3-D Bernoulli Beams within Akantu

Semester Project
Fall 2011

Fabian Barras
Professor Jean-Francois Molinari
Supervisors
Seyedeh Mohadeseh Taheri Mousavi
Guillaume Anciaux
Nicolas Richart
Computational Solid Mechanics Laboratory - LSMS
Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne - EPFL

Contents
1

Introduction
1.1 Purposes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2 Some structural mechanics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The 3-D Bernoulli Beam Element

2.1 Definition of the Element . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2 From local Archetype Element to the global space
2.3 Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.4 Finite Element Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.4.1 Stiffness Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.4.2 Force Vector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.4.3 Assembly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.4.4 Stresses Post-Processing . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Patch Test
3.1 Presentation . . . .
3.2 Analytical Solution
3.3 Numerical Solution
3.4 Comments . . . . .

2
2
2
10
10
13
15
16
16
17
19
20

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

21
. 21
. 22
. 23
. 24

Wood Tower, the study of a complex structure

4.1 Presentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2 Mesh loading on Akantu . . . . . . . . . .
4.2.1 Model Reader . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2.2 Sets assignment . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2.3 Verification . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.3 Wind Loads Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

Conclusion

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

26
26
29
31
33
34
36
39

Abstract
This report details the implementation of the Finite Element Method
dealing with Bernoulli structural mechanics model for 3-D Beams. The 3-D
Beam Element is developed within Akantu which is an open source Finite
Element library implemented at the Laboratory of Computational Solid Mechanics (LSMS) of EPFL. The aim of Akantus design is to consider different kinds of models (solid mechanics, structural mechanics, heat transfer,
etc...) while staying as generic as possible in the application of the Finite
Element Method (FEM). Thus each object or class presented in this report
is implicitly related to Akantus library.

1
1.1

Introduction
Purposes

This semester project consists in the extension of Bernoulli model for 3-D
beams. According to the general philosophy of Akantu, this implementation
should stay as generic as possible. Therefore the 3-D Element should be developed within the structure already defined for the 2-D beams and more generally
for all structural mechanics Elements.
Before starting the implementation, mechanics and their assumptions should be
studied in details, in order to construct an Element consistent with different behaviors.
Then the development of the Element according to mechanical assumptions and
Finite Element Theory is presented in details in this report.
For validation of the model, a patch test was performed in comparison with an
analytical case mixing the different behaviors in three dimensions.
Finally 3-D Bernoulli Beam Elements are used in the study of a complex tridimensional structure to validate the developed model also on a large number of
elements.

1.2

Some structural mechanics

In this section, the theoretical model and its assumptions used in the development of the 3-D Beam Element is described. A beam is a tridimensional structure
modeled with a curvilinear element suited for structural mechanics. Indeed geometrical and material properties are assigned to its axis.
The direct system of coordinates x y z is used in this report. Figure 1 presents
2

the convention used for axes related to beams.

Figure 1: System of coordinates considered in this section

Three different behaviors are considered for the development of the element.
They are briefly explained in the following sections, based on the theories presented in [3].
Note: In structural mechanics, stresses can often be considered as integrated
on the beam axis. They are thus expressed in unit of load ([N]).
Solid mechanics usually considers that stresses are applied on an infinitesimal
surface and they are then expressed in terms of pressure ([Pa]).
In this report, structural mechanics convention is used. Stresses at the axis are
related to solid mechanics stresses by equivalence principles. More details about
equivalence principle are given in the end of the present report.
Axial Behavior
The axial behavior statement is shown in figure 2. The cross section has a constant
area A. The displacement field u(x) and the Normal stress N are demanded under
a given distributed axial load state qx .

Figure 2: Axial behavior taken from [4]

Kinematic relation is directly derived from Bernoullis law. It corresponds to
the relation expressed as :
Planar cross sections which are perpendicular to the axis will be conserved in
deformed configuration.
This assumption is the core of modeling Beam Element that was also named 3-D
Bernoulli Beam Element. It leads to the following kinematic relation:
du
= x
dx

(1)

with x the axial strain.

Constitutive law which linked the normal stress N to the axial strain is described
by the linear elastic Hookes law :
N
= x
EA

(2)

with E the elastic modulus.

Finally, the equilibrium of axial stresses gives the following relation :
dN
= qx
dx

(3)

Equations 1, 2 and 3 give the following differential equation for the axial behavior :
d2u
EA 2 + qx = 0
(4)
dx

Planar Flexural Behavior

Flexural behavior into the plane x y can be seen on figure 3. The same beam
as before is assumed. Moreover, the beam is subjected to a vertical distributed
load qy . The moment of inertia of its cross section is defined by I. Displacements
field is described by the vertical displacement v(x) of a point in the axis and the
rotation (x).

Figure 3: Flexural behavior taken from [4]

Kinematic conditions are a bit more complex than in the axial behavior. Bernoullis
law is then expressed as :
After deformation, cross sections remain planar and perpendicular to the curved
axis but also to all other fibers of the beam.
Small displacements are also assumed for the model in a way that the neutral
axis of the beam conserves the same length after deformation.

