16TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPOSITE MATERIALS
CROSS SECTIONAL PROPERTIES OF THIN-WALLED
COMPOSITE BEAMS
Lszl P. Kollr
Budapest University of Technology and Economics
Keywords: beam theory, shear deformation, torsion, composite
Abstract
In the design of composite sections beam
theories are used, which require the knowledge
of the cross sectional properties, i.e. the
bending-, the shear-, the torsional-, the axial
stiffnesses and the coupling terms. In the
classical analysis the properties are calculated
by assuming kinematical relationships, e.g.
cross sections remain plane after the
deformation of the beam. These assumptions
may lead to inaccuracy or to contradictory
results. In the paper a new theory is presented,
in which no kinematical assumption is applied,
rather the properties are derived from the
accurate (three dimensional) equations of
beams using limit transition. The theory
includes the shear displacements both in the in-
plane and in the torsional deformations, and it
is applied both for open and for closed cross
sections.
1 Introduction
Fiber reinforced plastic (composite), thin-walled
beams are widely used in the aerospace industry and
are increasingly applied in the infrastructure.
In beam theories the stresses and strains of an
arbitrary point of the cross section is calculated from
the displacements of the beams axis. To reach this
relationship the displacements of the axis are
defined, and kinematical assumptions are made.
For example, when a beam deforms only in a
plane (e.g. in the x-z plane), in the classical beam
theory [1], (when the shear deformation is
neglected), only the displacement of the axis in the z
direction (w) is needed to calculate the strains
and deformations of any point of the cross section.
When the shear deformation is taken into account,
according to Timoshenkos beam theory [2], two
displacement functions of the axis are required: the
displacement perpendicular to the axis (w) and the
rotation of the cross section (z).
The plane cross section assumption leads to an
overestimation of the shear stiffness and contradicts
the three dimensional equations of the beam: the
plane cross section results in a uniform shear strain
and a uniform shear stress, however, according to
the equilibrium equations the shear stress and strain
distribution is parabolic (Fig.1).
V
V
V
V
Fig. 1. Shear deformation assuming uniform and
parabolic shear strain
This contradiction was recognized already by
Timoshenko, and the shear stiffness was calculated
as follows [1]: the axial stresses are calculated on the
basis of the kinematical assumption (i.e. cross
sections remain plane), while the shear stresses are
calculated from the equilibrium equation, and the
shear stiffness is evaluated with the use of the strain
energy. This leads to the usage of the shear
correction factor which, in many cases, gives
satisfactory results. However, as will be shown in
the next section, for composite beams it may be
inaccurate.
When a beam is subjected to torsion, in the
classical (Vlasov) theory only the rotation of the
cross section () about the beams axis is needed to
calculate the displacements of any point of the cross
section. (See [1] for isotropic and [2, 3] for
composite beams.) When the axial warping is
constrained, an open section beam carries the torque
load mainly by the bending and shear of the flanges.
Note, however that according to Vlasovs theory the
shear deformation of the walls in restrained
warping is neglected. To overcome this
1
 Lszl P. Kollr

shortcoming, analogously to Timoshenkos beam z

theory, a new displacement function was introduced Mz
Vz
[2, 4, 6], (in addition to the rotation of the cross
section, ): the rate of twist due to warping ( B ).
The rotational stiffnesses were calculated T y
NX Vy
analogously to the in plane stiffnesses [2]. x My
When we consider the spatial (in plane and Fig. 2. Internal forces in a beam
torsional) deformations of the beam, seven
displacements are taken into account [2]:
2 Problem statement
u , v , w , , y , z , B
To show the weakness of the above theory we
u is the axial displacement, while v and w are the
consider the example of a thin walled beam, which
displacements perpendicular to the axis, is the
consists of three walls connected at their axes:
rotation of the cross section about the beams axis;
y , z are the rotation of the cross sections about
E E E
the z and y axes, and B is the rate of twist due to G1 G2 G1
warping. For doubly symmetrical orthotropic cross
sections the material law can be written in the b
following form:

