FINITE DIFFERENCE BUCKLING ANALYSIS OF NON-UNIFORM COLUMNS

M.J. kEMONGERt Civil Engineering Department, Royal Military College of Science, Shrivenham, England
Abstract-Buckling loads for tapered and stepped columns have been determined by a finite difference method using a matrix iteration solution technique (a BASIC program for which is appended). Errors which can arise with the finite difference approach are discussed namely, that convergence towards the correct buckling load as the number of segment subdivisions is increased may not be monotonic, that simple averaging of the second moments of area to either side of a change of section is hardly adequate and that correct formulation of the problem using a fourth order differential equation is difficult. It is shown that consistent and correct results can be obtained using only a small number of segment subdivisions coupled with extrapolation procedures. A simple expression is derived for an effectivevalue of second moment of area at a change of section.
1. WlRODlJCTlON

Tapered and stepped columns such as those shown in Figs. 2 and 6 are of practical importance in structural engineering because of their reduced weight compared with uniform columns for the same axial load carrying performance (buckling load). Solutions for all the standard cases are now known[l], indeed some have exact closed form solutions, so any re-analysis can be regarded as of only academic interest. It is in this context however that the analysis of these non-uniform columns provide good examples in teaching upon which to exercise simple techniques of numerical analysis-a necessary topic in a modern treatment of stability. They can also illustrate lower bound solutions which can be contrasted with upper bounds obtained from a Rayleigh-Ritz energy approach. Lower bound solutions to buckling problems have been found by a method of successive approximations as done numerically by Newmark[2] or by finite element methods[3] but such analyses are somewhat complex. A simpler direct approach is presented in this paper. Differential equations for the equilibrium of a column with small lateral. displacements can easily be written in finite difference form. The expression of these equations at a number of stations along the column gives a set of homogeneous simultaneous linear equations the lowest eigenvalue solution of which leads to the buckling load. Many methods of solution are available to find the lowest eigenvalue including direct expansion of the determinant, which becomes inconvenient if there are more than about three unknown displacements. Most methods avoid matrix inversion but as this can be done with a single statement in a BASIC computer program the method outlined in this paper uses it in a matrix iteration technique, the program for which can be student written (see Appendix A). The direct finite difference approach may seem like well trodden ground but it is not easy to find answers to such questions as What value of second moment of area (I) should&e used at a step change of section? or What are the relative advantages and disadvantages of modelling a column using second or fourth order differential equations?. tprincipal Lecturer.

As will be shown, it is possible to obtain highly accurate solutions to the buckling load by dividing a column into a small number of segments, particularly if extrapolation methods are used. There are snags however which are not made clear in most textbooks employing these methods and giving simple examples. For instance the pattern of convergence towards the correct buckling load may depend upon whether a column is divided into an odd or even number of segments and an incorrect solution may be obtained if the problem is formulated using a fourth order differential equation. These difficulties will be highlighted and it will be shown how consistent and correct solutions can easily be obtained.
2.ANALYSBMETHODS

The buckling loads for axially loaded columns can be found from the governing differential equation for small deflection bending H(X) 2 = M(u, x) (1)

where E is Youngs modulus: x is distance along the column measured from one end; I(x) is the second moment of area about the neutral axis of bending; v is the lateral displacement; and M(u, x) is bending moment. The finite difference form of this equation is El(xr)(.-1-2p+. h )=M(o. x.) (2)

+I

where uiel, tri and tli+l are the lateral displacements at three stations covering two segments length h, a beam of length L being divided into (L/h) equal segments. It is mathematically invalid to write this equation for columns of varying I as ~(I(%-)&-Zl(Xi)Vi +I(Xi+l)Ui+l)= M(Q9-G)

(3) as is sometimes done. Application of eqn (2) at a number of stations yields a set of homogeneous linear simultaneous equations from
741

742

M.J. IREMONGER
giving

which the lowest eigenvalue corresponding to the buckling load can be determined. A solution using the matrix iteration technique is described in Appendix A. This method requires the simultaneous equations to be written in the matrix form [AIM = A[EI{D] (4)

where [A] and [B] are matrices containing displacement coefficients and A is the eigenvalue. To illustrate how the equations can be put into this particular matrix form for problems with different boundary conditions a column of uniform I divided into three segments will be considered (Fig. 1). (a) Pinned-Pinned (Euler column (Fig. la)) Bending moment M(u, x) = - PO = EZ (d*u/dx). In finite diRerence form this equation is

