This article was downloaded by:[University of Maine]

On: 1 January 2008

Access Details: [subscription number 784375915]
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal for

Computational Methods in
Engineering Science and Mechanics
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713872093
The Exact Two-Node Timoshenko Beam Finite Element
Using Analytical Bending and Shear Rotation
Interdependent Shape Functions
Ini B. Edem

Online Publication Date: 01 December 2006

To cite this Article: Edem, Ini B. (2006) 'The Exact Two-Node Timoshenko Beam
Finite Element Using Analytical Bending and Shear Rotation Interdependent Shape
Functions', International Journal for Computational Methods in Engineering Science
and Mechanics, 7:6, 425 - 431
To link to this article: DOI: 10.1080/15502280600826381
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15502280600826381

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article maybe used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction,
re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly
forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be
complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be
independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or
arising out of the use of this material.
 International Journal for Computational Methods in Engineering Science and Mechanics, 7:425–431, 2006
Copyright
c Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1550–2287 print / 1550–2295 online
Downloaded By: [University of Maine] At: 17:09 1 January 2008
DOI: 10.1080/15502280600826381
The Exact Two-Node Timoshenko Beam Finite Element
Using Analytical Bending and Shear Rotation
Interdependent Shape Functions
Ini B Edem
Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria
In this paper, the exact two-node Timoshenko beam finite ele-
ment is formulated using a new model for representing beam ro-
tation in a shear deformable beam. An exact relationship between
bending rotation and shear rotation was achieved using an ana-
lytical bending and shear rotation interdependent shape functions
obtained from a consideration of the asymmetrical beam flexural
mode, which is shown to embody bending and shearing kinemat-
ics. These functions enable the total beam cross sectional rotation
to be expressed in terms of bending and shear rotation, and sub-
sequently lead to the use of the usual cubic interpolation and lin-
ear interpolation to model the bending rotation and shear rotation
based beam curvatures respectively. The formulation ensures the
circumvention of the shear-locking phenomenon, permitting com-
plete interaction between bending and shear deformation fields
and thus allows for a straightforward derivation of the exact Tim-
oshenko beam stiffness matrix and consistent nodal load vector as
obtained in classical structural analysis.
Keywords Timoshenko Beam, Exact Timoshenko Beam Stiffness
Matrix, Consistent Load Vector, Beam Slenderness Ratio,
Shear-Locking, First Order Shear Deformation Theory
1. INTRODUCTION
The Euler-Bernoulli beam theory (EBT) frequently used for
the analysis of isotropic beams, which have extensive use in en-
gineering structures, describes beam kinematics completely in
terms of flexural deformation. In neglecting the contribution of
Received 14 July 2005; in final form 31 July 2005.
The author recognizes the tremendous inspiration acquired from the
numerous contributions of Prof. J. N. Reddy to the subject of beam fi-
nite element models. This paper is dedicated to Professor J. N. Reddy
on his 60th birthday.
Address correspondence to Ini B. Edem, P.O. Box 13104, Port
Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria. E-mail: structini@yahoo.co.uk
425
shearing deformation the EBT requires that plane sections re-
main plane and perpendicular to the neutral axis after deforma-
tion. Consequently, this theory is best suited for thin or slender
beams as shear strains have a considerable influence on the defor-
mation of thick beams. A more accurate representation of beam
flexure which allows for the inclusion of shear strains present
in isotropic beams and more suited for thick beam analysis is
the Timoshenko beam theory [1]. This theory, a first order shear
deformation theory (FSDT), relaxes the normality assumption
of plane sections evident in the EBT. By allowing for the inclu-
sion of a constant through thickness shear strain, it violates the
“no-shear” boundary condition at the top and bottom horizontal
beam surfaces, requiring a problem dependent shear correction
factor [2].
Displacement-based beam finite elements founded on the
Timoshenko beam theory have been beset by numerical diffi-
culties in the thin beam limit, such as the shear locking phe-
nomenon. This is characterized as the inability of the beam
to yield zero shear strains as the beam becomes progressively
slender, thus leaving the deformation considerably underesti-
mated. The locking phenomenon is observed when using equal,
particularly linear interpolation polynomial for transverse dis-
placement and sectional rotation. Traditionally, shear locking
has been alleviated using reduced or selective integration. This
basically involves using an integration rule one order less for
the evaluation of the shear stiffness terms while full integration
is used to evaluate the bending stiffness terms [3]. The gen-
esis of the shear locking phenomenon has been ascribed to a
number of causes. Carpenter et al. [4] credited the coupling
between bending and shear rotation in the Timoshenko beam
equations as causing shear locking and suggested that these be
decoupled through the use of appropriate strain fields. Using
the concept of field consistency, Prathap [5, 6] attributed shear
locking to the choice of interpolation functions used for dis-
placement fields, which impose spurious constraints that occur
because the strains developed from the displacement approxi-
mation are inconsistent. Discussions of different interpolation
 426 I. B. EDEM
Downloaded By: [University of Maine] At: 17:09 1 January 2008

