306 views

Uploaded by Banu Dwi Handono

- Cold Formed Cross Section 1
- Strength of Materials
- In Plane Arch Buckling Ofnetwork Arch Bridges
- Exercise4- Buckling of Trussworks-with Yield Stress
- Beeam Columns
- Strength Analysis of Hull Structures in Tankers
- EM317 - Assignment 2 - Jan-Apr 2018
- CE F211
- SPE-15467 Basic Concepts in Static BHA Analysis for Directional Drilling
- Handbook os structural stability
- Torsion 9
- Castellated Beamse28094new Developments
- Thin Shell Buckling Pit-Falls - NASA
- Attachment a DR&O (2)
- Behavior and Design of Single Angle
- Plastik
- FF
- Experimental Study of Beam–Column Behaviour of Steel Single Angles_Yi Liu
- Drinkwater Sunniberg
- Experiments on Castellated Steel Beams

You are on page 1of 15

Vol. 2, No. 3 (2002) 395–408

c World Scientific Publishing Company

Faculty of Civil Engineering, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology,

Technion City, Haifa 32000, Israel

∗cvrlevy@tx.technion.ac.il

Accepted 10 July 2002

whose cross sections vary along the axis in a uniform manner with respect to the principal

directions. The basic four coupled differential equations governing the behavior of 3D

beam-columns are first rederived using the method of perturbations. These equations

are reformulated to include varying cross sections. Finally, a 6×6 stiffness matrix (which

is sufficient to describe 3D behavior) is computed by solving the equations 6 times for a

sequence of appropriate discontinuities. The finite difference method is employed for that

purpose. Timoshenko’s closed form solution for the buckling load of a tapered column is

chosen for comparison with that obtained by the proposed formulation. Effects of twist

are also presented.

1. Introduction

The effect of the axial force within a member on the flexural stiffness that is dis-

cussed by Gere1 is commonly referred to as the beam-column effect or secondary

effect in structural engineering. This effect leads to the beam-column equations

that are used to generate the stiffness matrix for plane frames. Being a function of

the axial load this stiffness matrix may become singular for a certain compressive

load that will lead to buckling. In cases of tensile loads there will be an increase in

loading capacity known as stress hardening.

The question of what to do when it comes to space frames has been discussed

by Levy and Spillers2 who simply suggest that “if beam-columns are used in plane

frames then 3D beam-columns should be used in space frames”. This paper takes the

formulation for 3D prismatic beams a step further to 3D beam-column equations

for beams of varying cross section.

Engineering practice will often dictate that the effect of axial load on the stiff-

ness is by itself sufficient even if a 3D analysis is performed. While this might

∗ Associate Professor.

† Ph.D. Candidate.

395

September 10, 2002 9:4 WSPC/165-IJSSD 00064

be true for some cases it is not the general case and is definitely not consistent

with incremental analysis where a complete initial state of stress and not only

compression is involved. Consistency should dictate the use of the appropriate 3D

beam-column effects. Collapse analysis, for example, will require such use if mean-

ingful results of the capacity of the structure are sought. Since 3D beams have

bending about two axes and torsion in addition to axial deformations a rather com-

plex beam-column like set of interactions may occur and to disregard them might

prove quite unsafe. Predicting in advance how the coupled state of affairs will affect

the stiffness matrix, especially for cases of varying cross section, is quite a task.

It is not intended here to characterize individual interactions but to include them

all “at no cost” to the usual analysis routines by providing the appropriate linear

elastic stiffness matrix that contains their contribution. This is done by deriving

the implicit governing equations and using a finite difference scheme to solve them

for a set of discontinuities that are applied consecutively.

Geometrically full nonlinear analysis is usually performed iteratively for each

load increment with subsequent updating, of coordinates and internal stresses. Such

a type of analysis handles buckling since the determinant of the total stiffness ma-

trix can be monitored as the loading progresses. Typically for a given fixed joint load

matrix, P, the unbalanced load P0 is computed as P0 = P−NT F where N is a given

incidence matrix and F and P are vectors of internal stresses and joint loads respec-

tively. It is assumed that NT F = P describes deformed equilibrium. Incremental

displacements δ, are then computed from the system of equations (KE +KG (F))δ =

P0 . Here KE and KG (F) are the linear and geometric stiffness matrices in the global

coordinate system respectively. Coordinates are then updated and new member

stresses computed. Computation stops when the unbalanced load goes to zero.

