Home Search Collections Journals About Contact us My IOPscience

A new one-dimensional two-node layered composite beam element

This article has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text article.

2010 IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 10 012216

(http://iopscience.iop.org/1757-899X/10/1/012216)

View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details:
IP Address: 117.211.85.34
The article was downloaded on 28/02/2011 at 06:54

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

WCCM/APCOM 2010 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 10 (2010) 012216 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/10/1/012216

A new one-dimensional two-node layered composite beam

element

Xiaoshan Lin and Y X Zhang*

School of Engineering and Information Technology,
The University of New South Wales, Australian Defence Force Academy,
Canberra, ACT, 2600, Australia

E-mail: *y.zhang@adfa.edu.au

Abstract. A simple one-dimensional two-node beam element is developed in this paper based
on Timoshenko’s composite beam functions. To account for the layered characterization of the
composite beams, a layered method is employed in the proposed element. The proposed
element provides a unified formulation for both slender and moderately deep beam analyses,
and the notorious shear locking phenomenon for analysis of slender beams can be avoided
naturally. The proposed beam element is demonstrated to be efficient and accurate for both
isotropic and composite beams analyses by numerical examples.

1. Introduction
Finite element methods have been successfully applied for analysis and modelling of structural
behaviour of beams including composite beams. Till now, a lot of finite elements have been developed
and utilised to simulate the structural performance of composite beams with accuracy.
Three-dimensional discrete Lagrangian four-noded cubic elements with five, six and seven DOF
per node were used in the numerical analysis conducted by Manjunatha and Kant [1]. Higher-order
theories were developed in their elements and applied to the analyses of symmetric/unsymmetric
composite and sandwich beams. A 3-D two-node finite element with 8 DOF per node, based on a
higher-order shear deformation theory, was developed by Subramanian [2, 3] for the flexural analysis
of symmetric laminated composite beams. Displacements and slopes of displacement due to bending,
shear deformation and sectional warping together with longitudinal displacement were accounted for
in the eight degrees of freedom at each node, and the in-plane and transverse displacements were
assumed to be quintic and quartic in the thickness co-ordinate of beams respectively. Argyris et al. [4]
developed a 2-node isotropic and composite shear-deformable beam element with 12 DOF, which
were translational degrees of freedom and rotational degrees of freedom in three directions in space.
Natural modes were used to describe the elemental kinematics with 6 natural rigid-body and 6 natural
straining modes. Only the modes contributing to the pure deformation were used to build up the
elemental stiffness matrix.
Ferreira et al. [5] modelled FRP-reinforced concrete composite beams using degenerated 2-D shell
elements based on the first-order shear deformation theory. The element was degenerated from three-
dimensional brick element to a curved shell element with modes at the mid-surface. A two-
dimensional curved beam element was developed by Surana and Nguyen [6] based on higher-order
transverse shear deformation theory, and was used to analyze the linear static problems of laminated
composites beams.


c 2010 Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
WCCM/APCOM 2010 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 10 (2010) 012216 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/10/1/012216

A 1-D laminated beam element having five nodes with 16 DOF for a single lamina was developed
based on a higher-order theory by Yuan and Miller [7] for analysis of laminated beams. A layer-wise
constant shear beam element was generated based on the generalized laminate plate theory to predict
linear elastic behaviour of laminated beams by Davalos et al. [8]. The total DOF increased with
numbers of node and layer per element. Based on higher-order shear deformation theories, Murthy et
al. [9] refined a 2-noded beam element with 4 DOF at each node, which are longitudinal displacement,
transverse displacement, normal rotation and the slope of the neutral axis, for the analysis of
asymmetrically stacked laminated composite beams.
In this paper, a one-dimensional (1-D) two-node composite beam element with only 2 DOF
(transverse displacement and rotation) at each node is developed based on the Timoshenko’s
composite beam functions. Due to the employment of Timoshenko’s composite beam functions to
represent the displacements, a unified formulation is achieved for analysis of slender beams and
moderately deep beams, and what's more, shear-locking problem is avoided naturally when analyzing
slender beams. Layered approach is utilised to model the characterizations of different materials by
changing the material properties of specified layers. The proposed beam element is demonstrated to be
simple, accurate and computational effective for finite element analysis of both isotropic and
composite beams.

