Beam Elements

Are they precise ?

Dr.-Ing. Casimir Katz
FENet Technology Workshops,
October 2004, Glasgow, Scotland.
2
Cable Analysis
Cable
-H w(x) = p(x)
Solution for uniform load is a
quadratic parabola or a sinh
H
p
H
P1
P2
Cable element
Linear between the nodes
Solution space: polygonal
3
Cable Analysis
Solution Space
w
h
(x) = w
1
j
1
(x) + w
2
j
2
(x) + ...
Solution is exact for:
Single forces
Other loadings:
Minimum of energy => equilibrium
Exact solution is obtained in the nodes!
Why ?
4
Greens Functions
The influence function (Greens function) for
the deformation of the cable at a point is the
cable polygon created by a point load P=1 at
the point of interest.
If the FE-System is able to model this solution
exactly, the solution will be exact for this
value.
In all other cases, i.e. if the Greens function
is not within the possible solution space,
one has an approximate solution only.
5
What are Beam Elements ?
A 3D Continua with a length >> width / height
Simplification of the solution space
(Bernoulli-Hypothesis, persistence of shape)
Simplification for manual analysis
(gravity centre, principal axis, shear etc.)
Superstition:
Beam elements are simple
Beam elements are exact
6
Problematic continuous beam
Mechanic is not consistent
Plan view
Moments
7
Sections
Normal stress
0 y z
y
z
x x
u u z y
u u
E E E z y
x x x x

= +

(

= = = +
(


8
Sections Shear Stress
V is only valid if the normal
force and the section are
constant along the axis
Z is only valid if the section
is not multiple connected
The shear stress is not
necessarily constant along
the width b
For biaxial bending or non effective parts of
the section, the equation becomes more
complex (Swains formula)
V Z
I b
=
9
An other strategy:
a deformation method
2 2
2 2
:
0
x
x y
x
x z
x
x y y x z z
w
G z
y x
w
G y
z x
w w
G w G
y z x
B o u n d a r y C o n d i t i o n s
n n

| |
=
|

\ .