schemes for the transverse displacement and sectional rotation interdependent shape functions based on the beam’s geometric
which determine various Timoshenko beam finite element mod- and material parameters to express the total beam cross sectional
els have been given by Reddy [7]. A general view presently held rotation in terms of bending and shear rotation. By so doing we
is that shear locking arises from the independent interpolation enforce the requisite interaction between the aforementioned ro-
of transverse displacement and rotations, which do not allow for tation fields. The following model equation is therefore proposed
required interaction between bending and shear deformation. In as
light of this the option of interdependent interpolation for trans- θ = θ b ϕb + θ s ϕs . (1)
verse displacement and sectional rotation was put forward by
Tessler and Dong [8]. The formulation of interpolation func- Here, θ represents the total beam cross sectional rotation, θb the
tions, which embody certain interdependency between bending bending rotation and θs the average shear rotation in line with
and shear deformation, appears to overcome this phenomenon. FSDT. The symbols ϕb and ϕs are the aforementioned analytical
One such example is the use of interpolation polynomial based interdependent shape functions, which respectively account for
on the exact solution of the Timoshenko beam differential equa- the distribution of bending and shear rotation in the proposed
tion, which has been successfully applied to obtain locking-free shear deformable beam model. Consequently, the sum of ϕb and
superconvergent Timoshenko beam models. Several researchers ϕs must equal unity, ensuring compatibility of model rotations
that have applied the above approach to obtain interdependent θb and θs at the analytical level of abstraction and permitting
interpolation functions and thus obtain locking-free and super a complete recovery of bending rotation when relative values
convergent isotropic beam elements based on FSDT include for the bending/shear geometric and material property impose
Reddy [7] and Friedman & Kotsmatka [9]. Bazoune et al. [10] the slender beam configuration. Derivation of ϕb and ϕs satis-
also used this method to obtain shape functions for an isotropic fying the above conditions can be obtained by considering the
three-dimensional Timoshenko beam. Recently, a locking-free deformation of a beam in asymmetrical bending.
unified beam finite element using a corotational finite element
formulation and based on interdependent functions has been de- 2.1. Beam in Asymmetrical Bending
veloped [11]. These interpolation polynomials are functions of The asymmetrical bending mode can be decomposed to re-
the bending shear stiffness ratio, contain material and geomet- alize the bending and shear rotation present as follows. A beam
rical dependent constants, and allow for interaction of bending having equal anticlockwise moments applied at both ends
and shear deformations fields. (nodes 1 and 2) is said to undergo asymmetrical bending as
In this paper, an exact relationship between bending and a shown in Fig. 1. The equal nodal moments are m 1 and m 2 . The
proposed shear rotation is established using a bending and shear
rotation interdependent shape functions where the interpolation
is performed in the beam slenderness ratio coordinate. These
functions are obtained from a consideration of the asymmetrical
bending mode known to embody bending and shearing kinemat-
ics. Unlike classical structural analysis where bending and shear
rotation are treated separately, the present technique establishes
the relationship between the aforementioned rotations, allowing
for straightforward interpolation of bending curvature using the
usual cubic interpolation polynomial (resulting in linear curva-
ture) and a proposed shear curvature using linear interpolation
polynomials (resulting in constant curvature), respectively. This
approach is seen to circumvent the shear locking phenomenon,
and an exact order of integration can be used to obtain the ex-
act two-noded Timoshenko beam element stiffness matrix and
load vector that would otherwise result from classical structural
analysis.