Figure 4: Beam under bending from R.Hooke, taken from [3]

Those kinematic conditions are illustrated in figure 4 and bring the following
relations for the curvature r :
1 d
d2v
=
= 2
r
dx
dx

(5)

Constitutive relation for flexion in the model is also expressed by linear elastic
Hookes law as :
1
M
= =
(6)
r
EI
Finally, Bernoulli Beams theory belongs to the class of Thin Structures for which
the normal planes stay straight and perpendicular to the axis after flexural deformations. In other words, cross sections do not buckle under flexion. Deformations
under shear are thus neglected and the shear stress V is directly derived from the
moment M. Indeed this three following equilibrium equations are stated :
dV
dx

= qy

dM
dx

=V

d2M
dx2

= qy

(7)

Differential equation of flexural behavior which is the result of equations 5, 6 and

7 is expressed as :
d4v
EI 4 = qy
(8)
dx
6

Torsional Behavior
For 3-D Bernoulli Beam Element, only uniform torsion is considered. Assumptions for this behavior are :
Cross sections are free to buckle.
Torsional resistance is only ensured by shear stresses1 xy , xz active in the
sections plane.
The assumed distortion of the cross section seems to be a priori incompatible with
hypothesis of flexural behavior. This inconsistency is discussed and recalled in
the following section with the principle of superposition.

Figure 5: Torsional kinematic, taken from [3]

Under this assumptions, Saint-Venant torsion theory gives the next kinematic
relations for the torsion angle by unit length,
d
=
dx

(9)

with x the torsion angle defined on figure 5.

Uniform torsional constitutive law can be expressed as,
T = GJ
1 Solid

mechanics stresses expressed in unit of pressure

(10)

where G is the shear modulus and J is a geometrical characteristic of the section

called constant of torsion.
Finally, figure 6 presents the torsional equilibrium relation that is written as,
dT
= mx
dx

(11)

with mx the torsion moment by unit length.

Figure 6: Torsional equilibrium

Equations 9, 10 and 11 lead to the Torsional differential equation as following:
GJ

d 2 x
+ mx = 0
dx2

(12)

Principle of superposition
This principle is essential in the definition of 3-D Bernoulli Beam Element in
Akantu. As expressed in [3], this principle corresponds to :
The effect produces by different causes acting together is equal to the sum of the
effects produced by each of the causes assumed acting separately
To satisfy this principle, two conditions shall be satisfied.
Geometric linearization
Material linearization

The first condition means that deformations and rotations requires to be small.
This condition is included in the three different behaviors explained.
The second one requires a material which follows a linear elastic constitutive law
which is also verified since the three behaviors follow Hookes law.
This principle has two major effects in the modeling of the element.
Flexural and torsional effects are considered separately. Indeed, this principle
allows first to evaluate a cross section that does not buckle under flexural deformations and then a cross section free to buckle under torsion. The final stage is to
sum the effects of these two behaviors taken separately whose assumptions were
a priori incompatible.
By this principle the effects of an oblique flexion can be correctly evaluated by

projecting the oblique moment vector M into two moments My and Mz around the
principal axes of the beam y and z.
Then each of the two moments produces planar flexural behavior that could be
studied separately and summed in the end.
Since there are two directions of planar flexural behavior, the following convention is adopted in this report :

Flexion in x y plane : v(x) is the y directed displacements field and the

d4v
differential equation becomes EIz dx
4 = qy .
Flexion in x z plane : w(x) is the z directed displacements field and the
4
differential equation becomes EIy ddxw4 = qz .
Rotation angles, shear stresses and moments take also the index y or z depending on which axis they are expressed.

The 3-D Bernoulli Beam Element

This section details the implementation of the presented Beam model within
Akantus library.

2.1

Definition of the Element

The Archetype Element deals with four displacements fields separatly defined
by the following differential equations.
2

Axial displacements : EA ddxu2 + qx = 0

4

d v
Transversal displacements along y direction : EIz dx
4 qy = 0
4

Transversal displacements along z direction : EIy ddxw4 qz = 0

2

Rotations around the axis : GJ ddx2x + mx = 0

The highest degree of derivatives is commonly designed by 2m. Thus axial fields
are of degree two (m = 1) and transversal fields are of degree four (m = 2).
Construction of a conform Element Type requires the respect of several rules expressed below.
The first convergence criterion imposes that the unknown fields should be
of class Cm in the element and of class Cm1 at boundaries2 .
Thus for the axial fields, continuity C0 is required at boundaries which means
that only the unknown fields needs to be continuous.
For the transversal fields, continuity C1 is needed at boundaries and the unknown
fields and their derivatives needs to be continuous.
In summary, required continuity through boundaries concerns :
Axial displacements : u
Transversal displacements along y direction : v and
2A

dv
dx

function of continuity or class Cr is continue and its derivatives are also continue up to
degree r.

