Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 91 (2014) 1–15

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Finite Elements in Analysis and Design

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

A total-Lagrangian position-based FEM applied to physical

and geometrical nonlinear dynamics of plane frames including
semi-rigid connections and progressive collapse
Humberto Breves Coda n, Rodrigo Ribeiro Paccola
São Carlos School of Engineering, University of São Carlos, Brazil

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this study we apply the total Lagrangian formulation based on positions to develop a strategy for the
Received 13 November 2013 physical and geometrical nonlinear analysis of plane structures and mechanisms. The developed frame
Received in revised form elements have cross sections constituted by laminas of different materials and widths. The Reissner–Mindlin
15 May 2014
kinematics is adopted to include shear effects into the formulation. These elements are connected among
Accepted 1 July 2014
Available online 24 July 2014
each other by semi-rigid connections. Both elements and connections have multi-linear elastoplastic
behavior with isotropic hardening. An alternative flow direction rule, which allows the reproduction of
Keywords: any stress–strain curve and the determination of closed solution for the plastic multiplier, is shown. All steps
Physical and geometrical nonlinear to reproduce the formulation are provided. Various examples are used to demonstrate the good behavior of
dynamics
the formulation, including a progressive collapse analysis of a tall building subjected to a real seismic load.
Frames
& 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Machines
Finite element methods
Semi-rigid connections
Progressive collapse

1. Introduction Lagrangian or co-rotational schemes and the total Lagrangian

Due to recent advances in computational resources new possibi-
lities are opened to the dynamic analysis of solids, structures and
mechanisms. Particularly, in structural analysis, time domain non-
linear formulations are gaining more space in the specialized litera-
ture. It occurs because this kind of analysis allows forecasting the
behavior of structures in situations beyond the elastic limit, including
the loss of strength and stiffness related to the inelastic behavior of
materials and the occurrence of large displacements and rotations [1].
Regarding large displacement and rotations one must make differ-
ence between the geometrically exact representations present in works
like [2,3,4,5] and the approximate second order ones described by
[6,7,8,9], for example. Second order formulations, for which stability
functions are employed to modify the stiffness of bending elements, do
not consider the inertial properties of transverse movements and are
not capable of giving precise results for mechanism analysis and for the
post-critical behavior of ruined structures. Therefore, in this work we
choose to adopt a geometrically exact formulation.
Among the geometrically exact formulations for the analysis
of structures and mechanisms one should highlight the updated
n
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: hbcoda@sc.usp.br (H.B. Coda).
strategies. Due to the change of reference the mass matrix varies
in updated Lagrangian approaches, arising the need of special time
integration algorithms to guarantee the energy and momentum
conservation [3,5,10]. The total Lagrangian formulations present a
constant (or quasi-constant) mass matrix, which allows the use of
well established time integration procedures developed in the
context of geometrically linear analysis, as for example the New-
mark β algorithm [11].
Thus, in this work we use the total Lagrangian formulation
based on positions to develop a strategy for the physical and
geometrical nonlinear analysis of plane structures and mechan-
isms. The developed frame elements have cross sections consti-
tuted by laminas of different materials and widths following the
Reissner–Mindlin kinematics which includes a complete constitu-
tive relation. These elements are connected among each other by
semi-rigid connections. Both elements and connections have
multi-linear elastoplastic behavior with isotropic hardening.
Various researches related to geometrical nonlinear analysis of
two and three-dimensional frames that consider plasticity can be
cited. Some pioneering authors [12,13] applied co-rotational
techniques to analyze three-dimensional frames developing plas-
ticity. In these works elastoplasticity is treated in a discrete way
(plastic hinges), in which a moment–curvature relation is assumed
for continuous members cross sections. One can cite some recent

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.finel.2014.07.001
0168-874X/& 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
2 H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 91 (2014) 1–15
works that follow the same localized plastic hinge strategy to
model the behavior of frame elements, like [14–22].
Some authors [23–25] use distributed plasticity to model two
and three dimensional frames. One advantage of distributed
plasticity, when compared to plastic hinges, is the better repre-
sentation of the plastic evolution over cross sections, without the
necessity of a previous knowledge of moment–curvature curves.
However, both plastic hinges and the existent distributed plasticity
frame models do not consider the shear stress influence like the
finite element proposed in this work.
In the context of three dimensional analyses advanced works
such as [26–28] should be mentioned. In these works cable, truss
and beam-column elements are specifically designed to guarantee
efficiency for practical applications. Authors include second order
formulations for the beam-column element and apply lumped
mass matrix to proceed with time integration when all elements
are coupled together. Moreover, fiber concept plasticity is intro-
duced to consider distributed plasticity along elements.
Concerning problems in which semi-rigid connections are
present one can cite the works of [29–36]. All these works use
second order geometrical description, which limits the range of
applications, i.e., displacements and rotations should not be large
as required, for example, in machine and progressive collapse
analysis including the post-critical behavior of ruined structures.
In order to implement semi-rigid connections in any computa-
tional code it is necessary to use results from works that study
the experimental behavior of these connections, as, for example,
[37,38]. Some works, using experimental results, to establish
empirical mathematical models for connections behavior are also
present in literature; see, for example, the works of [29,39–44].
Based on these studies and in second order instability theory some
authors [45] adopted elastoplastic power laws to model the non-
linear behavior of semi-rigid connection for the analysis of 2D
structures subjected to seismic loads. These authors also adopted
localized plasticity at extremity of elements (as the elastic
instability approach has been adopted along bars) to model the
physical nonlinear behavior of 2D frames.
In the present work an alternative position based on finite
element (FE) formulation [46,47] is developed to comprise geo-
metrical and physical nonlinearity of both frame members and
connections for dynamic analysis of machines and structures. The
formulation, originally developed and presented in this work, is
geometrically exact and, considering the Reissner kinematic
hypothesis, includes shear stress contribution for both displace-
ment and failure criterion. Based on [48] the developed elasto-
plastic algorithm is multi-linear with an alternative flow direction
rule, which allows the reproduction of any stress–strain curve and
the determination of closed solution for the plastic multiplier.
Moreover, semi-rigid elastoplastic connections develop large rota-
tions allowing realistic analysis of unload situations for which
connections and/or frame elements suffer plastic deformations.
Fig. 1. Reference line parameterization for initial configuration (cubic approximation). (a) Reference line parametrization and (b) cross section initial positions.
We start the formulation description by defining the Reissner
kinematic for laminate frame elements passing through the
establishment of the total potential energy including plastic
dissipation for both frame elements and semi-rigid connections.
After that, the principle of stationary energy is employed to write
the dynamic equilibrium equations (regarding positions) and the
elastoplastic evolution is defined. The Newmark time integration
algorithm and the Newton–Raphson procedure are combined to
solve the resulting time step nonlinear system of equations.
Examples are presented to validate the proposed formulation
and to show its possibilities.
2. Frame element Reissner kinematics
The FE formulation presented here is called positional as it is
based on positions, not displacements [46,47]. The main advan-
tages of this total Lagrangian strategy are the establishment of
gradient deformation without the explicit use of the chain rule and
the achievement of quasi-constant mass matrix [49–52]. The chain
rule operation appears as a simple numerical (2
2) matrix
inversion, which allows an easy generalization of this procedure
for any class of nonlinear mechanical problems.
In this section we present the complete development of the
alternative 2D positional laminate Reissner kinematics to be used
in the proposed finite element formulation.
2.1. Initial configuration
The positional formulation is based on two mappings, one
related to the initial configuration and another related to the
current configuration. To describe the initial configuration map-
ping one starts with the reference line approximation, see Fig. 1a,
by the following expression:
f oi ðξ1 Þ ¼ xm
i ðξ1 Þ ¼ ϕℓ X iℓ
m m
ð1Þ
in which i is the coordinate direction (1 or 2), m represents the
reference line and ℓ the element node (or shape function). In
expression (1) the repetition of index ℓ indicates summation
(Einstein notation). Fig. 1a shows 4 nodes (cubic approximation);
however any number of nodes or approximation order may be
chosen.
!m
In Fig. 1a f 0 ðξ1 Þ is the mapping from the non-dimensional
variable ξ1 to the initial reference line. To define the cross sections
initial position one calculates the nodal angle θk that the normal
0
vector vik makes with the horizontal direction (x1 axis), see Fig. 1b, as
θ0k ¼ arctgðv2ðkÞ =v1ðkÞ Þ ð2Þ
in which
! !
v1k ¼  T 2k =jj T jj and v2k ¼ T 1k =jj T jj ð3Þ
 H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 91 (2014) 1–15 3