2. A 2-node composite beam element

The composite beam element with only two nodes and two degrees of freedom at each node and its
cross section are shown in figure 1. The cross section may include several layers with same or
different material properties for each layer depending on the layer up of the composite beam. But for
isotropic beams, the materials properties are the same for each layer.

        
Figure 1. A two-node composite beam element and its cross section.
It is assuming that each layer is in a state of plane stress and the material properties are constant
throughout the thickness of each layer. Material properties of the whole section are obtained by
summing algebraically the contribution of each layer.
1
Dbb = b∑ i =1 Ei ( zi3+1 − zi3 )
n
(1)
3
Dss = κ b∑ i =1 Gi ( zi +1 − zi )
n
(2)
where
Dbb and Dss: bending stiffness and transverse shear stiffness
b: width of beam element
n: number of layers
κ: constant of the non-uniformity of the shearing stress, which is generally set to be 5/6
Ei: bending elastic modulus of the ith layer
Gi: shear modulus of the ith layer
zi+1 and zi: coordinates of the upper and lower surfaces of the ith layer in z direction

2.1. Timoshenko’s composite beam functions

A notorious phenomenon of shear locking often occurs when an element for moderately deep beams is
used to analyze slender beams. To develop a unified beam element for analysis of both slender and
moderately deep beams, Timoshenko’s beam function method [10-13] is employed. The composite

2
WCCM/APCOM 2010 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 10 (2010) 012216 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/10/1/012216

Timoshenko’s beam functions have been successfully developed and used to develop composite plate
elements for linear and nonlinear finite element analysis of composite plates [10-13]. In this paper, the
one-dimensional two-node composite beam element is developed based on the Timoshenko’s beam
function method. Transverse shear deformation effect is included in the new element for accurate
analysis of moderately deep beams. When the thickness of the beam approaches to zero for slender
beams, transverse shear strain of the beam element approaches to zero, hence, shear locking has been
avoided naturally.
Rotations and transverse displacements at any point along the longitudinal direction of the proposed
beam element can be represented by the displacements and rotations of the two ends w1, w2, θ1, θ2 of
the composite beam. The formulas of deflection w and rotation θ for the composite beam element with
length L, width b and height h are given as
w = ( L1 + μe L1 L2 ( L1 − L2 )) w1 + ( L1 L2 + μe L1 L2 ( L1 − L2 )) L / 2θ1 + ( L2 + μe L1 L2 ( L2 − L1 )) w2 + (− L1L2 + μe L1L2 ( L1 − L2 )) L / 2θ 2 (3)

⎛ 6 L1 L2 ⎞ ⎛ 6 L1 L2 ⎞ (4)
θ = −⎜ ⎟ μe w1 + L1 (1 − 3μe L2 ) θ1 + ⎜ ⎟ μe w2 + L2 (1 − 3μe L1 ) θ 2
⎝ L ⎠ ⎝ L ⎠
where
x x 1 D
L1 = 1 − L2 = μe = λe = bb 2
L, L, 1 + 12λe , Dss L (5)
in which x is the coordinate along the beam, L is the length of the beam, Dbb and Dss are bending
stiffness and transverse shear stiffness as given in equations (1) and (2).

2.2. Basic formulations

Assuming that the in-plane forces are zero and the in-plane displacement (u0 v0) in the mid-plane are
zero, the displacement field of the beam element takes the form of
u ( x, z ) = − zθ ( x) (6)
w( x, z ) = w0 ( x)
(7)
Strain-displacement relationships are
∂u dθ
εx = = −z
∂x dx (8)
∂u ∂w ∂w
γ= + = −θ
∂z ∂x ∂x (9)
∂w
where εx is axial strain, γ is shear strain, and is the slope of the neutral axis.
∂x

2.3. Strain and strain matrix

The element bending strain vector and shear strain vector are

{ε } = − ddxθ = [ B ]{q }
b b
(e)