| |
= +
|

\ .
| |

= + =
|

\ .
+ =
10
Unit Warping
SOFiSTiK AG, 85764 Oberschleiheim, Bruckmannring 38, Tel:089/315-878-0 AQUP (V11.05-21) 24.10.2002
M 1 : 68
X
Y
Z
Y 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 -2.00 -4.00 -6.00 -8.00 m
Z
2
.
0
0
Querschnitt Nr 12 Vollquerschnitt
Verwlbung 1 CM = 50000.000 [cm2]
-
2
0
5
2
5
.
-
1
2
3
5
3
.
1
2
3
0
0
.
2
0
4
7
1
.
1
9
8
1
5
.
-
9
1
5
0
.
1
5
5
8
2
.
2
4
6
8
6
.
3
3
3
2
4
.
4
1
2
2
0
.
1
3
9
3
1
.
-
1
4
2
6
4
.
-
2
5
4
6
2
.
-
3
2
8
8
0
.
-
2
6
7
2
1
.
-
1
6
0
4
5
.
1
6
0
2
4
.
2
6
7
0
0
.
3
2
8
5
9
.
2
5
4
4
1
.
1
4
2
4
3
.
-
1
3
9
5
2
.
-
4
1
2
4
4
.
-
3
3
3
4
9
.
-
2
4
7
1
2
.
-
1
5
6
0
8
.
9
1
2
3
.
-
1
9
8
6
9
.
1
2
3
9
0
.
-
1
2
4
4
6
.
-
2
1
1
4
9
.
-
1
1
8
4
3
.
9
0
8
8
.
1
4
0
5
0
.
-
1
4
1
3
1
.
-
9
1
6
2
.
1
1
7
8
1
.
2
1
0
9
3
.
11
Shear stress from Mt
M 1 : 68
X
Y
Z
Y 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 -2.00 -4.00 -6.00 -8.00 m
Z
2
.
0
0
Querschnitt Nr 12 Vollquerschnitt
Schub aus MT=1000.00 1 CM = 0.05 [MPa]
0
.0
5
0
.0
6
0
.0
6
0
.0
6
0
.0
6
0
.0
5
0
.0
2
0
.0
5
0
.0
5
0
.0
5
0
.0
3
0
.0
1
0
.0
1
0
.0
1
0
.0
1
0
.0
1
0
.0
1
0
.0
3
0
.0
6
0
.0
6
0
.0
6
0
.0
6
0
.0
6
0
.0
6
0
.0
6
0
.0
3
0
.0
1
0
.0
1
0
.0
1
0
.0
1
0
.0
1 0
.0
1
0
.0
3
0
.0
5
0
.0
5
0
.0
5
0
.0
2
0
.0
4
0
.0
4
0
.0
4
0
.0
4
0
.0
4
0
.0
3
0
.0
2
0
.0
2
0
.0
3
0
.0
4
0
.0
4
0
.0
4
0
.0
4
0
.0
4
0
.0
4
0
.0
4
0
.0
3
0
.0
2
0
.0
2
0
.0
3
-
0
.0
4
-
0
.0
3
-
0
.0
2 0
.0
2
0
.0
3
0
.0
4
-
0
.0
2
-
0
.0
3
-
0
.0
3
0
.0
3
0
.0
3
0
.0
2
-
0
.0
5
-
0
.0
4 -
0
.0
3
0
.0
3 0
.0
4
0
.0
5
-
0
.0
6
-
0
.0
5
-
0
.0
4
0
.0
4
0
.0
5
0
.0
6
-
0
.0
6
-
0
.0
5
-
0
.0
4
0
.0
4
0
.0
5
0
.0
6
-
0
.0
6
-
0
.0
5
-
0
.0
4
0
.0
3 0
.0
4
0
.0
5
-
0
.0
6
-
0
.0
5
-
0
.0
4
0
.0
3 0
.0
4
0
.0
5
-
0
.0
6
-
0
.0
5
-
0
.0
4
0
.0
4
0
.0
5
0
.0
6
12
M 1 : 68
X
Y
Z
Y 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 -2.00 -4.00 -6.00 -8.00 m
Z
2
.
0
0
Querschnitt Nr 12 Vollquerschnitt
Schub aus VZ=1000.00 1 CM = 0.10 [MPa]
0
.1
5
0
.1
0
0
.0
3
-
0
.0
3
-
0
.1
0
-
0
.1
5
-
0
.0
4
-
0
.2
0
-
0
.2
3
-
0
.2
2
-
0
.1
7
-
0
.0
9
-
0
.0
7
-
0
.0
5
-
0
.0
3
0
.0
2
0
.0
5
0
.0
6
0
.0
8
-
0
.0
9 -
0
.0
5 -
0
.0
2
0
.0
2 0
.0
5
0
.0
9
-
0
.0
8
-
0
.0
6
-
0
.0
5
-
0
.0
2
0
.0
3
0
.0
5
0
.0
7
0
.0
9
0
.1
7
0
.2
2
0
.2
3
0
.2
0
0
.0
4
0
.0
7
0
.0
4
-
0
.0
4
-
0
.0
7
-
0
.1
4
-
0
.2
1
-
0
.2
3
-
0
.2
2
-
0
.1
9
-
0
.1
2
-
0
.0
6
0
.0
6
0
.1
2
0
.1
9
0
.2
2
0
.2
3
0
.2
1
0
.1
4
0
.2
1
0
.2
2
0
.2
2
0
.2
2
0
.2
2
0
.2
1
0
.1
3
0
.1
7
0
.2
3
0
.2
3
0
.1
7
0
.1
3
0
.2
1
0
.2
1
0
.2
0
0
.2
0
0
.2
1
0
.2
1
-
0
.0
8
-
0
.0
8
-
0
.0
8
0
.1
3
0
.1
5
0
.1
4
-
0
.1
4
-
0
.1
5
-
0
.1
3
0
.2
0
0
.2
1
0
.2
1-
0
.0
8
-
0
.0
7
-
0
.0
8
0
.2
0
0
.2
1
0
.2
1
0
.1
3
0
.1
5
0
.1
4
Shear stress from Vz
13
Shear deformation
Theory of Timoshenko/Marguerre (not exakt!)
Principal Axis of shear deformation
z
y
z
y y
V
G A
w
x