and


dϕℓ ðξ1 Þ

m
T ik ¼ X ð4Þ
dξ
k iℓ
1 ξ1

Knowing the nodal (cross sections) angles we use the same

shape functions to approximate θ ðξ1 Þ along the initial configura-
0

tion

θ0 ðξ1 Þ ¼ ϕℓ ðξ1 Þθ0ℓ ð5Þ

In Fig. 2 one can find any point inside the continuum (laminate
frame) using the following expressions:
!
lam
h
f 01 ðξ1 ; ξ2 Þ ¼ xlam ξ ξ ϕ ξ ξ cos ðϕℓ ðξ1 Þθℓ Þ
1ℓ lam 0
ð 1 ; 2 Þ ¼ ð
ℓ 1 ÞX þ d þ
1
2 2
Fig. 3. Current configuration mapping – detaching angles.
ð6Þ
!
lam
h
f 02 ðξ1 ; ξ2 Þ ¼ xlam
2 ðξ1 ; ξ2 Þ ¼ ϕℓ ðξ1 ÞX 2ℓ þ d ξ2 sin ðϕℓ ðξ1 Þθ0ℓ Þ
lam
þ
2
ð7Þ
in which ξ2 is the second non-dimensional variable, d
lam
is the
lam
distance of the lamina mid line from the reference line, h is
the height of a lamina and the pair ð cos ðϕℓ ðξ1 Þθℓ Þ; sin ðϕℓ ðξ1 Þθℓ ÞÞ
0 0

is the parameterized unit orthogonal vector. In Eqs. (6) and (7) the
symbol m is suppressed, and from now on X iℓ is simply the initial
nodal coordinate.
lam
The width of each lamina ðb Þ is introduced at the integration
procedure as an additional weighting value. Fig. 4. Change of configuration – positional mapping.

2.2. Current configuration One can see from Fig. 3 and from Eqs. (8) and (9) that cross
sections remain straight, but not orthogonal to the reference line.
The necessary information to build the initial configuration This characterizes the general Reissner kinematics. Moreover we
comprises the reference line nodal coordinates and the distance of kept h
lam
and b
lam
unchanged, limiting our constitutive relation to
each lamina from the reference line (assumed constant) as well as accept any shear elastic modulus (G), but null Poisson ratio
the height and width of each lamina (assumed constant). The regarding the longitudinal strain relations, see Eq. (16).
current configuration is achieved by a nonlinear process that uses
a trial position to start the solution procedure. So, at this stage, we
do not worry about the solution process and write the current 2.3. Change of configuration function (deformation) and its gradient
configuration similarly to the initial one, as
! As the mappings from the non-dimensional space to initial and
lam
h
f 11 ðξ1 ; ξ2 Þ ¼ ylam ξ ξ ϕ ξ ξ cos ðϕℓ ðξ1 Þθℓ Þ current configurations had been defined in previous section, we
lam
ð 1 ; 2 Þ ¼ ð
ℓ 1 ÞY 1ℓ þ d þ
1
2 2 start the description of the deformation of the analyzed body
ð8Þ (laminate frame). This is done by joining the two mappings of
! Figs. 2 and 3 in a single representation, see Fig. 4, for which the
h
lam !
f 12 ðξ1 ; ξ2 Þ ¼ ylam function f describes the deformation from initial configuration
2 ðξ1 ; ξ2 Þ ¼ ϕℓ ðξ1 ÞY 2ℓ þ d ξ2 ð sin ðϕℓ ðξ1 Þθℓ
lam
þ
2 !
ðB0 Þ to the current one ðBÞ. As is well known [46] f is written as a
ð9Þ ! !
composition of mappings f 0 and f 1 as
Here ylam
are the current coordinates of a general point inside the
i ! ! ! 1
frame element and lamina, Y iℓ are current nodal coordinates and f ¼ f 1ð f 0Þ ð10Þ
θℓ are the current angles of cross sections, see Fig. 3. !
and the gradient of f , called here A (a 2
2 tensor), is written
! !
from the gradient of f 0 and f 1 as

A ¼ A1 UðA0 Þ  1 or Aij ¼ A1ik Dkj ð11Þ

0
in which Dkj is the inverse of A .
The gradients of initial and current mappings are written as
∂f 0i
A0ij ¼ ¼ f 0i;j
∂ ξj
2n   o n lam o3
ϕ X 1ℓ  dlam þ h 2 ξ2 sin ðϕk θ0k Þðϕz;1 θ0z Þ 2 cos ðϕℓ θ ℓ Þ
lam 0
h
6 n ℓ;1  o n lam o7
¼4 5
ϕℓ;1 X 2ℓ þ dlam þ h 2 ξ2 Þ cos ðϕk θ0k Þðϕz;1 θ0z ϕ θ
lam 0
h
2 sin ð ℓ ℓ Þ

Fig. 2. Point P at a general cross section of the initial element configuration. ð12Þ
4 H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 91 (2014) 1–15

∂f 1i second Piola–Kirchhoff stress (S) as

A1ij ¼ ¼ f 1i;j
∂ ξj E 1
2n   o n lam o3 ue ¼ ðE211 þ E222 Þ þ GðE212 þ E221 Þ or ue ¼ E:ℭ:E ð16Þ
ϕℓ;1 Y 1ℓ  dlam þ h 2 ξ2 sin ðϕk θk Þðϕz;1 θz Þ 2 cos ðϕℓ θ ℓ Þ
lam
h 2 2
6 o7
¼4n   o n lam 5 in which G ¼ E=½2ð1 þ νÞ is the shear elastic modulus, ν is the
ϕℓ;1 Y 2ℓ þ dlam þ h 2 ξ2 cos ðϕk θk Þðϕz;1 θz Þ 2 sin ðϕℓ θ ℓ Þ
lam
h
Poisson ratio and Eij are the Green strain tensor in Einstein
ð13Þ notation. Alternatively, in dyadic notation, E is the Green strain
tensor and ℭ is the elastic constitutive tensor. Expression (16)
The objective Green–Lagrange strain measure E is chosen to avoids Poisson locking by annihilating the transverse material
develop the geometrically exact FE, that is expansion or contraction.
1 1 1 As the Green strain has been written as a function of nodal
E ¼ ðC  IÞ ¼ ðAt U A  IÞ or Eij ¼ ðAki Akj  δij Þ ð14Þ positions, see Eqs. (11) (through 14), the strain energy stored in
2 2 2
structure elements is written as
where I is the second order identity tensor and C is the right Z
! !
Cauchy stretch. Ueð Y Þ ¼ ue ð Y ÞdV 0 ð17Þ
V0

in which V 0 is the initial volume of the analyzed structure [47,50].