2. BASIC FORMULATION OF ANALYTICAL MODEL

In traditional strength of materials approach shear and bend-
ing rotations are considered uncoupled, requiring deformation
prediction of shear deformable beams to be obtained from a su-
perposition of bending and shearing components. Consequently,
when considering bending deformation only, one simply ignores
the existence of shearing deformation. In contrast, the approach FIG. 1. Shear deformable beam in asymmetrical bending showing bending
adopted here is to use an analytical bending and shear rotation and shearing kinetics/kinematics.
 THE EXACT TWO-NODE TIMOSHENKO BEAM FINITE ELEMENT 427
Downloaded By: [University of Maine] At: 17:09 1 January 2008

end rotation at node 1 due to m 1 and m 2 is Similar distribution of the shear rotation is given by the relation

m1 L θs1
θb1,1 = . (2) ϕs = . (13)
3E I θs1 + θb1
m2 L
θb1,2 =− . (3) Again using (4) and (10) in (13) we have
6E I

where E is the young’s modulus, I , the moment of inertia and L ϕs = . (14)
1+
the span of the beam. The superscripts i, j refers to the rotation
at node i due to moment applied at node j. The total bending Notice that
rotation at node 1, noting that m 1 is equal to m 2, is thus the
addition of (2) and (3), which is ϕb + ϕs = 1. (15)

mL The bending-shear stiffness factor is

θb1 = . (4)
6E I 12E I
= (16)
From equilibrium considerations a shear force, Q, is induced at L 2 G Ā
nodes 1 and 2. For a beam of rectangular cross section we have,
When shearing deformation is considered, the average cross
sectional shear rotation θs (from FSDT) due to Q is =
1
. (17)
1+ 2κ −1 (1 + υ)(η)2
Q
θs = . (5) where κ is the shear correction factor (5/6), υ, Poisson’s ratio
G Ā
and η a non-dimensionless parameter for the beam slenderness
G is the shear modulus and Ā is the shear area. ratio d/L, d being the depth of the beam. From (15) and (17)
The transverse shear force at node 1 induced by the applied it can be said that in a shear deformable beam element, ϕb and
moments at nodes 1 and 2 are ϕs constitute analytical bending and shear rotation interdepen-
m1 dent shape functions, where the said interpolation is performed
Q= . (6) in the beam slenderness ratio coordinate, η. These functions
L
m2 embody the bending-shear stiffness ratio given by (16), which
Q= . (7)
L in turn is dependent on both bending and shear material and
geometric parameters. Accordingly, the contribution from the
Substituting (6) and (7) into (5) we have the following:
bending rotation field dwdx
and shear rotation field θs (x) to the
m1 total cross-sectional beam rotation field θ (x) of the proposed
θs1,1 = . (8)
LG Ā shear deformable beam model is
m2
θs1,2 = . (9) dw
LG Ā θ (x) = ϕb + θs (x)ϕs . (18)
dx
In the above two equations, the notation of the superscripts de-
where w(x) is the beam transverse displacement field and dw dx
fined earlier still applies. The total shear rotation at node 1 is the
corresponds to the slope of the beam neutral axis and cross sec-
addition of (8) and (9)
tional bending rotation. Notice that when shear is negligible
2m (slender beams) as is occasioned by G Ā → ∞, or η → 0, 
θs1 = . (10) becomes zero, ϕb becomes unity and the total beam cross sec-
LG Ā
tional rotation is the bending rotation θb only. While for thick
2.1.1. Analytical Bending and Shear Rotation Interdependent beams, an explicit value of  uniquely includes the contribution
Shape Function from the shear rotation θs . It is obvious then that by introducing
The distribution of bending rotation θb1 , in the presence of an this interpolation relationship in the model equation, the above
average shear rotation θs1 , in a shear deformable beam element form will allow for a complete recovery of pure bending defor-
can then be written as mation in the thin beam limit without imposing any undesirable
constraint as encountered in the finite element implementation
θb1 of the Timoshenko beam equations where bending and shearing
ϕb = . (11)
θb1 + θs1 deformation are coupled.
From (4) and (10), (11) becomes 2.1.2. Moment-Curvature Equation
1 From elementary strength of materials, the relationship be-
ϕb = . (12) tween a generalized bending moment field M(x) and beam cross
1+
 428 I. B. EDEM
Downloaded By: [University of Maine] At: 17:09 1 January 2008