(b) Free-fixed column (Fig. lb) Bending moment M(u, x) = P( u. - u) = El(d*u/dx*). In finite difference form Ui_l-ZUi t Ui+l t A(Vo- u~)=O where Ph' A=wandh=J the boundary conditons are u(L)=O=u3 and u(L) = 0 zero slope at the fixed end can be represented by introducing a station 4 outside the column and then putting u4 = uz (slope being defined as U(Xi) = (- q_, t u,+,)/2h) L

Ui_l-2UitU~+lt AUi =O
where A = (PhIEZ) and h = (L/3) the boundary conditions are o(0)= 0 = uo u(L)=O=u3 and
u(0) = u(L) = 0

at luo-2uItu2-A(uo-u,)=O

at2u,-2u2tuj-A(uo-~z)=0 at3u2-2u9tu4-A(uo-us)=0

. . at 1

uo-2u,tu2tAu,=0
at 2

giving

u,-2u2tujtAu2=0
station 0 1 number 2 3 L
I

I
(a)

(c) Pinned-fixed column (Fig. lc) Bending moment M( u, x) = - Pu - Qx = EZ(d2u/dx2) where Q is the pin reaction. In finite difference form ui_l - 2Oi+ tli+t + Au,= (axlh) where A = (PhIEZ), a = (Qh/EZ) and h = (L/3) the boundary conditions are u(0) = 0 = u,

lb)

u(0)= 0 --fno equation at station 0 u(L)=O=I+ 0(L)=0+1)4=02

ICI

.Latl

uo-2u1tuztAuI=a

at2 u,-2u2+u3tAu2=2a at3 u2-2u3tu4tAu3=3a from the last equation a = (2u2/3)

......... buckled shape

Fig. 1. Uniform columns with various end conditions.

.. . [A2

-'S,3lkl=A

[I:

x:1.

Buckling analysis of non-uniform columns

143
3. TAPERED COLUMNS

Similar equations can be written for columns of varying Z, in which case some of the coefficients of matrix [B] are changed. It is also easy to derive the coefficient matrices [A] and [B] if a column is divided into a higher number of segments because of the regular structure of the finite dilTerence equations. As discussed later, it is not necessary to subdivide a column into a hi number of segments (more than say seven) in order to obtain very accurate buckling load predictions. Instead, the so-called h or Richardsons extrapolation method can be used[4]. This assumes that the error (e) in the ejgenvalue solution is given by e=ah2tbh4tch6t ...

With the further approximation that e=ah it follows that if a solution AI results from a column being divided into nr segments and a solution A2results from dividing the column into n2 segments then a better solution A is given by
A=

n,*A, - n2*A2
2 fh -n2 2

More accurate extrapolations can be obtained by taking into consideration two terms on the right hand side of eqn (5). Three approximate solutions are then required[4] but the extrapolation method given by eqn (6) is accurate enough for most purposes. In an attempt to simplify the analysis, eqn (1) can be diflerentiated to give a fourth order equation, which for columns with constant Z is
Ez fi =

d*Mu, xl
dx*

dx

where the right hand side equals P(dddx*) for all three columns shown in Fig. 1. In finite difference form this equationcanbewrittenas
&-2_4Ut-~

Application of eqn (2) to tapered columns such as those shown in Fig. 2 yield solutions that demonstrate how accurate buckling load predictions can be made with only a small number of segment subdivisions. Their use also illustrates that care may be necessary in extrapolating the results. For the single tapered free-fixed column of Fig. 2(a) the predicted buckling load monotonically converges to the exact value (numerical coefficient 4.92[1]) as shown in Fig. 3 when the number of segment subdivisions is increased. Only four segments are required to give a lower bound solution within 1% of the exact value. Using h* extrapolation (eqn 6), errors are only 0.4% using 2 and 3 segments and 0.1% using 3 and 4 segments. Similar accuracies could be expected for different degrees of taper and for the single tapered pinned-pinned column shown in Fig. 2(b). The value of this simple numerical method of solution is exemplified in this latter case because a closed form analytical solution is not possible. The solution to the double tapered pinned column shown in Fig. 2(c) is related by symmetry to that for the single tapered free-fixed column of Fig. 2(a). An exact closed form solution is possible, giving 19.675 as the buckling load numerical coefficient. However, as shown in Fig. 4 the numerical solution does not monotonically converge towards the exact solution. Using even numbers of segments only half the column need be considered because of the symmetry of the buckled shape (indeed, the analysis is identical to that for the single tapered column shown in Fig. 2(a) but of length L/2). The symmetry of the buckled shape can also be used with odd numbers of segments. The idealized column shapes which the numerical solutions represent are shown by the dashed lines in Fig. 5. These idealized shapes explain why higher buckling loads are predicted with even numbers of segments and illustrate the obviously overstiff idealization with just two segments. Predicted buckling loads within about 1% of the exact value can be obtained