(10)

{γ } = [ Bs ]{q ( e ) } (11)
in which

3
WCCM/APCOM 2010 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 10 (2010) 012216 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/10/1/012216

1
{ε b } = {ε x } (12)
z
⎡ 6μe ⎛ 1 2 x ⎞ 3μe + 1 x 6 μe ⎛ 1 2 x ⎞ 1 − 3μe x⎤
[ Bb ] = ⎢ ⎜ − 2⎟ − 6 μe 2 − ⎜ − 2⎟ − − 6 μe 2 ⎥
⎣ L ⎝L L ⎠ L L L ⎝L L ⎠ L L ⎦ (13)
1 μe μe 1 μe 1 μ ⎤
[ Bs ] = ⎡⎢ −
1
+ − − − + e⎥
⎣ L L 2 2 L L 2 2⎦ (14)
where [Bb] is the curvature-displacement matrix, and [Bs] is the shear strain-displacement matrix,
with the element nodal displacement vector expressed as

⎧ q1 ⎫ ⎧ wi ⎫
{q } = ⎨ q ⎬
(e)
{qi } = ⎨ ⎬
⎩ 2⎭ with ⎩ θ i ⎭ (i=1,2) (15)

2.4. Finite element equations

The strain energy of the composite beam element is
1 (e) T 1
{q } ∫ [ B ] ( D ) [ B ] dx {q } + 2 {q } ∫ [ B ] ( D ) [ B ] dx {q }
L T L T
(e) (e) T (e)
U ( e ) = U b( e ) + U s( e ) = b bb b
(e)
s ss s
(e)

2 0 0

1 (e) T 1
{ q } ⎡⎣ Kb( e ) ⎤⎦ {q ( e ) } + {q ( e ) } ⎡⎣ K s( e ) ⎤⎦ {q ( e ) }
T
= (16)
2 2
The governing equation when using virtual work approach is

( ⎣⎡ K (e)
b
(e)
)
⎦⎤ + ⎣⎡ K s ⎦⎤ {q } − { f } = 0
(e)
(17)

where {f} is equivalent nodal load vector and element bending stiffness matrix and shear stiffness
matrix is written as
T
⎡⎣ K b( e ) ⎤⎦ = ∫ [ Bb ] ( Dbb ) [ Bb ] dx
L (e)
(18)
0

T
⎡⎣ K s( e ) ⎤⎦ = ∫ [ Bs ] ( Dss ) [ Bs ] dx
L (e)
(19)
0

3. Numerical examples
To validate the proposed element, an isotropic beam and a composite beam are computed herein using
the proposed element and the computed results are compared with those obtained from other
literatures.

3.1. Finite element analysis of a slender isotropic beam

The isotropic beam as shown in figure 2 is analyzed using 4 proposed new elements. Young’s
modulus E, Poisson’s ratios υ, dimensions and applied loads are shown in table 1. The DOFs, slopes at
E and deflections at E obtained from the present element and other literatures [4] are listed in table 2.
It can be seen that the slope and deflection at point E obtained from the present model are very close to
the analytical solution [4] and result from Argyris’s model [4]. But comparing with the DOF of 48 and
84 for the Krichhoff model [4] and the Argyris’s model [4], there are only 10 DOF for the current
element to achieve similar accuracy. Thus, the proposed beam element reveals good accuracy in
modeling linear behaviors of isotropic beams.

4
WCCM/APCOM 2010 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 10 (2010) 012216 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/10/1/012216

Figure 2. Configuration of isotropic beam [4].

Table 1. Details of isotropic beams.

E (MPa) υ l (mm) ba (mm) hb (mm) a (mm) w(N/mm)
Isotropic
90000 0.3 200 10 10 100 0.01
beam
a
width of the cross section
b
height of the cross section

Table 2. Deflections and slops of isotropic beam.

