Flexural-torsional buckling analysis of composite beams by BEM

including shear deformation effect

E.J. Sapountzakis
*
, J.A. Dourakopoulos
Institute of Structural Analysis and Seismic Research, School of Civil Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Zografou Campus,
GR-157 80 Athens, Greece
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 30 November 2007
Received in revised form 6 June 2008
Available online 18 June 2008
Keywords:
Flexural-torsional buckling
Timoshenko beam
Nonuniform torsion
Warping
Flexural
Bar
Composite beam
Twist
Boundary element method
Shear deformation
a b s t r a c t
In this paper, a boundary element method is developed for the general exural-torsional
linear buckling analysis of Timoshenko beams of arbitrarily shaped composite cross-sec-
tion. The composite beam consists of materials in contact, each of which can surround a
nite number of inclusions. The materials have different elasticity and shear moduli with
same Poissons ratio and are rmly bonded together. The beam is subjected to a compres-
sive centrally applied load together with arbitrarily axial, transverse and/or torsional dis-
tributed loading, while its edges are restrained by the most general linear boundary
conditions. The resulting boundary value problem, described by three coupled ordinary dif-
ferential equations, is solved employing a boundary integral equation approach. Besides
the effectiveness and accuracy of the developed method, a signicant advantage is that
the method can treat composite beams of both thin and thick walled cross-sections taking
into account the warping along the thickness of the walls, while the displacements as well
as the stress resultants are computed at any cross-section of the beam using the respective
integral representations as mathematical formulae. All basic equations are formulated with
respect to the principal shear axes coordinate system, which does not coincide with the
principal bending one in a nonsymmetric cross-section. To account for shear deformations,
the concept of shear deformation coefcients is used. Six coupled boundary value problems
are formulated with respect to the transverse displacements, to the angle of twist, to the
primary warping function and to two stress functions and solved using the analog equation
method, a BEM based method. Several beams are analysed to illustrate the method and
demonstrate its efciency. The signicant inuence of the boundary conditions and the
shear deformation effect on the buckling load are investigated through examples with
great practical interest.
2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Elastic stability of beams is one of the most important criteria in the design of structures subjected to compressive loads.
This beam buckling analysis becomes much more complicated in the case the cross-sections centroid does not coincide with
its shear center (asymmetric beams), leading to the formulation of the exural-torsional buckling problem. Also, composite
structural elements consisting of a relatively weak matrix material reinforced by stronger inclusions or of materials in con-
tact are of increasing technological importance. Steel beams or columns totally encased in concrete, ber-reinforced mate-
rials or concrete plates stiffened by steel beams are most common examples. Moreover, unless the beam is very thin the
0093-6413/$ - see front matter 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.mechrescom.2008.06.007
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +30 2107721718; fax: +30 2107721720.
E-mail addresses: cvsapoun@central.ntua.gr (E.J. Sapountzakis), jdour@mail.ntua.gr (J.A. Dourakopoulos).
Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Mechanics Research Communications
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er. com/ l ocat e/ mechrescom
error incurred fromthe ignorance of the effect of shear deformation is substantial, and an accurate analysis requires its inclu-
sion in it.
The rst published work on exural-torsional buckling appeared in 1899 by Michell (1899) and Prandtl (1899) for thin,
rectangular, solid beams. Since then, the exural-torsional buckling problem of thin-walled homogeneous beams (based on
the assumptions of the thin tube theory) (Vlasov, 1961; Timoshenko and Gere, 1961; Rao and Carnegie, 1970; Mei, 1970;
Hodges and Peters, 1975; Reissner, 1979; Milisavljevic, 1995; Hodges, 2001) or of symmetrical cross-section beams ignoring
warping (Orloske et al., 2006) has been studied by many researchers noting that Reissner (1979) was the rst who included
transverse shear in his analysis. Moreover, the exural-torsional buckling problem in the case of composite beams of thin-
walled or laminated cross-sections has also been examined ignoring (Lee and Kim, 2001; Sapks and Kollr, 2002) or taking
into account (Kollr, 2001; Machado and Cortnez, 2005; Yu et al., 2002; Cortnez and Piovan, 2006) shear deformation effect
employing again the assumptions of the thin tube theory and using either the rened models or shell stress resultants. To
the authors knowledge publications on the solution to the general exural-torsional buckling analysis of Timoshenko beams
of arbitrarily shaped composite cross-section do not exist.
In this investigation, an integral equation technique is developed for the solution of the aforementioned problem. The com-
posite beam consists of materials in contact, each of which can surround a nite number of inclusions. The materials have
different elasticity and shear moduli with same Poissons ratio and are rmly bonded together. The beam is subjected to a
compressive centrally applied load together with arbitrarily axial, transverse and torsional distributed loading, while its edges
are restrained by the most general linear boundary conditions. The resulting boundary value problem, described by three cou-
pled ordinary differential equations, is solved employing the concept of the analog equation (Katsikadelis, 2002). According to
this method, the three coupled fourth order hyperbolic partial differential equations are replaced by three uncoupled ones
subjected to ctitious load distributions under the same boundary conditions. All basic equations are formulated with respect
to the principal shear axes coordinate system, which does not coincide with the principal bending one in a nonsymmetric
cross-section. To account for shear deformations, the concept of shear deformation coefcients is used. Six boundary value
problems are formulated with respect to the transverse displacements, to the angle of twist, to the primary warping function
and to two stress functions and solved using the analog equation method (Katsikadelis, 2002), a BEM based method. The
essential features and novel aspects of the present formulation compared with previous ones are summarized as follows:
(i) The proposed method can be applied to beams having an arbitrary composite constant cross-section and not to a nec-
essarily thin-walled one.
(ii) All basic equations are formulated with respect to the principal shear axes coordinate system, which does not neces-
sarily coincide with the principal bending one.
(iii) Shear deformation effect is taken into account on the exural-torsional buckling analysis of beams of nonsymmetric
constant composite cross-section avoiding the restrictions of the thin-walled theory.
(iv) Torsional warping arising from nonuniform torsion is taken into account.
(v) The beam is supported by the most general linear boundary conditions including elastic support or restraint.
(vi) The proposed method overcomes the shortcoming of the induced error in the case of the utilization of a thin tube the-
ory solution.
(vii) The shear deformation coefcients are evaluated using an energy approach, instead of Timoshenko and Goodiers
(1984) and Cowpers (1966) denitions, for which several authors (Schramm et al., 1994; Schramm et al., 1997) have
pointed out that one obtains unsatisfactory results or denitions given by other researchers (Stephen, 1980; Hutch-
inson, 2001), for which these factors take negative values.
(viii) With the exception of the structural models presented by Machado and Cortnez (2005), Cortnez and Piovan (2006)
which make use of shell stress resultants, previous formulations concerning composite beams of thin-walled cross-
sections or laminated cross-sections are analyzing these beams using the rened models. However, these models
do not satisfy the continuity conditions of transverse shear stress at layer interfaces and assume that the transverse
shear stress along the thickness coordinate remains constant, leading to the fact that kinematic or static assumptions
cannot be always valid.
(ix) The proposed method employs a pure BEM approach (requiring only boundary discretization) resulting in line or par-
abolic elements instead of area elements of the FEM solutions (requiring the whole cross-section to be discretized into
triangular or quadrilateral area elements), while a small number of line elements are required to achieve high
accuracy.
Several beams are analysed to illustrate the method and demonstrate its efciency. The signicant inuence of the
boundary conditions and the shear deformation effect on the buckling load are investigated through examples with great
practical interest.
2. Statement of the problem
Let us consider a prismatic beam of length l (Fig. 1), of constant arbitrary cross-section of area A. The cross-section con-
sists of materials in contact, each of which can surround a nite number of inclusions, with modulus of elasticity E
j
and shear
498 E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516
modulus G
j
, occupying the regions X
j
j 1; 2; . . . ; K of the y; z plane (Fig. 1). The materials of these regions are assumed
homogeneous, isotropic and linearly elastic. Let also the boundaries of the nonintersecting regions X
j
be denoted by
C
j
j 1; 2; . . . ; K. These boundary curves are piecewise smooth, i.e. they may have a nite number of corners. In Fig. 1a
CYZ is the coordinate system through the cross-sections centroid C, while y
C
, z
C
are its coordinates with respect to Syz prin-
cipal shear system of axes through the cross-sections shear center S. The beam is subjected to a compressive load P, to the
combined action of the arbitrarily distributed axial loading p
X
p
X
X, transverse loading p
Y
p
Y
X, p
Z
p
Z
X acting in the
Y and Z directions, respectively, and to the arbitrarily distributed twisting moment m
x
m
x
x (Fig. 1b).
Under the aforementioned loading the displacement eld of the beam with respect to the Syz system of axes is given as