If beam-columns are to be included then this paper assumes that their effects

simply correct the basic linear stiffness matrix, KE , and that geometric effects

are comprised of effects due to large rotations only. It is true that beam-column

effects are sometimes called geometric effects in the literature and in these cases are

interlocked with large rotations effects through large strains. This paper, therefore,

only replaces the linear elastic stiffness matrix of a tapered member to accommodate

the beam-column effects for a given set of initial forces.

Going back to 3D beam problems, the best known interaction is probably the

phenomenon of torsional (lateral) buckling that is discussed by Timoshenko.3 In

the simplest case, the presence of bending moment about the strong axis of a

beam weakens its effective stiffness about its weak axis (stress softening) leading

eventually to lateral buckling. The presence of axial compression, of course, only

makes matters worse. Biot4 in his classic book discusses another case of interaction

in which axial tension increases the torsional stiffness in a prismatic bar. More

generally, not knowing what to expect from the interaction of the entire initial

state of stress with the member stiffness matrix, only strengthens the need for a

complete 3D beam-column formulation.

September 10, 2002 9:4 WSPC/165-IJSSD 00064

stiffness for 3D beams whose stiffness varies along their axis in a uniform way with

respect to the principal axes. Prismatic beam members have been dealt with in

Ref. 2. Four coupled differential equations are solved numerically using the method

of finite differences. Eisenberger5 uses series expansions in his exact finite element

method to solve equations of this kind. In order to assemble the 6 × 6 member

stiffness matrix (the minimum size that is required) for a 3D beam, this system of

equations must be solved 6 times for each iteration of an incremental analysis rou-

tine. The full 12 × 12 matrix can be then expanded from equilibrium considerations

according to the degrees of freedom of Fig. 1.

2. 3D Beam-Column Equations

The 3D beam-column equations are obtained by subjecting to a small load pertur-

bation a given straight beam that is in equilibrium under given forces. The starting

point is the equilibrium of a 3D beam segment ds that is described in Fig. 2 by

Reissner’s6 force and moment equilibrium as:

ylocal

11 (5) 5 (3)

8

2

7 10 1 (1) 4 (2)

xlocal

9 3

6 (4)

12 (6)

zlocal

Fig. 1. Degrees of freedom for the expanded stiffness matrix (numbers in brackets indicate basic

D.O.F.s).

M(s+ds) t

P(s+ds)

M(s) P(s) p

t m

ds

September 10, 2002 9:4 WSPC/165-IJSSD 00064

P0 + p = 0

(1)

M0 + m + t × P = 0 .

Here P and M are the usual force and moment stress-resultants with p and m

the applied forces and moments and the prime symbol refers to the differentiation

with respect to arc length. The vector t is of course the unit tangent vector that will

also be referred to as for a straight beam. When going from initial to a perturbed

configuration the zero-order equations are assumed to satisfy equilibrium in the i0 ,

j0 , k0 directions and in the initial configuration. These are three force equilibrium

equations [Eqs. (2)–(4) below] and three moment equilibrium equations [Eqs. (5)–

(7) below] written as:

These equations [Eqs. (8)–(13)] are obtained by writing the equilibrium equations

in the perturbed configuration in the i0 , j0 , k0 directions and keeping terms which

are linear in a small parameter ε. The perturbed quantities are described as

P1 = P0 + εP̄

M1 = M0 + εM̄ (14)

i1 = i0 + εī

and the bar is used to highlight the perturbation term. For convenience this small

parameter can then be set to one in which case the terms indicated by bars represent

the full perturbation. Moreover the assumptions of small displacement theory are

September 10, 2002 9:4 WSPC/165-IJSSD 00064

to the space variable x.