3. Geometrical nonlinear elastodynamic – basic equations
3.3. Total potential energy and elastodynamic equilibrium
In this section, the elastic Saint-Venant-Kirchhoff constitutive
relation is adopted to relate the second Piola–Kirchhoff stress S In order to write the total potential energy of the mechanical
!
and the Green strain E for frame elements. Moreover, semi-rigid system Π ð Y Þ (conservative and isothermal) one sums the strain
linear elastic connections are introduced to make a preliminary energy of frame elements, the strain energy of semi-rigid connec-
development of the complete nonlinear solution technique, tions, the potential energy of external loads (and moments), the
including plasticity, to be shown in the next section. potential energy of external distributed forces and the kinetic
energy, resulting in
Z Z
! ! ! ! ! !m
3.1. Elastic connections Π ð Y Þ ¼ ue ð Y ÞdV 0 þU SR
e  F U Y  q U y dS0
V0 S0
Z
_ ! _
ρ !
In order to unify the notation, the degree of freedom θℓ will be 1
þ y U y dV 0 ð18Þ
called Y 3ℓ . Each element node has three degrees of freedom but 2 V0 0
when connecting elements by means of semi-rigid connections !
where F is the external nodal force vector (including moments),
(global numbering) an extremity node may have more than three
!
degrees of freedom, as the rotations of the connected elements are q is the general distributed force vector written as function of
not the same. Fig. 5 shows three cases to illustrate the linking by nodal values ðqi ¼ ϕℓ ðξÞQ ℓi Þ, ρ0 is the mass density related to the
means of free connections (joints). !_
initial configuration, y is the velocity of a general point inside the
Following Fig. 5 one observes that a master element defines the !m
domain, y is the current position at the reference line of frame
first rotation degree of freedom (the third of the node) and each
elements (see Eqs. (8) and (9)) and dS0 is the infinitesimal length
slave element introduces an extra degree of freedom for the
of the curved frame element.
connection node. Fig. 6 shows the introduction of elastic connec-
In order to find the equilibrium configuration one applies
tions in the arrangement of Fig. 5.
the principle of stationary potential energy on Eq. (18), using as
In general, the strain energy stored in a semi-rigid connection
ðηαβÞ parameters the nodal positions:
with stiffness modulus k is given by
Z
ðηαβ Þ ∂ue ∂E ! ∂U SR ! ! !
k
ðÞ
η η k η η δΠ ¼ : ! U δ Y dV 0 þ ! e
Uδ Y  F Uδ Y
U SR
η ¼ ðθ  θβ Þ2 ¼ ðY 3α  Y 3β Þ2 ð15Þ ∂E ∂Y ∂Y
2 α
V0
2 Z Z
!m ! ! !
! ∂y €
in which η is the node where the connection is considered, α is  q U ! U δ Y dS0 þ ρ0 !
y U ðϕ U δ Y ÞdV 0 ¼ 0 ð19Þ
the first connected element (master) and β is the other connected
S0 ∂Y V 0

element. No summation is implied.
3.2. Frame element strain energy
As mentioned before the Saint-Venant-Kirchhoff specific strain
energy is adopted here to relate the Green strain (E) and the
!_ !
in which y δt ¼ δ y has been used.
By the energy conjugate principle [53], the first term of the first
integral of Eq. (19) is the second Piola–Kirchhoff stress and the
derivative of the strain energy stored in elastic connections is the
!int
internal moment M . Therefore, in order to simplify the under-
standing of the physical nonlinear procedure shown in the next

Fig. 5. Some free connections and degrees of freedom numbering.

 H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 91 (2014) 1–15 5

Fig. 6. Some semi-rigid connections.

section, one rewrites Eq. (19) as In this case, instead of using the elastic strain energy, for both the
Z frame element and connections, one adopts the Helmholtz free
∂E ! !int ! ! !
δΠ ¼ S : !dV 0 U δ Y þ M U δ Y  F U δ Y energy potential [54].
Z
V0 ∂Y Z Following this reasoning the total potential energy for isother-
! ! !€ ! ! ! !
 q U ϕdS0 U δ Y þ ρ0 Y U ϕ  ϕ dV 0 U δ Y ¼ 0 ð20Þ mal problems is written as
S0 V0 Z
! ! !
!m ! ! Π ð Y Þ ¼ Ψ ðE; αÞdV 0 þ ΘSR ððY η3α  Y η3β Þ; αÞ  F U Y
To obtain Eq. (20) the property ∂ y =∂ Y ¼ ϕ and the nodal V0
! Z Z
! !m ! _ _
ρ0 ! !
characteristic of δ Y have been used. Moreover, the same approx- 1
 q U y ð Y ÞdS0 þ y U y dV 0 ð24Þ
imation adopted to position is used for acceleration. S0 2 V0

The understanding of Eq. (20) can be further improved as where Ψ and Θ are, respectively, the frame elements and the
SR

!int ! !int
! ! ! ! ! connections free energy potentials. These potentials are written as
δΠ ¼ F Uδ Y þ M Uδ Y  F Uδ Y L U Q Uδ Y
a function of the Green strain tensor, the relative angle positions at
!€ ! !_ ! !
þMU Y Uδ Y þDU Y Uδ Y ¼ 0 ð21Þ connections and the thermodynamic parameters α and α.
The variation of the total potential energy is zero at the
in which L is the matrix that transforms the distributed forces into equilibrium position, i.e.
nodal equivalent ones, M is the constant mass matrix and D is the
Z Z
mass proportional damping [52,54,55]. Due to the arbitrariness of ∂Ψ ∂E ! ∂ΘSR ! ! ! ! !
! δΠ ¼ : !dV 0 U δ Y þ ! U δ Y  F U δ Y  q U ϕdS0 U δ Y
δ Y Eq. (21) represents the geometrical nonlinear dynamic equili- V 0 ∂E ∂ Y ∂Y S 0
brium equation, i.e. Z
! € ! ! ! !
!int !int ! ! !€ !_ ! þ ρ0 Y U ϕ  ϕ dV 0 U δ Y ¼ 0 ð25Þ
F þ M  F  L U Q þ M U Y þD U Y ¼ 0 ð22Þ V0

It is important to note that this work deals with relatively
slender bars whose cross section rotational inertia is neglected;
see [47] for more information regarding this subject.
To close this item we show the pair of internal moments, for an
elastic semi-rigid connection, associated to a global node η related
to the initial (or final) point of a frame element α and to the final
(or initial) point of a frame element β, as
η ðηαβÞ η η η η
F 3α ¼ M ηα ¼ k ðY 3α  Y 3β Þ and F 3β ¼ M β ¼  k
ð23Þ
! meaning; i.e., while the passage from Eq. (19) to Eq. (20) is done by a
In Appendix A one finds explicit expressions to calculate ∂E=∂ Y
present in Eq. (20). In Section 4 the nonlinear dynamic equilibrium
is extended to include plasticity. In Section 5 the Newmark time
integration and the Newton–Raphson procedure are combined to
solve the resulting nonlinear dynamic system of equations.
4. Inelastic Procedure
The previous section is used to introduce the geometrical
nonlinearity concept into the total Lagrangian dynamic formula-
tion based on positions. This section takes advantage of the
previous equations to introduce elastoplasticity into the nonlinear
dynamic problem and briefly presents the multi-linear elastoplas-
tic evolution model, adopted for both frame end semi-rigid
connections.
4.1. Equilibrium equation
The difference between the elastic and inelastic procedures is
the way the potential energy of external forces is transferred to the
deformed body and dissipated during the dynamic process.
in which parameters α and α are not present due to their intrinsic
!int
relation with E and S and with the relative rotation and M to be
shown in Section 4.2.
Even for inelastic problems, the derivative of the free energy
potential with reference to Green strain is the second Piola–Kirchh-
off stress tensor. For the same reason, the energy conjugate of the
free energy at elastoplastic connections with repect to relative
ðηαβÞ η η
ðY 3α  Y 3β Þ angles are internal moments. In this way Eq. (25) can be written
exactly as Eq. (21) or (22). However, with a physical nonlinear
simple differentiation of the quadratic potential shown by
Eq. (16), now it is necessary to define an inelastic (plastic for
instance) relation to describe the material behavior and its
evolution rule.
4.2. Elastoplastic constitutive relation
In this item, we summarize the constitutive elastoplastic relation
developed by [48] and [56]. We follow a general 3D description in
order to adequate the constitutive relation to any finite element
kinematic, avoiding volumetric locking. A brief description of the
main equations is given for both frame and connections.
4.2.1. Frame element
Although the developed displacements are high, the strain level
present in our applications is relatively small. Therefore, the Green
strain approximates the linear strain and the second Piola–Kirchhoff
stress can be used in place of the Cauchy stress. Following this
reasoning we adopt the additive strain decomposition as
E ¼ Ee þ Ep or Ee ¼ E  Ep ð26Þ
6 H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 91 (2014) 1–15