ux; y; z ux h
Y
xZ h
Z
xY
dh
x
x
dx
/
P
S
y; z 1a

vx; y; z vx zh
x
x 1b

wx; y; z wx yh
x
x 1c
and therefore the displacement components of the cross-sections centroid can be written as
u
C
ux
dh
x
x
dx
/
P
S
y; z 2a
v
C
vx z
C
h
x
x 2b
w
C
wx y
C
h
x
x 2c
where ux, vx and wx are the beam axial and transverse displacements of the shear center S with respect to x, y and z
axes, respectively, h
Y
, h
Z
are the angles of rotation of the cross-section due to bending, dh
x
=dx denotes the rate of change
of the angle of twist h
x
regarded as the torsional curvature and /
P
S
is the primary warping function with respect to the shear
center S of the cross-section of the beam (Sapountzakis and Mokos, 2003).
Fig. 1. Prismatic element of an arbitrarily shaped composite cross section occupying region X (a) subjected in bending and torsional loading (b).
E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516 499
Moreover, according to the linear theory of beams (small deections), the angles of rotation of the deection line with
respect to the shear center x and to the centroid b in the xz and xy planes of the beam subjected to the aforementioned
loading and taking into account shear deformation effect satisfy the following relations
sinx
y
x
y

dw
dx
h
Y
c
xz
; sinx
z
x
z

dv
dx
h
Z
c
xy
3a; b
cos b
y
% 1; cos b
z
% 1 3c; d
sinb
y

dw
C
dx
; sinb
z

dv
C
dx
3e; f
while employing the stressstrain relations of the three-dimensional elasticity after ignoring the shear strain due to warping,
the arising shear stress resultants Q
z
, Q
y
are given as
Q
z

K
j1
_
X
j
s
xz
dX
j
G
1
A
z
dw
dx
h
Y
_ _
4a
Q
y

K
j1
_
X
j
s
xy
dX
j
G
1
A
y
dv
dx
h
Z
_ _
4b
where the rst material is considered as reference material, c
xz
, c
xy
are the additional angles of rotation of the cross-section
due to shear deformation (Fig. 2a) and G
1
A
z
, G
1
A
y
are the cross-sections shear rigidities of the Timoshenkos beamtheory, with
A
z
j
z
A
G

1
a
z
A
G

1
a
z

K
j1
G
j
A
j
G
1
5a
A
y
j
y
A
G

1
a
y
A
G

1
a
y

K
j1
G
j
A
j
G
1
5b
the shear areas with respect to z, y axes, respectively, j
z
, j
y
are the shear correction factors and a
z
, a
y
the shear deformation
coefcients. It is worth here noting that the reduction of Eq. (4) using the shear modulus G
1
of the rst material, could be
achieved using any other material, considering it as reference material.
Referring to Fig. 2, the stress resultants R
x
, R
y
, R
z
acting in the x, y, z directions, respectively, are related to the axial N and
the shear Q
y
, Q
z
forces as
R
x
Ncos b Q
z
sinb
y
Q
y
sinb
z
6a
R
y
Nsinb
z
Q
y
cos b
z
6b
R
z
Nsinb
y
Q
z
cos b
y
6c
which by virtue of the small deection theory and Eqs. (2) and (3) become
R
x
N Q
z
dw
C
dx
Q
y
dv
C
dx
7a
R
y
N
dv
C
dx
Q
y
N
dv
dx
z
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
Q
y
7b
R
z
N
dw
C
dx
Q
z
N
dw
dx
y
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
Q
z
7c
The second and third terms in the right hand side of Eq. (7a), express the inuence of the shear forces Q
y
, Q
z
on the horizontal
stress resultant R
x
. However, since initial shear forces are not taken into account, these terms can be neglected since Q
y
, Q
z
are much smaller than N (Rothert and Gensichen, 1987; Ramm and Hofmann, 1995) and thus Eq. (7a) can be written as
R
x
N 8
Employing Eq. (1a) to the straindisplacement equations of the three-dimensional elasticity and ignoring axial deformations,
the normal strain component e
x
can be written as
e
x

dh
Y
dx
Z
dh
Z
dx
Y
d
2
h
x
dx
2
/
P
S
9
and the arising bending moments M
Y
, M
Z
are given as
M
Y

K
j1
_
X
j
E
i
e
x
Z dX
j
E
1
I
YY
dh
Y
dx
E
1
I
YZ
dh
Z
dx
10a
M
Z

K
j1
_
X
j
E
i
e
x
Y dX
j
E
1
I
ZZ
dh
Z
dx
E
1
I
YZ
dh
Y
dx
10b
500 E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516
where
I
YY

K
j1
E
j
E
1
_
X
j
Z
2
dX
j
; I
ZZ

K
j1
E
j
E
1
_
X
j
Y
2
dX
j
; I
YZ

K
j1
E
j
E
1
_
X
j
YZdX
j
11a; b; c
are the moments and the product of inertia of the cross-section with respect to its centroid C. Substituting Eqs. (4a) and (4b)
in Eqs. (10a) and (10b) the bending moments M
Y
, M
Z
can be written as
M
Y
E
1
I
YY
1
G
1
A
z
dQ
z
dx

d
2
w
dx
2
_ _
E
1
I
YZ
d
2
v
dx
2

1
G
1
A
y
dQ
y
dx
_ _
12a
M
Z
E
1
I
ZZ
d
2
v
dx
2

1
G
1
A
y
dQ
y
dx
_ _
E
1
I
YZ
1
G
1
A
z
dQ
z
dx

d
2
w
dx
2
_ _
12b
The governing equations of the problem at hand will be derived by considering the equilibrium of the deformed element.
Thus, referring to Fig. 2 we obtain
Fig. 2. Displacements (a) and equilibrium of an element in the xz (b) and xy (c) planes.
E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516 501
dR
x
dx
p
X
0;
dR
y
dx
p
Y
0;
dR
z
dx
p
Z
0 13a; b; c13ac
dM
Y
dx
Q
z
0;
dM
Z
dx
Q
y
0 13d; e
Substituting Eqs. (8), (7b), and (7c) into Eqs. (13ac) we obtain
dN
dx
p
X
14a
dQ
y
dx

dN
dx
ov
ox
z
C
oh
x
ox
_ _
N
o
2
v
ox
2
z
C
o
2
h
x
ox
2
_ _
p
Y
0 14b
dQ
z
dx

dN
dx
ow
ox
y
C
oh
x
ox
_ _
N
o
2
w
ox
2
y
C
o
2
h
x
ox
2
_ _
p
Z
0 14c
Substituting Eqs. (14b) and (14c) into Eqs. (12a) and (12b) we obtain the expressions of the bending moments M
Y
, M
Z
as
M
Y
E
1
I
YY
d
2
w
dx
2

E
1
I
YY
G
1
A
z
p
Z
p
X
dw
dx
y
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
N
d
2
w
dx
2
y
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _ _ _
E
1
I
YZ
d
2
v
dx
2

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
y
p
Y
p
X
dv
dx
z
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
N
d
2
v
dx
2
z
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _ _ _
15a
M
Z
E
1
I
ZZ
d
2
v
dx
2

E
1
I
ZZ
G
1
A
y
p
Y
p
X
dv
dx
z
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
N
d
2
v
dx
2
z
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _ _ _
E
1
I
YZ
d
2
w
dx
2

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
z
p
Z
p
X
dw
dx
y
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
N
d
2
w
dx
2
y
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _ _ _
15b
subsequently the expressions of the shear forces Q
y
, Q
z
employing Eqs. (13d,e) as
Q
y
E
1
I
ZZ
d
3
v
dx
3
E
1
I
YZ
d
3
w
dx
3

E
1
I
ZZ
G
1
A
y
dp
Y
dx

dp
X
dx
dv
dx
z
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
2p
X
d
2
v
dx
2
z
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
N
d
3
v
dx
3
z
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _ _ _

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
z
dp
Z
dx

dp
X
dx
dw
dx
y
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
2p
X
d
2
w
dx
2
y
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
N
d
3
w
dx
3
y
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _ _ _
16a
Q
z
E
1
I
YY
d
3
w
dx
3
E
1
I
YZ
d
3
v
dx
3

E
1
I
YY
G
1
A
z
dp
Z
dx

dp
X
dx
dw
dx
y
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
2p
X
d
2
w
dx
2
y
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
N
d
3
w
dx
3
y
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _ _ _

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
y
dp
Y
dx

dp
X
dx
dv
dx
z
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
2p
X
d
2
v
dx
2
z
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
N
d
3
v
dx
3
z
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _ _ _
16b
and eliminating these forces from Eqs. (14b) and (14c) we obtain the rst two coupled partial differential equations of the
problem of the beam under consideration subjected to the combined action of axial, bending and torsional loading as
E
1
I
ZZ
d
4
v
dx
4
E
1
I
YZ
d
4
w
dx
4

E
1
I
ZZ
G
1
A
y
d
2
p
Y
dx
2

d
2
p
X
dx
2
dv
dx
z
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
3
dp
X
dx
d
2
v
dx
2
z
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
3p
X
d
3
v
dx
3
z
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _ _
N
d
4
v
dx
4
z
C
d
4
h
x
dx
4
_ __

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
z
d
2
p
Z
dx
2

d
2
p
X
dx
2
dw
dx
y
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
3
dp
X
dx
d
2
w
dx
2
y
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
3p
X
d
3
w
dx
3
y
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _ _
N
d
4
w
dx
4
y
C
d
4
h
x
dx
4
_ __
p
Y
p
X
dv
dx
z
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
N
d
2
v
dx
2
z
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
0 17a
502 E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516
E
1
I
YY
d
4
w
dx
4
E
1
I
YZ
d
4
v
dx
4

E
1
I
YY
G
1
A
z
d
2
p
Z
dx
2

d
2
p
X
dx
2
dw
dx
y
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
3
dp
X
dx
d
2
w
dx
2
y
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
3p
X
d
3
w
dx
3
y
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _ _
N
d
4
w
dx
4
y
C
d
4
h
x
dx
4
_ __

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
y
d
2
p
Y
dx
2

d
2
p
X
dx
2
dv
dx
z
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
3
dp
X
dx
d
2
v
dx
2
z
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
3p
X
d
3
v
dx
3
z
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _ _
N
d
4
v
dx
4
z
C
d
4
h
x
dx
4
_ __
p
Z
p
X
dw
dx
y
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
N
d
2
w
dx
2
y
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
0 17b
Finally, the angles of rotation of the cross-section due to bending h
Y
, h
Z
are given from Eqs. (4a) and (4b) as
h
Y

dw
dx

E
1
I
YY
G
1
A
z
d
3
w
dx
3

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
z
d
3
v
dx
3

E
1
I
YY
G
2
1
A
2
z
dp
Z
dx

dp
X
dx
dw
dx
y
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
2p
X
d
2
w
dx
2
y
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
N
d
3
w
dx
3
y
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _ _ _

E
1
I
YZ
G
2
1
A
y
A
z
dp
Y
dx

dp
X
dx
dv
dx
z
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
2p
X
d
2
v
dx
2
z
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
N
d
3
v
dx
3
z
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _ _ _
18a
h
Z

dv
dx

E
1
I
ZZ
G
1
A
y
d
3
v
dx
3

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
y
d
3
w
dx
3

E
1
I
ZZ
G
2
1
A
2
y
dp
Y
dx

dp
X
dx
dv
dx
z
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
2p
X
d
2
v
dx
2
z
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
N
d
3
v
dx
3
z
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _ _ _

E
1
I
YZ
G
2
1
A
y
A
z
dp
Z
dx

dp
X
dx
dw
dx
y
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
2p
X
d
2
w
dx
2
y
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
N
d
3
w
dx
3
y
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _ _ _
18b
Equilibrium of torsional moments along x axis of the beam element, after taking into account the additional shear stresses
due to the presence of the axial force N (Timoshenko and Gere, 1961), which employing Eq. (2) are written as
s
j
xz
r
j
d

w
dx
_ _
r
j
dw
dx
y
dh
x
dx
_ _
19a
s
j
xy
r
j
d

v
dx
_ _
r
j
dv
dx
z
dh
x
dx
_ _
19b
and the corresponding arising additional twisting moment
M
t;add

_
X
s
xz
y s
xy
zdX Ny
C
dw
dx
Nz
C
dv
dx
N
I
S
A
E
dh
x
dx
20
where
I
S

K
j1
y
2
C
A
E
j
z
2
C
A
E
j
I
j
YY
I
j
ZZ
_ _
21
A
E

k
j1
E
j
A
j
E
1
22
leads to the third (coupled with the previous two) partial differential equation of the problem of the beam under consider-
ation as

dM
t
dx

dM
t;add
dx
_ _
m
x
p
Z
y
c
p
Y
z
c
23
which employing Eq. (20) and having in mind that the torsional moment M
t
is given as (Sapountzakis and Mokos, 2003)
M
t
E
1
C
S
d
3
h
x
dx
3
G
1
I
t
dh
x
dx
24
can be written as
E
1
C
S
d
4
h
x
dx
4
G
1
I
t
d
2
h
x
dx
2
N y
c
d
2
w
dx
2
z
c
d
2
v
dx
2

I
S
A
E
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
m
x
p
Z
y
C
p
Y
z
C
p
X
y
c
dw
dx
z
c
dv
dx
_ _
p
X
I
S
A
E
dh
x
dx
25
E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516 503
where I
S
is the polar moment of inertia with respect to the shear center S, E
1
C
S
and G
1
I
t
are the cross-sections warping and
torsional rigidities, respectively, with C
S
, I
t
being its warping and torsion constants, respectively, given as (Sapountzakis and
Mokos, 2003)
C
S

K
j1
E
j
E
1
_
X
j
u
P
S

2
dX
j
26a
I
t

K
j1
G
j
G
1
_
X
j
y
2
z
2
y
ou
P
S
oz
z
ou
P
S
oy
_ _
dX
j
26b
It is worth here noting that the primary warping function u
P
S
y; z can be established by solving independently the Neumann
problem (Sapountzakis and Mokos, 2003)
r
2
u
P
S
0 in X [
K
j1
X
j
27
G
i
ou
P
S
on
_ _
i
G
j
ou
P
S
on
_ _
j

1
2
G
i
G
j

oq
2
S

os
_ _
j
on C
j
j 1; 2; . . . ; K 28
where r
2
o
2
=ox
2
o
2
=oy
2
is the Laplace operator; G
i
0 at the free part of the boundary of X
j
region or G
i
is the shear
modulus of X
i
region at the common part of the boundaries of X
i
and X
j
regions; q
S

x
2
y
2
_
is the distance of a point
on the boundary C
j
from the shear center S; o=on
j
denotes the directional derivative normal to the boundary C
j
and
o=os
j
denotes differentiation with respect to its arc length s.
As it is already mentioned, Eqs. (17a), (17b), and (25) constitute the governing equations of the beam subjected to the
combined action of axial, bending and torsional loading taking into account shear deformation effect. For the special case
of an axially compressive load N P p
X
0. The aforementioned equations are also subjected to the pertinent boundary
conditions of the problem, which are given as
a
1
vx a
2
R
y
x a
3
;

a
1
h
Z
x

a
2
M
Z
x

a
3
29a; b
b
1
wx b
2
R
z
x b
3
;

b
1
h
Y
x

b
2
M
Y
x

b
3
30a; b
c
1
h
x
x c
2
M
t
x c
3
;

c
1
dh
x
x
dx

c
2
M
w
x

c
3
31a; b
at the beam ends x 0; l, where R
y
, R
z
and M
Z
, M
Y
are the reactions and bending moments with respect to y and z axes,
respectively, obtained from Eqs. (7b), (7c), and (15a), (15b), (16a), (16b) as
R
y
E
1
I
ZZ
d
3
v
dx
3

E
1
I
ZZ
G
1
A
y
N
d
3
v
dx
3
z
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _
E
1
I
YZ
d
3
w
dx
3

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
z
N
d
3
w
dx
3
y
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _
N
dv
dx
z
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
32a
R
z
E
1
I
YY
d
3
w
dx
3

E
1
I
YY
G
1
A
z
N
d
3
w
dx
3
y
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _
E
1
I
YZ
d
3
v
dx
3

