Struct Multidisc Optim (2010) 40:157–164
DOI 10.1007/s00158-008-0354-0
RESEARCH PAPER
Vibrations and large postbuckling deflections of optimal
pinned columns with elastic foundations
Raymond H. Plaut · Lawrence N. Virgin
Received: 11 September 2008 / Revised: 4 December 2008 / Accepted: 6 December 2008 / Published online: 16 January 2009
© Springer-Verlag 2009
Abstract The optimal distribution of material to max-
imize the critical load of columns has been studied
extensively in the past, along with initial postbuckling
behavior. Here, large postbuckling deflections are an-
alyzed for optimal columns with pinned ends. Small
vibrations of the optimal columns about postbuckled
equilibrium shapes are also investigated. A shooting
method is utilized to obtain numerical solutions. In
some examples, an elastic foundation is attached to the
column. The foundation includes the usual transverse
resistance and an axial resisting force. The bifurcation
is subcritical in some cases, and then the column is
imperfection-sensitive. Results are compared to those
for the corresponding uniform column with the same
total volume.
Keywords Optimal columns · Maximum stability ·
Elastic foundation · Postbuckling · Vibration
1 Introduction
Optimization of structures for maximum stability is
an important and interesting problem (Gajewski and
R. H. Plaut (B)
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,
Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA
e-mail: rplaut@vt.edu
L. N. Virgin
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA
e-mail: l.virgin@duke.edu
Zyczkowski 1988). Small postbuckled deflections of
optimally designed columns have been treated pre-
viously, and large deflections are analyzed here. Vi-
brations about the equilibrium configurations are also
considered. The stability of the postbuckled states
can be determined from knowledge of the vibration
frequencies.
Studies of the postbuckling of optimal columns in-
clude Keller (1960), Frauenthal (1973), Seyranian and
Privalova (2003) and Olhoff and Seyranian (2008). Per-
turbation techniques were applied to determine the
initial postbuckling behavior. The first two of these
papers considered unimodal cases, and the last two
treated bimodal examples in which two buckling loads
coincide.
The present paper includes the postbuckling analysis
of columns attached to an elastic foundation. Such op-
timal designs were derived in Kiusalaas (1973), Turner
and Plaut (1980), Gajewski (1985), Plaut et al. (1986),
Seyranian et al. (1994), Kruzelecki and Smas (2004),
Atanackovic and Novakovic (2006), Smas (2007),
Atanackovic and Seyranian (2008) and Olhoff and
Seyranian (2008), among others. In most of these, the
foundation restoring force per unit length was assumed
to be independent of the width of the column, whereas
in Gajewski (1985), Kruzelecki and Smas (2004) and
Smas (2007) it was proportional to the column width.
For a cross section with constant width and varying
height, such as the sandwich cross section in Plaut et al.
(1986) that will be analyzed in Section 4, the two models
of the restoring force are identical.
The formulation is described in Section 2. Large
deflections are considered, along with small vibrations
about the postbuckled equilibrium state. Results for
pinned-pinned columns without an elastic foundation
158 R.H. Plaut, L.N. Virgin

are presented in Section 3, and the foundation is added respectively, with P positive in compression and Q
in Section 4. Concluding remarks are given in Section 5. positive in the −Y direction on a positive face. The
bending moment M(S, T) is positive if the curvature is
positive. The governing equations, based on geometry,
2 Formulation moment-curvature relation, and dynamic equilibrium
are (Virgin 2007)
The column is shown in Fig. 1. It is slender, incompress-
ible, and linearly elastic, and has length L, arc length S, ∂ X/∂ S = cos θ,
cross-sectional area A(S), moment of inertia I(S) with ∂Y/∂ S = sin θ,
respect to the plane of buckling, modulus of elasticity
E, and mass per unit length μ(S), and is subjected EI∂θ/∂ S = M,
to a compressive load P at S = L. Points along the ∂ M/∂ S = Q cos θ − P sin θ,
column have coordinates X(S, T) and Y(S, T), and
rotation θ(S, T) with respect to the X axis, where ∂ P/∂ S = −μ∂ 2 X/∂ T 2 − K X (X − S),
T is time. When the elastic foundation is present, it ∂ Q/∂ S = −μ∂ 2 Y/∂ T 2 − KY Y. (3)
is assumed to exert a restoring force KY Y(S, T) per
unit arc length along the column in the −Y direction, Damping is neglected.
and K X [X(S, T) − S] per unit arc length in the −X The analysis is conducted in terms of the following
direction, where K X and KY are constant stiffness nondimensional quantities:
coefficients (Villarraga et al. 2004).
The volume of the column is specified and is de- x = X/L, y = Y/L, s = S/L, a = A/A0 ,
noted V0 , and the corresponding uniform column has m = ML/EI0 , p = PL2 /EI0 , q = QL2 /EI0 ,
constant cross-sectional A0 = V0 /L, moment of inertia
I0 , and mass per unit length μ0 . The optimal area A(S) kx = K X L4 /EI0 , k y = KY L4 /EI0 ,
 
