Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 991–1003

www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Large deflection and postbuckling behavior of Timoshenko beam–columns

with semi-rigid connections including shear and axial effects
J. Dario Aristizabal-Ochoa ∗
School of Mines, National University, A.A. 75267, Medellı́n, Colombia

Received 8 June 2006; received in revised form 24 July 2006; accepted 26 July 2006
Available online 20 September 2006

Abstract

The nonlinear large deflection-small strain analysis and postbuckling behavior of Timoshenko beam–columns of symmetrical cross section
with semi-rigid connections subjected to conservative and non-conservative end loads (forces and moments) including the combined effects of
shear, axial and bending deformations, axial load eccentricities, lateral bracing and out-of-plumbness are developed in a simplified manner. A
new set of stability functions based on the “modified shear equation” that includes the effects of shear deformations and the shear component
of the applied axial forces is derived. Also, an expression for the axial displacement δb caused by the “bowing” of the beam–column subjected
to end forces and moments with generalized end conditions is derived in a classic manner. The proposed method and corresponding nonlinear
equations, although approximate, can be used in the tension and compression stability and nonlinear large deflection-small strain elastic analyses
of Timoshenko beam–columns with rigid, semi-rigid, and simple connections. Analytical studies indicate that shear deformations increase the
longitudinal and transverse deflections and reduce the buckling axial load capacities of beam–columns. The effects of shear deformations must be
considered in the analysis of beam–columns with relatively low effective shear areas (like in short laced columns, columns with batten plates and
with open webs) or low shear stiffness (like elastomeric bearings and short columns made of laminated composites with low shear modulus G
when compared to their elastic modulus E making the shear stiffness G As of the same order of magnitude as E I / h 2 ). The shear effects are also
of great importance in the tension and compression stability and dynamic behavior of laminated elastomeric bearings used for seismic isolation
of buildings. Four comprehensive examples are included that show the effectiveness of the proposed method and equations.
c 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Beams; Beam–columns; Large deflections; P–∆ analysis; Nonlinear analysis; Semi-rigid connections; Stability; Structural analysis; Postbuckling
behavior; Timoshenko beams

1. Introduction and nonconservative end loads has been investigated by

Advances in composite materials of high resilience
capacities and low shear stiffness as well as the need for lighter
and stronger structural members have created a great interest
in their large-deflection analysis and postbuckling behavior. For
instance, seismic isolators made of light polymer materials may
undergo extremely large deflections under axial and transverse
loads without exceeding their elastic limit.
The nonlinear geometric elastic behavior of a slender
beam–column with semi-rigid connections under conservative
∗ Corresponding address: National University of Colombia, Civil Engineer-
ing, Calle 9c # 15-165, Casa 2 Urbanizacion, Villaverde, Medellı́n, Antioquia,
Colombia. Tel.: +57 42686218; fax: +57 44255152.
E-mail address: jdaristi2@yahoo.com.
Aristizabal-Ochoa [1,2] using the classical stability functions
and the exact expression for the curvature in the differential
equation of the deflection curve (i.e., the “Elastica” approach),
respectively. Approximate methods based on the Finite Element
Method (FEM) with large deflections and with or without
large strains have been utilized by other researchers like
Torkamani et al. [3] to solve the nonlinear geometric
elastic behavior of slender beam–columns and frames with
rigid connections. However, the exact solution for the large
deflection behavior of Timohenko beam–columns under any
type of end loads (conservative and nonconservative) including
the combined effects of bending, shear and axial forces and
their corresponding deformations is not known yet.
The main objective of this publication is to present an
approximate and practical method for the nonlinear large

c 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

0141-0296/$ - see front matter
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2006.07.012
992 J.D. Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 991–1003