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
y
N
d
3
v
dx
3
z
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _
N
dw
dx
y
C
dh
x
dx
_ _
32b
M
Y
E
1
I
YY
d
2
w
dx
2

E
1
I
YY
G
1
A
z
N
d
2
w
dx
2
y
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
E
1
I
YZ
d
2
v
dx
2

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
y
N
d
2
v
dx
2
z
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
33a
M
Z
E
1
I
ZZ
d
2
v
dx
2

E
1
I
ZZ
G
1
A
y
N
d
2
v
dx
2
z
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
E
1
I
YZ
d
2
w
dx
2

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
z
N
d
2
w
dx
2
y
C
d
2
h
x
dx
2
_ _
33b
the angles of rotation due to bending h
Y
, h
Z
are evaluated from Eq. (18) as
h
Y

dw
dx

E
1
I
YY
G
1
A
z
d
3
w
dx
3

EI
YY
G
2
1
A
2
z
N
d
3
w
dx
3
y
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
z
d
3
v
dx
3

E
1
I
YZ
G
2
1
A
y
A
z
N
d
3
v
dx
3
z
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _
34
504 E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516
h
Z

dv
dx

E
1
I
ZZ
G
1
A
y
d
3
v
dx
3

E
1
I
ZZ
G
2
1
A
2
y
N
d
3
v
dx
3
z
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
y
d
3
w
dx
3

E
1
I
YZ
G
2
1
A
y
A
z
N
d
3
w
dx
3
y
C
d
3
h
x
dx
3
_ _
35
while in Eq. (31b) M
w
is the warping moment given as (Sapountzakis and Mokos, 2003)
M
w
E
1
C
S
d
2
h
x
dx
2
36
Finally, a
k
;

a
k
; b
k
;

b
k
; c
k
;

c
k
k 1; 2; 3 are functions specied at the beam ends x 0; l. Eqs. (29)(31) describe the most gen-
eral linear boundary conditions associated with the problem at hand and can include elastic support or restraint. It is appar-
ent that all types of the conventional boundary conditions (clamped, simply supported, free or guided edge) can be derived
from these equations by specifying appropriately these functions (e.g. for a clamped edge it is a
1
b
1
c
1
1,

a
1


b
1


c
1
1, a
2
a
3
b
2
b
3
c
2
c
3


a
2


a
3


b
2


b
3


c
2


c
3
0).
The solution of the boundary value problem given from Eqs. (17), (25) subjected to the boundary conditions (29)(31)
which represents the exural-torsional buckling of beams, presumes the evaluation of the shear deformation coefcients
a
y
, a
z
, corresponding to the principal shear axes coordinate system Syz. These coefcients are established equating the
approximate formula of the shear strain energy per unit length (Schramm et al., 1997)
U
appr:

a
y
Q
2
y
2A
G
G
1

a
z
Q
2
z
2A
G
G
1
37
with the exact one given from
U
exact

K
j1
E
1
E
j
_
X
j
s
xz

2
j
s
xy

2
j
2G
1
dX
j
38
and are obtained as (Mokos and Sapountzakis, 2005)
a
y

1
j
y

A
G
E
1
D
2

K
j1
_
X
j
E
j
rH
j
e rH
j
edX
j
39a
a
z

1
j
z

A
G
E
1
D
2

K
j1
_
X
j
E
j
rU
j
d rU
j
ddX
j
39b
where s
xz

j
; s
xy

j
are the transverse (direct) shear stress components, r i
Y
o=oY i
Z
o=oZ is a symbolic vector with
i
Y
; i
Z
the unit vectors along Y and Z axes, respectively, D is given from
D 21 mI
YY
I
ZZ
I
2
YZ
40
m is the Poisson ratio of the cross-section materials, e and d are vectors dened as
e m I
YY
Y
2
Z
2
2
I
YZ
YZ
_ _ _ _
i
Y
m I
YY
YZ I
YZ
Y
2
Z
2
2
_ _ _ _
i
Z
41a
d m I
ZZ
YZ I
YZ
Y
2
Z
2
2
_ _ _ _
i
Y
m I
ZZ
Y
2
Z
2
2
I
YZ
YZ
_ _ _ _
i
Z
41b
and HY; Z, UY; Z are stress functions, which are evaluated from the solution of the following Neumann type boundary
value problems (Mokos and Sapountzakis, 2005):
r
2
H
j
2I
YZ
Z I
YY
Y in X
j
j 1; 2; . . . ; K 42a
E
j
oH
on
_ _
j
E
i
oH
on
_ _
i
E
j
E
i
n e on C
j
j 1; 2; . . . ; K 42b
r
2
U
j
2I
YZ
Y I
ZZ
Z in X
j
j 1; 2; . . . ; K 43a
E
j
oU
on
_ _
j
E
i
oU
on
_ _
i
E
j
E
i
n d on C
j
j 1; 2; . . . ; K 43b
where E
i
is the modulus of elasticity of the X
i
region at the common part of the boundaries of X
j
and X
i
regions, or E
i
0 at
the free part of the boundary of X
j
region, while o=on
j
n
Y
o=oY
j
n
Z
o=oZ
j
denotes the directional derivative normal to
the boundary C
j
. The vector n normal to the boundary C
j
is positive if it points to the exterior of the X
j
region, while the
normal derivatives across the interior boundaries vary discontinuously. It is also worth here noting that the boundary con-
E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516 505
ditions (28), (42b), (43b) have been derived from the physical consideration that the traction vectors in the direction of the
normal vector n on the interfaces separating the j and i different materials are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction,
while it vanishes on the free surface of the beam.
3. Integral representations numerical solution
3.1. For the transverse v, w displacements and the angle of twist h
x
According to the precedent analysis, the exural-torsional buckling problem of composite beams reduces in establishing
the displacement components vx, wx and h
x
x having continuous derivatives up to the fourth order with respect to x,
satisfying the coupled governing equations (17) and (25) inside the beam and the boundary conditions (29)(31) at the beam
ends x 0; l.
Eqs. (17) and (25) are solved using the analog equation method (Katsikadelis, 2002) as it is developed for hyperbolic dif-
ferential equations (Sapountzakis, 2005; Sapountzakis and Tsiatas, 2007). This method is applied for the problem at hand as
follows. Let vx, wx and h
x
x be the sought solution of the aforementioned boundary value problem. Setting as
u
1
x vx, u
2
x wx, u
3
x h
x
x and differentiating these functions four times with respect to x yields
d
4
u
i
dx
4
q
i
x i 1; 2; 3 44
Eq. (44) indicate that the solution of Eqs. (17) and (25) can be established by solving Eq. (44) under the same boundary con-
ditions (29)(31), provided that the ctitious load distributions q
i
x i 1; 2; 3 are rst established. These distributions can
be determined using BEM as follows:
The solution of Eq. (44) is given in integral form as
u
i
x
_
l
0
q
i
u

dx u

d
3
u
i
dx
3

du

dx
d
2
u
i
dx
2

d
2
u

dx
2
du
i
dx

d
3
u

dx
3
u
i
_ _
l
0
45
where u

is the fundamental solution given as

u

1
12
l
3
2
r
l

3
3
r
l

2
_ _
46
with r x n, x, n points of the beam, which is a particular singular solution of the equation
d
4
u

dx
4
dx n 47
Employing Eq. (46) the integral representation (45) can be written as
u
i
x
_
l
0
q
i
K
4
rdn K
4
r
d
3
u
i
dx
3
K
3
r
d
2
u
i
dx
2
K
2
r
du
i
dx
K
1
ru
i
_ _
l
0
48
where the kernels K
j
r; j 1; 2; 3; 4 are given as
K
1
r
1
2
sgn
r
l
49a
K
2
r
1
2
l 1
r
l

_ _
49b
K
3
r
1
4
l
2
r
l

r
l

2
_ _
sgn
r
l
49c
K
4
r
1
12
l
3
2
r
l

3
3
r
l

2
_ _
49d
Notice that in Eq. (48) for the line integral it is r x n, x, n points inside the beam, whereas for the rest terms it is r x f, x
inside the beam, f at the beam ends 0, l.
Differentiating Eq. (48) with respect to x, results in the integral representations of the derivatives of u
i
as
du
i
x
dx

_
l
0
q
i
K
3
rdn K
3
r
d
3
u
i
dx
3
K
2
r
d
2
u
i
dx
2
K
1
r
du
i
dx
_ _
l
0
50a
d
2
u
i
x
dx
2

