., 2002; Cortnez and Piovan, 2006) shear deformation effect
employing again the assumptions of the thin tube theory and using either the rened models or shell stress resultants. To
the authors knowledge publications on the solution to the general exural-torsional buckling analysis of Timoshenko beams
of arbitrarily shaped composite cross-section do not exist.
In this investigation, an integral equation technique is developed for the solution of the aforementioned problem. The composite beam consists of materials in contact, each of which can surround a nite number of inclusions. The materials have
different elasticity and shear moduli with same Poissons ratio and are rmly bonded together. The beam is subjected to a
compressive centrally applied load together with arbitrarily axial, transverse and torsional distributed loading, while its edges
are restrained by the most general linear boundary conditions. The resulting boundary value problem, described by three coupled ordinary differential equations, is solved employing the concept of the analog equation (Katsikadelis, 2002). According to
this method, the three coupled fourth order hyperbolic partial differential equations are replaced by three uncoupled ones
subjected to ctitious load distributions under the same boundary conditions. All basic equations are formulated with respect
to the principal shear axes coordinate system, which does not coincide with the principal bending one in a nonsymmetric
cross-section. To account for shear deformations, the concept of shear deformation coefcients is used. Six boundary value
problems are formulated with respect to the transverse displacements, to the angle of twist, to the primary warping function
and to two stress functions and solved using the analog equation method (Katsikadelis, 2002), a BEM based method. The
essential features and novel aspects of the present formulation compared with previous ones are summarized as follows:
(i) The proposed method can be applied to beams having an arbitrary composite constant cross-section and not to a necessarily thin-walled one.
(ii) All basic equations are formulated with respect to the principal shear axes coordinate system, which does not necessarily coincide with the principal bending one.
(iii) Shear deformation effect is taken into account on the exural-torsional buckling analysis of beams of nonsymmetric
constant composite cross-section avoiding the restrictions of the thin-walled theory.
(iv) Torsional warping arising from nonuniform torsion is taken into account.
(v) The beam is supported by the most general linear boundary conditions including elastic support or restraint.
(vi) The proposed method overcomes the shortcoming of the induced error in the case of the utilization of a thin tube theory solution.
(vii) The shear deformation coefcients are evaluated using an energy approach, instead of Timoshenko and Goodiers
(1984) and Cowpers (1966) denitions, for which several authors (Schramm et al., 1994; Schramm et al., 1997) have
pointed out that one obtains unsatisfactory results or denitions given by other researchers (Stephen, 1980; Hutchinson, 2001), for which these factors take negative values.
(viii) With the exception of the structural models presented by Machado and Cortnez (2005), Cortnez and Piovan (2006)
which make use of shell stress resultants, previous formulations concerning composite beams of thin-walled crosssections or laminated cross-sections are analyzing these beams using the rened models. However, these models
do not satisfy the continuity conditions of transverse shear stress at layer interfaces and assume that the transverse
shear stress along the thickness coordinate remains constant, leading to the fact that kinematic or static assumptions
cannot be always valid.
(ix) The proposed method employs a pure BEM approach (requiring only boundary discretization) resulting in line or parabolic elements instead of area elements of the FEM solutions (requiring the whole cross-section to be discretized into
triangular or quadrilateral area elements), while a small number of line elements are required to achieve high
accuracy.
Several beams are analysed to illustrate the method and demonstrate its efciency. The signicant inuence of the
boundary conditions and the shear deformation effect on the buckling load are investigated through examples with great
practical interest.

2. Statement of the problem

Let us consider a prismatic beam of length l (Fig. 1), of constant arbitrary cross-section of area A. The cross-section consists of materials in contact, each of which can surround a nite number of inclusions, with modulus of elasticity Ej and shear

499

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

Fig. 1. Prismatic element of an arbitrarily shaped composite cross section occupying region X (a) subjected in bending and torsional loading (b).

modulus Gj , occupying the regions Xj j 1; 2; . . . ; K of the y; z plane (Fig. 1). The materials of these regions are assumed
homogeneous, isotropic and linearly elastic. Let also the boundaries of the nonintersecting regions Xj be denoted by
Cj j 1; 2; . . . ; K. These boundary curves are piecewise smooth, i.e. they may have a nite number of corners. In Fig. 1a
CYZ is the coordinate system through the cross-sections centroid C, while yC , zC are its coordinates with respect to Syz principal shear system of axes through the cross-sections shear center S. The beam is subjected to a compressive load P, to the
combined action of the arbitrarily distributed axial loading pX pX X, transverse loading pY pY X, pZ pZ X acting in the
Y and Z directions, respectively, and to the arbitrarily distributed twisting moment mx mx x (Fig. 1b).
Under the aforementioned loading the displacement eld of the beam with respect to the Syz system of axes is given as

 x; y; z ux hY xZ  hZ xY
u

dhx x P
/S y; z
dx

x; y; z vx  zhx x
v
 y; z wx yhx x
wx;

1a
1b
1c

and therefore the displacement components of the cross-sections centroid can be written as

dhx x P
/S y; z
dx
vC vx  zC hx x

2b

wC wx yC hx x

2c

uC ux

2a

where ux, vx and wx are the beam axial and transverse displacements of the shear center S with respect to x, y and z
axes, respectively, hY , hZ are the angles of rotation of the cross-section due to bending, dhx =dx denotes the rate of change
of the angle of twist hx regarded as the torsional curvature and /PS is the primary warping function with respect to the shear
center S of the cross-section of the beam (Sapountzakis and Mokos, 2003).

500

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

Moreover, according to the linear theory of beams (small deections), the angles of rotation of the deection line with
respect to the shear center x and to the centroid b in the xz and xy planes of the beam subjected to the aforementioned
loading and taking into account shear deformation effect satisfy the following relations

sin xy xy 
cos by  1;
sin by 

dw
hY  cxz ;
dx

sin xz xz 

dv
hZ  cxy
dx

cos bz  1

dwC
;
dx

sin bz 

3a; b
3c; d

dvC
dx

3e; f

while employing the stressstrain relations of the three-dimensional elasticity after ignoring the shear strain due to warping,
the arising shear stress resultants Q z , Q y are given as



dw
hY
dx
Xj
j1


K Z
X
dv
 hZ
sxy dXj G1 Ay
Qy
dx
Xj
j1

Qz

K Z
X

sxz dXj G1 Az

4a
4b

where the rst material is considered as reference material, cxz , cxy are the additional angles of rotation of the cross-section
due to shear deformation (Fig. 2a) and G1 Az , G1 Ay are the cross-sections shear rigidities of the Timoshenkos beam theory, with

Az jz AG

K
1 G
1 X
G j Aj
A
az
az j1 G1

5a

Ay jy AG

K
1 G
1 X
G j Aj
A
ay
ay j1 G1

5b

the shear areas with respect to z, y axes, respectively, jz , jy are the shear correction factors and az , ay the shear deformation
coefcients. It is worth here noting that the reduction of Eq. (4) using the shear modulus G1 of the rst material, could be
achieved using any other material, considering it as reference material.
Referring to Fig. 2, the stress resultants Rx , Ry , Rz acting in the x, y, z directions, respectively, are related to the axial N and
the shear Q y , Q z forces as