in which E e and E p are, respectively, the elastic and plastic parts of Using these variables we calculate the stress level considering
E. Therefore, the free energy potential can be written as ΔEp ðinstead of dEp Þ as the main unknown, as follows:
1 1 S ðn þ 1Þ ¼ ℭ:ðt E ðn þ 1Þ  t E pn  ΔE p Þ ¼ t S ðn þ 1Þ ℭ:ΔE p ð36Þ
Ψ ðE  Ep ; αÞ ¼ Ee : ℭ : Ee þ hα2 ð27Þ
2 2 t
where the trial stress S ðn þ 1Þ is known. Using this value we
where ℭ is the elastic constitutive tensor and h is the isotropic calculate the trial yielding expression
hardening parameter. qffiffiffiffiffiffi
f ðn þ 1Þ ¼ t J 2  t χ  Sy
The second Piola–Kirchhoff stress and the thermodynamic t
ð37Þ
force χ are written as
t
If f ðn þ 1Þ r 0 the step is elastic and the trial variables are the
∂Ψ t
S¼ ¼ ℭ : E e ¼ ℭ : ðE E p Þ ð28Þ correct ones. However, if f ðn þ 1Þ 4 0 then the step is elastoplastic
∂E and f ðn þ 1Þ should be zero, resulting in
∂Ψ Δλ ¼ t f ðn þ 1Þ =ðG þHÞ ð38Þ
χ¼ ¼ h α ð29Þ
∂α
Finally, the correct stress tensor to be introduced in Eq. (25) results
As mentioned after Eq. (25), in order to eliminate α from
by substituting (38) into (32) and using (32) and (36), i.e.
equilibrium equation it is necessary to relate E p and α. In classical
  0 1
formulations this is done introducing a plastic potential F S; χ
[57] for which the plastic flow is given by ∂Ψ t f ðn þ 1Þ Bt S ðn þ 1Þ C
¼ S ¼ tS  ℭ:B
@ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi C
A ð39Þ
∂E ðG þ HÞ G tr ð t
S Þ
∂F ∂F 2 J 2ðn þ 1Þ þ P pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
t

E_ ¼ λ_ α_ ¼ λ_
p t
J 2ðn þ 1Þ I
and ð30Þ 9k
∂S ∂χ
Moreover, the constitutive elastoplasticity tensor is written as [56]
or in infinitesimal notation !
∂S ∂2 Ψ t
S :ℭ
∂F ∂F ℭep ¼ ¼ ¼ ℭ E : η  t pffiffiffiffi ¼ ℭ  ℭp ð40Þ
dE p ¼ dλ and dα ¼ dλ ð31Þ ∂E ∂E∂E S : ℭ : η þ 2 J2 H
∂S ∂χ
where λ is the plastic multiplier. In the adopted formulation
[48,56] Eqs. (29) and (31) are replaced by α ¼  λ and 4.2.2. Elastoplastic model for semi-rigid connections
dE ¼ ηdλp
and dχ ¼ hdλ ð32Þ In this item the previous general elastoplastic procedure
(multi-linear) is simplified to accomplish the semi-rigid connec-
for which tion. Firstly, the notation of Eqs. (15) and (23) is changed to
!
S trðSÞ η η η
G G R3αβ ¼ ðY 3α  Y 3β Þ ð41Þ
η ¼ Dp :S ¼ pffiffiffiffi þ I and Dp ¼ pffiffiffiffiðℭp Þ  1 ð33Þ
J2 2G 9kp J2 η
in which R3αβ is the relative rotation between frame bars α and β
t
In Eq. (33) J 2 ¼ 1=2½S : S  is the second invariant of the deviatory at a connection node η. From now on, to simplify the develop-
ments, this relative rotation will be called simply R. This variable is
stress S and ℭp is an elastic constitutive tensor, similar to ℭ
clearly one-dimensional and is separated into elastic and plastic
changing the ν by νp . Moreover k ¼ E=½3ð1 2νp Þ is the elasto-
p
parts, as
plastic bulk modulus. Following this strategy, when νp ffi 0:5
isochoric plasticity takes place and when ν ¼ νp the plastic flow R ¼ Re þ Rp or Re ¼ R  Rp ð42Þ
occurs in the same direction of elastic flow. In this work we adopt The free Helmholtz energy potential, implicit in Eq. (24), is written
ℭp ¼ ℭ, defined by the second derivative of expression (16) with as
reference to strain. This choice releases any possible locking
1 1
related to Reissner kinematic. ΘSR ðR  Rp ; αÞ ¼ kðRe Þ2 þ hα2 ð43Þ
To complete the elastoplasticity procedure one defines the 2 2
yielding failure expression as where k is the elastic stiffness of the connection and h its isotropic
pffiffiffiffi hardening. Following the previous item one writes the internal
f ¼ J 2  χ Sy ð34Þ moment and the thermodynamic force related to the internal
pffiffiffi variable α as
in which Sy ¼ σ y = 3 is the initial size of the Von-Mises surface
∂Θ
SR
(f ¼0) with σ y being the yielding uniaxial stress. M¼ ¼ kRe ¼ kðR  Rp Þ ð44Þ
It is important to know that the plastic multiplier should satisfy ∂R
the Khun–Tucker conditions, related to the yielding surface (34), i.e.
∂θ
dλ Z 0; f r 0; dλ f ¼ 0
χ¼ ¼  hα ð45Þ
ð35Þ ∂α
which means that if f r 0 then dλ ¼ 0 and no plastic evolution occurs In the case of semi-rigid connections, the elastic limiting
and if, for some situation, one finds f 40 then dλ 4 0 should be moment M y 4 0 is used to write the failure expression as
achieved in order to guarantee the equality f ¼ 0. f ¼ jMj  M y  χ r 0 and f ¼ jMj  M y þ hα r0 ð46Þ
In terms of incremental solution we assume isotropic  hard-

ening (h), constant by parts, and a typical interval t n ; t n þ 1 for Following the steps described in the previous item, one achieves
which n is a previous (solved) step and n þ 1 is the current step. t
f
Therefore, one writes ΔRp ¼ signðMÞ: ð47Þ
kþh
t
E ðn þ 1Þ -elastic trial of the total strain in which sign represents signal. Moreover the tangent modulus is
t
E pðn þ 1Þ ¼ E pn -accumulated plastic strain ðassumed as trialÞ obtained as
t
λðn þ 1Þ ¼ λn -trial internal variable ∂2 Θ
SR
k:h
kt ¼ ¼ ð48Þ
t
χ ðn þ 1Þ ¼ χ n -trial thermodynamic internal force ∂R2 k þh
 H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 91 (2014) 1–15 7

5. Newmark and Newton–Raphson procedures From Eq. (54) the Newton–Raphson procedure to solve the non-
linear equation (51) gives
In this section we combine the Newmark time integration and ! ! !0 ! !0
the Newton–Raphson algorithm to solve the nonlinear dynamic H U Δ Y s þ 1 ¼  g ð Y s þ 1Þ and Δ Y s þ 1 ¼  H1 U !
g ð Y s þ 1Þ ð55Þ
equilibrium described by Eqs. (25) or (22), rewritten here joining
! !0 !
the external conservative loads into one single vector F : where Y s þ 1 is a trial position (usually Y s as the first choice) for
! !int !int ! !€ !_ ! ! !0 !
g ¼ F þ M  F þ M U Y þ DU Y ¼ 0 ð49Þ Y s þ 1 used in Eq. (51) to calculate g ð Y s þ 1 Þ. Solving Δ Y s þ 1 one
!
! ! calculates a new trial for Y s þ 1 as
in which g is a vector that is null if Y is the right position trial
!int !int ! !0 !
used to calculate internal forces F and M , if not it turns into Y Sþ1 ¼ Y sþ1 þΔ Y sþ1 ð56Þ
the unbalanced mechanical force. Expression (49) represents the Acceleration and velocity are corrected, for each iteration, by,
dynamic equilibrium equation at any time and has to be solved. In !
order to do so the first step is to write this equilibrium for a ! Y Sþ1 ! !_ _
! !€ !€
Y€ S þ 1 ¼  T S and Y S þ 1 ¼ Y S þ Δtð1  γ Þ Y S þ γΔt Y S þ 1
specific instant t s þ 1 , as follows: βΔt 2



ð57Þ
∂Π

∂Ψ

∂Θ


SR
!
g jS þ 1 ¼ !
¼ !
þ !

