008[1]. Slope-Deflection Equations for Stability and Second-Order Analysis of Timoshenko Beam-column Structures With Semirigid Conections

© All Rights Reserved

21 views

008[1]. Slope-Deflection Equations for Stability and Second-Order Analysis of Timoshenko Beam-column Structures With Semirigid Conections

© All Rights Reserved

- Design of Cantilever Beam
- Book
- Analysis of Box Beams 7
- NR 310103 Structural Engineering
- 203-3
- Duddingston Loch Pier
- 12745478 Analysis and Design of Flexure Member Rolled Beam Section
- 806
- Additional Column Notes
- Analysis & Design of Beam-Columns
- MxFrame Brochure UK
- prEN1993-3-1st-02.pdf
- Reinforced Concrete Column1
- General Beam Theory Module 8 Page21-31
- Wagners beam cycle
- ENDPLMC9
- Questions
- course outline engi23413-w2016
- 2008[1]. Slope-Deflection Equations for Stability and Second-Order Analysis of Timoshenko Beam-column Structures With Semirigid Conections
- Chapter 4 - Slender Columns - Sp17!09!07

You are on page 1of 12

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223279380

second-order analysis of Timoshenho beam

column structures with...

Article in Engineering Structures November 2008

DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.007

CITATIONS

READS

31

914

1 author:

J. Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa

National University of Colombia

145 PUBLICATIONS 1,231 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by J. Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa on 08 December 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document

and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Engineering Structures (

www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Timoshenho beamcolumn structures with semi-rigid connections

J. Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa

School of Mines, National University, A.A. 75267, Medellin, Colombia

Received 24 December 2007; received in revised form 28 January 2008; accepted 12 February 2008

Abstract

A new set of slope-deflection equations for Timoshenko beamcolumns of symmetrical cross section with semi-rigid connections that include

the combined effects of shear and bending deformations, and second-order axial load effects are developed in a classical manner. The proposed

method that also includes the effects of the shear component of the applied axial force as the member deflects laterally (Haringx Model) has the

following advantages: (1) it can be utilized in the stability and second-order analyses of framed structures made up of Timoshenko beamcolumns

with rigid, semi-rigid, and simple end connections; (2) the effects of semi-rigid connections are condensed into the slope-deflection equations for

tension or compression axial loads without introducing additional degrees of freedom and equations; (3) it is more accurate than any other method

available and capable of capturing the phenomena of buckling under axial tension forces; and (4) it is powerful, practical, versatile and easy to

teach. Analytical studies indicate that shear deformations increase the lateral deflections and reduce the critical axial loads of framed structures

made of members with low shear stiffness. The effects of shear deformations must be considered in the analysis of beamcolumns with relatively

low effective shear areas (like laced columns, columns with batten plates or with perforated cover plates, and columns with open webs) or with

low shear stiffness (like elastomeric bearing and short columns made of laminated composites with low shear modulus G when compared to their

elastic modulus E) making the shear stiffness GAs of the same order of magnitude as EI/L 2 . The shear effects are also of great importance in the

static, stability and dynamic behavior of laminated elastomeric bearings used for seismic isolation of buildings. Four comprehensive examples are

included that show the effectiveness of the proposed method and equations.

c 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Beams; Beamcolumns; Large deflections; Nonlinear analysis; Semi-rigid connections; Second-order analysis; Stability; Structural analysis; Timoshenko

beam

1. Introduction

The slope-deflection method represents a turning point in

the evolution and development of the matrix stiffness method

as it is known today (Samuelsson and Zienkiewicz [1]). It was

presented in 1915 by Wilson and Maney [2] in a Bulletin from

the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign as a general

method to be used in the analysis of beam structures with rigidjoints subjected to transverse loads.

The slope-deflection method may be used to analyze all

types of statically indeterminate beams and frames. The

classic slope-deflection equations are derived by means of

the momentarea theorems considering deformation caused by

Tel.: +57 42686218; fax: +57 44255152.

and axial forces. Basically, a number of simultaneous equations

are formed with the unknowns taken as the angular rotations

and displacements of each joint. Once these equations have

been solved, the moments at all joints may be determined.

The method is simple to explain and apply since it is

based on the equilibrium of the joints and members. The

classic slope-deflection method is generally taught in the

introductory structural analysis courses (Norris and Wilbur [3],

Kassimili [4]) and used in the structural design (Salmon and

Johnson [5]) because it provides a clear perspective and a

complete understanding of how the internal moments and the

corresponding deformations are interrelated, both of which are

essential in structural engineering.

However, advances in composite materials of high resilience

capacities and low shear stiffness as well as the need for lighter

0141-0296/$ - see front matter

doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.007

Please cite this article in press as: Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa J. Slope-deflection equations for stability and second-order analysis of Timoshenho beamcolumn

structures with semi-rigid connections. Engineering Structures (2008), doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.007

ARTICLE IN PRESS

2

Nomenclature

Effective shear area of the beamcolumn cross

section;

E

Youngs modulus of the material;

G

Shear modulus of the material;

L

Length of the beamcolumn AB;

I

Principal moment of inertia of the beamcolumn

about its axis of bending;

Ma and Mb Bending moments (clockwise +) at ends A

and B, respectively;

P

Applied axial load at ends A and B (+

compression, tension);

Pcr

Critical axial load;

Pe

2 EI/L 2 = Euler load;

Ra and Rb Stiffness indexes of the flexural connection at

A and B, respectively;

u(x)

Lateral deflection of the beamcolumn center

line;

1

= 1+P/(G

As ) Shear reduction factor;

a and b Flexural stiffness of the end connections at A

and B, respectively;

a and b Fixity factors at A and B of column AB,

respectively;

(x)

Rotation of the cross section due to bending alone

as shown by Fig. 1c;

a 0 and b0 Bending rotations of cross sections at ends A0

0

respect to cord A0 B0 , respectively;

q and B with

= P/ E I /L 2 Stability function in the plane of

As

bending;

a and b Rotations of ends A and B due to bending with

respect to the vertical axis, respectively [a =

Mb

a

0

a 0 + M

a and b = b + b ];

=

12(E I /L 2 )

G As

the shear effects and second-order analysis of framed structures.