10

 Transversal displacements along z direction :w and

dw
dx

Rotations around the axis : x

Since boundaries of Beam Element are at nodes, those requirements involve the
definition of a two nodes Element with six degrees of freedom (dof) u, v, w, x , y
and z at each nodes. The vector of the kinematic unknowns takes the following
form :
d T = {u1 , v1 , w1 , x1 , y1 , z1 , u2 , v2 , w2 , x2 , y2 , z2 }

(13)

The second convergence criterion deals with the interpolation. It is satisfied

if chosen polynomials are complete up to degree m.
The same shape functions defined for the 2-D Element are reused to define the
interpolation in the 3-D Element. For recall, they are defined by imposing a unitary displacement at the associated dof and keeping others equal to zero. The next
figure summarizes the six interpolation functions obtained.

Figure 7: Shape functions definitions, taken from [6]

11

Using the same notation as in figure 7, the interpolated fields in the Element
are defined as,

u(x)

v(x)

w(x)
u=
(14)
= Nd
x (x)

(x)

z (x)
with

N=

N1 0
0 0
0
0 N2 0
0 0
0
0
0 M1 0 0
0 L1 0 M2 0 0
0 L2

0 0 M1 0 L1 0 0 0 M2 0 L2 0

0 0
0 N1 0
0 0 0
0 N2 0
0

0 0 M10 0 L10 0 0 0 M20 0 L20 0

0 M10 0 0
0 L10 0 M20 0 0
0 L20

(15)

Note the signs of the interpolation functions in (15) which are linked to the rotations around y-axis (5th and 11th dof) are inverse compares to rotations around
z-axis because of direct coordinates system convention.
Since the Finite Element Method only solves the integral forms of the equations, m boundary conditions are needed and they concern the unknown fields
and its derivatives up to the degree 2m 1.
With the four unknown fields of the Element, required boundary condition are:
Axial displacements : One condition on u or

du
dx

Transversal displacements along y direction :

dv
d2v
Two conditions on v or dx
z or dx
2 Mz or

N
d3v
dx3

Transversal displacements along z direction :

d2w
Two conditions on w or dw
dx y or dx2 My or

Vy

d3w
dx3

Rotations around the axis : One condition on x or

Vz

dx
dx

Considering those conditions at the boundaries of the Element represented by two

nodes, the following force vector is defined :
f T = {N1 ,Vy1 ,Vz1 , T1 , My1 , Mz1 , N2 ,Vy2 ,Vz2 , T2 , My2 , Mz2 }
12

(16)

2.2

From local Archetype Element to the global space

After building correctly the 3-D Bernoulli Beam Element type, the developed
object needs to be characterized in a tridimensional space. First, Beam Element is
characterized by the position of its two nodes. It gives information about the elements length and the direction of its axis. But the orientation of its cross section
is missing. Thus for 3-D Beam Elements a new geometric parameter is needed
to describe completely their configuration in space. For this project, a new object

has been added to Akantus class Mesh and it corresponds to an unitary vectors
n
that gives the direction of the z axis of the cross section.
Then the Archetype Element should be clearly defined. It corresponds to a local
evaluation of the element where all shape functions are computed before being
rotated and assembled in the global space. Similarly to the 2-D Beam Element,
the choice of a dimensional Archetype Element is kept for the 3-D case. More
details about this choice are explained in Chapter 3 of [2].
As convention, Archetype Element is carried by the x axis between position a to
a, with a corresponding to half of the beam length. x direction is given from node

1 to 2 by its axis. z direction is deduced from

n and y direction is computed as
the cross product of x and z direction.
Then the rotation of Archetype Element local axes to the global axes of the structure needs to be defined. Similarly as it was explained for the 2-D Beam Element,
rotation must be performed via a rotation matrix. In the bidimensionnal case,
rotations are easy to be expressed because only one angle is used to described
change of referential. But in a 3-D space, rotations are much more complex to
be described. The most common method to rotate an object in 3-D is by using
Euler angles. But this method implies very strict and heavy processes to avoid
inconsistency such as the gimbals lock.
For this reason a simpler process is defined for structural objects in Akantu. It
consists in defining two 3x3 matrices Pg and Pe which characterize respectively
coordinates system of the beam in global space and its related Archetype Element.
Then the rotation matrix T saved as an object of Akantus class StructuralMechanicsModel , is constructed with equation 17.
Pe P1
g =T

13

(17)

Left matrices in equation 17 must be made of three row vectors which are linearly
independent and are expressed in both coordinates system. Its important that the
three vectors conserve their length in both axis in order to compute a consistent
rotation matrix. The following convention is chosen:
First vector corresponds to the direction of beam axis with size 2a.

Second vector corresponds to unitary vector

n.
Third vector corresponds to the cross-product of the two previous vectors to
be sure that we have three linearly independent vectors
Constructed with the chosen convention, coordinate system matrices can be expressed in equations 18 and 19:

2a 0 0
(18)
Pe = 0 0 2a
0 1 0

x2 x1 nx (y2 y1 ) nz (z2 z1 ) ny
Pg = y2 y1 ny (z2 z1 ) nx (x2 x1 ) nz
(19)
z2 z1 nz (x2 x1 ) ny (y2 y1 ) nx
,with (xi , yi , zi ) the coordinates of the ith node and (nx , ny , nz ) the components of

n expressed in global coordinates.

