Sie sind auf Seite 1von 30

.

9

The TL Timoshenko Plane Beam Element

9–1

Chapter 9: THE TL TIMOSHENKO PLANE BEAM ELEMENT

92

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

§9.1. Introduction 9–3 §9.2. Beam Models 9–3 §9.2.1. Basic Concepts and Terminology . . .
§9.1.
Introduction
9–3
§9.2.
Beam Models
9–3
§9.2.1.
Basic Concepts and Terminology
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9–3
§9.2.2.
Mathematical Models: Classical and Timoshenko
.
.
.
.
.
9–4
§9.2.3.
Finite Element Models
.
Bernoulli-Euler versus Timoshenko Beam Elements
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9–5
§9.2.4.
.
.
.
.
9–7
§9.3.
X -Aligned Reference Configuration
9–9
§9.3.1.
Element Description
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9–9
§9.3.2.
Motion
.
Displacement Interpolation
Strain-Displacement Relations
*Consistent Linearization
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9–9
§9.3.3.
9–12
§9.3.4.
9–12
§9.3.5.
9–13
§9.4.
Arbitrary Reference Configuration
9–14
§9.4.1.
Strain-Displacement Matrix
Constitutive Equations
Strain Energy
9–14
§9.4.2.
9–15
§9.4.3.
9–16
§9.5.
The Internal Force
9–16
§9.6.
The Stiffness Matrix
9–17
§9.6.1.
The Material Stiffness Matrix
Eliminating Shear Locking by RBF
The Geometric Stiffness Matrix
9–17
§9.6.2.
9–18
§9.6.3.
9–19
§9.7.
A Commentary on the Element Performance
Summary
Exercises
9–21
§9.8.
9–22
§9.
9–23

92

93

§9.2 BEAM MODELS

§9.1.

Introduction

In the present Chapter the Standard Formulation of Total Lagrangian (TL) kinematics is used to

derive the nite element equations of a two-node Timoshenko plane beam element. This derivation

is more typical of the general case. It is still short, however, of the enormous complexity involved,

for instance, in the FEM analysis of nonlinear three-dimensional beams or shells. In fact the latter

are still doctoral thesis topics.

In the formulation of the bar element in Chapter 8, advantage was taken of the direct expression of

the axial strain in terms of reference and current element lengths. That shortcut bypasses the use

of displacement gradients and coordinate transformations. The simplication works equally well

for bars in three-dimensional space.

A more systematic but lengthier procedure is unavoidable with more complicated elements. The

procedure requires going through the displacement gradients to construct a strain measure. Some- times this measure is too complex and must be simplied while retaining physical correctness. Then the stresses are introduced and paired with strains to form the strain energy function of the element. Repeated differentiations with respect to node displacements yield the expressions of the internal force vector and tangent stiffness matrix. Finally, a transformation to the global coordinate system may be required.

In

addition to giving a better picture of the general procedure, the beam element offers an illustration

of

the treatment of rotational degrees of freedom.

§9.2.

Beam Models

§9.2.1. Basic Concepts and Terminology

Beams represent the most common structural component found in civil and mechanical structures. Because of their ubiquity they are extensively studied, from an analytical viewpoint, in Mechanics

of Materials courses. Such a basic knowledge is assumed here. The following material recapitulates

denitions and concepts that are needed in the nite element formulation.

A beam is a rod-like structural member that can resist transverse loading applied between its

supports. By rod-likeit is meant that one of the dimensions is considerably larger than the other two. This dimension is called the longitudinal dimension and denes the longitudinal direction or axial direction. Directions normal to the longitudinal directions are called transverse. The intersection of planes normal to the longitudinal direction with the beam are called cross sections, just as for bar elements. The beam longitudinal axis is directed along the longitudinal direction and passes through the centroid of the cross sections. 1 .

Beams may be used as isolated structures. But they can also be combined to form framework structures. This is actually the most common form of high-rise building construction. Individual beam components of a framework are called members, which are connected at joints. Frameworks

1 If the beam is built of several materials, as in the case of reinforced concrete, the longitudinal axis passes through the centroid of a modied cross section. The modied-area technique is explained in elementary courses of Mechanics of Materials

93

Chapter 9: THE TL TIMOSHENKO PLANE BEAM ELEMENT

94

Chapter 9: THE TL TIMOSHENKO PLANE BEAM ELEMENT 9 – 4 reference configuration motion current configuration

reference configuration

motion current configuration Figure 9.1. A geometrically nonlinear plane framework structure.
motion
current configuration
Figure 9.1.
A geometrically nonlinear plane framework structure.

can be distinguished from trusses by the fact that their joints are sufciently rigid to transmit bending moments between members.