maximizes the critical load subject to the constraint t = (T/L2 ) EI0 /μ0 , ω = Ω L2 μ0 /EI0 , (4)
 L
A(S)dS = V0 . (1) where Ω is a dimensional vibration frequency. The
0 constraint (1) becomes
It is assumed that I(S) and A(S) satisfy the relation  1
  a(s)ds = 1. (5)
I(S) A(S) n
= . (2) 0
I0 A0 In nondimensional terms, the governing equations
The case n = 1 could correspond to a sandwich cross are
section with a core having negligible bending stiffness
and face sheets with varying thickness, or to a rectan- ∂ x/∂s = cos θ,
gular cross section with varying width. The case n = 2 ∂ y/∂s = sin θ,
corresponds to geometrically similar cross sections, and
an ∂θ/∂s = m,
n = 3 would represent a rectangular cross section with
varying height, for example. ∂m/∂s = q cos θ − p sin θ,
The internal forces in the column are denoted
∂ p/∂s = −a∂ 2 x/∂t2 − kx (x − s),
P(S, T) and Q(S, T) parallel to the X and Y axes,
∂q/∂s = −a∂ 2 y/∂t2 − k y y. (6)

L The variables are written in the form

θ x(s, t) = xe (s) + xd (s) sin ωt,
S
y(s, t) = ye (s) + yd (s) sin ωt,
Y
P θ(s, t) = θe (s) + θd (s) sin ωt,
X
m(s, t) = me (s) + md (s) sin ωt,
K X , KY p(s, t) = pe (s) + pd (s) sin ωt,
Fig. 1 Schematic of the pinned-pinned column q(s, t) = qe (s) + qd (s) sin ωt. (7)
Vibrations and large postbuckling deflections... 159

where subscripts e and d denote equilibrium and dy- n=1

namic quantities, respectively. For equilibrium, the uniform n=2
n=3
equations are
1.0
xe = cos θe , a(s)
ye = sin θe , 0 0.4 0.8 1.0
0.2 0.6
s
an θe = me ,
me = qe cos θe − pe sin θe , Fig. 2 Uniform area, and optimal areas for n = 1, 2, 3 (kx =
k y = 0)
pe = −kx (xe − s),
qe = −k y ye . (8)
For small vibrations about equilibrium, the linear and the corresponding critical load is pcr = 12. For n =
equations in the dynamic variables are 2 and n = 3, the solution can be written in terms of a
xd = −θd sin θe , parameter φ with 0 ≤ φ ≤ π . For n = 2 (Keller 1960),
yd = θd cos θe , 4 2 1
an θd = md , a= sin φ, s = (2φ − sin 2φ) (13)
    3 2π
md = qd − pe θd cos θe − pd + qe θd sin θe ,
and pcr = (4/3)π 2 = 13.16. For n = 3 (Budiansky et al.
pd = aω2 xd − kx xd ,
1969),
qd = aω2 yd − k y yd . (9)
5 2 1
The boundary conditions at s = 0 are a= sin φ, s = (8 − 9 cos φ + cos 3φ) (14)
4 16
xe = y e = m e = x d = y d = m d = 0 (10)
and pcr = 13.89. The area functions a(s) are plotted in
and at s = 1 they are Fig. 2, along with that for the corresponding uniform
column (a(s) = 1) for which pcr = π 2 . At the center
ye = me = yd = md = pd = 0. (11)
of the column, for n = 1, 2, and 3, respectively, a =
Numerical solutions are obtained using a shooting 1.5, 4/3, and 1.25.
method with the subroutines NDSolve and FindRoot Numerical results for a uniform column and for the
in Mathematica (Bahder 1995). For equilibrium, θe (0) is optimal column with n = 1 are obtained from (8), (9),
specified, and pe (0) and qe (0) are varied until ye (1) = 0 and the corresponding a(s). For n = 2 and n = 3, (8)
and me (1) = 0 with sufficient accuracy. (If kx = k y = 0, and (9) are written in terms of φ rather than s. The
then qe = 0, pe is constant, and pe is varied until ye (1) = equilibrium paths are plotted as the nondimensional
0. If kx = 0 but k y = 0, then pe is again constant.) When applied static compressive load pe versus the nondi-
kx = 0, the equilibrium configurations are symmetric mensional end-shortening δ, where δ = 1 − xe (1). They
about s = 0.5. For vibrations about a known equilib-
rium state, θd (0) is specified and pd (0), qd (0), and ω2 are
varied until yd (1) = md (1) = pd (1) = 0. Since a(0) = 0
17 3
and a(1) = 0 in the optimal solutions, the quantity a(s)
on the left-hand sides of the third equations in (8) and p 16 2
e
(9) is replaced by 10−7 + a(s) to avoid a singularity 15
in the numerical integration procedure. The sets of n=1
equations (8) and (9) can be solved sequentially or 14
simultaneously. 13