3-D Beam Elements bring some changes in the rotation process for structural
mechanics Elements. Rotation is no more accomplished in the Element Class
class that only deals with operations on Archetype Element. T is now computed
in StructuralMechanicsModel class and saved as an object of this class in order to
be called by the functions constructing the Finite Element Model presented later
in section 2.4.

14

Figure 8: 3-D Bernoulli Beam Element with its Archetype (in green)
Note that rotations are applied on two kinds of vector. Vectors of twelve components related to the dof like d in equation 13 and vectors of six components
related to the displacements fields like u in equation 14. The following rotation
matrices are also defined as convention for the rest of the report.

T
0
0
0
0
T
0
0

Tdo f =
(20)
0
0
T
0
0
0
0
T


T
0
T f ields =
(21)
0
T

2.3

Integration

3-D Bernoulli Beam Element uses Akantus GaussIntegrator to perform the

different integrations required by the FEM. Three Gauss points are set on the
Element. Similarly as for 2-D Beams, the position of the points and their weights
are expressed in Archetype Element coordinates system as follow.

15

Gauss Point
1
2
3

Position
q
a 35
0.0
q
a 35

Weight
5a
9
8a
9
5a
9

Table 1: Positions and weights of Gauss points defined on 3-D Beam Elements

According to Gauss theory, three points integrate exactly polynomials up to

degree five. This efficiency is discussed later in the report but the number of
Gauss points can be quickly adapted to the requirements of the different analyses.

2.4

Finite Element Model

Force-displacement relation
Kd = f

(22)

expresses the Finite Element Equilibrium. d is the vector of unknowns already defined in equation 13. The stiffness matrix K and the force vector f are presented
in detail in the next section.
2.4.1

Stiffness Matrix

To construct the Stiffness Matrix, strains vector and stresses vector need to be
defined.
According to the hypotheses of the model, strain due to shear stress is neglected.
Thus, strains are only due to normal stress, moment and torsion with the following
vector,

x

z
=
(23)
y

Kinematic relations from section 1.2 are used to construct shape derivatives matrix
B as following:

16

du
dx

d2v
dx
2
=
= Bd
2
d w

ddxx

dx

(24)

with,

0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0 0
0 N20
N10
0 M 00
0
0 0 L200
0
0 0 L100 0 M200
1

B=
00
00
00
0
0
0
0
0
M2 0 L200
0
M1 0 L1
0
0
0
0
0
N20 0
0
0
0
N10 0
(25)

Then, stresses are related to strains by constitutive relations which are given in
1.2,

N

Mz
=
= D
(26)
My

T
with constitutive matrix D constructed according to equation 2, 6 and 10 as,

EA 0
0
0
0 EIz 0
0

D=
(27)
0
0 EIy 0
0
0
0 GJ
Finally the Stiffness Matrix of an element is defined in the Finite Element Theory
by the following integration according to section 2.3,
Za

K=

BT DBdx

(28)

Since the highest degree of polynomial in this integral is two, the Gauss Integrator
computes exactly the equation 28.
2.4.2

Force Vector

The force vector on one element is defined by the sum of two integrals in the
Finite Element Theory,
17

f=

N bd +

NT td

(29)

,with referring to the domain of the element and its boundaries. For the 3-D
Beam Element, this equation becomes :
Za

f=

NT bdx + t

(30)

The right term t contains values of load applied at the nodes and has the same
composition as f detailed in equation 16.
The term b in the integral represents distributed loads applied on the element. It
is also composed similarly as f , however loads are expressed by unit length in
function of the position on beam axis, as following:

qx (x)

q
(x)

qz (x)
b=
(31)
mx (x)

my (x)

mz (x)
As the Stiffness Matrix, the integration for loads vector is performed by the Gauss
method presented in section 2.3. Since the highest polynomial in N is three, equation 30 is exactly computed with Gauss Integrator up to quadratic distributed load
functions.
Load functions need to be evaluated at quadrature point positions which are found
by interpolating position fields. This process is similar to the one defined for the
2-D Bernoulli Beam Element (more details are available in section 3.2.2 of [2]).
A novelty of the 3-D Element is to propose two ways to define a distributed load.
Indeed a load case can be defined in the global axes of the structures. An example
is the dead weight that is always oriented in the vertical direction. But in other
cases, the load case might be defined in the local axes of each element. For example, hydrostatic pressure for water or wind is used to be expressed perpendicular
to a given facet. In this case load vectors in local axes be are expressed in global
axes via the rotation matrix,
b = TTfields be
(32)