=
= +
(

(
(
(
(

=
(

z
y
z yz
yz y
z
y
V
V
GA GA
GA GA
*
1 1
1 1
14
Shear in haunched beams
h =100 cm
p = 10 kN/m
L = 10.0 m
h = 50 cm
h =100 cm
15
FE-Analysis
0
0
0
0
tau-xy
16
FE-Analysis
tau-xy in vertical section
10.62
57.90
52.10
53.96
0
00
00
00
17
Shear in haunches
sig-x
tau-xy
Schnitt senkrecht
zur Schwerachse
Schnitt senkrecht
zur Referenzachse
18
FE-Analysis
tau-nq in perpendicular section
-28.
-53.
-32.
.
.
19
Shear in haunched beams
Example for a shear reduction along the
provisions of design codes
Shear force V 40.0 kN
Yielding a faulty shear stress 63.2 kN/m
2
Reduction of shear by M/d* tan 5.6 kN
Reduced shear stress 54.9 kN/m
2
FE-shear stress 53.0 kN/m
2
Although the engineering approach has a
completely different view, the maximum stress
is quite good, distribution is faulty however.
20
FE of a haunched beam
21
Reference of forces ?
Gravity axis with N + V
Results suited for
design
Gravity axis with D + T
Similar as for 2
nd
order Theory
Superposition of
forces
General reference axis
Superposition of
forces if a
composite section
changes by in situ
concrete or
tendons.
N Q
D
T
a)
b)
c)
D
T
22
Excentricities at the end points
Interpolation u
0
linear, v,w,
x
,
y
cubic
Displacements within section
Strains from derivative (position of gravity centre is not constant!)
Principles of the FE-Beam
u u z y
u uj z y
i i yi i zi i
j yj j zj j
0
0
= +
= +




( ) ( )
u u z z y y
y s z s
= +
0

( ) ( )

x o y s z s
y s z s
u
x
u z z y y
z y
= = +
+
23
Example of a haunched beam
h =100 cm
p = 10 kN/m
L = 10.0 m
h = 50 cm
h =100 cm
24
Results for haunched beam
w[mm] Ne[kN] Nm[kN] Mye[kNm] Mym[kNm]
Inclined axis
C-Beam (1 element) 0,397 -80,50 -78,00 -73.58 31,91
C-Beam (8 elements) 0.208 -46,30 -43,80 -94,87 19,17
FE-Beam (1 element) 0,172 -39,80 -37,30 -93,65 22,00
Fe-Beam (8 elements) 0.206 -45,80 -43,30 -95,02 19,14
Horiz. reference axis
FE-Beam (1 element) 0.168 -37,90 -37,90 -93.01 22,52
FE-Beam (8 elements) 0.204 -44,20 -44,20 -94.85 19,10

- 3 7 . 8 8 - 3 7 . 8 8
-93.01
25
The precision of the
FE beam (bending)
19.2876 15.4301 19.2876 Cent. deflection
41.147 41.147 41.147 End Rotations
281.25 281.25 281.25 Max. Moment
2 Elements 1 Element Exact
26
Bending precision
The theoretical solution is a polynom of 4th order
The shape functions are cubical splines The highest
symmetric ansatz function is the quadratic parabula
As the influence function for the nodal displacements
are cubic functions, the deformations and rotations in
the nodes are exact.
The moments and shear forces are also exact.
The only values which are not are the displacements
between the nodes (which are of less interest)
For a buckling analysis there are the same principles,
but know the buckling force (which has a high
importance!) is not ok for a simple element.
27
The precision of the
FE beam (Buckling analysis)
52879
53249
53550
-
Euler IV
Numerical
13213 4 Elements
13219 3 Elements
13312 2 Elements
52848 16065 13312 1 Element
Euler IV
Exact
Euler II
Numerical
Euler II
Exact
28
Warping Torsion and Shape
deformation
> 6. Degrees of freedom per node
More forces and moments:
secondary torsional moment Mt2 etc.
Pure bending = 84.3 N/mm
2
Warping / 2
nd
Order Torsion = 136.1 N/mm
2
240 kN
2.625 kN/m
l = 16 m
29
Conclusion
Beam elements are not simple in theory
Beam elements are easy to use
There are a lot of modelling errors possible