subjected to end forces and moments is derived in a classic

Nomenclature manner. The proposed method and corresponding nonlinear
equations, although approximate, can be used in the tension
A cross-sectional area of the beam–column
and compression stability and postbuckling behavior as well as
As effective shear area of the beam–column
in the nonlinear large deflection-small strain elastic analyses of
E and G elastic and shear moduli of the material,
Timoshenko beam–columns with rigid, semi-rigid, and simple
respectively
connections. The proposed method and derived equations
Hz “bowing” bending function given by Eqs. (5) and
are extensions of those previously proposed by Aristizabal-
(6)
Ochoa [1] for slender beam–columns. The proposed method
h initial length of the beam–column AB
and equations can also be utilized in the large deflection-
hr chord length of the beam–column AB after
small strain inelastic analysis and postbuckling behavior of
“bowing” caused by bending and shear actions
Timoshenko beam–columns whose connections suffer from
I principal moment of inertia of the beam–column
flexural degradation or, on the contrary, flexural stiffening.
about its axis of bending
The advantages of the proposed method are: (1) the effects of
M external bending moment applied at A
semi-rigid connections are condensed into a single nonlinear
Ma and Mb end moments of beam–column at A and B,
equation with a single unknown (for tension or compression
respectively
axial loads) without introducing additional degrees of freedom
P applied vertical load at A (+ compression, −
and equations; (2) the proposed method, which is based on
tension)
the “modified shear equation” for Timoshenko beam–columns
Pe = π 2 E I / h 2 Euler load
with semi-rigid connections, is more accurate than any
Pt axial load along the cord AB (+ compression, −
other approximate method available and capable of capturing
tension)
the phenomena of tension buckling in members with low
Q applied transverse load at A
shear stiffness; (4) the method can be incorporated into the
Ra and Rb stiffness indexes of the flexural connection at
large deflection elastic analysis and postbuckling behavior of
A and B, respectively
Timoshenko beam–columns without major difficulties; and (5)
∆h and ∆v horizontal and vertical deflections of end A of
extension of the method to general elastic–plastic analysis
beam–column AB, respectively
requires the development and solution of incremental equations
κa and κb the flexural stiffness of the end connections at
and the handling of the spread of plasticity throughout the
A and B, respectively
volume of the members, including the interaction between
ρa and ρb fixity factors at A and B of column AB,
normal and shear stresses. This is a complex extension and it is
respectively
beyond the scope of this paper. Four comprehensive examples
θ angle of the cord AB with respect to the vertical
are included that show the effectiveness of the proposed method
axis (Fig. 1(a))
and equations.
θo initial out-of-plumb angle with respect to the
vertical axis (Fig. 1(a))
2. Structural model
θa0 and θb0 end slopes of member AB measured with
respect to its cord (Fig. 1(b))
2.1. Assumptions
u(x) lateral deflection of the column center line as
shown by Fig. 2(c)
Consider a 2-D prismatic beam–column that connects points
ψ(x) rotation of the cross section as shown by Fig. 2(c)
A and B as shown in Fig. 1(a). The element is made up of the
∆a and ∆b lateral sway at A and B, respectively
beam–column itself AB and the flexural connections κa and
∆ = ∆a − ∆b relative sidesway of column end A with
κb at the top and bottom ends, respectively. It is assumed that
respect to its bottom end B
the member AB of span h bends about the principal axis of its
ψa and ψb rotations of cross sections at A and B due to
cross section with a moment of inertia I , gross sectional area A,
bending, respectively
and effective shear area As and: (1) is made of a homogeneous
linear elastic material with Young and shear moduli E and G,
deflection-small strain analysis and postbuckling behavior of respectively; (2) its centroidal axis is a straight line with an
Timoshenko beam–columns of symmetrical cross section with initial out-of-plumbness θo with respect to the vertical axis; and
semi-rigid connections subjected to end loads and moments (3) is loaded at extreme A with P (vertical load), Q (transverse
(conservative or nonconservative) including the combined load), and M (M = Pe + M 0 , where M 0 is an additional
effects of: (1) bending, axial and shear deformations; (2) moment applied at A). Each one of these three loads can vary
the shear component of the applied axial forces (using the independently and are applied in the plane of bending.
“modified shear equation” presented by Timoshenko and The lateral bracing at A is provided by a linear displacement
Gere [4]); (3) out-of-plumbness of the member’s longitudinal spring of magnitude S∆ with one extreme connected to end A
axis; and (4) axial load eccentricities. Also, an expression of the beam–column and the other end on vertical rollers that
for the axial displacement δb caused by the “bowing” of the slide on a frictionless rigid vertical wall as shown in Fig. 1(a).
Timoshenko beam–column with generalized end conditions The dimensions of S∆ are in force/distance. The flexural
 J.D. Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 991–1003 993

Fig. 1. Model of column with sidesway partially inhibited and with rotational and lateral end restraints. (a) Structural model with an initial out-of-plumb angle θo ;
(b) end moments, forces, rotations and deflection moments in the plane of bending; and (c) internal forces and external loads on deformed element.

connectors have stiffnesses κa and κb (whose dimensions are nonlinear equations (2) and (3).
in force × distance/radian) in the plane of bending of the  
Ma + M b
beam–column. The ratios Ra = κa /(E I / h) and Rb = + P sin θ + Q − S∆ h
κb /(E I / h) are denoted as the stiffness indices of the flexural h
  
connections. These indices vary from zero (i.e., Ra = Rb = 0) hr hr
× sin θ − sin θo cos θ =0 (2)
for simple connections (i.e., pinned) to infinity (i.e., Ra = Rb = h h
∞) for fully restrained connections (i.e., rigid). Notice that the  
Pt Hz
proposed algorithm can be utilized in the inelastic analysis of hr / h = 1 − − (3)
beam–columns when the inelastic behavior is concentrated at E A 4Pt2 h 2
the connections. This can be carried out by updating the flexural where:
stiffness of the connections κa and κb for each load increment    
hr
in a linear-incremental fashion or including the corresponding Pt = P cos θ + S∆ h sin θ − sin θo − Q sin θ.
moment–rotation relationship of the connection as shown by h
Aristizabal-Ochoa [1,2]. By substituting Eq. (3) into Eq. (2), only the following
For convenience the following two parameters are intro- nonlinear equation has to be solved:
duced:  
Ma + M b
1 1 + P sin θ + Q − S∆ h
ρa = 3
and ρb = 3
(1a–b) h
1+ Ra 1+ Rb

Pt Hz
  
× 1− − sin θ − sin θo cos θ
where ρa and ρb are called the fixity factors. For perfectly E A 4Pt2 h 2
hinged connections, both the fixity factor ρ and the rigidity 
Pt Hz

index R are zero; but for rigid connections (i.e., perfectly × 1− − = 0. (4)
E A 4Pt2 h 2
clamped), the fixity factor is 1 and the rigidity index is infinity.
Since the fixity factor can only vary from 0 to 1 for elastic Eq. (2) represents the condition of moment equilibrium of
connections (while the rigidity index R may vary from 0 to ∞), the beam–column shown in Fig. 1(b) about B, and Eq. (3)
it is more convenient to use in the elastic analysis of structures the geometric condition of the actual distance between the
with semi-rigid connections. two extremes of the beam–column (expression that includes
the effects of the axial strain and the “bowing” caused by its
3. Proposed method and equations bending and shear deformations). Notice that the axial load
on the beam–column Pt is taken as the sum of the actual
The large deflection-small strain equations are developed components of the vertical and horizontal forces at A along its
in the plane of bending about one of the principal axes. chord. The magnitudes of the end moments Ma and Mb and the
The proposed method consists in solving simultaneously the “bowing” factor Hz depend on the actual sign of Pt , as follows:
994 J.D. Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 991–1003