18

2.4.3

Assembly

The Assembly is an essential step in the FEM. It consists in assembling the contribution of all elements that are connected to the same nodes. Generic functions of
Akantu are defined to assemble matrices and vectors. They are used to assemble
K and f before applying Finite Element Equilibrium relation 22.
The equilibrium is expressed in the global system of coordinates. Therefore each
element must be correctly translated into global axes before the Assembly. This
section presents the different procedures defined for Bernoulli Beam Elements
within Akantu. For convention matrices and vectors are indexed with e and g,
depending if they are expressed in element local axes or into global system of coordinates.
First of all, shape functions and their derivatives are pre-computed on quadrature points for every elements. Then shape functions and derivatives matrices Ne
and Be are constructed into local axes according to the equations 15 and 25. Relations must be defined to construct Kg and f g from local matrices.
Lets start with the expression of local Finite Element Equilibrium,
Ke de = fe
Relation 17 gives,
Ke Tdo f dg = Tdo f fg
and
TTdo f Ke Tdo f dg = fg
Thus
TTdo f Ke Tdo f = Kg
With equation 28,
Za
T
Kg = Tdo f [ BTe De Be dx]Tdo f
a

or,

Za

Kg =

(Be Tdo f )T De (Be Tdo f )dx

(33)

Lets find the same development for the global force vector. Assuming no load
applied directly on nodes, equation 30 becomes in local axes,
Za

fe =

NTe be dx

19

According to the size of each vector, 17 leads to,

Za

Tdo f fg =

NTe T f ields bg dx

and,

Za

fg =

[TTdo f NTe T f ields ]bg dx

(34)

Relations 33 and 34 are used to correctly construct the Stiffness Matrix and
the Force Vector of each element in order to be correctly assemble in the global
structure by the Assembly functions of Akantu.
2.4.4

Stresses Post-Processing

Finite Element Method computes the unknown displacements in global axes thanks
to equation 22. Stresses can be post-processed with the relation 26. Since stresses
have only physical sense in local axes of each element, the relation becomes :

N

Mz
(35)
= De Be Tdo f dg
e =
My

T
Since Be is evaluated on Gauss points in order to perform Gauss Integration,
stresses are also evaluated on each quadrature point which gives three stresses
evaluation on every 3-D Bernoulli Beam Element.
Note that the sign of transversal moments is depending on the defined axes

and therefore depending on the numbering of the nodes and the direction of
n.
If a positive moment is assumed to apply tension on the upper fiber of the cross
section, the convention to define the upper fibers should be set according to 9.

20

Figure 9: Fibers subjected to tension under positive transversal moments.

3
3.1

Patch Test
Presentation

Since the development of the Element in section 2.1 satisfies the convergence
criteria, the patch test is mainly useful to validate the implementation of the model.
Different verifications should deal with the torsion behavior, rotations, combination of beams with different orientations, loads integration and stresses postprocessing.
The chosen test combines all those difficulties with the advantage of knowing the
exact analytical solutions.
The example is the exercise 12.10.13 taken from [3]. Here the problem is setting:

21

Figure 10: Sketch of the patch test. Source [3]

The cantilever beam of figure 10 is submitted to distributed loads acting vertically on segment AB. Cross sections are circles of diameter 1.3[cm] made of steel.
Dead weight is neglected.
1. Compute vertical displacement wa of point A.
2. Compute rotation yB of point B around y axis.

3.2

Analytical Solution

The resolution by Displacements Method gives the following analytical solution:

wa = qa4 (69/(24EI) + 5/(GJ))
yB = 2qa3 (1/(EI) + 1/(GJ))
Cross sections properties are evaluated as,
E = 2.05e11 [N/m2 ]
A = 1.33e4 [m2 ]
I = 2.8e9 [m4 ]
22

 GJ = 220.77 [m2 ]
thus wa = 0.1037 [m] and yB = 0.0941 [rad].
Then stresses can also be evaluated at any points on the beam. Table 2 summarizes the values for the moment and the torsion at Gauss point positions according
to same local axes defined later in figure 11. For convention, they are numerated
starting from the embedding to the free edge.

# of Gauss Point
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Moment Torsion
5.8097 30.0000
0.0000 30.0000
5.8097 30.0000
26.6190 7.5000
15.0000 7.5000
3.3811
7.5000
5.9040
0.0000
1.8750
0.0000
0.0952
0.0000

Table 2: Stresses evaluated analytically, expressed in [Nm]

3.3

Numerical Solution

Numerical modeling of the problem is constructed according to figure 11.

Node one has all its dof set to zero because of the embedding. Distributed loads
are then applied on the z global axis on the third element.