In practical structures beam members can take up a great variety of loads, including biaxial bending,

transverse shears, axial forces and even torsion. Such complicated actions are typical of spatial

beams, which are used in three-dimensional frameworks and are subject to forces applied along arbitrary directions.

A plane beam resists primarily loading applied in one plane and has a cross section that is symmetric

with respect to that plane. Plane frameworks, such as the one illustrated in Figure 9.1, are assemblies

of plane beams that share that symmetry. Those structures can be analyzed with two-dimensional

idealizations.

A beam is straight if the longitudinal direction is a straight line. A beam is prismatic if the cross

section is uniform. Only straight, prismatic, plane beams will be considered in this Chapter.

§9.2.2. Mathematical Models: Classical and Timoshenko

Beams are actually three-dimensional solids. One-dimensional mathematical models of plane beams are constructed on the basis of beam theories. All such theories involve some form of

approximation that describes the behavior of the cross sections in terms of quantities evaluated at the longitudinal axis. More precisely, the element kinematics of a plane beam is completely dened

if the following functions are given: the axial displacement u X (X ), the transverse displacement

u Y (X ) and the cross section rotation θ Z (X ) θ(X ), where X denotes the longitudinal coordinate

in the reference conguration. See Figure 9.2.

Two beam models are in common use in structural mechanics:

Euler-Bernoulli (EB) Model. This is also called classical beam theory or the engineering beam theory and is the one covered in elementary treatments of Mechanics of Materials. This model accounts for bending moment effects on stresses and deformations. Transverse shear forces are recovered from equilibrium but their effect on beam deformations is neglected. Its fundamental assumption is that cross sections remain plane and normal to the deformed longitudinal axis. This

94

95

§9.2 BEAM MODELS

θ Z (X) ≡ θ(X) current configuration Current cross section Y, y motion u Y
θ Z (X) ≡ θ(X)
current configuration
Current
cross section
Y, y
motion
u Y (X)
X , x
u X (X)
reference configuration
Reference
X
cross section

Figure 9.2.

Denition of beam kinematics in terms of the three displacement functions u X (X), u Y (X ) and θ(X ). The gure actually depicts the EB model kinematics. In the Timoshenko model, θ(X ) is not constrained by normality (see next gure).

rotation occurs about a neutral axis that passes through the centroid of the cross section.

Timoshenko Model. This model corrects the classical beam theory with rst-order shear deformation effects. In this theory cross sections remain plane and rotate about the same neutral axis as the EB model, but do not remain normal to the deformed longitudinal axis. The deviation from normality is produced by a transverse shear that is assumed to be constant over the cross section.

Both the EB and Timoshenko models rest on the assumptions of small deformations and linear- elastic isotropic material behavior. In addition both models neglect changes in dimensions of the cross sections as the beam deforms. Either theory can account for geometrically nonlinear behavior due to large displacements and rotations as long as the other assumptions hold.

§9.2.3. Finite Element Models

To carry out the geometrically nonlinear nite element analysis of a framework structure, beam members are idealized as the assembly of one or more nite elements, as illustrated in Figure 9.3. The most common elements used in practice have two end nodes. The i th node has three degrees of freedom: two node displacements u Xi and u Yi , and one nodal rotation θ i , positive counterclockwise in radians, about the Z axis. See Figure 9.4.

The cross section rotation from the reference to the current conguration is called θ in both models. In the BE model this is the same as the rotation ψ of the longitudinal axis. In the Timoshenko

95

Chapter 9: THE TL TIMOSHENKO PLANE BEAM ELEMENT

96

current configuration

motion
motion

finite element idealization of current configuration

motion finite element idealization of current configuration reference configuration finite element idealization of
motion finite element idealization of current configuration reference configuration finite element idealization of

reference configuration

of current configuration reference configuration finite element idealization of reference configuration
of current configuration reference configuration finite element idealization of reference configuration
of current configuration reference configuration finite element idealization of reference configuration
of current configuration reference configuration finite element idealization of reference configuration
of current configuration reference configuration finite element idealization of reference configuration
of current configuration reference configuration finite element idealization of reference configuration
of current configuration reference configuration finite element idealization of reference configuration
of current configuration reference configuration finite element idealization of reference configuration
of current configuration reference configuration finite element idealization of reference configuration
of current configuration reference configuration finite element idealization of reference configuration

finite element idealization of reference configuration

Figure 9.3.

Idealization of a geometrically nonlinear beam member (as taken, for example, from a plane framework structure like the one in Figure 9.1) as an assembly of nite elements.