3ρa [(1 − ρb ) + 3ρb tan (φ/2) /φ] (θ − θo ) EhI βφ 2 − (1 − ρa ) (1 − ρb ) βφ 2 + 3ρb (1 − βφ/ tan φ) M
 
Ma = −
(1 − ρa ) (1 − ρb ) βφ 2 + 3 (ρa + ρb − 2ρa ρb ) (1 − βφ/ tan φ) + 9ρa ρb β [tan (φ/2) / (βφ/2) − 1]

Box I.

3ρb [(1 − ρa ) + 3ρa tan (φ/2) /φ] (θ − θo ) EhI βφ 2 + 3ρb (1 − ρa ) (1 − βφ/ sin φ) M
Mb = −
(1 − ρa ) (1 − ρb ) βφ 2 + 3 (ρa + ρb − 2ρa ρb ) (1 − βφ/ tan φ) + 9ρa ρb β [tan (φ/2) / (βφ/2) − 1]

Box II.

3ρa [(1 − ρb ) + 3ρb tanh (φ/2) /φ] (θ − θo ) EhI βφ 2 − (1 − ρa ) (1 − ρb ) βφ 2 − 3ρb (1 − βφ/ tanh φ) M
 
Ma =
− (1 − ρa ) (1 − ρb ) βφ 2 + 3 (ρa + ρb − 2ρa ρb ) (1 − βφ/ tanh φ) + 9ρa ρb β [tanh (φ/2) / (βφ/2) − 1]

Box III.

3ρb [(1 − ρa ) + 3ρa tanh (φ/2) /φ] (θ − θo ) EhI βφ 2 − 3ρb (1 − ρa ) (1 − βφ/ sinh φ) M
Mb =
− (1 − ρa ) (1 − ρb ) βφ 2 + 3 (ρa + ρb − 2ρa ρb ) (1 − βφ/ tanh φ) + 9ρa ρb [tanh (φ/2) / (βφ/2) − 1]

Box IV.

(a) For Pt ≥ 0 (compression) and β > 0 or Pt < 0 (tension) problem with a given set of input values P, Q, M, θo , E A, E I ,
and β < 0: See equations in Boxes I and II. G As , h, and S∆ .
Four examples that follow show the effectiveness, simplicity
2−β φ
  
H Z = βφ (Ma2 + Mb2 ) cos φ + and accuracy of the proposed method. Example 1 is on the
sin φ sin φ large deflection analyses of a cantilever beam–column under

2−β
 separate concentrated horizontal and vertical forces at the top.
+ 2βφ Ma Mb Example 2 shows the effects of an initial shape of a simply
sin φ
supported beam–column that consists of two identical straight-
× (1 + φ/ tan φ) − 2(Ma + Mb )2 . (5) line segments on its large deflection elastic response under
eccentric axial loads at the ends. Example 3 addresses the large
(b) For Pt < 0 (tension) and β > 0: See equations in deflection analyses of a beam–column with both ends restrained
Boxes III and IV. against rotation and with sidesway uninhibited subjected to

2−β

φ
 axial and lateral forces. Example 4 shows the application of
H Z = βφ(Ma2 + Mb2 ) cosh φ + the proposed method to the stability and postbuckling behavior
sinh φ sinh φ
of cantilever columns subjected to gravity and fixed non-
2−β
 
conservative axial loads.
+ 2βφ Ma Mb
sinh φ 4. Verification and comprehensive examples
× (1 + φ/ tanh φ) − 2(Ma + Mb ) 2
(6) 4.1. Example 1: Analysis of an out-of-plumb cantilever column
q
where: φ = |Pt / β E I / h 2 | and β = 1/[1 + Pt /(G As )].


Determine both the large-deflection behavior and stability of
Although in Eqs. (2) and (4) the lateral bracing is assumed the cantilever column subjected to concentrated loads P and Q
to be a linear spring (linear with respect to the horizontal at the top end A as shown in Fig. 2(a). Assume that the member
deflection of end A) on vertical rollers, so that vertical forces is initially out-of-plumb θo and with properties ρb , G, E, A, As ,
are not induced at any stage of lateral deflections, a nonlinear I and h. Also assume that the applied loads Q and P are always
bracing with different end conditions can be used in the horizontal and vertical, respectively. Include in the analysis the
proposed model, as long as its induced vertical and horizontal effects of the axial strain Pt /E A on the cord length h r .
forces are known as a function of the vertical and horizontal Solution. In this example M = Ma = S∆ = ρa = 0; then from
deflections of end A. Equations given in Boxes I–IV and Eq. (4):
Eqs. (5), (6) for Ma , Mb and Hz are derived in Appendix A.  
Mb Pt Hz
Eq. (2) could be solved for θ in two ways: a simplified one, + {P sin θ + Q cos θ } 1 − − =0 (7a)
by neglecting any change in the length of the cord AB (i.e., by h E A 4Pt2 h 2
making h r / h = 1 at all times); or in a complete manner, using where Pt = P cos θ − Q sin θ.
Eq. (4) which includes any change in the ratio h r / h. Eq. (2) or For Pt ≥ 0 (compression) and β > 0 or Pt < 0 (tension)
(4) must be solved for θ or every load increment or for any new and β < 0
 J.D. Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 991–1003 995

Fig. 2. Example 1. Cantilever column semi-rigidly connected at the base B

subjected to loads P and Q at the free end: (a) applied loads and properties;
and (b) deflected shape.