For instance, elastomeric seismic isolators and members

made of light polymer materials may undergo extremely

large deflections under combined axial and transverse loads

without exceeding their elastic limit. The slope-deflection

equations for Timoshenko beams including the effects of shear

deformations and transverse loads were developed by Bryan

and Baile [6]. Previously, Lin, Glauser and Johnson [7] had

developed the slope-deflection equations for laced and battened

beamcolumns including the effects of shear deformations,

axial load and end rigid stay plates. On the other hand, the

stability and second-order analysis of slender beamcolumns

and of framed structures with semi-rigid connections has been

investigated by Aristizabal-Ochoa [8,9] using the classical

stability functions. However, the stability of framed structures

using the classic slope-deflection method including the

combined effects of shear and bending deformations, second-

at ends A and B: (a) Structural model; (b) Degrees of freedom, forces and

moments in the plane of bending; (c) Rotations at a cross section and at ends A

and B.

known yet.

The main objective of this publication is to present a new

set of slope-deflection equations for the stability and secondorder analysis of framed structures made of Timoshenko

beamcolumns of symmetrical cross section with semi-rigid

connections under end loads including the combined effects

of: (1) bending and shear deformations; and (2) the shear

component of the applied axial forces (Haringxs Model).

The proposed method which is based on the modified

stability functions for Timoshenko beamcolumns with semirigid connections (Aristizabal-Ochoa [10,11]) has the following

advantages: (1) the effects of semi-rigid connections are

condensed into the slope-deflection equations for tension or

compression axial loads without introducing additional degrees

of freedom and equations; (2) it is more accurate than any

other method available and capable of capturing the phenomena

of buckling under axial tension forces of short columns like

laminated elastomeric bearings commonly used for seismic

isolation of buildings; and (3) the method is powerful, practical,

versatile and easy to teach. Four comprehensive examples are

included that show the effectiveness of the proposed method

and corresponding equations.

2. Structural model

Assumptions. Consider a 2-D prismatic beamcolumn that

connects points A and B as shown in Fig. 1a. The element

is made up of the beamcolumn itself A0 B0 , and the flexural

connections AA0 and BB0 with bending stiffness a and b at

ends A and B, respectively. It is assumed that the beamcolumn

A0 B0 of span L bends about the principal axis of its cross section

with a moment of inertia I , effective shear area As and: (1) is

made of a homogeneous linear elastic material with Young and

shear moduli E and G, respectively; (2) its centroidal axis is

a straight line; and (3) is loaded at extremes A and B with P

(compressive axial load is +) along its centroidal axis.

The flexural connections have stiffnesses a and b (whose

units are in forcedistance/radian) in the plane of bending of

Please cite this article in press as: Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa J. Slope-deflection equations for stability and second-order analysis of Timoshenho beamcolumn

structures with semi-rigid connections. Engineering Structures (2008), doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.007

ARTICLE IN PRESS

J. Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures (

b /(EI/L) are denoted as the stiffness indices of the flexural

connections. These indices vary from zero (i.e., Ra = Rb = 0)

for simple connections (i.e., pinned) to infinity (i.e., Ra = Rb =

) for fully restrained connections (i.e., rigid). Notice that the

proposed algorithm can be utilized in the inelastic analysis of

beamcolumns when the inelastic behavior is concentrated at

the connections. This can be carried out by updating the flexural

stiffness of the connections a and b for each load increment

in a linear-incremental fashion.

For convenience the following two parameters are introduced:

a =

1

1+

3

Ra

(1a)

and

b =

1

1+

3

Rb

(1b)

connections, both the fixity factor and the rigidity index R

are zero; but for rigid connections, the fixity factor is 1 and the

rigidity index is infinity. Since the fixity factor can only vary

from 0 to 1 for elastic connections (while the rigidity index R

may vary form 0 to ), it is more convenient to use in the

elastic analysis of structures with semi-rigid connections.

3. Proposed slope-deflection equations

In order to investigate the lateral stability and second-order

analysis of framed structures with semi-rigid connections, it is

first necessary to establish the relationships between the end

bending moments and the corresponding rotations for each

frame member and then apply the conditions of compatibility

of deformations at each joint. The application of classic slopedeflection method in the stability of plane frames (with rigid

connections and without transverse loads and shear deflection

effects) is well explained by Salmon and Johnson ([5], pp.

835843). The proposed slope-deflection equations for plane

frames with semi-rigid connections including shear deflection

effects and without transverse loads along each member are as

follows:

EI

EI

a

+ Sab

b

(2a)

Ma = Saa

L

L

L

L

EI

EI

Mb = Sba

a

+ Sbb

b

(2b)

L

L

L

L

where a and b values are the rotations of ends A and B

measured with respect to the initial axis of the member, and

/L the angle of rotation of the cord of the member AB. Both

rotations and end moments (Ma and Mb ) are positive clockwise

as shown in Fig. 1. Saa , Sab , Sba and Sbb are denoted as the

stiffness coefficients of the Timoshenko beamcolumn AB with

semi-rigid connections at both ends A and B. These coefficients

are listed below for easy reference.

3a (4 + b )

(4 a b ) + (a + b + a b )

3a b (2 )

= Sba =

(4 a b ) + (a + b + a b )

3b (4 + a )

=

.

(4 a b ) + (a + b + a b )

Saa =

(3)

Sab

(4)

Sbb

(5)

(a) For P > 0 (compression) or [1 + P/ (G As )] P > 0. See

Box I.

(b) For P < 0 (tension) and [1 + P/ (G As )] P < 0. See

Box II.

q

I /L 2 )

P/ E I /L 2 ;

In Boxes I and II = 12(E

;

=

G As

1

and = 1+P/(G

As ) .