_
l
0
q
i
K
2
rdn K
2
r
d
3
u
i
dx
3
K
1
r
d
2
u
i
dx
2
_ _
l
0
50b
506 E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516
d
3
u
i
x
dx
3

_
l
0
q
i
K
1
rdn K
1
r
d
3
u
i
dx
3
_ _
l
0
50c
d
4
u
i
x
dx
4
q
i
x 50d
The integral representations (48) and (50), when applied for the beam ends 0; l, together with the boundary condi-
tions (29)(31) are employed to express the unknown boundary quantities u
i
f, u
i;x
f, u
i;xx
f and u
i;xxx
f f 0; l in
terms of q
i
. This is accomplished numerically as follows. The interval 0; l is divided into L equal elements (Fig. 3), on
which q
i
x is assumed to vary according to certain law (constant, linear, parabolic, etc.). The constant element assumption
is employed here as the numerical implementation becomes very simple and the obtained results are very good. Employ-
ing the aforementioned procedure for the coupled boundary conditions (29) and (30) the following set of linear equations
is obtained:
D
11
0 0 D
14
0 0 0 D
18
0 D
22
D
23
D
24
0 0 D
27
D
28
E
31
E
32
E
33
E
34
0 0 0 0
0 E
42
E
43
E
44
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 D
54
D
55
0 0 D
58
0 0 D
63
D
64
0 D
66
D
67
D
68
0 0 0 0 E
31
E
32
E
33
E
34
0 0 0 0 0 E
42
E
43
E
44
_

_
_

_
^
u
1
^
u
1;x
^
u
1;xx
^
u
1;xxx
^
u
2
^
u
2;x
^
u
2;xx
^
u
2;xxx
_

_
_

a
3
a
3
0
0
b
3

b
3
0
0
_

_
_

0
0
F
3
F
4
0
0
0
0
_

_
_

_
q
1

0
0
0
0
0
0
F
3
F
4
_

_
_

_
q
2
51
while for the boundary conditions (31) we have
E
11
E
12
0 E
14
0 E
22
E
23
0
E
31
E
32
E
33
E
34
0 E
42
E
43
E
44
_

_
_

_
^
u
3
^
u
3;x
^
u
3;xx
^
u
3;xxx
_

_
_

c
3
c
3
0
0
_

_
_

0
0
F
3
F
4
_

_
_

_
q
3
52
where D
11
, D
14
, D
18
, D
22
, D
23
, D
24
, D
27
, D
28
, D
54
, D
55
, D
58
, D
63
, D
64
, D
66
, D
67
, D
68
, E
22
, E
23
, E
1j
, j 1; 2; 4 are 2 2 known square
matrices including the values of the functions a
j
;

a
j
; b
j
;

b
j
; c
j
;

c
j
j 1; 2 of Eqs. (29)(31); a
3
, a
3
, b
3
,

b
3
, c
3
, c
3
are 2 1 known
column matrices including the boundary values of the functions a
3
;

a
3
; b
3
;

b
3
; c
3
;

c
3
of Eqs. (29)(31); E
jk
,
j 3; 4; k 1; 2; 3; 4 are square 2 2 known coefcient matrices resulting from the values of the kernels K
j
r
j 1; 2; 3; 4 at the beam ends and F
j
j 3; 4 are 2 L rectangular known matrices originating from the integration of
the kernels on the axis of the beam. Moreover
^
u
i
fu
i
0; u
i
lg
T
53a
^
u
i;x

du
i
0
dx
;
du
i
l
dx
_ _
T
53b
^
u
i;xx

d
2
u
i
0
dx
2
;
d
2
u
i
l
dx
2
_ _
T
53c
^
u
i;xxx

d
3
u
i
0
dx
3
;
d
3
u
i
l
dx
3
_ _
T
53d
are vectors including the two unknown boundary values of the respective boundary quantities and q
i
fq
i
1
q
i
2
. . . q
i
L
g
T
i 1; 2; 3 is the vector including the L unknown nodal values of the ctitious load.
Nodal points
2
x
1
L
l
Fig. 3. Discretization of the beam interval and distribution of the nodal points.
E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516 507
Discretization of Eqs. (48) and (50) and application to the L collocation points yields
u
i
C
4
q
i
H
1
^
u
i
H
2
^
u
i;x
H
3
^
u
i;xx
H
4
^
u
i;xxx
54a
u
i;x
C
3
q
i
H
1
^
u
i;x
H
2
^
u
i;xx
H
3
^
u
i;xxx
54b
u
i;xx
C
2
q
i
H
1
^
u
i;xx
H
2
^
u
i;xxx
54c
u
i;xxxx
C
1
q
i
H
1
^
u
i;xxxx
54d
u
i;xxxx
q
i
54e
where C
j
j 1; 2; 3; 4 are L L known matrices; H
j
j 1; 2; 3; 4 are L 2 also known matrices and u
i
, u
i;x
, u
i;xx
, u
i;xxxx
, u
i;xxxx
are vectors including the values of u
i
x and their derivatives at the L nodal points.
The above equations, after eliminating the boundary quantities employing Eqs. (51) and (52), can be written as
u
i
T
i
q
i
T
ij
q
j
t
i
; i; j 1; 2; i 6 j 55a
u
3
T
3
q
3
t
3
55b
u
i;x
T
ix
q
i
T
ijx
q
j
t
ix
; i; j 1; 2; i 6 j 55c
u
3;x
T
3x
q
3
t
3x
55d
u
i;xx
T
ixx
q
i
T
ijxx
q
j
t
ixx
; i; j 1; 2; i 6 j 55e
u
3;xx
T
3xx
q
3
t
3xx
55f
u
i;xxx
T
ixxx
q
i
T
ijxxx
q
j
t
ixxx
; i; j 1; 2; i 6 j 55g
u
3;xxx
T
3xxx
q
3
t
3xxx
55h
u
i;xxxx
q
i
; i 1; 2; 3 55i
where T
i
, T
ix
, T
ixx
, T
ixxx
, T
ij
, T
ijx
, T
ijxx
, T
ijxxx
are known L L matrices and t
i
, t
ix
, t
ixx
, t
ixxx
are known L 1 matrices. It is worth here
noting that for homogeneous boundary conditions a
3


a
3
b
3


b
3
c
3


c
3
0 it is t
i
t
ix
t
ixx
t
ixxx
0.
In the conventional BEM, the load vectors q
i
are known and Eq. (55) are used to evaluate u
i
x and their derivatives at the
L nodal points. This, however, can not be done here since q
i
are unknown. For this purpose, 3L additional equations are de-
rived, which permit the establishment of q
i
. These equations result by applying Eqs. (17) and (25) to the L collocation points,
leading to the formulation of the following set of 3L simultaneous equations
A NB C
q
1
q
2
q
3
_

_
_

_
f 56
where the 3L 3L matrices A, B, C are given as
A
E
1
I
ZZ
E
1
I
YZ
0
E
1
I
YZ
E
1
I
YY
0
0 0 E
1
C
S
G
1
I
t
T
3xx
_

_
_

_ 57a
B

1
G
1
Ay
E
1
I
ZZ
T
1xx

1
G
1
Az
E
1
I
YZ
T
12xx
z
C
G
1
Ay
E
1
I
ZZ

y
C
G
1
Az
E
1
I
YZ
z
C
T
3xx

1
G
1
Ay
E
1
I
YZ
T
21xx

1
G
1
Az
E
1
I
YY
T
2xx
z
C
G
1
Ay
E
1
I
YZ

y
C
G
1
Az
E
1
I
YY
y
C
T
3xx
y
C
T
21xx
z
C
T
1xx
y
C
T
2xx
z
C
T
12xx
I
S
A
E
T
3xx
_

_
_

_
57b
C
C
11
C
12
C
13
C
21
C
22
C
23
C
31
C
32
C
33
_

_
_

_ 57c
the C
ij
L L matrices are evaluated from the expressions
C
11
p
X
T
1x

E
1
I
ZZ
G
1
A
y
p
X;xx
T
1x
3p
X;x
T
1xx
3p
X
T
1xxx

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
z
p
X;xx
T
21x
3p
X;x
T
21xx
3p
X
T
21xxx

_
58a
C
12
p
X
T
12x

E
1
I
ZZ
G
1
A
y
p
X;xx
T
12x
3p
X;x
T
12xx
3p
X
T
12xxx

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
z
p
X;xx
T
2x
3p
X;x
T
2xx
3p
X
T
2xxx