(1) t
N x EA x
1 /
M z EI zz z Fig. 3. Beam, which consists of three parallel wall
M EI yy 1 / y segments
y
M EI The Young modulus of the material are the same in
=
y
S yy each wall, and it is denoted by E, while the shear
Vy stiffness of the middle wall is much lower than those
V S zz z
z s of the other two: G 2 << G1 . According to the
T S classical shear deformation (Timoshenko) theory the
T axial stresses in the walls are the same, and hence,
SV GI t from the equilibrium the shear stresses are identical
too. These stresses lead to the following bending and
shear stiffnesses:
where <> denotes a diagonal matrix, N x is the axial
force (Fig.2), M z and M y are the moments about b 3t bt (3)
EI = 3E S = G2
12 1.2
the z and y axis, M is the bimoment, Vy and Vz are
the shear forces, T is the restrained warping

These results are incorrect: the middle wall, because
of the low shear stiffness, does not play a role, and
induced torque, while TSV is the Saint Venant hence the stiffnesses should be
torque, the sum of which gives the torque:
T = T + TSV (2)
b 3t bt
EI = 2 E S = 2G1 (4)
12 1.2
The generalized strains, on the right side of Eq.1,
are calculated from the displacements [2]. which are failed to be predicted by the classical
shear deformation theory. Note that the same
problem may arise in the case of torsion.
In this paper we consider thin walled beams
which consist of flat wall segments as shown in the
figure below.
2
 CROSS SECTIONAL PROPERTIES OF THIN-WALLED COMPOSITE
BEAMS

u
z z x =
bk bk x
w
s =
k k s (5)
u w
y y xs = +
s x
K 1 K 1
x x
while the constitutive equations are
Fig. 4. Open and closed section beams
N x A11 A12 A16 x (6)

3 Solution N s = A12 A22 A26 s
q A
16 A26 A66 xs
To overcome the problem presented in the previous
section the following solution is presented: thin
walled beams can be solved accurately using the s (w)
three dimensional equations if the displacements,
strains and stresses (and as a consequence the loads)
vary trigonometrically along the axial coordinate of
the beam: k bk x ( u)

Fig. 6. Coordinate system attached to a wall

segment and the displacements

Fig. 5. Variation of the load along the beam where Aij are the elements of the tensile
stiffness matrix of a layered composite plate [2].
These equations are formulated and then the cross It is assumed that N s , i.e. the resultant forces per
sectional properties are developed by limit
transition, assuming that L (i.e. the half wavelength unit length perpendicular to the beam axis, is
of the trigonometrical functions) is large compared small compared to N x and q , and hence s can
to the seize of the section. be eliminated form Eq.6. We obtain
It is important to note that we keep the
classical definition of the beam forces and strains, N x A11 A16 x (7)
and the seize of the stiffness matrix is not increased =
either: only the stifnesses are calculated in a q A16 A66 xs
consistent manner.
It may be stated that for the previously Where Aij can be calculated from the values of
presented theories the best stiffnesses are
determined. Aij . The distributed loads acting on a plate
4 Solution for one wall segmant element are related to the internal forces by the
equilibrium equations:
To obtain an accurate solution for a composite beam N x q
first a single, flat wall element (Fig.6.) is considered. + + ps= 0 (8)
(For simplicity only symmetrical layups are x s
considered.)
q
4.1 Basic equations of one anisotropic plate + ps = 0 (9)
x
The axial strain, transversal strain and the shear
strain are related to the displacements of the wall as

3
 Lszl P. Kollr

~
4.2 Solution for the trigonometric loads When the axial loads ~p x and ~p x are constant
As we stated above the solution of one plate is (uniform load), it can be shown that the general
assumed in the form of trigonometric functions. The solution is:
displacements of the axis of the wall is assumed in
the following form:
A ~ ~
~ u~s = 16 wo+
wo ( x ) = w
~ sin x w
o
~ cos x
o (10) A66
~ 1 1
u o ( x ) = u~o cos x + u~o sin x C1 cosh s + C3 sinh s cos s +
(11)
1 1 (17)
C2 cosh s + C4 sinh s sin s
~
~ , u~~ , w
where u~o , w ~
o o o , are yet unknown constants
and