3ρb (θ − θo ) EhI βφ 2
Mb = − ; and
(1 − ρb )βφ 2 + 3ρb (1 − βφ/ tan φ)
2−β φ
    
H Z = Mb βφ
2
cos φ + −2 .
sin φ sin φ
For Pt < 0 (tension) and β > 0
3ρb (θ − θo ) EhI βφ 2
Mb = ; and
−(1 − ρb )βφ 2 + 3ρb (1 − βφ/ tanh φ)
2−β φ
    
H Z = Mb2 βφ cosh φ + −2 .
sinh φ sinh φ

Substituting these expressions

p into Eq. (7a) (taking into
account that φ = |Pt /(β E I / h 2 )| and β = 1/[1 +
Pt /(As G)]), and including the axial strain effects (Pt /E A), θ Fig. 3. Example 1. Transversal and vertical deflections of a perfectly clamped
can be obtained from Eq. (7a). cantilever beam–column (ρb = 1) subjected to transverse load Q and P =
2E I /8h 2 with: (a) As G/(E I / h 2 ) = ∞; (b) As G/(E I / h 2 ) = 10; (c)
The following iterative process is suggested to determine the
As G/(E I / h 2 ) = 5.
values of θ, ∆v , and ∆h for a given value of the applied loads
P and Q: ∆h
∆v = h − . (8b)
(1) Knowing the value of the applied loads P and Q and the tan θ
input data θo , G, E, A, As , I and h, assume a trial value θ . Fig. 3(a)–(c) show the variations of ∆h / h and ∆v / h
(2) Calculate the values of Pt , β = 1/[1 + Pt /(As G)], φ = against the lateral load parameter Q/(E I / h 2 ) for three
p
|Pt /(β E I / h 2 )|, Mb and Hz . different values of G As /(E I / h 2 ) as indicated in the figures
for a particular case of a cantilever column subjected to a
(3) Check if Eq. (7a) is fulfilled, otherwise select a new value
constant vertical compressive load P of magnitude Pe /8 =
for θ and return to step 2. Use the bisection method to
π 2 E I /(8h 2 ) assuming that S∆ = θo = 0, ρb = 1 and
determine the value of θ for the given applied loads P and
Q and input data θo , G, E, A, As , I and h. E A = ∞. The results obtained with the proposed iterative
method are compared to those obtained using Eqs. (14) and
(4) The vertical and horizontal deflections at the tip of the beam
(15) for a perfectly clamped–clamped beam–column described
are approximately as follows:
  in Example 3 (substituting h for 2h and with the corresponding
Pt Hz values of ∆v and ∆h divided by two. These results are indicated
∆h = 1 − − h sin θ (8a)
E A 4Pt2 h 2 in Fig. 3(a)–(c) as “Small Deflection Theory”). Notice that
996 J.D. Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 991–1003

Fig. 4. Example 1. Large-deflection stability of a cantilever column (with ρb = 1 and θo = 0) subjected to axial load P at A. Effects of shear deformations on the
axial and lateral deflections at the free end for four different values of As G/(E I / h 2 ).

calculations based on small-deflection theory have a rather the calculated results with those presented by Timoshenko and
limited range of applicability, particularly for members made Gere [4] for small deflections and E A = G As = ∞. Include
of high resilient materials like advanced composites (FRP). the effects of the axial strain Pt /E A on the cord length h r .
Fig. 4 shows the effects of the shear deformations on
Solution. Taking only one segment as shown in Fig. 7(b), then
the large-deflection stability of a perfectly vertical cantilever
Q = S∆ = 0, M = Pe; ρa = 0 and ρb = 1; then from Eq. (4):
column (with θo = 0 and ρb = 1) under vertical compressive
load P. Notice that the deformation mode is in the range of (Ma + Mb )

Pt Hz

0 < ∆v / h < 1.5. Fig. 5(a)–(c) show the effects of shear + 1− − P sin θ = 0 (9)
h E A 4Pt2 h 2
deformations and factor of fixity at the base on the large-
deflection stability of a perfectly vertical cantilever column where Pt = P cos θ ≥ 0 (compression); Ma = Pe; Mb =
(θo = 0) under vertical compressive load P. Fig. 6(a)–(c) − (θ −θo ) cos(1−βφ/
θ +(1−βφ/ sin φ)(e/ h)
tan φ) Ph; and
show the effects of the factor of fixity at the base on the large-
2−β φ
  
deflection behavior of a perfectly vertical cantilever column
H Z = βφ(Ma + Mb )2 2
cos φ +
(θo = 0) subjected to tension load P and lateral load Q = sin φ sin φ
0.3π 2 E I / h 2 . Notice that the proposed method is capable of 
2−β