23

Figure 11: Problem modeling with Beam Elements

wa corresponds to the third dof of the fourth node and is computed as 0.1037
[m].
yB corresponds to the fifth dof of the third node and is evaluated as 0.0941 [rad].
Stresses are also post-processed on quadrature points and they are compared to
the analytical results in table 3.
# of Gauss Point
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Moment Moment
5.8097
5.8097
0.0000
0.0000
5.8097 5.8097
26.6190 26.6190
15.0000 15.0000
3.3811
3.3811
5.9040
5.4047
1.8750
2.5000
0.0952 0.4047

Torsion
30.0000
30.0000
30.0000
7.5000
7.5000
7.5000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000

Torsion
30.0000
30.0000
30.0000
7.5000
7.5000
7.5000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000

Table 3: Stresses evaluated numerically versus analytical results (in yellow), expressed in [Nm]

3.4

Comments
24

The model gives back exactly the analytical results for unknown displacements fields.
Stresses are also correctly evaluated except flexural moment on the third element.
The error is only caused by the approximation of the distributed loads into consistent forces acting on nodes (integral term in (30)). Indeed, distributed loads are
integrated exactly by Gauss Integrator into the following consistent nodal forces :
Vz4 = 15 [N], Mx4 = 1.25 [Nm] and Vz3 = 15 [N], Mx3 = 1.25 [Nm].
Figure 12 illustrates the difference between exact moment under distributed loads
case and numerical moment evaluated under consistent forces.

Figure 12: Numerical approximation of moment repartition under distributed

loads
Since on elements length the integral of the consistent flexural moment is
equal to integral of the analytical moment, those differences have no effects on
the computations of the unknown displacement fields that are exact.
To increase the accuracy of stresses evaluation, the mesh should be refined where
distributed loads are applied.
Finally, the symmetry of the considered cross sections allows to check the stability
of the model by changing local y z axes convention according to figure 13.

25

Figure 13: Equivalent problem modeling

Because computations give exact results, the 3-D Bernoulli Beam Element
implementation can be considered as validated.

4
4.1

Wood Tower, the study of a complex structure

Presentation

The last part of this project is to evaluate the 3-D Bernoulli Beam Element by
studying a complex 3-D structure.
The analyzed structure was designed at I-Bois laboratory of EPFL by Steve Cherpillod in the context of Ateliers Weinand.
First of all, I want to thanks I-Bois laboratory and its PhD student Seyed Sina
Nabaei for giving me the mesh of the structure and for presenting me their numerical analyses.

26

Figure 14: Wood Tower. Source [7]

The structure is a tower of 36 meters. It corresponds to a timber structures made

of glulam modulus superposed. As presented on figure 15, each modulus is made
of three curved vertical elements and one step.

27

Figure 15: Details of the timber modulus. Source [7]

In the elevation (figure 17), the structure is constructed by the superposition of

two helicals containing the two stairs, one for getting up and the other for coming
down. The structure is also reinforced by two helicals made of steel. At the top of
the tower, a platform is designed to appreciate surroundings.

Figure 16: Horizontal section of the tower. Source [7]

28

Figure 17: Elevation of the Wood Tower. (Source [7])

In the horizontal section (figure 16), the tower is constituted of the circular juxtaposition of the vertical modulus around a given center.
More details on the design of the Wood Tower are given in [7] and [1].
Our interest of this structure stands on the very high number of Beam Elements
(almost 20000) and the advantage of owning numerical results performed by IBois laboratory on another commercial FEM software, RFEM. RFEM is a 3-D
Finite Element Analysis program of the suit Dlubal Software for structural analysis. More details are given on [9].

4.2

Mesh loading on Akantu

Wood Tower Mesh consists of 18660 nodes for 19926 3-D Beam Elements
made of 4 different cross sections. The mesh of Wood Tower consists in a .xlsx
file generated by the software RFEM. This file consists in different spreadsheets.

29

Figure 18: MatLab plot of every nodes defined.

The first spreadsheet gives node coordinates in global space. Figure 18 gives
a MatLab (cf.[10]) plot of every nodes given by the file. Unlike Akantu, some
nodes are not connected to the structure. They correspond to help nodes that are
used later to orientate beams cross sections.
The second spreadsheet gives the lines linking two nodes, which corresponds to
the connectivities in Akantu.
Two other spreadsheets give the materials and the cross sections used in the structure. They should be entered as StructuralMaterial objects in Akantu.
The fifth spreadsheet assigns materials and cross sections to the different elements
and gives the orientation of their cross sections by the help nodes. In Akantu,
this spreadsheet should be used to assign StructuralMaterial to the elements and

to compute their vector

n.
Finally a spreadsheet gives the number of boundary nodes whose translations are
locked. Working with 3-D Bernoulli Beam Elements, those nodes shall have their
three first dof set to zero.
In summary, three main differences appear between this software and Akantus
mesh construction. The existence of non-connected nodes and the way to define
30

cross sections orientation. But also the interaction between mesh and model definition.
Thus for this project a new class of readers was developed in Akantu, named
ModelIO . Unlike MeshIO class, ModelIO allows to deal with interconnected
mesh and model generations. A subclass of ModelIO , called ModelIOIBarras
with the name of its creator, is presented in the next sections.

4.2.1

Model Reader

Figure 19 presents an example of the files used by the reader function.