t6Vi

-&+I

+ u~+z=~(U~-I

-2Ui

+ Ui+l)t. (8)

(a)

This formulation provides a slight simplification of the pinned-fixed column (Fig. lc) analysis because the reaction Q does not appear but for the other columns extra outside nodes have to be introduced. For columns where Z varies along their length this method of analysis provides no advantage. If Z continuously varies, eqn (7) is invalid and a much more complicated equation arises from differentiating eqn (1). For stepped columns eqn (8) is invalid in the region of the step change of section and its application provides an erroneous continuity of curvature at the step with consequent errors in both the buckling load and buckled shape (see later). It would be possible to modify the central difference eqn (8) using either forward or backward differences to avoid crossing the step but this considerably complicates the formulation of the problem.

fb)

(cl

tAtternatively the right hand side of eqn (8) can be written as tg(Di_*-2Vi+ Uj+d.

L___/

Fig. 2. Tapered columns.

M.

J. IREMONGER
Number of Segments

3 number

I of

5 segments

1
7
5

Fig. 3. Convergence of buckling load coefficient for single

tapered free-fixed column.

by using eight or more segments. However as demonstrated in Table I a danger arises when using rhZr extrapolation. If results for pairs of either odd or even segments are used, which inde~ndently converge monotonically to the exact value of buckling load, then very accurate lower bound solutions can be obtained. On the other hand if odd/even pairs are used (e.g. 4 and 5 segments) then the accuracy is less than the unextrapolated solution and, equally important, may not represent a lower bound.
4.srEPPED COLUMNS

Fig. 5. Idealized column shapes (shown dashed) as analysed to represent double tapered column.

Good solutions can be obtained to the buckling loads of stepped columns from the direct application of eqn (2) though the different effect of using odd or even numbers of segments is even more marked than for double tapered columns.

Two particular stepped columns, one free-fixed and the second pinned-fixed are shown in Fig. 6. The patterns of convergence towards the correct buckling load for these columns as the number of segment subdivisions is increased are shown respectively in Figs. 7 and 8, An exact closed form solution is possible for the free-fixed column giving a numerical coefficient 4.135[l] but for the pinned-fixed column a numerical solution is required. Newmarks method gives a numerical coefficient for this latter case of 25.175151. Using only odd numbers of segments the solutions to the buckling loads for both these problems converge monotonically from below. Accuracy within 1% is obtained with only 5 segments for the free-fixed column

Fig. 4. Convergence of buckling load coefficient for double tapered pinned column.

Buckling analysis of non-uniform columns Table 1. Errors measured in buckling load predictions for double tapered pinned column

745

Trror (X
-8.5

lsegment pair

lations segment pair

1
-rE:tror (X)