_
58b
508 E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516
C
13
z
C
p
X
T
3x

E
1
I
ZZ
G
1
A
y
z
C
p
X;xx
T
3x
3z
C
p
X;x
T
3xx
3z
C
p
X
T
3xxx

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
z
y
C
p
X;xx
T
3x
3y
C
p
X;x
T
3xx
3y
C
p
X
T
3xxx

_
58c
C
21
p
X
T
21x

E
1
I
YY
G
1
A
z
p
X;xx
T
21x
3p
X;x
T
21xx
3p
X
T
21xxx

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
y
p
X;xx
T
1x
3p
X;x
T
1xx
3p
X
T
1xxx

_
58d
C
22
p
X
T
2x

E
1
I
YY
G
1
A
z
p
X;xx
T
2x
3p
X;x
T
2xx
3p
X
T
2xxx

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
y
p
X;xx
T
12x
3p
X;x
T
12xx
3p
X
T
12xxx

_
58e
C
23
y
C
p
X
T
3x

E
1
I
YY
G
1
A
z
y
C
p
X;xx
T
3x
3y
C
p
X;x
T
3xx
3y
C
p
X
T
3xxx

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
y
z
C
p
X;xx
T
3x
3z
C
p
X;x
T
3xx
3z
C
p
X
T
3xxx

_
58f
C
31
y
C
p
X
T
21x
z
C
p
X
T
1x
58g
C
32
y
C
p
X
T
2x
z
C
p
X
T
12x
58h
C
33

I
S
A
E
p
X
T
3x
_ _
58i
and the 3L 1 column matrix f is given as
f
f
1
f
2
f
3
_

_
_

0
0
G
1
I
t
t
3xx
_

_
_

_
N
t
1xx
z
C
t
3xx
t
2xx
y
C
t
3xx
y
C
t
2xx
z
C
t
1xx

I
S
A
E
t
3xx
_

_
_

_
59
with
f
1
p
Y
p
X
t
1x
z
C
t
3x

E
1
I
ZZ
G
1
A
y
p
Y;xx
p
X;xx
t
1x
z
C
t
3x

3p
X;x
t
1xx
z
C
t
3xx
3p
X
t
1xxx
z
C
t
3xxx

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
z
p
Z;xx
60a
p
X;xx
t
2x
y
C
t
3x
3p
X;x
t
2xx
y
C
t
3xx
3p
X
t
2xxx
y
C
t
3xxx

f
2
p
Z
p
X
t
2x
y
C
t
3x

E
1
I
YY
G
1
A
z
p
Z;xx
p
X;xx
t
2x
y
C
t
3x

3p
X;x
t
2xx
y
C
t
3xx
3p
X
t
2xxx
y
C
t
3xxx

E
1
I
YZ
G
1
A
y
p
Y;xx
60b
p
X;xx
t
1x
z
C
t
3x
3p
X;x
t
1xx
z
C
t
3xx
3p
X
t
1xxx
z
C
t
3xxx

f
3
m
x
p
Z
y
C
p
Y
z
C
z
C
p
X
t
1x
y
C
p
X
t
2x

I
S
A
E
p
X
t
3x
60c
In the above set of equations the matrices E
1
I
YY
, E
1
I
ZZ
, E
1
I
YZ
, E
1
C
S
, G
1
I
t
are L L diagonal matrices including the values of
the corresponding quantities, respectively, at the L nodal points. Moreover, p
X
, p
X;x
, p
X;xx
are diagonal matrices and p
Y
, p
Y;xx
,
p
Z
, p
Z;xx
and m
x
are vectors containing the values of the external loading and their derivatives at these points.
Solving the linear system of Eq. (56) for the ctitious load distributions q
1
, q
2
, q
3
the displacements and their derivatives
in the interior of the beam are computed using Eq. (55).
3.1.1. Buckling equation
In this case it is a
3


a
3
b
3


b
3
c
3


c
3
0 (homogeneous boundary conditions) and p
X
p
X;x
p
X;xx

p
Y
p
Y;xx
p
Z
p
Z;xx
m
x
0, N P. Thus, Eq. (56) becomes
A PB
q
1
q
2
q
3
_

_
_

_
0 61
The condition that Eq. (61) has a nontrivial solution yields the buckling equation
detA PB 0 62
E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516 509
3.2. For the primary warping function /
P
S
The integral representations and the numerical solution for the evaluation of the angle of twist h
x
assume that the warp-
ing C
S
and torsion I
t
constants given from Eqs. (26a) and (26b) are already established. Eqs. (26a) and (26b) indicate that the
evaluation of the aforementioned constants presumes that the primary warping function /
P
S
at any interior point of the do-
main X of the cross-section of the beam is known. Once /
P
S
is established, C
S
and I
t
constants are evaluated by converting the
domain integrals into line integrals along the boundary employing the following relations
C
S

1
E
1

K
j1
_
C
j
B
j
E
j
o/
P
S
on
_ _
j
E
i
o/
P
S
on
_ _
i
_
_
_
_
ds on C
j
j 1; 2; . . . ; K 63a
I
t

1
G
1

K
j1
_
C
j
G
j
G
i
yz
2
zu
P
S

j
cos b zy
2
yu
P
S

j
sinb
_ _
ds on C
j
j 1; 2; . . . ; K 63b
and using constant boundary elements for the approximation of these line integrals. In Eqs. (63a) and (63b) C
j
j 1; 2; . . . ; K is an interface between regions X
j
and X
i
, while E
j
G
j
0 in the case C
j
is a free boundary. Moreover, in
these equations the normal n to the boundary C
j
points to the exterior of the region X
j
and C
j
is traveled only once, while
By; z
j
is a ctitious function dened as the solution of the following Neumann problem
r
2
B
j
u
P
S

j
in X
j
j 1; 2; . . . ; K 64
E
j
oB
on
_ _
j
E
i
oB
on
_ _
i
0 on C
j
j 1; 2; . . . ; K 65
C
b
2
b
1
h
2
h
1
S
2
E
z,Z
y
Y
2
E
1
E
Fig. 4. Cross-section of the composite beam of Example 1.
Table 1
Buckling load P (kN) of the composite beam of Example 1
E
2
=E
1
Hingedhinged Fixedhinged Fixedxed
Without shear
deformation
With shear
deformation
Without shear
deformation
With shear
deformation
Without shear
deformation
With shear
deformation
Present
study
FEM Present
study
FEM Present
study
FEM
b
2
h
2
0:02 m
0.5 479 476 502 530 527 541 573 570 556
1 783 780 815 834 831 841 882 879 849
2 1487 1483 1490 1547 1544 1512 1612 1609 1520
b
2
h
2
0:08 m
0.5 7046 6845 6949 13,343 12,586 13,010 22,288 20,571 21,164
1 13,558 13,089 13,288 25,306 23,646 24,550 39,929 36,892 38,117
2 27,076 25,828 26,299 50,698 46,425 48,521 75,155 69,625 72,321
b
2
h
2
0:20 m
0.5 24,098 23,524 23,591 49,235 46,666 47,666 96,012 87,510 92,800
1 39,442 38,082 38,301 80,601 74,580 76,766 157,223 137,653 147,284
2 57,031 54,383 54,978 116,685 105,070 108,940 228,201 190,992 206,875
510 E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516
The evaluation of the primary warping function u
P
S
and the ctitious function By; z is accomplished using BEM as this is
presented in Sapountzakis and Mokos (2001) and in Sapountzakis and Mokos (2003), respectively.
3.3. For the stress functions HY; Z and UY; Z
The evaluation of the stress functions HY; Z and UY; Z is accomplished using BEM as this is presented in Mokos and
Sapountzakis (2005). Moreover, since the exural-torsional buckling problem of composite beams is solved by the BEM, the
domain integrals for the evaluation of the area, the bending moments of inertia and the shear deformation coefcients (Eqs.
(39a) and (39b)) have to be converted to boundary line integrals, in order to maintain the pure boundary character of the
method. This is achieved using integration by parts, the Gauss theorem and the Green identity (Mokos and Sapountzakis,
2005).
Fig. 5. 3-D views of the buckling mode shapes of the FEM solution of the beams of Example 1 with E
2
/E
1
= 0.5 (numbers in parentheses correspond to the
FEM solution).
E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516 511
4. Numerical examples
On the basis of the analytical and numerical procedures presented in the previous sections, a computer program has been
written and representative examples have been studied to demonstrate the efciency and the range of applications of the
developed method. In all the examples treated, each cross-section has been analysed employing N 300 constant boundary
elements along the boundary of the cross section, which are enough to ensure convergence at the calculation of the sectional
constants, while the beam interval is divided into L 60 constant equal elements.
Example 1. A monosymmetric beam of length l 3:0 m, with a composite cross section consisting of three rectangular parts
b
1
h
1
0:40 m in contact (reference material 1: E
1
3:0 10
7
kN=m
2
, m
1
0:20, materials 2, 3: E
2
E
3
, m
2
m
3
0:20,
as this is shown in Fig. 4, has been studied. Three different types starting from a thin-walled and ending with a thick-walled
cross-section are considered, that is (i) b
2
h
2
0:02 m, (ii) b
2
h
2
0:08 m and (iii) b
2
h
2
0:20 m. In Table 1 the
computed values of the buckling load P for the cases of hingedhinged, xedhinged and xedxed boundary conditions
and for various values of the ratio E
2
=E
1
are presented taking into account or ignoring shear deformation effect as compared
with those obtained from a FEM solution (MSC/NASTRAN, 1999) employing 2600, 21,600 and 6000 solid brick elements for
the three cases, respectively (the buckling mode shapes of the latter are presented in Fig. 5). From the obtained results the
inuence of the inclusion of the aforementioned effect is remarkable leading to the conclusion that it has to be taken into
account. Moreover, it can be concluded that the inuence of the boundary conditions on the buckling load is signicant,
while the buckling load is increasing monotonically with the ratio E
2
=E
1
.
Example 2. To demonstrate the range of applications of the proposed method a slab-and-beam structure of length
l 40:0 m, with a composite cross section consisting of a rectangular concrete C20/25 plate (reference material 1:
E
1
2:9 10
7
kN=m
2
, m
1
0:20 stiffened by two concrete C35/45 I-section beams (material 2: E
2
3:35 10
7
kN=m
2
,
m
2
0:20, as this is shown in Fig. 6, has been studied. In Table 2 the geometrical and inertia properties of the composite
cross-section are presented together with its warping, torsion constants and its shear deformation coefcients referred to
25cm
15cm
7cm
177cm
20cm
35cm
90cm
3
5
c
m