18660
% Number of nodes
4.358 17.959 35.805
% x y z coordinates of node
4.051 18.171 35.999
...
19926
% Number of elements
1 2
% #node1 #node2
3 1
...
134
% Number of boudaries
205
% #node where translations are locked
410
...
8
% Number of cross section types
8000000000 3e+09 6.65e-05 1.88e-05 0.000568 0.0352
% E G J Iz Iy A
2.1e+11 8e+10 0.004376 0.002188 0.002188 0.053721
...
2 0
% #section type #help node
5 17808
% Note: Element are set in order of numbering
Figure 19: Format of files needed by the reader

Readers deal with help node is detailed in this section.

First, coordinates of all nodes are read and saved in an array named temp nodes .
This array contains all the nodes including help nodes. They should be filtered
to correctly construct node vectors of Akantu. Inspired by the connectivity vectors, an array named connect to akantu is created. It contents one integer related
31

to a given component on temp nodes . If the integer is zero, the given node is
a help node and is not saved in Akantus nodes . Otherwise the node is part
of the structure and needs to be saved in vector nodes . Figure 20 illustrates the
construction of the different vectors.

Figure 20: Filter process to separate help nodes.

Then the construction of

n needs to be detailed. If the cross section is a circle,

the scalar #help node of figure 18 is set to zero and

n is defined as some vector

perpendicular to beam axis. Otherwise n is constructed according to figure 21.

32

Figure 21: From help node to cross section vector

Finally the function is called on a member of StructuralMechanicsModel class.

Reader function creates the associated member of class Mesh that can be called
in the main routine of an anylsis by the accessor .getFEM().getMesh() applied on
the StructuralMechanicsModel member.
4.2.2

Sets assignment

For the Wood Tower analysis, a new member of the StructuralMechanicsModel

class is defined. set ID corresponds to a scalar used to associate different elements. Sets are useful to assign distributed loads only to particular elements. Sets
are also used as filters during results post-processing. Figure 22 presents a structure of files used by the sets assigner function.

33

12
1489 1572
7626 8044
10052 10135
18035
18036
8038
...
0
16608 17133
18142 18153
18155
8156
...

% Number of sets
% Including elements between 1489 and 1572

% Including elements 18035

% End of set 1

Figure 22: Format of files needed by sets assigner

Note that this function starts by setting every IDs to zero in order to define successively different sets during one analysis.
4.2.3

Verification

To verify that the reader does correctly his job, the writer function of the class
MeshIOMSHStruct is used to construct a .msh file from a member of the class
StructuralMechanicsModel . Figure 23 and 24 presents the written file open in the
software GMSH [8].

34

Figure 23: Mesh of Wood Tower displayed by GMSH

Figure 24: Details of Wood Tower displayed by GMSH

35

It shows that the mesh of the Wood Tower is correctly read into Akantu and
that the help nodes which are visible in figure 18 are correctly filtered.
For post-processing visualization, the software Paraview [11] is used for this analysis. At this step, it allows to check the consistency of the normals computations.
They should be unitary and orientated radially to the outward direction.

Figure 25: Consistency validation of normals computations in a vertical view of

the Tower
The mesh of the Wood Tower is correctly loaded in Akantu and the analyses
should then be defined.

4.3

Wind Loads Analysis

Two analyses are performed for the wind load cases defined in [1]. The first
load case corresponds only to wind loads. Report [1] considers that wind is acting
parallel to z-axis of the outdoor timber beams. Wind loads are also gradually
defined in function of considered sets of beams presented on figure 26.

36

Figure 26: Intensity of the wind in function of timber beam sets. Source [1]
A second load condition which is similar to the common load combinations
used in structural analysis is presented in Annex. The next table summarizes the
different loads acting on the structure and their factors of amplitude applied during
this second case.
Loads
Dead Weight
Wind
Exploitation Loads

Factor
1
0.5
0.6

Table 4: Loading case defined in [1] for loads combination of the Tower

Loads are applied to different sets of beams and defined both in global and local axes. Since the model and the mesh are completely defined by the reader, only
the essential boundary conditions, which are meant forces, need to be precised
in the main script of the analysis. As example, the following sequences shall be
defined to apply correctly the combined loading case.
1. Set ID of every elements are equal to their StructuralMaterial numbers
2. Compute forces vector from Dead Weight function along global z-axis
3. Assign sets from the file containing Exploitation Loads sets

37

4. Increment forces vector from Exploitation Loads function along global

z-axis
5. Assign sets from the file defining Wind Loads sets
6. Increment forces vector from Wind Loads function along local z-axis
7. Run the solving process
After FE analysis is performed, results are transmitted to Paraview through Dumper
class. The analysis of results on such a structure could be a project by itself. In
the present report the aim is just to verify the consistency of the results.
Figure 36 presents the computed displacements for the Tower evaluated by the
developed model for the pure wind load case.