3, -2.5 3, 5 -0.9 4, -3.6 4, 6 -0.4 5, -1.3 5, 7 -0. 6, -1.9 6, 8 -0.1 7, -0.8

5.1

-5.6

3.8

-3.6

3.0

When either of the stepped of Fig. 6 are . columns _ ._. divided into an even number of segments, eqn (Z) has to be applied at the step change of section. It is common[5]to choose a value of second momentof area (I) at this station which is a simpleaverage of the Zsto right and left of the section. This gives an effective I of Ia 21, value l.S& for the two columns in Fig. 6. This approximation is successful for the pinned-fixedcolumn P because the finite difference solution basicaly underestimates its stiffness. For the free-fixed column, buckling loads above the exact value are obtained. These converge slowly towards the exact bucklingload as the number of segment subdivisionsis increased. Not only L/2 I L/z I I does this lead to an uncharacteristicupper bound solu--------I tion but for both columns !I extrapolation based on Fig. 6. Free-fixed and pinned-fixed stepped columns even plus odd segment pairs leads to erroneous predictions of bucklingload. but I5 segments are necessary for the pinned-fixed The need for a better treatment of a step change of column because its buckled shape is more complex. For section was recognised by Girijavallabhan[6] who this latter case, 1% accuracy is obtained using h developed a somewhat complex expression for an extrapolationof the results from 3 and 5 segments. equivalent or effective I at the step involving dis-

P wit 1 2
I I I I I 1 I

= 12 of

CEI, T
L I J

IO

II number

13

14

15

segments

Fig. 7. Convergence of buckling load coefficient for free-fixed stepped column.

746

M. J. IREMONGER
exact

solution

x +

I.5 l-33

I, I,

at s&p
at

step

Peril 19
I I L

CEI,
L 13 14

10

11 number of

12 scgmcnIs

Fig. 8. Convergence of buckling load coefficient for pinned-fixed stepped column. placements at stations on either side of the step and an assumed displaced shape. A simpler expression mentioned by ORourke and Zebrowski [7] is However for both columns, as for the double tapered column, it is necessary to restrict h* extrapolation to results from pairs of either odd or even numbers of segments. Use of the fourth order eqn (8) leads to values of predicted buckling loads which converge to about 15% below the correct value for the pinned-fixed column as the number of segment subdivisions is increased. This is because, as shown in Fig. 9, application of eqn (8) leads to an invalid continuity of curvature at the step change in section which in turn leads to an incorrect and too flexible buckled shape. The same errors in curvature occur with the free-fixed column and the buckled shape is also too flexible but because this shape has less changes in curvature the effect on the buckling load is insignifIcant. 5. CONCLUSIONS The analysis of buckling ioadsfor the tapered and stepped columns shown in Figs. 2 and 6 has demonstrated that highly accurate lower bound solutions are possible using a direct finite difference approach coupled with a matrix iteration solution technique. In calculating the buckling loads, none of the above columns need be divided into more than 5 segments to give an accuracy within 1% (or 8 segments to give an accuracy within 0.1%) provided A* extrapolation of two solutions is used. There is not in general however a monotonic convergence towards the exact buckling load as the number of segment subdivisions is increased. Instead, there is often a marked difference between the pattern of results for even and odd numbers of subdivisions. It is easy therefore to be misled by the trends implied by the results of consecutive low numbers of segment subdivisions. These often appear as worked examples in textbooks. Instead, results from even and odd numbers of segment subdivisions should not be mixed when used for h* extrapolation. It has been shown that the most consistent sets of results for stepped columns are obtained with stations equally spaced either side of the step, i.e. odd numbers

where ZL and Z, are respectively second moments of area to left and right of the change of section. This expression yields an effective Z at the step equal to (4ZJ3) for the columns of Fig. 6. Equation (9) is derived in Appendix B using a similar method to that employed by Girijavallabhan. Using the value (4ZJ3) at the step there is a monotonic convergence towards the correct buckling loads for both columns as shown in Figs. 7 and 8. These give similar orders of accuracy to those obtained with odd numbers of segment subdivisions.

2nd

order

4th

order

i\ \ \
Step change

of section

Fig. 9. Variations in predicted buckled shape and curvature around step between second and fourth order formulations of pinned-fixed stepped column problem.

Buckling analysis of non-uniform columns

741

of segments. However if subdivision of the column into segments gives a station at a step change of cross-section then reliable results can be obtained if an effective second moment of area is used at that station given by eqn (9) and derived in Appendix B. Simple averaging of the second moments of area to the left and right of the step change of section can lead to misleading and erroneous predictions of buckling load. It has also been demonstrated that the fourth order formulation of eqn (8) cannot be used successfully for stepped columns because it predicts continuity of curvature at the change of section and erroneous buckling loads. To be used successfully the fourth order equation would have to be formulated using forward or backward differences in the region of the step change of section. The correct discontinuity of curvature could then be maintained at the expense however of a more complex analysis which moreover provides no advantage over a second order analysis. The analysis presented in this paper is useful in the teaching of stability. The application of finite difference equations is an important part of the modern treatment of that subject and the use of a matrix iteration solution technique makes a significant link with the teaching of vibrations. This paper has shown how some of the pitfalls of the finite difference approach can be avoided.

8. J. M. Prentis and F. A. Leckie, Mechanical Vibrations-An Introduction to Matrix Methods. Longmans, London (l%3). 9. L. Meirovitch, Elements of Vibration Analysis. McGraw-Hill, New York (1975).
APPENDIX A

Matrix iteration The mechanical vibrations of multi degree of freedom systems can be represented in matrix form as

[KIWI = ~[Ml W)

(At)

in which [M] and [K] are respectively mass and stiffness matrices, {X) is a displacement amplitude vector and w is natural frequency. The natural frequencies and corresponding mode shapes are commonly determined using a matrix iteration technique[8,9]. This technique is also applicable to the stability analysis presented in this paper because eqns (4) and (Al) are of similar form. For matrix iteration eqn (4) is rewritten as jr}=

ACAl- I4 {u).

(A3

In essence, the technique involves assuming a set of values for the displacement vector {u), evaluating the vector [A]- [B] {u), normalising this vector by extracting a coefficient, i.e. by dividing through by one of the terms (for instance the first) and repeating the procedure using this normalised vector for {u). The iteration procedure is repeated until the value of the extracted coefficient differs by less than some specified tolerance from one iteration to the next. The lowest eigenvalue A is then given by the reciprocal REFERENCIC3 of this extracted coefficient and lul gives the buckled shaoe. I. S. P. Timoshenko and .I. M. Gere, 77reory of Elastic sfa&/ity, In the BASIC program listed~below all the terms of the 2nd Edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (1961). 2. N. M. Newark, Numerical procedure for computine displacement vector {u) are initially set to unity (line 240 ); the deflections, moments and buckling loads. Trans. AS& 108: value of the extracted term is NI for the current iteration and NO 1161-1188 (1943). for the previous iteration. NO is initially set to a high number 3. Pen-Yuan Shih and H. L. Schreyer, Lower bounds to fun(line 250). It is assumed that adequate convergence has been damental frequencies and buckling loads of columns and attained when the extracted term differs between one iteration plates. Int. 1. Solids Structures 14, 1013-1026 (1978). and the next by less than 0.01% (line 300). In the unlikely event M. G. Salvadori, Numerical computation of buckling loads by that this level of convergence is not reached within 20 iterations finite differences. Trans. ASCE 116,590-624 (1951). a message is printed (line 340). The printed EIGENVALUE Ping-Chun Wang, Numerical and Matrix Methods in StrucCOEFFICIENT has to be multiplied by the square of the number tural Mechanics. Wiley, New York (1966). of segment subdivisions (either N2- or (N t I)) to give the C. V. Girijavallabhan, Buckling loads of nonuniform columns. coefficient C in the exoression for buckline load (CEI,/L*). J. Struct. Div. ASCE 95, 2419-2431 (1%9). DATA statements supplying data for l&es 126 and l3b have M. ORourke and T. Zebrowski, Buckling load for nonuniform been left out of the program listing. These can conveniently be columns. Comput. Structures 7, 717-720 (1977). added using line numbers less than 100.

CM

Vol. 12.No. S-F

748

At step change

of section

An expression for the most suitable value of second moment step change B of section can be derived of area (I) to be taken at a APPENDX by the moment-area method. It is assumed that the bending moment is constant across the segments to either side of the step, i.e. from stations i - I to it I in Fig. 10. In addition to the notation indicated in Fig. IO the slope of the displaced shape at the step (station i) is taken as 6. Anulication of the moment-area theorem for the region i - I to i about station i - I gives I v,_,-(a,+Bh)=EIl.Mh.i and for the region i to it I about station it
h
displaced

(Bl)

/
i-1

1
i

/
i+l

shape

1gives
(B2)

-I-.&f/,.; u;+,-(c!i-Bh)=EIR
Adding (Bl) and (B2) gives

If eqns (2) and (B3) are compared it can be seen that

Fig. IO. Notation and assumed variations around step of displacements and MEI diagram used in moment-area analysis.

This represents an ~equivalent or effective I at station i, the step change of section.