Rx N cos b Q z sin by Q y sin bz

6a

Ry N sin bz Q y cos bz

6b

Rz N sin by Q z cos by

6c

which by virtue of the small deection theory and Eqs. (2) and (3) become

dwC
dvC
 Qy
dx
 dx

dvC
dv
dhx
 zC
Qy N
Qy
Ry N
dx
dx
dx


dwC
dw
dhx
Qz
yC
Qz N
Rz N
dx
dx
dx

Rx N  Q z

7a
7b
7c

The second and third terms in the right hand side of Eq. (7a), express the inuence of the shear forces Q y , Q z on the horizontal
stress resultant Rx . However, since initial shear forces are not taken into account, these terms can be neglected since Q y , Q z
are much smaller than N (Rothert and Gensichen, 1987; Ramm and Hofmann, 1995) and thus Eq. (7a) can be written as

Rx N

Employing Eq. (1a) to the straindisplacement equations of the three-dimensional elasticity and ignoring axial deformations,
the normal strain component ex can be written as
2

ex

dhY
dhZ
d hx
Z
Y 2 /PS
dx
dx
dx

and the arising bending moments M Y , M Z are given as

MY

K Z
X
j1

MZ 

Ei ex Z dXj E1 IYY

Xj

K Z
X
j1

Xj

dhY
dhZ
 E1 IYZ
dx
dx

Ei ex Y dXj E1 IZZ

dhZ
dhY
 E1 IYZ
dx
dx

10a
10b

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

501

Fig. 2. Displacements (a) and equilibrium of an element in the xz (b) and xy (c) planes.

where

IYY

Z
K
X
Ej
Z 2 dXj ;
E1 Xj
j1

IZZ

Z
K
X
Ej
Y 2 dXj ;
E1 Xj
j1

IYZ

Z
K
X
Ej
YZdXj
E 1 Xj
j1

11a; b; c

are the moments and the product of inertia of the cross-section with respect to its centroid C. Substituting Eqs. (4a) and (4b)
in Eqs. (10a) and (10b) the bending moments M Y , M Z can be written as

MY E1 IYY
MZ E1 IZZ

!
!
2
2
1 dQ z d w
d v
1 dQ y

 2  E1 IYZ
G1 Az dx
dx
dx2 G1 Ay dx
!
!
2
2
d v
1 dQ y
1 dQ z d w

 E1 IYZ
 2
dx2 G1 Ay dx
G1 Az dx
dx

12a
12b

The governing equations of the problem at hand will be derived by considering the equilibrium of the deformed element.
Thus, referring to Fig. 2 we obtain

502

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

dRx
pX 0;
dx

dRy
pY 0;
dx

dMY
 Q z 0;
dx

dRz
pZ 0
dx

13a; b; c13ac

dM Z
Qy 0
dx

13d; e

Substituting Eqs. (8), (7b), and (7c) into Eqs. (13ac) we obtain

dN
pX
dx

14a



dQ y dN ov
ohx
 zC

N
dx ox
dx
ox


dQ z dN ow
ohx
N
yC

dx ox
dx
ox

o2 v
o2 hx
 zC 2
2
ox
ox

o2 w
o2 hx
yC 2
ox2
ox

pY 0

14b

!
pZ 0

14c

Substituting Eqs. (14b) and (14c) into Eqs. (12a) and (12b) we obtain the expressions of the bending moments M Y , M Z as

!!


2
2
dw
dhx
d w
d hx
pZ  pX
yC
N
yC
dx
dx2
dx
dx2
!!


2
2
2
d v E1 IYZ
dv
dhx
d v
d hx
 E1 IYZ 2 
 zC
pY  pX
 zC
N
dx
dx
dx2
G1 Ay
dx
dx2
!!


2
2
2
d v E1 IZZ
dv
dhx
d v
d hx
 zC
pY  pX

z
MZ E1 IZZ 2
N
C
dx
dx
dx2
G 1 Ay
dx
dx2
!!


2
2
2
d w E1 IYZ
dw
dhx
d w
d hx
N
E1 IYZ 2
yC
pZ  pX
yC
dx
dx
dx2
G1 Az
dx
dx2
2

d w E1 IYY
MY E1 IYY 2 
G1 Az
dx

15a

15b

subsequently the expressions of the shear forces Q y , Q z employing Eqs. (13d,e) as

3

d v
d w
 E1 IYZ 3
dx3
dx
!
!!


2
2
3
3
E1 IZZ dpY dpX dv
dhx
d v
d hx
d v
d hx
 zC

 2pX

 zC
 zC
N
dx2
dx3
G1 Ay dx
dx dx
dx
dx2
dx3
!
!!


2
2
3
3
E1 IYZ dpZ dpX dw
dhx
d w
d hx
d w
d hx
N

yC
yC
yC

 2pX
dx2
dx3
G1 Az dx
dx dx
dx
dx2
dx3

Q y E1 IZZ

16a

d w
d v
 E1 IYZ 3 
dx3
dx
!
!!


2
2
3
3
E1 IYY dpZ dpX dw
dhx
d w
d hx
d w
d hx

N

yC

y

 2pX
C
C
dx2
dx3
G1 Az dx
dx dx
dx
dx2
dx3
!
!!


2
2
3
3
E1 IYZ dpY dpX dv
dhx
d v
d hx
d v
d hx
 2pX

 zC
 zC
 zC
N

dx2
dx3
G1 Ay dx
dx dx
dx
dx2
dx3

Q z E1 IYY

16b

and eliminating these forces from Eqs. (14b) and (14c) we obtain the rst two coupled partial differential equations of the
problem of the beam under consideration subjected to the combined action of axial, bending and torsional loading as

" 2
!
!


4
4
2
2
2
3
3
d v
d w E1 IZZ d pY d pX dv
dhx
dpX d v
d hx
d v
d hx

3p

z

E
I



z

z

3
1
YZ
C
C
C
X
dx4
dx4 G1 Ay dx2
dx3
dx2 dx
dx
dx dx2
dx2
dx3
!#
"
!
!


4
4
2
2
2
2
3
3
d v
d hx
E1 IYZ d pZ d pX dw
dhx
dpX d w
d hx
d w
d hx

 3pX
 zC

yC
yC
yC
N
3
dx4
dx3
dx4
G1 Az dx2
dx2 dx
dx
dx dx2
dx2
dx3
!#
!


4
4
2
2
d w
d hx
dv
dhx
d v
d hx

N

p
0
N

z

p

z
C
C
C
Y
X
dx4
dx
dx2
dx4
dx
dx2

E1 IZZ

17a

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

"
!
!


4
4
2
2
2
2
3
3
d w
d v E1 IYY d pZ d pX dw
dhx
dpX d w
d hx
d w
d hx

3p

E
I

y

3
1 YZ
C
C
X
C
dx4
dx4 G1 Az dx2
dx3
dx2 dx
dx
dx dx2
dx2
dx3
!#
"
!
!


4
4
2
2
2
2
3
3
d w
d hx
E1 IYZ d pY d pX dv
dhx
dpX d v
d hx
d v
d hx
yC

 zC
 zC
 zC
N
3

 3pX
dx4
dx3
dx4
G1 Ay dx2
dx2 dx
dx
dx dx2
dx2
dx3
!#
!


4
4
2
2
d v
d hx
dw
dhx
d w
d hx

p
0

y

z

y
N

N
C
Z
X
C
C
dx4
dx
dx2
dx4
dx
dx2

503

E1 IYY

17b

Finally, the angles of rotation of the cross-section due to bending hY , hZ are given from Eqs. (4a) and (4b) as
3

dw E1 IYY d w E1 IYZ d v


dx G1 Az dx3 G1 Az dx3
"
!