DOF Slope at E Deflection at E (mm)
48 9.0122×10-5 8.3946×10-6
Kirchhoff [4]
84 8.9331×10-5 8.3553×10-6
48 9.0123×10-5 8.4124×10-6
Argyris et al. [4]
84 8.9335×10-5 8.3730×10-6
Present model 10 8.9112×10-5 8.3716×10-6
Analytical solution [4] 8.8889×10-5 8.3333×10-6

3.2. Finite element analysis of a composite beam

A symmetrically laminated cantilever beam consisting of two materials and loaded by a concentrated
tip load of 200N and a uniformly distributed load of 100N/mm is analysed. The shear modulus and
Poisson’s ratio of both of two materials are 0.5×106MPa and 0.25. The Young’s modulus of material 1
and material 2 are 30×106MPa and 5×106MPa respectively. The dimension and cross section of the
composite beam are shown in figure 3. The same composite beam was analysed by Surana and
Nguyen [6] using nine 2-D curved beam elements and by Davalos et al. [8] using eight one-
dimensional beam finite element with layer-wise constant shear. In the present analysis, six elements
are used to model the cantilever composite beam. The comparison of maximum deflections at the tip is
given in table 3. The present results agree very well with others.

Figure 3. Configuration and cross section of laminated cantilever beam [8].

5
WCCM/APCOM 2010 IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 10 (2010) 012216 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/10/1/012216

Table 3. Maximum deflection (mm).

Concentrated tip load Uniformly distributed load
Surana and Nguyen [6] 0.03031 0.535
Davalos et al. [8] 0.03029 0.552
Present model 0.03060 0.541

4. Conclusion
The proposed composite beam element is very simple in formulation and has only two nodes with two
degrees of freedom at each node. As far as computational economy and effectiveness concerned, the
element is efficient and time saving. By using Timoshenko’s composite beam functions, shear-locking
problem is avoided automatically for slender beam analysis. Numerical examples demonstrate that the
proposed element can model linear behaviours of both slender isotropic and moderately deep
composite beams with high accuracy.

5. References
[1] Manjunatha B S and Kant T 1993, New theories for symmetric/unsymmetric composite and
sandwich beams with C0 finite elements, Composite Structures, 23 61
[2] Subramanian P 1999, Flexural analysis of laminated composite plates, Composite Structures, 45
51
[3] Subramanian P 2001, Flexural analysis of symmetric laminated composite beams using C1 finite
element, Composite Structures, 54 121
[4] Argyris J, Tenek L, and Mattsson A 1998, BEC: A 2-node fast converging shear-deformable
isotropic and composite beam element based on 6 rigid-body and 6 straining modes,
Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 152 281
[5] Ferreira A J M, Camanho P P, Marques A T, and Fernandes A A 2001, Modelling of concrete
beams reinforced with FRP re-bars, Composite Structures, 53 107
[6] Surana K S and Nguyen S H 1990, Two-dimensional curved beam element with higher-order
hierarchical transverse approximation for laminated composites, Computers & Structures, 36
499
[7] Yuan F-G and Miller R E 1990, A higher order finite element for laminated beams, Composite
Structures, 14 125
[8] Davalos J F, Kim Y, and Barbero E J 1994, Analysis of laminated beams with a layer-wise
constant shear theory, Composite Structures, 28 241
[9] Murthy M V V S, Mahapatra D R, Badarinarayana K, and Gopalakrishnan S 2005, A refined
higher order finite element for asymmetric composite beams, Composite Structures, 67 27
[10] Zhang Y X, Bradford M A, and Gilbert R I 2007, A layered shear-flexural plate/shell element
using Timoshenko beam functions for nonlinear analysis of reinforced concrete plates, Finite
Elements in Analysis and Design, 43 888
[11] Zhang Y X and Kim K S 2004, Two simple and efficient displacement-based quadrilateral
elements for the analysis of composite laminated plates, International Journal for Numerical
Methods in Engineering, 61 1771
[12] Zhang Y X and Kim K S 2005, A simple displacement-based 3-node triangular element for
linear and geometrically nonlinear analysis of laminated composite plates, Computer
Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 194 4607
[13] Zhang Y X and Zhu Y 2010, A new shear-flexible FRP-reinforced concrete slab element,
Composite Structures, 92 730