= (12) ~ A ~
u~s = 16 w
L o +
A66
Here length, L is shown in Fig. 5.
1 1 (18)
C1 cosh s + C 3 sinh s sin s +
The two dimensional displacement of the
wall is: 1 1
C 2 cosh s + C 4 sinh s cos s

u (x, s ) = (u~s + u~o ) cos x
(13)
(s
~ ~
)
+ u~ + u~ sin x
o
where
A16
= (19)
~ A66
In Eq.13 u~s and u~s are functions of s. The
loads on the wall are also assumed in the form of A11 A2 (20)
= 16
trigonometric functions: A66 A 2
66
~
p s ( x, z ) = ~
p z sin x + ~
p z cos x When the axial loads are linearly varying
(14)
~
through the thickness, and the distribution is
p s ( x, z ) = ~
p x cos x + ~
p x sin x given by the following equations:
(15) ~
px = ~
p x1 s
(21)
~
~ ~
px = ~
p x1 s
After algebraic manipulation from Eqs. 5, 7, 8
and 11 we obtain:
The particular solution of Eq.16 is:
1 u~ &&
s A16 1 u~& s
1 ~ && + 2 ~ & A ~ ~
u~s A66 1 u~s u~s = 2 16 ~
p x1 + p x1 s (22)
2 A
A11 11
~
A u~s 2 A16
~
w ~ A ~ (23)
2 16 ~ = o
~ + u~s = 2 16 ~
p x1 ~
p x1 s
A66 u~s A66 w o (16) 2
A11 A11
~ ~
2 px 2 A16 u o
~ + ~ If both uniform and linearly varying axial loads
A66 ~
px A66 u~o ~
( p x and ~
~ p x ) are considered, the solution is
obtained as the sum of Eqs.17, 18 and 22, 23:
where dot denotes the derivation with respect to s.
Eq.16 is a second order differential equation
~
system for the unknown functions u~ and u~ . s s

4
 CROSS SECTIONAL PROPERTIES OF THIN-WALLED COMPOSITE
BEAMS

A ~ ~ ~
A16 ~ ~
u~s = 16 wo + 2 2 p x1 + px1s
A66 A11 A11
~ ~
~
1 1 N x ( x, z ) = N x sin x + N x cos x (32)
C1 cosh s + C3 sinh s cos s +

~
1 1 (24) q (x, z ) = q~ cos x + q~ sin x
C2 cosh s + C4 sinh s sin s (33)

~ A ~ A16 ~ ~ Then the resultant forces on a wall segment are

u~s = 16 w o + 2 2 p x1
~
p x1 s defined, and calculated as
A66 A11 A11

1 1 (25)
N= N x ds
C1 cosh s + C 3 sinh s sin s + (b )

1 1
M = N x zds (34)
C 2 cosh s + C 4 sinh s cos s (b )

V = qds
(b )
These functions contain 2 5 constants:
The resultant loads (which depend on the axial
~ ~ coordinate, x only) are the moment: m, the axial
u~o , wo , p x1 , C1 , C 3
(26) load: p xo , and the transverse load: p so , which
~ can be calculated from the equilibrium equations,
~ ~ , ~
u~o , w ~
p x1 , C2 , C4
o (27) which result in:

M
m= V
We may observe that for orthotropic walls, x
when A16 = A16 = 0 , the two displacement N
p xo = (35)
functions (Eqs.24 and 25) are uncoupled: x
V
p so =
~ x
u~s = p x1 s
A11
These loads can be written in the following form:
1 1 ~
+ C1 cosh s + C 3 sinh s (28) ~ cos x + m~ sin x
m=m
~
p xo = ~
p xo cos x + ~
p xo sin x
~ ~ ~ (36)
u~s = ~
px1s ~ ~
p so = p so sin x + p so cos x
A11
1 1
+ C2 cosh s + C4 sinh s (29)

Note again that these functions depend on the
constants given in Eqs.26 and 27.
4.3 Resultants
Using the above derived displacements we can 5 Exact solution for a beam
determine the strains and the internal forces from
Using the above derived displacements for one wall
Eqs. 5 and 7. They can be separated similarly as the
segment we can determine the exact solution of a
displacements and the loads:
beam consisting of several wall segments. The
~ displacements of each wall are given by Eqs.24 and
x (x, s ) = ~x sin x + ~x cos x (30) 25 which depend on the constants given in Eqs.26
and 27.
~
xs ( x, s ) = ~xs cos x + ~xs sin x (31)
The constants C1 , C3 , C 2 , C 4 can be
determined from the continuity conditions. At