Notice that the proposed method and corresponding

equations listed above are valid for beamcolumns subjected to

tension and compression axial forces. When 2 is negative (i.e.,

[1 + P/ (G As )] P < 0), the following three exchanges were

made in the equations in Box I to obtain those in Box II: (1)

sin for i sinh ; (2) tan for i tanh ; and (3) for i (where:

i = 1). Eqs. (2a) and (2b) are derived in Appendix for quick

reference.

To verify the coefficients given by Eqs. (3)(5), the

numerators and denominators of expressions in Box I must be

differentiated four times in accordance with LHospitals rule

and then apply the P = 0 limit. However, since to carry out

this process is really tedious and cumbersome, the derivations

of Eqs. (3)(5) are presented in the last part of the Appendix.

Four examples that follow show the effectiveness, simplicity

and accuracy of the proposed slope-deflection equations listed

above. Examples 1 and 2 are on the stability analysis of

beamcolumn structures subjected to concentrated forces at

the joints causing tension and/or compression in the members.

Examples 3 and 4 show the application of the proposed method

to plane frames subjected to axial loads (compression and/or

tension).

Example 1. Second-order analysis of a cantilever column

under several loads at the top.

Determine the second-order load-deflection equation of the

cantilever column shown in Fig. 2. Compare the resulting

expressions with those derived by Timoshenko and Gere ([12],

pp. 5 and 13) for a perfectly clamped BernoulliEuler cantilever

column (i.e., = = 1).

Solution: From equilibrium (Fig. 2b):

M21 = M

M12 + M + P + Q L = 0.

Now using Eqs. (2a) and (2b)

EI

EI

M12 = S11

1

+ S12

2

L

L

L

L

(6)

(7)

(8)

Please cite this article in press as: Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa J. Slope-deflection equations for stability and second-order analysis of Timoshenho beamcolumn

structures with semi-rigid connections. Engineering Structures (2008), doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.007

ARTICLE IN PRESS

4

Saa

Sab

Sbb

3a (1 b ) 2 + 9a b 1 tan

=

/2

1

9a b sin

= Sba =

tan(/2)

2

+

9

a

b

/2

3b (1 a ) 2 + 9a b 1 tan

=

tan(/2)

+

9

a

b

/2

Box I.

Saa

Sab

Sbb

3a (1 b ) 2 + 9a b 1 tanh

=

tanh(/2)

+

9

a

b

/2

9a b sinh 1

= Sba =

tanh(/2)

+ 9a b

/2

3b (1 a ) 2 + 9a b 1 tanh

=

/2

Box II.

S12

S22

sin

1

= S21 =

tan(/2)

(1 ) 1 tan

+ 3

/2

(1 ) 2 + 3 1 tan

.

=

tan(/2)

(1 ) 1 tan

+

3

/2

3

(11)

(12)

Knowing that 1 = 0 and using Eqs. (8) and (9) the following

matrix equation can be obtained from Eqs. (6) and (7):

S22

EI

L

EI

(S21 + S22 ) 2

L

2

M

.

=

Q

Fig. 2. Example 1: Second-order analysis of a cantilever column with semirigid connections at the support subjected to top end loads: (a) Structural model;

and (b) Deflected shape and end actions.

M21 = S21

EI

L

+ S22

EI

L

.

L

EI

L2

EI

(S11 + 2S12 + S22 ) 3 P/L

L

(S12 + S22 )

(13)

directly for a cantilever column subjected simultaneously to P,

Q and M at the top end:

(9)

(compression) and using the equations in Box I:

3 1 tan

S11 =

(10)

(1 ) 1 tan + 3 tan(/2)

/2

2 =

1+

S21

S22

M

+

L

S22

L

EI

(14a)

and

=

L.

2 /S ) P L

E I /L(S11 S12

22

(14b)

Please cite this article in press as: Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa J. Slope-deflection equations for stability and second-order analysis of Timoshenho beamcolumn

structures with semi-rigid connections. Engineering Structures (2008), doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.007

ARTICLE IN PRESS

J. Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures (

Fig. 3. Example 2: Stability analysis of a two span beamcolumn with an intermediate elastic support: (a) Structural model and deflected shape; and (b) End forces

and moments on elements 1 and 2.

3

Expression (14b) can be reduced to = EQIL 2 tan 1 +

M L 2 1cos

which is identical to the superposition of Eqs.

2

EI

cos

(g) and (1-33) presented by Timoshenko and Gere ([12],

pp. 5 and 14) for the particular case of a perfectly clamped

BernoulliEuler cantilever column (i.e., = = 1) subjected

to lateral load Q and overturning moment M, respectively. The

large deflection and post-buckling behavior of a Timoshenko

cantilever column subjected to loadings at the top end is fully

discussed by Aristizabal-Ochoa [11].

Example 2. Stability of a two-span beamcolumn with an

intermediate elastic support.

Determine the buckling load of the two-span continuous

beamcolumn shown in Fig. 3a. Assume that members 1 and

2 are initially horizontal with properties (GAs )1 , (EI)1 , l1 and

(GAs )2 , (EI)2 , l2 , respectively. Also assume that the applied

loads P and P remain always horizontal and are applied at

nodes 2 and 3, respectively. Include the effects of the transverse

stiffness S of the intermediate support 2. Compare the results

with those presented by Timoshenko and Gere ([12], pp. 70

and 99) when the member is made of two EulerBernoulli

beamcolumns.

Solution: From moment equilibrium of beam segments 1 and

2 (Fig. 3b) the following two equations are obtained:

M21 + (P + P) V1l1 = 0

(15)

M23 P + V2l2 = 0.

(16)

M21 + M23 = 0.

(17)

(15) and (16) the following equation is obtained:

l1

l1

M21 1 +

+ 1 + + P Sl1 = 0.

(18)

l2

l2

In this example a = 0 and b = 1 for element 1, and a = 1

and b = 0 for element 2. Then calling the bending rotation

of node 2 with respect to the horizontal axis and using Eq. (2):

EI

M21 = (Sbb )1

l1

l1

and

M23

EI

= (Saa )2

l2

+

l2

where for P > 0 and P(1 + ) > 0 and using the equations in

Box I: (Sbb )1 =

1 12

1 tan1 1

and (Saa )2 =

2 22

1 tan2 2

Box III.

By making the determinant of the 2 2 matrix of equation

given in Box III the characteristic equation can be determined

and the buckling loads can be calculated. For instance for the

particular case of EI 1 = EI 2 and l1 = l2 = L/2 and S = 0, the

characteristic equation in Box III is reduced to:

!

2 22

1 1

1+

1

tan 1

1 12

!

1 12

2 2

+ 1

1+

= 4.

(19)

tan 2

2 22

Eq. (19) yields identical results to those obtained by

Timoshenko and Gere ([12], p. 99, Eqs. 242) when

the member is a simply supported member made of an

EulerBernoulli beamcolumn (i.e., 1 = 2 = 1) with

compressive loads at mid span (node 2) and at end 3.

Another interesting case is when the value of S becomes

very large making 0, and then the characteristic equation

is reduced to the first term of the equation given in Box III as

follows:

(Sbb )1

E I1

E I2

+ (Saa )2

=0

l1

l2

or

2 22 tan 2

1 12 tan 1

tan 1 1 1

tan 2 2 2

=

l 2 E I1

.

l 1 E I2

(20)

structures with semi-rigid connections. Engineering Structures (2008), doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.007

ARTICLE IN PRESS

6

E I2

E I1

+ (Saa )2

l1

l2

E I1 L

(Sbb )1

l1 l2

(Sbb )1

E I1

E I2

+

(S

)

aa

2

l12

l22

=0

E I1 L

E I1

E I2 l 1

(Sbb )1 2

+ 1 12 2 + 2 22 2

+ Sl1

l1 l2

l1

l2 l2

(Sbb )1

Box III.

beamcolumn of Example 2 (for the particular case of l1 = l2 = L/2,

G 1 As1 = G 2 As2 = and E 1 I1 = E 2 I2 = EI) with an intermediate elastic

support with S/(EI/L 3 ) = , 100, and 0.

Fig. 6. Example 3: Stability analysis of a double symmetrical frame with beamto-column connection of stiffness . (After Timoshenko & Gere [12], p. 34.)

significantly not only by the location and stiffness of the midsupport but also by the magnitude of the shear stiffness of

the members as shown by the curves in Fig. 5; and (3) the

curve corresponding to GAs /Pe = in Fig. 5 shows that the

compressive critical load increases in approximately the same

proportion as S. This curve is identical to that presented by

Timoshenko and Gere ([12], pp. 73).

Example 3. Stability analysis of a double symmetrical frame

with semi-rigid connections.

Fig. 5. Variations of the critical Loads of a simple supported beamcolumn

with the stiffness of the intermediate elastic support S (where Pe = 2 EI/L 2 ).

Timoshenko and Gere ([12], p. 67, Eq. (b)) for a two-span

EulerBernoulli beamcolumn (i.e., 1 = 2 = 1) with

compressive loads located at nodes 1 and 3.

Fig. 4 shows a series of interaction diagrams of P/(EI/L 2 )

versus P/(EI/L 2 ) for different values of S/(EI/L 3 ) all

obtained using the equation given in Box III for the particular

case of l1 = l2 = L/2, (GAs )1 = (GAs )2 = and

(EI)1 = (EI)2 = EI. Fig. 5 shows the variations of the buckling

load Pcr of a simply supported beam with the stiffness of the

intermediate elastic support S located at midspan for different

values of GAs /Pe (notice that Pcr and S are normalized with

respect to Pe = 2 EI/L 2 ).

Notice that: (1) the values indicated in Fig. 5 corresponding

to curve with S = 0 are identical to those presented by

Timoshenko and Gere ([12], p. 100, Tables 26 for n = 1);

frame with semi-rigid beam-to-column connections shown

in Fig. 6. The horizontal members are connected to the

vertical columns at both ends with semi-rigid connections

of stiffness (or fixity factor ). Assume that the vertical

and horizontal members are initially straight each with

the following set of properties (G 1 , E 1 , A1 , As1 , I1 , h) and

(G 2 , E 2 , A2 , As2 , I2 , b), respectively. Also assume that the

applied loads P and Q are always vertical and horizontal,

respectively. Include the effects of the end connections.

Compare the results with those presented by Timoshenko and

Gere ([12], p. 62) when the beam-to-column connections are

rigid (i.e. = 1). Study the stability of the frame under tension

and compression forces.

Solution: In this particular frame a = b = 1 for both the

columns, and a = b = for both the beams. Now, from

moment equilibrium of joint 1:

(M12 )col. + (M14 )beam = 0.

(21)

structures with semi-rigid connections. Engineering Structures (2008), doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.007

ARTICLE IN PRESS

J. Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures (

1 and consequently a single unknown rotation and no sway

between the ends of the members), then using Eqs. (2a) and

(2b):

(M12 )col. =

E 1 I1

1 [(Saa )1 (Sab )1 ]

h

(22)

and

(M14 )beam =

E 2 I2

1 [(Saa )2 (Sab )2 ]

b

where: (Saa )1 =

1

tan(1 /2)

1 /2

1

1 tan1 1

; (Sab )1 =

(23)

1 1

sin 1 1

tan(1 /2)

1 /2

1

3(1 )2 22 + 9 2 1 tan2 2

2

;

(Saa )2 =

tan(2 /2)

(1 )2 2 22 + 6(1 ) 1 tan2 2 + 9 2

2 /2 2

2

and

9 2 sin2 2 1

2

.

(Sab )2 =

tan(2 /2)

(1 )2 2 22 + 6(1 ) 1 tan2 2 + 9 2

/2 2

2

equilibrium equation (21), Eq. (210 ) is obtained:

E 1 I1 b

{(Saa )1 (Sab )1 } + (Saa )2 (Sab )2 1 = 0. (210 )

E 2 I2 h

By making the left-hand term of Eq. (210 ) equal to zero and

substituting the four expressions for Saa and Sab listed above,

the following characteristic equation is finally obtained:

1 1

E 1 I1 b sin 1 (1 + cos 1 ) 2

tan(1 /2)

E 2 I2 h

1 /2

1

(1 )2 22 + 9 2 1 tan2 2 9 2 sin2 2 1

2

2

= 0.

+

tan(2 /2)

(1 )2 2 22 + 6(1 ) 1 tan2 2 + 9 2

/2 2

2

(24)

The characteristic equation (24) can be reduced further to

2 /2

= hb EE 12 II12 tan2/2

for a frame with BernoulliEuler

columns and beams with = 1 which is identical to Eqs. (2)

(25) presented by Timoshenko and Gere ([12], p. 63).

Fig. 7ac show a series of interaction diagrams of

P/(EI/L 2 ) versus Q/(EI/L 2 ) for different values and

GAs /(EI/L 2 ) all obtained using Eq. (24) for the particular case

of h = b = L, G 1 As1 = G 2 As2 = GAs and E 1 I1 = E 2 I2 =

EI. Notice that: (1) buckling load capacities are affected

significantly not only by the stiffness of beam-to-column

connections but also by the magnitude of the shear stiffness

of the members; and (2) buckling under axial tension forces

is a mirror image of buckling under axial compression forces

for short members with low shear stiffness like multilayer

elastomeric bearings as claimed by Kelly [13]. Further details

of buckling of beamcolumns under axial tension are given by

Aristizabal-Ochoa [10,11,14] and Kelly [13].

tan(1 /2)

1 /2

symmetrical frame of Example 3 with different values of GAs /(EI/L 2 ) and

beam-to-column fixity factor := (a) 1; (b) 0.6; and (c) 0.2.

structures with semi-rigid connections. Engineering Structures (2008), doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.007

ARTICLE IN PRESS

8

Fig. 8. Example 4: Stability analysis of an unsymmetrical frame with lateral sway partially inhibited: (a) Structural model and loads; and (b) Forces on each

deflected member.

under axial loads with lateral sway partially inhibited.

lateral sway partially inhibited as shown in Fig. 8a.

The flexural stiffness of beam-to-column and those

of the column-to-foundation semi-rigid connections are

indicated in Fig. 8a. Assume that the vertical and horizontal

members are initially straight each with the following

set of properties [(EI)1 , (GAs )1 , h 1 ], [(EI)2 , (GAs )2 , h 2 ] and

[(EI)3 , (GAs )3 , L], respectively. Also assume that the mode of

buckling is as shown in Fig. 8a and that the applied loads P and

P are always vertical. Include the effects of the stiffness S of

the lateral bracing at node 2. Compare the results with those

presented by Salmon and Johnson [5] for a symmetrical frame

made of EulerBernoulli members when the beam-to-column

connections are rigid (i.e., 1 = 2 = 1) and the bases of the

columns are perfectly hinged (i.e., 3 = 4 = 0) and = 1.

Discuss also the stability of the frame under tension forces.

Solution: In this particular frame there are three unknowns

1 , 2 and as shown in Fig. 8a. Now, from moment

equilibrium of joints 1 and 2:

M31 =

E I1

E I1

1 (Sab )1 2 [(Saa )1 + (Sab )1 ]

h1

h1

(28)

M13 =

E I1

E I1

1 (Sbb )1 2 [(Sbb )1 + (Sab )1 ]

h1

h1

(29)

M42 =

E I2

E I2

2 (Sab )2 2 [(Saa )2 + (Sab )2 ]

h2

h2

(30)

M24 =

E I2

E I2

2 (Sbb )2 2 [(Sbb )2 + (Sab )2 ]

h2

h2

(31)

M13 + M12 = 0

M24 + M21 = 0.

(25)

(26)

each member (see Fig. 8b):

Column 1: M31 + M13 + PV1 h 1 = 0

Column 2: M42 + M24 + PV1 h 1 = 0

Beam: V1+ V2 S = 0.

From these three conditions of equilibrium and Eqs. (25) and

(26), Eq. (27) is obtained:

M31 + M13

M42 + M24

+

h1

h2

1

+

+

P S = 0.

h1

h2

(27)

E I3

1 (Saa )3 +

L

E I3

=

1 (Sab )3 +

L

M12 =

M21

E I3

2 (Sab )3

L

E I3

2 (Sbb )3 .

L

(32)

(33)

homogeneous system given in Box IV is obtained:

In Box IV:

(Saa )1 =

(Sab )1 =

(Sbb )1 =

(Saa )2 =

1 1

tan 1

1

;

tan(1 /2)

1 1

+

3

(1 3 ) 1 tan

3

1

1

1 /2

1 1

33 sin 1 1

;

tan(1 /2)

1 1

(1 3 ) 1 tan

+

3

3

1

1

1 /2

1 1

2

(1 3 )1 1 + 33 1 tan

1

;

tan(1 /2)

1 1

(1 3 ) 1 tan

+

3

3

1

1

1 /2

2 2

34 tan 2 1

;

tan(2 /2)

2 2

(1 4 ) 1 tan

2 + 34

2 /2 2

33

structures with semi-rigid connections. Engineering Structures (2008), doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.007

ARTICLE IN PRESS

J. Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures (

EI

EI

(Sbb )1 1 + (Saa )3 3

h1

L

E I3

(Sab )3

E I1

(Sab )1 + (Sbb )1

h 21

(Sab )3

(Sbb )2

E I3

L

E I2

EI

+ (Sbb )3 3

h2

L

E I2

(Sab )2 + (Sbb )2

h 22

E I1

(Sab )1 + (Sbb )1

2

h1

E I2

(Sab )2 + (Sbb )2

1

2

h

=0

2

E I1 2

1

S

+

P + (Sab )1 + 2(Sab )1 + (Sbb )1

+

h1

h2

h1

E I2

(Sab )2 + 2(Sab )2 + (Sbb )2

h2

Box IV.

2 2

sin 2

1

;

tan(2 /2)

2 2

(1 4 ) 1 tan

+

3

3

2

2

2 /2

2 2

2

(1 4 )2 2 + 34 1 tan

2

;

(Sbb )2 =

tan(2 /2)

2 2

(1 4 ) 1 tan

2 + 34

2 /2 2

(Sab )2 =

34

31 (4 + 2 )

;

(4 1 2 ) + (1 + 2 + 1 2 )

31 2 (2 )

;

(Sab )3 =

(4 1 2 ) + (1 + 2 + 1 2 )

32 (4 + 1 )

(Sbb )3 =

.

(4 1 2 ) + (1 + 2 + 1 2 )

(Saa )3 =

and

Box IV equal to zero the characteristic equation is determined

and then the buckling loads can be calculated.

For the particular case of a symmetrical unbraced frame

with BernoulliEuler columns and beam with EI 1 = EI 2 ,

1 = 2 = 3 = 1, h 1 = h 2 = h, = 1, 1 = 2 = 1,

3 = 4 = 0, S = = 0, and assuming that 1 = 2 the

characteristic equation in Box IV can be reduced to:

1 tan 1 = 6

E I3 /L

.

E I1 / h

(34)

large making 0 (i.e. for a frame with sidesway inhibited),

then the characteristic equation is reduced to the first two rows

and columns of equation in Box IV:

E I1

E I3

E I3

(Sbb )1

+ (Saa )3

(Sab )3

h1

L

L

E I3

E I2

E I3 = 0.

(Sab )3

(Sbb )2

+ (Saa )3

L

h2

L

(35)

For the particular case of a braced symmetrical frame with

BernoulliEuler columns and beam with EI 1 = EI 2 , 1 = 2 =

3 = 1, h 1 = h 2 = h, = 1, 1 = 2 = 1, 3 = 4 = 0,

= 0 and assuming that 1 = 2 the characteristic equation

(35) can be further reduced to:

12 sin 1

E I3 /L

= 2

.

sin 1 1 cos 1

E I1 / h

(36)

Eqs. (34) and (36) are identical to Eqs. (14-2-30) and (14-218) presented by Salmon and Johnson ([5], pp. 900912) for

unbraced and braced symmetrical frames, respectively. It must

inhibited using the proposed method and a simplified formula after Salmon

and Johnson [5].

anti-symmetric modes of buckling of this unbraced symmetric

frame (since it was assumed that 1 = 2 ). Likewise, Eq. (36)

is only capable of capturing the symmetric modes of buckling

of this braced symmetric frame (since it was assumed that

1 = 2 ). Fig. 9 shows the first three eigen-values obtained

using the characteristic equation in Box IV and the first two

obtained using Eq. (34). Therefore, the proposed method is

more powerful, since it is capable of capturing all modes of

buckling including those under axial tension forces (as it was

shown in Example 3).

5. Summary and conclusions

A new set of slope-deflections equations that include the

effects of shear deformations and the shear component of the

applied axial forces (Haringx Model) are derived and then

utilized in the stability and second-order analysis of framed

structures made of Timoshenko beamcolumns with rigid,

semi-rigid, and simple connections. The proposed method is

based on the modified stability functions for beamcolumns

with semi-rigid connections (Aristizabal-Ochoa [10,11]). The

validity and effectiveness of the proposed equations are verified

against four well-documented solutions on elastic stability and

second-order analyses of beamcolumns and plane frames.

The advantages of the proposed method are: (1) the effects

of semi-rigid connections are condensed into two nonlinear

structures with semi-rigid connections. Engineering Structures (2008), doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.007

ARTICLE IN PRESS

10

the lateral sway between the ends of the member) for tension or

compression axial loads without introducing additional degrees

of freedom and equations; (2) more accurate than any other

method available and capable of capturing the phenomena

of buckling under axial tension forces. This is particularly

important in short columns like laminated elastomeric bearings

commonly used for seismic isolation of buildings; and (3) the

method is powerful, practical, versatile, and easy to teach.

Analytical studies indicate that shear deformations increase

the lateral deflections of framed structures, and reduce their

critical axial loads. The effects of shear deformations and

second-order P effects must be considered in the analysis

of beamcolumns with relatively low effective shear areas

(like short laced columns, columns with batten plates or with

perforated cover plates, and columns with open webs) or low

shear modulus G (like elastomeric bearing and short columns

made of laminated composites) resulting in members with shear

stiffness GAs of the same order of magnitude as EI/L 2 . The

shear effects are also of great importance in the static, stability

and dynamic behavior of laminated elastomeric bearings used

for seismic isolation of buildings.

Acknowledgments

The research presented in this paper was carried out at

the National University of Colombia, School of Mines at

Medellin. The author wants to express his appreciation to the

Department of Civil Engineering, School of Mines (DIME)

for the financial support and encouragement, and also to Jhon

Monsalve-Cano, Jaime Hernandez-Urrea, Camilo Builes-Mejia

and David Padilla-Llano members of the Structural Stability

Group of the National University of Colombia, for preparing

the figures of all four examples.

Appendix. Derivation of proposed slope-deflection equation (2a) and (2b)

The stability analysis of a prismatic column including

bending and shear deformations (Fig. 1ac) is formulated using

the modified approach proposed by Haringx and discussed by

Timoshenko and Gere ([12], page 134). This approach has been

utilized by Kelly [13] in the analysis of Elastomeric Isolation

Bearings and by Aristizabal-Ochoa [10,11,14] in the stability

analysis of columns, multicolumn systems and frames.

Knowing that the governing equation of bending for the

beamcolumn shown in Fig. 1b is:

x

and using Haringxs approach:

M = E I

V = G As P

u

.

=

x

(37)

[for which M = Ma (Ma + Mb + P) Lx Pu and V =

P + (Ma + Mb + P)/L] become:

2u

x

+ Pu = Ma + (Ma + Mb + P)

2

L

x

2

Ma + Mb + P

E I 2 + P =

L

x

EI

(39)

governing Eqs. (37) and (38) for bending moment and

(41)

line; and

= Rotation of the cross section along the beamcolumn

due to bending alone as shown in Fig. 1c.

= Shear deformation of the cross section along the

beamcolumn as shown in Fig. 1c.

The solutions to the second-order linear differential

equations (40) and (41) are as follows:

x

u(x) = A cos

L

x x Ma + Mb + P

Ma

+ B sin

(42)

L

L

P

P

x

x

. (x. ) = C cos

+ D sin

L

L

1 Ma + Mb + P

+

.

(43)

L

P

The unknown coefficients A, B, C, and D can be obtained from

the following boundary conditions:

At A0 (x = 0): u = 0, = a 0

At B0 (x = h) : u = and = b0 where: a 0 and

b0 = rotations of cross sections at ends A0 and B0 with respect

to the vertical axis due to bending, respectively;

+Mb

Therefore: A = MPa ; B = MPa tan(/2) MPasin

;C =

Ma +Mb

1

+ ; and

a 0 L

P

a 0 b0 cos

D=

sin

Ma + M b

+ tan(/2).

P

following expressions for a 0 and b0 can be obtained:

sin cos Ma

sin Mb

+

+

E I /L

L

2 sin

2 sin E I /L

(44a)

sin cos Mb

sin Ma

b 0 =

+

+ .

E I /L

L

2 sin E I /L

2 sin

(44b)

a 0 =

(38)

(40)

Mb

b ,

b = b 0 +

Therefore:

a

Ma

a

and

respectively.

sin cos Ma

=

L

E I /L

2 sin

sin Mb

Ma

+

+

2

E

I

/L

a

sin

(45a)

structures with semi-rigid connections. Engineering Structures (2008), doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.007

ARTICLE IN PRESS

J. Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures (

Ma sin

=

L

E I /L 2 sin

Mb sin cos

Mb

+

+

2

E I /L

b

sin

11

Mb

a

0

a = a 0 + M

a and b = b + b , respectively. Therefore:

(45b)

1

E I / h2

Ma

+

3

G As

E I/h

1

E I / h2

Mb

Ma

+ +

+

6

G As

E I/h

a

1

E I / h2

Ma

= +

a

h

6

G As

E I/h

1

E I / h2

Mb

Mb

+

+

+

.

3

G As

E I/h

b

and

a and b = rotations of ends A and B due to bending with

respect to the vertical axis, respectively.

Notice that Eqs. (44a) and (44b) are identical to

those derived by Salmon and Johnson ([6], p. 902) for

BernoulliEuler columns (i.e. when = 1). Now, expressing

(45a) and (45b) in matrix form, then by inverting the matrix

of coefficients and using expressions (1a) and (1b) [or Ra =

3a /(1 a ) and Rb = 3b /(1 b )], Eqs. (2a) and (2b) can

be obtained.

A.1. Derivations of Eqs. (3)(5)

The governing Eqs. (40) and (41) when P = 0 are reduced

=

h

(49a)

(49b)

the matrix of coefficients and using Ra = 3a /(1 a )

and Rb = 3b /(1 b ), Eqs. (2a)(2b) and (3)(4) can be

obtained.

References

to:

2u

x

= Ma + (Ma + Mb )

L

x2

2

Ma + M b

EI 2 =

.

L

x

EI

(46a)

(46b)

Eqs. (46a) and (46b) are now much simpler to solve. After

applying the boundary conditions [i.e., u = 0, = a 0 at

A0 (x = 0); and u = and = b0 at B0 (x = L)], their

solutions are:

L

Ma 2

x+

x

(2Ma Mb ) x

L

6E I

2E I

1

+

(Ma + Mb ) x 3

6E I L

1

L

(x) =

+ (Ma + Mb )

+

(2Ma Mb )

L

G As

6E I

1

Ma

x+

(Ma + Mb ) x 2 .

EI

2E I L

u(x) =

(47a)

(47b)

Mb )/L, the following expressions for a 0 and b0 can be

obtained from Eq. (47b):

1

E I /L 2

Ma

a 0 =

+

3

G As

E I /L

Mb

1

E I /L 2

+ +

+

(48a)

6

G As

E I /L

L

1

E I /L 2

Ma

b 0 = +

6

G As

E I /L

1

E I /L 2

Mb

+

+

+ .

(48b)

3

G As

E I /L

L

International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 2006;67:

14957.

[2] Wilson WM, Maney GA. Slope-deflection method. University of Illinois

Engineering Experiment Station, Bulletin 80, 1915.

[3] Norris CH, Wilbur JB. Elementary structural analysis. 2nd ed. McGrawHill Book Co; 1960.

[4] Kassimali A. Structural analysis. 2nd ed. Thomson-Engineering; 1998.

[5] Salmon CG, Johnson JE. Steel structures: Design and behavior. 4th ed.

Harper Collins College Publishers; 1996 [Chapter 14].

[6] Bryant RH, Baile OC. Slope deflection analysis including transverse

shear. Journal of the Structural Division 1977;103(2):4436.

[7] Lin FJ, Glauser EC, Johnston BJ. Behavior of laced and battened

structural members. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 1960;

123(5):1377401.

[8] Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa J. First- and second-order stiffness matrices and

load vector of beamcolumns with semirigid connections. Journal of

Structural Engineering, ASCE 1997;123(5):66978.

[9] Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa J. Story stability of braced, partially braced, and

unbraced frames: Classical approach. Journal of Structural Engineering,

ASCE 1997;123(6):799807.

[10] Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa J. Column stability and minimum lateral bracing:

effects of shear deformations. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 2004;

130(10):122332.

[11] Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa J. Large deflection and postbuckling behavior of

Timoshenko beamcolumns with semirigid connections including shear

and axial effects. Journal of Engineering Structures 2007;29(6):9911003.

[12] Timoshenko S, Gere J. Theory of elastic stability. 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill;

1961 [Chapter 2].

[13] Kelly JM. Tension buckling in multilayer elastomeric bearings. Journal

of Engineering Mechanics 2003;129(12):13638. Discussion by Dario

Aristizabal-Ochoa J. 2005; 131 (1): 106108.

[14] Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa J. Tension and compression stability and secondorder analyses of three-dimensional multicolumn systems: Effects of

shear deformations. ASCE Journal of Engineering Mechanics 2007;

133(1):10616.

structures with semi-rigid connections. Engineering Structures (2008), doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.02.007

- Design of Cantilever BeamUploaded byjs kalyana rama
- BookUploaded byNil D.G.
- Analysis of Box Beams 7Uploaded bykundanbvb
- NR 310103 Structural EngineeringUploaded bySrinivasa Rao G
- Duddingston Loch PierUploaded bymjp06
- 203-3Uploaded bySaad Al Hely
- 12745478 Analysis and Design of Flexure Member Rolled Beam SectionUploaded bydhanush
- 806Uploaded byajay_4811
- Additional Column NotesUploaded byDaryl Gomez Timatim
- Analysis & Design of Beam-ColumnsUploaded byDavor Kirin
- MxFrame Brochure UKUploaded byMoonze
- prEN1993-3-1st-02.pdfUploaded bymichel92748
- General Beam Theory Module 8 Page21-31Uploaded bymaran.sugu
- Reinforced Concrete Column1Uploaded byZitheeq Umar
- Wagners beam cycleUploaded byAhmed
- ENDPLMC9Uploaded byMartin Cristobal Cupitay
- QuestionsUploaded by11520035
- course outline engi23413-w2016Uploaded byapi-313424062
- 2008[1]. Slope-Deflection Equations for Stability and Second-Order Analysis of Timoshenko Beam-column Structures With Semirigid ConectionsUploaded byramoruso
- Chapter 4 - Slender Columns - Sp17!09!07Uploaded bysinambeladavid
- 16642Uploaded bySiddhant Agarwal
- 2D framesUploaded byV.m. Rajan
- CEE 101a SyllabusUploaded bylalo198
- applied_fem.pdfUploaded byPravin Bhor
- Ziemian Et Al-2018-Steel ConstructionUploaded byHicham Said Boukhalkhal
- VIT.pdfUploaded bySoikot Banerjee
- 2017 Winter Outline CIVE 3205Uploaded byJonelAurita
- 01 RCD IntroductionUploaded byGianne Nigelle Doria
- 6 Elastic stability of columns.pdfUploaded byP R Venkatesh
- CIVIL ENGINEERING INTERVIEW QUESTIONSUploaded byHello TV

- Lateral Torsional Buckling of I-beamsUploaded byRobert Vochescu
- Design of Partially or Fully Composite BeamsUploaded bybauemmvss
- R3DGenRefUploaded byMatthew DeFazio
- 2013-09-25 19-12Uploaded bybauemmvss
- C. Complex NumbersUploaded byanons2472
- 2013-09-09 21-39Uploaded bybauemmvss
- 4 SolutionUploaded bybauemmvss
- 108963_4414677_CHW4Uploaded bybauemmvss
- Foundation v 2Uploaded bybauemmvss
- Connection 2Uploaded bybauemmvss
- Connection 1Uploaded bybauemmvss
- Calculations v 2Uploaded bybauemmvss
- Finite Elements in Engineering ChandrupatlaUploaded byTahsinul Haque Tasif
- Finite Element Analysis in structures.Uploaded byMac Zephyr Bist
- 4nodeUploaded bybauemmvss
- Viswanathan 2015 IOP Conf. Ser.%3A Earth Environ. Sci. 23 012006Uploaded bybauemmvss
- vensko_matt_j_2008.pdfUploaded bybauemmvss
- Robot 2010 Training Manual MetricUploaded byanhkiem1980
- MGpaper FinalUploaded bybauemmvss
- Mech Science Personal CopyUploaded bybauemmvss
- MDOT Research Report R1519 250368 7Uploaded bybauemmvss
- Inelastic Lateral-Torsional Buckling of Beam-columns Proc. ASCEUploaded bybauemmvss
- Euler s FormulaUploaded bybauemmvss
- euler.pdfUploaded bybauemmvss
- Ansys Solids1Uploaded byapi-3833671
- Lateral Torsional Buckling of Steel BeamsUploaded byapirakq

- Singapore EngineerUploaded bymutlu
- vertical bracingUploaded byVenkat Balaji
- Reinforcing Loaded Steel Compression MembersUploaded byvlad lupasteanu
- Aect480 Lecture 3 RevUploaded byFiroz Rahuman Shukoor
- Roller Compacted Concrete Prof. AncogUploaded byYsma Yee
- Coal Ash ReportUploaded byUmesh Mhetre
- ICC-ESR US March AnchorsUploaded byFederico.Iori
- Circular Hollow SectionUploaded bykunjal_radia
- Engineering ReviewUploaded byChristine Verena Sarte
- Some Innovative steel structuresUploaded bygurdan
- Visual Quality Inspection of Structural Concrete BuildingUploaded byjoshuaisraeli
- Confined MasonryUploaded bymohan
- Ermco Fibre Guide September 2012 Corr AUploaded byourebooks
- Jhlasalle 095000 CeilingUploaded byPonz Madiano
- Column Design - As Per BS CodeUploaded bymasood_khalid
- Sagufta Civil RateUploaded byMM Fakhrul Islam
- Shear WallsUploaded byHumberto Estevez
- 9184S09-tocUploaded byKhalid Elazhary
- Composite Section - Tutorials - [CSI Wiki]Uploaded byWilson
- Plate Girder BridgeUploaded byDHANALAKSHMI G Teaching
- base isolationUploaded byMalikSayim
- HPC 1000 Single Row,10.0mUploaded bygagajain
- pizaUploaded byGreg
- Baker et al 2010 on Central_Saint_Giles.pdfUploaded byLeandro Guideli
- What Makes a Stud _Structural__ _ Steeler Construction SupplyUploaded bychokomaru
- 65101650 Triveni Kala SangamUploaded byHimanshu Saini
- Continuity Diaphragm for Skewed Continuous Span PrecastUploaded byDiego Estrada Paz
- A Rational Design Approach for Prestressed-concrete-girder Integral BridgesUploaded byKy Visoth Sambath
- Hit (Halfen)Uploaded byIonutAlexandruStroe
- Final Exam Appendix Dec 14 2016Uploaded bycolegerman

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.