12 uniform
3 Columns without elastic foundation 11

In this section, kx = k y = 0, and an analytical expres- 10

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
sion exists for the optimal area distribution. For the 0.0
δ
case n = 1 (Prager and Taylor 1968),
Fig. 3 Load versus end-shortening for uniform column and for
a(s) = 6s(1 − s) (12) optimal columns with n = 1, 2, 3 (kx = k y = 0)
160
17 3 independent of kx (see the Appendix). The optimal
p 2
e 16
15 n=1
14
13
uniform
12
11
10
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
0
ω2
Fig. 4 Load versus frequency squared for uniform column and
for optimal columns with n = 1, 2, 3 (kx = k y = 0)
are shown in Fig. 3 for the uniform column and the
three optimal columns. The curves are terminated when
the magnitude of either end rotation reaches π/2. (This
is also the case in subsequent figures.) In Fig. 3, at a
given value of δ, the slope is lowest for the uniform
column and increases as n increases.
The square of the nondimensional fundamental (i.e.,
lowest) frequency ω for small vibrations about each
postbuckling curve in Fig. 3 is depicted in Fig. 4, where
pe is plotted as a function of ω2 . At the onset of buck-
ling, ω2 = 0. At a given frequency, the slope is highest
for the uniform column and decreases as n increases, in
contrast to Fig. 3. At a given ratio pe / pcr , of the four
cases, the end-shortening is greatest for the uniform
column and least for the optimal column having n =
3, whereas the fundamental frequency is least for the
uniform column and greatest for the optimal column
having n = 3. For example, if pe / pcr = 1.1, then for the
uniform column and for the optimal columns with n =
1, 2, and 3, respectively, δ = 0.180, 0.151, 0.137, and
0.129, whereas ω2 = 12.88, 15.93, 18.58, and 20.33.
4 Columns with elastic foundation
In this section, the cross section is assumed to be rectan-
gular with constant width B. It consists of a lightweight
core of constant height H, covered by identical thin
face sheets with variable thickness T F (S) and mod-
ulus of elasticity E (Plaut et al. 1986). The core is
neglected, and the moment of inertia is approximately
BH 2 T F /2. For the corresponding uniform column with
the same face-sheet area, T F (S) = T0 , A0 = 2BT0 , and
I0 = BH 2 T0 /2 = H 2 A0 /4, so that n = 1.
Equations (1–11) are applicable. In a linearized
analysis, x = s and the initial buckling load y1 (s) is
R.H. Plaut, L.N. Virgin
area distribution is (Plaut et al. 1986)
 