2
2
E1 IYY dpZ dpX dw
dhx
d w
d hx
 2pX
yC
 2 2

y
N

C
dx2
dx dx
dx
dx2
G1 Az dx
"
!


2
2
E1 IYZ dpY dpX dv
dhx
d v
d hx
N

z
 zC
 2

 2pX
C
dx2
dx dx
dx
dx2
G1 Ay Az dx

hY 

!#
3
3
d w
d hx

y
C
dx3
dx3
!#
3
3
d v
d hx

z
C
dx3
dx3

dv E1 IZZ d v E1 IYZ d w

dx G1 Ay dx3 G1 Ay dx3
"
!
!#


2
2
3
3
E1 IZZ dpY dpX dv
dhx
d v
d hx
d v
d hx
N
2 2
 zC
 zC
 zC

 2pX
dx2
dx3
dx dx
dx
dx2
dx3
G1 Ay dx
"
!
!#


2
2
3
3
E1 IYZ dpZ dpX dw
dhx
d w
d hx
d w
d hx
yC

y

 2pX

N
2
C
C
dx2
dx3
dx dx
dx
dx2
dx3
G1 Ay Az dx

hZ

18a

18b

Equilibrium of torsional moments along x axis of the beam element, after taking into account the additional shear stresses
due to the presence of the axial force N (Timoshenko and Gere, 1961), which employing Eq. (2) are written as

 



dw
dw
dhx
rj
y
dx
dx
dx
 



dhx
j dv
j dv
r
z
r
dx
dx
dx

sjxz rj

19a

sjxy

19b

and the corresponding arising additional twisting moment

Mt;add

sxz y  sxy zdX NyC

dw
dv
IS dhx
 NzC
N E
dx
dx
A dx

20

where

IS

K 
X

y2C AEj z2C AEj IjYY IjZZ

21

j1
E

Pk

j1 Ej Aj

22

E1

leads to the third (coupled with the previous two) partial differential equation of the problem of the beam under consideration as



dM t dMt;add


mx pZ yc  pY zc
dx
dx

23

which employing Eq. (20) and having in mind that the torsional moment M t is given as (Sapountzakis and Mokos, 2003)
3

Mt E1 C S

d hx
dhx
G1 It
dx3
dx

24

can be written as
4

d hx
d hx
d w
d v I S d hx
E1 C S 4  G1 It
 N y c 2  zc 2 E
dx
dx
dx
dx2
A dx2



dw
dv
IS dhx
 pX E
 zc
mx pZ yC  pY zC  pX yc
dx
dx
A dx

25

504

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

where IS is the polar moment of inertia with respect to the shear center S, E1 C S and G1 It are the cross-sections warping and
torsional rigidities, respectively, with C S , It being its warping and torsion constants, respectively, given as (Sapountzakis and
Mokos, 2003)

Z
K
X
Ej
uP 2 dXj
E1 Xj S
j1

Z 
K
X
Gj
ouP
ouP
y2 z2 y S  z S dXj
It
G1 Xj
oz
oy
j1

CS

26a
26b

It is worth here noting that the primary warping function uPS y; z can be established by solving independently the Neumann
problem (Sapountzakis and Mokos, 2003)

r2 uPS 0 in X [Kj1 Xj
Gi

ouPS
on


i

 Gj

ouPS
on


j

27

 2
oq
12 Gi  Gj osS

on Cj j 1; 2; . . . ; K

28

where r2 o2 =ox2 o2 =oy2 is the Laplace operator; Gi 0 at the free part of the boundary
of Xj region or Gi is the shear
p
modulus of Xi region at the common part of the boundaries of Xi and Xj regions; qS x2 y2 is the distance of a point
on the boundary Cj from the shear center S; o=onj denotes the directional derivative normal to the boundary Cj and
o=osj denotes differentiation with respect to its arc length s.
As it is already mentioned, Eqs. (17a), (17b), and (25) constitute the governing equations of the beam subjected to the
combined action of axial, bending and torsional loading taking into account shear deformation effect. For the special case
of an axially compressive load N P pX 0. The aforementioned equations are also subjected to the pertinent boundary
conditions of the problem, which are given as

a1 vx a2 Ry x a3 ; a 1 hZ x a 2 MZ x a 3

29a; b

1 hY x b
2 MY x b
3
b

30a; b

b1 wx b2 Rz x b3 ;

c1 hx x c2 Mt x c3 ; c1

dhx x
2 Mw x c
3
c
dx

31a; b

at the beam ends x 0; l, where Ry , Rz and M Z , M Y are the reactions and bending moments with respect to y and z axes,
respectively, obtained from Eqs. (7b), (7c), and (15a), (15b), (16a), (16b) as

!
3
3
3
3
d v E1 IZZ
d v
d hx
d w
Ry E1 IZZ 3 
N
 zC
 E1 IYZ 3
dx
dx3
dx
G1 Ay
dx3
!


3
3
E1 IYZ
d w
d hx
dv
dhx

N

N

y

z
C
C
dx3
dx
G1 Az
dx3
dx
!
3
3
3
3
d w E1 IYY
d w
d hx
d v
 E1 IYZ 3
Rz E1 IYY

N
yC
3
3
3
dx
dx
dx
G1 Az
dx
!


3
3
E1 IYZ
d v
d hx
dw
dhx
N
yC

N
 zC
dx3
dx
G 1 Ay
dx3
dx
!
!
2
2
2
2
2
2
d w E1 IYY
d w
d hx
d v E1 IYZ
d v
d hx
 E1 IYZ 2 
MY E1 IYY 2 
N
yC
N
 zC
dx
dx2
dx
dx2
G1 Az
dx2
G1 Ay
dx2
!
!
2
2
2
2
2
2
d v E1 IZZ
d v
d hx
d w E1 IYZ
d w
d hx
MZ E1 IZZ 2
E1 IYZ 2
N
 zC
N
yC
dx
dx2
dx
dx2
G 1 Ay
dx2
G1 Az
dx2

32a

32b
33a
33b

the angles of rotation due to bending hY , hZ are evaluated from Eq. (18) as
3

dw E1 IYY d w EIYY
d w
d hx
hY 

N
yC

dx G1 Az dx3 G21 A2z
dx3
dx3
!
3
3
E1 IYZ
d v
d hx
 2
N
 zC
3
dx
dx3
G 1 Ay Az

E1 IYZ d v
G1 Az dx3
34

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

3

hZ

dv E1 IZZ d v E1 IZZ
d v
d hx

N
 zC
dx G1 Ay dx3 G21 A2y
dx3
dx3
!
3
3
E1 IYZ
d w
d hx
2
N

y
C
dx3
dx3
G1 Ay Az

505

E1 IYZ d w
G1 Ay dx3
35

while in Eq. (31b) M w is the warping moment given as (Sapountzakis and Mokos, 2003)
2

Mw E1 C S

d hx
dx2

36

k ; c ; c
 k ; bk ; b
k k 1; 2; 3 are functions specied at the beam ends x 0; l. Eqs. (29)(31) describe the most genFinally, ak ; a
k
eral linear boundary conditions associated with the problem at hand and can include elastic support or restraint. It is apparent that all types of the conventional boundary conditions (clamped, simply supported, free or guided edge) can be derived
from these equations by specifying appropriately these functions (e.g. for a clamped edge it is a1 b1 c1 1,
a 1 b1 c1 1, a2 a3 b2 b3 c2 c3 a 2 a 3 b2 b3 c2 c3 0).
The solution of the boundary value problem given from Eqs. (17), (25) subjected to the boundary conditions (29)(31)
which represents the exural-torsional buckling of beams, presumes the evaluation of the shear deformation coefcients
ay , az , corresponding to the principal shear axes coordinate system Syz. These coefcients are established equating the
approximate formula of the shear strain energy per unit length (Schramm et al., 1997)

U appr:

ay Q 2y
G

2A G1

az Q 2z

37

2AG G1

with the exact one given from

U exact

Z
K
X
sxz 2j sxy 2j
E1
dXj
Ej Xj
2G1
j1

38

and are obtained as (Mokos and Sapountzakis, 2005)

K Z
AG X
E rHj  e  rHj  edXj
jy E1 D2 j1 Xj j
K Z
1
AG X

E rUj  d  rUj  ddXj

az
jz E1 D2 j1 Xj j

ay

39a
39b

where sxz j ; sxy j are the transverse (direct) shear stress components, r  iY o=oY iZ o=oZ is a symbolic vector with
iY ; iZ the unit vectors along Y and Z axes, respectively, D is given from

D 21 mIYY IZZ  I2YZ

40

m is the Poisson ratio of the cross-section materials, e and d are vectors dened as
"
e

Y 2  Z2
IYY
 IYZ YZ
2

"
d

m IZZ YZ  IYZ

Y 2  Z2
2

!#
iY
!#

"

Y 2  Z2
IYY YZ IYZ
2

"

iY m IZZ

!#

Y 2  Z2
IYZ YZ
2

iZ

41a

!#
iZ

41b

and HY; Z, UY; Z are stress functions, which are evaluated from the solution of the following Neumann type boundary
value problems (Mokos and Sapountzakis, 2005):

r2 Hj 2IYZ Z  IYY Y in Xj j 1; 2; . . . ; K
Ej

oH
on j

 Ei

oH
on i

Ej  Ei n  e on Cj j 1; 2; . . . ; K

r2 Uj 2IYZ Y  IZZ Z in Xj j 1; 2; . . . ; K
Ej

oU
on j

 Ei

oU
on i

Ej  Ei n  d on Cj j 1; 2; . . . ; K

42a
42b
43a
43b

where Ei is the modulus of elasticity of the Xi region at the common part of the boundaries of Xj and Xi regions, or Ei 0 at
the free part of the boundary of Xj region, while o=onj  nY o=oYj nZ o=oZj denotes the directional derivative normal to
the boundary Cj . The vector n normal to the boundary Cj is positive if it points to the exterior of the Xj region, while the
normal derivatives across the interior boundaries vary discontinuously. It is also worth here noting that the boundary con-

506

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

ditions (28), (42b), (43b) have been derived from the physical consideration that the traction vectors in the direction of the
normal vector n on the interfaces separating the j and i different materials are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction,
while it vanishes on the free surface of the beam.
3. Integral representations numerical solution
3.1. For the transverse v, w displacements and the angle of twist hx
According to the precedent analysis, the exural-torsional buckling problem of composite beams reduces in establishing
the displacement components vx, wx and hx x having continuous derivatives up to the fourth order with respect to x,
satisfying the coupled governing equations (17) and (25) inside the beam and the boundary conditions (29)(31) at the beam
ends x 0; l.
Eqs. (17) and (25) are solved using the analog equation method (Katsikadelis, 2002) as it is developed for hyperbolic differential equations (Sapountzakis, 2005; Sapountzakis and Tsiatas, 2007). This method is applied for the problem at hand as
follows. Let vx, wx and hx x be the sought solution of the aforementioned boundary value problem. Setting as
u1 x vx, u2 x wx, u3 x hx x and differentiating these functions four times with respect to x yields
4

d ui
qi x i 1; 2; 3
dx4

44

Eq. (44) indicate that the solution of Eqs. (17) and (25) can be established by solving Eq. (44) under the same boundary conditions (29)(31), provided that the ctitious load distributions qi x i 1; 2; 3 are rst established. These distributions can
be determined using BEM as follows:
The solution of Eq. (44) is given in integral form as

ui x

"

d ui du d ui d u dui d u
qi u dx  u


ui

dx3
dx dx2
dx2 dx
dx3


#l

45
0

where u is the fundamental solution given as

u


r 3
r 2 
1 3


l 2  3
12
l
l

46

with r x  n, x, n points of the beam, which is a particular singular solution of the equation
4

d u
dx  n
dx4

47

Employing Eq. (46) the integral representation (45) can be written as

ui x

"

qi K4 rdn  K4 r

d ui
d ui
dui
K3 r 2 K2 r
K1 rui
dx3
dx
dx

#l
48
0

where the kernels Kj r; j 1; 2; 3; 4 are given as

1
r
K1 r  sgn
2
l
r 
1 

K2 r  l 1 
2
l

1 2 r  r
r
K3 r  l  2 sgn
4 l l
l
r 3
r 2 
1 3


l 2  3
K4 r
12
l
l

49a
49b
49c
49d

Notice that in Eq. (48) for the line integral it is r x  n, x, n points inside the beam, whereas for the rest terms it is r x  f, x
inside the beam, f at the beam ends 0, l.
Differentiating Eq. (48) with respect to x, results in the integral representations of the derivatives of ui as

dui x

dx

"

d ui
d ui
dui
qi K3 rdn  K3 r 3 K2 r 2 K1 r
dx
dx
dx
0
"
#
l
Z
2
3
2
l
d ui x
d ui
d ui

qi K2 rdn  K2 r 3 K1 r 2
2
dx
dx
dx
0
0

#l
50a
0

50b

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

3

d ui x

dx3

Z
0

"

d ui
qi K1 rdn  K1 r 3
dx

507

#l
50c
0

d ui x
qi x
dx4

50d

The integral representations (48) and (50), when applied for the beam ends 0; l, together with the boundary conditions (29)(31) are employed to express the unknown boundary quantities ui f, ui;x f, ui;xx f and ui;xxx f f 0; l in
terms of qi . This is accomplished numerically as follows. The interval 0; l is divided into L equal elements (Fig. 3), on
which qi x is assumed to vary according to certain law (constant, linear, parabolic, etc.). The constant element assumption
is employed here as the numerical implementation becomes very simple and the obtained results are very good. Employing the aforementioned procedure for the coupled boundary conditions (29) and (30) the following set of linear equations
is obtained:

D11
6 0
6
6
6 E31
6
6 0
6
6
6 0
6
6 0
6
6
4 0
0

D14

D22

D23

D24

D27

E32

E33

E34

E42

E43

E44

D54

D55

D63

D64

D66

D67

0
0

0
0

0
0

E31
0

E32
E42

E33
E43

38 ^ 9 8 9 2 3
2 3
0
D18 > u
0
a3 >
1 >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
7
7
6
607
>
>
>
>
^

>
>
>
D28 7>
a
0
u
3
1;x
6 7
6 7
> >
>
>
>
>
7>
6 7
>
>
> 6 7
> >
>
^ 1;xx >
6 F3 7
607
>
>
>
>
0 7>
0>
>
>u
>
>
>
>
>
7
7>
6
6 7
>
>
>
>
<u
= < 0 = 6F 7
607
^
0 7
1;xxx
7
6 47
6 7
6 7q1 6 7q2