∂Y
∂Y
∂Y

The stop criterion when a chosen tolerance (TOL) is satisfied, is
Sþ1 Sþ1 Sþ1
! !€ !_ ! !! !
 F Sþ1 þMU Y Sþ1 þDU Y Sþ1 ¼ 0 ð50Þ jj g ð Y s þ 1 Þjj r TOL or jjΔ Y s þ 1 jj r TOL ð58Þ

in which internal forces are assumed as the derivatives of In order to conclude the description of the formulation the
Helmholtz free energy potentials regarding positions. Substituting second derivatives of the Helmholtz free energy potentials of
the Newmark approximations [52,55] into Eq. (50) gives frame elements and semi-rigid connections regarding positions



are presented. From Eqs. (25), (40), (48) and (53) one writes
∂Π

∂Ψ

∂Θ


SR
!
g jS þ 1 ¼ !
¼ !
þ !
∂2 Ψ ∂E ∂2 Ψ ∂E ∂Ψ ∂2 E ∂E ∂E
∂Y
∂Y
∂Y

ep
Sþ1 Sþ1 Sþ1 ! ! ¼ ! : ∂E∂E : ! þ ∂E : ! ! ¼ ! : ℭ : !
∂Y ∂Y ∂Y ∂Y ∂Y ∂Y ∂Y ∂Y
! M ! ! !
 F Sþ1 þ U Y S þ 1  M U T S þD U R S ∂2 E
βΔt 2 þS : ! ! ð59Þ
∂Y ∂Y
γD ! !
þ U Y S þ 1  γΔtD U T S ¼ 0 ð51Þ
βΔt
∂2 Θ ∂2 Θ
SR SR

! ! ! ! ¼ ∂R∂R ¼ kt ð60Þ
where vectors T s and R s represent the dynamic contribution of ∂Y ∂Y
the past as
! _
!

! YS YS 1 €
! ! _
! !€
TS¼ þ þ  1 YS and R S ¼ Y S þ Δtð1  γ Þ_ Y S
βΔt 2 βΔt 2β
ð52Þ
and β and γ are the usual Newmark parameters [11].
!!
Eq. (51) can be understood simply by g ð Y S þ 1 Þ ¼ 0 and is
!
clearly nonlinear in Y S þ 1 . A Taylor expansion to solve this non-
linear equation is developed. The second derivative of the total
energy potential is then given by




∂2 Π

! ∂2 Ψ

∂2 Θ

M γD
! !
¼ H ¼ ∇ g ¼ ! !
þ ! !
þ þ ð53Þ
∂ Y ∂ Y
S þ 1 ∂ Y ∂ Y
S þ 1 ∂ Y ∂ Y
S þ 1 βΔt
2 βΔt

and the first order expansion results

! !! !0 !0 !
0 ¼ g ð Y s þ 1 Þ ffi gð Y s þ 1 Þ þ ∇gð Y s þ 1 Þ U Δ Y s þ 1 ð54Þ Fig. 8. Relative rotation angle (degrees).

Fig. 7. Flexible spin-up maneuver input data.

8 H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 91 (2014) 1–15

The necessary expressions to calculate the last term of Eq. (59) is rotation, elastoplastic connections, elastoplastic behavior of mate-
presented in Appendix B. rials and all aspects working together.

6.1. Spin-up maneuver

6. Numerical examples

The first numerical example is used to show the ability of the

Various examples have been selected to test the formulation
proposed formulation to deal with nonlinear dynamics and large
regarding all its features; they are nonlinear dynamics, large
rotations, it is a benchmark of nonlinear dynamic formulations
presented in several references [2,4,58,59]. The spin-up-maneuver
is subject to a turn function (ψ(t)), applied on the restricted node,
see Fig. 7. The adopted parameters for the beam are EI¼ 1.4
104,
EA¼2.8
107, ρI¼ 6.0
10  4, ρA ¼1.2 for a slender bar. The
adopted time step to run the problem is Δt ¼ 0:0015. This type
of turn function represents a typical helicopter blade rotation. The
structure is approximated by a mesh of 10 cubic Reissner kine-
matic finite elements.
The expressions of the turn function are as follows:
"
2
#
2 t2 15 2π
ψ ðtÞ ¼ þ cos t 1 rad; 0 r t r 15
5 2 2π 15

ψ ðtÞ ¼ ð6t  45Þ rad; t 4 15

Fig. 9. Flexible beam, selected time steps.
All results compare very well with the ones presented by all
references. Fig. 8 shows the difference between the free cross
section angle (at the blade free extremity) and the imposed
rotation angle. Reference [4] results are used for comparison.
In Fig. 9 some selected positions are compared with the rigid
bar and the solution achieved by [4] using an Euler–Bernoulli
kinematics.
In Fig. 10 the difference between the distance of the extreme
free cross section from the pin and the original length of the bar is
depicted against time. There is an apparent reduction of the length
of the bar due to the bending that occurs at the beginning of the
movement. As expected, the achieved final stretching presents a
slight oscillation around the technical solution ρω2 ℓ3 =ð3EÞ.

6.2. Elastoplastic connection of two bars

This example is used to confirm the computational implemen-

Fig. 10. Apparent bar stretching.
Fig. 11. Clamped bar connected by an elastoplastic connection.
tation of the elastoplastic connection and to demonstrate the
geometrically exact description of the proposed total Lagrangian
frame formulation. A clamped bar is divided into two equal elastic
parts linked by an elastoplastic connection, as seen in Fig. 11.
The cross section and the elastic properties of the bar are also
depicted in Fig. 11. Two finite elements of cubic approximation
order have been used and the load is divided into 30 steps. Fig. 12a
shows the moment versus rotation graphic comparing the achieved
numerical result with the analytical curve for a monotonically
crescent load. The initial elastic modulus of the connection is

