See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/298987177

Generalised Beam Theory

Method March 2016
DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2773.1601

READS

127

1 author:
Miguel Abambres
Pontifical Catholic University of Peru
10 PUBLICATIONS 44 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE

Available from: Miguel Abambres

Retrieved on: 10 July 2016

Generalised beam theory (GBT) is the most complete and disseminated beam theory ever formulated
and extensively validated. Its origin is due to Richard Schardt (1966), a German scientist from the University
of Darmstadt. Since then many other authors have extended the initial (first-order elastic) GBT formulations
developed by Schardt and his co-workers.[1][2] However, it is fair to say that a vast majority of the most
advanced/complete (in order to predict as close as possible the real behaviour (collapse and post-collapse)
of a structural member) formulations and applications of GBT have been developed by the research group
headed by Dinar Camotim, a full professor from the University of Lisbon, Portugal, since the beginning of
the 21st century [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] (please follow the website of his research group for information on
publications and available software).
The theory can be applied without restrictions to any prismatic thin-walled structural member exhibiting
straight or curved axial axis (any loading, any cross-section geometry, any boundary conditions), and it is
a very promising alternative to the powerful Finite Element Method employing 2D or 3D FEs to predict the
member structural behaviour.
GBT has already been widely recognised as a powerful, versatile, elegant and efficient approach to analyse
thin-walled members and structural systems. The elegance and efficiency arise mostly from its rather
unique modal nature the displacement field is expressed as a linear combination of cross-section
deformation modes whose amplitudes vary continuously along the member length (x axis) - see Figures 23. Due to GBT assumptions inherent to a thin-walled member, only 3 non-null stress components are
considered in the formulations (see Fig. 1).
Membrane displacement field (i.e., in the cross-section mid-surface):

The GBT modal nature makes it possible to (i) acquire in-depth knowledge on the mechanics of the thinwalled member behaviour and (ii) judiciously exclude, from subsequent similar GBT analyses, those
deformation modes found to play no (or negligible) role in the particular behaviour under scrutiny, thus
further reducing the number of d.o.f. involved in a GBT analysis (i.e., increasing its computational
efficiency). GBT has already extensively prooved its potential regarding (1) deep understanding of the
structural behaviour under analysis as well as (2) computational efficiency (i.e., number of degrees of
freedom involved in the analysis) - results and a more detailed insight of GBT-based inelastic analyses are
available online (check out works from Dinar Camotim, Nuno Silvestre, Pedro B. Dinis, Rodrigo
Gonalves, Cilmar Basaglia, Rui Bebiano, Nuno Silva and Miguel Abambres).
The investigation, application and dissemination of GBT will certainly last during many more years.

References

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Jump up^Schardt, Richard (1994). "Generalised Beam Theory an adequate method for coupled
stability problems". Thin-Walled Strcutures 19 (2-4): 161180. doi:10.1016/0263-8231(94)90027-2.
Jump up^ Davies, JM (2000). "Recent research advances in cold-formed steel structures". Journal of
Constructional Steel Research 55 (1-3): 267288. doi:10.1016/S0143-974X(99)00089-9.
Jump up^ Silvestre, N; Camotim, D (2002). "Second-order generalised beam theory for arbitrary
orthotropic materials". Thin-Walled Strcutures 40 (9): 791820. doi:10.1016/S0263-8231(02)00026-5.
Jump up^ Borges Dinis, P; Camotim, D; Silvestre, N (2006). "GBT formulation to analyse the buckling
behaviour of thin-walled members with arbitrarily branchedopen cross-sections". Thin-Walled
Strcutures 44 (1): 2038. doi:10.1016/j.tws.2005.09.005.
Jump up^ Camotim, D; Basaglia, C; Silvestre, N (2010). "GBT buckling analysis of thin-walled steel
frames:
a
state-of-the-art
report". Thin-Walled
Strcutures 48 (10):
726
743. doi:10.1016/j.tws.2009.12.003.
Jump up^ Abambres, M; Camotim, D; Silvestre, N (2014). "GBT-based elasticplastic post-buckling
analysis of stainless steel thin-walled members". Thin-Walled Strcutures 83 (October): 85
102. doi:10.1016/j.tws.2014.01.004.
Jump up^ Abambres, M; Camotim, D; Silvestre, N; Rasmussen, KJR (2014). "GBT-based structural
analysis of elasticplastic thin-walled members". Computers & Structures 136 (May): 1
23. doi:10.1016/j.compstruc.2014.01.001.
Jump up^ Bebiano, R; Gonalves, R; Camotim, D (2015). "A cross-section analysis procedure to
rationalise and automate the performance of GBT-based structural analyses". Thin-Walled
Strcutures 92 (July): 2947. doi:10.1016/j.tws.2015.02.017.
Jump up^ Gonalves, R; Camotim, D (2016). "GBT deformation modes for curved thin-walled crosssections
based
on
a
mid-line
polygonal
approximation". Thin-Walled
Strcutures (January). doi:10.1016/j.tws.2015.12.025.