7
^
>
>
>
>
7
7
6
607
b
D58 7>
0
u
2
>
>
>
3
> >
>
> 6 7
> >
6 7
>
>
>
>
>
>
7
7
6
607

>
>
>
>
^
07
D68 7>
6 7
> b3 >
> u2;x >
> 6
> >
>
>
>
7
7>
6
6 7
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
405
4 F3 5
^
E34 5>
0
u
>
>
>
2;xx
>
>
: >
:
;
; >
^ 2;xxx
0
E44
F4
0
u

51

while for the boundary conditions (31) we have

E11
6 0
6
6
4 E31
0

E12
E22

0
E23

E32

E33

E42

E43

9 8 9 2 3
38
^ 3 > > c3 >
E14 > u
0
>
>
> >
>
< c >
< ^ >
= 607
= >
0 7
3
3;x
7 u
6 7
6 7q3

7
^ 3;xx >
>
>u
4 F3 5
E34 5>
0>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
:
; : ;
^ 3;xxx
0
E44
F4
u

52

where D11 , D14 , D18 , D22 , D23 , D24 , D27 , D28 , D54 , D55 , D58 , D63 , D64 , D66 , D67 , D68 , E22 , E23 , E1j , j 1; 2; 4 are 2  2 known square
j ; c ; c
3 , c3 , c3 are 2  1 known
j ; bj ; b
j j 1; 2 of Eqs. (29)(31); a3 , 
matrices including the values of the functions aj ; a
a3 , b3 , b
j



column matrices including the boundary values of the functions a3 ; a3 ; b3 ; b3 ; c3 ; c3 of Eqs. (29)(31); Ejk ,
j 3; 4; k 1; 2; 3; 4 are square 2  2 known coefcient matrices resulting from the values of the kernels Kj r
j 1; 2; 3; 4 at the beam ends and Fj j 3; 4 are 2  L rectangular known matrices originating from the integration of
the kernels on the axis of the beam. Moreover

^ i fui 0; ui lgT
u

T
dui 0
dui l
^ i;x
;
u
dx
dx
(
)T
2
2
d ui 0
d ui l
^ i;xx
u
;
dx2
dx2
(
)T
3
3
d ui 0
d ui l
^ i;xxx
;
u
dx3
dx3

53a
53b
53c

53d

are vectors including the two unknown boundary values of the respective boundary quantities and qi fqi1 qi2 . . . qiL gT
i 1; 2; 3 is the vector including the L unknown nodal values of the ctitious load.

Nodal points
1

2
l

Fig. 3. Discretization of the beam interval and distribution of the nodal points.

508

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

Discretization of Eqs. (48) and (50) and application to the L collocation points yields

^ i H2 u
^ i;x H3 u
^ i;xx H4 u
^ i;xxx
ui C4 qi  H1 u
^
^
^
ui;x C3 qi  H1 ui;x H2 ui;xx H3 ui;xxx

54a
54b

^ i;xx H2 u
^ i;xxx
ui;xx C2 qi  H1 u

54c

^ i;xxxx
ui;xxxx C1 qi  H1 u

54d

ui;xxxx qi

54e

where Cj j 1; 2; 3; 4 are L  L known matrices; Hj j 1; 2; 3; 4 are L  2 also known matrices and ui , ui;x , ui;xx , ui;xxxx , ui;xxxx
are vectors including the values of ui x and their derivatives at the L nodal points.
The above equations, after eliminating the boundary quantities employing Eqs. (51) and (52), can be written as

ui Ti qi Tij qj ti ;

i; j 1; 2;

i 6 j

55a

u3 T3 q3 t3

55b

ui;x Tix qi Tijx qj tix ;

i; j 1; 2;

i 6 j

55c

u3;x T3x q3 t3x

55d

ui;xx Tixx qi Tijxx qj tixx ;

i; j 1; 2;

i 6 j

55e

u3;xx T3xx q3 t3xx

55f

ui;xxx Tixxx qi Tijxxx qj tixxx ;

i; j 1; 2;

i 6 j

55g

u3;xxx T3xxx q3 t3xxx

ui;xxxx qi ;

55h

i 1; 2; 3

55i

where Ti , Tix , Tixx , Tixxx , Tij , Tijx , Tijxx , Tijxxx are known L  L matrices and ti , tix , tixx , tixxx are known L  1 matrices. It is worth here
3 c c
 3 b3 b
3 0 it is ti tix tixx tixxx 0.
noting that for homogeneous boundary conditions a3 a
3
In the conventional BEM, the load vectors qi are known and Eq. (55) are used to evaluate ui x and their derivatives at the
L nodal points. This, however, can not be done here since qi are unknown. For this purpose, 3L additional equations are derived, which permit the establishment of qi . These equations result by applying Eqs. (17) and (25) to the L collocation points,
leading to the formulation of the following set of 3L simultaneous equations

8 9
>
< q1 >
=
A  NB C q2 f
>
: >
;
q3

56

where the 3L  3L matrices A, B, C are given as

E1 IZZ

6
A 4 E1 IYZ
2

E1 IYZ

E1 IYY

E1 CS  G1 It T3xx

 G11Ay E1 IZZ T1xx

6
1
B6
4  G1 Ay E1 IYZ T21xx
yC T21xx  zC T1xx
3
C11 C12 C13
6
7
C 4 C21 C22 C23 5
C31 C32 C33
2

3
7
5

57a

 G11Az E1 IYZ T12xx

zC
G1 Ay

 G11Az E1 IYY T2xx

zC
G1 Ay

E1 IZZ  Gy1CAz E1 IYZ  zC T3xx

7
E1 IYZ  Gy1CAz E1 IYY yC T3xx 7
5

yC T2xx  zC T12xx

IS
AE

57b

T3xx
57c

the Cij L  L matrices are evaluated from the expressions


E1 IZZ
C11 pX T1x 
p T1x 3pX;x T1xx 3pX T1xxx
G1 Ay X;xx

E1 IYZ
pX;xx T21x 3pX;x T21xx 3pX T21xxx

G1 Az

E1 IZZ
p T12x 3pX;x T12xx 3pX T12xxx
C12 pX T12x 
G1 Ay X;xx

E1 IYZ

pX;xx T2x 3pX;x T2xx 3pX T2xxx
G1 Az

58a

58b

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516


E1 IZZ
C13 zC pX T3x
zC pX;xx T3x 3zC pX;x T3xx 3zC pX T3xxx
G1 Ay

E1 IYZ
yC pX;xx T3x 3yC pX;x T3xx 3yC pX T3xxx

G1 Az

E1 IYY
C21 pX T21x 
p T21x 3pX;x T21xx 3pX T21xxx
G1 Az X;xx

E1 IYZ
pX;xx T1x 3pX;x T1xx 3pX T1xxx

G 1 Ay

E1 IYY
C22 pX T2x 
p T2x 3pX;x T2xx 3pX T2xxx
G1 Az X;xx

E1 IYZ
pX;xx T12x 3pX;x T12xx 3pX T12xxx

G 1 Ay

E1 IYY
C23 yC pX T3x 
y p T3x 3yC pX;x T3xx 3yC pX T3xxx
G1 Az C X;xx

E1 IYZ
zC pX;xx T3x 3zC pX;x T3xx 3zC pX T3xxx

G 1 Ay

509

58c

58d

58e

58f

C31 yC pX T21x  zC pX T1x 

58g

C32 yC pX T2x  zC pX T12x 



IS
C33 E pX T3x
A

58h
58i

and the 3L  1 column matrix f is given as

8 9 8
9
8
9
t1xx  zC t3xx
>
>
>
< f1 >
= >
< 0 >
=
<
=
t2xx yC t3xx
f f2
0
N
>
>
>
>
>
: ; :
;
: y t  z t IS t >
;
G1 It t3xx
f3
C 1xx
C 2xx
AE 3xx

59

with

E1 IZZ
p
 pX;xx t1x  zC t3x
G1 Ay Y;xx
E1 IYZ
p
 3pX;x t1xx  zC t3xx  3pX t1xxx  zC t3xxx 
G1 Az Z;xx
 pX;xx t2x yC t3x  3pX;x t2xx yC t3xx  3pX t2xxx yC t3xxx
E1 IYY
p  pX;xx t2x yC t3x
f 2 pZ  pX t2x yC t3x 
G1 Az Z;xx
E1 IYZ
p
 3pX;x t2xx yC t3xx  3pX t2xxx yC t3xxx 
G1 Ay Y;xx

f 1 pY  pX t1x  zC t3x 

 pX;xx t1x  zC t3x  3pX;x t1xx  zC t3xx  3pX t1xxx  zC t3xxx

IS
f 3 mx pZ yC  pY zC zC pX t1x  yC pX t2x  E pX t3x
A

60a

60b

60c

In the above set of equations the matrices E1 IYY , E1 IZZ , E1 IYZ , E1 CS , G1 It are L  L diagonal matrices including the values of
the corresponding quantities, respectively, at the L nodal points. Moreover, pX , pX;x , pX;xx are diagonal matrices and pY , pY;xx ,
pZ , pZ;xx and mx are vectors containing the values of the external loading and their derivatives at these points.
Solving the linear system of Eq. (56) for the ctitious load distributions q1 , q2 , q3 the displacements and their derivatives
in the interior of the beam are computed using Eq. (55).
3.1.1. Buckling equation
3 c c
 3 b3 b
3 0 (homogeneous boundary conditions) and pX pX;x pX;xx
In this case it is a3 a
3
pY pY;xx pZ pZ;xx mx 0, N P. Thus, Eq. (56) becomes

8 9
>
< q1 >
=
A PB q2 0
>
: >
;
q3

61

The condition that Eq. (61) has a nontrivial solution yields the buckling equation

detA PB 0

62

510

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

3.2. For the primary warping function /PS

The integral representations and the numerical solution for the evaluation of the angle of twist hx assume that the warping C S and torsion It constants given from Eqs. (26a) and (26b) are already established. Eqs. (26a) and (26b) indicate that the
evaluation of the aforementioned constants presumes that the primary warping function /PS at any interior point of the domain X of the cross-section of the beam is known. Once /PS is established, C S and It constants are evaluated by converting the
domain integrals into line integrals along the boundary employing the following relations

2
!
!3
K Z
1 X
o/PS
o/PS 5
4
ds on Cj j 1; 2; . . . ; K
CS 
B Ej
 Ei
E1 j1 Cj j
on
on
j

It

63a

K Z
h
i
1 X
Gj  Gi yz2  zuPS j cos b zy2 yuPS j sin b ds on Cj j 1; 2; . . . ; K
G1 j1 Cj

63b

and using constant boundary elements for the approximation of these line integrals. In Eqs. (63a) and (63b) Cj
j 1; 2; . . . ; K is an interface between regions Xj and Xi , while Ej Gj 0 in the case Cj is a free boundary. Moreover, in
these equations the normal n to the boundary Cj points to the exterior of the region Xj and Cj is traveled only once, while
By; zj is a ctitious function dened as the solution of the following Neumann problem

r2 Bj uPS j
Ej

oB
on j

 Ei

oB
on i

in Xj j 1; 2; . . . ; K

64

0 on Cj j 1; 2; . . . ; K

65

b2
z,Z

E1

C
h1

E2

E2

h2

b1
Fig. 4. Cross-section of the composite beam of Example 1.

Table 1
Buckling load P (kN) of the composite beam of Example 1
E2 =E1

Hingedhinged
Without shear
deformation

Fixedhinged
With shear
deformation
Present
study

Without shear
deformation
FEM

Fixedxed
With shear
deformation
Present
study

Without shear
deformation
FEM

With shear
deformation
Present
study

FEM

b2 h2 0:02 m
0.5
479
1
783
2
1487

476
780
1483

502
815
1490

530
834
1547

527
831
1544

541
841
1512

573
882
1612

570
879
1609

556
849
1520

b2 h2 0:08 m
0.5
7046
1
13,558
2
27,076

6845
13,089
25,828

6949
13,288
26,299

13,343
25,306
50,698

12,586
23,646
46,425

13,010
24,550
48,521

22,288
39,929
75,155

20,571
36,892
69,625

21,164
38,117
72,321

b2 h2
0.5
1
2

23,524
38,082
54,383

23,591
38,301
54,978

49,235
80,601
116,685

46,666
74,580
105,070

47,666
76,766
108,940

96,012
157,223
228,201

87,510
137,653
190,992

92,800
147,284
206,875

0:20 m
24,098
39,442
57,031

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

511

The evaluation of the primary warping function uPS and the ctitious function By; z is accomplished using BEM as this is
presented in Sapountzakis and Mokos (2001) and in Sapountzakis and Mokos (2003), respectively.
3.3. For the stress functions HY; Z and UY; Z
The evaluation of the stress functions HY; Z and UY; Z is accomplished using BEM as this is presented in Mokos and
Sapountzakis (2005). Moreover, since the exural-torsional buckling problem of composite beams is solved by the BEM, the
domain integrals for the evaluation of the area, the bending moments of inertia and the shear deformation coefcients (Eqs.
(39a) and (39b)) have to be converted to boundary line integrals, in order to maintain the pure boundary character of the
method. This is achieved using integration by parts, the Gauss theorem and the Green identity (Mokos and Sapountzakis,
2005).

Fig. 5. 3-D views of the buckling mode shapes of the FEM solution of the beams of Example 1 with E2/E1 = 0.5 (numbers in parentheses correspond to the
FEM solution).

512

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

4. Numerical examples
On the basis of the analytical and numerical procedures presented in the previous sections, a computer program has been
written and representative examples have been studied to demonstrate the efciency and the range of applications of the
developed method. In all the examples treated, each cross-section has been analysed employing N 300 constant boundary
elements along the boundary of the cross section, which are enough to ensure convergence at the calculation of the sectional
constants, while the beam interval is divided into L 60 constant equal elements.
Example 1. A monosymmetric beam of length l 3:0 m, with a composite cross section consisting of three rectangular parts
b1 h1 0:40 m in contact (reference material 1: E1 3:0  107 kN=m2 , m1 0:20, materials 2, 3: E2 E3 , m2 m3 0:20,
as this is shown in Fig. 4, has been studied. Three different types starting from a thin-walled and ending with a thick-walled
cross-section are considered, that is (i) b2 h2 0:02 m, (ii) b2 h2 0:08 m and (iii) b2 h2 0:20 m. In Table 1 the
computed values of the buckling load P for the cases of hingedhinged, xedhinged and xedxed boundary conditions
and for various values of the ratio E2 =E1 are presented taking into account or ignoring shear deformation effect as compared
with those obtained from a FEM solution (MSC/NASTRAN, 1999) employing 2600, 21,600 and 6000 solid brick elements for
the three cases, respectively (the buckling mode shapes of the latter are presented in Fig. 5). From the obtained results the
inuence of the inclusion of the aforementioned effect is remarkable leading to the conclusion that it has to be taken into
account. Moreover, it can be concluded that the inuence of the boundary conditions on the buckling load is signicant,
while the buckling load is increasing monotonically with the ratio E2 =E1 .
Example 2. To demonstrate the range of applications of the proposed method a slab-and-beam structure of length
l 40:0 m, with a composite cross section consisting of a rectangular concrete C20/25 plate (reference material 1:
E1 2:9  107 kN=m2 , m1 0:20 stiffened by two concrete C35/45 I-section beams (material 2: E2 3:35  107 kN=m2 ,
m2 0:20, as this is shown in Fig. 6, has been studied. In Table 2 the geometrical and inertia properties of the composite
cross-section are presented together with its warping, torsion constants and its shear deformation coefcients referred to