Proceeding with the derivation of the 3D beam-column equations [Eqs. (8)–(13)]

the component of form of the stress resultants that are written in the perturbed

state as:

P1 = Px1 i1 + Py1 j1 + Pz1 k1

(15)

M1 = Mx1 i1 + My1 j1 + Mz1 k1

is now inserted into the equilibrium equations [Eq. (1)] and terms collected in each

of the initial coordinate directions i0 , j0 , k0 . Before doing so it is important to

introduce the rotation vector, w, associated with any beam element in order to

determine the perturbed base vectors from

i1 = i0 + εī = i0 + w × i0

j1 = j0 + εj̄ = j0 + w × j0 (16)

k1 = k0 + εk̄ = k0 + w × k0 .

Here use has been made of the fact from rigid body mechanics7 that the change,

(di0 or εi) in a vector i0 undergoing a small rotation w is w × i0 .

If in the initial configuration the beam is straight and lies along the x-axis as

in Fig. 3, for the case of small rotations, w can be written as

vector, δy is the y component of the beam displacement vector, and the comma is

used to indicate differentiation. Thus −δz,x is the y component of the beam rotation

vector and δy,x is the z component of the beam rotation vector. It is now possible

to express the cross products of Eq. (16) in terms of θx , δz,x and δy,x making the

derivation complete.

The next step will combine some of the equilibrium equations [Eqs. (8)–(13)]

to produce a system of four with the displacements δx , δy , δz and θx as unknowns.

Equation (9) can be combined with Eq. (13) by eliminating the shear term P̄y .

Similarly Eq. (10) can be combined with Eq. (12) to eliminate the shear term P̄z .

k1 j1

i1

perturbed

0 configuration

k ,z

j0, y i0, x

initial configuration

September 10, 2002 9:4 WSPC/165-IJSSD 00064

Furthermore at this point all the member loads can be eliminated as not of interest

so that,

m0x = m0y = m0z = m̄x = m̄y = m̄z = 0

(18)

p0x = p0y = p0z = p̄x = p̄y = p̄z = 0 .

This implies that the initial axial thrust and torque, Px0 , Py0 , Pz0 and Mx0 , must be

constant and that the initial bending moments, My0 and Mz0 , can at most be linear

functions of x. This can be seen from Eqs. (2)–(7) that reduce to:

Px00 = Py00 = Pz00 = Mx00 = 0

Mz00 = −Py0

and Eqs. (8)–(13) then reduce to the following four equations:

P̄x0 − Py0 δy,xx − Pz0 δz,xx = 0

(20)

M̄z00 + 2My00 θx,x + Mx0 δz,xxx + My0 θx,xx − Px0 δy,xx = 0

To complete the formulation, four constitutive equations are appended,

P̄x = kx (x)δx,x ; M̄x = kT (x)θx,x ;

(21)

M̄y = −ky (x)δz,xx ; M̄z = kz (x)δy,xx .

Here the k’s are the usual spring constants from considerations of strength of ma-

terials. Some general comments on this system of equations can now be made:

• The last three equations are coupled and must be solved simultaneously. Then

the first equation can be integrated to complete the solution.

• The last two equations are fourth order in the beam displacements (like the linear

elastic beam equations). The other two equations are second order.

• The equations themselves are linear in x since the initial moment diagrams My0 ,

Mz0 may be linear in x.

From considerations of equilibrium it can be argued that the member stiffness

matrix is a 6 × 6 matrix. If the member forces are chosen properly, the terms in the

member stiffness matrix may be computed by introducing sequentially 6 discon-

tinuities into the boundary conditions of the system of the equilibrium equations

[Eq. (20)]. The appropriate unit “displacements” needed for that purpose are:

September 10, 2002 9:4 WSPC/165-IJSSD 00064

• A unit axial discontinuity (δx (L) = 1.0) while the others are held fixed, i = 1.

• A unit torsional discontinuity (θx (L) = 1.0) while the others are held fixed, i = 2.

• Four flexural discontinuities (δz,x (L) = −1.0; δy,x(L) = 1.0; δz,x(0) = −1.0;

δy,x (0) = 1.0; ) while the other held fixed, i = 3, 4, 5, 6 respectively.

Note that the four flexural discontinuities are those which are used in moment

distribution: a unit rotation about an axis of flexure is applied at one end of a

beam while the other end is held fixed. Two beam ends and 2 axes of flexure then

imply four flexural discontinuities.