(a) C (BE) model 1 θ 2 θ 1 Y, y u Y2 u Y1
(a) C (BE) model
1
θ 2
θ 1
Y, y
u Y2
u Y1
X, x
u X1
u X2
1
2
(b) C 0 (Timoshenko) model θ 2 θ 1 u Y2 u Y1 u X1
(b) C
0 (Timoshenko) model
θ 2
θ 1
u Y2
u Y1
u X1
u X2
1
2

Figure 9.4.

Two-node beam elements have six DOFs, regardless of the model used.

model, the difference γ¯ = ψ θ is used as measure of mean shear distortion. 2 These angles are illustrated in Figure 9.5.

Either the EB or the Timoshenko model may be used as the basis for the element formulation. Supercially it appears that one should select the latter only when shear effects are to be considered, as in deep beamswhereas the EB model is used for ordinary beams. But here a twistappear because of nite element considerations. This twist is one that has caused signicant confusion among FEM users over the past 25 years.

2 It is ψ θ instead of θ ψ because of sign convention, to make e XY positive.

96

97

§9.2 BEAM MODELS

normal to reference

beam axis X normal to deformed beam axis ψ θ 90 ◦ ψ ds γ
beam axis X
normal to deformed
beam axis
ψ
θ
90 ◦
ψ
ds
γ _ = ψ−θ

direction of deformed cross section

_

// X (X = X)

Note: in practice γ << θ; typically 0.1% or less. The magnitude

of γ is grossly exaggerated in the figure for visualization convenience.

_

_

Figure 9.5. Denition of total section rotation θ and BE section rotation ψ in the Timoshenko beam model. The mean shear deformation is γ¯ = θ ψ, which is constant over the cross section. For small deformations of typical engineering materials γ¯ << 1; for example, typical values for |γ¯ | are O(10 4 ) radians whereas rotations ψ and θ may be of the order of several radians.

Although the Timoshenko beam model appears to be more complex because of the inclusion of shear deformation, nite elements based on this model are in fact simpler to construct! Here are the two main reasons:

(i)

Separate kinematic assumptions on the variation of cross-section rotations are possible, as made evident by Figure 9.5. Mathematically: θ(X ) may be assumed independenltly of u X (X) and u Y (X ). As a consequence, two-node Timoshenko elements may use linear variations in both displacement and rotations. On the other hand a two-node EB model requires a cubic polynomial for u Y (X ) because the rotation θ(X ) is not independent.

(ii)

The linear transverse displacement variation matches that commonly assumed for the axial deformation (bar-like behavior). The transverse and axial displacements are then said to be consistent.

The simplicity is even more important in geometrically nonlinear analysis, as strikingly illustrated in the two-node elements depicted in Figure 9.6. Although as shown in that gure both of these elements have six degrees of freedom, the internal kinematics of the Timoshenko model is far simpler.

§9.2.4. Bernoulli-Euler versus Timoshenko Beam Elements

In the FEM literature, a BE-based model such as the one shown in Figure 9.4(a) is called a C 1 beam because this is the kind of mathematical continuity achieved in the longitudinal direction when a beam member is divided into several elements (cf. Figure 9.3). On the other hand the Timoshenko-based element shown in Figure 9.4(b) is called a C 0 beam because both transverse displacements, as well as the rotation, preserve only C 0 continuity.

97

Chapter 9: THE TL TIMOSHENKO PLANE BEAM ELEMENT

98

2-node C 1 (cubic) element for Euler-Bernoulli beam model: plane sections remain plane and normal
2-node
C 1
(cubic) element
for Euler-Bernoulli beam model:
plane sections remain plane and
normal to deformed longitudinal axis
(a)
2-node linear-displacement-and-rotations C 0 element for Timoshenko beam model: plane sections remain plane but not
2-node linear-displacement-and-rotations
C 0
element for Timoshenko beam model:
plane sections remain plane but not
normal to deformed longitudinal axis
(b)
C 1
element
with same DOFs
longitudinal axis (b) C 1 element with same DOFs Figure 9.6. Sketch of the kinematics of

Figure 9.6.

Sketch of the kinematics of two-node beam nite element models based on (a) Euler-Bernoulli beam theory, and (b) Timoshenko beam theory. These models are called C 1 and C 0 beams, respectively, in the FEM literature.

What would be the rst reaction of an experienced but old-fashioned (i.e, never heard about FEM) structural engineer on looking at Figure 9.6? The engineer would pronounce the C 0 element unsuitable for practical use. And indeed the kinematics looks strange. The shear distortion implied by the drawing appears to grossly violate the basic assumptions of beam behavior. Furthermore, a huge amount of shear energy would be require to keep the element straight as depicted.