capturing the “phenomena” of tension buckling of Timoshenko + 2βφ Ma Mb
sin φ
beam–columns (Kelly [5] and Aristizabal-Ochoa [6,7]), as well
as its postbuckling response. The axial shortening caused by P × (1 + φ/ tan φ) − 2(Ma + Mb )2 .
was neglected (i.e., Pt /E A = 0) in these analyses.
Substituting the expressions above forp Ma and Mb into
Figs. 3(a)–(c), 4, 5(a)–(c), and 6(a)–(b) show that the large-
deflection and stability analysis of a beam–column are affected Eq. (9) (taking into account that φ = |Pt /(β E I / h 2 )| and
by the end boundary conditions, the applied loads, the shear including the axial strain effects Pt /E A), θ can be obtained
deformations along the member, and the shear force induced by from Eq. (10):
the axial force as the member deforms. 1−cos φ
−(θ − θo ) cos θ + sin φ βφ (e/ h)
4.2. Example 2: Large-deflection behavior of a simple (1 − βφ/ tan φ)
supported beam–column with an initial imperfection subjected 
Pt Hz

to an eccentric axial load + 1− − sin θ = 0. (10)
E A 4Pt2 h 2
Determine the large deflection-small strain nonlinear Eq. (10) represents the large deflection-small strain behavior
equation of a simple supported beam–column subjected to of the beam–column shown in Fig. 7(b) [after the expression
eccentric end axial loads as shown in Fig. 7(a). Assume that for Hz is substituted in Eq. (10)]. With the solution for θ
its initial shape consists of two identical straight-line segments obtained from Eq. (10), the deflections ∆Lateral = [(1 − EPAt −
(with properties G, E, A, As , I and length h) both making Hz
2 2 ) sin θ − sin θo ]h and ∆Axial = [cos θo − (1 − E A −
Pt
an angle θo with the cord. Bending occurs in the plane of the 4Pt h
Hz
two segments about their cross-section major axis. Compare ) cos θ ]h can be calculated directly.
4Pt2 h 2
 J.D. Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 991–1003 997

Fig. 5. Example 1. Large-deflection stability of a cantilever column subjected to axial compressive load P at A. Effects of shear deformations and fixity factor at
the base on the axial and lateral deflections at the free end for three different values of As G/(E I / h 2 ).

Fig. 8(a)–(c) shows the effects of the shear stiffness on M = Pe for three different values of e/ h (0.05, 0.1, and 0.2).
the large-deflection response of the column (for θo = 0.1, As expected, shear deformations and the axial load eccentricity
ρb = 1 and AE = ∞) under the end load P (compression) and increase both deflections.
998 J.D. Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 991–1003

Fig. 6. Example 1. Large-deflection response of a cantilever beam–column subjected to tension load P and lateral load Q = 0.3Pe at the free end. Effects of shear
deformations and fixity factor at the base on the axial and lateral deflections at the free end for two different values of As G/(E I / h 2 ).

β = 1), Eq. (10) is reduced to

1−cos φ
−(θ − θo ) + sin φ φ (e/ h)
+θ =0 (11)
(1 − φ/ tan φ)
sin φ
 
1 e
or θ= θo + (1 − cos φ) . (12)
cos φ φ h
Expression (12) is identical to that obtained using the
method presented by Timoshenko and Gere [4] for small
deflections and strains using the classic stability functions that
include bending deformations only.

4.3. Example 3: Large deflection analysis of a beam–column

Fig. 7. Example 2. Simple supported beam–column with an initial imperfection
subjected to axial load P and end moment M = Pe.
Now, for small deflections and neglecting axial and shear
deformations (i.e., small values of θ, E A = G As = ∞, and
with sidesway uninhibited and both ends restrained
Determine the large deflection-small strain nonlinear
equations for the horizontal and vertical deflections of the
beam–column (Fig. 9) restrained at both ends and with an
 J.D. Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 991–1003 999

Fig. 8. Example 2. Effects of shear deformations on the axial and lateral deflections at the free end of an out-of-plumb cantilever beam–column (θo = 0.1 and
ρb = 1.0) for four different values of As G/(E I / h 2 ) and subjected to axial load P and moment M = Pe: (a) e/ h = 0.05; (b) e/ h = 0.1; and (c) e/ h = 0.2.

initial out-of-plumb angle θo . Assume that: (1) properties P and Q are always vertical and horizontal, respectively.
of the member are: ρa , ρb , G, E, A, As , I and h; Include the effects of the axial strain Pt /E A on the cord
and (2) the applied moment is M = Pe and the loads length h r .
1000 J.D. Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 991–1003

Fig. 10. Perfectly clamped cantilever column subjected to gravity load Po and
a fixed force P f at the free end. (a) Applied loads and properties. (b) Deflected
Fig. 9. Example 3. Unbraced beam–column restrained at both ends. (a) shape.
Structural model with an initial out-of-plumb angle θo and applied loads P
and Q. (b) Deflected shape and top end deflections. 4.4. Example 4: Large deflection and post bucking behavior of
a beam–column subjected to a nonconservative force (Reut’s
column) combined with a gravity load
Solution. In this example M = Pe and S∆ = 0, then from Eq.
(4): Determine both the large-deflection behavior and stability
of the cantilever column (Fig. 10) subjected to two vertical
(Ma + Mb )
 
Pt Hz concentrated loads: Po (gravity load) and P f (vertical force
+ 1− − (P sin θ + Q cos θ ) = 0
h E A 4Pt2 h 2 whose line of action always passes through point B). Assume
(13) that: (1) the member is initially out-of-plumb (θo ) with
properties ρb , G, E, A, As , I and h; (2) bending occurs about
where Pt = P cos θ − Q sin θ. one of its main axis; and (3) the applied loads Po and P f are
always vertical and vary independently. Include in the analysis
Substituting expressions for Ma , Mb , and Hz given by
the effects of the axial strain Pt /E A on the cord length h r .
Boxes I–IV and Eqs.
p (5), (6) into Eq. (13) (taking into account
that M= Pe, φ = |Pt /(β E I / h 2 )| and β = 1/[1+ Pt /(As G)]) Solution. In this example P = Po + P f ; Q = S∆ = 0,
and including the axial strain effects Pt /E A), θ can be obtained M = −(h r sin θ )P f ; ρa = 0 and ρb = 1; then from Eq. (4):
using an iterative process similar to that described in Problem (Ma + Mb )