The 6 × 6 stiffness matrix is first obtained from the displacements that are

computed for each discontinuity, i, from the following relations and then corrected

for deformed geometry:

(22)

M̄zi (L) = (kz (L)δy,xx (L))i

1 1 1

K1i = P̄xi (L); K2i = M̄xi (L); K3i = M̄yi (L)

(23)

1 1 1

K4i = M̄zi (L); K5i = M̄yi (0); K6i = M̄zi (0) .

Transformed components in the perturbed coordinate system P̄x1 (L), M̄x1 (L),

M̄y1 (L), M̄z1 (L), M̄y1 (0), M̄z1 (0), are computed from the components of Eq. (22)

by considering the change in the unit vectors due to a small rotation vector w.

Thus

September 10, 2002 9:4 WSPC/165-IJSSD 00064

0 (L) 0 (L)

P̄x1 (L) P̄x2 (L) P̄x3 (L) + Pz P̄x4 (L) − Py P̄x5 (L) P̄x6 (L)

M̄ 0 (L) 0 (L)

M̄x4 (L) − My

x1 (L) M̄x2 (L) M̄x3 (L) + Mz M̄x5 (L) M̄x6 (L)

0 (L) 0 (L)

M̄y1 (L) M̄y2 (L) − Mz M̄y3 (L) M̄y4 (L) + Mx M̄y5 (L) M̄y6 (L)

k = .

0 (L) 0 (L)

M̄z1 (L) M̄z2 (L) + My M̄z3 (L) − Mx M̄z4 (L) M̄z5 (L) M̄z6 (L)

M̄ 0 (0)

y1 (0) M̄y2 (0) M̄y3 (0) M̄y4 (0) M̄y5 (0) M̄y6 (0) + Mx

M̄z1 (0) M̄z2 (0) M̄z3 (0) M̄z4 (0) 0 (0)

M̄z5 (0) − Mx M̄z6 (0)

(26)

It is appropriate to state here that the 3D beam-column stiffness matrix is

generally nonsymmetrical. This is physically acceptable since equilibrium is required

in the perturbed configuration making the usual energy theorems inapplicable.

As a practical approach, each beam is divided into a number of segments and the

solution of Eq. (20) represented by a finite number of points using the method of

finite differences. If twenty spaces are taken along each beam and use is made of

central differences, introducing fictitious points to handle the boundary conditions

results in 75 simultaneous equations to be solved for every case which involves the

last three of Eq. (20). Once these equations are solved together, the first of Eq. (20)

can be solved. The accuracy in obtaining the stiffness terms is determined by com-

parison with a closed form solution made available using flexibility coefficients easily

attained by applying unit loads to a statically determinate beam. Moreover, the ac-

curacy of using this solution technique for attaining buckling loads is compared to

solutions available in the literature.3

Proceeding with the development of the finite difference formulation for a beam

of varying cross sectional dimensions, central difference approximations are substi-

tuted into Eq. (20) in the following manner. Initially the first derivative of the axial

force and torque and the second derivative of the bending moments are approxi-

mated then Eq. (21) is invoked and finally first, second, third and fourth deriva-

tives of the displacements are transformed with appropriate nodal values. When

performing the first step the following set of equations is obtained:

1

(−(P̄x )n− 12 + (P̄x )n+ 12 ) − Py0 δy,xx − Pz0 δz,xx = 0 (27)

h

1

(−(M̄x )n− 12 + (M̄x )n+ 12 ) − My0 δy,xx − Mz0 δz,xx = 0 (28)

h

1

((M̄z )n−1 − 2(M̄z )n + (M̄z )n+1 ) + 2Py0 θx,x

h2

+Mx0 δz,xxx − Mz0 θx,xx + Px0 δz,xx = 0 (29)

1

((M̄y )n−1 − 2(M̄y )n + (M̄y )n+1 ) + 2Pz0 θx,x

h2

+Mx0 δy,xxx + My0 θx,xx − Px0 δy,xx = 0 . (30)