The engineer would be both right and wrong. If the two-node element of Figure 9.6(b) were constructed with actual shear properties and exact integration, an overstiff model results. This phenomenom is well known in the FEM literature and receives the name of shear locking. To avoid locking while retaining the element simplicity it is necessary to use certain computational devices. The most common are:

1. Selective integration for the shear energy.

2. Residual energy balancing.

These devices will be used without explanation in some of the derivations of this Chapter. For detailed justication the curious reader may consult advanced FEM books such as Hughes. 3

In this Chapter the C 0 model will be used to illustrated the TL formulation of a two-node, geomet- rically nonlinear beam element.

Remark 9.1. As a result of the application of the aforementioned devices the beam element behaves like a BE beam although the underlying model is Timoshenkos. This represents a curious paradox: shear deformation

3 T. J. R. Hughes, The Finite Element Method, Prentice-Hall, 1987.

98

99

§9.3 X -ALIGNED REFERENCE CONFIGURATION

is used to simplify the kinematics, but then most of the shear is removed to restore the correct stiffness. 4 As a result, the name C 0 elementis more appropriate than Timoshenko elementbecause capturing the actual shear deformation is not the main objective.

Remark 9.2. The two-node C 1 beam element is used primarily in linear structural mechanics. (It is in fact the beam model used in the Introduction to FEMcourse.) This is because some of the easier-construction advantages cited for the C 0 element are less noticeable, while no articial devices to eliminate locking are needed. The C 1 element is also called the Hermitian beam element because the shape functions are cubic polynomials specied by Hermite interpolation formulas.

§9.3.

X-Aligned Reference Conguration

§9.3.1. Element Description

We consider a two-node, straight, prismatic C 0 plane beam element moving in the (X, Y ) plane, as depicted in Figure 9.7(a). For simplicity in the following derivation the X axis system is initially aligned with the longitudinal direction in the reference conguration, with origin at node 1. This assumption is relaxed in the following section, once invariant strain measured are obtained.

The reference element length is L 0 . The cross section area A 0 and second moment of inertia I 0 with respect to the neutral axis 5 are dened by the area integrals

A 0 = A 0 d A,

A 0 Y dA = 0,

I 0 = A 0 Y 2 d A,

(9.1)

In the current conguration those quantities become A, I and L, respectively, but only L is frequently used in the TL formulation. The material remains linearly elastic with elastic modulus E relating the stress and strain measures dened below.

As in the previous Chapter the identication superscript (e) will be omitted to reduce clutter until it is necessary to distinguish elements within structural assemblies.

The element has the six degrees of freedom depicted in Figure 9.4. These degrees of freedom and the associated node forces are collected in the node displacement and node force vectors

u =

u

u

X1

Y1

1

X2

Y2

2

θ

u

u

θ

,

f =

f

X1

f

Y1

f

θ1

f

X2

f

Y2

f

θ2

.

(9.2)

The loads acting on the nodes will be assumed to be conservative.

4 The FEM analysis of plates and shells is also rife with such paradoxes.

5 For a plane prismatic beam, the neutral axis at a particular section is the intersection of the cross section plane X = constant with the plane Y = 0.

99

Chapter 9: THE TL TIMOSHENKO PLANE BEAM ELEMENT

910

(a) (b) L _ Y, y θ = ψ − γ θ(X) 2 2 P(x,y)
(a)
(b)
L
_
Y, y
θ = ψ − γ
θ(X)
2
2
P(x,y)
ψ
x
x
C(x
,y
C(X+u ,u )
C )
C
C
C
X
Y
y
1
1
u YC
u YP
y
C
u
Y (X) = u
YC
X
u
XC
(X) = u
X u
X
XC
P (X,Y)
o
u
XP
X, x
Y
C (X)
1
o
2
1
C (X,0)
o
2
C 0
L
o

Figure 9.7.

Lagrangian kinematics of the C 0 beam element with X -aligned reference conguration: (a) plane beam moving as a two-dimensional body; (b) reduction of motion description to one dimension measured by coordinate X .

§9.3.2. Motion

The kinematic assumptions of the Timoshenko model element have been outlined in §9.2.2. Ba- sically they state that cross sections remain plane upon deformation but not necessarily normal to the deformed longitudinal axis. In addition, changes in cross section geometry are neglected.