Pt Hz

(1), and the corresponding values of ∆v and ∆h can be + 1− − P sin θ = 0 (16)
h E A 4Pt2 h 2
determined from Eqs. (8a) and (8b), respectively.
where Pt = P cos θ ≥ 0 (compression);
When the beam–column is perfectly vertical (θo = 0),
clamped at both ends (i.e., ρa = ρb = 1) and subjected to P
 
Pt Hz Pf
Ma = M = − 1 − − Pt h tan θ
and Q only, the solutions for ∆h , and ∆v proposed by Kelly [5] E A 4Pt h2 2 Po + P f
using small deflection theory are as follows:
(θ − θo ) EhI βφ 2 + (1 − βφ/ sin φ) M
Mb = − ;
Qh

tan (φ/2)
 (1 − βφ/ tan φ)
∆h = −β (14)
βP φ/2 and
2−β φ
  
Q2 φβ cos φ − 2 sin φ + 2φ − β sin φ H Z = βφ(Ma2 + Mb2 ) cos φ +
 
∆v = . (15) sin φ sin φ
2β P 2 (φ/ h)(1 + cos φ)
2−β
 
+ 2βφ Ma Mb (1 + φ/ tan φ)− 2(Ma + Mb )2 .
Notice that the cantilever beam–column of Problem (1) can sin φ
be solved using the solution of this problem by simply making Substituting the expressions above forp Ma and Mb into
ρa = ρb = 0 and substituting h for 2h. The corresponding Eq. (16) (taking into account that φ = |Pt /(β E I / h 2 )| and
values of ∆v and ∆h must be divided by two. including the axial strain effects Pt /E A), θ can be obtained
 J.D. Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 991–1003
from Eq. (17):
θ − θo
 
Pt Hz
= 1− − webs) or low shear stiffness (like elastomeric bearings and short
tan θ E A 4Pt2 h 2
βφ
  
Pf
× 1− 1− (1 − 1/ cos φ) . (17)
tan φ Po + P f
Eq. (17) represents the large deflection-small strain behavior
of the beam–column shown in Fig. 9 [after the expression
for Hz is substituted in Eq. (17)]. With the solution for θ
obtained from Eq. (17), the deflections at the top ∆h = [(1 −
Pt Hz
2 2 ) sin θ − sin θo ]h and ∆v = [cos θo − (1 − E A −
Pt
EA − 4Pt h
Hz
) cos θ ]h
can be calculated directly.
4Pt2 h 2
Notice that when θ = θo = 0, Eq. (17) is reduced to
the characteristic equation: cos φ = −P f /Po . This result
is identical to Eq. (14c) reported by Bolotin [8] (p. 103)
and Aristizabal-Ochoa [9] (p. 479) for a perfectly clamped
cantilever column subjected to a force with a fixed line of action
and gravity load.
The four examples presented above show that the proposed
method is very practical and versatile allowing both the
small- as well as the large-deflection analysis of Timoshenko
beam–columns subjected to end loads.
5. Summary and conclusions
The nonlinear large deflection-small strain analysis and post-
buckling behavior of Timoshenko beam–columns of symmetri-
cal cross section with semi-rigid connections subjected to con-
servative and nonconservative end loads (forces and moments)
including the combined effects of shear, axial and bending de-
formations, axial load eccentricities, lateral bracing and out-of-
plumbness are developed in a simplified manner. A new set of
stability functions based on the “modified shear equation” that
include the effects of shear deformations and the shear compo-
nent of the applied axial forces is derived. Also, an expression
for the axial displacement δb caused by the “bowing” of the
member subjected to end forces and moments with generalized
end conditions is derived in a classic manner. The proposed
method, although approximate, can also be used in the non-
linear large deflection analyses of Timoshenko beam–columns
with rigid, semi-rigid, and simple connections subjected to ten-
sion forces.
The analytical results indicate that the large deflection-
small strain elastic response and postbuckling behavior of
Timoshenko beam–columns of symmetrical cross section is
not only affected by the magnitude of the axial load, the
lateral drift restraints (i.e., bracing), the degree of fixity of the
connections and its elastic properties, but also by the bowing
effect caused by the flexural moments and shear deflections.
Significant increases in the lateral and axial deflections are
caused by the geometric nonlinear effects, particularly those
induced by the shear deformations and by the shear component
of the axial force. Also the buckling load of beam–columns
is reduced by shear deformations and by the shear component
of the axial force. These shear effects must be considered in
the analysis of beam–columns with relatively low effective
1001
shear areas (like in short laced columns, columns with batten
plates or with perforated cover plates, and columns with open
columns made of laminated composites with low shear modulus
G when compared to their elastic modulus E making the shear
stiffness G As of the same order of magnitude as E I / h 2 ).
The shear effects are also of great importance in the tension
and compression stability and dynamic behavior of laminated
elastomeric bearings used for seismic isolation of buildings.
The advantages of the proposed method are: (1) the effects of
semi-rigid connections and shear deformations are condensed
into a single nonlinear equation with a single unknown
(for tension or compression axial loads) without introducing
additional degrees of freedom and equations; (2) the proposed
method, which is based on a new set of stability functions
for Timoshenko beam–columns with semi-rigid connections,
is very practical, versatile and more accurate than any other
approximate method available; and (3) extension of the method
to general elastic–plastic analysis requires the development
and solution of incremental equations and the handling of the
spread of plasticity throughout the volume of the members,
including the interaction between normal and shear stresses.
This is a complex extension and it is beyond the scope of this
paper. Four comprehensive examples are included that show the
effectiveness of the proposed method and equations.
Acknowledgments
The research presented in this paper was carried out at
the National University of Colombia, School of Mines at
Medellin. The author wants to express his appreciation to
DIME for the financial support and to David Padilla-Llano and
Johnny Moncada-Palacios, members of the Structural Stability
Research Group of the National University of Colombia, for
carrying out the analytical studies.
Appendix A. Derivations of equations given in Boxes I–IV
and Eqs. (5), (6)
A.1. Expressions for Ma and Mb
The stability analysis of a prismatic column including
bending and shear deformations (Fig. 1(a)–(c)) is formulated
using the “modified shear equation” proposed by Timoshenko
and Gere [4] (p. 134). This approach has been utilized by
Aristizabal-Ochoa [6,7] in the stability analysis of columns, and
Kelly [5] in the analysis of Elastomeric Isolation Bearings. The
governing equations are as follows:
x
β E I u 00 (x) + Pu(x) = −Ma − (Ma + Mb + P∆) (18a)
h
Ma + Mb + P∆
β E I ψ 00 (x) + Pψ(x) = (18b)
h
where u(x) = lateral deflection of the column center line; and
ψ(x) = rotation of the cross section as shown by Fig. 1(c). The
solutions to the second-order linear differential equations (18a)
and (18b) are as follows:
1002 J.D. Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 991–1003