sectional rotation field θ(x) is given by,

L
M(x)
θ(x) = d x. (19)
0 EI
Using the expression for θ (x) from (18) and substituting in (19)
gives
 
L
dw M(x)
ϕb + θs (x)ϕs = . (20)
dx 0 EI
 
d dw M(x)
ϕb + θs (x)ϕs = . (21)
dx dx EI
FIG. 2. Beam carrying distributed loading showing beam coordinate system.
On expanding the bracket on the left, two distinct moment-
curvature equations can be written 3.1. Weak Form of Differential Equation
Consider an isotropic beam carrying distributed loading q(x)
d 2w dθs applied at the top of the beam as shown in Fig. 2. Using a poten-
E I1 = M1 (x) and E I2 = M2 (x). (22) tial energy approach, we obtain the weak form of the proposed
dx2 dx
beam defined by (22). We proceed as follows. The total potential
where, I1 and I2 are the moment of inertia of a beam, having a energy is obtained by summing the strain energy associated with
modified width b1 = bϕb and b2 = bϕs respectively, b being the the bending curvature and shear curvatures from (22) and (23)
width of the beam. The bending curvature (or beam curvature plus the potential from distributed loading q(x).
from bending deformation field) and “shear curvature” (beam

1 L 
curvature from shear deformation field) in (22) are defined by  = (κb (w), κs (θs )) = (w, θ ) E I1 κb2 d x
2 0

L
L
d 2w dθs 1  
κb = and κs = . (23) + E I2 κs2 d x − q(x)wd x. (27)
dx dx 2 0 0

where κb and κs are the bending and shear curvature respectively

The shear curvature above refers to the curvature obtained if θs
defined earlier.
(the shear rotation) is interpreted as the usual beam rotational
The beam equilibrium equations are obtained considering the
degree of freedom and not the typical shear strain component it
stationary value of the potential energy and taking the variations
also represents. This way, the curvature of a shear deformable
the weak form of the proposed shear deformable beam element
beam is given by two curvature terms, a second order and a first
is
order term in the spatial coordinate x. The above form will be

1 L
seen to circumvent shear locking. d(w, θ) [δw, δθs ] = [δκb E I1 κb ]d x
2 0

L
L
1
+ [δκs E I2 κs ]d x − q(x)δwd x = 0. (28)
3. FINITE ELEMENT FORMULATION 2 0 0
For an element e, in the domain D = (x1 x2 ), a non-
δκb and δκb are weight functions, which in terms of the field
dimensional coordinate ξ is taken to span
variables can be restated as
x̄   2    
0≤ξ = ≤ 1. (24) d w dθs
L δκb = δ , δκs = δ . (29)
dx2 dx
where x̄, is a local beam coordinate, with origin x1 away from the An introduction into virtual work methods and variational prin-
global origin O, as depicted in Fig. 2. Derivatives of a function, ciples can be found in the text by Reddy [12].
(•), with respect to x̄ will be denoted by a prime and when the
function (•) is in terms of ξ , then 3.2. Interpolation Functions
d(•) dξ 1 The choice of interpolation functions for w(x) and θs (x) is
(•) = = . (25) dictated by the variational index in the energy functional ,
dξ d x L
presented in (27). For the bending curvature and shear curva-
Where as earlier stated, tures κb and κs , the value is two and one, respectively. Thus
any admissible displacement w(x) must be continuous and pos-
d(•) sess continuous first derivatives (slopes) while only continuity of
(•) = . (26)
dx θs (x) is required. Consequently the minimum requirements are
 THE EXACT TWO-NODE TIMOSHENKO BEAM FINITE ELEMENT 429
Downloaded By: [University of Maine] At: 17:09 1 January 2008