330cm
C35/45
C20/25
C
Z,z
Y
S
50cm
30cm
30cm
50cm
90cm
320cm
190cm
y
Fig. 6. Cross-section of the composite slab-and-beam structure of Example 2.
Table 2
Geometric, inertia, torsion and warping constants and shear deformation coefcients of the composite cross-section of example 2
I
YY
4:049 m
4
a
y
3:349
I
ZZ
17:182 m
4
a
z
3:618
I
YZ
0:00 m
4
a
yz
0:0
C
S
16:572 m
6
y
C
0:0 m
I
t
0:205 m
4
z
C
1:55 m
I
S
31:403 m
4
A
G
4:246 m
2
Table 3
Buckling load P (kN) of the composite beam of Example 2
Hingedhinged Fixedhinged Fixedxed
Without shear
deformation
With shear
deformation
Without shear
deformation
With shear
deformation
Without shear
deformation
With shear
deformation
674,313 661,137 1,082,168 1,045,833 1,834,828 1,744,819
512 E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516
its principal shear system of axes (the directions of which coincide with the principal bending ones due to the monosym-
metric property of the cross-section). In Table 3 the computed values of the buckling load P for the cases of hingedhinged,
xedhinged and xedxed boundary conditions are presented taking into account or ignoring shear deformation effect.
From the obtained results the inuence of both the aforementioned effect and the boundary conditions is once more
remarkable.
Example 3. To demonstrate the range of applications of the proposed method, three different cases of a nonsymmetric beam
of length l 1:0 m, with a rectangular composite cross-section consisting of a rectangular part (reference material 1:
E
1
2:9 10
7
kN=m
2
, m
1
0:30 stiffened by an L-section of unequal legs (material 2: E
2
2:1 10
8
kN=m
2
, m
2
0:30 hav-
ing three different thickness t values, namely t t
1
1 cm (composite cross-section properties A
G
3:188 10
2
m
2
,
I
t
6:800 10
5
m
4
, C
S
1:057 10
8
m
6
, I
S
1:147 10
4
m
4
, t t
2
3 cm (composite cross-section properties
A
G
5:394 10
2
m
2
, I
t
8:611 10
5
m
4
, C
S
2:420 10
8
m
6
, I
S
2:024 10
4
m
4
, t t
3
5 cm (composite cross-
section properties A
G
8:181 10
2
m
2
, I
t
1:137 10
4
m
4
, C
S
4:009 10
8
m
6
, I
S
2:518 10
4
m
4
, as this is shown
in Fig. 7, has been studied. Since the proposed method requires the coordinate system CYZ through the cross-sections cen-
troid C to have Y, Z axes parallel to the principal shear axes, in the rst column of Tables 46 the geometric, the inertia con-
stants and the shear deformation coefcients of the three aforementioned cases of the examined cross-section are given with
C
b=10.5cm
h
=
1
5
.
5
c
m

t
t
S
S

Principal shear axes (at S)

Y
Z
~
~
y
z
S

1
2
2
Fig. 7. Cross-section of the nonsymmetric composite beam of Example 3.
Table 4
Geometric, inertia constants and shear deformation coefcients of the composite cross-section of Example 3 for t t
1
1 cm
Coordinate system C

Z Coordinate system CYZ

I

Y
7:7371 10
5
m
4
I
YY
7:8757 10
5
m
4
I

Z
3:5671 10
5
m
4
I
ZZ
3:4286 10
5
m
4
I

Z
7:9462 10
6
m
4
I
YZ
1:8532 10
6
m
4
a~ y
1:649 a
y
1:654
a~z
1:426 a
z
1:422
a~ y~z
3:233 10
2
a
yz
0:00
~ y
C
5:92 10
3
m y
C
6:46 10
3
m
~z
C
4:30 10
3
m z
C
3:43 10
3
m
h
S
0:14 rad
E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516 513
Table 5
Geometric, inertia constants and shear deformation coefcients of the composite cross-section of Example 3 for t t
2
3 cm
Coordinate system C

Z Coordinate system CYZ

I

Y
1:3362 10
4
m
4
I
YY
1:3805 10
4
m
4
I

Z
5:4703 10
5
m
4
I
ZZ
5:0266 10
5
m
4
I

Z
2:6147 10
5
m
4
I
YZ
1:7718 10
5
m
4
a~ y
1:828 a
y
1:831
a~z
1:530 a
z
1:527
a~ y~z
3:045 10
2
a
yz
0:00
~ y
C
1:06 10
2
m y
C
1:16 10
2
m
~z
C
1:12 10
2
m z
C
1:01 10
2
m
h
S
0:10 rad
Table 6
Geometric, inertia constants and shear deformation coefcients of the composite cross-section of Example 3 for t t
3
5 cm
Coordinate system C

Z Coordinate system CYZ

I

Y
1:7038 10
4
m
4
I
YY
1:4297 10
4
m
4
I

Z
6:6739 10
5
m
4
I
ZZ
9:4151 10
5
m
4
I

Z
3:2453 10
5
m
4
I
YZ
5:6061 10
5
m
4
a~ y
1:516 a
y
1:527
a~z
1:415 a
z
1:404
a~ y~z
3:457 10
2
a
yz
0:00
~ y
C
8:41 10
3
m y
C
4:94 10
3
m
~z
C
1:04 10
2
m z
C
1:25 10
2
m
h
S
0:30 rad
Table 7
Buckling load P (kN) of the composite beam of Example 3
Hingedhinged Fixedhinged Fixedxed
Without shear
deformation
With shear
deformation
Without shear
deformation
With shear
deformation
Without shear
deformation
With shear
deformation
Present
study
FEM Present
study
FEM Present
study
FEM
t t
1
1 cm
9791 9364 9430 20,029 18,154 18,824 39,158 33,126 36,128
t t
2
3 cm
13,392 12,917 12,916 27,373 25,268 25,931 53,422 46,580 50,000
t t
3
5 cm
16,423 15,994 15,948 33,572 31,654 32,371 65,539 59,202 63,341
Table 8
Buckling load P(kN) of the composite beam of Example 3, for various beam lengths
Beam length
(m)
Hingedhinged Fixedxed
Without shear
deformation
With shear
deformation
Discrepancy
(%)
Without shear
deformation
With shear
deformation
Discrepancy
(%)
t t
1
1 cm
1.00 9791 9364 4.56 39,158 33,126 18.21
0.90 12,087 11,444 5.62 48,334 39,464 22.48
0.80 15,297 14,281 7.11 61,155 47,616 28.43
t t
2
3 cm
1.00 13,392 12,917 3.68 53,422 46,580 14.69
0.90 16,530 15,811 4.55 65,877 55,776 18.11
0.80 20,915 19,778 5.75 83,224 67,736 22.87
t t
3
5 cm
1.00 16,423 15,994 2.68 65,539 59,202 10.70
0.90 20,271 19,621 3.31 80,835 71,408 13.20
0.80 25,649 24,618 4.19 102,157 87,554 16.68
514 E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516
respect to an original coordinate system C