(θ − θo )βφ 2 (E I / h) + βφ βφ
h i  2 
1 tan(φ/2) M
− Rb + φ Rb + 1 − tan φ Ra
Ma =
βφ 2 βφ
    
tan(φ/2)
Ra R b + Ra + Rb 1 − tan φ + βφ/2 − 1 β
1 1

Box V.

βφ
h i  
tan(φ/2)
− 1
Ra + φ (θ − θo )βφ 2 (E I / h) + 1 − sin φ
M
Ra
Mb =
βφ 2 βφ
    
tan(φ/2)
Ra R b + 1
Ra + Rb 1 − tan φ + βφ/2 − 1 β
1

Box VI.

(θ − θo )βφ 2 (E I / h) − βφ φ
h i  2 
1 tanh(φ/2) M
Rb + φ Rb − 1 + tanh φ Ra
Ma =
βφ
− Rφa Rb
2
    
tanh(φ/2)
1 1
+ Ra + Rb 1 − tan φ + βφ/2 − 1 β

Box VII.

βφ
h i  
tanh(φ/2)
1
Ra + φ (θ − θo )βφ 2 (E I / h) + 1 − sinh M
φ Ra
Mb =
− Rβφ βφ
2
    
tanh(φ/2)
βφ/2 − 1 β
1
a Rb
+ Ra + R1b 1 − tanh φ +

Box VIII.
x  Ma sin φ − βφ Mb sin φ − βφ cos φ ∆
u(x) = A cos φ ψb = + +
h    E I / h βφ sin φ
2 E I/h βφ sin φ
2 h
x x Ma + M b Ma
+ B sin φ + +∆ − (19a) (20b)
h h P P
x  but ∆
h = (θ − θo ) and
ψ(x) = C cos φ
h    Ma − M
x
φ +
1 Ma + M b θa0 = −(θ − θo ) −
+ D sin
h h P
+∆ (19b) κa
Ma sin φ − βφ cos φ Mb sin φ − βφ
= + (21a)
where φ 2 = P/(β E I / h 2 ). E I/h βφ 2 sin φ E I / h βφ 2 sin φ
The unknown coefficients A, B, C, and D can be obtained Mb
from the following boundary conditions: θb0 = −(θ − θo ) −
κb
At x = 0: u = 0, ψ = ψa Ma sin φ − βφ Mb sin φ − βφ cos φ
At x = h: u = ∆ and ψ = ψb = + (21b)
E I / h βφ 2 sin φ E I/h βφ 2 sin φ
where ψa and ψb = rotations of cross sections at A and B due
to bending, respectively; where ψa and ψb = rotations of cross sections at A and B due
to bending, respectively;
∆a and ∆b = lateral sway at A and B, respectively.
θa0 and θb0 = rotations of ends A and B with respect to the
∆ = ∆a − ∆b = relative sidesway of column end A with p
respect to its bottom end B. cord AB, respectively; and φ = |Pt /(β E I / h 2 )|.
Therefore: A = MPa ; B = MPa tan(φ/2) − MPasin +Mb
φ ; C =
From Eqs. (21a) and (21b) the end moments Ma and Mb can

M +M
 be expressed in terms of (θ − θo ), M and the fixity ratios (Ra
ψa − h1 a
P
b
+ ∆ ; and and Rb ) as shown in the equations given in Boxes V and VI,
where β = 1/[1 + P/(As G)]; and As = effective shear area of
Ψa − Ψb cos φ
 