Fig. 12. Connection moment
rotation graphics – (a) Monotonic and (b) cyclic.
 H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 91 (2014) 1–15
k ¼ 12 kN cm with elastic limit M y ¼ 3 kN cm. Fig. 12b shows the
connection behavior when subjected to a cyclic loading.
As one can see in Fig. 12 the multi-linear strategy is capable of
accurately reproducing any elastoplastic curve.
Fig. 13 shows partial positions for 15 equally spaced loading
levels, demonstrating that the nonlinear geometric description is
exact. This level of rotation is not accomplished by formulations
that adopt second order geometrical descriptions.
6.3. Four point test
In order to show the behavior of the implemented elastoplas-
ticity, a simply supported beam, subjected to a monotonically
crescent controlled displacement at load positions, see Fig. 14, is
analyzed. The cross section is also presented in Fig. 14, for which
three laminas and five Gauss integrations points for each lamina
are employed to perform the Gauss integration procedure. Two
different materials are employed for comparisons, one is perfect
elastoplastic and the other presents softening, see Fig. 15a.
Fig. 15b shows the beam behavior for both materials. Results
are compared to the elastic limit load and the ultimate load for
perfect elastoplasticity. Position control is sufficient to model the
post-critical behavior of this example. Three cubic elements (with-
out considering symmetry) are used to model this case.
Fig. 16 shows the evolution of bending moments for different
load levels. One can observe that for the perfect elastoplastic case
Fig. 13. Partial positions for equally spaced loads.
Fig. 14. Simple supported beam – loading and cross section.
Fig. 15. Curves: stress
strain and force
displacement (under the load). (a) Stress–strain relation and (b) load versus displacement.
9
a degradation spreads over the beam; moreover the load stabilizes
after the displacement of 7 cm. After the imposed displacement of
2.2 cm a reduction in the load level occurs for the softening case
and, consequently, in the bending moment. Moreover, no bending
moment spreads along the beam.
6.4. Elastoplastic column
This example tests the formulation regarding the coupling of
plasticity and geometrical nonlinearity. It is the simulation of an
eccentric compression of a column, depicted in Fig. 17a. The
material properties are E ¼ 21; 000 kN/cm2, ν ¼ 0:0 and
σ y ¼ 21 kN/cm2 with perfect elastoplasticity. Fig. 17b compares
the results obtained using the proposed formulation with the
elastic closed second order analytical solution (secant formulae).
We adopt six cubic finite elements to run this example: four along
the column and two for the small consoles at extremities. Position
control is employed and, to impose symmetry, the rotation of the
central node is restricted.
This example confirms that the elastic second order theory
gives a more flexible result than the elastic geometrically exact
one. The plastic flow starts at the load level of 13 kN, 16% less than
the column critical load ð15:545 kN). The elastic release starts at
the load level 3:773 kN and the residual displacement, at the new
unloaded situation, is about 30 cm.
6.5. Frame analysis subjected to concentrated loads - elastoplastic
connection
In this example the frames depicted in Fig. 18 are analyzed
considering elastoplastic connections. The original data of this
problem are given by [60,36]. In these works the connection
model handles nonlinear elasticity and bars follow second order
approximation. Moreover the kinematics does not include shear
effects. To simplify comparisons, we adopt elastic bars with
E ¼ 21; 000 kN/cm2 and ν ¼ 0:0.
The adopted multi-linear connection diagrams, shown in
Fig. 19, are extracted from [60]. The adopted elastic limits of the
connections for the four tested cases are M Ay ¼ 750 kN cm,
M By ¼ 1625 kN cm, M Cy ¼ 5000 kN cm and M Dy ¼ 20; 480 kN cm with
their corresponding rotations θy ¼ 1:67
10  3 rad, θy ¼ 1:67

A B
3
rad, θy ¼ 5:00
10 3
rad and θy ¼ 6:67
10 3
C D
10 rad. More
data information can be seen in [60].
Beams are constituted of steel wide flange shaped section
W14
48 while columns are constituted of W12
96 section.
It is interesting to note that bars behave elastically because the
ultimate limit of the strongest connection (case D) is practically
equal to the elastic limit of beams, and loads are applied at
connections.
10 H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 91 (2014) 1–15

Fig. 16. Bending moments diagrams for various load levels. (a) Perfect elastoplastic and (b) softening.

Fig. 17. Eccentric column and results. (a) Geometry and (b) load versus central displacement.

Fig. 18. Analized frames, adapted from [57]. (a) Clamped and (b) simple supported.

The load P (Fig. 18) grows monotonically until the critical load
shows up. Figs. 20 and 21 show that the results presented by our
formulation agree with the ones given by references. For semi-
rigid connections the differences in results are less than 2% for all
cases. For rigid connection the difference is about 6%, explained by
the difference among the exact geometrical description and
second order approximations.
For connections A and B the displacement levels are very small
and failure occurs in an abrupt way. In order to show up the
horizontal plateau (for A and B), Figs. 20 and 21, we used lateral
 H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 91 (2014) 1–15
loads of 0:0015P and 0:003P instead of 0:001P and 0:002P.
However, this procedure does not change the critical load value.
6.6. Seismic loading imposed on a tall frame
This example demonstrates the capability of the proposed
formulation to model the behavior of structures to real seismic
Fig. 19. Connections bending moment
rotation diagrams.
Fig. 20. Simple supported structure behavior.
Fig. 21. Clamped structure behavior.
11
loading. The real event chosen is the Superstation Hill in 1987. The
original unscaled time series record has been extracted from [61].
Both vertical (UP) and horizontal (360) accelerations are trans-
formed into displacements (cm) and applied as base movements
in the time domain analysis. The structure is a 25 storeys building,
Fig. 22, modeled with (a) free connections (articulated joints),
(b) rigid connections, (c) semi-rigid connections, (d) semi-rigid
connections with bracing and (e) semi-rigid connections with
bracing and pendulum.
All beams are made of wide flange W200
46. The columns are
divided as follows: (i) from the 1st to the 5th floor W610
155,
(ii) from the 6th to the 10th floor W610
140, (iii) from the 11th to
the 15th W610
113, (iv) from the 16th to the 20th floor
W460
74 and (v) from the 21st to the 25th W200
46. Bracings
are 3:606 m long and pose square cross section of 5:83 cm side.
The adopted material is structural steel with simplified proper-
ties depicted in Fig. 23. The adopted density of columns is
ρst ¼ 7000 kg/m3. For beams we adopt an equivalent density
ρeq ¼ 15; 333 kg/m3, in order to include the mass influence of a
reinforced concrete slab with 10 cm of height and 4 m of width.
The considered vertical load q ¼ 4088 kN/m is uniformly distrib-
uted over beams. The frame is considered simple supported and
the soil moves horizontally and vertically following the real
earthquake data.
12 H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 91 (2014) 1–15
Fig. 22. Analyzed structure. Cases (a), (b) and (c). Cases (d) and (e).
Fig. 23. Adopted stress–strain diagram (uniaxial representation).
Fig. 24. Moment–rotation curve for connections.
The adopted semi-rigid connection moment–rotation diagram
is depicted in Fig. 24, in which 70 kN m is the elastic limit of the
connection and 120 kN m is the final strength.
The pendulum is modeled by a steel bar connected through a
free joint at the top of the structure (point A of Fig. 22) and a steel
cylinder also connected to this bar through a free joint. The bar is
1:75 m long and has square cross section of 5:83 cm side. The
cylinder is 2:50 m long with a diameter of 1:93 m; the body weight
of the cylinder is distributed over its length. The adopted time step
is the same as the one given by the earthquake data, i.e.,
Δt ¼ 0:005 s.
The structure modeled in case (a) suffers a progressive collapse
shown in Fig. 25. Fig. 25a presents sequential positions for time
from 2.25 s through 3 s with a displacement scale amplification of
10. Fig. 25b presents sequential positions from time 3 s through 4 s
without amplification.
In Fig. 26 the horizontal displacements at the top of the
building for cases ‘b’ through ‘e’ are depicted together with the
horizontal soil movement; values are presented for 50 time steps.
The horizontal displacements are computed subtracting the rest-
ing value. This static displacement is different for each case due to
the difference of the respective elastic center and the maintenance
of the external vertical applied load.
As one can see the proposed formulation is a good tool to
model the behavior of structures under seismic loads. Starting
with rigid connection one may say that substituting them by semi-
rigid elastoplastic connections reduces the general amplitude with
time and reduces the overall movement frequency; however the
first pick has been increased during the plastic dissipation. The
introduction of bracings along the stair case increases the overall
frequency and reduces the plastification of connections, but does
not reduce the overall amplitude. The best solution for the
problem is introducing a contra-balance pendulum; however the
columns from floor 21st through 23rd, under the pendulum
connection, should be substituted by the same ones used in floors
16th through 20th, in order to resist the extra load. In order to
illustrate the pendulum movement, Fig. 27 shows some select
positions for case (e); displacements are enlarged 20 times.
Fig. 25. Progressive collapse of case (a). (a) 2.25 s, 2.5 s 2.75 s and 3 s – enlarged
displac. (b) 3 s, 3.25 s, 3.5 s, 3.75 s and 4 s – not enlarged.
 H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 91 (2014) 1–15 13

Fig. 26. Horizontal displacement of top floor.