Z, followed by the evaluation of the angle of rotation h

S
(Mokos and Sapountza-
kis, 2005) giving the nal coordinate systemCYZ and the newgeometric, inertia constants and shear deformation coefcients
given in the second column of the aforementioned tables. In Tables 7 and 8 the computed values of the buckling load P for
various boundary conditions are presented taking into account or ignoring shear deformation effect. More specically, to
demonstrate the accuracy of the proposed method, in Table 7 the obtained results are compared with those obtained from
a FEM solution (MSC/NASTRAN, 1999) employing 16,500, 17,600 and 16,000 solid brick elements for the three cases, respec-
tively (the corresponding buckling mode shapes of the latter method are presented in Fig. 8), while in Table 8 the discrep-
ancy of the obtained results taking into account or ignoring shear deformation effect for various beam lengths demonstrates
the inuence of this effect.
5. Concluding remarks
In this paper a boundary element method is developed for the general exural-torsional linear buckling analysis of Tim-
oshenko beams of arbitrarily shaped composite cross-section without initial effects. The main conclusions that can be drawn
from this investigation are:
Fig. 8. 3D views of the buckling mode shapes of the FEM solution of the beams of Example 3 (numbers in parentheses correspond to the FEM solution).
E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516 515
(a) The numerical technique presented in this investigation is well suited for computer aided analysis for composite
beams of arbitrary cross-section, subjected to any linear boundary conditions and to an arbitrarily distributed or con-
centrated loading.
(b) The proposed method can treat composite beams of both thin and thick walled cross-sections taking into account the
warping along the thickness of the walls, while the displacements as well as the stress resultants are computed at any
cross-section of the beam using the respective integral representations as mathematical formulae.
(c) All basic equations are formulated with respect to the principal shear axes coordinate system, which does not neces-
sarily coincide with the principal bending one.
(d) The discrepancy of the obtained results arising from the ignorance of shear deformation especially in thick-walled
cross-sections is remarkable and necessitates its inclusion in these cases.
(e) The developed procedure retains the advantages of a BEM solution over a pure domain discretization method since it
requires only boundary discretization.
Acknowledgements
This work has been funded by the Project PENED 2003. The project is conanced 75% of public expenditure through EC
European Social Fund and 25% of public expenditure through Ministry of Development General Secretariat of Research and
Technology and through private sector, under measure 8.3 of OPERATIONAL PROGRAM COMPETITIVENESS in the 3rd Com-
munity Support Program.
References
Cortnez, V.H., Piovan, M.T., 2006. Stability of composite thin-walled beams with shear deformability. Computers and Structures 84, 978990.
Cowper, G.R., 1966. The shear coefcient in Timoshenkos beam theory. Journal of Applied Mechanics, ASME 33 (2), 335340.
Hodges, D.H., 2001. Lateral-torsional utter of a deep cantilever loaded by lateral follower force at the tip. Journal of Sound and Vibration 247 (1), 175183.
Hodges, D.H., Peters, D.A., 1975. On the lateral buckling of uniform slender cantilever beams. International Journal of Solids and Structures 11, 12691280.
Hutchinson, J.R., 2001. Shear coefcients for Timoshenko beam theory. ASME Journal of Applied Mechanics 68, 8792.
Katsikadelis, J.T., 2002. The analog equation method, a boundary-only integral equation method for nonlinear static and dynamic problems in general
bodies. Theoretical and Applied Mechanics 27, 1338.
Kollr, L.P., 2001. Flexural-torsional buckling of open section composite columns with shear deformation. International Journal of Solids and Structures 38,
75257541.
Lee, J., Kim, SE., 2001. Flexural-torsional buckling of thin-walled I-section composites. Computers and Structures 79, 987995.
Machado, S.P., Cortnez, V.H., 2005. Lateral buckling of thin-walled composite bisymmetric beams with prebuckling and shear deformation. Engineering
Structures 27, 11851196.
Mei, C., 1970. Coupled vibrations of thin-walled beams of open-section using the nite element method. International Journal of Mechanical Science 12,
883891.
Michell, A.G.M., 1899. Elastic stability of long beams under transverse forces. Philosophical Magazine 48 (5th Series), 298309.
Milisavljevic, B.M., 1995. On lateral buckling of a slender cantilever beam. International Journal of Solids and Structures 32 (16), 23772391.
Mokos, V.G., Sapountzakis, E.J., 2005. A BEM solution to transverse shear loading of composite beams. International Journal of Solids and Structures 42,
32613287.
MSC/NASTRAN for Windows, 1999. Finite element modeling and postprocessing system. Help System Index, Version 4.0, USA.
Orloske, K., Leamy, M.J., Parker, R.G., 2006. Flexural-torsional buckling of misaligned axially moving beams: I. Three-dimensional modeling, equilibria, and
bifurcations. International Journal of Solids and Structures 43, 42974322.
Prandtl, L., 1899. Kipperscheinungen, Dissertation der Universitat Munchen.
Ramm, E., Hofmann, T.J., 1995. Stabtragwerke, Der Ingenieurbau. In: Mehlhorn, G. (Ed.), Band Baustatik/Baudynamik. Ernst&Sohn, Berlin.
Rao, J.S., Carnegie, W., 1970. Solution of the equations of motion of coupled-bending torsion vibrations of turbine blades by the method of RitzGalerkin.
International Journal of Mechanical Science 12, 875882.
Reissner, E., 1979. On lateral buckling of end-loaded cantilever beams. ZAMP 30, 3140.
Rothert, H., Gensichen, V., 1987. Nichtlineare Stabstatik. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Sapks, A., Kollr, L.P., 2002. Lateral-torsional buckling of composite beams. International Journal of Solids and Structures 39, 29392963.
Sapountzakis, E.J., 2005. Torsional vibrations of composite bars of variable cross-section by BEM. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering
194, 21272145.
Sapountzakis, E.J., Mokos, V.G., 2001. Nonuniform torsion of composite bars by boundary element method. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE 127 (9),
945953.
Sapountzakis, E.J., Mokos, V.G., 2003. Warping shear stresses in nonuniform torsion of composite bars by BEM. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and
Engineering 192, 43374353.
Sapountzakis, E.J., Tsiatas, G.C., 2007. Flexural-torsional buckling and vibration analysis of composite beams. Computers, Materials and Continua 6 (2), 103
115.
Schramm, U., Kitis, L., Kang, W., Pilkey, W.D., 1994. On the shear deformation coefcient in beam theory. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 16, 141
162.
Schramm, U., Rubenchik, V., Pilkey, W.D., 1997. Beam stiffness matrix based on the elasticity equations. International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering 40, 211232.
Stephen, N.G., 1980. Timoshenkos shear coefcient from a beam subjected to gravity loading. ASME Journal of Applied Mechanics 47, 121127.
Timoshenko, S.P., Goodier, J.N., 1984. Theory of Elasticity, third ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Timoshenko, S.P., Gere, J.M., 1961. Theory of Elastic Stability. McGraw-Hill, Tokyo.
Vlasov, V.Z., 1961. Thin-walled elastic beams. Israel Program for Scientic Translations, Jerusalem.
Yu, W., Hodges, D.H., Volovoi, V., Cesnik, C.E.S., 2002. On Timoshenko-like modeling of initially curved and twisted composite beams. International Journal
of Solids and Structures 39, 51015121.
516 E.J. Sapountzakis, J.A. Dourakopoulos / Mechanics Research Communications 35 (2008) 497516