Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
net/publication/286140224
CITATIONS READS
5 398
3 authors, including:
Nebojša Zdravković
University of Kragujevac
31 PUBLICATIONS 52 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Research and development of new concept for connection between undercarriage frame and revolving upper structure in construction and transportation machines
View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Nebojša Zdravković on 11 April 2018.
© Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Belgrade. All rights reserved FME Transactions (2013) 41, 222-22 222
The strain energy accumulates as the column is l
M 2 dx
being bended. At the same time, the potential energy V . (6)
decreases due to certain lowering of acting point of the 2 EI
0
force. If V represents strain energy and T the work
2. METHODOLOGY OF THE ANALYTICAL MODEL
of force P while lowering its acting point, then the
elastic stability will be maintained if V T 0 , or
The case being considered is a three-segment cantilever
violated for V T 0 . The eigenvalue Pcr, called
stepped column subjected to axial compressive force
the critical load, which denotes the value of load P for acting at the top. The line that goes through the
which a nonzero deflection of the perfect column is centroids of all cross-sections is straight. In addition, the
possible, can be determined from the following following assumptions are made: the column is assumed
condition: to be made of homogeneous material that obeys
V T . (1) Hooke’s law, the load P is concentrated and the
deformations of the column are small. Self-weights
The displacement of acting point of force P is were also taken into account, which are considered to
theremainder between bended column elastic line length act at the middle of segments lengths. The model of the
and column height. To determine the total displacement, considered case is shown in Fig. 2.
the relation upon an elementary portion of the elastic
line is established (Fig. 1b):
dy 2
ds dx dx 2 dy 2 dx dx ( 1 ( ) 1) . (2)
dx
By expanding the function into Maclaurin serie, it is
derived:
1 dy 1 dy
ds dx dx 1 ( )2 1 ( )2 dx . (3)
2 dx 2 dx
The total displacement of force P acting point is As approximate function that satisfies the boundary
obtained by integration [2]: conditions of support and deflection at the top, the
l following expression can be adopted:
1 dy 2
2 dx
( ) dx . (4) x
0 y ( x) (1 cos ) (7)
2l
Work of force P along displacement is:
l where δ is deflection at free end of the column and l is
1 dy
T P P ( )2 dx . (5) overall column length.
2 dx Deflection values at points of forces action,
0
Strain energy is calculated as follows: according to adopted approximation of elastic line are:
a1 sin 0.25 s1
a2 sin 0.5 s1
a3 sin 0.5 s1 0.5s2
a4 sin 0.5 s1 s2
a5 sin 0.5 s1 s2 0.5s3
b1 sin 0.5 s1
b2 sin s1
b3 sin s1 0.5s2
b4 sin s1 s2
b5 sin s1 s2 0.5s3
c1 cos 0.25 s1 Figure 3. Verification model for analytical solution:a)
stepped column with cross-sections; b) FE model and
c2 cos 0.5 s1 0.5s2 result for well-known case of cantilever column with
uniform cross-section.
c3 cos 0.5 s1 s2 0.5s3
Wall thickness of pipes is w=5[mm] and overall
p1 m1 m2 m3 1 height of column is l=3000[mm]. In all cases, the
diameter of first (lowest) segment is D1=100[mm],
p2 m2 m3 1 while the diameters of second and third segment D2 and
p3 m3 1 D3 are varied. Young’s modulus of elasticity for steel is
taken to be E=2.1·104[kN/cm2]. In all cases, the
r1 m1c1 m2 c2 m3c3 compressive axial force P=1000[N] is applied at the top
of the column, while its bottom end is fixed.
r2 m2 c2 m3c3
Since the results of an analytical model are to be
r3 m3c3 compared with FEM results that are considered as true,
a preliminary test was done in order to verify the FEM
By varying the values of dimensionless load ratios
model. A well-known case of cantilever column with
and segments stiffness and lengths ratios, the influence
uniform cross-section with pipe diameter of
coefficient can be defined for any combination of the
D=100[mm], wall thickness w=5[mm] and height
parameters. On the other hand, segments lengths ratios
l=3000[mm] was discretized by 9644 20-node
have the limitation s1+s2+s3=1. If in expression for hexagonal finite elements and 64718 nodes, Fig. 3b.
influence parameter q are put the values m1=m2=m3=0, Analytical solution is well-known Euler’s formula:
NOMENCLATURE
ЕНЕРГЕТСКИ МЕТОД У ЕФИКАСНОМ
V strain energy ОДРЕЂИВАЊУ КРИТИЧНОГ ОПТЕРЕЋЕЊА
T deformation work ИЗВИЈАЊА АКСИЈАЛНО ОПТЕРЕЋЕНОГ
lowering of column’s free end ТРОСЕГМЕНТНОГ СТУБА
P compressive force
E Young’s modulus Небојша Здравковић, Миломир Гашић, Миле
free end deflection Савковић
l overall column length У раду је разматрана еластична стабилност
l1 , l2,l3 segments lengths тросегментног аксијално оптерећеног стуба помоћу
енергетске методе. Спроведена је методологија са
hi , i 1,..., 6 sections heights
циљем формирања прорачунског модела који је
M i ( x) , i 1,..., 6 sections bending moments погодан за брзо и истовремено довољно тачно
G1 , G2,G3 segments self-weights одређивање критичног оптерећења које доводи до
payload - compressive force извијања. Уводећи у анализу односе оптерећења,
G4
крутости савијања и дужина сегмената, дефинисан
I1 , I 2, I 3 sectional moments of inertia је општи бездимензиони утицајни коефицијент за
i , i 1,3,5 deflections at acting points било коју комбинацију параметара. Дати су
loads ratios дијаграми промене критичног оптерећења у односу
m1 , m2, m3
на варијацију геометријских параметара. Резултати
n2, n3 bending stiffness ratios аналитичког модела су дати упоредо са резултатима
s1 , s2, s3 lengths ratios добијеним из нумеричке анализе методом коначних
елемената. Кроз два режима испитивања, засебно су
q elastic buckling dimensionless
анализирани утицаји од промене крутости савијања
influence parameter
и дужина сегмената.
D1 , D2, D3 sections diameters
w pipe wall thickness
Table 4. Comparative results from analytical model and FEM for the regime of variable segment lengths for some
combinations of pipe diameters (fixed bending stiffness)
Segment Segment
Segment I Pcr for Pcr Pcr Point Relative
I1 II I2 III I3
diameter D1 n =n = n =I /I n =I /I s s2 s3 theory FEM designation error
[cm4] 2 3 diameter [cm4] 2 2 1 diameter [cm4] 3 3 1 1
[cm] 1 [kN] [kN] in diagram [%]
D2 [cm] D3 [cm]
0.60 0.20 0.20 95.29 96.00 R1 -0.74%
0.50 0.25 0.25 93.69 94.36 R2 -0.71%
9.50 143.58 0.85 9.00 121.00 0.72 0.40 0.30 0.30 91.56 92.10 R3 -0.59%
0.30 0.35 0.35 88.99 89.81 R4 -0.91%
0.20 0.40 0.40 86.10 86.56 R5 -0.53%
0.60 0.20 0.20 93.33 93.49 G1 -0.17%
0.50 0.25 0.25 90.19 90.41 G2 -0.24%
9.00 121.00 0.72 8.50 100.92 0.60 0.40 0.30 0.30 86.21 86.32 G3 -0.13%
0.30 0.35 0.35 81.64 81.88 G4 -0.29%
0.20 0.40 0.40 76.81 76.99 G5 -0.23%
10.00 168.81 97.19
0.60 0.20 0.20 90.86 91.11 B1 -0.27%
0.50 0.25 0.25 85.97 85.49 B2 0.56%
8.50 100.92 0.60 8.00 83.20 0.49 0.40 0.30 0.30 80.05 79.58 B3 0.59%
0.30 0.35 0.35 73.64 73.14 B4 0.68%
0.20 0.40 0.40 67.26 66.91 B5 0.52%
0.60 0.20 0.20 87.78 87.26 M1 0.60%
0.50 0.25 0.25 80.95 80.12 M2 1.04%
8.00 83.20 0.49 7.50 67.69 0.40 0.40 0.30 0.30 73.14 72.14 M3 1.39%
0.30 0.35 0.35 65.18 64.60 M4 0.90%
0.20 0.40 0.40 57.76 57.21 M5 0.96%