To analyze the Lagrangian kinematics of the element shown in Figure 9.6(a), we study the motion of a particle originally located at P 0 (X, Y ). The particle moves to P(x, y) in the current conguration. The projections of P 0 and P along the cross sections at C 0 and C upon the neutral axis are called C 0 (X, 0) and C(x C , y C ), respectively. We shall assume that the beam cross section dimensions do not change, and that the shear distortion γ << 1 so that cos γ can be replaced by 1. Then

x

y = y C +

= x C Y (sin ψ + sin γ cos ψ) = x C Y [sin+ γ) + (1 cos γ) sin ψ] = x C Y sin θ,

.

Y (cos ψ sin γ sin ψ) = y C

+ Y [cos+ γ) + (1 cos γ) cos ψ] = y C + Y cos θ.

.

(9.3)

But x C = X + u XC and y C = u XC . Consequently x = X + u XC Y sin θ and y = u YC + Y cos θ.

From now we shall call u XC and u YC simply u X and u Y , respectively, so that the Lagrangian representation of the motion is

x y = X + u X Y sin θ u Y + Y cos θ

910

(9.4)

911

§9.3 X -ALIGNED REFERENCE CONFIGURATION

in which u X , u Y and θ are functions of X only. This concludes the reduction to a one-dimensional model, as sketched in Figure 9.7(b).

For future use below it is convenient to dene an extendedinternal displacement vector w, and its gradient or X derivative:

w = u X (X)

θ(X)

u Y (X) ,

w = dw d X

=

du X /d X

X

du Y /d

dθ/d X

= u

u

X

Y

θ

,

(9.5)

in which primes denote derivatives with respect to X . The derivative θ is also as κ, which has the meaning of beam curvature in the current conguration. Also useful are the following differential relations

1 + u X = s cos ψ,

u Y

= s sin ψ,

s =

ds

d X

= (1 + u X ) 2 + (u Y ) 2 ,

(9.6)

in which ds is the differential arclength in the current conguration; see Figure 9.5. If u X and u are constant over the element,

Y

s = L/L 0 ,

1 + u X = L cos ψ/L 0 ,

u Y = L sin ψ/L 0 .

(9.7)

Remark 9.3. The replacement of 1 cos γ by zero in (9.3) is equivalent to saying that Y (1 cos γ) can be neglected in comparison to other cross section dimensions. This is consistent with the uncertainty in the cross section changes, which would depend on the normal stress and Poissons ratio effects. The motion expression (9.4) has the virtue of being purely kinematic and of leading to (exactly) e YY = 0.

911

Chapter 9: THE TL TIMOSHENKO PLANE BEAM ELEMENT

912

§9.3.3. Displacement Interpolation

For a 2-node C 0 element it is natural to express the displacements and rotation functions as linear in the node displacements:

 u X1   u Y1 w = u X (X) 2 1 −
u X1
u Y1
w = u X (X)
2 1 − ξ
0
01 + ξ
0
0
θ 1
1
u Y (X) =
0
01 + ξ
0
 = N u,
1 − ξ
0
u X2
θ(X)
0
01 − ξ
0
01 + ξ 
u Y2
θ 2

(9.8)

in which ξ = (2X/L 0 ) 1 is the isoparametric coordinate that varies from ξ = −1 at node 1 to ξ = 1 at node 2. Differentiating this expression with respect to X yields the gradient interpolation:

u X1

u Y1

θ

0

1001

 

Y2

 

u

θ

2

w = u

u

X

Y

=

1

L

0 1

0

0

1

0

0

0

100

010

u

θ 1

X2

L 0 − 1 0 0 − 1 0 0 0 100 010   

  = G u.

(9.9)

§9.3.4. Strain-Displacement Relations

The deformation matrix of the motion (9.4) is

F =

x

X

y

X

x

Y

y

Y

= 1 + u X Y κ cos θ

u Y Y

κ

sin θ

sin θ cos θ

(9.10)

where primes denote derivatives with respect to X , and κ = θ . The displacement gradient matrix is 6

(9.11)

G F = F I = u u X Y − − Y Y κ κ

cos θ

sin θ

sin θ cos θ

1 ,

from which the Green-Lagrange (GL) strain tensor follows:

e

= e X

X

e Y X

e XY

YY

e

= 2 (F T F I) = 2 (G F + G T F ) +

1

1

1

2

G T F G F

= 2 2(u X Y κ cos θ) + (u X Y κ cos θ) 2 +

1

(1 + u X ) sin θ + u Y cos θ

(u Y Y κ sin θ) 2

(1 + u X ) sin θ + u Y cos θ

0

(9.12)

It is seen that the only nonzero strains are the axial strain e X X and the shear strain e XY +e Y X = 2e XY , whereas e YY vanishes. Through the consistent-linearization techniques described in the subsection