Invoking Eq. (21) and substituting the central difference approximations

September 10, 2002 9:4 WSPC/165-IJSSD 00064

1

(P̄x )n− 12 = (kx )n− 12 (−(δx )n−1 + (δx )n ) (31)

h

1

(P̄x )n+ 12 = (kx )n+ 12 (−(δx )n + (δx )n+1 ) (32)

h

1

(M̄x )n− 12 = (kT )n− 12 (−θn−1 + θn ) (33)

h

1

(M̄x )n+ 12 = (kT )n+ 12 (−θn + θn+1 ) (34)

h

(kz )n

(M̄z )n = ((δy )n−1 − 2(δy )n + (δy )n+1 ) (35)

h2

(kz )n−1

(M̄z )n−1 = ((δy )n−2 − 2(δy )n−1 + (δy )n ) (36)

h2

(kz )n+1

(M̄z )n+1 = ((δy )n − 2(δy )n+1 + (δy )n+2 ) (37)

h2

(ky )n

(M̄y )n = ((δz )n−1 − 2(δz )n + (δz )n+1 ) (38)

h2

(ky )n−1

(M̄y )n−1 = ((δz )n−2 − 2(δz )n−1 + (δz )n ) (39)

h2

(ky )n+1

(M̄y )n+1 = ((δz )n − 2(δz )n+1 + (δz )n+2 ) (40)

h2

will finally yield the following four finite difference equations corresponding to

Eq. (20).

! ! !

(kx )n+ 12 (kx )n− 12 (kx )n+ 12 (kx )n− 12

Xn+1 − + Xn + Xn−1

h2 h2 h2 h2

! ! ! !

Py0 Py0 Py0 Pz0

− Yn+1 + 2 Yn − Yn−1 − Zn+1

h2 h2 h2 h2

! !

Pz0 Pz0

+2 Zn − Zn−1 = 0 (42)

h2 h2

! ! !

(kT )n+ 12 (kT )n− 12 (kT )n+ 12 (kT )n− 12

θn+1 − + θn + θn−1

h2 h2 h2 h2

! ! ! !

My0 My0 My0 Mz0

− Yn+1 + 2 Yn − Yn−1 − Zn+1

h2 h2 h2 h2

! !

Mz0 Mz0

+2 Zn − Zn−1 = 0 (43)

h2 h2

September 10, 2002 9:4 WSPC/165-IJSSD 00064

! ! ! !

Py0 Mz0 Mz0 Mz0 Py0 Mx0

− 2 θn+1 + 2 θn − − θn−1 + Yn+2

h h h2 h2 h 2h3

! ! !

Mx0 Mx0 Mx0

−2 Yn+1 + 2 Yn−1 − Yn−2

2h3 2h3 2h3

! !

(ky )n+1 2(ky )n 2(ky )n+1 Px0

− Zn+2 + + + 2 Zn+1

h4 h4 h4 h

!

(ky )n−1 2(ky )n (ky )n+1 2Px0

+ − + − − 2 Zn

h4 h4 h4 h

! !

2(ky )n 2(ky )n−1 Px0 (ky )n−1

+ + + 2 Zn−1 − Zn−2 = 0 (44)

h4 h4 h h4

! ! ! !

Pz0 My0 My0 My0 Pz0 Mx0

+ 2 θn+1 − 2 θn + − θn−1 + Zn+2

h h h2 h2 h 2h3

! ! !

Mx0 Mx0 Mx0

−2 Zn+1 + 2 Zn−1 − Zn−2

2h3 2h3 2h3

! !

(kz )n+1 2(kz )n 2(kz )n+1 Px0

+ Yn+2 + − − − 2 Yn+1

h4 h4 h4 h

!

(kz )n−1 2(kz )n (kz )n+1 2Px0

+ − + + 2 Yn

h4 h4 h4 h

! !

2(kz )n 2(kz )n−1 Px0 (kz )n−1

+ − − − 2 Yn−1 + Yn−2 = 0 . (45)

h4 h4 h h4

Here

n =

segment number (node count starts at zero)

h =

space length

(kx )n = EAn =

axial stiffness at node n

(kT )n = GIxn =

torsional stiffness at node n

(ky )n = EIyn =

bending stiffness at node n

(kz )n = EIzn =

bending stiffness at node n

An , Ixn , Iyn , Izn =

area of cross section, polar moment of inertia and moments

of inertia about y and z respectively

E = Young’s modulus

G = Shear modulus

X, Y , Z = δx , δy , δz .