Fig. 27. Illustration of the pendulum movement (enlarged 20 times).

7. Conclusions Acknowledgments

In this study an alternative position based on finite element The authors would like to thank FAPESP (São Paulo Research
formulation is presented and successfully implemented. The for- Foundation) and CNPq (National Council for Scientific and Tech-
mulation is originally presented here, providing all steps for its nological Development – Brazil) for the financial support of this
reproduction. It is capable of accurately solving geometrical and research (FAPESP: 11/15731-5; CNPq: 306152/2013-4).
physical nonlinear dynamic problems of both machines and
structures.
Examples show good behavior of the formulation for various !
Appendix A. Calculating ∂E=∂ Y
applications, covering progressive collapse of structures under
seismic loading. Future works include the implementation of
From expression (14), reproduces as,
damage mechanics, also allowing the analysis of reinforced con-
crete structures developing large displacements and under severe 1 1
E ¼ ðC  IÞ ¼ ðAt UA IÞ ðA1Þ
dynamic loading. 2 2
14 H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 91 (2014) 1–15

one writes [3] I. Romero, F. Armero, An objective finite element approximation of the

∂E 1 ∂C 1 ∂ n t o 1 ∂ n 0  t 1 t 1 0 1
o kinematics of geometrically exact rods and its use in the formulation of an
! ¼ 2 ! ¼ 2 ! A U A ¼ 2 ! ½ðA Þ U ðA Þ  U ½ðA Þ U ðA Þ  energy-momentum conserving scheme in dynamics, Int. J. Numer. Methods
∂Y ∂Y ∂Y ∂Y Eng. 54 (2002) 1683–1716.
(" !# [4] M. Greco, H.B. Coda, Positional FEM formulation for flexible multi-body
1 t
1 ∂A
¼ ðA0 Þ  t U ! U ½ðA1 Þ U ðA0 Þ  1  dynamic analysis, J. Sound Vib. 290 (2006) 1141–1174.
2 ∂Y [5] G. Jelenic, M.A. Crisfield, Dynamic analysis of 3D beams with joints in presence
" ! #) of large rotations, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 190 (2001) 4195–4230.
∂A1 [6] W.F. Chen, E.M. Lui, Structural Stability: Theory and Implementation, Elsevier;
þ ½ðA0 Þ  t U ðA1 Þt  U ! UðA 0 1
Þ ðA2Þ
∂Y New York, 1987.
[7] S.E. Kim, H.T. Thai, Nonlinear inelastic dynamic analysis of suspension bridges,
!
In which all terms are known except ∂A1 =∂ Y , detailed as follows: Eng. Struct. 32 (2010) 3845–3856.

" #
∂A1 ϕϖ;1 0
¼ ðA3Þ
∂Y 1ϖ 0 0
" #
∂A1 0 0
¼ ðA4Þ
∂Y 2ϖ ϕ ϖ ;1 0

2( lam
! ) (
lam
)3
h h
6  d þ ξ ½ cos ðϕk θk Þðϕz;1 θz Þϕϖ þ sin ðϕk θk Þϕϖ ;1 
lam
 sin ðϕℓ θℓ Þϕϖ 7
∂A1 ∂A1 6 2 2 2 7
6 7
¼ ¼6 ( ! ) ( ) 7 ðA5Þ
∂Y 3ϖ ∂θϖ 6 h
lam
h
lam 7
4 lam
d þ ξ ½ cos ðϕk θk Þϕϖ ;1  sin ðϕk θk Þðϕz;1 θz Þϕϖ  cos ðϕℓ θℓ Þϕϖ 5
2 2 2

[8] E.M. Lui, A. Lopes, Dynamic analysis and response of semirigid frames, Eng.
in which Y iϖ is the degree of freedom i of node ϖ , component of Struct. 19 (1997) 644–654.
! [9] J.C. Awkar, E.M. Lui, Seismic analysis and response of multistory semirigid
vector Y .
frames, Eng. Struct. 21 (1999) 425–441.
[10] A. Ibrahimbegovic, R.L. Taylor, On the role of frame-invariance in structural
! ! mechanics models at finite rotations, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 191
Appendix B. Calculating ∂2 E=ð∂ Y ∂ Y Þ (2002) 5159–5176.
[11] J. Argyris, H.P. Mlejnek, Dynamics of structures, Texts on Computational
From expression (A2) one writes: Mechanics, 5, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1991.

8 "
t # 

>
>
>
> 0 t
2 U ðA Þ U ∂A
1
U ∂A1
UðA0 Þ  1 þ
> ! !
∂2 E 1< ∂Y ∂Y
! ! ¼ 2> "
t # 
  ðB1Þ
∂Y ∂Y >
>
> 0  t 2 1
∂ A
U ½ðA1 Þ UðA0 Þ  1  þ ½ðA0 Þ  t U ðA1 Þt  U ∂2 A 1 0 1
: þ ðA Þ U ! !
> ! ! U ðA Þ 
∂Y ∂Y ∂Y ∂Y

[12] G. Shi, S.N. Atluri, Elasto-plastic large deformation analysis of space-frames—a

! !
All terms are known except ∂2 A1 =ð∂ Y ∂ Y Þ. From Eqs. (A3) and (A4)
one concludes that all second derivatives regarding translations
are null. However, from Eq. (A5) one writes:
plastic-hinge and stress-based explicit derivation of stiffnesses, Int. J. Numer.
Methods Eng. 26 (3) (1988) 589–615.
[13] J.H. Argyris, B. Boni, U. Hindenlang, M. Kleiber, Finite element analysis of two-
and three-dimensional elasto-plastic frames-the natural approach, Comput.
Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 35 (2) (1982) 221–248.

∂2 A 1
∂Y 3ϖ ∂Y 3μ
2( !" #) ( )3
h
lam cos ðϕk θk Þϕμ;1 ϕϖ þ cos ðϕk θk Þϕϖ ;1 ϕμ þ lam
h
6  dlam þ ξ  cos ðϕℓ θℓ Þϕϖ ϕμ 7
6
6 2 2  sin ðϕk θk Þðϕz;1 θz Þϕϖ ϕμ 2 7
7
ðB2Þ
¼6
6 ( !" #) ( )7
7
6 h
lam sin ðϕk θk Þϕϖ ;1 ϕμ þ sin ðϕk θk Þϕμ ϕμ;1 þ lam
h 7
4  dlam þ ξ  sin ðϕℓ θℓ Þϕϖ ϕμ 5
2 2 þ cos ðϕk θk Þðϕz;1 θz Þϕϖ ϕm 2