C 1 continuity ensured by Hermite cubic interpolation functions 3.2.2. Linear Interpolation Functions for θs (x)
for nodal freedoms arising from w and C 0 continuity satisfied Approximating θs (x) using a linear polynomial, results in
by linear lagrangian interpolation for θs . These aforementioned saying
interpolation functions are derived as follows.
θs (x̄) = c1 + c2 x̄. (41)
3.2.1. Hermite Interpolation Functions for w(x) = D T c. (42)
Using a cubic polynomial approximation for w(x) D is the column vector [1 x̄]T , c stands for the column vector of
ci for 1 ≤ i ≤ 2
w(x̄) = a1 + a2 x̄ + a3 x̄ 2 + a4 x̄ 3 . (30)
θ̄s1 = θ1 = θs (0), θ̄s2 = θ̄2 = θs (L). (43)
= H T a. (31)
In (43), a constraint is enforced, ensuring compatibility of nodal
H is the column vector [1 x̄ x̄ 2 x̄ 3 ],T a stands for the column vec- displacements arising from w(x) and θs (x). Consequently, both
tor of ai for 1 ≤ i ≤ 4 and x̄ = x − x1 . The nodal displacements displacement fields recover identical nodal displacements,
are labeled as namely θ1 and θ2 at nodes one and two, respectively.
The vector of nodal displacements is
w̄1 = w(0), w̄2 = θ (0) = θ̄1 ,
w̄3 = w(l), w̄4 = θ (L) = θ̄2 . (32) θ̄ s = [θ̄1 θ̄2 ]T . (44)
Using (43), the relationship between c in terms of θ̄ s is
where θ = dw
dx
and the vector of nodal displacements is
θ̄ s = Sc. (45)
w̄ = [w̄1 θ̄1 w̄2 θ̄2 ]T (33) c = S−1 θ̄ s . (46)
The equations from (32) expresses a in terms of w̄, thus where
   
w̄ = Ca. (34) 1 0 −1 1 0
S= S = (47)
1 L −1/L 1/L
Solving for a
Substitution of (46) in (42) gives
a = C −1 w̄. (35)
θs (x) = N θs θ̄ s (48)
where
The Matrix of linear interpolation functions is
   
1 0 0 0
0 N θs = DS −1 = N1θs N2θs (49)
 1 0 0 
C=  (36) The entries of N θs are
1 L L2 L3 
0 1 2L 3L 3 N1θs = (1 − ξ ), N2θs = ξ. (50)
 
1 0 0 0
 0  3.3. Finite Element Equations
 1 0 0 
C −1 =  (37) Using (38) and (48) the variations in the field variables w(x),
 −3/L 2 −2/L 3/L 2 −1/L  θs (x) and the curvatures, κb ,κs become
2/L 3 1/L 2 −2/L 3 1/L 2
δw = N w δ w̄ and δθs = N θs δ θ̄ s . (51)
Substituting (35) in (31), the following results w θs
δκb = B δ w̄, δκs = B δ θ̄ s . (52)
w
w(x) = N w̄. (38)
where κb and κs in matrix form following from using (38) and
The matrix of Hermite interpolation functions is (48) in (23) is
κb = (N w ) w̄ = Bw w̄, κs = (N θ ) θ̄ s = Bθs θ̄ s . (53)
N w = HC −1 = [N1w N2w N3w N4w ] (39)
Bw and Bθs are the curvature displacement matrix defined by
The entries of N w are the following
        
N1w = (1 − 3ξ 2 + 2ξ 3 ), N2w = −Lξ (1 − ξ )2 , Bw = N1w N2w N3w N4w and
(40)
N3w = ξ (3 − 2ξ )
2
and N4w = Lξ (1 − ξ )
2
B θs
= [(N1θs ) (N2θs ) ]. (54)
 430 I. B. EDEM