September 10, 2002 9:4 WSPC/165-IJSSD 00064

5. Numerical Example

This section addresses two points for the purpose of establishing some level of

confidence to the finite difference technique that has been presented. The accuracy

of a computed stiffness matrix is discussed and the accuracy of obtaining buckling

loads compared to Timoshenko’s3 closed form results.

The stiffness matrix of a three dimensional beam element with no initial loads

is first computed. Then it is compared to that obtained via the flexibility method

where unit loads are applied to a statically determinate basic element. A pro-

gram coded in FORTRAN accommodates the finite difference equations [Eqs. (38)–

(41)], boundary conditions and fictitious points solving for the displacements at

each nodal point. With these displacements at hand first and second derivatives

are approximated using central differences and stiffnesses computed according to

Eq. (23). The flexibility coefficients and the inverse of the flexibility matrix were

computed using the symbolic algebra program, MAPLE.

For a beam with base dimensions of 0.22 m × 0.6 m, a length of 10.0 m, top

2 2

dimensions of 0.2 m × 0.4 m, E = 2 × 107 t/m , and G = 8 × 106 t/m the stiffness

matrix is given in Fig. 4 and each element contains three values. The top value is

obtained using finite differences, the middle value (the exact value) comes from the

flexibility matrix and the third value is the percentage difference.

The terms in the stiffness matrix were calculated using 50 segments. This choice

was made by studying the convergence characteristics of the stiffness elements as

the number of segments was increased. A convergence plot for K44 is given in Fig. 5

below. It is seen that results with less than 20 segments may be inaccurate. With

20 segments the accuracy is about 0.3% and with 50 segments about 0.06%.

Timoshenko3 provides a closed form solution of the buckling compressive load

for a column of varying moment of inertia. An example having top dimensions of

2063.45

(2063.48) 0 0 0 0 0

(−0.001%)

1201.06

0 (1201.01) 0 0 0 0

(+0.004%)

22924 . 4

8224. 4

0 0 (22921.1) 0 (8240.7 ) 0

(+0.01%) (−0.19%)

K =

3595.62 1508.8

0 0 0 ( 3597 . 88 ) 0 (1510. 8 )

(−0.06%) (−0.13%)

8238.3 11878.7

0 0 (8240.7 ) 0 (11893.8) 0

(−0.03%) (−0.13%)

1508.8 2544.89

0 0 0 (1510.8 ) 0 (2546.79 )

− (+0.07%)

( 0. 13 %)

September 10, 2002 9:4 WSPC/165-IJSSD 00064

3.8

3.6

3.4

stiffness ∗ 10e-3

3.2

3

2.8

2.6

2.4

2.2

2

0 10 20 30 40 50

No. of segments

3.5

3

determinant ∗ 10e-4

2.5

2

1.5

0.5

0

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25

compressive load ∗10e-2

(Timoshenko) (Levy/Gal)

0.1 0.35 0.7463 641.07 641.72 +0.10

0.2 0.3 0.5926 401.33 401.28 −0.01

0.3 0.28 0.459 304 304.l37 +0.12

0.4 0.25 0.5120 249.33 249.25 −0.03

0.5 0.24 0.4630 213.55 213.59 +0.02

0.6 0.22 0.5009 188.09 188.39 +0.16

0.7 0.21 0.4936 168.91 169.19 +0.16

0.8 0.21 0.4319 153.87 153.88 +0.01

0.9 0.205 0.4127 141.67 141.71 +0.03

1.0 0.2 0.4 131.57 131.60 +0.02

September 10, 2002 9:4 WSPC/165-IJSSD 00064

moment of inertia ratios, E = 2 × 107 t/m2 and G = 8 × 106 t/m2 was solved using

the finite difference formulation of Eqs. (38)–(41) and the results are summarized

in Table 1. The buckling load for each ratio of moments of inertia is determined

when the determinant of the tangent stiffness matrix, which is computed for each

load increment, goes to zero. An example of the behavior of the determinant with

the applied load is given in Fig. 6 for the case I1 /I2 = 1.0. The first row of Table 1

contains ten different ratios of top to base moments of inertia. Rows 2 and 3 give

the dimensions of the rectangular cross section at the base of the column. Row 5

has the buckling loads according to Timoshenko.3 Row 6 has the buckling loads

according to this paper (Levy/Gal) and row 7 gives the percent error.