Z,z
330cm
25cm

30cm

15cm

30cm

S
Y

7cm

C20/25
C35/45

35cm

177cm

190cm

20cm
35cm

50cm
50cm 90cm

320cm

90cm

Fig. 6. Cross-section of the composite slab-and-beam structure of Example 2.

Table 2
Geometric, inertia, torsion and warping constants and shear deformation coefcients of the composite cross-section of example 2
IYY 4:049 m4
IZZ 17:182 m4
IYZ 0:00 m4
C S 16:572 m6
It 0:205 m4
IS 31:403 m4

ay 3:349
az 3:618
ayz 0:0
yC 0:0 m
zC 1:55 m
AG 4:246 m2

Table 3
Buckling load P (kN) of the composite beam of Example 2
Hingedhinged

Fixedhinged

Fixedxed

Without shear
deformation

With shear
deformation

Without shear
deformation

With shear
deformation

Without shear
deformation

With shear
deformation

674,313

661,137

1,082,168

1,045,833

1,834,828

1,744,819

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

513

its principal shear system of axes (the directions of which coincide with the principal bending ones due to the monosymmetric property of the cross-section). In Table 3 the computed values of the buckling load P for the cases of hingedhinged,
xedhinged and xedxed boundary conditions are presented taking into account or ignoring shear deformation effect.
From the obtained results the inuence of both the aforementioned effect and the boundary conditions is once more
remarkable.
Example 3. To demonstrate the range of applications of the proposed method, three different cases of a nonsymmetric beam
of length l 1:0 m, with a rectangular composite cross-section consisting of a rectangular part (reference material 1:
E1 2:9  107 kN=m2 , m1 0:30 stiffened by an L-section of unequal legs (material 2: E2 2:1  108 kN=m2 , m2 0:30 having three different thickness t values, namely t t1 1 cm (composite cross-section properties AG 3:188  102 m2 ,
It 6:800  105 m4 , C S 1:057  108 m6 , IS 1:147  104 m4 , t t 2 3 cm (composite cross-section properties
AG 5:394  102 m2 , It 8:611  105 m4 , C S 2:420  108 m6 , IS 2:024  104 m4 , t t 3 5 cm (composite crosssection properties AG 8:181  102 m2 , It 1:137  104 m4 , C S 4:009  108 m6 , IS 2:518  104 m4 , as this is shown
in Fig. 7, has been studied. Since the proposed method requires the coordinate system CYZ through the cross-sections centroid C to have Y, Z axes parallel to the principal shear axes, in the rst column of Tables 46 the geometric, the inertia constants and the shear deformation coefcients of the three aforementioned cases of the examined cross-section are given with

t
Principal shear axes (at S)

~
Z

h=15.5cm

~
Y
y

t
b=10.5cm
Fig. 7. Cross-section of the nonsymmetric composite beam of Example 3.

Table 4
Geometric, inertia constants and shear deformation coefcients of the composite cross-section of Example 3 for t t1 1 cm
eZ
e
Coordinate system C Y

Coordinate system CYZ

Iee 7:7371  105 m4

YY
Iee 3:5671  105 m4
ZZ
Iee 7:9462  106 m4
YZ
ay~ 1:649
a~z 1:426
ay~~z 3:233  102
~C 5:92  103 m
y
~zC 4:30  103 m
hS 0:14 rad

IYY 7:8757  105 m4

IZZ 3:4286  105 m4
IYZ 1:8532  106 m4
ay 1:654
az 1:422
ayz 0:00
yC 6:46  103 m
zC 3:43  103 m

514

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

Table 5
Geometric, inertia constants and shear deformation coefcients of the composite cross-section of Example 3 for t t2 3 cm
eZ
e
Coordinate system C Y

Coordinate system CYZ

Iee 1:3362  104 m4

YY
Iee 5:4703  105 m4
ZZ
Iee 2:6147  105 m4
YZ
ay~ 1:828
a~z 1:530
ay~~z 3:045  102
~C 1:06  102 m
y
~zC 1:12  102 m
hS 0:10 rad

IYY 1:3805  104 m4

IZZ 5:0266  105 m4
IYZ 1:7718  105 m4
ay 1:831
az 1:527
ayz 0:00
yC 1:16  102 m
zC 1:01  102 m

Table 6
Geometric, inertia constants and shear deformation coefcients of the composite cross-section of Example 3 for t t3 5 cm
eZ
e
Coordinate system C Y

Coordinate system CYZ

Iee 1:7038  104 m4

YY
Iee 6:6739  105 m4
ZZ
Iee 3:2453  105 m4
YZ
ay~ 1:516
a~z 1:415
ay~~z 3:457  102
~C 8:41  103 m
y
~zC 1:04  102 m
hS 0:30 rad

IYY 1:4297  104 m4

IZZ 9:4151  105 m4
IYZ 5:6061  105 m4
ay 1:527
az 1:404
ayz 0:00
yC 4:94  103 m
zC 1:25  102 m

Table 7
Buckling load P (kN) of the composite beam of Example 3
Hingedhinged

Fixedhinged

Without shear
deformation

With shear
deformation
Present
study

Fixedxed

Without shear
deformation

With shear
deformation

FEM

Without shear
deformation

Present
study

FEM

With shear
deformation
Present
study

FEM

t t 1 1 cm
9791

9364

9430

20,029

18,154

18,824

39,158

33,126

36,128

t t 2 3 cm
13,392

12,917

12,916

27,373

25,268

25,931

53,422

46,580

50,000

t t 3 5 cm
16,423

15,994

15,948

33,572

31,654

32,371

65,539

59,202

63,341

Table 8
Buckling load P(kN) of the composite beam of Example 3, for various beam lengths
Beam length
(m)

Hingedhinged

Fixedxed

Without shear
deformation

With shear
deformation

Discrepancy
(%)

t t 1 1 cm
1.00
0.90
0.80

9791
12,087
15,297

9364
11,444
14,281

4.56
5.62
7.11

t t 2 3 cm
1.00
0.90
0.80

13,392
16,530
20,915

12,917
15,811
19,778

t t 3 5 cm
1.00
0.90
0.80

16,423
20,271
25,649

15,994
19,621
24,618

Without shear
deformation

With shear
deformation

Discrepancy
(%)

39,158
48,334
61,155

33,126
39,464
47,616

18.21
22.48
28.43

3.68
4.55
5.75

53,422
65,877
83,224

46,580
55,776
67,736

14.69
18.11
22.87

2.68
3.31
4.19

65,539
80,835
102,157

59,202
71,408
87,554

10.70
13.20
16.68

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

515

Fig. 8. 3D views of the buckling mode shapes of the FEM solution of the beams of Example 3 (numbers in parentheses correspond to the FEM solution).

e Z,
e followed by the evaluation of the angle of rotation hS (Mokos and Sapountzarespect to an original coordinate system C Y
kis, 2005) giving the nal coordinate system CYZ and the new geometric, inertia constants and shear deformation coefcients
given in the second column of the aforementioned tables. In Tables 7 and 8 the computed values of the buckling load P for
various boundary conditions are presented taking into account or ignoring shear deformation effect. More specically, to
demonstrate the accuracy of the proposed method, in Table 7 the obtained results are compared with those obtained from
a FEM solution (MSC/NASTRAN, 1999) employing 16,500, 17,600 and 16,000 solid brick elements for the three cases, respectively (the corresponding buckling mode shapes of the latter method are presented in Fig. 8), while in Table 8 the discrepancy of the obtained results taking into account or ignoring shear deformation effect for various beam lengths demonstrates
the inuence of this effect.