Ma + M b
D= − + ∆ tan(φ/2). the column.
sin φ P Similarly, when the axial load Pt is negative (tension) and
Since u 0 = ψ + V /(As G) and V = Pψ − Ma +Mhb +P ∆ , the β > 0: See equations in Boxes VII and VIII.
following expressions for ψa and ψb can be obtained: Equations in Boxes√ VII and VIII were obtained by replacing
φ or iφ (where i = −1) in equations in Boxes V and VI
Ma sin φ − βφ cos φ Mb sin φ − βφ ∆ and also taking into account that sin(iφ) = i sinh φ, cos(iφ) =
ψa = + +
E I/h βφ sin φ
2 E I / h βφ sin φ
2 h cosh φ, and tan(iφ) = i tanh φ. Equations in Boxes I, II,
(20a) III and IV can be obtained once Ra = 3ρa /(1 − ρa ) and
 J.D. Aristizabal-Ochoa / Engineering Structures 29 (2007) 991–1003 1003

Rb = 3ρb /(1 − ρb ) are substituted into the equations given Therefore:

in Boxes V, VI, VII and VIII, respectively.
2−β
 
The elastica is given by Eq. (19a) or H Z = (4P 2 h)δb = βφ(Ma2 + Mb2 )
sin φ
φ
     
Ma x x  
φ
 
2−β

u(x) = cos φ + tan sin φ −1 × cos φ + + 2βφ Ma Mb
P h 2 h sin φ sin φ
 
x Ma + M b
× +∆ . (22a) × (1 + φ/ tan φ) − 2(Ma + Mb )2 . (26)
h P
Similarly, when the axial load Pt is negative (tension) and
Similarly, when the axial load Pt is negative (tension) and β > 0:
β > 0:
2−β φ
  
φ H Z = βφ(Ma + Mb ) cosh φ +
    2 2
Ma x  x 
u(x) = cosh φ − tanh sinh φ −1 sinh φ sinh φ
P h 2 h
2−β
 
 
x Ma + M b + 2βφ Ma Mb
+ +∆ . (22b) sinh φ
h P
× (1 + φ/ tanh φ) − 2(Ma + Mb )2 . (27)
A.2. Expression for bowing factor Hz
Notice that the expression for the bowing factor Hz given by
The axial displacement δb caused by the “bowing” of the Eq. (26) is identical to that developed by Ekhande et al. [10]
beam–column given by Eq. (23) was derived by Kelly [5]: when β = 1 (i.e., when the effects of shear deformations and
those of the shear component of the axial force are neglected).
1
Z h 
du
 The expression for Hz developed by Ekhande et al. [10] was
δb = 2ψ − ψ 2 dx. (23) used by Aristizabal-Ochoa [1] in the nonlinear large-deflection
2 0 dx
small-strain analysis of slender beam–columns with semi-rigid
Substituting Eqs. (19a) and (19b) with ∆ = M = 0 connections.
into Eq. (23), carrying out the integration and after lots
of algebra, the expression for the axial displacement δb References
caused by the “bowing” of the beam–column can be reduced
to: [1] Aristizabal-Ochoa J Dario. Nonlinear large-deflection small-strain
analysis of beam–columns under end loads. Journal of Structural
h Hb2 Hb h ψa + ψb
 
Hb tan(φ/2)
δb = − + Engineering ASCE 2001;127(1):92–6.
2 P2 P 2 P βφ/2 [2] Aristizabal-Ochoa J Dario. Large-deflection stability of slender
beam–columns with semi-rigid connections: The elastica approach.
φ + sin φ
  
h Hb 2 Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE 2004;274–82.
+ −1
4φ P β cos2 (φ/2) [3] Torkamani MAM, Sonmez M, Cao J. Second-order elastic plane-frame
    analysis using finite-element method. Journal of Structural Engineering
Hb h 2
× (ψa + ψb ) + + −1 ASCE 1997;123(9):1225–35.
P 8φ β [4] Timoshenko S, Gere J. Theory of elastic stability. 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill;
  1961 [Chapter II].
(2φ−sin 2φ)(ψa2 +ψb2 )−4(φ cos φ−sin φ)ψa ψb [5] Kelly JM. Tension buckling in multilayer elastomeric bearings. Journal of
× (24) Engineering Mechanics ASCE 2003;129(12):1363–8.
sin2 φ [6] Aristizabal-Ochoa J Dario. Tension buckling in multilayer elastomeric
bearings by James M. Kelly. Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE
where Hb = − Ma +M h
b
. 2003;129(12):1363–8. Discussion: 131(1):106–8.
After substituting Eq. (20) into Eq. (24), the expression for [7] Aristizabal-Ochoa J Dario. Column stability and minimum lateral bracing:
δb in terms of Ma and Mb is as follows: Effects of shear deformations. Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE
 2004;130(10):1223–32.
1 [8] Bolotin VV. Nonconservative problems of the theory of elastic stability.
δb = − 2(Ma + Mb )2 + βφ(Ma2 + Mb2 ) 60 Fifth Avenue, New York (NY): MacMillan; 1963. p. 103.
4P 2 h
[9] Aristizabal-Ochoa J Dario. Stability of beam–columns with semirigid
2−β φ
  
connections under conservative and non-conservative end axial forces:
× cos φ + Static method. Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE 2005;131(5):
sin φ sin φ 473–84.
2−β φ [10] Ekhande SG, Selvappalam M, Madugula MKS. Stability functions for
  
+ 2βφ Ma Mb 1+ . (25) three-dimensional beam columns. Journal of Structural Engineering
sin φ tan φ ASCE 1989;115(2):467–79.