Another example that is presented is that of a simply supported beam under

initial twist. The results are given in Table 2. It is worth noting that for the case

of I1 /I2 = 1.0 Timoshenko3 reports a value of 2π that was obtained here as well.

que for non-uniform lin-

early varying columns

b/h = 0.5.

T I1 /I2

2π 1.0

2.076π 0.906

2.24π 0.823

2.376π 0.683

2.629π 0.572

2.794π 0.48

2.96π 0.41

3.245π 0.301

3.527π 0.197

4.0π 0.1066

4.5

T=0 (classical 2D beam-column) M0xL

4 T=

Normalized Bending Stiffness, k

T=3 E I yIz

3.5

T=4

k=KyL/(EIz)=KzL/(EIy)

3

T=5

2.5

2

T=6

1.5

1

0.5

0

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5

Normalized Compression Load, P*

P* = Px0L2 /(EI y )

September 10, 2002 9:4 WSPC/165-IJSSD 00064

Finally a set of interactions, for a uniform member, showing the effect of twist

on the classical 2D beam-column curves (effect of compressive loads upon bending

moments) are presented in Fig. 7.

6. Conclusions

General nonlinear analysis programs for space frame analysis that possess tangential

stiffness matrices that separate large rotations from 3D beam-column effects may

now incorporate, without difficulty, cases of variable stiffness elements by inserting

the coded subroutine of this paper in place of the usual linear stiffness matrix.

These nonlinear analysis programs will thus possess the ability of determining

buckling loads of rather intrinsic interactions that may result from the 3D states

of stress. The effect of a state of stress (at any increment after convergence) on

the elastic stiffness matrix that is to be used in the next increment may now be

accounted for since this paper can accommodate this general state of initial stress

in its beam-column formulation.

The finite difference formulation for the solution of the coupled 3D beam-column

equations proved rather accurate in determining both the stiffness matrix and buck-

ling loads.

This paper handled examples of beams with linearly varying cross sectional

dimensions but the formulation presented in Eqs. (38)–(41) is quite general for

handling varying axial, torsional and bending (in both directions) stiffnesses.

References

1. J. M. Gere, Moment Distribution, D. Van Nostrand Co., Princeton, New Jersey, 1963.

2. R. Levy and W. R. Spillers, Analysis of Geometrically Nonlinear Structures, Chapman

and Hall, New York, 1994.

3. S. P. Timoshenko, Theory of Elastic Stability, McGraw Hill, New York, 1936.

4. M. A. Biot, Mechanics of Incremental Deformation, John Wiley and Sons, New York,

1965.

5. M. Eisenberger, “An exact element method,” Int. J. Num. Meth. Eng. 30, pp. 363–370,

1990.

6. E. Reissner, “Variational considerations for elastic beams and shells,” J. Eng. Mech.

Div. Proc. ASCE 88(EM1), pp. 23–57, 1962.

7. H. Goldstein, Classical Mechanics, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading,

MA, 1950.