References
[1] G.G. Deierlein, A.M. Reinhorn, M.R. Willford, Nonlinear structural analysis for
seismic design: a guide for practicing engineers, NEHRP Seismic Design
Technical Brief No. 4, NIST, USA, 2010.
[2] J.C. Simo, L. Vu-Quoc, On the dynamics of flexible beams under large overall
motions – the plane case: part 1, J. Appl. Mech., ASME, 53, 1986849–854.
[14] Z.H. Zhou, S.L. Chan, Elastoplastic and large deflection analysis of steel frames
by one element per member I: one hinge along member, J. Struct. Eng.-ASCE
130 (4) (2004) 538–544.
[15] W.X. Ren, X.G. Tan, Z.C. Zheng, Nonlinear analysis of plane frames using rigid
body-spring discrete element method, Comput. Struct. 71 (1) (1999) 105–119.
[16] F. Armero, D. Ehrlich, Numerical modeling of softening hinges in thin Euler–
Bernoulli beams, Comput. Struct. 84 (10–11) (2006) 641–656.
 H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola / Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 91 (2014) 1–15
[17] D. Ehrlich, F. Armero, Finite element methods for the analysis of softening
plastic hinges in beams and frames, Comput. Mech. 35 (4) (2005) 237–264.
[18] D.W. White, Plastic hinge methods for advanced analysis of steel frames, J.
Constr. Steel Res. 24 (2) (1993) 121–152.
[19] W.F. Chen, Y. Goto, J.Y.R. Liew, Stability Design of Semi-rigid Frames, John
Wiley & Sons, USA, 1996.
[20] A. Landesmann, E.M. Batista, Advanced analysis of steel framed buildings to
brazilian standard and Eurocode-3, J. Constr. Steel Res. 61 (2005) 1051–1074.
[21] S.L. Chan, Z.H. Zhou, Elastoplastic and large deflection analysis of steel frames
by one element per member. II: three hinges along member, J. Struct. Eng.-
ASCE 130 (2004) 545–553.
[22] C. Ngo-Hu, S.E. Kim, J.R. Oh, Nonlinear analysis of space steel frames using
fiber plastic hinge concept, Eng. Struct. 29 (2007) 649–657.
[23] A.R. Alvarenga, R.A.M. Silveira, Second-order plastic-zone analysis of steel
frames Part I: numerical formulation and examples of validation, Lat. Am.
J. Solids Struct. 6 (2009) 323–342.
[24] P. Avery, M. Mahendran, Distributed plasticity analysis of steel frame struc-
tures comprising non-compact sections, Eng. Struct. 22 (2000) 901–919.
[25] F. Gruttmann, R. Sauer, W. Wagner, Theory and numerics of three-dimensional
beams with elastoplastic material behavior, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 48
(2000) 1675–1702.
[26] H.T. Thai, S.E. Kim, Practical advanced analysis software for nonlinear inelastic
dynamic analysis of steel structures, J. Constr. Steel Res. 67 (3) (2011) 453–461.
[27] H.T. Thai, S.E. Kim, Nonlinear inelastic analysis of space frames, J. Constr. Steel
Res. 67 (4) (2011) 585–592.
[28] H.T. Thai, S.E. Kim, Second-order inelastic dynamic analysis of steel frames
using hinge method, J. Constr. Steel Res. 67 (10) (2011) 1485–1494.
[29] E.M. Lui, W.F. Chen, Behavior of braced and unbraced semi-rigid frames, Int. J.
Solids Struct. 24 (9) (1988) 893–913.
[30] W.S. King, The limit loads of steel semi-rigid frames analyzed with different
methods, Comput. Struct. 51 (5) (1994) 475–487.
[31] L.M.C. Simões, Optimization of frames with semi-rigid connections, Comput.
Struct. 60 (4) (1996) 531–539.
[32] P.P.T. Chui, S.L. Chan, Vibration and deflection characteristics of semi-rigid
jointed frames, Eng. Struct. 19 (12) (1997) 1001–1010.
[33] L. Xu, Second-order analysis for semi-rigid steel frame design, Can. J. Civ. Eng.
28 (2001) 59–76.
[34] M. Sekulovic, R. Salatic, Nonlinear analysis of frames with flexible connections,
Comput. Struct. 79 (11) (2001) 1097–1107.
[35] T.S. Kruger, B.W.J. van Rensburg, G.M. du Plessis, Nonlinear analysis of
structural steel frames, J. Construct. Steel Res. 34 (1995) 285–306.
[36] S.L. Chan, P.P.T. Chui, Nonlinear Static and Cyclic Analysis of Steel Frames with
Semi-Rigid Connections, Elsevier, Oxford, 2000.
[37] W.F. Chen, N. Kishi, Semi-rigid steel beam-to-column connections: Data base
and modeling, J. Struct. Div. ASCE 115 (1) (1998) 105–119 (1989).
[38] K.M. Abdalla, W.F. Chen, Expanded database of semi-rigid steel connections,
Comput. Struct. 56 (4) (1995) 553–564.
[39] R.M. Richard, B.J. Abbott, Versatile elastic–plastic stress–strain formula, J. Eng.
Mech., Div. ASCE 101 (4) (1975) 511–515.
[40] M.J. Frye, G.A. Morris, Analysis of flexibly connected steel frames, Can. J. Civ.
Eng. 2 (3) (1975) 280–291.
15
[41] K.M. Ang, G.A. Morris, Analysis of three-dimensional frames with flexible
beam-column connections, Can. J. Civ. Eng. 11 (1984) 245–254.
[42] N. Kishi, W.F. Chen, Steel connection data bank program, Structural Engineer-
ing Report no. CE-STR-86-18, School of Civil Engineering, Purdue Univ., West
Lafayette, IN, 1986.
[43] N. Kishi, W.F. Chen, Data base of steel beam-to-column connections, Structural
Engineering Report no. CE-STR-93-15, School of Civil Engineering, Purdue
Univ., West Lafayette, IN, 1986.
[44] K. Zhu, F.G.A. Al-Bermani, S. Kitipornchai, B. Li, Dynamic response of flexibility
jointed frames, J. Struct. Div. ASCE, 17, 1995575–580.
[45] M. Sekulovic, M. Nefovska-Danilovic, Contribution to transient analysis of
inelastic steel frames with semi-rigid connections, Eng. Struct. 30 (2008)
976–989.
[46] J. Bonet, R.D. Wood, J. Mahaney, P. Heywood, Finite element analysis of air
supported membrane structures, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 190 (5–
7) (2000) 579–595.
[47] H.B. Coda, M. Greco, A simple FEM formulation for large deflection 2D frame
analysis based on position description, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 193
(33–35) (2004) 3541–3557.
[48] A.S. Botta, R.R. Paccola, W.S. Venturini, H.B. Coda, A discussion on volume
change in the plastic phase, Commun. Numer. Methods Eng. 24 (2008)
1149–1162.
[49] H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola, A positional FEM formulation for geometrical non-
linear analysis of shells, Lat. Am. J. Solids Struct. 5 (3) (2008) 205–223.
[50] H.B. Coda, A solid-like FEM for geometrically nonlinear 3D frames, Comp.
Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 198 (47–48) (2009) 3712–3722.
[51] H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola, Improved finite element for 3D laminate frame
analysis including warping for any cross-section, Appl. Math. Model. 34 (4)
(2010) 1107–1137.
[52] H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola, A FEM procedure based on positions and uncon-
strained vectors applied to nonlinear dynamic of 3D frames, Finite Elem. Anal.
Des. 42 (4) (2011) 319–333.
[53] R.W. Ogden, Nonlinear Elastic Deformation, Ellis Horwood, England, 1984.
[54] C. Lanczos, The Variational Principles of Mechanics, fourth ed, 1970, Dover
Publications; New York.
[55] H.B. Coda, R.R. Paccola, Unconstrained finite element for geometrical non-
linear dynamics of shells, Math. Probl. Eng. (2009) (Art. 575131).
[56] Ronaldo Rigobello, Humberto Breves Coda, Jorge Munaiar Neto, Inelastic
analysis of steel frames with a solid-like finite element, J. Constr. Steel Res.
86 (2013) 140–152.
[57] J.C. Simo, T.J.R. Hughes, Computational Inelasticity, Springer; New York, 1998.
[58] K.M. Hsiao, R.T. Yang, A.C. Lee, A consistent finite element formulation for
nonlinear dynamic analysis of planar beam, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 37
(1994) 75–89.
[59] H.A. Elkaranshawy, M.A. Dokainish, Corotational finite element analysis of
planar flexible multibody systems, Comput. Struct. 54 (1995) 881–890.
[60] L. Pinheiro, R.A.M. Silveira, Computational procedures for nonlinear analysis of
frames with semi-rigid connections, Lat. Am. J. Solids Struct. 2 (2005)
339–367.
[61] 〈http://peer.berkeley.edu/peer_ground_motion_database/spectras/21713/
unscaled_searches/84357/edit〉.