Downloaded By: [University of Maine] At: 17:09 1 January 2008

The entries of Bw and Bθs are: 1

f =
e
q(x)(N w )T Ldξ . (64)
0
1 1
B1w = 2 (−6 + 12ξ ), B2w = 2 (6Lξ − 4L), The assembled beam element stiffness matrix K e has the form
L L
w 1 w 1
B3 = 2 (6 − 12ξ ) and B4 = 2 (6Lξ − 2L). (55) K e = K eκb + K eκs . (65)
L L
and In algebraic form, the finite element equation to be solved in
(61) and (62) is
−1 1
B1θs = and B2θs = . (56) e
L L K e d¯ − f e = 0. (66)
Introducing the approximations from (51), (52) and (53) in e
d¯ is the vector of nodal displacement for the assembled beam
the weak form in (28) element given as

1
1
 θs   e
[(Bw δ w̄)E I1 Bw w̄]Ldξ + B δ θ̄ s E I2 Bθs θ s Ldξ d¯ = [w̄1 θ̄1 w̄2 θ̄2 ]T . (67)
0 0

1 For a constant value of E I1 and E I2 , and integrating exactly the
− q(x)(N w )T δ w̄ Ldξ = 0. (57) integrals in (63) noting that E I1 = E I ϕb and E I2 = E I ϕs , we
0
obtain the following
Rearranging (57),  

1 12 6L −12 6L
(δ w̄) T
[(Bw )T E I1 Bw w̄]Ldξ + (δ θ̄ s )T E I ϕb 
 6L 4L 2 6L 2L 2 
0 K eκb =   . (68)

1
1 L 3  −12 −6L 12 −6L 
θs T θs
× [(B ) E I2 B θ̄ s ]Ldξ − (δ w̄) q(x)(N w )T Ldξ = 0. 6L 2L 2 −6L 4L 2
0 0  
(58) E I ϕs 1 −1
K eκs = . (69)
L −1 1
The following two equations evident in (58) are

1 Using (68) and (69) in (65)
(δ w̄)T [(Bw )T E I1 Bw w̄]Ldξ − (δ w̄)  

1
0 12 6L −12 6L
 ϕs ϕs 
× q(x)(N w )T Ldξ = 0. (59) E I ϕb  6L 4L + L 2
2
6L 2L 2 − L 2 
 ϕb ϕb 
0

1 K =
e
 .
L3  −12 −6L 12 −6L 
(δ θ̄ s ) T
[(Bθs )T E I2 Bθs θ̄ s ]Ldξ = 0. (60)  ϕs ϕs 2 
6L 2L − L 2
2
−6L 4L + L
2
0
ϕb ϕb
Noting that δ w̄ and δ θ̄ s are arbitrary or virtual, from (59) and (70)
(60) we write

1
1 Using (10) and (11) in (70), the following form is written
w T w
[(B ) E I1 B w̄]Ldξ − q(x)(N w )T Ldξ = 0. (61) EI
0 0 Ke = 3

1 L (1 + )
[(Bθs )T E I2 Bθs θ̄ s ]Ldξ = 0.  
(62) 12 6L −12 6L
0
 6L 4L + L 2
2
2L 2 − L 2 
 6L 
Equation (61) and (62) represent a set of two matrix equations × .
 −12 −6L 12 −6L 
having four and two simultaneous equations, respectively, to be
solved for the unknown nodal displacement vectors w̄ and θ̄ s 6L 2L 2 − L 2 −6L 4L 2 + L 2
respectively. Evidently, from (61) and (62) the stiffness matrices (71)
from linear varying curvature K eκb and constant curvature K eκs
and the load vector f e are The consistent load vector (in the case of a uniformly distributed
load) is, upon simplification of f e in (64),

1  
K eκb = [(Bw )T E I1 Bw ]Ldξ and K eκs 
 6 
0 qL  L 

1 f =
e
. (72)
12  6 
= [(Bθs )T E I2 Bθs ]Ldξ . (63)  
0
−L
 THE EXACT TWO-NODE TIMOSHENKO BEAM FINITE ELEMENT 431
Downloaded By: [University of Maine] At: 17:09 1 January 2008

The resulting system of linear algebraic equation can be written dimensional locking-free curved beam element was developed
as by Zhu and Meguid [14]. Locking-free plate and shell finite ele-
  ments are very much desired and the recent paper of Reddy and
12 6L −12 6L
 6L Arciniega [15] provides some answers in this regard.
EI  4L 2 + L 2 6L 2L 2 − L 2 

 
L (1 + )  −12
3 −6L 12 −6L 
REFERENCES
6L 2L 2 − L 2 −6L 4L 2 + L 2 1. Timoshenko, S., “On the correction for shear of differential equation for
   

 w̄1 
 
 6 
transverse vibrations of prismatic bars,” Philos. Mag. 6, 744 (1921).
  qL   2. Wang, C. M., Reddy, J. N., and Lee, K. H. Shear Deformable Beams and
θ̄2 L
× = · (73) Plates-Relationships with Classical Solutions, Elsevier Science, New York

 w̄2 
 12 
 6  (2000).
   
θ̄2 −L 3. Averill, R. C., and Reddy, J. N., “On the behaviour of plate elements based
on the first-order theory,” Engrg. Comput. 7, 57 (1990).
The beam stiffness matrix in (71) is in complete agreement with 4. Carpenter, N., Belytschko, T., Stolarski, H., “Locking and shear scaling
the Timoshenko beam stiffness matrix derived by Przemeniecki factors in C0 bending elements,” Comput. Struct. 22, 39 (1986).
[13] and by Friedman and Kotsmatka [9]. An interesting note 5. Prathap, G., “Field-consistency and violent stress oscillations in the finite
element method,” Int. J. Numer. Meth. 24, 2017 (1987).
is, while the stiffness matrix is identical to those derived by the
6. Prathap, G., “Reduced integration and the shear flexible beam element,” Int.
aforementioned authors, the expression in (64) for the consistent J. Numer. Meth.18, 195 (1982).
load vector yields the same Euler-Bernoulli nodal load vector 7. Reddy, J. N., “On locking–free shear deformable beam finite elements,”
for all load configuration and does not contain , the bending- Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng. 149, 113 (1997).
shear stiffness factor. This again is in agreement with the nodal 8. Tessler, A., and Dong, S. B., “On a hierarchy of conforming Timoshenko
beam elements,” Comput. Struct. 14, 335 (1981).
vector obtained if the equation in (66) for a straight Timoshenko
9. Friedman, Z., and Kosmatka, J. B., “An improved two node Timoshenko
beam is derived using a virtual work approach. beam finite element,” Comput. Struct. 47, 473 (1993).
10. Bazoune, A., Khulief, Y. A., and Stephen, N. G., “Shape functions of three-
4. CONCLUDING REMARKS dimensional Timoshenko beam element,” J. Sound Vibr. 259, 473 (2003).
In this paper, the exact locking-free two-noded Timoshenko 11. Urthaler, Y., and Reddy, J. N., “A corotational finite element formulation
beam finite element has been formulated. An analytical rela- for the analysis of planar beams,” Comm. Numer. Methods Engrg. In Press.
12. Reddy, J. N., Mechanics of Laminated Composite Plates and Shells: Theory
tionship between bending and a proposed shear rotation was es- and Analysis, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, Second Edition, (2004).
tablished. In contrast to the Timoshenko beam equations where 13. Przemieniecki, S., Theory of Matrix Structural Analysis, McGraw-Hill,
bending and shear deformation are coupled, the use of this re- New York (1968), p. 70.
lationship in the beam flexural equation leads to a decoupled 14. Zhu, Z. H., and Meguid, S. A., “Analysis of three-dimensional locking-free
system of bending and shear rotation based curvature fields mod- curved beam element,” Int. J. Comp. Meth. Engng. Sci. Mech. (formerly Int.
J. Comp. Engng. Sci.), 5(3), 535–556 (2004).
eled using cubic and linear interpolation function. Consequently, 15. Reddy, J. N., and Arciniega, R., “Shear deformation plates and shell theo-
we show that bending of a shear deformable beam comprises ries: Stavsky to present,” Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures,
of linear varying and constant curvature/strain modes. A three- 11(6), 535–582 (2004).