Figure 27: Deformation of Wood Tower computed with Akantu. Displacements in

[m]. Deformations scale 150x

The magnitude of displacements is very close to the results obtained with the software RFEM that evaluated the maximum magnitude of displacements at 136[mm]
versus 130[mm] with Akantu. The deformed states are also extremely close when
comparing Akantus analysis and RFEM. Figure 28 compares the two deformations.
38

Figure 28: Deformation of Wood Tower computed on Akantu (left) and on RFEM
(right). Deformations scale 150x. Maximum magnitude of displacements corresponds to 130[mm] with Akantu and 136[mm] with RFEM
Those results validate the stability and the robustness of the developed
3-D Bernoulli Beam Element even when used on a real structure containing a
great number of elements. Other results of the combined loads analysis are set in
Annex of the present report.

Conclusion

The subject of the present project was the extension of the Bernoulli model
for beams in 3-D. Even if the general skeleton needed for Structural Elements
was already defined in Akantu and Bernoulli Element were already implemented
during previous semester project, many traps were hidden behind those advantages. Paradoxically, the main challenge was perhaps forgetting the developments
and the processes defined for the 2-D Elements. Indeed the 3-D extension of the
model caused some new problems due to generalization. Rotation in a tridimensional space, axes conventions, combinations of three kinds of nodal rotations, are
some of the difficulties which were encountered during this project.
After its development, the 3-D Beam Element was evaluated with a patch-test
that allowed to show remaining problems and to validate the implementation of
Bernoulli Elements in the 3-D space.
Finally, the icing on the cake was the possibility to evaluate the robustness of
the Element in the study of a complex structure and the comparison with a com39

mercial FEM software. Results show that the model is able to deal with a great
number of elements.
Finally , the Wood Tower analysis also shows the great potential of using Akantu
library in structural analysis post-processing, compared to the common FE softwares. First, the generation of Paraview files gives good flexibility to process the
results independently of the FE computations and on different platforms (Unix,
Mac, Windows). Furthermore, it is often faster than post-processing using the
commercial softwares. While it takes about three minutes to apply a deformation or to represent stress repartitions in RFEM, Paraview does it almost instantaneously.

Figure 29: Principle of equivalence (7th row) set in [3].

Table 29 brings the last words of this report. It shows the principles of equivalence (cf. Note of page 3) defined for 3-D Beams behaviors. Dumping correctly to
Paraview all the parameters defined in the principle of equivalence formulations
gives the users the ability to evaluate stresses at any points of beams cross sections. In other words, the users can define analysis tools according to their needs
and with more control on them. Besides, it contributes to reduce even more the
reluctant problem of black box encountered with Finite Element Analysis.

40

References
[1] Fares Hobeiche, Stefan Sander, Construction en bois II, Rapport, Tour
tressee. I-Bois, EPFL, Semestre de printemps 2011.
[2] Fabian Barras, 2-D Bernoulli Beams in Akantu. Bachelors Project, LSMS
- EPFL, 2011.
[3] Francois Frey, Mecanique des structures. Analyse des structures et milieux
continus. Traite de Genie Civil, volume 2. Presses Poytechniques et Universitaires Romandes, 2006.
[4] Francois Frey, Mecanique des solides. Analyse des structures et milieux
continus. Traite de Genie Civil, volume 3. Presses Poytechniques et Universitaires Romandes, 1998.
[5] Francois Frey et Jaroslav Jirousek, Methode des e lements finis. Analyse
des structures et milieux continus. Traite de Genie Civil, volume 6. Presses
Poytechniques et Universitaires Romandes, 2009.
[6] Pierrino Lestuzzi, Polycopies du cours Mecanique des Structures II.
Plaques, Parois, Torsion non uniforme. EPFL-ENAC-SGC, Automne 2010.
[7] Steve Cherpillod Wooden Waves, a tower for paleo festival. Presentation at
the Atelier Weinand. I-Bois, EPFL, 2009.
[8] http://geuz.org/gmsh/
[9] http://www.dlubal.com/RFEM-4xx.aspx
[10] http://www.mathworks.ch/products/matlab/
[11] http://www.paraview.org

41

Annex (Results of combined loads analysis)

Figure 30: Axial stresses on the member set printed in magenta on the global
structure. Maximum tensile stresses of timber modulus happen at the rear of the
Tower, as expected. Units [N]

42

Figure 31: Axial stresses on the member set printed in magenta on the global
structure. Maximum compressive stresses of timber modulus stand in the front of
the Tower, as expected. Units [N]

43

Figure 32: Axial stresses on the steps of Tower stairs. Because of the composition
of modulus (figure 15), stairs are compressed when vertical stanchion beams are
tensed and inversely.

44

Figure 33: Flexural Moment on the whole tower. As expected, stiffer elements
(steel tubes) take
q almost all the stresses of the structure. Units [Nm]. Moment
corresponds to My2 + Mz2 .

45

Figure 34: Moment filtered on steel tube. High stresses

q happens in region of
curvature changes. Units [Nm]. Moment corresponds to My2 + Mz2 .

46

Figure 35: Concentrations of Torsion at the irregularities in the helicals. Units

[Nm]. Torsion corresponds to ||T ||.

47

Figure 36: Similar Torsion concentrations observed on the Analysis with RFEM

48