5. Concluding remarks
In this paper a boundary element method is developed for the general exural-torsional linear buckling analysis of Timoshenko beams of arbitrarily shaped composite cross-section without initial effects. The main conclusions that can be drawn
from this investigation are:

516

E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516

(a) The numerical technique presented in this investigation is well suited for computer aided analysis for composite
beams of arbitrary cross-section, subjected to any linear boundary conditions and to an arbitrarily distributed or concentrated loading.
(b) The proposed method can treat composite beams of both thin and thick walled cross-sections taking into account the
warping along the thickness of the walls, while the displacements as well as the stress resultants are computed at any
cross-section of the beam using the respective integral representations as mathematical formulae.
(c) All basic equations are formulated with respect to the principal shear axes coordinate system, which does not necessarily coincide with the principal bending one.
(d) The discrepancy of the obtained results arising from the ignorance of shear deformation especially in thick-walled
cross-sections is remarkable and necessitates its inclusion in these cases.
(e) The developed procedure retains the advantages of a BEM solution over a pure domain discretization method since it
requires only boundary discretization.
Acknowledgements
This work has been funded by the Project PENED 2003. The project is conanced 75% of public expenditure through EC
European Social Fund and 25% of public expenditure through Ministry of Development General Secretariat of Research and
Technology and through private sector, under measure 8.3 of OPERATIONAL PROGRAM COMPETITIVENESS in the 3rd Community Support Program.
References
Cortnez, V.H., Piovan, M.T., 2006. Stability of composite thin-walled beams with shear deformability. Computers and Structures 84, 978990.
Cowper, G.R., 1966. The shear coefcient in Timoshenkos beam theory. Journal of Applied Mechanics, ASME 33 (2), 335340.
Hodges, D.H., 2001. Lateral-torsional utter of a deep cantilever loaded by lateral follower force at the tip. Journal of Sound and Vibration 247 (1), 175183.
Hodges, D.H., Peters, D.A., 1975. On the lateral buckling of uniform slender cantilever beams. International Journal of Solids and Structures 11, 12691280.
Hutchinson, J.R., 2001. Shear coefcients for Timoshenko beam theory. ASME Journal of Applied Mechanics 68, 8792.
Katsikadelis, J.T., 2002. The analog equation method, a boundary-only integral equation method for nonlinear static and dynamic problems in general
bodies. Theoretical and Applied Mechanics 27, 1338.
Kollr, L.P., 2001. Flexural-torsional buckling of open section composite columns with shear deformation. International Journal of Solids and Structures 38,
75257541.
Lee, J., Kim, SE., 2001. Flexural-torsional buckling of thin-walled I-section composites. Computers and Structures 79, 987995.
Machado, S.P., Cortnez, V.H., 2005. Lateral buckling of thin-walled composite bisymmetric beams with prebuckling and shear deformation. Engineering
Structures 27, 11851196.
Mei, C., 1970. Coupled vibrations of thin-walled beams of open-section using the nite element method. International Journal of Mechanical Science 12,
883891.
Michell, A.G.M., 1899. Elastic stability of long beams under transverse forces. Philosophical Magazine 48 (5th Series), 298309.
Milisavljevic, B.M., 1995. On lateral buckling of a slender cantilever beam. International Journal of Solids and Structures 32 (16), 23772391.
Mokos, V.G., Sapountzakis, E.J., 2005. A BEM solution to transverse shear loading of composite beams. International Journal of Solids and Structures 42,
32613287.
MSC/NASTRAN for Windows, 1999. Finite element modeling and postprocessing system. Help System Index, Version 4.0, USA.
Orloske, K., Leamy, M.J., Parker, R.G., 2006. Flexural-torsional buckling of misaligned axially moving beams: I. Three-dimensional modeling, equilibria, and
bifurcations. International Journal of Solids and Structures 43, 42974322.
Prandtl, L., 1899. Kipperscheinungen, Dissertation der Universitat Munchen.
Ramm, E., Hofmann, T.J., 1995. Stabtragwerke, Der Ingenieurbau. In: Mehlhorn, G. (Ed.), Band Baustatik/Baudynamik. Ernst&Sohn, Berlin.
Rao, J.S., Carnegie, W., 1970. Solution of the equations of motion of coupled-bending torsion vibrations of turbine blades by the method of RitzGalerkin.
International Journal of Mechanical Science 12, 875882.
Reissner, E., 1979. On lateral buckling of end-loaded cantilever beams. ZAMP 30, 3140.
Rothert, H., Gensichen, V., 1987. Nichtlineare Stabstatik. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Sapks, A., Kollr, L.P., 2002. Lateral-torsional buckling of composite beams. International Journal of Solids and Structures 39, 29392963.
Sapountzakis, E.J., 2005. Torsional vibrations of composite bars of variable cross-section by BEM. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering
194, 21272145.
Sapountzakis, E.J., Mokos, V.G., 2001. Nonuniform torsion of composite bars by boundary element method. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE 127 (9),
945953.
Sapountzakis, E.J., Mokos, V.G., 2003. Warping shear stresses in nonuniform torsion of composite bars by BEM. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and
Engineering 192, 43374353.
Sapountzakis, E.J., Tsiatas, G.C., 2007. Flexural-torsional buckling and vibration analysis of composite beams. Computers, Materials and Continua 6 (2), 103
115.
Schramm, U., Kitis, L., Kang, W., Pilkey, W.D., 1994. On the shear deformation coefcient in beam theory. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 16, 141
162.
Schramm, U., Rubenchik, V., Pilkey, W.D., 1997. Beam stiffness matrix based on the elasticity equations. International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering 40, 211232.
Stephen, N.G., 1980. Timoshenkos shear coefcient from a beam subjected to gravity loading. ASME Journal of Applied Mechanics 47, 121127.
Timoshenko, S.P., Goodier, J.N., 1984. Theory of Elasticity, third ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Timoshenko, S.P., Gere, J.M., 1961. Theory of Elastic Stability. McGraw-Hill, Tokyo.
Vlasov, V.Z., 1961. Thin-walled elastic beams. Israel Program for Scientic Translations, Jerusalem.
Yu, W., Hodges, D.H., Volovoi, V., Cesnik, C.E.S., 2002. On Timoshenko-like modeling of initially curved and twisted composite beams. International Journal
of Solids and Structures 39, 51015121.