- Cold Formed Cross Section 1Uploaded bySakis
- Strength of MaterialsUploaded byNaresh Stomp
- In Plane Arch Buckling Ofnetwork Arch BridgesUploaded byJuan Pablo Lopez Carrasco
- Exercise4- Buckling of Trussworks-with Yield StressUploaded byNirbhay Tiwary
- Beeam ColumnsUploaded byInno Odira
- Strength Analysis of Hull Structures in TankersUploaded byMahdi
- EM317 - Assignment 2 - Jan-Apr 2018Uploaded bySam Khor
- CE F211Uploaded byVinayak
- SPE-15467 Basic Concepts in Static BHA Analysis for Directional DrillingUploaded bydrilling moneytree
- Handbook os structural stabilityUploaded byGuilherme Monteiro de Carvalho
- Torsion 9Uploaded byCheng Por Eng
- Castellated Beamse28094new DevelopmentsUploaded byDjoko Susilo Jusup
- Thin Shell Buckling Pit-Falls - NASAUploaded byPrasad Pbn
- Attachment a DR&O (2)Uploaded byNono4138
- Behavior and Design of Single AngleUploaded byandyhr
- PlastikUploaded byAidah Amir
- FFUploaded byMuhammad Firdaus
- Experimental Study of Beam–Column Behaviour of Steel Single Angles_Yi LiuUploaded bycici
- Drinkwater SunnibergUploaded byRicardo Diaz Moenen
- Experiments on Castellated Steel BeamsUploaded byLuiz Flávio Vieira Brant
- J. Exp. Bot.-2000-Ennos-2085-93Uploaded byIli Pardo
- 72072_03Uploaded byNhân Nguyễn
- Exemple Calcul FocUploaded byFlavian Gafița
- sssout.pdfUploaded byRrrrrrr
- Castellated Beams - New DevelopmentsUploaded byJetame Poonan
- abhrjul-aug-84-89435-durack.pdfUploaded byyanickdouce5408
- Columns and Strut Notes NewUploaded byNarasimham Guggilla
- Rr322102 Aircraft Structures IIUploaded bygeddam06108825
- Full Text 01Uploaded byGogy
- 72072_tocUploaded byNhân Nguyễn

- Different Views on National SecurityUploaded byEli Cohen
- 83586886 Distribution TransformerUploaded byarnab
- Fanon and the Possibility of Post-Colonial Critical ImaginationUploaded byTigersEye99
- 3 Step Multiplication Trick - A Shortcut Method _ Bank Exams TodayUploaded byVivek Sen Gupta
- Autodesk Robot Structural Analysis Professional 2015 What is NewUploaded byRangel Sonaglio
- DLL_SCIENCE 4_Q3_W2Uploaded bymary grace
- Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives, 10th Edition, Copyright © John C. Hull 2017Uploaded byArindam Paul
- Strategy Implementation and Project ManagementUploaded byapi-3707091
- Arch Day Design Case Study.pdfUploaded bysapiencecorp
- A Cognitive and Social Perspective on the Study of Interactions - Emerging Communication- Studies in New Technologies and PrUploaded byariman_708
- Information Systems ClassesUploaded byrb272013
- QEMU Syborg Workshop September 2009Uploaded bySymbian
- Chemical Engineering Magazine - Feb. 2009 (Malestrom).pdfUploaded byHafizszul Feyzul
- SAT2 Answer KeyUploaded byAndrea Llanto
- Non Linear Dynamics - Cable_tutorial_rev1Uploaded byCostynha
- Xilinx Verilog and CadenceUploaded bymdzakir_hussain
- IndexUploaded byWika Estimation
- Mohammed R SnookUploaded byBechir Mettali
- Barquat PQUploaded byDonatas Bertasius
- National Science Foundation: minutes 10 03Uploaded byNSF
- Military Revolutions and Revolutions in Military AffairsUploaded byÉder Souza
- Leibniz; Determinist, Theist, Idealist - Robert Merrihew Adams.pdfUploaded byZsolt Ziegler
- Micro FeederUploaded byJose Angel Gomez
- E 1049 - 85 R97 _RTEWNDK_Uploaded byNiku Pasca
- 4.0 Trait Approach to Leadership MZ 04 (1)Uploaded byAnonymous xMXvFt
- The Role of organisationUploaded byMadhury Mosharrof
- IITJEE Tips McqsUploaded bypankajbhai1joshi
- (Contributions to the Study of Science Fiction and Fantasy) Martha a. Bartter-The Utopian Fantastic_ Selected Essays From the Twentieth International Conference on the Fantastic in the Arts -Praeger (Uploaded byCarlos A. León
- DP Biometric 13113 DriversUploaded byWarnetmuda
- Cpeo 450 Ds FinalUploaded bymy_scribd_docs