5
 Lszl P. Kollr

each intersection the displacement and the shear 5 Cross sectional properties of a beam
force must be continuous (Fig.4.): When the displacements of each wall is given the
b b
u~s ,k 1 + k 1 = u~s ,k k strain energy of the beam can be formulated. For
2 2 length L, for each wall segment, the strain energy is:
~ b ~ b L
u~s,k 1 + k 1 = u~s ,k k 1
2 2
U=
2 (N x x + q xs )dsdx (41)
0 (b )
b b (37)
q~k 1 + k 1 = q~k k
2 2
which can be written (see Eq.30-33) in the following
~ b ~ b
q~k 1 + k 1 = q~k k form
2 2
U=
L ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~~
N x x + q~ xs + N x x + q~ xs ds
~ ~ ~ (42)
while for an open section beam the shear force
4
on the free edges must be zero (b )

To derive the cross sectional properties of the

b beam we compare the strain energy (Eq.42) to that
q~1 1 = 0
2 of a beam given in [6].
From the condition that for the same
b
q~K K = 0 displacements of the axis of the beam the strain
2 (38) energy obtained from the exact solution (Eq. 42) and
~ b from the beam equations are the same the properties
q~1 1 = 0
2 can be determined. In the calculation we keep the
~ b same number of terms in the Taylor series expansion
q~K K = 0
2 for both the exact and the beam solution.
This calculation requires an extensive
Using the continuity conditions we obtain an algebraic manipulations of the equations, which,
exact solution of the beam, which depends only on excepts for very simple cases, can be done
(Eqs. 26 and 27) numerically only.
~ ~ For example, in the case treated in the
u~o , wo , p x1 ,
(39) Problem statement, this new theory results in Eq.4.
~ Another simple example, if we have an
~ ~ , ~
u~o , w ~
p x1 (40) orthotropic beam, which consists of one anisotropic
o
wall only. The constitutive equation is:
We may observe that the displacements of the (43)
N x x
beam (Eqs. 10 and 13) depends on (Eq.11), which
is a function of the length, L. M z = C1 / z
The hyperbolic and trigonometrical functions V
in the displacements (Eqs.24 and 25) can be y y
eliminated, if the Taylor series expansions of the
functions with respect to are determined. We must where the stiffness matrix, C is:
keep in mind that parameter L is related to the length
of the beam, which is large compared to b, and
hence is small. In such a way we obtain functions
where the displacements are polynomials, similarly
as in the classical beam theory. However, at least for
trigonometrically varying loads, we obtain an
exact solution of the beam. The accuracy of the
solution depends on the number of terms in the
Taylor series expansion.

6
 CROSS SECTIONAL PROPERTIES OF THIN-WALLED COMPOSITE
BEAMS

[4] Wu, X. and C.T. Sun, Simplified Theory for

Composite Thin-Walled Beams, AIAA J., Vol. 30,
A66 A16
b det A
1992, pp. 2945-2951.
b det A [5] T. M. Roberts and H. Al-Ubaidi, Influence of Shear

12 A66 Deformation on Restrained Torsional Warping of
b 3 det A Pultruded FRP Bars of Open Cross-Section, Thin-
2 Walled Structures, Vol. 39, 2001, pp. 395-414.
A16 1 .2
1+
5 A16 [6] Kollr, L.P.: Kollr, L.P.: New theory of thin walled
b det A bA66 6 det A composite beams with arbitrary layup. European
Conference on Composite Materials, ECCM 12,
(44) Biaritz, 29. Aug -1. Sept, 2006
2
where det A = A11 A66 A16 . For orthotropic wall
( A16 = A16 = 0 ) this matrix simplifies to the well
known form:
1 (45)

bA11
12
3
b A11
1. 2
bA66

5 Conclusion
In the classical analysis the properties of a
beam are calculated by assuming kinematical
relationships, e.g. cross sections remain plane after
the deformation of the beam. These assumptions
may lead to inaccuracy or to contradictory results. In
the paper a new theory is presented, in which no
kinematical assumption is applied, rather the
properties are derived from the accurate (three
dimensional) equations of beams using limit
transition.
This calculation requires an extensive
manipulations of the equations, which, excepts for
very simple cases, can be done numerically only.
However, this solution does not contain the
shortcomings of the classical derivations.

References
[1] Megson, T.H.G., Aircraft Structures for Engineering
Students, Halsted Press, John Wiley & Sins. U.S.
New York, (1990)
[2] Kollr, L.P. and George S. Springer, Mechanics of
Composite Structures, Cambridge University Press.
(2003)
[3] Massa, J.C. and Barbero, E.J., A Strength of
Materials Formulation for Thin Walled Composite
Beams with Torsion, Journal of Composite
Materials. 32. (1998), 1560-1594