ky ky 2 ky 3 ky 4
a(s) = 6 + s− 6+ s + s − s (15)
120 20 12 24
for 0 ≤ k y < 376 and any value of kx . In this range of
k y , the corresponding maximum critical load is pcr =
12 + (k y /10), and y1 (s) is proportional to s(1 − s). (If
k y > 376, the optimal solution is bimodal.) For the
uniform column, if 0 ≤ k y < 4π 4 = 389.6, then pcr =
π 2 + (k y /π 2 ) and y1 (s) is proportional to sin π s. For
kx = k y = 0, naturally (12) and the curves for n = 1 in
Figs. 3 and 4 are applicable.
4.1 Only transverse foundation stiffness
In this subsection, kx = 0. As seen in Fig. 3, with k y = 0
the bifurcation point for each curve is supercritical, i.e.,
each postbuckling curve branches upward from the triv-
ial equilibrium path. When k y > 0, the bifurcation point
is subcritical in some cases (i.e., the postbuckling curve
branches downward, at least initially). For the uniform
column, the first subcritical range as k y is increased
from zero occurs for π 4 /3 < k y < 4π 4 , i.e., 32.5 < k y <
389.6 (Thompson and Hunt 1973). For the optimal area
distribution (15), it occurs for 42.7 < k y < 376.
The case k y = 50 is considered in Figs. 5 and 6. The
postbuckling curves in Fig. 5 for both the uniform and
optimal columns decrease initially, reach a minimum,
and then increase. Therefore, when the load applied to
the straight column is increased from zero and reaches
its critical value, the column suddenly exhibits large
deformations. If some damping is present, the motion
of the optimal column will settle into the equilibrium
state on the rising part of the postbuckling path at
17
optimal
p
e
16
15 uniform
14
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
δ
Fig. 5 Load versus end-shortening for uniform column and for
optimal column with n = 1 (kx = 0, k y = 50)
Vibrations and large postbuckling deflections... 161

21
17 pe (1) optimal
optimal 20
p 19
e
18
uniform
16
17

15 uniform
14
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10
ω2
Fig. 6 Load versus frequency squared for uniform column and
for optimal column with n = 1 (kx = 0, k y = 50)
pcr , which has end-shortening δ = 0.219 and central
transverse deflection ye (0.5) = 0.259. For the uniform
column, the positive value of δ at which pe = pcr is
beyond the end of the lower curve in Fig. 5.
Since the initial slope is negative, the columns are
imperfection-sensitive (i.e., a small imperfection could
lead to a significant decrease in the critical load). Here
the initial slope is more negative for the uniform col-
umn than the optimal column (the same is true in a
plot of pe / pcr versus δ), so the optimal column has a
smaller imperfection-sensitivity than the uniform one.
(For cases in which the optimal structure involves a
coincidence of two types of buckling modes, which is
not the present situation, the imperfection-sensitivity
may be high, as noted in Thompson and Hunt (1973)
and other studies.)
16
15
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
0.0 δ
Fig. 8 Load versus end-shortening for uniform column and for
optimal column with n = 1 (kx = k y = 50)
12
When the slope of the postbuckling path is nega-
tive, the equilibrium state is unstable and then ω2 < 0
for the associated motion, which grows exponentially
in the linear dynamic solution. Plots of pe versus ω2
for k y = 50 are presented in Fig. 6. On each curve,
the value of ω2 becomes positive after the postbuckling
curve reaches its minimum point and begins to rise.
The postbuckling curves for k y = 100 are shown in
Fig. 7. The bifurcation points for both the uniform and
optimal column are again unstable. In this case, the
curves continue to fall in the range considered (end
rotations up to π/2). The corresponding values of ω2
are negative and are not plotted.
4.2 Axial and transverse foundation stiffnesses
Both kx and k y are positive in this subsection, and are
assumed to be equal to 50 or 100. The addition of
the axial stiffness kx does not affect the critical load,
but changes the postbuckling behavior. Also, the equi-
librium configurations ye (s) are not symmetric about

p
e 21 optimal
21 pe (1)
20
20
optimal
19
19
18
18 uniform
17

17 uniform 16

16 15
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 10 20 30 40 50
0
δ 0
ω2
Fig. 7 Load versus end-shortening for uniform column and for Fig. 9 Load versus frequency squared for uniform column and
optimal column with n = 1 (kx = 0, k y = 100) for optimal column with n = 1 (kx = k y = 50)
162 R.H. Plaut, L.N. Virgin