6 This is denoted by G F to avoid clash with the shape function gradient matrix G = N introduced in (9.9).

912

913

§9.3 X -ALIGNED REFERENCE CONFIGURATION

below, it can be shown that under the small-strain assumptions made precise therein, the axial strain e X X can be replaced by the simpler form

(9.13)

in which all quantities appear linearly except θ . The nonzero axial and shear strains will be arranged in the strain vector

e X X = (1 + u X ) cos θ + u Y sin θ Y κ 1,

e =

e

e

2 =
1

XY = (1 + u X ) cos θ + u Y sin θ Y θ 1 = e Yκ

e X X

2e

(1 + u X ) sin θ + u Y cos θ

γ

.

The three strain quantities introduced in (9.14):

(9.14)

e = (1 + u X ) cos θ + u Y sin θ 1,

γ = −(1 + u X ) sin θ + u Y cos θ,

κ = θ ,

(9.15)

characterize axial strains, shear strains and curvatures, respectively. These are collected in the following generalized strain vector:

(9.16)

Because of the assumed linear variation in X of u X (X), u Y (X ) and θ(X ), e and γ only depend on θ whereas κ is constant over the element. Making use of the relations (9.7) one can express e and γ in the geometrically invariant form

h T

= [ e

γ

κ ]

1 + e = s cosψ) =

L cos γ¯ ,

L 0

γ = −s sinψ) = L sin γ¯ L 0

(9.17)

L 0 , but these simplicationsactually

In theory one could further reduce e to L/L 0 and γ to Lγ/¯

complicate the strain variations taken in the following Section.

§9.3.5. *Consistent Linearization

The derivation of the consistent linearization (9.14) is based on the following study, known in continuum mechanics as a polar decomposition analysis of the deformation gradient. Introduce the matrix

(α) = cos sin α α

sin α cos α

(9.18)

which represents a two-dimensional rotation (about Z ) through an angle α. Since is an orthogonal matrix, T = 1 . The deformation gradient (9.9) can be written

F = (ψ) s

0

0 0 + (θ) Yθ 0

0 1 .

(9.19)

where s is dened in (9.6). Premultiplying both sides of (9.19) by (θ) gives the modied deformation gradient

(9.20)

F = (θ)F = s cosψ) Y θ

¯

s sinψ)

0

1

Now the GL strain tensor 2e = F T F I does not change if F is premultiplied by an orthogonal matrix

because F T T F = F T F. Consequently 2e = F T F I. But if the strains remain small, as it is assumed in

the Timoshenko model, the following are small quantities:

¯

¯

913

Chapter 9: THE TL TIMOSHENKO PLANE BEAM ELEMENT

914

(i)

s 1 = (L/L 0 ) 1 because the axial strains are small;

(ii)

Y θ = Y κ because the curvature κ is of order 1/R, R being the radius of curvature, and |R| >> |Y | according to beam theory because Y can vary only up to the cross section in-plane dimension;

(iii)

γ¯ = ψ θ , which is the mean angular shear deformation.

¯

Then F = I + L + higher order terms, where L is a rst-order linearization in the small quantities s 1, Y θ

and γ¯ = ψ θ . It follows that

(9.21)

Carrying out this linearization one nds that e XY and e YY do not change, but that e X X simplies to (9.13). It

can also be shown that 2e XY = γ

e = 2 (L + L T ) + higher order terms

1

= . γ¯ within the order of approximation of (9.21).

§9.4.

Arbitrary Reference Conguration

In the general case the reference conguration C 0 of the element is not aligned with X .

longitudinal axis

freedom of the element are indicated in that Figure. Note that the section rotation angle θ is

The

The six degrees of

¯

X forms an angle ϕ with X , as illustrated in Figure 9.8.

¯

¯

measured from the direction Y , normal to X , and no longer from Y as in Figure 9.6.

Given the node coordinates (X 1 , Y 1 ) and (X 2 , Y 2 ), the reference angle ϕ is determined by

(9.22)

The angle φ = ψ +ϕ formed by the current longitudinal axis with X (see Figure 9.12) is determined by

cos ϕ = X 21 /L 0 ,

sin ϕ = Y 21 /L 0 ,

X 21 = X 2 X 1 ,

Y 21 = Y 2 Y 1 ,

2

L 0 = X

2

21 + Y

2

21 .

cos φ = cos+ ϕ) = x 21 /L , sin φ = sin+ ϕ) = y 21 /L ,

with

x 21 = x 2 x 1 = X 21 + u X2 u X1 , y 21 = y 2 y 1 = Y 21 + u Y2 u Y1 , L 2 = x

2

21 + y

2

21 .

Solving the trigonometric relations (9.22)-(9.23) for ψ gives

cos ψ =

sin ψ =

X 21 x 21 + Y 21 y 21

=

LL 0

X 21 y 21 Y 21 x 21

=

LL 0

X 21 (X 21 + u X2 u X1 ) + Y 21 (Y 21

+ u Y2 u Y1 )

LL 0

X 21 (Y 21 + u Y2 u Y1 ) Y 21 (X 21 + u X2 u X1 )

LL 0

 

(9.23)

,

 

(9.24)

.

It follows that L sin ψ and L cos ψ are exactly linear in the translational node displacements. This property simplies considerably the calculations that follow.

§9.4.1. Strain-Displacement Matrix

For the generalized strains it is convenient to use the invariant form (9.17), which does not depend on ϕ. The variations δe, δγ and δκ with respect to nodal displacement variations are required in the formation of the strain displacement relation δ h = B δ u. To form B we take partial derivatives of e, γ and κ with respect to node displacements. Here is a sample of the kind of calculations involved:

e

=

u X1

=

[L cosψ)/L 0 1] = [L(cos θ cos ψ + sin θ sin ψ)/L 0 1]

u X1 X 21 cos θ + Y 21 sin θ

u X1

cos ω
=

= cos ϕ cos θ + sin ϕ sin θ

L

2

0

L 0

L 0

914

(9.25)

915

§9.4 ARBITRARY REFERENCE CONFIGURATION

Y, y

9 – 15 § 9.4 ARBITRARY REFERENCE CONFIGURATION Y, y X, x _ // γY φ

X, x

_ // γY φ = ψ+ϕ _ θ 2 ψ // γX ϕ 2(x ,y
_
// γY
φ = ψ+ϕ
_
θ
2 ψ
// γX
ϕ
2(x
,y )
// γX
2
2
_ C
// γY
u Y2
θ
1
_
1(x
,y )
1
1
ϕ
2(X , Y )
2
2
u Y1
_
u X2
C 0
u X
1(X , Y )
1
1

Figure 9.8.

Plane beam element with arbitrarily oriented reference conguration.

in which ω = θ + ϕ, and where use is made of (9.24) in a key step. These derivatives were checked with Mathematica. Collecting all of them into matrix B:

B =

1

L

0

cos ω sin ω

0

sin ω cos ω

0

L 0 N 1 γ L 0 N 1 (1 + e) sin ω

cos ω

sin ω

cos ω

1

00

L 0 N 2 γ L 0 N 2 (1 + e) .

1

(9.26)

Here N 1 = (1 ξ)/2 and N 2 = (1 + ξ)/2 are abbreviations for the element shape functions (caligraphic symbols are used to lessen the chance of clash against axial force symbols).

§9.4.2. Constitutive Equations

Because the beam material is assumed to be homogeneous and isotropic, the only nonzero PK2 stresses are the axial stress s X X and the shear stress s XY . These are collected in a stress vector s related to the GL strains by the linear elastic relations

s = s X X

s XY

=

s

s

2 =

1

s 0

s

1

0

2

+ Ee + Ge 2 = s

1

0

s 0 + E

1

2

0

G

0

e

e

2 = s 0 + Ee,

1

(9.27)

where E is the modulus of elasticity and G is the shear modulus. resultants

We introduce the prestress

N 0 = A 0

s 0 d A,

1

V 0 = A 0 s

0

2

d A,

M 0 = A 0 Ys 0 d A,

1

(9.28)

915

Chapter 9: THE TL TIMOSHENKO PLANE BEAM ELEMENT

916

N

M V C M 0
M
V
C
M 0

N 0

V 0 C 0
V 0
C 0

Figure 9.9.

Beam stress resultants (internal forces) in the reference and current congurations.

which dene the axial forces, transverse shear forces and bending moments, respectively, in the reference conguration. We also dene the stress resultants

N = N 0 + E A 0 e,

V

= V 0 + G A 0 γ,

M = M 0 + E I 0 κ.

(9.29)

These represent axial forces, tranverse shear forces and bending moments in the current congura- tion, respectively, dened in terms of PK2 stresses. See Figure 9.9 for signs. These are collected in the stress-resultant vector

(9.30)

z T = [ NVM ] .

§9.4.3. Strain Energy

As in the case of the bar element, the total potential energy = U P is separable because P = λq T u. The strain (internal) energy is given by

U = V 0 (s 0 ) T e + 2 e T Ee dV = A 0 L 0 (s 0 e 1 + s

1

1

0

2

e 2 ) + 2 (Ee 2 + Ge

1

1

2

2

)

¯

dAd X .

(9.31)

Carrying out the area integrals while making use of (9.27) through (9.30), U can be written as the sum of three length integrals:

U

= L 0 (N 0 e + 2 E A 0 e 2 ) d X + L 0 (V 0 γ + 2 G A 0 γ 2 ) d X + L 0 (M 0 κ + 2 E I 0 κ 2 ) d X,

1

¯

1

¯

1

¯

(9.32)

The three terms in (9.32) dene the energy stored through bar-like axial deformations, shear dis- tortion and pure bending, respectively.

916

917

§9.6 THE STIFFNESS MATRIX

§9.5.

The Internal Force

The internal force vector can be obtained by taking the rst variation of the internal energy with respect to the node displacements. This can be compactly expressed as

δU = L 0 N δe + V δγ + M δκ d X =

¯

L 0

z T δh d X = L 0 z T B d X δu.

¯

¯

(9.33)

Here h and B are dened in equations (9.16) and (9.26) whereas z collects the stress resultants in C as dened in (9.28) through (9.30). Because δU = p T δu, we get

p = L 0 B T z d X.

¯

(9.34)

This expression may be evaluated by a one point Gauss integration rule with the sample point at ξ = 0 (beam midpoint). Let θ m = 1 + θ 2 )/2, ω m = θ m + ϕ, c m = cos ω m , s m = sin ω m , e m = L cosm ψ)/L 0 1, γ m = L sinθ m )/L 0 , and

B m = B| ξ=0 =

1

L 0

2 L 0 (1 + e m )

c m

s m

0

s m

c m

0

2 L 0 γ m

1

1

1

c m

s m

s m

c m

00

1

2

L 0 γ m

1

2 L 0 (1 + e m )

1

where subscript m stands for beam midpoint.Then

p = L 0 B m z =

T

c m

s m

0

s m

c m

0

§9.6.

The Stiffness Matrix

1

2 L 0 γ m

2 L 0 (1 + e m )

1

1

c m

s m

s m

c m

00

1

2 L 0 γ m

2 L 0 (1 + e m )

1

1

T

N

M

V

(9.35)

(9.36)

The rst variation of the internal force vector (9.34) denes the tangent stiffness matrix

δp = L 0 B T δz + δB T z d X = (K M + K G ) δu = K δu.

¯

(9.37)

This is again the sum of the material stifness K M and the geometric stiffness K G .

§9.6.1. The Material Stiffness Matrix

The material stiffness comes from the variation δz of the stress resultants while keeping B xed. This is easily obtained by noting that

δN

δz = δV

δM = E A 0

0

0

0

G A 0

0

0 I 0

0

E

δγ = S δh,

δκ

δe

(9.38)

where S is the diagonal constitutive matrix with entries E A 0 , G A 0 and E I 0 . Because δh = B δu, the term B T δz becomes B T SB δu = K M δu whence the material matrix is

K M = L 0 B T SB d X.

¯

917

(9.39)

Chapter 9: THE TL TIMOSHENKO PLANE BEAM ELEMENT

918

This integral is evaluated by the one-point Gauss rule at ξ = 0. Denoting again by B m the matrix (9.35), we nd

(9.40)

K M = L 0 B m SB m d X = K a M + K b M + K s

T

¯

M

where K a M , K b M and K s M are due to axial (bar), bending, and shear stiffness, respectively:

K a M = E A 0

L 0

K s M = G A 0

L 0


c m γ m

c m γ m

c c m s m

m

c m

c m s m

2

L 0 /2

2

L 0 /2

m

  a 1 L 0 s m

2

s m

s

c m

2

s m

/2

c m a 1 L

s m 0 s m /2

in which a 1 = 1 + e m .

c m s m s m

2

2

m

c m γ m L 0 /2 γ m L 0 s m /2

2

γ m L

2

0 /4

c m γ m L 0 /2

γ m L 0 s m /2

0

2

m L

γ

2

0 /4

0

0

0

0

c m c m s m

γ m L 0 /2 c m c m s m

c m γ m L 0 /2

c m

2

2

γ m L 0 s m /2

c m s m s γ m L 0 s m /2

00

00

1

00

100

00

00

00

00

00

00

00

0

0

0

1

0

0

1

K b M = E I 0

L 0

c m s m s m

γ m L 0 s m /2

c m s m

2

s

2

m

γ m L 0 s m /2

c m s m

c

2

m

c m a 1 L 0 /2

c m s m c m c m a 1 L 0 /2

2