26
optimal 5 Concluding remarks
p (1)
e 25
Pinned elastic columns designed for maximum critical
24 uniform load have been considered, along with the associated
uniform column. Small postbuckled deflections were
23
investigated previously by others. Here, large post-
22 buckled deflections were analyzed, along with small
vibrations about those equilibrium states. The column
21 was modeled as an inextensible elastica.
20
Columns with no elastic foundation were treated
0.1 0.2 0.3
0 δ first. Different types of cross-sectional variations were
considered. Then, with an attached foundation, the
Fig. 10 Load versus end-shortening for uniform column and for cross section was assumed to be a sandwich with face
optimal column with n = 1 (kx = k y = 100) sheets of varying thickness. Analyses were conducted
for cases in which (i) the optimal area function was
s = 0.5 in this case. The magnitude of the end rotation known analytically and (ii) the critical load was associ-
is greater at the loaded end, and the equilibrium paths ated with a single buckling mode (i.e., unimodal cases).
will be terminated when this magnitude reaches π/2. The problem was formulated, and then numerical
Results for kx = k y = 50 are plotted in Figs. 8 results were obtained with a shooting method. Results
and 9. The applied compressive load is pe (1), and the were presented for increasing deflections, ending when
postbuckling paths shown in Fig. 8 are rising and stable. the magnitude of one of the end rotations reached
Their slopes are almost constant, with the optimal col- π/2. For the cases with no foundation, the postbuckling
umn having a slightly higher slope. In Fig. 9, the slopes equilibrium paths rise (Fig. 3). When the foundation
of the corresponding frequency curves increase as the resistance is only transverse (kx = 0, k y > 0), there are
load is increased (although only slightly for the optimal ranges of k y in which the bifurcation point is subcritical
column). and the initial postbuckling paths fall. Two foundation
The case kx = k y = 100 is considered in Figs. 10 stiffnesses within that range were considered, k y = 50
and 11. Again the postbuckling curves shown are stable (Fig. 5) and k y = 100 (Fig. 7). The uniform and optimal
for both the uniform and optimal columns. The slopes columns are imperfection-sensitive. Optimization does
of the postbuckling curves decrease with increasing not have a large effect on the magnitude of this sensi-
load, and the uniform column almost reaches a limit tivity; the designs do not involve the coincidence of two
(maximum) point in the range that is plotted. The load- types of failure modes here.
frequency curve for the uniform column also resembles When the foundation has equal stiffnesses trans-
one that tends toward a limit point, at which the funda- versely and axially, the postbuckling behavior may be
mental frequency would have decreased to zero. altered significantly. The axial foundation stiffness kx
causes the initial postbuckling slope to increase, as
shown in the Appendix where a perturbation analysis
optimal is conducted. For kx = k y = 50 (Fig. 8) and kx = k y =
pe (1) 100 (Fig. 10), the uniform and optimal columns are
25 not imperfection-sensitive, and they may approach a
limit point, which would cause a jump in the deflection
24
(as occurs at the critical loads in Figs. 5 and 7 where
23 kx = 0).
The fundamental frequency can be used to deter-
22 mine the stability of equilibrium states. In Fig. 6, the
uniform square of this frequency is negative when the equilib-
21
rium configuration is unstable. For rising postbuckling
20 equilibrium paths, the fundamental frequency tends to
10 20 30 40 50 increase as the applied compressive load increases. An
0
ω2 exception is seen in Fig. 11 at the end of the plotted path
Fig. 11 Load versus frequency squared for uniform column and for the uniform column, indicating that the system may
for optimal column with n = 1 (kx = k y = 100) be approaching an unstable condition.
Vibrations and large postbuckling deflections... 163

Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to the reviewers The right-hand side of (19) must be orthogonal
for their helpful suggestions. to y1 (s), and this condition can be manipulated and
written in the form
 1  1 
1 2 1
Appendix p2 θ1 ds = pcr
2
θ1 ds −
4
q1 θ13 ds. (20)
0 6 0 3 0
Perturbation analysis for small displacements From the first equation in (16), evaluated at
s = 1, xe (1) = x1 (1) + 2 x2 (1). Since x1 (s) = s, x1 (1) =
A perturbation technique is applied to the equilibrium 1. The end-shortening δ equals 1 − xe (1), and therefore
equations (8) for the uniform column and for the opti- one can write 2 = −δ/x2 (1). Integration of the second
mal column with n = 1, with me eliminated. This pro- equation in (17), along with x2 (0) = 0, gives
vides an analytical treatment of the initial postbuckling 
behavior. 1 1 2
x2 (1) = − θ ds. (21)
The variables are written in terms of a small parame- 2 0 1
ter as follows: Based on these relationships, one can write
xe (s) = x1 (s) + x2 (s),
2
pe (1) = pcr + γδ (22)
ye (s) = y1 (s) + 3 y2 (s),
where
θe (s) = θ1 (s) + 3 θ2 (s),
2 p2 (1)
pe (s) = pcr + 2 p2 (s), γ =
1 . (23)
θ
0 1
2
ds
qe (s) = q1 (s) + 3 q2 (s). (16)
If kx = 0, pe and p2 are constants.
The term x1 (s) will be the arc length s, and the sub- The initial slope γ of the postbuckling curves in the
sequent term in the expansion for the axial displace- figures is computed using (20) and (23), along with the
ment will be of order 2 . The critical loads pcr and the known pcr and y1 (s). The results are
functions y1 (s) are listed in the paragraph preceding
Subsection 4.1. γ = 7.200 − 0.169k y + 0.286kx (24)
Equations (16) are substituted into (8), after cos θe
and sin θe are expanded, and then coefficients of like for the optimal column, and
powers of are equated to zero. This leads to γ = 4.935 − 0.152k y + 0.295kx (25)
1
x1 = 1, x2 = − θ12 , for the uniform column.
2
For the case of no elastic foundation, the initial
1
y1 = θ1 , y2 = θ2 − θ13 , postbuckling slopes of the uniform column and of the
6 optimal column with n = 1, respectively, are 0.5 pcr and
p2 = −kx x2 , 0.6 pcr , as previously obtained in Frauenthal (1973). The
q1 = −k y y1 , q2 = −k y y2 , (17) transverse stiffness k y of the foundation tends to reduce
the initial slope, whereas the axial foundation stiffness
from the first two and last two equations in (8). The kx tends to increase it.
boundary conditions include x1 (0) = x2 (0) = 0 and, due
to symmetry of the deflection of the linearized system,
q1 (0.5) = 0.
References
Next, the third and fourth equations in (8) are used
along with (17) and the boundary conditions to obtain
Atanackovic TM, Novakovic BN (2006) Optimal shape of an
   elastic column on elastic foundation. Eur J Mech A Solids
ay1 + pcr y1 + k y y1 = 0 (18) 25:154–165
Atanackovic TM, Seyranian AP (2008) Application of
and Pontryagin’s principle to bimodal optimization problems.
   Struct Multidisc Optim 37:1–12
ay2 + pcr y2 + k y y2 Bahder TB (1995) Mathematica for scientists and engineers.
Addison-Wesley, Reading
1    1  
= − aθ12 θ1 − p2 θ1 − q1 θ12 . (19) Budiansky B, Frauenthal JC, Hutchinson JW (1969) On optimal
2 2 arches. J Appl Mech 36:880–882
164
Frauenthal JC (1973) Initial postbuckling behavior of optimally
designed columns and plates. Int J Solids Struct 9:115–127
Gajewski A (1985) Bimodal optimisation of a column in an elastic
medium, with respect to buckling or vibration. Int J Mech Sci
27:45–53
Gajewski A, Zyczkowski M (1988) Optimal structural design
under stability constraints. Kluwer, Dordrecht
Keller JB (1960) The shape of the strongest column. Arch Ration
Mech Anal 5:275–285
Kiusalaas J (1973) Optimal design of structures with buckling
constraints. Int J Solids Struct 9:863–878
Kruzelecki J, Smas P (2004) Optimal design of simply supported
columns for buckling under loading controlled by displace-
ments. Eng Optim 36:645–658
Olhoff N, Seyranian AP (2008) Bifurcation and post-buckling
analysis of bimodal optimum columns. Int J Solids Struct
45:3967–3995
Plaut RH, Johnson LW, Olhoff N (1986) Bimodal optimization
of compressed columns on elastic foundations. J Appl Mech
53:130–134
R.H. Plaut, L.N. Virgin
Prager W, Taylor JE (1968) Problems of optimal structural
design. J Appl Mech 35:102–106
Seyranian AP, Lund E, Olhoff N (1994) Multiple eigenvalues
in structural optimization problems. Struct Optim 8:207–
227
Seyranian AP, Privalova OG (2003) The Lagrange problem on an
optimal column: old and new results. Struct Multidisc Optim
25:393–410
Smas P (2007) Design of clamped columns for maximizing the
axial displacement at buckling. Struct Multidisc Optim 33:
229–241
Thompson JMT, Hunt GW (1973) A general theory of elastic
stability. Wiley, London
Turner HK, Plaut RH (1980) Optimal design for stability under
multiple loads. J Eng Mech Div (ASCE) 106:1365–1382
Villarraga JA, Rodriguez JF, Martinez C (2004) Buried pipe
modeling with initial imperfections. J Press Vessel Technol
126:250–257
Virgin LN (2007) Vibration of axially loaded structures.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge